Transfer Targets 2026

[longtimefan]

It seems rather quiet, but not overwhelmed with the guys SU is involved with. I expected us to be involved with a few top level guys. It’s still early, but this current roster is very average at best.

"Current roster" is 5.

7 to 10 more slots to be filled.

 

[Cusefan0307]

It seems rather quiet, but not overwhelmed with the guys SU is involved with. I expected us to be involved with a few top level guys. It’s still early, but this current roster is very average at best.

We are the only team in the ACC even with a committed transfer right now.

 

[Melancer46]

"Current roster" is 5.

7 to 10 more slots to be filled.

This is true, but pretty likely 2 or 3 of our starters are already on that roster. Having said that, for all we know those guys end up being our bottom 2 or 3 starters (doubtful but we'll see!)

No point in panicking until we know what the final roster looks like.

 

[AngryOtto]

I think it’s good the staff is not tipping who they are really interested in. Why create a bidding war. It’s the agents that are leaking interest in attempt to drive up the price.

 

[Orangezoo]

This is true, but pretty likely 2 or 3 of our starters are already on that roster. Having said that, for all we know those guys end up being our bottom 2 or 3 starters (doubtful but we'll see!)

No point in panicking until we know what the final roster looks like.

Not to mention if there are guys we have relationships with who haven’t gone portaling yet too…

Don’t want to be a broken record but we have new staff who have different networks and have watched different teams and players at their previous stops. That’s a lot of territory to traverse but also a lot of insight and opportunity. Just as much as Brunt clearly have some overseas connections that may again come in handy too.

 

[007]

No point in panicking until we know what the final roster looks like.

This is great advice and, apparently, cannot be repeated often enough.

I would add that talking in absolutes about starters (not aimed at you, Melancer) is also premature. There is a lot of portal movement yet to come. I don't expect that we will be real contenders for any of the top end guys. But I do expect that we will be adding several more skilled players that fit the culture.

 

[Orangezoo]

This is great advice and, apparently, cannot be repeated often enough.

I would add that talking in absolutes about starters (not aimed at you, Melancer) is also premature. There is a lot of portal movement yet to come. I don't expect that we will be real contenders for any of the top end guys. But I do expect that we will be adding several more skilled players that fit the culture.

One thing and I think 0307 pointed it out is what makes a top guy/star? I think that’s a very fair question and the margins are not huge at this level of hoops. Which is why it’s also so maddening to see some of the larger deals that get cut.

Look at two guys we are connected with. Estrella and Allenspach. The latter far more realistic as numbers play out but essentially put up similar numbers and are about the same size. Estrella has the higher ceiling and more impactful on the boards but Allenspach is the beefier of the two and has been very productive yet also healthy. Allenspach would be a great add but won’t qualify under that “top guy “ moniker. He also could have just as much impact or even a negligible amount less.

The conversation of where they are in 3 years may be a much wider margin but as for right now and next year…

 

[BEGood]

This is great advice and, apparently, cannot be repeated often enough.

I would add that talking in absolutes about starters (not aimed at you, Melancer) is also premature. There is a lot of portal movement yet to come. I don't expect that we will be real contenders for any of the top end guys. But I do expect that we will be adding several more skilled players that fit the culture.

Which is fine. Often times winning culture is bigger than getting top transfers. We gotta win this year to increase the nil next year to then target the bigger transfers that fit what Gmac is trying to do here. Look at Purdue. They kept pretty much their entire team. They have some culture there that allows that to still happen.

 

[007]

One thing and I think 0307 pointed it out is what makes a top guy/star? I think that’s a very fair question and the margins are not huge at this level of hoops. Which is why it’s also so maddening to see some of the larger deals that get cut.

Look at two guys we are connected with. Estrella and Allenspach. The latter far more realistic as numbers play out but essentially put up similar numbers and are about the same size. Estrella has the higher ceiling and more impactful on the boards but Allenspach is the beefier of the two and has been very productive yet also healthy. Allenspach would be a great add but won’t qualify under that “top guy “ moniker. He also could have just as much impact or even a negligible amount less.

The conversation of where they are in 3 years may be a much wider margin but as for right now and next year…

I think it's not difficult to know who the top guys are. I look at it more as an exercise in probability. It's not a coincidence that the blue blood programs seem to target the same guys. There is certainly a correlation between a history of high end productivity at the P5 level and the probability of success going forward. Similarly, there is a correlation for players at any level with elite numbers in one or more area (scoring, shooting, rebounding, shot blocking) and analytical data support (Bayesian Performance Rating, eFG%, TS%, USG%).

Those are the top guys. Teams are paying up for the higher correlation. That's why those large deals are made. Will there be exceptions? Yes, there always are. And this is true no matter what you are measuring. But, exceptions to the correlation do not disprove the correlation.

So...could Allenspach be the better player as compared to Estrella? Yup. But, Estrella was the better bet.