Every offseason, some Division I programs chant the same mantra: “We need shooting.” Yet year after year, the transfer portal delivers a long list of proven, affordable, high-volume three-point specialists—players who somehow slip through the cracks, landing at low-majors, 200+ level programs, or even Division II schools. I’ve seen examples of shooters transferring down a level entirely on this list. Sure, not every one of these players would single-handedly save a team that struggles to shoot, but many would have made shots when it mattered and opened space for others. There’s always value in having a reliable shooter on the floor—whether you’re down 15 and hoping for a spark, or just need someone to stretch the floor and keep the defense honest. You’d think every team would want that “break-glass” three-point specialist, even if they only used him sparingly. Yet too many rosters are built with no proven shooter anywhere. At the very least, having one forces defenses to respect him, which opens space and opportunities for everyone else.
The reason is simple: many programs don’t prioritize shooting, and a few coaches don’t even believe in its value. Don’t tell me there weren’t options—there were plenty worth paying a premium for, and even some low-hanging fruit likely available for likely peanuts—or even free—players who would have jumped at a chance to play for a program like Seton Hall or Boston College just to earn minutes and have the exposure those conferences provide. For smaller schools, that’s actually a huge opportunity: when the big programs ignore proven shooters, mid-majors can lean into one of the easiest skills to target, giving themselves the best chance to overachieve and punch above it’s weight.
It’s usually obvious who can shoot and who can’t, and while there will always be variance, the odds a proven shooter makes shots are far better than betting on someone coming from a 30% career clip. The pattern has become predictable: teams starved for spacing routinely overlook plug-and-play shooters who should be well within reach for any Power Five program—and even for high-end mid-majors with strong NIL structures, like the A10, AAC, or Mountain West.
I once heard a coach—let’s just say one whose team ranked in the 300s in three-point percentage—explain in an interview that the difference between bad and average shooting was “only one three-pointer a game.” I looked at that team’s point differential for the year: -2. Basically, he didn’t grasp the real impact of poor shooting and how many games were being lost just by the math. This is the type of coach who recruits a player shooting 23% from three and insists he can develop him into a reliable shooter. In reality, the odds of that happening are low, and even if a player has a breakout improvement, there are always teammates having down years. The math rarely works out. Recruit a bunch of sub-30% shooters hoping to raise the team average to 34%, and the most likely outcome is a wash—some improve, some regress, and the team remains stuck in mediocrity. This is how most bad-shooting teams delude themselves: either by straight-up undervaluing shooting or by overestimating their, or really anyones ability to develop it. These coaches will tell you early in the year they will make shots that never come.
This offseason was no different. I compiled a list of “el-cheapo shooters”—players with real volume, real makes, and real résumés—who landed in low-major or fringe mid-major situations despite possessing the exact skillset that P5s claim they desperately need. These weren’t fantasy targets; these were players whose market value clearly placed them in the “gettable” tier for almost any well-funded program. I even built a theoretical roster using only transfers who didn’t go to the P5, A10, AAC, MWC, or WCC—guys any Seton Hall-level program even with limited funds should have been able to recruit and had advantages to do so. That team graded out around 65th nationally in my model in the preseason, with three top-300 players, and would have instantly solved talent and some shooting problems for multiple high-majors who instead punted the issue. These are some of the shooters you could have filled out the back end of that hypothetical roster with or likely had as role players or situational up the food chain.
These are players identified over the summer going to mid and low majors.
These aren’t players you’d expect to come in and star for a Power Five program—or even, in many cases, the schools they ended up at. What they are, however, are valuable role players: floor spacers who command respect and help the offense function at worst. If defenses ignore them, they’ve already proven they can make you pay.
That’s the theme here: proven shooters were available to teams in top 8 or so conference if they wanted them. The variance in three-point shooting is real, and yes—there’s no guarantee a 40% guy from the Southland walks into the Big East and repeats his numbers. But a player with a multi-year track record of making threes at volume carries a baseline probability that is far higher than handing the job to someone who has shot 31% for his career and hoping “development” fills the gap. If a guy has made shots before, you can reasonably project he’ll land somewhere between his career level and maybe five percentage points off his peak. That’s far better than gambling on players who have never proven they can shoot in the first place.
And this isn’t just about the bottom half of the power structure. Even a national-title contender like Gonzaga—a program that can realistically target almost anyone outside the top NIL arms race—managed to enter the season without adding a true perimeter specialist. This is a team I believe can legitimately win a national championship. They’re loaded inside with Ike, Huff, and Mario Saint-Suprey, and when those two bigs shared the floor last season against Houston, Gonzaga looked like the better team for long stretches. Houston is weaker this year and still a top 1 or two team, so this might finally be Mark Few’s best shot at a title. But the one glaring hole remains: they never replaced Nolan Hickman’s shooting. Guys like Alex Chaikin or CJ Luster—the range of shooters who clearly had the ability and the résumé—were right there in the portal, fully attainable for a program of Gonzaga’s stature. For a contender, there’s really no excuse not to land one.
Meanwhile, Seton Hall and Boston College—two programs that have struggled with shooting for years—again passed on accessible, proven options. Yes, NIL budgets vary. Yes, you can’t just “point and take” a P5 shooter on demand. But players like the ones I identified—low-major volume shooters with strong histories—were absolutely within reach for programs of that caliber. If Portland or Portland State can land these guys, a Big East program should not be left searching for answers. Instead, they gambled on players with shaky résumés or injury history, like relying on Steele Venters, who even pre-injury was an over hyped shooter once you adjust for competition and context. Expecting him to be the primary floor spacer was always a bet with a thin margin. Even a program like Gonzaga could have used insurance on him with guys on this going to say Portland or Portland State.
Chase Cormier – 6-2, Iona
Chase Cormier has proven himself as a high-efficiency three-point shooter throughout his college career. In his best season (2023‑24 at Wofford), he shot 50.0% from three on 3.5 attempts per game, showing both volume and accuracy. Over his career, he has maintained a 45.1% three-point clip on 2.4 attempts per game, demonstrating consistent shooting ability. In the current 2025‑26 season at Iona, Cormier is off to a hot start, shooting 66.7% from three on 1.5 attempts per game, though the sample size is small with only four games played. He’s the type of reliable floor-spacing guard any team would value, especially for mid-major programs looking for efficient shooting and instant offensive spacing.
Louie Jordan – 6-8, Radford
Louie Jordan has developed into a reliable three-point option over his college career. His best season came in 2024‑25 at UMBC, where he shot 48.8% from three on 3.9 attempts per game, showing both volume and efficiency. Over his career, Jordan has maintained a solid 42.0% three-point percentage on 2.6 attempts per game, proving consistent shooting ability. In the current 2025‑26 season at Radford, he is shooting 34.8% from three on 3.8 attempts per game, indicating he is continuing to contribute from deep, though it’s still early in the season. Jordan represents a low-maintenance floor-spacing forward who can immediately provide offensive spacing and threat from beyond the arc.
Alex Chaikin – 6-4, UC San Diego
Alex Chaikin has proven himself as a reliable three-point shooter throughout his career. His best season came in 2024‑25 at Lafayette, where he shot 47.9% from three on 5.2 attempts per game, combining high volume with efficiency. Over his career, he has maintained a strong 46.6% three-point clip on 5.3 attempts per game, showing consistent shooting ability. In the current 2025‑26 season at UC San Diego, Chaikin is shooting 36.4% from three on 5.5 attempts per game, providing a floor-spacing option for his team early in the season. Chaikin represents a plug-and-play shooter who can immediately stretch defenses and create space for teammates.
Wilson Dubinsky – 6-2, Marshall
Wilson Dubinsky has consistently shown the ability to stretch the floor as a three-point shooter. His best season came in 2024‑25 at South Carolina State, where he shot 44.7% from three on 4.0 attempts per game, combining both volume and efficiency. Over his career, Dubinsky has maintained a 40.2% three-point clip on 4.0 attempts per game, proving himself a reliable perimeter option. In the early 2025‑26 season at Marshall, he is shooting 36.8% from three on 4.8 attempts per game, providing a proven shooting presence to help space the floor and create opportunities for his teammates.
Jordan Battle – 6-2, Old Dominion
Jordan Battle’s best three-point shooting season came in 2024‑25 at Coastal Carolina, where he shot 42.7% from three on 5.3 attempts per game, showing both volume and efficiency as a perimeter threat. Over his career, he has maintained a solid 40.3% three-point clip on 3.5 attempts per game, proving his ability to stretch defenses consistently. In the early 2025‑26 season at Old Dominion, he is shooting 21.1% from three on 3.8 attempts per game, so it’s still early, but he has a proven track record of hitting threes and spacing the floor effectively.
Mak Manciel – 6-3, Eastern Michigan
Mak Manciel has developed into a reliable shooter over his college career. His best season was 2024‑25 at Detroit Mercy, when he shot 42.3% from three on 4.3 attempts per game, pairing solid efficiency with decent volume. Over his career, Manciel has averaged 33.7% from three on 3.7 attempts per game, showing flashes of his shooting potential. In the early 2025‑26 season at Eastern Michigan, he is shooting 41.7% from three on 3.0 attempts per game, providing his team with an effective perimeter threat and floor-spacing option. Manciel offers a plug-and-play shooting presence that can create opportunities and keep defenses honest.
