Page 4 of 15 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 288
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, D.C.

    Hoping

    Quote Originally Posted by Listen to Quants View Post
    I wouldn't mind someone eating up a scholarship at all. I suspect the team would be better off, long term, with a red-shirt/transfer-sit-out than anybody besides Sha-buzz. Imagine the following Red-White game

    Marshall - Ryan - Sulaimon - Dre - Quinn
    Mason - Murphy - {g} - Curry - Thornton

    seems like a good game and shows (to my eye) just how deep next year's team will be without any additions. A red-shirt gain value and retains eligibility.
    I hope you mean Blue-White game!

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Quote Originally Posted by MChambers View Post
    I hope you mean Blue-White game!
    lol, right, right, mate. Red-shirt and Blue-White game. I'll repeat at home 100 times, my bad.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Halifax, Nova Scotia
    I just noticed that Hood is left-handed. I believe the perception out there is that Duke can't develop good lefties as Coach Collins often works with the wings and he is not left-handed. All it takes is one or two lefties to come to Duke and be used effectively to change that perception though. I don't think Louie Carnesecca was left-handed but he was still able to coach Chris Mullin. So, maybe it can be done.

    (I hope I don't need any smilies for this post.)

  4. #64
    So after tonight, would it be safe to say Hood is our 3rd option after Jefferson and TP? I'm not saying I believe he should be 3rd on the list but is that the consensus at this point?

    If I remember correctly, Duke has 2 schollys left so perhaps we land 1 or 2 of the three remaining targets.

  5. #65
    As crazy as this sounds, if Hood says tomorrow "Coach, I want to be a Blue Devil", you take him. UNC had a shot to get Hurley but they said they were waiting on Kenny Anderson. You saw how that turned out. Now granted, lets not compare apples to oranges. The point is, if you pass up on a player to wait on another, you could miss out.

  6. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by cbnaylor View Post
    As crazy as this sounds, if Hood says tomorrow "Coach, I want to be a Blue Devil", you take him. UNC had a shot to get Hurley but they said they were waiting on Kenny Anderson. You saw how that turned out. Now granted, lets not compare apples to oranges. The point is, if you pass up on a player to wait on another, you could miss out.
    While this is true, I feel compelled to point out that Duke still has 7 years of combined eligibility from Alex Murphy and Michael Gbinije. We can afford to wait on both Amile and Jabari. What we should not, and hopefully will not do is take a player that even slightly hurts our chances with Jabari Parker. Not saying Amile or Rodney Hood do that. But, that's a factor here.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by cbnaylor View Post
    As crazy as this sounds, if Hood says tomorrow "Coach, I want to be a Blue Devil", you take him. UNC had a shot to get Hurley but they said they were waiting on Kenny Anderson. You saw how that turned out. Now granted, lets not compare apples to oranges. The point is, if you pass up on a player to wait on another, you could miss out.
    Well, why bring up the comparison if we aren't going to compare apples to oranges? Duke has arguably two similar players in Murphy and Gbinije. They'll be a junior and sophomore by the time Hood becomes eligible. And at that point, we may also have Parker or Wiggins (and we may not, just as easily). But this is not a situation where Hood is some elite player and we have chopped liver otherwise.

    In any case, it is a moot point. It doesn't appear that Duke is interested and there is no indication that he's interested in Duke.

  8. #68
    I was implying to comparing talent wise, Kenny and Hurley in comparison to Hood. Now on to your points. If we are looking at this through the perspective of Coach K, there is no such thing as a position; only players. However, I could see how this could affect possible recruits for next year but who says you have to have two forwards? We just need 5 on the court.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by cbnaylor View Post
    I was implying to comparing talent wise, Kenny and Hurley in comparison to Hood. Now on to your points. If we are looking at this through the perspective of Coach K, there is no such thing as a position; only players. However, I could see how this could affect possible recruits for next year but who says you have to have two forwards? We just need 5 on the court.
    Players have to guard players. You would have never seen us start 5 Zoubeks or 5 Hurleys. And while Coach K often says we don't have positions, he and the staff just as frequently refer to positions when talking about the team's strengths and needs. We aren't going to be adding Hood.

  10. #70
    We don't have positions but it was pretty clear this year what type of player Duke needed. If we got Hood, Amile, Jabari to go along with Mike and Alex... we'd just be switching our recent small guards situation for a tweener-wing situation.

  11. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by DukieTiger View Post
    We don't have positions but it was pretty clear this year what type of player Duke needed. If we got Hood, Amile, Jabari to go along with Mike and Alex... we'd just be switching our recent small guards situation for a tweener-wing situation.

    In the pursuit of recruiting information, I have been subjected to at least ten thousand posts as to the sizes and kinds (positions played) of players we need and/or don't need at Duke. So far, everyone seems to be either too small, too short, too large, too tall or there are too many of them. I going to suggest in order for us to resolve this obviously perplexing problem, that we just not recruit anyone.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New Bern, NC unless it's a home football game then I'm grilling on Devil's Alley
    Quote Originally Posted by billoz View Post
    In the pursuit of recruiting information, I have been subjected to at least ten thousand posts as to the sizes and kinds (positions played) of players we need and/or don't need at Duke. So far, everyone seems to be either too small, too short, too large, too tall or there are too many of them. I going to suggest in order for us to resolve this obviously perplexing problem, that we just not recruit anyone.
    threebears.jpg
    Q "Why do you like Duke, you didn't even go there." A "Because my art school didn't have a basketball team."

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Columbus OH 614
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    Well, why bring up the comparison if we aren't going to compare apples to oranges? Duke has arguably two similar players in Murphy and Gbinije. They'll be a junior and sophomore by the time Hood becomes eligible. And at that point, we may also have Parker or Wiggins (and we may not, just as easily). But this is not a situation where Hood is some elite player and we have chopped liver otherwise.

    In any case, it is a moot point. It doesn't appear that Duke is interested and there is no indication that he's interested in Duke.
    Recent Duke related tweets floating around...


    Wayne Gooch ‏ @Bluedevilsreign

    Duke is all in on Miss St transfer Rodney Hood.


    Clint Jackson ‏ @clintjackson1

    Looks like Duke is pursuing Rodney Hood with some intensity.

    Appears Duke is quite interested actually...Im guessing the staff has got at least some indication that Hood would be interested also.

  14. #74
    It is a curious development, this apparent mutual interest between Duke and Hood. For it would seem at first glance that Duke wouldn't "need" Hood when he becomes eligible, as a soph in 2013-'14. This would seem even more the case, doubly or triply so, should Jabari Parker arrive that season.

    Consider this pretty amazing list of wings [2s and 3s] for 2013-'14: Gbinije (Jr), Sulaimon (So), Hood (So), Jones (Fr), Parker??? (Fr).

    I exclude Murphy from this list simply because, depending on exactly what new recruits come to Duke in the next 3 seasons, Alex might well be a combo wing/4, but might play a lot more 4 than wing.

    My general impression is that Duke doesn't have a long list of bigs being pursued in the classes of 2013 and 2014. I think K is of course hoping to bring in Randle (2013) and/or Okafor (2014), but unless at least one of Randle/Okafor show up, and unless neither Jabari Parker nor Hood do come to Duke, Alex is even more likely to be a 4, if still a combo wing/4.

    And, occasioned by this surprising pursuit of Hood - thinking big picture, here - it sure does seem that K has sworn never again to be in the position of having a set of small wings. He seems to be moving in such a way as to try to have a whole bunch of athletic, rangy wings, who, collectively - and pretty close to individually - can shoot, run, handle, pass, drive, attack, harass, pursue, defend, and rebound.

    Probably a 3-peat in '13, '14, '15. Piece of cake. We're gold, or getting there.

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Nashville
    The only way I can make sense of this is if Murphy or Hood is planning on spending most of their time at the 4, and they're both pretty pure wings. I suppose the staff may bring Murphy down to the post, but he sure didn't look like a PF last summer. I know he's a little bigger now, but his game was completely guard oriented (unlike Singler, for example).

    Not sure what to think. Hood seems like a guy that anyone would love to have, but I also really like our current 6'7 WFs.

  16. #76
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    20 Minutes From The Heaven That Is Cameron Indoor
    Quote Originally Posted by Greg_Newton View Post
    The only way I can make sense of this is if Murphy or Hood is planning on spending most of their time at the 4, and they're both pretty pure wings. I suppose the staff may bring Murphy down to the post, but he sure didn't look like a PF last summer. I know he's a little bigger now, but his game was completely guard oriented (unlike Singler, for example).

    Not sure what to think. Hood seems like a guy that anyone would love to have, but I also really like our current 6'7 WFs.
    I am not sold on Alex as a 4 at all. He has always looked like a pure perimeter 3 to me. In his play prior to Duke, he has always been a great slasher and driver of the ball. Thats what I fell in love with the most when watching him in AAU ball. It will be interesting next season to see how much time if any Alex spends at the 4.

    As for Hood, like someone else opined, K seems to be on a mission to load up with bigger, taller wings. I am all for it to be honest. You can get away with a smallish PG if they are surrounded by size on the wings like Hurley and Jason Williams were. Quinn and a bunch of tall wings sounds good actually.

  17. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by Newton_14 View Post
    I am not sold on Alex as a 4 at all. He has always looked like a pure perimeter 3 to me. In his play prior to Duke, he has always been a great slasher and driver of the ball. Thats what I fell in love with the most when watching him in AAU ball. It will be interesting next season to see how much time if any Alex spends at the 4.
    To be a Duke "4," all he has to do is be able to guard the opposing 4. If Alex is really up to 220, as he is listed on GoDuke, he should have the size and strength to defend the college PF position. That doesn't mean he can't do his slashing and driving thing on offense.

    Next year seems pretty full at the wing, and Alex spending time at PF frees up minutes for Michael and/or Andre. If we pick up Hood and/or Jabari Parker, then it may make sense for Alex to defend the PF more often. So, I wouldn't be surprised if Alex plays 10 or so minutes at the "4" in 2012-13, nor would I be surprised if he plays 20+ minutes at the "4" in 2013-14. It will mostly depend on the rest of the roster.

  18. #78
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Quote Originally Posted by Newton_14 View Post
    I am not sold on Alex as a 4 at all. He has always looked like a pure perimeter 3 to me. In his play prior to Duke, he has always been a great slasher and driver of the ball. Thats what I fell in love with the most when watching him in AAU ball. It will be interesting next season to see how much time if any Alex spends at the 4.

    As for Hood, like someone else opined, K seems to be on a mission to load up with bigger, taller wings. I am all for it to be honest. You can get away with a smallish PG if they are surrounded by size on the wings like Hurley and Jason Williams were. Quinn and a bunch of tall wings sounds good actually.
    Okay to all that ... on offense. But seems to me that an offense can run fine with 4 or even 5 wing or stretch players as long as they can shoot and pass (and drive, I hope). Defense is another matter. Depending upon the opponent, 2 defenders had better be able to bang/defend inside. Perhaps Alex and/or Hood or Parker or a stronger {g}*can* do that. Rebounding help would also appear to follow from big athletic wings.

  19. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by Greg_Newton View Post
    The only way I can make sense of this is if Murphy or Hood is planning on spending most of their time at the 4, and they're both pretty pure wings. I suppose the staff may bring Murphy down to the post, but he sure didn't look like a PF last summer. I know he's a little bigger now, but his game was completely guard oriented (unlike Singler, for example).

    Not sure what to think. Hood seems like a guy that anyone would love to have, but I also really like our current 6'7 WFs.
    Quote Originally Posted by Newton_14 View Post
    I am not sold on Alex as a 4 at all. He has always looked like a pure perimeter 3 to me. In his play prior to Duke, he has always been a great slasher and driver of the ball. Thats what I fell in love with the most when watching him in AAU ball. It will be interesting next season to see how much time if any Alex spends at the 4.

    As for Hood, like someone else opined, K seems to be on a mission to load up with bigger, taller wings. I am all for it to be honest. You can get away with a smallish PG if they are surrounded by size on the wings like Hurley and Jason Williams were. Quinn and a bunch of tall wings sounds good actually.
    I agree with the Newtons. I am all for long and athletic wings, but Murphy is not an ideal 4, especially if we don't have a massive Zoubekian center playing behind him. And yes, Alex Murphy is no Kyle Singler (unless he has adamantium infused into his bones in the offseason).

  20. #80
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by dcar1985 View Post
    Appears Duke is quite interested actually...Im guessing the staff has got at least some indication that Hood would be interested also.
    Well, color me surprised. Guess I was wrong about Duke's interest. I must concur with those who think Coach K must be stockpiling tall wings with the plan to be more athletic at the PF spot, because if we get even one of the three targets we have over the next three years, we'll have 3 6'7"-6'8" athletic wing players to go along with 2 6'4"-ish SG. That means either they'll play a lot at PF or two will be very unhappy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Listen to Quants View Post
    Okay to all that ... on offense. But seems to me that an offense can run fine with 4 or even 5 wing or stretch players as long as they can shoot and pass (and drive, I hope). Defense is another matter. Depending upon the opponent, 2 defenders had better be able to bang/defend inside. Perhaps Alex and/or Hood or Parker or a stronger {g}*can* do that. Rebounding help would also appear to follow from big athletic wings.
    Quote Originally Posted by FireOgilvie View Post
    I agree with the Newtons. I am all for long and athletic wings, but Murphy is not an ideal 4, especially if we don't have a massive Zoubekian center playing behind him. And yes, Alex Murphy is no Kyle Singler (unless he has adamantium infused into his bones in the offseason).
    I think we need to dispel the myth that a PF needs to be a big, physical, low-post banger. That's just not the reality of college basketball. In fact, most teams use a very athletic PF. I'd argue that this was actually one of our weaknesses, as Kelly and Miles/Mason were generally much less quick than their counterparts at PF (in some cases glaringly so). Let's take a look at the probable starting PF around the ACC next year:

    BC: Ryan Anderson (6'8", 215, good athlete)
    Clemson: Milton Jennings (6'9", 225, but hardly a banger)
    FSU: Okaro White (6'8", 205, very athletic but not a banger)
    Georgia Tech: Cameron Holsey (6'8", 225, somewhat physical but certainly not imposing)
    Maryland: Ashton Pankey (6'9", 220)
    Miami: Kenny Kadji (6'11", 250 - the only true big-body PF)
    UNC: James McAdoo (6'9", 220, very athletic but not a banger)
    NC State: Calvin Leslie (6'8, 210, athletic freak, but most certainly not a banger)
    Virginia: Darion Atkins (6'8", 220) or Akil Mitchell (6'8", 235) depending on whether or not they find another big man
    Virginia Tech: Dorian Finney-Smith (6'8", 185, clearly more athlete than banger)
    Wake: I'm not even sure they'll field a team next year.

    Aside from Kadji, there's nobody that Murphy can't match up with physically if he's up to 210+ by next year. And he'd have a huge quickness edge on Kadji, so that's somewhat offset. So I don't see where the concern is with his ability to defend at PF.

    And also importantly, having an athletic PF makes us less susceptible to mismatches generated by successive screens. If we have a guy who can defend the 2, 3, and 4, it's much harder for the opponent to set up the mismatch you want.

    I guess I'm feeling more comfortable with the idea of a smaller, quicker PF the more I talk/type about it. Of course, my comfort with such an approach would hinge on also being bigger at SG and SF (I don't want to see us on the smaller side at 3-4 positions). But given that we're adding Sulaimon, Jones, and we have Gbinije, such an approach might not be an issue.

Similar Threads

  1. Rodney Rogers
    By dball in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 64
    Last Post: 12-07-2013, 10:47 AM
  2. Rodney Purvis to NC State
    By JasonEvans in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 10-06-2011, 03:14 PM
  3. Rodney Purvis
    By HCheek37 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 227
    Last Post: 07-26-2011, 10:09 PM
  4. Range hood
    By bluebutton in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-25-2010, 04:15 PM
  5. FB: DT Tevin Hood
    By airowe in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 02-08-2010, 07:52 PM

Posting Permissions

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