PDA

View Full Version : UNC Recruitment and a Roster Comparison



RockyMtDevil
05-23-2007, 05:18 PM
Roy did not bring in one player this year, can someone explain that logic to me. Is he under the impression that he has no needs, because beyond Hansborough and Lawson, I don't see how they are any better an any position beyond what they did this year, and that is without Wright.

I do not believe UNC is head and shoulders above Duke at all, let's look at a roster comparison and see if Roy should have brought in at least a shooting guard or something this year, seems pretty evident he has some holes to fill.

Let's compare Rosters:

Lawson Paulus (even)
Ellington Henderson (Edge Duke) Gerald is going to be a star
Ginyard DeMarcus (Edge Duke) Same player, Markie has more O
Copeland Singler (Edge Duke) Kyle is more polished on O
Hansblabla Zoubs (Edge UNC) A Big one by the way

Bench
Greene Scheyer (Edge Duke) different players but I'll take Jon
Stepheson Thomas (Even) Toss up for now
Thompson King (Even) Ditto
Thomas Smith (Edge Duke) Thomas is a liability, Smith a stopper
Frasor McClure (Even)
Graves Pocius (who knows...)

Why are they pre-season #1 in some polls and Duke is back in the 22-23 with the two rosters we are looking at?

RockyMtDevil

kramerbr
05-23-2007, 05:55 PM
I love Paulus to death and he is my favorite Duke player at the moment but there's no way he and Lawson are "even". Lawson could almost score at will against Paulus and Paulus would have a tough time scoring on Lawson. IMHO

juise
05-23-2007, 06:11 PM
I love Paulus to death and he is my favorite Duke player at the moment but there's no way he and Lawson are "even". Lawson could almost score at will against Paulus and Paulus would have a tough time scoring on Lawson. IMHO

Agreed. And as excited as I am to see Henderson develop, I don't think you can say point-blank that he's got the edge on Ellington. Draft Express slightly favors Ellington. (http://www.draftexpress.com/player_rankings.php?r=5)

RockyMtDevil
05-23-2007, 06:24 PM
Given Paulus' ability to hit the three and hopefully finally be healthy, he presents a totally different game than simply pushing the ball at full speed up the court and trying to penetrate and dish everytime down. Ultimately, I want to see Lawson hit some open shots and limit his turnovers before I say he is hands down better than Greg.

Ralph-Wiggum
05-23-2007, 06:38 PM
Copeland as a starter? He'll be lucky to get 7 minutes a game.

Thompson or Green (depending if Roy wants to go small or big) will be the starter almost guaranteed. And Stephenson will be Thompson's (and Hansbrough's) main backup.

Ralph-Wiggum
05-23-2007, 06:42 PM
Ultimately, I want to see Lawson hit some open shots and limit his turnovers before I say he is hands down better than Greg.

Hitting open shots I can understand, but Lawson was outstanding in his assist/turnover by the end of the season. For the total of our ACC and NCAA play, he had 39 assists and 11 turnovers. That's pretty incredible, especially considering that for the most part we were playing pretty good teams.

Bob Green
05-23-2007, 07:39 PM
Looking at returning players, UNC has an advantage at Point Guard (Lawson) and in the Post (Hansbrough/Thompson/Stephenson). Duke has an advantage at 2-Guard (Scheyer/Pocius) and the Wing (Nelson/Henderson). Two factors will determine how good Duke is in 07-08. First, the level of development of Thomas and Zoubek as post players. We need significant productive minutes from both. And, the level of productivity of Duke's incoming Freshmen. Will Singler, Smith, and King come in and improve Duke as a team? As always, staying healthy will be a key factor.

For UNC, I believe they will miss Reyshawn Terry more than some folks realize. Who is going to step up and be the team leader? I also agree that Quentin Thomas is a liability.

I predict a Duke sweep! :)

Bob Green
Yokosuka, Japan

Bud
05-23-2007, 08:25 PM
To say that we are even is a bold statement, I agree that are wings are better than UNC. But there post players are going to eat us alive, we have nobody to stop tyler, and there is no way Copeland will be starting, the only time he will be on the court is during the layup drills. Deon Thompson will be starting and I'am as big as a Duke fan as any of you, but there is no way we sweep UNC, we will be lucky to win one game against UNC.

Bob Green
05-23-2007, 09:59 PM
... but there is no way we sweep UNC, we will be lucky to win one game against UNC.

I disagree with your assessment of the situation and believe we are in good shape going into the 07-08 season. Our situation at the 2-Guard and Wing is rock solid. Greg Paulus is a solid though not spectacular Point Guard. We will need Thomas and Zoubek to be more productive. The incoming Freshmen are the Wild Card.

