ADVERTISEMENT

2022-23 Transfer Watch

Eventually we will get one of these guys. There are 27 points to replace
Hammond (or Sessoms), Wright and Young probably surpasses 27 ppg. 14, 10 and 8. That's 32 ppg. More balanced scoring. Just need to account for McConnell's 7 ppg if he leaves. More scoring from returnees Hyatt, Reiber, Mag could cover that. Heck, Cliff can score 4 more per game on missed dunks alone..lol

That's my preference. Wright could be a super sub if McConnell returns and then start the next year.

Starters.

Hammond or Sessoms
Mulcahy
Wright or McConnell
Hyatt
Cliff

Bench: Young, Mag, Reiber, Miller and Simpson. Woolfolk -RS.

2 more spots - Palmquist ? HS recruit.

Just throwing it out there.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: briccnerff
Hammond (or Sessoms), Wright and Young probably surpasses 27 ppg. 14, 10 and 8. That's 32 ppg. More balanced scoring. Just need to account for McConnell's 7 ppg if he leaves. More scoring from returnees Hyatt, Reiber, Mag could cover that. Heck, Cliff can score 4 more per game on missed dunks alone..lol

That's my preference. Wright could be a super sub if McConnell returns and then start the next year.

Starters.

Hammond or Sessoms
Mulcahy
Wright or McConnell
Hyatt
Cliff

Bench: Young, Mag, Reiber, Miller and Simpson. Woolfolk -RS.

2 more spots - Palmquist ? HS recruit.

Just throwing it out there.
Caleb’s scoring would be naturally absorbed by the combination of players who take his minutes. That’s not the concern.

Replacing his defense would be a huge wild card and not as easy to do in tandem with bringing in scorers from the portal. Don’t underestimate this factor - it would not be an easy replacement. Caleb’s defensive style makes everyone else on the court around him better. He’s all over the court and a team defense master. This isn’t like prior years where the guys we lost are more of individual defensive studs. Also, of the starters RHJ and Geo probably ranked next in terms of the best defenders.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RUChoppin
Simple. People in this forum think it was the best conference in college basketball this year when that’s clearly not the case. Let of the nation already knows that.
Define best conference in the nation? Apparently you define it as the conference with the best 1-2 teams.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChasRC69

PG from NY, 2 years left to play I think, great defender for a guard and athletic. Maybe not the same level of shooter as the other guys but this guy is a very solid player
This sounds like a Pike guy and he shot 35% from 3 on almost 4 shots per game.

 
This sounds like a Pike guy and he shot 35% from 3 on almost 4 shots per game.

Yeah honestly, I watched some more game film on him and he is a very very good playmaker. And it’s not like there’s no hope for him from 3 (actually shot a better percentage than Geo last season), but it’s clear that teams aren’t too worried about letting him shoot. My worry with the guys we’ve so far reached out to to be that lead guard in Hammond and Sessoms is defensively, them and Paul could limit our defensive ceiling. On the other hand, I’d worry bout Roberts as he isn’t exactly one getting his shots through isolation where the others are good at it and his lack of shooting could again limit us as we currently don’t have many great shooters.
 
IIRC we weren't really interested as a high schooler (he was originally a PSU commit for Chambers) and he didn't do anything at SCar to change that.

If their other big guy Leveque from Massachusetts enters the portal then I'd be interested.
Leveque is in.



Ta’Quan may be following Martin to UMass.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kcg88 and Scangg
Doesn't seem confusing to me at all.

Most fans are not privy to what a school is doing with regards to the inner workings with specific targets.

Also, just a guess but RU likely reached out right away and the kid was interested. Then other programs reached out and are promising him starter minutes at Center. Why would the kid not be interested in stepping in and being a starter right away?
This. No reason for Pike to show us fans his cards. Quinn prob was interested but once others came calling and he probably sees 25-30 minutes vs 16 minutes
 
  • Like
Reactions: rubigtimenow
Caleb’s scoring would be naturally absorbed by the combination of players who take his minutes. That’s not the concern.

Replacing his defense would be a huge wild card and not as easy to do in tandem with bringing in scorers from the portal. Don’t underestimate this factor - it would not be an easy replacement. Caleb’s defensive style makes everyone else on the court around him better. He’s all over the court and a team defense master. This isn’t like prior years where the guys we lost are more of individual defensive studs. Also, of the starters RHJ and Geo probably ranked next in terms of the best defenders.
They all developed into good defensive players. McConnell is the most naturally gifted defender of the 3 with instincts you can't teach. His time here woukd end sooner or later and a replacement would be needed.

I think Pikiell sees Mag as his next really good perimeter defender.
 
This. No reason for Pike to show us fans his cards. Quinn prob was interested but once others came calling and he probably sees 25-30 minutes vs 16 minutes
Not many enter the portal saying " I want to be a backup".

