Page 19 of 23 FirstFirst ... 91718192021 ... LastLast
Results 361 to 380 of 448
  1. #361

    Nolan gets the start

    After averaging about 14 mins in the last 8 games and playing decently, Nolan got the start tonight and 26 minutes as Raymond Felton was with his family. He played pretty poorly, shooting 1-9 from the field with 3 assists to one turnover, a couple rebounds, and one steal. He did shoot 1-2 from 3-point land but 0-7 on 2-pointers. His backup, Johnny Flynn, had 10 points on 3-6 shooting and had 5 assists to 1 turnover in 25 minutes.

    I hope Nolan can continue to get more time, and it must be noted that he was going up against Russell Westbrook, who is by no means an easy match up. Unfortunately, Westbrook had a very good game, so this game can't contribute to Nolan's chances of getting more minutes. Good luck Nolan!

  2. #362
    Quote Originally Posted by DukieInBrasil View Post
    My initial reaction was that it was kinda like the Demarcus Nelson situation, in that an unheralded, hardworking player gets some starts to fire up the other plahyers. Of course, Nelson was denied a roster spot and cut, eventually landing in Europe, whereas LT was recently guaranteed a roster spot and won't be downsized any time soon for capricious reasons. I really can't say that i think LT will be a long-term starter based on his production up to now, but what he has done is pretty impressive. K was right, go LT!
    Nelson was an undersized player who lacked the ball handling and shooting skills for the next level. Lance has decent size is long and has the potential to be a contributor on both ends of the floor. Some player's game translate better to the Pros. Lance has to continue to play harder than everyone around him- but he has a chance to have a career. It certainly helps to get minutes to make that case.
    dukelifer

  3. #363
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Quote Originally Posted by dukelifer View Post
    Nelson was an undersized player who lacked the ball handling and shooting skills for the next level. Lance has decent size is long and has the potential to be a contributor on both ends of the floor. Some player's game translate better to the Pros. Lance has to continue to play harder than everyone around him- but he has a chance to have a career. It certainly helps to get minutes to make that case.
    Lance Thomas = Chuck Hayes with less offense. Even so, that will stick around for a while. 6 fouls, good defense, no mistakes, clean up garbage on offensive end.

  4. #364
    Quote Originally Posted by A-Tex Devil View Post
    Lance Thomas = Chuck Hayes with less offense. Even so, that will stick around for a while. 6 fouls, good defense, no mistakes, clean up garbage on offensive end.
    I don't see them as all that similar, actually. Chuck Hayes is a truck - short and stout (6'6", 250) and plays the PF/C spot and provides very strong rebounding and little else (he's averaging fewer points per 48 than Thomas). Thomas is more of a PF/SF, who doesn't rebound as much but plays tough defense and provides energy and flexibility to guard either forward spot.

  5. #365
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    I don't see them as all that similar, actually. Chuck Hayes is a truck - short and stout (6'6", 250) and plays the PF/C spot and provides very strong rebounding and little else (he's averaging fewer points per 48 than Thomas). Thomas is more of a PF/SF, who doesn't rebound as much but plays tough defense and provides energy and flexibility to guard either forward spot.
    I haven't watch Hayes in about 3 years. But what little I've seen from Lance reminds me a lot of what Chuck was doing for the Rockets circa 2007.

  6. #366
    Quote Originally Posted by A-Tex Devil View Post
    I haven't watch Hayes in about 3 years. But what little I've seen from Lance reminds me a lot of what Chuck was doing for the Rockets circa 2007.
    Well, Hayes hasn't changed body types since his college days. He was always a short, stout, unselfish, physical, bruising post player who could defend much taller players and rebound well. Now, I haven't seen much of Thomas in the NBA, but I can't imagine his game fits that description.

  7. #367

    Dunleavy

    in March averaged 15.3 points, shooting 56.9 percent from the floor, 54.4 from 3, and 89.3 from the line, with almost a 3-1 assist to turnover ratio. Great to see him playing his best ball since before his injury.

  8. #368
    Quote Originally Posted by Duke79UNLV77 View Post
    in March averaged 15.3 points, shooting 56.9 percent from the floor, 54.4 from 3, and 89.3 from the line, with almost a 3-1 assist to turnover ratio. Great to see him playing his best ball since before his injury.
    And perhaps his most important stat: 1 tyler hansbrough broken nose. Hilarious, however terribly unsporting of me it is....

  9. #369
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by theAlaskanBear View Post
    And perhaps his most important stat: 1 tyler hansbrough broken nose. Hilarious, however terribly unsporting of me it is....
    Speaking of which; Shelden got poked in the eye by non other than our old Carolina friend last week, and will be out for a while. Seems
    like there's no love lost between ol' Tyler and ex Dukies in the NBA!

  10. #370
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Mount Kisco, NY
    Last night's Miami v OKC game, a potential NBA Finals preview, was awesome! It had an NBA Finals level of intensity and huge play after huge play down the stretch. Shane was in the thick of it all, nailing several key second half 3s and playing all the crunch time minutes. It is amazing how his move to the Heat makes me root for the Heat...because last year I HATED the Heat. All hail 31!

  11. #371
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    raleigh
    i am pulling for the heat.....last night's game showed everyone what a playoff series between these two teams would be like...

    hope they both have good cut men...
    "Either we're going down, or they are....... Kirk out!"

  12. #372
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    raleigh
    just saw the box score on the magic's game and it had duhon listed as DNP SUSPENDED BY TEAM...

    did i miss something?
    "Either we're going down, or they are....... Kirk out!"

  13. #373
    Quote Originally Posted by moonpie23 View Post
    just saw the box score on the magic's game and it had duhon listed as DNP SUSPENDED BY TEAM...

    did i miss something?
    Duhon missed the morning shoot around and did not contact team officials until after it had ended. Per team policy, they suspended him for one game. Apparently, he had some personal issues that came up that he had to take care of, but everything is good now.

    http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...-hedo-turkoglu

  14. #374
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO
    Quote Originally Posted by moonpie23 View Post
    just saw the box score on the magic's game and it had duhon listed as DNP SUSPENDED BY TEAM...

    did i miss something?
    One game suspension for "conduct detrimental to the team." Apparently he missed a shoot-around. Personal issues, now resolved, sayeth his agent.

    Orlando won easily and JJ started and scored 20.

    sage

  15. #375

    some stats

    I had some time on my hands tonight. So, i went back to wikipedia and looked up some stats about Duke big men drafted in first rounds since 2006.
    Here is what I came up with:
    Duke UNC UK UCONN UCLA Kansas OSU
    2006 1 0 0 3 0 0 0
    2007 0 1 0 0 0 1 1
    2008 0 0 0 0 1 1 1
    2009 0 1 0 1 0 0 1
    2010 0 1 3 0 0 1 0
    2011 0 0 1 0 0 2 0
    TOTAL 1 3 4 4 1 5 3

    I assumed the following while building this table:
    1. Include candidates drafted in first round
    2. Do not include second round + undrafted candidates
    3. Include drafts from 2006 onwards
    4. Compare top basketball programs in terms of popularity
    5. Only consider players drafted for PF and C positions

    Conclusion:
    1. Duke laid big solid eggs in the last 5 draft classes
    2. Duke and UCLA has same number of draft picks except Kevin Love is famous among high school kids and Shelden Williams not as much
    3. More consistent programs are UNC, OSU and Kansas each with atleast 1 draft pick without a gap of more than 2 years
    4. UK is producing draft picks only after Coach Cal took over


    Enjoy and feel free to make more conclusions!!

  16. #376
    Quote Originally Posted by IBleedBlue View Post
    I had some time on my hands tonight. So, i went back to wikipedia and looked up some stats about Duke big men drafted in first rounds since 2006.
    Here is what I came up with:
    Duke UNC UK UCONN UCLA Kansas OSU
    2006 1 0 0 3 0 0 0
    2007 0 1 0 0 0 1 1
    2008 0 0 0 0 1 1 1
    2009 0 1 0 1 0 0 1
    2010 0 1 3 0 0 1 0
    2011 0 0 1 0 0 2 0
    TOTAL 1 3 4 4 1 5 3

    I assumed the following while building this table:
    1. Include candidates drafted in first round
    2. Do not include second round + undrafted candidates
    3. Include drafts from 2006 onwards
    4. Compare top basketball programs in terms of popularity
    5. Only consider players drafted for PF and C positions

    Conclusion:
    1. Duke laid big solid eggs in the last 5 draft classes
    2. Duke and UCLA has same number of draft picks except Kevin Love is famous among high school kids and Shelden Williams not as much
    3. More consistent programs are UNC, OSU and Kansas each with atleast 1 draft pick without a gap of more than 2 years
    4. UK is producing draft picks only after Coach Cal took over


    Enjoy and feel free to make more conclusions!!
    And despite those "eggs" as you call them, Duke still has two big men in the league who have been better than anyone else with the exception of Kevin Love -- Carlos Boozer and Elton Brand (now on reaching the end of his career). A third, Josh McRoberts plays for the lakers, and finally, Shelden Williams is not famous like Love -- but has been a solid role player ever since being drafted.

    But lets focus simply on your suspiciously selective time frame and let us examine the quality of those big men being drafted. Take UConn first in 2006 -- only two of those players were PF-C in fact, the third I assume you meant Marcus Williams who is a SF and cannot be included. Then you had Hasheem Thabeet in 2009. Well of those ONLY Josh Boone has had any real career in the NBA and is not currently playing -- an inferior one to Shelden Williams to be sure.

    Now lets take Kansas...during that time frame you have Julian Wright, Sasha Kaun, Cole Aldrich, and the Morris twins. Only Cole and the Morris twins are in the NBA, and only Markieff is having any impact whatsoever. The others struggle to average 2pts a game.

    Now, OSU: Greg Oden, BJ Mullens, and Kosta Koufos. Well, we know how that Greg Oden pick turned out, BJ Mullins is as bad as Cole Aldrich, but Koufos has been a servicable roleplayer.

    UNC: Brandan Wright, Tyler Hansbrough, Ed Davis. Wright has been a huge dissapointment...a role player having a "breakout" year with the Mavs at 6.7ppg. Ed Davis has only had a couple of years, but so far has been no more impressive than Shelden in his first two seasons. Hansbrough is a solid player, a good bench player, better than Shelden, yes.

    Obviously no team has put a PF/C into the league better than UCLA. Love has been tremendous. But it is just one player...

    Now to Kentucky! Patrick Patterson, Demarcus Cousins, Daniel Orton, and Enes Kanter. I don't know how you can include Kanter, as he was a Euro professional who was ruled ineligible to play college BB. That is ridiculous to include him. Cousins is very good, but also a headcase causing all sorts of problems for Sacremento. Orton has dont nothing, but Patterson looks to be a good player. If you insist on including Kanter, he projecting to be a role player -- in his first yr averaging 4ppg 4rpg.

    So, Duke who has laid all those eggs...yet when you go back and see who is still in the league...only 5 players can be said to be better than our lone pick Shelden Williams. Love, Hansbrough, Markieff Morris, Demarcus Cousins, and with all probability Patrick Patterson. That's 5/20 for a 25% success rate among those schools for putting players in the league better than Shelden Williams. When you expand the timeframe, Duke gets as good as any school for big men, save maybe Georgetown.

  17. #377
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO
    Quote Originally Posted by IBleedBlue View Post
    I had some time on my hands tonight. So, i went back to wikipedia and looked up some stats about Duke big men drafted in first rounds since 2006.
    Here is what I came up with:
    Duke UNC UK UCONN UCLA Kansas OSU
    2006 1 0 0 3 0 0 0
    2007 0 1 0 0 0 1 1
    2008 0 0 0 0 1 1 1
    2009 0 1 0 1 0 0 1
    2010 0 1 3 0 0 1 0
    2011 0 0 1 0 0 2 0
    TOTAL 1 3 4 4 1 5 3

    I assumed the following while building this table:
    1. Include candidates drafted in first round
    2. Do not include second round + undrafted candidates
    3. Include drafts from 2006 onwards
    4. Compare top basketball programs in terms of popularity
    5. Only consider players drafted for PF and C positions

    Conclusion:
    1. Duke laid big solid eggs in the last 5 draft classes
    2. Duke and UCLA has same number of draft picks except Kevin Love is famous among high school kids and Shelden Williams not as much
    3. More consistent programs are UNC, OSU and Kansas each with atleast 1 draft pick without a gap of more than 2 years
    4. UK is producing draft picks only after Coach Cal took over


    Enjoy and feel free to make more conclusions!!
    Quote Originally Posted by theAlaskanBear View Post
    And despite those "eggs" as you call them, Duke still has two big men in the league who have been better than anyone else with the exception of Kevin Love -- Carlos Boozer and Elton Brand (now on reaching the end of his career). A third, Josh McRoberts plays for the lakers, and finally, Shelden Williams is not famous like Love -- but has been a solid role player ever since being drafted.

    .................................................. .......................

    So, Duke who has laid all those eggs...yet when you go back and see who is still in the league...only 5 players can be said to be better than our lone pick Shelden Williams. Love, Hansbrough, Markieff Morris, Demarcus Cousins, and with all probability Patrick Patterson. That's 5/20 for a 25% success rate among those schools for putting players in the league better than Shelden Williams. When you expand the timeframe, Duke gets as good as any school for big men, save maybe Georgetown.
    I agree totally with you, Alaskan Bear (stay away from the grouse, if you don't mind). The Ibleedble post is, moreover, a negative recruiting advertisment for Duke. It is biased and unfair. Ibleedblue -- is that Kentucky blue, Kansas blue or Carolina blue? It sure ain't Duke blue.

    sagegrouse

  18. #378
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Nashville
    Quote Originally Posted by sagegrouse View Post
    I agree totally with you, Alaskan Bear (stay away from the grouse, if you don't mind). The Ibleedble post is, moreover, a negative recruiting advertisment for Duke. It is biased and unfair. Ibleedblue -- is that Kentucky blue, Kansas blue or Carolina blue? It sure ain't Duke blue.

    sagegrouse
    I agree with Sage and Alaskan Bear. What I actually think that chart shows is how difficult it is to project big guys at a young age. The old adage that big men develop more slowly is completely true. This is why someone like Dwight Howard is so coveted. He is the only all-world center in, well, the world. In terms of centers at the NBA level, there really just aren't that many that are elite? Bynum is really good. Al Jefferson is putting it together. Duncan, if you consider him a center, is still valuable even as he gets older. Greg Monroe is a center of a different mold, but is really good. We could throw in defensive specialist guys like Chandler and Noah into the mix, as well. Horford could also be considered a center, even though I think he'd be best playing the PF spot. Otherwise, that's about it. From that group, most didn't even go to college and the ones that did, (Monroe, Horford and Noah) went to Georgetown and Florida, which weren't even on the draft chart of the OP. The club is a little bigger if you expand it to include power forwards, as guys like Griffin, Love, Aldridge (for whom it took a little while to become elite), Boozer, Bosh, Josh Smith, DeMarcus Cousins, Paul Millsap etc can be added to the list if we're not being to picky. Still, out of that group, you still don't have many from the list of schools in that draft chart. Anyway, my point is simply that even among the top recruits each year, it is hard to project who is going to turn themselves into an NBA star. And, in many cases, the ones that do, take a little time to develop. Griffin, Horford, Monroe, Love, and Cousins have taken off pretty quickly, but of that group, only Cousins went to one of the schools listed. I think it's pretty hard to say that any single school flat out churns out star big men. The ones that appear to churn out bigs are really the ones that are lucky enough to have had talented players who stay healthy and realize their ability at the next level stop over on campus for a year or two (or three in the case of Horford and Noah).

    I think different coaches definitely have different strengths and weaknesses. There is no doubt about that. Some coaches have signatures in terms of style of play (run and gun for Roy, man to man defense and motion offense for K). It is very possible that in the case of Manning when he was at Kansas he helped turn otherwise non-NBA bigs into guys who could get a cup of coffee in the league. However, when it comes to the long term development of star big guys, I really don't think any one school can really claim to be the king of the court. In fact, despite the reputation places like UCONN and Kansas have gotten with big guys recently, they really haven't had anyone make their mark in the league since 2006.

  19. #379
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Quote Originally Posted by IBleedBlue View Post
    I assumed the following while building this table:
    1. Include candidates drafted in first round
    2. Do not include second round + undrafted candidates
    3. Include drafts from 2006 onwards
    4. Compare top basketball programs in terms of popularity
    5. Only consider players drafted for PF and C positions

    Conclusion:
    1. Duke laid big solid eggs in the last 5 draft classes
    2. Duke and UCLA has same number of draft picks except Kevin Love is famous among high school kids and Shelden Williams not as much
    3. More consistent programs are UNC, OSU and Kansas each with atleast 1 draft pick without a gap of more than 2 years
    4. UK is producing draft picks only after Coach Cal took over


    Enjoy and feel free to make more conclusions!!
    I appreciate the effort you put into this, but take somewhat of an issue with your assessment of each school's success in "producing" bigs. I think a fairer way to do it would be to look at the effect the time each player had at a school affected his ranking. For example, you could argue that UCONN and Kansas have both done a great job of "producing" bigs because of how much their bigs' draft stock improved between their senior year of high school and ultimately entering the draft. Hasheem Thabeet could make a great case that UCONN was able to turn a guy who at this time hasn't shown the ability to be a productive NBA player into the number 2 draft pick in the NBA. And while Okafor has been a solid role player, he hasn't had the type of career one would expect out of the number 2 overall pick. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any recent Kansas or UCONN bigs that have outperformed their draft positions.

    On the flip side, Kentucky, UCLA, and Ohio State have had a lot of first round picks, but their draft stock remained relatively steady during their time in school. Cousins and Oden would have been top 5 picks out of high school and were top 5 picks after their one year on campus; despite his high school ranking, I remember Love being projected as a mid-to-late lottery pick before arriving at UCLA.

    Finally, you've got Duke and UNC. First, I would expand your parameters to include McRoberts and/or Boozer. I'd have a hard time arguing that either Duke or UNC have significantly improved a player's draft position during their time on campus, and have occasionally seen their stocks drop (cough, McRoberts, cough). However, more frequently than not, they have outperformed their draft position and are on pace to have lengthy NBA careers (except for Big, Fat, Sean May). Hansbrough played himself into the the lottery and is looking like he'll have a lengthy career as a role player and Ed Davis' stock dropped somewhat by staying at UNC, but he looks to be in the league for a while. As for Duke's bigs, McRoberts and Boozer were both second round picks (McRoberts slipping from his freshman projection and Boozer maintaining his stock, while being underrated relative to his college accomplishments) who have had or are on pace to have longer careers and make significantly more money than most second round picks. In both cases, they've exceeded their draft day expectations. Maybe you'd counter to say that Shelden hasn't lived up to the 5th overall pick, but you have to remember that the 2005 draft was one of the weakest drafts ever and he's arguably outperformed every PF or C drafted behind him except for Paul Millsap.

