PDA

View Full Version : Duke Recruiting Misses



BlueintheFace
03-27-2009, 12:00 PM
Before some of you start the now annual, "Duke needs a big man" threads I just wanted to make sure that all of you are aware of what K said last night at the post-game press conference.


Bob Ryan: Does this in any way make you more eager to find a post player who can really score?

Coach K: And a point. Yeah. It's not like we haven't tried to find them. A couple of them have gone to other schools right at the last second, but yeah. We were like a three headed monster on offense and it carried us a long way but they played a lot of five against three tonight and their good. You got someone in mind? No? Alright, you're not that helpful (says smiling).


http://all-access.cbssports.com/player.html?code=ncaa&media=111158
(@26 minute mark)

K has certainly tried to bring in big-time post players and ball handlers, but he has just missed on 2 or three (Patterson, Monroe, Boynton, etc...). It is not as though K is unaware of the deficiencies of the roster or that he has somehow decide to become an all-around jump-shooting team. Sometimes you just miss on recruits and it effects results down the line. That has been the case for us the last few years. K has acknowledged as much and I believe it is important for a lot of us on the board to remember this.

weezie
03-27-2009, 12:07 PM
Yeah, I doubt there is anything that escapes Coach K. His demeanor last night was telling. No real screaming and hollering, some minor griping at Hess but K is a realist above all.

I imagine he'll be on a plane Monday morning for some more wooing.

gotham devil
03-27-2009, 12:53 PM
Yeah, I doubt there is anything that escapes Coach K. His demeanor last night was telling. No real screaming and hollering, some minor griping at Hess but K is a realist above all.

I imagine he'll be on a plane Monday morning for some more wooing.

Definitely, while I'm sure some might criticize his loyalty to Paulus and Wojo, he is a realist. His willingness to shake up his staff in the mid-90s proved instrumental to our positive change in the late 90s and early part of this decade. Perhaps, one or both associate head coaches will, um, move on to head coaching postions.

He's got to do a brutally honest self-examination.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/news?slug=dw-dukebounced032709&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

whereinthehellami
03-27-2009, 01:10 PM
I was just listening to the "Locker Room" sports radio show in the DC area and they were really giving it to Duke. Kevin Sheehan had picked Duke to win and was getting hammered pretty good. This led to a discussion about what is wrong with Duke and it of course led to Duke's recruiting. Not that they know what they are talking about or anything but the perception is definately out there by most of the DC area that Duke can't recruit athletes anymore in todays one and done climate.

I didn't realize that Duke had the worst shooting game in the history of the tourney. I think they also said that was the worst loss in the sweet 16. Ouch.

Classof06
03-27-2009, 01:20 PM
That Wetzel article hit the nail on the head. I was watching Krzyzewski during the 2nd half as the game got out of control and it was clear that he knew what was going on. He wasn't surprised in the least. Like I said, as soon as Duke started the game 1/8 or 2/9 from 3, I knew we were in grave danger.

I remember watching the game last night and the camera did a quick scan of the faces on our bench. Sitting there were McClure, Paulus, Pocious, Zoubek and the rest of the kids, and I remember thinking to myself "none of these players would even make the roster on that 2001 national championship team". This is not to denigrate those players because they're all busting their behinds trying to become the best they can be. But Duke fans have to stop fighting reality; we're not what we used to be. 10 years ago, we had teams where Nate James and Corey Maggette weren't even starters; Maggette would undoubtedly be the best player on this year's team and you could make a strong argument for James as well.

I'm both surprised and refreshed that Krzyzewski admitted the personnel deficiencies in the press conference last night. Surprised because he usually likes to talk about those things in-house and refreshed because it's to the point where he couldn't possibly deny it any longer.

The one thing I will say about Krzyzewski is that, like he himself said, you can't say he hasn't tried to recruit the players necessary to uphold Duke's storied tradition.

And that may be the scariest thing of all.

NYDukie
03-27-2009, 01:42 PM
To put a positive spin on things, just wait until we get the usual recruiting haul back in play which Coach K wants similar to what he had in 2001 and during the period 1998 through 2004. JJ and Sheldon and Co. were the last great recruiting haul but that class lacked some of the athletic diversity the previous others had. With the 2010 haul on the horizon, which hopefully includes Barnes, with an outside shot at Josh Smith added to Nolon, Elliot, Mason, Kelly ajnd possibly Kyle, the needed roster diversity will be there. We as fans, just need to be patient. I for one was just as frustrated as any of you were watching last nights game but after taking a step back, I think things will swing back our way. Just think of what Coach K and the staff have done with the past couple of teams given their limitations and translate that to what the staff will be able to do with that future roster.

