2018 Basketball Recruiting Thread

[JasonEvans]

I'm not usually one to complain too much about thread derailments, but...anyone have any thoughts on remaining Duke 2018 recruiting?



I'd be surprised if we were completely done. Coach K has always paired the one-and-dones with a supporting cast of four-year players. While we might not get a commitment from a player with the recruiting ranking of, say, Alex O'Connell or Javin DeLaurier, are there any lower ranked players a la Vrankovic, White, or Goldwire we might be going after?

I don't have any particular players in mind -- this is outside my area of expertise -- so I'm hoping someone may be able to shed some light on it for us.

The only guys 247 has on Duke's radar at this point are Bryan Penn-Johnson, a 7-0 center from Utah who is ranked around #100 (he seems to mostly be looking at Pac 12 schools), and EJ Montgomery, who is a top 20 PF but who probably won't be interested in Duke now that we have Zion on board.

I bet someone will crop up in the months ahead, perhaps an international prospect like Jack White or Marty Pocius, but we have not heard any names as of yet.

-Jason "when we look at Duke for next year, it is hard to see where anyone who is not a top 25 prospect would get playing time... we seem quite deep everywhere" Evans

[plimnko]

whatever happened to e j montgomery? wasn't duke looking at him after he decommitted from auburn?

[Truth&Justise]

The only guys 247 has on Duke's radar at this point are Bryan Penn-Johnson, a 7-0 center from Utah who is ranked around #100 (he seems to mostly be looking at Pac 12 schools), and EJ Montgomery, who is a top 20 PF but who probably won't be interested in Duke now that we have Zion on board.

I bet someone will crop up in the months ahead, perhaps an international prospect like Jack White or Marty Pocius, but we have not heard any names as of yet.

-Jason "when we look at Duke for next year, it is hard to see where anyone who is not a top 25 prospect would get playing time... we seem quite deep everywhere" Evans

Gotcha, makes sense. This isn't really about next season, but about the three after that. I agree there isn't much playing time to be had next year, so we'd be looking for someone who is willing to accept a deep bench role in exchange for an opportunity to play down the line. For that reason I think our most likely candidate is an international prospect or someone way down the recruiting ladder (like Vrankovic or Goldwire) that we're not involved with yet. But I still think it's important we find someone to fill that role each year -- you never want to get to a place where you have no upper-classman leadership.

[jimsumner]

The only guys 247 has on Duke's radar at this point are Bryan Penn-Johnson, a 7-0 center from Utah who is ranked around #100 (he seems to mostly be looking at Pac 12 schools), and EJ Montgomery, who is a top 20 PF but who probably won't be interested in Duke now that we have Zion on board.

I bet someone will crop up in the months ahead, perhaps an international prospect like Jack White or Marty Pocius, but we have not heard any names as of yet.

-Jason "when we look at Duke for next year, it is hard to see where anyone who is not a top 25 prospect would get playing time... we seem quite deep everywhere" Evans

Pocius played high-school basketball in New Hampshire and thus was not an international prospect.

I'm reasonably certain Jack White is the only Duke recruit in ACC history who did not play high-school basketball in either the US or Canada. Deng, Ast, Czyz all prepped in the US.


With the uncertainty involving the class of 2019 and prospective changes in the NBA's CBA and the likelihood of losing at least three of next year's freshmen after one season, I would like to see Duke bring in a player or two who would be good enough to be a starter in 2019 but not good enough to be a OAD, because elite talents like Vernon Carey and Cole Anthony may not bother to show up in college.

[devildeac]

Since this has gone off topic, we should move on from this line of debate... but I've got to respond to this, in good fun, even tho I'll be labeled a troll by somebody, but here goes..

There is not a single window of the past 14 seasons that Duke has out-performed UNC in NCAAT wins.
Last 14. Roy leads 42 to 31.
Last 10. Roy leads 31 to 23.
Last 7. Roy leads 21 to 14.
Last 5. Roy leads 15 to 12.
Last 3. Roy leads 13 to 9.

These numbers include the season UNC missed the tourney. Just sayin'...

PS: I got these #'s from another poster who's proven before to be right, I assume they are accurate. I didn't reasearch it.

I'm much happier and much more proud of this:

http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.db...DB_OEM_ID=4200

From a prior post of mine dated 11/8/17:

"Upon further review, I see some key data:

Overall Duke GSR=97, tied for 3rd among all FBS schools; "u"nc=84 (last in acc)

Duke FB=96, tied for 3rd among all FBS schools; "u"nc=66 (last in acc)

Duke MBB=100, tied for 1st in nation; "u"nc=40 (last in acc)

I'm not the brightest person on DBR but I'm seeing a trend here..."

Major credit to devil84 for the assist in finding this old GoDuke article (originally quoted by Jim Sumner) and my post.

[BandAlum83]

I'm much happier and much more proud of this:

http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.db...DB_OEM_ID=4200

From a prior post of mine dated 11/8/17:

"Upon further review, I see some key data:

Overall Duke GSR=97, tied for 3rd among all FBS schools; "u"nc=84 (last in acc)

Duke FB=96, tied for 3rd among all FBS schools; "u"nc=66 (last in acc)

Duke MBB=100, tied for 1st in nation; "u"nc=40 (last in acc)

I'm not the brightest person on DBR but I'm seeing a trend here..."

Major credit to devil84 for the assist in finding this old GoDuke article (originally quoted by Jim Sumner) and my post.

How is this even possible? From the article:

A total of 14 Duke teams achieved a 100 percent GSR: men’s basketball

We've had OADs for a while now. More than six years, right? In any case, that number will drop precipitously in the very near future. The OADs aren't graduating within six years if at all.

[Troublemaker]

With the uncertainty involving the class of 2019 and prospective changes in the NBA's CBA and the likelihood of losing at least three of next year's freshmen after one season, I would like to see Duke bring in a player or two who would be good enough to be a starter in 2019 but not good enough to be a OAD, because elite talents like Vernon Carey and Cole Anthony may not bother to show up in college.

Amazingly, I think only three players, maybe two players, fitting that description remain uncommitted in this class.

First off, only 11 players in the top 100 remain uncommitted.

#10th-ranked Anfernee Simons is likely entering the 2018 draft, so really, there are only 10 players in the top 100 available.

We previously recruited and backed off #5 Romeo Langford, #23 Jahvon Quinerly, and #24 Emmitt Williams. We're unlikely to rekindle those recruitments AND they're all looking to start as freshmen anyway, and we don't have starting spots open for them.

7 players remaining. Good luck prying #17 Jordan Brown from the West Coast. 6 players remaining.

I'm skeptical that #65, #79, and #99 are good enough to start at Duke as sophomores.

That leaves #15 PF/C EJ Montgomery, #38 PG Courtney Ramey, and #52 SF Khavon Moore. (Moore at #52 is probably stretching the limit of "can start as a sophomore" but we'll count him for the purposes of this exercise).

[JasonEvans]

I'm much happier and much more proud of this:

http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.db...DB_OEM_ID=4200

From a prior post of mine dated 11/8/17:

"Upon further review, I see some key data:

Overall Duke GSR=97, tied for 3rd among all FBS schools; "u"nc=84 (last in acc)

Duke FB=96, tied for 3rd among all FBS schools; "u"nc=66 (last in acc)

Duke MBB=100, tied for 1st in nation; "u"nc=40 (last in acc)

I'm not the brightest person on DBR but I'm seeing a trend here..."

Major credit to devil84 for the assist in finding this old GoDuke article (originally quoted by Jim Sumner) and my post.

[Troublemaker]

How is this even possible? From the article:



We've had OADs for a while now. More than six years, right? In any case, that number will drop precipitously in the very near future. The OADs aren't graduating within six years if at all.

From the article:

The GSR is based on student-athletes who entered college as freshmen in 2007-10 and allows for the removal of those individuals from the cohort who left Duke in good academic standing.

Yeah, we'll probably take a hit on GSR in the next update unless "left Duke in good academic standing" allows for early-entry NBA players to not be counted.

[BandAlum83]

From the article:

The GSR is based on student-athletes who entered college as freshmen in 2007-10 and allows for the removal of those individuals from the cohort who left Duke in good academic standing.

Yeah, we'll probably take a hit on GSR in the next update unless "left Duke in good academic standing" allows for early-entry NBA players to not be counted.

I honestly do not know what that means. So transfers, if in good academic standards don't count? Drop outs (OADs) don't count as long as they were in good academic standing?

So what does count? Only those who truly flunk out?

I always said the hardest thing about Duke is getting in. I saw quite a few students almost flunk out, but Duke gives multiple opportunities to get righted and graduate. They do (or did) have an amazing graduation rate for the general student body.

[Troublemaker]

I honestly do not know what that means. So transfers, if in good academic standards don't count? Drop outs (OADs) don't count as long as they were in good academic standing?

So what does count? Only those who truly flunk out?

I always said the hardest thing about Duke is getting in. I saw quite a few students almost flunk out, but Duke gives multiple opportunities to get righted and graduate. They do (or did) have an amazing graduation rate for the general student body.

