Looking for a profile

It's something found in every category of life which requires a choice to be made. Some call it an archetype -- the preferential features desired in a mate, a car, a television and, yes, even a basketball recruit. It's the assortment of elements that induce the sale.

In their wildest dreams, college coaches desire prospects who are tall, lean, can jump out of gym and run like a greyhound. Add to that is either the ability to put the ball in the cylinder with ease or sweep the boards like picking fruit from a backyard tree.

But there are so very few available players who match or come close to such a description and those have an array of multiple top level basketball programs to choose from.

At the mid-level and lower rungs, coaches typically engage for kids whose summary of skills or athletic abilities is missing preferred elements. However, the desire for and the quest in landing the closest to the prototype talent remains in place.

Oakland Rebel Coach Shawn Hadnot has a term not about the search for the 'Jesus Shuttleworths' but what comprises the checklist and how it is employed. He calls it a profile and believes the rigidity with which it is cast about and applied is baffling.

Here's Hadnot riffing on the subject:

"Colleges coaches look for a profile, like what men seek in a woman. It's 'I want someone who looks like this' regardless of the intelligence, personality and well-roundedness demonstrated ... the tweeners, the late bloomers [of body] who are solid fundamentally with a great basketball IQ but who are perceived as more complementary talents, get shunned ... I've literally seen coaches walking by a player during a game while on their way to see someone who better fits the profile ... There are guys [in northern California] getting interest from coaches in Texas and elsewhere who can't get a look from colleges here ... Damian Lillard didn't fit the profile for many schools in Northern California and look what happened to him ... he could always score although no Bay Area school recruited him heavily ... heart, motor and the attitude required to get better are harder for coaches to determine ... some kids get on the map early in high school and receive plenty interest but then don’t get any better -- yet continue to receive plenty of press while the key question is this: will there be continued improvement on their game?

It seems not necessarily a matter of blowing up the prototype and starting anew but more an expansion of the mindset of the seeker ... I have seen many kids with notoriety, highly-ranked and placed on teams with other players of their caliber, and they lose. Does the “profile” coaches use have a place for a player who just does the necessary things to win? ... some players have charismatic personalities which fosters team chemistry and creates winning. On the other hand, I have seen great players who meet the “profile” tear apart teams or transfer after one year ... like someone who consistently gets better as opposed to a guy busting out for a game or maybe two but then feels he doesn’t need to continue to improve. However, he never stops receiving the looks from coaches because he was rated high on the various national scouting publications. A kid who will play tough throughout his career versus someone shining for a spectacular moment or two -- who brings greater value? ... just look at the NCAA tournament as many mid-majors schools such as Ohio University have late bloomers with great hoops pedigrees and beat the teams with “profile” players every year.

A lot of coaches spend time at tournaments chasing this or that player and never get him while someone in their backyard doesn’t even get acknowledged -- yet if the local player goes to another D-I program but then decides to transfer, he may then get interest from the same school that originally had no interest in him ... many players in Northern California players have begun to leave the area to reclassify or attend post graduate schools in order to receive college interest. This approach will be interesting to watch over the next five years.