"I'd never take someone ranked out of the top 75 in high school again. If I can't find a transfer better than the 75th ranked high school player in the country I wouldn't be doing my job. I don't take them anymore".... Anonymous D1 Coach
"Is it advantage to bring this many freshmen when transfers are so coveted? " This is the title of a section on the most recent CBS podcast where that quote came from.
It starts 27:15 in.
This was in reference to Duke landing the #1 player in the class this week and solidifying the best class. They asked the question: "Do you even want four high school players now?" and made the point, in talking to over two dozen D1 coaches this summer, that freshmen have never carried so little value as they do now.
They even went on to question why Duke would lock in the #56th ranked freshman in this class when there would be so many transfers that would be better, especially before you even knew what you needed and the weaknesses of this team.
Another D1 coach. "I have an entire country of proven players, they carry more value to me than a high school player"
They repeatedly emphasize that portal players, by and large, make the most impact. These claims come from individuals affiliated with 247 and OVERRATE freshmen in general. They discussed in detail how basketball has evolved since the advent of NIL and free transfer and how most coaches express a preference for utilizing NIL funds on proven portal players.
They deliberated on the question of when one would prioritize high school recruits, indicating it as a sliding scale. They both concurred that they would select the top few high school players over the top transfers, but to me that's even debatable. Hunter Dickenson was an All American 2 years ago and has only gotten better. Who knows what these high schoolers are. The top 2 consensus ranked players last year averaged 8ppg and 5ppg at Duke.
They highlighted a tipping point where the preference would lean towards transfers. Parish expressed a preference for the 15th best transfer over the 15th best high school player certainly and underscoring the widening gap in favor of transfers beyond that. He stressed that it becomes even more apparent as the rankings go deeper that transfers are much more prefered, asserting it's "not even close."
ECU
I've been expressing the same sentiment years now independently of all these D1 coaches and talking heads. It's baffling ECU is recruiting high school players and then expect to retain them if they show any potential. Their discussions only emphasize the absurdity of this approach, which is also perceived as such by most highly regarded coaches in the field.
There are even inquiries about Duke's approach to high school recruitment outside of landing those elite of the elite top 5 players, especially signing someone ranked 56th since NIL and free transfers became prevalent. That's probably akin to ECU potentially signing the 200th best player. To put it into context, and ECU isn't securing players with even that level of rankings at all. Even with most of other coaches avoiding high schoolers in general after the top 100. Most of the high schoolers ECU is recruiting have a few low major offers for the most part.
Perhaps if ECU were recruiting a relatively high for ECU historical high school classes it could be defended. It's not, these are not only high school players no one wants in general, these are some of the lowest regarded high school recruits ever at ECU. The 1st class of 5 was dead last on 247 high school rankings.
To make matters worse ECU is bringing in these players now multiple times now with limited options before even get to see them their Junior or Senior year or understanding the team dynamics and weakness makes it even more ridiculous. Locking them down years in advance. The recruitment strategy pursued by ECU is implausible especially when considering the broader landscape of college athletics. The chances of it working are deemed low by anyone in the industry by their words or own actions.
