Remember when we were in "great shape" for a number of bigs? No, the other time

[gwlaw99]

Amile looks like he's going to be a fine defender at the 4 and maybe the 3, but he's listed at 195 pounds. He's skinny.

Amile is 208 now. Not huge, but if he can put on that much weight in 4 months then he could be 220-225 next year.

[elvis14]

Contrary to this thread, I don't think people necessarily are pining for a "back-to-the-basket" Tractor Traylor style big man. (If they are, they shouldn't be.) I think people are hungry for merely a super-elite talent with size.

I think Starter has hit the nail on the head. When you look at the most talented big men that have come out of HS the last several years (many of which have been listed in this thread), you don't see them coming to Duke. I don't think we have to change the nature of our program to have a balanced team. I think of the inside/outside balance we had with JJ and Sheldon (and lament what could have been if Luol had stayed) and see where we could do great things with more balance. Elite big men can also be elite defenders and can help raise the level of play that we get from our guards as well. Basically, you can add me to the list of guys that would love to see an elite big man come to Duke because I know Coach K knows how to get the most from his players, big or small.

[tommy]

Clearly we need to have several big players on the roster to remain competitive defensively. However, that's not what this thread seems to be about. In the six years since our last great back-to-the-basket center, we have successfully recruited six top 25 (according to RSCI) players 6'8 or taller who were capable of defending inside, plus four other 6'8 or taller guys outside the top 25 who were capable of doing so (including a guy who was top 15 before he reclassified and a guy who ended up as a first round NBA draft pick). That seems like plenty of big defenders to me.

Hmm. Let's take a look at that. I assume the six top 25 players 6'8" or taller that you refer to were:

2006 Lance Thomas RSCI #20
2006 Brian Zoubek RSCI #25
2007 Kyle Singler RSCI #5
2009 Ryan Kelly RSCI #14
2009 Mason Plumlee RSCI #18
2012 Amile Jefferson RSCI #21

I think of those six, only Zoubek and Mason Plumlee qualify as the type of guy being contemplated in this thread: guys having some combination of height, strength, and athleticism -- or at least two of the three, maybe, that enables them to be stout enough to hopefully play the post on offense, but at least to be able to guard opposing 5's comfortably.

Lance did a fabulous job defensively in his senior year, and did fill in guarding 5's, but he was a wiry 6'8" guy, though he did gain strength over his years at Duke, but he was only 6'8", he was not wide, and guarding 5's was a stretch for him. Singler was a great defensivel player, but when he had to spend some time guarding 5's it took a lot out of him and the rest of his game, and I'm not sure how successful he was at it in any event at 6'8". Kelly has played some 5 defensively, but again, he's a pretty thin guy, though he has put weight on during his career, but the area inside 8 feet is not his natural habitat. He gave up a lot of hoops last year inside that area. A lot. Amile seems to have a similar body type to Lance Thomas - 6'8" or so and wiry. Like Lance, he'll probably be fine at the 4, but I'm not sure he's really going to be all that effective against bigger and stronger bodies.

The other guys who were 6'8" or taller and not in the top 25 that we recruited in this time period were:

2008 Miles Plumlee RSCI #81
2011 Alex Murphy RSCI #49 (reclassified so downgraded, I know)
2011 Marshall Plumlee RSCI #61

Not sure who you had as the fourth. Hairston? Czyz? I think both are 6'7" but in any event, Hairston was the #32 rated player and Czyz the #66.

In the meantime, some of the 6'8" and above guys we've missed on, include the following. (I know I'm missing some, probably a lot, as I am not privy and/or don't remember everyone we recruited over the years.)

2006 Greg Oden #1
2006 Brandan Wright #3
2007 Patrick Patterson #9
2008 Greg Monroe #6
2009 Erik Murphy #43 (if Alex is listed, then so should be Erik)
2010 Josh Smith #18 (blessiing in disguise we didn't get him)
2012 Alex Poythress #8
2012 Tony Parker #24
2012 Mitch McGary #26
2012 Perry Ellis #31
2012 Ricardo Gathers #32
2013 Julius Randle
2013 Marcus Lee
2013 Austin Nichols

I'm not compiling these lists to be critical of Duke recruiting. We have recruited at a very high level -- the highest -- for over two decades, including some very good big men. But when it comes to inside-oriented big men, we've missed on a lot more than we've gotten, in particular among the most highly rated in the last few years. The result has been a fair amount of scrambling to get the position covered by getting guys to stretch to take on roles they're not ideally suited for, and in some cases, this has been to the detriment of the team. Maybe that's where the root of some of the angst comes from: the feeling that "This is Duke. With a program as successful as ours, why are we having to scramble and make do and settle with guys who are too short and/or too skinny to play inside, and having to do so as frequently as we are?"

