PDA

View Full Version : Gbinije to transfer



Pages : [1] 2

dcar1985
04-15-2012, 04:00 PM
Reports are all over that Mike is likely to transfer....hate if it's true, I mentioned him being unhappy earlier this year and hoped it wouldn't lead to this....

JNort
04-15-2012, 04:05 PM
Reports are all over that Mike is likely to transfer....hate if it's true, I mentioned him being unhappy earlier this year and hoped it wouldn't lead to this....

This was posted 15 mins ago and got deleted so this prob wont be up long either.

IBleedBlue
04-15-2012, 04:07 PM
Reports are all over that Mike is likely to transfer....hate if it's true, I mentioned him being unhappy earlier this year and hoped it wouldn't lead to this....

Yeah, i posted with a link and it was deleted and i got a warning. Lets see how long this one lasts:D

proelitedota
04-15-2012, 04:08 PM
Why would it be deleted if it's not a baseless rumor? I don't think DevilsIllustrated would randomly make up stuff about players transferring on twitter.

Smells like pre-emptive damage control.

Johnny Chill
04-15-2012, 04:10 PM
Why did it get deleted? I saw the tweet about it also.

If its holds to be true, its a shame I wanted to see Gbinije play in a Duke uni.

YouTube this: UNC vs Duke smack talk 3. Gbinije and McAdoo. McAdoo was right about Gbinije riding the pine.

At least through this whole thing, Gbinije has been a class act about his playing time and transfering. Good luck where ever he goes, I will probably still following his career.

hughgs
04-15-2012, 04:14 PM
Why would it be deleted if it's not a baseless rumor? I don't think DevilsIllustrated would randomly make up stuff about players transferring on twitter.

Smells like pre-emptive damage control.

The only thing on DevilsIllustrated.com is a link on the message board about the transfer. I'm not sure how that is the same thing as DenilsIllustrated reporting a transfer.

proelitedota
04-15-2012, 04:17 PM
The only thing on DevilsIllustrated.com is a link on the message board about the transfer. I'm not sure how that is the same thing as DenilsIllustrated reporting a transfer.

https://twitter.com/#!/DevilsIllust/status/191603177492197376

CameronBornAndBred
04-15-2012, 04:20 PM
https://twitter.com/#!/DevilsIllust/status/191603177492197376
That's not the same thing as DI saying "G just called us to say he's transferring", that's DI saying that "we've heard from people without names that he's transferring". It might be true, but that isn't "reporting".

proelitedota
04-15-2012, 04:23 PM
That's not the same thing as DI saying "G just called us to say he's transferring", that's DI saying that "we've heard from people without names that he's transferring". It might be true, but that isn't "reporting".

DI is reporting a likely transfer.

Could be the same situation as Nolan.

Gthoma2a
04-15-2012, 04:23 PM
Why would he do this? He is likely better than Hood anyway, right? Hood also wouldn't even be an option to play until 2013-2014. This is nuts if it is true. I hope it isn't.

CajunDevil
04-15-2012, 04:29 PM
This doesn't make any sense. Next year I expected G to play a huge role at the 3 - getting between 12-16 min/game, or maybe even start if he beat out Murphy. I really hope this is just a rumor...

Devilsfan
04-15-2012, 04:41 PM
I looked at this team last night at the banquet and thought, this might begin to be somewhat athletic with Gbinje, Murphy, Mason, and our new recruit. Now one of our four athletic players leaving you have to question, why? Boy do we need to start recruiting athletes like Ky., UCLA and even State did this year. Fans pay mega bucks to support this program and should expect more than a team without at least two super stars.

Kedsy
04-15-2012, 04:51 PM
Boy do we need to start recruiting athletes like Ky., UCLA and even State did this year.

Far as I know, UCLA recruited one great athlete this year, and we recruited the same guy. He just decided to go to UCLA instead. And you really think we ought to adopt the State recruiting model? Why, because they (and UCLA for that matter) have been performing so much better than Duke over the past (fill in whatever number you want here) years?

The most puzzling part of your post is that the rumored transfer of one player (which may or may not occur) somehow means in your mind that we aren't recruiting properly.


Fans pay mega bucks to support this program and should expect more than a team without at least two super stars.

Maybe you should ask for your money back.

Atlanta Duke
04-15-2012, 04:57 PM
Fans pay mega bucks to support this program and should expect more than a team without at least two super stars.

The NCAA respectfully requests that you edit your post to state "without at least two super star student athletes":)

Thanks for summing up the state to which big time college sports has devolved

DukeGirl4ever
04-15-2012, 04:58 PM
It seems like it is being more widely reported now:
http://collegebasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/04/15/michael-gbinije-reportedly-to-transfer-from-duke/

Johnny Chill
04-15-2012, 05:01 PM
If he transfers, he will have to sit out another year. That is basically 2 years of no basketball. People say players get better in practice, I agree with that statement, but I say, players get even better in games against opponents that their not familiar with.

I'm ticked off about this transfer.

uh_no
04-15-2012, 05:02 PM
If he transfers, he will have to sit out another year. That is basically 2 years of no basketball. People say players get better in practice, I agree with that statement, but I say, players get even better in games against opponents that their not familiar with.

I'm ticked off about this transfer.

at whom and for what?

G wasn't ready to contribute here so he didn't play.
G would rather continue his career elsewhere, so he did.

I'm not sure why anyone would have reason to be "ticked off"

Devil in the Blue Dress
04-15-2012, 05:03 PM
It seems like it is being more widely reported now:
http://collegebasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/04/15/michael-gbinije-reportedly-to-transfer-from-duke/
This source quotes the original single source... not really a confirmation of anything.

Chicago 1995
04-15-2012, 05:05 PM
Why would he do this? He is likely better than Hood anyway, right? Hood also wouldn't even be an option to play until 2013-2014. This is nuts if it is true. I hope it isn't.

There's no basis to think he's better than Hood.

Don't get me wrong. I'm sad to see things not work out for Gbinijie at Duke, but Hood averaged 10 and 5 as a freshman in the SEC. MG couldn't earn minutes on a team with a desperate need for a player with his skill set.

There's just no reason to think MGs better than Hood or a lot of other players who actually got on the court and contributed as frosh.

If he is that good and he didn't play, well that explains the transfer, if it happens, for a different reason

Lunchab1es
04-15-2012, 05:07 PM
at whom and for what?

G wasn't ready to contribute here so he didn't play.
G would rather continue his career elsewhere, so he did.

I'm not sure why anyone would have reason to be "ticked off"

Frustrated at the situation?

Because it's frustrating for a fan to dream about the potential of the team and its players, then have ones of those players unexpectedly transfer for reasons the fan can't understand?

Seems very understandable to me that a fan would be upset to lose a player with a lot of upside, particularly for reasons that are unknown to said fan, as their frustrations are compounded be lack of understanding.

dukelion
04-15-2012, 05:12 PM
I was wondering why we made such a hard push for these guys.....seems like the staff may have known this was coming.

Hood seems like a real possibility now.

Not a bad swap if it turns out that way.

DukeGirl4ever
04-15-2012, 05:13 PM
This source quotes the original single source... not really a confirmation of anything.

Not sure where I said "confirmed".

The link was provided to show there's more smoke out there.
I remember years ago when it was first reported that McBob would leave early for the NBA draft. I was at first upset that a "source" would report such inaccurate information. I learned then to listen to the good old cliche - where there's smoke....

I wish G the best of luck no matter what he decides.
I just find the timing interesting: night after the banquet; in the midst of a recruiting battle for several recruits.

Johnny Chill
04-15-2012, 05:15 PM
at whom and for what?

G wasn't ready to contribute here so he didn't play.
G would rather continue his career elsewhere, so he did.

I'm not sure why anyone would have reason to be "ticked off"

He wouldnt have been any worse than:

Kelly getting pushed around for rebounding position.
Curry watching his man drive pass him.
Dawkins standing at the 3 point line.
Thornton fouling anyone thats drives to the rim.
Cook jacking up crazy, contested floaters
Hairston shooting lasers at the rim, the second he touched the ball.
Mason trying to dribble in traffic.
Miles having the ball bounce off of his hands.

You say his wasnt ready to contribute, yet there are plenty of minutes for him to get on the court and the players on the court weren't much better than him.

It's about him not getting minutes, while other players who arent that good are getting major minutes and thats why he is transfering.

The reason why I'm ticked off is because this is another negative recruiting pitch thats going to be used against Duke.

Jarhead
04-15-2012, 05:17 PM
What I don't understand is the fact that this thread is still open. There is a sticky message at the top of the forum that discusses rumor mongering in detail (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?28140-A-Reminder-on-Rumor-Mongering). At this point we are discussing a rumor, and that is a no-no.

watzone
04-15-2012, 05:17 PM
I have a stong hunch is could be true but as of this very moment my most reliable sources as close as you can possibly get said it is not official. There have been rumors about this happening for a long, long time. I would imagine if it is true it will come out in an official manner sometime tomorrow. As for the timing, well, this is when you usually have this kind of thing happening during exit interviews as school ends. Gbinije was most recently at the Dave Telep Carolina Challenge and he indicated to some he would be back at that time. Until I see an official link tho, I am not sure I would discuss it in great detail. Everybody should know soon enough.

Gthoma2a
04-15-2012, 05:20 PM
I have a stong hunch is could be true but as of this very moment my most reliable sources as close as you can possibly get said it is not official. There have been rumors about this happening for a long, long time. I would imagine if it is true it will come out in an official manner sometime tomorrow. As for the timing, well, this is when you usually have this kind of thing happening during exit interviews as school ends. Gbinije was most recently at the Dave Telep Carolina Challenge and he indicated to some he would be back at that time. Until I see an official link tho, I am not sure I would discuss it in great detail. Everybody should know soon enough.

Good enough for me. I hope he knows that we all definitely support him. He seems like a very good kid and I, for one, really looked forward to him being ready to show off his skills at this level. Even if he is somewhere else, I will pull for him.

uh_no
04-15-2012, 05:20 PM
He wouldnt have been any worse than:

Kelly getting pushed around for rebounding position.
Curry watching his man drive pass him.
Dawkins standing at the 3 point line.
Thornton fouling anyone thats drives to the rim.
Cook jacking up crazy, contested floaters
Hairston shooting lasers at the rim, the second he touched the ball.
Mason trying to dribble in traffic.
Miles having the ball bounce off of his hands.

You say his wasnt ready to contribute, yet there are plenty of minutes for him to get on the court and the players on the court weren't much better than him.

It's about him not getting minutes, while other players who arent that good are getting major minutes and thats why he is transfering.

The reason why I'm ticked off is because this is another negative recruiting pitch thats going to be used against Duke.

Have you seen him in practice?

I haven't. Maybe you have. You argue:

a) that he isn't getting minutes
b) that he is better than the players on the court

now, assuming that you haven't actually seen him in practice much of the time, how exactly can you declare that he is anywhere as good as the players we were putting on the court? Your sample size was a minute in the game here or there. K's sample size is hours upon hours every day.

I also find it interesting that you called the players getting extra minutes "aren't that good"....

DukeGirl4ever
04-15-2012, 05:21 PM
I have a stong hunch is could be true but as of this very moment my most reliable sources as close as you can possibly get said it is not official. There have been rumors about this happening for a long, long time. I would imagine if it is true it will come out in an official manner sometime tomorrow. As for the timing, well, this is when you usually have this kind of thing happening during exit interviews as school ends. Gbinije was most recently at the Dave Telep Carolina Challenge and he indicated to some he would be back at that time. Until I see an official link tho, I am not sure I would discuss it in great detail. Everybody should know soon enough.

Thank you Watzone! I always appreciate your insights, information, and honesty.

From afar, G seems like a very great kid.

m g
04-15-2012, 05:24 PM
IMO, Gbinije would be a fool to transfer... I loved him last year and I think he will become a key player for Duke. Even if he doesn't see significant court time next year (I think he will), he would definitely be playing major minutes by his junior year, the first year he could play for a new team. I hope for his sake and for Duke's that he stays.

Big Pappa
04-15-2012, 05:28 PM
G is a great kid and I wish him all the best whatever he decides to do. I posted this on the first thread that was promptly deleted, but to me this indicates a few positives for Duke fans.

1. To me this further serves to confirm just how good Alex Murphy really is. I think G most likely had a very honest end of year meeting with K about playing time and future prospects. If G couldn't get minutes on this past year's team with no SF on it, then next year with Alex he probably saw the writing on the wall.

2. I think it could also mean that we are in great shape for Jabari Parker and/or Rodney Hood and/or Amile Jefferson.

Again, I really like G and when I had the pleasure of interviewing him he was a very well-spoken, high character kid. I wish him the best wherever he decides to go.

Johnny Chill
04-15-2012, 05:29 PM
I seen Dawkins, Curry, Cook, Hairston, Kelly, Thornton play in games, there are many times when they dont contribute in games and even hurt the team by being on the court.

The point is Gbinije doesnt have to be ready contribute or have to be better than those players, but he needs minutes every game.

I remember Mike Dunleavy, not getting any minutes as a rookie in his first game with the Warriors with his parents in the crowd. The whole time, I was thinking, this has to be the worst situation ever for Mike. Maybe he wasnt better than the other guys or ready, but he should have still got into the game. His whole rookie season, his confidence was shot.

I'm not comparing Dunleavy to Gbinije as players, but that whole situation killed Mike's confidence that year.

dyedwab
04-15-2012, 05:40 PM
I seen Dawkins, Curry, Cook, Hairston, Kelly, Thornton play in games, there are many times when they dont contribute in games and even hurt the team by being on the court.

The point is Gbinije doesnt have to be ready contribute or have to be better than those players, but he needs minutes every game.

I remember Mike Dunleavy, not getting any minutes as a rookie in his first game with the Warriors with his parents in the crowd. The whole time, I was thinking, this has to be the worst situation ever for Mike. Maybe he wasnt better than the other guys or ready, but he should have still got into the game. His whole rookie season, his confidence was shot.

I'm not comparing Dunleavy to Gbinije as players, but that whole situation killed Mike's confidence that year.

I'm not thrilled about Gbinije transferring - I hate it when any kids transfer -but this is the "backup QB" syndrome. It was completely obvious to anyone, and K even said, that we lacked the athletic wing to make us more flexible. Yet, Gbinije sat on the bench despite this, while many players struggled at various times. So clearly something was amiss. But as fans, we want the guys we don't see, when the guys we do see struggle....

uh_no
04-15-2012, 05:44 PM
I'm not thrilled about Gbinije transferring - I hate it when any kids transfer -but this is the "backup QB" syndrome. It was completely obvious to anyone, and K even said, that we lacked the athletic wing to make us more flexible. Yet, Gbinije sat on the bench despite this, while many players struggled at various times. So clearly something was amiss. But as fans, we want the guys we don't see, when the guys we do see struggle....

thats a great name for it...the idea that just because the guys we do see are bad, the guys we don't see must be better. All those players that weren't very good (as chill put it) took us to playing for the regular season title during the last game of the season...they must have been doing something right.

While we weren't a great team, for sure, i think people's views of how bad the season went are HEAVILY skewed by the last loss....perspective guys...we weren't that bad....

Kedsy
04-15-2012, 05:57 PM
I seen Dawkins, Curry, Cook, Hairston, Kelly, Thornton play in games, there are many times when they dont contribute in games and even hurt the team by being on the court.

The point is Gbinije doesnt have to be ready contribute or have to be better than those players, but he needs minutes every game.

So any decent high school player in his first year in college would have been better than Dawkins, Curry, Cook, Hairston, Kelly, and Thornton? It's amazing we won any games at all.

Des Esseintes
04-15-2012, 05:57 PM
I seen Dawkins, Curry, Cook, Hairston, Kelly, Thornton play in games, there are many times when they dont contribute in games and even hurt the team by being on the court.

The Duke fanbase, ladies and gentlemen!


The point is Gbinije doesnt have to be ready contribute or have to be better than those players, but he needs minutes every game.

North Korean air force commander: "The point is our ICBM launcher doesn't have to be ready to contribute or be better than a potato cannon, but it needs a high-profile test launch right now."

Self-taught doctor: "The point is a medical student doesn't have to be ready to contribute or be better than a medieval barber, but he needs to be performing surgeries everyday."

Carnival barker: "The point is a new rollercoaster doesn't have to be ready to contribute or be better than Uzbekistani building standards, but it needs to be carrying riders at speeds in excess of 80mph tonight."

wgl1228
04-15-2012, 06:00 PM
I never like to see anyone leave but I could tell by his facial expressions he didn't seem happy on the bench. He probably just wants to play like most kids and saw he would still be coming off the bench this year. I hope he does well wherever he goes but I also hope we can pull in Jefferson as a result of this.

CDu
04-15-2012, 06:03 PM
I would hate it if this is true. But the reality was that one of our wing players was going to play a very limited role next year. It sounds as though (if the rumors are true) that guy is going to be Gbinije. If he's not happy with his role or his experience, then it's best for him to transfer. College is too short to be unhappy.

dcar1985
04-15-2012, 06:12 PM
So any decent high school player in his first year in college would have been better than Dawkins, Curry, Cook, Hairston, Kelly, and Thornton? It's amazing we won any games at all.

I get your point but "decent"?!? He was a Jordan Brand AA and probably a McDonalds kid had he been eligible to play in the game

NashvilleDevil
04-15-2012, 06:21 PM
I get your point but "decent"?!? He was a Jordan Brand AA and probably a McDonalds kid had he been eligible to play in the game

Boateng was a McDs AA too. That doesn't always mean college success

dcar1985
04-15-2012, 06:26 PM
Boateng was a McDs AA too. That doesn't always mean college success

who said anything about college success?!?

Big Pappa
04-15-2012, 06:28 PM
who said anything about college success?!?

This is a Duke UNIVERSITY basketball message board. The whole thing is about college success. If you aren't talking about G's college success, then what are you talking about?

Johnny Chill
04-15-2012, 06:31 PM
So any decent high school player in his first year in college would have been better than Dawkins, Curry, Cook, Hairston, Kelly, and Thornton? It's amazing we won any games at all.

Gbinije wasnt any decent high school player. He is a Duke recruit. I never said he would of been better, you should learn to read.

dcar1985
04-15-2012, 06:32 PM
This is a Duke UNIVERSITY basketball message board. The whole thing is about college success. If you aren't talking about G's college success, then what are you talking about?

I stated that G was more than a decent HS basketball player based off a comment from another opp....which has nothing to do w/ whether he'll have success in college, even though I hope and suspect he will whether its at Duke (hoping) or somewhere else.....that ok with you?

NashvilleDevil
04-15-2012, 06:34 PM
Gbinije wasnt any decent high school player. He is a Duke recruit. I never said he would of been better, you should learn to read.

So were Eric Boateng, Chris Burgess, Michael Thompson. It happens to some kids. If he feels like he'll get more time somewhere else do be it.

CDu
04-15-2012, 06:37 PM
Gbinije wasnt any decent high school player. He is a Duke recruit. I never said he would of been better, you should learn to read.

If you're going to call people out for misreading your posts, perhaps you should work on improving your grammar first.

G man
04-15-2012, 06:38 PM
If this is accurate what a bummer. I think a big part of the issue in regards to transfers (not specifically G) is that most of these guys don't want to take the time that is required to develop. Not every recruit comes to duke and averages 10 points a game. It is hard to get a young man who was the guy in high school to buy into a system that might require him to develop for a couple of seasons. Like I said above not sure if this applies to G, because I think after another season he could be a valuable team asset. What I want to know is how KU has gotten so many guys to wait for their time to shine. Anyway hope he stays seems like a good guy.

Johnny Chill
04-15-2012, 06:45 PM
thats a great name for it...the idea that just because the guys we do see are bad, the guys we don't see must be better. All those players that weren't very good (as chill put it) took us to playing for the regular season title during the last game of the season...they must have been doing something right.

While we weren't a great team, for sure, i think people's views of how bad the season went are HEAVILY skewed by the last loss....perspective guys...we weren't that bad....

This was a really bad Duke team. Wins against Kansas in Maui and UNC in Chapel Hill covered up how bad this team was. And the team got worse as the season went on.

This team was exposed by OSU and St Johns. Duke should have stayed home sick with Cook and Gbinije instead of playing Temple.
This team was manhandled twice by FSU. Down double digits at home to NCSU. Loss 3 home games, cant even remember the last time that happened. UNC embarrassed Duke in Cameron. This team was LUCKY to win 27 games. That's not the perspective, thats the reality.

Losing to Lehigh didnt skew anything about this team. It was just the exclamation to a flawed team that was trending downward as other national powers were getting better.

Maybe, I am the only 1, but I feel Gbinije playing and getting minutes early in the year and throughout the season, wouldnt have hurt the team. It would have only helped him develop as a player, and he wouldnt be transferring now.

Big Pappa
04-15-2012, 06:48 PM
I stated that G was more than a decent HS basketball player based off a comment from another opp....which has nothing to do w/ whether he'll have success in college, even though I hope and suspect he will whether its at Duke (hoping) or somewhere else.....that ok with you?

The whole conversation is about how good he is/will be IN COLLEGE. We are only talking about how good he was in HS in regard to projecting how good he will be in college. You're missing the point of the whole conversation.

Johnny Chill
04-15-2012, 06:55 PM
If you're going to call people out for misreading your posts, perhaps you should work on improving your grammar first.

That has nothing to do with misquoting me.

Newton_14
04-15-2012, 06:57 PM
I changed the title until we get something official. If true its a definite bummer...

