Potential Transfers '14

Oryou think hecan produce more in a different system and role.

I'd be shocked if we showed any interest in Horford. I'd love to grab BJD, House (dude from Houston) and Ryan Andersen or someone who hasn't said they are transfering yet. Only reason I might not want Andersen is because our front court could will be good already, obviously he would help, but that's a lot of seniors to lose in 2016.
 
Nope. A big reason you are taking transfers and 5th years is that they are known commodities- you know that Horford is a 4 and 4 guy. There is no projection with Horford- he is about as known as you can be. If you offer him, it is because that level of play is good enough.

Uhh, we will not be taking a guy to get 4 and 4.
 
Uhh, we will not be taking a guy to get 4 and 4.
I disagree on that. We took Edozie, and I doubt the coaches thought he would even be a 4 and 4 guy. There is only one ball and so many minutes. With Georges, hopefully BDJ, Nader, Thomas, and Long, we do not need a guy that impacts the game with only shots. With only Georges, Nader, and Hogue, we do need a guy that is overall competent, 6'10" 250, and has better touch, feet, and hands than Edozie. We also need one that does not expect 20+ minutes a game. Judging from what I have read and the fact he played less than 15 minutes a game at Michigan, that may be Horford.

But that is my point- if we don't want 4 and 4, we will not take it. There is no risk to taking Horford- that does not mean there is reward. Are you familiar with the risk-reward concept? Horford is no risk, some reward. That may or may not warrant an offer.
 
Daniel "The Nigerian Nightmare" Edozie> John "4 and 4" Horford

I'm glad it's not just me.

I will say if he does come here I think it's likely he has a much bigger role and is much more productive, but there is definitely risk that he won't and the scholarship would be wasted on someone who is no better than what Edozie could've given and you sacrifice the opportunity to maybe grab a talented traditional transfer.
 
I disagree on that. We took Edozie, and I doubt the coaches thought he would even be a 4 and 4 guy. There is only one ball and so many minutes. With Georges, hopefully BDJ, Nader, Thomas, and Long, we do not need a guy that impacts the game with only shots. With only Georges, Nader, and Hogue, we do need a guy that is overall competent, 6'10" 250, and has better touch, feet, and hands than Edozie. We also need one that does not expect 20+ minutes a game. Judging from what I have read and the fact he played less than 15 minutes a game at Michigan, that may be Horford.

But that is my point- if we don't want 4 and 4, we will not take it. There is no risk to taking Horford- that does not mean there is reward. Are you familiar with the risk-reward concept? Horford is no risk, some reward. That may or may not warrant an offer.

Opportunity cost, man.
 
I don't think many tears were shed at Maryland when any of those 3 guys left, but Faust is probably the best of the bunch. He is a very good defender.
 
@alex_prewitt: Like @insidemdsports said, have also heard Iowa State has interest in Nick Faust. Few others, across multiple levels, have called too.



edit: Nvm I am too slow.
 
Last edited:
Opportunity cost, man.
I am glad to see you are getting up to speed. I had my doubts when you posted "Also, not sure why you compared the risk of signing Horford vs the risk of doing nothing and not the risk of signing a more talented graduate transfer or a more talented sit and play guy."

The answer to your question: opportunity cost.

Which is why I said: "When you are willing, if not wanting to hold a scholarship open, the act of taking him would mean the risk you want to attribute to him does not exist".

Fred is well aware of opportunity cost. It is why we have changed our recruiting strategy and are no longer willing to speculate as much, and rather have a spot open. If you understand Fred's recruiting, the "not being good enough" input has is already passed if we are taking him.
 
I am glad to see you are getting up to speed. I had my doubts when you posted "Also, not sure why you compared the risk of signing Horford vs the risk of doing nothing and not the risk of signing a more talented graduate transfer or a more talented sit and play guy."

The answer to your question: opportunity cost.

Which is why I said: "When you are willing, if not wanting to hold a scholarship open, the act of taking him would mean the risk you want to attribute to him does not exist".

Fred is well aware of opportunity cost. It is why we have changed our recruiting strategy and are no longer willing to speculate as much, and rather have a spot open. If you understand Fred's recruiting, the "not being good enough" input has is already passed if we are taking him.


Name one transfer we have had that played the same or worse at ISU than he did at the previous school.

If FH takes Horford he will expect far more than 4 and 4.

4 and 4 is not enough to pass up on a guy who has proven he can get 10 and 6 for the next year or next couple years.
 

Help Support Us

Become a patron