Hoops Recruiting Has A Preference: The Guards
As we await the impact of Juwan Howard on the 2022s taking official visits to Ann Arbor, this seems like an ideal time to go through my own personal board by position. In the first of a three part series, I rundown my Guard board today.
**Note: for measurements listed below I'm using my own eye test to approximate actual heights rather than outdated/possibly inaccurate list heights in the absence of actual measurements over the last year+**
Lead Guard
A) Jaden Bradley
Measurements: 6'2-6'3/180
School/AAU: IMG Academy (FL)/Team CP3 (Nike EYBL/North Carolina)
Why: The most college ready of the three realistic options. Bradley has a defined role as a playmaker for others with a college ready frame and projects to be a rotational player from day 1.
I differ from Brian a bit in that I don't necessarily prioritize how long a given prospect is projected to remain in college. The better question in my opinion, is how many impact years will you get from a given prospect in college. I call this the DJ Wilson approach. Sure, Wilson stuck around for 3 years, but was only an impact player for 1 year. If you're only going to get a year of rotational impact from a player, I'd rather have it sooner than later.
Where Michigan Stands: Jaden completed his OV with Michigan last week and Poppa Bradley told Sam Webb of 247 the family feel and playstyle under Juwan Howard are appealing. Alabama just wrapped-up their official visit with the Bradleys and Nate Oats' NBA style of play hit home per an article with 247.
Bradley still has OVs with North Carolina and Arizona in June, with a Kentucky unofficial getting worked out for August. While one-on-one time with Juwan Howard can only improve Michigan's chances here, I'm still not optimistic that Jaden will play college basketball in Ann Arbor.
[Hit THE JUMP for updates on Trimble + McDaniel]
B) Seth Trimble
Measurements: 6'1-6'2/185
School/AAU: Menomonee Falls HS (WI/Phenom U (Nike EYBL/Wisconsin)
Why: Will be physically ready to play in the B10 as freshman. Like the ability to score and flash as a facilitator, but sort of a tweener combo-guard that could be more undersized SG than PG. Jury is still out. Has the chance to be an impact freshman with Eli Brooks' departure if two of Zeb Jackson/Frankie Collins/Kobe Bufkin don't seize control of the backcourt minutes. No defined role + multiple guys on the current roster potentially ahead of him = too many questions to confidently project him as instant-impact.
Where Michigan Stands: Currently on campus in Ann Arbor for OV. Michigan thought to be in strong position along with North Carolina. I feel best about our chances with Trimble and think his timeline is more expedited in relation to Bradley. Assuming he gets out of Chapel Hill without committing, Michigan may be in pole position here and primed for a commitment in the next few months.
C) Dug McDaniel
Measurements: 5'8-5'9/155
School/AAU: Paul VI Catholic (VA/Metro DC)/Team Takeover (Nike EYBL/Metro DC)
Why: Entertaining prospect that is a good playmaker for others and a capable shooter. Undersized for B10 and may not be able to hold up physically in such a rugged conference. Likely to be 3-4 year guy in college, but may not ever be an impact player at the high-major level. Too many questions surrounding his floor and ceiling to confidently project him in any meaningful way, at least as it relates to the B10 conference.
Where Michigan Stands: Will be in Ann Arbor for his OV immediately after Trimble departs. The lead-man for Michigan likes him, mixed reviews from the rest of the staff. Was supposed to OV to Penn State on 6/12, but instead took unofficial to Virginia Tech. Arizona State also involved. Seems a bit more open to new suitors in relation to Bradley/Trimble. Likely due, at least in part, because he's a Plan B for some programs rather than a priority. Doesn't appear to be in any rush with his recruitment based on the same logic.
Good to see this version of a recruiting update - sort of a Matt's view of the priorities. Thanks for posting.
One suggestion....maybe an "others to keep an eye on" outside of the top three where there are guys Michigan is staying in touch with but they are plan-B guys. I'm not sure if anyone applies for lead guard, but worth keeping in mind as we get to the other positions.
My take on Trimble is partially the number of years, but also the roster fit. You need to have three rotational guards who can play 20+ minutes per game on a good team. At this very moment Michigan projects to have three guards on the roster.....but may or may not have three that can play (Zeb, Frankie, Kobe). We've seen the value of having a guy like Eli who can be a combo guard and fit into that rotation. Trimble could ease his way into the rotation along side those guys. A true PG would be fine in the rotation like the other two guys, but if they aren't substantially better than Frankie you wonder if it is worth signing them....especially a guy who wants to be in college for just a year.
I'm not sure how Bradley compares to Frankie as a lead guard at this point.
The Plan B types will be incorporated for the wings tomorrow. Frankly, there aren't any Plan Bs for the guards. The guard class is extremely weak for 2022. The last 3 years has seen a revival for depth for bigs in a role-reversal of sorts.
Also, with the portal, two things are assured: 1) attrition will happen and 2) you can address gaps with more certainty in the off-season
That said, I'm less concerned about roster fit and place more emphasis on projected impact. Gaps can and will be addressed via the portal.
I’m baffled that any year could be weak for guards. Sure, things are relative, and freaks of nature will always be rare, but the country will never want for kids under 6’6” playing ball.
After listening to Sam interview Jaden’s dad I definitely felt like we had a legit shot. Certainly wouldn’t bet on Michigan, even against the field but I’ve got some hope
I like your "DJ Wilson approach" for evaluating player impact. And I agree, it's probably better to have rotational impact come sooner rather than later, especially with today's transfer climate. I.e., if DJ Wilson was joining the team today, would he even make it to his breakout third year, or would he transfer after a year or two of being stuck on the bench?
You can have success with both early impact (Duke/Kentucky/UNC) and late impact (Wisconsin/Villanova/MSU) models. Both have risks, but both can work. One big risk though is when you switch approaches, either by choice or circumstance. Because unless you have seasoned players ready to replace departing one or two-and-dones, the only way to maintain success is to keep recruiting early impact players. We saw that with Beilein; he traditionally built his teams with late impact players, but then found himself with a number of two-and-dones, many of which were unexpected (e.g. Morris, Burke and Stauskas along with three-and-done Hardaway, to go with perhaps less unexpected two-and-dones McGary and GRIII). Those players helped power some great runs from 2012-2014, but after 2014, when they weren't replaced by similar early impact players, the bottom more or less fell out for a few years. The good news is that Juwan seems to be a good enough recruiter to continue to recruit early impact talent to replace departing players.
At this point, considering the portal, GLeague/Overtime/Overseas options, every coach should recruit while anticipating attrition. It's the just the way things are these days. Kids are going to bolt at any hint of being compensated in most cases. Like it or not, basketball is very much a player driven sport.
That said, talent acquisition is absolutely the most important facet of winning in basketball. Particularly at the NBA level where you don't have single-game format to determine a champion. But it's also true at the CBB level.
I hear what you guys are saying and don't entirely disagree in the age of the portal. At the same time, I think building a roster entirely on 1-year players (portal or OAD) is a risky proposition. I think you need some of those DJ type guys that are on the fringe of your rotation early and build into a 1-2 year strong contributor.
By the DJ logic are we saying that we shouldn't want/target/expect guys like Simpson, Teske, Livers anymore? I'm a little confused by the analogy. DJ was ranked #123 in the composite and a known project. No one is saying that Juwan is targeting very many guys like that and none of these PGs are close to that "project" category.
I think the question you're trying to answer is more about who will be ready to contribute early AND stick around for more than a minute. That balance is hard to predict in general, especially for guys in the 25-75 range of recruits.
- Bradley might be the most ready day one, might be better than Frankie, and might have one foot out the door as soon as he steps on campus.....but if he's that good you want him anyway (just like Houstan & Diabate).
- Bradley might also be a freshman PG who's behind Frankie and doesn't help us as much right away because he can only play PG in the few minutes that Frankie isn't. Where a combo guy that's equally ready to contribute could fill more minutes.
Who knows? And we won't know more about the situation until games are played. I'll just be happy with whichever one Juwan gets and then fill any other voids later.
I think we have to account for specifics under Juwan Howard. The man is an ace recruiter. John Beilein, while a superb coach with an impeccable resume, was not the same level of recruiter in relation to Coach Howard.
That said, targeting developmental prospects that may not see the floor until they're upperclassmen, seems like a recipe for hitting the portal because they will be recruited over. Some have openly wondered whether Tschetter will fall victim to this.
So for me, accounting for the excellence that is Juwan Howard in tandem with the portal, I think you always want to sign prospects that are closer to the instant-impact side of the spectrum. Probably works out better for both parties that way in most cases.
We have to come to terms with the fact that CBB is becoming much more NBA-like, specifically Michigan under Juwan Howard. You can see it in our playstyle and recruiting approach.
Yeah, I don't think we'll be taking many DJ Wilson type players out of high school, instead we'll get them via the portal after they've had their break out.
I am really enjoying reading the discussion being held here-so many salient points. Matt, between you from this forum side and having Juwan leading this program, we Michigan basketball fans are in the catbird seat.
Regarding the three young men you have brought to this discussion-I believe Juwan and staff can compete very well with any of them as the lead guard. I prefer Bradley or Trimble because they will offer more defensive flexibility. Both are so difficult to deny when penetrating and finishing-love how they initiate just the right amount of contact to neutralize their defender and still finish. Offensively, I see their strengths and weaknesses as pretty much a wash-though I may have a slight preference for Trimble's shooting over Bradley's finishing. I agree that McDaniel holds more risk-again, because of the defensive end of the court. But offensively Tug does everything you want from a lead guard-and that is why Juwan likes him.
Is Jaden Bradley a good enough shooter / scorer that he could play the 2 in some lineups next to Frankie? Or is he only a lead guard and they would need to split minutes?
Bradley has never been a willing shooter during my live viewings. Based on that, I'd say he's strictly a PG.
Apparently Jordan Poole is on campus right now while Trimble is there which I'm sure isn't a coincidence
Trimble come on down!
Every time that Dug video is posted, I have to watch that dime he drops at 0:15 on the pick and roll
Comments