MBB TPT2 TRANSFER PORTAL THREAD 2

Are Moser and the boys done adding pieces? I see no reason to hold the last scholarship open in today's new-roster-every-year environment, but pickings are starting to look pretty slim.
 
Are Moser and the boys done adding pieces? I see no reason to hold the last scholarship open in today's new-roster-every-year environment, but pickings are starting to look pretty slim.


No reason to hang on to it, but no reason to use it on anything but a one year rental either. On the flip side, how many minutes are there to go around? It's tough to give significant minutes to more than 8-9 guys.. everyone else gets scraps.
 
Haha, we heard that same argument last year. "How are we going to have enough minutes for all these studs we have?"
 
Haha, we heard that same argument last year. "How are we going to have enough minutes for all these studs we have?"

We have all these GREAT athletes -- how can we possibly divide up the playing time? Although, since we are going to play SO fast, we will really need to go 12 deep so guys can stay fresh.
 
Haha, we heard that same argument last year. "How are we going to have enough minutes for all these studs we have?"


I never said we have a bunch of studs. What I said was its tough to find minutes for a rotation of more than 8 or 9 guys. When you start getting down to #10, 11, 12 or 13 it's tough. Unless you are a team that rotates whole groups, which you don't find a lot of.
 
Serious question. Do you ever get tired of sarcastic retorts that you, and you alone, see as cute? If you’re using them to increase your post count, I get that!

Steve's post is 100 percent accurate. Last summer, and just about every one before that, is full of posts about how deep we are and noting that there are only so minutes to go around. Despite having a roster that is probably weaker than all the returning Big 12 teams (plus Houston, at a minimum), we are already being told that the last scholarship isn't that important to use because we already have a good roster. Sorry if my post offended your sensibilities.
 
I never said we have a bunch of studs. What I said was its tough to find minutes for a rotation of more than 8 or 9 guys. When you start getting down to #10, 11, 12 or 13 it's tough. Unless you are a team that rotates whole groups, which you don't find a lot of.

Then the goal should be to find studs and bump Soares and Moore and some of the other guys who are currently in the top 8 or 9 down to the 10 and 11 spots. That's how you get better.
 
Then the goal should be to find studs and bump Soares and Moore and some of the other guys who are currently in the top 8 or 9 down to the 10 and 11 spots. That's how you get better.

For once we agree about something. Your goal should be to find better players always. That being said, you have never seen either of those two play. You are making assumptions. If I'm not mistaken though, Soares is a one year guy?
 
Well we do rotate whole groups unless Moser adjusts his hockey line change substitution pattern
 
Well we do rotate whole groups unless Moser adjusts his hockey line change substitution pattern

I was talking mass subs like Grinnell does. 5 in 5 out every couple of minutes. Moser doesn't do that.Sherfield and Hill both played over 32 mpg
, Los and Groves played 28 and 25+ mpg, then J Groves played 20.....after that when you get down to 8-10 it went down to like 11, 12 & 13 minutes. Past #10 it went down to 4 mpg

That's what I was talking about when I said it's hard to get minutes past 8-9 or 10 guys.

That's not a Moser thing...thats coaches in general.
 
For once we agree about something. Your goal should be to find better players always. That being said, you have never seen either of those two play. You are making assumptions. If I'm not mistaken though, Soares is a one year guy?

Soares has played enough that it isn't an assumption to say that he hasn't shown himself to be good enough to be a starter or top reserve on a good Big 12 team. The fact he is only a one-year guy makes his signing even more troublesome IMO. Ideally, one-year transfers should be guys who you can count on to come in and make a big, immediate impact. Grant is the only one of those we have managed to snag thus far.

I would love for Moore to prove me wrong. I just think that we have a large enough sample size with his career to think it is very unlikely that he is the kind of player that can help us take the big leap we need. Maybe he is the kind of player who does tons of little things well, but those guys are usually most valuable on great teams, not on teams that need scoring, shooting, rebounding, etc.
 
