Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="oldhusky, post: 4884778, member: 9844"] I think the natural inclination is too look ahead one year at a time, but you are right that the tight roster constraints affect far more than just next year. There is an opportunity cost there. If we got Sarah, and Paige came back for a second additional year, and that meant no more 2025 recruits or portal additions for that year, I think that is a price we would be willing to pay. If we have a roster spot for next year for someone, and don't get Sarah that opportunity cost could play an even bigger role. For example we know Rodriquez is in the mix, potentially as a plan B if we don't get Sarah. If we use that spot on her, it affects the next four years, creating the same 25/26 roster crunch that Sarah would. Maybe we are willing to give up another 2025 recruit for the top ranked 2024 recruit, but would we want to potentially close the door on the many 25 prospects we are pursuing to add a prospect that is currently not ranked in the top 100, who also is probably not big enough to solve our isuues with not enough proven bigs? If we hit that point, namely one remaining 2024/25 spot available and Sarah is not coming, I think the portal is probably the best way to go. We of course would be looking for a proven big and don't know who may throw their name in the hat, but the odds are probably better of meeting immediate team needs that way, and if it were only for one year it wouldn't affect our ability to pursue another 2025 recruit. Obviously things could happen that opens up additional spots, but probably for the next two seasons every decision to add a player has to be weighed against the potential downside of not being able to pursue others. I think Sarah is worth it, Rodriquez may not be, and if we lose out on Sarah, a one year big fix might be our best bet. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach