PDA

View Full Version : 2011 Jordan Brand Classic



AlaskanAssassin
02-15-2011, 02:39 PM
Roster announced today:

The East Team features Austin Rivers, Khem Birch, Michael Carter-Williams, Rakeem Christmas, Michael Gbinije, Michael Gilchrist, P.J. Hairston, James McAdoo, Quincy Miller, Shannon Scott and Marquis Teague.

The West Squad features, Bradley Beal, Jabari Brown, Kentavious Caldwell-Pope, Anthony Davis, Myck Kabongo, Johnny O'Bryant, Dom Pointer, Otto Porter, Adonis Thomas, Kyle Wiltjer and Tony Wroten, Jr.


No Quinn or Marshall, but glad Austin and Michael are in!


http://www.jordanbrandclassic.com/News/2011-jordan-brand-classic-team-announced.html

DukeBlueDevils47
02-15-2011, 02:41 PM
Roster announced today:

The East Team features Austin Rivers, Khem Birch, Michael Carter-Williams, Rakeem Christmas, Michael Gbinije, Michael Gilchrist, P.J. Hairston, James McAdoo, Quincy Miller, Shannon Scott and Marquis Teague.

The West Squad features, Bradley Beal, Jabari Brown, Kentavious Caldwell-Pope, Anthony Davis, Myck Kabongo, Johnny O'Bryant, Dom Pointer, Otto Porter, Adonis Thomas, Kyle Wiltjer and Tony Wroten, Jr.


No Quinn or Marshall, but glad Austin and Michael are in!


http://www.jordanbrandclassic.com/News/2011-jordan-brand-classic-team-announced.html

so why was Michael eligible for this game but not the McDonald's All American Game?

mkline09
02-15-2011, 02:43 PM
so why was Michael eligible for this game but not the McDonald's All American Game?

He is a fifth year senior. McDonald's AA doesn't allow participation from fifth year seniors.

AlaskanAssassin
02-15-2011, 02:43 PM
so why was Michael eligible for this game but not the McDonald's All American Game?

It's his fifth year of high school. Jordan allows, but not McDonalds. This happened to John Wall a couple years ago.

*lol, mkline09 beat me to it

DeBlueDevil
02-15-2011, 03:26 PM
IMO the Jordan Brand is passing the McDonald's AA game as the better overall game for entertainment purposes. The teams seem more even and I think for the most part the selection of talent makes more sense. Either way they both serve their purpose tho.

DukeBlueDevils47
02-15-2011, 03:28 PM
IMO the Jordan Brand is passing the McDonald's AA game as the better overall game for entertainment purposes. The teams seem more even and I think for the most part the selection of talent makes more sense. Either way they both serve their purpose tho.

this may be true but the McDonald's AA game will ALWAYS be bigger than the Jordan Classic

rotogod00
02-15-2011, 03:30 PM
Roster announced today:

The East Team features Austin Rivers, Khem Birch, Michael Carter-Williams, Rakeem Christmas, Michael Gbinije, Michael Gilchrist, P.J. Hairston, James McAdoo, Quincy Miller, Shannon Scott and Marquis Teague.

The West Squad features, Bradley Beal, Jabari Brown, Kentavious Caldwell-Pope, Anthony Davis, Myck Kabongo, Johnny O'Bryant, Dom Pointer, Otto Porter, Adonis Thomas, Kyle Wiltjer and Tony Wroten, Jr.


No Quinn or Marshall, but glad Austin and Michael are in!


http://www.jordanbrandclassic.com/News/2011-jordan-brand-classic-team-announced.html

Isn't Miller done for the year. If so, I assume he'll be replaced, so there's still hope for Quinn or Marshall.

Spy
02-15-2011, 03:32 PM
Why would they put all the Duke and UNC guys on the same team?

DeBlueDevil
02-15-2011, 04:27 PM
this may be true but the McDonald's AA game will ALWAYS be bigger than the Jordan Classic

How do you figure? There are lots of critics of the McDonald's selection process. I mean I see your point but I just always hate when people say ALWAYS, NEVER, etc... :)

DeBlueDevil
02-15-2011, 04:28 PM
Plus never underestimate the popularity of Mr. Jordan. If anyone could surpass the McDonald's AA game....it'd be him.

rasputin
02-15-2011, 04:29 PM
Plus never underestimate the popularity of Mr. Jordan. If anyone could surpass the McDonald's AA game....it'd be him.

Every time I look at this thread and see that name at the top I throw up in my mouth a little.

Indoor66
02-15-2011, 04:30 PM
Plus never underestimate the popularity of Mr. Jordan. If anyone could surpass the McDonald's AA game....it'd be him.

Mr. Jordan's star is fading with time and McDonald's will continue to sell Big Macs and Happy Meals. No contest here on which one has staying power.

cato
02-15-2011, 04:49 PM
Mr. Jordan's star is fading with time and McDonald's will continue to sell Big Macs and Happy Meals. No contest here on which one has staying power.

I dunno. Babe Ruth League has been around for quite a long time, so there is precedent for tying a legendary figure to sporting events for kids. Also, there is a much more logical tie between Jordan and basketball than between Big Macs and basketball (just ask Sean May).

McDonald's certainly has the money to remain the top player if they want, but who knows who will want to throw more dollars at a silly high school basketball game in the future? Certainly, I don't think that the simple fact of the passage of time between Jordan's playing days and the year that most recent crop of youngsters are graduating from high school will be the determining factor.

DeBlueDevil
02-15-2011, 04:56 PM
Mr. Jordan's star is fading with time and McDonald's will continue to sell Big Macs and Happy Meals. No contest here on which one has staying power.

To be honest I could care less about that guy as well with him being every Tarhole's claim to fame but most consider this guy the best bball player ever. May I present to you a certain "Himwhosenamewedontspeakof" up the road as exhibit A for the defense? Whom passed on the best team in the country to play at MJ's college.

Kids will always flock to MJ because he's considered "cool" by most. Don't think we'll see him go out of style anytime soon. For the sake of argument

BD80
02-15-2011, 05:53 PM
Mr. Jordan's star is fading with time and McDonald's will continue to sell Big Macs and Happy Meals. No contest here on which one has staying power.

McDonald's has had as much success in the 1st round of the NBA draft

-bdbd
02-15-2011, 05:58 PM
so why was Michael eligible for this game but not the McDonald's All American Game?

Conspiracy theory 1,298, 467 : I heard that Michael Jordan reached out and said he didn't want more Duke players than NC players playin' in HIS game! That is the only reasonable explanation.

;)

That said, I still hope Quinn does slip in as an injury replacement, etc. Odd that he wasn't picked up initially, as he's generally listed among the top 20 or so players in the 2011 class...


:rolleyes:

Starter
02-16-2011, 08:54 AM
Mr. Jordan's star is fading with time and McDonald's will continue to sell Big Macs and Happy Meals. No contest here on which one has staying power.

I'd have to disagree. His big sneaker releases still sell out in like five minutes. I was just at the Primetime Shootout, and EVERYONE was wearing Jordan sneakers and gear. The man himself (http://www.sportsangle.com/2010/07/air-of-hypocrisy-jordans-typical-shots-at-lebron-ring-hollow/) is not what he used to be, but his brand is very healthy, his myth is alive and well, and having been to several Jordan Classics, including last year, he's packed the Garden for it. And kids get all sorts of Jordan gear and sneakers for going, which is a draw in itself. It's not like the Jordan game attracts any less talent than the McDonald's Game.

As for McDonald's, well, the restaurant franchise is definitely still popular and profitable among people who don't want to eat healthier food, or can't afford to. (Their revenues are still healthy, even if their food isn't) But though the game still has historical cache, I'd actually go as far as to say the Jordan game has actually surpassed it in terms of street cred and cool factor.

Duke: A Dynasty
02-16-2011, 10:59 AM
Yea idk if the Jordan Brand Classic will ever surpass the mickey D game but to me the Brand Classic is much better and has the better players with more rounded teams

mkline09
02-16-2011, 11:12 AM
Yea idk if the Jordan Brand Classic will ever surpass the mickey D game but to me the Brand Classic is much better and has the better players with more rounded teams

I'll be honest that neither game does much for me. You get to see some future stars but the game does nothing to show their ability to play fundamentally sound basketball. It is fun and fast paced but nothing contructive is generally derived from any of the all-star games. That said it is always good to see the future Duke kids get to play.

DMV2434
02-16-2011, 11:23 AM
The lack of defense in these games could set up Austin having a huge night. If he has a hot shooting night he could easily drop 30.

CharlestonDevil
02-16-2011, 11:35 AM
The lack of defense in these games could set up Austin having a huge night. If he has a hot shooting night he could easily drop 30.

The kid could get 40 in this kind of game. He averages 29 and that is with teams TRYING to play defense on him.

Starter
02-16-2011, 12:10 PM
I'll be honest that neither game does much for me. You get to see some future stars but the game does nothing to show their ability to play fundamentally sound basketball. It is fun and fast paced but nothing contructive is generally derived from any of the all-star games. That said it is always good to see the future Duke kids get to play.

In terms of projecting how a player will fit in an NCAA game setting, I agree, these games don't show a whole lot. In terms of sheer athletic gifts and certain basketball skills, if you watch closely, you can pick up a great deal. They're worthwhile to watch, even past the fact that they universally have Duke players in them.

AlaskanAssassin
04-14-2011, 05:09 PM
Here is a fun clip of Jordan Brand players singing:

http://rise.espn.go.com/Boys-Basketball/Videos.aspx?id=ddd30751-96dd-434a-ac66-df859c4bf40f


AR chose not to participate and you'll know why.

SupaDave
04-14-2011, 05:20 PM
Not to point out the obvious but some of you may want to count the no. of all-star games some of these kids have been in bc they are only allowed to compete in a set amount.

ncexnyc
04-14-2011, 06:40 PM
Why would they put all the Duke and UNC guys on the same team?
So the folks over at IC can complain that all the Duke ballhogs decided to freeze out the UNC studs. I'm being serious as that's already been mentioned after the last game. Poor McAdoo didn't get enough shots, because Cook and Rivers lkept the ball away from him.

Olympic Fan
04-15-2011, 10:45 AM
Not to point out the obvious but some of you may want to count the no. of all-star games some of these kids have been in bc they are only allowed to compete in a set amount.

Senior prospects are allowed to participate in two all-star games (before the end of classes in May/Jun; a late summer game like the North Carolina East-West game is not covered).

There is one exception -- the Hoop Summitt, because it is a function of USA Basketball, is exempt.

The McDonald's Game and the Brand Game are currently the big two. That's caused some problems for some other games, some of which have even longer histories (the Capital Classic or the Kentucky-Indiana All-Star Game).

The goal of the top kids (which included Kyrie last year and Austin this year) is to play in the McDonald's, the Jordan Brand and the Hoop Summit. But that's the limit.

gumbomoop
04-15-2011, 11:15 AM
FYI - friendly reminder: Jordan Brand Classic on TV tomorrow eve [Sat 4/16], 8:00, ESPN2. Repeated on ESPNU at midnight.

Reilly
04-15-2011, 12:39 PM
... The McDonald's Game and the Brand Game are currently the big two. That's caused some problems for some other games, some of which have even longer histories (the Capital Classic or the Kentucky-Indiana All-Star Game).

The goal of the top kids (which included Kyrie last year and Austin this year) is to play in the McDonald's, the Jordan Brand and the Hoop Summit. But that's the limit.

How many other, older games are still out there? The ones I recall hearing about back in the day were the Capital Classic from DC and Dapper Dan out of Pittsburgh, I think. I seem to recall Grant Hill saying one of his only goals in high school was to play in the Capital Classic.

MChambers
04-15-2011, 12:49 PM
How many other, older games are still out there? The ones I recall hearing about back in the day were the Capital Classic from DC and Dapper Dan out of Pittsburgh, I think. I seem to recall Grant Hill saying one of his only goals in high school was to play in the Capital Classic.

You are dating yourself. ;)

The Capital Classic still exists, but it doesn't get the best players. Olek Czyz was one of the MVPs a few years back, for example.

I don't know whether the Dapper Dan still exists.

Daniel tosh
04-15-2011, 05:54 PM
Did anyone go to the open practice today?

Gthoma2a
04-15-2011, 07:45 PM
"DraftExpress:‎ Bradley Beal is flat-out dominating Austin Rivers on both ends of the floor. Driving, shooting, passing, and locking down on D. #jbclassic
Twitter - Apr 15, 2011 1:57:08 PM"

This disturbs me.

Duvall
04-15-2011, 07:47 PM
"DraftExpress:‎ Bradley Beal is flat-out dominating Austin Rivers on both ends of the floor. Driving, shooting, passing, and locking down on D. #jbclassic
Twitter - Apr 15, 2011 1:57:08 PM"

This disturbs me.

If you're disturbed by a Twitter report from a scrimmage for a high school all-star game, you probably get disturbed too easily.

Gthoma2a
04-15-2011, 08:34 PM
If you're disturbed by a Twitter report from a scrimmage for a high school all-star game, you probably get disturbed too easily.

It is more this mixed with the fact that he was MVP of the McDonald's game against Austin, and Austin didn't exactly go off on him there. It just seems like he might have his number right now. That is a little annoying to me since we have been calling Austin one of the greatest ever to come through the program (he may be, but are we getting ahead of ourselves in saying that he is THAT great?). I just wonder since our skepticism of freshman seems to hit everyone but Austin, should we start showing some reservations on him, like the others, until we see him dominate players on this level?

TonyWR
04-15-2011, 09:07 PM
So the folks over at IC can complain that all the Duke ballhogs decided to freeze out the UNC studs. I'm being serious as that's already been mentioned after the last game. Poor McAdoo didn't get enough shots, because Cook and Rivers lkept the ball away from him.

Further proof you cant reason with idiots. They're always poor little victims until they win then they're final four bound. Its an unhealthy mix of ignorance fused with arrogance.

Newton_14
04-15-2011, 09:11 PM
It is more this mixed with the fact that he was MVP of the McDonald's game against Austin, and Austin didn't exactly go off on him there. It just seems like he might have his number right now. That is a little annoying to me since we have been calling Austin one of the greatest ever to come through the program (he may be, but are we getting ahead of ourselves in saying that he is THAT great?). I just wonder since our skepticism of freshman seems to hit everyone but Austin, should we start showing some reservations on him, like the others, until we see him dominate players on this level?

I see this as more of a compliment to Beal than a knock on Austin. In my view, Austin Rivers is the real deal and will be an impact player from Day 1. He is that good. He has good size and strength, excellent ball-handler, good shooter, and great getting to the rim and finishing.

That said after watching the McDonald's game and the Nike Hoop Summit, the 2 players I came away most impressed with, were Beal, and the Davis kid going to Kentucky. Beal is awesome. A little taller than Austin, and appears to have a little more length. Beal's jumpshot is picture perfect, and he finishes as well as Austin. Beal cannot match Austin's crossover though. Both are great players, and no shame if Beal is a little better.

I really like the Davis kid too. Great length which he makes use of on offense, defense and rebounding. He is going to be a load to deal with in the paint. He has great touch around the rim as well.

All 3 players are really good imo.

Gthoma2a
04-15-2011, 10:00 PM
I see this as more of a compliment to Beal than a knock on Austin. In my view, Austin Rivers is the real deal and will be an impact player from Day 1. He is that good. He has good size and strength, excellent ball-handler, good shooter, and great getting to the rim and finishing.

That said after watching the McDonald's game and the Nike Hoop Summit, the 2 players I came away most impressed with, were Beal, and the Davis kid going to Kentucky. Beal is awesome. A little taller than Austin, and appears to have a little more length. Beal's jumpshot is picture perfect, and he finishes as well as Austin. Beal cannot match Austin's crossover though. Both are great players, and no shame if Beal is a little better.

I really like the Davis kid too. Great length which he makes use of on offense, defense and rebounding. He is going to be a load to deal with in the paint. He has great touch around the rim as well.

All 3 players are really good imo.

I agree, but I was just pointing it out since he is the one we, understandably, love as a savior of our program next year. He might do it, but the prospective that he is the only new player that has a chance to be great next year for us. Quinn had a better game in the McDonald's game, so I was just pointing out that all of these guys are very strong players, and we can't say one is an impact guy off the bat, but the others aren't. There are going to be very good defensive players that match up against Austin, so putting him at the 2, Seth at the 1, and keeping the rest of the players we had last year playing more doesn't make us a great team again. We will need to use more freshmen, because we aren't a team that brings back champions again (like last year), and the distance between players at these games isn't so far that we need to relegate guys to the bench. Gbinije, Quinn, Plumlee, or any other could make an impact (I am of course talking about our potential last recruit, Deandre Daniels; also Murphy if K doesn't want him to red-shirt).

El_Diablo
04-15-2011, 10:19 PM
It is more this mixed with the fact that he was MVP of the McDonald's game against Austin, and Austin didn't exactly go off on him there. It just seems like he might have his number right now. That is a little annoying to me since we have been calling Austin one of the greatest ever to come through the program (he may be, but are we getting ahead of ourselves in saying that he is THAT great?). I just wonder since our skepticism of freshman seems to hit everyone but Austin, should we start showing some reservations on him, like the others, until we see him dominate players on this level?

1) Yes
2) Yes

Duke4life92
04-15-2011, 10:40 PM
Originally Posted by Gthoma2a
"DraftExpress:‎ Bradley Beal is flat-out dominating Austin Rivers on both ends of the floor. Driving, shooting, passing, and locking down on D. #jbclassic
Twitter - Apr 15, 2011 1:57:08 PM" This disturbs me


If you're disturbed by a Twitter report from a scrimmage for a high school all-star game, you probably get disturbed too easily.

Too funny:D,if i'm not mistaken i read somewhere austion tweaked his wrist in practice and may have been saving himself for the game saturday instead of wearing it out in practice.Heck he knows what he's capable of.Jmo.

dukelifer
04-15-2011, 10:50 PM
It is more this mixed with the fact that he was MVP of the McDonald's game against Austin, and Austin didn't exactly go off on him there. It just seems like he might have his number right now. That is a little annoying to me since we have been calling Austin one of the greatest ever to come through the program (he may be, but are we getting ahead of ourselves in saying that he is THAT great?). I just wonder since our skepticism of freshman seems to hit everyone but Austin, should we start showing some reservations on him, like the others, until we see him dominate players on this level?

Why does it matter that Beal has Austin's number? The chances of Austin playing Beal is very small until both get to the NBA. I am also not sure how Austin's performance in a scrimmage says anything about Austin's ability to play and contribute at Duke. Austin did just fine in the Hoop summit - maybe he is a gamer and Beal is a great practice player.

OZ
04-15-2011, 10:54 PM
Too funny:D,if i'm not mistaken i read somewhere austion tweaked his wrist in practice and may have been saving himself for the game saturday instead of wearing it out in practice.Heck he knows what he's capable of.Jmo.

Yesterday, while driving for the basket, he was knocked to the floor. It was reported that he slightly injured his wrist and was out for a while. After, a short break, he returned.

I just returned home and checked out this thread. I found it difficult to believe that Austin's abilities - as compared to Beal - are being questioned due to a tweet from one of these all star practices. It is difficult to judge one's talents from the game, let alone from a PRACTICE! It is now officially the crazy season.

Gthoma2a
04-15-2011, 11:06 PM
Yesterday, while driving for the basket, he was knocked to the floor. It was reported that he slightly injured his wrist and was out for a while. After, a short break, he returned.

I just returned home and checked out this thread. I found it difficult to believe that Austin's abilities - as compared to Beal - are being questioned due to a tweet from one of these all star practices. It is difficult to judge one's talents from the game, let alone from a PRACTICE! It is now officially the crazy season.

As stated before, it wasn't just this practice, but the McDonald's All American experience. I am not saying he isn't great, but if a HS senior can challenge him like this, there are likely guys that are currently in college too that can do it. That was my vessel for making the argument that we should question him the same as we do all of our freshman. I have heard people talk about nobody else being able to have an impact until they have some years, so it was a great opportunity to point out that we haven't seen him face college opposition yet, either. No doubt, he is very good, but is he really among the all-time greats we are already talking like he is on the level of? That is yet to be stated, and the inability of the rest of the guys is yet to be seen. Quinn had a better McDonald's All-American game, but was still said to be a < Seth player, but we assume that Austin is better than Seth at Seth's normal position (Nolan handled the ball most of the season). It wasn't knocking Austin, but trying to bring back the idea of a level playing field for our players (everything isn't as set in stone as we are acting until we see him prove it against the top guys). There will be more Beals out there, and we may see a HB type of season as Austin has to get used to the new level.

sagegrouse
04-15-2011, 11:23 PM
As stated before, it wasn't just this practice, but the McDonald's All American experience. I am not saying he isn't great, but if a HS senior can challenge him like this, there are likely guys that are currently in college too that can do it. That was my vessel for making the argument that we should question him the same as we do all of our freshman. I have heard people talk about nobody else being able to have an impact until they have some years, so it was a great opportunity to point out that we haven't seen him face college opposition yet, either. No doubt, he is very good, but is he really among the all-time greats we are already talking like he is on the level of? That is yet to be stated, and the inability of the rest of the guys is yet to be seen. Quinn had a better McDonald's All-American game, but was still said to be a < Seth player, but we assume that Austin is better than Seth at Seth's normal position (Nolan handled the ball most of the season). It wasn't knocking Austin, but trying to bring back the idea of a level playing field for our players (everything isn't as set in stone as we are acting until we see him prove it against the top guys). There will be more Beals out there, and we may see a HB type of season as Austin has to get used to the new level.

It is true we don't know how good a player Austin Rivers will be next year. I think I have been around Duke and K long enough to conclude that Austin Rivers will be a starter from day 1 (which is high praise at Duke). Do you disagree?

I would personally be disappointed if he didn't average 15 points per game or so and contribute in many other ways on offense and defense. And I know that there are no guarantees.

Do I think he will be as good as Kyrie was, injury aside, from the git-go? I have no idea, but I would be pleasantly surprised if he were. Kyrie was the best freshman guard I have seen in watching Duke for the past several decades. JWill was very good but not as polished as Kyrie. JJ was less of a complete player. Hurley was clearly talented but struggled with TOs. JD played on a really terrible team (mostly freshmen). Spanarkel is a dim memory.

So I agree that extrapolating Austin to be as good or better than Kyrie is real stretch. Are you trying to say more than this?

sagegrouse

dukelifer
04-15-2011, 11:24 PM
As stated before, it wasn't just this practice, but the McDonald's All American experience. I am not saying he isn't great, but if a HS senior can challenge him like this, there are likely guys that are currently in college too that can do it. That was my vessel for making the argument that we should question him the same as we do all of our freshman. I have heard people talk about nobody else being able to have an impact until they have some years, so it was a great opportunity to point out that we haven't seen him face college opposition yet, either. No doubt, he is very good, but is he really among the all-time greats we are already talking like he is on the level of? That is yet to be stated, and the inability of the rest of the guys is yet to be seen. Quinn had a better McDonald's All-American game, but was still said to be a < Seth player, but we assume that Austin is better than Seth at Seth's normal position (Nolan handled the ball most of the season). It wasn't knocking Austin, but trying to bring back the idea of a level playing field for our players (everything isn't as set in stone as we are acting until we see him prove it against the top guys). There will be more Beals out there, and we may see a HB type of season as Austin has to get used to the new level.

Tempering expectations is always a good idea- but how does talking about Beal do this? Why are you not tempering Beal's expectations? The kid didn't even crack double digits in the Hoop Summit. How is that possible if he is such a great, dominating player? Clearly the talent on the other side was not that impressive otherwise a supposedly lesser player, Rivers, could not have scored 20. I just do not get the logic.

Gthoma2a
04-15-2011, 11:41 PM
Tempering expectations is always a good idea- but how does talking about Beal do this? Why are you not tempering Beal's expectations? The kid didn't even crack double digits in the Hoop Summit. How is that possible if he is such a great, dominating player? Clearly the talent on the other side was not that impressive otherwise a supposedly lesser player, Rivers, could not have scored 20. I just do not get the logic.

He's not the player that my audience (fellow Duke fans) would tend to call the greatest thing for Duke ever. I will however make the statement... Bradley Beal is not going to be a game changer for us. j/k

Seriously though, he isn't rated AS highly, and it pointed out that a lot of these guys who play in these games have a great chance to make just as big an impact (we have several guys playing in these games). It also served to show that there are guys in the college game that will challenge Austin. It isn't going to be a cakewalk when Brad Beal can perform like this against him, others have the potential to just as well. That is another means of tempering expectations for the only audience that I care about.

Note: Austin, if you see this prove me wrong. I believe in you, but I want you to show me before I openly state your dominance over the college game, and your teammates.

ChicagoHeel
04-16-2011, 08:54 AM
It is true we don't know how good a player Austin Rivers will be next year. I think I have been around Duke and K long enough to conclude that Austin Rivers will be a starter from day 1 (which is high praise at Duke). Do you disagree?

I would personally be disappointed if he didn't average 15 points per game or so and contribute in many other ways on offense and defense. And I know that there are no guarantees.

Do I think he will be as good as Kyrie was, injury aside, from the git-go? I have no idea, but I would be pleasantly surprised if he were. Kyrie was the best freshman guard I have seen in watching Duke for the past several decades. JWill was very good but not as polished as Kyrie. JJ was less of a complete player. Hurley was clearly talented but struggled with TOs. JD played on a really terrible team (mostly freshmen). Spanarkel is a dim memory.

So I agree that extrapolating Austin to be as good or better than Kyrie is real stretch. Are you trying to say more than this?

sagegrouse

I don't think there is any doubt that Austin is a very good player and in all likelihood will be your leading scorer next year. The big question is whether he will score efficiently, and therefore dramatically improve the team, or struggle with shot selection, occasional defensive lapses, and turnovers the way most freshman do. There are only 2-3 freshman per year that have that transcendent game that makes it hard to believe they are only freshman. Irving obviously was one; Henson was not- both were ranked among the top incoming freshman. I expect Rivers to struggle a bit, not because I question his ability but because I am just playing the odds. I would not be surprised if Duke and Rivers follow a similar trajectory as UNC and Barnes last year, i.e. rough around the edges early on and tough in March.

By the way, how well can he create off the dribble? It seems like that will be important next year since everyone will try to clamp down on your shooters and take their chances with inside scoring. In the limited times I have seen him play, I have seen a couple of nice drives to the basket, but for the most part all I have seen him do is launch threes. A lack of a consistent ability to get inside and to the line is one area I am hoping Barnes works on this year. I am just wondering how you will create shots. Obviously last year you were very reliant on smith and singler in that department.

Bob Green
04-16-2011, 10:17 AM
I don't think there is any doubt that Austin is a very good player and in all likelihood will be your leading scorer next year. The big question is whether he will score efficiently, and therefore dramatically improve the team, or struggle with shot selection, occasional defensive lapses, and turnovers the way most freshman do.

Efficiency and shot selection does not concern me. Rivers scored 20 points on 11 shots in the Nike Hoop Summit game. Last summer he averaged 20.2 points on 12 shots per game on the USA U18 team. When Rivers is on the court with other talented players, he knows when to shoot and when to pass.


There are only 2-3 freshman per year that have that transcendent game that makes it hard to believe they are only freshman. Irving obviously was one; Henson was not- both were ranked among the top incoming freshman.

Henson isn't a good comparison because his freshman season struggles were partly due to him playing out of position as a small forward. Once injuries forced Henson into his natural power forward position, he started to shine.


I expect Rivers to struggle a bit, not because I question his ability but because I am just playing the odds. I would not be surprised if Duke and Rivers follow a similar trajectory as UNC and Barnes last year, i.e. rough around the edges early on and tough in March.

As you state, you are playing the odds here so it is hard to argue with you. While us Duke fans desire to see Rivers light it up from day one, he will have to adjust to the speed and talent of the college game just like everyone else and he could struggle with that adjustment.


By the way, how well can he create off the dribble? It seems like that will be important next year since everyone will try to clamp down on your shooters and take their chances with inside scoring....I am just wondering how you will create shots.

I'm confident Coach Krzyzewski will figure out what works best for the players he has available. With two pure point guards (Tyler Thornton and Quinn Cook) plus two combo guards (Seth Curry and Austin Rivers) splitting the duties at point guard and shooting guard, handling and distributing the basketball shouldn't be a major concern.

NashvilleDevil
04-16-2011, 11:09 AM
Maybe Beal turns it up against Austin because they were both going to go to Florida and then Austin backed out and went to Duke. Maybe Beal feels that he has to prove himself against Austin because Florida fans were upset that they lost Rivers and were forgetting about Beal.

This reminds me of the comments about Marshall after Kyrie crossed him up and made him fall in a McDonald's practice. Many were talking how Marshall could not handle the athleticism at the college level and would need some time to establish himself. A year later he is being credited with Barnes and UNC having a great 2nd half of the year and is being talked about as the best pure point in the college game. Like many have said let's not read to much into a practice or how one performs in these All-Star games.

NSDukeFan
04-16-2011, 11:48 AM
I agree, but I was just pointing it out since he is the one we, understandably, love as a savior of our program next year. He might do it, but the prospective that he is the only new player that has a chance to be great next year for us. Quinn had a better game in the McDonald's game, so I was just pointing out that all of these guys are very strong players, and we can't say one is an impact guy off the bat, but the others aren't. There are going to be very good defensive players that match up against Austin, so putting him at the 2, Seth at the 1, and keeping the rest of the players we had last year playing more doesn't make us a great team again. We will need to use more freshmen, because we aren't a team that brings back champions again (like last year), and the distance between players at these games isn't so far that we need to relegate guys to the bench. Gbinije, Quinn, Plumlee, or any other could make an impact (I am of course talking about our potential last recruit, Deandre Daniels; also Murphy if K doesn't want him to red-shirt).
I agree with your general point that expectations should probably be tempered for a freshman who has yet to play a college minute. As others have stated, (such as Bob Green quite well) I also expect Austin to start and wouldn't be surprised to see him lead the team in scoring as he is a great talent. It is unlikely that he will be able to have the same impact right off the bat that Kyrie did, but who knows?
Did the banner from 2010 come down? Because if it didn't, Mason, Miles, Andre, Ryan and Seth (even if he didn't get a ring) are still all returning champions. That will never be taken away from them.

Why does it matter that Beal has Austin's number? The chances of Austin playing Beal is very small until both get to the NBA. I am also not sure how Austin's performance in a scrimmage says anything about Austin's ability to play and contribute at Duke. Austin did just fine in the Hoop summit - maybe he is a gamer and Beal is a great practice player.

This reminds me a bit of the "Thornton outplayed Marshall in a couple of games so he must be better" discussion. Maybe a couple of games or practices shouldn't overwhelm the mountains of other evidence suggesting Rivers is the best player in his class and will very likely be make a big impact for Duke next year.

Gthoma2a
04-16-2011, 12:27 PM
I think he will start unless Seth is playing great ball. If Seth is playing great ball, he may keep his position. Granted that realistically, he will get to start due to K's promise to him and his potential. The thing I think is that he will have to bust his butt really hard to live up to his potential in a single year. He is very good, but he is still playing at a very high "high school" level. Kemba Walker would have owned the McDonald's All American game, the practice, and the Jordan Brand Classic game. The reason is that he got to that next level over years. Austin will need to do that over the next year if he is going to be what we hope. It is a ridiculously high expectation, but he is a special kid. Who knows, but I know Seth has had those years to get his skills up too (and he is going to be busting his butt all Summer to make sure he keeps improving). Kyrie took his team on his back in those games to try to swing the tide back his way (he was extremely rare for any school; he was a No. 1 pick after only 11 games in the NCAA).

I agree they havea part in the banner, but I was going by K's designation for the guys who started on the championship team. "Those guys are champions, and they have got to teach these other guys how to become that." It may not be exact, but it was something to that effect.

Kedsy
04-16-2011, 12:31 PM
I think he will start unless Seth is playing great ball.

Are you suggesting Austin and Seth won't both start? I'll concede there's a remote possibility of that, but I would think the most likely probability by far would be both of them starting.

Gthoma2a
04-16-2011, 01:40 PM
Are you suggesting Austin and Seth won't both start? I'll concede there's a remote possibility of that, but I would think the most likely probability by far would be both of them starting.

Which plays the 2? The veteran who has started at the position for most of a year, or the freshman who has never played a college game? Seth didn't handle the ball most of the time, Nolan did. Does he lose his position to Austin? Does Quinn lose his spot at his natural position to put Seth at a secondary position of his? All will be doing something new if Seth isn't starting at the 2. Plus, I don't see any of them doing the defensive job that Gbinije would do at the 3, so I don't see all three starting. Quinn is a natural at the 1, Seth is a very good 2 that can go to the 1 here and there, and Austin is a great high school player. That is why those positions aren't so settled (except for that K has a commitment to trying to get Austin in there at the 2 to get him to reach his potential).

Kedsy
04-16-2011, 02:04 PM
Which plays the 2?

I can't imagine any of them care what position they play, as long as they play.


Seth didn't handle the ball most of the time, Nolan did.

Which is why it won't be a new thing for Seth if Austin takes over the Nolan role.


Does he lose his position to Austin?

Again, so long as Seth is playing, do you think he would feel like he "lost" his position?


Does Quinn lose his spot at his natural position to put Seth at a secondary position of his?

Sorry, a freshman can't "lose his spot." Freshmen have to win their spot.


Plus, I don't see any of them doing the defensive job that Gbinije would do at the 3, so I don't see all three starting.

How much defense have you seen Gbinije play? Although I agree that all three of Austin, Seth, and Quinn probably won't all start. Where we disagree is that if I had to predict which two of those three would start, Quinn would end up on the bench.

And you didn't say so explicitly, but it seems like you're suggesting Michael G and Quinn could start and Austin could come off the bench? My guess is you could get really good odds betting that long shot. Although I'm not sure if that one's more or less likely than us starting three freshmen (Quinn, Austin, Michael G), which is the only other scenario you seem to be supporting here. Probably less likely, I guess, but neither scenario has a realistic chance of being our regular starting lineup.

COYS
04-16-2011, 02:21 PM
He's not the player that my audience (fellow Duke fans) would tend to call the greatest thing for Duke ever. I will however make the statement... Bradley Beal is not going to be a game changer for us. j/k

Seriously though, he isn't rated AS highly, and it pointed out that a lot of these guys who play in these games have a great chance to make just as big an impact (we have several guys playing in these games). It also served to show that there are guys in the college game that will challenge Austin. It isn't going to be a cakewalk when Brad Beal can perform like this against him, others have the potential to just as well. That is another means of tempering expectations for the only audience that I care about.

Note: Austin, if you see this prove me wrong. I believe in you, but I want you to show me before I openly state your dominance over the college game, and your teammates.

Right now in the first game of the NBA playoffs, Darren Collison is outplaying D-Rose. He's playing better defense and running Indiana's offense better than Rose is doing with the Bulls. If D-Rose is a number 1 pick and supposed to be the MVP a, how can the 21st pick in the 2009 draft be outplaying him? Maybe Rose isn't the player we thought he was.

I don't disagree with you that we should temper expectations for Rivers, but just because Collison is outplaying Rose right now doesn't mean that Collison is a better player. Also, it's not like Austin hasn't proven himself in a multitude of All Star games, AAU games, and high school games. The truth is, they are both great players. If there is a talent disparity between the two, it is probably marginal enough that one player will best the other a few times in a row (kind of like flipping a coin 1,000 times. You're going to get tails 5 or 6 times in a row at some point). K will put Austin in position to succeed and maximize his talents. Whether that means he wins national player of the year honors as a freshman or just has a strong freshman campaign, I am not worried that we will be disappointed in Austin's performance for Duke next year.

Gthoma2a
04-16-2011, 03:02 PM
Right now in the first game of the NBA playoffs, Darren Collison is outplaying D-Rose. He's playing better defense and running Indiana's offense better than Rose is doing with the Bulls. If D-Rose is a number 1 pick and supposed to be the MVP a, how can the 21st pick in the 2009 draft be outplaying him? Maybe Rose isn't the player we thought he was.

I don't disagree with you that we should temper expectations for Rivers, but just because Collison is outplaying Rose right now doesn't mean that Collison is a better player. Also, it's not like Austin hasn't proven himself in a multitude of All Star games, AAU games, and high school games. The truth is, they are both great players. If there is a talent disparity between the two, it is probably marginal enough that one player will best the other a few times in a row (kind of like flipping a coin 1,000 times. You're going to get tails 5 or 6 times in a row at some point). K will put Austin in position to succeed and maximize his talents. Whether that means he wins national player of the year honors as a freshman or just has a strong freshman campaign, I am not worried that we will be disappointed in Austin's performance for Duke next year.

He's not shutting down Rose. Rose has 30 (I am a fan of Rose). Rose's teammates just aren't doing enough when he gets them the ball. I don't expect to be really disappointed out of Austin, but I am thinking he is going to have a hard mountain to climb if we expect him to be the leader of a contending team as the only freshman that we have playing a large role (we just lost our three best players last year, and one new guy isn't going to make a Sweet 16 team without its three best great). We need our freshman to step up, so we need to stop discounting them so much, and be realistic about Austin. Guard spots are going to be highly contended. The 3 and 4 are wide open IMO, so the need at those positions could cause other freshman to be more crucial to our development next year. Once again, a more equal distribution of expectation.

COYS
04-16-2011, 03:09 PM
He's not shutting down Rose. Rose has 30 (I am a fan of Rose). I don't expect to be really disappointed out of Austin, but I am thinking he is going to have a hard mountain to climb if we expect him to be the leader of a contending team as the only freshman that we have playing a large role (we just lost our three best players last year, and one new guy isn't going to make a Sweet 16 team without its three best great).

Where did I say he was shutting him down? And Beal hardly shut down Austin. He just had a better game just like Collison had a better 1st half. And you're also ignoring Seth, Mason, Andre, Ryan and Miles who will be there to help shoulder the load. What I'm saying is that whether Austin is spectacular or "merely" a good freshman won't be the thing that makes or breaks the team next year. If the rest of our team improves as we hope, they will be able to shoulder a large portion of the load while Austin adjusts. Hopefully come tourney time everyone will be clicking.

Kedsy
04-16-2011, 03:40 PM
(we just lost our three best players last year, and one new guy isn't going to make a Sweet 16 team without its three best great)

I can't stand statements like this, calling one of the top three teams in the country (for the entire season) a "Sweet 16 team" as if that defines who we were.

But, on your own terms, I refer you to Connecticut, an NIT team in 2010 that lost 4 starters including 3 of its top 4 scorers and brought in a mediocre recruiting class with only one newcomer in the top 70 recruits (and that one was #28). And yet, lo and behold, that team is the 2011 national champion.


We need our freshman to step up, so we need to stop discounting them so much, and be realistic about Austin.

I think most people on these boards are neither discounting our freshmen nor being unrealistic about Austin. Most people simply seem to believe Austin will start and the other freshmen won't start. Frankly it seems to me that it is you who are being unrealistic.

We all hope that as many of our freshmen as possible will be able to play meaningful roles next year. Yet historically only the top-of-the-top recruits are able to make the leap from high school to starter at Duke. Austin is one of the top-of-the-top recruits, and thus most of us expect him to start. Despite the fact that someone started a thread about Austin being the best scorer ever at Duke, I don't think so many people around here are touting Austin for first team All America or anything. We just think he's going to be good.

The other freshmen are going to be good players too, but really aren't top-of-the-top recruits. So whether they can contribute immediately is totally unknown (though I think we can be confident they will all contribute eventually). You say we need our freshmen to step up, but we have six returning players who played major roles in our rotation this past year, plus another who could make the freshman/sophomore leap over the summer, so I don't think we need anybody other than our returnees and Austin to "step up." If some of the other freshmen are able to do it (and personally I expect 2 or 3 of them will be), then great, but to act like we have to start them because we have nothing else coming back is just wrong.

Chris Randolph
04-16-2011, 08:59 PM
You can tell he has been around the NBA his whole life.... Yelling at the officials about not getting a call

If Rivers weren't coming to Duke, my view would be more harsh. Rivers behavior on the court is not something to boast about. Coach K and staff will have to tell him to leave his ego at the door. I love his game and what he brings to the floor but his arrogance and "i have arrived attitude" needs to go.

I've always said you've got to have a little cockiness to be good (and all basketball players do for the most part, some of it undeserved I might add). But something just rubs me the wrong way with how he carries himself on the floor. Hopefully it will change at Duke

Gthoma2a
04-16-2011, 09:13 PM
I can't stand statements like this, calling one of the top three teams in the country (for the entire season) a "Sweet 16 team" as if that defines who we were.

But, on your own terms, I refer you to Connecticut, an NIT team in 2010 that lost 4 starters including 3 of its top 4 scorers and brought in a mediocre recruiting class with only one newcomer in the top 70 recruits (and that one was #28). And yet, lo and behold, that team is the 2011 national champion.



I think most people on these boards are neither discounting our freshmen nor being unrealistic about Austin. Most people simply seem to believe Austin will start and the other freshmen won't start. Frankly it seems to me that it is you who are being unrealistic.

We all hope that as many of our freshmen as possible will be able to play meaningful roles next year. Yet historically only the top-of-the-top recruits are able to make the leap from high school to starter at Duke. Austin is one of the top-of-the-top recruits, and thus most of us expect him to start. Despite the fact that someone started a thread about Austin being the best scorer ever at Duke, I don't think so many people around here are touting Austin for first team All America or anything. We just think he's going to be good.

The other freshmen are going to be good players too, but really aren't top-of-the-top recruits. So whether they can contribute immediately is totally unknown (though I think we can be confident they will all contribute eventually). You say we need our freshmen to step up, but we have six returning players who played major roles in our rotation this past year, plus another who could make the freshman/sophomore leap over the summer, so I don't think we need anybody other than our returnees and Austin to "step up." If some of the other freshmen are able to do it (and personally I expect 2 or 3 of them will be), then great, but to act like we have to start them because we have nothing else coming back is just wrong.

I don't think you can really argue that results are all that matter. We finished up in the Sweet 16. I don't see how that means we were a top 3 team. Our ranking didn't end at 3.

Also, UConn did develop their freshman, and I liked that. I hope we do something similar.

The reason that I think we need freshman too is that I don't think we have a 3 outside of freshman, and our 4 position guys may have reached their peaks IMO. Our 4 could have improved shooting from Kelly, but I don't expect him to start driving, or we could have Miles start to play with a strong post game, but that is about all that is going to change about the team if we keep everything the same as this year. It was an early exit, and that may mean something needs to be shaken up in a big way.

Devilsfan
04-16-2011, 10:15 PM
Rivers might be the second best player in the country down from #1 but he just doesn't seem like a typical Duke kid. He seems a little cocky, not modest and letting his game speak for itself. Can't wait to see how he handles the millitary type coaching in Durham. How he handles the first time Coach K "politely" asks him to play a little better like he did recently in Charlotte when his team didn't respond to adjustment suggestions at halftime and he called an early second half timeout, softly asking his men to play a little better if they wanted to advance in the tournament. Should be interesting as he is molded into a true Dukie with a team first attitude.

Starter
04-16-2011, 10:31 PM
Rivers might be the second best player in the country down from #1 but he just doesn't seem like a typical Duke kid. He seems a little cocky, not modest and letting his game speak for itself. Can't wait to see how he handles the millitary type coaching in Durham. How he handles the first time Coach K "politely" asks him to play a little better like he did recently in Charlotte when his team didn't respond to adjustment suggestions at halftime and he called an early second half timeout, softly asking his men to play a little better if they wanted to advance in the tournament. Should be interesting as he is molded into a true Dukie with a team first attitude.

Austin is the son of the second-best coach in the NBA. I think he's a "true Duke kid." You're seeing someone adapt to the atmosphere of the game he's in. I went to last year's Jordan classic; Kyrie threw a bounce pass to himself through someone's legs on a break (which he actually did frequently at St. Pat's). Austin will be just fine, and if anything, his killer instinct is going to come in very handy next season.

dukelifer
04-16-2011, 10:37 PM
Rivers might be the second best player in the country down from #1 but he just doesn't seem like a typical Duke kid. He seems a little cocky, not modest and letting his game speak for itself. Can't wait to see how he handles the millitary type coaching in Durham. How he handles the first time Coach K "politely" asks him to play a little better like he did recently in Charlotte when his team didn't respond to adjustment suggestions at halftime and he called an early second half timeout, softly asking his men to play a little better if they wanted to advance in the tournament. Should be interesting as he is molded into a true Dukie with a team first attitude.

JJ was plenty cocky- as was Jason Williams. The kid is competitive and a bit of a perfectionist. He is definitely intense and that can be both good and bad.

CajunDevil
04-16-2011, 10:39 PM
Rivers might be the second best player in the country down from #1 but he just doesn't seem like a typical Duke kid. He seems a little cocky, not modest and letting his game speak for itself. Can't wait to see how he handles the millitary type coaching in Durham. How he handles the first time Coach K "politely" asks him to play a little better like he did recently in Charlotte when his team didn't respond to adjustment suggestions at halftime and he called an early second half timeout, softly asking his men to play a little better if they wanted to advance in the tournament. Should be interesting as he is molded into a true Dukie with a team first attitude.

I totally agree. I'm concerned about his arrogant attitude. However, I'm sure K will do a fine job teaching young Austin how to be humble.

roywhite
04-16-2011, 10:46 PM
Who was that really arrogant guy we had 20 years ago? Cocky, super-competitive, opponents hated him, even some of his teammates didn't like him.

Oh, yeah, Christian Laettner.

Turned out okay.

dukelifer
04-16-2011, 10:51 PM
I don't think you can really argue that results are all that matter. We finished up in the Sweet 16. I don't see how that means we were a top 3 team. Our ranking didn't end at 3.



You are right-Duke could not be a top 4 team. VCU and Butler were two of the top 4 teams in the country this year - that was clear all year- and UConn was the best. Results are all that matter.

Kedsy
04-16-2011, 10:54 PM
Our ranking didn't end at 3.

We were #2 in post-tournament Pomeroy, #3 in post-tournament Sagarin (#2 "predictor"), and #4 in post-tournament RPI (just behind San Diego State, who also lost in the Sweet 16). We were #3 in the last AP poll. The only poll I'm aware of where we did not end up in the top 3 (or 4) was the post-tournament ESPN/USA Today poll, which is a joke (we finished #7, just behind VCU).


The reason that I think we need freshman too is that I don't think we have a 3 outside of freshman, and our 4 position guys may have reached their peaks IMO.

You think Miles, Mason, Ryan, and Josh have reached their peaks? On what do you base that opinion? Because I think that's a laughable statement.

And would you say Andre Dawkins is more or less of a "3" than Daniel Ewing, JJ Redick, Gerald Henderson, and/or DeMarcus Nelson, all of whom played the "3" for Duke in recent years?


It was an early exit, and that may mean something needs to be shaken up in a big way.

Another laughable statement. Ohio State lost the same round we did. Pittsburgh lost the round before that. Kansas the round after that. In Duke's case, our team played a poor second half and lost to a very hot Arizona team. Just because we lost doesn't mean there was some fatal flaw with the team.

The 2002 team lost in the Sweet 16, and then the top four players either graduated or bolted. But if the core of that team had returned in 2003 they would have been by far the best team in the country. In that hypothetical situation, would you have recommended we should have "shaken [things] up in a big way" because of our "early exit"?

If you persist in thinking that how far a team gets in the NCAAT defines the team, you have to also believe that VCU and Butler were better than anybody in the final regular season top 25. You have to believe that UConn was significantly better than the 10 teams who finished above them or tied with them in the Big East. Sorry, but it makes no sense.

OZ
04-16-2011, 11:03 PM
Who was that really arrogant guy we had 20 years ago? Cocky, super-competitive, opponents hated him, even some of his teammates didn't like him.

Oh, yeah, Christian Laettner.

Turned out okay.

You could also have said... Danny Ferry or Bobby Hurley.

dukelifer
04-16-2011, 11:09 PM
First time I have seen Gbinije play. He is as advertised- solid and sneaky good. He is not 6' 8" despite what his coach might think- but he is a solid 6' 6" and will be a very good player for Duke. I continue to be impressed with McAdoo- he has a great skill set- very old school and I think he is actually better than anybody on UNC team right now. Kentucky's new players are also good. They have potential to be a scary good team. UNC will be better early (if Barnes comes back)- but once the KY have a regular season under their belt- they will be very dangerous.

DBFAN
04-16-2011, 11:21 PM
Why are people saying Rivers may be the #2 player, down from #1? And how does someone think Mcadoo (sp?) is better than Barnes? Maybe I misread that statement.

Gthoma2a
04-16-2011, 11:58 PM
Yes, we should just throw Austin in to do what Nolan did, Andre in to do what Kyle did at 6'4, and Seth is a perfect guy to take Kyrie's role. The national title is ours. I don't know how we could need anything changed from a team that didn't win the title. The reason these guys aren't leaving yet is that they aren't ready. Those were players who were NBA ready. I honestly don't see that in our players yet, so I tend to think they are not untouchable.

Perhaps reached their peaks isn't the right word for Josh, but it is going to be a big step up to play this year for him. Ryan's is as good as his shot until he learns to go to the post or becomes a freak athlete. Mason has high potential, but he has played for the all or nothing play for his entire career, but they are very good, and I would use a steady diet of him and his brother on next year's team. Miles is the same way. Both play their butts off and I see them as 5s in our system. They try very hard and are very good, but we were out-rebounded badly, so I see a reason to consider changing things up. Why are we supposed to be slaves to what year a guy is in? I think more athleticism and speed could do us well. We were taken off the dribble a lot this year.

Also, I don't care about RPI or Pomeroy or Sagarin or any other poll. You don't get titles for being ranked highly in those polls.

You know who were great teams... Louisville last year, Syracuse last year, and Kansas. Those were the teams I will remember. Forget everybody who made it past them in the tournament, and got to the Final Four. Tournament success is chump change, getting a 1 seed, that's all tha matters. Really? I don't think we should hang that banner for a 1 seed. I think celebrating the players effort is fine, but celebrating a year that ended in the Sweet 16 for this program is kind of missing the point. We could celebrate the 2009 team... they accomplished the same overall task. They had a #1 ranking at one point during the year, etc. I love the team, but the 2010 team has a title, and is therefore a team that goes in the books on top, this team doesn't by result. They go in our hearts for effort.

VCU beat a Kansas team very badly. They did that to multiple teams that should have beaten them in most's opinion, but they were good enough to string together a great series of wins. Butler has done this two years in a row. I think those teams deserve to be put above the teams they beat. To me, the regular season is practice. It is what a team can do in crunch time when titles are on the line that counts. Go undefeated, but lose in the tournament, and a team is an anecdote, not a champion.

As far as who played the 3, remember what K said about those teams? He said they reached their potential with early exits. He said they were limited. How many of those players won titles? I think his statement may be a correlation to the potential of the team. It isn't a knock to the players, but if they are that far undersized, they aren't likely to avoid the mismatches that can get you exploited by athletic teams with full-sized wings.

Olympic Fan
04-16-2011, 11:59 PM
Why are people saying Rivers may be the #2 player, down from #1? And how does someone think Mcadoo (sp?) is better than Barnes? Maybe I misread that statement.

I think the comment about Rivers being No. 2 is referring to the new ESPN rankings, which now have Anthony Davis No. 1 and Rivers No. 2 (the rankings changed last week).

Of course, that's ESPN's opinion. The last consensis rank I saw still had Rivers No. 1 ... although that could change. Frankly, who cares whether a kid is rated No. 1 or No. 2 -- Josh McRoberts ended up the consensus No. 1 just ahead of Tyler Hanstravel. Barnes ended up No. 1 a year ago and we saw how it took him half a season to emerge as an outstanding player.

Don't sweat the rankings ... and yeah, I agree that it's a little silly to suggest McAdoo is better than Barnes. He's not -- but he is a very good prospect.

Duvall
04-17-2011, 12:06 AM
Why are people saying Rivers may be the #2 player, down from #1? And how does someone think Mcadoo (sp?) is better than Barnes? Maybe I misread that statement.

I'm more concerned by the fact that someone thinks Barnes was UNC's best player.

Starter
04-17-2011, 12:11 AM
I don't know, I think McAdoo's really good. I like his aggressiveness, and skills-wise, I think he can potentially provide more of an instant impact than Barnes did. That said, it's a really crowded frontcourt they have, in a good way.

-bdbd
04-17-2011, 12:22 AM
Maybe Beal turns it up against Austin because they were both going to go to Florida and then Austin backed out and went to Duke. Maybe Beal feels that he has to prove himself against Austin because Florida fans were upset that they lost Rivers and were forgetting about Beal. This reminds me of the comments about Marshall after Kyrie crossed him up and made him fall in a McDonald's practice. Many were talking how Marshall could not handle the athleticism at the college level and would need some time to establish himself. A year later he is being credited with Barnes and UNC having a great 2nd half of the year and is being talked about as the best pure point in the college game. Like many have said let's not read to much into a practice or how one performs in these All-Star games.

Here's an alternative thory. Maybe Austin is just secondary in this discusion. If I recall correctly, 1.5 year ago (?), early in the Beal recruiting process, I recall reading - before he committed to FL - that Beal said in an interview that he grew up as a DUKE fan. Some were wondering why Duke wasn't recruiting him hard, preferring this Rivers kid. Anyway, Beal quickly narrowed it down and chose FL. Additionally, AR backed out of FL and then chose Duke. So there's probably hard feelings there on several levels, and competitive fires....

In any event, as to the larger conversation, Austin is obviously the real deal. He has as as good a shot as anybody coming into college BB next year having an immediate impact. As ChiHeel says, it "plays the numbers" not to expect too much from a new freshman, as they very frequently disappoint -- especially if expectations are placed too high. But that said, I'll take my shot with Austin Rivers ANY DAY. And I, for one, really like that highly competitive spirit/ego that he has. Many here on these boards have complained for a long time bthat we lacked that mental toughness/ego since the days of Laettner, or at least since JJ. Well, Austin has it. And I think that will give us an edge. I hope that the rest of the team rallies around the individual and that attitude the way Grant Hill, Bobby Hurley, Cherokee Parks, Thomas Hill, et all did circa 1990 - 1992....


:confused:

Kedsy
04-17-2011, 12:27 AM
Yes, we should just throw Austin in to do what Nolan did, Andre in to do what Kyle did at 6'4, and Seth is a perfect guy to take Kyrie's role. The national title is ours. I don't know how we could need anything changed from a team that didn't win the title. The reason these guys aren't leaving yet is that they aren't ready. Those were players who were NBA ready. I honestly don't see that in our players yet, so I tend to think they are not untouchable.

Anyone who believes that each year we should just plug in guys to fill the exact roles of the players from the season before has a very limited imagination in my opinion.


We could celebrate the 2009 team... they accomplished the same overall task. They had a #1 ranking at one point during the year, etc. I love the team, but the 2010 team has a title, and is therefore a team that goes in the books on top, this team doesn't.

Well, we could celebrate the 2009 team, which had a heckuva year. But instead, for the moment, let's talk about the 2010 team, as you suggest. When the 2009-10 season started, we had lost our best player and two most athletic players from a "Sweet 16 team." We had several upperclassmen who hadn't left school and therefore weren't "NBA ready" (and in fact, most of them will probably never play in the NBA). Pretty much all of our upperclassmen were considered by people like yourself to have "reached their peak." We had three very highly ranked freshmen coming in, though (more highly ranked than any of next year's freshman class except Austin). So based on your logic, the most obvious thing to do would be to plug the freshmen into the starting lineup and ignore Nolan Smith (who had not yet averaged double figures in his two years in the program up to that point) and Brian Zoubek and Lance Thomas. In fact, in the 2009 pre-season, really through about mid-February of 2010, a lot of posters here advocated just that.

Except they were wrong. Somehow that 2009 Sweet 16 team who'd lost their best, most athletic players managed to "go in the books on top," despite the fact that the freshmen played limited, non-starting roles in the title run. How'd that happen?


They try very hard and are very good, but we were out-rebounded badly, so I see a reason to consider changing things up.

Well, we were outrebounded in the Arizona game. Over the course of the season we outrebounded our opponents by a decent margin.


Also, I don't care about RPI or Pomeroy or Sagarin or any other poll. You don't get titles for being ranked highly in those polls.

You know who were great teams... Louisville last year, Syracuse last year, and Kansas. Those were the teams I will remember. Forget everybody who made it past them in the tournament, and got to the Final Four. Tournament success is chump change, getting a 1 seed, that's all tha matters. Really? I don't think we should hang that banner for a 1 seed. I think celebrating the players effort is fine, but celebrating a year that ended in the Sweet 16 for this program is kind of missing the point.

* * *

VCU beat a Kansas team very badly. They did that to multiple teams that should have beaten them in most's opinion, but they were good enough to string together a great series of wins. Butler has done this two years in a row. I think those teams deserve to be put above the teams they beat. To me, the regular season is practice. It is what a team can do in crunch time when titles are on the line that counts. Go undefeated, but lose in the tournament, and a team is an anecdote, not a champion.


If you think that only titles count, then I can't imagine why you even bother to pay attention. Put another way, if you think luck does not play a big factor in who wins the NCAA tournament you are deluded; if you admit that luck does play a big factor, then the rest of your argument makes no sense. If you think that the best team wins every college basketball game, then frankly there's no point in this discussion.

DBFAN
04-17-2011, 12:37 AM
I'm more concerned by the fact that someone thinks Barnes was UNC's best player.

I don't like Barnes at all, but when ya put up 40 in an ACC tourney semi, you kinda have to put his name in that discussion

Gthoma2a
04-17-2011, 12:49 AM
"Anyone who believes that each year we should just plug in guys to fill the exact roles of the players from the season before has a very limited imagination in my opinion."

That is my point. I don't see why doing putting the same guys in is going to fix things. We had another great guard beside Seth Curry last year (two at the end of the season), but it didn't equal a title or even a regular season championship.

I am aware that luck plays a role in the tournament, but regular season champs are footnotes. Our goal isn't to win a regular season title, but hope to "beat the odds" in the tournament. Our goal is to win the title.

As for the belief that guys had reached their peaks in 2009, we just thought Zoubs was running out of time to reach his potential. He found the right time to figure out. The fact remains that the team was a significant shake-up from the previous year. We relied on Henderson to get us places the year before, and Defense and Rebounding were not our mantra by any stretch of the imagination. That is why I don't see this year's team as untouchable in the lineup for next year. We had several good players, and three great players, but we just have the good players back. They can either make a huge leap to being great, or they will have to compete with the freshman for a spot. They may get it, but I am not as married, as some, to a lineup.

Kedsy
04-17-2011, 01:05 AM
We had several good players, and three great players, but we just have the good players back. They can either make a huge leap to being great, or they will have to compete with the freshman for a spot. They may get it, but I am not as married, as some, to a lineup.

Based solely on your recent posts, I'd say you are quite married to a particular lineup. It's just that your lineup starts mostly freshman.

Kedsy
04-17-2011, 01:07 AM
Our goal isn't to win a regular season title, but hope to "beat the odds" in the tournament. Our goal is to win the title.

There's a big difference between setting a goal and saying nothing counts except that goal.

dukelifer
04-17-2011, 07:30 AM
I think celebrating the players effort is fine, but celebrating a year that ended in the Sweet 16 for this program is kind of missing the point. We could celebrate the 2009 team... they accomplished the same overall task.

VCU beat a Kansas team very badly. They did that to multiple teams that should have beaten them in most's opinion, but they were good enough to string together a great series of wins. Butler has done this two years in a row. I think those teams deserve to be put above the teams they beat.

Why even rank teams then, if the regular season is just practice. Just have a random draw for the tourney. Ultimately, VCU and Butler, are just like the rest- losers. Why would you celebrate a Final Four team? Losers are losers- doesn't matter when they went out- the teams did not accomplish anything all year and could not get it done.

Saratoga2
04-17-2011, 07:38 AM
I have heard the hype surrounding Austin and watched him in seveal games. At first, I kind of expected the second coming of Pistol Pete Maravich. Now, I have a better feel for his capabilities on the offensive end, but since little defense has been played, I will have to await some real competitive game time situations for that/

Austin:

He has an excellent handle, a really ankle breaking crossover, can shoot from outside, get by people and can score around the basket or draw contact and hit his foul shots. Otherwise, he is as nearly complete an offensive player as you will see coming out of high school. Her is also quite agile as seen by one of his incredible putbacks last night, but he isn't super quick like John Wall.

He does have some areas to improve. His release on his outside shot is not smooth and therefore I expect him to be an inconsistent shooter from 3, unless he addresses that. He likes to face up with a defender and either use a screen or just set up a crossover. He will no doubt draw the best long and quick defender from the opponent and he may be picked fairly often as he was last night. He is likely to be taking a significant percentage of shots next season, so I hope that he will learn to play off the ball, so that the rest of the team doesn't stand and watch Austin. Maybe he has been told that he is a star often enough that he feels he needs to live up to the billing. That bounce off the backboard to himself was the kind of play that would have a coach scratching their head.

I am not trying to be negative about Austin, just realistic about what he brings to the table. All kids learn as they come into Div I ball, and Austin will get stronger and be in a position to use his skills and learn what works and doesn't.

Michael:

I really watched for him on the court, but never knew his number and never saw the back of his jersey. There were so many that fit his description, that I didn't really see him play specifically. Wish the announcers had been better about indicating who was substituted in. He scored 10 and people say he played well, but I never heard one word about him come out of an announcers mouth during game time.

Just a word about McAdoo. That kid had a heck of a game. He was one of the most impressive kids on the floor last night. Hairston didn't impress at all.

MaxAMillion
04-17-2011, 10:39 AM
I think McAdoo will fit perfectly in the UNC system. He will be the perfect energy player off the bench. Rivers is obviously talented but I think he needs direction (both in his game and emotionally). I think K will do wonders for Rivers game.

sagegrouse
04-17-2011, 10:47 AM
I think McAdoo will fit perfectly in the UNC system. He will be the perfect energy player off the bench. Rivers is obviously talented but I think he needs direction (both in his game and emotionally). I think K will do wonders for Rivers game.

Did anyone else see this quote from Doc in the NY Times article (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/17/sports/basketball/17celtics.html)linked on the Front Page? Maybe we should affix it to every post that promises immediate stardom for a Duke recruit?



"It seems to amuse Rivers that Austin is already pegged as a high lottery pick for the 2012 draft.

“'I just tell him that he’s a really good high school basketball player right now,' his father said. 'But that’s all he is.'”

sagegrouse

gumbomoop
04-17-2011, 11:13 AM
Michael: I really watched for him on the court, but never knew his number and never saw the back of his jersey. There were so many that fit his description, that I didn't really see him play specifically. Wish the announcers had been better about indicating who was substituted in. He scored 10 and people say he played well, but I never heard one word about him come out of an announcers mouth during game time.

I can easily understand why S2 had trouble seeing Gbinije, as Jay Bilas and Jimmy Dykes - both solid color commentators in other contexts - were perilously close to Dickie V territory last night in their inability to focus on the game, on specific plays, all [as opposed to a select few] players, subtle moves [as opposed to diaper dandy dunkeroos]. Had I had the power to fire Jay and Jimmy on the spot - and the power to transport either myself or any of dozens of observant DBR posters to the spot to take over the commentary - I'd have done so. In short, bluntly and fervently stated, Jay and Jimmy sucked, big time, last eve. I usually enjoy their expertise, but last night, no good. I trust Jay will regain his equilibrium, and soon. Jimmy, too.

As to the actual substance of Michael Gbinije's play, I'll take my comments over to the Gbinije thread, since, clearly, Jay and Jimmy implied - by their sins [I use the word advisedly] of omission - that Gbinije "didn't belong." Jump in the bloody lake, you two. Come up for air when you remember how to do your job.

COYS
04-17-2011, 11:18 AM
I have heard the hype surrounding Austin and watched him in seveal games. At first, I kind of expected the second coming of Pistol Pete Maravich. Now, I have a better feel for his capabilities on the offensive end, but since little defense has been played, I will have to await some real competitive game time situations for that/

Austin:

He has an excellent handle, a really ankle breaking crossover, can shoot from outside, get by people and can score around the basket or draw contact and hit his foul shots. Otherwise, he is as nearly complete an offensive player as you will see coming out of high school. Her is also quite agile as seen by one of his incredible putbacks last night, but he isn't super quick like John Wall.

He does have some areas to improve. His release on his outside shot is not smooth and therefore I expect him to be an inconsistent shooter from 3, unless he addresses that. He likes to face up with a defender and either use a screen or just set up a crossover. He will no doubt draw the best long and quick defender from the opponent and he may be picked fairly often as he was last night. He is likely to be taking a significant percentage of shots next season, so I hope that he will learn to play off the ball, so that the rest of the team doesn't stand and watch Austin. Maybe he has been told that he is a star often enough that he feels he needs to live up to the billing. That bounce off the backboard to himself was the kind of play that would have a coach scratching their head.

I am not trying to be negative about Austin, just realistic about what he brings to the table. All kids learn as they come into Div I ball, and Austin will get stronger and be in a position to use his skills and learn what works and doesn't.

Michael:

I really watched for him on the court, but never knew his number and never saw the back of his jersey. There were so many that fit his description, that I didn't really see him play specifically. Wish the announcers had been better about indicating who was substituted in. He scored 10 and people say he played well, but I never heard one word about him come out of an announcers mouth during game time.

Just a word about McAdoo. That kid had a heck of a game. He was one of the most impressive kids on the floor last night. Hairston didn't impress at all.

Gbinije was number 5 for the east. He had a solid game and was oh so close to finishing two spectacular plays that would've put him in the highlight reel (he missed an almost-incredible put back jam off the back iron that, even though he missed it, displayed some impressive hops and lost the handle on a few acrobatic forays to the rim amid the trees). When he wasn't pressing and instead let the game come to him, he was at his best, including a nice breakaway jam and a smooth three off of an assist from Austin. You can only glean so much from an all star game, of course, but the reports on Mike seem to be accurate. His movements are generally smooth as silk and he seems to be good at a lot of things. He's got a pretty good handle, a smooth shooting stroke, good passing instincts, and solid athleticism. While his actual size will play a big role in determining what positions he can guard, I don't doubt his coach that he could cover opposing 1's, 2's, and 3's. He seems like a guy who, if he can adapt to Duke defense quickly, could earn some PT as a long wing defender who can hit the open jumper and sneak in for an offensive rebound from the wing. He could also play a huge role in the full-court press. He also seems pretty strong for a wing player, which should help his transition to college ball. I almost never pencil freshman into the starting lineup or anything, but it wouldn't surprise me if Mike ended up making the regular rotation next year . . . especially if his defensive versatility proves to be an asset.

As for Austin, he didn't have his best shooting night, but the East's offense actually functioned more efficiently when he played point guard instead of Teague. He spent a lot of the night playing off the ball, but when he did bring the ball up, he consistently looked to set teammates up. He also did a good job running the break (except for that ill-advised only-in-an-all-star-game attempt at an alley-oop to himself off the glass). He would have had more assists if a few of his passes hadn't been fumbled. He also wasn't afraid to go for rebounds in the paint, even though he had a few nice boards knocked out of his hands. His offensive skillset is very advanced. I think that strength will be the biggest issue for him in terms of adjustment to college as he will be bumped and bullied like he never has, before. Luckily, he's got the guile, agility, and creativity to get off his shots even when the opposing defender is stronger or taller. He's so elusive with the ball that I'd think K and the staff will help translate some of that agility to his movements off the ball, as well. While he will probably have the ball in his hands most of the time, I think we'll see him move around quite a bit more than he has in the all star games when he's off the ball at Duke.

Gthoma2a
04-17-2011, 12:15 PM
Why even rank teams then, if the regular season is just practice. Just have a random draw for the tourney. Ultimately, VCU and Butler, are just like the rest- losers. Why would you celebrate a Final Four team? Losers are losers- doesn't matter when they went out- the teams did not accomplish anything all year and could not get it done.

Final Four means you were one of the last 4 teams left in the entire country. That is why you celebrate a Final Four. When you are down to there, the ones who are left have done some pretty impressive things. That's why. It is also success in the tournament. You could go undefeated through the regular season, but without a high level of success in the tournament, you won't be remembered by any fanbase other than your own. I am sorry, but the regular season hasn't won anyone a real championship in the opinion of the general population.

As to the feelings on who should start, I don't care who starts, but I get tired of hearing, "Austin can start, no other freshman will. You have to have years to play in K's system. All of our players are better than any freshman could be." For one thing, Austin hasn't played a college game, so he shouldn't get a pass from competing. Second, how do you know that Andre will be a better 3 than Michael automatically? How do you know that Seth will play the point better than Quinn automatically? How do you know that Deandre, should we get him, wouldn't be a great fit at a 4 for next year's team (he could be a 3, he could be any number of things, but I certainly don't see why we wouldn't be able to play some 4 like Kyle with his athleticism/overall game)? My point has always been that people throwing around absolutes like that don't know a thing yet. K will decide, so why say that a player is, "going to take a couple of years before he can make an impact for this program"? I don't need any of these guys to start, but there is no reason to say, before they ever get to step on the court, that we know who they are next to our players. We will see how they play next year, and I like to think highly of who we are bringing in. My reasoning is that most of the guys we are bringing back are good players who have been the role players up until now, so they are auditioning to be impact guys too. Last Year's team was a combo of Kyle, Nolan, and Kyrie's team with different guys stepping up in different ways at different times. No player is untouchable yet.

Devilsfan
04-17-2011, 12:15 PM
I also noticed that Bilas was so updated on the top 9-10 players he seemed not to have done his homework on the rest of the squad, unlike a Dukie who has also earned a law degree and tries to a fault not to be a homer.

TaiAdmiral
04-17-2011, 12:26 PM
Hi everybody,

We drove down to Charlotte (through a couple of tornadoes) yesterday to check out the JBC. Here's a recap from us, and an interview with Mike G/Austin: http://www.crazie-talk.com/2011/04/17/recap-crazie-talk-at-the-2011-jordan-brand-classic/

NSDukeFan
04-17-2011, 02:07 PM
Final Four means you were one of the last 4 teams left in the entire country. That is why you celebrate a Final Four. When you are down to there, the ones who are left have done some pretty impressive things. That's why. It is also success in the tournament.
I agree that reaching a final four is a great accomplishment and should be celebrated and is more of an achievement than a regular season championship or even an ACC championship, in my mind. But, there are only four teams that get there and sometimes they are not the best teams. As others have pointed out, don't discount a team because of one game in the tournament. It is blatantly unfair.
You could go undefeated through the regular season, but without a high level of success in the tournament, you won't be remembered by any fanbase other than your own. I am sorry, but the regular season hasn't won anyone a real championship in the opinion of the general population.
You're right that a great regular season doesn't count as a championship, but I certainly remember UNLV in 1991, Georgetown's great team that lost to Villanova, Kansas last year, OSU this year, Syracuse in 1987 (though I was a fan of them then), Kansas with Pierce and Lafrentz, Temple with Mark Macon, St. Joe's with Jameer Nelson and Delonte West, Stanford who entered the tourney with one loss? etc. as very good or great teams that didn't win a championship. I believe there are many other posters on this board (maybe they don't count as the general population) who remember some of the great regular seasons both from Duke and other schools. I am pretty sure there aren't any teams that have gone through the regular season undefeated that have been forgotten.

As to the feelings on who should start, I don't care who starts, but I get tired of hearing, "Austin can start, no other freshman will. You have to have years to play in K's system. All of our players are better than any freshman could be." For one thing, Austin hasn't played a college game, so he shouldn't get a pass from competing. Second, how do you know that Andre will be a better 3 than Michael automatically? How do you know that Seth will play the point better than Quinn automatically? How do you know that Deandre, should we get him, wouldn't be a great fit at a 4 for next year's team (he could be a 3, he could be any number of things, but I certainly don't see why we wouldn't be able to play some 4 like Kyle with his athleticism/overall game)? My point has always been that people throwing around absolutes like that don't know a thing yet. K will decide, so why say that a player is, "going to take a couple of years before he can make an impact for this program"? I don't need any of these guys to start, but there is no reason to say, before they ever get to step on the court, that we know who they are next to our players. We will see how they play next year, and I like to think highly of who we are bringing in. My reasoning is that most of the guys we are bringing back are good players who have been the role players up until now, so they are auditioning to be impact guys too. Last Year's team was a combo of Kyle, Nolan, and Kyrie's team with different guys stepping up in different ways at different times. No player is untouchable yet.

I agree that nobody knows yet who will start and how much everyone will play and those are things that the coaching staff will decide. Some people, however have been following the team for a few years and based on what has happened in the past may have a better idea of what may occur in the future. You can say all you want that these freshmen are very talented and will likely start, but sometimes it may be a good idea to look at history to get a basis for what may happen in the future. As many have pointed out, recruits that are not in the top 5 in the country don't typically start for Duke, unless there is a shortage at their position. Also, a 15th ranked recruit who is now a junior tends to play more than a 20th ranked freshman. Again, nobody knows for sure what will happen, but some people like to look at other information when making their points, rather than stating an unwavering opinion based on ...opinion.

I am looking forward to the competition for minutes next year as I have no idea who will eventually play how much. I also expect this very talented incoming class to make a big impact at Duke. I am just not sure it will be this year more so than the very talented and highly ranked Junior class of Mason, Ryan, Andre and I will include Seth, all of whom have shown the ability to compete very well at this level and will likely continue to improve.

COYS
04-17-2011, 04:58 PM
Gbinije was number 5 for the east. He had a solid game and was oh so close to finishing two spectacular plays that would've put him in the highlight reel (he missed an almost-incredible put back jam off the back iron that, even though he missed it, displayed some impressive hops and lost the handle on a few acrobatic forays to the rim amid the trees). When he wasn't pressing and instead let the game come to him, he was at his best, including a nice breakaway jam and a smooth three off of an assist from Austin. You can only glean so much from an all star game, of course, but the reports on Mike seem to be accurate. His movements are generally smooth as silk and he seems to be good at a lot of things. He's got a pretty good handle, a smooth shooting stroke, good passing instincts, and solid athleticism. While his actual size will play a big role in determining what positions he can guard, I don't doubt his coach that he could cover opposing 1's, 2's, and 3's. He seems like a guy who, if he can adapt to Duke defense quickly, could earn some PT as a long wing defender who can hit the open jumper and sneak in for an offensive rebound from the wing. He could also play a huge role in the full-court press. He also seems pretty strong for a wing player, which should help his transition to college ball. I almost never pencil freshman into the starting lineup or anything, but it wouldn't surprise me if Mike ended up making the regular rotation next year . . . especially if his defensive versatility proves to be an asset.

As for Austin, he didn't have his best shooting night, but the East's offense actually functioned more efficiently when he played point guard instead of Teague. He spent a lot of the night playing off the ball, but when he did bring the ball up, he consistently looked to set teammates up. He also did a good job running the break (except for that ill-advised only-in-an-all-star-game attempt at an alley-oop to himself off the glass). He would have had more assists if a few of his passes hadn't been fumbled. He also wasn't afraid to go for rebounds in the paint, even though he had a few nice boards knocked out of his hands. His offensive skillset is very advanced. I think that strength will be the biggest issue for him in terms of adjustment to college as he will be bumped and bullied like he never has, before. Luckily, he's got the guile, agility, and creativity to get off his shots even when the opposing defender is stronger or taller. He's so elusive with the ball that I'd think K and the staff will help translate some of that agility to his movements off the ball, as well. While he will probably have the ball in his hands most of the time, I think we'll see him move around quite a bit more than he has in the all star games when he's off the ball at Duke.

One more point on Austin that I should've added in my original post was that he twice stole the West's inbound pass after an East made basket. Both steals were really slick and showed extremely quick hands and feet as well as awareness. Under K's tutelage, I bet Austin's defense will improve to the point that opposing teams are going to really fear the quick hands of Rivers and Curry.

dukelifer
04-17-2011, 05:20 PM
Final Four means you were one of the last 4 teams left in the entire country. That is why you celebrate a Final Four. When you are down to there, the ones who are left have done some pretty impressive things. That's why. It is also success in the tournament. You could go undefeated through the regular season, but without a high level of success in the tournament, you won't be remembered by any fanbase other than your own. I am sorry, but the regular season hasn't won anyone a real championship in the opinion of the general population.

As to the feelings on who should start, I don't care who starts, but I get tired of hearing, "Austin can start, no other freshman will. You have to have years to play in K's system. All of our players are better than any freshman could be." For one thing, Austin hasn't played a college game, so he shouldn't get a pass from competing. Second, how do you know that Andre will be a better 3 than Michael automatically? How do you know that Seth will play the point better than Quinn automatically? How do you know that Deandre, should we get him, wouldn't be a great fit at a 4 for next year's team (he could be a 3, he could be any number of things, but I certainly don't see why we wouldn't be able to play some 4 like Kyle with his athleticism/overall game)? My point has always been that people throwing around absolutes like that don't know a thing yet. K will decide, so why say that a player is, "going to take a couple of years before he can make an impact for this program"? I don't need any of these guys to start, but there is no reason to say, before they ever get to step on the court, that we know who they are next to our players. We will see how they play next year, and I like to think highly of who we are bringing in. My reasoning is that most of the guys we are bringing back are good players who have been the role players up until now, so they are auditioning to be impact guys too. Last Year's team was a combo of Kyle, Nolan, and Kyrie's team with different guys stepping up in different ways at different times. No player is untouchable yet.

To quote your previous post "Go undefeated, but lose in the tournament, and a team is an anecdote, not a champion." 3 Final Four teams lose in the tournament- they are all anecdotes and not champions by your definition. Why do YOU celebrate them but not other teams that lose before the FF- despite having great regular seasons. I don't understand your logic.

Also- you say that "You could go undefeated through the regular season, but without a high level of success in the tournament, you won't be remembered by any fanbase other than your own. " Really? Who defines high level of success? Is it based on how you do in the post season given your seed which is based on the regular season performance which you argue is just practice and meaningless. Or is high level of success only getting to a FF- although not wining the NC delegates you to anecdote status. Also do you really believe that no one outside UNLV remembers UNLV in 1991? No one outside KY remembers KY and their game against Duke in 1992? No one remembers Northern Iowa and their win against Kansas?

Gthoma2a
04-17-2011, 05:45 PM
To quote your previous post "Go undefeated, but lose in the tournament, and a team is an anecdote, not a champion." 3 Final Four teams lose in the tournament- they are all anecdotes and not champions by your definition. Why do YOU celebrate them but not other teams that lose before the FF- despite having great regular seasons. I don't understand your logic.

Also- you say that "You could go undefeated through the regular season, but without a high level of success in the tournament, you won't be remembered by any fanbase other than your own. " Really? Who defines high level of success? Is it based on how you do in the post season given your seed which is based on the regular season performance which you argue is just practice and meaningless. Or is high level of success only getting to a FF- although not wining the NC delegates you to anecdote status. Also do you really believe that no one outside UNLV remembers UNLV in 1991? No one outside KY remembers KY and their game against Duke in 1992? No one remembers Northern Iowa and their win against Kansas?

You don't get a banner for a regular season championship. You get one for a Final Four. That is where my point of view is based. If you don't get a banner for your performance, you didn't make a huge mark on more than memories.

El_Diablo
04-17-2011, 05:56 PM
You don't get a banner for a regular season championship. You get one for a Final Four. That is where my point of view is based. If you don't get a banner for your performance, you didn't make a huge mark on more than memories.

Well, a team can give itself a banner for whatever it wants to, whether it's a regular-season championship or a Sweet Sixteen appearance. Please stop hijacking this thread.

arnie
04-17-2011, 06:49 PM
I can easily understand why S2 had trouble seeing Gbinije, as Jay Bilas and Jimmy Dykes - both solid color commentators in other contexts - were perilously close to Dickie V territory last night in their inability to focus on the game, on specific plays, all [as opposed to a select few] players, subtle moves [as opposed to diaper dandy dunkeroos]. Had I had the power to fire Jay and Jimmy on the spot - and the power to transport either myself or any of dozens of observant DBR posters to the spot to take over the commentary - I'd have done so. In short, bluntly and fervently stated, Jay and Jimmy sucked, big time, last eve. I usually enjoy their expertise, but last night, no good. I trust Jay will regain his equilibrium, and soon. Jimmy, too.

As to the actual substance of Michael Gbinije's play, I'll take my comments over to the Gbinije thread, since, clearly, Jay and Jimmy implied - by their sins [I use the word advisedly] of omission - that Gbinije "didn't belong." Jump in the bloody lake, you two. Come up for air when you remember how to do your job.


Though G looked very capable last night. And I wholeheartedly agree with you, Bilas loves hearing himself talk and does a very poor job with game announcing. At one point, Dykes said Carolina won the ACC last year and Bilas just kept talking through that statement.

COYS
04-17-2011, 11:25 PM
Though G looked very capable last night. And I wholeheartedly agree with you, Bilas loves hearing himself talk and does a very poor job with game announcing. At one point, Dykes said Carolina won the ACC last year and Bilas just kept talking through that statement.

If only it were limited to on-air slip-ups. I also saw it mentioned in an article on ESPN.com (I can't remember which article it was at the moment) which said that UNC would be able to build off a team that won the ACC in 2011. Not only is this not true, but no one seems to remember that UNC was not just beaten, but blown out by Duke in the final. Man, I hate that the last game of the season colors most people's view of the rest of the season so much. We really had a great team this year. If not for a bad half against Zona . . . oh well.

Duke: A Dynasty
04-18-2011, 09:45 AM
If only it were limited to on-air slip-ups. I also saw it mentioned in an article on ESPN.com (I can't remember which article it was at the moment) which said that UNC would be able to build off a team that won the ACC in 2011. Not only is this not true, but no one seems to remember that UNC was not just beaten, but blown out by Duke in the final. Man, I hate that the last game of the season colors most people's view of the rest of the season so much. We really had a great team this year. If not for a bad half against Zona . . . oh well.

Well I did not hear it so im not sure the context it was being used with but most people consider the regular season champs to be the ones who are ACC Kings not the tournament..

Duvall
04-18-2011, 10:04 AM
Well I did not hear it so im not sure the context it was being used with but most people consider the regular season champs to be the ones who are ACC Kings not the tournament..

Those people are wrong - not as a matter of opinion, but fact.

SupaDave
04-18-2011, 10:20 AM
Those people are wrong - not as a matter of opinion, but fact.

What Duvall said...

You might get some t-shirts for winning the ACC regular season title - that's it besides a small nod in the record books.

COYS
04-18-2011, 10:20 AM
Well I did not hear it so im not sure the context it was being used with but most people consider the regular season champs to be the ones who are ACC Kings not the tournament..

Yeah, I'm not sure when this came to be the case. It certainly wasn't the case in 2004 when the Twerps came back to upset Duke. I remember how that boosted their seed and the media kept on referring to how they were rewarded for being conference champs.

Even if I concede that a short, single elimination tournament is not the best way to determine the conference champion, it is silly to say that the holes were kings of the ACC this past year. In all ACC games, including games in the tournament, UNC was 16-3 and Duke was 16-3. Duke wins the tie-breaker with a 2-1 edge in head to head matchups including the dismantling of UNC in the ACC tournament final.

Duke: A Dynasty
04-18-2011, 10:37 AM
Yeah, I'm not sure when this came to be the case. It certainly wasn't the case in 2004 when the Twerps came back to upset Duke. I remember how that boosted their seed and the media kept on referring to how they were rewarded for being conference champs.

Even if I concede that a short, single elimination tournament is not the best way to determine the conference champion, it is silly to say that the holes were kings of the ACC this past year. In all ACC games, including games in the tournament, UNC was 16-3 and Duke was 16-3. Duke wins the tie-breaker with a 2-1 edge in head to head matchups including the dismantling of UNC in the ACC tournament final.



I agree the reason I hear people say it is because the seaason is more telling of who is good than the tournament is. Tournament requires a little bit of luck and the season is more telling. But like I said I agree with you

Faison1
04-18-2011, 10:40 AM
How come I'm not hearing anything about Quincy Miller in any of these All-Star Events?

gumbomoop
04-18-2011, 10:51 AM
FYI - boxscore from JBC

http://www.jordanbrandclassic.com/images/stories/media-page/jbc-all-american2011-stats.pdf

Obviously can't judge everything from one all-star game, but, IMO, the boxscore does accurately reflect some things about some players:

- McAdoo was superb, all over the court; Heels have a great one
- Davis is a monster, long, smooth
- UK recruits are good as advertised; Wiltjer smart player; if both Knight and Jones stay, UK should be preseason consensus 1-2; even if they leave, UK will be pre-top-3-4, as Lamb, Miller, and Liggins are now experienced with deep NCAAT run
- Wroten is great passer; his 10 assists more impressive than Teague's 7
- Not sure why Khem Birch didn't get a little more PT; impressive; going to Pitt
- Austin Rivers got the most minutes, but not because he was playing the best. I think Shannon Scott [son of the great Charlie Scott] must have been injured [only a cameo], so AR was definitely the PG for the East when Teague was out
- Gbinije was not shy; 12 shots in 16 min; I hope he is as aggressive right away for Duke; can't tell by his calm demeanor, but he had/has a chip on shoulder, of the "I belong, too" variety; he's right

A few observations that one couldn't get from the boxscore..... nor from Bilas and Dykes:

- At some point when AR was at PG, the West coach [I assume] had his guys double-team AR, to [I assume] get the ball out of his hands
- Many of Wroten's assists were great-to-spectacular passes [To be fair, Bilas/Dykes did comment on this; they were rightly impressed with Wroten]
- Not much D, save for tall guys trying to block everything; but.... Gbinije plays D, stopped alley-oop by hustle D, then flicked ball away on subsequent post-pass
- McAdoo is a "makes everybody better" guy; he lets game come to him, but it comes to him a whole lot
- Gilchrist may play mostly wing SF at UK, some PF, too, esp if Jones leaves; anyhow, Gilchrist seems an attacking guy rather than a shooter; not sure whether his poor FT shooting in the Jordan game is typical, but he should get plenty of FT chances

gumbomoop
04-18-2011, 10:56 AM
How come I'm not hearing anything about Quincy Miller in any of these All-Star Events?

On JBC roster, but injured, maybe most/all [?] of his senior season.

roywhite
04-18-2011, 11:02 AM
FYI - boxscore from JBC

http://www.jordanbrandclassic.com/images/stories/media-page/jbc-all-american2011-stats.pdf

Obviously can't judge everything from one all-star game, but, IMO, the boxscore does accurately reflect some things about some players:
....


Agree with your observations about the players, and the announcers.

Wroten is an intriguing player; I've seen some sloppy play from him in some post-season games, but he has a ton of ability. One interesting tidbit is that he went out for the track team this spring and has the fastest 100m time of any Washington state high schooler....10.78 if I recall.

I liked seeing Austin occasionally go to the boards or sneak in for a put-back; he'll be even more effective in those areas if he hits the weight room and adds some muscle.

Kentucky will be a power next year, and depending on the pro intentions of their current players, could be really loaded.

sandinmyshoes
04-18-2011, 01:37 PM
FYI - boxscore from JBC

http://www.jordanbrandclassic.com/images/stories/media-page/jbc-all-american2011-stats.pdf

Obviously can't judge everything from one all-star game, but, IMO, the boxscore does accurately reflect some things about some players:

- McAdoo was superb, all over the court; Heels have a great one
- Davis is a monster, long, smooth
- UK recruits are good as advertised; Wiltjer smart player; if both Knight and Jones stay, UK should be preseason consensus 1-2; even if they leave, UK will be pre-top-3-4, as Lamb, Miller, and Liggins are now experienced with deep NCAAT run
- Wroten is great passer; his 10 assists more impressive than Teague's 7
- Not sure why Khem Birch didn't get a little more PT; impressive; going to Pitt
- Austin Rivers got the most minutes, but not because he was playing the best. I think Shannon Scott [son of the great Charlie Scott] must have been injured [only a cameo], so AR was definitely the PG for the East when Teague was out
- Gbinije was not shy; 12 shots in 16 min; I hope he is as aggressive right away for Duke; can't tell by his calm demeanor, but he had/has a chip on shoulder, of the "I belong, too" variety; he's right

A few observations that one couldn't get from the boxscore..... nor from Bilas and Dykes:

- At some point when AR was at PG, the West coach [I assume] had his guys double-team AR, to [I assume] get the ball out of his hands
- Many of Wroten's assists were great-to-spectacular passes [To be fair, Bilas/Dykes did comment on this; they were rightly impressed with Wroten]
- Not much D, save for tall guys trying to block everything; but.... Gbinije plays D, stopped alley-oop by hustle D, then flicked ball away on subsequent post-pass
- McAdoo is a "makes everybody better" guy; he lets game come to him, but it comes to him a whole lot
- Gilchrist may play mostly wing SF at UK, some PF, too, esp if Jones leaves; anyhow, Gilchrist seems an attacking guy rather than a shooter; not sure whether his poor FT shooting in the Jordan game is typical, but he should get plenty of FT chances

Good post.

I think Austin will benefit greatly from hitting the weight room. That alone will tighten up his handle and improve his defense. Speaking of his defense, he has great anticipation.

Gbinije has the makings of a classic skilled glue guy.

Can only ditto what you said about McAdoo. If Henson doesn't continue his late season free throw improvement, it'll be McAdoo in late game situations for UNC.

Hairston needs work on his handle, and didn't seem to rebound much for a guy his size. He didn't shoot well either, but I have seen him when he did shoot well, so I won't get lulled into a false impression from this game.

Davis, looks like a candidate for the number one pick next year.

CDu
04-18-2011, 03:11 PM
My impressions of the second half where as follows:

1. I didn't realize Gbinije was playing until the fourth quarter. He had a quiet game. If you looked for him, I'm sure you were able to see some nice things. But it can be challenging in an All-star game enviroment to do so.
2. Rivers had a tough second half. The West played physical against him and he didn't seem to respond. He also appeared frustrated and it showed on some of his drives.
3. McAdoo did do a lot nice things, but a LOT of his points in the second half came as a result of being the big man standing on his half of the court in series of fast breaks both ways (i.e., neither team's bigs playing defense). I think he's going to be a very good backup for UNC next year, but the impressions of him may be overly inflated based on the Jordan game.
4. Hairston, like Gbinije, was fairly quiet during the stretch of the game I saw. Again, I don't want to reflect too much on that observation.

Overall, the quality of play was pretty poor (as is typical of a high school all-star game). The guards had opportunities to stand out and the bigs got lots of chances to put in dunks. But it's hard to gauge what these guys will do in a half-court setting where defense is actually played.

COYS
04-18-2011, 11:47 PM
My impressions of the second half where as follows:


3. McAdoo did do a lot nice things, but a LOT of his points in the second half came as a result of being the big man standing on his half of the court in series of fast breaks both ways (i.e., neither team's bigs playing defense). I think he's going to be a very good backup for UNC next year, but the impressions of him may be overly inflated based on the Jordan game.

Overall, the quality of play was pretty poor (as is typical of a high school all-star game). The guards had opportunities to stand out and the bigs got lots of chances to put in dunks. But it's hard to gauge what these guys will do in a half-court setting where defense is actually played.

I'm not trying to dump on McAdoo as I think he'll be great for UNC, but this is a very important point. He got the vast majority of his points at the rim on fast breaks. Some of this was because he was still standing at midcourt when the other side turned the ball over or missed a quick shot. He'll be great, but he was the leading scorer in this contest largely because he was on the receiving end of most of Teague's and Austin's assists.

BD80
04-19-2011, 12:03 AM
Great snippet in preview from "Men of Certain Age:"

"If you are Jordan, you are Jordan when he was on the Wizards"

"Then you'd be Jordan playing for the White Sox"

Ouch. That's gonna leave a mark ...

Even for older men, MJ is now an object of ridicule.

dcar1985
04-19-2011, 12:07 AM
Great snippet in preview from "Men of Certain Age:"

"If you are Jordan, you are Jordan when he was on the Wizards"

"Then you'd be Jordan playing for the White Sox"

Ouch. That's gonna leave a mark ...

Even for older men, MJ is now an object of ridicule.


Really!?!

FireOgilvie
04-19-2011, 12:16 AM
I don't think so. Jordan and Pippen were mentioned about 10 times today in the new episode of "Mad Love" (the show on after How I Met Your Mother). The context was "great teammates." Austin Rivers just called Jordan "the greatest to put on a jersey" or something similar in his interview before the Jordan Brand Classic.

Starter
04-19-2011, 12:29 AM
As of a year and a half ago (http://www.cnbc.com/id/32798277/Michael_Jordan_First_Athlete_To_1_Billion), three out of every four basketball sneakers sold in America were Jordans. It's five percent of Nike's overall business (!) and about $1 billion annually in sales. (!!) Jordan's Wizards tenure was a punchline, and his character flaws are more evident every time he opens his mouth as he becomes less guarded following his playing career. But as long as his logo is literally everywhere -- and as long as he owns an NBA team -- Jordan will always be relevant.

Aditya
04-19-2011, 12:58 AM
Jordan strikes me at the verge of being more relevant with the direction in which Silas has pushed the Bobcats. I honestly believe that the Bobcats will actually pull it together in the coming years, at which point Jordan will be known as a quality owner.

Poincaré
04-19-2011, 01:00 AM
As of a year and a half ago (http://www.cnbc.com/id/32798277/Michael_Jordan_First_Athlete_To_1_Billion), three out of every four basketball sneakers sold in America were Jordans. It's five percent of Nike's overall business (!) and about $1 billion annually in sales. (!!) Jordan's Wizards tenure was a punchline, and his character flaws are more evident every time he opens his mouth as he becomes less guarded following his playing career. But as long as his logo is literally everywhere -- and as long as he owns an NBA team -- Jordan will always be relevant.

There are degrees of relevance. I think and hope that his relevance is decreasing in degree, even if does not disappear all at once.

I intentionally try to promote the Magic/Bird/Wilt/Hakeem/Russell/Kareem (even Kobe, although that's more of a stretch) > Jordan whenever the opportunity presents itself (and blame Jordan for all of today's ills)---mostly to those without opinions on the subject themselves or young kids. The sooner we can rub Jordan out of the collective conscience, the better. That said, until his memories are erased, he will not be completely irrelevant.

darjum
04-19-2011, 04:45 AM
The sooner we can rub Jordan out of the collective conscience, the better. That said, until his memories are erased, he will not be completely irrelevant.

Unless lobotomies become the new craze, anybody who watched basketball in the 90's will not be able to forget nor stop discussing the influence he had.

Instead, every time someone mentions MJ in relation to North Carolina greatness we should also mention just how crappy Vince Carter was considering his athletic ability. They equal each other out in terms of potential and potential not reached!

SupaDave
04-19-2011, 07:28 AM
Yes, just ALWAYS avoid the Jordan argument - trust me on this. In the black community he's pretty much untouchable so I doubt he loses much relevance anytime soon. As he gets even older, tales of his bitterness and competitiveness will give way to the gentleness of age and he will be even more revered.

It's one of those stones you just leave alone.

Supa "I'm moving this thread to the thread named after HIS tourney" Dave...

darjum
04-19-2011, 08:34 AM
I have not seen the 2011 Jordan game, my question to anybody who did:

Recent posts on the thread welcoming Michael Gbinije to Duke claim he is a legitimate 6-8. Did he appear to be? Big difference between the 6-5/6-6 range and a legitimate 6-8. Would love to have a 6-8 wing player after Kyle leaves.

dcar1985
04-19-2011, 09:49 AM
After watching the game Id doubt he's 6'8 however I did catch him standing side by side w/ PJ Hairston who is a legit 6'6 and he was definitely taller....I'd say he's 6'7 easy

oldnavy
04-19-2011, 11:46 AM
Great snippet in preview from "Men of Certain Age:"

"If you are Jordan, you are Jordan when he was on the Wizards"

"Then you'd be Jordan playing for the White Sox"

Ouch. That's gonna leave a mark ...

Even for older men, MJ is now an object of ridicule.

MJ has not played a game in over 8 years. His last few years were not very special since he spent them with the Wizards.

He will have name recognition for a long time since his shoes are everywhere, but the days of kids actually having seen MJ play and therefore want to be like Mike are fading fast. Not a slam on MJ by any means, it is just what time does...

One day he will be the "Chuck Taylor" of basketball... I mean we all wore Chuck Taylor Cons, but did any of us know who the heck he was?

Duvall
04-19-2011, 11:53 AM
Jordan strikes me at the verge of being more relevant with the direction in which Silas has pushed the Bobcats. I honestly believe that the Bobcats will actually pull it together in the coming years, at which point Jordan will be known as a quality owner.

Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Let's not get crazy here.

NEVER FORGET:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/wizardsinsider/kwamejordan.jpg

gumbomoop
04-19-2011, 11:55 AM
McAdoo did do a lot nice things, but a LOT of his points in the second half came as a result of being the big man standing on his half of the court in series of fast breaks both ways (i.e., neither team's bigs playing defense). I think he's going to be a very good backup for UNC next year, but the impressions of him may be overly inflated based on the Jordan game.


I'm not trying to dump on McAdoo as I think he'll be great for UNC, but this [Edit: CDu's point, in above tag quote] is a very important point. He got the vast majority of his points at the rim on fast breaks. Some of this was because he was still standing at midcourt when the other side turned the ball over or missed a quick shot. He'll be great, but he was the leading scorer in this contest largely because he was on the receiving end of most of Teague's and Austin's assists.

Reluctant but resigned [lies, pretty obviously] am I to disagree with the usually reliable and oft-brilliant CDu and COYS. While I may be guilty of overinflating McAdoo's talent, I won't back down. My assessment of his value to his team does not rest mostly on his having been the leading scorer. I was more impressed with his rebounding [14, 5 on O] in traffic, his relentlessness on a couple of plays in particular, his demeanor, his steady confidence. I was surprised by his 2 [for 2] 3-bombs.

I repeat: an exemplar of the cliches, "he makes his teammates better" and "he lets the game come to him," McAdoo's special quality is that the game seems to come to him a high percentage of the time. It's somehow in his neighborhood a whole lot.

Thing is, McAdoo was apparently close to Shaka Smart, when SS was an assistant at Fla. McAdoo likely [?] headed to Gainesville. Smart left for VCU [dumb move, jeez, what was he thinking of??], McAdoo winds up at UNC, to torture us for awhile. Need Ryan, Josh, Michael to block out when McAdoo heads for the boards. Won't be easy.

dcdrumsinc
04-19-2011, 12:04 PM
All I have to say is I wish we got Anthony Davis (on top of having austin of course). He is the best player in this upcoming class. He is a 6'9'' long armed shot blocker, scorer, rebounder with guard skills. It is scary. We will have a lot of undersized guards yet again next season which may very well be our downfall again. We will have to rely alot of austin rivers next season. The thing I am worried about is our expectations for Austin. He is portrayed as a deadly outside shooter yet he only made 31% of his threes in high school. He made a great percentage of his 2 point tries however. That said, I don't know if that will translate to the higher levels. Another thing too is he is an average 70% free throw shooter which needs to improve

Faison1
04-19-2011, 12:12 PM
All I have to say is I wish we got Anthony Davis (on top of having austin of course). He is the best player in this upcoming class. He is a 6'9'' long armed shot blocker, scorer, rebounder with guard skills. It is scary. We will have a lot of undersized guards yet again next season which may very well be our downfall again. We will have to rely alot of austin rivers next season. The thing I am worried about is our expectations for Austin. He is portrayed as a deadly outside shooter yet he only made 31% of his threes in high school. He made a great percentage of his 2 point tries however. That said, I don't know if that will translate to the higher levels. Another thing too is he is an average 70% free throw shooter which needs to improve

Well, we do have a 6'10" shot blocker who's a pretty good rebounder too. And I bet he grows his avg from 7.2 points into double digits next year. Plus, he already knows K's system, which takes some big men years to understand.

darjum
04-20-2011, 09:07 AM
All I have to say is I wish we got Anthony Davis (on top of having austin of course). He is the best player in this upcoming class. He is a 6'9'' long armed shot blocker, scorer, rebounder with guard skills. It is scary. We will have a lot of undersized guards yet again next season which may very well be our downfall again. We will have to rely alot of austin rivers next season. The thing I am worried about is our expectations for Austin. He is portrayed as a deadly outside shooter yet he only made 31% of his threes in high school. He made a great percentage of his 2 point tries however. That said, I don't know if that will translate to the higher levels. Another thing too is he is an average 70% free throw shooter which needs to improve

Anthony Davis will be an elite level NBA player; however I have to say as a Duke fan the second they sign with Calipari, time to wash your hands with them, yuck!

darjum
04-20-2011, 09:10 AM
Well, we do have a 6'10" shot blocker who's a pretty good rebounder too. And I bet he grows his avg from 7.2 points into double digits next year. Plus, he already knows K's system, which takes some big men years to understand.

Absolutely. And that player is the key to everything the coaching staff will do next year. Without MP2 back there blocking shots and rebounding at a high rate Duke would be pulling the ball out of their basket a whole lot more!