2012 Basketball Recruiting Thread

[CDu]

Well, Scheyer wasn't, and Redick was #11 in the RSCI, but that seems close enough. And Scheyer and Dunleavy might not have gotten there anyway if the 2000 and 2007 teams weren't so lacking in upperclassmen. The two youngest teams in the K era, so some freshmen had to get the minutes.

That won't be the case next year, though, so I can't see Amile getting enough minutes to average 8 ppg. Especially as a big man. Even McRoberts and Shelden Williams barely got past 8 ppg.

I was excluding Scheyer already, as you'd already noted him. I didn't realize Redick was #11 in the final RSCI. I guess I just lumped him in the top 10 based on his performance in the McDonald's game that year. But yeah, #11 is close enough for me .

I totally agree though - it's atypical for even elite prospects to average 8ppg. It's especially atypical for a big man to do so. Maybe Amile will be the exception. I wouldn't mind it. I just wouldn't expect it next year (especially if Mason returns, but even if he doesn't).

[dcdevil2009]

Barring unexpected injuries or departures (beyond the possible departures of Austin and Mason), I'd be absolutely shocked to see Amile score 8 ppg as a freshman.

Here is a list of Duke freshmen since 2000 who have scored 8 or more points per game their freshmen year:

Rivers [11-12]
Irving [10-11]
Singler [07-08]
Scheyer [06-07]
McRoberts (but only 8.7 ppg) [05-06]
Deng [03-04]
Redick [02-03]
Shelden Williams (only 8.2 ppg) [02-03]
Jason Williams [99-00]
Boozer [99-00]
Dunleavy (only 8.0 ppg if you count DNPs as games played; 9.1 if you don't) [99-00]

All (except Scheyer) were either top 10 recruits or future lottery picks (or both). From what I know of Amile, it's doubtful he's in that class. I imagine he could be a key contributor in his later years, maybe even as a sophomore, but he's unlikely to play enough minutes to get 8 ppg as a freshman.

Granted most freshman haven't averaged more than 8 ppg, but more often than not, we've had a freshman average more than 8. I'm not sure if Amile will do it, but I don't think it's inconceivable that if we do have a freshman average it, then Amile will be the freshman to do it.

[superdave]

Granted most freshman haven't averaged more than 8 ppg, but more often than not, we've had a freshman average more than 8. I'm not sure if Amile will do it, but I don't think it's inconceivable that if we do have a freshman average it, then Amile will be the freshman to do it.

Why do you think Amile will do it?

If Mason comes back, Amile's minutes will be somewhat limited. If Mason goes pro, Amile will have more of an opportunity, but would be fighting for minutes at the 4 mostly with Josh and Alex, and maybe a little with Ryan depending on MP3's mpg.

How do you expect the Alex vs. Amile minutes battle to play out?

[Kedsy]

Granted most freshman haven't averaged more than 8 ppg, but more often than not, we've had a freshman average more than 8. I'm not sure if Amile will do it, but I don't think it's inconceivable that if we do have a freshman average it, then Amile will be the freshman to do it.

Well, are you counting Alex Murphy and MP3 as freshmen? If so, I'd say Amile is the 3rd or possibly 4th most likely freshman on next year's team to score 8 or more ppg. (Assuming he comes to Duke, of course.) If you don't count the redshirt freshmen, Rasheed Sulaimon would still be more likely than Amile to do it. That list is mostly perimeter players. And even for Rasheed, odds aren't better than 50/50 that he'll do it.

[CDu]

Why do you think Amile will do it?

If Mason comes back, Amile's minutes will be somewhat limited. If Mason goes pro, Amile will have more of an opportunity, but would be fighting for minutes at the 4 mostly with Josh and Alex, and maybe a little with Ryan depending on MP3's mpg.

How do you expect the Alex vs. Amile minutes battle to play out?

Yeah, I had a similar question. While it's true that we frequently have a freshman average at least 8ppg, I see no reason to assume it would be Jefferson instead of Sulaimon or Muhammad (both of whom are more highly rated than Jefferson). In fact, I'd say that historically we've gotten more scoring from our perimeter players than our post players. Combining that with the fact that we tend to get more scoring from guards and we'll have a pretty deep and experienced frontcourt, I'm not seeing a big window for Jefferson to score a ton next year. Now the following year and beyond? Sure.

I hate being in this position. I hate downplaying the opportunities for recruits/players as I want them all to do well. But there's a definite historical trend that people often ignore. It seems like every year folks overdo it on the expectations for some of the freshmen. This year, for example, it was Cook and Gbinije, who are both terrific players but have very experienced and talented players in front of them at the moment.

[Devilsfan]

We've got guards (Austin?, Quinn, Thorton, Shabazz (hope, hope, hope), now we'll have wings, Alex, MB, Sulaimon, what we need is a real BIG! Not competition for Alex and MB's minutes, IMO.

[CDu]

We've got guards (Austin?, Quinn, Thorton, Shabazz (hope, hope, hope), now we'll have wings, Alex, MB, Sulaimon, what we need is a real BIG! Not competition for Alex and MB's minutes, IMO.

I hear that Marshall is pretty big. So is Mason, if he decides to come back for his senior year.

PS: I assume you're referring Gbinije as "MB." I'd call him MG.
PPS: based on their size and scouting reports, I'd call Sulaimon more of a guard and Shabazz more of a wing.

[Devilsfan]

You're right, just didn't see him enough this year to learn his name. Also if mason comes back it would still be nice to have some power big to help Mason and Ryan. Maybe Marshall turns out to be ok. Zoubs and Miles turned out to be terrific late. Wish we could have that play early in someone's career. Miles was a MAN against the team from Franklin Street!

[Starter]

I love Shane too, but Shane as a freshman was not the same player that we all remember cutting down the nets in 2001. Perhaps it's not really fair, because his role was limited by the immense talent surrounding him, but as a freshman he averaged 7.6 points per game in 24.6 minutes. He did a little bit of everything on offense, but his primary role and identity was on the defensive end, which remained true until his junior year.

Is it reasonable to expect Jefferson to be Shane Battier? Not at all. But is it reasonable to expect him to put up 8 points per game? Maybe so.

I thought Battier was pretty special as a freshman, actually. You're right that he wasn't yet the fully developed player he was in 2001. But besides 7.6 ppg -- nothing to sneeze at for someone who was at best the team's fourth option, without even counting senior Wojo -- his 6.4 rebounds, 1.5 blocks and 1.4 steals were elite for his position on both the court and the team. Battier's play at the end of this game against Clemson is my most vivid memory of his freshman year and essentially typifies him. And besides, I don't think you can fully quantify Battier by his statistics, particularly his scoring. Shane was my year, and I recall him being designated to address the freshman class the first month we were on campus to create excitement for the team. What other freshman can you see doing that -- ever?

To keep this reasonably on topic, I'd compare Shabazz favorably to Deng in terms of a versatile yet explosive player who's ready to come in and make an impact right away. I really hope he sees himself at Duke, though I've always kind of got a Kentucky vibe from him.

[Devilsfan]

Shabazz is A huge part of what we need to get us back to the Duke teams of old, dominate.

[SupaDave]

Shabazz is A huge part of what we need to get us back to the Duke teams of old, dominate.

This is confusing because we've been pretty successful for a very long time. What TEAMS do you speak of? And of those teams - which one had a player like Shabazz?

In FACT - this year's team has a few 40 point victories. A few 30 point victories and quite a few more of 15 plus.

Last year's team demoralized UNC at home and this year's team stole their heart.

What are you basing this on? Points in wins? Record? Victories? Championships?

It would be nice to have a Duke team with super talent players that stayed 4 years combined with new young super talented players - but those days are probably over. With teams like Murray State, San Diego St., Wichita St., Creighton, and Gonzaga keeping themselves in competition with the recruiting giants out there it's obvious that there's plenty of talent to go around. (but I will add to the fact that we actually look kinda loaded next year)

In the last 12 years alone we have won two national championships, been to 6 Sweet 16s, and countless tourney championships (Big 10, Maui, ACC, etc).

[flyingdutchdevil]

This is confusing because we've been pretty successful for a very long time. What TEAMS do you speak of? And of those teams - which one had a player like Shabazz?

In FACT - this year's team has a few 40 point victories. A few 30 point victories and quite a few more of 15 plus.

Last year's team demoralized UNC at home and this year's team stole their heart.

What are you basing this on? Points in wins? Record? Victories? Championships?

It would be nice to have a Duke team with super talent players that stayed 4 years combined with new young super talented players - but those days are probably over. With teams like Murray State, San Diego St., Wichita St., Creighton, and Gonzaga keeping themselves in competition with the recruiting giants out there it's obvious that there's plenty of talent to go around. (but I will add to the fact that we actually look kinda loaded next year)

In the last 12 years alone we have won two national championships, been to 6 Sweet 16s, and countless tourney championships (Big 10, Maui, ACC, etc).

You are dead wrong. It's 10 Sweet 16s in 12 years.

[duke09hms]

I'd be so happy to make it 11 Sweet Sixteens in 13 years - anything beyond that is gravy for this year's team.

[LamJones]

This is confusing because we've been pretty successful for a very long time. What TEAMS do you speak of? And of those teams - which one had a player like Shabazz?

In FACT - this year's team has a few 40 point victories. A few 30 point victories and quite a few more of 15 plus.

Last year's team demoralized UNC at home and this year's team stole their heart.

What are you basing this on? Points in wins? Record? Victories? Championships?

It would be nice to have a Duke team with super talent players that stayed 4 years combined with new young super talented players - but those days are probably over. With teams like Murray State, San Diego St., Wichita St., Creighton, and Gonzaga keeping themselves in competition with the recruiting giants out there it's obvious that there's plenty of talent to go around. (but I will add to the fact that we actually look kinda loaded next year)

In the last 12 years alone we have won two national championships, been to 6 Sweet 16s, and countless tourney championships (Big 10, Maui, ACC, etc).

I don't know, SupaDave. While I agree that teams like the '99 and '01 team are hard to come by, we have been, for the most part, a fairly one dimensional (3-pt-shooting) team for a while now. Perhaps that's unfair because of what Kyrie could have done as a penetrator if not for the injury last year, but we really could use more (i) athletes and (ii) back to the basket bigs. So could everybody, fine, but Duke is a perennial contender and you'd think we would be able to land more of these types so that we could field a more well-rounded team. I don't know how anyone can argue with that.

I'm thrilled with the success we've had, but to play Debbie Downer for a moment, the ACC has been a fairly weak conference for a while now which translated to a lot of high tourney seeds for Duke. When you're a #1 seed and well coached, you ought to beat the 8/9 seed and get to the Sweet 16 most of the time.

One could argue that every conference has its UVAs, GTs, WFs, and BCs, and that Duke plays a strong out-of-conference schedule. I would argue, however, that Duke has an advantage playing and winning those out-of-conference games early in the season before those teams have had a chance to prepare for Duke's style of play. For example, I'd hate to match up with Mich, MSU or Kansas again in the tourney. As for the championships, the '10 Championship was a nice surprise (and a close game), but I think a lot of chips fell our way that tourney. That's sports; upsets happen and its an incredible feat to win it all no matter who you play. That said, I think you have to think about the context a little bit too.

I agree with you that the landscape is getting more competitive. We have been wildly successful, despite the fact (and it is a fact) that we have not been particularly athletic or skilled in the post with a few notable exceptions. I agree with the poster that landing Shabazz is important for Duke, not so much for next years teams but for more so for perceptions in recruiting. My two cents.

[duke09hms]

I don't know, SupaDave. While I agree that teams like the '99 and '01 team are hard to come by, we have been, for the most part, a fairly one dimensional (3-pt-shooting) team for a while now. Perhaps that's unfair because of what Kyrie could have done as a penetrator if not for the injury last year, but we really could use more (i) athletes and (ii) back to the basket bigs. So could everybody, fine, but Duke is a perennial contender and you'd think we would be able to land more of these types so that we could field a more well-rounded team. I don't know how anyone can argue with that.

I agree with you that the landscape is getting more competitive. We have been wildly successful, despite the fact (and it is a fact) that we have not been particularly athletic or skilled in the post with a few notable exceptions. I agree with the poster that landing Shabazz is important for Duke, not so much for next years teams but for more so for perceptions in recruiting. My two cents.