    So if you're going to use first round draft picks as a metric, then I'd have to concede Duke hasn't done as well as other big-time programs. However, I'd counter that Duke has done a better job than most in helping its bigs develop a foundation to go on to lengthy NBA careers where their lower draft picks (and corresponding rookie deals) are more than made up for by their second and third contracts.

  20. #380
    Quote Originally Posted by COYS View Post
    I agree with Sage and Alaskan Bear. What I actually think that chart shows is how difficult it is to project big guys at a young age. The old adage that big men develop more slowly is completely true. This is why someone like Dwight Howard is so coveted. He is the only all-world center in, well, the world. In terms of centers at the NBA level, there really just aren't that many that are elite? Bynum is really good. Al Jefferson is putting it together. Duncan, if you consider him a center, is still valuable even as he gets older. Greg Monroe is a center of a different mold, but is really good. We could throw in defensive specialist guys like Chandler and Noah into the mix, as well. Horford could also be considered a center, even though I think he'd be best playing the PF spot. Otherwise, that's about it. From that group, most didn't even go to college and the ones that did, (Monroe, Horford and Noah) went to Georgetown and Florida, which weren't even on the draft chart of the OP. The club is a little bigger if you expand it to include power forwards, as guys like Griffin, Love, Aldridge (for whom it took a little while to become elite), Boozer, Bosh, Josh Smith, DeMarcus Cousins, Paul Millsap etc can be added to the list if we're not being to picky. Still, out of that group, you still don't have many from the list of schools in that draft chart. Anyway, my point is simply that even among the top recruits each year, it is hard to project who is going to turn themselves into an NBA star. And, in many cases, the ones that do, take a little time to develop. Griffin, Horford, Monroe, Love, and Cousins have taken off pretty quickly, but of that group, only Cousins went to one of the schools listed. I think it's pretty hard to say that any single school flat out churns out star big men. The ones that appear to churn out bigs are really the ones that are lucky enough to have had talented players who stay healthy and realize their ability at the next level stop over on campus for a year or two (or three in the case of Horford and Noah).

    I think different coaches definitely have different strengths and weaknesses. There is no doubt about that. Some coaches have signatures in terms of style of play (run and gun for Roy, man to man defense and motion offense for K). It is very possible that in the case of Manning when he was at Kansas he helped turn otherwise non-NBA bigs into guys who could get a cup of coffee in the league. However, when it comes to the long term development of star big guys, I really don't think any one school can really claim to be the king of the court. In fact, despite the reputation places like UCONN and Kansas have gotten with big guys recently, they really haven't had anyone make their mark in the league since 2006.
    I would give you pitchforks buts it won't let me. No one is going to argue that Duke puts better gaurds than big men in the league (actually I would SF is our specialty) but no school can really point to the success of big men in the league and claim to produce bigs with any consistancy. Georgetown recently had Hibbert and Monroe. Florida had Horford and Noah and David Lee (earlier)....thats really about as good as it gets from the college ranks over that timeframe. Most quality NBA bigs are foreign or straight from HS to pro.

    Take the top 15 rebounders in the league:
    4 are foreign players
    4 came straight from HS
    The only school with more than 1 player is FL.

    Big men are born, not made. I doubt there is any correlation between college coaching and successful NBA big men...

Similar Threads

  1. For Old Dukies Only
    By dukepsy1963 in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 102
    Last Post: 03-30-2012, 11:47 PM
  2. Top 5 Dukies
    By lotusland in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 90
    Last Post: 01-13-2011, 01:05 PM
  3. Dukies in the NBA- Sat Nov 3
    By DukeBlood in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 11-04-2007, 07:57 AM
  4. Dukies in the NBA- Sat Nov 3
    By JasonEvans in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-04-2007, 07:50 AM
  5. Dukies in the NBA - Fri Nov 2
    By JasonEvans in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-03-2007, 07:25 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •