2025 Transfer Portal

[Markusquette]

Doubling down on the lowest common dominator insults I see...

1 I chose to share a tidbit which was true. Query - do people change their minds or is everything set in stone?

2 James is an incredible talent playing against a very high level of competition (higher probability of predicable success @zogster) He will push Sean every step of the way and I'm predicting he will ultimately start/play more minutes than Sean next year. Competition breeds success.

3 if a big on the roster couldn't help the team last year, I don't see how they could possibly ever contribute. Personal opinion that isn't very controversial.

I have a feeling Nigel will be the next MU great.

Clark is 7'1 which is great. MU will need him to get up to speed quickly. Hamilton doesn't appear to have much to offer anytime soon with that we saw this past season. If one pans out and is a solid contributor I will be pleased. If I had to guess it would be clark just because of his height.

I really like Shaka; he seems like a great guy, and I'm happy to have him as the coach for many reasons. I'm still surprised he has yet to bring one higher profile big man recruit to MU.

[Markusquette]

The issue isn't whether Shaka can identify and develop talent.

It's the fact that his stated approach to NIL eliminates him from competing for recruits in three talent-rich pools.

First, in the post-NIL era, top-ranked HS players rightly expect an NIL package. Shaka's public statements on the topic state that if a player has that expectation, he won't recruit that player. That leaves us out of the running for players at the talent level of guys like Liam McNeely, Jackson McAndrew, or Kon Kneuppel.

Second, couple NIL with the immediate eligibility of transfers, and there is now a strong pool of late-bloomers that don't get high major offers out of HS, but after a year or two emerge with solid high-major potential.  And there is a market rate for these players as well, and because those players expect NIL at market rates, they're off the table for Shaka. Ironically, guys like Kolek and Prosper would fall into this category today.

Third, you have the transfers from high major programs that are going through a coaching change. For better or worse, the sport is 100% invested in the notion that players sign with the coach, not the school, and if the coach leaves it's just expected that the roster will jump en masse to the portal. Obviously, once again there is a market price for these players, taking them out of consideration for MU.

The only pool Shaka can recruit if he sticks with his "no NIL for newcomers" approach is the borderline top 100 who aren't quite good enough to command an NIL package, but where an MU offer is likely the best they'll see.

The situation is no different than other self-imposed restrictions that MU placed on itself in the past--no prop 48s, no players from academically suspect programs, no JUCOs (or only 1 at a time), etc.  When you take away a potential pool of talent, you remove one of the tools that can be used to succeed.

That's not to say that Shaka can't develop players or doesn't know what he's doing. It's the observation that when you limit the talent pool, you self-limit your potential for success. 

Nobody's saying that Shaka has to go full Pitino and buy the best players on the market every year.  But when we see teams like Creighton and UConn and Xavier succeed by blending a mix of top-ranked recruits, lower rated development players, and transfers, it's only natural to wonder whether they have a better approach.

If you start with a belief that Shaka is a better coach and developer of talent than McDermott or Hurley--which I think most here believe--the only rational explanation as to how those teams finished ahead of MU in the standings is a difference in talent.

Very well said. My exact thoughts. Shaka has been adamant he is not interested in prioritizing portal players with NIL over recruits. So there goes all the potential to supplement a roster with additional talent. It doesn't mean go out and replace 3 out of your 5 starters every year. It means keeping the door open and having a willingness to pay when the situation is right and maintains the relationships he prides himself on.

[muwarrior69]

Very well said. My exact thoughts. Shaka has been adamant he is not interested in prioritizing portal players with NIL over recruits. So there goes all the potential to supplement a roster with additional talent. It doesn't mean go out and replace 3 out of your 5 starters every year. It means keeping the door open and having a willingness to pay when the situation is right and maintains the relationships he prides himself on.

...or the capability to pay.

[tower912]

I think the portal is a tool.  If Shaka had utilized it extensively to win 98 games in 4 seasons, I would be exactly as satisfied with the results as I am right now.  If Shaka signed a player from the portal this season, I would welcome that player to MU, like I did transfers of all kinds previously.  And I would root for them to be successful and for MU to win.  Just as I have for every player and coach at MU.
  I think TAMU and Ted Baxter point out some fascinating things about experience and the relative depth of talent in the portal.  I also look at the reported dollar amounts and don't care whether JB thinks they are accurate or not.
  If there are mass departures, I assume Shaka will use the portal.  Until that day, I assume he will stay with his philosophy.

[Uncle Rico]

...or the capability to pay.

With the economy cratering, that might help Marquette with NIL if no one can afford players

[Zog from Margo]

The probability of hitting on unranked recruits is astronomically low.

The probability of hitting on higher ranked recruits is much higher.

Not rocket science. 

I wouldn't dream of accusing you of expounding on rocket science. A rocket that flies as randomly as your comments would be dangerous.

You're arguing that Shaka should never have signed Clark or Hamilton because neither had other high major offers. You claimed that, in 2025, those type of players will never become high major players. When I pointed out, after ten seconds of looking, that Boise State had such a player, then you said, no matter how good the player was, you apparently wouldn't want him because his only offer was from Boise State. I've no idea where the unranked player argument comes from because Shaka only has two on the roster.

I'll let you argue with yourself from this point forward. Enjoy being a dissatisfied MU fan. Lloyd, I hope you have a nice weekend.

[Vander Blue Man Group]

so, last season was ok? Pick up this fall where things left off? 🤔

Yes, after two consecutive 2 seeds and graduating two all-timers to the NBA I have no issue with a season where Marquette was in the top 25 almost the entire season and comfortably in the tourney as a 7 seed.

Anyone expecting a protected seed every season is delusional - there are going to be ebbs and flows. That's even true for blue bloods.

And as I've said multiple times before, if this season is a small step back but contributes to steps forward the following seasons I'm good with that as well.

[panda2.0]

I wouldn't dream of accusing you of expounding on rocket science. A rocket that flies as randomly as your comments would be dangerous.

You're arguing that Shaka should never have signed Clark or Hamilton because neither had other high major offers. You claimed that, in 2025, those type of players will never become high major players. When I pointed out, after ten seconds of looking, that Boise State had such a player, then you said, no matter how good the player was, you apparently wouldn't want him because his only offer was from Boise State. I've no idea where the unranked player argument comes from because Shaka only has two on the roster.

I'll let you argue with yourself from this point forward. Enjoy being a dissatisfied MU fan. Lloyd, I hope you have a nice weekend.

Ahhh herein lies the problem. Maybe next time come correct and spend more than two seconds to think of a point and it will make much more sense rather than crafting one of the worst takes scoop has ever seen.

[The Equalizer]

...or the capability to pay.

This is ridiculous. Of course MU has the capability to pay. 

Shaka is telling recruits (and everyone that will listen) that he won't pay them--not that he can't afford to pay them.  And, keep in mind, that at the same time he says he won't pay newcomers, he claims to have plenty of money for retention.

We don't need to have Kansas or Kentucky-sized war chest.  We should be competitive with the Xaviers and Creightons of the world.

[tower912]

He has not said anything of the sort.  He said you don't need an agent because you are going to get paid the same.  Not that they won't get paid, that he won't negotiate.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Why are Xavier and Creighton being brought up as examples of success? Id take our last 3 years over either of theor last 3 years.

[Markusquette]

It's all pretty similar for the three programs. Creighton has the edge with post-season success for sure. MU a little more during the regular season.

[The Sultan]

It's all pretty similar for the three programs. Creighton has the edge with post-season success for sure. MU a little more during the regular season.

Not really. Xavier didn't make the tournament one of those years and I would take a BE and BET title any day over an E8.

[muwarrior69]

This is ridiculous. Of course MU has the capability to pay. 

Shaka is telling recruits (and everyone that will listen) that he won't pay them--not that he can't afford to pay them.  And, keep in mind, that at the same time he says he won't pay newcomers, he claims to have plenty of money for retention.

We don't need to have Kansas or Kentucky-sized war chest.  We should be competitive with the Xaviers and Creightons of the world.

Are you sure about that? I am not sure our AD thinks that.

He has said anything of the sort.  He said you don't need an agent because you are going to get paid the same.  Not that they won't get paid, that he won't negotiate.

Perhaps we won't negotiate because the money is not there or is it not negotiating at all or just with an agent? Will Shaka give up on a recruit because they are asking too much even without an agent because that recruit is being offered more from another school? With the court ruling on revenue sharing that is the world of college basketball that we are entering and as our AD admitted these are uncharted waters and MU MAY not be able to compete.

[Markusquette]

Not really. Xavier didn't make the tournament one of those years and I would take a BE and BET title any day over an E8.

MU and Creighton have very similar success over the last three years. I'd rather have the additional wins in the big dance, but I can understand the preference for either.

[Viper]

Yes, after two consecutive 2 seeds and graduating two all-timers to the NBA I have no issue with a season where Marquette was in the top 25 almost the entire season and comfortably in the tourney as a 7 seed.

Anyone expecting a protected seed every season is delusional - there are going to be ebbs and flows. That's even true for blue bloods.

And as I've said multiple times before, if this season is a small step back but contributes to steps forward the following seasons I'm good with that as well.

👍

[MU82]

If any portal player in the entire country is a major contributor** to his program, I'll print out this comment and eat it.

(** "major contributor" is defined as averaging a triple-double)

[Viper]

Just whining from the typical chicken-littles.

I owe you one...don't be a dumbass, hey! Adapt. Adjust. Go for it. That's not chicken-little. Whining? That's the point of Scoop, yes?

[The Sultan]

I owe you one...don't be a dumbass, hey! Adapt. Adjust. Go for it. That's not chicken-little. Whining? That's the point of Scoop, yes?

For you obviously.

[MuMark]

62 pages of recycled arguments.........with nobody's mind being changed.
Whining might be what you think scoop is for......many of us strive for a little higher level of discourse.

At least in the non game threads.

Ps I don't even mind the arguments.........but the endless back and forth is just tiresome.

[JakeBarnes]

ND still sucks.

[Uncle Rico]

62 pages of recycled arguments.........with nobody's mind being changed.
Whining might be what you think scoop is for......many of us strive for a little higher level of discourse.

At least in the non game threads.

Ps I don't even mind the arguments.........but the endless back and forth is just tiresome.

I think back to the original post.  Name your guy that you want in the portal.  Haven't seen one in this thread in a LONG time.

[wadesworld]

Nobody's saying that Shaka has to go full Pitino and buy the best players on the market every year.  But when we see teams like Creighton and UConn and Xavier succeed by blending a mix of top-ranked recruits, lower rated development players, and transfers, it's only natural to wonder whether they have a better approach.

If you start with a belief that Shaka is a better coach and developer of talent than McDermott or Hurley--which I think most here believe--the only rational explanation as to how those teams finished ahead of MU in the standings is a difference in talent.

We are using Xavier as proof that we need to take transfers? A team we've been unquestionably better than since Shaka arrived?

And "most here" believe that Shaka is a better coach than Hurley? Hurley is the best college basketball coach in the country. Who thinks Shaka is a better coach than him? Let alone "most here?"

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Are you sure about that? I am not sure our AD thinks that.

Yes I'm sure about that.

Do you really think that programs stop fundraising just because they have enough to get by?

[Uncle Rico]

Yes I'm sure about that.

Do you really think that programs stop fundraising just because they have enough to get by?

He does