UNC is down two starters (Wright and Terry) and brought in zero new players. We can definitely beat them!

Bob Green
Yokosuka, Japan

Ralph-Wiggum
05-23-2007, 10:22 PM
I wouldn't be surprised if we split. Hell, we almost lost the Cameron game we played against you this year and the talent discrepancy was larger then than it will be next season.

Bud
05-24-2007, 07:15 AM
Bob Green I agree that are guards and wings are solid but are post players are what scares me. Last year if Josh did not get the rebound the other team did, we will not have Josh this year for rebounds. I think teams like UNC and NC State are going to kill us on the boards. I do agree that are freshman are the wild card they are going to make are break are season. I still say UNC is going to be better than us next year, I hope I'am wrong, only time will tell.

whereinthehellami
05-24-2007, 07:37 AM
UNC is a bad matchup for Duke with Lawson and Hansborough being virtually unstoppable. I think Lawson in particular is going to be much more in control/command this upcoming season. I was really hoping he would have gone pro. Deon Thompson showed flashes last season of being a real beast down low with a nice touch and reports on the UNC board of his off-season progress do not bode well for the ACC. You have got to think that Ellington will become more consistent next year and that Frasor will be back to being healthy. Add in a more mature Green, Ginyard, and Stephenson and I think Duke is lucky to be close in any games with UNC next year. Now the rest of the ACC is a different story.

mcdukie
05-24-2007, 08:03 AM
I don't know who Copeland is so I won't mess with that match up, but I must say you are dreaming on the rest of the starters. Paulus is tough but he can't touch Lawson. Ellington is not as athletic as Henderson but far more polished as a player. Ginyard/Nelson I don't know what to say. You can argue that Nelson has more offense but he also looks to score more than Ginyard. Besides, I won't give Nelson a flat out advantage until he turns into a more consistent scorer and doesn't fade in the second half of games. By the way, if I'm Roy I don't need any additions because we are already a top 10 team.

Patrick Yates
05-24-2007, 08:48 AM
UNC was in a bad spot last year. Potential recruits looked at UNC and were very uncertain.

If UNC wins the NC, or has a very strong showing in the FF, then UNC suffers massive attrition in the form of losing Wright, Hans, Lawson, and Ellington, along with graduating Sr's.

But, for potential recruits, many of whom commit and sign prior to the season, this was no sure thing. By the time they made their decisions, they had not seen UNC play a significant game. As talented as UNC was last year, many of the most talented players were freshman, and it is hard to accurately guage and predict their performance at the major collge level.

As it turned out, potential recruits were smart to avoid UNC. UNC underachieved in the postseason (no way to put lipstick on that pig), and the expected attrition did not occur. Since UNC did not suffer the expected attrition, losing only BW, who was a 1-and-done certainty, no matter what anyone else was saying, there were few roster slots available. Roy went after, and was turned down by, the only recruit who would have gotten sure fire minutes, Kevin Love. Other players in the class probably would have gotten PT, but, given the returning players, it would have been a fight, and top flight recruits do not flock to schools where they have to fight and scrape for minutes.

Roy loaded for bear, knowing that if he bagged it, the cupboard might be bare next year. He failed to bag the big prize, and the current players realized they needed more seasoning. There were no minutes available for incoming frosh, and they wisely stayed away. They are still noticably better than we are next year.

On a related note, some of you are smoking crack in your comparisions. Hans will beat whoever we have in the post. BZ might slow him down some, but BZ's underdeveloped O will result in a net loss at the position. KS will go nuts on Thompson or Stephenson, but he has to guard one of them on the other side. They are much bigger and stronger, and have well developed low post moves, so I think KS will have trouble. We will win that position, but I think it will be a small net gain.

I saw in one of the preseason predictions where one writer sad how scary UNC's backcourt would be once they became more complete, ie learned to play D. And both TL and WE were god-awful on D last year. Many freshman are. Most of those Frosh take huge strides their Soph years in that Department. Imagine if TL used his quickness to play D. WE has potential in that regard as well.

Also, off season improvent is not limited to Duke. Roy has a history of really improving his kids over the summer. No way are TL and WE not currently in the gym jacking up Jumpers. If TL is a consistent shooter next year, everyone in the ACC, Duke included, is in a world of hurt. Who does Paulus guard. WE or TL are the only options when they are on the court together, and that is a nightmare for us, especially if they step up the Defense. They could have stopped GP this year, only they didn't really try on D. GP couldn't stop them, no matter how much he tried, and I cannot question GP's effort.

As far as Henderson, I agree that his ceiling is higher than WE. But, that asthma is a major problem. That is the sort of thing that can derail a career. Who knows if he will overcome it. We are all sort of taking it for granted that it won't be a problem next year. Maybe it will be.

As for JS and DN, I remain unconvinced we are much better than UNC's Green and Ginyard. Those guys have size on both our players, and athleticism, if only slightly, on JS. If, and it's a solid if, we are better here, it is not by much.

By my caluculations we are weaker, and maybe by a great deal, at PG and C, by far the most important positions in college, if not all levels of basketball. Last year, the best wing to play college ball in decades had marginal TEAM success, while teams with good posts and PG were very successful. We will be OK to good next year, but we remain solidly behind UNC, which will be one of, if not the, elite team nationally next season.

Patrick Yates

ps UNC got Larry Drew, who they long ago offered for, who is dropping like a rock. He is short and fast in the TL catagory, but he appears to be having some trouble with the distributing portion of being a PG. Rivals and scout pronged him, hard, saying that he is a vastly undersized scoring guard with poor floor vision. He is very skinny, unlike the stout TL. This doesn't hurt us, and the Roe defection was huge for UNC. The monster class they may have to have next year is not shaping up they way they'd hoped. Yay.

CMS2478
05-24-2007, 08:54 AM
I wish..............I love Greg to death and he is a much better shooter, but I would love to have a guy like Lawson who can penetrate and finish or dish. I really hope Duke can recruit a PG in the near future that has the ability to go by people like Duhon and Jay Williams use to.

CMS2478
05-24-2007, 08:56 AM
I don't know who Copeland is so I won't mess with that match up, but I must say you are dreaming on the rest of the starters. Paulus is tough but he can't touch Lawson. Ellington is not as athletic as Henderson but far more polished as a player. Ginyard/Nelson I don't know what to say. You can argue that Nelson has more offense but he also looks to score more than Ginyard. Besides, I won't give Nelson a flat out advantage until he turns into a more consistent scorer and doesn't fade in the second half of games. By the way, if I'm Roy I don't need any additions because we are already a top 10 team.

I see Carolina having an BIG ADVANTAGE with Lawson and Hansblah. As for the other 3 spots I wouldn't give Duke a clear advantage on any of them, I see them all as a toss up.

Bud
05-24-2007, 09:02 AM
Like I said are guards are good but so are there guards. Also I think there guards are more athletic. But the big problem is are post players, there post player are better and more experinced then are post player's are. In the end that will kill us I agree we will be lucky to keep the games close between UNC. Everybody keeps saying well Brian and Lance are going to improve which I think they will but what if they don't. And even if they do they still will not be is good as UNC post player's. I no we have three very talented freshmen coming in, but we no from experince you can't count on freshmen to lead your team.

phaedrus
05-24-2007, 09:41 AM
Also, off season improvent is not limited to Duke. Roy has a history of really improving his kids over the summer. No way are TL and WE not currently in the gym jacking up Jumpers. If TL is a consistent shooter next year, everyone in the ACC, Duke included, is in a world of hurt.

you have not read TL's quotes w.r.t. practice. i doubt he will improve much either as a shooter or as a defender. he's a supremely talented player in the derrick coleman mold (mentally).

twigmas
05-24-2007, 09:57 AM
Like these Lawson quotes:


"I started practicing hard, that's probably the main thing," he said. "Going hard at everything in practice. Ö I've now realized that how you do in practice is how you'll do in the game, so practice is a big part."

Lawson said practice at Oak Hill Academy was mostly scrimmaging, so getting used to the regiment and intensity of a college practice took some getting used to. Now he's fine with it.

"It's a benefit," he said. "It gets you better faster."

Dukerati
05-24-2007, 10:03 AM
I agree with the large majority of the posts on this board in saying that Carolina is distinctly better than us next year (although I do think we can sneak one out). I perceive an advantage in the guard/wing positions and in depth for Duke. However, Carolina has the two best players on the court which basically supercedes anything we can tout in our advantage. In crunch time, basketball is played by its star players and sadly, Carolina brings more to the table. I'd rather have Lawson driving to the hoop with the game on the line than Paulus (who I THINK will be the go-to player in the stretch next year) taking a jump shot.

Classof06
05-24-2007, 10:33 AM
Carolina's probably better overall, but I'm very confident we can win a game, and I expect a split in the regular season series. Lawson and Hansbrough are problems, but I'm confident we have players that can slow Ty down and given the way Singler defended Koufos in the Jordan game, I think either he or Zoubek can make it tough for Hansbrough. That being said, Lawson and Paulus are not even (I don't know how that even came up) and Hansbrough is going to get his one way or another.

Bias and everything aside though, I really don't think Carolina will be as good as everyone is making them out to be. I say that in the sense that there are a lot of uncertainties given that multiple players will be expected to fill modified roles. Stepheson and Thompson are good players, but they will have MUCH bigger responsibilities next year and you have to consider how they will handle that a question mark at this point. Ellington is a player I believe had a similar freshman year to Scheyer offensively (Scheyer - 12.2ppg, Ellington 11.7ppg), not to mention Ellington had 4 points and 3 points against Duke last year; I don't believe he's a player than can hurt us as long as we have Nelson, Henderson, or Smith on him. Ginyard has been a career role player, so whether or not he can step up is another question mark. Pretty much, Lawson and Hansbrough are the only returning starters who had major roles last year. I also agree with whoever said that Carolina is going to miss Reyshawn Terry more than they realize; Terry was really the glue guy and the veteran on that team last year. And I don't even need to elaborate on the hole Brandan Wright left.

phaedrus
05-24-2007, 10:41 AM
well, actually i was talking about the interview where he said he didn't like practice or working hard, because it just wasn't his thing.

i liked that one better.

twigmas
05-24-2007, 10:51 AM
I think the practice not being "his thing" quote was before he had to sit for most of the first half against GT. I think he decided that if he wanted to start he might need to try a little bit harder in practice.

Ralph-Wiggum
05-24-2007, 10:54 AM
One more note: while we didn't get any recruits for the upcoming season, we will have one new player: William Graves (who redshirted this year). I have no idea what kind of playing time he'll get, though.

jawk24
05-24-2007, 12:00 PM
Roy did not bring in one player this year, can someone explain that logic to me. Is he under the impression that he has no needs, because beyond Hansborough and Lawson, I don't see how they are any better an any position beyond what they did this year, and that is without Wright.

I do not believe UNC is head and shoulders above Duke at all, let's look at a roster comparison and see if Roy should have brought in at least a shooting guard or something this year, seems pretty evident he has some holes to fill.

Let's compare Rosters:

Lawson Paulus (even)
Ellington Henderson (Edge Duke) Gerald is going to be a star
Ginyard DeMarcus (Edge Duke) Same player, Markie has more O
Copeland Singler (Edge Duke) Kyle is more polished on O
Hansblabla Zoubs (Edge UNC) A Big one by the way

Bench
Greene Scheyer (Edge Duke) different players but I'll take Jon
Stepheson Thomas (Even) Toss up for now
Thompson King (Even) Ditto
Thomas Smith (Edge Duke) Thomas is a liability, Smith a stopper
Frasor McClure (Even)
Graves Pocius (who knows...)

Why are they pre-season #1 in some polls and Duke is back in the 22-23 with the two rosters we are looking at?

RockyMtDevil


Donít get me wrong, Iím a Duke fan but you really have some issues if you believe that Paulus is even with Lawson (letís put it this way, Lawson will be in the proís next year and Paulus will not). Why are they pre-season #1, more athletes. We have a problem dealing with athletic teams (look at the losses to FSU, UNC and Maryland). In terms of recruiting, at the moment they are getting better quality players. Can you honestly tell me the last time we landed two quality post players, it seems that we canít land one when we need them (Brandon Wright and Patrick Patterson).

Highlander
05-24-2007, 01:55 PM
Carlos Boozer, Shelden Williams, and Josh McRoberts aren't bad post players who have all have played for Duke within the last 6 years (McRoberts and Williams side by side). The lack of an experienced post player is a fairly new phenomenon at Duke.

phaedrus
05-24-2007, 02:31 PM
zoubek was the 3rd rated center in his class. wasn't thomas ranked not too far below where patterson is this year?

skoob
05-24-2007, 04:13 PM
Roy did not bring in one player this year, can someone explain that logic to me. Is he under the impression that he has no needs, because beyond Hansborough and Lawson, I don't see how they are any better an any position beyond what they did this year, and that is without Wright.

From what I understand UNC did not have any scholarships available after signing Lawson, Thompson, Stepheson, Wright, Graves, and Ellington. I could be wrong (enlighten me if necessary).

_Gary
05-24-2007, 04:24 PM
In terms of recruiting, at the moment they are getting better quality players. Can you honestly tell me the last time we landed two quality post players, it seems that we canít land one when we need them (Brandon Wright and Patrick Patterson).

I have to admit that I'm definitely concerned about this issue as well. I think we are quickly approaching a watershed moment in terms of being able to outrecruit Williams and other coaches, especially as it concerns athletic big men. If we don't land Monroe next year, it's time to really be concerned (not about the team going into the tank, but about our ability to get the athletic big men we need to be at the top). I feel the Monroe recruitment is the watershed moment for the coaching staff. We simply cannot miss our primary big man target 3 years in a row!

