Top 10 Backcourts in 2011-12

[rotogod00]

Behind the Insider wall, but for those without access, here's the top 10

1. Florida
2. Duke
3. Kentucky
4. Ohio St.
5. UNC
6. Missouri
7. Washington
8. Xavier
9. Pittsburgh
10. Wisconsin

on Duke: "Depending who's doing the rating, 6-5 freshman combo guard Austin Rivers is either the top recruit in the nation or a close second behind Kentucky freshman big man Anthony Davis. (Both of whom, by the way, are projected as lottery picks in the 2012 NBA draft). In either case, Duke is happy to have Rivers, not to mention his classmates: 6-6 wing Michael Gbinije and 6-0 point guard Quinn Cook. Add in veteran shooters Seth Curry and Andre Dawkins (the duo shot a combined 43 percent on 3s last season), and you can see why Mike Krzyzewski says his team will have "very good talent" and "good depth," even with the departures of Nolan Smith, Kyle Singler and Kyrie Irving."

http://insider.espn.go.com/ncb/tournament/2011/insider/news/story?id=6663452

[MChambers]

Behind the Insider wall, but for those without access, here's the top 10

1. Florida
2. Duke
3. Kentucky
4. Ohio St.
5. UNC
6. Missouri
7. Washington
8. Xavier
9. Pittsburgh
10. Wisconsin

on Duke: "Depending who's doing the rating, 6-5 freshman combo guard Austin Rivers is either the top recruit in the nation or a close second behind Kentucky freshman big man Anthony Davis. (Both of whom, by the way, are projected as lottery picks in the 2012 NBA draft). In either case, Duke is happy to have Rivers, not to mention his classmates: 6-6 wing Michael Gbinije and 6-0 point guard Quinn Cook. Add in veteran shooters Seth Curry and Andre Dawkins (the duo shot a combined 43 percent on 3s last season), and you can see why Mike Krzyzewski says his team will have "very good talent" and "good depth," even with the departures of Nolan Smith, Kyle Singler and Kyrie Irving."

http://insider.espn.go.com/ncb/tournament/2011/insider/news/story?id=6663452

Not sure this projection is completely warranted, but how nice is it to root for a program that loses both Nolan Smith and Kyrie Irving and is ranked #2 in the category? Man, it's nice to be a Duke fan.

[Saratoga2]

Behind the Insider wall, but for those without access, here's the top 10

1. Florida
2. Duke
3. Kentucky
4. Ohio St.
5. UNC
6. Missouri
7. Washington
8. Xavier
9. Pittsburgh
10. Wisconsin

on Duke: "Depending who's doing the rating, 6-5 freshman combo guard Austin Rivers is either the top recruit in the nation or a close second behind Kentucky freshman big man Anthony Davis. (Both of whom, by the way, are projected as lottery picks in the 2012 NBA draft). In either case, Duke is happy to have Rivers, not to mention his classmates: 6-6 wing Michael Gbinije and 6-0 point guard Quinn Cook. Add in veteran shooters Seth Curry and Andre Dawkins (the duo shot a combined 43 percent on 3s last season), and you can see why Mike Krzyzewski says his team will have "very good talent" and "good depth," even with the departures of Nolan Smith, Kyle Singler and Kyrie Irving."

http://insider.espn.go.com/ncb/tournament/2011/insider/news/story?id=6663452

Rivers is a top recruit and probably a lottery pick but I seriously doubt he is more than 6'3" in stocking feet, unless he has grown some since the McDonald's game. It is a good thing for him that he has an excellent handle as he will need it when he reaches the NBA.

[Newton_14]

Rivers is a top recruit and probably a lottery pick but I seriously doubt he is more than 6'3" in stocking feet, unless he has grown some since the McDonald's game. It is a good thing for him that he has an excellent handle as he will need it when he reaches the NBA.

It's also a good thing that Austin will actually play with shoes on! :D

On a serious note, I thought the latest measurements on Austin was 6'5 without shoes on? I thought I remembered reading somewhere that he had grown a bit over his Sr year and was a legit 6'5? Not a huge deal given his skillset as you note, but if he is a legit 6'5, all the better.

I hope to get to see him in person soon at the Summer League at Central. We are not too far away now from that league starting up.

[uh_no]

Not sure this projection is completely warranted, but how nice is it to root for a program that loses both Nolan Smith and Kyrie Irving and is ranked #2 in the category? Man, it's nice to be a Duke fan.

indicative of how ridiculous our back court should have been last year

[jipops]

The insider quote seems to have Duke's ranking based on some perceived depth in the back court. But in reality we are most likely looking at having a stating lineup in the back court that features a shooting guard filling in a point guard role and a freshman (a highly touted one at that). We really don't know going in if we have an answer at the point. I feel confident that Dawkins can give us valuable production but will he be a guy we can count on to score when we need it? Can Austin defend? Just seems like too many question marks to give us such a lofty ranking in that dept. With the collective experience of our bigs I actually feel like we may have more of a strength there. I'm interested to see where the "experts" rank us in the front court.

[johnb]

.. I'm interested to see where the "experts" rank us in the front court.

unranked, but doubtless we were an unnamed #11.

[sporthenry]

The insider quote seems to have Duke's ranking based on some perceived depth in the back court. But in reality we are most likely looking at having a stating lineup in the back court that features a shooting guard filling in a point guard role and a freshman (a highly touted one at that). We really don't know going in if we have an answer at the point. I feel confident that Dawkins can give us valuable production but will he be a guy we can count on to score when we need it? Can Austin defend? Just seems like too many question marks to give us such a lofty ranking in that dept. With the collective experience of our bigs I actually feel like we may have more of a strength there. I'm interested to see where the "experts" rank us in the front court.

Well its college, every team has question marks. But whose backcourt would you put above Dukes? UNC who still can't hit a 3? UK who is relying more on freshmen than Duke? OSU who have Craft and Buford? Every team has questions and Austin has the least questions of all freshmen. Curry playing the point is for one not that big of a concern b/c that is his future if he has an NBA career and if he fails than Rivers, Cook, and Thornton can all play the point. They will have some growing pains but between Dre, Cook, TT, Rivers, Curry, and even MG (if you include the 3 in the back court), I'd put Duke's backcourt against anyones.

[Olympic Fan]

I think the list makes sense ...

Florida deserves its No. 1 ranking. They return both starters off a guard-driven NCAA team, add a former Big East standout in Rosario (who sat out last year), plus the No.2 rated wing guard prospect in Bradley Beal.

Duke is a mix of experienced players (Curry, Dawkins and to a lesser extent Thornton), the nation's top rated backcourt prospect (Rivers) and another that ranks among the top 2-3 point guard.

I agree that there are some question marks as to who plays the point. Curry gets first shot (and the China trip to win the job), but even if he fails in that position, K has two true point guards in Thornton and Cook to compete for the job. All in all, a nice mix of options ... and a coach with a fairly good track record of figuring such things out.

Behind Duke, as noted, is a Kentucky backcourt that's even more inexperienced than Duke is going to be ... beyond Lamb.

I can't see who else you might argue deserves to be ranked above those three teams?

PS The same author that did the top 10 backcourts has already done the top 10 frontcourts -- and he didn't have Duke in the top 10. I can understand his skepticism -- while Mason, Miles and Ryan are all fairly experienced guys, until one or two step up their roles (or Josh or Murphy or MP3 blossom), I can see the expectation that they are all role players.

[gumbomoop]

I think the list makes sense ...

I can't see who else you might argue deserves to be ranked above those three teams?

I'd be tempted to rate OSU and UNC #1 and 2. OSU because of Craft, a great, great, great defender. A revelation re positioning, beating opponent to spot, hands, smarts, relentless hounding.

UNC because of Marshall's brilliant passing, both beautiful long passes and perfectly placed gems into post [a strangely lost art among so many college guys], which post is very talented.

But, knowing that "backcourt" means several players, and that depth counts in this rating, I'd probably resist the temptation.

[jipops]

I think the list makes sense ...

Florida deserves its No. 1 ranking. They return both starters off a guard-driven NCAA team, add a former Big East standout in Rosario (who sat out last year), plus the No.2 rated wing guard prospect in Bradley Beal.

Duke is a mix of experienced players (Curry, Dawkins and to a lesser extent Thornton), the nation's top rated backcourt prospect (Rivers) and another that ranks among the top 2-3 point guard.

I agree that there are some question marks as to who plays the point. Curry gets first shot (and the China trip to win the job), but even if he fails in that position, K has two true point guards in Thornton and Cook to compete for the job. All in all, a nice mix of options ... and a coach with a fairly good track record of figuring such things out.

Behind Duke, as noted, is a Kentucky backcourt that's even more inexperienced than Duke is going to be ... beyond Lamb.

I can't see who else you might argue deserves to be ranked above those three teams?

PS The same author that did the top 10 backcourts has already done the top 10 frontcourts -- and he didn't have Duke in the top 10. I can understand his skepticism -- while Mason, Miles and Ryan are all fairly experienced guys, until one or two step up their roles (or Josh or Murphy or MP3 blossom), I can see the expectation that they are all role players.

I'm not trying to be contrarian at all, I just find it interesting that the backcourt is being ranked as #2 in the country whereas our frontcourt will more than likely be the most stable portion of the roster. We now have a load of experience among 3 talented big guys, all with exceptional and different skill sets. We can go with a number of looks underneath and really not sacrifice any size. And unlike the past few years I actually do feel like we can rely on getting significant offense from our rotation of bigs on a regular basis. Defensively we will be very tough with older Plumlee's ability to block shots, Miles' ongoing improvement on D, and Kelly's excellent position D. Overall the frontcourt won't boast the combination of talent and experience that exists down the road, but I feel like it is worthy of being considered in the top 10. There are three guys that have played together for a full two seasons now. This is a big deal.

I'm really not sold on the backcourt yet. I feel like most of the team weaknesses exist there. Point guard play and distribution of the ball on offense are of course huge. My concern is that with Seth now shouldering the load of facilitating the offense and really no other experienced scorers other than maybe Dawkins, who has yet to show reliable ball skills and see consistent minutes in his career, will the offense be able to manage the ball or will it lend itself to be turnover prone? On the defensive end I don't know what to expect. Maybe Austin will be able to provide solid D coming in. Maybe Seth can manage the opposing point without sacrificing his own offense. Maybe Andre can be that on-the-ball defensive stopper many of us have envisioned him to be. Can Thornton be a true rotation guy? I feel uncertain that all of this is really going to pan out that way, probably not starting out at least. What kind of identity is this backcourt going to have?

[CDu]

I'm not trying to be contrarian at all, I just find it interesting that the backcourt is being ranked as #2 in the country whereas our frontcourt will more than likely be the most stable portion of the roster. We now have a load of experience among 3 talented big guys, all with exceptional and different skill sets. We can go with a number of looks underneath and really not sacrifice any size. And unlike the past few years I actually do feel like we can rely on getting significant offense from our rotation of bigs on a regular basis. Defensively we will be very tough with older Plumlee's ability to block shots, Miles' ongoing improvement on D, and Kelly's excellent position D. Overall the frontcourt won't boast the combination of talent and experience that exists down the road, but I feel like it is worthy of being considered in the top 10. There are three guys that have played together for a full two seasons now. This is a big deal.

I'm really not sold on the backcourt yet. I feel like most of the team weaknesses exist there. Point guard play and distribution of the ball on offense are of course huge. My concern is that with Seth now shouldering the load of facilitating the offense and really no other experienced scorers other than maybe Dawkins, who has yet to show reliable ball skills and see consistent minutes in his career, will the offense be able to manage the ball or will it lend itself to be turnover prone? On the defensive end I don't know what to expect. Maybe Austin will be able to provide solid D coming in. Maybe Seth can manage the opposing point without sacrificing his own offense. Maybe Andre can be that on-the-ball defensive stopper many of us have envisioned him to be. Can Thornton be a true rotation guy? I feel uncertain that all of this is really going to pan out that way, probably not starting out at least. What kind of identity is this backcourt going to have?

Your questions about the backcourt are legitimate, but I think we have just as many questions in the frontcourt. There's loads of potential (and Mason seemed to start to reach some of it), but there are lots of questions. Can Mason improve his offensive game and defensive awareness/positioning? Can Miles improve his consistency and defensive awareness/positioning? Can Kelly become more than a streaky jumpshooter on offense? Can any of those three prove able to consistently defend quicker PF?

The reality is that the whole team is a question mark. I'm not saying that in a bad way. There are many very talented players who could emerge this year. Curry, Dawkins, Mason, Kelly, and Rivers are the most likely possibilities to emerge, but there are also Miles, Cook, Gbinije, Thornton, and Hairston (I'm not expecting much out of Marshall as I think the transition to college ball is toughest on the bigs). So much positive could happen in terms of development with this roster. At the same time, there's a lot that needs to go right.

That said, I think our backcourt ranking is a combination of high expectations for Rivers and a low bar being set by other teams in terms of returning players.

[Kfanarmy]

Behind the Insider wall, but for those without access, here's the top 10....http://insider.espn.go.com/ncb/tournament/2011/insider/news/story?id=6663452

It seems to me this type of post violates posting guidelines and potentially sets the site owners and administrators up for potential lawsuits, not to mention being simply wrong...quoting from posting guidelines:

Copyright Infringement. It's illegal. In addition to the poster who posted the information, DBR might be held accountable for posts that violate copyrights. To avoid copyright infringement, summarize the main point of the article in a few sentences, perhaps add a short quote, and post a link to it. Note that “article” refers to any text, including (but not limited to) articles, books, blogs, and posts on other message boards.

This also includes divulging information found on premium sites. If you read it on a premium site and don't see it in the mainstream media, it doesn't belong here.

[sagegrouse]

It seems to me this type of post violates posting guidelines and potentially sets the site owners and administrators up for potential lawsuits, not to mention being simply wrong...quoting from posting guidelines:

You may be right, Kfanarmy, but does this really have anything to do with violation of a copyright, which prohibits the copying of a protected work? I'll defer to the lawyers and the intellectual property experts, but the use of ten ro twenty words (the list of teams with highest ranked backcourts) out of a lengthy article (that discusses each of these teams, I suppose) doesn't seem like any kind of copyright violation. I mean, book reviews quote far more liberally. And even ESPN makes the first three paragraphs available.

Now the OP also has agreed to some sort of license agreement that may have tighter limits than copyright law. And the last sentence of Kfanarmy's quote from the DBR Guidelines appears to be far stronger than the law:


This also includes divulging information found on premium sites. If you read it on a premium site and don't see it in the mainstream media, it doesn't belong here.

DBR and its owners can set the rules, and this one may apply in this case, although relaying an ESPN writer's opinion on college backcourts doesn't seem problematic to me. And surely some sports section or newspaper blog somewhere quoted this info.

sagegrouse

[Kfanarmy]

...but the use of ten ro twenty words (the list of teams with highest ranked backcourts) out of a lengthy article (that discusses each of these teams, I suppose) ...relaying an ESPN writer's opinion on college backcourts doesn't seem problematic to me. And surely some sports section or newspaper blog somewhere quoted this info.

sagegrouse

You may be right, Sage. Still it seems to me the essence of the proprietary material here is the list itself...and this isn't quoted from a second party.