UNC basketball 2026 transfer portal

rodoheel said:
Exactly. There aren't 10 Henri Veesaars (or Henri Veesaar equivalents) out there.
Click to expand...
And there aren’t 10 teams with our resources.

And even if you can’t get an equivalent center, you could use those funds to substantially upgrade at every other position.
 
Calheel said:
And there aren’t 10 teams with our resources.
Click to expand...
I actually think there are. Or close enough that the difference doesn't matter that much.

But in any event, I understand your broader point, but players are not fungible. It will not be easy to ensure that the money we would spend on Veesaar gets as much return as he would. I know what we have in Veesaar. There are likely to be few players in the portal with his level of proven production for a top 25 team.
 
rodoheel said:
I actually think there are. Or close enough that the difference doesn't matter that much.

But in any event, I understand your broader point, but players are not fungible. It will not be easy to ensure that the money we would spend on Veesaar gets as much return as he would. I know what we have in Veesaar. There are likely to be few players in the portal with his level of proven production for a top 25 team.
Click to expand...
But if he stays, he would get a raise.

Is it worth it to tie up such a large percentage of our resources into a big that struggles to rebound and has strength issues? Maybe. But it is not a slam dunk to pay through the nose for Henri as the building block for next year.

The strategy could work. There are also other strategies that could be just as effective in roster construction.

Back in the day, these stay/go decisions seemed so important to the next year. Today, not so much.

There is the caveat that Malone got a late start on the portal - even later than Jai Lucas last year - and that it would be easier to build a roster if we could get this one issue resolved fast.
 
rodoheel said:
I actually think there are. Or close enough that the difference doesn't matter that much.

But in any event, I understand your broader point, but players are not fungible. It will not be easy to ensure that the money we would spend on Veesaar gets as much return as he would. I know what we have in Veesaar. There are likely to be few players in the portal with his level of proven production for a top 25 team.
Click to expand...
I think the key is proven production. And not just the scope, but the type. It is much easier to build a team if you have a build-around. For instance, you know what type of PG you need, what type of perimeter players you need. If we have Henri spacing the floor, we can get by with a non-shooting wing or PF provided they bring something else to the table. Or a pass-first PG. If we don't know whether we will have that, the portal becomes more difficult.
 
Calheel said:
Is it worth it to tie up such a large percentage of our resources into a big that struggles to rebound and has strength issues? Maybe. But it is not a slam dunk to pay through the nose for Henri as the building block for next year.
Click to expand...
IMO, yes. Because he is a proven high-usage scorer with elite efficiency, size, and some playmaking skill to boot. If he stays in college basketball next year, he will be one of the top projected offensive players in the country. IMO the most important building block you can have, at any level of basketball, is a high-usage, high-efficiency scorer. It would perhaps be better if that player was also a lead ballhandler, but the list of guys who are proven efficient, high-usage scorers + lead ballhandlers and aren't in or on their way to the NBA is very small.

That Veesaar has elite size and also offers some playmaking skill/potential is a bonus, especially given that Malone's NBA tenure was largely built around a playmaking big-man hub. If you are going to pick any big man in college bball to be a Jokic-ish playmaking hub next year, I would suspect that Veesaar (assuming he doesn't go pro) would be one of the first five names on that list.
 
Bigs23 said:
I say pay Veesaar and let everyone else walk.
Click to expand...
Nah, I’d like to keep a core of the current roster and then get 3-4 really good transfers to mix in. No need to blow everything up.

Keep Veesaar, Stevenson, and Dixon. Powell if possible. Then we need to lock down Maximo Adams (really like him) and Mingo (if possible).

Then in portal, a 1-2 scoring guards, another physical/athletic big, and a wing with size and scoring ability.
 
WaynetheDrain said:
Nah, I’d like to keep a core of the current roster and then get 3-4 really good transfers to mix in. No need to blow everything up.

Keep Veesaar, Stevenson, and Dixon. Powell if possible. Then we need to lock down Maximo Adams (really like him) and Mingo (if possible).

Then in portal, a 1-2 scoring guards, another physical/athletic big, and a wing with size and scoring ability.
Click to expand...
I like what Michigan did!
 
Luka's back. He is returning to UNC. Not sure if that means he and Malone have already spoken, but I'd assume so. Good bench piece and having him for a full summer with the team should make him a solid rotation player.

*Not 100% confirmed yet, but he did specifically say he'll return to UNC next year and not enter the portal.
 
Glad to have Luka back. I know it's all about putting together the best roster you can from year-to-year. But I enjoy whatever continuity can be maintained and being able to recognize some of the players going in to each season.
 
05C40 said:
In regard to paying college players and letting them transfer at will without penalty, I can't believe I'm going to say this, but I think it is a good idea. College basketball long ago ceased to be a college thing. It's just a publicly financed showcase for NBA scouts. If the NCAA abolished the requirement to attend classes and treated basketball players the same way as they do other employees of universities, I'd be OK with that. Pay them. Give them health insurance. Give them paid vacation days and holidays. Pay them overtime for long road trips. It has been a LONG time since these Division 1 college basketball players were actual students. There is a reason why Rusty Clark, a Morehead scholar who had no interest in professional basketball, would sit in his hotel room studying before away games and periodically scream, "I HATE DEAN SMITH!" The current embodiment of student athletes in Division I college basketball is both a joke that should be ended and a mockery of all the students who have to study and pay to stay in school. I have enormous pride when a member of the faculty at any of the colleges I attended wins some prestigious award for his or her work at that college. If basketball players were employees rather than students, I feel certain my admiration for them and their accomplishments would be just as strong and sincere as that I have for distinguished faculty members. The mockery of the notion of "student athletes" in revenue generating sports should be discarded for the fraud that it is. However, if a "student athlete" actually wants a degree, then by all means, the university should bend over backwards to accommodate his or her desires.

ETA1: The only restriction I would place on the ability of student athletes to transfer is that they should not be able to transfer to another school after the season begins and be able to play for that school that same season. Just can't have star players transferring during the week prior to the NCAA Tournament. That would just be a step too far and just turn the Tournament into a multi-round all-star game, with the line-ups reshuffling every week. I don't want to imagine a UNC - Michigan NCAA championship game where Worthy and Jordan transferred to Michigan at half-time.

ETA2: Also, I see absolutely nothing wrong with "student athletes" executing a compensated 6 month non-compete addendum to their contracts prior to the commencement of the season.
Click to expand...
The PTO could only be used outside of basketball season.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top