PG Tremont Waters (UConn Offer)

[7774]

This is revisionist history. In the 2011 season, we were the talk of the sport after Maui. At one point we were 17-2. We had a lull, then the Big East tournament again made us the biggest thing going. Why people forget all this is beyond me.

Not sure how it was revisionist history. Seems accurate to me.

 

[Gurleyman]

In this five year span we're fretting about, we had an aging coach with health issues (which cost us both wins and surely some success on the recruiting trail), a sudden coaching turnover in the middle of a recruiting season, recruiting violations docking us a scholarship, academic sanctions costing us two more, probation causing a mass exodus of transfers and early entries, and a coach who was unproven on the big stage until six months ago. The fact that we won two national titles in the middle of all this is remarkable. When Kentucky had its issues with probation and coaching changes, they retired the jersey numbers of the four seniors who helped the team get back to the Elite Eight, because they were so grateful to those players who stuck with the program and brought them out of the abyss into the point where they were a buzzer-beater away from the Final Four. They call them "The Unforgettables" - a nice nickname, although personally, I can't forget how Pelphrey just got out of the way and let Laettner shoot, but either way, they became legends for being quarterfinalists. Our version of The Unforgettables won two titles.

The fact that we haven't been top 10 much lately and won two titles anyway is not a sign of the decline of our program, it's a sign that we have a championship pedigree and are almost always a threat to end the year with scissors in our hands.

 

[sdhusky]

I still don't get it. We win 4 titles in 15 years, beating Duke and Kentucky each twice en route -- what more is it going to take for UConn to be thought of with these schools? I really just don't understand it. Whatever. Rhetorical question.

Gosh. Who has a better schedule this year?

When was the last time UConn spent a good part of the year #1 in the country?

We've gotten some lucky bounces the past few years that make up for the bad luck we had with the Ray and Donyell teams, but we aren't a dominating program from nov to March.

 

[AfgHusky15]

This is revisionist history. In the 2011 season, we were the talk of the sport after Maui. At one point we were 17-2. We had a lull, then the Big East tournament again made us the biggest thing going. Why people forget all this is beyond me.

Hmm not sure what you are referring to when you say revisionist history, but here are some facts for you:

- Between 2010/11-2013/14 seasons UCONN spent a total of 21 weeks in the regular season ranked in the top 10.
- 19 of which were in 2011 season alone
- The 2 times they were ranked in top 10 in 2014 season they both came in at #10
- They spent a total of 6 weeks ranked in top 5 over the course of 4 years

Compare to Arizona regular season:

Arizona spent 39 weeks ranked in the top 10 last season alone. Their lowest ranking was #6 and that was in the beginning of the season. They spent 17 weeks as the number #1 ranked team.

This is really a moot point, as a UCONN fan I care much more about ships than number of weeks we spend ranked in top 10, but the reality is Zona has had a slot of success in the past few years during the regular season which is reflected in their rankings.

They have a bright future too with their recruiting classes of late, but I can almost guarantee you we will win another ship before they do, b/c simply we are UCONN and they are not. End of story.

 

[sdhusky]

2009 was the last time we were consistently in the top 10...maybe even the top 5 all season.

That's what we should shoot to get back to. More likely to win NC #5 with a team in the top 4 than in the top 30.

 

[Inyatkin]

We've gotten some lucky bounces the past few years that make up for the bad luck we had with the Ray and Donyell teams, but we aren't a dominating program from nov to March.

And who is, over the past five years?
Duke? I guess if your definition of March means all the way to the first game of the NCAA tournament. Kentucky? Let's ask Robert Morris. Kansas? I guess, but they've basically made losing to an 8/9 seed their thing. Syracuse was pretty dominant for most of last season. So what?

 

[Gurleyman]

Hmm not sure what you are referring to when you say revisionist history, but here are some facts for you:

Arizona spent 39 weeks ranked in the top 10 last season alone. Their lowest ranking was #6 and that was in the beginning of the season. They spent 17 weeks as the number #1 ranked team.

