Squaring something with the portal | Syracusefan.com

Squaring something with the portal

OttoinGrotto

2023-24 Iggy Award Most 3 Pointers Made
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
60,840
Like
175,930
It seems (at least) 2 things are true when it comes to the portal:

1, there is more money flowing to transfer players than anticipated

2, some percentage of guys in the portal end up without a destination

dasher recently commented about some uncertainty around how successful we may be adding players to the roster at this point from the portal, presumably because Lampkin's shenanigans may have impacted our ability to pursue talent.

But are we also not expecting that in this game of musical chairs there are some decent players that won't be guys that command a bag, but if they have to choose between being on a scholarship somewhere to play basketball vs not, they'll want to make sure they can play somewhere?

I'm just having a hard time squaring the money with the scarcity of roster spots. Not to be crass, but it seems like inevitably there's a "bargain bin" shopping phase to the portal, and I feel like we should be positioned to pull a surprise or two there given we have scholarship room and outside playing time opportunities at point guard, forward and center. If a player has multiple years of eligibility left and ends up being roster fodder, it's just not a big deal because they can play musical chairs in the portal the next year, but now with added experience under their belt at a school in a top conference.

Basically, how to portal flyers work in this era of college basketball? Because I don't think having unused scholarships is a sound strategy for us.
 
It seems (at least) 2 things are true when it comes to the portal:

1, there is more money flowing to transfer players than anticipated

2, some percentage of guys in the portal end up without a destination

dasher recently commented about some uncertainty around how successful we may be adding players to the roster at this point from the portal, presumably because Lampkin's shenanigans may have impacted our ability to pursue talent.

But are we also not expecting that in this game of musical chairs there are some decent players that won't be guys that command a bag, but if they have to choose between being on a scholarship somewhere to play basketball vs not, they'll want to make sure they can play somewhere?

I'm just having a hard time squaring the money with the scarcity of roster spots. Not to be crass, but it seems like inevitably there's a "bargain bin" shopping phase to the portal, and I feel like we should be positioned to pull a surprise or two there given we have scholarship room and outside playing time opportunities at point guard, forward and center. If a player has multiple years of eligibility left and ends up being roster fodder, it's just not a big deal because they can play musical chairs in the portal the next year, but now with added experience under their belt at a school in a top conference.

Basically, how to portal flyers work in this era of college basketball? Because I don't think having unused scholarships is a sound strategy for us.
Finding diamonds in the rough is critical for all programs, especially programs that aren't the best NIL destinations. So we definitely need to find guys who out-perform expectations and don't command a big price. It's up to the coaches to be better at evaluating talent than the rest of the country. But also if we're relying on "bargain bin" shopping for main pieces such as a starting point guard, it's pretty tough to see how we can be a Top 15 program of the future, like we were of the past. We should discount shop for depth though, such as young Bigs with potential.
 
It seems (at least) 2 things are true when it comes to the portal:

1, there is more money flowing to transfer players than anticipated

2, some percentage of guys in the portal end up without a destination

dasher recently commented about some uncertainty around how successful we may be adding players to the roster at this point from the portal, presumably because Lampkin's shenanigans may have impacted our ability to pursue talent.

But are we also not expecting that in this game of musical chairs there are some decent players that won't be guys that command a bag, but if they have to choose between being on a scholarship somewhere to play basketball vs not, they'll want to make sure they can play somewhere?

I'm just having a hard time squaring the money with the scarcity of roster spots. Not to be crass, but it seems like inevitably there's a "bargain bin" shopping phase to the portal, and I feel like we should be positioned to pull a surprise or two there given we have scholarship room and outside playing time opportunities at point guard, forward and center. If a player has multiple years of eligibility left and ends up being roster fodder, it's just not a big deal because they can play musical chairs in the portal the next year, but now with added experience under their belt at a school in a top conference.

Basically, how to portal flyers work in this era of college basketball? Because I don't think having unused scholarships is a sound strategy for us.
I think part of the problem for Syracuse here is that we are trying to backfill needs from the portal while still making the recruitment of HS players a major priority.

So we might want to add a solid PG, maybe a combo PG/SG to the mix. But we are very much involved with a number of PG recruits from the class of 2025 and we really want to land one of them.

If we add a guard with only one year of remaining eligibility, it will not affect these class of 2025 PG recruits. If we add one with a couple of years, it might throw away years of work establishing a strong relationship with some of the 2025 guys.

Same applies with adding a forward or a center from the portal. I think we are really only looking at guys with one year of eligibility. Add in considerations for whether the guy fit the style of play Coach Autry wants to play, is the guy a fit culturally, is his skill set a fit and the fact that most of the best players in the portal are gone now, and it becomes quite a challenge to find players the staff thinks meet all the criteria they are looking for.

Even if some of the guys left in the portal might be panicking a bit and might be willing to sign on for a much lower price than they might have been asking for originally.
 
It seems (at least) 2 things are true when it comes to the portal:

1, there is more money flowing to transfer players than anticipated

2, some percentage of guys in the portal end up without a destination

dasher recently commented about some uncertainty around how successful we may be adding players to the roster at this point from the portal, presumably because Lampkin's shenanigans may have impacted our ability to pursue talent.

But are we also not expecting that in this game of musical chairs there are some decent players that won't be guys that command a bag, but if they have to choose between being on a scholarship somewhere to play basketball vs not, they'll want to make sure they can play somewhere?

I'm just having a hard time squaring the money with the scarcity of roster spots. Not to be crass, but it seems like inevitably there's a "bargain bin" shopping phase to the portal, and I feel like we should be positioned to pull a surprise or two there given we have scholarship room and outside playing time opportunities at point guard, forward and center. If a player has multiple years of eligibility left and ends up being roster fodder, it's just not a big deal because they can play musical chairs in the portal the next year, but now with added experience under their belt at a school in a top conference.

Basically, how to portal flyers work in this era of college basketball? Because I don't think having unused scholarships is a sound strategy for us.
^^ This may end up becoming the counterbalance with the $ as players start to realize there's a real risk of not having a school. In theory, it should start reducing number of players entering the portal. You better damn know you have a landing spot.
 
^^ This may end up becoming the counterbalance with the $ as players start to realize there's a real risk of not having a school. In theory, it should start reducing number of players entering the portal. You better damn know you have a landing spot.
I don't think it will affect the NIL market. The guys who command a big price have absolutely no risk of not finding a school. And the supply/demand driving NIL isn't based on total number of portal entries, it's based on total number of quality entries. It will just mean the 12th and 13th guys who don't get any PT might not try their luck with the portal.
 
I don't think it will affect the NIL market. The guys who command a big price have absolutely no risk of not finding a school. And the supply/demand driving NIL isn't based on total number of portal entries, it's based on total number of quality entries. It will just mean the 12th and 13th guys who don't get any PT might not try their luck with the portal.
Your last sentence refutes your first. As of now the 10th, 11th and 12th player from Syracuse's roster hit the portal this season.
 
It seems (at least) 2 things are true when it comes to the portal:

1, there is more money flowing to transfer players than anticipated

2, some percentage of guys in the portal end up without a destination

dasher recently commented about some uncertainty around how successful we may be adding players to the roster at this point from the portal, presumably because Lampkin's shenanigans may have impacted our ability to pursue talent.

But are we also not expecting that in this game of musical chairs there are some decent players that won't be guys that command a bag, but if they have to choose between being on a scholarship somewhere to play basketball vs not, they'll want to make sure they can play somewhere?

I'm just having a hard time squaring the money with the scarcity of roster spots. Not to be crass, but it seems like inevitably there's a "bargain bin" shopping phase to the portal, and I feel like we should be positioned to pull a surprise or two there given we have scholarship room and outside playing time opportunities at point guard, forward and center. If a player has multiple years of eligibility left and ends up being roster fodder, it's just not a big deal because they can play musical chairs in the portal the next year, but now with added experience under their belt at a school in a top conference.

Basically, how to portal flyers work in this era of college basketball? Because I don't think having unused scholarships is a sound strategy for us.
i agree...that's why I think the patience will eventually pay off here

there are too many players in portal for there not to be some bargains eventually

i think after the combines and everything fnish there will be a surge in activity

but i think they are setting the table for kiyan and want a big freshman class next year

so it does limit it this year to seniors...
 
Your last sentence refutes your first. As of now the 10th, 11th and 12th player from Syracuse's roster hit the portal this season.
How so? I was responding to a post that said seeing guys not find a new school might counterbalance the NIL money being paid to transfers. My first sentence was that seeing guys not find a new school likely won't affect the high amount of NIL being offered to transfers. My last sentence was the future effect of seeing players not find a new school is that the bottom portal players might not enter. I don't see how that's contradictory.

Why would seeing guys not find a new school deter the guys who are getting big dollars? They are in different classes. It would deter the worst players who could be at risk of getting no offers. And if you take out the worst 350 players in the portal, I don't think that affects the big NIL valuations we're seeing. The worst players don't command much, if any, NIL. For example, not having the Chaz Owens' of the World enter the portal won't affect the Lampkin's getting offered 750k.

And as for this year's Syracuse team in the portal, our posts are about the future effect on NIL valuations after years of seeing the worst players not find a landing spot.
 
Unused scholarships aren’t always bad. Coaches never want to be in the position to force guys out. And you you can find yourself in a bad spot if you over-recruit with the expectation that a certain number of spots will open up that don’t actually open up (which brings you back to forcing guys out or missing out on recruits). It’s a similar dance that airlines have to do, and they pay dudes a lot of money to figure it out and still get it wrong pretty much every time.

How many scholarship spots are there now? I used to care about this stuff more than I do. Is it 13? If so, I’m fine with the team rolling with 11 or 12 scholarship players. A bargain bin guy just to fill out the roster creates a potential headache that probably isn’t worthwhile for a player who is just there as a body in practices.
 
Unused scholarships aren’t always bad. Coaches never want to be in the position to force guys out. And you you can find yourself in a bad spot if you over-recruit with the expectation that a certain number of spots will open up that don’t actually open up (which brings you back to forcing guys out or missing out on recruits). It’s a similar dance that airlines have to do, and they pay dudes a lot of money to figure it out and still get it wrong pretty much every time.

How many scholarship spots are there now? I used to care about this stuff more than I do. Is it 13? If so, I’m fine with the team rolling with 11 or 12 scholarship players. A bargain bin guy just to fill out the roster creates a potential headache that probably isn’t worthwhile for a player who is just there as a body in practices.
As of right now we only have these guys on scholarship:

Carlos
Cuffe
Westry
Starling
Moore
Bell
Davis
Freeman
McLeod
Lampkin

Leaving three spots open isn't ideal. You can't solve every problem with bodies, but I do think we need at least another body. Ideally a forward I think.
 
I think part of the problem for Syracuse here is that we are trying to backfill needs from the portal while still making the recruitment of HS players a major priority.

So we might want to add a solid PG, maybe a combo PG/SG to the mix. But we are very much involved with a number of PG recruits from the class of 2025 and we really want to land one of them.

If we add a guard with only one year of remaining eligibility, it will not affect these class of 2025 PG recruits. If we add one with a couple of years, it might throw away years of work establishing a strong relationship with some of the 2025 guys.

Same applies with adding a forward or a center from the portal. I think we are really only looking at guys with one year of eligibility. Add in considerations for whether the guy fit the style of play Coach Autry wants to play, is the guy a fit culturally, is his skill set a fit and the fact that most of the best players in the portal are gone now, and it becomes quite a challenge to find players the staff thinks meet all the criteria they are looking for.

Even if some of the guys left in the portal might be panicking a bit and might be willing to sign on for a much lower price than they might have been asking for originally.
Yep we are looking for one year rentals for the short run. Guys with one year left are prioritizing money, starting spots or both. We aren't offering the later and others are offering more of the former. That doesn't mean we wont get a couple more guys once chairs disappear as the OP indicated.
 
Last edited:
^^ This may end up becoming the counterbalance with the $ as players start to realize there's a real risk of not having a school. In theory, it should start reducing number of players entering the portal. You better damn know you have a landing spot.
But it hasn't.

Last few years every time the portal opened there were reports of portal entry numbers, and also reports of how many didn't find a landing spot. Yet each year that number became more and more staggering.

Also those seeking high NIL dollars and those seeking better landing spots are not the same but has overlaps. Some want more $, some want a different scenery, some want more PT.
 
But it hasn't.

Last few years every time the portal opened there were reports of portal entry numbers, and also reports of how many didn't find a landing spot. Yet each year that number became more and more staggering.

Also those seeking high NIL dollars and those seeking better landing spots are not the same but has overlaps. Some want more $, some want a different scenery, some want more PT.
Too soon. I don't think it will be immediate, but over next few years I do. It's no longer "just" about what the players want, it's what the coaches want.
 
I don't think it will affect the NIL market. The guys who command a big price have absolutely no risk of not finding a school. And the supply/demand driving NIL isn't based on total number of portal entries, it's based on total number of quality entries. It will just mean the 12th and 13th guys who don't get any PT might not try their luck with the portal.
I agree, with the top players, NIL will do what NIL does. Things may not change much for them. I'm thinking more along the lines of a player not at that tier, asking himself "do I enter the portal" not being a top player? May not reduce NIL dollars, but I think it will reduce at some point, the decision to enter portal, thus reducing turnover for some teams.
 
I don't think it will affect the NIL market. The guys who command a big price have absolutely no risk of not finding a school. And the supply/demand driving NIL isn't based on total number of portal entries, it's based on total number of quality entries. It will just mean the 12th and 13th guys who don't get any PT might not try their luck with the portal.
Agree, with last sentence... What I was trying to say more or less.
 
As of right now we only have these guys on scholarship:

Carlos
Cuffe
Westry
Starling
Moore
Bell
Davis
Freeman
McLeod
Lampkin

Leaving three spots open isn't ideal. You can't solve every problem with bodies, but I do think we need at least another body. Ideally a forward I think.
I agree; I like 11 and it should be a Forward
 
we should use every scholarship on players who the staff thinks can help us get to NCAA tourney. They have an analytics guy now, we need people who can help us win. Missing NCAA is not acceptable for me anymore. I don't get holding scholarships in our hip pocket.
 
we should use every scholarship on players who the staff thinks can help us get to NCAA tourney. They have an analytics guy now, we need people who can help us win. Missing NCAA is not acceptable for me anymore. I don't get holding scholarships in our hip pocket.
We have an analytics guy and our only two returning starters are Bell and Starling? Christ...
 
we should use every scholarship on players who the staff thinks can help us get to NCAA tourney. They have an analytics guy now, we need people who can help us win. Missing NCAA is not acceptable for me anymore. I don't get holding scholarships in our hip pocket.
In the old days, 3 years ago, you developed players now that’s a waste in today’s world. 10 or 11 is plenty and let the small schools develop kids.
 
In the old days, 3 years ago, you developed players now that’s a waste in today’s world. 10 or 11 is plenty and let the small schools develop kids.
Why wouldnt we go get more developed kids? I don’t get keeping schollies in hip pocket
 
I don't think it will affect the NIL market. The guys who command a big price have absolutely no risk of not finding a school. And the supply/demand driving NIL isn't based on total number of portal entries, it's based on total number of quality entries. It will just mean the 12th and 13th guys who don't get any PT might not try their luck with the portal.
Entering the portal is not all about NIL. The end of the bench may just want to play and dropping down in conference strength might just offer them that. Ie. Patterson going to Siena. Heck they could be just looking for court time. So there will always be some movement there.
 
It seems (at least) 2 things are true when it comes to the portal:

1, there is more money flowing to transfer players than anticipated

2, some percentage of guys in the portal end up without a destination

dasher recently commented about some uncertainty around how successful we may be adding players to the roster at this point from the portal, presumably because Lampkin's shenanigans may have impacted our ability to pursue talent.

But are we also not expecting that in this game of musical chairs there are some decent players that won't be guys that command a bag, but if they have to choose between being on a scholarship somewhere to play basketball vs not, they'll want to make sure they can play somewhere?

I'm just having a hard time squaring the money with the scarcity of roster spots. Not to be crass, but it seems like inevitably there's a "bargain bin" shopping phase to the portal, and I feel like we should be positioned to pull a surprise or two there given we have scholarship room and outside playing time opportunities at point guard, forward and center. If a player has multiple years of eligibility left and ends up being roster fodder, it's just not a big deal because they can play musical chairs in the portal the next year, but now with added experience under their belt at a school in a top conference.

Basically, how to portal flyers work in this era of college basketball? Because I don't think having unused scholarships is a sound strategy for us.
A major percentage end up without a destination. I would imagine most all of them stay with their present team.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
168,384
Messages
4,771,546
Members
5,949
Latest member
Laxmom2317

Online statistics

Members online
39
Guests online
859
Total visitors
898


Top Bottom