[Saratoga2]

There a small number of prep big men in each class capable of handling Duke's academics and contributing on the court.

But there are some.

And they are all confronted with an incredible amount of negative recruiting regarding Duke's alleged propensity to bury its big men as screeners and rebounders, while those entitled guys on the perimeter jack up 3s with impunity.

We all know this isn't true but we aren't teenagers getting this from every school out there recruiting against Duke.

That said, Okafor has publicly mocked this narrative. So, maybe he's smarter than the average bear.

Of course, Okafor is class of 2014, which doesn't help Duke get through next season.

I think the angst for next season is related to two questions.

The first is simple. How good is Marshall Plumlee?

And it's a good question. We haven't actually seen him in over a year and we'll have to wait a tad longer. But by all accounts, he's bigger, stronger and more skilled than he was the last time he appeared on stage. His coaches and teammates have praised him and expect him to be really good next season.

Of course, he's not going to start this season and despite all the things he can and will learn in practice, a big part of the learning curve can only be learned in real games. So, he'll be a redshirt sophomore next season, starting for the first time.

Of course, part 2, he'll still be more experienced than a Marcus Lee or an Austin Nichols will be at the same point.

But even if he's an impact player next season, he's going to be an impact player for 30 minutes per game. Somebody has to play center for those other 10.

That's the second question.

Josh Hairston is 240 but only 6-7. I would like for Josh to embrace more of his inner DeJuan Blair and less of his inner Trajan Langdon. But Hairston has worked hard on his game and his body and I suspect he'll be in the mix at the 5.

Then there's Amile Jefferson, who has delighted the Duke fan base thus far with his energy, length, athleticism and personality. He's a keeper.

Jefferson is likely to play lots of 3 this season. But with the arrival of Hood, Jones, Ojelye, maybe Parker, maybe the return of Dawkins, it seems to me that Jefferson will be playing more inside next season. He seems awfully thin for extended time at the 5 but he says he's put on 15 pounds since arriving at Duke and we're not looking for extended time at the 5, just a few minutes here and there. If he gets to 225 or so, no reason he can't fill in at the 5.

It should be noted that Jefferson, Nichols and Lee are almost exactly the same size. If Nichols or Lee was the answer to the question, why couldn't Jefferson be the answer?

Murphy? Maybe. He's as big as McLeod, Battier or Thomas and all of them played some 5 at Duke.

Todd Zafirovski should be back as a fifth-year senior next season. He's likely just a practice player but he's big enough to help in that role. Patrick Johnson got some place-holder minutes a few years back and Zafirovski is at least as good as Johnson.

As I've stated elsewhere, I think Duke will look for a one-year grad student should one become available. Depth for next season but wouldn't tie up a scholarship for more than one season. A Justin Knox analog. But no guarantee one will pop up on the radar screen.

But I would not expect Duke to go after a juco or a lower-rated project, just to have another 5 on the roster. Duke would have loved Randle, would have liked Nichols or Lee. But I think Duke will be fine with a Plumlee/Hairston/Jefferson/?? rotation at the 5 for next season, while waiting on Okafor.

This post covers the concerns and the line of thought I have for next year. Yes indeed it would be great to have someone to share time inside with Marshall, and even at the power forward position. Our options at the 5 and 4, which you cover, probably would have a world of difficulty dealing with a opponents talented big men who might be 6'10" or more and weigh in the 250 to 270 range. We haven't been very successful recruiting that type of player, realizing that there aren't many of those who both want to be recruited by Duke and also meet the academic challenges.

To me, it is a constant battle for the coaches to recruit players who provide a balanced roster. Recent recruiting trends have focused on going after larger and talented shooting guards and small forwards. In the case of the point guards, we are trying to get that kind of special talent in whatever size is available. It appears to me that our difficulty in recruiting that special truly big man will unbalance the team in a different way. I imagine that the coaches are well aware of the issue and are working to find a solution.

[Dukeface88]

But when it comes to inside-oriented big men, we've missed on a lot more than we've gotten, in particular among the most highly rated in the last few years.

That may be true, but it's hardly unique to that category. We've missed on a ton of guards and wings as well. From last year's class alone we offered Shabazz, Poythress (on your list, but isn't he more of a wing than a big man?), Ledo and Tokoto. That's pretty much the nature of the recruiting game - particularly if you're going with the "wide net" approach.

[jimsumner]

That may be true, but it's hardly unique to that category. We've missed on a ton of guards and wings as well. From last year's class alone we offered Shabazz, Poythress (on your list, but isn't he more of a wing than a big man?), Ledo and Tokoto. That's pretty much the nature of the recruiting game - particularly if you're going with the "wide net" approach.

I'm pretty sure no one at Duke regards Ledo as a miss. You have to swing first. Duke never formally withdrew its offer to Tokoto but they sure backed off big-time.

And somebody earlier in the thread mentioned Oden as a Duke miss. Duke realized very, very early that Oden was not going to leave the heartland and didn't waste any further time on him. Gathers was the flavor of the day for about a day.

Duke does have recruiting misses. Always had, always will. As is/was the case with every other program. But, I see no reason to inflate that list just to make a point.

[Dukeface88]

I'm pretty sure no one at Duke regards Ledo as a miss. You have to swing first. Duke never formally withdrew its offer to Tokoto but they sure backed off big-time.

And somebody earlier in the thread mentioned Oden as a Duke miss. Duke realized very, very early that Oden was not going to leave the heartland and didn't waste any further time on him. Gathers was the flavor of the day for about a day.

Duke does have recruiting misses. Always had, always will. As is/was the case with every other program. But, I see no reason to inflate that list just to make a point.

Meh, I just went through the RCSI list for names I recognized and typed "[name]", "Duke" and "offer" into google. Agree that recruiting misses, however they're defined, are pretty much a cost of doing business.

[jimsumner]

Meh, I just went through the RCSI list for names I recognized and typed "[name]", "Duke" and "offer" into google. Agree that recruiting misses, however they're defined, are pretty much a cost of doing business.

It's fascinating how often we read that a player has an offer from Duke, when they do not, never had and never will have an actionable offer.

Sometimes, it's someone who hears "we're going to be evaluating you this summer" and somehow it gets translated into "I have an offer."

But I'm convinced that some guys just invent an offer from Duke because it sounds so cool.

And some of the recruiting services are either too gullible in this area or too quick to conflate kicking-the-tires-with something more serious.

[JNort]

So, 23 such players in 7 years. And in that time, Duke successfully recruited two of the 23 players (Mason Plumlee (#18) and Brian Zoubek (#25), plus Ryan Kelly, who was #14, but only 6'9 as a senior in high school, according to RSCI). In that same time period, Kentucky recruited three such players (although granted all three were top 5 guys, not just top 25). UNC recruited two. It's hard for me to look at this and see a systemic recruiting failure at Duke.

I'm not compiling these lists to be critical of Duke recruiting. We have recruited at a very high level -- the highest -- for over two decades, including some very good big men. But when it comes to inside-oriented big men, we've missed on a lot more than we've gotten, in particular among the most highly rated in the last few years. The result has been a fair amount of scrambling to get the position covered by getting guys to stretch to take on roles they're not ideally suited for, and in some cases, this has been to the detriment of the team. Maybe that's where the root of some of the angst comes from: the feeling that "This is Duke. With a program as successful as ours, why are we having to scramble and make do and settle with guys who are too short and/or too skinny to play inside, and having to do so as frequently as we are?"

Well that would be true for 100% of the college basketball world! Only UK has gotten more of these bigs than us and well they are the best at it right now (recruiting the Elite talent).

[Kedsy]

Hmm. Let's take a look at that. I assume the six top 25 players 6'8" or taller that you refer to were:

2006 Lance Thomas RSCI #20
2006 Brian Zoubek RSCI #25
2007 Kyle Singler RSCI #5
2009 Ryan Kelly RSCI #14
2009 Mason Plumlee RSCI #18
2012 Amile Jefferson RSCI #21

I think of those six, only Zoubek and Mason Plumlee qualify as the type of guy being contemplated in this thread: guys having some combination of height, strength, and athleticism -- or at least two of the three, maybe, that enables them to be stout enough to hopefully play the post on offense, but at least to be able to guard opposing 5's comfortably.

