Poll: What Transfer Do You Want?

[HAPvsOA 283]

I wish there was a way to do a poll on here, but I am curious how you guys would rank the following potential portal targets that I've seen listed here. 247 has them listed at different positions, but they can all shoot and play the wing. 

• AJ Green - - link to ESPN stats, profile

• Matthew Mayer - link to ESPN stats, profile

• Isiaih Mosley - link to ESPN stats, profile 

I'd probably rank them as Mosley, Mayer, Green.

With Mosley getting the nod because he could play both the 2 & 3 where we would need more help if Flanigan doesn't return to peak form. Mayer would be a close 2nd due to his size, shooting & most importantly his D, but I think he'd take some minutes from Jaylin or potentially Cardwell if Traore played more 5. Green would obviously be a sharpshooter at the 2/wing, but he seems less athletic / D oriented from what I've seen. 

[Rednilla 5,383]

8 hours ago, HAPvsOA said:

I wish there was a way to do a poll on here, but I am curious how you guys would rank the following potential portal targets that I've seen listed here. 247 has them listed at different positions, but they can all shoot and play the wing. 

• AJ Green - - link to ESPN stats, profile

• Matthew Mayer - link to ESPN stats, profile

• Isiaih Mosley - link to ESPN stats, profile 

I'd probably rank them as Mosley, Mayer, Green.

With Mosley getting the nod because he could play both the 2 & 3 where we would need more help if Flanigan doesn't return to peak form. Mayer would be a close 2nd due to his size, shooting & most importantly his D, but I think he'd take some minutes from Jaylin or potentially Cardwell if Traore played more 5. Green would obviously be a sharpshooter at the 2/wing, but he seems less athletic / D oriented from what I've seen. 

I think I'd have the same ranking as you, but I wonder about the minutes played. Mayer would be a great get from a defensive perspective, but we need a sharpshooter, and his 3 point percentage went way down last year. I don't know if it had anything to do with playing more minutes, but it scares me a bit. 

Green doesn't seem to come from the same kind of system (you don't play 36 minutes a game for Bruce), which is the worry with him, but honestly I'd be happy with any one of these three.

[ellitor 33,062]

16 hours ago, HAPvsOA said:

am curious how much of that was him and how much of that was Baylor's system.

@HAPvsOA The metrics I was told about grades on individual D & not system.

16 hours ago, HAPvsOA said:

Where do you get your D rating stats? 

Just saw a graphic a user named crococile posted on On3. Never asked for the site.

16 hours ago, HAPvsOA said:

How do I get the option to edit posts? And to be a verified member?

I think you have to have 50 posts minimum. You are at 32.

[ellitor 33,062]

7 hours ago, Rednilla said:

but we need a sharpshooter, and his 3 point percentage went way down last year

Umm @Rednilla did you see my post about him playing with & through injuries last season? He is a sharpshooter.

[ellitor 33,062]

16 hours ago, HAPvsOA said:

I wish there was a way to do a poll on here

@HAPvsOAThere is. You have to create a new topic & may have to have made 50 posts also. As you can see I made your post a topic & created a pol for you.

Also Mosley is supposedly a heavy Kansas lean.

[Rednilla 5,383]

1 hour ago, ellitor said:

Umm @Rednilla did you see my post about him playing with & through injuries last season? He is a sharpshooter.

Yeah, I did, but it slipped my mind when I was making the comment. Of course, it should be duly noted that he played *more* minutes per game while dealing with injuries than he did in seasons prior, so perhaps the injuries had to do with the increased work load?

But whatever. I'd feel just fine with any of these three taking what would have been Phillips roster spot.

[Rednilla 5,383]

Also, I changed my vote to Mayer, because I love two way players, and he's the best defensively, at least per the analytics.

[Dual-Threat Rigby 8,641]

I like Mosley’s statline the best out of the two I don’t know 

Seems like he put up top 2 player on a team type shot attempts. I think whoever we get at this point is going to have to be content to be relegated behind Green, Traore, and potentially Flanigan, Westry and KD in touches. Complementary. 
 

So I just want the guy that knocks down shots, doesn’t get murdered on D and isn’t a high usage guy 

 

[AuburnNTexas 7,128]

I would go with Mayer look at his 1st 2 years when healthy he shot a real solid 3. Last year with injury his 3 went down. That is assuming he is 100% Mosel number 2.  If can't get either of those 2 we have a scholarship to lose and this might be a good time to lose it. especially if Westry proves as good as some think he will be.

[KansasTiger 3,242]

I voted for Mayer cause I assumed Mosley is a reach for us to get, being late to the party and reading that KU has a big head start on him. Hoping thats not the case with Mayer. But I'd be happy if we got either one, honestly. 

[Rednilla 5,383]

3 hours ago, Dual-Threat Rigby said:

So I just want the guy that knocks down shots, doesn’t get murdered on D and isn’t a high usage guy 

Well, that's about the least we can afford to get, but I'd rather have the guy who knocks down shots, is the one doing the murdering on D, and pushes Allen for the starting job at the 3, which is, to me, Mayer. He makes us about the most complete team we can possibly be this year, and that includes if Phillips had decided to come here instead. Phillips just would have been a 2 year deal, whereas Mayer will be one and done.

These three guys, probably amongst a few others not on our (AUF's) radar, are probably a big part of the reason for not pushing harder for Phillips. We've already got two big time freshmen and an elite second year big man, and there are options in the portal for guys who can fill the role we needed Phillips to play at least as well as Phillips would have (this year, anyway) for a (hopefully) much reduced rate. 

There's a reason the Ludwig von Mises Institute is headquartered on Magnolia near Donahue: Auburn understands economics. 

[Dual-Threat Rigby 8,641]

35 minutes ago, Rednilla said:

Well, that's about the least we can afford to get, but I'd rather have the guy who knocks down shots, is the one doing the murdering on D, and pushes Allen for the starting job at the 3, which is, to me, Mayer. He makes us about the most complete team we can possibly be this year, and that includes if Phillips had decided to come here instead. Phillips just would have been a 2 year deal, whereas Mayer will be one and done.

These three guys, probably amongst a few others not on our (AUF's) radar, are probably a big part of the reason for not pushing harder for Phillips. We've already got two big time freshmen and an elite second year big man, and there are options in the portal for guys who can fill the role we needed Phillips to play at least as well as Phillips would have (this year, anyway) for a (hopefully) much reduced rate. 

There's a reason the Ludwig von Mises Institute is headquartered on Magnolia near Donahue: Auburn understands economics. 

I think Mayer is fine as a complementary piece, he was fine in that role for Baylor. I don’t think he’d transfer from being a complementary piece for multiple years to be a complementary piece again. He’d also be leaving from an incredibly guard centric/perimeter offense to another incredibly guard centric/perimeter offense. I just don’t see that as a real possibility, that’s why I didn’t talk on it too much. But obv, he’s pretty solid 

[autan 737]

I doubt if we have much of a chance with any of these three studs. Frankly I was expecting (maybe hoping a little) one or two more of our guys to test the portal waters. It probably would be best for AU and the player(s). If they have played sparingly over two years it's likely they will not increase pt much next year but who knows?

[Rednilla 5,383]

1 minute ago, Dual-Threat Rigby said:

I think Mayer is fine as a complementary piece, he was fine in that role for Baylor. I don’t think he’d transfer from being a complementary piece for multiple years to be a complementary piece again. He’d also be leaving from an incredibly guard centric/perimeter offense to another incredibly guard centric/perimeter offense. I just don’t see that as a real possibility, that’s why I didn’t talk on it too much. But obv, he’s pretty solid 

I suppose that makes some sense, but I still maintain that the economics of the Phillips deal really did tip toward letting him go, especially if we get any of these three.

[Dual-Threat Rigby 8,641]

17 minutes ago, Rednilla said:

I suppose that makes some sense, but I still maintain that the economics of the Phillips deal really did tip toward letting him go, especially if we get any of these three.

I think we just got outbid. I’m not disagreeing with anything you said; I also said in the Phillips thread that if we didn’t have to pay other big names, we probably get him. But it’s all just conjecture and at the end, we lost. I highly doubt any of our coaches view it as a big one though 

[Rednilla 5,383]

24 minutes ago, Dual-Threat Rigby said:

I think we just got outbid. I’m not disagreeing with anything you said; I also said in the Phillips thread that if we didn’t have to pay other big names, we probably get him. But it’s all just conjecture and at the end, we lost. I highly doubt any of our coaches view it as a big one though 

I don't think there's any question, at this point, that we got outbid, but the reason is that it wasn't economically viable for us to put up the kind of dough UTk did, all things considered.

[Dual-Threat Rigby 8,641]

32 minutes ago, Rednilla said:

I don't think there's any question, at this point, that we got outbid, but the reason is that it wasn't economically viable for us to put up the kind of dough UTk did, all things considered.

I believe we’re saying the same thing lol 

[Dual-Threat Rigby 8,641]

I don’t think there’s a massive difference between us not having the money and it not being financially lucrative to pursue him at a certain price point. One just sounds better than the other 

[KansasTiger 3,242]

9 minutes ago, Dual-Threat Rigby said:

I don’t think there’s a massive difference between us not having the money and it not being financially lucrative to pursue him at a certain price point. One just sounds better than the other 

I think there's a difference. Not having the money implies we couldnt have kept bidding. Not being financially lucrative implies proper use of the money. They don't have to be connected. You can have lots of money and still not think Phillips was worth 2M. Now eventually you can have enough money where principled use of the money doesn't matter as long as the transaction is a net positive for the team, but I think only a few teams are at that point.

[Rednilla 5,383]

1 hour ago, Dual-Threat Rigby said:

I believe we’re saying the same thing lol 

Oh, I was agreeing with you. 

 

[Rednilla 5,383]

1 hour ago, Dual-Threat Rigby said:

I don’t think there’s a massive difference between us not having the money and it not being financially lucrative to pursue him at a certain price point. One just sounds better than the other 

There *is* a difference, though. Either way, the money is not there, that much is true, but the perspective is completely different if we wanted him but there wasn't enough to get him vs we wanted him but not at the price he would have had to have had to come here. It's not that we're broke, it's that we have financial strategies in place...and that's not just BS to sound good, because when we needed it to keep Bruce from even thinking about going to Louisville, the Neville family stepped forward and secured the deal. So you know we *do* have people who will put their money where their mouth is...

[ellitor 33,062]

5 hours ago, Dual-Threat Rigby said:

if we didn’t have to pay other big names, we probably get him

Not sure there is any recruiting class scenario where we would have gone $2 mil or more for JP. 1. He's not expected to be a Jalen Green type freak that deserves it. 2. We just didn't need him enough to get in a bidding war. Also if we had been willing to get in a bidding war it's been reported in multiple places the Vols were always to bid much higher no matter how high it got.

[Dual-Threat Rigby 8,641]

3 hours ago, KansasTiger said:

I think there's a difference. Not having the money implies we couldnt have kept bidding. Not being financially lucrative implies proper use of the money. They don't have to be connected. You can have lots of money and still not think Phillips was worth 2M. Now eventually you can have enough money where principled use of the money doesn't matter as long as the transaction is a net positive for the team, but I think only a few teams are at that point.

I don’t think we had that money to give at that point, that’s just where I’m differing

I think we have a budget and we maxed that budget. Asking for more wasn’t another option 

[TexasTiger 12,811]

1 minute ago, Dual-Threat Rigby said:

I don’t think we had that money to give at that point, that’s just where I’m differing

I think we have a budget and we maxed that budget. Asking for more wasn’t another option 

Still adjusting to this being a public discussion.

[Dual-Threat Rigby 8,641]

5 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Still adjusting to this being a public discussion.

I prefer it to us acting like 5 star recruits just picked one school over another purely over good will and an education they willingly put on pause after 3 years anyway 

this is way less intellectually dishonest