Thanks but I don't think you understand my feelings about this situation in any way, shape or form.
Nick Noskowiak
- Thread starter cyclonefan32
- Start date
Thanks but I don't think you understand my feelings about this situation in any way, shape or form.
Had Georges decommitted from ISU after missing part of his senior year for what was thought as mental illness problems, I don't think he would have that type of interest.
I get where your guarded optimism is coming from, i had the same about Custer. Certainly reasonable doubt to anyone not overly insecure about the program. But we also could be getting a steal.
I'm not trying to say he will end up having a career like Georges, but I'm simply trying to point out that there are plenty of top 100 players that don't get blue blood type offers. Rivals, ESPN, 247, and Scout all have him as a 4 star prospect.
Right after you run through every top 50 team and tell me they couldn't use a top 80 combo guard.
I would have to say that burden is on you since you're the one that can't seem to make any sense out of the situation. I'm just trying to give you a way to answer your own question that seems to be consuming you.
This has gone on waaaaaay too long. Just let us know what answer you want to hear and I can give it to you on my next reply. That way we can move to something else, like maybe his actual visit.
Monte had a Michigan offer. If we exclude the elite of the elite recruits, a Michigan offer, to me, is about as good as it gets considering Beileins track record in the previous 5 years or so. He got Burke and Stauskas (what could have been), uncovered Hardway and Robinson before anyone knew how good they were, gave an offer to a kid named ALbrecht who nobody had offered (not that he's great but he's definitely serviceable, Offed Caris Levert who nobody offered and recently, Aubrey Dawkins who I don't think will play college ball for four years.
On Niang, I think everyone recognized the skill. I just think certain teams, until late didn't know that it could translate. If we're honest, the guy makes incredibly tough shots a lot of the time and I think when you look at a 6'7 high school kids whose strength is making tough shots while being limited athletically, there's some risk there. If we saw his clone playing high school ball we would all say the same. Now, it turned out so we win and maybe Fred and Tj didn't have doubt, I don't know but I think that's the reasoning for lack of real top end offers.
Which is a perfectly logical opinion to hold and makes absolute sense. I agree it's very possible that we are getting that top 60 type guy with no competition if everything off the court is alright.
Hell, if you look at the thread about him I'm in there asking these same questions literally a year ago about why we don't have any interest in him. I wanted him offered and targeted. Why those other schools don't baffles me. I think it's a no brainer to take him. I just don't think it's safe to take 3 other role players with our scholarships and point to NN as the reason we will be ok. There certainly must be some risk there, even if it is a calculated one.
But most just want to be lazy and project the opinion that "I hate NN and think he sucks" onto me.
Let's just go with NCAA tourney and NIT teams from power 5 schools and then any elite mid majors.
Yeah, obviously not all situations are the same, but it's not like we're beating out the Kentucky's of the world for high school talent. With a few exceptions, Fred has done a pretty good job at identifying talent
He is a low top-100 recruit, not top-30. Would you feel different if he was 130? His recruiting is not unusual for the level and type of recruit in combination with off court question marks and periods of being off the market. Some guy's game is more immune to rumors of taking a leave from basketball imo.
Are we not going after impact 16/17 transfers? Perhaps the impact guys we haven't been able to get without MA. It is not as though we got premium ones even with MA.
Last edited:
I'm saying there is a difference between not INITIALLY getting offers (You are absolutely right, we were one of the first in on him), and being very highly recruited and becoming available late in the process and having almost nobody show interest even though at that point he was probably one of the top 20 players not committed in the entire country based on those rankings.
Once Niang was properly evaluated by those teams, he did get tons and tons of offers before signing with ISU. And you can bet he'd have been heavily recruited by those schools if he for some reason got out of his LOI.
That's very different from NN.
And this is pretty much the reason we are recruiting NN. Custer needs to be replaced badly with the amount of guys we could lose next year. If Monte leaves we have 2 true guards on the roster. It's not that difficult.
Next year, assuming Fred is back, with TJ having been on his feet a little long, I would imagine we would be able to land at least one premium transfer. Especially if Morris is back. We will have a minimum of two starting spots up for grabs.
Well I haven't seen our name mentioned with any big name transfers this year and we took Babb who is by far the least proven transfer we have ever taken. Every other transfer was either highly recruited out of high school or had at least proven production early in their career.
And we always got premium transfers with Matt.... Royce White, Kane, BDJ were all premium guys and guys like Babb, Clyburn, Nader, and Lucious were proven to some extent.
And I do think that our ability/willingness to get top level transfers has diminished, which doesn't make much sense to me with all the available PT in 16/17.
Don't think anyone doubts that it makes sense for us to recruit or want Noskowiak. Nobody is arguing that.