Transfer season | Page 9 | The Boneyard

Transfer season

Status
Not open for further replies.
It doesn't seem that UConn is going the transfer route this season. With that said, and seeing the results of last season, I'm no longer a big fan of taking these grad transfers.

I'm all for adding one if the team has a bunch of players that have played for a while and are poised for a deep run in the tournament, and that one player is what might put them over the top.

I'd much rather see a scholarship be given to a incoming freshman who can develop over the next season or two and will be around for a while. I think team chemistry is underrated. We've seen UConn teams that didn't have the most talented players win national championships and a lot had to do with having a few winning time ready players and a solid set of role players who knew how to play at a high level on both ends of the floor.

Each time you add a grad transfer or two, you're pretty much starting over at their positions if they are starters, instead of having a steady stream of underclassmen who have gotten minutes the prior year or two who are familiar with the system and teammates and ready to contribute in bigger ways.

Examples are Kemba, Bazz and Boatright, all players who got better as their freshmen seasons went on, and were ready to take on bigger roles their sophomore, junior and in some cases their senior seasons.

Do others here feel similarly as I do, or am I in the minority?
 
DogMania said:
Do others here feel similarly as I do, or am I in the minority?
Expand ...

Others feel the way you do and you are in the minority. There have been a handful of threads about people suggesting that Miller and Gibbs were bad for chemistry.
 
Leebo said:
Others feel the way you do and you are in the minority. There have been a handful of threads about people suggesting that Miller and Gibbs were bad for chemistry.
Expand ...
That was not my point. If Miller and Gibbs were not one year players and returning for another season, it would give them another year to improve their game as well as the team chemistry. With that said, I think Miller was a nice addition and blended in very well, while IMO Gibbs was not a great fit for what the team needed most at the guard position. Now that they're gone, the team needs to integrate two new starters instead of having two at those positions returning for another year.
 
@DogMania, I understand your point, but I don't think you can just walk away from this type of player, even bringing in more than one. You said yourself that Miller was a good addition, which to me seems to indicate it can work chemistry wise, if it's the right player.

I don't think you can draw black and white conclusions based on last year at all. Last year was a season of many barely missed opportunities, and ultimately the whole team showed weaknesses in almost equal measure.
 
DogMania said:
That was not my point. If Miller and Gibbs were not one year players and returning for another season, it would give them another year to improve their game as well as the team chemistry. With that said, I think Miller was a nice addition and blended in very well, while IMO Gibbs was not a great fit for what the team needed most at the guard position. Now that they're gone, the team needs to integrate two new starters instead of having two at those positions returning for another year.
Expand ...

What does next year's chemistry have to do with your original premise?

You said that it doesn't look like we're going to add transfers, and that you're okay with this given how last season went.

Last season without Miller and Gibbs is maybe not even an NIT season. I'm not sure things would be better in the future simply by taking some 3 or 2 star freshmen in place of them for the sake of them being better buds next year and later.

This hypothetical future chemistry isn't worth much if we have a prolonged slump of no UConn-caliber years.
 
DogMania said:
It doesn't seem that UConn is going the transfer route this season. With that said, and seeing the results of last season, I'm no longer a big fan of taking these grad transfers.

I'm all for adding one if the team has a bunch of players that have played for a while and are poised for a deep run in the tournament, and that one player is what might put them over the top.

I'd much rather see a scholarship be given to a incoming freshman who can develop over the next season or two and will be around for a while. I think team chemistry is underrated. We've seen UConn teams that didn't have the most talented players win national championships and a lot had to do with having a few winning time ready players and a solid set of role players who knew how to play at a high level on both ends of the floor.

Each time you add a grad transfer or two, you're pretty much starting over at their positions if they are starters, instead of having a steady stream of underclassmen who have gotten minutes the prior year or two who are familiar with the system and teammates and ready to contribute in bigger ways.

Examples are Kemba, Bazz and Boatright, all players who got better as their freshmen seasons went on, and were ready to take on bigger roles their sophomore, junior and in some cases their senior seasons.

Do others here feel similarly as I do, or am I in the minority?
Expand ...
I think everyone overrated Gibbs in a big way.

I haven't hated on Gibbs all year and I am not going to start now.

He is what he is, 3 point spot up shooter, never thought we were getting much else, I am not sure why everyone else thought we were.

Miller had a really nice season for us and made a smooth transition from Ivy League play to AAC.

Bottomline is that we currently have 3 open scholarships for this upcoming year, hopefully we can try to fill them with some talent that will help us win this year. Don't let Gibbs sour your taste in all grad transfer, it's silly, this venom for Gibbs I don't get it, he played hard everyday, he seemed to be a good teammate, didn't cause any off the court issues, like I said before it seems like everyone overrated him.
 
.-.
I am really not understanding this Gibbs and Miller were bad for team chemistry sentiment floating around here. They were added to a team that made that NIT the year before and lost their best player, why are folks acting like DHam and Purvis accomplished anything as scoring leaders the year before? I'd take them again on our squad all day everyday, Gibbs was a bit disappointing compared to expectations but he still contributed to winning games and Miller exceeded every fan's expectations. A couple of more shots for him in close losses instead of DHam bricks and they would have put themselves in a better position to win an extra game or two in the tourney. If a grad transfer option is out there to be added at the 4 so we're not pinning our hopes on Facey turning into a reliable presence or another guard to be added to depth I would be all for it. If its freshmen additions I would be OK with that also, either way the team needs at least one or two players assuming Purvis and Brimah are back.
 
I agree. Gibbs and Miller were good for UCONN. 4 players ave. 12+ points last year. Gibbs and Miller were two of them. Without them we would not have made the NCAA's. Gibbs had 32 points in the tour., 20 against Kansas and kept us relatively close. He did his part. Miller had a bad tour., total of 8 points. However going into the tour. he was our only low post scoring optioned. If we had the same opportunity to bring in two players like them again, you would have my vote to bring them in.
 
EBonz30 said:
He is what he is, 3 point spot up shooter, never thought we were getting much else, I am not sure why everyone else thought we were.
Expand ...
Probably because he was an all conference player at Seton Hall.
 
.-.
He'd be great, but would be a pretty tough battle between Vance/Larrier/Justin for minutes at the 3 and we've been throwing out 3-guard lineup ideas also.
 
auror said:
He'd be great, but would be a pretty tough battle between Vance/Larrier/Justin for minutes at the 3 and we've been throwing out 3-guard lineup ideas also.
Expand ...

It would be a talented team.

Adams:Gilbert
Purvis:Vital
Larrier:Jackson
Facey:Jackson
Brimah:Enoch: Diarra

RS: Durham

Main problem would be aside from Enoch (assuming Brimah is back) is the only non-freshman on the bench. Probably most talented team KO has had, on paper.

There will probably be minutes with Larrier/Jackson/Jackson (if commits) to play at the four with one of the others at the three, or with a three guard lineup. We all know Facey has foul issues.
 
caw said:
It would be a talented team.

Adams:Gilbert
Purvis:Vital
Larrier:Jackson
Facey:Jackson
Brimah:Enoch: Diarra

RS: Durham

Main problem would be aside from Enoch (assuming Brimah is back) is the only non-freshman on the bench. Probably most talented team KO has had, on paper.

There will probably be minutes with Larrier/Jackson/Jackson (if commits) to play at the four with one of the others at the three, or with a three guard lineup. We all know Facey has foul issues.
Expand ...
If we get Jackson I don't see any situation were facey would start. KO would just go small and rotate Jackson, larrier, Jackson between the 3-4. He might even put diaria in the mix if he can play solid d and rebound. I just don't see much upside in Kelis Fisher's game and he just doesn't complement ab's game enough for them to play on the floor together.
 
caw said:
It would be a talented team.

Adams:Gilbert
Purvis:Vital
Larrier:Jackson
Facey:Jackson
Brimah:Enoch: Diarra

RS: Durham

Main problem would be aside from Enoch (assuming Brimah is back) is the only non-freshman on the bench. Probably most talented team KO has had, on paper.

There will probably be minutes with Larrier/Jackson/Jackson (if commits) to play at the four with one of the others at the three, or with a three guard lineup. We all know Facey has foul issues.
Expand ...

Lots of combinations. Justin Jackson looks really good to me. Wow, what an addition he would be! If he could become an elite rebounder, he would be just about perfect. Nice timing of blocks, can use his left hand, made a few good looking passes (but who knows if they were a typical thing or not), dribbled up after a rebound, and just going up really strong! Lots to like, that's for sure. Hope it comes together.
 
3rdbass said:
If we get Jackson I don't see any situation were facey would start. KO would just go small and rotate Jackson, larrier, Jackson between the 3-4. He might even put diaria in the mix if he can play solid d and rebound. I just don't see much upside in Kelis Fisher's game and he just doesn't complement ab's game enough for them to play on the floor together.
Expand ...
I feel like you consistently ignore the factors that actually get someone playing time on our team. It's real easy for me to see a situation where Facey would start. The situation where he understands our team defensive schemes much better than a bunch of freshman and a sophomore transfer.
 
7774 said:
I feel like you consistently ignore the factors that actually get someone playing time on our team. It's real easy for me to see a situation where Facey would start. The situation where he understands our team defensive schemes much better than a bunch of freshman and a sophomore transfer.
Expand ...
Well unfortunately I haven't really seen much of really understanding the defense and you can't have two non- offensive stick figures in the game at the same time. I just think facey is what he is after 3 years, a backup who can get you offensive rebounds and not much else.
 
.-.
3rdbass said:
Well unfortunately I haven't really seen much of really understanding the defense and you can't have two non- offensive stick figures in the game at the same time. I just think facey is what he is after 3 years, a backup who can get you offensive rebounds and not much else.
Expand ...

He is inconsistent for sure and after 3 years you would have hoped there was a better understanding of help defense as well as defensive rebounding, but "not much else" isn't fair. I agree the best part of his game is offensive rebounding but he has improved albeit slightly and his athleticism at times comes out and makes you go "wow". His back is to the ball when he is playing defense a little too much but there's a chance he is our 4 this year, if he improves over the summer a real good chance. With the fluidity of recruiting something may happen still but for now as we stand he has as good or better a chance to be the 4. But as you say, after 3 years there are huge issues playing with 2 guys with little to no offensive game minus a lob or put back. There will be times this will probably happen but if it's too often this team will not be really competitive.
 
image.png

Looks like the staff has at least contacted Romello White.
 
.-.
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,154
Messages
4,555,014
Members
10,438
Latest member
UConnheart


Top Bottom