NBA Early Entries: non-Duke

[CDu]

Wheat, no disrespect at all (I value your perspective on UNC things), but that team does not strike fear into me. I do think Strickland and Bullock are nice pieces, and McAdoo clearly has a lot of talent. I think Hairston will have a nice year next year as well.

But UNC will almost never be an "easy" win for anyone. That said, I don't think they'll be a difficult win for most Top-10 maybe even Top-20 teams. Am I completely off base here (question directed at Wheat and everyone)?

To go from Zeller, Henson, Barnes, Strickland, Marshall (four legitimately great players) as a Top-5 team (I'll give them Top-3), to the team listed above...I mean, I'm not sold. That looks like a Top-25 team to me. Maybe I'm underselling them, I guess?

James: Completely unproven.
McAdoo: Good player.
Bullock: Nice, not great.
MacDonald: Meh.
Strickland: Nice, not great.

A bunch of young guys on the bench / no proven depth.

Feel free to tell me I'm living under a rock. But this does not seem like a surefire Top-3 ACC team given the up-and-coming squads around here. Let alone a team challenging for the ACC Championship as UNC is traditionally accustomed to.

If McAdoo doesn't come back...oh dear.

- Chillin

That team would need McAdoo to REALLY step up next year. As you said, they'll be tough to beat because they'll be able to play uptempo with two fast, capable ballhandlers in Strickland and Paige. They'll have (potentially) 3 good 3pt shooters and the depth and length to pressure on the wings. And they'll have lots of bodies inside if nothing else. But you're right. Unless McAdoo makes great strides as a player, there isn't a player on the floor that you have to really gameplan against, which is in stark contrast to the past decade of UNC teams save for maybe 2009.

By virtue of the mediocrity in college basketball, they'd still be upper-tier in the ACC and a sure-fire top-20 team. Maybe even top-10 if McAdoo steps up (my tip of the cap to you, gumbomoop). But unless McAdoo is ready to be a star or the perimeter guys make big leaps, it's just a good basketball team and not too much more. It's not a team that I'd see threatening the Final Four.

And if McAdoo doesn't come back, you're right. That's a middle-of-the-road ACC team.

[MChambers]

Wheat, no disrespect at all (I value your perspective on UNC things), but that team does not strike fear into me. I do think Strickland and Bullock are nice pieces, and McAdoo clearly has a lot of talent. I think Hairston will have a nice year next year as well.

But UNC will almost never be an "easy" win for anyone. That said, I don't think they'll be a difficult win for most Top-10 maybe even Top-20 teams. Am I completely off base here (question directed at Wheat and everyone)?

To go from Zeller, Henson, Barnes, Strickland, Marshall (four legitimately great players) as a Top-5 team (I'll give them Top-3), to the team listed above...I mean, I'm not sold. That looks like a Top-25 team to me. Maybe I'm underselling them, I guess?

James: Completely unproven.
McAdoo: Good player.
Bullock: Nice, not great.
MacDonald: Meh.
Strickland: Nice, not great.

A bunch of young guys on the bench / no proven depth.

Feel free to tell me I'm living under a rock. But this does not seem like a surefire Top-3 ACC team given the up-and-coming squads around here. Let alone a team challenging for the ACC Championship as UNC is traditionally accustomed to.

If McAdoo doesn't come back...oh dear.

- Chillin

I agree. McAdoo is key. He's the only proven inside player. I'm not sold on Strickland as a starting point guard (I still remember the humor of watching him play point in 2010). Strickland's a very good defender and lightning fast, but can't shoot and isn't a good distributor.

So I see the team as having a very weak inside game, lots of good, but not great, wing players (probably too many), and a real question mark at point. Could have another shot at the NIT Championship.

If McAdoo comes back, I think the inside game is good enough to combine with the wings to put a good team on the floor, but I'm still not sold at the point.

[FerryFor50]

That team would need McAdoo to REALLY step up next year. As you said, they'll be tough to beat because they'll be able to play uptempo with two fast, capable ballhandlers in Strickland and Paige. They'll have (potentially) 3 good 3pt shooters and the depth and length to pressure on the wings. And they'll have lots of bodies inside if nothing else. But you're right. Unless McAdoo makes great strides as a player, there isn't a player on the floor that you have to really gameplan against, which is in stark contrast to the past decade of UNC teams save for maybe 2009.

By virtue of the mediocrity in college basketball, they'd still be upper-tier in the ACC and a sure-fire top-20 team. Maybe even top-10 if McAdoo steps up (my tip of the cap to you, gumbomoop). But unless McAdoo is ready to be a star or the perimeter guys make big leaps, it's just a good basketball team and not too much more. It's not a team that I'd see threatening the Final Four.

And if McAdoo doesn't come back, you're right. That's a middle-of-the-road ACC team.

You mean they'll have 3 point shooters who can't create their own shots?

Hmm... sounds familiar.

Hairston and Bullock were only effective as spot up shooters and on the glass. They weren't really guys who were going to beat you off the dribble or shoot pull up jumpers.

I see them struggling a bit next year with having to be primary ball handlers.

[CDu]

You mean they'll have 3 point shooters who can't create their own shots?

Hmm... sounds familiar.

Hairston and Bullock were only effective as spot up shooters and on the glass. They weren't really guys who were going to beat you off the dribble or shoot pull up jumpers.

I see them struggling a bit next year with having to be primary ball handlers.

They won't have to be primary ballhandlers, though. Strickland and Paige are both very capable ballhandlers, so Bullock and Hairston won't be asked to do much differently than they did this year - they'll just be asked to do it better and more consistently.

I suspect UNC will put the ball in Strickland's and Paige's hands and say "run, run, run." That'll make life much easier for everyone. And in the half court, they'll feed the post, run their screens, and have the PGs carry the load. They won't be as good as with Marshall, obviously.

[FerryFor50]

They won't have to be primary ballhandlers, though. Strickland and Paige are both very capable ballhandlers, so Bullock and Hairston won't be asked to do much differently than they did this year - they'll just be asked to do it better and more consistently.

I suspect UNC will put the ball in Strickland's and Paige's hands and say "run, run, run." That'll make life much easier for everyone. And in the half court, they'll feed the post, run their screens, and have the PGs carry the load. They won't be as good as with Marshall, obviously.

I think they'll try running the offense through Bullock and Hairston some, though. Until they realize what a bad idea that is...

[CDu]

I think they'll try running the offense through Bullock and Hairston some, though. Until they realize what a bad idea that is...

I think they'll run it like they always have - with the wings being primarily catch and shoot or catch and one dribble players. Ellington and Green weren't very good ballhandlers and they did fine. Jawad Williams couldn't dribble at all and he was a double-figure scorer. Barnes and Bullock couldn't dribble either.

The wing players in UNC's system are rarely asked to do more than run around screens, catch-and-shoot, run the floor and finish in transition on offense and pressure the passing lanes on defense. The pressure has always been on the PG and the bigs to make that team go. The same will be true next year.

[gumbomoop]

Wheat, no disrespect at all (I value your perspective on UNC things), but that team does not strike fear into me. I do think Strickland and Bullock are nice pieces, and McAdoo clearly has a lot of talent. I think Hairston will have a nice year next year as well.

But UNC will almost never be an "easy" win for anyone. That said, I don't think they'll be a difficult win for most Top-10 maybe even Top-20 teams. Am I completely off base here (question directed at Wheat and everyone)?

To go from Zeller, Henson, Barnes, Strickland, Marshall (four legitimately great players) as a Top-5 team (I'll give them Top-3), to the team listed above...I mean, I'm not sold. That looks like a Top-25 team to me. Maybe I'm underselling them, I guess?

James: Completely unproven.
McAdoo: Good player.
Bullock: Nice, not great.
MacDonald: Meh.
Strickland: Nice, not great.

A bunch of young guys on the bench / no proven depth.

Feel free to tell me I'm living under a rock. But this does not seem like a surefire Top-3 ACC team given the up-and-coming squads around here. Let alone a team challenging for the ACC Championship as UNC is traditionally accustomed to.

If McAdoo doesn't come back...oh dear.

- Chillin

I lean toward Wheat in this mini-debate, because I think you are underselling them, if McAdoo returns. Should McAdoo leave [yes, please], then you're right - "oh dear" - even if Wheat comes back and says, "Heels will do fine." Not so fine. Nerlens Noel comes to CH? No clue. We'll have to wait on McAdoo.

Meanwhile, judging the debate based specifically on the assumption that McAdoo stays, the difference is Wheat's assertion - "This team will not be an easy win for anyone" - v. your assertion - "I don't think they'll be a difficult win for most Top-10 maybe even Top-20 teams." Your "even Top-20" strikes me as way-underselling, as I infer you'd put them - with McAdoo - around #30-35. Maybe the essence of my lean toward Wheat's prognostication actually revolves around my view of McAdoo as an excellent-to-great player next season; whereas you give him only ... "good player."

Presumably you and maybe others [Edit: to take into account several posts that were posted as I was typing] think I'm overselling McAdoo. Fair enough. Again, we'll have to wait on McAdoo. I hope in goes in the upcoming NBA lottery, ahead of Barnes, which is where he should land. My advice to James Michael: take some of Harrison's money and run. [Edit: Your indulgence, please. Join me, won't you, in sending out this very vibe to James Michael for the next week or so: take some of Harrison's money and run. See how happy that would make so many of us? Please.]

I agree with Wheat that a McAdoo-led Heels would be a difficult test for any of next season's #5, 6, 9, 11, 14, 17 teams. Doesn't mean Heels would win all such games, but they'd win some, and challenge in all.

[OldPhiKap]

Duke lost a lot coming into this year, and fell all the way to second place in the regular season conference race by a last-game loss.

Carolina will lose a lot going into next year, and fall all the way to second or third place in the conference race with a chance to compete for the regular season crown.

A lot depends on McAdoo, and how well they gel around the new point guard.

[CDu]

Presumably you [and likely others... CDu, you out there?] think I'm overselling McAdoo. Fair enough. Again, we'll have to wait on McAdoo. I hope in goes in the upcoming NBA lottery, ahead of Barnes, which is where he should land. My advice to James Michael: take some of Harrison's money and run.

We've definitely had our back and forth on McAdoo, so I want to clarify my position. I think my predictions on McAdoo last year were spot on. Some people (not saying it was you, gumbo - I really don't remember who) were suggesting McAdoo was the best freshman entering the ACC and that he might even threaten for an All-ACC spot. I said I wasn't impressed and that I felt he'd be a bit player as a freshman. Even though UNC needed a strong contributor from the 3rd big, McAdoo wasn't ready to contribute early. And even at the end of the season (when he was forced into big minutes because of the Henson injury) he wasn't exactly a force against decent competition (9 and 2 against NCSU in 27 min, 4 and 8 against FSU in 28 min, 9 and 4 against Creighton in 24 min, 15 and 4 against Kansas - mostly on breakaways - in 19 min).

The reason I wasn't high on him last year was because he had shown no ability to create his own shot in the post. Nearly everything was on off-ball/transition stuff (finishing fast breaks, running to the rim to follow missed shots). At the college game, you aren't a star to me unless you can consistently score in the half court, and McAdoo didn't show me any evidence of that this year. Aside from an occasional jumper everything he did was of the off-ball/transition variety.

As for next year, I'm not sure what he'll do if he comes back. He certainly has the size and athleticism to be effective as a college PF. The question is if he has the post game. UNC will need him to be the go-to scorer, and that's not something he's done at the college level. If he can expand his game this offseason (certainly a possibility) I agree that he could be a force for them. But based on what I've seen, I think it's a lot to ask to expect him to thrive as the focal point of the offense next year. But whatever he does next year has no bearing on my opinion of him last year (which was simply that he wasn't going to be a stud for them as a freshman).

It's also why I have questions about him in the NBA. He's an undersized PF with no range, no ballhandling skills, and no proven offensive moves.

[Kedsy]

Unless McAdoo makes great strides as a player, there isn't a player on the floor that you have to really gameplan against, which is in stark contrast to the past decade of UNC teams save for maybe 2009.

You mean 2010?

[CDu]

You mean 2010?

Ugghh. Where is my brain today? Twice in a row with dumb dumb statements (one more than usual!). Yes, 2010. The post-Hansbrough year.

[niveklaen]

Duke lost a lot coming into this year, and fell all the way to second place in the regular season conference race by a last-game loss.

Carolina will lose a lot going into next year, and fall all the way to second or third place in the conference race with a chance to compete for the regular season crown.

A lot depends on McAdoo, and how well they gel around the new point guard.

Duke lost 2 first round picks, and 1 early 2nd round pick. UNC is losing 4 likely first round picks.
Duke returned 3 rotation bigs, UNC returns 1 rotation big.
Duke returned Coach K, UNC returns Roy.

When Duke has a down/rebuilding year, we are a 2 seed. When UNC has one they're in the NIT.

[Kedsy]

When Duke has a down/rebuilding year, we are a 2 seed. When UNC has one they're in the NIT.

The universe is older than three years. UNC also had a down/rebuilding year in 2006, and ended up a 3 seed. In 2007, Duke had the down/rebuilding year and, while we did make the NCAAT, it wasn't exactly a resounding success for us.

[OldPhiKap]

When Duke has a down/rebuilding year, we are a 2 seed. When UNC has one they're in the NIT.

Love the fire, and sure hope you're right. This old anvil has seen many hammers, though.

[yancem]

We've definitely had our back and forth on McAdoo, so I want to clarify my position. I think my predictions on McAdoo last year were spot on. Some people (not saying it was you, gumbo - I really don't remember who) were suggesting McAdoo was the best freshman entering the ACC and that he might even threaten for an All-ACC spot. I said I wasn't impressed and that I felt he'd be a bit player as a freshman. Even though UNC needed a strong contributor from the 3rd big, McAdoo wasn't ready to contribute early. And even at the end of the season (when he was forced into big minutes because of the Henson injury) he wasn't exactly a force against decent competition (9 and 2 against NCSU in 27 min, 4 and 8 against FSU in 28 min, 9 and 4 against Creighton in 24 min, 15 and 4 against Kansas - mostly on breakaways - in 19 min).

The reason I wasn't high on him last year was because he had shown no ability to create his own shot in the post. Nearly everything was on off-ball/transition stuff (finishing fast breaks, running to the rim to follow missed shots). At the college game, you aren't a star to me unless you can consistently score in the half court, and McAdoo didn't show me any evidence of that this year. Aside from an occasional jumper everything he did was of the off-ball/transition variety.

As for next year, I'm not sure what he'll do if he comes back. He certainly has the size and athleticism to be effective as a college PF. The question is if he has the post game. UNC will need him to be the go-to scorer, and that's not something he's done at the college level. If he can expand his game this offseason (certainly a possibility) I agree that he could be a force for them. But based on what I've seen, I think it's a lot to ask to expect him to thrive as the focal point of the offense next year. But whatever he does next year has no bearing on my opinion of him last year (which was simply that he wasn't going to be a stud for them as a freshman).

It's also why I have questions about him in the NBA. He's an undersized PF with no range, no ballhandling skills, and no proven offensive moves.

To be completely honest, how is he different than Marvin Williams? I think that there are a lot of similarities between McAdoo and Williams both in skill, athleticism, physicality and usage as a freshman. From what I have seen from Williams in the nba, he is basically the same player now as he was his rookie year. It would be interesting to see McAdoo return to unc just to compare results of his career path to Williams. By coming back does he expand his game and improve to the point that he can be more than a roll player in the nba or does he expose his weaknesses, drop in the draft and end up with Williams' career but with a smaller initial contract. Of course Ed Davis wasn't much different from these two and he ended up demonstrating the latter scenario (at least from a developmental stand point, the nba does love it's potential).

[FerryFor50]

Duke returned Coach K, UNC returns Roy.

When Duke has a down/rebuilding year, we are a 2 seed. When UNC has one they're in the NIT.

Cause, meet effect.

[FerryFor50]

To be completely honest, how is he different than Marvin Williams? I think that there are a lot of similarities between McAdoo and Williams both in skill, athleticism, physicality and usage as a freshman. From what I have seen from Williams in the nba, he is basically the same player now as he was his rookie year. It would be interesting to see McAdoo return to unc just to compare results of his career path to Williams. By coming back does he expand his game and improve to the point that he can be more than a roll player in the nba or does he expose his weaknesses, drop in the draft and end up with Williams' career but with a smaller initial contract. Of course Ed Davis wasn't much different from these two and he ended up demonstrating the latter scenario (at least from a developmental stand point, the nba does love it's potential).

Difference is that Marvin Williams won a National Championship as a freshman and had no real reason to stick around after that...

[CDu]

To be completely honest, how is he different than Marvin Williams? I think that there are a lot of similarities between McAdoo and Williams both in skill, athleticism, physicality and usage as a freshman. From what I have seen from Williams in the nba, he is basically the same player now as he was his rookie year. It would be interesting to see McAdoo return to unc just to compare results of his career path to Williams. By coming back does he expand his game and improve to the point that he can be more than a roll player in the nba or does he expose his weaknesses, drop in the draft and end up with Williams' career but with a smaller initial contract. Of course Ed Davis wasn't much different from these two and he ended up demonstrating the latter scenario (at least from a developmental stand point, the nba does love it's potential).

I'd say he's pretty different from Marvin Williams. Williams was a much better producer in his one year of college despite somewhat similar circumstances. He averaged 22.2 mpg, 11.3 ppg, 6.6 rpg, 50.6 fg%, 43.2 3pt%, 84.7 ft%. McAdoo averaged 15.6 mpg, 6.1 ppg, 3.9 rpg, 43.4 fg%, 0.0 3pt%, 63.8 ft%. They are of similar size and athleticism, but Williams pretty clearly showed the skill set of a SF whereas McAdoo has showed no real offensive game. While Williams hasn't really developed beyond the player he was coming out, he at least already had a clearly-defined position and skillset. With McAdoo, the hope is that he has that skill set. The reality is that he hasn't shown any of it.

[ChillinDuke]

Duke lost 2 first round picks, and 1 early 2nd round pick. UNC is losing 4 likely first round picks.
Duke returned 3 rotation bigs, UNC returns 1 rotation big.
Duke returned Coach K, UNC returns Roy.

When Duke has a down/rebuilding year, we are a 2 seed. When UNC has one they're in the NIT.

To emphasize, UNC is losing 3 and maybe 4 lottery picks.

Not celebrating it as if this will make UNC NIT-bound. But they are losing a considerable amount more than Duke lost last year, and that is no slight to Nolan, Kyle, or Kyrie.

- Chillin

[ChillinDuke]

I lean toward Wheat in this mini-debate, because I think you are underselling them, if McAdoo returns. Should McAdoo leave [yes, please], then you're right - "oh dear" - even if Wheat comes back and says, "Heels will do fine." Not so fine. Nerlens Noel comes to CH? No clue. We'll have to wait on McAdoo.

Meanwhile, judging the debate based specifically on the assumption that McAdoo stays, the difference is Wheat's assertion - "This team will not be an easy win for anyone" - v. your assertion - "I don't think they'll be a difficult win for most Top-10 maybe even Top-20 teams." Your "even Top-20" strikes me as way-underselling, as I infer you'd put them - with McAdoo - around #30-35. Maybe the essence of my lean toward Wheat's prognostication actually revolves around my view of McAdoo as an excellent-to-great player next season; whereas you give him only ... "good player."

Presumably you and maybe others [Edit: to take into account several posts that were posted as I was typing] think I'm overselling McAdoo. Fair enough. Again, we'll have to wait on McAdoo. I hope in goes in the upcoming NBA lottery, ahead of Barnes, which is where he should land. My advice to James Michael: take some of Harrison's money and run. [Edit: Your indulgence, please. Join me, won't you, in sending out this very vibe to James Michael for the next week or so: take some of Harrison's money and run. See how happy that would make so many of us? Please.]

I agree with Wheat that a McAdoo-led Heels would be a difficult test for any of next season's #5, 6, 9, 11, 14, 17 teams. Doesn't mean Heels would win all such games, but they'd win some, and challenge in all.

You may very well be right. I haven't formed enough of an opinion on McAdoo to weigh in with any sort of conviction.

I wouldn't say #30-35. I was thinking more of them being in the Top-20, meaning that they would be in the mix in Top-20 games, losing some handily and winning some, perhaps handily.

In the end I agree that a McAdoo-led UNC team will be good, but I'm not sure they will challenge in all Top-20 games.

And for the record, I think they will inevitably find a way to battle for the ACC crown next year. But at least on paper, there's some evidence that it could be a struggle.

- Chillin

Edit: Apologies for taking this thread off topic there a bit. Very interested to see what McAdoo decides.