39 weeks? A calendar year is 52.

 

[sdhusky]

And who is, over the past five years?
Duke? I guess if your definition of March means all the way to the first game of the NCAA tournament. Kentucky? Let's ask Robert Morris. Kansas? I guess, but they've basically made losing to an 8/9 seed their thing. Syracuse was pretty dominant for most of last season. So what?

There is a lot to be said about the accomplishment of winning P5 Championships and earning #1 seeds. Those are the teams most likely to win NC's year in and year out.

 

[Inyatkin]

We all want to be in a real conference. There's no debate there. But Gurleyman is absolutely right that the fact that we're still in the hunt almost every year despite everything that's happened is a good sign for us, not a bad one. You can nitpick it different ways, but I don't get why you'd want to. There's nothing higher profile than winning a title.

 

[sdhusky]

We all want to be in a real conference. There's no debate there. But Gurleyman is absolutely right that the fact that we're still in the hunt almost every year despite everything that's happened is a good sign for us, not a bad one. You can nitpick it different ways, but I don't get why you'd want to. There's nothing higher profile than winning a title.

And if the plan is to win a NC with 6+ seeds, we might not see another NC in our lifetimes.

 

[Inyatkin]

And if the plan is to win a NC with 6+ seeds, we might not see another NC in our lifetimes.

It's not the plan. The plan is to get in a real conference and win championships as one, two and three seeds, which we did in the Big East. You have to look real hard to take the fact that we won one as a seven seed as a mark against us.

 

[CTBasketball]

Not sure if they are comparable, but Tyler Ulis was a McDonald's All-American at 5'9" and playing for Kentucky right now.

Ulis's stats were inflated in high school. Very Boatright-esque. Although I'm not saying he'll be a bad player, he'll most likely be good. Plus Ulis's numbers are inflated at Kentucky. He plays with the best team in the country and merely is a role player.

Are you nuts? He's one of the best 2017 point guards in the country and is almost certainly a 4-year player because of his size.

Not to mention, we just won a national championship with a 5'11'' shooting guard.

Not too many players like Shabazz come around. Maybe once in a decade. I think Waters would be excellent here, but I think other PG's can be better.

 

[upstater]

39 weeks? A calendar year is 52.

Something is definitely wrong with those numbers. First poll is Nov. 17, and last poll is around March 12-15.

Last year's poll went for 19 weeks total.

 

[HuskyBballFan]

Ulis's stats were inflated in high school. Very Boatright-esque. Although I'm not saying he'll be a bad player, he'll most likely be good. Plus Ulis's numbers are inflated at Kentucky. He plays with the best team in the country and merely is a role player.

Not too many players like Shabazz come around. Maybe once in a decade. I think Waters would be excellent here, but I think other PG's can be better.

You wouldn't want Tyler Ullis on our team right now? He'd be playing 30 minutes per game for us...and just about every other team in the country.

 

[BUConn10]

You wouldn't want Tyler Ullis on our team right now? He'd be playing 30 minutes per game for us...and just about every other team in the country.

Again, as CT is saying, the results like that of Ullis are the exception 95% of the time, not the norm.

 

[Stainmaster]

Are people really "NEXT"-ing this kid? Sheesh. Kid will probably end up being a very solid 4-star PG by the time he is a senior. Calm down with your Kentucky complexes.

 

[BUConn10]

Are people really "NEXT"-ing this kid? Sheesh. Kid will probably end up being a very solid 4-star PG by the time he is a senior. Calm down with your Kentucky complexes.

There is no "Kentucky complex" here. Its simply the idea of a 5' 9" point guard playing high-major D1 basketball is an anomaly (there is really no way this can be refuted). I along with some others here simply feel that maybe we shouldnt put too many eggs on a guy who clearly has physical limitations in the game of basketball that will put a ceiling on his development. No matter how you cut it, this kid could have the talent of MJ coursing through his veins, and he would still be a good college player, but being 5' 9" is always gonna hurt you and your potential. I agree the size will make him more attractive since he wont likely be going to the NBA, but still, if there are similarly talented guys with more standard height for the position interested in us we should put time in there as well. Look at the current trend of All-Star level PGs in the NBA, besides for maybe CP3, the trend is overwhelming going towards taller, more athletic players like Westbrook, Rose, Irving, MCW, Exum, etc. Guys like Isaiah Thomas on the Suns only come around at that level once a generation. Hell, even small PGs like Curry are still 6ft+ even on their shortest days, 3 inches is huge in basketball.

Think of it like this, would you want a highly skilled 6' 6" guy playing your 5 spot and being your primary paint defender? The kid could have post moves like Kevin McHale for all I care, but if hes small hes limited on both ends automatically. Thats the point being made here, not some "Kentucky complex" you just throw in there to try and demean the person you are responding to as if it would somehow reflect poorly on our level of judgement on the issue.

 

[Stainmaster]

There is no "Kentucky complex" here. Its simply the idea of a 5' 9" point guard playing high-major D1 basketball is an anomaly (there is really no way this can be refuted). I along with some others here simply feel that maybe we shouldnt put too many eggs on a guy who clearly has physical limitations in the game of basketball that will put a ceiling on his development. No matter how you cut it, this kid could have the talent of MJ coursing through his veins, and he would still be a good college player, but being 5' 9" is always gonna hurt you and your potential. I agree the size will make him more attractive since he wont likely be going to the NBA, but still, if there are similarly talented guys with more standard height for the position interested in us we should put time in there as well. Look at the current trend of All-Star level PGs in the NBA, besides for maybe CP3, the trend is overwhelming going towards taller, more athletic players like Westbrook, Rose, Irving, MCW, Exum, etc. Guys like Isaiah Thomas on the Suns only come around at that level once a generation. Hell, even small PGs like Curry are still 6ft+ even on their shortest days, 3 inches is huge in basketball.

Think of it like this, would you want a highly skilled 6' 6" guy playing your 5 spot and being your primary paint defender? The kid could have post moves like Kevin McHale for all I care, but if hes small hes limited on both ends automatically. Thats the point being made here, not some "Kentucky complex" you just throw in there to try and demean the person you are responding to as if it would somehow reflect poorly on our level of judgement on the issue.

I was responding to the point "other PGs would be better" when I made the Kentucky remark. No that's true, but people act like it's a 100% necessity to have the #1 player at every single position to compete. Waters is probably top 5 among 2017 PGs, I believe ESPN has him at #2. FWIW this is shaping up to be a weak PG class, with only one (Troy Brown Jr.) currently in ESPN's Top 25. How much further down on the ladder of talent are you willing to go to get a PG who's "tall enough"?

We're also not searching for NBA all-stars. We're searching for players that will make our collegiate team as successful as possible. We have one, maybe two future NBA all-stars on our current roster, so is everyone else a waste?

I think that it's also a fair assumption that he hasn't stopped growing yet. 2-3 inches between the first semester of one's HS sophomore year and when they set foot on a college campus is by no means unheard of. That being said I have no way to back this up.

 

[Hoophound]

Based on what is out there on him, he's a no brainer for us. Even if he proved to be something less than a starting pg, he brings skills that we need. We play a lot do three guard lineups, there is always room for a very talented water bug in our scheme.

 

[Gurleyman]

Khalid El-Amin is somewhere reading this thread, wondering if his career meant nothing to us.

 

[Mots010]

We won 3 national championships with sub 6 foot point guards starting for our team.

