It's True - 40% of Freshman Transfer

[TallTitan34]

If you see a player with a background of transfers pre-college, not only is he more likely to de-commit, he's also more likely to become part of the NABC's statistic of the transfer rate which states that 40 percent of all signees transfer prior to their sophomore season.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/recruiting/basketball/mens/news/story?id=5729730

[Pakuni]

Seriously, who in their right mind would doubt Buzz when it comes to knowledge of obscure and quirky statistics?

[StillAWarrior]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/recruiting/basketball/mens/news/story?id=5729730

Thanks, Titan.

[lab_warrior]

Uh oh, more facts.  That's not going to sit well with the "belief" based members here.  Surely no other players anywhere else in D1 NCAA basketball transfer.

[Blackhat]

I don't care about a pg transferring out of this program but Buzz sure as hell better get some big boys who can run and rebound in his program or trouble will be coming down the road.

[4everwarriors]

I guess some will argue that guards trump big dudes. LOL

[dw3dw3dw3]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/recruiting/basketball/mens/news/story?id=5729730

Oh yeah... well I still haven't seen his birth certificate.. oh wait, wrong leader.

[wadesworld]

I don't care about a pg transferring out of this program but Buzz sure as hell better get some big boys who can run and rebound in his program or trouble will be coming down the road.

Because our last really good big man was...?  Marcus Jackson?  Heck, even Oose was decent.  Looks like we've really struggled without those big men.  This NCAA Tournament drought we've had is killing me...

[Danny Noonan]

Because our last really good big man was...?  Marcus Jackson?  Heck, even Oose was decent.  Looks like we've really struggled without those big men.  This NCAA Tournament drought we've had is killing me...

Like it or not, we haven't made a substantial NCAA tourney run since 2003. (I realize injuries to McNeal 2007 and D James 2009 did not help our cause.

[IAmMarquette]

Seriously, who in their right mind would doubt Buzz when it comes to knowledge of obscure and quirky statistics?

I had this exact thought when I read the JS story about Reggie's transfer. The man is a stats freak

[wadesworld]

Like it or not, we haven't made a substantial NCAA tourney run since 2003. (I realize injuries to McNeal 2007 and D James 2009 did not help our cause.

I understand that, but to say "trouble will be coming down the road" if we don't get ourselves a big man who can "run and rebound" isn't necessarily true at all.  Maybe if the talent of our guards/wings begins to decline AND we don't a good big man, THEN we will be in trouble down the road.  But we have proven that we can have success without a really good big man.  Would I like to add a big man that would push us into Sweet 16s, Elite 8s, and Final Fours?  Of course.  But even without one we have been THE most consistent team in terms of finishing with double digit wins and finishing (I believe) 4 games over .500 in the Big East.  Would I love to win Big East championships rather than being consistently in that 2nd tier?  Again, of course.  But again, I'm not ready to say we're in trouble without a big man, as we've proven to not be for the last 5 years.

[GGGG]

My guess is that 40% of freshmen don't transfer from Big East level programs that don't go through a coaching change.  So, out of the eight true freshmen that Buzz has recruited and signed for the past two seasons, three have already transferred out.  (And that doesn't include Newbill.)

Simply put, it's not good.  We can make all the excuses we want about parents, playing time and simple inability, but he has to do a better job of laying out expectations before the kids get here, communicating with them while they are here, or simply not signing bad talent.

[IAmMarquette]

My guess is that 40% of freshmen don't transfer from Big East level programs that don't go through a coaching change.  So, out of the eight true freshmen that Buzz has recruited and signed for the past two seasons, three have already transferred out.  (And that doesn't include Newbill.)

Simply put, it's not good.  We can make all the excuses we want about parents, playing time and simple inability, but he has to do a better job of laying out expectations before the kids get here, communicating with them while they are here, or simply not signing bad talent.

This is a fair point. I don't think anyone here is happy when players leave the program, but the need to blame somebody is unfortunate. Reggie didn't fit Marquette/Marquette didn't suit Reggie. Reggie chose to transfer. It happens...apparently 40% of the time.

[ChicosBailBonds]

http://www.beyondchron.org/news/index.php?itemid=6734

See article and matchups at the bottom of article

[mu_hilltopper]

Indeed, when you hear 50% of marriages end in divorce, you immediately want to get more classifications to get closer to your category.   Control for education or religion, and you get a different picture.  (I'm guessing the divorce rate of Marquette grads is less than half the national average.)

So .. 40% of freshmen transfer from the 323 NCAA teams.

I'd like to see the stat after .. throw out all coaching change transfers.  .. I'd be curious if the top 100 teams have a different rate than the bottom 200+ teams do.   Curious about public vs. private school transfers.  (Although that might not make much difference.)

Also .. head coach age and tenure might change the rate.  I suppose the older coaches know who is going to stick around, the younger coaches perhaps have a better "identifying" rate with kids .. so who knows.

Just throwing that out there.

[ChicosBailBonds]

http://www.ncpanow.org/more?id=0008


Interesting that the following schools are doing better in that department than we are

Wisconsin 0%
Michigan State 0%
Texas 0%
Texas A&M 7.1%
Duke 8.3%

Maryland, Clemson, Ohio State, LSU, UCLA, Minnesota, Kansas, North Carolina, Syracuse, Xavier, Gonzaga, BYU, UCONN also doing better

[ChicosBailBonds]

Indeed, when you hear 50% of marriages end in divorce, you immediately want to get more classifications to get closer to your category.   Control for education or religion, and you get a different picture.  (I'm guessing the divorce rate of Marquette grads is less than half the national average.)

Especially since the 50% claim that everyone assumes is correct is not.  That's an urban myth that just won't die.

[Lennys Tap]

Indeed, when you hear 50% of marriages end in divorce, you immediately want to get more classifications to get closer to your category.   Control for education or religion, and you get a different picture.  (I'm guessing the divorce rate of Marquette grads is less than half the national average.)

So .. 40% of freshmen transfer from the 323 NCAA teams.

I'd like to see the stat after .. throw out all coaching change transfers.  .. I'd be curious if the top 100 teams have a different rate than the bottom 200+ teams do.   Curious about public vs. private school transfers.  (Although that might not make much difference.)

Also .. head coach age and tenure might change the rate.  I suppose the older coaches know who is going to stick around, the younger coaches perhaps have a better "identifying" rate with kids .. so who knows.

Just throwing that out there.

Looks like you've just given yourself a homework assignment that you're interested in and curious about. We'll anxiously await the facts to see if they match speculation.

[Dr. Blackheart]

http://www.ncpanow.org/more?id=0008


Interesting that the following schools are doing better in that department than we are

Wisconsin 0%
Michigan State 0%
Texas 0%
Texas A&M 7.1%
Duke 8.3%

Maryland, Clemson, Ohio State, LSU, UCLA, Minnesota, Kansas, North Carolina, Syracuse, Xavier, Gonzaga, BYU, UCONN also doing better

Are they counting arrests too?  Or seniors who mysteriously give up their free rides?  Or recruits who are cut before they can earn their scholly? 

[mu_hilltopper]

Looks like you've just given yourself a homework assignment that you're interested in and curious about. We'll anxiously await the facts to see if they match speculation.

Yeah, I let myself open to that.  Was fishing for someone else to do the work!  

Truly, I'm not sure what the speculation would be prior to knowing the numbers.  It wouldn't surprise me if the results had no correlation to anything..

Does the top 100 or bottom 220 have more transfers?  Could go either way.  The bottom 220 probably don't have too many kids dreaming about the NBA/ (more) delusions of grandeur.  (Well, semi-legitimately dreaming, anyhow.)

Private vs. Public may have no correlation to anything.   Nor might coaching age or tenure, as I wrote above.  

The data just might be one noisy mess.  <baiting> I imagine even Henry Sugar or John Pudner wouldn't be able to figure it out. </baiting>

Perhaps in the end, I care not.  If 40% is the average, I think we all want MU to be better than that.  

[avid1010]

Like it or not, we haven't made a substantial NCAA tourney run since 2003. (I realize injuries to McNeal 2007 and D James 2009 did not help our cause.

UW has big men, yet I don't see deep runs in the NCAA tourney. 

[avid1010]

http://www.ncpanow.org/more?id=0008


Interesting that the following schools are doing better in that department than we are

Wisconsin 0%
Michigan State 0%
Texas 0%
Texas A&M 7.1%
Duke 8.3%

Maryland, Clemson, Ohio State, LSU, UCLA, Minnesota, Kansas, North Carolina, Syracuse, Xavier, Gonzaga, BYU, UCONN also doing better

Nice bit of data....the article itself says the transfer % is unclear. 

[karavotsos]

Those articles were ridiculous.  First, why do they label college basketball players missing?  They're not like kids on milk cartons, or dogs that wander off.  I bet with minimal research you could figure out exactly what happened to them, so why not figure it out and give us some real stats.  Instead, you label them missing?  It's not hard to figure out there's an agenda there, though the articles are so poorly written its difficult to figure out what the agenda is.

Second, it seems unfair when twins who entered a program together, like the Wear twins at UNC, transfer together, to count that as 2 transfers or losses.  They only have one mind at this time, so they should only count as one lost person.

Finally, Wisconsin has no lost players because Bo and his players have the same standoff every year.  Bo looks at them and asks, 'where else can you go?'  The players look at him and ask, 'who else can you recruit?'  and they decide to stay together.

[IAmMarquette]

Those articles were ridiculous.  First, why do they label college basketball players missing?  They're not like kids on milk cartons, or dogs that wander off.  I bet with minimal research you could figure out exactly what happened to them, so why not figure it out and give us some real stats.  Instead, you label them missing?  It's not hard to figure out there's an agenda there, though the articles are so poorly written its difficult to figure out what the agenda is.

Second, it seems unfair when twins who entered a program together, like the Wear twins at UNC, transfer together, to count that as 2 transfers or losses.  They only have one mind at this time, so they should only count as one lost person.

Finally, Wisconsin has no lost players because Bo and his players have the same standoff every year.  Bo looks at them and asks, 'where else can you go?'  The players look at him and ask, 'who else can you recruit?'  and they decide to stay together.

Well done.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Finally, Wisconsin has no lost players because Bo and his players have the same standoff every year.  Bo looks at them and asks, 'where else can you go?'  The players look at him and ask, 'who else can you recruit?'  and they decide to stay together.

I admit, I chuckled.  Then I also realized they just simply win and win and win while teams with better athletes don't beat them and usually finish behind them in the standings.  They're doing something right.