Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="auror, post: 5256719, member: 1329"] Because you're thinking about it from UConn's perspective and not the incoming committed transfer and uncommitted recruit's perspectives. For most players, the #1 concern is overall future compensation, followed by current compensation and winning in some continuum. To get future compensation, you need to play a lot in order to get accolades, exposure, and development. And you need to play the role you want to develop. Very few are going to elect to play 10-15 minutes a night when you can play 25-30 somewhere else on a similar tier of the sport. Especially not for younger players who still need exposure and development to ensure a future career path. [LIST] [*]So if we bring in another starting caliber PG, Demary will be upset, because he wants to develop his PG role. [*]If we bring in a clear bench PG, that makes Demary happy, but it can't be someone that wants a starting role somewhere, so it likely would make Acaden unhappy (I don't know for sure, just speculating based on his recent decommitment). [*]If we really wanted more starting lineup playmaking, we'd likely have to bring in another big combo type, someone who won't claim to be a "PG" but still helps with overall playmaking and passing. But that will push someone else to the bench down lineup. [/LIST] These are some of the problems of roster construction you run into when you have a ~6'2" SG who isn't a playmaker for others. And also some of the pitfalls of the transfer portal, where playing time in the market gets really efficient. There's very little standing in the way of guys going to where they can optimize their playing time. Someone like Malachi Smith is more likely to take the 6th man role because he's established a track record that will get him paid overseas and knows he isn't going to make the NBA. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach