Parker Emerson

With our apparent lack of recruiting success--for now--wouldn't it be wise to offer this young man a scholarship for next year? I suppose he would not consider an offer from us after what happened last spring, but if he would, based on his play last year, he would be next year's favorite for the starting small forward position. He certainly brought a scoring ability that was sorley lacking on last year's team. One small matter: extending him an offer would also be the right thing to do. Parker is also better than many on scholarship now. It may be that last spring he turned down an offer for a scholarship for next year . . .I simply do not know, but it seems counter-productive to lose one of your best players if you can avoid doing so.

Anyone know whether he is already enrolled and playing elsewhere?

I'm not sure if he is playing elsewhere or not, I would have to guess he is. I would also have to agree that he is better than some guys on scholarship right now, but we couldn't very well yank their scholarships and give them to Parker. I think (and hope) that the coaches have bigger and better ideas with the available scholarships (again, no knock on Parker).

I am hoping that Ethan makes a big jump this year, I think he has the potential to contribute. But again, I'm not thiking he can be terribly effective at the three (at least defensively). B.J. Porter is certainly a future option at the 3. There has been talk of Smuelders putting in some time at the 3 as well.

Unfortunatly, the 3-spot has always been a weak link at UP. Luckily, my opinion is that you can get away with having a big 2 guard playing the three spot in the WCC. There aren't a lot of teams that have terribly effective 6'6" guys that can play around the perimeter in the WCC. Now, I think that if we truly want to make some noise, this position would help tremendously (I don't want to say it's key, because I think point guard is the key). The fact of the matter in the WCC is that a small line-up, even in the post, can win you a lot of games if the players are talented. You saw Jamie Jones be a 6'6" post, and be very effective. Casey Calvary dominated inside, and he was undersized (at least height-wise).

If we can recruit a solid 3 spot talent (with the appropriate size), then HUGE steps would be made towards finishing in the top three in the conference. BUT, you saw what Donald Wilson could do at the three spot, and he was certainly not the ideal size for a 3. (I still cringe at how underutilized Donald was in his junior and senior seasons - it was a shame we wasted his offensive talent).

I thought Ethan looked pretty good at the scrimmage... seems like he has more confidence in his shot and that the game has slowed down a bit for him (and I mean that in a good way). I really do think he could develop into a solid player that can hurt teams if they leave him open and do all the little things like rebounding, hustling, etc.

As for BJ... it's hard to say because I have never seen him play, but I KNOW he's super athletic and can jump out of the gym. I mean... the guy high-jumped 6'10" last year, the fifth highest mark in the entire country. But I think his game is still pretty raw and will require lots of hard work on his end.

And Rochin54... so, so true about Donald. He could have done so much more...

Why would Emerson want to come back to UP? Looks like he was told that he was better than some of the scholarship players but you are not wanted. Last year Ethan N looked like a deer looking into head lamps. Sorry but the kid didn't show me anything the few times I saw a game. Question: If a young man really liked playing the game and like winning, why would they want to go to UP? Education? I think it is difficult to recruit for UP because of the past. Does the school support men's basketball?

Rochin, if the scholarship is for next year the U would not have to yank anyone's scholarship to give one to Emerson: that is the point. And, you could get me to invoke some sarcasm when you suggest the U has bigger and better plans with the scholarships available for next year. Yeah they probably do, but they are simply unlikely to get a better player. Those bigger and better plans have been the stuff of discussion for so long that at some point rational fans are sceptical. I do not necessarily disagree with it being unlikely that Emerson himself would not accept an offer from us now even if offered. The lack of wisdom and foresight in not offering him a scholarship last year will probably be quite evident when the Pilots take the court.

This is perhaps true, and I totally see your point. But put yourself in Reveno's shoes:

He wants to build this program. This is his goal, regardless of the recent and not so recent history of this program. In order to build the program, he HAS to get better talent, right? I don't disagree with you that Parker could contribute. But if Reveno wants to actually buiild the program, he has to believe that he can use the available scholarships to get a better player than Parker.

Look, it's a crappy situation that some of the scholarship players haven't panned out, and he couldn't give Parker on of those scholarships. But, to me, it is clear that if he truly wants to move the program, then he would have to keep these available scholarships to try and build a very sound class to come to the bluff next year.

You say, "they are simply unlikely to get a better player." Perhaps this is true. I sure as heck hope that Reveno can, and will get a better player!!! THIS IS NOT A KNOCK ON PARKER! It would be fantastic to swap Parker with one or two of the guys on the team right now, but that couldn't be done, and to me, Reveno also HAD to keep those other scholarships available to start evening out recruiting classes and to get a better talent!!

Rochin's got it right in my book. Parker was terrific as a walk-on and was definitely able to contribute, but really... it would have been irresponsible of the coaches - who, remember, were brought in to resurrect the program - to offer a scholarship to someone that they didn't feel had the potential to bring the Pilots to the next level.

I mean, I realize it would be "nice" or a "good story" to give a guy like Parker a scholarship, but I really can't fault the coaches for deciding to try and get someone they feel will have a better opportunity to get us some wins.

And wrv, I disagree that the coaches would be unlikely to get a better player - just watching the srimmage this weekend you could see the potential and skill of all the new guys. Hannibal is raw, but his size is unbelievable. I would take ALL of them over Parker. Like Rochin said, this is NOT a knock on Parker, who I would take over a few other guys on the roster any day. But the situation was what it was and I trust the coaches made the right decision.

Don't understand can't when you are trying to build a program. Scholarships are only good for a year. Many new coaches that come in take back scholarships to help improve their programs. If you want to be a "nice guy" it is difficult to rebuild in a short period of time. Understand Reveno has a 4 year contract. Freshman and Sophomores rarely help you win games and raw talent takes a lot longer to develope. Emerson should have been given one.

I disagree. While it's true that scholarships are year-to-year, it reflects poorly on a program if a coach has a track record of pushing guys out if they don't perform. Loyalty is a big thing in college basketball, and it's kind of unfair to expect a kid to commit to you if you can't make a commitment to him. I think it would be a damaging precedent to set to start giving year-to-year scholarships.

Remember, the school is in the power position when it comes to scholarships. If a school jettisons a kid, they still have to sit out a year when they transfer. If I were a high school senior, I would see it as a big risk to go to a school that has shown a willingness to give players the boot after a bad year.

Big time programs do it... heck, even Gonzaga has done it in recent seasons (Altidor-Cespedes and Burgess last year). But a small program like UP? We can't afford it.

Look... I don't think anyone has a single bad thing to say about Parker - he was a good kid who worked hard and contributed last year as a walk-on. But again - I'm trusting that the coaches have a plan to rebuild the program and that giving a scholarship to Parker just didn't fit into that.

I don't see it as pushing a kid out because he did not perform well. They were not recruited by the surrent staff and therefore that is the risk a kid takes by playing. I didn't know that scholarships are like "teachers tenure" and they are not. Many kids leave programs for various reason, grades, illnesses, performance. It does not mean that kids are not talented. As we know, there are many levels in which kids can play. Perhaps some of the UP players are at the wrong level. Again if you can not place a competitive team on the floor, who wants to play for that team?

Well, I am not in favor of pushing anyone out, but I disagree on Emerson's potential value to this team. I count four players at the small forward position, excluding Sikma. With due respect to them and to Stonehouse and Rochin, Parker Emerson is better and out-played every one of them last year. Quoting Pat Monihan (which may be dangerous) you are entitled to your opinion but not your facts. If your assumption that Emerson was just good walk-on were at all true then you might have a point, but it is not true. Enerson is better than Thompson, Carter, Watson and Neidemeyer(sp?). His value to this team by year end last year was evident and far greater than your posts acknowledge.

I dont disagree that Emerson was a valuable (although inconsistent) contributor to the team last season; he was a heck of a catch for a walk-on. Was Emerson even still around to consider once we knew Jones wasnt returning?!

IMHO, we are better off holding the scholarship for the next class in hopes of getting a higher caliber player that in the long run will be better for the program than having Emerson play for 3 more years...

In fact if Reveno is going to turn the program around, he MUST make short-term sacrifices like this to hold out for better players; if we dont upgrade the quality of players, it will be more of the same. While we may hurt a little this year, we should be much better off 2 years down the road with a higher caliber Rev recruit.

wrv wrote:Emerson is better than Thompson, Carter, Watson and Neidemeyer(sp?). His value to this team by year end last year was evident and far greater than your posts acknowledge.

First of all, no way was Emerson better than Watson. I know Sherrard is erratic at times, but he was a much more consistent player, can slash to the basket, is much more athletic, and is a better defender.

Niedermeyer I am willing to give the benefit of the doubt to, given the high-quality high school program he played on and his athleticism. Remember, Emerson already had a year of college basketball when he came to UP, so it makes sense that he was more game-ready. I can already see that Ethan has much more confidence and has improved his shot. Personally, I think his ceiling is higher than Parker's.

As for the other guys... the big difference, of course, is that those guys are on scholarship and Emerson wasn't. I mean... yes, I would rather have Parker than either of them. Absolutely. But we can't just cut bait on those guys, and the coaches obviously made the decision that they could get someone better than Parker.

I've said it a few times already, but this really is what it comes down to... the coaches clearly had an opportunity to give him a scholarship and chose not to. We can argue if it was wise or not, but that's the decision that was made. And in the end, I think ALL of can agree that we would love nothing more than to see some more W's up on the board. And the only way to get those W's is to get the best players we possibly can.

PilotNut wrote:In fact if Reveno is going to turn the program around, he MUST make short-term sacrifices like this to hold out for better players; if we dont upgrade the quality of players, it will be more of the same. While we may hurt a little this year, we should be much better off 2 years down the road with a higher caliber Rev recruit.

BINGO! Couldn't have said it any better myself.

Emerson did help last year, but he was hardly lites out.
He shot .359 % from the floor - .259 % from 3 pt. land and averaged 4.1 pts/gm.
Thats not too bad, but remember he had a year at wyoming before coming to Portland. You would have to say that Wyoming did not see anything special in him.
It might be good idea to see who we sign either in Nov. or in the late signing period in the spring. Who knows, the staff may have players already lined up but have not locked them up yet.
Based on the players we signed the last go around I have some confidence in Reveno's ability to recruit.