Right, I think the idea is that if a player transfers from Duke in good academic standing, the responsibility to graduate this player falls upon the next institution the player attends. That makes sense to me. I don't know how they deal with early-entry NBA players, though, because for the time period of the study, we didn't have any.

[Kedsy]

So what does count? Only those who truly flunk out?

Presumably guys who used all their eligibility but don't have enough credits to graduate (and don't get those credits within 6 years) would count. I imagine that situation was what the rule was originally intended to deal with anyway, rather than players who transfer or who were doing well in school but left early to get multi-million dollar jobs.

[Duke95]

GSR and APR are some of the most ridiculous and pointless metrics I've seen from the NCAA. If you want actual statistics, check out the work on adjusted graduation rates by CSRI.

[cato]

Presumably guys who used all their eligibility but don't have enough credits to graduate (and don't get those credits within 6 years) would count. I imagine that situation was what the rule was originally intended to deal with anyway, rather than players who transfer or who were doing well in school but left early to get multi-million dollar jobs.

Or guys who stop going to class and don’t finish spring semester, but leave school before the NCAA rules catch up to them.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

There seem to be more "feel good" NCAA rules in place now than thirty years ago. Also, more loopholes. I guess it is sort of a "win-win," provided you don't care about academics.

[sagegrouse]

I honestly do not know what that means. So transfers, if in good academic standards don't count? Drop outs (OADs) don't count as long as they were in good academic standing?

So what does count? Only those who truly flunk out?

I always said the hardest thing about Duke is getting in. I saw quite a few students almost flunk out, but Duke gives multiple opportunities to get righted and graduate. They do (or did) have an amazing graduation rate for the general student body.

"Look to the right of you -- look to the left of you. If both of these men are here in four years, you won't be." Dean of Trinity College Alan K. Manchester on the 67 percent graduation rate and delivered to freshmen men in Page Auditorium, October 1960. Standards have really fallen.

[kAzE]

Apparently, prior to Zion's commitment, our recruiting class with the #1, #2, and #8 players in the class was not good enough to surpass Oregon's recruiting class. And even after adding Zion, our score in their system is just barely higher than Oregon's.

If this is the best recruiting class of all time (and it certainly seems like it), I'm extremely confused with how they score these recruiting classes. Does quantity really matter that much more than quality?

No offense to Oregon's recruiting class, but I'd take just RJ Barrett by himself over all 4 of those guys any day.

Capture.JPG

[Stray Gator]

"Look to the right of you -- look to the left of you. If both of these men are here in four years, you won't be." Dean of Trinity College Alan K. Manchester on the 67 percent graduation rate and delivered to freshmen men in Page Auditorium, October 1960. Standards have really fallen.

If that approach -- which is a story I've often heard recounted by people who attended large state universities -- was being taken by Duke in 1960, it evidently reversed itself within a short span, because when I arrived as a freshman in the fall of 1966, the policy at Duke was more along the lines of "if you could survive the scrutiny of the admissions office and get into this school, we'll endeavor to help make it possible for you to maintain good academic standing and reach graduation." In fact, for as long as I can recall, Duke has prided itself on having one of the highest graduation rates in the country, with more than 90% of those entering as freshman successfully earning degrees.

[MChambers]

"Look to the right of you -- look to the left of you. If both of these men are here in four years, you won't be." Dean of Trinity College Alan K. Manchester on the 67 percent graduation rate and delivered to freshmen men in Page Auditorium, October 1960. Standards have really fallen.

The Dean seems to be making an obvious statistical mistake, assuming that your success is linked to those seated next to you. Maybe standards for deans are higher today?

[sagegrouse]

If that approach -- which is a story I've often heard recounted by people who attended large state universities -- was being taken by Duke in 1960, it evidently reversed itself within a short span, because when I arrived as a freshman in the fall of 1966, the policy at Duke was more along the lines of "if you could survive the scrutiny of the admissions office and get into this school, we'll endeavor to help make it possible for you to maintain good academic standing and reach graduation." In fact, for as long as I can recall, Duke has prided itself on having one of the highest graduation rates in the country, with more than 90% of those entering as freshman successfully earning degrees.

The Dean seems to be making an obvious statistical mistake, assuming that your success is linked to those seated next to you. Maybe standards for deans are higher today?

I found the Chronicle article from October 1963 (don't ask) and the All Men's Average was an anemic 2.32. Not hard to figure out that a lot of guys didn't graduate. The Women's College average was one-half a grade point higher, but is that really a fair comparison -- I ask you????

Yeah, the Dean's statement was illogical and not befitting a history professor, but his message was clear.