MSU-Mankato

[MontanaRabbit]

Re: MSU-Mankato

So I want to throw a question out there that's been on my mind for a couple of days, especially based on the discussion happening in this thread. Would love to hear anyone's thoughts who is willing to chime in.

I know the general consensus is, "Monaghan is only doing as well as he is because he's at a lower level." That's fine. I get why people, particularly SDSU fans, look at it that way.

So here's the setup for my question, and hopefully people get the point I'm trying to make...

Let's look at Nate Wolters. The general consensus is that his final choice was between Augie and SDSU. At least, that's what he said in that big ESPN article during your first NCAA Tourney appearance. Unfortunately for Augie fans, he chose SDSU.

Now, on the one hand, part of the reason Nate got so good was because he was playing against D1 competition. I hope it's clear that I understand that point. But let's say Nate had actually chosen Augie and averaged 30 ppg at the D2 level, won a Player of the Year award or two, maybe a National Championship, etc., and still went to the NBA as a 2nd round draft pick. If, during his time at Augie, some Augie fan got on these boards and said "Bet you wish you'd gotten Nate Wolters," would SDSU fans have responded with something along the lines of, "Well, it's because he's playing at a lower level that he's doing so well."?

Even if he were foundationally the same player (worked just as hard in the offseason, got up just as many shots in his late-night shooting sessions, etc.), would you guys simply dismiss him as a "playing at a lower level so he can't be as good as the guys at our level" type of player?

Like I said, I get that he played against D1 competition for four years and had an opportunity to play in some big games (Washington, etc.), so that in itself adds a major element of "we'll never know." It just makes me wonder if there's not so much of a talent gap as it would appear (at least in regards to specific, individual players) or if the level makes that much of a difference. What I mean is, it's obvious that Monaghan is playing at a lower level, but it's not like D2 is junior high girls basketball compared to the Summit League. Yes, the Summit League is a higher talent level overall top-to-bottom, I totally admit that and agree, but would Monaghan not still possess the skills to be a serviceable (or better) player for SDSU, regardless of the level he's currently playing in?

To be clear, I'm not a Monaghan fan. Particularly after hearing him f-bomb the Augie coaching staff after a made 3 in front of Augie's bench earlier this season, amongst other things. But it seems like, at least on these message boards, any player at the D2 level is automatically dismissed as being incapable of competing at the D1 level. But I find it hard to believe Monaghan wouldn't be helping SDSU in some form or fashion based on the skills he has displayed this season at Mankato.

To compare it differently, you look at a guy like Mike Rostampour. When he played a year at St. Cloud back in 2011, he averaged 7.8 points per game and 4.7 rebounds per game. Not exactly someone you would expect to do more than ride the bench in the Summit League (based on the perception it seems people have for D2 basketball). Yet this year he's averaging 9.1 points per game and 6.9 rebounds per game for Nebraska-Omaha. Not saying he's a superstar, but he started 29 of 30 games for UNO and seems to be a pretty important piece of their puzzle. And it's not like he transferred in to UNO from St. Cloud averaging 22 ppg and 12 rpg.

Anyway, the original point of this post was to get thoughts on how you would've viewed an alternate universe version of Nate Wolters that was nearly the same player, just dropped down a level. If he would've been immediately dismissed as a result of being at a D2 school or if there's a chance that version of Nate Wolters might've been able to make an impact for a D1 school like SDSU. I apologize if it just turned into a big, rambling mess.

I will bite.

Not everyone here is saying Zach is below SDSU. I posted above that Nagy publically said he was disappointed Zach left and that Zach would have been a key contributor had he stayed. That's enough to tell me right there Zach is capable of playing in the Summit League. Only Zach knows why he transferred, but I don't believe it's because he "wasn't good enough".

Every year you will be able to pick several kids in the DII ranks that could give meaningful minutes at the DI level and even a few that could be stars. Cody Schilling is one Augie has had recently that likely would have been very good and possibly great at State. We won't know though because that didn't happen. He went to Augie and had a great career.

The difference between DI Summit and DII is about the same as DI Summit and DI Big Ten. State has one or two players that could contribute at the Big Ten level whereas a Wisconsin (for instance) has 10. The difference between one or two players may not be much, but comparing the team as a whole, the gap gets bigger.

Had Nate Wolters played for Augie there would have been even more questions surrounding his ability to compete at the NBA level and it's unlikely he would have been a 2nd round pick. He may have eventually landed on an NBA roster, but he likely would have had to the the D-League route. Hell there were lots of questions surrounding him even though he dominated or at least held his own against some of the best (See New Mexico, Washington, Baylor, Nate vs. Trey, etc.).

[SF_Rabbit_Fan]

Re: MSU-Mankato

So I want to throw a question out there that's been on my mind for a couple of days, especially based on the discussion happening in this thread. Would love to hear anyone's thoughts who is willing to chime in.

I know the general consensus is, "Monaghan is only doing as well as he is because he's at a lower level." That's fine. I get why people, particularly SDSU fans, look at it that way.

So here's the setup for my question, and hopefully people get the point I'm trying to make...

Let's look at Nate Wolters. The general consensus is that his final choice was between Augie and SDSU. At least, that's what he said in that big ESPN article during your first NCAA Tourney appearance. Unfortunately for Augie fans, he chose SDSU.

Now, on the one hand, part of the reason Nate got so good was because he was playing against D1 competition. I hope it's clear that I understand that point. But let's say Nate had actually chosen Augie and averaged 30 ppg at the D2 level, won a Player of the Year award or two, maybe a National Championship, etc., and still went to the NBA as a 2nd round draft pick. If, during his time at Augie, some Augie fan got on these boards and said "Bet you wish you'd gotten Nate Wolters," would SDSU fans have responded with something along the lines of, "Well, it's because he's playing at a lower level that he's doing so well."?

Even if he were foundationally the same player (worked just as hard in the offseason, got up just as many shots in his late-night shooting sessions, etc.), would you guys simply dismiss him as a "playing at a lower level so he can't be as good as the guys at our level" type of player?

Like I said, I get that he played against D1 competition for four years and had an opportunity to play in some big games (Washington, etc.), so that in itself adds a major element of "we'll never know." It just makes me wonder if there's not so much of a talent gap as it would appear (at least in regards to specific, individual players) or if the level makes that much of a difference. What I mean is, it's obvious that Monaghan is playing at a lower level, but it's not like D2 is junior high girls basketball compared to the Summit League. Yes, the Summit League is a higher talent level overall top-to-bottom, I totally admit that and agree, but would Monaghan not still possess the skills to be a serviceable (or better) player for SDSU, regardless of the level he's currently playing in?

To be clear, I'm not a Monaghan fan. Particularly after hearing him f-bomb the Augie coaching staff after a made 3 in front of Augie's bench earlier this season, amongst other things. But it seems like, at least on these message boards, any player at the D2 level is automatically dismissed as being incapable of competing at the D1 level. But I find it hard to believe Monaghan wouldn't be helping SDSU in some form or fashion based on the skills he has displayed this season at Mankato.

To compare it differently, you look at a guy like Mike Rostampour. When he played a year at St. Cloud back in 2011, he averaged 7.8 points per game and 4.7 rebounds per game. Not exactly someone you would expect to do more than ride the bench in the Summit League (based on the perception it seems people have for D2 basketball). Yet this year he's averaging 9.1 points per game and 6.9 rebounds per game for Nebraska-Omaha. Not saying he's a superstar, but he started 29 of 30 games for UNO and seems to be a pretty important piece of their puzzle. And it's not like he transferred in to UNO from St. Cloud averaging 22 ppg and 12 rpg.

Anyway, the original point of this post was to get thoughts on how you would've viewed an alternate universe version of Nate Wolters that was nearly the same player, just dropped down a level. If he would've been immediately dismissed as a result of being at a D2 school or if there's a chance that version of Nate Wolters might've been able to make an impact for a D1 school like SDSU. I apologize if it just turned into a big, rambling mess.

Good post.

I think there are loads of DII players who could help or even star on DI teams. Likewise, there are loads of DI players who would struggle on DII rosters.

People like to think that talent is talent, but forget that circumstance is often just as important as talent. Wolters got to start early in his career at SDSU, and had A TON of freedom even as a freshman. He was talented, but the circumstances let him show and develop that talent in the best way. Pretty similar to how his NBA career is going so far: he has the talent to play, and circumstances on the Bucks have led to him playing. No doubt his performance has something to do with it, but if he drafted by the Clippers nobody would be talking about how much of a steal he was in the draft.

I believe that Nate could have actually had a worse career at Augie than at SDSU.

Just my $.02.

[SF_Rabbit_Fan]

Re: MSU-Mankato

I will bite.

Not everyone here is saying Zach is below SDSU. I posted above that Nagy publically said he was disappointed Zach left and that Zach would have been a key contributor had he stayed. That's enough to tell me right there Zach is capable of playing in the Summit League. Only Zach knows why he transferred, but I don't believe it's because he "wasn't good enough".

Every year you will be able to pick several kids in the DII ranks that could give meaningful minutes at the DI level and even a few that could be stars. Cody Schilling is one Augie has had recently that likely would have been very good and possibly great at State. We won't know though because that didn't happen. He went to Augie and had a great career.

The difference between DI Summit and DII is about the same as DI Summit and DI Big Ten. State has one or two players that could contribute at the Big Ten level whereas a Wisconsin (for instance) has 10. The difference between one or two players may not be much, but comparing the team as a whole, the gap gets bigger.

Had Nate Wolters played for Augie there would have been even more questions surrounding his ability to compete at the NBA level and it's unlikely he would have been a 2nd round pick. He may have eventually landed on an NBA roster, but he likely would have had to the the D-League route. Hell there were lots of questions surrounding him even though he dominated or at least held his own against some of the best (See New Mexico, Washington, Baylor, Nate vs. Trey, etc.).

I agree 100% with the bold.

[MrAugustana]

Re: MSU-Mankato

Good post.

I think there are loads of DII players who could help or even star on DI teams. Likewise, there are loads of DI players who would struggle on DII rosters.

People like to think that talent is talent, but forget that circumstance is often just as important as talent. Wolters got to start early in his career at SDSU, and had A TON of freedom even as a freshman. He was talented, but the circumstances let him show and develop that talent in the best way. Pretty similar to how his NBA career is going so far: he has the talent to play, and circumstances on the Bucks have led to him playing. No doubt his performance has something to do with it, but if he drafted by the Clippers nobody would be talking about how much of a steal he was in the draft.

I believe that Nate could have actually had a worse career at Augie than at SDSU.

Just my $.02.

Good thoughts. I completely agree that starting early at SDSU and getting to play against D1 talent for 4 years helped Nate immensely. Also agree completely that his NBA career seems to be paralleling his first few years at SDSU, which is interesting in itself.

The one thing I'd disagree with is that I don't know if I'd go so far as to say he would've had a worse career at Augie. He definitely would have been starting from day 1 at Augie (obviously), so he would have still seen just as many in-game minutes, if not more. But it certainly wouldn't have been at the same level as SDSU offered. So I don't know if his career at Augie would have necessarily been worse than his career at SDSU, he just might not have had a career that ultimately led to a sometimes-starting spot on the Milwaukee Bucks roster.

Either way, I appreciate the open-minded response. That's the type of conversation I was hoping would result.

[MrAugustana]

Re: MSU-Mankato

I will bite.

Not everyone here is saying Zach is below SDSU. I posted above that Nagy publically said he was disappointed Zach left and that Zach would have been a key contributor had he stayed. That's enough to tell me right there Zach is capable of playing in the Summit League. Only Zach knows why he transferred, but I don't believe it's because he "wasn't good enough".

Every year you will be able to pick several kids in the DII ranks that could give meaningful minutes at the DI level and even a few that could be stars. Cody Schilling is one Augie has had recently that likely would have been very good and possibly great at State. We won't know though because that didn't happen. He went to Augie and had a great career.

The difference between DI Summit and DII is about the same as DI Summit and DI Big Ten. State has one or two players that could contribute at the Big Ten level whereas a Wisconsin (for instance) has 10. The difference between one or two players may not be much, but comparing the team as a whole, the gap gets bigger.

Had Nate Wolters played for Augie there would have been even more questions surrounding his ability to compete at the NBA level and it's unlikely he would have been a 2nd round pick. He may have eventually landed on an NBA roster, but he likely would have had to the the D-League route. Hell there were lots of questions surrounding him even though he dominated or at least held his own against some of the best (See New Mexico, Washington, Baylor, Nate vs. Trey, etc.).

I appreciate the response. Although there wasn't a need to "bite." I wasn't trying to bait anyone. Just trying to add a different perspective to the conversation.

I wasn't exactly trying to bait you guys. Was just hoping to hear people's thoughts when stuff was presented in a slightly different way. I don't disagree on the ability to compete at the NBA level part of your comment. I think the likelihood of him getting drafted was, obviously, substantially lower at Augie. I meant it more as a talent comparison between Summit League-level D1 and D2. Like I said, I'm not defending Monaghan (mostly because I don't like him/his attitude), but it just seemed like others--not you specifically, obviously--were immediately dismissive of his recent accomplishments simply because he's at a D2, when, skill-wise, I don't think he's that far away from being a helpful part of SDSU's roster. Which, I recognize, you essentially agree with. Like I said, I appreciate the response.

[SDSU82]

Re: MSU-Mankato

I appreciate the response. Although there wasn't a need to "bite." I wasn't trying to bait anyone. Just trying to add a different perspective to the conversation.

I wasn't exactly trying to bait you guys. Was just hoping to hear people's thoughts when stuff was presented in a slightly different way. I don't disagree on the ability to compete at the NBA level part of your comment. I think the likelihood of him getting drafted was, obviously, substantially lower at Augie. I meant it more as a talent comparison between Summit League-level D1 and D2. Like I said, I'm not defending Monaghan (mostly because I don't like him/his attitude), but it just seemed like others--not you specifically, obviously--were immediately dismissive of his recent accomplishments simply because he's at a D2, when, skill-wise, I don't think he's that far away from being a helpful part of SDSU's roster. Which, I recognize, you essentially agree with. Like I said, I appreciate the response.

I saw Monaghan play for us as much as anyone else did which, unfortunately, was not that much given the short bench that we typically play and the amount of minutes that Nate and Brayden were on the floor each night. I, for one, feel that he would have been a significant contributor for us. I wish he would have stayed here.

[MontanaRabbit]

Re: MSU-Mankato

I appreciate the response. Although there wasn't a need to "bite." I wasn't trying to bait anyone. Just trying to add a different perspective to the conversation.

I wasn't exactly trying to bait you guys. Was just hoping to hear people's thoughts when stuff was presented in a slightly different way. I don't disagree on the ability to compete at the NBA level part of your comment. I think the likelihood of him getting drafted was, obviously, substantially lower at Augie. I meant it more as a talent comparison between Summit League-level D1 and D2. Like I said, I'm not defending Monaghan (mostly because I don't like him/his attitude), but it just seemed like others--not you specifically, obviously--were immediately dismissive of his recent accomplishments simply because he's at a D2, when, skill-wise, I don't think he's that far away from being a helpful part of SDSU's roster. Which, I recognize, you essentially agree with. Like I said, I appreciate the response.

It's an interesting topic and it's fun to discuss.

What are your thoughts on Augie potentially going DI?

[SDSUAlum08]

Re: MSU-Mankato

I would take Carlson over Monaghan any day of the week. Carlson is a first team All Academic All American. He may also be a first team All Summit League. Monaghan is where he should be. In the NCIS.

You're under the assumption that State couldn't have both. We're not dissing Carlson. ZM would have helped.

[SDSUAlum08]

Re: MSU-Mankato

Carlson still would have started at the point but Monaghan would have gave us more depth. The kid can play, he just had this one guy who is playing in nba in front of him. Also if Monaghan would have stayed Broman could have redshirted and made him that much better.

How do you know? Carlson could have played the 2 snd slid over in a backup roll. Lots of assumptions in this thread.

[witness]

Re: MSU-Mankato

Zach Monaghan would have been a role player at SDSU had he stayed. D2 basketball isn't D2 wrestling. In wrestling many kids that are D2 could compete and do well at the D1 level. In fact, D2 national champs used to be able to participate in the D1 tourney and some were D1 All-Americans, but this basketball isn't wrestling. Also, Nate got better at SDSU because of the quality of teammates were higher and he was able to practice and play in games against better players which made him better. Also, no way does Nate even sniff getting drafted if he goes to Augie.

[SDSUAlum08]

Re: MSU-Mankato

I don't remember him standing out that much. I just looked at his stats and they were brutal.

The coach's loved him. He'd literally try to dunk over people in practice. A tough, fearless kid.

[SanDakotaState]

Re: MSU-Mankato

How do you know? Carlson could have played the 2 and slid over in a backup roll. Lots of assumptions in this thread.

So you're saying Monaghan would have started at point, Carlson at the 2, and have Bittle come off the bench? Everyone saw how much SDSU struggled when Bittle was out. I'm pretty sure Nagy would have used this same lineup this year even if Monaghan decided to stay. Monaghan could come off the bench for Bittle then Carlson could move to the 2 guard. No one knows what would have happened. That's just my opinion of what would have happened.

[goon]

Re: MSU-Mankato

Basically what it sounds like is it would have been a good problem for sdsu to have an extra player who go maybe start or atleast be a role player and give us depth and more scoring. even if he was a bench guy here he would have played more last year and got plently of mintues this year that went to Broman who should have been redshirted and horstman IMHO.

[filbert]

Re: MSU-Mankato

My guess based on zero reliable information is that Monaghan transferred when he realized that Bittle was going to be ahead of him on the depth chart this year.

Personally, I was sorry to see him transfer, as I am about most people who are recruited to SDSU and then go elsewhere. I am however happy for his success.

The D-II vs. D-I discussion . . . I find a bit tedious and silly. (Meditate upon overlapping bell curves--one somewhat offset from the other--and that's my opinion, summarized graphically. Slap a few more bell curves on there for D-III and NAIA players, too. Add others as you think them up. The key word in the foregoing is overlapping.)

But anyway, carry on . . .

[RabbitObsessed]

Re: MSU-Mankato

So you're saying Monaghan would have started at point, Carlson at the 2, and have Bittle come off the bench? Everyone saw how much SDSU struggled when Bittle was out. I'm pretty sure Nagy would have used this same lineup this year even if Monaghan decided to stay. Monaghan could come off the bench for Bittle then Carlson could move to the 2 guard. No one knows what would have happened. That's just my opinion of what would have happened.

He's not saying that at all. All he said was that we don't know what would have happened at that people are making assumptions.