NashvilleDevil
04-15-2012, 06:58 PM
This was a really bad Duke team. Wins against Kansas in Maui and UNC in Chapel Hill covered up how bad this team was. And the team got worse as the season went on.

This team was exposed by OSU and St Johns. Duke should have stayed home sick with Cook and Gbinije instead of playing Temple.
This team was manhandled twice by FSU. Down double digits at home to NCSU. Loss 3 home games, cant even remember the last time that happened. UNC embarrassed Duke in Cameron. This team was LUCKY to win 27 games. That's not the perspective, thats the reality.

Losing to Lehigh didnt skew anything about this team. It was just the exclamation to a flawed team that was trending downward as other national powers were getting better.

Maybe, I am the only 1, but I feel Gbinije playing and getting minutes early in the year and throughout the season, wouldnt have hurt the team. It would have only helped him develop as a player, and he wouldnt be transferring now.

Manhandled by FSU? Duke crushed them in Tallahasse and lost to them by a combined 5 points. That's not manhandled. They didn't lose an ACC road game, none of the 4 title teams can say that.

We get it though. Duke was no good this year and Gbinije would have cured all their ills. I remember similar sentiments heading into the 09-10 season after Gerald left and Eliot transferred.

CDu
04-15-2012, 06:58 PM
That has nothing to do with misquoting me.

Using poor grammar makes you sound ignorant (not saying that you are). Saying "learn to read" to someone - aside from being extremely rude - suggests that you find them ignorant. So I'd say the two have a lot in common.

Newton_14
04-15-2012, 07:01 PM
This was a really bad Duke team. Wins against Kansas in Maui and UNC in Chapel Hill covered up how bad this team was. And the team got worse as the season went on.

This team was exposed by OSU and St Johns. Duke should have stayed home sick with Cook and Gbinije instead of playing Temple.
This team was manhandled twice by FSU. Down double digits at home to NCSU. Loss 3 home games, cant even remember the last time that happened. UNC embarrassed Duke in Cameron. This team was LUCKY to win 27 games. That's not the perspective, thats the reality.

Losing to Lehigh didnt skew anything about this team. It was just the exclamation to a flawed team that was trending downward as other national powers were getting better.

Maybe, I am the only 1, but I feel Gbinije playing and getting minutes early in the year and throughout the season, wouldnt have hurt the team. It would have only helped him develop as a player, and he wouldnt be transferring now.

Hyperbole much? "Really bad teams" don't win 27 games and stay in the top 10 all year long while playing the 2nd strongest schedule in the country. Whats absurd is trying to spin 27-6 into a bad season. FSU manhandled Duke twice? Duke could have easily won all 3 of the games. The 2 losses went down to the wire.

Duke had a bad post season, without Kelly. Gbinije transferring does not change that.

dcar1985
04-15-2012, 07:01 PM
The whole conversation is about how good he is/will be IN COLLEGE. We are only talking about how good he was in HS in regard to projecting how good he will be in college. You're missing the point of the whole conversation.


The convo was about whether mike should have played more minutes at the expense of the other players we have....where the statement was made that "So any decent HS player in their first year in college should play over said players......" All I said was, he was way better than a decent HS player and was a Jordan AA and possible McDonalds AA, Someone mentioned Eric Boateng and said he was a Mcdonalds AA too but didnt have college success....Mike being a better than decent HS player had nothing to do w/ whether his career ends up a bust or not....please tell me what I missed

Des Esseintes
04-15-2012, 07:03 PM
This was a really bad Duke team. Wins against Kansas in Maui and UNC in Chapel Hill covered up how bad this team was. And the team got worse as the season went on.

This team was exposed by OSU and St Johns. Duke should have stayed home sick with Cook and Gbinije instead of playing Temple.
This team was manhandled twice by FSU. Down double digits at home to NCSU. Loss 3 home games, cant even remember the last time that happened. UNC embarrassed Duke in Cameron. This team was LUCKY to win 27 games. That's not the perspective, thats the reality.

Losing to Lehigh didnt skew anything about this team. It was just the exclamation to a flawed team that was trending downward as other national powers were getting better.

Maybe, I am the only 1, but I feel Gbinije playing and getting minutes early in the year and throughout the season, wouldnt have hurt the team. It would have only helped him develop as a player, and he wouldnt be transferring now.

May I suggest some edits to this post?

This was a really bad [post I just wrote]. Wins against Kansas in Maui and UNC in Chapel Hill [were awesome]. And the team [deserves way better than my churlish, childish ingratitude].

This team was [beaten] by OSU and [beat] St Johns. Duke should have stayed home sick with Cook and Gbinije instead of playing Temple [because if you can't win every single game, there's really no point in playing, amiright?].
This team was [narrowly beaten] twice by FSU[, same as UNC, though at least we won OUR game in Tallahassee]. Down double digits at home to NCSU [before a rally for the ages that I am not mentioning because I hate sports and don't understand what it means to be a fan]. Loss 3 home games, cant even remember the last time that happened [and went undefeated on the road in conference, which, again, I am not mentioning because I don't know anything about basketball]. UNC embarrassed Duke in Cameron [after Duke gave Carolina one of the most painful defeats in the history of the rivalry, for which I am completely ungrateful]. This team was LUCKY to win 27 games [without my expert advice]. That's not the perspective, thats the [ravings of a fool].

Losing to Lehigh didnt [make me any better at punctuation]. It was just the [excuse] to [shout at the top of my lungs a bunch of hateful garbage about our players].

Maybe, I am the only 1, but I feel Gbinije playing and getting minutes early in the year and throughout the season, would [have won us two national championships in a single season, first time that's ever happened]. It would have only helped him develop [into the wing-annihilating cyborg he has always been in my fevered dreams].

gofurman
04-15-2012, 07:04 PM
There's no basis to think he's better than Hood.

Don't get me wrong. I'm sad to see things not work out for Gbinijie at Duke, but Hood averaged 10 and 5 as a freshman in the SEC. MG couldn't earn minutes on a team with a desperate need for a player with his skill set.

There's just no reason to think MGs better than Hood or a lot of other players who actually got on the court and contributed as frosh.

If he is that good and he didn't play, well that explains the transfer, if it happens, for a different reason

I didnt think Hood was coming? Am I wrong - is Hood coming?

Big Pappa
04-15-2012, 07:06 PM
The convo was about whether mike should have played more minutes at the expense of the other players we have...please tell me what I missed

More minutes where? In college. High school was brought up in reference to G playing more minutes in college. It doesn't make sense for you to say that college playing doesn't matter. That is what you missed.

Devilsfan
04-15-2012, 07:07 PM
Maybe Michael was too athletic to fit in our system. Just a thought.

Johnny Chill
04-15-2012, 07:07 PM
Manhandled by FSU? Duke crushed them in Tallahasse and lost to them by a combined 5 points. That's not manhandled. They didn't lose an ACC road game, none of the 4 title teams can say that.

We get it though. Duke was no good this year and Gbinije would have cured all their ills. I remember similar sentiments heading into the 09-10 season after Gerald left and Eliot transferred.

Oh yeah. I remember. The circumstances where different though.

Rivers going pro was expected and Gbinije transferring while shocking but kinda not surprising, yet it could have been avoided.

dcar1985
04-15-2012, 07:08 PM
Hyperbole much? "Really bad teams" don't win 27 games and stay in the top 10 all year long while playing the 2nd strongest schedule in the country. Whats absurd is trying to spin 27-6 into a bad season. FSU manhandled Duke twice? Duke could have easily won all 3 of the games. The 2 losses went down to the wire.

Duke had a bad post season, without Kelly. Gbinije transferring does not change that.

Does he hurt it though?!? Say Mike got some of the minutes Dre saw down the stretch where he was putting up 0, 0, 5, 3, 0 and so on....Mike could have played just as bad, possibly better and gained some game experience and possibly been the difference between him transferring now and looking forward to next year at Duke

Newton_14
04-15-2012, 07:08 PM
The convo was about whether mike should have played more minutes at the expense of the other players we have....where the statement was made that "So any decent HS player in their first year in college should play over said players......" All I said was, he was way better than a decent HS player and was a Jordan AA and possible McDonalds AA, Someone mentioned Eric Boateng and said he was a Mcdonalds AA too but didnt have college success....Mike being a better than decent HS player had nothing to do w/ whether his career ends up a bust or not....please tell me what I missed

I know you are a huge Gbinije fan, and so am I. I hated to see his minutes reduced, but as we discussed often, he struggled with the defensive scheme's, and the offensive scheme's, often being in the wrong place at the wrong time. The game did not quite slow down enough for him. But normally, that is ok, because he was a freshman, and most freshman with his rating start slow and develop into good players over time. I have no doubt Mike would have too. The problem is a lot of kids in this era do not want to pay their dues like the old days. They want PT right away. I had hoped Mike was not one of those kids, but if he does in fact transfer, maybe he is.

Still holding out hope until we see something official...

Johnny Chill
04-15-2012, 07:09 PM
Maybe Michael was too athletic to fit in our system. Just a thought.

Maybe he was to "Silent."

dcar1985
04-15-2012, 07:12 PM
More minutes where? In college. High school was brought up in reference to G playing more minutes in college. It doesn't make sense for you to say that college playing doesn't matter. That is what you missed.

Umm he could've took some of Dre's minutes, Tyler imo shouldn't have played as many minutes but I'm not the one who made the arguement. I just respsonded directly to the comment saying "So any decent HS player in their first year of college should get minutes over said players"

Devilsfan
04-15-2012, 07:14 PM
[
Are we to believe our lying eyes? I hope not or I have a lot of koolaide to throw away.




QUOTE=Johnny Chill;572245]He wouldnt have been any worse than:

Kelly getting pushed around for rebounding position.
Curry watching his man drive pass him.
Dawkins standing at the 3 point line.
Thornton fouling anyone thats drives to the rim.
Cook jacking up crazy, contested floaters
Hairston shooting lasers at the rim, the second he touched the ball.
Mason trying to dribble in traffic.
Miles having the ball bounce off of his hands.

You say his wasnt ready to contribute, yet there are plenty of minutes for him to get on the court and the players on the court weren't much better than him.

It's about him not getting minutes, while other players who arent that good are getting major minutes and thats why he is transfering.

The reason why I'm ticked off is because this is another negative recruiting pitch thats going to be used against Duke.[/QUOTE]

ncexnyc
04-15-2012, 07:15 PM
Nice to see everyone in such a civil mood. I'd hate to see what the board will look like if indeed the transfer talk pans out.

I'll hold off on further comments until we know one way or the other.

dcar1985
04-15-2012, 07:16 PM
I know you are a huge Gbinije fan, and so am I. I hated to see his minutes reduced, but as we discussed often, he struggled with the defensive scheme's, and the offensive scheme's, often being in the wrong place at the wrong time. The game did not quite slow down enough for him. But normally, that is ok, because he was a freshman, and most freshman with his rating start slow and develop into good players over time. I have no doubt Mike would have too. The problem is a lot of kids in this era do not want to pay their dues like the old days. They want PT right away. I had hoped Mike was not one of those kids, but if he does in fact transfer, maybe he is.

Still holding out hope until we see something official...

Yea I'm not arguing that he wasn't ready, he definitely looked lost out there...Yea I think it would have slowed down for him next year but it possibly could've slowed down this year with more opportunities...some kids need that real game experience and don't get as much from just going through things in practice....Im with you in still hoping he changes his mind and sticks it out and realizes the opportunity he has here at Duke

pfrduke
04-15-2012, 07:48 PM
Until there is anything resembling an official announcement, this is rumor mongering (not to mention that the thread appears to have devolved into snipes at our team and one another). It's a Sunday people - enjoy the outdoors, watch some baseball, have a barbecue with some friends, but stay out of this thread, because it's closed.

scheyerismyhero
04-16-2012, 11:58 AM
http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_LANG=C&ATCLID=205414543&DB_OEM_ID=4200

Will the thread be unlocked now or will someone have to create a new one?

pfrduke
04-16-2012, 12:00 PM
Now that this is official (see GoDuke announcement (http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_LANG=C&ATCLID=205414543&DB_OEM_ID=4200)) you may recommence with your previously scheduled gnashing of teeth, pulling of hair, and rending of garments (subject, of course, to all other forum rules).

We'll miss you Mike - sorry to hear that you're leaving.

MulletMan
04-16-2012, 12:02 PM
Now that this is official (see GoDuke announcement (http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_LANG=C&ATCLID=205414543&DB_OEM_ID=4200)) you may recommence with your previously scheduled gnashing of teeth, pulling of hair, and rending of garments (subject, of course, to all other forum rules).

We'll miss you Mike - sorry to hear that you're leaving.

This is extremely disappointing to say the least. I was really looking forward to G playing his way onto the court this fall. Needless to say that its even more disappointing since he seemed to be so entrenched in Duke life.

Sigh...

dukedoc
04-16-2012, 12:03 PM
Now that this is official (see GoDuke announcement (http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_LANG=C&ATCLID=205414543&DB_OEM_ID=4200)) you may recommence with your previously scheduled gnashing of teeth, pulling of hair, and rending of garments (subject, of course, to all other forum rules).

We'll miss you Mike - sorry to hear that you're leaving.

So sad to hear. Alas...I wish Mike the best. I hope he succeeds and finds a productive role at another school. I was looking forward to seeing his athleticism on display this coming year. Hopefully we'll be able to fill his slot soon enough.

CDu
04-16-2012, 12:03 PM
Now that this is official (see GoDuke announcement (http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_LANG=C&ATCLID=205414543&DB_OEM_ID=4200)) you may recommence with your previously scheduled gnashing of teeth, pulling of hair, and rending of garments (subject, of course, to all other forum rules).

We'll miss you Mike - sorry to hear that you're leaving.

Definitely sorry he's leaving. I wish him the best in finding his new home, and hope that he's happier there (whether it be happier with his role on the team or happier with his overall college life, or both). Sorry that it didn't work out, but I'm guessing that he felt his chances of playing at Duke were limited given that Murphy was (apparently) ahead of him in the rotation for the foreseeable future.

Now the recruitment of Hood and Zeigler officially makes more sense.

Dr. Rosenrosen
04-16-2012, 12:06 PM
Definitely sorry he's leaving. I wish him the best in finding his new home, and hope that he's happier there (whether it be happier with his role on the team or happier with his overall college life, or both). Sorry that it didn't work out, but I'm guessing that he felt his chances of playing at Duke were limited given that Murphy was (apparently) ahead of him in the rotation for the foreseeable future.

Now the recruitment of Hood and Zeigler officially makes more sense.

Though I thought it was implied by some that we backed off of Zeigler at the end...

dukedoc
04-16-2012, 12:08 PM
Though I thought it was implied by some that we backed off of Zeigler at the end...

I had heard that too. Had Hood been on the radar by that point?

Channing
04-16-2012, 12:09 PM
If Gbinijie was really and truly only good enough to get the paltry minutes he got this year - this is unfortunate but no huge loss. If however, he actually is a talented basketball player and was stuck on the bench because he had not yet perfectly mastered the hedge on a high screen or because he occasionally missed defensive switches, this is really disappointing.

Being wed to this idea that upper classmen are inherently better or more deserving of PT over freshmen, unless the freshman is a stud (see Kyrie and Austin) is going to result in more transfers in years to come.

MCFinARL
04-16-2012, 12:15 PM
Definitely sorry he's leaving. I wish him the best in finding his new home, and hope that he's happier there (whether it be happier with his role on the team or happier with his overall college life, or both). Sorry that it didn't work out, but I'm guessing that he felt his chances of playing at Duke were limited given that Murphy was (apparently) ahead of him in the rotation for the foreseeable future.

Now the recruitment of Hood and Zeigler officially makes more sense.

Your guess certainly makes sense. And, of course, a lot of college students transfer, whether they are athletes or not. By definition, it's a period of life when kids are sorting things out and learning about themselves; maybe playing time is just part of it. Maybe he doesn't feel as comfortable in the program, or at Duke as a whole, as he would like to, so there weren't enough positives elsewhere to outweigh the need to wait for, and/or fight for, playing time. It's no knock on him if that is the case, and I hope he finds a situation that works well for him. He seems like a good guy.

Speaking as a fan, though, I am disappointed. Like other posters, I was looking forward to seeing him get more integrated into the offense and defense and realize some of his potential on the court for Duke. :(

dcar1985
04-16-2012, 12:17 PM
Yaaay! More Dre playing SF....I really hope Alex is ready to go next year and not just a practice superstar.

CDu
04-16-2012, 12:23 PM
Your guess certainly makes sense. And, of course, a lot of college students transfer, whether they are athletes or not. By definition, it's a period of life when kids are sorting things out and learning about themselves; maybe playing time is just part of it. Maybe he doesn't feel as comfortable in the program, or at Duke as a whole, as he would like to, so there weren't enough positives elsewhere to outweigh the need to wait for, and/or fight for, playing time. It's no knock on him if that is the case, and I hope he finds a situation that works well for him. He seems like a good guy.

Speaking as a fan, though, I am disappointed. Like other posters, I was looking forward to seeing him get more integrated into the offense and defense and realize some of his potential on the court for Duke. :(

I'm glad you brought this up. I feel like whenever we see "so and so is transferring" we then see a slew of posts bashing the player for not wanting to work hard for his minutes. In many cases, I think that's unfair. For example, guys like Boykin (and he had other extenuating circumstances) and Czyz were guys who weren't likely to play major minutes for most (if not all) of their careers at Duke, no matter how hard they fought. If playing time in college was important to them, then transferring made sense. It's also reasonable that not everyone is happy at Duke. For those folks, transferring makes sense. Gbinije sounds like a kid with a lot of character, so I hope we don't see the "it's a shame these kids are so spoiled and expect to not have to work hard for PT" posts with regard to him.

Devilsfan
04-16-2012, 12:25 PM
If we win at least 27 games next year and/or make it to the Final Four it will be the best coaching in Coach K's tenure at Duke IMO.

UrinalCake
04-16-2012, 12:30 PM
Disappointed to see him go, but as we've discussed in other threads we have a very crowded roster this season and someone was going to get pushed out for playing time. I would have expected him to average 5-10 minutes a game; instead those minutes will now go to Murphy, Dawkins, and maybe Rasheed. I know a lot of people wanted him to get more playing time based on his athleticism but there are a lot of athletes on the track team that wouldn't see the floor in a basketball game. We'll be fine.

sporthenry
04-16-2012, 12:31 PM
I thought that G was going to be our starting SF so I'm not sure if this is more of he was still going to struggle to play next year or he just didn't like it at Duke. I forget what analyst it was, but he has a theory that kids who transfer in HS are more likely to transfer in college. I'd hate to see the kid go searching for something that doesn't exist similar to Taylor King but indications are that he has other high majors on his list like King with Nova so either the kid thinks he can still be the man elsewhere, or Duke/Alex Murphy are in better position than we thought.

Bluealum
04-16-2012, 12:32 PM
I'm glad you brought this up. I feel like whenever we see "so and so is transferring" we then see a slew of posts bashing the player for not wanting to work hard for his minutes. In many cases, I think that's unfair. For example, guys like Boykin (and he had other extenuating circumstances) and Czyz were guys who weren't likely to play major minutes for most (if not all) of their careers at Duke, no matter how hard they fought. If playing time in college was important to them, then transferring made sense. It's also reasonable that not everyone is happy at Duke. For those folks, transferring makes sense. Gbinije sounds like a kid with a lot of character, so I hope we don't see the "it's a shame these kids are so spoiled and expect to not have to work hard for PT" posts with regard to him.

Agreed. Seemed like a great, high character kid, who valued academics and certainly appeared to be a very good athlete with a lot of potential. All the best to him in his future endeavors, I hope he finds what he is looking for.

DukeWarhead
04-16-2012, 12:33 PM
It's always hard to predict how to feel about these transfers:

When Boateng, Boykin, Olek, and King left - I did a big "meh" shoulder shrug. It was cool to see Boykin's energy, but wasn't sure how much he would play.
When E-Will left, it hurt, but the circumstances were understandable. So, couldn't blame him.
I liked the idea of Silent G becoming a big-time player for us, that was hope more than anything - no certainty that it would happen.

Can he transfer to an ACC school? Hope not, but then again, UVa or VaTech could really use him. Maybe Georgetown will give him a shot and let him play close to home.

NashvilleDevil
04-16-2012, 12:37 PM
I thought that G was going to be our starting SF so I'm not sure if this is more of he was still going to struggle to play next year or he just didn't like it at Duke. I forget what analyst it was, but he has a theory that kids who transfer in HS are more likely to transfer in college. I'd hate to see the kid go searching for something that doesn't exist similar to Taylor King but indications are that he has other high majors on his list like King with Nova so either the kid thinks he can still be the man elsewhere, or Duke/Alex Murphy are in better position than we thought.

Airowe tweeted about this yesterday. Luke Winn is the guy who says if a player transfers high schools more than twice than he will likely transfer in college. Michael went to 3 high schools.

ncexnyc
04-16-2012, 12:38 PM
I recall a thread which lasted all of 10 minutes earlier in the year that was based on some tweets from Mike, which had something to do with some supposed unhappiness. The OP was taken to task because nobody knew exactly what Mike was unhappy about based on the tweet.

I got flamed for my comments based on my observations of Mike after he was benched during the last WF game.

Seems like things aren't always sunshine and lollipops in Kville and people need to be adult enough to understand this. While I understand the desire and the need not to have rumours spread, it's also important that we keep our eyes and minds open to the fact that these are young kids who have needs and dreams of their own and that these dreams often don't align with those of the staff and those of the fans.

I'm sorry to see Mike go, I'd say more on the matter, but without all the facts that would be pointless. I wish the kid the best where ever he decides to go and I hope it works out for him.

freedevil
04-16-2012, 12:41 PM
Really liked G's potential and am sad to see him go. Best of luck to him.

House G
04-16-2012, 12:56 PM
Airowe tweeted about this yesterday. Luke Winn is the guy who says if a player transfers high schools more than twice than he will likely transfer in college. Michael went to 3 high schools.

I've got a couple of friends that have been married 3-4 times. I think there may be an analogy here.

DeBlueDevil
04-16-2012, 01:05 PM
Really liked G's potential and am sad to see him go. Best of luck to him.

Not going to lie...me too. I was really looking forward to seeing what he could do this upcoming season. Seemed like the type of player that given the opportunity would blossom into a great player by Senior year. I wish him the best of luck and am interested in seeing where he ends up. Not saying that this will be the case with Silent G but I feel most of the time when players transfer from Duke it usually doesn't turn out to be a total loss for the team and the player doesn't really end up living up to the lofty incoming expectations elsewhere.

But I'm just speaking with out doing any research honestly.

sagegrouse
04-16-2012, 01:09 PM
I thought that G was going to be our starting SF so I'm not sure if this is more of he was still going to struggle to play next year or he just didn't like it at Duke. I forget what analyst it was, but he has a theory that kids who transfer in HS are more likely to transfer in college. I'd hate to see the kid go searching for something that doesn't exist similar to Taylor King but indications are that he has other high majors on his list like King with Nova so either the kid thinks he can still be the man elsewhere, or Duke/Alex Murphy are in better position than we thought.

My working assumption in these matters, expecially when the decision doesn't appear to be hurried or rash or based on family reasons, is that the coaches went over in detail where he stood, what he had to do to improve, and his likely role on the team. I am surprised that he left because usually academic achievement is an indication of overall satisfaction (MG was All-ACC).

Perhaps he just felt he could not achieve his basketball objectives at Duke.

sagegrouse

azzefkram
04-16-2012, 01:11 PM
The worst part of this to me is that it isn't in the least bit surprising. Gbinije is an athletic 3 with no similar competition in front of him. He was a top 30 recruit and he was given only 100 minutes of game time. I would have been shocked if he didn't transfer. The only other top 30 recruit I could find was Ryan who played about twice the minutes, but he wasn't physically ready and he was stuck behind Z, Kyle, LT and MP1.

Do I think Silent G should have been starting? No, he definitely looked a little lost at times, but you'd have a tough time convincing me that he didn't deserve about 10 mpg.

MulletMan
04-16-2012, 01:13 PM
Perhaps he just felt he could not achieve his basketball objectives at Duke.

sagegrouse

Maybe there were other factors that we don't know about as well.

NM Duke Fan
04-16-2012, 01:15 PM
I've got a couple of friends that have been married 3-4 times. I think there may be an analogy here.

One friend is on his SEVENTH marriage. I refused to go to the last wedding!

Best of Success to G.

And best of Success to Murphy being the dominant small forward that this team needs.

roywhite
04-16-2012, 01:25 PM
The worst part of this to me is that it isn't in the least bit surprising. Gbinije is an athletic 3 with no similar competition in front of him. He was a top 30 recruit and he was given only 100 minutes of game time. I would have been shocked if he didn't transfer. The only other top 30 recruit I could find was Ryan who played about twice the minutes, but he wasn't physically ready and he was stuck behind Z, Kyle, LT and MP1.

Do I think Silent G should have been starting? No, he definitely looked a little lost at times, but you'd have a tough time convincing me that he didn't deserve about 10 mpg.

If you changed "given" only a certain amount of minutes to "earned" only a certain amount of minutes, I think that changes the perspective considerably.

I'm sure that Coach K and the rest of the staff would have been glad to play an athletic wing like Mike G. if he had picked up things in practice and game appearances.
He was at an area of need for the team, but still couldn't play his way into more minutes.

I don't speak for Coach K, but I've followed him pretty closely over his 30+ years at Duke, and know that he places great emphasis on practice performance and players earning their minutes.

lotusland
04-16-2012, 01:31 PM
It's always hard to predict how to feel about these transfers:

When Boateng, Boykin, Olek, and King left - I did a big "meh" shoulder shrug. It was cool to see Boykin's energy, but wasn't sure how much he would play.
When E-Will left, it hurt, but the circumstances were understandable. So, couldn't blame him.
I liked the idea of Silent G becoming a big-time player for us, that was hope more than anything - no certainty that it would happen.

Can he transfer to an ACC school? Hope not, but then again, UVa or VaTech could really use him. Maybe Georgetown will give him a shot and let him play close to home.

I the same way as you about the other transfers but Mike seemed like a Duke guy and, based only on his HS reputation and comments from teamates about his freak athleticism, I thought he would be a big-dtime contributor by the time he became an upper-classman. You can't help but wonder what happened even though I know fans don't necessarily have a right know what goes on behind the scenes with players. Generally speaking I like upper-classmen over one and done type players so it's frustrating to see a guy who is thought to be a 3-4 year contributors leave before he's earned his shot.

I think after his transfer Boykin said something to the affect that K had told him frankly that his primary role would likely be a cheer-leader from the bench so he left for a better opportunity with no hard feelings. Maybe this is a similar situation but but Mike's reputation was such that I assumed he would be a stud at Duke before all was said and done. I can see how his PT might not have been much more this year though if you assume he is 3/4 player but primarily a 3 because we only lost one 2/3(AR) and one 4/5(Miles) and we picked up another 2/3(Good Sheed) as well as a 3/4(Murphy) from last year's roster. Well I guess I wish him all the best (JP) unless he tranfers to Carolina or UK.

g-money
04-16-2012, 01:34 PM
I have no idea what the reason is for Gbinijie's transfer, but here's what makes it a real bummer in my mind: Prior to his freshman season, it seemed like he really wanted to be a Dukie. Unlike many players who draw out their recruitment for more publicity or a better chance at immediate PT, Silent G came to a Carolina game, liked what he saw, and committed shortly thereafter (without any stunts, might I add).

It's always sad when a kid who is so eager to don a Duke uniform ends up not feeling that way in the end.

lotusland
04-16-2012, 01:34 PM
One friend is on his SEVENTH marriage. I refused to go to the last wedding!

Best of Success to G.

And best of Success to Murphy being the dominant small forward that this team needs.

Are you friends with Steve Earle?:D

sagegrouse
04-16-2012, 01:36 PM
The worst part of this to me is that it isn't in the least bit surprising. Gbinije is an athletic 3 with no similar competition in front of him. He was a top 30 recruit and he was given only 100 minutes of game time. I would have been shocked if he didn't transfer. The only other top 30 recruit I could find was Ryan who played about twice the minutes, but he wasn't physically ready and he was stuck behind Z, Kyle, LT and MP1.

Do I think Silent G should have been starting? No, he definitely looked a little lost at times, but you'd have a tough time convincing me that he didn't deserve about 10 mpg.

Cause and effect. Ya think there's a reason he didn't get more PT? --sage

tommy
04-16-2012, 01:48 PM
According to a source of unknown quality, the following schools have called Gbinije, though even if true, that says nothing about whether the interest is reciprocal: Syracuse, Georgetown, Villanova, Rutgers, and Alabama.

http://www.zagsblog.com/2012/04/16/gbinije-leaving-duke/#more-71590

azzefkram
04-16-2012, 01:58 PM
If you changed "given" only a certain amount of minutes to "earned" only a certain amount of minutes, I think that changes the perspective considerably.

I'm sure that Coach K and the rest of the staff would have been glad to play an athletic wing like Mike G. if he had picked up things in practice and game appearances.
He was at an area of need for the team, but still couldn't play his way into more minutes.

I don't speak for Coach K, but I've followed him pretty closely over his 30+ years at Duke, and know that he places great emphasis on practice performance and players earning their minutes.

I think it only changes the perspective considerably if "earned" is an absolute. I have been following Coach K for about the same amount of time you have but probably not the extent you have. I have always thought that Coach K underutilizes his bench. 10 mpg is only 5% of gametime. If a top 30 recruit in an area of need can't earn 10 mpg something has fallen through the cracks along the way.

Big Pappa
04-16-2012, 01:59 PM
My working assumption in these matters, expecially when the decision doesn't appear to be hurried or rash or based on family reasons, is that the coaches went over in detail where he stood, what he had to do to improve, and his likely role on the team.


Although I certainly hate to see G leave, I think that you are right about his meeting with the coaches. In fact, in the Herald-Sun article about it by Steve Wiseman he has a quote from Frank (Mike's Dad):

“We were still on the fence and wanted to know more about his role going forward,” Frank Gbinije said in a telephone interview. “He gave us general plans from general perspective. He felt (Michael) would have more opportunities this season with potential change in the system. It was all promising.”

It seems that G wasn't happy with where he stood in regard to playing time - simple as that. On the bright side though, I think this is a strong indicator of how confident our coaches are with Alex, as well as how much G respects Alex as a player. If Mike thinks that he would have trouble getting minutes after practicing for a year with Alex, that is a great indicator of just how good Alex really is.

ArtVandelay
04-16-2012, 02:04 PM
Leaving aside the wringing of hands over whether Silent G got enough playing time last year or what prompted him to transfer, I'm primarily interested in the effect on the next year's team. This development obviously now makes the emergence of Murphy all the more important to next year's success. As many have noted, the 2011 team had guards and big men, but was lacking on the wing and lacking in versatility in general, particularly on the defensive end. I saw Gbinije and Murphy as the potential solutions to that problem, as both seem to have the size and skill-set to play/guard multiple positions.

With Silent G now gone, that responsibility falls to Murphy alone. Without him, we are looking at basically the same team as last year in terms of make-up -- several guards who can chuck it from long-range (Curry, Rasheed, Dawkins) and a few big men who have great size (Plumlee, Kelly, MP3). Without Rivers, we lose the slashing/attacking element on offense and now without Silent G we lose a potential option on the wing. That's certainly not to say that Gbinije was the panacea to these problems (or that I have any special insight into whether he would be truly good enough to contribute next year), but Silent G at least offered a possibility of improvement in this area. It strikes me that we are now very reliant on Alex to step up his game. Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised by Andre next year, but I sort of think he is who he is at this point.

elvis14
04-16-2012, 02:08 PM
I'm bummed to hear SG is leaving. I'm going to have a moment of Silent G.

OK, that's done. I wish Mike success wherever he goes (as long at it's not CH). I felt for months that Quinn and Mike were the keys to our tournament success. With Quinn having knee issues and Mike getting sick and not progressing, our season didn't go where it could have. Before I found out that Mike had been quite sick I really thought that not bringing him along was a huge miss on the part of our coaching staff. Even knowing he was sick I still feel there was an issue.

I do hope that this means that Alex is very ready to contribute in a big way. We will need him.

azzefkram
04-16-2012, 02:11 PM
Cause and effect. Ya think there's a reason he didn't get more PT? --sage

I'm going to hazard a guess and say yes. What that reason was and if it was the right one, well that might be up for debate.

Son of Jarhead
04-16-2012, 02:22 PM
Agreed. Seemed like a great, high character kid, who valued academics and certainly appeared to be a very good athlete with a lot of potential. All the best to him in his future endeavors, I hope he finds what he is looking for.

I agree, as well. This somewhat reminds me of Boykin, who seemed like a "Duke kind of guy" when he came here, and I was sad to see him go, but wished him well. Likewise, Mike seems the same to me. He has always come across as a good kid, quiet and reserved, and very bright. He also seems to have a lot of basketball potential. I will miss watching him grow, and I hope he finds happiness and success wherever he goes.

Bluealum
04-16-2012, 02:24 PM
Leaving aside the wringing of hands over whether Silent G got enough playing time last year or what prompted him to transfer, I'm primarily interested in the effect on the next year's team. This development obviously now makes the emergence of Murphy all the more important to next year's success. As many have noted, the 2011 team had guards and big men, but was lacking on the wing and lacking in versatility in general, particularly on the defensive end. I saw Gbinije and Murphy as the potential solutions to that problem, as both seem to have the size and skill-set to play/guard multiple positions.

With Silent G now gone, that responsibility falls to Murphy alone. Without him, we are looking at basically the same team as last year in terms of make-up -- several guards who can chuck it from long-range (Curry, Rasheed, Dawkins) and a few big men who have great size (Plumlee, Kelly, MP3). Without Rivers, we lose the slashing/attacking element on offense and now without Silent G we lose a potential option on the wing. That's certainly not to say that Gbinije was the panacea to these problems (or that I have any special insight into whether he would be truly good enough to contribute next year), but Silent G at least offered a possibility of improvement in this area. It strikes me that we are now very reliant on Alex to step up his game. Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised by Andre next year, but I sort of think he is who he is at this point.

Having Alex and Andre as the two options at '3' is a pretty good situation really. Not many rosters have that kind of 2 man punch at the 3 spot around the country. We've all heard K's accolades for Alex and the Singler comparisons he has elicited. He has also put on strength and muscle and now knows the system. Furthermore I am definitely not in the 'is what it is' camp with Andre.

I submit that at each level of hoops, from grade school to high school, to college, to the pro's players bring physical talent and basketball IQ. Physical talent, I would argue, is much harder to improve upon than basketball IQ, but basketball IQ can compensate for physical limitations to a point. Paulus had a high b-ball IQ, but hit his limit based on his physical talent in college. Kendall Marshall has a very high basketball IQ which carried him through college, but I suspect his physical talent will limit him in the pro's (it was good he left early when his value was high). Andre has the physical talent, and he still has a chance to develop his b-ball IQ. I don't believe we have seen the best of AD yet.

BD80
04-16-2012, 02:27 PM
... Seems like things aren't always sunshine and lollipops in Kville ...

It is when you keep on your royal blue glasses!

Me, I'm a glass half full kinda guy. To me this indicates that "G" wasn't seeing great opportunity in his future. For next year, I hope that means Alex is expected to be in the rotation. Mason coming back pushes Alex more into the 3 than the 4.

For the year after, this could suggest we are expecting success in next year's recruiting class with a tall athletic wing ...

Good luck to Mike, I hope he winds up in a good situation

OldPhiKap
04-16-2012, 02:31 PM
Good luck {g}. I hope you end up in a happy situation and do well. OPK

gus
04-16-2012, 02:32 PM
Being wed to this idea that upper classmen are inherently better or more deserving of PT over freshmen, unless the freshman is a stud (see Kyrie and Austin) is going to result in more transfers in years to come.

Are you confusing Coach K with Dean Smith? Coach K is certainly not wedded to the idea that upper classmen are inherently better.

Greg Paulus, Billy McAffrey, Mike Chappell and Nate James all say hello.

bounce840
04-16-2012, 02:37 PM
They are all still just freshman though. Really, Murphy is just a freshman. I think it hurts Duke in the bench depth. They won't be as deep. He could have been a really good player.

Matches
04-16-2012, 02:39 PM
Are you confusing Coach K with Dean Smith? Coach K is certainly not wedded to the idea that upper classmen are inherently better.



Yeah, I think people generalize a little too much from a few specific examples. Wojo playing over Avery and Paulus over Nolan seem to be the ones that get the most play - but that very well may say more about K's attachment to those specific players than a trend. (Plus as you note, Paulus did eventually head to the pine.)

There's a laundry list of Duke freshman who have gotten big minutes as freshmen, and not all of them were the elite Kyrie/ JWill level talents. (Scheyer, Duhon, Carrawell, Thomas and Paulus all come to mind as relatively recent examples.)

Anyway, sorry to see Gbinije go. I always feel like the university has failed a kid that chooses to go elsewhere, unless it's an academic situation (obviously not the case here). Sucks but it's part of the game.

UrinalCake
04-16-2012, 02:40 PM
Not saying that this will be the case with Silent G but I feel most of the time when players transfer from Duke it usually doesn't turn out to be a total loss for the team and the player doesn't really end up living up to the lofty incoming expectations elsewhere.

But I'm just speaking with out doing any research honestly.

Other than Billy McCaffrey, I can't think of a transfer who left who we then really regretted losing, except maybe Elliott Williams, and even then we won the title without him so we did okay for ourselves. Not trying to put down our former players, but I do think there's a reason that people transfer and a lot of times it's because they weren't as prepared for college ball as everyone thought. Like you said, this may or may not wind up being the case with Gbinije.

I think a positive way to look at things would be that we run a high-level program and every year we bring in top recruits who are very accomplished in high school and accustomed to being the star. There's always a degree of uncertainty in evaluating players, for any school, and there's only so much playing time to go around, so inevitably some players are going to find that Duke doesn't work for them, or that they'd be better off going elsewhere. Sometimes players leave, and other times they're willing to play a supporting role (Nate James comes to mind as a guy that could have started at a lot of other schools and there were in fact rumors that we was going to transfer, but he instead decided to stay).

If nobody every transferred away from Duke, that probably wouldn't be a good thing either.

We basically have ten guys who would qualify for being "in the rotation" next year - Quinn, Tyler, Seth, Rasheed, Andre, Murphy, Josh, Ryan, Mason, and Marshall. Coach K typically plays a 7-man rotation, maybe 8. Someone was going to get pushed for time. Even without Gbinije, someone will still be playing fewer minutes than they "deserve."

bounce840
04-16-2012, 02:41 PM
Heard he was a good kid and think he will a long and successful career ahead of him.

Classof06
04-16-2012, 02:44 PM
This is unfortunate, I really think Gbinije could've been solid player for Duke. That said, this does place more importance on Murphy. I also wonder if this has anything to do with Amile Jefferson's upcoming decision.

tommy
04-16-2012, 02:46 PM
Although I certainly hate to see G leave, I think that you are right about his meeting with the coaches. In fact, in the Herald-Sun article about it by Steve Wiseman he has a quote from Frank (Mike's Dad):

“We were still on the fence and wanted to know more about his role going forward,” Frank Gbinije said in a telephone interview. “He gave us general plans from general perspective. He felt (Michael) would have more opportunities this season with potential change in the system. It was all promising.”

It seems that G wasn't happy with where he stood in regard to playing time - simple as that. On the bright side though, I think this is a strong indicator of how confident our coaches are with Alex, as well as how much G respects Alex as a player. If Mike thinks that he would have trouble getting minutes after practicing for a year with Alex, that is a great indicator of just how good Alex really is.

I was going to post essentially the same thing. While there are certainly a number of negatives about Mike transferring out, including feeding some negative perceptions about Duke's player development, I think one of the silver linings is, or at least potentially could be, the idea that Mike knew he wasn't going to be beating Murphy out for minutes at the small forward position. If so, that is really encouraging about Murphy's development and readiness to assume major minutes at a position where we had essentially nobody last year.

Channing
04-16-2012, 02:49 PM
this is also made harder based on AR's glowing comments that Gbinijie was really a high talent kind of player. Would have liked to see that prophecy come to fruition.

gus
04-16-2012, 02:50 PM
Other than Billy McCaffrey, I can't think of a transfer who left who we then really regretted losing,

Duke won the title after he transferred too. I suppose the '93 team would have been better with a Senior McCaffrey, but I think the drop off that year was in the front court.

BlueDevilCorvette!
04-16-2012, 02:51 PM
I have no idea what the reason is for Gbinijie's transfer, but here's what makes it a real bummer in my mind: Prior to his freshman season, it seemed like he really wanted to be a Dukie. Unlike many players who draw out their recruitment for more publicity or a better chance at immediate PT, Silent G came to a Carolina game, liked what he saw, and committed shortly thereafter (without any stunts, might I add).

It's always sad when a kid who is so eager to don a Duke uniform ends up not feeling that way in the end.

My sentiments exactly! Just can't understand why he couldn't get any playing time...SMDH!

CDu
04-16-2012, 02:56 PM
There's a laundry list of Duke freshman who have gotten big minutes as freshmen, and not all of them were the elite Kyrie/ JWill level talents. (Scheyer, Duhon, Carrawell, Thomas and Paulus all come to mind as relatively recent examples.)

I agree with your main point, but disagree with your statement here. Duhon was the #6 prospect in the country coming out of high school. He was an elite prospect. And even he came off the bench for much of the season until Boozer's injury. Carrawell averaged 16 mpg and Thomas averaged 15 mpg as freshmen, and both arguably only saw those minutes because of a real lack of alternatives. And it was either going to be Scheyer or Henderson playing major minutes along with Paulus and Nelson on the wings because we didn't have anyone else to do it (thanks to the 2003, 2004, and 2005 recruiting classes having only 3 key players (only 1 upperclassman) returning for the 2006-2007 season. Paulus started because we again had a shortage of guards in the 2005-2006 season, and he was a top-15 recruit.

It is pretty rare for a freshman to play major minutes at Duke unless said freshman was a top-10/15 prospect in his class. It really only happens when there is a complete absence of players at his possession.

gumbomoop
04-16-2012, 03:09 PM
Maybe there were other factors that we don't know about as well.

I'd guess, if wildly, that this is an accurate statement, that some non-basketball things were at play here.

Sticking to what is less, if still somewhat, speculative, I assume almost no one would disagree that it's very likely that Michael has been thinking about his role on the team next season, which, in shorthand, is PT.

In that regard, the wonderful news that Mason will return was perhaps, domino-like, less than wonderful to Michael. For, had Mason departed, and absent any decision yet from Amile or Tony, we have to assume that Alex would have spent lots of time next season at the 4. [If you don't agree with that, you must think that Josh and Marshall would - if they were 2 of Duke's only 3 bigs - each get about 25 mpg each next season.]

Michael would, in the no-Mason/no-TP/no-AJ scenario, have been competing with Seth, Andre, and Rasheed for PT on the wing, and Michael would have had the advantage of being the only true SF among the wings. But Mason's return likely means that the backup bigs are Josh and Marshall, thus allowing Alex to compete for SF/wing PT.

I don't know whether all the chatter about Rodney Hood "hurt" Michael. Obviously Hood would redshirt next season, but the idea that Duke "needs" Hood is not, whatever it is, a statement of confidence in Michael. But speculation about Parker, Jefferson, and Hood is, right now, still speculation. Mason's return is a fact. And while Alex may split his time between wing/SF and the 4, he will certainly compete for some PT at wing/SF. And while Rasheed is no wing/SF, he is a combo/wing, so he, too, would compete with Michael for PT.

Not to mention the great hope that Jabari Parker will arrive in 2013......

I want to echo the disappointment and frustration expressed by several previous posters, and say further that I'm likely to follow Michael's career with another team rather more closely than I did the post-Duke years of Boateng, Boykin, and Czyz. It may be that those fellows disappeared from my view because they all went way west. But I think I'll want to keep up with Michael. I really hope he finds a place where he can shine. Wish it had been in CIS.

mikegismynewhero
04-16-2012, 03:14 PM
i need a new hero....

Des Esseintes
04-16-2012, 03:14 PM
Other than Billy McCaffrey, I can't think of a transfer who left who we then really regretted losing, except maybe Elliott Williams, and even then we won the title without him so we did okay for ourselves. Not trying to put down our former players, but I do think there's a reason that people transfer and a lot of times it's because they weren't as prepared for college ball as everyone thought. Like you said, this may or may not wind up being the case with Gbinije.

I think a positive way to look at things would be that we run a high-level program and every year we bring in top recruits who are very accomplished in high school and accustomed to being the star. There's always a degree of uncertainty in evaluating players, for any school, and there's only so much playing time to go around, so inevitably some players are going to find that Duke doesn't work for them, or that they'd be better off going elsewhere. Sometimes players leave, and other times they're willing to play a supporting role (Nate James comes to mind as a guy that could have started at a lot of other schools and there were in fact rumors that we was going to transfer, but he instead decided to stay).

If nobody every transferred away from Duke, that probably wouldn't be a good thing either.

We basically have ten guys who would qualify for being "in the rotation" next year - Quinn, Tyler, Seth, Rasheed, Andre, Murphy, Josh, Ryan, Mason, and Marshall. Coach K typically plays a 7-man rotation, maybe 8. Someone was going to get pushed for time. Even without Gbinije, someone will still be playing fewer minutes than they "deserve."

Great post. Transfers are what happen when you stockpile serious talent, and Duke had more high-major recruits than it had spots to play them. I don't want to use the word "Darwinian;" a guy like Pete Carroll would instead call it "competitive." Regardless, you have a situation where {g} may not have gotten big minutes at any point in his career, should Murphy prove as excellent as many think and should a guy like Jabari Parker end up wearing white at Cameron Indoor. If that was going to be the case, he probably made the right decision for himself. I wish him all success. Duke will be fine.

airowe
04-16-2012, 03:20 PM
I have some crow to eat here, sadly, and owe whomever it was from the Chronicle an apology.

Best of luck to Gbinije.

Zafort
04-16-2012, 03:21 PM
Silent G has the kind of athleticism that Duke lacked this year, except for Rivers. It's hard to speculate on what kept him out of the lineup, but I predict that if he lands in the right situation in terms of PT and team cohesion, this will turn out to be a loss that Duke will regret.
Unfortunate decisions will always be a risk in the evaluating and using young athletes. K is not immune to that, as he reminded us at the Banquet when relating a recent phone call with Grant Hill from the Suns locker room when the topic of recruiting Canadian athletes inadvertently appeared. That came when Steve Nash piped up with "Why did you want Newton and not me?"
He dicho.:cool::cool:

Matches
04-16-2012, 03:21 PM
I have some crow to eat here, sadly, and owe whomever it was from the Chronicle an apology.

Best of luck to Gbinije.

I don't think you have to eat crow if the player tells you one thing and then does another. Not much you can do about that.

Kedsy
04-16-2012, 03:26 PM
this is also made harder based on AR's glowing comments that Gbinijie was really a high talent kind of player. Would have liked to see that prophecy come to fruition.

Back in the 90s, I had some inside connections, and I was told Grant Hill made very similar glowing comments about Tony Moore in 1994. Tony Moore never got it together, though, so you really just never know.

Dev11
04-16-2012, 03:31 PM
I don't know whether all the chatter about Rodney Hood "hurt" Michael. Obviously Hood would redshirt next season, but the idea that Duke "needs" Hood is not, whatever it is, a statement of confidence in Michael. But speculation about Parker, Jefferson, and Hood is, right now, still speculation. Mason's return is a fact. And while Alex may split his time between wing/SF and the 4, he will certainly compete for some PT at wing/SF. And while Rasheed is no wing/SF, he is a combo/wing, so he, too, would compete with Michael for PT.

Not to mention the great hope that Jabari Parker will arrive in 2013......

This kind of thing gets mentioned a lot, and I wanted to ask if anybody could provide some insight here. In general, how often do the current players follow the recruiting activities of the coaching staff, either in contact with the coaches or reading about it in mags or online?

There are a few different factors I think that would be at play. First off, basketball has very few players relative to sports like football, baseball, or lacrosse, so current players could envision any recruit within 4 inches of him either way being a competitor. In those bigger sports, you need tons of players just to field the team, so a QB doesn't see the recruitment of another QB as a huge insult, whereas a PG could. Additionally, players in the sports with bigger teams often have to earn their playing time a little more, since there are a lot more guys around and moving positions isn't as hard in those sports. If you have two good shortstops and can't get at-bats for both at SS, one of them becomes a second baseman, problem solved with minimal change to his game.

I would imagine that interacting directly with the coaches on recruiting would be inappropriate for current players, beyond something like "Hey Coach, I played against this one dude last year at a smaller school, and even though we smoked his team, maybe you should take a look." Again, really different for basketball than football, since football needs to make a lot more inroads to find players, but not all that weird. However, if your program has a lot of smart or mature kids (Duke would generally come to mind relative to other programs), players might be able to handle those kinds of discussions with coaches, even if they might be inappropriate somewhere else. I doubt many coaches would enjoy having such discussions with their current players.

Finally, do they read these crazy fan boards? I assume not, since it would drive them nuts. In basketball, I imagine that most of the information the players get is the reliable hearsay based on the fact that all the top guys know each other. Gbinije, for instance, has all the other Duke players, the Duke commits, and any of his old AAU buddies talking to all their buddies, so the network need not be very deep for him, or any other player at a big program, to be constantly informed about recruiting, whether they are looking for the news or not. I imagine they would spend more time on ESPN than DBR.

In short, my guess to my original question would be that the current guys just talk to other players and gather information casually, rather than seeking it out. If anybody has insight, this could be an interesting topic.

burnspbesq
04-16-2012, 03:34 PM
Silent G has the kind of athleticism that Duke lacked this year, except for Rivers. It's hard to speculate on what kept him out of the lineup, but I predict that if he lands in the right situation in terms of PT and team cohesion, this will turn out to be a loss that Duke will regret.
Unfortunate decisions will always be a risk in the evaluating and using young athletes. K is not immune to that, as he reminded us at the Banquet when relating a recent phone call with Grant Hill from the Suns locker room when the topic of recruiting Canadian athletes inadvertently appeared. That came when Steve Nash piped up with "Why did you want Newton and not me?"
He dicho.:cool::cool:

Talent is great, and Michael has a lot of it. But it was apparent every time he stepped on the court last year that he wasn't ready to contribute. It's easy to speculate that if he'd gotten more minutes he would have gotten up to speed, but it has always been the case under K (with the notable exception of Hurley as a freshman) that minutes are earned in practice, not awarded based on potential.

It's a shame that everybody wants instant gratification, and instant gratification takes too long.

gumbomoop
04-16-2012, 03:36 PM
.... a quote from Frank (Mike's Dad):

“We were still on the fence and wanted to know more about his role going forward,” Frank Gbinije said in a telephone interview. “He gave us general plans from general perspective. He felt (Michael) would have more opportunities this season with potential change in the system. It was all promising.”

Didn't want to let this throwaway line pass without a brief mention. Although I'm with those who think we had a very good season, it was clear in his last weekly TV show that K was pretty deflated about how the season ended, and how tired the team played in its last several games.

Have to think Mason's return, Rasheed's arrival, expectations that Quinn will be healthy, and the promise shown by Alex - and Marshall - have set the staff to thinking anew about all sorts of things for 2012-'13. Add to all that 3 other talented seniors, plus 2 experienced juniors, and it does seem, however ironic where Michael is [no longer] concerned, "all promising."

ChicagoCrazy84
04-16-2012, 03:38 PM
I'm not happy about this one bit, I hate when kids transfer, but it seems to happen more and more now days. I understand it especially when you are highly recruited like Mike.

I think I share the same sentiments as some people when they say it is a good indicator of how good Alex Murphy is. I think he'll be a special player and when it is all said and done, Silent G will have a carreer similar to that of Jamal Boykin. I think we get Rodney Hood to for 2013-2014. I hate to see Mike leave, but we're going to be just fine.

sagegrouse
04-16-2012, 03:38 PM
Next year Duke will have ten players (11 when MG was in the equation) who can reasonably be expected to contribute. Yet there are only 200 minutes of playing time per game, and it is unrealistic to expect the PT to be divided equally among the players.

Here are the playing times sorted by number of minutes in various years picked because Duke was fairly deep. Note that after the top nine players the playing times become miniscule. Only in 2009, however, were there as many as 11 recruited players.




Seq. 1999 2005 2009 2012
1 31.0 37.3 32.8 33.2
2 29.3 34.5 32.2 30.2
3 28.6 33.6 29.7 28.4
4 28.6 21.8 19.8 23.6
5 22.6 21.7 18.6 22.4
6 17.7 19.2 15.6 21.1
7 15.6 16.6 15.4 20.5
8 14.7 6.5 15.2 11.4
9 7.6 5.6 11.5 7.2
10 2.1 2.6 4.5 3.3
11 1.3 1.0 3.6 0.3


One could resonably conclude that one would need to among the top nine players to get respectable minutes on the court. The handwriting, as they say, is on the wall (or the spreadsheet).

sagegrouse

Big Pappa
04-16-2012, 03:42 PM
Didn't want to let this throwaway line pass without a brief mention. Although I'm with those who think we had a very good season, it was clear in his last weekly TV show that K was pretty deflated about how the season ended, and how tired the team played in its last several games.

Overachieved during the regular season, underachieved during the postseason. I think it is as simple as that.


Have to think Mason's return, Rasheed's arrival, expectations that Quinn will be healthy, and the promise shown by Alex - and Marshall - have set the staff to thinking anew about all sorts of things for 2012-'13. Add to all that 3 other talented seniors, plus 2 experienced juniors, and it does seem, however ironic where Michael is [no longer] concerned, "all promising."

It seems to me that the shift in system refers mainly to being more defensively oriented and attempting to run more. If Cook does take the reigns at PG (and I expect him to do so) then I think we will push the ball much more. With Alex in the front-court with Mason and Ryan, we have three guys with serious length who can finish well in transition.

nmduke2001
04-16-2012, 03:56 PM
First, good luck to Silent G. He’ll be missed.

Secondly, I fear that this may hurt recruiting. The next time that we are competing for a player ranked in the 20-35 range, the opposing coach (cough, coach cal, cough) could use Mike as an example of a kid that sat on the pine an entire year despite a glaring need for someone with his perceived talent. Further, the coach could say that MPIII and Alex used a redshirt year (we know this isn’t the entire story but high school kids don’t care).

A-Tex Devil
04-16-2012, 04:03 PM
Great post. Transfers are what happen when you stockpile serious talent, and Duke had more high-major recruits than it had spots to play them. I don't want to use the word "Darwinian;" a guy like Pete Carroll would instead call it "competitive." Regardless, you have a situation where {g} may not have gotten big minutes at any point in his career, should Murphy prove as excellent as many think and should a guy like Jabari Parker end up wearing white at Cameron Indoor. If that was going to be the case, he probably made the right decision for himself. I wish him all success. Duke will be fine.

Agreed. I still contend that if MG was a future starter for us that would get more than 20 minutes a game, we would have seen more of him this year. At Duke, generally, if you don't get burn as a freshman, unless the position is loaded in front of you (e.g. Ryan Kelly his freshman year) you are likely going to be nothing more than a role player. We needed a player with his skill set several times this year (especially when Kelly got hurt), and if he could have helped, I trust he would have played. I wasn't that excited about him being anything more than a "nice" player for us if he stuck around.

The front page in the initial article tried to show examples of where players that didn't get a ton of run their freshman year ended up as pretty good players: "Nate James, Brian Zoubek, Greg Koubek, Alaa Abdelnaby, Dan Meaghar, Kevin Strickland, Matt Christensen, Marty Clark, Antonio Lang, Steve Wojciechowski, Sean Dockery and Gerald Henderson"

I'll note that in the last 10 years, only Zoubek and Ryan Kelly fit this description, and Zoubek was waylaid by injuries. I'm sorry, but Dockery got more than 10 minutes a game and Gerald got almost 20 in their respective freshman years, and they played pretty much every game they were healthy. Wojo had to play WAY more than I would have wanted as a freshman. He played a ton. Show me someone with significant DNPs as a freshman, other than Ryan (who got into most games, way more than 19) that has recently developed at Duke. That player doesn't exist, and, as far as I'm concerned, was telling about what Gbinije's ceiling really was --- hint: not high.

That's not an indictment on Duke as much as it is that players want to play and they know better than us where they fit on our depth chart - and I imagine our coaches are honest with them about it. I would love, love, love for us to have a player with Nate James career development arc. We need more of that. But my impression is that if a guy can't get in his freshman year, especially in the backcourt/wings, he (and we) better be prepared for that person to be a role player at best or transfer out.

NYC Duke Fan
04-16-2012, 04:04 PM
First, good luck to Silent G. He’ll be missed.

Secondly, I fear that this may hurt recruiting. The next time that we are competing for a player ranked in the 20-35 range, the opposing coach (cough, coach cal, cough) could use Mike as an example of a kid that sat on the pine an entire year despite a glaring need for someone with his perceived talent. Further, the coach could say that MPIII and Alex used a redshirt year (we know this isn’t the entire story but high school kids don’t care).

I never have a grudge when someone treansfers. If that person feels that he is better off somewhere else God bless him. As far as him being missed, while I do not want anything bad to happen to him, I will not miss him . He did virtually nothing this year and probably would not have been a factor next year either.

The only thing that I am a little uncertain about him is that after Rivers departed, he did say very nice things about him and kinda intimated that he thought he would be a star. Maybe they were just very good friends.

devil84
04-16-2012, 04:15 PM
Finally, do they read these crazy fan boards? I assume not, since it would drive them nuts. In basketball, I imagine that most of the information the players get is the reliable hearsay based on the fact that all the top guys know each other. Gbinije, for instance, has all the other Duke players, the Duke commits, and any of his old AAU buddies talking to all their buddies, so the network need not be very deep for him, or any other player at a big program, to be constantly informed about recruiting, whether they are looking for the news or not. I imagine they would spend more time on ESPN than DBR.

In short, my guess to my original question would be that the current guys just talk to other players and gather information casually, rather than seeking it out. If anybody has insight, this could be an interesting topic.

Do players read these boards? I don't know how often, but they've been known to do so. Do their friends and family? Yes.

Big Pappa
04-16-2012, 04:24 PM
Do players read these boards? I don't know how often, but they've been known to do so. Do their friends and family? Yes.

Thanks for the fix on the quotes. Two summers ago I interviewed a player that is currently on the roster and asked him the same question off the record. His response was something to the affect of "Most guys check every so often. Some guys laugh at it and some guys hang on every word."

NSDukeFan
04-16-2012, 04:33 PM
I am, like most, sad to see Gbinijie go. He is a solid student, good athlete, seemed like he contributed in a lot of different ways in high school and AAU ball, and seemed like a quiet, good kid. I wish him the best and wonder how Duke is going to replace the greatest foul shooter in the program's history.

Channing
04-16-2012, 04:40 PM
Next year Duke will have ten players (11 when MG was in the equation) who can reasonably be expected to contribute. Yet there are only 200 minutes of playing time per game, and it is unrealistic to expect the PT to be divided equally among the players.

Here are the playing times sorted by number of minutes in various years picked because Duke was fairly deep. Note that after the top nine players the playing times become miniscule. Only in 2009, however, were there as many as 11 recruited players.




Seq. 1999 2005 2009 2012
1 31.0 37.3 32.8 33.2
2 29.3 34.5 32.2 30.2
3 28.6 33.6 29.7 28.4
4 28.6 21.8 19.8 23.6
5 22.6 21.7 18.6 22.4
6 17.7 19.2 15.6 21.1
7 15.6 16.6 15.4 20.5
8 14.7 6.5 15.2 11.4
9 7.6 5.6 11.5 7.2
10 2.1 2.6 4.5 3.3
11 1.3 1.0 3.6 0.3


One could resonably conclude that one would need to among the top nine players to get respectable minutes on the court. The handwriting, as they say, is on the wall (or the spreadsheet).

sagegrouse

I know technically they play different positions (although Coach K always says we play the 5 best without really defined positions), but if Mike G was not good enough to get minutes over Hairston, this is not a major loss. Hairston may hustle and give 110%, but he also airballs jumpers (and even a dunk!) with shocking regularity, and just isn't a very good defender (be it because of his size, footwork, or anything else).

dukelifer
04-16-2012, 04:44 PM
First, good luck to Silent G. He’ll be missed.

Secondly, I fear that this may hurt recruiting. The next time that we are competing for a player ranked in the 20-35 range, the opposing coach (cough, coach cal, cough) could use Mike as an example of a kid that sat on the pine an entire year despite a glaring need for someone with his perceived talent. Further, the coach could say that MPIII and Alex used a redshirt year (we know this isn’t the entire story but high school kids don’t care).

Well sure- I am sure they use everything to their advantage. But you are suggesting that he was extremely talented and K sat him simply because he was not a top player? I am not quite sure why K would sit a player that was much better than everyone around him unless, of course, he was not quite ready.

dukelifer
04-16-2012, 04:49 PM
I know technically they play different positions (although Coach K always says we play the 5 best without really defined positions), but if Mike G was not good enough to get minutes over Hairston, this is not a major loss. Hairston may hustle and give 110%, but he also airballs jumpers (and even a dunk!) with shocking regularity, and just isn't a very good defender (be it because of his size, footwork, or anything else).

Reminds me of the trashing of Zoubek for all his weaknesses. Then in his senior year- Zoubek made all the difference. These kids are not finished products- that can and do get better. No one here ever thought that sophomore Nolan Smith would have matured into the best player in the league when he became a senior. Kids get better.

Channing
04-16-2012, 05:01 PM
Reminds me of the trashing of Zoubek for all his weaknesses. Then in his senior year- Zoubek made all the difference. These kids are not finished products- that can and do get better. No one here ever thought that sophomore Nolan Smith would have matured into the best player in the league when he became a senior. Kids get better.

My comparison was not "what will they become". It was a simple side-by-side comparison today. If you look at Josh's skill set today, and make the assumption that Gbinijie's skill set today isn't sufficient to take time from Josh, then, by definition, you are saying that Josh is a better player (assuming, as Coach K points out, that he doesn't really focus on positions). And, if Josh is the better player, and would not take Josh's time next year, then the loss of Gbinijie is not that significant.

Also, unless something has been kept very quiet, I don't think that Josh has been suffering crippling foot problems for the past two years.

ChicagoCrazy84
04-16-2012, 05:17 PM
My comparison was not "what will they become". It was a simple side-by-side comparison today. If you look at Josh's skill set today, and make the assumption that Gbinijie's skill set today isn't sufficient to take time from Josh, then, by definition, you are saying that Josh is a better player (assuming, as Coach K points out, that he doesn't really focus on positions). And, if Josh is the better player, and would not take Josh's time next year, then the loss of Gbinijie is not that significant.
.
Also, unless something has been kept very quiet, I don't think that Josh has been suffering crippling foot problems for the past two years.


It's going to be interesting to see how are bench shakes out. I wasn't expecting Gbinige or Hairston to start this year but I was wondering if we would still do a 3 guard lineup or more of a traditional lineup with Gbinije or Murphy. I am thinking Coach K is leaning towards a 3 guard lineup. If we were going to a traditional lineup, I think Coach K would have asked him to stay and contend for a starting job with Murphy. I'm thinking were going to see a lineup of Cook, Curry, Sulaimon with Dawkins, Thornton, and Murphy being the firsts off the bench. That would definitely put him further down the ladder.
.

xblade
04-16-2012, 05:30 PM
It is pretty rare for a freshman to play major minutes at Duke unless said freshman was a top-10/15 prospect in his class. It really only happens when there is a complete absence of players at his possession.

It is pretty rare for a freshman to play major minutes anywhere, but especially at top schools, unless said freshman was a top-10/15 prospect in his class. It's not just a Duke thing.

It's pretty funny. These guys come in as freshmen, and so many fans believe they're the awesomest players and should get all the playing time....until they become sophomores, lol. Then apparently, they're no good any more and their playing time should go to the next class of freshmen.

xblade
04-16-2012, 05:33 PM
Airowe tweeted about this yesterday. Luke Winn is the guy who says if a player transfers high schools more than twice than he will likely transfer in college. Michael went to 3 high schools.

