Josh Smith offered?

[Dukefan1989]

According to scout, we've extended an offer to Josh Smith. Does Watzone or anyone have any word on validity of this news? If true, this would put us at 5 offers and one commit for the class of 2010.

[geraldsneighbor]

I had heard something to that effect but this is the first website to offically confirm these reports. Very exciting news!

[OZZIE4DUKE]

According to scout, we've extended an offer to Josh Smith. Does Watzone or anyone have any word on validity of this news? If true, this would put us at 5 offers and one commit for the class of 2010.


I had heard something to that effect but this is the first website to offically confirm these reports. Very exciting news!

A question on a bulletin board hardly qualifies as a web site confirming a rumor. When Watzone confirms it, then I'll believe it.

[FireOgilvie]

A question on a bulletin board hardly qualifies as a web site confirming a rumor. When Watzone confirms it, then I'll believe it.

"According to scout"

[Dukefan1989]

A question on a bulletin board hardly qualifies as a web site confirming a rumor. When Watzone confirms it, then I'll believe it.

Here's the link. http://duke.scout.com/a.z?s=167&p=9&cfg=bb&c=4&yr=2010

[Dukefan1989]

Bump...Bump...Bump for anyone who has any news

[Bluedawg]

Here's the link. http://duke.scout.com/a.z?s=167&p=9&cfg=bb&c=4&yr=2010

...are the "Schools of Interest" listed in any particular order?

[Bluedog]

...are the "Schools of Interest" listed in any particular order?

Yes, they are listed in the order of interest according to scout. If schools are all "medium interest," which is usually the case, then they are listed alphabetically. For example, for Josh Smith it is: "UCLA, Arizona, Duke, Georgetown, Gonzaga, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisville, Syracuse, Tennessee, Washington, Washington State.." UCLA is listed as "High Interest" so it appears first. The rest are "Med Interest" so are alphabetical...I doubt the accuracy of the levels of interest for several players though, so I wouldn't put too much faith in it.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Yes, they are listed in the order of interest according to scout. If schools are all "medium interest," which is usually the case, then they are listed alphabetically. For example, for Josh Smith it is: "UCLA, Arizona, Duke, Georgetown, Gonzaga, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisville, Syracuse, Tennessee, Washington, Washington State.." UCLA is listed as "High Interest" so it appears first. The rest are "Med Interest" so are alphabetical...I doubt the accuracy of the levels of interest for several players though, so I wouldn't put too much faith in it.

Thanks for that, answered 1/2 of a long pondered question. The other 1/2 is who's interest? The school's or the player's? I've taken it as the player's interest, because otherwise it should be "Interested Schools" and not "Schools of Interest".

[skitelz]

Thanks for that, answered 1/2 of a long pondered question. The other 1/2 is who's interest? The school's or the player's? I've taken it as the player's interest, because otherwise it should be "Interested Schools" and not "Schools of Interest".

well, the prospects give scout the school list if that's what you mean. i think that they try to gage interest levels between schools and prospects by looking at both sides interest level though. it mainly goes by what the prospects tell them and what they are quoted as saying in other publications.

[BlueintheFace]

So how do we think these commitments affect each of our top targets:

Kenny Boynton- This is tough to gage. If Boynton really sees himself as a one and done player then these commitments should not affect him. If he thinks he will be at Duke for three years and a diploma (J-will style) then this could hurt. My guess is that he sees himself as a one and done player. Another consideration is how badly does he want to play with Brandon Knight? These commitments might move Brandon off the table.

Brandon Knight- As I said, these commitments will hurt our chances with him. He will see the crowded point/playmaker position with Nolan, E-will, and Thornton and certainly be worried about playing time. This will probably push him to playing at Florida (coincidentally, Boynton's other big option...uh-oh).

Josh Smith- I think this has to help. Smith will see all this talent committing in and none of it down low in the post. As of right now our front court would be Plumlee, Plumlee, Czyz, and Hairston (kind of) in 2010. There isn't a pure center in the group. Still, Smith is going to have a long recruitment and there are just sooooo many suitors.

Harrison Barnes- After Gerald leaves, Duke will not have a single player in the "athletic SF" mold coming down the pipe. Harrison Barnes has to look at our roster and see that he has a huge opportunity to possibly start from day one and be an impact player at his position. Duke teams have always had a player like him and we are in need of another soon. These commitments shouldn't affect him much. If there is any affect, it should be positive since he will see the talent coming in.

Ryan Kelly- We are now loaded at the "versatile PF" position with the plumlees... and Hairston on the way. Will Kelly still want to jump into the mix? He seemed to really like Duke not too long ago. After all, we made his final 6 as the only team not to offer him a scholarship. Still, if he is smart, he will move on to another school... though one could make the argument, If he is really smart he will come to Duke for a national championship.


I'm sure some of you have differing opinions... feel free to add

[jimsumner]

I suspect Elliott Williams will end up being more of an athletic wing than a point guard.

I think Boynton's decision will have more potential impact on Knight than anything that happened yesterday. Smith would be a senior when Knight would show up and Smith can play the 2. Duke regards Thornton as a solid, four-year player and Knight as a one-or-two-year player, so the theory is they could co-exist for a year or two until Knight heads off to the NBA and then the job is Thornton's.

Boynton and Knight? Who knows for sure? People who claim to be insiders swear that the duo desperately wants to play together. People who claim to be insiders swear that Boynton and Knight absolutely will never play together. My reading is that a Boyton signing would make Knight a luxury recruit.

Duke really likes Barnes and there's nobody around who's going to scare him off. Barnes was a local recruit until he exploded this summer. Now all the big boys, Duke included, are trying to get involved, and he's got some sorting out to do. I suspect this one might take awhile.

Josh Smith would be a huge get, in several meanings of the word. His father has had some real nice things to say about K but distance could be a major factor here. K does have a track record with recruits on the west coast, so this could get interesting.

Kelly? Should know soon.

[Edouble]

So how do we think these commitments affect each of our top targets:

Kenny Boynton- This is tough to gage. If Boynton really sees himself as a one and done player then these commitments should not affect him. If he thinks he will be at Duke for three years and a diploma (J-will style) then this could hurt. My guess is that he sees himself as a one and done player. Another consideration is how badly does he want to play with Brandon Knight? These commitments might move Brandon off the table.

Brandon Knight- As I said, these commitments will hurt our chances with him. He will see the crowded point/playmaker position with Nolan, E-will, and Thornton and certainly be worried about playing time. This will probably push him to playing at Florida (coincidentally, Boynton's other big option...uh-oh).

Josh Smith- I think this has to help. Smith will see all this talent committing in and none of it down low in the post. As of right now our front court would be Plumlee, Plumlee, Czyz, and Hairston (kind of) in 2010. There isn't a pure center in the group. Still, Smith is going to have a long recruitment and there are just sooooo many suitors.

Harrison Barnes- After Gerald leaves, Duke will not have a single player in the "athletic SF" mold coming down the pipe. Harrison Barnes has to look at our roster and see that he has a huge opportunity to possibly start from day one and be an impact player at his position. Duke teams have always had a player like him and we are in need of another soon. These commitments shouldn't affect him much. If there is any affect, it should be positive since he will see the talent coming in.

Ryan Kelly- We are now loaded at the "versatile PF" position with the plumlees... and Hairston on the way. Will Kelly still want to jump into the mix? He seemed to really like Duke not too long ago. After all, we made his final 6 as the only team not to offer him a scholarship. Still, if he is smart, he will move on to another school... though one could make the argument, If he is really smart he will come to Duke for a national championship.


I'm sure some of you have differing opinions... feel free to add

I agree with most of this. Nice breakdown on the targets. I feel that these commitments can only help with Smith and Barnes. As we have a finite number of scholarships to offer, and three are now spoken for, it seems clear that if either one of these two commit, he will be "the (one and only) man" at his respective position.

I really don't see Ewill getting involved in any PG congestion, albeit even without him in the mix it may still be an issue. I would think, though, that Knight would have to look at the number of PG targets that Florida is involved with as well, and if this is something that gives Knight pause with us, hopefully the issue is present in his Florida recruitment too.

I hope that Boynton does not chain himself to Knight as you suggest he may.

[BlueintheFace]

Yah, I tossed in E-will to the point/playmaker mix simply because of the Czyz video where he called himself a pg. I doubt he will actually have those responsibilities though.

[budwom]

So how do we think these commitments affect each of our top targets:

Kenny Boynton- This is tough to gage. If Boynton really sees himself as a one and done player then these commitments should not affect him. If he thinks he will be at Duke for three years and a diploma (J-will style) then this could hurt. My guess is that he sees himself as a one and done player. Another consideration is how badly does he want to play with Brandon Knight? These commitments might move Brandon off the table.

Brandon Knight- As I said, these commitments will hurt our chances with him. He will see the crowded point/playmaker position with Nolan, E-will, and Thornton and certainly be worried about playing time. This will probably push him to playing at Florida (coincidentally, Boynton's other big option...uh-oh).

Josh Smith- I think this has to help. Smith will see all this talent committing in and none of it down low in the post. As of right now our front court would be Plumlee, Plumlee, Czyz, and Hairston (kind of) in 2010. There isn't a pure center in the group. Still, Smith is going to have a long recruitment and there are just sooooo many suitors.

Harrison Barnes- After Gerald leaves, Duke will not have a single player in the "athletic SF" mold coming down the pipe. Harrison Barnes has to look at our roster and see that he has a huge opportunity to possibly start from day one and be an impact player at his position. Duke teams have always had a player like him and we are in need of another soon. These commitments shouldn't affect him much. If there is any affect, it should be positive since he will see the talent coming in.

Ryan Kelly- We are now loaded at the "versatile PF" position with the plumlees... and Hairston on the way. Will Kelly still want to jump into the mix? He seemed to really like Duke not too long ago. After all, we made his final 6 as the only team not to offer him a scholarship. Still, if he is smart, he will move on to another school... though one could make the argument, If he is really smart he will come to Duke for a national championship.


I'm sure some of you have differing opinions... feel free to add

I couldn't disagree more regarding Knight. He isn't going to be scared off by anyone, and he isn't going to lose playing time to anyone. He's going to play a great deal wherever he goes.

And as far as Boynton is concerned, I don't think it hurts at all, even though I disagree with your assessment that he's one and done. He's 6-2 and at this point primarily a scoring guard. Right now he's small for an NBA SG and he isn't quite yet up to snuff as a PG skillwise....so while he could be one and done, I don't think it's likely.

[dukefan47]

Ryan Kelly- We are now loaded at the "versatile PF" position with the plumlees... and Hairston on the way. Will Kelly still want to jump into the mix? He seemed to really like Duke not too long ago. After all, we made his final 6 as the only team not to offer him a scholarship. Still, if he is smart, he will move on to another school... though one could make the argument, If he is really smart he will come to Duke for a national championship.

There is definately room for Kelly because he would be the best offensive PF that we would have if Singler leaves. His skill set is similiar to Singlers. Also, it is down to Notre Dame and Duke with Duke having the edge right now

[gotham devil]

Also, it is down to Notre Dame and Duke with Duke having the edge right now

Where did you get that idea?

[mo.st.dukie]

Ryan Kelly- We are now loaded at the "versatile PF" position with the plumlees... and Hairston on the way. Will Kelly still want to jump into the mix? He seemed to really like Duke not too long ago. After all, we made his final 6 as the only team not to offer him a scholarship. Still, if he is smart, he will move on to another school... though one could make the argument, If he is really smart he will come to Duke for a national championship.


It'll be interesting to see what Kelly does. If he does go to Duke he will be fighting seniors Thomas and Zoubek, and sophomores Plumlee and Czyz as well as fellow freshman Mason. If he's patient he could see some time his sophomore year even with Hairston because IMO the Plumlees will be more like centers rather than 4's.

[gotham devil]

It'll be interesting to see what Kelly does. If he does go to Duke he will be fighting seniors Thomas and Zoubek, and sophomores Plumlee and Czyz as well as fellow freshman Mason. If he's patient he could see some time his sophomore year even with Hairston because IMO the Plumlees will be more like centers rather than 4's.

You are operating under the assumption that Miles Plumlee and Olek Czyz will develop into better overall players by their sophomore seasons than Ryan Kelly showing up for his freshman year. As it is now, Kelly is a more complete offensive player than Lance Thomas. Kelly's issue will be improving enough on defense that a staff can take advantage of his offensive talents.

[miramar]

which shows how complicated these decisions must be for potential recruits. You have a number of variables, including schools, coaches, academics, preparation for a potential NBA career, and then possible playing time on top of that. That's much tougher than the "If I'm lucky enough to get in and if I can afford it I'm going" attitude that many high school seniors have.

As far as PF is concerned, if we don't end up with the only center in the bunch, we will probably play two PFs by the time the class of 2010 shows up. So although there is a bit of a traffic jam there, anyone with some self confidence and a competitive nature shouldn't back down.

[CameronCrazy'11]

which shows how complicated these decisions must be for potential recruits. You have a number of variables, including schools, coaches, academics, preparation for a potential NBA career, and then possible playing time on top of that. That's much tougher than the "If I'm lucky enough to get in and if I can afford it I'm going" attitude that many high school seniors have.

As far as PF is concerned, if we don't end up with the only center in the bunch, we will probably play two PFs by the time the class of 2010 shows up. So although there is a bit of a traffic jam there, anyone with some self confidence and a competitive nature shouldn't back down.

Yeah, the Plumlees and maybe Ryan Kelly could all play "center" in a Duke system if they gained a bit of weight. I don't really see a traffic jam in the post as of yet.

[dukefan47]

Where did you get that idea?

check out the free board on rivals.com for duke, a poster who is friends with the kelly's said so.

Scroll 1/3 of the way down (http://duke.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?SID=1021&fid=1690&style=2&tid=117758420&Page=1)

[CameronBornAndBred]

Regardless of what they each decide, the way 2010 is shaping up should do plenty to quell the recent naysayers of K's recruiting ability lately. To have the commits we already have, plus the list above with Duke still in serious consideration says we aren't do anything but keeping up our history of excellence.

[BlueintheFace]

I think what we really NEED is Harrison Barnes, Roscoe Smith, or Mychal Parker in our 2010 class. Beyond that, it's all gravy.

[mgtr]

Some of us (OK, me) get confused about who is when in this recruiting convo. I think that Boynton and Ryan are for 09 (plus Mason Plumlee) and the rest are 2010. Is this correct? Are there other players we are seriously interested in for 2009?
Is the thinking on this board that because of graduation and possible early leaving, 2010 is the year where we need the most help? Or do we go for the good players we can get whenever we can get them?

[dukeimac]

How about the recruits looking at it as if it would be a great challenge to go to Duke and compete with some good people for playing time?

If Knight is worried that Thornton is going to give him a tough time in getting playing time I'm not sure Knight is the #1 PG then and maybe Thornton is better than being rated #9.

As far as I see it, if they are one and done, think about playing elsewhere. I like the idea that Thornton is the type to stick around for 4 years. No dynasty has been built on one and done's.

[skitelz]

09:
Mason Plumlee 6'11 PF (committed)
Kenny Boynton 6'2 PG/SG (offered)
Ryan Kelly 6'10 PF (offered)
Jamil Wilson 6'7 SF/PF (possible offer, more of a back-up plan, has scheduled a visit)

10:
Andre Dawkins 6'5 SG (committed)
Josh Hairston 6'8 SF/PF (committed)
Tyler Thornton 6'2 PG (committed)
Brandon Knight 6'3 PG (offered)
Josh Smith 6'10 C (offered)
Harrison Barnes 6'6 SF (offered)
Mychal Parker 6'6 SF (back-up plan)
Nate Lubick 6'8 PF (back-up plan)

does that help? :)

[miramar]

Some of us (OK, me) get confused about who is when in this recruiting convo. I think that Boynton and Ryan are for 09 (plus Mason Plumlee) and the rest are 2010. Is this correct? Are there other players we are seriously interested in for 2009?
Is the thinking on this board that because of graduation and possible early leaving, 2010 is the year where we need the most help? Or do we go for the good players we can get whenever we can get them?

Your breakdown on 2009 and 2010 looks good. I think that any team nowadays has to get good players when they can. Considering the number of players who leave early or unexpectedly transfer, it seems harder than ever to forecast what your needs will be a few years down the road.

For example, Duke's current senior class was considered to be the best in the country when they came in. I don't think anyone expected McRoberts to stay around forever, but he clearly did not live up to his billing. Erick Boateng was a McDonalds, yet he didn't stay around long and only scored 3.9PPG last year at ASU (although we could have probably used him anyway). Jamal Boykin also left, and we could have certainly used his 8 PPG and 4 RPG.

So Greg Paulus and Martinas Pocius are the only ones left from that group.

[Edouble]

As far as I see it, if they are one and done, think about playing elsewhere. I like the idea that Thornton is the type to stick around for 4 years. No dynasty has been built on one and done's.

I would have taken the 2008 Final Four we possibly could have had with one year of Kevin Love. With Zoubek's injury, he'd have about the same level of experience as we move into our upcoming season. Who knows, he and LT could be better players for having worked with Love for a year.

Coach K is clearly taking a hard look at two-and-dones that are possibly one-and-dones. Those types of players will have a role in building and maintaining most college basketball dynasties from here on out, until the rules for declaring for the draft are changed. If the player is not going to "unpack his bags", and is only going to play for his draft positioning, that's another thing entirely. I don't think we'll be taking anyone like that though.

[Devilsfan]

Finally! Looks like there's fire back in Coach. The 2009 targets and the 2010 targets and commitments remind me of the classes that wound up as regular visitors to the final four.

[ice-9]

I agree that we should get talent where we can. Imagine the following: Duke puts in a dominant season and gets to the Final Four. Heck, we win the championship.

In this scenario, I'd expect Henderson to be gone and Singler likely gone as they prove to be the superstars we expect them to be. Paulus and Pocius will graduate. Thus losing four players is a very possible scenario. BUT...what if in this championship season Smith had supplanted Paulus' role as starting PG and also turned out to be a major stud? What if he decides his stock will never be higher and declares for the draft?

Then we'd be REALLY glad to have Boynton on board because without Paulus or Smith we'd have serious PG questions. (Not to say that Scheyer and Elliot won't do a good job playing PG for 30+ minutes a game, but we don't know for certain and we'd need depth at those positions anyway.)

PG: Scheyer/Elliot
SG: Scheyer/Elliot
SF: Mason/Olek
PF: Thomas/Olek
C: Zoubek, Miles

As you can see in the above lineup, there's also room for a player like Ryan Kelley as Ryan and Mason can both play the SF and PF positions. Actually, come to think of it, if Olek does not turn out as good as we hope, it'd be REALLY good to have Ryan on board as well.

[awich1]

was looking at a big ten school's board the other day where one poster indicated that barnes was ours to lose.

[Jumbo]

Finally! Looks like there's fire back in Coach. The 2009 targets and the 2010 targets and commitments remind me of the classes that wound up as regular visitors to the final four.

What on Earth does that mean? Since when was Coach K lacking "fire?" And other than the well-documented misses on a few big guys, what was wrong with snaggin the likes of Henderson, Scheyer, Singler and Smith from the last two clases we've seen play? (Too early to evaluate this year's frosh.)

[dkbaseball]

was looking at a big ten school's board the other day where one poster indicated that barnes was ours to lose.

It was Mark Miller, who writes a newsletter on Wisconsin sports. A pretty credible source usually.

[mgtr]

Skitelz- Nice breakdown. thanks for helping an old guy understand.

[miramar]

Finally! Looks like there's fire back in Coach. The 2009 targets and the 2010 targets and commitments remind me of the classes that wound up as regular visitors to the final four.

Although we may have been disappointed about how the season has been ending of late, Duke has been doing a great job on recruiting the last few years. The current seniors were the top HS recruiting class (McBob, Paulus, Boateng, Jamal, and Marty, who's now listed as a junior), although obviously a lot of things happened along the way. The junior class is outstanding (Henderson, Scheyer, Thomas, and Zoubek), as is the sophomore class (Singler, Smith, and the now-departed King). The freshmen are also strong (Czyz, Williams, and surprise! Miles Plumlee), so I don't think we can complain after four straight years of strong recruiting. I would agree that we were short handed for a couple of years before, but that was then and this is now.

[Ignatius07]

was looking at a big ten school's board the other day where one poster indicated that barnes was ours to lose.

Judging by the articles I've read on Barnes, it doesn't sound like he's all that close to a decision. It'd be nice if we were leading, but I'm not sure it means too much at this point before he's really visited any school outside the state of Iowa.

[jv001]

Finally! Looks like there's fire back in Coach. The 2009 targets and the 2010 targets and commitments remind me of the classes that wound up as regular visitors to the final four.

I don't think Coach K has lost any fire and determination. Not in coaching and certainly not in recruiting. I believe he may have changed his strategy but he has not lost any fire. Just watch him the next few years. Go Duke!

[revmel53]

I believe conjecture in both realms is way overblown... K's lost nothing; and though the seasons haven't ended our way lately, our recruiting has been more than solid and the players are still good - maybe not as good as predicted however...

[SilkyJ]

I agree that we should get talent where we can. Imagine the following: Duke puts in a dominant season and gets to the Final Four. Heck, we win the championship.

In this scenario, I'd expect Henderson to be gone and Singler likely gone as they prove to be the superstars we expect them to be. Paulus and Pocius will graduate. Thus losing four players is a very possible scenario. BUT...what if in this championship season Smith had supplanted Paulus' role as starting PG and also turned out to be a major stud? What if he decides his stock will never be higher and declares for the draft?


PG: Scheyer/Elliot
SG: Scheyer/Elliot
SF: Mason/Olek
PF: Thomas/Olek
C: Zoubek, Miles

As you can see in the above lineup, there's also room for a player like Ryan Kelley as Ryan and Mason can both play the SF and PF positions. Actually, come to think of it, if Olek does not turn out as good as we hope, it'd be REALLY good to have Ryan on board as well.

Couple things: Marty redshirted last year so while he could graduate and leave after this year, he could also stick around for a 5th year. Additionally, you will NEVER see mason or ryan kelly (should he commit) play the 3 in our offense. They will play the 4 and/or the 5. We like to play players "up" a position so to speak, not down a position. i.e. gerald is really a SG or a 2, but we play him at the 3 quite often, and singler is really a college 3 or a 4, but we play him as a 4 or a 5. You will almost never see a guard oriented team like Duke play a 6'11 or 6'10 guy at the small forward position.

[jimsumner]

"Additionally, you will NEVER see mason or ryan kelly (should he commit) play the 3 in our offense"

I'd be careful about that word "never." Mark Alarie and Mike Dunleavy both played the 3 at one time or another at Duke, so there are some precedents. Kelly especially may have the skill set to play the 3. Whether or not he has the defensive ability to play the 3 is another question.

[COYS]

Couple things: Marty redshirted last year so while he could graduate and leave after this year, he could also stick around for a 5th year. Additionally, you will NEVER see mason or ryan kelly (should he commit) play the 3 in our offense. They will play the 4 and/or the 5. We like to play players "up" a position so to speak, not down a position. i.e. gerald is really a SG or a 2, but we play him at the 3 quite often, and singler is really a college 3 or a 4, but we play him as a 4 or a 5. You will almost never see a guard oriented team like Duke play a 6'11 or 6'10 guy at the small forward position.

That's true most of the time, but to be fair, we did play Dunleavy at the "3" position, even though his height at 6'9'' would generally make him a typical Duke 4 or 5. I know he's a different case in some ways because he was originally recruited as a guard and then he just kept growing, but I think it does indicate that K will have no problem adapting his lineups to put the best players on the court. If any of our future forwards or possible recruits demonstrate the lateral quickness and the ball skills to play as a "3" in K's system, I definitely don't think K would have a problem fielding a lineup of (this is purely hypothetical, of course) say Nolan Smith, Williams, Kelly, Mason, and Josh Smith (if we actually managed land Smith and Kelly). Honestly, I think such a lineup could be devastatingly effective on both ends of the floor assuming that Kelly and Mason are quick enough to spend some time at the 3.

[bozz03]

Barnes is a player that we really need for the '10 class. He's a prototype for the 3 in college at 6'6 and would be the ideal replacement for G. Elliot will probably see time at the 3 as well give his size and length.

I have to disagree on what was said regarding boynton and knight. Neither of them will be scared whatsoever by guards on either UF or Duke's roster b/c both are big time players.

IF KB is a one n done player then it favors UF bc of proximity to his family and maybe more playing time at UF b/c he'd probably start. Knight wouldn't be concerned about Tyler being there either as they are the same class and Tyler is definitely a 4 yr guy.

[SilkyJ]

"Additionally, you will NEVER see mason or ryan kelly (should he commit) play the 3 in our offense"

I'd be careful about that word "never." Mark Alarie and Mike Dunleavy both played the 3 at one time or another at Duke, so there are some precedents. Kelly especially may have the skill set to play the 3. Whether or not he has the defensive ability to play the 3 is another question.

couple things: I don't think either alaire or dunleavy are good direct comparables. Dunleavy is, was, and always has been a shooting guard, but as pointed out above, he just didn't stop growing his senior year of HS and first year or two at duke. Kelly and Mason and power forwards and I think both played some center on the U-18 team this year.

Also, Alarie was 6'8.

yes, using superlatives is never a good a idea ( ;) ) so I'll take it back, but playing those guys at the 3 is certainly something you won't see employed except in the most rare of situations...and perhaps never.


If any of our future forwards or possible recruits demonstrate the lateral quickness and the ball skills to play as a "3" in K's system, I definitely don't think K would have a problem fielding a lineup of (this is purely hypothetical, of course) say Nolan Smith, Williams, Kelly, Mason, and Josh Smith (if we actually managed land Smith and Kelly). Honestly, I think such a lineup could be devastatingly effective on both ends of the floor assuming that Kelly and Mason are quick enough to spend some time at the 3.

Big assumption, and i don't think either is quick enough to defend the 3.

Another factor that neither one of you addressed is our tendency to be guard oriented and have a guard heavy team, nearly all of them Semi-Studs to Studs. We are talking about having, nolan, marty, scheyer, elliott, and potentially gerald and KB in the backcourt when Mason and Kelly arrive. then the next year add nolan, elliot, dawkins and thornton for sure, and potentially KB and BK and maybe Barnes. Their competition up front is less formidable as the only stud to compete against for playing time will be Singler. Lance and Zoubs should get some PT, but there is no known commodity up front, so I'll stand by my statement that they will be playing the 4 and the 5.

[bozz03]

I don't see either playing the 3 at Duke unless we come up against a team where the size is favorable and comfortable defensively. There are some teams that utilize a 6'8 guy at the 3 where u could see a player like kelly play that position. This is also why i think Barnes becomes such a vital player for this recruitment class b/c of him being 6'6.

[jimsumner]

"Also, Alarie was 6'8."

Still is. :)

And Kelly is 6'9". I'm not sure that one inch categorically precludes Kelly from playing the 3. Lateral quickness might, however.

Just trying to point out that K hasn't always gone the three-guard route. In fact, that is a fairly recent development.

[jv001]

"Also, Alarie was 6'8."

Still is. :)

And Kelly is 6'9". I'm not sure that one inch categorically precludes Kelly from playing the 3. Lateral quickness might, however.

Just trying to point out that K hasn't always gone the three-guard route. In fact, that is a fairly recent development.

And that has been more from necessity than anything else. We have some very good guards.

[jimsumner]

"And that has been more from necessity than anything else. We have some very good guards."

A little push, a little pull. Recently Duke has had so many good players in the 6'5" and under range, that playing three, even four, has seemed like the best option. But some of the taller players haven't kept up their end of the bargain.

[COYS]

Dunleavy is, was, and always has been a shooting guard

I believe this to be a debatable point, although I guess the debate is over minutia rather than anything serious. He has played both positions in the NBA and I think there are pros and cons to him at either spot. Right now it looks like he'll be playing SG for another year with Indy, but he is more than capable of playing the SF spot and would do well in that role. Either way, I definitely think this is a pretty strong statement. If anything, he's a perfect example of one of K's players who can adapt to multiple positions as need be.


. . . Big assumption, and i don't think either is quick enough to defend the 3 . . .

I apologize if my original post was confusing, but the situation I described with Mason, Kelly, and Josh Smith all seeing the floor at the same time was purely a hypothetical based on a large number of self-acknowledged assumptions (that Mason or Kelly will have enough lateral quickness to play as a college "3," that Kelly and Smith actually show up on campus, and that our personnel situation is such that we could see a lineup with Nolan, Williams, Kelly, Mason, and Josh Smith). I used this example only to demonstrate a situation in which coach K would have a lineup with three tall forwards including a power forward/small forward combo like Mason or Kelly. I haven't seen Kelly play or anything, but from what I've read, I'm inclined to agree with you that it's unlikely that we would see that unless Mason or Kelly becomes quicker than anyone realizes is possible at this moment or develops a truly killer three point shot. I certainly recognize how unlikely it is that all these things will happen. Throw the possible commitments of Boynton, Knight, and Barnes into the mix and it is even more unlikely (although that would be awesome to have all those guys, no?).


I'll stand by my statement that they will be playing the 4 and the 5.

Definitely not arguing with you, here. I think if one of them ends up playing the "3" spot it means some of our guards didn't live up to expectations or we have a huge combination of early-entry and/or recruiting misses with some of the guards. Even if all of the other assumptions I made for the hypothetical turn out to be true and Kelly works as a '3' (despite the fact that this is unlikely) our depth at guard will still probably mean we play three guards.

[dukeimac]

These are examples of why I don't put much faith in what posters have to say about recruits. In looking at Scout. com, Rivals.com and Espn (only non-paying sites I will give you) and this is what they have to say.

Miles Plumlee pluses are plays facing the basket, instincts and potential (BB IQ) with minuses being strength and rebounding. He is a good weak side helper and because he can put the ball on the floor he fits between a 4 (not a power) and a 3. No way he plays the post but he does run the floor well for a big guy.

Mason Plumlee pluses are mid-range game, rebounding and potential (BB IQ) with minuses as no go-to move and weak at the post play (doesn't do well with back to the basket). Thus, no way this guy plays the 5 and possible 4 but not a power 4. He does run the floor well for a big guy. Weak at the 3 until he gets a good outside game and is able to put the ball on the floor.

Ryan Kelly pluses are perimeter game, poised and versatility with misuses being defensive presence and traffic rebounding. Another between the 3 and 4 positions with no power in it. No way he plays the 5 but does run the floor well for a big guy.

Coach K is always about making teams adjust to his style than Duke adjusting to the other teams style. Actually, with this kind of size without the physicalness I would believe Duke will be playing some zone; that is if they get Kelly.

[skitelz]

While those comments might have been true a while ago, they hardly ever get updated. For example, Miles was at one point considered a small power forward, but he grew about 2 inches, learned to rebound his senior year, and has gained serious weight. He can very easily be a more perimeter oriented center (think laettner) in the Duke offense.

The comments on Mason and Ryan need to be updated as well. Mason was once considered a weak power forward with no go to move but is much better now. If he can score and hold his own defensively with derrick favors, then he is obviously much improved. Plus the added growth and muscle factor into the equation. Ryan's case is slightly different. While the two negatives for him (defensive presence and traffic rebounding) still plague him, he has improved in both areas and most feel that his outstanding in/out game on offense makes up for everything else. Added height (most publications list him at 6'10 now) has helped add power to his game.

