📄 CBGM’s Top Players in Portal for Season 2045

The transfer portal always reshapes the college basketball landscape, each year’s class is loaded with players capable of changing a program’s trajectory in a hurry. Some bring proven production, some bring raw upside, and some look ready to explode in a bigger role the moment they land in the right system.

In this breakdown, we take a closer look at the top names in the portal and what makes them so valuable. From scoring guards to versatile forwards to impact big men, this is a look at the skill sets, fit, and ceiling of the players drawing the most attention as the portal market heats up.

Top #1 to #5 Players

1. Harmon McMahan (Marquette) — Guard

McMahan is one of the more intriguing guards in this portal because his stat line only tells part of the story. The surface numbers are modest — 5.9 points, 1.3 assists, 2.3 rebounds — but the underlying profile is far more exciting than that. At 6-foot-2, 209 pounds, he already has sturdy college guard size, and once you layer in 82 outside shooting, 92 passing, and 90 athleticism, you start to see why a staff could view him as a much bigger asset than his production suggests.

The biggest draw is the offensive package. McMahan looks like a guard who can make an offense breathe easier. He can shoot it from deep, he can move the ball at a very high level, and he has the athletic pop to keep defenders honest. That does not automatically make him a star, but it does make him dangerous, especially if he lands somewhere that wants the ball hopping and the floor spread. He feels like a player who could go from role guard to major offensive connector in a hurry.

What is especially interesting is that he is not just one thing. A lot of portal guards are either pure scorers or pure distributors. McMahan looks like a true blend piece. His floor-range chart leans heavily toward jump shooting, especially midrange and outside, and that fits the ratings. He is not a rim-pressure merchant, and he is not a bruising paint guard, but he can punish gaps, make smart reads, and keep an offense flowing without bogging it down. There is real value in a backcourt player who can create offensive order without monopolizing possessions.

The limiting factor is pretty clear too. He does not project as a tone-setting defender. His defensive ability is light for a guard with that kind of athleticism, and the steal and block production do not suggest someone who is regularly causing havoc. That means his next team probably needs to understand exactly what it is buying. McMahan is not your two-way junkyard dog in the backcourt. He is your offensive table-setter with shooting juice.

That is why the fit matters so much. Drop him into a structured offense with spacing, movement, and clear reads, and he could pop. Let him play beside another creator and attack tilted defenses, and he becomes even more interesting. He feels like the kind of transfer who could dramatically outperform his old box-score résumé once a coaching staff decides to trust the skill set rather than the previous usage. He is not the loudest name in the portal, but he has breakout written all over him.

2. Dantrell Covington (Iowa) — Forward

Covington looks like one of the best upside bets in the portal because the frame and athletic profile are exactly what programs hunt for. He is 6-foot-9, 216 pounds, averaged 9.3 points and 5.8 rebounds per game, and his ratings paint the picture of a highly useful modern forward. A 94 athleticism mark jumps off the page immediately, but it is the full package that sells him: 76 inside scoring, 72 outside shooting, 80 offensive rebounding, 79 defensive rebounding, and solid defensive value across the board.

This is the kind of player who does not need to dominate touches to impact winning. Covington can finish around the basket, crash the glass, run the floor, and hold his own defensively. That alone gives him a strong floor. But there is probably more to unlock here than just energy-forward production. The outside number suggests a player with enough shooting touch to expand his value, even if his current shot profile still leans more toward the interior and midrange than the three-point line. In other words, there is a modern stretch-forward template sitting in here, even if it is not fully formed yet.

That is what makes him so attractive. He already looks playable in a lot of systems, but he still feels unfinished in a good way. He can be a play finisher now and maybe more later. He can operate as a cutter, transition threat, rebounder, and second-side scorer without needing isolation touches. And because of his athleticism, there is lineup flexibility here that many transfer forwards do not offer. He looks capable of playing with another big, or sliding into smaller, more mobile units depending on what a team wants.

Defensively, there is enough here to believe he can really matter. The rebound numbers are strong, the block and steal marks are respectable, and that athleticism gives him a chance to cover mistakes and survive tough assignments. He may never be a pure lockdown piece, but he does not have to be. Covington profiles more as the kind of forward who can raise a defense simply by being active, long, and disruptive. Coaches love those guys because they can patch a lot of holes.

The main concern is refinement. The court IQ and discipline numbers are not where you want them, and the ball-handling tells you he should not be treated like a perimeter creator. He is not a grab-and-go star wing. He is a high-functioning forward whose value comes from how much ground he covers and how many small winning plays he can stack over 30 minutes. That is still a major asset. In the right program, Covington feels like a player who could make a leap from “useful” to “problem.” He has that sort of portal glow.

3. Lavonne Garrett (Princeton) — Guard

Garrett feels like the cleanest offensive identity in this top five. He is a scorer, he knows he is a scorer, and everything in the profile backs that up. He averaged 14.1 points per game, the best scoring mark of this group, and his ratings confirm that he is built to generate offense. At 6-foot-1, 170 pounds, he is not imposing physically, but a 77 scoring mark, 64 outside shooting, 80 free throws, and a heavy shooting tendency tell you exactly what he is about.

The first thing that stands out is how perimeter-oriented he is. Garrett is not a downhill guard who lives at the rim. He is much more comfortable hunting jumpers, especially from outside, and that makes him a very natural fit for teams that need instant shot creation without fully redesigning the offense. He can slot into a system and immediately become one of the players opponents have to account for. That kind of translation matters in the portal, because not every productive scorer carries over cleanly. Garrett’s shot-making profile feels portable.

He also looks more structured than reckless, which is important. His strongest set proficiency comes in Princeton concepts, and that tracks with the overall feel of his game. He does not come off like a wild gunner. He looks like a guard who understands how to score within an offense, using spacing, timing, and clean reads to get to his spots. That should appeal to a lot of programs because he is not the sort of scorer who automatically breaks the team concept. He can be featured without becoming chaotic.

There is enough secondary value here too. Garrett is not a pure point guard, but he is not a total tunnel-vision guard either. The passing number is solid enough that he can make reads and keep a defense honest. Defensively, he brings more bite than you might expect from a relatively slender scoring guard. His stealing and shot-blocking ratings are respectable, and the overall defensive profile suggests he can compete rather than simply survive. That matters because if he were a defensive traffic cone, the offensive burden would be much heavier.

The real question is scale. How much offense can he carry against tougher athletes and bigger defenders? He looks like a very good scorer, but probably not a player you hand the keys to and expect a whole offense to orbit around. That is not a criticism so much as a fit note. Garrett feels best as a high-end scoring piece who can punish teams as a featured option or devastating second option depending on roster context. That is still extremely valuable. Among this group, he may be the easiest player to imagine stepping into a bigger role and putting up loud numbers right away.

4. Kuisma Pesola (St. Bonaventure) — Center

Pesola is one of the most fascinating players in this group because he is a center who does not read like a conventional center. At 6-foot-8 and 233 pounds, he has enough size to hold down the position, but the real intrigue comes from how many systems he seems capable of fitting. His box score — 7.2 points, 5.8 rebounds, 0.8 blocks — is respectable, not overwhelming. The deeper profile is where things get interesting.

Pesola grades well in a wide range of offensive sets, which is a big deal for a frontcourt player. Motion, Princeton, Triangle, 1-3-1 Attack, 2-3 Attack, 1-2-2 Attack — that is not the resume of a simple post-up bruiser. That is the profile of a big man who understands offensive structure and can function inside a scheme without needing touches forced his way. Coaches value that more than ever. Not every center has to be a star. Some become hugely important because they help everything else fit.

Offensively, Pesola looks like a true support big with some hidden versatility. He has equal inside and outside shooting ratings at 68, but his actual shot profile leans much more toward post and midrange work than perimeter volume. That suggests there may be a bit more offensive breadth here than his previous role showed. He is probably never going to be a true stretch five, but he does not look limited to being a dunker spot body either. He can operate from the elbows, score enough to keep defenses honest, and contribute within structure rather than just waiting for dump-offs.

Defensively, there is enough substance for him to matter. He rebounds well, blocks shots at a decent rate, and his man-to-man defense profile is sturdy. He is not a pogo-stick athlete and he is not built for frantic pace, but he looks like someone who can survive because he knows where to be and gives a team some reliability around the rim. That reliability has real value in portal bigs, especially for programs that do not want to live and die by chaos.

The concerns are obvious and they matter. Pesola’s athleticism is poor, his discipline is shaky, and the free-throw number is rough. That limits certain ceilings and probably rules out some stylistic fits. He does not look built for a turbo-paced, switch-everything system that asks its center to constantly recover in space. But in a program that values half-court structure, offensive poise, and dependable frontcourt play, he starts to make a lot of sense. He may not be the flashiest portal big, but he feels like one of the smarter bets to help a good team stay good.

5. Robb Reece (Minnesota) — Center

Reece is the most matchup-dependent player in this top five, but that should not be mistaken for a lack of value. In the right setting, he could be a real weapon. He is 6-foot-8, 274 pounds, and brings exactly the kind of size that still shifts a game when used properly. His production — 7.6 points, 6.2 rebounds, 0.9 blocks — is solid, but like several players in this group, the more revealing details live underneath the box score.

The obvious appeal starts inside. Reece has an 83 inside scoring mark, rebounds well on both ends, and carries real shot-blocking value with a 78 rating there. He is built to play through contact, occupy space, and make life uncomfortable around the basket. For teams that have been too soft inside, too light on the glass, or too easy to attack at the rim, that alone gives him a strong market. He is not theoretical. He brings force.

What makes him more interesting than a standard low-post big is that there are a few quirks in the profile. His passing is surprisingly decent for a center at 66, which hints that he may have more feel than the stereotype suggests. His steal number is also strong for a frontcourt player, which usually points to active hands and some instinctive disruption. Then there is the shot profile. For someone with almost no outside game, the heavy midrange weighting is unusual. That does not mean he is secretly a floor-spacing big, but it does suggest he may have more touch and variation than a simple rim-only label would imply.

Still, fit is the whole conversation with Reece. He is not built for an up-tempo, space-heavy identity where he is constantly dragged into open-floor decisions. His athleticism is low, his court IQ number is concerning, and his discipline raises another flag. That combination makes him much more of a defined-role center than an all-purpose one. Ask him to do too much in space and the weaknesses probably get exposed. Keep the job clean and physical, and the value climbs quickly.

That is why he feels less like a centerpiece and more like a tactical answer. Reece is the kind of transfer who can punish finesse frontcourts, stabilize the glass, and change the physical tone of a rotation. Against some opponents, he may look merely useful. Against others, he may look like a portal steal. There is something to be said for players who can force a game to be played on different terms, and Reece has that sort of effect when everything around him is aligned properly. He is not the smoothest player in this group, but he may be one of the most uncomfortable to play against.

Top #6 to #10 Players

Top #11 to #15 Players

Top #16 to #20 Players

Top #21 to #25 Players

Good luck this CBGM Season.