I agree with you on this, Kedsy. But I think you and dcar are both wasting your time arguing about where he should be rated and whether or not he'll make an impact next year. You think he will (I agree with you) and dcar doesn't. No debating here is going to change either opinion on that.
But your missing the reason he's ahead of the others NOW even though u mentioned it...he's not in HS anymore, they are...he was ranked 41st before coming to Duke and sitting out a year so you can't take that into consideration...why should he be ranked with a class he's not in? You compare him to he class he comes in with...maybe if he somehow finished HS in 3 years and was actually a year behind then I would get it but he's an ORIGINAL 2011 recruit
Just a friendly debate on my part, no hard feelings...I just think its too early to pencil him in as a starter based off him playing 0 mins this year and being the 41st ranked player in his class...FWIW I do think he'll contribute next year and be even better in his redshirt soph year.
Had to make one more change to make this correct. Anyway you never did address why coach K thinks Alex is going to be really good. He sees Alex way more playing against the guys in practice than we have. Also a year of him being red-shirted will help in his development as a player.
I hope he's going to be really good. I think the worst case scenario is starting Curry, Dawkins and Thornton again. If we have to go that small again, I see the results being similar to this year. That is why everyone is so enamored with Jefferson, Ziegler, and every other potential player over 6'6". I would love Murphy to be that guy. If Mason stays, with Kelly and Murphy in the front court, Sulaimon and Curry/Thornton/Dawkins in the back court, things could get very interesting!
I didn't need you to change my post...Alex graduated and came to Duke class of 2011 in which he was ranked 41st...look it up
Cause hopefully he's going to be really good...I've already said I think he's going to be good I just think its way to early to pencil him in as a starter after not playing a minute this year and redshirting (regardless of why) he and Marshall were the only redshirts and he damn sure wasn't ready so I don't think I'm crazy for thinking Alex might not be either
This off season is going to be huge for next season. Time for these players to have a come to Jesus kind of moment and figure out who really wants to play for Duke and what Duke stands for.
Of course skill development is crucial in the off season. But for this Duke group, gaining an understanding of what it takes to be great/leadership/TEAM CHEMISTRY/pride/unselfishness... All these things need to addressed with each player, worked on, developed and become the fabric of the off season. 2011-12 Duke was lacking greatly in those areas and if Duke 2012-13 is going to be a championship team, they must learn to embrac those aspects of sport
I don't understand how you or another fan knows if this team was lacking in leadership, team chemistry [I don't do all caps], pride, and unselfishness. I do know it was not good defensively and lacked forwards. I believe that this team had a darned good season, but hit a slump at the wrong time. I'd lay off the pop psychology and sports cliches.
Assuming that Rasheed and the redshirts are the only newbies in the rotation and Rivers and Mason are gone, it's going to be a group with a ton more questions than we are used to having. I felt before this past season there would be quite a few ups and downs. Actually that group beat my expectations overall. Now K and the 2013 group have even more challenges.
My biggest questions:
Will we be any better on defense? Is it likely/possible we'll be worse? Will the light come on for Andre at that end of the floor?
Can Cook finally give us reliable pg play while holding up his end on the defensive side of the floor? If so will this allow Seth to hunt for his shot instead of facilitate?
Other big questions:
The past several seasons we have been very strong on the boards. Will that continue with the far less physical Kelly and Plumlee? What will Murphy give us in the front court?
I don't see us having a particularly quick or physical group. We'll have to rely very heavily on the perimeter for scoring (even more than this year) cause there just won't be many options down low. I'm sure that will get a few groans.
Another question:
How well can this team adapt to an injury? Let's face it, given recent history it's a high probablility and has had major impacts on the past 2 seasons.
As usual I'm sure K will get as many wins as humanly possible out of this group. May not be as many as we would like there but are atleast some challenges he'll figure out.
Last edited by jipops; 03-24-2012 at 08:11 PM.
I think this is an underappreciated aspect of what happened. Certainly there were significant holes in this year's team, but a big part of our early exit was that we hit a cold streak at the absolute worst time. This, plus Ryan's injury, in a team that didn't have as much buffer against such volatility as other recent Duke teams had, was just too much to overcome. On the flip side, Louisville, which is not clearly a better team I don't think, is riding a hot streak into the final four. I'm not saying they don't deserve it, but there is some luck and "hotness" involved. Thus, the craziness of the month.
Well I don't truly KNOW but what do any of us truly know without being inside the program. That is why their are places like this to state an opinion. Pop psychology or cliche, call it what you will. I'm certain the coaching staff knew what they had talent wise so when a team is as inconsistent as Duke was this season seems to me that something is lacking/missing. And when you return 7 players from a cmobo of an NCAA championship team or ACC championship team combined with a great recruiting class (#1 or #2 player in country supposedly) then talent isn't a big issue. Something else must be missing
Maybe I am the only person who thinks this but when I watched this team play, I didn't see the "togetherness/fist" that most Duke teams play with. Why was it so frustrating at times to watch Duke? Because they would not show up for awhile then turn it on in games. That isn't physical, that is part of the psychologicl side of things.
Couldn't agree more. We were a struggling team even before Kelly got hurt (barely beat VT at home, let Wake make it really close, and then crushed by UNC at home). Then Kelly got hurt, and we continued to stink from 3 over the ACC and Lehigh games. Losing Kelly hurt a lot. Losing our shooting touch as a team hurt a lot as well.
As an optimist where Duke bball is concerned, I always prefer to consider the worst-case scenario. If one can look at the team having lost players early to NBA, and with the fewest possible new guys, and still be optimistic, then one is in loony-nutter-land. Which is where I live.
As several threads have been hijacked toward the "next year" theme, I can't remember where the debate over "sure-fire NCAA team" occurred, and I do realize that if all/most of the ?-marks come up bad, it's not sure. Further, I concede that in the ACC, if, say, UNC, NCSt, and Miami all enter next season with best-case scenarios [wow, UNC's best-case scenario is pretty impressive] and Duke enters with worst-case, Duke would struggle to get 3d, maybe even 4th [is VaT top 5??].
Plenty of time to talk about ACC competition after early-entry decisions. As for our worst-case team, I'll guess the following, for our pre-ACC schedule:
PG: Cook 22 mpg, Thornton 18
Wings: Curry 28, Dawkins 20, Sulaimon 12, Gbinije 12, Thornton 8
PF: Kelly 20, Murphy 20
C: Hairston 20, Kelly 8, Plumlee 12
Even if these guesses are anywhere close, I'd assume some fluctuation by ACC-time, but I wouldn't think that more than one player would move toward DNP; and I have trouble figuring out who that player would be.
I have posted elsewhere my preference that if either Austin or Mason returns, that Andre would redshirt. Without going through all my reasoning, the short version is that he has great potential, is held back by an awful handle for a wing, and deserves a "makeup" year to compensate for his early matriculation and to learn how to play much, much more effectively. So, I'll double-down, even-worse-than-worst-case-scenario-style, and prefer that Andre redshirt even if both Austin and Mason depart. That would alter my pre-ACC mpg-guess as follows:
PG: Cook 22, Thornton 18
Wings: Curry 28, Sulaimon 20, Gbinije 18, Thornton 8, Murphy 6
PF: Kelly 22, Murphy 18
C: Hairston 20, Kelly 6, Plumlee 14
IMO, Cook will become a good PG in '12-'13, an excellent one thereafter. I want to see him play. Thornton is more than merely a capable backup; he's a disrupter. [I'd prefer, btw, that neither Thornton nor Cook become woofers. Bad form. Just a minor concern.] Cook and Thornton can play together, at least for limited minutes.
Wings - Curry is a given, likely leading scorer, could play some PG but not his best role. Like to see him drive to hoop more. I'm high on Sulaimon, whom I have seen twice: smart, handle, long, D, versatile. Yep, I'd give him big minutes right off. Murphy would have to play mostly inside, but for a few minutes each game, he can also be a wing, presumably his ultimate role down the road. I expect noticeable improvement from Gbinije, as you can see.
As the worst-case scenario means no TP, and as Kelly's position clearly is not the 5, that means significant mpg for both Hairston and Plumlee. I've always been more impressed with MP3 than most posters who have commented on him, so as a loony, I got not problem letting him play more than spot minutes. It's going to happen, unless TP comes; and even if TP comes, Marshall will play some. Marshall has attitude. I don't know how far it will get him next year, but I don't expect him to go meek.
Second, after NCSt, in ACC? Tough, unless Durand Scott and Reggie Johnson leave early, and unless 3 of UNC's 4 excellent players [Henson, Marshall, McAdoo, and Barnes] leave early.
I hope both Austin and Mason return. I'll be surprised if that happens. I hope Andre has a remarkable summer, and vastly improves both his handle [way, way more than did Barnes last summer] and his understanding of the game. I'll be surprised if that happens.
I won't be so surprised to see promising play from Gbinije and Plumlee, and I expect ACC-all-frosh-team years from Sulaimon and Murphy.
With the exception of Austin, I thought this years team lacked talent at guard and had no real small forwards. By lacking talent, I mean there wasn't much in the way of being able to get into the lane nor was there ability to stop penetration on defense. Each of our four other guards were lacking in some category, whether it be athleticism and lateral quickness, size, ball handling, toughness, scoring moves, etc. While Seth is experienced and is our best remaining scorer, he is not a first round NBA pick, Dawkins just hasn't developed his skills, Tyler and Quinn both have significant upside and our new guys will be wait and see. It is difficult to see this team being more competitive next year unless we pick up a couple of top notch talents. I look for a big man and a small forward to bolster our team. We will also be weaker in the front court without a new big. Short of that happening, next years team is not likely to be an improvement over this years. It goes without saying that they still deserve our steadfast support, since we may well get back to the glory years in the near future.
I don't know if Andre should redshirt as a senior, but if he doesn't show some vast improvements in his game then I wouldn't have any problem watching him sit...I was high on Dre when he first came in and really thought he would put the work in the take that next step but it just doesn't appear to be the case.
I kind of went through this earlier but...I know some of the top recruits are going this route Mike G for example, Alex before he reclassified and Nerlens Noel to name a few...of holding there self back a year to better ready their game for D1 ball and being 5th yr seniors....Dre would have been a 5th yr senior had he not come to Duke when he did so does he really deserve this "makeup" year...for most of us 4 yrs of HS was plenty, I don't think Dre coming in when he did hurt his game at all and actually helped...which makes me wonder were he'd be if he didn't come early.
I totally agree. This year's team showed tremendous heart and fight in a number of games this year that would not indicate a lack of chemistry: Kansas, UNC, the comeback against NC State. If you've ever played on a team, you know that when you play well its easy to have good, chemistry but when you struggle its difficult. This team simply was not good enough defensively, and by the end offensively. Their struggles made them look like they had bad chemistry, but the chemistry did not cause their struggles to play well.
Not taking away the Kansas game but that was very early in the year and we had an advantage that we had played more games together as a team because of China/Dubai trip, just a fact. Yes, UNC game we played well all game and battled back with help from them, nonetheless a good comeback. NC State is a good example for my argument of Duke missing something. They looked uninterested/bad in 1st half and all the sudden flip a switch. Why wait a half?
So what would say caused their up and down/inconsistent play throughout the season? What caused them to look like they weren't ready to play in a number of games? Just curious as to your opinion
I am having a hard time buying the argument that "well we just hit a slump at a bad time." We supposedly hit a slump after playing our best/close to best game at FSU late in the season? Why wouldn't a team that, according to some, didn't have chemistry or leadership issues, just all of a sudden hit a slump after winning one of the biggest games of the year? It was all because of not playing defense? Or lack of talent? See, that is where I think there was something more. There was enough talent on this team to get past the first weekend in the tournament. And there will be enough talent next year to be a championship team. But there are other factors about a team that have to be good to be really good