- This topic has 25 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Included in things that I never thought I would say was the phrase, “Go Torin Dorn!” For those of you too young to remember, the first Torin Dorn was
[See the full post at: Dorn to State; Gottfried continues winning the transfer game]The nice thing about the transfers is you get actual college game film on them and you get them for a full year of practice before they play. Much less uncertainty as to how they will play. Nice addition. Go Pack!
AND…the other nice thing about transfers is that they don’t usually transfer again!! So, they are not a transfer risk! And, with that, they lose some leverage (and therefore cockiness) and often are better cultural fits for programs because their ass is now over a barrell!
Gottfried has done a really good job with transfers.
You know what else I’m in favor of? Recruiting guys and having them stick around for 4 years. I like seeing seniors on the roster. And to some extent, I feel like you’re getting less bang for your buck when it comes to recruiting time spent on transfers. Spend all of the time recruiting and you get a guy for 2 years instead of 4.
This is a serious question, not sarcasm but do we really have a shot at landing the big kid from overseas??? Any rumors?
This is excellent news, long after I thought we were in the lull.
I like everything about this guy, and especially the fact that he is a proven talent. AND, we get him for three years – maybe.Not sure if we have a chance at the big guy, but if we do, I’m back on board with high expectations for next season.
I’m a big fan of the Model T and bi-wing planes and sports on the radio (who needs HD?). Seriously, can we end the “if we can’t succeed the way we used to in the 80’s, then it’s not really succeeding” mentality?
Valvano would’ve adapted to transfers and one-and-dones just like Coach K has.
We just get a great kid to transfer who will be here for 4 total years (but he didn’t start here, the horrors!), and all you can do is say “get off my lawn!”
You know what else I’m in favor of? Recruiting guys and having them stick around for 4 years.
When I was first driving, gas was $0.68/gal. Those days are gone forever…and so are the days of top recruits staying in college for four years.
And, with that, they lose some leverage (and therefore cockiness) and often are better cultural fits for programs because their ass is now over a barrell!
So you like transfers because we’ve got leverage over them? Sorry, that’s just a bad message even if that is the way you feel.
I tend to think of them as somewhat risky. The pluses are that you have real film, that the second time through the process they may better understand what they’re looking form, they have something invested in the transfer year and they have a year to learn the system.
The cons are that they’ve “quit once,” that they may have some academic issues to make up in that off year, that they’re older (see Lacey), and that you invest in them a year before you get them on the court.
I don’t see why a kid won’t redshirt a year and develop, but will transfer and be forced to sit that year out. I don’t understand why programs won’t redshirt a player, but will take in a transfer (seemingly the same financial commitment). I think redshirting was the best thing that happened to Vandy while he was here.
Now, back to the original point of the post up top, I think Dorn was a good pick up for us. We’ve had good luck with transfers so it seems like this staff does a good job of evaluating them. If so, then this could be another valuable piece. If nothing else it gets us better players to practice with. I’m happy with the addition.
Memo to VaWolf…..I like the license plate….my wife has one that made the “STATEment”….
But, when I got my ticket in 1961, Regular was a hefty $0.199 or so and my daddy fussed because it had went up….
I could be wrong….I pumped enough of it on Saturday’s and washed cars between customers and changed a bunch of oil and filters….all for $5 per day.
Then, I hit the big time….graduated from HS in 1963 and got a summer job where I earned $1.25 per hour plus all the OT I could log…
My how times have changed…..
It definitely is a game, but I don’t know if anyone really “wins” the transfer game. Guys transfer out, other guys transfer in. Call it a tie. Like soccer. But I digress. Some leave early, some redshirt and stay for 4 years. On the downside, you never know what the team is going to look like from year to year. On the upside, it gives us something to talk about in the offseason. It is what it is.
I believe in basketball…as it always has been since Frosh and JV’s went bye-bye, the only time you’ll see true redshirting is by injury.
Vandy had a foot.
Here’s the deal. When a transfer comes to us, we like ’em. Both when someone decides to leave us, they are short sighted, self centered, bad for chemistry, and we probably didn’t want ’em to stay anyway. Simple as that.
I like ryebread’s comments and we indeed are in a different age of basketball. I don’t adjust easily to change like a lot of the older people I know (I’m one), but we simply aren’t going to get many really good 4-year players anymore. So we may as well go after anybody we can get, 4 years or 2.
I am not a fan of transfers in general, but things are changing and it looks to me like Dorn is a very good catch for State. I guess what I’m saying is that I like transfers a lot better in basketball than I do in football, because most of the talent level we get at NCSU for football isn’t going to be the 2 or even 3 and out variety. You can jump to the NBA because it is predicated more on talent than any sport I know. And that’s to me why it sucks so much.
It has been refreshing to see even not even one post on here about those sons of bitches who are showcasing their hip-hop culture’s “game” on ABC this week.
Remember, NBA stands for Never Buy Anything.
At one time I was a huge NBA fan. These days not as much (and a lot of that is oversaturation of sports on TV in general). This particular final series I am watching. The NBA game has always been different from the college game but over time the college game in some ways mirrors the NBA game.
As far as the college game and transfers yes the landscape has changed. Love him or hate him but Calipari was the first to really adjust. So far Gott’s approach has been pretty good. We also tend to forget that transfers have been a significant part of the college game for decades – much more today than in the past granted but it has always been a factor.… transfers ain’t nothing new…
Let’s start with…
Phil Spence
Mo Rivers
Spud Webb…Mr. Dog, et al, help me out here…
…and for what it’s worth…
the ratio of the price of one gallon of gas divided by the minimum wage is basically the same today as it was back in Wuf and Old13’s day…some things never change…
#NCSU-North Carolina's #1 FOOTBALL school!Nate McMillan and spud Webb were jucos…like dez lee, mickey hinnant. Let’s not confuse these guys with true transfers like…mike giomi, Ralston Turner and Trevor lacy.
Great pick up. This kid’s a baller.
The cons are that they’ve “quit once,” that they may have some academic issues to make up in that off year, that they’re older (see Lacey), and that you invest in them a year before you get them on the court.
I kinda get what you’re saying here Rye, but in this case, I don’t consider Dorn to be any of these. I believe what you have here is a kid who was overlooked by most major programs while in HS. He took a shot with UNCC, succeeded, and caught the attention of some major programs. As a kid, he saw the opportunity to come to NCSU, play on a larger national scale (i.e. more eyes watching his game), and decided it was a great opportunity for him. Hell, I doubt many of us know his academic background. He might have an interest in mechanical engineering and saw what STATE has to offer. Not likely, but could be the case for some.
I get that some kids who transfer can be seen as “quitting” (bubbleguts), but I think in the case of some transfers, like Lacey and BSW, they saw the opportunity the ACC has on their future stock. I mean, seriously, who watches Alabama or LSU basketball? Lacey’s name was mentioned a ton based on his performance at NCSU. Yeah, I get it. He was old, but if it weren’t for Gott and staffs trained eyes, Lacey would most likely still be playing on a bad Alabama team. Instead, he’s chasing his dream, whether now was the right time for him or not, he made that decision. An opportunity presented to him by his performances after transferring and attention he received by playing for a pretty good ACC team.
I don’t recall that many NCSU transfers that had academic issues. This might not be saying much as my memory sucks. I’m not sure why a program (well except for #UNCheat) would bring in a transfer with academic issues, but I’m sure it happens.
I’m not sure that investing in them for a year before they play is such a bad thing. I think this can allow said player to adjust to the new coaches/game style while meshing with players on the current roster. If they are great players, it would also give a nice body to practice against. I do get what you’re saying though. It can suck if you invest a year in the kid and he doesn’t fit well with the team.
I guess the point, if any, that I’m trying to make is that in today’s game of college basketball, I think the pros of a transfer far outweigh the cons. Without the valuable addition of transfers, I think the state of STATE basketball would be in really rough shape. Gott often goes for home runs with respect to top dog recruits. I’m glad he sees our program as an elite one with chances to land these guys. However, this can often backfire and we end up ending a season with players graduating, leaving early, or transferring, without a scholarship player to replace them. So then begins the hunt for some transfers. /rant
I tend to think of them as somewhat risky. The pluses are that you have real film, that the second time through the process they may better understand what they’re looking form, they have something invested in the transfer year and they have a year to learn the system.
IMO you are underselling the pluses.
1. Having real film from college means the staff has a much better idea of what they are getting than when signing a high school recruit. So it is much more likely a transfer will meet the staff’s expectations than a high school recruit.
2. The transfer going through the process a second time means he is much more likely to be realistic about his role and playing time, and much more likely to be happy than a high school recruit who might have unrealistic expectations.
3. The invested transfer year is huge, as it is a real commitment from the transfer to the program. It is also a year to learn the system, coaches, and teammates, get settled academically, and get better in the weight room and conditioning. High school recruits don’t get that. Furthermore, in a transfer, that year is used by an older and more mature and experienced player, making it more likely to have real value.
The cons are that they’ve “quit once,” that they may have some academic issues to make up in that off year, that they’re older (see Lacey), and that you invest in them a year before you get them on the court.
Players who transfer due to unhappiness over role/playing time and/or personality differences could typically be fairly characterized as quitting on their programs. (Harrow, Purvis, TDT, Raymond, Harris)
However, there are many reasons for transferring that I wouldn’t characterize as ‘quitting’ on the program:
1. Family reason (Painter)
2. Jucos who went to junior college to prove themselves in order to make a jump up to the major college level (Lee)
3. Players who graduate early and performed well enough to have earned a jump to major conference basketball, which is a once in a lifetime dream/event (Alex Johnson)
4. Players who committed to a specific coach/staff that left or were fired (Harrow, Lacey, Turner, Dorn)I don’t remember the situation with Henderson, but the rest of our incoming transfers have had reasons I wouldn’t characterize as quitting on their programs. So this ‘con’ seems irrelevant to our program.
I’m not aware that we have taken any incoming transfers who have had academic issues. Even if they did, they had a redshirt year to address them. To my knowledge, none of incoming transfers have struggled academically. So this ‘con’ seems irrelevant to our program.
Investing in them a year before getting them on the court is a pro, not a con, as I already outlined above. I assume you are saying it is a con referring to having had Lacey only one year and not two years. To that I say, so what, was it better to have Lacey in practice for one year and on the court for one year or not to have had him at all? Obviously, it was better to have him. So this ‘con’ doesn’t seem like a con at all.
All in all, there doesn’t seem to be any cons you have listed that come close to offsetting the positives. At least not for our program, which does a good job of selecting and recruiting good transfers.
I don’t see why a kid won’t redshirt a year and develop, but will transfer and be forced to sit that year out. I don’t understand why programs won’t redshirt a player, but will take in a transfer (seemingly the same financial commitment). I think redshirting was the best thing that happened to Vandy while he was here.
This is all about the kids. Vandy redshirted and it was great for him. But most transfers who transfer for selfish reasons like role/playing time don’t think redshirting in place will fix their issue. They have to sit out a year to transfer, but they would see that as more worthwhile elsewhere, where they are presumably promised the role/playing time they think they deserve.
All in all, I don’t follow other programs closely enough to intelligently compare, but it’s hard to imagine any other non-elite programs doing a better job than Gott and staff at bringing in quality transfers.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
