MVCfans.com

A lot of rumors floating around that he's leaving

I hope they are rumors that never come to fruition.

Some of the rumors suggest he may not be transferring on his own, but it may turn out to be Dan Muller's decision not to have him back.

Either way I hope the rumors, stay rumors and not turn in to fact.

Guys got potential to be a stud in the MVC next season.

Especially with how he was playing since the UNI game. He was shooting with confidence and was also taking the defensive end of the court seriously. That Arch Madness game showed what the future could be with him...

No doubt Dan Muller took some risks in the guys he brought in last year. For the most part---it has paid off with an improved season.

Knight had issues, Middlebrooks gone, now Lofton's issues. Not a surprise to anyone but can Muller continue to take those risks for the sake of better talent?

tribecalledquest wrote:No doubt Dan Muller took some risks in the guys he brought in last year. For the most part---it has paid off with an improved season.

Knight had issues, Middlebrooks gone, now Lofton's issues. Not a surprise to anyone but can Muller continue to take those risks for the sake of better talent?

Prior to the season, I thought Muller made some BAD decisions on his recruiting. Based on the performance of the Redbirds, I think I was mistaken, but…

Calculated risks are good and are necessary for improvement. Too many risks can bankrupt a program and send them spiraling out of control. Muller is walking a thin line between improvement and falling off a cliff.

Returning players from 2012-13:

Keane, Jones, and Zeisloft - as a group, they are solid and still have some upside. Not a group to build around. This group gets a C- for all around quality. Could have been a C+ had Ekey stuck around.

Freshman:

Lee, Wills, McIntosh, Lynch, Hawkins. Three out of five were eligible. One is still questionable. Of the three that played, One was a stud, two were very good freshman. Tons of upside in this group, but still tons of question marks. A- here. Freshman don't always pan out, so three out of five in year one is nice!

Transfers:

Hunter, Knight, Samuel, Lofton, Middlebrooks. Talented group for instant wins. The best player has attitude problems and likely won't return. The second best had some legal difficulty…but played. Middlebrooks was doing very well, but was booted early in the season. Hunter is tiny, but effective. Samuel is a project. Overall, this group gets a C. They were effective enough to get Muller through the transition year, and Knight and Hunter get one more opportunity.

Muller gets a B from me for effectiveness of a total rebuild in year one.

Wufan wrote:Muller gets a B from me for effectiveness of a total rebuild in year one.

I don't disagree with your analysis. But it should be noted that these actions took place in year two, not year one.

Wufan wrote:Calculated risks are good and are necessary for improvement. Too many risks can bankrupt a program and send them spiraling out of control. Muller is walking a thin line between improvement and falling off a cliff.

I agree. Too many risks can be trouble. Moving forward, I don't think you'll see so many. Mainly because there won't be as much year to year turnover. Personally I have no issues with a coach taking one gamble each year on a high risk/high reward guy. If the avg recruiting class is 3-5 guys, having one that's a gamble is fine by me. However, the others had better be steady, consistent, and even if they don't project to be an A type player for their ceiling, their floor can't drop below a B. If each recruiting class typically has one guy who doesn't pan out anyway, I'm good with having one be a risk each year.

Wufan wrote:

tribecalledquest wrote:No doubt Dan Muller took some risks in the guys he brought in last year. For the most part---it has paid off with an improved season.
Freshman:
Lee, Wills, McIntosh, Lynch, Hawkins. Three out of five were eligible. One is still questionable. Of the three that played, One was a stud, two were very good freshman.

Lots of good information here and this may be a minor point, but I disagree that Lynch (I assume this is the stud) is a stud. A nice freshman, good athlete, nice rebounder, very good shot blocker, not a good scorer. He is a nice player and one of the better freshman in the league but he was never a serious factor against us. Lynch is not a stud yet. If he improves his game, becomes a better free throw shooter (he was awful from the line),he may become one but he has a ways to go to be considered a stud in my opinion.

Fugg it, I might as well post these vids of him in here:
Forgive my editing.
But coming off the bench for a 9-0 run by himself when they were down 10 around 2:30-3:00 min mark was outrageous.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oTtl7U4wd9 ... ata_player

And this win against sweet 16 Dayton wasn't too pretty highlight-wise, but the commentators sure talked highly of him.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=F8inn4zzEgs

Be nice if he's back next year, if not I'm sure he can do well somewhere else.
Example is Joey King left Drake University last season for the MN Gophers after averaging 10 points at Drake, he's doing fine.
He's playing well in the NIT final 4...
Go gophers.

jigga wrote:Fugg it, I might as well post these vids of him in here:
Forgive my editing.
But coming off the bench for a 9-0 run by himself when they were down 10 around 2:30-3:00 min mark was outrageous.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oTtl7U4wd9 ... ata_player

And this win against sweet 16 Dayton wasn't too pretty highlight-wise, but the commentators sure talked highly of him.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=F8inn4zzEgs

Be nice if he's back next year, if not I'm sure he can do well somewhere else.
Example is Joey King left Drake University last season for the MN Gophers after averaging 10 points at Drake, he's doing fine.
He's playing well in the NIT final 4...
Go gophers.

Actually, averaged a little under 7 ppg at Drake but your point is valid. Both Rayvonte Rice and Joey King put up numbers in the Big 10 similar to what they put up at Drake.