From what I've heard, this will be his 6th school in 6 years.

ArtVandelay
04-16-2012, 05:48 PM
Having Alex and Andre as the two options at '3' is a pretty good situation really. Not many rosters have that kind of 2 man punch at the 3 spot around the country. We've all heard K's accolades for Alex and the Singler comparisons he has elicited. He has also put on strength and muscle and now knows the system. Furthermore I am definitely not in the 'is what it is' camp with Andre.

I submit that at each level of hoops, from grade school to high school, to college, to the pro's players bring physical talent and basketball IQ. Physical talent, I would argue, is much harder to improve upon than basketball IQ, but basketball IQ can compensate for physical limitations to a point. Paulus had a high b-ball IQ, but hit his limit based on his physical talent in college. Kendall Marshall has a very high basketball IQ which carried him through college, but I suspect his physical talent will limit him in the pro's (it was good he left early when his value was high). Andre has the physical talent, and he still has a chance to develop his b-ball IQ. I don't believe we have seen the best of AD yet.

I agree that Dre and Murphy is hardly bubkus. And I hope you're right about Dre improving before next year. I think he is very talented (albeit streaky as hell) at shooting 3s, but doesn't have the handle to have much more of an offensive repertoire even though he has fairly explosive leaping ability. Let's hope he works on that over the summer. He has improved a lot on D, but I don't really see him as the solution as a wing defender, partially due to his height. I know I shouldn't give up on him, but with the way he tends to disappear at times, I'll just say I'm not counting on Dre.

I admit I don't know whether Mike G would've been good enough to earn minutes at the 3 next year, but the possibility of a slightly more flexible and athletic lineup took a bit of a hit. We pretty much know what we're getting with next year's team (again, in the absence of further commitments) at this point.

Chris Randolph
04-16-2012, 06:05 PM
I haven't read this entire thread as I think it would be a waste of time so I'm sure this may have been said:

Let me say, you never like to see anyone transfer. Especially an athletic/long guy like Mike G. That being said, let us not get too outta control questioning the Duke staff for how they 'handled' Mike G's minutes this past season. I'm certain the Duke staff knew what they were doing this past season: When you are capable of winning a championship, you don't play a kid more minutes because you hope he doesn't transfer after the season, lets make that clear

The last time we lost our best player early to the NBA and had a promising freshman transfer, we won the whole thing the next season :)

DukieInBrasil
04-16-2012, 06:14 PM
I know technically they play different positions (although Coach K always says we play the 5 best without really defined positions), but if Mike G was not good enough to get minutes over Hairston, this is not a major loss. Hairston may hustle and give 110%, but he also airballs jumpers (and even a dunk!) with shocking regularity, and just isn't a very good defender (be it because of his size, footwork, or anything else).

Actually, i remember Hairston making 15 ft jumpers with "shocking" regularity. He is not the best post player we have, but he is more valuable than your portrayal of Josh would make him seem. I don't really see him cranking out lots of points or rebounds this coming year, as he'll be the 4th (maybe even 5th) option in the post.
Now Miles Plumlee, he blew dunks with shocking regularity.

Rudy
04-16-2012, 06:22 PM
I think it only changes the perspective considerably if "earned" is an absolute. I have been following Coach K for about the same amount of time you have but probably not the extent you have. I have always thought that Coach K underutilizes his bench. 10 mpg is only 5% of gametime. If a top 30 recruit in an area of need can't earn 10 mpg something has fallen through the cracks along the way.
I got a chuckle out of the bolded line. That would only be true if the player can play effectively at all 5 positions. Has there been anyone since Magic Johnson or Grant Hill who could do that? (Even Grant may have had a hard time playing #5 in college.) If a player is slotted at one position, the available mpg for him is 40.

Did anyone other than Mike (if even he did) think he would get 10 mpg his first year? Maybe what fell through the cracks was unreasonable expectations.

There are lots of reasons why a kid would want to transfer. Unless and until he or the coaching staff say something about why, we won't know. Most kids who come to Duke are high character kids. I assume he is, too, and I wish him well.

azzefkram
04-16-2012, 06:24 PM
Now Miles Plumlee, he blew dunks with shocking regularity.

Don't think so. Miles made 61% of his FG attempts.

MCFinARL
04-16-2012, 06:30 PM
It's going to be interesting to see how are bench shakes out. I wasn't expecting Gbinige or Hairston to start this year but I was wondering if we would still do a 3 guard lineup or more of a traditional lineup with Gbinije or Murphy. I am thinking Coach K is leaning towards a 3 guard lineup. If we were going to a traditional lineup, I think Coach K would have asked him to stay and contend for a starting job with Murphy. I'm thinking were going to see a lineup of Cook, Curry, Sulaimon with Dawkins, Thornton, and Murphy being the firsts off the bench. That would definitely put him further down the ladder.
.

Don't know what Coach K might have told Gbinije about competing with Murphy for a starting spot, but it is clear from what Gbinije's Dad told the Herald-Sun that Coach K did ask him to stay--or at least encouraged him to stay--and suggested there would be some opportunities (unspecified) next year. I don't think we can conclude much about what kind of lineup Coach K is envisioning for next year based on this transfer.

ACCBBallFan
04-16-2012, 06:43 PM
This transfer by Mike is certainly not unique to Duke or how he was handled by coaching staff.

This article is a couple of weeks old so list of transfers is probably above 350 by now

2012 End-of-Year Updated Transfer List: 300-plus and growing ...

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/blog/eye-on-college-basketball/18443369/2012-end-of-year-updated-transfer-list-300-plus-and-growing

Unless one of the tranfers like Rodney Hood or Amile comes to Duke, Alex has no one his size to practice against at WF with the default being Tyler or Sheed or Dre.

So he can't get used to defending a guy his size nor used to being defended by somone his size.

Of the three only Sheed is a versatile offensive player with Tyler being limited and Dre tending to camp out beyond the 3 point line.

To some extent Alex can get that experience when practicing against Ryan or Josh at the PF slot, but then one of them is misplaced at WF with the 5 guards Seth, Quinn, Dre, Tyler and Sheed instead of with the three bigs: the other of Ryan/Josh plus MP2 and MP3.

Having a mid-sized 11th ACC caliber player like Mike Gbinije helps immensely in practice, especially when one guy is nicked with an injury.

Depending on where he transfers, he not only has to sit a year, he may be practicing against lesser talent until he ascends to more PT the next year.

More PT the next season may have happened anyway when Duke loses its four seniors as Alex may have to play PF leaving the WF slot wide open for Mike.

Seems like a good kid. Good luck to him. Next play.

Dev11
04-16-2012, 06:50 PM
It's pretty funny. These guys come in as freshmen, and so many fans believe they're the awesomest players and should get all the playing time....until they become sophomores, lol. Then apparently, they're no good any more and their playing time should go to the next class of freshmen.

...and with that, you've just risen above most of the discussion on this board. Congratulations

ChicagoCrazy84
04-16-2012, 07:11 PM
I got a chuckle out of the bolded line. That would only be true if the player can play effectively at all 5 positions. Has there been anyone since Magic Johnson or Grant Hill who could do that? (Even Grant may have had a hard time playing #5 in college.) If a player is slotted at one position, the available mpg for him is 40.

Did anyone other than Mike (if even he did) think he would get 10 mpg his first year? Maybe what fell through the cracks was unreasonable expectations.

There are lots of reasons why a kid would want to transfer. Unless and until he or the coaching staff say something about why, we won't know. Most kids who come to Duke are high character kids. I assume he is, too, and I wish him well.


Count me as one who thought he would get 10 minutes a game...especially after Alex announced he would redshirt. It was no secret where our weakness would be, so I absolutely thought he would get a shot at minutes. Didn't seem like it ever took off though.

tommy
04-16-2012, 07:20 PM
I agree that Dre and Murphy is hardly bubkus. And I hope you're right about Dre improving before next year. I think he is very talented (albeit streaky as hell) at shooting 3s, but doesn't have the handle to have much more of an offensive repertoire even though he has fairly explosive leaping ability. Let's hope he works on that over the summer. He has improved a lot on D, but I don't really see him as the solution as a wing defender, partially due to his height. I know I shouldn't give up on him, but with the way he tends to disappear at times, I'll just say I'm not counting on Dre.

I admit I don't know whether Mike G would've been good enough to earn minutes at the 3 next year, but the possibility of a slightly more flexible and athletic lineup took a bit of a hit. We pretty much know what we're getting with next year's team (again, in the absence of further commitments) at this point.

You have one of my favorite user names on the board, but I don't agree with you that "we pretty much know what we're getting with next year's team at this point." A quick list of some things we don't know might include:

1. Will Quinn Cook's knee really heal properly?
2. If so, will he be able to play the type of ball-hawking defense and move his feet sufficiently to stay in front of his man that will enable him to take over from Thornton as our primary point guard?
3. Will Thornton improve his ballhandling, shooting, and/or passing, enabling him to actually participate in the offense in a meaningful way and put some pressure on the opposing defense?
4. What will Rasheed Sulaimon bring to the table in terms of ballhandling, shooting, passing, defense, toughness, and contribution to team chemistry?
5. Who will emerge as the leader(s) of the team?
6. Will Seth Curry improve his passing and/or his defense?
7. Will Andre Dawkins add any elements to his game, such as penetrating with the ball, shooting off the dribble, rebounding, or defense?
8. Will Andre gain any consistency in his game?
9. Will he maintain focus and concentration for longer stretches of games?
10. What will Murphy bring to the table in terms of shooting, ballhandling, passing, rebounding, defense, toughness, and contribution to team chemistry?
11. Will Murphy be big and strong enough to play the PF position in Duke's scheme, or will he really belong at the 3?
12. Will Ryan Kelly improve his strength? What about his aggressiveness under the boards?
13. Will Ryan add any back to the basket moves, as may be needed if he plays the 5 when Mason is out?
14. Will Mason play with more consistent confidence than he did this past year?
15. Will Mason play more fluidly when he gets the ball on the blocks?
16. Will Mason develop a face-up 12-to-15 foot jump shot?
17. Will Marshall Plumlee be ready to play big boy basketball? What will he be able to contribute? Will he be strong enough inside against mature post players?
18. Will Josh Hairston (re)gain explosiveness in his legs?
19. Will Josh learn to use his body (without fouling) to keep taller players out of the lane so as to avoid them playing over the top of him?
20. Will Josh gain better judgment as to when it is a good time for him to shoot 17 foot jumpshots and when it isn't?

So there are 20 quick ones that I'd love to know the answers to. I'm sure others have many additional ones. That's part of the fun of watching a team develop is seeing these questions answered as the season goes on. I don't think we know much at all 7 months before the season starts.

Greg_Newton
04-16-2012, 07:33 PM
Don't know what Coach K might have told Gbinije about competing with Murphy for a starting spot, but it is clear from what Gbinije's Dad told the Herald-Sun that Coach K did ask him to stay--or at least encouraged him to stay--and suggested there would be some opportunities (unspecified) next year. I don't think we can conclude much about what kind of lineup Coach K is envisioning for next year based on this transfer.

This will probably be unpopular, but I think this whole situation is a little unsettling from a distance, and that the bolded seems like a disingenuous sentiment.

I mean... if I put myself in his shoes, I have a hard time blaming him for his decision, or even disagreeing with it. I'm 6'7, the best athlete on the team, and Coach K told me I have the highest basketball IQ of anyone he's ever recruited when he was trying to get me to come to Duke. However, now I can't crack the rotation, even occasionally as an energy guy, when I'm the only guy between 6'4 and 6'8 and our historically poor perimeter defense is full of guys who let ballhandlers waltz right by them and don't compete for rebounds. Then, after benching me for months, Coach K gives me a nice slap in the face by putting me in for the last few seconds of the humiliating loss to Lehigh so I can sacrifice my fouls for him before going back to the bench. Then, not only does K go all out for a one-and-done who would jump me on the depth chart next year, he goes after any transfer from CMU to Mississippi State that looks like me once he misses, and continues to go all out for a one-and-done who would jump me on the depth chart the following year.

I may be shy, but I'm a very talented basketball player who most high-major programs would be ecstatic to have, and would appreciate. Why in the world would I stay in this situation?

Perhaps he was just a head case, or became a terrible player since I saw him last summer or something, but on the surface... I just don't like how this played out, at all.

jv001
04-16-2012, 07:39 PM
You have one of my favorite user names on the board, but I don't agree with you that "we pretty much know what we're getting with next year's team at this point." A quick list of some things we don't know might include:

1. Will Quinn Cook's knee really heal properly?
2. If so, will he be able to play the type of ball-hawking defense and move his feet sufficiently to stay in front of his man that will enable him to take over from Thornton as our primary point guard?
3. Will Thornton improve his ballhandling, shooting, and/or passing, enabling him to actually participate in the offense in a meaningful way and put some pressure on the opposing defense?
4. What will Rasheed Sulaimon bring to the table in terms of ballhandling, shooting, passing, defense, toughness, and contribution to team chemistry?
5. Who will emerge as the leader(s) of the team?
6. Will Seth Curry improve his passing and/or his defense?
7. Will Andre Dawkins add any elements to his game, such as penetrating with the ball, shooting off the dribble, rebounding, or defense?
8. Will Andre gain any consistency in his game?
9. Will he maintain focus and concentration for longer stretches of games?
10. What will Murphy bring to the table in terms of shooting, ballhandling, passing, rebounding, defense, toughness, and contribution to team chemistry?
11. Will Murphy be big and strong enough to play the PF position in Duke's scheme, or will he really belong at the 3?
12. Will Ryan Kelly improve his strength? What about his aggressiveness under the boards?
13. Will Ryan add any back to the basket moves, as may be needed if he plays the 5 when Mason is out?
14. Will Mason play with more consistent confidence than he did this past year?
15. Will Mason play more fluidly when he gets the ball on the blocks?
16. Will Mason develop a face-up 12-to-15 foot jump shot?
17. Will Marshall Plumlee be ready to play big boy basketball? What will he be able to contribute? Will he be strong enough inside against mature post players?
18. Will Josh Hairston (re)gain explosiveness in his legs?
19. Will Josh learn to use his body (without fouling) to keep taller players out of the lane so as to avoid them playing over the top of him?
20. Will Josh gain better judgment as to when it is a good time for him to shoot 17 foot jumpshots and when it isn't?

So there are 20 quick ones that I'd love to know the answers to. I'm sure others have many additional ones. That's part of the fun of watching a team develop is seeing these questions answered as the season goes on. I don't think we know much at all 7 months before the season starts.

Let me add one or two more questions:
Will our guards get the ball to Mason in a good position around the basket?
Will our guards play the passing lanes on defense and create steals that enable us to get out on fast breaks.
There are probably more but those just came to mind.
GoDuke!

jimsumner
04-16-2012, 07:53 PM
This will probably be unpopular, but I think this whole situation is a little unsettling from a distance, and that the bolded seems like a disingenuous sentiment.

I mean... if I put myself in his shoes, I have a hard time blaming him for his decision, or even disagreeing with it. I'm 6'7, the best athlete on the team, and Coach K told me I have the highest basketball IQ of anyone he's ever recruited when he was trying to get me to come to Duke. However, now I can't crack the rotation, even occasionally as an energy guy, when I'm the only guy between 6'4 and 6'8 and our historically poor perimeter defense is full of guys who let ballhandlers waltz right by them and don't compete for rebounds. Then, after benching me for months, Coach K gives me a nice slap in the face by putting me in for the last few seconds of the humiliating loss to Lehigh so I can sacrifice my fouls for him before going back to the bench. Then, not only does K go all out for a one-and-done who would jump me on the depth chart next year, he goes after any transfer from CMU to Mississippi State that looks like me once he misses, and continues to go all out for a one-and-done who would jump me on the depth chart the following year.

I may be shy, but I'm a very talented basketball player who most high-major programs would be ecstatic to have, and would appreciate. Why in the world would I stay in this situation?

Perhaps he was just a head case, or became a terrible player since I saw him last summer or something, but on the surface... I just don't like how this played out, at all.

He's not a terrible player and he's certainly not a head case. And he had some bad luck, including a mid-season virus that knocked him back a bit.

But it's a meritocracy. He knew that coming in. He was welcome to compete for PT but not required to. Wish him luck and move on.

Duke was recruiting Muhammad a long time ago. You wouldn't recruit the consensus number one player in the class because that might hurt the 10th-man's feelings? Are you certain that Duke's interest in Zeigler and/or Hood wasn't a result of the likelihood of losing Gbinije? It's not like this came out of nowhere.

And Duke put him in late in the Lehigh game for a simple reason. Duke had to commit a lot of fouls in a hurry and he had fouls to give. You think this was intended as a slap in the face? I see it as a rational allocation of resources.

Players tend to transfer for one of three reasons; PT, academics or distance from home. Gbinije is from Richmond and he was All-ACC academic. I don't think there's any reason to see this as anything more than a decision by a player to seek more playing time somewhere else. It happens. A lot.

Zeb
04-16-2012, 08:11 PM
This will probably be unpopular, but I think this whole situation is a little unsettling from a distance...

Perhaps he was just a head case, or became a terrible player since I saw him last summer or something, but on the surface... I just don't like how this played out, at all.


I do not believe in using K's career success to silence all criticisms or concerns. It's a discussion board after all. And I think you do a good job of painting why this is "unsettling". But if we can agree K is not perfect, we can also agree he's not an idiot--if Gbinjie had the ability to make his 2011-2012 team significantly better, isn't it a pretty safe assumption he would have gotten more playing time? Obviously there's something that the coaching staff saw in hundreds of hours of practice and other team interactions that led them to not use Gbinjie much. Its not as if in his small amount of time on the court he showed vastly superior talent/skill than other Duke bench players. The fact that Duke players have raved about his athleticism in practice is certainly something to consider, but no one speculates that it was a lack of athleticism that kept him off the court.

As far as K asking him to stay, I don't think there's much to read into that. Isn't that something that he would say to most players? And wouldn't it certainly be something his family would want people to believe was said? If K really thought he was critical to Duke's future success, he would have used him differently his freshman year. His playing time was K's clearest and loudest assessment of Gbinjie's importance.

While its always possible that Gbinjie is a great talent that has been squandered or mistreated by K and his staff, I think Occam's razor says that its more likely he just isn't as good as we all hoped he would be. As stated numerous times elsewhere in the thread, these types of discussions have occurred after every Duke transfer and about the only one I can remember proving to be a significant D1 contributor was Billy McCaffery, and he was already a solid contributor at Duke when he transferred.

ncexnyc
04-16-2012, 08:11 PM
They say there are two sides to every story and I think Greg's and Jim's posts give us a pretty good look at both.

It's difficult for fans to be on the outside looking in and while we'd all like to have a reason given to us it's not going to happen.

MCFinARL
04-16-2012, 08:19 PM
This will probably be unpopular, but I think this whole situation is a little unsettling from a distance, and that the bolded seems like a disingenuous sentiment.

I mean... if I put myself in his shoes, I have a hard time blaming him for his decision, or even disagreeing with it. I'm 6'7, the best athlete on the team, and Coach K told me I have the highest basketball IQ of anyone he's ever recruited when he was trying to get me to come to Duke. However, now I can't crack the rotation, even occasionally as an energy guy, when I'm the only guy between 6'4 and 6'8 and our historically poor perimeter defense is full of guys who let ballhandlers waltz right by them and don't compete for rebounds. Then, after benching me for months, Coach K gives me a nice slap in the face by putting me in for the last few seconds of the humiliating loss to Lehigh so I can sacrifice my fouls for him before going back to the bench. Then, not only does K go all out for a one-and-done who would jump me on the depth chart next year, he goes after any transfer from CMU to Mississippi State that looks like me once he misses, and continues to go all out for a one-and-done who would jump me on the depth chart the following year.

I may be shy, but I'm a very talented basketball player who most high-major programs would be ecstatic to have, and would appreciate. Why in the world would I stay in this situation?

Perhaps he was just a head case, or became a terrible player since I saw him last summer or something, but on the surface... I just don't like how this played out, at all.


He's not a terrible player and he's certainly not a head case. And he had some bad luck, including a mid-season virus that knocked him back a bit.

But it's a meritocracy. He knew that coming in. He was welcome to compete for PT but not required to. Wish him luck and move on.

Duke was recruiting Muhammad a long time ago. You wouldn't recruit the consensus number one player in the class because that might hurt the 10th-man's feelings? Are you certain that Duke's interest in Zeigler and/or Hood wasn't a result of the likelihood of losing Gbinije? It's not like this came out of nowhere.

And Duke put him in late in the Lehigh game for a simple reason. Duke had to commit a lot of fouls in a hurry and he had fouls to give. You think this was intended as a slap in the face? I see it as a rational allocation of resources.

Players tend to transfer for one of three reasons; PT, academics or distance from home. Gbinije is from Richmond and he was All-ACC academic. I don't think there's any reason to see this as anything more than a decision by a player to seek more playing time somewhere else. It happens. A lot.
Mostly, I agree with Jim here. And, again, the comments from Gbinije's father, noting how hard a decision it was for Mike and how much he loves Duke, suggest that the Gbinijes didn't think Coach K's remarks were disingenuous. They just, apparently, didn't give him (it was presented clearly as his decision, though the family discussed it) enough confidence that he would see the kind of playing time he wants.

But I do agree with Greg_Newton that, from Gbinije's perspective, this year may have seemed like a lot less than he expected. Doesn't mean anyone misrepresented anything to him, just means he apparently wasn't able to do the things that would get him more time on the court, and he might well have expected that he could do those things--or that other things that he was doing would be a bigger factor than they were in playing time decisions. I'm willing to at least allow for the possibility that the coaching staff might have been able to do something more, or something different, to develop Mike Gbinije's talents this year, given their high praise as he came in. But I don't think I would go as far as saying something doesn't feel right about it--it just didn't work out, and that is too bad for both Mike and Duke.

Saratoga2
04-16-2012, 08:37 PM
This will probably be unpopular, but I think this whole situation is a little unsettling from a distance, and that the bolded seems like a disingenuous sentiment.

I mean... if I put myself in his shoes, I have a hard time blaming him for his decision, or even disagreeing with it. I'm 6'7, the best athlete on the team, and Coach K told me I have the highest basketball IQ of anyone he's ever recruited when he was trying to get me to come to Duke. However, now I can't crack the rotation, even occasionally as an energy guy, when I'm the only guy between 6'4 and 6'8 and our historically poor perimeter defense is full of guys who let ballhandlers waltz right by them and don't compete for rebounds. Then, after benching me for months, Coach K gives me a nice slap in the face by putting me in for the last few seconds of the humiliating loss to Lehigh so I can sacrifice my fouls for him before going back to the bench. Then, not only does K go all out for a one-and-done who would jump me on the depth chart next year, he goes after any transfer from CMU to Mississippi State that looks like me once he misses, and continues to go all out for a one-and-done who would jump me on the depth chart the following year.

I may be shy, but I'm a very talented basketball player who most high-major programs would be ecstatic to have, and would appreciate. Why in the world would I stay in this situation?

Perhaps he was just a head case, or became a terrible player since I saw him last summer or something, but on the surface... I just don't like how this played out, at all.

Based on the performance of last seasons team, it absolutely seemed we needed a long athletic wing. Without trying to put the blame anywhere, it is very disappointing to see him leave after one year. Who knows if he would have blossomed at Duke, all we can do is watch what he does at another University. We likely go forward into next season with Alex as the only wing player over 6'4".

dukedoc
04-16-2012, 08:54 PM
all we can do is watch what he does at another University

I'm curious to see what his next fan base does. Specifically, will they maintain the moniker "Silent G"? Also, will they keep the shorthand "{g}"? Only time will tell.

Seriously though, I'm very sad to see him go. I find it's best for my heart and soul to assume the best in these sorts of situations. Being disappointed, my reflex is to assume the worst about Mike, because that makes my heart ache less when he leaves. Kind of like when you're dumped in a relationship. However, that's just a selfish defense mechanism. In the long run it's always most profitable for everyone involved (including yourself) to assume the best about others. When a waitress is rude to you, assume her kid is sick at home and she stressed beyond belief. When someone cuts you off on the road, assume they're rushing their pregnant wife to the hospital. Call it idealistic pollyannaism, but it works for me. Patients often do seemingly crazy things. If I didn't assume best intentions I'd go crazy pretty quickly.

In this situation, I assume Mike's decision was exquisitely complicated and agonizing. I assume that he tried his best in practices throughout the year. I assume K has been giving him fair iterative feedback to keep him posted as to where he stood. I assume he is really sad thinking about leaving his teammates. I assume he is second guessing himself even now. I assume there is more to the story than just a hankering for playing time. Etc.

Whatever the rationale, his decision is done. We wish him the best. Oh yeah, and I also assume that we will be fine. We will miss him, but we will be fine.

Devilsfan
04-16-2012, 09:04 PM
I wonder what the real story is although we may not know for years if ever.

ThePublisher
04-16-2012, 09:16 PM
I haven't heard any transfer rumors, but it wouldn't shock me if Gbinije looked into going elsewhere. I get the vibe from him that he doesn't exactly love the Duke spotlight. Let's hope not as I think he can be a valuable asset to the team and school.


I posted that on the morning of 3/28 in the 'New 2012 recruiting thread'. Shame to see my hunch come true...

On the sunny side, I do think this put us up a notch for Amile.

moonpie23
04-16-2012, 09:40 PM
well, i hate to see him leave.......i hope it was amicable....for all you folks speculating, i'd be willing to bet that if his future was that bright at duke, that the staff would have convinced him to stay.......

i wish him the best of luck.....

Gthoma2a
04-16-2012, 09:41 PM
I am sad on so many levels. I wanted to have a 1-2 punch of Gbinije and Alex, but more than that, I wanted to see him succeed in that uniform. He is a very talented player who was our first recruit of last year. He also seemed like such a bright kid. It hurts in a lot of ways. I wish him the best. I always saw him coming into his own later on and becoming a little Battier. I don't know... just sad.

We absolutely need to get a SF to add depth to the position and have two guys that matchup well against each other in practice at the position.

Lord Ash
04-16-2012, 10:13 PM
Reminds me of the Jamal transfer... he seemed like a really good kid, and frankly to have some skills that might be useful. It just didn't work out, and it leaves me a bit sad.

That said... I remember my first glimpse of {g} was in his "smack" video with JMM before he came to Duke. I remember being struck by two things... first, that JMM seemed like a really good, down to earth kid.... and second, how strange it was to hear Mike talk about being one and done. Now, he may have just felt the need to "compete" with JMM, who everyone knows was a possible one-and-done, but still... it was very rare to hear a Duke player say anything like this, and even rarer to hear a non Top 5 type of player to say it. Honestly, it made me just a touch uncomfortable... like Mike wasn't maybe understanding the situation he was in, a situation where he CLEARLY would not get one-and-done sort of playing time.

Maybe it was random, or maybe it was a sign of things to come. Who knows?

azzefkram
04-16-2012, 10:14 PM
I got a chuckle out of the bolded line. That would only be true if the player can play effectively at all 5 positions. Has there been anyone since Magic Johnson or Grant Hill who could do that? (Even Grant may have had a hard time playing #5 in college.) If a player is slotted at one position, the available mpg for him is 40.

Did anyone other than Mike (if even he did) think he would get 10 mpg his first year? Maybe what fell through the cracks was unreasonable expectations.

There are lots of reasons why a kid would want to transfer. Unless and until he or the coaching staff say something about why, we won't know. Most kids who come to Duke are high character kids. I assume he is, too, and I wish him well.

340 minutes out of a possible 6,800 is 5%. That would be slightly less than Quinn but more than Josh. Position doesn't really factor into it.

Assuming 900 players enter D1 each year, Mike's top 30 ranking puts him in the top 4% of all entering players. How unreasonable is it to expect an athletic top 30 recruit who happens to fill a glaring area of need to play 340 minutes over the course of a season.

sporthenry
04-16-2012, 10:18 PM
The last thing I will say is the last time we had our best player leave early for the NBA and lost a player who many fans expected to be in the rotation we won a national championship. Heck, all we need now is that transfer and we have 3 ingredients to the recipe.

CDu
04-16-2012, 10:20 PM
340 minutes out of a possible 6,800 is 5%. That would be slightly less than Quinn but more than Josh. Position doesn't really factor into it.

Assuming 900 players enter D1 each year, Mike's top 30 ranking puts him in the top 4% of all entering players. How unreasonable is it to expect an athletic top 30 recruit who happens to fill a glaring area of need to play 340 minutes over the course of a season.

Gbinije entered not only a D1 program, but one of the top 3% of D1 programs. So saying he's in the top 4% of all entering players is sort of moot. Most of those players are going to much worse basketball teams, and most of those players aren't playing major minutes as a freshman.

Coach K has been very consistent with his rotations over the years. He's going to play the key 7-8 players major minutes and the 9th and 10th guys play sparingly. Gbinije was (apparently in Coach K's eyes) the 9th or 10th best player on last year's team. As such, he sat. Complaining about the way Coach K handles his rotations isn't going to change that. This wasn't some conspiracy. It's really as simple as the coaching staff didn't feel (based on practice, which Coach K values A LOT) Gbinije gave his team the best chance to win.

Greg_Newton
04-16-2012, 10:43 PM
That said... I remember my first glimpse of {g} was in his "smack" video with JMM before he came to Duke. I remember being struck by two things... first, that JMM seemed like a really good, down to earth kid.... and second, how strange it was to hear Mike talk about being one and done. Now, he may have just felt the need to "compete" with JMM, who everyone knows was a possible one-and-done, but still... it was very rare to hear a Duke player say anything like this, and even rarer to hear a non Top 5 type of player to say it. Honestly, it made me just a touch uncomfortable... like Mike wasn't maybe understanding the situation he was in, a situation where he CLEARLY would not get one-and-done sort of playing time.

I've seen this mentioned a few times, and he was clearly just messing around. He even took the mic back after he finished his joke to say that he was kidding about being a one-and-done.

The main thing I don't understand is how hard he was recruited over. Alex Murphy reclassifying, no big deal. Shabazz and Jabari... bad luck that they play his position, although it's still kind of too bad for him.

However, Duke going hard after Zeigler and being "all in" for Hood before his decision was made is a little much, IMO. If they knew he was gone, that's one thing - but everything I've heard points against that, including what watzone has said and G's father saying they were still undecided last weekend and that K tried to convince him to say. The most realistic scenario, I think, is that the staff knew he was considering the possibility, but that he had given no indication that he was leaving.

Guess this is over and there's not much left to say, but there were a lot of things about how this all went that I don't like.

freshmanjs
04-16-2012, 10:47 PM
I've seen this mentioned a few times, and he was clearly just messing around. He even took the mic back after he finished his joke to say that he was kidding about being a one-and-done.

The main thing I don't understand is how hard he was recruited over. Alex Murphy reclassifying, no big deal. Shabazz and Jabari... bad luck that they play his position, although it's still kind of too bad for him.

However, Duke going hard after Zeigler and being "all in" for Hood before his decision was made is a little much, IMO. If they knew he was gone, that's one thing - but everything I've heard points against that, including what watzone has said and G's father saying they were still undecided last weekend and that K tried to convince him to say. The most realistic scenario, I think, is that the staff knew he was considering the possibility, but that he had given no indication that he was leaving.

Guess this is over and there's not much left to say, but there were a lot of things about how this all went that I don't like.

If there is a player on the roster that is not ready to contribute in the near or medium term, why shouldn't the coaches recruit other players at that position? Especially in this era where players don't stay 4 years as often.

Why is there so much sentiment that G is a great player who was unfairly treated when the evidence points more to him being a player that did not hav the tools to contribute much right now?

Greg_Newton
04-16-2012, 10:51 PM
If there is a player on the roster that is not ready to contribute in the near or medium term, why shouldn't the coaches recruit other players at that position? Especially in this era where players don't stay 4 years as often.

Why is there so much sentiment that G is a great player who was unfairly treated when the evidence points more to him being a player that did not hav the tools to contribute much right now?

Well, according to K, he did feel that there was an opportunity for Gbinije to contribute next year. And given that Hood and Zeigler would have to sit out a year, it's not exactly recruiting for the short-term.

I don' think anyone has implied G is a "great player". However, I do think he would have been a terrific role player for us, which is not of marginal importance (see 1998-2002). And I'm mainly basing my sentiment on watching him play a ton against college and professional players last summer.

Steven43
04-16-2012, 10:53 PM
Reminds me of the Jamal transfer... he seemed like a really good kid, and frankly to have some skills that might be useful. It just didn't work out, and it leaves me a bit sad.

That said... I remember my first glimpse of {g} was in his "smack" video with JMM before he came to Duke. I remember being struck by two things... first, that JMM seemed like a really good, down to earth kid.... and second, how strange it was to hear Mike talk about being one and done. Now, he may have just felt the need to "compete" with JMM, who everyone knows was a possible one-and-done, but still... it was very rare to hear a Duke player say anything like this, and even rarer to hear a non Top 5 type of player to say it. Honestly, it made me just a touch uncomfortable... like Mike wasn't maybe understanding the situation he was in, a situation where he CLEARLY would not get one-and-done sort of playing time.

Maybe it was random, or maybe it was a sign of things to come. Who knows?

What is a 'smack' video and who is JMM? I probably should know the answer to both of those questions, but I don't.

Kedsy
04-16-2012, 10:55 PM
What is a 'smack' video and who is JMM? I probably should know the answer to both of those questions, but I don't.

James Michael McAdoo, and a silly video the prospects did before one of the high school all-star games last April.

azzefkram
04-16-2012, 10:57 PM
Gbinije entered not only a D1 program, but one of the top 3% of D1 programs. So saying he's in the top 4% of all entering players is sort of moot. Most of those players are going to much worse basketball teams, and most of those players aren't playing major minutes as a freshman.

Coach K has been very consistent with his rotations over the years. He's going to play the key 7-8 players major minutes and the 9th and 10th guys play sparingly. Gbinije was (apparently in Coach K's eyes) the 9th or 10th best player on last year's team. As such, he sat. Complaining about the way Coach K handles his rotations isn't going to change that. This wasn't some conspiracy. It's really as simple as the coaching staff didn't feel (based on practice, which Coach K values A LOT) Gbinije gave his team the best chance to win.

More often than not I tend to agree with you but this isn't one of those times. First off I don't consider 10 mpg to be major minutes. Secondly I have always felt that Coach K has underutilized the bench and while Coach K may have 927 more wins than me, I have never lost a D1 game that I coached. Thirdly, I never stated nor thought that it was a conspiracy, just a poor utilization of an asset. Finally, it's a message board isn't bellyaching on the menu.

I think I've said my fill on this topic. I can't remember who wrote this and I'm just too lazy to look it up but if feel sad for both Duke and Mike that it came to this. I wish him well wherever his travels may take him.

Steven43
04-16-2012, 10:59 PM
If there is a player on the roster that is not ready to contribute in the near or medium term, why shouldn't the coaches recruit other players at that position? Especially in this era where players don't stay 4 years as often.

Why is there so much sentiment that G is a great player who was unfairly treated when the evidence points more to him being a player that did not hav the tools to contribute much right now?

I agree. I didn't see anything special in Mike G's play last year. Yes, it was a small sample size, but many other players in similar situations are able to show that they are likely going to be very good. I don't know. I'm just not convinced.

Newton_14
04-16-2012, 11:06 PM
I've seen this mentioned a few times, and he was clearly just messing around. He even took the mic back after he finished his joke to say that he was kidding about being a one-and-done.

The main thing I don't understand is how hard he was recruited over. Alex Murphy reclassifying, no big deal. Shabazz and Jabari... bad luck that they play his position, although it's still kind of too bad for him.

However, Duke going hard after Zeigler and being "all in" for Hood before his decision was made is a little much, IMO. If they knew he was gone, that's one thing - but everything I've heard points against that, including what watzone has said and G's father saying they were still undecided last weekend and that K tried to convince him to say. The most realistic scenario, I think, is that the staff knew he was considering the possibility, but that he had given no indication that he was leaving.

Guess this is over and there's not much left to say, but there were a lot of things about how this all went that I don't like.

This was a tough one to swallow for all the reason mentioned that I won't repeat, and I see both yours and Jim's points. Both have merit. I do have to believe, that given the glaring need at SF this year, if Gbinije could have helped, K would have played him more. Especially after Murph redshirted.

On the other hand, K said something in 2010, and I have heard him repeat the sentiment since then. To paraphrase, K said he learned from Wooden, that once you figure out what your team is best at, you should make your focus improving the team at whatever that best is. In 2010, that meant abandoning post offense, and working to perfect the 2 screener/rebounding bigs + 3 perimeter scorers. That is actually what started the whole myth that all Duke bigs do are "Screen". Never mind K radically changed the offense the very next season.

This year, if memory serves, Gbinije's first DNP was in the GaTech game in Atlanta. From that point on, K cut the rotation and focused on making the shorter rotation the best team he could make it. Gbinije was unfortunately on the outside looking in, and did not make that "cut" so to speak. Right, wrong, or indifferent, that's how K plays it. It does not mean the kids outside that rotation never get to play again that season, as E-Will proved. Josh initially wasn't in the core rotation either, but he worked his way into more minutes, garnered a start at Va Tech, and was solidly in the rotation once Kelly went down. As someone else mentioned, at that point, Gbinije was actually battling Josh and Andre for minutes, yet still could not get on the floor. Once I saw K play Andre at the 4 in that first ACC tourney game, I knew unfortunately, that Gbinije's time was certainly not going to be this year. As much as Andre struggled down the stretch, Mike not being able to get on the floor was a big signal as to where K and the Staff saw him in his progression.

I do hate that in the end the transfer happened. He is a great kid and stated he loved it at Duke. I wish him well wherever he goes and will certainly pull for him to be successful. Like others before him though, I will always wish he would have chosen to stick it out and fight for minutes at Duke.

1 24 90
04-16-2012, 11:18 PM
Just so everyone doesn't feel alone, espn.com has transfer stories on Kansas, Purdue and Ohio State in addition to ours. None of them were great players who saw much playing time and are looking to go elsewhere to get that playing time.

ACCBBallFan
04-17-2012, 02:26 AM
I agree. I didn't see anything special in Mike G's play last year. Yes, it was a small sample size, but many other players in similar situations are able to show that they are likely going to be very good. I don't know. I'm just not convinced.

I had tracked 26 Duke games +/- by player starting with the Davidson game. Agree it is a small sample size for Mike and it could be a chicken and egg thing but Mike's +/- came out zero while everyone else was positive. I threw out the high and the low:

~Hi/Lo Duke +/- Sum 26 Min Max

242 Austin Rivers, G 263 -24 45

200 Ryan Kelly, F 213 -17 30

160 Seth Curry, G 175 -14 29

151 Mason Plumlee, F 150 -22 21

122 Andre Dawkins, G 122 -27 27

116 Tyler Thornton, G 147 -04 35

114 Miles Plumlee, F 132 -08 26

100 Quinn Cook, G 105 -13 18

022 Josh Hairston, F 032 -08 18

000 Michael Gbinije, G-F 006 -06 12

My guess is the rumors of Alex being a solid practice player are true, even though he did not show it in China/Dubai nor Blue-White nor did any frosh except Austin with Quinn injured. When Mason came back, that removed any hope Mike had that the superior player Alex would have to play PF as Ryan had to play a Euro style center leaving the WF slot open for the taller Mike to compete with Dre. He lost that battle last year even though coach K has Dre on a very short leash.

Not having Mike hurts Alex's development in practice.

Des Esseintes
04-17-2012, 02:49 AM
Not having Mike hurts Alex's development in practice.

I'm guessing this is somewhat overstated. While the team might not have anyone with Alex's exact body type to send him against in practice, there is certainly plenty of talent with which to contend. Murphy can hone guard skills against our guard horde and post skills against the likes of Hairston and Ryan. And we might get Jefferson or Hood, rendering the issue moot. Even if we don't, we very likely bring in a wing the following year, so at worst we are talking a single season here. He will find plenty of practice challenges.

heyman25
04-17-2012, 05:46 AM
You have one of my favorite user names on the board, but I don't agree with you that "we pretty much know what we're getting with next year's team at this point." A quick list of some things we don't know might include:

1. Will Quinn Cook's knee really heal properly?
2. If so, will he be able to play the type of ball-hawking defense and move his feet sufficiently to stay in front of his man that will enable him to take over from Thornton as our primary point guard?
3. Will Thornton improve his ballhandling, shooting, and/or passing, enabling him to actually participate in the offense in a meaningful way and put some pressure on the opposing defense?
4. What will Rasheed Sulaimon bring to the table in terms of ballhandling, shooting, passing, defense, toughness, and contribution to team chemistry?
5. Who will emerge as the leader(s) of the team?
6. Will Seth Curry improve his passing and/or his defense?
7. Will Andre Dawkins add any elements to his game, such as penetrating with the ball, shooting off the dribble, rebounding, or defense?
8. Will Andre gain any consistency in his game?
9. Will he maintain focus and concentration for longer stretches of games?
10. What will Murphy bring to the table in terms of shooting, ballhandling, passing, rebounding, defense, toughness, and contribution to team chemistry?
11. Will Murphy be big and strong enough to play the PF position in Duke's scheme, or will he really belong at the 3?
12. Will Ryan Kelly improve his strength? What about his aggressiveness under the boards?
13. Will Ryan add any back to the basket moves, as may be needed if he plays the 5 when Mason is out?
14. Will Mason play with more consistent confidence than he did this past year?
15. Will Mason play more fluidly when he gets the ball on the blocks?
16. Will Mason develop a face-up 12-to-15 foot jump shot?
17. Will Marshall Plumlee be ready to play big boy basketball? What will he be able to contribute? Will he be strong enough inside against mature post players?
18. Will Josh Hairston (re)gain explosiveness in his legs?
19. Will Josh learn to use his body (without fouling) to keep taller players out of the lane so as to avoid them playing over the top of him?
20. Will Josh gain better judgment as to when it is a good time for him to shoot 17 foot jumpshots and when it isn't?

So there are 20 quick ones that I'd love to know the answers to. I'm sure others have many additional ones. That's part of the fun of watching a team develop is seeing these questions answered as the season goes on. I don't think we know much at all 7 months before the season starts.
7.,8., & 9.
After 3 years of Andre Dawkins, he remains an enigma. We all hope he would work on dribbling,penetrating & finishing.He is so one dimensional that he really becomes a liability on the court. Only when he shoots lights out is he a potent force.

dukeman28428
04-17-2012, 08:22 AM
Sorry to see you leaving Duke and wish you the best.

Whatever the reason, you deserve happiness and hope you find it.

Stay classy and good luck.

Slackerb
04-17-2012, 09:06 AM
It's unfortunate to see all the sour grapes here, including the DBR article on Silent G transferring.

There's no need to downplay the kid's talents or supposed lack of intensity just because he is transferring. I heard none of these complaints when we were discussing lineups, next year's prospects, etc.