 

[upstater]

There is no "Kentucky complex" here. Its simply the idea of a 5' 9" point guard playing high-major D1 basketball is an anomaly (there is really no way this can be refuted). I along with some others here simply feel that maybe we shouldnt put too many eggs on a guy who clearly has physical limitations in the game of basketball that will put a ceiling on his development. No matter how you cut it, this kid could have the talent of MJ coursing through his veins, and he would still be a good college player, but being 5' 9" is always gonna hurt you and your potential. I agree the size will make him more attractive since he wont likely be going to the NBA, but still, if there are similarly talented guys with more standard height for the position interested in us we should put time in there as well. Look at the current trend of All-Star level PGs in the NBA, besides for maybe CP3, the trend is overwhelming going towards taller, more athletic players like Westbrook, Rose, Irving, MCW, Exum, etc. Guys like Isaiah Thomas on the Suns only come around at that level once a generation. Hell, even small PGs like Curry are still 6ft+ even on their shortest days, 3 inches is huge in basketball.

Think of it like this, would you want a highly skilled 6' 6" guy playing your 5 spot and being your primary paint defender? The kid could have post moves like Kevin McHale for all I care, but if hes small hes limited on both ends automatically. Thats the point being made here, not some "Kentucky complex" you just throw in there to try and demean the person you are responding to as if it would somehow reflect poorly on our level of judgement on the issue.

He's a 2017 kid? He's a sophomore, which means he just turned 15? He probably has one more year of growing. Sometimes more.

Kid could easily be 5'11" by the time he gets to university.

 

[BigErnMcCracken]

There is no "Kentucky complex" here. Its simply the idea of a 5' 9" point guard playing high-major D1 basketball is an anomaly (there is really no way this can be refuted). I along with some others here simply feel that maybe we shouldnt put too many eggs on a guy who clearly has physical limitations in the game of basketball that will put a ceiling on his development. No matter how you cut it, this kid could have the talent of MJ coursing through his veins, and he would still be a good college player, but being 5' 9" is always gonna hurt you and your potential. I agree the size will make him more attractive since he wont likely be going to the NBA, but still, if there are similarly talented guys with more standard height for the position interested in us we should put time in there as well. Look at the current trend of All-Star level PGs in the NBA, besides for maybe CP3, the trend is overwhelming going towards taller, more athletic players like Westbrook, Rose, Irving, MCW, Exum, etc. Guys like Isaiah Thomas on the Suns only come around at that level once a generation. Hell, even small PGs like Curry are still 6ft+ even on their shortest days, 3 inches is huge in basketball.

Think of it like this, would you want a highly skilled 6' 6" guy playing your 5 spot and being your primary paint defender? The kid could have post moves like Kevin McHale for all I care, but if hes small hes limited on both ends automatically. Thats the point being made here, not some "Kentucky complex" you just throw in there to try and demean the person you are responding to as if it would somehow reflect poorly on our level of judgement on the issue.

Your judgment is poor without the Kentucky complex. The kid is going to be a coveted recruit at the highest levels. There are also plenty of 5-10 point guards playing D1 basketball, if I didn't have a job that required my attention I'd list a handful for you.

The fact that you're saying we back off this kid - who's what, 15 years old - because of his "physical limitations" is about as clear an example of a hysterical Boneyard overreaction as you're going to find.

Two more things: your 6-6 center example is a terrible analogy for what I thought should be the face-slappingly obvious reason that height is a lot more important for post players than it is for point guards. As to your comment on "All-Star level" point guards being big, I got a kick out of the part where you said (I'm paraphrasing) "Except for the best point guard my list . . . "

 

[James]

tremont waters is really really good. @BUHusky10 go watch some of his highlights as freshman playing on south kent. he goes at and outplays plenty of high d1 prospects that are upperclassmen... in the best prep basketball league in the world. Not only is he extraordinary on the court, his academics are through the roof - pretty sure he was winning crazy awards like high honors (1 of 5) in his class...

I consider him near must get territory as most of this board does. He will be tough to get because he will end up a top 30 player in 2017.

 

[superjohn]

Tremont Waters is about as close to a surefire kid as a soph in high school can be. Can't believe there are any UConn fans questioning if we want him, the kid is going to be an absolute stud in college and he's from Connecticut.