Transfers. V one and done

[Catfanlou]

I think the transfer rule absolutely makes the one and Done en mass obsolete .

Maybe take one if u have an outstanding five star who can play immediately like Suggs or Cunningham .

However , projects like Boston just no longer make sense.

What does make a lot more sense is loading up on grad transfers to fill holes in your offense like Michigan’s number 12 .

also using all 13 of ur scholarships to build future upperclassmen and to play where u make a mistake like Boston.

IMHO that’s how Cal needs to change .

 

[sk73]

There are many more good players in the portal now than there are 4 and 5 star recruits so it makes sense to scour the portal. Unless the transfer rule changes, the portal route is the way most coaches will most likely go. Looking at star ratings only, a coach could recruit a top ten team talent wise going the portal route. It is proven college level talent as well.

 

[BBNinSC]

Boston was a top 5-10 player in the country, every school in the country would have taken him

 

[bucsrule8872]

Need a good mix.

You need 4-5 guys (that can play) back every year.

Add 1-2 high level impact recruits.

Add 1-2 high level impact transfers.

Finish the roster with 2-3 recruits that are willing to bide their time for a year or two before becoming one of the 4-5 impact returnees.

That keeps you from having to rely on a new roster every year, but leaves room for new talent to come in.

 

[Catfanlou]

Boston was a top 5-10 player in the country, every school in the country would have taken him

I agree most Anyone would gave taken him but it was obvious early on he was not ready and should have been benched . No one deserves playing time . You earn it l

 

[Dead Cat Bounce]

The transfer rule opens a huge can of worms. How do you keep other leagues and teams from poaching your talent? Certainly, unhappy players aren't gonna stick around and ride the pine. And how will the NCAA prevent tampering? What's to stop other teams from offering back-channel payments or incentives to good players or their families?

 

[G-PIP]

Boston was a top 5-10 player in the country, every school in the country would have taken him

Boston was a Top 5-10 freshman. But, that is not even close to the same thing as being a top 5-10 player in college basketball. Still, you're right that every college program with an open scholarship would have taken Boston (and maybe even the ones that were already at the scholarship limit).

 

[chroix]

I agree with the OP. Who wouldn’t take a proven commodity over a shot in the dark. The elites will still be highly sought but the rising four star that busts out and transfers is money in the bank.

 

[Smashcat]

Transfers make sense. Houston has started 4 transfers at times. Arkansas has 5 transfers. Mitchell and Teague at Baylor. Michigan replaced Livers with a transfer. UCLA is not the same team without Juzang, etc, etc.

 

[G-PIP]

Transfers make sense. Houston has started 4 transfers at times. Arkansas has 5 transfers. Mitchell and Teague at Baylor. Michigan replaced Livers with a transfer. UCLA is not the same team without Juzang, etc, etc.

Yeah, I think transfers make a lot of sense under the free transfer rule. As a general proposition, I think the better upperclassmen - the ones that have been baptized by fire and responded with big success at the Div. I level - are just better college basketball players than freshmen - even 5-star freshmen. But, I still think it's better if the core of the team is recruited and developed. Just be careful with and limit the OADs.

 

[cats2010]

I don’t care who we get, transfers or freshmen, as long as you recruit basketball players who have demonstrated AN IQ. These athletes who cant shoot and putting 3-4 of them on the court together at a time is a recipe for disaster.

 

[ThreeHogNight]

Transfers make sense. Houston has started 4 transfers at times. Arkansas has 5 transfers. Mitchell and Teague at Baylor. Michigan replaced Livers with a transfer. UCLA is not the same team without Juzang, etc, etc.

Coach Musselman put together a very good roster at Arkansas with a huge amount of turnover. Our normal starting rotation is two graduate transfers and three top 100 recruits. We also have another transfer as the SEC sixth man of the year., another with significant playing time in Vanover, and one more top 100 recruit that has been out almost the entire season with a foot injury.

He was big on using transfers to fill roster holes when at Nevada, and he is keeping it going in Fayetteville.

 

[katwest]

Boston and Clarke couldn't wait to get out of here, I would rather have a good transfer than overrated freshman.

 

[JonathanW]

Boston and Clarke couldn't wait to get out of here, I would rather have a good transfer than overrated freshman.

But you don't really know what you are getting (in advance), in either case, although you have a slightly better idea w/ transfers than with FR.
Who knew SGA or Booker or Ulis would be as good as they were.
Who knew Skal or Clarke or Boston would be as mediocre as there were.
To me, Travis and Sarr were big disappointments.
Uncle Julius and Mintz were slight positive surprises.

You would trade Boston and Clarke for 2 good transfers, yeah of course. But would you have traded Davis and MKG for 2 good transfers, I don't think so. Or even Fox and Bam & Monk, probably not.

 

[BlueSince92]

I agree this is the way to go but it won’t be easy for Cal. The turnover that hurt us was actually the reason he recruited so well: “Look, I can get you out of here.”

It was a stronger pitch when more of his kids were bolting for first round draft picks and less were bolting for G-league and overseas. But it was still a pitch that appealed especially to a certain kind of kid that thought college was kind of below him, except maybe for a special G-league-flavored college that only Cal was offering.

He won’t find that so appealing to transfers. And by focusing on them—which I do agree he needs to do—he’s gonna lose half his pitch which was, “at Kentucky you’ll improve more because every day in practice you’ll be going against big-name AAU stars you’ve heard about your whole high school career.”

He’s got a tiger by the tail.

 

[Dore95]

It would be theoretically possible this year for a group of players to get together like Lebron/Wade/Bosh and transfer en masse to UK or some other school. Maybe we'll see it happen.

And that raises another issue - Cal was (maybe still is) great at recruiting OAD talent. Part of that was his relationships (or relationships of some of his associates/colleagues like WWW) with AAU people, shoe companies, high school coaches, etc. Those relationships were built over many years. Recruiting the "transfer market" is totally different. Will Cal still be the top dog (or one of them) in recruiting transfers?

 

[Lempface]

Boston was a top 5-10 player in the country, every school in the country would have taken him

This is what's crazy. All the stars-don't-mean-anything get some real evaluators in here people are nuts. Literally every single school would have taken BJ. Sometimes you just get a bust.

 

[rolaid]

I’ve been saying for a year - get a couple High School kids and complete roster with transfers
Older more experienced players

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

Need a good mix.

You need 4-5 guys (that can play) back every year.

Add 1-2 high level impact recruits.

Add 1-2 high level impact transfers.

Finish the roster with 2-3 recruits that are willing to bide their time for a year or two before becoming one of the 4-5 impact returnees.

That keeps you from having to rely on a new roster every year, but leaves room for new talent to come in.

Yep, been saying it since 2013.

 

[Dead Cat Bounce]

A real challenge will be the fact that *nobody* will be content with limited minutes. Not the one-and-dones who are auditioning for the NBA, not the prospective G-Leaguers for whom even low pay will seem like an attractive offer, and not the prospective transfer students for whom the the grass will always look greener at another school. IMHO, this dynamic will present a big challenge for a coach like Cal, who has always showcased his one and dones. It will take a very special kid and a very strong relationship with his coach for a player like Quickley or Ulis, for example, to bide his time and accept a limited role as a freshman.

 

[aaren.rivals69]

I think the transfer rule absolutely makes the one and Done en mass obsolete .

Maybe take one if u have an outstanding five star who can play immediately like Suggs or Cunningham .

However , projects like Boston just no longer make sense.

What does make a lot more sense is loading up on grad transfers to fill holes in your offense like Michigan’s number 12 .

also using all 13 of ur scholarships to build future upperclassmen and to play where u make a mistake like Boston.

IMHO that’s how Cal needs to change .

Transfer is the new wave baby

 

[Bluesbrother]

Boston was a top 5-10 player in the country, every school in the country would have taken him

...and those are the coaches that allow others to do their talent evaluation for them. Counting to five doesn't make you a good evaluator of talent. Boston was a bust and our misfortune that he landed here because he took minutes from others that deserved to play ahead of him. Cal too stupid and stubborn to admit his failures with Boston and OAD in general and as a result better players sit or transfer...all for wholesale OAD. Loyal fans of the PROGRAM are fed up with WHOLESALE OAD. Either Calipompus fixes this dumpster fire or GTFU. He claims it's all about the "kids" but that not true...it's all about HIM.

 

[Kybluedude]

It will certainly benefit UK. Already has this year with 2 of the top transfers. UK and Cal will feast. He should be able to build a great roster every year and with a lot less projects

 

[DrH. Lecter]

The Transfer Portal will replace the McD All American game.

 

[jwphelps]

I think the transfer rule absolutely makes the one and Done en mass obsolete .

Maybe take one if u have an outstanding five star who can play immediately like Suggs or Cunningham .

However , projects like Boston just no longer make sense.

What does make a lot more sense is loading up on grad transfers to fill holes in your offense like Michigan’s number 12 .

also using all 13 of ur scholarships to build future upperclassmen and to play where u make a mistake like Boston.

IMHO that’s how Cal needs to change .

I would say transfers take some of the guess work out of it, they have already played college ball so you know what you get, where as this year, Boston, Askew and Clark were projects at best and only one of them is coming back. So the project never got finished.

 

[CatPhight]

Coach Musselman put together a very good roster at Arkansas with a huge amount of turnover. Our normal starting rotation is two graduate transfers and three top 100 recruits. We also have another transfer as the SEC sixth man of the year., another with significant playing time in Vanover, and one more top 100 recruit that has been out almost the entire season with a foot injury.

He was big on using transfers to fill roster holes when at Nevada, and he is keeping it going in Fayetteville.

Hawgs had better bust open their piggy bank or you're liable to lose Delmar.

 

[TankedCat]

IMO, its still a lottery ticket/shotgun approach that hasn't proved capable of winning a national championship

Until Cal develops players on his own and gets the right mix of talent instead of a hodge podge collection each year that he throws together and hopes they become something in March, we are never going to reach a title game.

This isn't innovation, this is desperation. Its shortcut coaching.