Hard to sell come be a backup Center for 15-17 minutes per even if the guy is moving up to P5. He must be willing to do it with the belief that he would be the starter in Year 2. Same with Ryan Young.

Best option could be a guy that can be a backup 4 and 5. But not easy to find because they would need to have some perimeter skills....like a Pete Nance type.
 
Not many enter the portal saying " I want to be a backup".

Hard to sell come be a backup Center for 15-17 minutes per even if the guy is moving up to P5. He must be willing to do it with the belief that he would be the starter in Year 2. Same with Ryan Young.

Best option could be a guy that can be a backup 4 and 5. But not easy to find because they would need to have some perimeter skills....like a Pete Nance type.
I do think it’s possible that someone would like to be a key piece on an NCAA team.

Problem is Cliff seems to have good stamina, plays 30 minutes a game, only commits 3 fouls per 40 minutes, and ‘23 RU is not an obvious NCAA lock.

But I can see someone like the NW kid liking Pike, wanting to get to a tourney, and thinking that a portal guard, enabling Rieber to be more of a stretch 4, and Paul adds up to an opportunity.
 
Joey Brunk from Indiana to Ohio State as a backup.
Always exceptions. Only Played 19 mpg at Indiana as a starter and was about to lose his spot to TJD. Add in that he probably wanted to play on a tourney team....it made sense.

Most guys want a clear path to playing time, minutes and even shots....as Pikiell eluded to last year.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: rubigtimenow
I do think it’s possible that someone would like to be a key piece on an NCAA team.

Problem is Cliff seems to have good stamina, plays 30 minutes a game, only commits 3 fouls per 40 minutes, and ‘23 RU is not an obvious NCAA lock.

But I can see someone like the NW kid liking Pike, wanting to get to a tourney, and thinking that a portal guard, enabling Rieber to be more of a stretch 4, and Paul adds up to an opportunity.
Absolutely possible, but not an easy sell as I stated. The good thing is both could start by year 2 if they come and stay and play on a tourney team if a few other pieces are found.
 
Last edited:
Absolutely possible, but not an easy sell as I stated. The good thing is both could start by year 2 if they come and stay and play on a tourney team if a few other pieces are found.
Cliff proabaly will leave after next season which means a starter at center will be needed .That should be part of discussion regarding playing time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scangg
I guess you define it as whatever conference you root for
I’m not sure there is a definitive objective measure.

KenPom ranks conferences by the adjusted efficiency of a theoretical league team that would be expected to go .500 in that league.

That seems like a good way. But just as easily could be “league with most teams in top 10 adjusted efficiency”, or “league with most top 4 NCAA seeds”, or “league with most coaches’ poll ranked teams”.

Judging a league by “most teams able to clear the at-large bid bar” could be one, too, but not sure I’d go to Vegas with that strategy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RUChoppin
The official way the teams are rated is through their seeding. Just casually thinking about it, the Big Ten has mostly performed as expected according to their seeding. We got 9 teams in, but mostly in mid and lower seedings. It's a conference with a high floor and strong middle, but no single dominant team. So how is that overrated?

Correct to a point, but still too many upsets of well seeded Big 10 teams. Iowa, IL, Wisconsin and Purdue all lost to worse-seeded teams And did not look good in doing so!
 
Last edited:
Correct to a point, but still too many upsets of well seeded Big 10 teams. Iowa, IL and Purdue all lost to worse-seeded teams And did not look good in doing so!

It may be a little bit of the availability heuristic - we're following the Big 10, and the Big 10 gets a lot of attention because of the large number of bids.

P5+BE teams that lost to worse-seeded teams:

SEC (Five upsets)
2 Kentucky (SEC), to 15 St. Peter's (13 seed difference)
2 Auburn (SEC), to 10 Miami (8 seed difference)
3 Tennessee (SEC), to 11 Michigan (8 seed difference)
6 Alabama (SEC), to 11 ND (five seed difference)
6 LSU, to 11 Iowa State (five seed difference)

B10 (Four upsets)
3 Purdue (B10), to 15 St. Peter's (12 seed difference)
3 Wisconsin (B10), to 11 Iowa State (8 seed difference)
4 Illinois (B10), to 5 Houston (1 seed difference)
5 Iowa (B10), to 12 Richmond (7 seed difference)

B12 (1 upset)
1 Baylor (B12), to 9 UNC (8 seed difference)

P12 (3 upsets)
1 Arizona (P12), to 5 Houston (4 seed difference)
4 UCLA (P12), to 8 UNC (4 seed difference)
7 USC (P12), to 10 Miami (3 seed difference)

BE (2 upsets)
5 UConn (BE), to 12 NM State (7 seed difference)
8 Seton Hall (BE), to 9 TCU (1 seed difference)

ACC (No upset losses)
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT