What grade would you give the Gophers 2020 basketball recruiting class?

What grade would you give the Gophers 2020 basketball recruiting class?

  • A

    Votes: 63 44.1%
  • B

    Votes: 70 49.0%
  • C

    Votes: 10 7.0%
  • D

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • F

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    143

GopherHole Staff

GopherHole Admin
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
Messages
4,451
Reaction score
141
Points
63
What grade would you give this class: Jamal Mashburn Jr., Martice Mitchell, David Mutaf, Both Gach, Liam Robbins and Brandon Johnson?
 

El Amin Fan

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
2,463
Reaction score
166
Points
63
I voted B but would give a B+ as well. Heck of a spring. Good balance of eligibility variance of the six newcomers so we aren't overloaded with 4 year guys or two years guys.
 

theczar

Banned
Joined
Jun 13, 2018
Messages
1,330
Reaction score
439
Points
83
Truly a remarkable class ...for having struck out on perhaps the best group Mn. seniors ever.
 

gbbfan

Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
155
Reaction score
3
Points
18
A solid B. If both transfers are able to play this year, then the grade is even better, close to an A (Minnesota standards). Who cares where these players are from. To me Mashburn is just as good as Walton, Robbins is just as good or better than Garcia, and Both is comparable with Suggs.
 

GopherBlood666

Well-known member
Joined
May 17, 2019
Messages
1,005
Reaction score
324
Points
83
A solid B. If both transfers are able to play this year, then the grade is even better, close to an A (Minnesota standards). Who cares where these players are from. To me Mashburn is just as good as Walton, Robbins is just as good or better than Garcia, and Both is comparable with Suggs.
Gach is not comparable to Suggs, that is a huge reach. I'm very happy with the Gach signing, but Suggs is on another level.
 

jamiche

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
21,278
Reaction score
988
Points
113
I gave it a B because we don't know yet who will be eligible and the in state recruiting remains an ongoing weakness in terms of building a solid foundation. If Robbins and Gach are both eligible I would give it an A-.
 

jovs

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
3,543
Reaction score
111
Points
63
If both are eligible a B+, only one a B, neither a C.
 

SPEGOPHER

Active member
Joined
Feb 4, 2013
Messages
182
Reaction score
27
Points
28
I think A on overall talent (especially if everyone gets eligible) but Pitino seems like he’s grasping for straws every spring. To his credit, he nailed it this time around, but it just doesn’t seem sustainable. Maybe Pitino is ahead of his time w relying on the transfer market, but it doesn’t seem like the optimal way to build a program.

In the end, though, my fear of us finishing last in the BIG is gone, and I can look forward to next season; we should have a competitive squad.
 

bfriedrichs10

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 23, 2019
Messages
488
Reaction score
331
Points
63
I think A on overall talent (especially if everyone gets eligible) but Pitino seems like he’s grasping for straws every spring. To his credit, he nailed it this time around, but it just doesn’t seem sustainable. Maybe Pitino is ahead of his time w relying on the transfer market, but it doesn’t seem like the optimal way to build a program.

In the end, though, my fear of us finishing last in the BIG is gone, and I can look forward to next season; we should have a competitive squad.
I wouldn't say that Robbins and Gach fell into our laps, but we did have some pretty tight ins with Gach being from Austin and Robbins having relatives on the team and coaching staff. Without those connections who knows what happens. I agree, I think it would be everyone's preference to have a full class of quality HS players going into the spring and then replace early leavers and transfers with transfers. I fear what we were able to do this year isn't sustainable.
 

EG#9

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
6,591
Reaction score
355
Points
83
These grades are shockingly high to me, but I guess it's all in how you view the question. If you only look at if from the perspective of talent added to impact the 2020-2021 season, then I can certainly see it as a B. If you only look at it like there was a historically inept job done keeping in state talent home in a year where you could have Suggs, Garica, Dainja, Walton, Carlson (all rated higher than Minnesota's highest rated high school commit) then you can certainly see it as an F. I view the high school recruiting as far more sustainable and the Gophers were below average in the B1G at that before even factoring in another historically great local batch of players. Pitino and staff did a good job of putting a band aid on a bad situation, but it was a bad situation that they created with poor Fall recruiting results and poor play on the court. The biggest get in the class is the nephew of the assistant coach and you obviously cannot count on a relative that can be an impact guy joining the roster every year. Overall, I think people are fairly rating this class high through the prism of 20-21 which is the only year that matters for Pitino but real questions are out there going forward.
 

builtbadgers

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
5,917
Reaction score
1,617
Points
113
These grades are shockingly high to me, but I guess it's all in how you view the question. If you only look at if from the perspective of talent added to impact the 2020-2021 season, then I can certainly see it as a B. If you only look at it like there was a historically inept job done keeping in state talent home in a year where you could have Suggs, Garica, Dainja, Walton, Carlson (all rated higher than Minnesota's highest rated high school commit) then you can certainly see it as an F. I view the high school recruiting as far more sustainable and the Gophers were below average in the B1G at that before even factoring in another historically great local batch of players. Pitino and staff did a good job of putting a band aid on a bad situation, but it was a bad situation that they created with poor Fall recruiting results and poor play on the court. The biggest get in the class is the nephew of the assistant coach and you obviously cannot count on a relative that can be an impact guy joining the roster every year. Overall, I think people are fairly rating this class high through the prism of 20-21 which is the only year that matters for Pitino but real questions are out there going forward.
In a sense it is not really a class since they all will not start or finish with the 2020 class, some are added to classes already here.
 

eker0016

Importer Exporter
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
1,373
Reaction score
160
Points
63
I think one of the best parts of this recruiting class is that it is not a bunch of 17/18 year olds. We will have an experienced and mature lineup.

Brandon Johnson is a 5th year guy. Liam Robbins took a post grad year so this is his 4th year out of HS. This is Both Gach's 3rd or 4th year out of HS (Was the year in AZ a post grad year?). Mashburn should hopefully be able to contribute 15-20 minutes per night and should be our youngest role player. Mutaf and Mitchell IMO won't be contributors this but are great developmental guys.

Ages of our potential starting lineup:
Marcus Carr - 21
Gabe Kalscheur - 20
Both Gach - 21
Brandon Johnson - 22?
Liam Robbins - 21?

So our youngest starter is a 3 year starter. Not bad.
 
Last edited:

builtbadgers

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
5,917
Reaction score
1,617
Points
113
I think one of the best parts of this recruiting class is that it is not a bunch of 17/18 year olds. We will have an experienced and mature lineup.

Brandon Johnson is a 5th year guy. Liam Robbins took a post grad year so this is his 4th year out of HS. This is Both Gach's 3rd year out of HS. Mashburn should hopefully be able to contribute 15-20 minutes per night and should be our youngest role player. Mutaf and Mitchell IMO won't be contributors this but are great developmental guys.

Ages of our potential starting lineup:
Marcus Carr - 21
Gabe Kalscheur - 20
Both Gach - 21
Brandon Johnson - 22?
Liam Robbins - 21?

So our youngest starter is a 3 year starter. Not bad.
Huge advantage. Even more so when they have been together the whole time.
 

eker0016

Importer Exporter
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
1,373
Reaction score
160
Points
63
Huge advantage. Even more so when they have been together the whole time.
Agreed, it is somewhat negated by the fact that they are all coming in from different programs and won't have a normal off-season to gel. But I still like it.
 

builtbadgers

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
5,917
Reaction score
1,617
Points
113
Agreed, it is somewhat negated by the fact that they are all coming in from different programs and won't have a normal off-season to gel. But I still like it.
Same. The benefits of strength and skill development, travel experience, leadership growth just maturity are all generally greater in a 21 year old versus 18-19.
 

Biggsohnasty

Active member
Joined
Feb 11, 2016
Messages
500
Reaction score
215
Points
43
I have similar concerns to an earlier post about this model for Pitino feeling unsustainable but in a year where he needed to get a lot done, he added pieces to form a roster that might be good enough to save his job.

There is definitely a benefit to using the transfer market so as to not have to rely on freshmen. Having five (if Robbins gets a waiver) upperclassmen in the starting lineup is rare for a Power 6 school and all are at least relatively proven. I think that establishes a solid floor. And it allows your underclassmen, like Mashburn and Ihnen, to develop in a lower-leverage setting where you can play through some expected inconsistencies.

With that said, the high school recruiting has to be better. Mashburn is a nice get. Mitchell looks like a solid pickup as a longterm play and Mutaf is an unknown.

I don't get my panties in a bunch over Pitino's lack of in-state recruiting, but I do think that lack of success is a symptom of a problem that has been hurting the program for years.

That is his inability to establish and develop good relationships with kids over a period of time and evaluate/project talent. The spring recruiting is a lot more quick and dirty with less competition (still some for the guys they got this spring which is impressive) from guys who have already developed a lot.
 

builtbadgers

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
5,917
Reaction score
1,617
Points
113
I have similar concerns to an earlier post about this model for Pitino feeling unsustainable but in a year where he needed to get a lot done, he added pieces to form a roster that might be good enough to save his job.

There is definitely a benefit to using the transfer market so as to not have to rely on freshmen. Having five (if Robbins gets a waiver) upperclassmen in the starting lineup is rare for a Power 6 school and all are at least relatively proven. I think that establishes a solid floor. And it allows your underclassmen, like Mashburn and Ihnen, to develop in a lower-leverage setting where you can play through some expected inconsistencies.

With that said, the high school recruiting has to be better. Mashburn is a nice get. Mitchell looks like a solid pickup as a longterm play and Mutaf is an unknown.

I don't get my panties in a bunch over Pitino's lack of in-state recruiting, but I do think that lack of success is a symptom of a problem that has been hurting the program for years.

That is his inability to establish and develop good relationships with kids over a period of time and evaluate/project talent. The spring recruiting is a lot more quick and dirty with less competition (still some for the guys they got this spring which is impressive) from guys who have already developed a lot.
Great post.
 

YoungGopher

New member
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
8
Reaction score
2
Points
3
I have similar concerns to an earlier post about this model for Pitino feeling unsustainable but in a year where he needed to get a lot done, he added pieces to form a roster that might be good enough to save his job.

There is definitely a benefit to using the transfer market so as to not have to rely on freshmen. Having five (if Robbins gets a waiver) upperclassmen in the starting lineup is rare for a Power 6 school and all are at least relatively proven. I think that establishes a solid floor. And it allows your underclassmen, like Mashburn and Ihnen, to develop in a lower-leverage setting where you can play through some expected inconsistencies.

With that said, the high school recruiting has to be better. Mashburn is a nice get. Mitchell looks like a solid pickup as a longterm play and Mutaf is an unknown.

I don't get my panties in a bunch over Pitino's lack of in-state recruiting, but I do think that lack of success is a symptom of a problem that has been hurting the program for years.

That is his inability to establish and develop good relationships with kids over a period of time and evaluate/project talent. The spring recruiting is a lot more quick and dirty with less competition (still some for the guys they got this spring which is impressive) from guys who have already developed a lot.
My concern is that it is going to be another situation where the coaching staff relies too heavily on their starters and doesn't give the bench a chance to grow, unless it's a blowout. With the depth we hopefully have, assuming waivers are granted, I want to see more balance in both the starters and the bench's time-management. It will be interesting to see if unlike previous years, the bench is able to step on the court during meaningful minutes to accelerate their development.
 

JimmyJamesMD

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
8,335
Reaction score
1,077
Points
113
Pitino might be able to be more aggressive on defense with all that depth
 

Holy Man

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
3,780
Reaction score
249
Points
63
I think one of the best parts of this recruiting class is that it is not a bunch of 17/18 year olds. We will have an experienced and mature lineup.

Brandon Johnson is a 5th year guy. Liam Robbins took a post grad year so this is his 4th year out of HS. This is Both Gach's 3rd or 4th year out of HS (Was the year in AZ a post grad year?). Mashburn should hopefully be able to contribute 15-20 minutes per night and should be our youngest role player. Mutaf and Mitchell IMO won't be contributors this but are great developmental guys.

Ages of our potential starting lineup:
Marcus Carr - 21
Gabe Kalscheur - 20
Both Gach - 21
Brandon Johnson - 22?
Liam Robbins - 21?

So our youngest starter is a 3 year starter. Not bad.
This is the Brian Dutcher/SDSU strategy. They found themselves to be young and talented, which made a difference especially in the post season. They deliberately went the transfer route to "get older" and it has had some success. This year would have been a great year to see the theory in practice in the NCAA tournament.

I like talent. I like experience. I like talented experience together, but those days are gone. Will be very interesting to see how this works out, especially with pandemic limitations.

I'm with others that think over reliance on transfers for key roster spots is akin to rolling the dice every year, and I wonder how sustainable it is in the long run.
 

builtbadgers

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
5,917
Reaction score
1,617
Points
113
This is the Brian Dutcher/SDSU strategy. They found themselves to be young and talented, which made a difference especially in the post season. They deliberately went the transfer route to "get older" and it has had some success. This year would have been a great year to see the theory in practice in the NCAA tournament.

I like talent. I like experience. I like talented experience together, but those days are gone. Will be very interesting to see how this works out, especially with pandemic limitations.

I'm with others that think over reliance on transfers for key roster spots is akin to rolling the dice every year, and I wonder how sustainable it is in the long run.
Those days are not gone everywhere.
 

Biggsohnasty

Active member
Joined
Feb 11, 2016
Messages
500
Reaction score
215
Points
43
My concern is that it is going to be another situation where the coaching staff relies too heavily on their starters and doesn't give the bench a chance to grow, unless it's a blowout. With the depth we hopefully have, assuming waivers are granted, I want to see more balance in both the starters and the bench's time-management. It will be interesting to see if unlike previous years, the bench is able to step on the court during meaningful minutes to accelerate their development.
Me too.

It's one of those things where some people say the bench guys don't get better because they don't play. Others (I'm probably in this camp more than the other) say the bench players don't play because they aren't better and around we all go with the starters continue to log 38 minutes a game.

I think some guys can do it. In general, the best players on a lot of college teams play 35 minutes per game. This isn't the NBA where they play 82 games in 6 months and guys have to load manage. They play 30 in about 4 months with at most, three games a week. But if you don't have elite players logging 36 minutes, you want strength in numbers. And in general, typical college rotations go 7.5 to 8.5 (the ol' play 8 trust 7 model).

If you can have starters in the 28-32 minute range with a pair of bench guys (Mashburn and Ihnen) in the 18-22 minute range plus another (Williams in my head) around 12-15, you've got a viable rotation - which also, in theory, keeps guys happy and may mitigate potential transfer risk.
 
Top Bottom