NIL Pay Structure

WANTED: Passionate Sycamore Fanatics. That You?

Register NOW to join our community of die-hard Sycamore fans.

jturner38

The Wade Level
Supporter
You don’t have to read the whole article because there are different sections but pay attention to the last section called Thunder Model.
I’m curious if we should follow the same model.

 

Become a Supporting Member to remove this ad and help support the site.
You don’t have to read the whole article because there are different sections but pay attention to the last section called Thunder Model.
I’m curious if we should follow the same model.

Seems like something we should at least look into.
 
Determining who is your best, 2nd best, 3rd best, etc players could be very subjective, especially in the player's minds.
 
Just such a complicated situation, I really think that the only way a school like us can survive this landscape is valuing under valued skills. Are we going to get 12+ PPG guys in the portal? Probably not. But we might be able to get a big guard that is a distributor and makes the guys around him better but doesn’t post big PPG numbers.

I really think passing ability and court vision should be the top traits to looks for offensively. If you have multiple guys that are very skilled in that, that leads to easy buckets and higher % shots which would offset the skillset that we just don’t have money for. Also placing a premium on defense will keep you in games. And I really want “dogs” in our program again.

Recruiting philosophy
- passing ability, vision, IQ
- good+ defense
- dog

We don’t have money for high PPG guys, sharp shooters, etc. give me the Ian Scott’s, Xavier Bledsons, Julian Larry’s of the world.
 
You don’t have to read the whole article because there are different sections but pay attention to the last section called Thunder Model.
I’m curious if we should follow the same model.

I like the concept. Devil in the details, but certainly an interesting idea.
 

Become a Supporting Member to remove this ad and help support the site.
You don’t have to read the whole article because there are different sections but pay attention to the last section called Thunder Model.
I’m curious if we should follow the same model.


There isn't really anything special to the Thunder Model versus what our offense is supposed to do. Honestly, the Gini Coefficient is essentially a lot like the PER, except instead of wanting a high PER, you want a low Gini. But the crux of both is to optimize player efficiency and resource distribution. Remember a couple years back when we were fucking cooking, we had like 6 guys that all had PERs at like 20 or more and several more in the high teens.

That meant that on any given night, we had a combination of players that would beat whatever was thrown at them because it wasn't heliocentric and there was shared identity and success. Ball didn't stick, distribution was balanced... makes it hard do damn near impossible to fucking guard.

That said, at the end of the day, you still have to have talent to take and make shots. I feel like we've moved the ball pretty well this year and guys just haven't hit shots. Their is a discussion to be had there whether or not it is a talent or skill deficiency?
 
I’m not for certain how we allocated $$ and who got what… I didn’t want to know for obvious reason. I’m pretty sure Brad Stevens model had some input on the process.
 
Back
Top