Jump to content

UNT lands BBall Verbal Greg Wesley

Harry

By Harry
in Mean Green Basketball

 Share

Recommended Posts

Cooley Mentor

Cooley

Posted
Posted (edited)

He is a 3 without an outside shot. Same athletic ability as Jordan Williams. Great addition to a full court game but you'll never see offensive plays going through him in a half court game. Currently ranked #17 in Texas Hoops' Top 100 (class of 2013)

Edited by Cooley
  • Upvote 1
NT03 Newbie

NT03

Posted
Posted

Interesting to see ULL in the mix of offers...how much you want to bet Shawn Forrest is why?

It's only a matter of time before he snags a few Dallas products. ULL will be a solid program if Marlin & Forrest stay together the next couple of years

  • Upvote 1
akriesman Mentor

akriesman

Posted
Posted

It is just unbelievable how far this BB program has come in the last 5 or 6 years. Instead of hoping for top notch talent, you almost come to expect it these days.

While our FB program seems on the right track, it is taking baby steps compared to BB.

  • Upvote 4
glick1980 Community Regular

glick1980

Posted
Posted

Here's the good part for UNT, he had a chance to stay close to home at TCU or SMU, but picked UNT instead.

Wesley said both of the Metroplex's other Division I schools offered, along with Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Arkansas, New Mexico State and Louisiana-Lafayette.

:)

In before Hoopmanx tells us he didn't really have an offer from basketball powerhouse SMU.

  • Upvote 1
adman Apprentice

adman

Posted
Posted

He is a 3 without an outside shot. Same athletic ability as Jordan Williams. Great addition to a full court game but you'll never see offensive plays going through him in a half court game. Currently ranked #17 in Texas Hoops' Top 100 (class of 2013)

I've mentioned before that Im not a basketball guy so here goes a dumb question - is the bolded section above a common trait amongst 3's? And does that mean he'll be looked at more for D and going inside?

Thanks. Hanging up now to hear the answer.

  • Upvote 1
UNT90 Newbie

UNT90

Posted
Posted

I've mentioned before that Im not a basketball guy so here goes a dumb question - is the bolded section above a common trait amongst 3's? And does that mean he'll be looked at more for D and going inside?

Thanks. Hanging up now to hear the answer.

To play the 3 in college, he is going to have to develop an outside shot to be a threat on offense. Being a slasher is great, but when defenders can give you a 2 foot cushion, it makes it hard to get to the rim.

He may have every other skill to play the position, and just needs to develop the shot. May be why he isn't a 4 star recruit.

  • Upvote 1
TheTastyGreek Collaborator

TheTastyGreek

Posted
Posted

I've mentioned before that Im not a basketball guy so here goes a dumb question - is the bolded section above a common trait amongst 3's? And does that mean he'll be looked at more for D and going inside?

Thanks. Hanging up now to hear the answer.

Depending on level of competition and roster construction, there are two general categories of guys who play at the 3.

In the NBA and at a lot of power conference schools, a 3 is the traditional small forward. Not quite as large or physical as true post players, but usually with a much better outside shot. Not as good as a true wing player, though. Good examples for casual Mavs fans would be Shawn Marion and recent draftee (and Benford alum) Jae Crowder. Both around 6'6"-6'7", college 3 point percentages around 30-35%, rebound averages at or near double digits.

The other general category of 3s is oversized (or not) second shooting guard. Faster, not as thick or well built for under the basket play. This is what we've had under JJ for most if not all of his coaching tenure. Guys like Tristan, Adam McCoy, and Brandan Walton... 6'4" to 6'6", 3 point averages around 40%, more like 4-6 rebounds per game (or less). This tends to be a little more common in college, because finding NBA-style players (at any position, but particularly at one that involves shooting, mobility, AND size) is hard enough for the NBA, much less 340+ Division 1 colleges. Bobby Cremins used to build his teams the same way... The first time I can remember really noticing that college basketball was very different from the NBA was watching pregame for Georgia Tech's Final Four game in 1990 and being confused how they could start 3 guards at the same time and why they didn't have a center.

meangreenfan65 Newbie

meangreenfan65

Posted
Posted

Depending on level of competition and roster construction, there are two general categories of guys who play at the 3.

In the NBA and at a lot of power conference schools, a 3 is the traditional small forward. Not quite as large or physical as true post players, but usually with a much better outside shot. Not as good as a true wing player, though. Good examples for casual Mavs fans would be Shawn Marion and recent draftee (and Benford alum) Jae Crowder. Both around 6'6"-6'7", college 3 point percentages around 30-35%, rebound averages at or near double digits.

The other general category of 3s is oversized (or not) second shooting guard. Faster, not as thick or well built for under the basket play. This is what we've had under JJ for most if not all of his coaching tenure. Guys like Tristan, Adam McCoy, and Brandan Walton... 6'4" to 6'6", 3 point averages around 40%, more like 4-6 rebounds per game (or less). This tends to be a little more common in college, because finding NBA-style players (at any position, but particularly at one that involves shooting, mobility, AND size) is hard enough for the NBA, much less 340+ Division 1 colleges. Bobby Cremins used to build his teams the same way... The first time I can remember really noticing that college basketball was very different from the NBA was watching pregame for Georgia Tech's Final Four game in 1990 and being confused how they could start 3 guards at the same time and why they didn't have a center.

Good analogy!

  • Upvote 2
TheTastyGreek Collaborator

TheTastyGreek

Posted
Posted

Cooley and TTG...what are your thoughts on this commit? I have no doubt that he is a good player, but how good?

Just a little confused since he doesn't have much info on Rivals.

Disclaimers: I don't believe I've seen Wesley play in person. And I'm not a coach.

I think this is a very nice pickup, but I think it makes it obvious that a verbal will not equal a scholarship player in 2013. More on that at the end.

Wesley seems like a taller, less explosive Soma Edo, with all the pluses and minues that entails. Not really built to play forward, not enough of a shooter to be a pure wing. But athletically gifted and definitely a valuable asset for a non-power conference school. The biggest relief to me is that we landed a well regarded Metroplex recruit for the first time in this class. National scope is nice, but I was getting anxious that out of 4 verbals, none of them came from the area that has developed to be our bread and butter source for talent.

My concern is that, as a couple of people have mentioned, he doesn't seem to shoot from the outside. The rest of what he does makes up for that, but it seems to establish even more clearly that Benford will recruit and run a system where the 3 is a post who faces the basket, instead of a shooting wing. We're fortunate in that the personnel on hand allow for that transition pretty smoothly (guys like Patton and Jordan). The worry is that there's a reason that 2 posts and 3 guard/wings is the usual floor configuration in college. It's harder to bring in the talent you need to make an NBA style lineup work. And the parts/philosophies aren't interchangeable. Think back to the struggles we had when we had to make our system run despite guard injuries or ineligibility the past two years. Or, if you're a football fan... Think of it as a shift from a 4-3 defense to a 3-4. A coaching change or a few recruiting misfires, and we could be in for some painful transition years in the near future.

Anyway, Wesley's complete lack of outside shooting highlights is, ignoring his other skills, a worry to me. Especially because those highlights are from AAU and not from his high school team. If you guys think back to Clarke Overlander's highlights, we saw him playing a lot under the basket for his high school team... But his AAU choices put him in a position where he was an outside shooter. You could clearly see that he had range and accuracy. But even Wesley's AAU team uses him as a post, and I don't think (unless he puts on some size) that's his intended purpose for us.

If you're going to run a system with a 3 that tilts more towards the post side than the wing side, and the guys for that position aren't respectable 3 point threats... Your 1 and 2 guards need to be very good 3 point shoooters to keep the defense from just collapsing to clog the inside. Ours (speaking generally) are not. Also, you need to have very well designed and executed interior offensive plays. Generally, college players aren't as adept at making that sort of offense work as their professional counterparts. And, perhaps most importantly... You have to play in a league where physical post play doesn't draw quick fouls. Anyone who watches Big East conference games probably noticed that, compared to SBC action, interior play looks like a street fight or a mugging. If your system is dependent on banging around inside for points, and the defense can keep 3 guys hovering around the lane (instead of the outside) because of the minimal threat of a 3 point basket... It could get very physical. Playing in a league (and next year, another league) where that isn't really the norm... We could have to fight through a lot of foul trouble.

The other thought based on this verbal is that we obviously aren't going to see everyone that has verbaled in a North Texas uniform next year. 5 out of 6 (possibly 7 or 8, but that's still to be determined) expected open scholarships have verbals to match them now. Only one of those 5 has an outside shot. Two of the five seem like the exact same sort of player (raw, wide bodied post with limited offensive skills, rebounding hustle, and questionable physical conditioning). And the last one has been jokingly referred to as Niko Braziliovic (or, Howerton in a man-thong). Wesley and Norris aren't going anywhere else without a fight, but I wouldn't be surprised if only one or maybe two (depending on academics) of the others actually suit up for us next year. The pieces just don't fit.

Censored by Laurie Veteran

Censored by Laurie

Posted
Posted

The pieces just don't fit.

While I do agree we likely won't see all 5 verbals on campus, I will disagree that if they all show that the pieces don't fit. We'll still have 5 legit guards (CJ, PJ, TJ, Alzee and Clarke) and a true wing in Jordan Williams on the '13-'14 roster...2 combo forwards (Norris and Wesley) capable at the 3 or 4...and 4 posts (Coleman, Casmino, Nunn and Friar) with a scholarship left to give. That's decent balance...may want a shooter...or may want a more polished post with the last ship, depending on how along Nunn and/or Friar are. Lot's of teams don't have pure shooters...we have enough in those 6 smallest guys to keep teams honest, in my opinion

Wesley seems like Edo's back-up plan. Edo had the same weaknesses...I wonder if we'd be rubbing our hands over shooting had this been Edo's verbal.

Question for anyone who cares to share an opinion: Does his reel remind anyone else a little bit of Isaac Wells from Arkansas State? Other than the outside shooting.

I remember Wells being bigger...a real college 4's body who tended to play on the perimeter more than his frame would suggest he should. For SBC comparison's sake, he reminds me a bit more of a more athletic Brandon Davis from USA or Tyren Johnson from ULL.

  • Upvote 3
TheTastyGreek Collaborator

TheTastyGreek

Posted
Posted

I remember Wells being bigger...a real college 4's body who tended to play on the perimeter more than his frame would suggest he should. For SBC comparison's sake, he reminds me a bit more of a more athletic Brandon Davis from USA or Tyren Johnson from ULL.

Memory is so weird... I remember Wells and Johnson as the exact opposite. Tyren Johnson, I think of as a legit power forward with the accompanying size and bulk. For some reason, Wells sticks in my memory as the slimmer of the two.

Google says you're right. 220 vs. 208, scales towards Wells.

Censored by Laurie Veteran

Censored by Laurie

Posted
Posted

Also, kids can still develop their shot...hops are tougher to come by. I think Jordan's numbers will trend upward this season...he has a good looking stroke, as the game slows for him the shots will start to drop a bit more frequently.

Wesley looked like he was out there playing the 5...6'7" at a public high school likely means you're in the post, no matter your skill set or where you'll be playing at the next level. Didn't watch the whole tape...didn't see him take a jumper so I can't speak to mechanics, but if the basics are there he can develop at least a 15-18 foot range.

  • Upvote 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

WE BELIEVE IN THE MEAN GREEN!

News

Recruiting

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Please review our full Privacy Policy before using our site.