[dukeimac]

Some places are behind but the paid sights stay updated. And they are still holding true. None of these guys are logging as physical players; Mason is the closet to a post player but they still don't liken him to a physical 4 position.

The reason most sites don't update so quickly is because a player might play well for 2 or 3 games (special events) but that is no indication they have improved. Most of the scouting reports will hold true until about mid way through the season because a few games don't change anything.

Scouts will note, that players tend to play at a higher level when they know coaches (multiple) are in the crowd and then they go home and revert back to their old ways or their high school coaches need them to play differently.

I'll go back to what someone said earlier on this thread, that KB and Bk want to play together and others say they heard that they won't play together, in college that is. I would rather defer to the scouts and go by what they say, they have a lot more inside info than most.

[ice-9]

Couple things: Marty redshirted last year so while he could graduate and leave after this year, he could also stick around for a 5th year. Additionally, you will NEVER see mason or ryan kelly (should he commit) play the 3 in our offense. They will play the 4 and/or the 5. We like to play players "up" a position so to speak, not down a position. i.e. gerald is really a SG or a 2, but we play him at the 3 quite often, and singler is really a college 3 or a 4, but we play him as a 4 or a 5. You will almost never see a guard oriented team like Duke play a 6'11 or 6'10 guy at the small forward position.

Oops, my bad RE: Marty.

The situation I posited was the following: Henderson, Singler and Smith leave early. That means we'll have: Scheyer, Williams, Pocius, Miles, Olek, Mason, Zoubek and Thomas on the roster. Note that I've also deliberately assumed that Boynton isn't coming.

What's the best starting five with the above roster for 2009-2010 season? There's a reasonable chance it'll be
PG: Scheyer
SG: Marty
SF: Williams
PF: Thomas
C: Zoubek

I could also see a scenario where Williams plays SG and Olek plays SF if Marty doesn't improve enough. There's also a scenario where if Thomas fails to take his game to the next level Mason will start instead. Similarly, if Miles exceeds expectations while Zoubek underperforms, Miles could start over Zoubek.

Given the above, IF we get Kelly, where would you slot him in assuming he plays up to his high school ranking? Do we play Scheyer, Marty and Williams on the wings? Will Marty improve enough to merit a starting position? Or do we go with our five best players relative to positions needed and slot Kelly at the 3 and Williams at the 2?

While the probability of this scenario occurring is already small, I'd think the probability of a lineup with Scheyer, Williams, Kelly, Thomas/Mason and Zoubek/Miles is certainly better than "never."

Of course we won't have this problem if Smith doesn't leave early and/or if we get Boynton, because in that scenario 3 of our best 5 players are likely wings. But if neither player is there come 2009...I think there's a chance that Kelly can play the 3 for us.

(And note that in the pros, if Kelly makes it there, he's definitely a 3. And if he plays for a team like, say, Syracuse, he could cause a lot of matchup nightmares on the offensive end at the 3.)

[jimsumner]

"The situation I posited was the following: Henderson, Singler and Smith leave early"

With all due respect, the Nolan Smith-to-the-NBA-after-this-season scenario seems a bit much to me. Well, more like a lot much.

[jv001]

"The situation I posited was the following: Henderson, Singler and Smith leave early"

With all due respect, the Nolan Smith-to-the-NBA-after-this-season scenario seems a bit much to me. Well, more like a lot much.

I would be greatly suprised to see Nolan head to the NBA next year. He would have to put up fantastic numbers and Duke would have to reach the Final Four imo. But I have been suprised before(Corey and Will).

[ice-9]

I would be greatly suprised to see Nolan head to the NBA next year. He would have to put up fantastic numbers and Duke would have to reach the Final Four imo. But I have been suprised before(Corey and Will).

That's precisely the scenario I laid out. If we get to the Final Four or win a championship and Smith plays well enough to supplant Paulus for the starting role (which means he puts up decent numbers)...why not?

Isn't this what happened with Avery? I frame this in terms of Smith (as his going to the draft and us not getting Boynton would really hurt) but the same can be said for Scheyer. It's possible that as one of the top 3 scorers on a championship team he may decide to leave early for the draft. Ya never know.

The above scenarios are exactly why we should keep chasing Boynton and Kelly, because we are one monster season away from having many good players to too few. But this would be an excellent problem to have. :)

[jv001]

That's precisely the scenario I laid out. If we get to the Final Four or win a championship and Smith plays well enough to supplant Paulus for the starting role (which means he puts up decent numbers)...why not?

Isn't this what happened with Avery? I frame this in terms of Smith (as his going to the draft and us not getting Boynton would really hurt) but the same can be said for Scheyer. It's possible that as one of the top 3 scorers on a championship team he may decide to leave early for the draft. Ya never know.

The above scenarios are exactly why we should keep chasing Boynton and Kelly, because we are one monster season away from having many good players to too few. But this would be an excellent problem to have. :)Yes we should continue chasing Kenny, Ryan and maybe even Wilson. I had rather have too many rather than not having enough. If memory serves me correctly that has happened in seasons passed.

[dukeimac]

Some good news, KB has listed Duke as his last official visit. That always bodes well. Usually means he won't commit until after all the visits are complete and Duke has the last chance to impress him.

Also, Nolan didn't seem like the type of person to leave early for the pros but I know he was very close to Johnny and with Johnny gone one just doesn't know. If he valued that relationship a lot and it isn't replaced, which frankly I don't see how it can be because Johnny was there for him after his dad passed, I could see him leave early. Not to say it wouldn't be a mistake for him to leave early but he just may not have that feeling for Duke.

I hope he has a close relationship with the Duke family and that Johnny points him in the right direction but one just doesn't know how changes like this affect a person.

[Cameron]

and Smith plays well enough to supplant Paulus for the starting role

By "supplant Paulus," are you referencing toward a moment during this season when you believe that Nolan could possibly overtake the point, or toward next year, when Nolan would in fact be Greg's replacement? (My latter question intends to ask whether you were merely referring to Nolan's starting role progression in a theoretical sense, as in he will have played well enough to be Greg's replacement the following season but not actually take Greg's current spot.)

I'm sure that was as confusing as hell, but I didn't want to put words into your mouth as I was not totally sure what sentiment you were trying to convey.

(If the following is not what you were referencing, then please ignore. This will just be for the posters who I have seen share this belief.)

However, if you were in fact hinting towards Greg possibly being removed from his starting point guard slot, I think you are vastly mistaken. Coach Krzyzewski has been honing Greg since his first day in Durham for this very moment, Greg's senior campaign. Why? Because he's Coach Krzyzewski's point guard. And Greg only further solidified our Coach's inner beliefs by having an All-ACC season a year ago, stepping up as Duke's go to performer down the stretch time and time again. Not only did Greg lead all ACC point guards in assist to turnover ratio in 2007-08, but he also was the number one three-point shooter in the league--and possibly the most clutch long ball shooter in all of America.

He's not being replaced.

I'm sure Nolan will see some major time at the one. Don't get me wrong. But it certainly won't be as a starter.

It should also be noted that this is coming from a person who, with all his finger strength, protested for a Nolan Smith point guard position after the 2006-07 season.

Today, I am proud that Greg is our man. Extremely proud.

[BD80]

Some good news, KB has listed Duke as his last official visit. That always bodes well. Usually means he won't commit until after all the visits are complete and Duke has the last chance to impress him.


Kenny would be a huge get for us. He is National Championship level talent. Not that we don't have a shot at it without KB - but he is the kind of player that can take over big games against even the most talented opponents. The fact that we already have a team good enough to reach the Final Four should be an inducement for KB to come to Duke, where he would be most likely to be going to the Final Four.

I am fine with Kenny having one great season and leaving as a top draft pick, knowing that he will have the option to stay if he doesn't perform sufficiently well his first year. It sounds like KB is the kind of kid that will take his classes seriously, even if he hopes to soon be cashing an NBA paycheck.

[watzone]

09:
Mason Plumlee 6'11 PF (committed)
Kenny Boynton 6'2 PG/SG (offered)
Ryan Kelly 6'10 PF (offered)
Jamil Wilson 6'7 SF/PF (possible offer, more of a back-up plan, has scheduled a visit)

10:
Andre Dawkins 6'5 SG (committed)
Josh Hairston 6'8 SF/PF (committed)
Tyler Thornton 6'2 PG (committed)
Brandon Knight 6'3 PG (offered)
Josh Smith 6'10 C (offered)
Harrison Barnes 6'6 SF (offered)
Mychal Parker 6'6 SF (back-up plan)
Nate Lubick 6'8 PF (back-up plan)

does that help? :)

Jamil Wilson has NOT scheduled a visit to Duke nor has he been offered. There are a couple of names missing according to my list. Not to mention one which is way down the line.

[jimsumner]

I just don't see the Avery-Smith correlation. Avery was the only true PG on the '99 team. He started from day one, averaged 14 points and 5 assists per game, barely missed making first-team All-ACC, for a 37-2 team. He wasn't especially interested in academics and his family had serious financial needs.

Smith is a reserve, albeit one with significant potential, a good student, and his family isn't poor. He also hasn't demonstrated anything approaching NBA-level PG skills.

Not to mention the fact that leaving early for the NBA didn't exactly work out for Avery.

[Kedsy]

"The situation I posited was the following: Henderson, Singler and Smith leave early"

With all due respect, the Nolan Smith-to-the-NBA-after-this-season scenario seems a bit much to me. Well, more like a lot much.


While I agree that Nolan Smith entering the NBA draft this coming June is quite a long shot, isn't the real concern with him that he might transfer now that the Johnny Dawkins connection is gone and we have so many other guards? I don't have any inside information and I'm not suggesting it's going to happen, but it's not out of the realm of possibility when speculating about losing several players after this year, is it?

[Diddy]

While I will agree with most posters that Nolan will be on the team next year, the original poster was correct that Nolan COULD go pro this year. By could, I mean that he is one of the three players on this years team that could be good enough to warrant an early entrance.

I expect a good year from Kyle, and a monster year from Hendo. I think Hendo will have the sort of year that come March many pundits will say words to the effect of "Hans gets all the pub but Hendo might be having a better year."

If both these guys have good to great years AND we make a deep run in March (Elite 8 at the very least) then they could both go. Frankly, for that deep run to happen, I really feel that at least one other player would have to have a good year. I think Nolan is the only guy who fits that description. None of our posts do, and I just don't think Eliot Williams will show enough as a true frosh to warrant the NBA. The only remaining player is Jon, and I doubt his game will sparkle enough for the NBA. He will be a good player for us, and at the next level, but he just doesn't scream early entry, and there is nothing wrong with that.

Nolan has the athleticism, skills, and attitude to excell in the NBA. If he has really pushed himself this summer, and shows that this year, then he COULD be an early entry candidate.

Remember, this will be one of the worst NBA drafts in years, and that will affect the decision making process of every player even considering the NBA.

[Edouble]

While I will agree with most posters that Nolan will be on the team next year, the original poster was correct that Nolan COULD go pro this year.

Glad to know you think he'll be on the team. :confused:

[jimsumner]

I don't think there was ever much of a chance that Nolan would transfer.

But if he were going to, he would have done so over the summer. Right now he projects as the top backcourt reserve at both the 1 and 2 and should play 25 or so minutes per game. Next year he projects to take over as starting PG upon the graduation of Greg Paulus.

I fail to see how Duke has or will have so many guards that Nolan Smith doesn't play a major role over the next three seasons.

Think about the bizarre turn taken by this thread. Either Nolan Smith is going to blow up and go directly to the NBA or transfer because he's not good enough to play ahead of all the other talented guards in the program.

Honestly, do people just stay awake nights thinking of things to worry about?

Deep cleansing breath. Find your happy place.

[SilkyJ]

I believe this to be a debatable point, although I guess the debate is over minutia rather than anything serious. He has played both positions in the NBA and I think there are pros and cons to him at either spot. Right now it looks like he'll be playing SG for another year with Indy, but he is more than capable of playing the SF spot and would do well in that role. Either way, I definitely think this is a pretty strong statement. If anything, he's a perfect example of one of K's players who can adapt to multiple positions as need be.

Sorry, I mean that his style of play or whatever is that of a SG. He is a SG, he's just tall so he can move around and defend multiple positions.



I apologize if my original post was confusing

It wasn't. You said (and repeated) that if they were quick enough to play the 3 they might. I don't think they are, and I expect both of them to bulk up, i.e. work on strength on more than quickness.



our depth at guard will still probably mean we play three guards.

Exactly, or maybe we move singler/lance to the 3 or something, but given our depth at guard and lack of inside presence (and other reasons I mentioned), these guys will be playing up front.


"Also, Alarie was 6'8."

Still is. :)

Doubt it. 20+ years later he's bound to have shrunk half an inch or so ;)



And Kelly is 6'9". I'm not sure that one inch categorically precludes Kelly from playing the 3. Lateral quickness might, however.

Just trying to point out that K hasn't always gone the three-guard route. In fact, that is a fairly recent development.

Scout lists him at 6'10.5...clearly you're looking at Rivals...I guess that's why we have to take all the recruiting info with a grain of salt.


"And that has been more from necessity than anything else. We have some very good guards."

A little push, a little pull. Recently Duke has had so many good players in the 6'5" and under range, that playing three, even four, has seemed like the best option. But some of the taller players haven't kept up their end of the bargain.

I think this speaks to my point as well.


These are examples of why I don't put much faith in what posters have to say about recruits. In looking at Scout. com, Rivals.com and Espn (only non-paying sites I will give you) and this is what they have to say.

Miles Plumlee pluses are plays facing the basket, instincts and potential (BB IQ) with minuses being strength and rebounding. He is a good weak side helper and because he can put the ball on the floor he fits between a 4 (not a power) and a 3. No way he plays the post but he does run the floor well for a big guy.

Mason Plumlee pluses are mid-range game, rebounding and potential (BB IQ) with minuses as no go-to move and weak at the post play (doesn't do well with back to the basket). Thus, no way this guy plays the 5 and possible 4 but not a power 4. He does run the floor well for a big guy. Weak at the 3 until he gets a good outside game and is able to put the ball on the floor.

Ryan Kelly pluses are perimeter game, poised and versatility with misuses being defensive presence and traffic rebounding. Another between the 3 and 4 positions with no power in it. No way he plays the 5 but does run the floor well for a big guy.

You are neglecting to consider that those quotes are about the players in general, and don't take into consideration where they will be playing their basketball, i.e. what style of play the coach likes to employ, the personnel on that team, etc. etc.

I bet if you looked up those same quotes for Singler and Lance, it would have said very, very, similar stuff, yet both play the 4 and the 5 for us, for a couple different reasons.



Coach K is always about making teams adjust to his style than Duke adjusting to the other teams style. Actually, with this kind of size without the physicalness I would believe Duke will be playing some zone; that is if they get Kelly.

How long have you watched duke basketball? how many minutes of zone have you seen?

[COYS]

.
I bet if you looked up those same quotes for Singler and Lance, it would have said very, very, similar stuff, yet both play the 4 and the 5 for us, for a couple different reasons.


I think that's a really good point. Lance and Singler are "similar" in that they are forwards who prefer to face the basket and roam the perimeter rather than stay as an anchor in the post. Both guys' face up games are far superior to their post games (although, I actually think Singler is pretty savvy on the block). Yet they are totally different players. Kelly and Mason might be described similarly in the short scouting write-ups that the masses (meaning me) can read, but for those of us who have seen them play and for Coach K and the rest of the staff, it's probably pretty obvious that each player has a distinctive game even if they both can be described as forwards with developed perimeter games.

[SilkyJ]

While I agree that Nolan Smith entering the NBA draft this coming June is quite a long shot, isn't the real concern with him that he might transfer now that the Johnny Dawkins connection is gone and we have so many other guards? I don't have any inside information and I'm not suggesting it's going to happen, but it's not out of the realm of possibility when speculating about losing several players after this year, is it?

How in the world did this thread get hijacked into a Nolan going pro or transferring thread. Nolan is NOT transferring (how in the world did that get brought up). Nolan is nowhere NEAR going pro (though I would love for him to have such a breakout year where such speculation would be warranted. At this point it is insane to talk about that, however.) Let's get back to recruiting.

[jv001]

I agree. Nolan is not declaring nor transferring. Now what about KB? Is he coming or isn't he? 50-50?

[RainingThrees]

If coach K can connect to him (which Kenny says hasn't really happened) then I think he will come to duke. That is just my gut feeling because we are still frontrunners even though he says he hasn't really connected to the staff.

[skitelz]

Jamil Wilson has NOT scheduled a visit to Duke nor has he been offered. There are a couple of names missing according to my list. Not to mention one which is way down the line.


Well according to scout, he has scheduled a visit....and I know that he has not been offered yet. That's why I put "possible offer, more of a back-up plan".

http://duke.scout.com/a.z?s=167&p=8&c=1&nid=3001375

Thats the most complete list that I can give him. I dont have premium. I'm sure you do know more about the Duke recruitment list than I do, but as you didnt post a list, I posted one in the most general fashion.

[ice-9]

By "supplant Paulus," are you referencing toward a moment during this season when you believe that Nolan could possibly overtake the point, or toward next year, when Nolan would in fact be Greg's replacement? (My latter question intends to ask whether you were merely referring to Nolan's starting role progression in a theoretical sense, as in he will have played well enough to be Greg's replacement the following season but not actually take Greg's current spot.)

I'm sure that was as confusing as hell, but I didn't want to put words into your mouth as I was not totally sure what sentiment you were trying to convey.

(If the following is not what you were referencing, then please ignore. This will just be for the posters who I have seen share this belief.)

However, if you were in fact hinting towards Greg possibly being removed from his starting point guard slot, I think you are vastly mistaken. Coach Krzyzewski has been honing Greg since his first day in Durham for this very moment, Greg's senior campaign. Why? Because he's Coach Krzyzewski's point guard. And Greg only further solidified our Coach's inner beliefs by having an All-ACC season a year ago, stepping up as Duke's go to performer down the stretch time and time again. Not only did Greg lead all ACC point guards in assist to turnover ratio in 2007-08, but he also was the number one three-point shooter in the league--and possibly the most clutch long ball shooter in all of America.

He's not being replaced.

I'm sure Nolan will see some major time at the one. Don't get me wrong. But it certainly won't be as a starter.

It should also be noted that this is coming from a person who, with all his finger strength, protested for a Nolan Smith point guard position after the 2006-07 season.

Today, I am proud that Greg is our man. Extremely proud.


Last season, I was one of the few people who kept saying Paulus should keep his starting job even when many people on this board pushed for Nolan...and this was BEFORE Nolan got injured and had minutes reduced. So I am a huge Paulus fan.

However, it's possible that Nolan could have such a breakout season this year that he takes over Paulus' starting role. Or at least finishes games if he doesn't start them.

All of the Nolan-going-pro talk is just me being paranoid and sketching out all the possible scenarios that could happen to our team. I do think the chances of Nolan going pro is small, but if it does happen it would be really, really good to have Boynton on board.

[freedevil]

I'm not an advocate of "dirty recruiting" (i.e. emphasizing other schools' negatives as opposed to the positive attributes of your own school), but how can Donovan's contract situation not affect his recruitment of KB and BK?

[Kedsy]

I'm not an advocate of "dirty recruiting" (i.e. emphasizing other schools' negatives as opposed to the positive attributes of your own school), but how can Donovan's contract situation not affect his recruitment of KB and BK?


Wishful thinking.

[SilkyJ]

Wishful thinking.

agreed. especially considering it appear those guys dont plan to stick around too long.

[dukeimac]

You are neglecting to consider that those quotes are about the players in general, and don't take into consideration where they will be playing their basketball, i.e. what style of play the coach likes to employ, the personnel on that team, etc. etc.

How long have you watched duke basketball? how many minutes of zone have you seen?

Your right they are quotes in general from professional scouts. They evaluate the kid on what skills they have and what position they are best fit for in college. After all they have seen these guys play more than just a weekend of basketball games. No scout every said a word about Singler guarding the post but he did. The thing that made that happen was Singler was a physical player and the scouts stated that. And your right, no scout had Thomas as a post player but come on, are you really considering him a post player now?

Thus, I take the scouts reports much more serious than posters.

As for the zone, you are right about Duke not playing zone, I never said they did. I'm saying if he signs these three guys you just might see him go to zone with all three of them in the game, they would be best fit for a zone since they are not physical players.

[SilkyJ]

No scout every said a word about Singler guarding the post but he did. The thing that made that happen was Singler was a physical player and the scouts stated that. And your right, no scout had Thomas as a post player but come on, are you really considering him a post player now?


I wouldn't consider lance a pure poster player, no. But he plays the 4 or the 5 for us. So thank you for proving my point.

Kelly and Mason may not be pure post players but they will/would play the post for US. Mason and Kelly are also both taller and will or should be heavier than Lance was as a freshman, if/when they matriculate.

[ice-9]

Question for the old(er) timers...

With Brand, Boozer and Shelden the Duke teams tend to play a 4-out 1-in offense. But before we had those big bruisers, i.e. at a time when our centers were skinnier or shorter, did we still play a 4-out 1-in offense? Or was it more like 3-out and 2-in?

My amateur opinion is that in a 4-out, 1-in offense, Lance Thomas is ill-suited to be that guy in the post. And I suspect the same for Mason and Ryan though I could be proven wrong.

[miramar]

Question for the old(er) timers...

With Brand, Boozer and Shelden the Duke teams tend to play a 4-out 1-in offense. But before we had those big bruisers, i.e. at a time when our centers were skinnier or shorter, did we still play a 4-out 1-in offense? Or was it more like 3-out and 2-in?

My amateur opinion is that in a 4-out, 1-in offense, Lance Thomas is ill-suited to be that guy in the post. And I suspect the same for Mason and Ryan though I could be proven wrong.

Actually it's been a bit of a mixed bag as far as I can remember. A guy like Laettner could play inside and out, which made him all the more effective. Ferry could play both ways, although he wasn't a true center (well, neither was Brickey, who played alongside him part of the time). With a motion offense, positions don't mean as much, and Coach K obviously adapts things to his personnel.

[RainingThrees]

This 4 out 1 in is more advantageous on offense when we have guys like Singler who can step out and shoot the 3 or drive past the slow big guy cough Hansbrough cough. But on defense when the other team plays 2 big guys and a bigger 3 it is almost impossible to keep up defensively.

[MChambers]

This 4 out 1 in is more advantageous on offense when we have guys like Singler who can step out and shoot the 3 or drive past the slow big guy cough Hansbrough cough. But on defense when the other team plays 2 big guys and a bigger 3 it is almost impossible to keep up defensively.
I beg to differ. Duke's pressure defense is most effective with five good, quick athletes. Size is not as important as speed and the ability to defend multiple positions.

[RainingThrees]

One problem with pressure D is that it is hard to pull off against a good point like Lawson. And will pressure d help you when a skilled big man has the ball in the low post. if you doulbe he'll kick it out and that skilled point will find the open man.

[jimsumner]

"But on defense when the other team plays 2 big guys and a bigger 3 it is almost impossible to keep up defensively"

Right. That's why Duke had so much trouble with that Christian Laettner, Grant Hill, Brian Davis frontline in the early 1990s. Couldn't guard the big guys.

[throatybeard]

I just don't see the Avery-Smith correlation. Avery was the only true PG on the '99 team. He started from day one, averaged 14 points and 5 assists per game, barely missed making first-team All-ACC, for a 37-2 team. He wasn't especially interested in academics and his family had serious financial needs.

Smith is a reserve, albeit one with significant potential, a good student, and his family isn't poor. He also hasn't demonstrated anything approaching NBA-level PG skills.

Not to mention the fact that leaving early for the NBA didn't exactly work out for Avery.

I want to assert that we need to listen to Jim Sumner, instead of shooting off our mouths.

[RainingThrees]

Can you really compare our line-up now to that of Laettner, Hill, Davis. All I know is Gerald is probably better than Brian, but you cannot compare Singler and Thomas to two of Duke's greatest ever.

[dkbaseball]

I want to assert that we need to listen to Jim Sumner, instead of shooting off our mouths.

Invariably a wise policy. I was forced to contemplate a doctor visit the other day because I had found myself in minor disagreement with Jim over a couple of matters, and figured I must have come unhinged.

[jv001]

"But on defense when the other team plays 2 big guys and a bigger 3 it is almost impossible to keep up defensively"

Right. That's why Duke had so much trouble with that Christian Laettner, Grant Hill, Brian Davis frontline in the early 1990s. Couldn't guard the big guys.

Yes I seem to remember Christian out playing Shack and Grant really putting it to The Big Dog. Brian was a fine player his senior year. Yeh I would say that was a pretty good frontline.

[jimsumner]

Raining Threes,

Of course Zoubek and Singler aren't as good as Laettner and Hill.

It also is irrelevant to your assertion that it is almost impossible for a 4 out, 1 in team to adequately defend larger teams. Maybe Mike Krzyzewski needs better players. But that's a different discussion.

If you like, I could reference the 1988 team, which had a front line that went 6'10", 6'6", 6'5" and frequently had the smallest guy of the bunch-Robert Brickey--jump center. And the 6'10" guy spent a lot of time on the perimeter. That team somehow made the the Final Four and they absolutely shut down people on D. They won three times against a UNC team that started J.R. Reid and Scott Williams at the 4/5.

Or the 1994 team which made it to the title game with Tony Lang at the 4, a skinny but very mobile defender.

Without putting too fine a point on it, Duke has used a scheme similar to this year's likely scheme with some regularity over the years and somehow has lived to tell about it.

K has also used twin towers, e.g. 1989, 1990, 1996, 2006, on occasion. So the man does have some flexibility. But let me suggest that the 4 out, 1 in system is not inherently flawed.

[RainingThrees]

I actually like the 4 out 1 in system because it allows us to attack off the dribble and it streches out the opponents d. I just think that this year our personnel are going to have a hard time playing that system on d like last year, sure we have 2 more PF's in OC and Miles but neither are lock down d type of players.

[Jumbo]

I actually like the 4 out 1 in system because it allows us to attack off the dribble and it streches out the opponents d. I just think that this year our personnel are going to have a hard time playing that system on d like last year, sure we have 2 more PF's in OC and Miles but neither are lock down d type of players.

Slow down.
Fact: Duke has rarely played two pure bigs under K. Generally, the "4" has been a versatile guy in the 6'6"-6'8" range. Duke played Shel and Shav together in 2004-05, Josh and Shel together in 2005-06 and Meek and Parks together in 1994-95 (and I don't think we'd want to repeat that experience). Abdelnaby and Laettner played together, as did Laettner and Ferry.

Fact: Most teams around the country don't play two pure bigs.
Because of this, you whoever plays the 4 isn't exactly going to get abused on the block. Plus, Singler's post D is solid, and anyone who plays a real slow-footed, bruising, tall PF will have to deal with Singler's perimeter skills at the other end.

Fact: Duke's pressure man-to-man requires quickness across the board (or, at a minimum, at the 1-4 spots).
Duke's system allows teams to attack off the dribble if they can handle the ball pressure. Duke's wings stay at home and deny threes, which requires quick help-and-recover skills from the 4 and 5.

Fact: Duke's defense doesn't require a "lock down defender," particularly in the post.
It's much more important to be a good help defender down low, because of what I described above. And, as we've seen, Coach K is perfectly fine letting one guy go to town down low (see Killingsworth, Marco) as long as the D can take the perimeter players out of the game by denying looks from three.

I'm not sure where you're going with your analysis, but Duke's best teams have always been built on quickness and versatility.

[MChambers]

That the really talented big men in college ball tend to be the ones who go to the NBA very early, meaning that there are fewer talented bigs in college ball.

[dukeimac]

SilkJ you are right, Thomas has been playing the 4 and 5 for Duke but in comparisons to other ACC teams, when he does it makes himself about the 8th or 9th best 4 or 5 in the ACC. He definitely isn't a 5 and plays a poor 4.

I'm just surprised that people are going back to the 80's and early 90's to make there points. Just in the 21st century this game has changed. I think the motion offense Coach K is running these days is a better fit for 2 - 4's and a taller 3 then having the traditional 5 - 4 - 3 players. And I see that from the recruits they have offered.

I see this from the Duke pros. Brand and Boozer play the finesse 4 and not the power 4 or 5 position and they are having success. If Sheldon is going to have success in the pros he too will need to convert his ways. And I think Coach K sees that and believes he needs to coach that way in college.

[COYS]

Fact: Duke's pressure man-to-man requires quickness across the board (or, at a minimum, at the 1-4 spots).
Duke's system allows teams to attack off the dribble if they can handle the ball pressure. Duke's wings stay at home and deny threes, which requires quick help-and-recover skills from the 4 and 5.

Fact: Duke's defense doesn't require a "lock down defender," particularly in the post.
It's much more important to be a good help defender down low, because of what I described above. And, as we've seen, Coach K is perfectly fine letting one guy go to town down low (see Killingsworth, Marco) as long as the D can take the perimeter players out of the game by denying looks from three.


As usual, excellent points, Jumbo. I would also like to add that another essential element of the Duke defense is denying the easy entry pass into the post in the first place. By applying intense pressure on the perimeter and jumping into the passing lanes in all parts of the court, coach K's system also prevents opposing guards from making quality passes into the post. The opposing team's post players are often forced to receive the ball a little further out than they are used to or simply receive a poor pass that does not allow them to transition into their offensive moves comfortably and quickly. If our wings are successfully denying entry passes into the post and our post players possess the quickness to intercept lazy passes into the post (which Lance, Kyle, Olek, etc. all possess), it almost doesn't matter how good the opposition's post players are. Obviously, this doesn't happen all the time, but it does allow Duke to overwhelm teams with weak guard play no matter how good their post players are.

[Kedsy]

As usual, excellent points, Jumbo. I would also like to add that another essential element of the Duke defense is denying the easy entry pass into the post in the first place. By applying intense pressure on the perimeter and jumping into the passing lanes in all parts of the court, coach K's system also prevents opposing guards from making quality passes into the post. The opposing team's post players are often forced to receive the ball a little further out than they are used to or simply receive a poor pass that does not allow them to transition into their offensive moves comfortably and quickly. If our wings are successfully denying entry passes into the post and our post players possess the quickness to intercept lazy passes into the post (which Lance, Kyle, Olek, etc. all possess), it almost doesn't matter how good the opposition's post players are. Obviously, this doesn't happen all the time, but it does allow Duke to overwhelm teams with weak guard play no matter how good their post players are.


I agree with this, and Jumbo's post as well, which is a main reason why IMO the Zoubek dreamers out there are probably not going to get their wish, unless Z has gotten a lot quicker and a lot better at help defense. Last year to me he only seemed effective during the rare periods that Duke played zone, and we all know how often that's going to happen. (The other reason, of course, is that Zoubek is not fast enough to be effective in Duke's "Phoenix-style" offense, but that's probably a discussion for another day.)

And, please, don't accuse me of hijacking this thread. It was hijacked by others a long time ago. If anyone has anything of value to add about Duke's remaining recruits, I'm all in favor of bringing this thread back to its original purpose.

[dw0827]

Fact: Duke's pressure man-to-man requires quickness across the board (or, at a minimum, at the 1-4 spots).
Duke's system allows teams to attack off the dribble if they can handle the ball pressure. Duke's wings stay at home and deny threes, which requires quick help-and-recover skills from the 4 and 5.

Fact: Duke's defense doesn't require a "lock down defender," particularly in the post.
It's much more important to be a good help defender down low, because of what I described above. And, as we've seen, Coach K is perfectly fine letting one guy go to town down low (see Killingsworth, Marco) as long as the D can take the perimeter players out of the game by denying looks from three.


Jumbo talks about our how our defense has emphasized denying the three (among other things).

With the line being pushed back some, any thoughts on whether this will have a significant impact on our overall defensive philosophy? Personally, I suspect not . . .

. . . and if this has been discussed at length in other threads, I apologize. I've been tuned out lately.

Ditto on hijacking the thread . . . see above

[jimsumner]

"Just in the 21st century this game has changed. I think the motion offense Coach K is running these days is a better fit for 2 - 4's and a taller 3 then having the traditional 5 - 4 - 3 players. And I see that from the recruits they have offered."

How has it changed in the 21st century? Did it change from 1999 when Duke won 37 games with a Brand-Battier-Carrawell front line to 2001 when Duke won the NCAA title with a Boozer-Battier-Dunleavy front line? How did it change from the 32-4 team in 1998 to the Final Four team in 2004?

The only significant change I can see is that the game is younger. I'm serious. In what ways has college basketball fundamentally changed in the last eight years?

"I see this from the Duke pros. Brand and Boozer play the finesse 4 and not the power 4 or 5 position and they are having success."

Elton Brand is a finesse 4? Carlos Boozer? Neither of these guys shoots 3s, neither does much in the way of assists, and both score the overwhelming majority of their points close to the basket and they score a lot of them by physcially overpowering weaker defenders. In what what are they finesse 4s?


"If Sheldon is going to have success in the pros he too will need to convert his ways. And I think Coach K sees that and believes he needs to coach that way in college."

Evidently, if Shelden is going to have to have success in the pros, he'll have to change the way he spells his first name. Exactly how will Shelden have to change his ways? Became a finesse 4 like Brand or Boozer? He needs to play better not differently.

I'm sorry but I honestly have no earthly idea what you're talking about. I hate to bore you with examples from the '80s or '90s but how does the way K used Singler differ from the way he used Danny Ferry? If Lance Thomas were as good as Mark Alarie, them K would use Thomas the same way he used Alarie.

K has always coached to the abilities of his team. Eric Meek was a low-post power player. Greg Newton relied more on his quickness and mobility. K didn't change his philosophy, he adapted to the difference between a strong, 240-pound post player with limited mobility and a skinny 220-pounder with great mobility. They weren't the same person anymore than Zoubek and Thomas are the same person. Ferry, Laettner, and Parks could hit 3s, so they took them. Meek and Newton couldn't, so they didn't. It wasn't a change in philosophy.

How is K recruiting differently? Wouldn't Patrick Patterson or Blake Griffin have been classic back-to-the-basket 5s, similar to Brand, Boozer, or Williams? The fact that K didn't sign them doesn't mean he didn't recruit them. K has made Josh Smith a priority for 2010. He's a 280-pound post. How does Duke's interest in Smith reflect K's change in recruiting philosophy?

And if K is changing the way he coaches and he is changing the way he's recruiting, exactly how can we ascertain that without referencing the 1980s and 1990s?

[Devilsfan]

My analogy to the Olympic team is that we are a very good team but we don't have a D. Howard. We may have a Chris Bosh in the making, imo, if and when Kelly signs. Remember Bosh wasn't an all-star from birth either. We then add Smith and we have our version of Howard. Now where do we get Kobe, LeBron and Wade? Nowhere. But we do have Kyle and G thank goodness.. Hey, that's good enough to beat the college of chapel hill two out of three times a year. I'd be satisfied.

[dkbaseball]

Fact: Duke's pressure man-to-man requires quickness across the board (or, at a minimum, at the 1-4 spots).
Duke's system allows teams to attack off the dribble if they can handle the ball pressure. Duke's wings stay at home and deny threes, which requires quick help-and-recover skills from the 4 and 5.

Fact: Duke's defense doesn't require a "lock down defender," particularly in the post.
It's much more important to be a good help defender down low, because of what I described above. And, as we've seen, Coach K is perfectly fine letting one guy go to town down low (see Killingsworth, Marco) as long as the D can take the perimeter players out of the game by denying looks from three.

I'm sure most regular readers here will agree that there is very little that isn't grist for my Olek mill. These excellent points by Jumbo explain why I think Olek will be a significant contributor right away. His tools are ideally suited for Duke's pressure D.

Like everybody else in Duke's post rotation last year, he can't stop anybody in the low post, and won't until he learns to move his feet better. But he moves his feet extremely well over distances of 10-20 feet, which means he can be an excellent help and recovery defender right away. I think that he will be able to move from a position of perimeter pressure to getting over and taking a charge or blocking a shot quicker than anybody in the post rotation. He also has a real knack for stealing the ball on the perimeter, and I would expect him to be very good contesting the passing lanes.

[Diddy]

My analogy to the Olympic team is that we are a very good team but we don't have a D. Howard. We may have a Chris Bosh in the making, imo, if and when Kelly signs. Remember Bosh wasn't an all-star from birth either. We then add Smith and we have our version of Howard. Now where do we get Kobe, LeBron and Wade? Nowhere. But we do have Kyle and G thank goodness.. Hey, that's good enough to beat the college of chapel hill two out of three times a year. I'd be satisfied.

Say What? Granted, Bosh was not a superstar from the 7th grade on, but by his Senior year in Texas he was widely regarded as one of the very top prospects in the nation. Bosh seems like a very different player than Kelly. Kelly is a player with solid athleticism and advanced skills, especially on the offensive end.

Bosh was a freak athlete whose skills were very raw. VERY RAW. I do not see them as comparable players, other than they both made pushes their senior years. Kelly may well turn out to be a fantastic player, but he will play a different game than Bosh. Nowhere have I read that Kelly is even close to Bosh's athleticism, and that is NOT a slam on Kelly. He may be a capable athlete and not be in Bosh's class.

[whereinthehellami]

I'm sure most regular readers here will agree that there is very little that isn't grist for my Olek mill. These excellent points by Jumbo explain why I think Olek will be a significant contributor right away. His tools are ideally suited for Duke's pressure D.

Like everybody else in Duke's post rotation last year, he can't stop anybody in the low post, and won't until he learns to move his feet better. But he moves his feet extremely well over distances of 10-20 feet, which means he can be an excellent help and recovery defender right away. I think that he will be able to move from a position of perimeter pressure to getting over and taking a charge or blocking a shot quicker than anybody in the post rotation. He also has a real knack for stealing the ball on the perimeter, and I would expect him to be very good contesting the passing lanes.

I have only seen Olek play in All-Star games but I don't see him getting significant PT this year. His awareness and positioning are going to take a while to develop. While he might be able to move his feet pretty well, the issue will more than likley be with his head tying up his feet.

What i find funny is how people think Olek would see time in front of a healthy McClure. Dave might not have the physical potential of a Olek but he is rarely out of position and is usually a second ahead of the action. Dave is always around the ball.

[SilkyJ]

SilkJ you are right, Thomas has been playing the 4 and 5 for Duke but in comparisons to other ACC teams, when he does it makes himself about the 8th or 9th best 4 or 5 in the ACC. He definitely isn't a 5 and plays a poor 4.

Look I'm not saying the guy is good or bad at where he plays. I'm just saying thats where he plays and that, amongst other thing leads me to believe that's where Mason and Kelly will play, which I think we now agree on.



I see this from the Duke pros. Brand and Boozer play the finesse 4 and not the power 4 or 5 position and they are having success. If Sheldon is going to have success in the pros he too will need to convert his ways. And I think Coach K sees that and believes he needs to coach that way in college.

Yikes you picked a bad example. Coach K played these guys at Center their entire career, and Brand's team was one of the best in Duke history, and Boozer's won a Championship. What makes you think, after having been so successful with them as power players on the block, that Coach would change what he did or change is philosophy? I think Coach K would play them at the 5 IN COLLEGE every day of the week.


I'm sure most regular readers here will agree that there is very little that isn't grist for my Olek mill. These excellent points by Jumbo explain why I think Olek will be a significant contributor right away. His tools are ideally suited for Duke's pressure D.

Like everybody else in Duke's post rotation last year, he can't stop anybody in the low post, and won't until he learns to move his feet better. But he moves his feet extremely well over distances of 10-20 feet, which means he can be an excellent help and recovery defender right away. I think that he will be able to move from a position of perimeter pressure to getting over and taking a charge or blocking a shot quicker than anybody in the post rotation. He also has a real knack for stealing the ball on the perimeter, and I would expect him to be very good contesting the passing lanes.

I am optimistic about Olek as well, and I think you may not be giving him enough credit for his post D, especially if he is guarding the opponents PF as opposed to Center. Time will tell, but I think he can be an effective post defender while playing the 4, which is where I think we will/should use him most (even if our need is defending the 5).

But that brings me to my next point, which is that Singler is our 4, and possibly best player, and last year he showed that his post defense is solid, and that was against ACC centers. If we can slide him over to the play the 4 this year, then I think he will be more than just a solid defender: a good one, and when you combine that with his offense, I don't see him sitting very often...

[Devilsfan]

Is Olek the next Reggie Love, very athletic role player or is he more like a Tony Moore who could jump out of the gym but that's about all?

[dkbaseball]

Is Olek the next Reggie Love, very athletic role player or is he more like a Tony Moore who could jump out of the gym but that's about all?

Boy, that's sure a low ceiling you're setting for him. Vastly better than either, IMO.

[MChambers]

The poster is just trying to make sure Olek exceeds expectations?

[SilkyJ]

The poster is just trying to make sure Olek exceeds expectations?

I suppose thats possible, but comparing him to a walk-on? The guy got a scholarship offer out of high school. I hope he is more akin to what Dave McClure would have been without his knee injuries.

[mgtr]

I am of the view that Olek will be more of a Duke player than Taylor King ever was. I don't know that he will get big minutes this year, but when he is in, I expect that he will make an impact.

[Jumbo]

"Just in the 21st century this game has changed. I think the motion offense Coach K is running these days is a better fit for 2 - 4's and a taller 3 then having the traditional 5 - 4 - 3 players. And I see that from the recruits they have offered."

How has it changed in the 21st century? Did it change from 1999 when Duke won 37 games with a Brand-Battier-Carrawell front line to 2001 when Duke won the NCAA title with a Boozer-Battier-Dunleavy front line? How did it change from the 32-4 team in 1998 to the Final Four team in 2004?

The only significant change I can see is that the game is younger. I'm serious. In what ways has college basketball fundamentally changed in the last eight years?

"I see this from the Duke pros. Brand and Boozer play the finesse 4 and not the power 4 or 5 position and they are having success."

Elton Brand is a finesse 4? Carlos Boozer? Neither of these guys shoots 3s, neither does much in the way of assists, and both score the overwhelming majority of their points close to the basket and they score a lot of them by physcially overpowering weaker defenders. In what what are they finesse 4s?


"If Sheldon is going to have success in the pros he too will need to convert his ways. And I think Coach K sees that and believes he needs to coach that way in college."

Evidently, if Shelden is going to have to have success in the pros, he'll have to change the way he spells his first name. Exactly how will Shelden have to change his ways? Became a finesse 4 like Brand or Boozer? He needs to play better not differently.

I'm sorry but I honestly have no earthly idea what you're talking about. I hate to bore you with examples from the '80s or '90s but how does the way K used Singler differ from the way he used Danny Ferry? If Lance Thomas were as good as Mark Alarie, them K would use Thomas the same way he used Alarie.

K has always coached to the abilities of his team. Eric Meek was a low-post power player. Greg Newton relied more on his quickness and mobility. K didn't change his philosophy, he adapted to the difference between a strong, 240-pound post player with limited mobility and a skinny 220-pounder with great mobility. They weren't the same person anymore than Zoubek and Thomas are the same person. Ferry, Laettner, and Parks could hit 3s, so they took them. Meek and Newton couldn't, so they didn't. It wasn't a change in philosophy.

How is K recruiting differently? Wouldn't Patrick Patterson or Blake Griffin have been classic back-to-the-basket 5s, similar to Brand, Boozer, or Williams? The fact that K didn't sign them doesn't mean he didn't recruit them. K has made Josh Smith a priority for 2010. He's a 280-pound post. How does Duke's interest in Smith reflect K's change in recruiting philosophy?

And if K is changing the way he coaches and he is changing the way he's recruiting, exactly how can we ascertain that without referencing the 1980s and 1990s?

Exactly, Jim. The college game has gotten smaller since the 1980s and 1990s, due to both early entry and the increasing importance of the three-point line. And the NBA game is totally different. The fact that Brand and Boozer play the 4 there (and spend a ton of time on the block) means absolutely nothng about about where they would/should have played in college. I'm not sure what the original poster was talking about.

[NYC Duke Fan]

If I told you that right now you can have only one more recruit for 2009-10 who would it be from the following and give your reasons :

Brandon Knight
Nate Lubick
Josh Smith
Harrison Barnes

Take into account that noone else has committed for 2008-2009 except Mason Plumlee

[jv001]

If I told you that right now you can have only one more recruit for 2009-10 who would it be from the following and give your reasons :

Brandon Knight
Nate Lubick
Josh Smith
Harrison Barnes

Take into account that noone else has committed for 2008-2009 except Mason Plumlee

In order of preference and need:
1. Josh Smith
2. Harrison Barnes
3. Brandon Knight
4. Nate Lubick

[SilkyJ]

What i find funny is how people think Olek would see time in front of a healthy McClure. Dave might not have the physical potential of a Olek but he is rarely out of position and is usually a second ahead of the action. Dave is always around the ball.

Thats a great point. I must have accidentally skipped over your post earlier. The big question though is how much of his quickness/explosiveness has Dave lost after having all those surgeries...he certainly isn't a player who relies on his athleticism, but given that he is a pretty average athlete (for an ACC basketball player) he'll need every bit of it.


If I told you that right now you can have only one more recruit for 2009-10 who would it be from the following and give your reasons :

Brandon Knight
Nate Lubick
Josh Smith
Harrison Barnes

Take into account that noone else has committed for 2008-2009 except Mason Plumlee

plumlee is for 2009-2010. but i think we all know what you meant. Given that, I would agree with the below.


In order of preference and need:
1. Josh Smith
2. Harrison Barnes
3. Brandon Knight
4. Nate Lubick

[JasonEvans]

So you folks figure we need a big man more than an athletic wing or a PG?

I dunno. I see some potential issues in the backcourt in a couple years. I love Smith and would be thrilled for us to get him, but it may be that Barnes or Knight are a better fit with what we need going forward.

--Jason "then again, a Dwight Howard-like big man is a gooood thing to have" Evans

[Diddy]

I would grant that Smith might not be number 1 on that list. But only because of Barnes. I think Knight is more of a want than a need at this point. If nothing else, I know that the staff can at least cobble together a PG rotation. There might not be a true PG, but we will have 2-3 combo type guards all capable of handling the ball and running the O.

I think Barnes is the must get. He seems like a Corey Maggette type player, and those are hard to come by. Smith would be awesome, and plays a need position. I think we will be OK in the post with the Plumlees, Olek, and others, but Smith would be a game changer.

But I am close to conceding him to UCLA. I would see us getting him as a big surprise.

[SilkyJ]

So you folks figure we need a big man more than an athletic wing or a PG?

I dunno. I see some potential issues in the backcourt in a couple years. I love Smith and would be thrilled for us to get him, but it may be that Barnes or Knight are a better fit with what we need going forward.

--Jason "then again, a Dwight Howard-like big man is a gooood thing to have" Evans

We already have players committed at PG and on the wing, and but are missing a true post player. Apparently knight is a great talent and would be an upgrade at PG, but based on need we have a PG committed (Thornton) and do not have a true Center.

As for the Wing player, I agreed that Barnes would be #2 on my list, so its not like I don't want him. But we will have Ewill, Dawkins and Hairston that can all play out on the wing (though hairston is more of a post player) so we have some wiggle room there. We'll have Plumlees 1/2 and Olek down low, but none of them are true Centers, and I don't think its any secret that many people feel thats what we've been lacking...

[JasonEvans]

We already have players committed at PG and on the wing, and but are missing a true post player. Apparently knight is a great talent and would be an upgrade at PG, but based on need we have a PG committed (Thornton) and do not have a true Center.

As for the Wing player, I agreed that Barnes would be #2 on my list, so its not like I don't want him. But we will have Ewill, Dawkins and Hairston that can all play out on the wing (though hairston is more of a post player) so we have some wiggle room there. We'll have Plumlees 1/2 and Olek down low, but none of them are true Centers, and I don't think its any secret that many people feel thats what we've been lacking...

Look, I like Thornton and am glad we got him. Seems like a good kid and a nice recruit. I have never seen him play but based on what I have read and heard, I am not sure he is the starting PG on a national title contender. Most comparisons seem to bring up Sean Dockery. Dock was a nice player, but it is not like Duke was at a big advantage over the opposing PG when he was our starter.

The odds that Hairston plays a lot on the wing for Duke would seem to be kinda slim. Again, I am only going on what I have read but isn't he much more of a PF than a SF? Once Singler is gone, I would think that Hairston and Plumlee (x2) are likely to be the post players.

So, that is why I think a PG or stud athletic wing are slightly higher priorities than a C.

But, if we land Josh Smith, I certainly won't cry ;)

--Jason "feel free to rip me for having no knowledge at all about Thornton or Hairston-- I am only going on lousy internet reports" Evans

[skitelz]

i think that the only reason weve heard that thornton compares to dock is because he has only needed to show that defensive shut-down ability and great decision making.

i think that this year, he will show more of a scoring threat because he'll be the man for his high school team and a experienced leader for the aau team. after that, i think the comparisons will be more duhon than dock. the only major fault that ive heard so far is that he needs to work on his long distance shooting. and he has two years to work on that before he even steps foot onto the duke campus.

[Oriole Way]

Look, I like Thornton and am glad we got him. Seems like a good kid and a nice recruit. I have never seen him play but based on what I have read and heard, I am not sure he is the starting PG on a national title contender. Most comparisons seem to bring up Sean Dockery. Dock was a nice player, but it is not like Duke was at a big advantage over the opposing PG when he was our starter.

The odds that Hairston plays a lot on the wing for Duke would seem to be kinda slim. Again, I am only going on what I have read but isn't he much more of a PF than a SF? Once Singler is gone, I would think that Hairston and Plumlee (x2) are likely to be the post players.

So, that is why I think a PG or stud athletic wing are slightly higher priorities than a C.

But, if we land Josh Smith, I certainly won't cry ;)

--Jason "feel free to rip me for having no knowledge at all about Thornton or Hairston-- I am only going on lousy internet reports" Evans

I think Thornton will turn out to be better than Dockery, but that's just a guess. I think him being so familiar with Hairston/Dawkins will have a positive effect his entire time at Duke.

I think Smith is much more important. We haven't had a center/PF like him since Shelden Williams, and that's the main reason we've struggled in the postseason since he graduated.

I am a huge skeptic of the Plumlees being that kind of player for us in the post. They seem to be more finesse/tweener players who don't face up as a primary approach to scoring. While it will be nice to have their size on the perimeter in order to cause matchup problems offensively, this team will go to another level with a powerful rebounder and interior scorer that shoots ~60% from the field. Shelden, Boozer, and Williams were the interior keys to our last three final four teams, and I think Smith is a similar kind of player. I'd love to get Boynton and Barnes, but I think I'd rather have Smith if I could only have one.

[COYS]

Shelden, Boozer, and Williams were the interior keys to our last three final four teams, and I think Smith is a similar kind of player. I'd love to get Boynton and Barnes, but I think I'd rather have Smith if I could only have one.

Sorry if I misread this post, but did you mean Boozer and Shelden Williams or were you referring to Jason Williams?

If you meant Boozer and Shelden, while I agree that they were very important to those teams, the SF position was no less important. Battier and Deng each played extremely important roles on those teams. As long as the Plumlees can rebound and play solid D down low, a dynamic player like Barnes could put us over the top. Don't get me wrong, I agree with you that Smith could certainly take our team to another level. But I don't think success in the postseason can be reduced just to having a bruising front-court scorer. Athletic wings and talented guards coupled with strong defenders/rebounders in the post were the keys to Kansas and Memphis reaching the title game this year. I view Barnes and Smith as 1A and 1B recruits. Either would dramatically affect Duke in a positive way. At this point in the recruiting and scouting process, it's probably hard to say for sure if one would definitely help us more than another.

[El_Diablo]

Sorry if I misread this post, but did you mean Boozer and Shelden Williams or were you referring to Jason Williams?

I think he meant to say Brand, Boozer, and Shelden Williams.

[yancem]

i think that the only reason weve heard that thornton compares to dock is because he has only needed to show that defensive shut-down ability and great decision making.

i think that this year, he will show more of a scoring threat because he'll be the man for his high school team and a experienced leader for the aau team. after that, i think the comparisons will be more duhon than dock. the only major fault that ive heard so far is that he needs to work on his long distance shooting. and he has two years to work on that before he even steps foot onto the duke campus.

Being compared to Dockery is no faint praise. I know that his numbers were never very impressive at Duke but he had spectacular numbers in HS, over 1k assists and I believe he holds the steals record in Ill. Remember that he had to play behind Duhon his first couple of seasons and then had a senior in Ewing. Had Duhon not stuck around for 4 years and Dockery had then gotten the chance to start earlier, I think people would have looked at him differently. He had a lot of talent but because he was the ultimate team player, I don't think that he ever got a chance to really show it. There was always a Duhon or Redick type of player taking the spot light.

Unfortunately for Thorton, if Duke signs Boyton and Knight, he may end up in the same category as Dockery.

[yancem]

I am a huge skeptic of the Plumlees being that kind of player for us in the post. They seem to be more finesse/tweener players who don't face up as a primary approach to scoring. While it will be nice to have their size on the perimeter in order to cause matchup problems offensively, this team will go to another level with a powerful rebounder and interior scorer that shoots ~60% from the field. Shelden, Boozer, and Williams were the interior keys to our last three final four teams, and I think Smith is a similar kind of player. I'd love to get Boynton and Barnes, but I think I'd rather have Smith if I could only have one.

While Brand was certainly a driving force behind the '99 final four run, I hardly think that you can credit Boozer and Williams as the keys to getting to the F4 in '01 and '04. Remember that Boozer sat out the majority of the tournament and it was Sanders playing the center position until the actual F4. Also, with Boozer healthy we fell short in '02. Battier and Jason Williams were the keys to getting to the '01 F4 and it was Dunleavy who made all of the 3's in the title game.

In '04, Williams was tied for 3rd in scoring with Ewing and behind Redick and Deng. Duhon was the emotional leader and the glue that held the team together. Don't forget that with Williams as a Jr and Sr, Duke exited in the round of sixteen both years.

This notion that the only way to get to the final four is with a big burly center is absurd. K has led 10 teams to the F4 and only 3 of them had a big burly center and as I mentioned, Boozer was out for most of the '01 run. Laettner was part of 4 F4's, Ferry 3 and while they were big, they were more face up centers than back to the basket centers. Brand, Boozer and Williams only got to the F4 once apiece and they were back to the basket centers. If the Plumlee's and Czyz are as talented as many of us hope then Duke should have solid chances at reaching the F4 in the next several years.

[studdlee10]

Being compared to Dockery is no faint praise. I know that his numbers were never very impressive at Duke but he had spectacular numbers in HS, over 1k assists and I believe he holds the steals record in Ill. Remember that he had to play behind Duhon his first couple of seasons and then had a senior in Ewing. Had Duhon not stuck around for 4 years and Dockery had then gotten the chance to start earlier, I think people would have looked at him differently. He had a lot of talent but because he was the ultimate team player, I don't think that he ever got a chance to really show it. There was always a Duhon or Redick type of player taking the spot light.

Unfortunately for Thorton, if Duke signs Boyton and Knight, he may end up in the same category as Dockery.

Neither Boynton nor Knight will likely be around past Tyler's sophomore year in college, so at worst, he'll have 2 years of seasoning before taking over the PG position.

People are sleeping on Thornton because he's not flashy and not a prolific scorer. The kid is quick and fast enough to be a terror on the offensive side. He just needs some polish on his jumper, but that is something you can teach and practice. He is most definitely a championship-level PG. As a Junior in HS he has already won a state championship and has already won multiple AAU tournaments. He's a winner and is selfless. If we bring in teh players we hope to bring in (Barnes, Smith, Hairston..etc) that kind of selflessness and leadership will be very valuable to the team.

[jv001]

I really don't care if the players that rebound and play defense on the interior are 5's, 4's or even 3's. Just as long as we don't get killed on the boards or by the opposing front line down low. I just think that Mason, Miles and Kyle are very similar in size and style of play. I hope that Mason or Miles proves me wrong. We don't need Kyle playing the other team's big guy. Go Duke!

[BlueintheFace]

I don't have insider, but....

http://basketballrecruiting.rivals.com/barrier_noentry.asp?ReturnTo=&sid=&script=content.asp&cid=852130&fid=&tid=&mid=&rid=

[SilkyJ]

If you meant Boozer and Shelden, while I agree that they were very important to those teams, the SF position was no less important. Battier and Deng each played extremely important roles on those teams.

Both Deng and Battier played the PF position not SF. On the '01 team, pre Boozer's injury, we started Jwill at the 1, Dunleavy and James on the Wing, at the 2 and 3, and Battier at the 4, Boozer at the 5.

On Deng's team, we started Duhon at the 1, Redick and Ewing on the wing (essentially a 3 guard lineup), Deng at the 4 and Sheld at the 5.

I think in my mind, though, that the person playing that "4" or PF position was key in all those runs, and I think Singler is our next player in that mold.

[phaedrus]

They (Battier and Deng) may have technically played the 4 because there were always 3 smaller players than them on the court, but their roles and skills on the court were certainly more aligned with the traditional small forward. I think COYS' point is that the burly power player down low was significantly less important to the success of those teams than the play of our versatile inside-out threats in Battier and Deng. I agree that Singler is the logically closest equivalent to those guys, and unsurprisingly he's our best and most important player.

[COYS]

Both Deng and Battier played the PF position not SF. On the '01 team, pre Boozer's injury, we started Jwill at the 1, Dunleavy and James on the Wing, at the 2 and 3, and Battier at the 4, Boozer at the 5.

On Deng's team, we started Duhon at the 1, Redick and Ewing on the wing (essentially a 3 guard lineup), Deng at the 4 and Sheld at the 5.

I think in my mind, though, that the person playing that "4" or PF position was key in all those runs, and I think Singler is our next player in that mold.

I apologize, I didn't clarify my observation. I just meant that both Battier and Deng were listed as SF when they were recruited and that their versatility and skillsets were instrumental in runs to the FF, allowing to fill the 4-spot within the Duke system just as Singler has (and Singler's even played the 5). Barnes could potentially fill the role a a 4 within the Duke system . . . especially if he grows an inch or two or proves to be a strong rebounder, etc. Depending on how our roster shakes out, he could also play on the wing as a 3. It already looks like his offensive game will be stellar and he'll be either a mismatch for opposing fours or just a handful for opposing 3's.

And I also agree, I think that Singler fills that role very well on the current squad. I see Barnes the potential successor to Singler for in that role, whether he's on the court as a 3 or 4.

[COYS]

They (Battier and Deng) may have technically played the 4 because there were always 3 smaller players than them on the court, but their roles and skills on the court were certainly more aligned with the traditional small forward. I think COYS' point is that the burly power player down low was significantly less important to the success of those teams than the play of our versatile inside-out threats in Battier and Deng. I agree that Singler is the logically closest equivalent to those guys, and unsurprisingly he's our best and most important player.

Ah yes, you clarified my point much better than I did. :) Ultimately I think we're all three in agreement that the versatile inside-outside player has been a cornerstone in many of Duke's runs to the Final Four, regardless of which position they are listed as playing.

[Orange&BlackSheep]

that the player will have to do this AT LEAST once during his years at Duke :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JuQ-dlhyfNc

Dockery will ALWAYS be a legend for me.

O&B Sheep

[SilkyJ]

Ah yes, you clarified my point much better than I did. :) Ultimately I think we're all three in agreement that the versatile inside-outside player has been a cornerstone in many of Duke's runs to the Final Four, regardless of which position they are listed as playing.

Yes. we are definitely in agreement with that. And I think coah K may be trying to add more and more of those players in the Plumlees, hairston, and by offering Kelly.

[chrisheery]

i think that the only reason weve heard that thornton compares to dock is because he has only needed to show that defensive shut-down ability and great decision making.


you think dockery was a great decision maker? not sure what that is based on. i loved dock, but his propensity for ill-timed turnovers was what prevented him from ever being a big part of the offense. no? correct me if that is way off.

[jimsumner]

"Look, I like Thornton and am glad we got him. Seems like a good kid and a nice recruit. I have never seen him play but based on what I have read and heard, I am not sure he is the starting PG on a national title contender"

Jason, how good does he have to be the starting PG on a national title contender? As good as Quin Snyder in 1988 and 1989? As good as Taliek Brown? As good as Taurean Green? Or Wayne Turner? Or Teddy Dupay?

Given my druthers, I'd rather have a Jason Williams-clone at PG than not. But it doesn't seem that having an elite PG is an absolute requirement for contending for the national title.

And this isn't to say that Thornton won't become an elite point guard. Duke seems to like him.

[chrisheery]

i think that this year, he will show more of a scoring threat because he'll be the man for his high school team and a experienced leader for the aau team. after that, i think the comparisons will be more duhon than dock. the only major fault that ive heard so far is that he needs to work on his long distance shooting. and he has two years to work on that before he even steps foot onto the duke campus.

i think dockery was the scoring leader for the entire chicago public schools league his senior year (can't confirm this, but he did average 28ppg) . just saying, the logic that one guy might be a great scorer without being great shooter because he is "the man" for his high school team might not be 100% true. seems like he is almost a copy of dockery with regard to his scoring ability based on that assessment.

link for above:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/seth_davis/02/14/hoop.thoughts/index.html
"A three-time all-state selection and the 2002 Chicago player of the year, Dockery was a McDonald's All-American after averaging 28 points, seven assists and four rebounds as a senior."

[Tim1515]

It's unfair to compare a soon to be junior in high school to someone who has already passed through college. Yes some of their scouting report sounds similar but all players develop differently. Tyler already knows he's going to be more of a role player with Duke...heck he's helping to recruit other PGs in 2010!

Tyler, as a junior, has already admitted he needs to work on his shot and will do that over the next 2 years. At the same time he wants to run the offense at Duke and get others involved.

Dock relied on his ability to get to the basket to score...he was quicker then everyone in high school. Tyler will come in as a distributor.

[SilkyJ]

It's unfair to compare a soon to be junior in high school to someone who has already passed through college. Yes some of their scouting report sounds similar but all players develop differently. Tyler already knows he's going to be more of a role player with Duke...heck he's helping to recruit other PGs in 2010!

Tyler, as a junior, has already admitted he needs to work on his shot and will do that over the next 2 years. At the same time he wants to run the offense at Duke and get others involved.

Dock relied on his ability to get to the basket to score...he was quicker then everyone in high school. Tyler will come in as a distributor.

great points all around. the comparisons definitely aren't fair, though they are bound to happen. I think the real key is what you said at the end, which is that Dock was a score 1st PG and Tyler is a pass 1st.

[SilkyJ]

Look, I like Thornton and am glad we got him. Seems like a good kid and a nice recruit. I have never seen him play but based on what I have read and heard, I am not sure he is the starting PG on a national title contender. Most comparisons seem to bring up Sean Dockery. Dock was a nice player, but it is not like Duke was at a big advantage over the opposing PG when he was our starter.

The odds that Hairston plays a lot on the wing for Duke would seem to be kinda slim. Again, I am only going on what I have read but isn't he much more of a PF than a SF? Once Singler is gone, I would think that Hairston and Plumlee (x2) are likely to be the post players.

So, that is why I think a PG or stud athletic wing are slightly higher priorities than a C.

But, if we land Josh Smith, I certainly won't cry ;)

--Jason "feel free to rip me for having no knowledge at all about Thornton or Hairston-- I am only going on lousy internet reports" Evans

Something I should have mentioned in my earlier posts/responses: We normally don't recruit guys who have only finished their sophomore year, but we did with these guys. If Coach K & Co. saw something in Thornton that early that made them go after him that early, then I think the kid is going to be pretty darn good. This isn't some kid we snagged late in the game or whatever, we targeted him early on. Same for Hairston and Dawkins for that matter. That tells me all I need to know.

[Diddy]

For a person to be capable of being a starting PG at the NC level, he has to have some base line qualities. Those being size and speed. Thornton is plenty big enough, and seems to be fast/quick enough. Everything else can be learned, even competitive spirit.

Shooting, running a team, passing, dribbling, etc are things that he WILL get better at. If a player is small (for his position) or slow, then there is a real chance that he will be a liability once you get to the Elite Eight and beyond.

Frankly, I like that he plays for national caliber HS and AAU teams and is a True PG who runs the team and distributes rather than scores. J-Will was a great player, but Duke didn't win the NC until he moved to SG. K's teams need a distributor who can penetrate and D up. Anything beyond that is gravy.

Though Thornton is not ranked extremely high yet, as he scores more, due to need, at the HS level, his ranking may go up. He could well be our best ranked player from the class (unless Barnes or Smith commit).

Frankly, given K's pursuit of Dawkins and Thornton, he may be hedging his bets where Knight and Boykin are concerned. Duke needs players over the next few years, and we cannot afford to be left in the cold. K has been burned the last couple of years by waiting for certain players, and he may be moving away from that strategy. I have seen nothing that indicates that Boynton or Knight consider Duke any more than co-leaders. If talented other players want to commit, do it. Remember UNC and Kenny Anderson/Bobby Hurly.

[JasonEvans]

(Dockery) had a lot of talent but because he was the ultimate team player, I don't think that he ever got a chance to really show it. There was always a Duhon or Redick type of player taking the spot light.


Well, not always (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JuQ-dlhyfNc) ;)

--Jason "a real favorite" Evans

[Skitzle]

If talented other players want to commit, do it. Remember UNC and Kenny Anderson/Bobby Hurly.

I was five in 1989... so no don't remember. But I did some research

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940DE6DF1F3AF93BA15752C1A96E9482 60

From the last paragraph on the first page: "Dean Smith, the North Carolina coach, was so confident about getting Anderson that he refused to guarantee Bobby Hurley, a talented guard from Jersey City, that the Tar Heels would not recruit Anderson if Hurley signed early with North Carolina. Hurley signed with Duke instead."


Suffice it to say, I have 0 problem holding Thorton to the Hurley Standard.

[skitelz]

Hey, I was just disagreeing with Jason's comparison of Dock and Tyler. I've always thought that Tyler was much more Duhon than anything else. But then again, some of the things Tyler does remind me of Dock. Like his lock-down ability.

I think that Tyler will be the point guard for a NC team. But I'm an optomistic person, so... I also think that we do not need Brandon Knight. I think that having even his great abilities will not make us that much of a better team. I'd much rather have Josh, Harrison, or Kenny than Brandon. I think that Duke fans will be surprised by how much better Tyler will be than what scouts rate him as. I think he has a lot of tricks up his sleeve that he hasn't needed to display yet.

[yancem]

great points all around. the comparisons definitely aren't fair, though they are bound to happen. I think the real key is what you said at the end, which is that Dock was a score 1st PG and Tyler is a pass 1st.

I don't understand why people think that Dockery was a score first pg. He holds the Ill state career assist record at over 1000 assists. His assist numbers weren't anything special at Duke but that was more because he mostly only got spot duty at the pg spot during his career. I hate to say this because I'm a big Dockery fan and loved that he went to Duke, but from a basketball perspective, I think that he would have had a much more impressive career at another program or at Duke at a different time. Duhon was firmly entrenched as the starter his first 2 years, Ewing as a Sr was given the ball his third year and Paulus was handed the ball his fourth year.

You can argue that the fact that a freshman knocked him out of the starting pg spot his senior year proves that Dockery was cut out to be a big time college pg but I don't think that's really a fair judgment. Since Dockery had spent a lot of time at the 2 and K planned on making Paulus the pg of the future anyway, he gave the ball to Paulus. This is different that the current situation of keeping Paulus as the starting pg last year instead of starting a more athletic Smith. Dockery never had the spot so it was easier to give it to someone else.

[kramerbr]

It's kind of funny when someone says they don't think he can be a pg on a NC team. The guy has been described as a player that just flat out finds a way to win. He's a winner and a leader and he's ONLY going into his Junior year. That is phenomenal to have those qualities at a young age. He still has plenty of time to improve on any basketball skills.

[chrisheery]

It's unfair to compare a soon to be junior in high school to someone who has already passed through college. Yes some of their scouting report sounds similar but all players develop differently. Tyler already knows he's going to be more of a role player with Duke...heck he's helping to recruit other PGs in 2010!

Tyler, as a junior, has already admitted he needs to work on his shot and will do that over the next 2 years. At the same time he wants to run the offense at Duke and get others involved.

Dock relied on his ability to get to the basket to score...he was quicker then everyone in high school. Tyler will come in as a distributor.

my (extremely long winded) point (that was clearly not well-made) is that you can't just go by what you read about these guys and numbers you see, because they mean nothing in translation to college from high school. the examples are countless of guys who were great in high school and not so good in college and guys who were relatively unknown in high school and good or great in college. so, it is even harder to assume a guy will be "similar" to some other guy when you have never seen him play.

[Wakeboard06]

OK this is my first post so go easy on my thoughts here. But I read this site almost everyday and love the discussion that goes on. My question is this. What if we don't get Kelly, Boynton, or any of the top 2010 recruits that we are after? I mean I know that's something that know one wants to look at but I mean them more I read on Kenny, the more I think he's leaning toward Florida. It just seems to me the only reason we're in the running is because his "boys" Nolan and Elliot go here, and Coach K just won the gold medal. As for Kelly I wonder how he'll like the competition and I think he likes UNC and Notre Dame as good prospects. Not to mention how in the world are we going to pull Josh Smith away from UCLA and over here? I hate to be such a buzzkill but it seems like we havn't had a class in a while since Paulas' one. Any inside or discussion here? My roommate bet me we will never make another Final Four while K is the coach on grounds that he is past his prime? I mean we need a collection of superstars, not just someone like Singler every once in a while.

[jimsumner]

" Ewing as a Sr was given the ball his third year and Paulus was handed the ball his fourth year."

Duke expected Dockery to take over as PG in '05 following Duhon's graduation. He wasn't up to the task. Neither Ewing nor Paulus was given or handed the ball. They earned the starting PG spot by being better than the competition.

[DevilCastDownfromDurham]

Duke expected Dockery to take over as PG in '05 following Duhon's graduation. He wasn't up to the task. Neither Ewing nor Paulus was given or handed the ball. They earned the starting PG spot by being better than the competition.

Quoted for truth. Dock is one of my all time favorite Devils based on his attitude, character, and the falsehoods he shot down about what a "Duke player" is and is not in terms of academics, race, class, etc. I'm very proud of everything he did, and I don't regret giving up on Robertson, Jack etc. to have him here.

That said, he just never became the PG that we hoped he would be. In fact, I'd argue that Duke hasn't had a legit PG that can lock down, create for others, and break down a defender (what we all think of when we say "a Duke PG") since Chris graduated after 2004. It's no coincidence that we haven't had a legit title contender since 2004 either (2006 was fun to watch, but was really just two great players and always subject to an off shooting night).

I actually think that goes to Wakeboard's point about recruiting. It's not accurate, imo, to say "we havn't had a class in a while since Paulas' one." Rather, we had a string of absolute disasters after the "Selected 6" culminating with the McRoberts class, which, given their rankings and expectations (and what we needed based on earlier mistakes) may be the single most underperforming group in Duke history.

Since then, I'd argue we are quickly coming back into form. We're still struggling with legit post players (not finesse guys or stiffs) but otherwise I think we've done a superb job of bring in solid 2-4 players, including highlights like Hendo and Singler, who were both major coups. If we can get Kenny and a beast for the post I'd argue we're right back at our 1998-2004 level recruiting that is as strong as anyone anywhere in the nation.

Even if we don't, I think we still have as good a shot at the FF for the next few seasons as 8-10 other teams. Having K's full attention once again for recruiting and coaching, I think the future looks very, very bright. We need some things to fall our way with recruiting (and to finally get some luck with guys staying healthy!) but I can only name a handful of programs that are even with us right now, and only 2-3 that I think are clearly ahead. Time will tell, but I'm more optimistic than I've been in 4-5 years.

[Edouble]

J-Will was a great player, but Duke didn't win the NC until he moved to SG.

I think you are remembering this incorrectly. Jason Williams was the point guard on the NC team. Duhon was not even a starter on the NC team until the last 10 games, and even during that time, Jason Williams was definitely the point guard.

[COYS]

I think you are remembering this incorrectly. Jason Williams was the point guard on the NC team. Duhon was not even a starter on the NC team until the last 10 games, and even during that time, Jason Williams was definitely the point guard.

I think the poster might be thinking of the next season when Jason Williams played off the ball a little bit more frequently when Duhon became a full time starter. Even then, Williams still was the primary play-maker on the offensive end.

[RainingThrees]

OK this is my first post so go easy on my thoughts here. But I read this site almost everyday and love the discussion that goes on. My question is this. What if we don't get Kelly, Boynton, or any of the top 2010 recruits that we are after? I mean I know that's something that know one wants to look at but I mean them more I read on Kenny, the more I think he's leaning toward Florida. It just seems to me the only reason we're in the running is because his "boys" Nolan and Elliot go here, and Coach K just won the gold medal. As for Kelly I wonder how he'll like the competition and I think he likes UNC and Notre Dame as good prospects. Not to mention how in the world are we going to pull Josh Smith away from UCLA and over here? I hate to be such a buzzkill but it seems like we havn't had a class in a while since Paulas' one. Any inside or discussion here? My roommate bet me we will never make another Final Four while K is the coach on grounds that he is past his prime? I mean we need a collection of superstars, not just someone like Singler every once in a while.

Yes this would be a disaster and I already think we won't get Josh Smith. In fact I agree with most of this post as I have found that if you look at the glass half empty in recruiting you will usually be happily surprised.

[RainingThrees]

But I do think we will get Harrison Barnes and Hopefully Brandon Knight although this goes against my philosophy.

[Diddy]

If Barnes is the only other player we get out of the class of 10, I think it is a huge win. The other 3 are good to great, but he is a game changer from Day 1.

As for 09, eh. I am interested in that PF from WVa that K went up to see, but no one on the board really blows wind up my skirt. Kelly would help, but I do not know that that he is a game changing player. I think Boynton is a game changer, but we have good options at his position even if he does not come to Duke.

I tend to be very realistic/pessimistic in general. But we will be OK even without Kelly and Boynton. They would help, sure. But Duke's only real, glaring need is a big bodies post, and neither Kelly nor Boynton satisfy that need.

[RainingThrees]

If we get Boynton I think we will have easily the best backcourt in the nation.

[SilkyJ]

It just seems to me the only reason we're in the running is because his "boys" Nolan and Elliot go here, and Coach K just won the gold medal.

Well we've been in the running long before coach K won the gold and before elliott committed as well.

You really think those are the ONLY reasons? Not b/c duke is an excellent program with excellent academics with one of the greatest head coaches of all time at the helm? You don't think those are reasons too???



As for Kelly I wonder how he'll like the competition and I think he likes UNC and Notre Dame as good prospects.

He'll get WAY more competition for playing time at UNC with Zeller, davis, and stephenson already there, not to mention Henson, the top PF in the class of 2009 according to Scout as well as the Wear twins also already committing in that class.

[Devilsfan]

"If ifs and buts were candy and nuts what a wonderful world this would be" "Dandy" Don Merideth, Monday Night Football.

[skitelz]

He'll get WAY more competition for playing time at UNC with Zeller, davis, and stephenson already there, not to mention Henson, the top PF in the class of 2009 according to Scout as well as the Wear twins also already committing in that class.

not to be picky but stepheson is not there anymore. did you mean thompson?

[SilkyJ]

not to be picky but stepheson is not there anymore. did you mean thompson?

whichever one of them is not transferring due to the special situation...either way the frontcourt is loaded

[Devilsfan]

Yeah, but at UNC he'll have alot more free (bench) time allowing him to date teen age coeds.

[SilkyJ]

Yeah, but at UNC he'll have alot more free (bench) time allowing him to date teen age coeds.

only if ol' roy lets him out of "jail"!

[skitelz]

Yeah, but at UNC he'll have alot more free (bench) time allowing him to date teen age coeds.

...And Ol' Roy will get him a free suit...:cool: pimpin'

[chrisheery]

I'd like to comment on the post that said the only reason we are in the running for Boynton is because he is friends with Nolan and Elliot Williams.

My thoughts on why we are still high on Boyton's list:

1. Duke is the best possible school he could find himself to showcase his talent. Jason Williams may or may not be comparable in their style of play, but the level of talent and play-making ability does seem comparable from everything I've read. Jason had absolute freedom in his sophomore and junior years, perhaps to the extent that it kept others from improving around him. Carlos Boozer might have been an unstoppable force on almost any other team. You might make the same case about JJ. Unbelievable player, but other players around him were just there to throw him the ball on offense. Might have caused them have no confidence when they needed to score without him. The precedent is clearly set for a stud offensive guard to have his way at Duke. I can not think of another school who has the record of making guards look like superstars that Duke does.

2. He's a smart, grounded, well-rounded guy (from things I have read, never met him). Duke offers something Florida might not: exposure to amazing people from all walks of life with aspirations and goals that would impress anyone. He will have the opportunity to learn from his peers. He will be exposed to new opportunities and ideas that few people get a see and hear. I am still amazed at the array of people I met at Duke and life experience I gathered from their pooled knowledge and interests.

3. Coach K. For all the "sincerity" Billy Donovan showed at their meeting, does anyone really believe that guy is sincere? Coach K walks the walk and has been a proven man of character who will do anything to help his players succeed in life if they give what they can to the team.

4. He could potentially be the centerpiece of Duke's "revival." While everyone (especially working for ESPN) wants to tear Duke down and say the best of Duke's years are over, there really isn't much evidence for that. Duke will likely be in or win a championship game in coming years, and with a player of his caliber, that may be sooner than later.

5. Florida is lame. Let's be serious. Kinda kidding here, but seriously, Florida over Duke. Imagine telling your grandkids you chose Florida of one of the greatest universities in the world when both could do similar things for your basketball career (but Duke could do more, see #1).

[jimsumner]

"Jason had absolute freedom in his sophomore and junior years, perhaps to the extent that it kept others from improving around him. Carlos Boozer might have been an unstoppable force on almost any other team."

I'm not sure I follow you here. JW averaged almost six assists per game as a sophomore and junior and that's with Duhon sharing the playmaking. So clearly he was passing the ball.

JW's sophomore year, he played with four other double figure scorers, one of whom averaged 20 ppg and was consensus national POY. His junior year Boozer averaged 18.2 ppg and Dunleavy 17.3 ppg and Dunleavy was the third pick of the NBA draft. Hard to argue that JW hindered his development. And Boozer's scoring average was higher than that of Elton Brand in 1999 when Brand was consensus national POY.

I'm sorry but the image you paint of Williams doesn't gibe with what I recall.

As for KB, yes there are lots of reasons why he would go to Duke. Lots of reasons why he would go to Florida.

[chrisheery]

That was going to far. Ignore that and strike it from the record.

[SilkyJ]

switching gears, a little, did you guys see the interview watzone has up with Hairston?

In it they talk about how tyler, josh, and andre are acting as recruiters too and they have already begun working on Harrison Barnes.

I'd love to get KB and still think we have a shot, but its good to know 2010 is looking good as well.

http://bluedevilnation.net/?p=1052

[chrisheery]

is just great. As always, watzone asks all the questions I wish I could ask these guys.

[houstondukie]

Anyone who thinks Josh Smith is a lock for UCLA should read the 9/18 update about Smith on Rivals.

He and his Dad seem to absolutely love Coach K, and if I were a betting man I would put my money on Smith to DUKE. Coach K apparently doesn't mind if Smith is one-and-done.

And I wouldn't mind either.

A frontcout of Smith along w/ Kyle Singler, Mason and Miles Plumnee, and Josh Hairston (maybe Josh Kelly too?) would be unstoppable.

And what an awesome team that would be with a backcourt of Nolan Smith, Elliot Williams, Andre Dawkins, and Tyler Thornton (Kenny Boynton? Harrison Barnes? Brandon Knight?).

Smith also expressed a very strong desire to play in the UNC-DUKE rivalry and was really impressed that Coach K stayed in touch with him while in China.

Distance from home shouldn't be a factor, in my opinion, since Smith is most likely one-and-done anyway. He might as well get use to it in preparation for the NBA and who better to learn from than Coach K.

Not to mention playing for the potential #1 team in the nation.

[RainingThrees]

I wouldn't care if he was a one and done either. As long as we get a legit post threat added to our backcourt we will be a championship contender.

[jv001]

I hope your prediction comes to be fact. A true center that can bang down low, rebound and play inside defense will be welcomed even if it is for just one year. And who knows maybe it plays out to be 2 or 3 years. Go Duke!

[TwoDukeTattoos]

I tried sifting through pages of this thread but it seemsed to get a bit off topic. I feel like the only player Duke is still lacking is a true real estate man down low. So, does anyone have any feel regarding our efforts to land Josh Smith? Was he ever offered?

[Bluedog]

I tried sifting through pages of this thread but it seemsed to get a bit off topic. I feel like the only player Duke is still lacking is a true real estate man down low. So, does anyone have any feel regarding our efforts to land Josh Smith? Was he ever offered?

He was offered. Apparently, his leader is UCLA. His list of interested schools is VERY long.

[BlueintheFace]

Mason is better than his brother and is more of a true low-post player. He has also gained some significant weight this year. He might be need to be our real estate guy and that might not be a bad thing

[DevilCastDownfromDurham]

I tried sifting through pages of this thread but it seemsed to get a bit off topic. I feel like the only player Duke is still lacking is a true real estate man down low. So, does anyone have any feel regarding our efforts to land Josh Smith? Was he ever offered?

Just to reiterate what bluedog said, Smith is considered an overwhelming lean for UCLA. He's a west coast guy that's interested in staying out there. According to scout (http://scouthoops.scout.com/a.z?s=75&p=8&c=1&nid=2648740), UCLA is the only school listed as "high interest" with Washington and Louisville listed as "medium." Duke, along with many other schools is listed as "low interest." In short, he's probably not coming.

[TwoDukeTattoos]

Just to reiterate what bluedog said, Smith is considered an overwhelming lean for UCLA. He's a west coast guy that's interested in staying out there. According to scout (http://scouthoops.scout.com/a.z?s=75&p=8&c=1&nid=2648740), UCLA is the only school listed as "high interest" with Washington and Louisville listed as "medium." Duke, along with many other schools is listed as "low interest." In short, he's probably not coming.

So, it looks like we're not in the running for other real estate big men for 2010, which is mildly concerning considering we don't have any for 2009 either.

[COYS]

So, it looks like we're not in the running for other real estate big men for 2010, which is mildly concerning considering we don't have any for 2009 either.

Honestly, I wouldn't consider this too concerning. We've got a lot of depth at the PF/C position and honestly, I feel that people have been undervaluing MP2 and Kelly. MP2 is quick, long, athletic and should give us a boost in terms of shot blocking and rebounding in the post. He'll have more size than Kyle in terms of banging down low (even if that's not his strength) and he'll present match up problems for opposing bigs. He has the potential to be a great player. Obviously, adding Smith would be great, even if seems like it will be difficult to pry him away from the west coast, but I think the production in the post will look very different in the near future as Mason develops.

Edit: Oh yeah, and just remember that there aren't very many talented big bodies out there. There's a reason why center is the hardest position to fill in the NBA, as well.

[DevilCastDownfromDurham]

So, it looks like we're not in the running for other real estate big men for 2010, which is mildly concerning considering we don't have any for 2009 either.

I'm actually pretty sanguine about our post situation. Kelly and Singler are obviously not the answer at the 5 (in fact I've heard Kelly compared to Dunleavy more often than Boozer) but I think the Plumlees may give us what we need.

I think K is going back to our late 1980's model of play with versatile 5's a la Ferry and Laettner. Mason and Miles are both 6'10 or better and both can defend the post. We still won't have a low-post bully, but I think we can generate easy baskets in other ways as long as we get a killer PG to drive and dish. If we land Wall, Knight, etc I think we'll be just fine for the next 2-3 seasons with Singler, Kelly, Plumlee x2, Lance, Z, Olek, and Hairston (with guys like McAdoo on the horizon).

[Welcome2DaSlopes]

http://scouthoops.scout.com/a.z?s=75&p=8&c=1&nid=2648740

Does any one think we have a chance of getting him?

He seems like a dominate post player we can really use.

[flyingdutchdevil]

http://scouthoops.scout.com/a.z?s=75&p=8&c=1&nid=2648740

Does any one think we have a chance of getting him?

He seems like a dominate post player we can really use.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that Duke is anywhere near the top of Smith's list.

Also, IMO, K must feel that his 5 spot is set for the future with the Plumlee brothers and, more likely than not, the third Plumlee coming in in 2011 (who I've also heard is the best). I may be completely wrong, but that's what I think.

If we didn't get Smith, I wouldn't be that upset. If we lost out on Barnes, I may cry. Also, I would love either Knight, Irving or McCallum (I think I butchered that last one).

[rotogod00]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that Duke is anywhere near the top of Smith's list.

Also, IMO, K must feel that his 5 spot is set for the future with the Plumlee brothers and, more likely than not, the third Plumlee coming in in 2011 (who I've also heard is the best). I may be completely wrong, but that's what I think.

If we didn't get Smith, I wouldn't be that upset. If we lost out on Barnes, I may cry. Also, I would love either Knight, Irving or McCallum (I think I butchered that last one).

The Plumlees are not the inside post players that Josh Smith potentially is. It's just not their games. That said, THEY do many things on the court that Smith cannot do. Smith would provide us our first true inside presence since Shelden. Unfortunately, I don't see him leaving the West coast.

In my little dream world, I'd love to nab Barnes, Smith, and Knight (I'd even be willing to settle for Irving). Along with Dawkins, Hairston, and Thornton, that'd make one heck of a class. With Curry coming in, not sure we'd even have enough scholarships to go around, but again, a man can dream.

[NSDukeFan]

The Plumlees are not the inside post players that Josh Smith potentially is. It's just not their games. That said, THEY do many things on the court that Smith cannot do. Smith would provide us our first true inside presence since Shelden. Unfortunately, I don't see him leaving the West coast.

In my little dream world, I'd love to nab Barnes, Smith, and Knight (I'd even be willing to settle for Irving). Along with Dawkins, Hairston, and Thornton, that'd make one heck of a class. With Curry coming in, not sure we'd even have enough scholarships to go around, but again, a man can dream.

I agree entirely with your post, though I have heard that scholarship numbers don't matter that much, as you just kick Kentucky kids out if you get someone better.:p

[flyingdutchdevil]

The Plumlees are not the inside post players that Josh Smith potentially is. It's just not their games. That said, THEY do many things on the court that Smith cannot do. Smith would provide us our first true inside presence since Shelden. Unfortunately, I don't see him leaving the West coast.

In my little dream world, I'd love to nab Barnes, Smith, and Knight (I'd even be willing to settle for Irving). Along with Dawkins, Hairston, and Thornton, that'd make one heck of a class. With Curry coming in, not sure we'd even have enough scholarships to go around, but again, a man can dream.

While I completely agree that the Plumlee's aren't "traditional 5s", Duke has had huge success with tall, lanky, fundamentally-sound 5s (see Laettner). I really think that is what K sees in the Plumlees (primarily the middle one). While getting Smith would be great, I would rather have a key PG (one of three that we are targetting) as well as Barnes. Getting Barnes would be huge. He would be like Henderson, except with a better shot (a JJ / Henderson combo!)

[Welcome2DaSlopes]

I think we would have enough scholarships to get Josh Smith because Coach K already offered him. My Dream Class would be the three we have along with 1.HB 2. BK 3.Josh Smith 4.Dominique Ferguson

[Bob Green]

I think we would have enough scholarships to get Josh Smith because Coach K already offered him. My Dream Class would be the three we have along with 1.HB 2. BK 3.Josh Smith 4.Dominique Ferguson

With the departure of Scheyer, Thomas, and Zoubek, Duke will be able to bring in five 2010 players and be at the 13 scholarship limit. Signing a sixth player would require someone to leave early and signing seven would require two early departures. It isn't a stretch to expect one player to leave early, but two leaving early doesn't seem likely to me. Therefore, IMO, Duke will sign a maximum of six players in 2010.

While it would be great to sign Joshua Smith, he is considered a longshot as he is a West Coast guy. But who knows?

My Dream Class would be to add Harrison Barnes and a five star point guard to a team that includes senior, and National Player of the Year candidate, Kyle Singler.

[Kedsy]

I think we would have enough scholarships to get Josh Smith because Coach K already offered him. My Dream Class would be the three we have along with 1.HB 2. BK 3.Josh Smith 4.Dominique Ferguson

I'm not sure I understand what offers have to do with available scholarships? We have 11 scholarship players for next year (including Curry). For the following year we'll lose 3 seniors and possibly Singler, bringing us to 7 or 8, plus the three 2010 commits, bringing us up to 10 or 11. The maximum total allowed is 13.

In other words there will be room for three recruits only if Kyle leaves and room for four only if Kyle leaves AND an underclassman unexpectedly leaves the program. Your dream class isn't going to happen.


(sorry for the repetitive nature of this post; Bob Green's post wasn't there when I started writing mine)

[NSDukeFan]

With the departure of Scheyer, Thomas, and Zoubek, Duke will be able to bring in five 2010 players and be at the 13 scholarship limit. Signing a sixth player would require someone to leave early and signing seven would require two early departures. It isn't a stretch to expect one player to leave early, but two leaving early doesn't seem likely to me. Therefore, IMO, Duke will sign a maximum of six players in 2010.

While it would be great to sign Joshua Smith, he is considered a longshot as he is a West Coast guy. But who knows?

My Dream Class would be to add Harrison Barnes and a five star point guard to a team that includes senior, and National Player of the Year candidate, Kyle Singler.

I agree completely. It is also the same rationale that G as a senior would have been a greater addition to our team next year than Wall as a freshman in my estimation. I think Kyle as a senior could be scary good, after the fantastic freshman and sophomore years he has already had. All good dreams, but whatever happens, reality should be fun as well.

[dukieinhebron]

I didn't know if anyone else had already posted this, so I figured I would give it a shot.
Josh Smith claims to be tired of being recruited.

His decision could come before July ,but he has yet to trim his list.

http://scouthoops.scout.com/a.z?s=75&p=2&c=872532&ssf=1&RequestedURL=http%3a%2f%2fscouthoops.scout.com%2f2 %2f872532.html

Couldn't hyper link; just have to copy and paste.

[kramerbr]

I didn't know if anyone else had already posted this, so I figured I would give it a shot.
Josh Smith claims to be tired of being recruited.

His decision could come before July ,but he has yet to trim his list.

http://scouthoops.scout.com/a.z?s=75&p=2&c=872532&ssf=1&RequestedURL=http%3a%2f%2fscouthoops.scout.com%2f2 %2f872532.html

Couldn't hyper link; just have to copy and paste.


Hmmm Washington or UCLA? Seems the staff has been evaluating other bigs in the class, maybe they will make some more offers out after Josh is off the table.

[COYS]

I didn't know if anyone else had already posted this, so I figured I would give it a shot.
Josh Smith claims to be tired of being recruited.

His decision could come before July ,but he has yet to trim his list.

http://scouthoops.scout.com/a.z?s=75&p=2&c=872532&ssf=1&RequestedURL=http%3a%2f%2fscouthoops.scout.com%2f2 %2f872532.html

Couldn't hyper link; just have to copy and paste.

If this is true, I'm not that surprised. He was always regarded as a longshot for anyone on the east coast.

[El_Diablo]

The 'teaser' for the scout.com article linked above says this on the TDD homepage:


Josh Smith says he's ready for the recruiting process to end; continues to claim Duke interest...

[Duke #33]

The 'teaser' for the scout.com article linked above says this on the TDD homepage:

Not renewing my scout subscription, i know realize how much those premuim articles titles/first sentences irritate me because you start reading it, then it cuts off right before the juicy part.

[SupaDave]

Josh Smith still looking at Duke...

http://www.highschoolhoop.com/recruiting-news/2009/06/josh-smith-i-think-im-the-best-and-nobody-is-better-than-me/#more-1350

[dgoore97]

Josh Smith still looking at Duke...

http://www.highschoolhoop.com/recruiting-news/2009/06/josh-smith-i-think-im-the-best-and-nobody-is-better-than-me/#more-1350

is when Josh tells the guy he hates talking about recruiting and people asking hime the same question, he asks hims so.. where are you going to go?

i think josh has a very good attitude about it.

[houstondukie]

is when Josh tells the guy he hates talking about recruiting and people asking hime the same question, he asks hims so.. where are you going to go?

i think josh has a very good attitude about it.

I thought Duke had offered, but Smith says they have not, only "high interest."

[Welcome2DaSlopes]

I thought he was going to sign sometime in July. Guess Not

[ACCBBallFan]

Looked like in addition the the West Coast Schools UCLA and Washington, he mentioned TX and Louisville more than Duke which is even further East.

The part about not just run and gun sounded positive for UCLA too, as well as Duke. Depends on how good a memory he has on whether the putting big men in NBA plays for Duke, does for UCLA again.

"HSH: Well, you’re No. 5 overall in our rankings. That too low?
JS: Well, I truly feel that I am the top player. That’s the mindset I go into every game with. I’m trying to play like I’m the top player at all times. I mean I’m definitely not trying to play like I’m the No. 5 player and four other guys are better than me. When I’m out there I think that I’m the best and nobody is better than me. Nothing against none of the other guys. "

[airowe]

http://www.hoopsreport.com/news/hoopsnews/joshsmithrestingupforbigseniorseason


It might be local, might be east coast, might be west coast or down south, whatever.

[jimsumner]

I'm reasonably certain Duke is not actively recruiting Josh Smith. FWIW, Smith's reputation plummeted over the summer as a result of indifferent play and conditioning issues. Doesn't mean he can't be a stud down the line but there seem to be some valid concerns.

[airowe]

I'm reasonably certain Duke is not actively recruiting Josh Smith. FWIW, Smith's reputation plummeted over the summer as a result of indifferent play and conditioning issues. Doesn't mean he can't be a stud down the line but there seem to be some valid concerns.

I wonder if we'd go after Enes Kanter (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/highschool/news/story?id=4407971&campaign=rss&source=twitter&ex_cid=Twitter_espn_4407971) then? We're not really recruiting any bangers and with Zoubek leaving, MP1 would be our only wide-body...