Eric Bledsoe

[Tim1515]

Looks like there might be some interest in a PG for the 2009 recruiting class yet. I'm not trying to start any huge rumors because everything is completely unknown but it sounds like we haven't completely given up on the 09 class outside of Wall.

There is an article about him on the Duke rivals homepage for insiders

http://www.duke.rivals.com/

and here's another little article about him...makes an interesting quote about Duke.

http://bhamsrecruitingblog.blogspot...cide-late.html

[Bluedog]

Beat me to it. Here's the rivals article via Yahoo Sports:

http://sports.yahoo.com/top/news?slu...vals&type=lgns

I’ve been liking Duke for a long time. I never thought they would call.

Sounds like he's on the fringe of NCAA minimum regarding academics requirements...#8 PG according to scout. #12 PG according to rivals and #67 overall. Offers from Bama, South Florida, UAB and Ole Miss. Committed to Ole Miss in October, but two hours later changed his mind and re-opened recruitment.

BH: If you could go to ANY school, what school would you go to? Your dream school?
EB: "Duke cause I like how they play….their style of play."
BH: What is one thing you are looking forward to the most about going to college?
EB: "Getting to graduate. Girls…partying."

[CDu]

Looks like there might be some interest in a PG for the 2009 recruiting class yet. I'm not trying to start any huge rumors because everything is completely unknown but it sounds like we haven't completely given up on the 09 class outside of Wall.

There is an article about him on the Duke rivals homepage for insiders

http://www.duke.rivals.com/

and here's another little article about him...makes an interesting quote about Duke.

http://bhamsrecruitingblog.blogspot...cide-late.html

If it is true that both he and Duke are at least somewhat interested, that's a good sign. I was concerned that we were almost certainly going into next season with no true PG (Smith and Scheyer are wings that have played PG, obviously) next year.

[geraldsneighbor]

Beat me to it. Here's the rivals article via Yahoo Sports:

http://sports.yahoo.com/top/news?slu...vals&type=lgns



Sounds like he's on the fringe of NCAA minimum regarding academics requirements...#8 PG according to scout. #12 PG according to rivals and #67 overall. Offers from Bama, South Florida, UAB and Ole Miss. Committed to Ole Miss in October, but two hours later changed his mind and re-opened recruitment.

Sounds that if Duke as much as offers, he will commit. That being said, be careful with the fact that we are recruiting guards in 2010, and I don't want a log jam back there if hes just a one year fix. I think that really means we are starting to give up on Nolan then.

[JDev]

That is an interesting development, and specifically saying Duke is your dream school can only be a good sign. I think at least part of the reason Duke has not offered Wall is due to scholarship considerations (i.e. if G or Kyle decide to go pro, or Marty playing in Europe, or any other development). I would assume that same issue applies here. He states in the article that he plans on making his decision in April, and Wall is probably looking at the same time (Spring). Will Duke be in a position to offer either player by then?

[COYS]

I think that really means we are starting to give up on Nolan then.

I don't think the staff is giving up on Nolan, at all. I just think it's clear that Nolan is better suited to play off the ball.

[CDu]

Sounds that if Duke as much as offers, he will commit. That being said, be careful with the fact that we are recruiting guards in 2010, and I don't want a log jam back there if hes just a one year fix. I think that really means we are starting to give up on Nolan then.

I wouldn't read it that way at all. I'd read it as Duke is thinking Smith may be better served as a wing player, and Henderson and Scheyer will be gone after next year. Then, we'll have a senior Smith and a junior Williams as theoretically the starting wings, and freshman guards to come off the bench (or start if need be). Having a true PG to develop next year and start in the 2010/11 season would seem to make sense.

[geraldsneighbor]

I don't think the staff is giving up on Nolan, at all. I just think it's clear that Nolan is better suited to play off the ball.

He isn't a shooter though either...

[Tim1515]

I don't think the staff is giving up on Nolan, at all. I just think it's clear that Nolan is better suited to play off the ball.

I agree...plus Nolan could take a big step going into next year...Duke doesn't "give up" on players. LT and Z struggled much more then Nolan as freshman and sophomores. Even Greg had huge struggles until part way through is sophomore year.

The problem is Duke doesn't have a backup PG. Sure it could and might be Jon but if one of them were to get hurt we'd be in a ton of trouble.

I wouldn't be surprised if Duke never offers Wall...too many personality questions...but this kid could end up like Nick Russell...very interested in Duke but grade questions end up having him go elsewhere.

[CDu]

He isn't a shooter though either...

His shooting percentages would disagree with that statement. As a freshman playing more at SG last year, he shot .386 from 3pt range. Even with the struggles adapting to the PG this year, he's shooting .339.

Smith played his entire career up to this season as a wing. It seems completely logical that he's more comfortable in (and more suited to) that role.

[pfrduke]

He isn't a shooter though either...

Neither, really, is Scheyer. But he's definitely better suited to being a wing (in an ideal world).

[COYS]

His shooting percentages would disagree with that statement. As a freshman playing more at SG last year, he shot .386 from 3pt range. Even with the struggles adapting to the PG this year, he's shooting .339.

Smith played his entire career up to this season as a wing. It seems completely logical that he's more comfortable in (and more suited to) that role.

Plus, he doesn't have to be a lights out shooter from deep, anyway. Get him in positions so he can cut into the lane, shoot mid range jumpers, and get to the hole without having to drive through the entire defense from the PG spot. He clearly is not in his comfort zone trying to be a distributor. I think if K does recruit a "pure" pg, it would be to benefit Nolan and the rest of the team, not to replace him in the rotation.