Lance did a fabulous job defensively in his senior year, and did fill in guarding 5's, but he was a wiry 6'8" guy, though he did gain strength over his years at Duke, but he was only 6'8", he was not wide, and guarding 5's was a stretch for him. Singler was a great defensivel player, but when he had to spend some time guarding 5's it took a lot out of him and the rest of his game, and I'm not sure how successful he was at it in any event at 6'8". Kelly has played some 5 defensively, but again, he's a pretty thin guy, though he has put weight on during his career, but the area inside 8 feet is not his natural habitat. He gave up a lot of hoops last year inside that area. A lot. Amile seems to have a similar body type to Lance Thomas - 6'8" or so and wiry. Like Lance, he'll probably be fine at the 4, but I'm not sure he's really going to be all that effective against bigger and stronger bodies.

The other guys who were 6'8" or taller and not in the top 25 that we recruited in this time period were:

2008 Miles Plumlee RSCI #81
2011 Alex Murphy RSCI #49 (reclassified so downgraded, I know)
2011 Marshall Plumlee RSCI #61

Not sure who you had as the fourth. Hairston? Czyz? I think both are 6'7" but in any event, Hairston was the #32 rated player and Czyz the #66.

In the meantime, some of the 6'8" and above guys we've missed on, include the following. (I know I'm missing some, probably a lot, as I am not privy and/or don't remember everyone we recruited over the years.)

2006 Greg Oden #1
2006 Brandan Wright #3
2007 Patrick Patterson #9
2008 Greg Monroe #6
2009 Erik Murphy #43 (if Alex is listed, then so should be Erik)
2010 Josh Smith #18 (blessiing in disguise we didn't get him)
2012 Alex Poythress #8
2012 Tony Parker #24
2012 Mitch McGary #26
2012 Perry Ellis #31
2012 Ricardo Gathers #32
2013 Julius Randle
2013 Marcus Lee
2013 Austin Nichols

I'm not compiling these lists to be critical of Duke recruiting. We have recruited at a very high level -- the highest -- for over two decades, including some very good big men. But when it comes to inside-oriented big men, we've missed on a lot more than we've gotten, in particular among the most highly rated in the last few years. The result has been a fair amount of scrambling to get the position covered by getting guys to stretch to take on roles they're not ideally suited for, and in some cases, this has been to the detriment of the team. Maybe that's where the root of some of the angst comes from: the feeling that "This is Duke. With a program as successful as ours, why are we having to scramble and make do and settle with guys who are too short and/or too skinny to play inside, and having to do so as frequently as we are?"

You seem to be arguing both sides of this one. When I said most of the OP's list were not elite back-to-the-basket centers, you (correctly) said we needed bigs to play defense. When I listed guys we successfully recruited who could defend bigs, you talk about being able to play the post on offense.

Also, almost all the guys on your list aren't back-to-the-basket centers either. Obviously we miss on more than we get. So does everyone else (with the possible exception of Kentucky), especially if you list guys on whom we merely kicked the tires and then moved on.

[tommy]

You seem to be arguing both sides of this one. When I said most of the OP's list were not elite back-to-the-basket centers, you (correctly) said we needed bigs to play defense. When I listed guys we successfully recruited who could defend bigs, you talk about being able to play the post on offense.

No, what I said was that the type of player being discussed in this thread was a guy who could hopefully play in the post on offense, but at least be able to guard opposing 5's comfortably. It was the defense which was the essential quality, and the offense is nice if we can get that too. And of the six guys on your list, it seems to me that only two had a workable combination of height, strength, and athleticism that enabled them to be natural defenders of opposing 5-men.

[Kedsy]

No, what I said was that the type of player being discussed in this thread was a guy who could hopefully play in the post on offense, but at least be able to guard opposing 5's comfortably. It was the defense which was the essential quality, and the offense is nice if we can get that too. And of the six guys on your list, it seems to me that only two had a workable combination of height, strength, and athleticism that enabled them to be natural defenders of opposing 5-men.

OK, then I disagree. I think all those guys adequately defended opposing post players. I don't think any of them were really the type of guy discussed in this thread, and that was sort of my point.

My other point was very few of the listed players we "missed" on are actually the type of guy discussed in this thread either. True post-players are few and far between these days.