Max Hooper - SF - Harvard Transfer - Irvine, CA - ST. JOHN'S

Quote from: Chilleb on March 21, 2012, 01:53:38 PM

Quote from: fordham96 on March 21, 2012, 01:51:34 PM

Again if they can get him as a walk-on I don't see the downside either way.

He'd have to really wanna play here to do that. I don't see a kid with that much ability willing to do that

I am not so sure he wouldn't do that. He could be like a Kuric for St Johns (trust me I know he is not that type of player) but should be able to walk on and get a scholarship later.

He would only be a scholarship player.

I've seen Max play a few times, he has good size, consistent release, not overly quick/agile, but doesn't require much daylight to get his shot off. I liked him when I saw him play. I don't think he's a "Big East" player so to speak but do think in the right situation he can be successful in the Big East.

You don't have 5 studs out on the court all the time. Role players/ specialists whatever you want to call them can thrive if they are accepting to do their job. Max wants to get minutes and if he came to St. John's he'd be expected to crack the rotation otherwise he would have stayed at Harvard.

I think he's a good teammate and will work hard in practice. For me that means something too.

He would definitely crack the rotation at St Johns just because he can shoot. We have so many athletes that can tae the ball to the hoop that D could not zone in on him. 

Is this all speculation or he has interest in coming to sju?

Quote from: fordham96 on March 21, 2012, 11:34:28 AM

Quote from: gman on March 21, 2012, 11:29:35 AM

Quote from: Moose on March 21, 2012, 11:15:57 AM

Quote from: gman on March 21, 2012, 10:58:54 AM

From mater di too I believe. Lav knows that school week. Why did he decommit?

He played in just 1 game all year.  I don't know the eligibility rules but can Ivy to regular conference playing only 2 minutes in one game all year get him eligible immediately?

I was wondering the same thing. Maybe he would be a mid year eligible transfer.

I don't think it matters.  If you played 1 second you have been deemed to have played that year unless you suffered a serious injury.  In that case the rule is as long as you have not played in more then 1/3 of your games you can use that season as a redshirt. 

Bottom line is I think he would have to sit a year.

He played 2 minutes early in the season. I think he actually could be Dec eligible

How do you figure?

BTW-The transfer rule has nothing to do with how much or how little a player played at his prior destination.  The transfer rule says you must establish residency at your NEW school for 1 full year (2 semesters if you go by 2 semesters) before you are eligible to play in live games.

Period.  I don't see how he gets around that.  Even if he did not play at all and redshirted at Harvard, he would still have to sit an entire year at SJU to meet the transfer requirements.

Even if Jamal Branch did not play for A & M in their first few games he needs to sit 2 semesters at SJU (the equivalent of 1 year) before he is eligible.

Keep in mind let's say he withdrew from Harvard after the first semester and sat at home for the last 3 months and then decided he wanted to go to SJU.  That semester he sat at home and did not enroll anywhere does NOT count as part of his 1 year of sitting.  He has to establish residency at a school for 1 full academic year for that to count. 

Is this all speculation or he has interest in coming to sju?

Speculation. He just decommitted today and was Jakarrs roomate at Brewster.

Does the fact that ivies don't have athletic scholarships change any of the transfer rules?

Does the fact that ivies don't have athletic scholarships change any of the transfer rules?

No I don't think it is impacted in anyway.  We know not being on scholarship does not preclude you from having to go thru the NCAA Eligiblity Center to be cleared/

His name is HOOPER, go get him.

if you had to choose would you go with Max Hooper or Marco B.?

any thoughts?

if you had to choose would you go with Max Hooper or Marco B.?

any thoughts?

Depends
Are they both playing next year?

if you had to choose would you go with Max Hooper or Marco B.?

any thoughts?

Never seen Marco in person and only saw him from the game the other day but wasn't overly impressed with him. He did some nice things but think he may be a reach based off what I saw. I would rather have Hooper he shoots lights out and knows how to play off of talent from playing with Mater Dei & Brewster. I trust Lavin's judgment though

Quote from: lihoop on March 21, 2012, 11:20:24 PM

if you had to choose would you go with Max Hooper or Marco B.?

any thoughts?

Never seen Marco in person and only saw him from the game the other day but wasn't overly impressed with him. He did some nice things but think he may be a reach based off what I saw. I would rather have Hooper he shoots lights out and knows how to play off of talent from playing with Mater Dei & Brewster. I trust Lavin's judgment though

Marco can play off talent though.  He is the 5th option on a stacked Monroe team where the PG and SG dominate shots.  Either choice is pretty low risk IMO.  They both solve a weak area.

Quote from: Redstormy80 on March 21, 2012, 11:33:54 PM

Quote from: lihoop on March 21, 2012, 11:20:24 PM

if you had to choose would you go with Max Hooper or Marco B.?

any thoughts?

Never seen Marco in person and only saw him from the game the other day but wasn't overly impressed with him. He did some nice things but think he may be a reach based off what I saw. I would rather have Hooper he shoots lights out and knows how to play off of talent from playing with Mater Dei & Brewster. I trust Lavin's judgment though

Marco can play off talent though.  He is the 5th option on a stacked Monroe team where the PG and SG dominate shots.  Either choice is pretty low risk IMO.  They both solve a weak area.

True thats a good point. He looked like a good passer who is a team player but just didn't find him that impressive. Like I said though I only saw him that one time through an online stream so its tough tell how good he actually is

Quote from: sju89tr on March 21, 2012, 11:42:30 AM

Quote from: fordham96 on March 21, 2012, 11:34:28 AM

Quote from: gman on March 21, 2012, 11:29:35 AM

Quote from: Moose on March 21, 2012, 11:15:57 AM

Quote from: gman on March 21, 2012, 10:58:54 AM

From mater di too I believe. Lav knows that school week. Why did he decommit?

He played in just 1 game all year.  I don't know the eligibility rules but can Ivy to regular conference playing only 2 minutes in one game all year get him eligible immediately?

I was wondering the same thing. Maybe he would be a mid year eligible transfer.

I don't think it matters.  If you played 1 second you have been deemed to have played that year unless you suffered a serious injury.  In that case the rule is as long as you have not played in more then 1/3 of your games you can use that season as a redshirt. 

Bottom line is I think he would have to sit a year.

He played 2 minutes early in the season. I think he actually could be Dec eligible

How do you figure?

BTW-The transfer rule has nothing to do with how much or how little a player played at his prior destination.  The transfer rule says you must establish residency at your NEW school for 1 full year (2 semesters if you go by 2 semesters) before you are eligible to play in live games.

Period.  I don't see how he gets around that.  Even if he did not play at all and redshirted at Harvard, he would still have to sit an entire year at SJU to meet the transfer requirements.

Even if Jamal Branch did not play for A & M in their first few games he needs to sit 2 semesters at SJU (the equivalent of 1 year) before he is eligible.

Keep in mind let's say he withdrew from Harvard after the first semester and sat at home for the last 3 months and then decided he wanted to go to SJU.  That semester he sat at home and did not enroll anywhere does NOT count as part of his 1 year of sitting.  He has to establish residency at a school for 1 full academic year for that to count. 

+1  He wouldn't play until 2013/14 which puts him in the class with Hall (assuming he doesn't qualify), Wainwright, Domingo and Severe amongst others and STJ with limited schollies that year.  Everyone still interested?

We have offered Hooper according to the Brewster coach.  Still not sure if he would be a '12 or '13 kid.

An old article about IS8 experience w Nate's Scout team. Nice comment from Tom Konchalski

http://www.zagsblog.com/2011/05/24/harvard-bound-hooper-lights-it-up-at-is8/

No interest in Severe and we offer a guy who has played only 2 games in Harvard. Curious.

Severe is local and Hooper is from California. Perhaps it is the reason.

Guess is Lavin is offering several shooters and will grab the first commit, not putting all his eggs in the proverbial one basket.

No interest in Severe and we offer a guy who has played only 2 games in Harvard. Curious.

Severe is local and Hooper is from California. Perhaps it is the reason.

Could also be that Hooper is 6'7 while Severe is 6'2.  Could also be that Severe has strong ties with Nate Blue and Jakarr.  Could be a number of reasons...

Quote from: ris on March 28, 2012, 02:39:52 PM

No interest in Severe and we offer a guy who has played only 2 games in Harvard. Curious.

Severe is local and Hooper is from California. Perhaps it is the reason.

Could also be that Hooper is 6'7 while Severe is 6'2.  Could also be that Severe has strong ties with Nate Blue and Jakarr.  Could be a number of reasons...

No no,  it's obvious.   Steve Lavin hates NY kids.   Pssh, when will Harrington show him the door already?