CJ Luster – 6-3, UNC Wilmington
CJ Luster has proven to be an efficient scoring guard with range and consistency. After a standout season at Stony Brook, where he averaged 16.8 points per game while shooting 42.1% from three on 7.6 attempts per game, Luster has transferred to UNC Wilmington. Early in the 2025‑26 season, he’s continued to showcase his scoring ability and floor spacing, with a strong effective field goal percentage of 56.3% and reliable free-throw shooting at 86.5%. His combination of shooting volume, efficiency, and experience makes him a key backcourt contributor for the Seahawks.
Marcus Banks Jr. – 6-2, Massachusetts
Marcus Banks Jr. has consistently been a strong perimeter shooter and a reliable scoring option. His best season was 2024‑25 at UMBC, when he shot 41.8% from three on 8.0 attempts per game, showing both high efficiency and significant volume. Over his career, Banks Jr. has averaged 36.2% from three on 7.2 attempts per game, maintaining a solid threat from deep. In the early 2025‑26 season at Massachusetts, he is shooting 36.7% from three on 7.5 attempts per game, continuing to provide floor spacing and offensive production for his team while remaining a dangerous perimeter option.
Knute Wood – 6-4, Alabama Huntsville
Knute Wood has shown consistent three-point shooting throughout his career. His best season came in 2024‑25 at Tennessee State, where he shot 41.6% from three on 3.4 attempts per game, combining solid volume with efficiency. Over his career, Wood has maintained a strong 41.7% three-point percentage on , proving he can reliably stretch the floor. He transferred down to Divsion 2, he represents a floor-spacing guard with size who could provide immediate value as a shooter off the bench or in key moments.
Damoni Harrison – 6-5, Charlotte
Damoni Harrison has shown the ability to score efficiently from both inside and beyond the arc. In his 2024‑25 season at Southern Indiana, he averaged 15.1 points per game on 43.1% overall shooting and 40.9% from three, proving he could carry a significant offensive load. Transitioning to Charlotte in 2025‑26, Harrison is contributing 8.8 points per game while maintaining excellent shooting efficiency (44.0% FG, 41.2% 3P), showing he can adapt his game to a new team while continuing to provide floor spacing and scoring versatility.
Rob Martin – 5-10, High Point
Rob Martin has proven to be an elite floor general and efficient scorer throughout his career. In 2025‑26 at High Point, he is averaging 15.6 points, 5.4 assists, and shooting 41.2% from three, showing his ability to create for himself and teammates while spacing the floor. Over his career, Martin has maintained strong shooting splits (44.7% FG, 40.2% 3P, 83.2% FT) and consistently contributed across the stat sheet, making him a high-impact guard capable of controlling the pace of the game. His combination of scoring, playmaking, and efficiency has made him a reliable leader on each team he’s joined.
Brycen Long – 6-2, Portland State
Brycen Long is a sharp-shooting guard with a career built on efficiency and perimeter scoring. In 2025‑26 at Portland State, he’s averaging 3.8 points in limited minutes, but he’s knocking down 41.7% of his threes for his career and 100% from the free-throw line this season. Over his college career, Long has shown the ability to stretch the floor and contribute in a variety of roles, posting solid 42.4% FG and 40.3% 3P while maintaining good decision-making and low turnovers. His shooting and spacing make him a valuable complementary guard capable of fitting into multiple offensive scheme.
Dior Conners – 6-3, Ohio
Dior Conners is a versatile guard who provides scoring and floor spacing for Ohio. In 2025‑26, he’s averaging 6.5 points in limited minutes, but his career shows solid shooting efficiency, including 39.1% from three-point range and 80% from the free-throw line. Conners has the size to defend multiple positions and contributes modestly across rebounds and assists, making him a complementary option in the backcourt. His ability to knock down shots from deep and maintain efficiency makes him a reliable piece for a balanced team offense.
Eren Banks – 6-4, Appalachian State
Eren Banks is a 6-foot-4 guard who brings scoring, rebounding, and playmaking to Appalachian State. In 2025‑26, he’s averaging 9.4 points, 3.6 rebounds, and 2.0 assists per game while shooting 44.7% from the field and 35% from three. Banks has shown the ability to step up in key moments, exemplified by his 16-point outing against Dartmouth. With his size and versatility, he contributes on both ends of the floor and provides floor spacing while maintaining solid efficiency, making him a key backcourt piece for his team.
Riley Parker – 6-2, Portland
Riley Parker is a 6-foot-2 guard from Australia with scoring and playmaking ability. In 2024‑25 at Saint Francis (PA), he averaged 13.4 points, 3.5 rebounds, and 3.3 assists per game, shooting 48.1% from the field and 39.6% from three, earning All-NEC and All-NEC Tournament honors. Parker transferred to Portland for 2025‑26, where he has limited action so far, logging 19 minutes in his only game, going 0-for-1 from the field but hitting 4-of-5 free throws. He brings experience, efficiency, and versatility to the backcourt, with a track record of leading his conference in multiple offensive categories.
Kahlil Singleton – 6-3, Canisius
Kahlil Singleton is a 6-foot-3 guard who provides scoring and rebounding for Canisius. In 2025‑26, he’s averaging 9.6 points, 4.0 rebounds, and 1.0 assists per game while shooting 37.2% from the field and 35.1% from three. Singleton has shown the ability to heat up from deep, highlighted by a 16-point outing against Holy Cross, and contributes on both ends with rebounds and defensive plays. With size, versatility, and experience across multiple programs, he’s a key wing option for the Canisius backcourt.
Alexis Marmolejos – 6-1, Pacific
Alexis Marmolejos is a 6-foot-1 guard from Santiago, Dominican Republic, currently playing for Pacific. After earning All-Southland honors at Lamar, Marmolejos has continued his scoring efficiency in the 2025‑26 season, averaging 8.3 points, 3.3 rebounds, and 0.5 assists per game in limited minutes. He’s an accurate shooter, posting 52.9% overall shooting and 44.4% from three, along with 91.7% from the free-throw line, making him a highly efficient scoring option off the perimeter. Over his career, he averages 13.9 points per game while maintaining strong shooting percentages, highlighting his value as a reliable offensive contributor.
Coleton Benson – 6-1, New Orleans
Coleton Benson is a 6-foot-1 guard from Austin, TX, with a proven scoring pedigree. After stints at Army and Texas State, he’s now starring at New Orleans for the 2025‑26 season. In four games so far, Benson is averaging 20.5 points, 4.0 rebounds, and 2.0 assists per game, shooting 42.9% from three and 100% from the free-throw line. Over his career, he’s demonstrated consistent efficiency with 41% overall shooting and 38% from deep, making him a primary offensive weapon and reliable scorer for his team.
Aaron Talbert – 6-0, Gardner-Webb
Aaron Talbert is a 6-foot guard, now playing for Gardner-Webb after stints at Saint Francis (PA). In 2025‑26, he’s averaging 7.4 points, 1.6 rebounds, and 2.6 assists per game in 24 minutes, showing his role as a steady floor general. Talbert has improved his perimeter shooting, hitting 23.8% of threes this season, and maintains solid efficiency overall (34.3% FG, 80% FT). Career-wise, he’s averaged 8.5 points, 2.2 assists, and 2.2 rebounds per game, with his ability to handle the ball and distribute being his standout traits.
Yann Farell – 6-6, Sacred Heart
Yann Farell has been a reliable shooter throughout his career, capable of spacing the floor effectively. His best season came as a freshman at St. Bonaventure in 2022‑23, when he shot 41.9% from three on 4.8 attempts per game, showing strong volume and efficiency. Over his career, Farell has maintained a solid 37.2% three-point percentage on 4.2 attempts per game. In the current 2025‑26 season at Sacred Heart, he is shooting 37.5% from three on 6.0 attempts per game, proving he continues to provide a proven outside threat for his team. The percentages aren’t crazy but he’s been a starter 26 minute a game player on St. Bonaventure who was ranked 104th one season, and is important because he played Power Forward and even some center allowing for lost of spacing and functionality. It was shocking other A10 or AAC level teams didn’t see him play against them and run to scoop him up in the portal and that he fell to Sacred Heart.
Final Thoughts
At the end of the day, shooting isn’t some abstract luxury—it’s a concrete, measurable skill that directly impacts wins and losses. Yet year after year, proven, high-volume three-point specialists slip through the cracks, landing at low-majors or even Division II programs while Power Five and high-end mid-major teams struggle to space the floor. There are no excuses: the talent is out there, often affordable, and frequently willing to take a chance at minutes and exposure. Teams that ignore this reality either undervalue shooting outright or overestimate their ability to develop unreliable shooters, trapping themselves in cycles of poor offense and lost games.
For smaller programs, these missed opportunities are gold—leaning into the transfer portal and targeting proven shooters gives them their best chance to overachieve. For P5 programs, it’s a reminder that even top-tier rosters need balance and spacing, and that sometimes the simplest, most overlooked solutions are the ones sitting right in front of you. At the end of the day, if your team can’t shoot, the problem usually isn’t the players—it’s that someone on the staff failed to prioritize the one skill that can change a game in a single possession.