I agree with a lot of what you say, especially with the importance of perception in recruiting even if those perceptions are false. Remember how Mitch McGary stated "Duke bigs just rebound and set screens for their guards?" Even though K has demonstrated that when we have a great post player, we use him. The problem is we rarely get these post players whereas our elite peers seem to pull these guys in on a regular basis.

Therefore, wouldnt you say Tony Parker is a much more important recruit than Shabazz in terms of perception? Especially since K has gone to extreme lengths, just about Harrison Barnes levels of recruiting, to get this kid.

[Greg_Newton]

This is confusing because we've been pretty successful for a very long time. What TEAMS do you speak of? And of those teams - which one had a player like Shabazz?

Probably '92 and '99, to start with, which had 6'6-6'7 future NBA all-stars Grant Hill and Corey Maggette. For contrast, the 1999 team won its eight February games by an average of 26 points, and its first round ACC tourney game by 37.

Obviously no one expects that, but I think that's what "dominance" means by Duke standards.

[ChicagoCrazy84]

Probably '92 and '99, to start with, which had 6'6-6'7 future NBA all-stars Grant Hill and Corey Maggette. For contrast, the 1999 team won its eight February games by an average of 26 points, and its first round ACC tourney game by 37.

Obviously no one expects that, but I think that's what "dominance" means by Duke standards.

Ahhh, those were the days. Even though we lost in the natty that year, that was one entertaining and fun team to watch. I don't even need a team like that to be happy. Sure it would be nice to steamroll your conference foes like we did that year or like Kentucky did this year, but I mostly just want a team that is balanced, tough to guard, and has 4 guys on the court at one time that can go off. We don't have that right now and we probably won't have it next year either unless Gbinije and Cook turn in summers that rival NFL training camps.

I'd like to add Shabazz or Tony, but it's looking more likely Shabazz is heading to sexy Lexy and TP is heading to the other UK. It would not be too bad to add Rasheed Sulaimon and Amile Jefferson. Just those 2 would probably give us a top 15 class. Does anyone realize how good Sulaimon really is? The guy is seriously a beast and will probably make Andre Dawkins obsolete.

[Kedsy]

...but I mostly just want a team that is balanced, tough to guard, and has 4 guys on the court at one time that can go off. We don't have that right now...

We absolutely have that this year (or at least we did before Ryan got injured). Frankly, this is exactly how I would describe our current team, except sometimes we have five guys on the court who can go off, rather than just four.

What we don't have this year is a team that plays consistent good defense, but based on your quote, that doesn't seem to be on your wish list.

The guy is seriously a beast and will probably make Andre Dawkins obsolete.

I'm sure Rasheed is good, but this statement is rather silly.

[dcar1985]

We absolutely have that this year (or at least we did before Ryan got injured). Frankly, this is exactly how I would describe our current team, except sometimes we have five guys on the court who can go off, rather than just four.

What we don't have this year is a team that plays consistent good defense, but based on your quote, that doesn't seem to be on your wish list.



I'm sure Rasheed is good, but this statement is rather silly.

Yea he's almost managed to do that by himself

[turnandburn55]

Probably '92 and '99, to start with, which had 6'6-6'7 future NBA all-stars Grant Hill and Corey Maggette. For contrast, the 1999 team won its eight February games by an average of 26 points, and its first round ACC tourney game by 37.

Obviously no one expects that, but I think that's what "dominance" means by Duke standards.

..Or fielding a team with five future NBA starters, spotting a very talented Maryland squad 22 points in the Final Four, then coming back in a youd-have-to-see-it-to-believe-it offensive barrage to win by double-digits.

I don't need a team like that to be happy either. I thoroughly enjoying watching the "alarmingly unathletic" kids make their run to the title as much as any other. But you have to admit, there was something about the start of next season when Kyrie was leading the charge that made us say "This won't be like last year... now WE'RE going to dictate terms". While it was certainly fun watching that team redevelop midseason, especially to the point of getting sweet revenge against the hated Heels... I'd sure like to have another "Duke Invitational Tournament" (and maybe win it this time)