Re: Transfer Portal 2022
Posted: Wed Aug 04, 2021 10:34 am
Terps +5 in (-7 out), Rutgers +7 in (-1 out). Interesting
I just realized I posted that NCAA article to the wrong thread by mistake!
UVA only brought in 1 transfer last year and 1 transfer this summer. Is this a “dereliction of duty” on Lar’s part?
The jury is still out on if the transfer bonanza can be a consistently successful strategy. Early returns have been mixed. Just look at Duke and Denver this year.
That’s right. And bringing in lots of transfers doesn’t necessarily result in a better TEAM. Sometimes it might, if done smartly with an eye toward team culture. But, again, we don’t really have enough data yet.It's all about fielding the best team you can. That's it.
Duke made the final 4. It wasn’t pretty though.HopFan16 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:32 pmThe jury is still out on if the transfer bonanza can be a consistently successful strategy. Early returns have been mixed. Just look at Duke and Denver this year.
That’s right. And bringing in lots of transfers doesn’t necessarily result in a better TEAM. Sometimes it might, if done smartly with an eye toward team culture. But, again, we don’t really have enough data yet.It's all about fielding the best team you can. That's it.
Henpecked wrote: ↑Wed Aug 04, 2021 1:53 pm I think Tillman is the best recruiter in the business. He is also one of the best x and o guys out there. I made a point a couple weeks back that many of the 4 and 5 star guys that he recruits will get little to no playing time and will likely leave as a result of the coach adding 22 and 23 year old transfers every year. I agree that it is survival of the fittest and the best players will naturally rise to the top and star for the Terps. This is a meritocracy in its purest sense and Tillman is doing what he believes is best for his team. That is his job. And the results have shown this to be a successful strategy.
Maryland regularly brings in 9 or 10 four or five star guys each year and then adds 3-5 transfers each year on top of that. There are simply not enough balls to go around in College Park when you do this for four classes. So it is a shame that we never get to see some of these great players competing.
I mentioned that Dylan Pallonetti at Stony Brook and James Avanzato at Towson both got out early and made significant impact at their respective schools - Pallonetti with 36 goals and 19 assists and Avanzato with 18 goals and 22 assists. Had Pallonetti and Avanzato stayed in Terpland, maybe we would have never gotten to see them play. And that is a shame.
I have always wondered how many potential all-americans were buried on the benches at Virginia, Syracuse, Hopkins, North Carolina and Maryland. Nothing is new about this concept other than the increase in transfers that we are seeing these days.
And got completely blown off the field by the type of team they were assembled specifically to compete with.Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:55 pmDuke made the final 4. It wasn’t pretty though.HopFan16 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:32 pmThe jury is still out on if the transfer bonanza can be a consistently successful strategy. Early returns have been mixed. Just look at Duke and Denver this year.
That’s right. And bringing in lots of transfers doesn’t necessarily result in a better TEAM. Sometimes it might, if done smartly with an eye toward team culture. But, again, we don’t really have enough data yet.It's all about fielding the best team you can. That's it.
Where do you think Duke ends up without those transfers? I am genuinely curious. Do they maybe not make the Final Four? Do they win the championship without Sowers?HopFan16 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 04, 2021 3:35 pmAnd got completely blown off the field by the type of team they were assembled specifically to compete with.Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:55 pmDuke made the final 4. It wasn’t pretty though.HopFan16 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:32 pmThe jury is still out on if the transfer bonanza can be a consistently successful strategy. Early returns have been mixed. Just look at Duke and Denver this year.
That’s right. And bringing in lots of transfers doesn’t necessarily result in a better TEAM. Sometimes it might, if done smartly with an eye toward team culture. But, again, we don’t really have enough data yet.It's all about fielding the best team you can. That's it.
If you look closely, you'll see that they dominated the first half of the year when they were fortunate to catch Denver early and then played a bunch of cupcakes. But when the ACC schedule started (and then into the NCAA tournament), it was decidedly tougher sledding. From April on they were 5-3 with one of those wins against High Point. All three losses were pretty decisive. I'd argue they really underperformed the talent they had. Unanimous preseason #1—arguably had the best attackman, best freshman, and best defenseman in the country—they did the absolute bare minimum by squeaking into the Final Four.
They made the Final Four in 2019 too, the last time there was a full season (and with more competition that year, with the Ivy playing). So I don't think there's a super compelling argument that the transfers made them clearly better than they already were.
Hence, it wasn’t pretty. Offense was abysmal. I can’t remember, other than Sowers and little used Phil Robertson, what offensive player was also a transfer? That midfield play was just awful. Not sure transfers were the problem with the team. Just didn’t look good all season. COVID protocols screwed up chemistry also.HopFan16 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 04, 2021 3:35 pmAnd got completely blown off the field by the type of team they were assembled specifically to compete with.Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:55 pmDuke made the final 4. It wasn’t pretty though.HopFan16 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:32 pmThe jury is still out on if the transfer bonanza can be a consistently successful strategy. Early returns have been mixed. Just look at Duke and Denver this year.
That’s right. And bringing in lots of transfers doesn’t necessarily result in a better TEAM. Sometimes it might, if done smartly with an eye toward team culture. But, again, we don’t really have enough data yet.It's all about fielding the best team you can. That's it.
If you look closely, you'll see that they dominated the first half of the year when they were fortunate to catch Denver early and then played a bunch of cupcakes. But when the ACC schedule started (and then into the NCAA tournament), it was decidedly tougher sledding. From April on they were 5-3 with one of those wins against High Point. All three losses were pretty decisive. I'd argue they really underperformed the talent they had. Unanimous preseason #1—arguably had the best attackman, best freshman, and best defenseman in the country—they did the absolute bare minimum by squeaking into the Final Four.
They made the Final Four in 2019 too, the last time there was a full season (and with more competition that year, with the Ivy playing). So I don't think there's a super compelling argument that the transfers made them clearly better than they already were.
What’s the point of bringing guys back for 5th years if they aren’t going to make a major impact? Did it help Duke to have Joey Manown, a 2yr starting attackman, running 3rd line midfield a couple games last year as a grad student? If I were underclassman/recruits I would be pretty pumped that their coach trusts in the talent coming out up in the ranks enough to feel ok about people graduating.
No Sowers would probably mean they give the keys to ONeill right out of the gate and give Dyson Williams a full spot on attack as the finisher in chief. I think they would have benefited from incorporating Williams more as he is one of the better off ball players in college and has enough 1v1 skill where you can't count on a shorty to lock him up. His talents seemed somewhat wasted as just another guy on one of their many middie lines. That also sounds like a more balanced attack with Robertson as the righty dodger, ONeill as the lefty, and Williams as the reliable offball weapon. The line they went with was kind of a dribble fest a la Harden Kyrie and Durant of the Brooklyn nets.HopFan16 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 04, 2021 3:35 pmAnd got completely blown off the field by the type of team they were assembled specifically to compete with.Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:55 pmDuke made the final 4. It wasn’t pretty though.HopFan16 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:32 pmThe jury is still out on if the transfer bonanza can be a consistently successful strategy. Early returns have been mixed. Just look at Duke and Denver this year.
That’s right. And bringing in lots of transfers doesn’t necessarily result in a better TEAM. Sometimes it might, if done smartly with an eye toward team culture. But, again, we don’t really have enough data yet.It's all about fielding the best team you can. That's it.
If you look closely, you'll see that they dominated the first half of the year when they were fortunate to catch Denver early and then played a bunch of cupcakes. But when the ACC schedule started (and then into the NCAA tournament), it was decidedly tougher sledding. From April on they were 5-3 with one of those wins against High Point. All three losses were pretty decisive. I'd argue they really underperformed the talent they had. Unanimous preseason #1—arguably had the best attackman, best freshman, and best defenseman in the country—they did the absolute bare minimum by squeaking into the Final Four.
They made the Final Four in 2019 too, the last time there was a full season (and with more competition that year, with the Ivy playing). So I don't think there's a super compelling argument that the transfers made them clearly better than they already were.
Why Dyson Williams didn’t comeback to attack after he went out with COVID protocols is a mystery. I thought O’Neill was better suited to come out of the box. He moved down to attack when Dyson went out and Dyson moved up to midfield when he came back. Offense had no balance…..After screwing around with the ball in the midfield, it would be thrown to the attack to try to make something happen with a clock winding down. That’s never good offense anywhere. Defenses also made some smart adjustments.Antonio114 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 04, 2021 5:12 pmNo Sowers would probably mean they give the keys to ONeill right out of the gate and give Dyson Williams a full spot on attack as the finisher in chief. I think they would have benefited from incorporating Williams more as he is one of the better off ball players in college and has enough 1v1 skill where you can't count on a shorty to lock him up. His talents seemed somewhat wasted as just another guy on one of their many middie lines. That also sounds like a more balanced attack with Robertson as the righty dodger, ONeill as the lefty, and Williams as the reliable offball weapon. The line they went with was kind of a dribble fest a la Harden Kyrie and Durant of the Brooklyn nets.HopFan16 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 04, 2021 3:35 pmAnd got completely blown off the field by the type of team they were assembled specifically to compete with.Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:55 pmDuke made the final 4. It wasn’t pretty though.HopFan16 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:32 pmThe jury is still out on if the transfer bonanza can be a consistently successful strategy. Early returns have been mixed. Just look at Duke and Denver this year.
That’s right. And bringing in lots of transfers doesn’t necessarily result in a better TEAM. Sometimes it might, if done smartly with an eye toward team culture. But, again, we don’t really have enough data yet.It's all about fielding the best team you can. That's it.
If you look closely, you'll see that they dominated the first half of the year when they were fortunate to catch Denver early and then played a bunch of cupcakes. But when the ACC schedule started (and then into the NCAA tournament), it was decidedly tougher sledding. From April on they were 5-3 with one of those wins against High Point. All three losses were pretty decisive. I'd argue they really underperformed the talent they had. Unanimous preseason #1—arguably had the best attackman, best freshman, and best defenseman in the country—they did the absolute bare minimum by squeaking into the Final Four.
They made the Final Four in 2019 too, the last time there was a full season (and with more competition that year, with the Ivy playing). So I don't think there's a super compelling argument that the transfers made them clearly better than they already were.
It's an interesting question but in the end I'm leaning towards the occams razor that having Sowers on your attack line is better than not having him. I think the gains in production he had for them while always drawing a teams No. 1 cover man cancel out any staleness him being there may have caused. A lot of the problems with this years offense would probably still be there if he was not on the team.
Championship level players want to win it all, aren’t afraid of competition and want to be on the best team possible.stupefied wrote: ↑Wed Aug 04, 2021 3:35 pmHenpecked wrote: ↑Wed Aug 04, 2021 1:53 pm I think Tillman is the best recruiter in the business. He is also one of the best x and o guys out there. I made a point a couple weeks back that many of the 4 and 5 star guys that he recruits will get little to no playing time and will likely leave as a result of the coach adding 22 and 23 year old transfers every year. I agree that it is survival of the fittest and the best players will naturally rise to the top and star for the Terps. This is a meritocracy in its purest sense and Tillman is doing what he believes is best for his team. That is his job. And the results have shown this to be a successful strategy.
Maryland regularly brings in 9 or 10 four or five star guys each year and then adds 3-5 transfers each year on top of that. There are simply not enough balls to go around in College Park when you do this for four classes. So it is a shame that we never get to see some of these great players competing.
I mentioned that Dylan Pallonetti at Stony Brook and James Avanzato at Towson both got out early and made significant impact at their respective schools - Pallonetti with 36 goals and 19 assists and Avanzato with 18 goals and 22 assists. Had Pallonetti and Avanzato stayed in Terpland, maybe we would have never gotten to see them play. And that is a shame.
I have always wondered how many potential all-americans were buried on the benches at Virginia, Syracuse, Hopkins, North Carolina and Maryland. Nothing is new about this concept other than the increase in transfers that we are seeing these days.
If Tillman is such a great recruiter of top hs talent than why does Maryland so frequently have to import players that were recruited and developed by other coaches and programs?
If he is so good at x and o's then shouldn't the numerous four and five star classes gathered be enough for a championship run instead of bringing in imports that displaces ?
Tillman is doing what is best for himself not for his own recruits. His 'model' is simply a impatient shortcut to success .Pallonetti and Avanzato would have eventually played at Maryland if Tillman had the patience to develop what he pursued.
No applause here for how he and some others operate.
If he felt that he could have upgraded his talent level and didn't do that, than yes. If not, no.
It worked very well for Rutgers last year. I am certain the staff and administration feel they have established the culture to continue seamlessly adding talented players who fit in. ND and Maryland obviously feel similar.HopFan16 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:32 pmThe jury is still out on if the transfer bonanza can be a consistently successful strategy. Early returns have been mixed. Just look at Duke and Denver this year.
That’s right. And bringing in lots of transfers doesn’t necessarily result in a better TEAM. Sometimes it might, if done smartly with an eye toward team culture. But, again, we don’t really have enough data yet.It's all about fielding the best team you can. That's it.