Untitled Document
Brown Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Harvard Penn Princeton Yale



 Page 1 of 4 1234
Username Post: Mike Wang to Penn        (Topic#20551)
FlaQuaker 
Junior
Posts: 223

Age: 41
Loc: NYC
Reg: 12-04-07
10-12-17 10:16 AM - Post#233842    

Figured this needed its own thread.

Discuss.

 
T.P.F.K.A.D.W. 
PhD Student
Posts: 1169

Loc: Our Nation's Capital
Reg: 01-18-05
Re: Mike Wang to Penn
10-12-17 10:46 AM - Post#233846    
    In response to FlaQuaker

A tall guy who can shoot.

A rich man's Jan Fikiel?

A poor man's Andrea Bargnani?

A well-adjusted man's Bill Laimbeer?



Edited by T.P.F.K.A.D.W. on 10-12-17 10:46 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
weinhauers_ghost 
Postdoc
Posts: 2125

Age: 64
Loc: New York City
Reg: 12-14-09
10-12-17 11:45 AM - Post#233850    
    In response to T.P.F.K.A.D.W.

I saw the video. He may not be the most athletic guy out there, but he's got some range. I like the fact that he's got a deft touch with either hand around the rim (one of my long-standing pet peeves is players who cannot use their non-dominant hand effectively).

I worry about comments indicating that he doesn't play with high energy, but that could be a conditioning issue the coaches at Penn should discuss with him before he ever shows up on campus.

He's listed at 215lbs, which means he's going to need to get stronger. Add another 10-15lbs and we might have something there.

I'd like to have a better idea of his defensive instincts, skills and intensity.

 
AsiaSunset 
Postdoc
Posts: 4350

Reg: 11-21-04
10-12-17 11:56 AM - Post#233853    
    In response to weinhauers_ghost

where did you see comments he doesn't play with high intensity?

 
Streamers 
Professor
Posts: 8141
Streamers
Loc: NW Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
10-12-17 12:19 PM - Post#233854    
    In response to weinhauers_ghost

If we only get one kid in this class, I'm glad it is a big who can shoot. If you look at the big future picture, PG is going to be the big need and there is nobody out there to take over from Silpe and Goodman at this point unless they land a transfer.

 
AsiaSunset 
Postdoc
Posts: 4350

Reg: 11-21-04
10-12-17 12:22 PM - Post#233855    
    In response to Streamers

Jelani Williams is a point guard although I agree they will probably want a pg in the 2019 class.

 
Mike Porter 
Postdoc
Posts: 3615
Mike Porter
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
10-12-17 02:20 PM - Post#233862    
    In response to AsiaSunset

I saw the motor comment also on ESPN. Here is his write up from June (rated him 3* with a 79 grade)

ESPN Analyst
Updated 06/22/2017
Strengths:
Wang is a versatile center/forward who has excellent touch out past the arch. Wang also can knockdown the face up mid range shot with consistency and is a smart and willing passer on the block.

Weaknesses:
Wang is not motivated to play with a elite motor. Wang can play the game of basketball on an elite level but needs to add more passion to his play. Wang is also an average athlete who needs to focus on explosiveness and stamina. Wang needs physical toughness and a mental mindset to rebound the ball consistently.

Bottom Line:
Wang is a skilled big who will affect the game facing up from 15 feet to out past the 3 point line. Wang has the touch, size and the skill set to be an impact at the next level. Wang%u2019s length, IQ and his length will help most college's front court rosters.

 
UPIA1968 
PhD Student
Posts: 1117
UPIA1968
Loc: Cornwall, PA
Reg: 11-20-06
10-12-17 08:32 PM - Post#233874    
    In response to Mike Porter

Were Mike Wang a scorer, with strength and defensive quickness he would be going to Stanford. He is exactly the kind of 3 star recruit who projects as a useful Ivy player. When, for instance, did Penn last recruit a 6'10" player who could shoot 3's?

This is a good get - not something we can bank on, but as Mike James points out, 3 stars have a higher probability of success than 2 stars.

 
SRP 
Postdoc
Posts: 4894

Reg: 02-04-06
10-13-17 12:27 AM - Post#233877    
    In response to UPIA1968

He can't miss if he can't miss.

 
AsiaSunset 
Postdoc
Posts: 4350

Reg: 11-21-04
10-13-17 06:10 AM - Post#233879    
    In response to SRP

Here is ESPN's write up on Matt Cotton. Would the weakness part cause you concern?

https://delgrecowilson.com/2017/03/11/black-cage r-...



 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 6062

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
10-13-17 07:54 AM - Post#233881    
    In response to AsiaSunset

To be fair, that's consensus three star players that I think you're referring to, not just 3-star players at one outlet. Mike Wang would still be in that general 1, 2, 2+ star bucket that is all sort of up in the air.

 
AsiaSunset 
Postdoc
Posts: 4350

Reg: 11-21-04
10-13-17 09:24 AM - Post#233883    
    In response to mrjames

Mike - it's true that he is not really updated in the Rivals database and that Scout tends to mimic 247 and Verbal Commits, but he's a 3 star anyway you slice it and a high 3*** at that in ESPN's numerical rating system. In fact - there isn't much distance between Mike Wang and the two low 4**** ESPN pgs coming into the league according to ESPN analysts. I haven't seen him rated lower anywhere else. If you have, feel free to share, but there are only so many sites that do this kind of stuff.

I think the description that Jeff made earlier which defined Mike Wang as someone less than an elite athlete is correct and consistent with other things I've read and my own viewing of the limited film on him available on the Internet; nevertheless, the reigning Ivy POY was someone I'd describe as not being an elite athlete in today's hs bb recruiting world, nor would I put that tag on some excellent Penn players from the past like Tim Begley.

I also wouldn't call Spencer Freedman an elite athlete either. I watched his highlight film. Is he a very good player? Absolutely. Could he play in a better league? Absolutely. But - he's no Michael Westbrook for sure. Haven't checked out the pg Princeton got but it's possible that he might be.

I also think it's unfair to compare Wang to Jon Jaques and to assume his college career will track similarly since you clearly didn't know who Jon Jacques was as a rising senior in hs. To say the few clips we all saw remind you of Jon Jaques as a senior at Cornell is fine, but Jaques was a guy who really went virtually unnoticed until his senior year in college. We are looking at a 17 year old. Plus - Mike Wang is already a lot bigger at either 6-9 or 6-10 and likely to get a lot stronger as he matures.

Why can't you just be gracious? You had to put down Columbia's 4**** recruit last year instead of just leaving well enough alone. I know you talk to people (who actually go way beyond where they should go in sharing certain types of confidential information), but those same people make repeated incorrect talent evaluations for their own teams. Certainly you have more guys at your alma mater who came in as very hyped and have been either disappointed or reduced to minimum roles. Look at Zena. We all thought he was going to dominate the league. It didn't quite work out that way although he had his moments. And - there are a bunch of others. Then you have coaches like Henderson and Jones who've constructed championship teams with guys with less stars than guys who barely get off of Harvard's bench.

Penn needed a versatile big and a wing player in this class. Right now I'd say we've been successful in completing 50% of the mission.

I agree that there remains some distance between Y,H, and Pr and the rest of the league, but I think Penn and some other Ivies will give them a run for their money. Last year a very imperfect Penn team beat Harvard at home, Yale in New Haven and took Princeton to OT at the Palestra. I'm not saying that the gap will close this year because I still don't know much about the team we will put on the floor, both in Nov and by the start of the league season. But - I don't think anyone at Penn or the other Ivies looks at Y,H or Pr as someone they can't compete with, if not over a 14 game season, then absolutely on any particular night.



 
TheLine 
Professor
Posts: 5597

Age: 60
Reg: 07-07-09
Mike Wang to Penn
10-13-17 10:14 AM - Post#233887    
    In response to AsiaSunset

People take a player comparison to someone like Jaques as some sort of slight when it's not meant as one. But maybe a Jan Fikiel comparison would've been perceived as more OK even though Jaques was a considerably better player IMO. What I meant by saying I agreed with a Jaques comparison is that I think Wang's peak contributions will look similar to Jaques' - superior outside shooting, able to contribute in other ways to the team (not just an outside scorer), likely topping out as a very solid contributor vs. a feature player of the team.

As a Senior Jon Jaques shot 45% from behind the arc and had 2.6 win shares. He was more than just an outside shooter, he contributed in other ways. That's a comfortably above average starter for our league. We should be happy if Wang puts up something comparable to Jaques' numbers his senior year. And I do hope Wang is able to contribute before his senior year.

I don't like to draw too many conclusions from highlight reels, but you can draw some. Wang's shot mechanics look pretty solid to me and he seems very comfortable with the ball. If any of his team's full games are broadcast then I'll try to slog through them as you learn a lot more form that.


 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 3580

Reg: 02-15-15
10-13-17 10:30 AM - Post#233889    
    In response to TheLine

Asia,

Thank you for your post. I think it is fair and balanced.

Mr James,

1,2, 2+ bucket? Where do I find that list? which Ivy League coach uses that as an evaluation tool? Saying that Mike Wang is potentially a 1* player or a 2/2+ bucket comes off as a dig when it doesn't appear to me that you don't have any more information nor expertise at projecting talent than anyone else on the kid.

 
91Quake 
PhD Student
Posts: 1124

Reg: 11-22-04
10-13-17 10:53 AM - Post#233895    
    In response to PennFan10

I am just going to agree here. Mike does outstanding work on the numbers driven analytical work. But he lets his H fan colors show when commenting on incoming players consistently. Every H 2* recruit seems to really be an under-rated, under the radar player who is really a much higher caliber player. At the same time Mike Wang, Penn's whole freshman class, Columbia recruits and others are not as highly regarded as they are rated.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but this gets pretty close to trolling when it happens on a consistent basis. This is not meant to be an attack on Mike, but maybe just be a little more fair to the rest of the league is my suggestion.

 
AsiaSunset 
Postdoc
Posts: 4350

Reg: 11-21-04
Re: Mike Wang to Penn
10-13-17 11:05 AM - Post#233903    
    In response to TheLine

Jaques barely got off the bench until his senior year. We hardly knew he existed.

If Wang or any other Penn player shoots 45% from three, I'm sure many of us would be thrilled. Still this kid is 17.

In a private email I described Wang as a slightly more skilled Bob Morse. Of course when Bob played there were not many 6-8 kids who shot the ball like he did. And - of course - there was no 3 point shot then so perhaps he would have been defended differently today.

Just a few years later we had 6-8 point guards playing college basketball and the game has even undergone more dramatic change after the Magic Johnson's first appeared on the scene.

I expect Mike Wang was recruited to be much more than a role player and to see time much earlier in his career than Jon Jaques did. But - time will tell.

 
yoyo 
Senior
Posts: 355

Reg: 03-25-09
10-13-17 11:07 AM - Post#233904    
    In response to mrjames

pretty smug post.

 
FlaQuaker 
Junior
Posts: 223

Age: 41
Loc: NYC
Reg: 12-04-07
10-13-17 11:11 AM - Post#233907    
    In response to 91Quake

Not trying to be a Mike James apologist, but I tend to agree with the general point that he was making regarding consensus 3-star players versus others that aren't rated 3-stars by all of the ratings groups. With the point being that there's a higher correlation to success with those that have a consensus with the ratings. Logically, it's hard to argue against that point.

However, it does look like Wang is highly rated by both ESPN (3-star and #39 PF) and Scout/247 (3-star), so I think that bodes well and he's probably more likely to see success than the guy that gets a 3-star from one agency and is a 2-star or isn't mentioned by others.

 
TheLine 
Professor
Posts: 5597

Age: 60
Reg: 07-07-09
10-13-17 12:43 PM - Post#233922    
    In response to FlaQuaker

You know what we think doesn't really matter. What Mike Wang does on the court matters.

Not directing this at you FlaQuaker as I agree with what you say. My one caveat is that there's a tendency to inflate ratings of bigs - probably because they can make a huge difference if they do pan out.

I'll stand with the Jaques comparison. Doesn't mean they will have the exact same career arc.

Would it be a diss if I compared a recruit to Belcore even though Rob really had only one good year?


 
Okoro Dude 
Senior
Posts: 309

Loc: Glen Mills, PA
Reg: 11-24-04
10-13-17 01:31 PM - Post#233923    
    In response to TheLine

Yes.

If the best recruits we can get mature out to be players who make their only impact as Juniors/Seniors and amount to little more than the best of Belcore, Fikiel or Jaques, we will not be contending in this league. Fikiel and Jaques played on borderline top 100 teams and were helpful role players only because there were at least 3 other 1st/2nd team all-ivy talents around them.

FWIW to the other comments in this thread - I recall Mike James giving significant props to Oni/Bruner (Yale), Boudreaux (Dartmouth, Brodeur/Simmons (Penn), Llewellyn (Princeton) when they committed. I think I recently saw him comment on the Princeton board that Ethan Wright was probably much better than some Princeton fan was speculating. Everyone here has a bias for their team (Mike included), but I think he tries more than most to follow the whole league and to call them as he sees them. No trolling from my point of view.

 
 Page 1 of 4 1234
Icon Legend Permissions Topic Options
Report Post

Quote Post

Quick Reply

Print Topic

Email Topic

7634 Views





Copyright © 2004-2012 Basketball U. Terms of Use for our Site and Privacy Policy are applicable to you. All rights reserved.
Basketball U. and its subsidiaries are not affiliated in any way with any NCAA athletic conference or member institution.
FusionBB™ Version 2.1 | ©2003-2007 InteractivePHP, Inc.
Execution time: 0.243 seconds.   Total Queries: 16   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT -0500) Eastern. Current time is 07:23 AM
Top