Hope Y’all Like Transfers

[xuphan]

Looks like Steele is interest in bring in transfer Paul Atkinson Jr. from Yale. Looks like a good transfer based on his stats. It will be interesting to see how a team loaded with transfers is able to work over the next couple of years. Steele definitely like to eat from the transfer dish.

https://www.zagsblog.com/2020/11/21/...during-season/

[GIMMFD]

I liked Atkinson a lot when I watched him play a couple times last season, him and Jordan Bruner were a really good duo for the front court (Bruner transferred to Alabama for what it's worth), I think it'd be a great pick up for some front court depth, especially with someone played pretty well for a decent Yale team. Not to mention having the grades and work ethic to get into Yale is nothing to scoff at either, so the kid probably has a good head on his shoulders. A lot to be excited for moving forward in terms of roster and talent.

[xavierj]

Looks like Steele is interest in bring in transfer Paul Atkinson Jr. from Yale. Looks like a good transfer based on his stats. It will be interesting to see how a team loaded with transfers is able to work over the next couple of years. Steele definitely like to eat from the transfer dish.

https://www.zagsblog.com/2020/11/21/...during-season/

Does three transfers constitute loaded with transfers? It’s kind of what everyone is doing now. College coaches are not even allowed to have recruits on campus. With the rules changing there is going to be transfers flying around everywhere.

[XUGRAD80]

I would guess that moving forward 1/4-1/3 of most schools rosters will be made up of transfers.

You know, it already seems like 75% of the “freshman” have spent a year in prep school or have attended more than one HS, especially when we are talking top 50 recruits. As someone that did transfer into X after a year away at another school, I don’t see what the big deal is. I spent 4 years on a Xavier roster and got my degree from X. Does it really matter where they start? I think it matters more where they finish.

[xu82]

In Steele I trust.

[xudash]

I would guess that moving forward 1/4-1/3 of most schools rosters will be made up of transfers.

You know, it already seems like 75% of the “freshman” have spent a year in prep school or have attended more than one HS, especially when we are talking top 50 recruits. As someone that did transfer into X after a year away at another school, I don’t see what the big deal is. I spent 4 years on a Xavier roster and got my degree from X. Does it really matter where they start? I think it matters more where they finish.

Great post.

[Jumpin_Jamal_Forever]

I would guess that moving forward 1/4-1/3 of most schools rosters will be made up of transfers.

You know, it already seems like 75% of the “freshman” have spent a year in prep school or have attended more than one HS, especially when we are talking top 50 recruits. As someone that did transfer into X after a year away at another school, I don’t see what the big deal is. I spent 4 years on a Xavier roster and got my degree from X. Does it really matter where they start? I think it matters more where they finish.

It feels like the game is changing quickly and potentially in a big way. With no "sit-out" year (the lone exception being our own Ben Stanley), the numbers of transfers, across college basketball, seem destined to increase, perhaps substantially. If that happens, recruiting changes and attracting transfers becomes a critical capability. Each year, Steele will, more or less, start over filling out his squad.

One can make an argument that Steele (perhaps) recognizes this new normal; that he is getting out in front of this trend. If so, good for him. But, we, on this board, have seen, over the last couple of years, there are both advantages and disadvantages to relying more on transfers. Specifically, there will be more pressure on Steele to closely manage and be in control of his team, both to satisfy the new faces transferring in and to keep the traditional recruits on board. After all, more liberal transfer rules is a two edged sword---you can lose guys too. And, I'm not speaking of Elias Harden, Dontarius James, etc. I'm talking about guys we don't want to lose. You could, conceivably, find coaches whose principal strategy is to rely on transfers, trolling other teams and convincing established players the grass is greener with them. Hell, that could be a strategy well suited for John Calipari. He's already sleezy.

Much of the criticism leveled at Steele, on this board, involves his lack of control over his team. Managing diverse personalities and competing player interests has not been his perceived strength. So, let's see how this all shakes out. It will be interesting to watch.

[X-Expert]

I would guess that moving forward 1/4-1/3 of most schools rosters will be made up of transfers.

You know, it already seems like 75% of the “freshman” have spent a year in prep school or have attended more than one HS, especially when we are talking top 50 recruits. As someone that did transfer into X after a year away at another school, I don’t see what the big deal is. I spent 4 years on a Xavier roster and got my degree from X. Does it really matter where they start? I think it matters more where they finish.

I agree with you. my concern is alienating existing roster and potential recruits.

[GIMMFD]

I agree with you. my concern is alienating existing roster and potential recruits.

I think that also depends though, for someone like Atkinson, you have an all conference type of talent (albeit at a lesser conference), if you aren't confident about getting someone as talented as that through recruiting, why not take the transfer? Alienating the current roster is a risk you may have to take to build a more talented squad, but it doesn't seem like many teams have a problem with bringing transfers in, seems basketball is pretty big on comradery.

[XUGRAD80]

Don’t you risk alienating the roster when you bring in top 50 recruits out of prep/HS? Those guys enter college expecting to play right away, which means they are going to be taking minutes away from returning players. It’s my guess that something like that has entered into decisions to transfer more often than not. But competition for playing time is a good thing in my opinion. As a coach, I want players that don’t shrink from a challenge and are willing to compete everyday in practice.

Bottom line.....if you’re not willing to compete for your spot on the squad, your probably not going to be willing to compete for wins. I want guys that are going to compete. I’ll take a 3* that has a chip on his shoulder and wants to prove something to everyone, over a 4-5* who thinks the basketball world owes him something, everyday. Who wants a player that shrinks from a challenge? “You’re upset that the new player might take away your playing time? Fine, prove to me that you’re a better player. You don’t want to compete and feel that you’ve already earned that spot? Fine, see you later. Next.”

Does anyone think that Jay Wright worries that his returning players might not like him bringing in new talented players every year? Do anyone really think that they really care if they are transfers? What about Coach K or Coach Cal? They bring in the top recruiting classes every year. Think it ever crosses their mind that they might alienate their upperclassmen by doing that? I can’t think of a coach worth anything that worries about alienating his returning players by bringing in talented new players. In fact, they use it as a motivational tool to get the returners to work harder and improve themselves.

Worry about alienating the current roster to the point where you won’t try to get the best players available to come to your program.....that’s the surest way I know to find yourself looking for a new job.