Even setting this crazy COVID-19 stuff aside, it's a weird time to be a college hoops fan. With the mass amount of transfer portal guys, the new G-League program, the potential for more guys to opt to play overseas, the apparent delay in getting rid of the one-and-done and the upside down landscape where guys are going to BYU over Kentucky (Matt Haarms) -- it's interesting to consider how much recruiting has changed for programs everywhere.
A few thoughts:
Redshirting may be a thing of the past
I feel like there's a lot of talk about redshirting guys -- i.e. if we could land Haarms or another grad transfer big, should we redshirt Edwards -- but I'm not sure there's much point to it anymore. When you consider how many dudes transfer and how much roster turnover there is, it almost seems like you just take a kid, try to get him on the floor if you can and if you can't, in the first year or two, he's just going to be gone regardless. So, for example, it feels like the right move to preserve a year of eligibility for JBA but if he doesn't play much this year, is he gone anyway? To be clear, I'm hoping he contributes this year or stays and becomes a contributor down the road, I'm just not sure how realistic it would be to see that if he doesn't get a decent chunk of minutes this year.
A more robust G-League and the eventual end of the 1-and-done rule could make college hoops look more like college baseball
The most interesting thing about this G-League program is that it's the first step the NBA has taken to make it a true developmental league. There have been some teams that have actually used it that way (Toronto, most notably), but generally it's just been a league for roster filler. If this program is a step toward each team investing more in a developmental league and we eventually get rid of the 1-and-done, you'd have to think the top 40 or 50 prospects each year could be at least tempted to skip college basketball altogether. You'd have to think that could potentially lead to a free-for-all as it's much more difficult to know who the best players are when you take the cream of the crop off the top. There could also be some kids in that top 50 who end up still going to college, so you still need to recruit them. Could get really interesting.
Even in a post-JB world, have to figure we'll need to get creative to fill out the roster in many seasons
A lot of folks feel like we'll be a recruiting powerhouse once JB is gone. I'm fine with people having that opinion, but even so, consider: There will be a ton of 5th-year guys available and a loaded transfer portal each year, plus the potential to think you have a commit but then see him decide to test the pro leagues AND the potential for kids to leave after a year if they taste any success. That's a recipe for even more roster upheaval than the past four or five years have brought. Bringing in a couple transfers a year could become the norm and you may have a year where you're bringing in more than that. Just feels like the reality will be more fluidity in the roster as opposed to less.
There will be more weird destination decisions by recruits
We're used to this at the Cuse with losses to st bonaventure and others in the past few years, but UK losing Haarms to BYU makes no sense. I get that it's playing time and whatever but it's still freaking UK. You could potentially win a title. Anyway, point is, more of these guys are going to view these decisions as 7-month decisions more than ever before and I'm not sure the tradition of the bigger programs matters that much to kids who probably grew up rooting for individual players more than programs anyway.
In that case, if you feel your best path to the floor early is a place like Providence, for example, you might jump at it with the idea that you can either go pro or simply move to another school that isn't prioritizing you now, but could be at that point. We've already seen this with Elijah Hughes, right? Interested in Syracuse, they like him but don't love him, he moves to ECU, doesn't actually play particularly well (most likely due to injuries) but he still ends up transferring the next season to syracuse. Could see that type of scenario play out more often even with bigger name schools than ECU -- more like Griffin leaving a pretty good Illinois team where he saw plenty of PT and transferring to the Cuse, which struggled last season. I'm thrilled but it's a strange transfer in some ways.
Bottom line
I think the world of college basketball recruiting is getting ever weirder. Feel like there will be a very free agency-type vibe to this going forward and it will involve a lot more players (like this year's hunt for a big man) than the old days where JB and co. would start with maybe 25 targets, narrow it down to 10, you had a pretty good idea (even before the commitment) of who was likely to come your way and once they committed it was over. There was always a player or two who could go one way or another or a player like Anthony Davis who would blow up and all the big boys would come calling, but it was a pretty stable, fairly predictable process. Those days are over, IMO.
A few thoughts:
Redshirting may be a thing of the past
I feel like there's a lot of talk about redshirting guys -- i.e. if we could land Haarms or another grad transfer big, should we redshirt Edwards -- but I'm not sure there's much point to it anymore. When you consider how many dudes transfer and how much roster turnover there is, it almost seems like you just take a kid, try to get him on the floor if you can and if you can't, in the first year or two, he's just going to be gone regardless. So, for example, it feels like the right move to preserve a year of eligibility for JBA but if he doesn't play much this year, is he gone anyway? To be clear, I'm hoping he contributes this year or stays and becomes a contributor down the road, I'm just not sure how realistic it would be to see that if he doesn't get a decent chunk of minutes this year.
A more robust G-League and the eventual end of the 1-and-done rule could make college hoops look more like college baseball
The most interesting thing about this G-League program is that it's the first step the NBA has taken to make it a true developmental league. There have been some teams that have actually used it that way (Toronto, most notably), but generally it's just been a league for roster filler. If this program is a step toward each team investing more in a developmental league and we eventually get rid of the 1-and-done, you'd have to think the top 40 or 50 prospects each year could be at least tempted to skip college basketball altogether. You'd have to think that could potentially lead to a free-for-all as it's much more difficult to know who the best players are when you take the cream of the crop off the top. There could also be some kids in that top 50 who end up still going to college, so you still need to recruit them. Could get really interesting.
Even in a post-JB world, have to figure we'll need to get creative to fill out the roster in many seasons
A lot of folks feel like we'll be a recruiting powerhouse once JB is gone. I'm fine with people having that opinion, but even so, consider: There will be a ton of 5th-year guys available and a loaded transfer portal each year, plus the potential to think you have a commit but then see him decide to test the pro leagues AND the potential for kids to leave after a year if they taste any success. That's a recipe for even more roster upheaval than the past four or five years have brought. Bringing in a couple transfers a year could become the norm and you may have a year where you're bringing in more than that. Just feels like the reality will be more fluidity in the roster as opposed to less.
There will be more weird destination decisions by recruits
We're used to this at the Cuse with losses to st bonaventure and others in the past few years, but UK losing Haarms to BYU makes no sense. I get that it's playing time and whatever but it's still freaking UK. You could potentially win a title. Anyway, point is, more of these guys are going to view these decisions as 7-month decisions more than ever before and I'm not sure the tradition of the bigger programs matters that much to kids who probably grew up rooting for individual players more than programs anyway.
In that case, if you feel your best path to the floor early is a place like Providence, for example, you might jump at it with the idea that you can either go pro or simply move to another school that isn't prioritizing you now, but could be at that point. We've already seen this with Elijah Hughes, right? Interested in Syracuse, they like him but don't love him, he moves to ECU, doesn't actually play particularly well (most likely due to injuries) but he still ends up transferring the next season to syracuse. Could see that type of scenario play out more often even with bigger name schools than ECU -- more like Griffin leaving a pretty good Illinois team where he saw plenty of PT and transferring to the Cuse, which struggled last season. I'm thrilled but it's a strange transfer in some ways.
Bottom line
I think the world of college basketball recruiting is getting ever weirder. Feel like there will be a very free agency-type vibe to this going forward and it will involve a lot more players (like this year's hunt for a big man) than the old days where JB and co. would start with maybe 25 targets, narrow it down to 10, you had a pretty good idea (even before the commitment) of who was likely to come your way and once they committed it was over. There was always a player or two who could go one way or another or a player like Anthony Davis who would blow up and all the big boys would come calling, but it was a pretty stable, fairly predictable process. Those days are over, IMO.