[CDu]

Plus, he doesn't have to be a lights out shooter from deep, anyway. Get him in positions so he can cut into the lane, shoot mid range jumpers, and get to the hole without having to drive through the entire defense from the PG spot. He clearly is not in his comfort zone trying to be a distributor. I think if K does recruit a "pure" pg, it would be to benefit Nolan and the rest of the team, not to replace him in the rotation.

Well said. Smith isn't a Redick-like shooter, but he's pretty solid (the Scheyer comp is a pretty good one in terms of both being better scorers off the dribble than pure shooters). There are other aspects of offense besides purely shooting that make for a good wing offensively.

We can certainly make do with Smith and Scheyer as the PG. But getting another PG (whether it be to back up or to start) would seem to both make the team AND Smith stronger, rather than signalling giving up on Smith in any way.

[sagegrouse]

"Giving up on Nolan." Hunh?

Times have changed. I remember when the engimatic Bill Foster decided he only wanted to recruit one player in 1978 because the team of Giminski, Spanarkel, Banks, Dennard, Bender, Harrell, etc. was loaded. The result, Vince Taylor, was a very good player. The sensitivity was that your high-profile recruits will expect to play and extended bench time would be tough. Back then, even Dean Smith once said IIRC (Hey, there's always a first time!) that, really, you would like to have eight first-rate players all getting minutes and a bunch of guys at the end of the bench who are totally happy getting to be on the team and wear the uniform.

Of course, even in 1978 it would have been better if Foster were a bit more welcoming of new recruits at Duke. It would have given K some upperclass talent to work with after Banks and Dennard graduated in 1981.

These days (especially at Duke since Brand, Maggette, and Avery departed in 1999), you are not so much constructing a roster 2-4 years in advance as doing portfolio management, which is decision-making under uncertainty. Players may not perform as expected or may have academic or discipline problems. But now the question is also: how long are they going to stay? You have to plan on having more contributing players than in the past. And that itself promotes turbulence as freshmen look at future competition for PT (Taylor King, e.g.).

So, after all this blather, I am not impressed with the argument that K is "recruiting over" Nolan or "giving up on Nolan," even if he were the best player on the team. K can't afford to take a chance, particularly at PG. I believe K would like to have 12 good players under scholarship and let the best ones thrive. This is a new era, and there is no way that Nolan should (or will) take it personally.

sagegrouse
'This topic could be a thread in its own right: "How many talented players should a team have under scholly and what should be their distribution by position or skill?"'

[Oriole Way]

We absolutely need to grab a pure point for next year's class. I haven't given up on Nolan either, but it is essential to have a backup point guard in case of injuries. There is also the possibility that Nolan may just be more comfortable as a shooting guard/combo guard as he was in high school, so it will be nice to have the option of starting someone like Bledsoe, who is a pure point.

I think Wall would be a great fit, but it's unlikely he decides on Duke. I hope that we show some interest in Bledsoe so that he keeps us in mind, as long as his grades are sufficient. And if not Bledsoe, we need to target other players, because a PG is now a priority for this team that can't wait until Thornton gets here in 2010.

[loran16]

I'm against recruiting him in any case that his academics come CLOSE to the ncaa requirements. I pride myself in our players being held at a higher academic standard. I know that we've probably recruited some occasional players in the past, but even so, I don't want to step into murky territory now just cuz we need a point guard.

[DukeFanInTerpLand]

video of Bledsoe:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-XVRsOZ7Po

[MulletMan]

I'm against recruiting him in any case that his academics come CLOSE to the ncaa requirements. I pride myself in our players being held at a higher academic standard. I know that we've probably recruited some occasional players in the past, but even so, I don't want to step into murky territory now just cuz we need a point guard.

Well... you know, Sean Dockery was a marginal student, and worked very hard to get into Duke. He used that chance to get an education at a world-class institution. The staff made the right call there. If they decide to offer this kid, or anyone, a scholarship, I will trust thier judgement and hope that the young man's intentions re:classwork and studying have been well vetted.

[loran16]

Well... you know, Sean Dockery was a marginal student, and worked very hard to get into Duke. He used that chance to get an education at a world-class institution. The staff made the right call there. If they decide to offer this kid, or anyone, a scholarship, I will trust thier judgement and hope that the young man's intentions re:classwork and studying have been well vetted.

I'd guessed Dock would come up in response. I didn't follow recruiting till back then, though I'd heard about this. Let me put this out here: I loved dock, even before he made my Frosh year with the VT game. And Dock did GRADUATE from here, so I have much props for him.

So maybe I am sort of a hypocrite with regards to players in the past. I admit it up front. As i said before, we may have pushed a fine line with some previous recruits. But the last thing I EVER want to hear as a Duke fan is that one of our players gets ruled at any point as being academically ineligible. If the team can ensure that Bledsoe stays above the line? Fine. But I'd be extremely weary...not every player near the line cares as much as Dock did and will put forth that effort.

[dyedwab]

So maybe I am sort of a hypocrite with regards to players in the past. I admit it up front. As i said before, we may have pushed a fine line with some previous recruits. But the last thing I EVER want to hear as a Duke fan is that one of our players gets ruled at any point as being academically ineligible. If the team can ensure that Bledsoe stays above the line? Fine. But I'd be extremely weary...not every player near the line cares as much as Dock did and will put forth that effort.

I generally agree with the point BUT we have had players ruled academically ineligible (Ricky Price, Joe Cook, Phil Henderson) and there's no guarantee. Phil Henderson was never a questionable recruit when in came to meeting academic standards, but...

I think that Duke's track record includes players like Dockery and, further back, Gene Banks and others who had to work harder than the average Duke student to attain their degrees. If the staff sees a player who has that desire, then I trust their judgement on putting a program in place to allow such a player to thrive both on and of the court. I would be thrilled if another kid like Sean Dockery represented Duke.