Soares has played enough that it isn't an assumption to say that he hasn't shown himself to be good enough to be a starter or top reserve on a good Big 12 team. The fact he is only a one-year guy makes his signing even more troublesome IMO. Ideally, one-year transfers should be guys who you can count on to come in and make a big, immediate impact. Grant is the only one of those we have managed to snag thus far.

I would love for Moore to prove me wrong. I just think that we have a large enough sample size with his career to think it is very unlikely that he is the kind of player that can help us take the big leap we need. Maybe he is the kind of player who does tons of little things well, but those guys are usually most valuable on great teams, not on teams that need scoring, shooting, rebounding, etc.
Soares isn’t good enough to be a 6th man on a good big12 team? Dang
 
Soares has played enough that it isn't an assumption to say that he hasn't shown himself to be good enough to be a starter or top reserve on a good Big 12 team. The fact he is only a one-year guy makes his signing even more troublesome IMO. Ideally, one-year transfers should be guys who you can count on to come in and make a big, immediate impact. Grant is the only one of those we have managed to snag thus far.

I would love for Moore to prove me wrong. I just think that we have a large enough sample size with his career to think it is very unlikely that he is the kind of player that can help us take the big leap we need. Maybe he is the kind of player who does tons of little things well, but those guys are usually most valuable on great teams, not on teams that need scoring, shooting, rebounding, etc.

I'm not saying you are wrong. I'm just saying I'll reserve judgement on them until the season. I think Moore will be better than you think but who knows? I could be wrong too.

As for Soares, I don't think the plan was/is for him to be a starter. I think he is more of a reserve who has some length and athleticism.
 
Soares averaged roughly 7 points and 3 boards in 28 minutes per game last year for a NIT team from the pac12. That doesn't seem strong enough to be a good 6th man on a good b12 team. But, it seems good enough that he could contribute, maybe in ways other than scoring and rebounding, on a below average b12 team, which we will likely be.

To be clear, I'm not trying to start anything with my last sentence simply acknowledging that we don't have to be a good b12 team to have a good year and show clear improvement.
 
Soares averaged roughly 7 points and 3 boards in 28 minutes per game last year for a NIT team from the pac12. That doesn't seem strong enough to be a good 6th man on a good b12 team.

He started 33 games for an NIT 1 seed (i.e. first 4 out). Considering him a 6th man for an NCAA tournament team seems like a really easy leap. I understand the concerns about his shooting and fit, but the guy can obviously play.
 
I'm not saying you are wrong. I'm just saying I'll reserve judgement on them until the season. I think Moore will be better than you think but who knows? I could be wrong too.

As for Soares, I don't think the plan was/is for him to be a starter. I think he is more of a reserve who has some length and athleticism.

I am definitely higher on Moore than Soares, in that I at least feel he may have some upside. I hope you're right about Soares and his role, but it feels like after we failed to land a high quality four, a lot of people now see Soares as a potential starter or 6th man.
 
I am definitely higher on Moore than Soares, in that I at least feel he may have some upside. I hope you're right about Soares and his role, but it feels like after we failed to land a high quality four, a lot of people now see Soares as a potential starter or 6th man.



For me I am not sure he plays the four. Maybe he does see some minutes there but I see him more as a wing whose specialty is as a defender. That's supposed to be his forte I thought?

I wouldn't think he is a starter but stranger things have happened.
 
Steve's post is 100 percent accurate. Last summer, and just about every one before that, is full of posts about how deep we are and noting that there are only so minutes to go around. Despite having a roster that is probably weaker than all the returning Big 12 teams (plus Houston, at a minimum), we are already being told that the last scholarship isn't that important to use because we already have a good roster. Sorry if my post offended your sensibilities.

I think the idea is more like we are bringing in like 7 new transfers that are all expecting to play (as opposed to sometimes freshman and transfers in the past expected to sit for a while possibly) in addition to the players we brought back and HS guys. Some of these dudes are gonna be 100% unhappy and will have to transfer again to play no matter what. Not necessarily about all being studs.
 
Back
Top