DevilCastDownfromDurham
03-27-2009, 02:51 PM
The one thing I will say about Krzyzewski is that, like he himself said, you can't say he hasn't tried to recruit the players necessary to uphold Duke's storied tradition.

And that may be the scariest thing of all.

I think you can say that about low-post players, and I agree that missing on so many successive guys even with major minutes available for a team like Duke (ESPN every game, history of producing NBA post players, etc) is really scary.

I don't think you can say the same thing about PG's. It was apparent by early in his soph season that Dockery just wasn't going to be a pass-first PG. Since then, we've gone after Livingstone, who was 1 year at best, and Paulus. Those were 2 highly-rated guys, but in a period of 7 years that's just silly. Even if Leavingsoon had been the bridge to Paulus that some folks were dreaming of, that's 4 seasons of Greg with no back-up in case of illness, injury, or going NBA early (and if you bought his HS ranking as legit then that had to be a possibility). In those seven years Scout (http://duke.scout.com/a.z?s=167&p=9&c=4&cfg=bb&yr=2007)lists us as pursuing only one other PG: 1-star PG Justin Robinson.

I obviously have no inside info so maybe the staff pursued guys in private that we don't know about. Maybe the plan really was to dragoon SG's like Ewing, Nolan, and Jon into a position they weren't prepared for. I have no idea. And I'm not sure if seeing the problem but failing to fix it (with 5's) or not even seeing the problem is worse, but that combination has left us with amazing wings despondent on the bench every time we play a top 4 seed. Until we start addressing these problems (and unless Wall surprises a whole lot of people it won't be until 2010 or 2011) there's simply a ceiling on what we can be as a team.

DUKIE V(A)
03-27-2009, 03:22 PM
Not that anyone is crying for us...but it's hard to do things right and get everyone you want. I love the kids we are bringing in the next two years and the kids we have returning. AND I LOVE that we do things the right way. While nobody is perfect, our players are tremendous on the court, graduate, and conduct themselves well off the court (win or lose).

P.S. The guys on D.C. sports radio are mostly Maryland homers and always seem to forget things like our 30 wins including a 7-0 record against the local squads (3-0 Maryland, 2-0 VATECH, 1-0 G-Town, 1-0 UVA). I think they may wish their beloved Terps had our problems.

Devilsfan
03-27-2009, 03:28 PM
I like the year after next kids, too. It's hard to recruit when your focus is split between college and Team USA's quest for gold. Our entire staff was involved in one aspect or another. Now everyone can get back to focusing on their day jobs.

Devilsfan
03-27-2009, 03:52 PM
I wish whoever selects the McDonalds AA team would stop picking players because they signed with Duke. Next years recruits while they might be and probably are very good went to small private schools and are not from inner city Brooklyn or Detroit where they need to be metally and physically tough. Maybe there should be an AA team for Ivy, Duke, and Stanford bound players.

JonnyWonder
03-27-2009, 04:27 PM
I'm just going to throw this out there because I'm curious of others' opinions:

Do you think there is a certain stigma that Duke has when recruiting big guys?

I've always thought using Wojo as a big man coach is strange, and to be honest, we've had more than a few big men go through not really developing that much. Shelden was always good, and Boozer obviously has loads of talent - and really got even better after being in the NBA. Maybe I'm missing something, but I've never felt we can develop big men like we develop guards or wing players.

I mean, you are a big hs recruit - do you go to Duke, where you get coached by a former PG who comes up to your chest...and you most likely will get only garbage time your entire first year? Or do you go to G-town where Patrick Ewing will work with you, or another program that successfully cultivates big men and you might actually get into the rotation from your first season?

I know Duke's style of offense is never going to be dumping into the post and scoring, but we used both Boozer's offense and Shelden's shot blocking to great effect back in the day.

I won't even start on our desperate need of a real penetrate and pass PG, because that could be a whole other post. But I am not that confident in us landing a game-changing big man - and I don't exactly see the incentive for one to come to Duke. We barely saw Plumlee or Czyz this year - are they really that bad?

