KSUFans Archives

Sports => Frank Martin's OOD sponsored by the "Angriest Fans in America" => Topic started by: waks on April 25, 2007, 01:26:56 AM

Title: New PG...
Post by: waks on April 25, 2007, 01:26:56 AM
Josue Soto. Is he worth offering??
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: atybimf on April 25, 2007, 07:11:13 AM
yes.  I think he's exactly the type of guy we need running the point.  he's apparently a 'pass-first' point guard.

I also want V-Dub.

Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: McGrowlTowelZac on April 25, 2007, 07:32:54 AM
I would take this kid, apparently FSU did everything they could to keep him, so maybe that says something.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: michigancat on April 25, 2007, 07:38:24 AM
The guy's a four star on scout and #111 on rivals.

I'd say that's offer worthy, plus it takes a roster spot that might be otherwise filled by a really crappy player in 08-09.


http://www.kansas.com/248/story/53464.html
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: ksu_FAN on April 25, 2007, 07:41:08 AM
This would be a great get for Martin.  He could be in the system and learn for a year while sitting out, then be in the mix with Pullen and Brown for 08-09.  Offered by FSU, Indiana, and Wake Forest, so the kids has to have some talent.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: chum1 on April 25, 2007, 07:43:11 AM
Of the players we have a shot with, wouldn't he be considered the best available?
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: michigancat on April 25, 2007, 07:45:42 AM
Of the players we have a shot with, wouldn't he be considered the best available?

For sure.  There's only like two top 100 players available for 2007.  He's just out of the 2006 top 100.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: ksu_FAN on April 25, 2007, 07:58:31 AM
#85 RSCI.  Definately best available at this time.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: chum1 on April 25, 2007, 08:00:00 AM
I think that answers the initial question.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: Saulbadguy on April 25, 2007, 08:02:58 AM
Why is he transferring from FSU?
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: michigancat on April 25, 2007, 08:05:04 AM
Why is he transferring from FSU?

PT
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: yosh on April 25, 2007, 08:17:13 AM
No question that we should go after him.  He was RSCI #85.  What a steal.  This guy would go a long way to having a strong team post Beasley/Walker/Hoskins.  The backcourt would be set for the next three years with Pullen, Brown, Shipman, Soto & Sutton (I've decided he'll play some at the 2).  We're really going to need some bigs in the 08 class though.  

 http://home.nc.rr.com/rsci/RSCI_100_PostSeason_2006.htm 
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: michigancat on April 25, 2007, 08:28:19 AM
Of the players we have a shot with, wouldn't he be considered the best available?

Edit:  Except for Tyree.

:-[
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: ksu_FAN on April 25, 2007, 08:32:05 AM
Soto does have a Willingham-esque extremely high rating from hoopscoop (38).  Don't know if that is good or not.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: chum1 on April 25, 2007, 08:33:20 AM
Of the players we have a shot with, wouldn't he be considered the best available?

Edit:  Except for Tyree.

Isn't his status that KSU can't be ruled out becuase he is such a loose cannon?  I guess that means we have a shot with him, but not really the kind I had in mind.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: WildWillie21 on April 25, 2007, 08:43:54 AM
2006 Florida Gatorade P.O.Y. with JB in the same state. Jump on this kid.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: WildCatzPhreak on April 25, 2007, 09:33:37 AM
So what's the story on the kid?  2006 PG from Florida, transferring from Florida State because of playing time?  That'd be a great PG for us, but it's too bad he has to sit out a year because of the transfer rule.  We could really use a great ball handling PG on next years team with Beasley, Walker, and Hoskins.

At least we have good Florida connections.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: catsfan20012002 on April 25, 2007, 09:40:52 AM
http://www.kansas.com/248/story/53464.html

Frank Martin compares Soto to Jose Juan Barea, whom Martin lured to Northeastern when he was an assistant. Soto was the 2006 Gatorade Player of the Year in Florida. He averaged 18 points and 10 assists, guiding the Apaches to a 52-6 record and two state titles during his two seasons at ACD. But with the Seminoles, he never got started. Stuck behind experienced guards Toney Douglas and Isaiah Swann, Soto saw action in 13 games, averaging 0.7 points and 0.8 rebounds in 4.2 minutes.

The book on Soto is that he's a pass-first point guard -- even though Alvarez said Soto dropped 42 on current North Carolina point guard Tywon Lawson during an AAU tournament. If so, he'd be a quality addition for the Wildcats, even though he'd have to sit out the 2007-08 season under NCAA transfer guidelines. Clent Stewart will be gone, as will Blake Young.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: ksu_FAN on April 25, 2007, 09:42:27 AM
I like the Florida connections.  Alvarez is the poster boy for what a "handler" is though.  Not saying its good or bad, it is what it is. 
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: yosh on April 25, 2007, 09:47:00 AM
Just watched his vids from Rivals.  There is a bunch there... all free to watch.  He looks like he can create shots.  Showed great range shooting the ball. Great ball handler.  Reminded me a Larry Reid at times.

http://rivalshoops.rivals.com/viewprospect.asp?pr_key=22020&Sport=2#videos

 :hope: :popcorn:

Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: sys on April 25, 2007, 11:57:03 AM
seems like a nice player.  timing is a little odd though, to get 3 1ish guards in the same class.  unless brown or pullen is not going to qualify.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: michigancat on April 25, 2007, 11:59:19 AM
seems like a nice player.  timing is a little odd though, to get 3 1ish guards in the same class.  unless brown or pullen is not going to qualify.

I'd just as soon have every guard be 1ish, as long as they don't kill you defensively.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: sys on April 25, 2007, 12:07:19 PM
seems like a nice player.  timing is a little odd though, to get 3 1ish guards in the same class.  unless brown or pullen is not going to qualify.

I'd just as soon have every guard be 1ish, as long as they don't kill you defensively.

6'4" 1ish yes, 5'11" 1ish no.  which i guess is what you are saying with the defense thing.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: michigancat on April 25, 2007, 12:13:22 PM
seems like a nice player.  timing is a little odd though, to get 3 1ish guards in the same class.  unless brown or pullen is not going to qualify.

I'd just as soon have every guard be 1ish, as long as they don't kill you defensively.

6'4" 1ish yes, 5'11" 1ish no.  which i guess is what you are saying with the defense thing.

Isn't Fred Brown a "long" 6-3?

I don't think having two players on the court right around 6-0 hurts you all that much.  If teams were smart and would post up a 6-4 guard on a 5-11 guard, it might.  But they don't, so it doesn't.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: sys on April 25, 2007, 12:18:09 PM
yeah brown is supposed to be something like that.  he looked smaller to me when he was in on his visit though.  pullen looks really small.

i think the size of ut's guards hurt them at times this season.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: michigancat on April 25, 2007, 12:31:37 PM
yeah brown is supposed to be something like that.  he looked smaller to me when he was in on his visit though.  pullen looks really small.

i think the size of ut's guards hurt them at times this season.

Probably, but they went 6-2, 5-11, 5-10.  That's kind of extreme.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: power4PURPLE on April 25, 2007, 12:50:33 PM
we dont need a guard, no matter what rank he is. the only reason we should even consider one is if somebody wasn't going to qualify or something (i think someone said that earlier).

the 2 guys we need to concentrate on are Victor aka- the russian rampage, and finally get an offer out to Tearon Hill!!!! is that so much to ask?

http://kansasstate.rivals.com/viewprospect.asp?Sport=2&pr_key=44624
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: michigancat on April 25, 2007, 01:02:05 PM
we dont need a guard, no matter what rank he is. the only reason we should even consider one is if somebody wasn't going to qualify or something (i think someone said that earlier).

the 2 guys we need to concentrate on are Victor aka- the russian rampage, and finally get an offer out to Tearon Hill!!!! is that so much to ask?

http://kansasstate.rivals.com/viewprospect.asp?Sport=2&pr_key=44624

You should always get the best player available.  Plus, this guy is essentially the first member of our 2008 class.  With Stewart, Young, and Walker (likely) leaving, there is no reason to not have another guard with three years of eligibility in 08-09.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: ksu_FAN on April 25, 2007, 01:05:13 PM
Rusty is correct.  Get best available with one ship and the other one whatever they can find.  I'd take the Russian kid or the best available big.  But in any case, I think we are in best available mode for any scholarship we have. 
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: sys on April 25, 2007, 01:12:51 PM
i don't agree.  if you can't get a player that fills a need (eg., really good shooter), bank the scholly for 08.  unless you are getting a player as good as, or better than what you expect in 08.

top 100 rsci qualifies as as good as an expected 08, i just like bigger guards.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: pissclams on April 25, 2007, 01:31:49 PM
Jeff Wires hates your guts.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: sys on April 25, 2007, 01:35:45 PM
some exceptions.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: power4PURPLE on April 25, 2007, 01:41:52 PM
best available is an option that should only be looked at by either...
a) teams that aren't very skilled or talented that just want the best recruit they can get, no matter what position
or
b) teams that don't have any more holes to fill.

we don't fall into either of these categories, therefore, we dont need a guard. and as for him being an 08 guy, who says jacob pullen and fred brown aren't going to be around??
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: chum1 on April 25, 2007, 01:47:19 PM
Skill beats size.  There are possible upgrades to come along with these Soto and Bennett events.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: michigancat on April 25, 2007, 01:48:06 PM
best available is an option that should only be looked at by either...
a) teams that aren't very skilled or talented that just want the best recruit they can get, no matter what position
or
b) teams that don't have any more holes to fill.

we don't fall into either of these categories, therefore, we dont need a guard. and as for him being an 08 guy, who says jacob pullen and fred brown aren't going to be around??

Are two guards enough?

Based on your requirements for taking the best player available, lets say our scholarship situation looked like this:

C: 2
PF: 3
SF: 3
SG: 3
PG:  Clent Stewart

That team clearly has a "hole" at point guard.  Let's say you can use your last available scholarship on a PG about as good as Blake Young or Michael Beasley.

Who would you give it to?
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: WildCatzPhreak on April 25, 2007, 01:52:12 PM
best available is an option that should only be looked at by either...
a) teams that aren't very skilled or talented that just want the best recruit they can get, no matter what position
or
b) teams that don't have any more holes to fill.

we don't fall into either of these categories, therefore, we dont need a guard. and as for him being an 08 guy, who says jacob pullen and fred brown aren't going to be around??
Jacob Pullen, Fred Brown are scorers, not necessarily distributers.  Josue is a distributer first and foremost.  He has the capability to score, but he's a distributer before anything else.

Also, two guards is not nearly enough.  We'll likely have two guards on the floor at all times, why would having a third be a bad thing?

We need a big man.  There's not really any good ones available, at least that I know of.  Good centers are hard to come by.

Aside from a big man, we need a shooter and a distributer.  VD has a good 3 pt shot, and he's been offered.  Josue is a distributer, and we should offer him.  He'd still have 3 years to play after using a redshirt for his sitout year after transferring.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: yosh on April 25, 2007, 01:53:52 PM
best available is an option that should only be looked at by either...
a) teams that aren't very skilled or talented that just want the best recruit they can get, no matter what position
or
b) teams that don't have any more holes to fill.

we don't fall into either of these categories, therefore, we dont need a guard. and as for him being an 08 guy, who says jacob pullen and fred brown aren't going to be around??

While I tend to agree that "best available" isn't a hard and fast rule.  In this instance we DO need the guard.  Jacob Pullen and Fred Brown will be there, but then who?  2 guards isn't enough.  Now lets say we sign Josue, then we get Shipman, Releford and Manzano in the early period next year.  After Beasley and Walker declare, then you absolutely have to get frontcourt players in the late period; best available be damned.  Of course situations like that rarely occur.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: ksu_FAN on April 25, 2007, 01:54:13 PM
Yeah, I'm not buying that guard, especially PG, won't be a need after next year.  That's why I think Soto would be a good get.

As far as the other ship, I'm not sure.  I think the priorites are (obviously) a big or a shooter and I think you take the best available at either spot.

Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: sys on April 25, 2007, 01:54:53 PM
best available is a great philosophy for the fall, but the best player available in the spring often isn't very good.  spring should be pretty much jucos and transfers only imo.  and generally should fill a definate need.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: doom on April 25, 2007, 01:57:35 PM
best available is an option that should only be looked at by either...
a) teams that aren't very skilled or talented that just want the best recruit they can get, no matter what position
or
b) teams that don't have any more holes to fill.

we don't fall into either of these categories, therefore, we dont need a guard. and as for him being an 08 guy, who says jacob pullen and fred brown aren't going to be around??

Are two guards enough?

Based on your requirements for taking the best player available, lets say our scholarship situation looked like this:

C: 2
PF: 3
SF: 3
SG: 3
PG:  Clent Stewart

That team clearly has a "hole" at point guard.  Let's say you can use your last available scholarship on a PG about as good as Blake Young or Michael Beasley.

Who would you give it to?

Pullen is a PG?  Blake can play the position too.  So long as the guy can get the ball down court and get it to Walker or The Beas my Colon could do it.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: michigancat on April 25, 2007, 01:58:09 PM
best available is a great philosophy for the fall, but the best player available in the spring often isn't very good.  spring should be pretty much jucos and transfers only imo.  and generally should fill a definate need.

Basically, "best available" gets kind of gray when they're outside of the top 150 or so, because it's usually a crapshoot across the board with those guys.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: sys on April 25, 2007, 01:59:34 PM
we get Shipman, Releford and Manzano in the early period next year.  After Beasley and Walker declare, then you absolutely have to get frontcourt players in the late period; best available be damned.

if ksu has 4 quality players wanting to sign in the fall, they'll sign 4.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: yosh on April 25, 2007, 02:02:31 PM
we get Shipman, Releford and Manzano in the early period next year.  After Beasley and Walker declare, then you absolutely have to get frontcourt players in the late period; best available be damned.

if ksu has 4 quality players wanting to sign in the fall, they'll sign 4.

OK, but the point remains.  That 4th player has to be a frontcourt guy.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: michigancat on April 25, 2007, 02:09:30 PM
we get Shipman, Releford and Manzano in the early period next year.  After Beasley and Walker declare, then you absolutely have to get frontcourt players in the late period; best available be damned.

if ksu has 4 quality players wanting to sign in the fall, they'll sign 4.

OK, but the point remains.  That 4th player has to be a frontcourt guy.

Why?  We only lose Hoskins, Young, and Stewart for sure.


I think this discussion is moot, though, because there is no way 4 quality guards will want to sign early with KSU when Pullen, Brown, Sutton, Walker, and Soto are already on the roster.  I think the 4th "best player available" would have to be a big man by default.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: yosh on April 25, 2007, 02:35:51 PM
we get Shipman, Releford and Manzano in the early period next year.  After Beasley and Walker declare, then you absolutely have to get frontcourt players in the late period; best available be damned.

if ksu has 4 quality players wanting to sign in the fall, they'll sign 4.

OK, but the point remains.  That 4th player has to be a frontcourt guy.

Why?  We only lose Hoskins, Young, and Stewart for sure.


I think this discussion is moot, though, because there is no way 4 quality guards will want to sign early with KSU when Pullen, Brown, Sutton, Walker, and Soto are already on the roster.  I think the 4th "best player available" would have to be a big man by default.

Which is why I said situations like that rarely occur.  If you are loaded on quality guards already, you repel other quality guards, while attracting quality forwards.  I was just trying to illustrate a situation when you have to fill a need over taking best available.  If you don't think such a situation would occur, I'm not likely to convince you.

Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: michigancat on April 25, 2007, 02:37:48 PM
Which is why I said situations like that rarely occur.  If you are loaded on quality guards already, you repel other quality guards, while attracting quality forwards.  I was just trying to illustrate a situation when you have to fill a need over taking best available.  If you don't think such a situation would occur, I'm not likely to convince you.

We're basically in agreement.  I just don't consider a player that isn't interested to be "available".
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: yosh on April 25, 2007, 02:57:04 PM
Which is why I said situations like that rarely occur.  If you are loaded on quality guards already, you repel other quality guards, while attracting quality forwards.  I was just trying to illustrate a situation when you have to fill a need over taking best available.  If you don't think such a situation would occur, I'm not likely to convince you.

We're basically in agreement.  I just don't consider a player that isn't interested to be "available".

Yeah...I look at ku, for example, and say they are trying to fill a need by going after big guards/small forwards, while you might say they are so stacked with small guards and bigs that swing players are the only players they can get.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: power4PURPLE on April 25, 2007, 03:54:37 PM
fellas, say what you must, i'm taking in the opinions and i understand each one. but you gotta understand that's not what we need THIS year. why all of a sudden are we looking past 07? we've got a serious chance here, but we've got problems up front, and all im hearing is that we need another guard because it's weak for 08!

if sojo comes, ill welcome him...but the last thing i wanna hear is a bunch of bologna next winter when we're gettin beat on boards and in the paint blaming beasley and colon and our lack of big men. ill just look and say "i told you so"

and for whoever mentioned us getting releford in 08, try again...cuz im doubting that...seriously doubting
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: michigancat on April 25, 2007, 04:01:51 PM
fellas, say what you must, i'm taking in the opinions and i understand each one. but you gotta understand that's not what we need THIS year. why all of a sudden are we looking past 07? we've got a serious chance here, but we've got problems up front, and all im hearing is that we need another guard because it's weak for 08!

if sojo comes, ill welcome him...but the last thing i wanna hear is a bunch of bologna next winter when we're gettin beat on boards and in the paint blaming beasley and colon and our lack of big men. ill just look and say "i told you so"

With Beasley, Colon, Kent, Hoskins, and Walker, we aren't in desperate need of interior help - we aren't in desperate need of help anywhere for 07, really.

We dominated the boards with a much smaller front line this season, and no one but Maric hurt us inside defensively.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: Saulbadguy on April 25, 2007, 04:04:29 PM
Look for Colon to improve tremendously.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: power4PURPLE on April 25, 2007, 04:05:11 PM
ya but remember that cartier, akeem, and lance were big parts of us rebounding well, and maybe even jason a little too.
they're all gone.

i think that bill and beaz will help, even 'nique...but my worries come when luis gets in foul trouble against a dominant big man...lord knows darren kent wont guard him
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: WildCatzPhreak on April 25, 2007, 04:09:11 PM
i think that bill and beaz will help, even 'nique...but my worries come when luis gets in foul trouble against a dominant big man...lord knows darren kent wont guard him
Bill and Mike are great rebounders.  Colon will probably only be used in extreme circumstances, otherwise I'd expect a frontcourt rotation of Beasley, Walker, Hoskins, and Sutton.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: waks on April 25, 2007, 04:10:24 PM
Can the year that he sits out be considered a redshirt year so that he can play for the three years after that or is that not allowed??
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: michigancat on April 25, 2007, 04:10:59 PM
Can the year that he sits out be considered a redshirt year so that he can play for the three years after that or is that not allowed??

It is allowed.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: yosh on April 25, 2007, 04:22:31 PM
Look for Colon to improve tremendously.

I hope so. :hope:
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: sys on April 25, 2007, 04:43:33 PM
we need a shooter.  evans or d'sky.  we are fine inside.
Title: Re: New PG...
Post by: treysolid on April 25, 2007, 04:54:43 PM
if having 1 more capable pg on the team is a problem, then it's a great problem to have.  signing tearon hill is not the solution - what's he really gonna do his first year?  might as well focus our attention on getting a big man in the '08 class.