Gary

Classof06
05-24-2007, 05:46 PM
I have to admit that I'm definitely concerned about this issue as well. I think we are quickly approaching a watershed moment in terms of being able to outrecruit Williams and other coaches, especially as it concerns athletic big men. If we don't land Monroe next year, it's time to really be concerned (not about the team going into the tank, but about our ability to get the athletic big men we need to be at the top). I feel the Monroe recruitment is the watershed moment for the coaching staff. We simply cannot miss our primary big man target 3 years in a row!

Gary


Agreed. I know a lot of Duke fans don't want to think about it, but this is something that we will have to face sooner or later if it continues, no two ways about it.

hondoheel
05-24-2007, 06:36 PM
Duke will go a solid 11 deep next year. Problem is that 8 of them are 2 guards and wings, with 1 point guard and 2 post players. I can easily see Duke with an all 2 guard/wing lineup on the floor at times (which would be OK if they were athletic.)

Bob Green
05-24-2007, 06:45 PM
In addition to pursuing Greg Monroe (6'10" 225 lbs) from the Class of 2008, we are pursuing Daniel Orton (6'10" 250 lbs) from the Class of 2009. I'm not sure where we stand with Orton, but Monroe has stated in interviews that he has always loved Duke. Hopefully, Coach K closes the deal on both these guys.

Bob Green
Yokosuka, Japan

HDB
05-24-2007, 07:45 PM
UNC will be a HORRIBLE match up for Duke next year as their two greatest strengths (quick penetrating point guard and strong post play) will give Duke fits. I think Duke will be better next year, but I'll have to be honest, I'd be thrilled with a split vs. UNC. Just trying to be realistic.

RockyMtDevil
05-25-2007, 09:43 AM
Yeah, yeah, yeah...So why are we even playing them next year, let's just start the season 0-2..

C'mon, where is your hope!!!

I believe we've seen all we are gonna see out of Lawson and Hansblah. What pray tell can PsychoT show us that he hasn't shown already. He's big, he fouls a hellofalot, he struggles with centers his size or bigger and his only offensive move is a wide open 12 footer or a barrell his way to the hoop. He's not getting any better people...

I believe Zoubs can at least keep him honest for 25 minutes a game, then, we switch up and double down on him and dare UNC, Sans Terry and Miller, to actually hit some open shots. Did anyone watch the G'town game?????

Bob Greene said it best, let's wait and see how they do without what I said all year was there most valuable player, in Rayshawn Terry. He was the glue to that team and it is no small wonder why they lost to G'town with his sickness...

How many huge shots did that kid make against us last year, especially at Cameron...

mcdukie
05-25-2007, 09:53 AM
I agree with the person who said that we need some athletic big men. A guy like Gist at Maryland gave and will give us fits. We also need to do our homework because it seems we are not beating the bushes to find some studs that are not McDAA's. Don't get me wrong, K will get it done, but there is need for concern in the post. Zoubs on Tyler is scary if that is our best option and Thomas is foul prone. I am scared to death that we might almost have to play with no post.

Patrick Yates
05-25-2007, 12:01 PM
I have (as the original Screaming Howler Panic Monkey) stated my concerns regarding athleticism of recruits on numerous occasions. The poster above is correct.

It is not that K isn't landing (most of) the kids he targets, it is that K doesn't seem to find any hidden gems. Where are our athletic kids who aren't highly rated who develop into studs in 3-4 years?

Admittedly, part of this our fault as fans. I am as obsessive as the next person (excluding Watzone) when it comes to recruiting. I want the shiniest new McD's all-americans every year. Well, some the key players are not McD's AAs. Look at FL. None of their Beasts on the Front Line were McD's AA. Fl developed them into superstars. We, and the staff, probably need to understand that many of the McD's AAs are almost as developed as they are going to get.

Unfortunately, few, if any, of our players really develop when they get to school. What little improvements we see are usually the product of rigorous personal workouts (see JJ and DN), or the natural progress that comes from playing against high quality opponents on a nightly basis. Elton, Shel, and Carlos never made huge strides while at Duke. They made consistent strides.

Elton lifted weights for the first time ever after his freshman year. Shel, slowly, developed post moves. Carlos refined his body and slowly worked on post moves. Admittedly, they were fairly polished when they arrived. But look at the failures. Boateng, who would be huge next year, transfered out. Shav, McBob, and Burgess never met their potential. Casey sanders, with all his athleticism, never learned how to play basket ball.

I fear, and this my opinion, that K and the staff are only interested in big men with polished skill sets, regardless of thier athleticism. Granted, it is easier to coach these kids, but it cuts off a potentially rich vein of recruits that are often the backbone of elite teams now. Because, unfortunately, less athletic big men will compensate by having more developed post moves. Athletes don't really need to be polished at the HS level because they can rely solely on athleticism. A slow kid learns that he must develop his skills to offset the athleticism. Unfortunately, the athletes can learn and develol thier skills, while non-athletes cannot make themselves sufficiently faster, quicker, or be able to jump higher. Sad Fact of Life.

Recruits who need to polish their skills must see this trend at Duke. Our recent history shows that K is unwilling to let raw players on the court, even for spot minutes on a regular basis. If I was a big, athletic, player, albeit with raw skills, I would be wary of Duke. History does not favor Duke turning those kids into pros.

As far as Monroe, while he is huge, is not a true watershed recruit. In fact, he is very much in the mold of the type of Big K covets: someone with advanced skills. The fact that he is tall and athletic are moot. The skills are what K covets. A true watershed recruit will be the highly athletic, but raw recruit who comes to Duke.

Regardless, the next few years will really show if we are going to remain an elite program or not. Recently, K could take the team to a modicum of success because the skilled athletes, and elite athletes, went strait to the pros. Skilled, unathletic guys could compete with good (not elite) athletes who were raw. Unfortunately, few of these elite athletes are considering Duke, for whatever reason (what? Duke has actual classes that are hard and you have to attend? How Dare We?). How K adapts in the next year or 2 will be very telling.

Patrick Yates

Indoor66
05-25-2007, 12:39 PM
I don't understand how we have won a game over the past 25 or so years with such poor player development and our myopic recruiting. Maybe we will do better.

Patrick Yates
05-25-2007, 02:14 PM
No one has said that we were bad. Since the 2001 NC, we have been a good team. Good teams do not, and will not, win the National Championship. In reality, excepting the 2004 FF run, we have not been in serious competition for the NC. Two years ago was our best chance, and we were soundly beaten by a team that made Duke look like it was playing in waste-deep water.

If Coach K stays-the-course, and recruits and develops players in the same manner as currently, Duke will continue to be a good team. We will win the majority of our games, and we will be in the upper echelon of the ACC. In certain years, when the rest of the league is down, we will win the ACC championship.

Then, we will promptly flame out of the NCAAs in the round of 32, 16, and the very occasional 8.

There is nothing there to be ashamed of as fans. I have just described a successul program that fans can be proud of.

But, it is by no means an elite program. This comes at a time when other historically elite programs are really stepping up. UCLA is a national power again. KY may have hired the perfect coach for their program, and he will have them back to elite status in 2-3 years. KS has talent out the wazoo, even with the defections they suffered this year. UNC is back, and they will stay among the elite. Roy isn't going anywhere for the next 15-20 years.

On top of that, TX, OSU, and FL have committed to basketball, and they have the resources, local talent pools, and national exposure to compete at a very high level.

Teams do not go from elite to mediocre over night. Elite programs do not fall so much as they wander vaguely downward. IU under Knight went from great to mediocre to poor, and it took the better part of a decade for anyone to notice. KY saw its program go from national power to an afterthought in its conference division, again over a period of 4-6 years.

Duke is not guaranteed a place at the top. You have to work and innovate.

Maybe the staff will do what it takes, maybe they won't.

I am tired of some people jumping on anyone who has a problem. Cause if there is no problem, then I must have missed the 3 or so FF's and the National Championship that we won in last 4 years (which according to your logic is an argument I am allowed to use). Because, if I am wrong, and we are fine and dandy, and have had no problems over the years, why have so many kids failed to reach their potential, why has Duke suffered some of the most high profile flops, busts, and early flameouts? Bad Luck? A conspiracy? The One-Armed Man? Is there a second gunman on the grassy quad?

We want to be an elite team. If we are honest, we haven't been so since 2004. The 2006 team was not really elite. That was a real weak year in conference, and the team looked dead by the end of the year, and we were spanked by LSU. If people want to say that they have problems with the team, there is a middle ground. It is not all or nothing: either the team is good or bad. People who criticize the program will admit that the team is good.

Who Cares about Good? We want greatness, and we do not see it, nor the prospect of it in the future. Sure, in two years, IF we get the number 1 player in the class and suffer no attrition. Well that is not asking for much. UNC lost its most talented player, brought in no recruits, and will be a top 3 program next year. We lost 1 player, brought in 3 McD's AA, and will be darn lucky to be in the top 15 next year. You know what, it is ok to wonder if it is time to push the panic button. We are only wondering. Unclench.

Patrick Yates

phaedrus
05-25-2007, 03:08 PM
I agree with much of your post, but you must have missed the Duke-LSU game in '06. We were not spanked. We had a very good chance to win that game in the final minutes.

Indoor66
05-25-2007, 03:36 PM
It seems to me that this is a little simplistic.The combination of players, personalities, circumstances, events, injuries and even serendipity that come together to win a national championship are beyond quantification. It seems there is an assumption of omniscience surrounding recruiting and coaching that is not realistic. Selection of the players that one feels will best serve a team and a program is subject to infinite possibilities of failure.

To posit that our staff is rigid and moves with blinders based on hindsight is folly, at best. Our coaches evaluate 16 - 18 year old kids and try to project their physical development, mental development, drive, ambition, dedication, intelligence, academic proficiency, interest in success, maturity, coachability, citizenship, honesty and other non-quantifiable qualities. Then they have to attract the individual to Duke. After success to that point they have to keep them motivated in the face of extreme competition while assuring that they remain qualified to play. Add in that these are maturing people who develop varying interests as maturing university students as well as the hormones of young adults.

With all of this, we sit here and are critical of our coaches selections, pass judgment on the performance of both staff and players and express unrelenting dissatisfaction with those performances that have consistently been among the top sixteen finishers in college basketball and this has been done a vast majority of the years over a period of almost 50 years!

Maybe we are a little enamored with our own views and opinions....

mapei
05-25-2007, 05:02 PM
The long view is definitely the one that will give you the best perspective on Duke.

I agree with Patrick's post. Being a bit critical (I would say "realistic") in one's assessment doesn't mean that one thinks the whole program is crashing down. It just means that even true fans can be objective sometimes. Right now we're pretty darn good. But great? Maybe we will become so again.

_Gary
05-25-2007, 05:30 PM
As far as Monroe, while he is huge, is not a true watershed recruit.

I wasn't implying that Monroe was a watershed recruit in the sense that he's the next coming of Laettner for us. I'm saying that his recruitment is a watershed moment for the coaching staff in terms of us getting the #1 guy we are recruiting at the 4/5 position. We've missed out two years in a row with guys that we badly wanted at that power forward/center position. And if we lose Monroe that makes three years in a row that we didn't get our top target at that position. That's a very bad sign, IMHO. We need to get this kid, not so much because of what he is or might be, but because he's our top target at the position and we've missed out 2 years in a row already.

Gary

mapei
05-25-2007, 05:40 PM
Hope we get him! I never, ever thought we were realistic contenders for PP, but it sounds like we are for Monroe.

Patrick Yates
05-29-2007, 11:21 AM
I wasn't implying that Monroe was a watershed recruit in the sense that he's the next coming of Laettner for us. I'm saying that his recruitment is a watershed moment for the coaching staff in terms of us getting the #1 guy we are recruiting at the 4/5 position. We've missed out two years in a row with guys that we badly wanted at that power forward/center position. And if we lose Monroe that makes three years in a row that we didn't get our top target at that position. That's a very bad sign, IMHO. We need to get this kid, not so much because of what he is or might be, but because he's our top target at the position and we've missed out 2 years in a row already.

Gary

I was unclear in what [I]I[I] said. You are right that GM is a key player, and important in our ability to identify and land a recruit. But, we cannot label the no.1 recruit as watershed, not when he has so many options.

Where we differ is that I beleive Monroe falls into the class of posts that coach K loves, and tends to target. He is already highly skilled. In fact the reason that he is rated so highly is not because of his great athleticism, but because he has a highly refined skill set to go along with it. He can already dribble and pass (nearly as well as McBob) but GM is also in possession of refined post moves and midrange shooting ability. He is also a good defender, and is willing to mix it up inside.

This skill set is what attracted K (and every one else). GM is academcially strong also.

My point, is that the athlecism is merely a bonus to K. He goes after bigs who already have a similiar level of refinement to their basketball skills as GM does, regardless of athleticism. The fact that GM is also a great athlete is a coincidence.

In my mind, a true watershed recruit (and it would have to be a post, cause K can recruit any PG-SF and land him), is an athlete with unrefined skills who develops over 2-3 years into a key, or even star, player. I envision a Gist, Okafor type player. Someone who is athletic but raw, who becomes a good to great player as the staff refines the basketball skills.

With regards to our bigs, I just do not see that type of development. Brand and Boozer, (and McBob), were already very skilled players when they arrived. Both were good, not great athletes. Really, the staff had little to do with the refinement of shooting, passing, or post moves from any of these players. Shel was a little rougher around the edges, but he had decent skills when he arrived, and even when Shel graduated those skills were not near the level of Brand or Boozer when they left. His post moves, and ability to recognize and pass out of the double team, were spotty at best, even when he graduated. His superiour rebounding, positioning, and even defensive skills (all of which were superior to B and B), led to his value to the team, which was outstanding.

I feel that in today's environment, when more elite HS bigs actually attend college, raw athletes are the backbone of elite teams.

Look at FL. Their front line was athletic but raw as freshmen, and they were developed into skilled, athletic beasts. Even JN, who is still raw, has seen his skill level increase far more than any Duke big since Gaudet left the program. I feel that a team must develop these raw gems to be an elite team long term. (I know that winning an NC is not a given, but an elite 8 or Final four every couple of years is my definition of elite).

If we get GM, we should be fine. But, how often do skilled, athletic, academically superior recruits come along? Not evey year. And then, like now, there is no guarantee that Duke will secure the kid. Heck, some of those kids might grow up hating Duke, or be life-long fans of other programs. GM can walk into ANY program in America and start next year. Kids with his approximate combined abilities will be able to do the same. Duke cannot count on an influx of skilled athletes (cause that is the definition of 1 and done) from the HS level. We must be able to polish and refine our own athletic diamonds in the rought to remain elite. And right now, those kids do not see that development at Duke, so they don't consider Duke. That is why I am concerned.

In my mind, a raw athlete who develops into a serious contributor is the true watershed recruit for Duke.

Patrick Yates

Indoor66
05-29-2007, 02:04 PM
Who is JN?

rsvman
05-29-2007, 03:07 PM
I have to believe JN refers to Joakim Noah.

Indoor66
05-29-2007, 06:55 PM
I really dislike initials for players. Too easy to miss the reference or mis-identify the player. Just me?

kydevil
05-29-2007, 07:17 PM
I was unclear in what [I]I[I] said. You are right that GM is a key player, and important in our ability to identify and land a recruit. But, we cannot label the no.1 recruit as watershed, not when he has so many options.

Where we differ is that I beleive Monroe falls into the class of posts that coach K loves, and tends to target. He is already highly skilled. In fact the reason that he is rated so highly is not because of his great athleticism, but because he has a highly refined skill set to go along with it. He can already dribble and pass (nearly as well as McBob) but GM is also in possession of refined post moves and midrange shooting ability. He is also a good defender, and is willing to mix it up inside.

This skill set is what attracted K (and every one else). GM is academcially strong also.

My point, is that the athlecism is merely a bonus to K. He goes after bigs who already have a similiar level of refinement to their basketball skills as GM does, regardless of athleticism. The fact that GM is also a great athlete is a coincidence.

In my mind, a true watershed recruit (and it would have to be a post, cause K can recruit any PG-SF and land him), is an athlete with unrefined skills who develops over 2-3 years into a key, or even star, player. I envision a Gist, Okafor type player. Someone who is athletic but raw, who becomes a good to great player as the staff refines the basketball skills.

With regards to our bigs, I just do not see that type of development. Brand and Boozer, (and McBob), were already very skilled players when they arrived. Both were good, not great athletes. Really, the staff had little to do with the refinement of shooting, passing, or post moves from any of these players. Shel was a little rougher around the edges, but he had decent skills when he arrived, and even when Shel graduated those skills were not near the level of Brand or Boozer when they left. His post moves, and ability to recognize and pass out of the double team, were spotty at best, even when he graduated. His superiour rebounding, positioning, and even defensive skills (all of which were superior to B and B), led to his value to the team, which was outstanding.

I feel that in today's environment, when more elite HS bigs actually attend college, raw athletes are the backbone of elite teams.

Look at FL. Their front line was athletic but raw as freshmen, and they were developed into skilled, athletic beasts. Even JN, who is still raw, has seen his skill level increase far more than any Duke big since Gaudet left the program. I feel that a team must develop these raw gems to be an elite team long term. (I know that winning an NC is not a given, but an elite 8 or Final four every couple of years is my definition of elite).

If we get GM, we should be fine. But, how often do skilled, athletic, academically superior recruits come along? Not evey year. And then, like now, there is no guarantee that Duke will secure the kid. Heck, some of those kids might grow up hating Duke, or be life-long fans of other programs. GM can walk into ANY program in America and start next year. Kids with his approximate combined abilities will be able to do the same. Duke cannot count on an influx of skilled athletes (cause that is the definition of 1 and done) from the HS level. We must be able to polish and refine our own athletic diamonds in the rought to remain elite. And right now, those kids do not see that development at Duke, so they don't consider Duke. That is why I am concerned.

In my mind, a raw athlete who develops into a serious contributor is the true watershed recruit for Duke.

Patrick Yates


Im gonna have to disagree about Duke's staff and developing bigs... look at what we did with Horvath. :rolleyes: