Let'sGoZips94

Payton Sparks is back in the Portal. So is Ra'Heim Moss.

Per Grok... Yes, a college basketball player can enter the transfer portal on the day it closes, as long as they submit their entry before the deadline. The NCAA transfer portal has specific windows, typically closing in mid-April for basketball (e.g., April 16, 2025, based on recent cycles). Entries must be finalized by 11:59 p.m. local time on the closing date. Just over 24 hours left in the anxiety department.

If they're wanting success, Utah and Kansas State aren't exactly winning programs. This is purely a 1-year money grab and they cannot be blamed given the $$$ amounts we're hearing. They absolutely benefitted from the system Groce has in place here, and they're cashing in. All the more reason I'm in favor of transfer fees.

We were 1 of 5 teams to offer him out of high school. Marshall, Western Kentucky, and Maryland were the other notable programs. Didn't have any stats last year as a freshman (not sure if he redshirted).

Technically all 4 returning starters if you include Harris who was a starter before his injury. I don't care how they are positioned in our lineup. Teams are paying 6+ figures for our least efficient scorers (despite most FGA per game) and leading turnover guys because of accolades that struggled vs. top teams. Good luck to them, thank you for your service as Zips, and let's reload with better fits.

There it is. I would not worry much about a mass exodus.

I completely forgot about the potential for JUCOs. There has to be a ton of value at that level if we can find it.

Keep in mind that part of Akron's NIL is a post-Akron-career partnership (if I've understood what has been mentioned previously). Unless a player is getting life-changing money like Nate & presumably Okonkwo have, Akron's total NIL package is pretty attractive if someone is willing to commit and be loyal to the Zips.

That's certainly a possibility, although I haven't heard that other players outside of Tavari are looking to "cash in". My hope is this means we can attract better-than-expected talent with the funds that have seemingly become available with the departures.

I'm not sure you've read a single one of my posts outside of the original one you replied to haha. Go Zips.

Yup. Sounds like it's ~$1.5M and Kentucky had a similar offer to Nate. Agreed.

Is there a point difference I'm unaware of between a dunk/layup and a turnaround 14 ft jumper? Otherwise, I did the math & projections in a previous post. Those projections are based on the volume increases we've seen with our other transfers. I'm not saying Evan has Nate's ceiling, but his averages shouldn't be far off from Nate's averages.

No - MAC POTY, 1st Team All MAC, and MAC DPOY are worth that if a team is desperate enough to make a "splash".

Rumor has it K State offered north of $1 million.

Like I said, offensive game was probably the wrong verbiage. However, seeing the highlights, he has dribble-drive capabilities and he is more developed basketball IQ wise on the offense end than MMK. He looks to make backdoor cuts and make runs towards the hoop on baseline drives by his teammates. Scheming towards his explosiveness/athleticism is something I expect Groce to do, in addition to his put backs and clean ups. Let's say he takes 6-8 shots per game from these scenarios, which is a realistic range given his expected increased role at Akron vs Ohio State. If he's making 50% minimum, that's 6-8 pts; 60% is 7-10 pts. Add in some free throws, and you're not far off from Nate's more inefficient 14 PPG.

And you'd still have your senior 6th Man of the Year PG, who arguably was your most steady, stabilizing player all season (led the team in assists-to-turnover ratio), along with your All Freshman Team PG who led the team in 3P%. Nate took the most shots on the team, yet had one of the lowest FG%. Tavari took the second most shots and was slightly more efficient scoring wise, but did not run the offense very well at times either (led the team in TO). My point is the accolades being used to amplify the losses of Nate and most likely Tavari are volume-based accolades from the two highest scorers on the best team in the league. Nate's 14 PPG was good for 378th nationally in that category and Tavari's 13 PPG ranked him 518th. We have talent currently that, if given similar volume, can put up very similar numbers in possibly a more efficient manner. We also have 2, most likely 3 open roster spots to add even more talent. Assuming Tavari departs, we'll likely be bigger at all 3 roster spots, too. I'm not saying we'd necessarily be better without them; that remains to be seen. I'm saying their production is nowhere near irreplaceable, especially given their inability to produce most of the time vs top talent OOC.

You're going to have a hard time convincing me that a 67.1% FG% with 18 mpg is a poor offensive player. Low volume? Sure, but that's insane efficiency. Freeman is exhibit A of what efficiency can lead to on offense. Is Evan capable of the offensive ceiling that Nate has? Probably not, and maybe offensive game wasn't the right verbiage for the comparison, but I don't think there's a huge drop off production wise on offense going from Nate to Evan. I don't expect Evan to play a similar role either and that's a good thing. I'd rather our PGs facilitate the offense rather than the isolation ball we saw too much of this season.

Evan's offensive "woes" came from him not shooting the ball very often. He had a 67.1% FG% last season compared to Nate's 43.9%. I don't know how much of an actual shooter Evan is, but they both score most of their baskets inside the 3P line. I suspect Groce & his staff will be able to open up opportunities that will unlock Evan's offensive abilities. Furthermore, there is an even deeper scenario where the aggregate with Evan instead of Nate is more productive based on the inefficiencies in Nate's volume (43.9% from the field and 30.1% from 3). By the way, none of my posts in any way, shape, or form are meant to crap on any of the players departing. Last season was a helluva lot of fun, and I am very appreciate of those players for representing Akron how they did. As Kreed eluded to, us fans tend to have Blue & Gold colored glasses which can skew our view of reality in all sorts of ways. There are stats & basketball fundamentals that can be used to maintain a positive outlook in an otherwise difficult & annoying time. I personally would rather remain positive. Go Zips.

Your post in its entirety doesn't explain away the ceiling you put on the team regardless of TJ's official decision. Nate is a loss until he's replaced and we've already replaced half his production (Evan Mahaffey's defense). He had a few games that he took over, but was largely inefficient in doing so. His game requires the ball to be in his hands, which often killed movement on offense. There's a world where the offense operates better without him and even without TJ. We had a competitive but weaker OOC that saw no significant wins for Akron. Nate had 4 pts vs Yale, 11 vs Arkansas State (26.7% from the field), 8 vs Saint Mary's (33% from the field), and 17 vs Princeton (although he only shot 37.5% from the field). Nate won MAC POTY because he dominated a weak MAC, and deservedly so. However, I'm not sure Nate is the type of player that elevates the program to the next level. You said our ceiling next year is likely the same as this year - MAC Champions with a +15 pt spread as a 13 seed in the NCAAT. I would make the argument that was the ceiling with Nate as our "best player" given the volume he occupied each game. Depending on how he's replaced, our ceiling could be higher. TJ is a similar player, although a more efficient shooter. His shooting would be a bigger loss, but he is a ball-dominant PG that might not be the best fit for this offense; Tavari iso-ball was aggravating most of the time and killed the flow of the offense. We'd also have the opportunity to get bigger at guard (or elsewhere since we're still very loaded at guard). Okonkwo was absolutely fine in his role, but he's replaceable. I don't know who the replacement(s) will be for him, but they're out there. Potter can ask for all the money he wants - he's still a free agent which may say something about his asking price. Akron is an attractive destination for a lot of players and we have way more money now than before to upgrade the front court.

What in the Chicken Little Sky is Falling crap is this? My goodness this couldn't be further from the truth. Is that a realistic outcome? Sure. Is it the only and best realistic outcome? Hell no; not even close. The 3 players that have been confirmed to be lost are a guy that wasn't a team fit/didn't play all year, and undersized/poor finishing/foul-happy PF, and a guard that made quite a few mistakes in many games/scored 4 pts vs Yale/shot 11% vs Arizona/not a greater shooter in general/great defensive player otherwise. We have, at the moment until TJ is official, 2 open roster spots. The previously open 3rd spot has already been filled with an even bigger version of Nate Johnson with maybe a slightly worse offensive game (TBD). With the 2 open spots, we have an opportunity to add more scoring AND get bigger in the front court. Not to mention we will have room for the talent that's already on the roster to have a higher volume and flourish more. We performed as poorly as realistically possible in the OOC last year and that wasn't in spite of Nate/Okonkwo/Harris. Our floor next season is that. Our ceiling is higher. Aaron Rodgers said it best. R-E-L-A-X.

I don't think Evan has anything to do with what has happened. I think an earlier post eluded to what is probably the closest thing to the truth - teams are getting desperate to fill roster spots and All-Conference Teams are easy accolades to find and sell to your fan/donor base. James is a little bit different because his value comes from basic supply & demand economics for bigs. I truly believe we have a shot to really improve with these 3 open spots. Can't wait to see who we add.

Something tells me we're going to like this get.

Wow. I... uhhh... I don't think this list was given much thought.

It all depends on how we fill these vacant roster spots (I think we are overvaluing a bit the talent portion of what we've lost), but this constant turnover year after year isn't fun. What a broken, rotten system the NCAA has.