GoingFor#5
03-27-2009, 04:31 PM
Jonny,

I recall Shelden making significant improvements. For his first 2 years, I remember being constantly frustrated that he would jump into guys to go for blocks instead of jumping straight up, but he fixed that problem with some coaching. Also, he really improved on the offensive end. It probably would help if he was starring in the NBA, though.

should_be_working
03-27-2009, 04:34 PM
Regarding Olek Czyz, and I mean this in no disrespectful manner, but with the number of bigger guys coming in over the next couple of years, would it serve him best, in regards of playing time, to transfer ala Taylor King. Again, this is nothing against the kid, but if he's looking for playing time here at Duke, I just don't see much of it going to him in the next three years. Thoughts?

novablue4
03-27-2009, 04:36 PM
I wish whoever selects the McDonalds AA team would stop picking players because they signed with Duke. Next years recruits while they might be and probably are very good went to small private schools and are not from inner city Brooklyn or Detroit where they need to be metally and physically tough. Maybe there should be an AA team for Ivy, Duke, and Stanford bound players.

I wonder the same thing, is Ryan Kelly really an greasy mac player? What if he had signed with Appy State or Northeastern? Aaric Murray signed with LaSalle and I wonder who the better player really truly is. I am hopeing it is Ryan. At least he came, bless him

LaettnerWannabe
03-27-2009, 04:40 PM
Does anyone remember Carolina's big men dry spell earlier in this decade? They missed out on quite a few prospects before Sean May came on board. Now it seems like they sign a couple of them every month. I hope that, like Carolina, all it will take is one top big man to commit and reverse the trend. Coach K knows what is needed, but I think there's just been some bad luck lately.

Diddy
03-27-2009, 04:53 PM
http://duke.scout.com/a.z?s=167&p=9&c=8&cfg=bb&yr=2010

Above is a list for Duke's 2010 class. As it stands, it is good. Not great. Dawkins looks like a stud. An athletic, skilled, shooter. Great.

Hairston is iffy. If he is highly skilled, or better yet, very athletic, he can help. But it seems like his game is very similiar to Singler or Kelly. If one or both is still here, where does he play? Heck, the two plums could be manning the post, with Nolan, E-Will and Dawk on the perimeter. I don't see savior written all over him. I like his upside, but he isn't an impact player right now.
Also, he plays against real weak comp. In the state title game, the other team's tallest opponent was 6-4 or something.

As for Thornton, he looks solid, but I see Dockery written all over him right now. A good, not great, athlete who may be a score first guard. A less athletic Nolan Smith.

Hairston looks like a stud, granted. But he isn't committed. I have heard that Duke is in good shape, but that he wants to take visits. Anything can happen in recruiting. When he committs, I will breath much easier.

Same with Kyrie Irving. Although, I feel Bledsoe might preclude Irving, but I am OK with that.

As for Josh Smith and Brandon Knight, move on. They aren't comming. We might not even make their top 5, barring massive coaching changes (Billy D to UK).

The 2010 class isn't fully committed yet, and big holes still exist. We have counted on players before that have yet to materialize. When talking about 2010, only talk about the players we definitely have. Not the ones we hope or think we have.

As an aside, when talking about misses, the entire 2005 class was a miss. A bust class like that has destroyed lesser programs than Duke.

Ian
03-27-2009, 04:56 PM
I don't think player's get on the McDonald's list for signing with Duke.

I do think the McDonald's list has a lot of politics and thus is often not the 24 best HS players in the country.

There is a tendency to spread out the list between the geographical regions, . There is probably also a tendency for diversity sakes put in players who different economic background (inner city prep school) and sometime maybe even an extra incentive to put some white players on there who probably don't deserved it. (Neil Fingleton comes to mind).

So while as a whole the McDonalds AAs are very good, being named one doesn't necessarily mean anything about a particular player.

JonnyWonder
03-27-2009, 04:59 PM
GoingFor#4 - Thanks for the perspective. Sometimes memory is such that you always think a player was as good as his best games. With that said, Shelden came to Duke as "The Landlord" for a reason - he was already a tremendous shotblocking talent. I don't mean to say Wojo or the coaching staff never facilitated any improvement (and apologize to them if my original post came off like that), but rather maybe our bigs could improve even more/prospects would be more attracted to Duke if we had a bigs coach who had actually played the 5.

Duvall
03-27-2009, 05:00 PM
maybe our bigs could improve even more/prospects would be more attracted to Duke if we had a bigs coach who had actually played the 5.

That's an interesting idea. Could you perhaps elaborate on that?

BD80
03-27-2009, 05:11 PM
Regarding Olek Czyz, ... would it serve him best, in regards of playing time, to transfer ala Taylor King. ... Thoughts?

My thoughts are that we shouldn't raise the issue of current players transfering. It is divisive and not productive.

Do we need the scholarship? No. Coach K isn't wasting his time with this kid; there is a good reason he is on the team, he has the level of athleticism we have all been crying for.

Transfer speculation doesn't belong on this board, it certainly shouldn't start on this board.

[Note to moderators, has this been toned down enough?]

[Could I get away with a bit more next time?]

heyman25
03-27-2009, 05:11 PM
I don't think its the staff. Duke has an image of a privileged white school. Fortunately in 2010 we have 3 African American recruits that may help change that. Nate James and Chris Carrawell will be trying to change the perception.People like Kenny Boynton perhaps John Wall do not feel comfortable in that environment. However Duke is on TV all the time. That is our advantage.We need speed and quickness,which David Cutliffe is going after for football. We need a global reach. Players like Patty Mills overseas are there we need to reach out.Many outstanding Australians are going to schools other than Duke.Coach K's target recruiting has backfired. He needs a backup plan for every target.Kelly and Plumlee may surprise me,but I get the feeling its more of the same type player.2010 with Hairston and Dawkins, we can get back to the top with. We just need 5 or 6 more players with their skills.

RelativeWays
03-27-2009, 05:23 PM
I seem to remember that mid 90's recruiting was pretty bad with lots of misses outside of maybe Trajon, Nate, Chris (and Mike too, even though he transferred).

should_be_working
03-27-2009, 05:30 PM
My thoughts are that we shouldn't raise the issue of current players transfering. It is divisive and not productive.

Do we need the scholarship? No. Coach K isn't wasting his time with this kid; there is a good reason he is on the team, he has the level of athleticism we have all been crying for.

Transfer speculation doesn't belong on this board, it certainly shouldn't start on this board.

[Note to moderators, has this been toned down enough?]

[Could I get away with a bit more next time?]

Wow, well I apologize if the subject of transferring is forbidden discussion on this board, I didn't know. I honestly had this kid's best interest in mind when I brought up the subject. I don't know what's best for him, but it just seems like if playing time is something he wants, Duke doesn't seem to be the best fit. That's just my opinion. I'm not saying he shouldn't have been recruited, and certainly that he isn't capable of making a contribution here. This looks to be a deep team at that position for the next few years and I just don't see him getting a great deal of playing time, based on what we saw of him this season - granted its hard to get a handle on this since his minutes were very limited.

Again, I didn't meant to ruffle any feathers, nor did I mean to talk about something that is not allowed.

Jeffrey
03-27-2009, 05:39 PM
I'm not sure it's always possible to know how well a HS players skills will translate to ACC ball. When recruited, many thought Greg would have been an excellent ACC PG. When recruited, many thought Nolan also would have been an excellent ACC PG. I still think Nolan has significant potential. Recruiting may be a science but, IMO, there's also an element of luck. I think Coach K has experienced both sides of recruitment luck (lately bad).

Said differently, IIRC, when we recruited Brand, Battier, and Burgess... Burgess was considered the premier recruit. If we hadn't landed him, then that would have a been considered a big miss. Luckily for us, Brand was much better than many predicted.

miramar
03-27-2009, 05:50 PM
I seem to remember that mid 90's recruiting was pretty bad with lots of misses outside of maybe Trajon, Nate, Chris (and Mike too, even though he transferred).

Yes, but in a different way. According to John Feinstein's "A March to Madness" (1998, back when he was a worthwhile read) Coach K got very busy because he was too nice of a guy to say no to any invitation: "Krzyzewski was convinced that recruiting was the area in which the program had slipped the most since the back to back titles [. . .]. Each Duke recruiting class had players ranked and lauded by all the recruiting gurus. The difference was that Krzyzewski hadn't had the time to get to know them as well as he had in the past [. . .]. If he had had the extra time he might have figured out that Greg Newton and Joey Beard were ill suited for Duke academically and socially. He might have thought twice about Tony Moore's and Ricky Price's ability to handle the school's academic rigor" (72-73).

So back then everyone was delighted with the recruiting classes, but they just didn't work out. I heard nothing but raves about Newton, Beard, and Price (I don't remember much about Moore), but there was a real decline before we bounced back. People like Dickie V (big deal, right?) were saying that Beard was at the same level as Ferry and Laettner, so that will give you some idea.

Ignatius07
03-27-2009, 05:55 PM
http://duke.scout.com/a.z?s=167&p=9&c=8&cfg=bb&yr=2010

Above is a list for Duke's 2010 class. As it stands, it is good. Not great. Dawkins looks like a stud. An athletic, skilled, shooter. Great.

Hairston is iffy. If he is highly skilled, or better yet, very athletic, he can help. But it seems like his game is very similiar to Singler or Kelly. If one or both is still here, where does he play? Heck, the two plums could be manning the post, with Nolan, E-Will and Dawk on the perimeter. I don't see savior written all over him. I like his upside, but he isn't an impact player right now.
Also, he plays against real weak comp. In the state title game, the other team's tallest opponent was 6-4 or something.

As for Thornton, he looks solid, but I see Dockery written all over him right now. A good, not great, athlete who may be a score first guard. A less athletic Nolan Smith.

Hairston looks like a stud, granted. But he isn't committed. I have heard that Duke is in good shape, but that he wants to take visits. Anything can happen in recruiting. When he committs, I will breath much easier.

Same with Kyrie Irving. Although, I feel Bledsoe might preclude Irving, but I am OK with that.

As for Josh Smith and Brandon Knight, move on. They aren't comming. We might not even make their top 5, barring massive coaching changes (Billy D to UK).

The 2010 class isn't fully committed yet, and big holes still exist. We have counted on players before that have yet to materialize. When talking about 2010, only talk about the players we definitely have. Not the ones we hope or think we have.

As an aside, when talking about misses, the entire 2005 class was a miss. A bust class like that has destroyed lesser programs than Duke.

This is an excellent post. People are looking to 2010 as the class that saves Duke basketball, but at this point can we really expect it to do anything but replace the 2006 class that is still around at that point? Each of them seems to be a solid recruit - though Thornton does seem like he'll be a career backup - but none of them is yet elite (consensus top-15 IMO). And none if them is a PG or true big man. I'm optimistic about the 2010 class but there is no reason at this point to conclude that it is going to dramatically change things with the players currently committed.

DevilCastDownfromDurham
03-27-2009, 06:03 PM
http://duke.scout.com/a.z?s=167&p=9&c=8&cfg=bb&yr=2010

Above is a list for Duke's 2010 class. As it stands, it is good. Not great.

...

The 2010 class isn't fully committed yet, and big holes still exist. We have counted on players before that have yet to materialize. When talking about 2010, only talk about the players we definitely have. Not the ones we hope or think we have.

I have very similar feelings about 2010 right now. We're talking about a very good stud SG and 2 four-star players. That's a fine beginning to a class, and if you add Barnes it's a very good class. But it's not game-changing at all. We have great wings, so adding more is nice but doesn't address our issues. Thornton will be a solid backup PG in time, but the list of players that were rated the 9th best at their position and started/made an impact as freshmen at Duke is pretty short.

If we can add a real stud post player (like Josh Smith) and a real PG (like Knight) this can be the class that puts us back on top. But until then, all the talk about 2010 as the answer to all of our problems is, IMO, severely misguided.

NYC Duke Fan
03-27-2009, 06:14 PM
John Brockman was another near miss who would have helped.

My only criticism, and obviously, I don't know what actually goes on , is that there seems not to be any backup plan that Coach K has. He went after Patterson hard, but Patterson indicated that he wasn going to commit in the Spring. Was there a backup for Patterson? I thought that after Thomas committed to Duke that Samuels would be following soon as they were good friends at St. Benedicts. Did we recruit him heavily ?

Same for Monroe and Boynton...no backup plan .

Does anyone have any other opinion other than Duke doesn't have a big man coach,to explain why we cannot recruit players in the ilk of Boozer, Brand and Williams ? I seems like Pitino, Calipari, Donovan etc can attract these kind of players.

Troublemaker
03-27-2009, 06:20 PM
I don't think its the staff. Duke has an image of a privileged white school. Fortunately in 2010 we have 3 African American recruits that may help change that. Nate James and Chris Carrawell will be trying to change the perception.People like Kenny Boynton perhaps John Wall do not feel comfortable in that environment. However Duke is on TV all the time. That is our advantage.We need speed and quickness,which David Cutliffe is going after for football. We need a global reach. Players like Patty Mills overseas are there we need to reach out.Many outstanding Australians are going to schools other than Duke.Coach K's target recruiting has backfired. He needs a backup plan for every target.Kelly and Plumlee may surprise me,but I get the feeling its more of the same type player.2010 with Hairston and Dawkins, we can get back to the top with. We just need 5 or 6 more players with their skills.

Good post. While I don't agree with a lot of what you say here, I think it's great to recognize that our coaching staff faces a unique challenge in the recruiting world. Namely, people hate us. We're the most loathed program around, and this inevitably will affect recruiting. Our recruits sometimes have coaches, family members, and friends that push them towards other schools. This influence on the recruit can be overt, or it may just be a subtle pressure of him knowing that his parents or siblings or friends have always rooted against Duke.

I think Duke has recognized the issue of Duke hatred and started to combat it. Duke Blue Planet was created to provide the program with positive representation on the web. Nate and Cwell are coaches that some of our recruits can relate to better than Chris and Wojo. Certainly, the Olympic experience will help as well, as Coach K can sit in a recruit's living room and regale him with tales about Lebron and Kobe, who are idolized by young basketball players, especially in the black community.

Duke's recruiting should be on its way back to an elite level. I mean, we're pretty good right now but obviously we want to be elite, which is why this discussion is even taking place. Some of the misses in recruiting that Duke has experienced in recent years that would've made a big difference to the team on the court will start turning into hits. The program is making gradual progress towards repairing its image and combating Duke hatred (and, of course, it's unfair that we even have to do that in the first place, but life isn't fair sometimes). Just stay patient and know that, regardless, our coaches will always bring great kids into the program to represent Duke.

Jeffrey
03-27-2009, 06:21 PM
Does anyone have any other opinion other than Duke doesn't have a big man coach,to explain why we cannot recruit players in the ilk of Boozer, Brand and Williams ?

IMO, we can and are successfully recruiting at that level currently. Were any of the three you listed considered top 5 recruits? IIRC, Randolph and Burgess were rated higher but that did not translate to ACC success.

Ian
03-27-2009, 06:25 PM
Can we stop with this "everyone hate Duke" poor us stuff.

Sure there are a lot of people who hate Duke, but only because a lot of other people like Duke. A recent public opinion survey had Duke as the #1 most popular basketball team in the country. Duke games always gets the highest ratings.

When you're a popular program that have a long history of success a lot of people are going to love you, and a lot of people are going to hate you. The Yankees are the most "hated" MLB team, the Cowboys are the most "hated" NFL team. They also happen to be the most popular. Same is true for Duke.

You want people to stop hating Duke, start losing a lot, then people won't hate you any more.

Troublemaker
03-27-2009, 06:30 PM
Can we stop with this "everyone hate Duke" poor us stuff.

Sure there are a lot of people who hate Duke, but only because a lot of other people like Duke. A recent public opinion survey had Duke as the #1 most popular basketball team in the country. Duke games always gets the highest ratings.

When you're a popular program that have a long history of success a lot of people are going to love you, and a lot of people are going to hate you. The Yankees are the most "hated" MLB team, the Cowboys are the most "hated" NFL team. They also happen to be the most popular. Same is true for Duke.

You want people to stop hating Duke, start losing a lot, then people won't hate you any more.

This is naive. There's more to this than just winning.

Name Duke's most hated players over the course of the past 20 years. I bet you'll easily find a trend among them.

There's a lot of class warfare / racial undertones mixed in with the Duke hatred. It's unfair, but we have an image of being elitist which needs to be combated.

DevilCastDownfromDurham
03-27-2009, 06:31 PM
Does anyone have any other opinion other than Duke doesn't have a big man coach,to explain why we cannot recruit players in the ilk of Boozer, Brand and Williams ? I seems like Pitino, Calipari, Donovan etc can attract these kind of players.

Until 2004 we could recruit them as well as anyone in the nation (Brand, Boozer, Shel, Hump, McBob). Then our recruiting ace stopped spending his summers recruiting and he took his staff with him.

K is back now, and the question is whether he has the energy and juice to regain the momentum he killed, or whether the precarious situation Duke is in based on academic requirements and anti-Duke sentiment nationally are just too much. I think there's a fine chance that he will. But there's also some concern that the damage is too great, and that our failures are snowballing.

FWIW, I also think there's an argument that the anomaly isn't the past 4 years, but the 7 before that. Brand, Boozer, and Shel were all late additions where things fell our way, in part based on building on the recent success in the post (i.e. Brand came because Quinn was the man, Boozer saw Brand and was willing to follow suit, etc.) Having UNC in such a state of flux didn't hurt either.

That's not to say we're doomed without a Brand/Boozer-type guy. We did pretty well in the late 1980's with high post guys and killer PG's, and if we can get some speed demons and ball hawks in the back court we may be able to return to that style.

tendev
03-27-2009, 06:44 PM
Duke can only recruit players who are good enough to get them to the Sweet 16 the past whatever number of times the past whatever number of years, get to the Final Four whatever number of times it was in the past whatever number of years and 3 National Championships, one in this decade. Can someone please name the programs who have done better? If you go back 20 years, Duke is second to none. In this decade we have 1 NCAA title and one Final Four and a number of Sweet 16s. Florida, UConn, UNC, Kansas are the only schools that I can think of that can compete with that. Where is Florida now? They can't recruit I guess.

dukeballer2294
03-27-2009, 07:06 PM
Imo, K is a great coach and we all know that as well as Duke being a top-5 program. After last nights loss I took a long look at the season and rembered what i thought would be good at the beginning. I recalled saying that this is not a championship team a good 1 maybe final 4 but no championship i hoped and prayed during the year that we would become one but it just didnt happen. I did say though that next year could be great. Think about it. Potentially we lose no starters especially if G doesnt want his last game in college to be his worst. So thats already the top team in the ACC (i think its highly likely that ellington and lawson leave) All year people have been saying how great Kelly and MP2 have been so why critiszce them now. I know its tough after a lose but look on the brightside we were young believe it or not this year and at worst will return all starters and gain 2 more potential big time players. I wont start to fret about the state of the program until we start
A: get into a recruiting scandal like some other schools in order to win
or B: just totally stop getting players ala Kentucky and not make the tournament.
I agree we should be a contender every year but Imo the last 2 years we have been contenders at the least. 2 seed isnt bad. So while this long offseason starts remember we are still at the top and although we may be in a dry spell the sky is not falling.

Diddy
03-27-2009, 07:30 PM
IMO, we can and are successfully recruiting at that level currently. Were any of the three you listed considered top 5 recruits? IIRC, Randolph and Burgess were rated higher but that did not translate to ACC success.

Not so.

After the McD's AA, Brand was a consensus top 5 recruit, and as high as Number 3 in Prepstars. Burgess was in the 5-12 range. Battier was considered a better recruit in the final stages of that recruiting year. When they initially committed, Burgess was the stud. But by the end of that summer, Brand and Battier were at least considered equals. Avery, though not a McD's AA, ended up much better than thought also.

Hmm, a kid from a southern town at a school with poor academics who is coming on. Bledsoe, come on down.

But, back to the original pt, the final rankings were very indicitive.

Randolf and Burgess had dropped noticiably by the end of the year, whereas other players went up accordingly.

Lately, it seems most of our players have been heading the wrong direction in the final tally.

Paulus and McBob aside. Along with Boateng, the ENTIRE freaking world missed.

Dukeford
03-27-2009, 07:39 PM
I heard nothing but raves about Newton, Beard, and Price (I don't remember much about Moore), but there was a real decline before we bounced back......

There's no doubt that Newton had issues off the court, but I remember him having great athleticism for a big guy. I kept expecting him to break out from his Soph year forward, but he never realized full potential.
He sure as heck would have started at the post on this year's team.

bgibbs1001
03-27-2009, 07:54 PM
I seem to remember that mid 90's recruiting was pretty bad with lots of misses outside of maybe Trajon, Nate, Chris (and Mike too, even though he transferred).

And K was also working with USA Basketball during that time.

bgibbs1001
03-27-2009, 08:04 PM
John Brockman was another near miss who would have helped.

My only criticism, and obviously, I don't know what actually goes on , is that there seems not to be any backup plan that Coach K has. He went after Patterson hard, but Patterson indicated that he wasn going to commit in the Spring. Was there a backup for Patterson? I thought that after Thomas committed to Duke that Samuels would be following soon as they were good friends at St. Benedicts. Did we recruit him heavily ?

Same for Monroe and Boynton...no backup plan .

Does anyone have any other opinion other than Duke doesn't have a big man coach,to explain why we cannot recruit players in the ilk of Boozer, Brand and Williams ? I seems like Pitino, Calipari, Donovan etc can attract these kind of players.

Well Greg Monroe made it clear to Jason Williams that he wanted to come to Duke but just couldn't see himself being coached by a guy who played point guard his whole life.

Maxwell1977
03-27-2009, 08:27 PM
Well Greg Monroe made it clear to Jason Williams that he wanted to come to Duke but just couldn't see himself being coached by a guy who played point guard his whole life.

So how did that work out for him?

RelativeWays
03-27-2009, 08:48 PM
This is naive. There's more to this than just winning.

Name Duke's most hated players over the course of the past 20 years. I bet you'll easily find a trend among them.

There's a lot of class warfare / racial undertones mixed in with the Duke hatred. It's unfair, but we have an image of being elitist which needs to be combated.
You know, most of the most hated Cowboy players are black. I'n sure people hated Aikman, but not like they hated Irvin or clowned on Leon Lett. Sometimes its not just the players on the team, its the culture the team exudes perceived by outsiders, if that makes any sense.

Also LOL at Joey Beard. His sole distinction was going to Grant Hill's high School. I don't know who was a bigger bust between him and Newton. Newton might be my least favorite devil ever

MulletMan
03-27-2009, 08:55 PM
I think we're done here.

Scorp4me
04-07-2009, 10:27 AM
I don't start threads often, so be kind. Just for fun.

With all this talk of Duke's demise, which anyone who reads me knows I don't buy into and I saw someone mentioning how one recruiting class could make such a difference I thought let's swap a very limited # of recruits/recruiting misses.

So let's go back and consider if we had retained Shaun Livingston playing point and we had gotten one of our inside players, say Patrick Patterson for lack of a better choice. Do we look any better last year?

Now to reverse roles let's take away UNC's point, they missed on Lawson and so they are starting Bobby Frasor this year. And we won't take away Tyler Hansbrough cause that'd just be ridiculous, but let's remove Deon Thompson. Do they win it all this year?

Now I realize we didn't get them and they did and we didn't win and they did. Not trying to question that. Not trying to take anything away from Carolina. But I am curious how different the last two seasons are. The last two tournaments. The last four rivalry games. Can two simple recruiting changes (and I've tried to make them simple. Not claiming we get a Kobe Bryant recruit here, these are kids we almost got.) make that big of a difference?

And if it can then I suggest Duke's demise is way overblown. Could the same be said of other teams? Yes, I think it could, but not alot. And that's the point, we're still in the top 10, not the bottom 300.

rotogod00
04-07-2009, 10:29 AM
"So let's go back and consider if we had retained Shaun Livingston playing point and we had gotten one of our inside players, say Patrick Patterson for lack of a better choice. Do we look any better last year?"

please don't take this the wrong way, but is this a serious question? of course, we're better...probably final four better.

"Now to reverse roles let's take away UNC's point, they missed on Lawson and so they are starting Bobby Frasor this year. And we won't take away Tyler Hansbrough cause that'd just be ridiculous, but let's remove Deon Thompson. Do they win it all this year?"

imo, lawson was the most important player to any team in the country this year (maybe blake griffin). and for that reason, if he weren't on this team, carolina becomes well....duke.

jv001
04-07-2009, 10:30 AM
it does just come down to recruiting. And we have not been doing as well as they have in the last few years. But I think that's about to change. GoDuke!

DevilCastDownfromDurham
04-07-2009, 10:50 AM
I don't start threads often, so be kind. Just for fun.

With all this talk of Duke's demise, which anyone who reads me knows I don't buy into and I saw someone mentioning how one recruiting class could make such a difference I thought let's swap a very limited # of recruits/recruiting misses.

So let's go back and consider if we had retained Shaun Livingston playing point and we had gotten one of our inside players, say Patrick Patterson for lack of a better choice. Do we look any better last year?

Now to reverse roles let's take away UNC's point, they missed on Lawson and so they are starting Bobby Frasor this year. And we won't take away Tyler Hansbrough cause that'd just be ridiculous, but let's remove Deon Thompson. Do they win it all this year?

Now I realize we didn't get them and they did and we didn't win and they did. Not trying to question that. Not trying to take anything away from Carolina. But I am curious how different the last two seasons are. The last two tournaments. The last four rivalry games. Can two simple recruiting changes (and I've tried to make them simple. Not claiming we get a Kobe Bryant recruit here, these are kids we almost got.) make that big of a difference?

And if it can then I suggest Duke's demise is way overblown. Could the same be said of other teams? Yes, I think it could, but not alot. And that's the point, we're still in the top 10, not the bottom 300.

I get the point of the exercise but you can't just add/subtract players in a vacuum. If UNC had missed on Lawson, they wouldn't have stood pat, they'd have gone out and grabbed another PG. That year (http://northcarolina.scout.com/a.z?s=78&p=9&c=4&pid=40&cfg=bb&yr=2006) they were also looking at Mike Conley, Javaris Crittenton, and DJ Augustin. They got the best PG, but they would have been fine with any of those guys. If they miss on everybody, in 2007 maybe they grab Nick Calathes or (dear god) Derrick Rose. Or Kemba Walker in 2008.

By the same token, even if Livingstone had come to Duke, there's just no way he would have been here for 3-4 season. I agree that specific players (B. Wright, for example) can be a bit of a crap shoot. But over several seasons elite programs always have great PG's, dynamic wings, and legit post guys. Elite programs are bigger than 1 player because they have backup plans in a given class and more talent at all three areas in the pipeline as well. UNC has had some good breaks and we've had some bad ones. But it wasn't a fluke that we were sending Paulus and a group of SG's against Lawson and Drew or watching Z and Lance try to battle Hans and Co this season. It was UNC keeping their team stocked and us failing to do so over many seasons.

ItalianDevil
04-07-2009, 01:08 PM
it does just come down to recruiting. And we have not been doing as well as they have in the last few years. But I think that's about to change. GoDuke! I wouldn't bet my skinny I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this. on it :rolleyes: