Pittsburgh offered 2017 New Mexico JC (NM) F Kenechukwu Chukwuka. Three years to play. (HT @JucoRecruiting) @kene_96 http://verbalcommits.com/players/kenechukwu-chukwuka…
Last edited:
2017?
- Thread starter gary2
- Start date
Pittsburgh offered 2017 New Mexico JC (NM) F Kenechukwu Chukwuka. Three years to play. (HT @JucoRecruiting) @kene_96 http://verbalcommits.com/players/kenechukwu-chukwuka…
Could you imagine Groat and Hillgrove trying to pronounce that name. Great googly moogly.
Verbal Commits@VerbalCommits 11m11 minutes ago
Pittsburgh offered 2017 New Mexico JC (NM) F Kenechukwu Chukwuka. Three years to play. (HT @JucoRecruiting) @kene_96 http://verbalcommits.com/players/kenechukwu-chukwuka…
Thanks for the find gary but I have to wonder if we should tie up another scholarship with another mid-major type player.
Verbal Commits@VerbalCommits 11m11 minutes ago
Pittsburgh offered 2017 New Mexico JC (NM) F Kenechukwu Chukwuka. Three years to play. (HT @JucoRecruiting) @kene_96 http://verbalcommits.com/players/kenechukwu-chukwuka…
I don't disagree but you can't coach 6'8" and he seems to have a decent skill set for a team in need of lots of things.
It's no risk to take him, because in a year he probably won't be here anyway. If he's anything like his offers, he's going to be recruited over. So you take him, and if he surprises, great. If not, he'll get cut in a year. The same with George, Davis.
What I don't get is that now 2 years in, KS can't land one consensus top 100 recruit. Not one. Not hire an assistant who has one of those guys locked up. On almost every hire, that happens.
Carr, Golden...they are decent recruits. But with KS coaching, you need a whole lot better players than that in this league.
2018 recruits are dropping left and right. Really, really, really could use an impact recruit...at any position. If the 2018 class is more like 2017 than not, this coaching regime are essentially lame ducks because no way this group makes the NCAAs in the next two seasons. And if he is 0-3...adios.
But...it's not over for 2018. Have to land the remaining priority recruits.
If a recruit does not even visit, he was never yours to lose (Thomas-Omersa, Kalscheur).
Bolton was not a priority.
We will end up with a desirable point guard.
My post came with no endorsement. I have never heard of this kid. Video indicates he might be able to shoot it a little, has some post moves, though not a true post player and bio states he was born in 1996 (so he is older and maybe physically mature).
Last edited:
At this point, even if we land 2 or 3 players whom I would consider "priority" recruits (zegarowski, lasewski etc) It's still not going to be good enough. It just isn't. Desirable...I mean compared to the quality of this roster...sure. NCAA caliber ACC talent considering this coaching staff...ehhh.
How can someone else be so certain that:
There is no fallback plan anymore in the backcourt so if we miss on Zegarowski you can probably just light this recruiting class on fire.
Well, for one, the 2017 class is kind of a dumpster fire. Not a lot of priority recruits, and the class is being filled in winning battles over Iona, Loyola Marymount, and now apparently Utah Valley St. (Stewart was a nice get late, credit there).
I'm sure there will be fallback plans. But that doesn't make them "desirable". How many "desirable" players and talent are on the roster right now (and I'll define desirable as starter/impact player on ACC NCAA team)...do we have any? I'm not sure. The answer is probably zero..maybe 1. And the clock is ticking..that's the bigger issue. Everyone will (or should) give KS a mulligan in 2017, but that 2018 team will have a lot of pressure. Can it make the field of 68 and get its coach a 4th season? Tall task, we'll see.
After three years of bringing in only five freshmen(including 2 local kids nobody wanted), would you have been happy with a Dixon 5-man class consisting of: LLegomah, Brown, Stevenson, Stewart and Carr? I know I would have looked at it as the start of an upgrade and the beginning of a build..
Who for 2018 have we lost that anyone expected to sign?
Kalsheur or Thomas-Omersa? They never even (unofficially) visited.
These players visited but I never read an interview after from Locke, Johns, Hunter, Bolton, Thamba or Bizeau.
Stone, Aiken and Efretuei were courtesy visits.
I have heard good things after visits from, Golden, Zegarowski, Forrester, Parks, Cohill and at one time, Brazdeikis..
Of players that have not visited: I have heard positive remarks about Pitt from Kisunas and Nichols (you can now add Sow). I have heard Jeenathan Williams and Nate Laszewski reference Pitt. PSN has T.Samuels associated with Pitt. Other names from other sources include: Segu, Tyson, Calloo and Gregoritis.
There are a lot of names recently becoming associated with Pitt(including Canadians(maybe our new niche)). That is what happens during evaluation. More names will emerge. It is a long way to the November signing period.
.
Last edited:
In my opinion, there is a big difference between the caliber of player needed for JD to make the tournament and KS. When you are a better coach, you have more leeway.
But whether that is right or wrong doesn't really matter. After a year one where we were in next to last place, a year two where absent a miracle we will finish the same or worse, are the 2017 class as sophomores and the caliber of 2018 recruit we are involved with enough to jump 7-8 teams in the standings and make the field in 2018? Cause that's really the only question that matters.
Just making a point that many on the board speak conveying a degree of their own certainty.
Answering your question directly: Stallings had no trouble recruiting (though not keeping) two ACC quality point guards for last season in Thompson and Carr. I "feel" certain (better?) he will be able to recruit one this season.
I listed Zegarowski, Kalscheur and Cohill as players who I felt were possibilities. I mentioned Segu and Llewellyn .
Kalscheur and Llewellyn are now off the board. Three remain from my original listing. There are undoubtedly others that Pitt is currently recruiting and probably even more they might get involved with. (Scott, Hinton, Sackey, maybe Devoe, a JC pg, etc.)
I think many on the board have become consumed with recruiting ranking.
Before we throw up our hands and say woe is me, lets see who will get and lets see if they can actually play.
Last edited:
So you're deeming it a recruiting "win" that he had a commitment from a guy who will never play at Pitt?
Dixon had Heron and Rowan too, but they aren't here, and thus neither is Dixon.
To answer your previous question: The 2017 class might have been acceptable if they were being added to a roster that had any talent on it. That's probably a good infusion of role players and development guys, but it is not acceptable as a prospective starting lineup. You're question was "would you be happy". This team is likely 0-18. There is no reason to be happy.
So your saying the 2017 class would be perfectly acceptable if Dixon had developed and maintained a base? I agree. You can not build and maintain a team with grad transfers and JC reaches. That is patching, not building. Five freshmen (and not very good ones) in 3 years is all the evidence you need.
The illusion of competitiveness by winning all games against a weak OC schedule, then going 10-8 or 9-9 or 8-10 and barely making the tournament was just that, an illusion. Worse yet, it was an unsustainable illusion.
You said this:
The 2017 class might have been acceptable if they were being added to a roster that had any talent on it. That's probably a good infusion of role players and development guys, but it is not acceptable as a prospective starting lineup.
I agreed with you and put my agreement in context.
For me, it is completely unacceptable for a coach who sold a bill of goods to a fanbase about his recruiting restrictions at Vandy, and that a 2017 class with this many recruits looks similar (or worse) than those same Vandy classes.
Dixon's records may or may not have been illusions, but the reality now is we have a worse coach and will be finishing next to last (or last) in the ACC two straight seasons. That's not good. It's an abject failure.
Again..all this is really immaterial. He has to make the tourney in 2018. For the sake of the program (and his future at Pitt), I hope he does.
Last edited:
The lack of impact players in 17 class and Pitt seemingly not being in good position with high impact 18 kids is troubling.
Frankly, Pitt doesn't normally recruit impact freshmen but if there were ever a time for adding an impact kid or two it was the 17 and 18 class. Getting good quality freshmen who require some development is fine and is how Pitt needs to normally build its roster. I think the 17 class has that in a few players. Th 18 class might have it and Golden is good start. But they are dying for an impact kid or two as well.
This rebuild is going to be a multi year rebuild at this point
Frankly, Pitt doesn't normally recruit impact freshmen but if there were ever a time for adding an impact kid or two it was the 17 and 18 class. Getting good quality freshmen who require some development is fine and is how Pitt needs to normally build its roster. I think the 17 class has that in a few players. Th 18 class might have it and Golden is good start. But they are dying for an impact kid or two as well.
This rebuild is going to be a multi year rebuild at this point
Right. And what has me concerned is that we've added a new HC, we've added 5 assistant coaches in the last two years. You see this all around the country..coaches who have impact guys attached to the hip. But we've added all this coaching personnel..and..nothing.
This rebuild is going to be a multi year rebuild at this point
Does that come as a surprise?
Did he sell us that bill of goods though or was it that moron Barnes.
Barnes will go down as the worst thing to happen to Pitt. Awful hire.
No..not now. But Stallings won't be in charge of the rebuild if its 3 straight non-NCAA seasons. He just won't.
It's not that hard in basketball to remake a roster, but you need a good coach and good recruiter. Also, a bit of luck. Maybe the 2017 class will have some future stars? I hope so.
I think most times there is a little something involved with those assistants that have a recruit attached at their hip.
I could be completely wrong but I thought KS at that infamous presser also pushed the narrative of restrictions at Vandy..but Barnes is the main culprit for sure.
Not a total surprise and I expected a couple year rebuild for sure. I was expecting them in year 3 to make some good strides back to respectability. At the rate they are recruiting this is more like a 4 or 5 year rebuild at best because the players they are getting are development type players who in best case scenario make their impacts as Juniors/Seniors.
Whirly, your repetitive reference to hiring coaches with impact guys attached to their hip inferring it as some good thing is downright laughable. I'm sorry but that shouldn't be the reason why you hire an asst coach. Don't need to look any further than Pat Skerry.
Didn't pat skerry get a head coaching gig?
Perhaps it wasn't just the connection?
Meanwhile, we've essentially turned over our staff- and replaced recruiting deadweight with more dead weight
I believe you are correct in that Stallings has proven over the years that he does less with more talent than many coaches do. This means, IMHO, he will need lots of superior (i.e., top 20 level) talent throughout his roster to be able to make the NCAAs out of the ACC. So far that isn't happening.
Well, he may have sold Barnes that bill of goods. I never believed it for a second.
I would have hoped a little more of that rebuild would have come with the 2017 class.
It absolutely has to start with the 2018 and I'm losing hope that it will. I'm fearing 2018 will be as unremarkable as 2017 and maybe worse.
You seem to have a good share of optimism and I appreciate that. I regret that I don't feel the same.
Similar threads