It's just sad that people feel the need to make themselves feel better when something bad happens, and losing players of this caliber are definitely bad things.

gumbomoop
04-17-2012, 09:17 AM
I was happy to see in the several links to the home page's "More on Gbinije's Departure" the straightforward explanation provided by Michael's high school coach. Namely, nothing against the school, his teammates, or K. "He just wants to play." And Michael's "just looking for a little bit of a fresh start."

Although I'm a little disappointed in the [not unexpected] brevity of K's farewell comment, it's pretty standard fare, so no reason to read anything into that, either.

However, the main page version of why Michael didn't play much does remind me of one final - and for me the essential - puzzle in his season. We are reminded of "the way things are done at Duke," meaning "defense, communication, and trust. A player earns trust in practice by playing hard, communicating and most of all defending."

Fair enough, and I mean that. For me the really puzzling thing is that I'd have bet anything, based on seeing Michael several times on TV during his senior year and in all-star games, that he'd make his mark on D and trust. I posted a year ago that Michael was one of the only players in one of those all-star games to play any D; and as "proof" I gave 2 specific examples of his hustle and smart D. Further, I thought I saw in Michael just a hint of attitude, that he came into that all-star game with a bit of a chip on his shoulder, ready to prove he belonged. I thought, "This kid is going to be a really valuable player."

So, I was either way off, or things just never clicked for Michael, once faced with the intensity [Is that it???] of K's system and tutelage. Maybe Michael's hustling D didn't mesh with the actual intricacies with K's defensive principles. Or maybe Michael's apparently very quiet demeanor became a real problem for him in Duke's system, for K has stated repeatedly that active communication is an absolute.

I want to say, too, that I have been impressed with both the civility and insights provided in this thread by Greg_Newton, jimsumner, Zeb, MCFinARL, dukedoc, and Newton 14. [The rest of you are all great, too....]. Like Greg_Newton, I have found Michael's decision to transfer somewhat unsettling. But the many thoughtful posts have been informative and steadying. Seriously.

I'm off for a bit of a cry now. Less seriously.

freedevil
04-17-2012, 09:35 AM
There's no need to downplay the kid's talents or supposed lack of intensity just because he is transferring. I heard none of these complaints when we were discussing lineups, next year's prospects, etc.

I read the frontpage article the same way as you. I wish G the best of luck and am disappointed it didn't work out for him at Duke. The speculation as to why he's transferring is completely understandable, but downplaying his talents or intensity (absent some pretty specific evidence) is not really necessary or productive in my mind.

BlueDevilCorvette!
04-17-2012, 09:38 AM
It's unfortunate to see all the sour grapes here, including the DBR article on Silent G transferring.

There's no need to downplay the kid's talents or supposed lack of intensity just because he is transferring. I heard none of these complaints when we were discussing lineups, next year's prospects, etc.

It's just sad that people feel the need to make themselves feel better when something bad happens, and losing players of this caliber are definitely bad things.

I was thinking the same thing! Why is there a need to downplay Silent G abilities? The fact is we didn't see enough of him to make a judgment about his basketball capabilities one way or the other, outside of his high school performances. We do know that he is smart and athletic and appeared to be the biggest cheerleader on the bench despite barely playing. He basically played during garbage time and everybody knows that during garbage time the flow is inconsistent because more than likely the outcome of the game has already been determined and players (on both teams) are just trying to get on the stat sheet. I wish Mike G well and wish him all the happiness in the world. I have a funny feeling that he may be a cornerstone to whatever team he decides to join and flourish as a player. Thanks Mike G for always cheering the other guys on despite the limited opportunities you received to contribute!

dukeballboy88
04-17-2012, 10:19 AM
I think what bothers me about it is G never got a chance. Its frustrating because this team wasnt good on d and losing to Lehigh proved that we needed help.

I new G wasnt going to stick around after he said he was one and done in the video with mcadoo. He retracted it but usually the first thing out of your mouth is what your thinking. Do I think he was good enough to be one and done, no but I think he could have started on last years Duke team.

I know Im going to get the question "Who would he have started over?" So I will go ahead and answer it, Seth, Andre, Ryan and Tyler. None of them showed up every game on either end.

FerryFor50
04-17-2012, 10:24 AM
I was thinking the same thing! Why is there a need to downplay Silent G abilities? The fact is we didn't see enough of him to make a judgment about his basketball capabilities one way or the other, outside of his high school performances. We do know that he is smart and athletic and appeared to be the biggest cheerleader on the bench despite barely playing. He basically played during garbage time and everybody knows that during garbage time the flow is inconsistent because more than likely the outcome of the game has already been determined and players (on both teams) are just trying to get on the stat sheet. I wish Mike G well and wish him all the happiness in the world. I have a funny feeling that he may be a cornerstone to whatever team he decides to join and flourish as a player. Thanks Mike G for always cheering the other guys on despite the limited opportunities you received to contribute!

I don't think they downplayed his athletic ability. I think they focused on the idea that you make the most out of your chances. It seems that in practice, G might not have put in the work that the coaches wanted to see.

However, I do take umbrage at the notion that he didn't show much during games. For one, you barely ever saw him in games for meaningful minutes. And when he did go in, I thought that while he looked lost at times, he also looked like he had loads of potential.

Did he dive for loose balls in games? No... because he was never really in long enough to get the chance.

What surprised me most is when Kelly got hurt and he didn't sniff the floor. That spoke volumes to me and I really hoped he'd work hard and stick around instead of transfer.

I personally think he'll be a good player somewhere and we'll likely regret seeing him leave (a la McCaffrey or Olek).

freshmanjs
04-17-2012, 10:25 AM
I think what bothers me about it is G never got a chance. Its frustrating because this team wasnt good on d and losing to Lehigh proved that we needed help.

I new G wasnt going to stick around after he said he was one and done in the video with mcadoo. He retracted it but usually the first thing out of your mouth is what your thinking. Do I think he was good enough to be one and done, no but I think he could have started on last years Duke team.

I know Im going to get the question "Who would he have started over?" So I will go ahead and answer it, Seth, Andre, Ryan and Tyler. None of them showed up every game on either end.

So which do you think it is:

1) coaches were grossly incompetent at identifying that mike g was superior to seth, andre, ryan and tyler this year
2) coaches were grossly incompetent and forgot that they had mike g on the bench and just forgot to put him in the game
3) coaches were willfully trying to sabotage mike g and/or the team?

unless you believe one of those, i don't see how you can make the argument you made above.

Jderf
04-17-2012, 10:31 AM
It's unfortunate to see all the sour grapes here, including the DBR article on Silent G transferring.

There's no need to downplay the kid's talents or supposed lack of intensity just because he is transferring. I heard none of these complaints when we were discussing lineups, next year's prospects, etc.

It's just sad that people feel the need to make themselves feel better when something bad happens, and losing players of this caliber are definitely bad things.


I read the frontpage article the same way as you. I wish G the best of luck and am disappointed it didn't work out for him at Duke. The speculation as to why he's transferring is completely understandable, but downplaying his talents or intensity (absent some pretty specific evidence) is not really necessary or productive in my mind.

Or maybe it is sad that, rather than engage in the actual debate, some people feel the need to undercut other's positions by projecting an imaginary psychological bias, rather than addressing the very well-formed reasoning presented throughout the thread. I guess some people just cannot accept the fact that others can reasonably disagree.

(Hehe, see how psychological projection can always be sent in both directions? :p)

I'm just trying to illustrate that once you stray away from discussing the actual points that people make in their posts, you get trapped in a very deep rabbit hole of speculative psychology. You claim that people are downplaying Mike G's talents, but by inferring a "sour grapes" mentality where none is present (without accounting for the numerous reasonable points made by others) you are actually downplaying the validity of many poster's opinions. Why not try to tackle some of the actual things people have said? Like, with quotes and stuff. :D

(The front page article, for example, made very clear points about defense and production, which seem to have been completely swept away by the phrase "sour grapes.")


I was thinking the same thing! Why is there a need to downplay Silent G abilities? The fact is we didn't see enough of him to make a judgment about his basketball capabilities one way or the other, outside of his high school performances.

Or maybe the fact that we didn't see much of him is exactly what informs our judgments about his basketball ability: I can reasonably infer that Coach K made his own judgment (from both limited playing time and significant practice time) and I can't think of anything that would give me grounds to disagree -- except, at best, a single throw-away line from a draft-bound player.

Don't get me wrong, I liked Gbinije A LOT and wish him the best. He seems like a fantastic kid with plenty of talent, and I wish I could have seen him learn, grow, and contribute for four years at Duke. But if he could have lit the world on fire as a freshman or sophomore, he would have.

ArtVandelay
04-17-2012, 10:36 AM
You have one of my favorite user names on the board, but I don't agree with you that "we pretty much know what we're getting with next year's team at this point." A quick list of some things we don't know might include:

1. Will Quinn Cook's knee really heal properly?
2. If so, will he be able to play the type of ball-hawking defense and move his feet sufficiently to stay in front of his man that will enable him to take over from Thornton as our primary point guard?
3. Will Thornton improve his ballhandling, shooting, and/or passing, enabling him to actually participate in the offense in a meaningful way and put some pressure on the opposing defense?
4. What will Rasheed Sulaimon bring to the table in terms of ballhandling, shooting, passing, defense, toughness, and contribution to team chemistry?
5. Who will emerge as the leader(s) of the team?
6. Will Seth Curry improve his passing and/or his defense?
7. Will Andre Dawkins add any elements to his game, such as penetrating with the ball, shooting off the dribble, rebounding, or defense?
8. Will Andre gain any consistency in his game?
9. Will he maintain focus and concentration for longer stretches of games?
10. What will Murphy bring to the table in terms of shooting, ballhandling, passing, rebounding, defense, toughness, and contribution to team chemistry?
11. Will Murphy be big and strong enough to play the PF position in Duke's scheme, or will he really belong at the 3?
12. Will Ryan Kelly improve his strength? What about his aggressiveness under the boards?
13. Will Ryan add any back to the basket moves, as may be needed if he plays the 5 when Mason is out?
14. Will Mason play with more consistent confidence than he did this past year?
15. Will Mason play more fluidly when he gets the ball on the blocks?
16. Will Mason develop a face-up 12-to-15 foot jump shot?
17. Will Marshall Plumlee be ready to play big boy basketball? What will he be able to contribute? Will he be strong enough inside against mature post players?
18. Will Josh Hairston (re)gain explosiveness in his legs?
19. Will Josh learn to use his body (without fouling) to keep taller players out of the lane so as to avoid them playing over the top of him?
20. Will Josh gain better judgment as to when it is a good time for him to shoot 17 foot jumpshots and when it isn't?

So there are 20 quick ones that I'd love to know the answers to. I'm sure others have many additional ones. That's part of the fun of watching a team develop is seeing these questions answered as the season goes on. I don't think we know much at all 7 months before the season starts.

Just to be clear, when I said we know what we're getting, I mainly meant (referring to my prior post) that the team "make-up" and positions are pretty well established. Just like last year, we'll be predominantly guards and bigs, with little in between. We'll have two point guards, three SG (two of whom are primarily long range shooters and one -- Rasheed -- has the rep of a shooter but admittedly is more of a wildcard), three bigs, and two flex 3/4 players, one of whom will likely get limited minutes (Hairston). Murphy is the only real new dimension that will be added to our arsenal next year, hence my initial premise that he is an extremely important player for us. Almost all of the other guys can play pretty much one position. although obviously Dawkins will probably get most minutes as a '3' even though his game is basically that of a 2. My point was that the positional make-up of the team will be very similar to last year.

I agree players can improve and change the "look and feel" of the team next year, and obviously you've hit on some of the key variables for next year's squad, many of which I agree with. That said, I'll bite on some of your 20 points:

3 - I would be surprised if this happens. No knock on Tyler, who seems to be a great kid (albeit a bit of a chippy player), and maybe he'll reform his shot this offseason, but he's obviously limited offensively.

7/8/9 - I think 8 and 9 are basically the same point, and as noted in my prior post, I'm bearish on Dawkins changing his game in any significant way. If he's anything more than an extremely streaky shooter next year, I'll be pleasantly surprised.

12/13 - This question is basically will Ryan develop an inside game? I think it's a fair question, and I hope we'll see more of it. That said, to the extent he has a pro future, it's in the role he has at Duke -- a pick-and-pop stretch 4. What he really needs to improve is his lateral quickness and rebounding if he wants to realistically be a pro 4. I agree his strength is obviously key.

14/15/16 - Again, I think this sort of lumps together variations on the question of whether Mason Plumlee can put together the whole package to become a dominant offensive player. I'm particularly bearish that 16 will ever happen. He doesn't really seem to have the touch with the basketball to ever be a consistent jump shooter, although I could be wrong.

18-20 - 19 and 20 are good, nuanced questions, although I'm wondering what you're driving at on number 18. Is there some injury problem with Josh's legs that I'm missing? From my perspective, the over-arching question is whether Josh Hairston will ever make the leap into a rotation regular as opposed to fringe, spot-duty player. As I see it, unless he (a) gets a lot stronger to allow him to play a small 4, or (b) gets a lot quicker and works on his jump shot to allow him to play the 3, he'll always be a bit of a tweener. Again, no knock on Josh, who plays hard and does seem to love Duke.

Your other questions are all very good and valid ones. I think 1/2, 5, and 10 are the most pressing questions in my book.

MCFinARL
04-17-2012, 10:48 AM
I don't think they downplayed his athletic ability. I think they focused on the idea that you make the most out of your chances. It seems that in practice, G might not have put in the work that the coaches wanted to see.

However, I do take umbrage at the notion that he didn't show much during games. For one, you barely ever saw him in games for meaningful minutes. And when he did go in, I thought that while he looked lost at times, he also looked like he had loads of potential.

Did he dive for loose balls in games? No... because he was never really in long enough to get the chance.

What surprised me most is when Kelly got hurt and he didn't sniff the floor. That spoke volumes to me and I really hoped he'd work hard and stick around instead of transfer.

I personally think he'll be a good player somewhere and we'll likely regret seeing him leave (a la McCaffrey or Olek).

Yes, but even this is speculation coming from anyone who doesn't regularly watch practice--don't know if that applies to the person who wrote the front page article or not. Yes, there is a Duke system, and yes, it's reasonable to assume that when someone is not getting into games, it's because the Duke system allots that playing time to someone else--because they are better, because they fit what the team needs in that particular game situation, and/or because the coaches liked what they saw from that player in practice. But I'd still argue that a player could, at least in theory, be working very hard in practice but still not show whatever it is that the coaches want to see for him to get on the floor, which might be a particular type of play, or extra hustle in a particular type of situation. So even there, I guess I side with those who thought the front page article was a bit snarkier than it needed to be.

Edit: having now read Jderf's eloquent post, I acknowledge that snarkiness may be in the eye of the beholder....:)

PaIronDuke
04-17-2012, 10:59 AM
I don't think they downplayed his athletic ability. I think they focused on the idea that you make the most out of your chances. It seems that in practice, G might not have put in the work that the coaches wanted to see.

However, I do take umbrage at the notion that he didn't show much during games. For one, you barely ever saw him in games for meaningful minutes. And when he did go in, I thought that while he looked lost at times, he also looked like he had loads of potential.

Did he dive for loose balls in games? No... because he was never really in long enough to get the chance.

What surprised me most is when Kelly got hurt and he didn't sniff the floor. That spoke volumes to me and I really hoped he'd work hard and stick around instead of transfer.

I personally think he'll be a good player somewhere and we'll likely regret seeing him leave (a la McCaffrey or Olek).

We have season tickets to Villanova games, and G's physical characteristics resemble those Jay Wright usually favors, so G may endup there. However, he'll ride the pine there, too, if he doesn't learn/play aggressive defense....

FerryFor50
04-17-2012, 11:00 AM
We have season tickets to Villanova games, and G's physical characteristics resemble those Jay Wright usually favors, so G may endup there. However, he'll ride the pine there, too, if he doesn't learn/play aggressive defense....

You sure about that? Because Taylor King managed to get into games and I can't remember him playing much D, even at Nova. :)

Kedsy
04-17-2012, 11:01 AM
Almost all of the other guys can play pretty much one position.

I disagree with this point. I think we will see 7 of our 10 players playing multiple positions this coming season:

Quinn: PG only
Seth: SG, PG
Rasheed: SG, PG, SF (against small teams)
Tyler: PG, SG, SF (against small teams)
Andre SF, SG
Alex: SF, PF
Ryan: PF, C
Mason: C, PF
Josh: PF only
Marshall: C only

Having listed it that way, I admit we probably won't see very much of Tyler or Andre at SG, and while Tyler did guard Harrison Barnes a bit this past season I doubt he plays more than a few minutes at SF. But that doesn't matter so much because I think the positional flexibility of newcomers Rasheed and Alex will be key when Coach K inevitably shortens his rotation.

Rasheed and Alex give us the ability to have a pretty big lineup if we want (e.g., Rasheed/Andre/Alex/Ryan/Mason) or we could also go very small and quick (e.g., Quinn/Seth/Rasheed/Alex/Mason). The Duke three-guard set (e.g., Quinn/Seth/Andre/Ryan/Mason), or a basic traditional lineup (e.g., Quinn/Seth/Alex/Ryan/Mason). We could have an amazing shooting lineup (e.g., Seth/Rasheed/Andre/Alex/Ryan) or a strong defensive lineup (Tyler/Rasheed/Alex/Ryan/Mason). All in the context of an 8-man rotation (assuming Josh and Marshall get squeezed as the season moves toward March). Personally, I think that's plenty of positional flexibility.

Kedsy
04-17-2012, 11:04 AM
Sorry, but i don't think this bodes well for our image; or for the future success of K.

I was actually with you until you got here. I can't imagine that Michael's transfer will have even one iota of influence on Coach K's future success in any conceivable way.

FerryFor50
04-17-2012, 11:07 AM
I was actually with you until you got here. I can't imagine that Michael's transfer will have even one iota of influence on Coach K's future success in any conceivable way.

I seem to remember similar sentiments when Taylor King left... And then K won a national championship.

CDu
04-17-2012, 11:10 AM
I disagree with this point. I think we will see 7 of our 10 players playing multiple positions this coming season:

Quinn: PG only
Seth: SG, PG
Rasheed: SG, PG, SF (against small teams)
Tyler: PG, SG, SF (against small teams)
Andre SF, SG
Alex: SF, PF
Ryan: PF, C
Mason: C, PF
Josh: PF only
Marshall: C only

Having listed it that way, I admit we probably won't see very much of Tyler or Andre at SG, and while Tyler did guard Harrison Barnes a bit this past season I doubt he plays more than a few minutes at SF. But that doesn't matter so much because I think the positional flexibility of newcomers Rasheed and Alex will be key when Coach K inevitably shortens his rotation.

Rasheed and Alex give us the ability to have a pretty big lineup if we want (e.g., Rasheed/Andre/Alex/Ryan/Mason) or we could also go very small and quick (e.g., Quinn/Seth/Rasheed/Alex/Mason). Or just a traditional lineup (e.g., Quinn/Seth/Alex/Ryan/Mason). We could have an amazing shooting lineup (e.g., Rasheed/Seth/Andre/Alex/Ryan) or a strong defensive lineup (Tyler/Rasheed/Alex/Ryan/Mason). All in the context of an 8-man rotation (assuming Josh and Marshall get squeezed as the season moves toward March). Personally, I think that's plenty of positional flexibility.

Mason and Kelly have no business defending quicker PF. They get toasted there. So while Kelly may play some C, he'll mostly play PF. And unless he really improves his quickness, he's going to be a liability there against most PF. I suspect that Mason will not be playing any PF next year by virtue of the composition of the team.

But I think the argument is really that we don't have a ton of guys who can cover the guard, wing, and forward spots. That's at least what I mean when discussing defensive versatility. If I'm designing a team, I'd like to see the ability to have the SG, SF, and PF switch freely on screens. The PG and C need to be flexible to guard "one-off" positionally, but otherwise need to switch back quickly to the right sized matchup.

As of now, we have only one guy with that kind of versatility (Murphy). Kelly and Mason can only guard bigs. Cook can only guard PG. Sulaimon will be comfortable against smaller players of any sort. Curry is in a similar boat. Thornton is capable against slower PG and SG and smaller SF, but he's not a great on-ball defender against quickness. Dawkins can theoretically guard SG or SF, but he suffers from lapses in focus. And he can't guard PG or PF.

The defensive versatility has less to do with lineup composition (in my opinion) and more to do with ability to handle switches on defense. It is much harder to isolate a mismatch if you have 2-3 guys that can guard the middle three positions. If you have a bunch of guys who can only guard bigs and a bunch of guys who can only guard smalls, it is much easier to set up a mismatch opportunity.

thenameisbond
04-17-2012, 11:15 AM
I was happy to see in the several links to the home page's "More on Gbinije's Departure" the straightforward explanation provided by Michael's high school coach. Namely, nothing against the school, his teammates, or K. "He just wants to play." And Michael's "just looking for a little bit of a fresh start."

Although I'm a little disappointed in the [not unexpected] brevity of K's farewell comment, it's pretty standard fare, so no reason to read anything into that, either.

However, the main page version of why Michael didn't play much does remind me of one final - and for me the essential - puzzle in his season. We are reminded of "the way things are done at Duke," meaning "defense, communication, and trust. A player earns trust in practice by playing hard, communicating and most of all defending."

Fair enough, and I mean that. For me the really puzzling thing is that I'd have bet anything, based on seeing Michael several times on TV during his senior year and in all-star games, that he'd make his mark on D and trust. I posted a year ago that Michael was one of the only players in one of those all-star games to play any D; and as "proof" I gave 2 specific examples of his hustle and smart D. Further, I thought I saw in Michael just a hint of attitude, that he came into that all-star game with a bit of a chip on his shoulder, ready to prove he belonged. I thought, "This kid is going to be a really valuable player."

So, I was either way off, or things just never clicked for Michael, once faced with the intensity [Is that it???] of K's system and tutelage. Maybe Michael's hustling D didn't mesh with the actual intricacies with K's defensive principles. Or maybe Michael's apparently very quiet demeanor became a real problem for him in Duke's system, for K has stated repeatedly that active communication is an absolute.

I want to say, too, that I have been impressed with both the civility and insights provided in this thread by Greg_Newton, jimsumner, Zeb, MCFinARL, dukedoc, and Newton 14. [The rest of you are all great, too....]. Like Greg_Newton, I have found Michael's decision to transfer somewhat unsettling. But the many thoughtful posts have been informative and steadying. Seriously.

I'm off for a bit of a cry now. Less seriously.

Good post. I had similar expectations for Mike after watching him play at last summer's EYBL. He had a smoothness to his game and a willingness to play hard on the defensive end. His shooting stroke looked very good also. Based on those observations and his overall demeanor, I expected his game to transfer well to the next level. Without the benefit of seeing how he performed in team practices, it is difficult to guess why that didn't happen.

Kedsy
04-17-2012, 11:20 AM
The defensive versatility has less to do with lineup composition (in my opinion) and more to do with ability to handle switches on defense. It is much harder to isolate a mismatch if you have 2-3 guys that can guard the middle three positions. If you have a bunch of guys who can only guard bigs and a bunch of guys who can only guard smalls, it is much easier to set up a mismatch opportunity.

Fair point. That certainly was a factor in our below-standard defense this past season. And Michael arguably could have helped with this sort of flexibility next season. But I would argue that Tyler, Andre, and (hopefully) Rasheed and Alex would all be able to handle a switch (to anything but a center for the first three and probably a PG for Alex) for a possession at a time. I wouldn't want the small wings guarding any big man for long stretches, but any of those four guys ought to be able to at least adequately handle the switch on most pick-and-rolls.

azzefkram
04-17-2012, 11:21 AM
I was actually with you until you got here. I can't imagine that Michael's transfer will have even one iota of influence on Coach K's future success in any conceivable way.

As a coach you are definitely right but it stands a good chance of having an influence in recruiting. I think highly recruited transfers out feed into a negative perception. Whether the perception is valid or not is somewhat of a moot point as it is out there and at times needs to be overcome.

freshmanjs
04-17-2012, 11:22 AM
As a coach you are definitely right but it stands a good chance of having an influence in recruiting. I think highly recruited transfers out feed into a negative perception. Whether the perception is valid or not is somewhat of a moot point as it is out there and at times needs to be overcome.

but all of the major programs have them, so how would this make any difference relative to others?

Kedsy
04-17-2012, 11:24 AM
As a coach you are definitely right but it stands a good chance of having an influence in recruiting. I think highly recruited transfers out feed into a negative perception. Whether the perception is valid or not is somewhat of a moot point as it is out there and at times needs to be overcome.

But almost all the big programs have a lot of transfers out. Hard to see how Michael's departure could be any more negative for Duke than the plethora of recent UNC departures, for example.

-jk
04-17-2012, 11:32 AM
An important thing to remember about playing for K: it's a team sport and players must work together (cf, "fist"), and without rigid structure imposed on offense or defense.

A player should know where his four teammates are. And where all five opponents are. And anticipate where the play is headed. And do all this without using a lot of set plays, but rather creating and adapting as each possession develops. It's tricky and subtle and very hard to learn. We struggled with this all year on D, and now and then on O.

Communication and awareness are vital. Calling - and hearing - a switch vs. hedge being the most obvious one on D; miss on that and someone's left really open for an easy shot. Anticipating where a player will be on O without a diagrammed play - Irving was a savant <sigh>. Seeing the entirety of the game flow, being ready to help on D, using screens to free a good shooter, calling screens to protect your teammates, finding the open big in the lane. All require broader awareness. Zoubs had amazing awareness down the stretch. He knew where his teammates were on an offensive rebound and could get the ball to an open one before the other team could begin to react. And his teammates were equally ready to catch and shoot: a team working together. This year, Kelly seemed to see the whole game better than anyone else, and we really missed it when he was out. And I think Andre often struggled to see the whole game, then would get out of position, miss an assignment, and sit.

Under K, freakish athleticism isn't necessary: just look back to our recent alarmingly unathletic team. Many of our NBA alums aren't there because of athleticism, either, but because they truly understand the whole game. Some are still there - and productive - well past their athletic prime. Still, a freakish athlete will excel under K as long as he buys into K's whole game concept. We're at our best when we have athletic players that understand the whole game. When forced to make a choice, though, K generally prefers understanding the game to athleticism.

G seemed to have a hard time adapting to this broader game K requires, and K made the choice not to play him - even though we really missed having an athletic wing. I suspect G will do quite well on a team that learns a series of sets and executes them well, where there is a lot of structure. UNC is a prime example of a set-driven team that can execute. Well, they are until JJ recognizes a potential game winning play just as it starts and breaks it up before it can develop. JJ couldn't have recognized that play without seeing the whole game. That stop was sweet, and why K insists on communication and awareness, and being more fluid and unpredictable. It's not easy, but when a team plays together, it works beautifully.

-jk

OldPhiKap
04-17-2012, 11:33 AM
But almost all the big programs have a lot of transfers out. Hard to see how Michael's departure could be any more negative for Duke than the plethora of recent UNC departures, for example.

I don't think this impacts recruiting at all. Every kid coming to Duke knows he will have to compete for playing time; that there are already good players here; and that there will be good players coming in behind him. Most kids think they have the chops to make the floor. Some do immediately; some grow into it; some never get a whole lot of time. That's true for us, as it is for most major programs (with the exception of Calipari's one-and-done-load-the-next-round model).

I was looking forward to seeing {g} play for us, but understand that he needs to do what he feels is best for him. I wish him the best of luck going forward and will always thank him for his contributions to this team -- whether they were on the floor, in practice, or in the locker room.

azzefkram
04-17-2012, 11:37 AM
Mason and Kelly have no business defending quicker PF. They get toasted there. So while Kelly may play some C, he'll mostly play PF. And unless he really improves his quickness, he's going to be a liability there against most PF. I suspect that Mason will not be playing any PF next year by virtue of the composition of the team.

But I think the argument is really that we don't have a ton of guys who can cover the guard, wing, and forward spots. That's at least what I mean when discussing defensive versatility. If I'm designing a team, I'd like to see the ability to have the SG, SF, and PF switch freely on screens. The PG and C need to be flexible to guard "one-off" positionally, but otherwise need to switch back quickly to the right sized matchup.

As of now, we have only one guy with that kind of versatility (Murphy). Kelly and Mason can only guard bigs. Cook can only guard PG. Sulaimon will be comfortable against smaller players of any sort. Curry is in a similar boat. Thornton is capable against slower PG and SG and smaller SF, but he's not a great on-ball defender against quickness. Dawkins can theoretically guard SG or SF, but he suffers from lapses in focus. And he can't guard PG or PF.

The defensive versatility has less to do with lineup composition (in my opinion) and more to do with ability to handle switches on defense. It is much harder to isolate a mismatch if you have 2-3 guys that can guard the middle three positions. If you have a bunch of guys who can only guard bigs and a bunch of guys who can only guard smalls, it is much easier to set up a mismatch opportunity.

Light Bulb! Great post. It had irked me all season that our switches on defense seemed to often create those mismatch opportunities you mentioned. I couldn't really put my finger on it until I read your post. It's interesting that you bring this up because a while ago I looked at our championship and near championship teams and noticed that we didn't have a lot of PF/C or PG/SG but a ton of WF. Last years roster and this year's upcoming will have 5 PG/SG seeing significant minutes.

Jderf
04-17-2012, 11:39 AM
As a coach you are definitely right but it stands a good chance of having an influence in recruiting. I think highly recruited transfers out feed into a negative perception. Whether the perception is valid or not is somewhat of a moot point as it is out there and at times needs to be overcome.


But almost all the big programs have a lot of transfers out. Hard to see how Michael's departure could be any more negative for Duke than the plethora of recent UNC departures, for example.

I agree with Kedsy and others, and would also like to add that, whether or not Gbinije's departure has a negative influence on our program's perceptions, Coach K has already been recruiting against the rising tide of negativity for over a decade now. Yet over that span he has still been one of the best recruiters in the game.

K knows what his pitch is; and for any negativity that gets spewed in the direction of his recruits, he knows how to counter it. Inevitably, some recruits will buy into the negative hype, while others won't -- and those are the kids that K is after.

ArtVandelay
04-17-2012, 11:40 AM
I disagree with this point. I think we will see 7 of our 10 players playing multiple positions this coming season:

Quinn: PG only
Seth: SG, PG
Rasheed: SG, PG, SF (against small teams)
Tyler: PG, SG, SF (against small teams)
Andre SF, SG
Alex: SF, PF
Ryan: PF, C
Mason: C, PF
Josh: PF only
Marshall: C only

Having listed it that way, I admit we probably won't see very much of Tyler or Andre at SG, and while Tyler did guard Harrison Barnes a bit this past season I doubt he plays more than a few minutes at SF. But that doesn't matter so much because I think the positional flexibility of newcomers Rasheed and Alex will be key when Coach K inevitably shortens his rotation.

Rasheed and Alex give us the ability to have a pretty big lineup if we want (e.g., Rasheed/Andre/Alex/Ryan/Mason) or we could also go very small and quick (e.g., Quinn/Seth/Rasheed/Alex/Mason). The Duke three-guard set (e.g., Quinn/Seth/Andre/Ryan/Mason), or a basic traditional lineup (e.g., Quinn/Seth/Alex/Ryan/Mason). We could have an amazing shooting lineup (e.g., Seth/Rasheed/Andre/Alex/Ryan) or a strong defensive lineup (Tyler/Rasheed/Alex/Ryan/Mason). All in the context of an 8-man rotation (assuming Josh and Marshall get squeezed as the season moves toward March). Personally, I think that's plenty of positional flexibility.

Well, sure, some of the guys "can" play multiple positions. The question is whether they should be playing multiple positions or, to be more accurate, whether they can do so well. In particular, I'm looking for guys that play on the wing, both shoot and rebound, and guard multiple positions, particularly when we switch screens. I would be very surprised if Rasheed plays anything other than the 2 or possibly the "3" in a 3-guard lineup, but I've never heard anyone say he can play PG, and I wouldn't think as a frosh that he'll have the size/strength to really hang at the 3 against superior teams. To say that Tyler is anything other than a PG is exalting form over substance. Sure, he guarded Barnes this year, but I think that illustrates the desperation of the situation -- we had so few quality defenders that we had to stick a 6'1" guy on the 6'8" Barnes. As for Ryan and Mason, yeah, I guess they technically can play both, but realistically Mason will probably only play the five and Ryan the 4, with possible back-up minutes at the 5 depending on how ready Marshall is.

As for your line-up combos:
Big -- Rasheed/Andre/Alex/Ryan/Mason --> sorry, don't see Sheed playing the PG position
Small and Quick -- Quinn/Seth/Rasheed/Alex/Mason --> agree this is small and I hope that it's quick (I haven't seen Sheed or Murphy play enough to know, really). But I worry about Sheed's ability to guard the 3 based on his size/age, as noted above.
3 guards -- Quinn/Seth/Andre/Ryan/Mason --> I'd say there's a decent chance this is our starting lineup next year, which is essentially guards and bigs, which was my point.
Traditional -- Quinn/Seth/Alex/Ryan/Mason --> I hope that Quinn and Murphy improve enough for this to be our starting lineup next year.
Shooting -- Seth/Rasheed/Andre/Alex/Ryan --> Fair that this is a good shooting lineup, although I don't know much about Murphy's reputation as a shooter, and I'm thinking we've probably seen the last of the Seth Curry as PG experiment. If we weren't going to use it last year, I'd be surprised if K goes back to it next year.
Defensive -- Tyler/Rasheed/Alex/Ryan/Mason --> This is the one that I take most umbrage with. What is the basis for assuming that Rasheed and Murphy will be above-average defenders? Neither of them have played a minute of DI basketball yet. And to put Ryan in our prime defensive lineup is a bit of a stretch, wouldn't you say? He's not bad at rotating and taking help-side charges and is a pretty good shot-blocker, but I don't think that D is necessarily his forte.

Kedsy
04-17-2012, 11:43 AM
(with the exception of Calipari's one-and-done-load-the-next-round model)

Kentucky has had transfers recently (Stacey Poole springs to mind). So even Calipari isn't immune.

ArtVandelay
04-17-2012, 11:47 AM
Mason and Kelly have no business defending quicker PF. They get toasted there. So while Kelly may play some C, he'll mostly play PF. And unless he really improves his quickness, he's going to be a liability there against most PF. I suspect that Mason will not be playing any PF next year by virtue of the composition of the team.

But I think the argument is really that we don't have a ton of guys who can cover the guard, wing, and forward spots. That's at least what I mean when discussing defensive versatility. If I'm designing a team, I'd like to see the ability to have the SG, SF, and PF switch freely on screens. The PG and C need to be flexible to guard "one-off" positionally, but otherwise need to switch back quickly to the right sized matchup.

As of now, we have only one guy with that kind of versatility (Murphy). Kelly and Mason can only guard bigs. Cook can only guard PG. Sulaimon will be comfortable against smaller players of any sort. Curry is in a similar boat. Thornton is capable against slower PG and SG and smaller SF, but he's not a great on-ball defender against quickness. Dawkins can theoretically guard SG or SF, but he suffers from lapses in focus. And he can't guard PG or PF.

The defensive versatility has less to do with lineup composition (in my opinion) and more to do with ability to handle switches on defense. It is much harder to isolate a mismatch if you have 2-3 guys that can guard the middle three positions. If you have a bunch of guys who can only guard bigs and a bunch of guys who can only guard smalls, it is much easier to set up a mismatch opportunity.

This. CDu, you stole some of my thunder from my subsequent post, which I guess I was still typing when you posted this response. No plagiarism was intended. Good post.

azzefkram
04-17-2012, 11:50 AM
But almost all the big programs have a lot of transfers out. Hard to see how Michael's departure could be any more negative for Duke than the plethora of recent UNC departures, for example.

You're right that it happens at all the big programs but that doesn't mean it doesn't have an impact. It sucks but negative recruiting exists. I think Coach K and his staff are exceptionally upstanding individuals and I would be completely shocked if any of them engaged in such a practice. Other programs, on the other hand, well let's just say I don't have the same level of confidence there.

Kedsy
04-17-2012, 12:06 PM
I would be very surprised if Rasheed plays anything other than the 2 or possibly the "3" in a 3-guard lineup, but I've never heard anyone say he can play PG...

After Rasheed played PG for most of a recent high school all-star game, he was quoted as saying Coach K asked him to work on playing point in preparation for the coming season. Don't know how well he'll do, but I bet we see him stealing a few minutes a game at PG next season.


As for Ryan and Mason, yeah, I guess they technically can play both, but realistically Mason will probably only play the five and Ryan the 4, with possible back-up minutes at the 5 depending on how ready Marshall is.

Ryan played some C this past season, on a team that had both Mason and Miles. I remember him guarding Sullinger and doing a creditable job. Personally, I think Ryan can guard most college centers better than he can guard quicker college PFs. I expect Ryan to pick up at least 5 minutes a game at C next season, maybe as many as 10.


Big -- Rasheed/Andre/Alex/Ryan/Mason --> sorry, don't see Sheed playing the PG position

Well, you might be right, but if Coach K asked Rasheed to get prepared to play some PG, my guess is you also might be wrong. Having said that, I doubt we'll see this particular lineup very often, if at all, but I like that Coach K will have that club in his bag.


But I worry about Sheed's ability to guard the 3 based on his size/age, as noted above.

That's a valid concern. We'll have to wait and see if he's capable there.


Fair that this is a good shooting lineup, although I don't know much about Murphy's reputation as a shooter, and I'm thinking we've probably seen the last of the Seth Curry as PG experiment. If we weren't going to use it last year, I'd be surprised if K goes back to it next year.

In a lineup containing Rasheed, Seth, Andre, and Ryan, I'm not sure it matters how well Alex can shoot from the outside. As far as Seth at PG is concerned, while he stopped being our primary PG in early December this past season, he still played several minutes at PG in almost every game. I suspect that trend will continue.


Defensive -- Tyler/Rasheed/Alex/Ryan/Mason --> This is the one that I take most umbrage with. What is the basis for assuming that Rasheed and Murphy will be above-average defenders? Neither of them have played a minute of DI basketball yet. And to put Ryan in our prime defensive lineup is a bit of a stretch, wouldn't you say? He's not bad at rotating and taking help-side charges and is a pretty good shot-blocker, but I don't think that D is necessarily his forte.

My basis for assuming Rasheed is a plus defender is his well-reported reputation as a plus defender (at least in high school). My basis for Alex is that Coach K has said he's a potential four-year starter and it's hard to imagine him making such a statement if Alex wasn't pretty good on D. Also, assuming Rasheed actually is a good defender, and that Tyler continues his hard-nosed off-ball D, Alex's size alone makes him a defensive asset unless he has very slow lateral footspeed and, again, if that was the case I doubt Coach K would have made such glowing comments about Alex. As far as Ryan is concerned, I think he's a better defender than most on this board seem to believe. Even if I'm wrong about that, if Rasheed, Tyler, Alex, and Mason perform as well defensively as I hope they will, then Ryan's help-side shot-blocking and charge-taking is all we'll really need from him in that lineup.

CDu
04-17-2012, 12:19 PM
Fair point. That certainly was a factor in our below-standard defense this past season. And Michael arguably could have helped with this sort of flexibility next season. But I would argue that Tyler, Andre, and (hopefully) Rasheed and Alex would all be able to handle a switch (to anything but a center for the first three and probably a PG for Alex) for a possession at a time. I wouldn't want the small wings guarding any big man for long stretches, but any of those four guys ought to be able to at least adequately handle the switch on most pick-and-rolls.

I don't think Sulaimon, Dawkins, or Thornton would function well in a switch against most PF on any sort of regular basis. I do think each could function on a switch against most PG, SG, and most SF. They wouldn't be ideal at all of those spots, but they could handle it. Murphy is the one guy with the size and athleticism to not be a complete fish out of water in a switch onto any position (though I agree I wouldn't really want to see him often on a C or PG).

And I certainly don't mean to suggest that Gbinije would certainly have addressed this issue. But he's one of the few guys who could conceivably address it. It's one of the reasons that I like Coach K's efforts in going after Hood, Parker, and Randle next year and Wiggins the year after (or next year if he reclassifies) especially now that we know Gbinije is transferring.

Kedsy
04-17-2012, 01:24 PM
I don't think Sulaimon, Dawkins, or Thornton would function well in a switch against most PF on any sort of regular basis. I do think each could function on a switch against most PG, SG, and most SF. They wouldn't be ideal at all of those spots, but they could handle it. Murphy is the one guy with the size and athleticism to not be a complete fish out of water in a switch onto any position (though I agree I wouldn't really want to see him often on a C or PG).

And I certainly don't mean to suggest that Gbinije would certainly have addressed this issue. But he's one of the few guys who could conceivably address it. It's one of the reasons that I like Coach K's efforts in going after Hood, Parker, and Randle next year and Wiggins the year after (or next year if he reclassifies) especially now that we know Gbinije is transferring.

That all makes sense. I wouldn't argue that we're in great shape on all those switches. I do think we'll be in better shape than we were this past season.

g-money
04-17-2012, 01:30 PM
It's unfortunate to see all the sour grapes here, including the DBR article on Silent G transferring.

There's no need to downplay the kid's talents or supposed lack of intensity just because he is transferring. I heard none of these complaints when we were discussing lineups, next year's prospects, etc.

It's just sad that people feel the need to make themselves feel better when something bad happens, and losing players of this caliber are definitely bad things.

Add me to the list of folks that feels the article on the DBR front page is unnecessarily negative. Gbinijie barely played this year, so it seems highly presumptuous and/or speculative to claim that he was a poor defender. (Unless the author was privy to Duke's practices last year, which I doubt.)

Furthermore, Gbinijie has not been impugning Duke in the media regarding his decision to go elsewhere; there's no need for DBR to take the low road by doing the opposite.

The article reminds me of the "See ya" title that popped up after Austin decided to go pro. A bit too negative regarding a former player, IMO. These kids make big sacrifices during the time they are here, however short that time may be.

Kewlswim
04-17-2012, 01:44 PM
Hi,

I think we should let the kid go without reading too much into why he left, now that we know it wasn't anything "bad" he did or that he didn't get along with the coaching staff. I didn't read anywhere where Coach K said, "If only Mike had played better defense he would have been on the floor more." We can garner that is probably what happened, but we don't know. Maybe he was playing d just fine, but not passing enough on O? Maybe the coaches didn't like something else about his game and wanted him to work on it and voila on the pine he road? However, I have another explanation. Coach K seems to always pick an 8 maybe 9 man rotation and if you aren't a part of it, wait until next year or an injury. I just think Mike might have been odd man out, he was a freshman, he didn't want to risk being odd man out again and he transferred. Again, this is just my take on all of it, it could be that the coaches felt his D was sub-standard, but I haven't read that. Then again, I haven't read every post and article on the situation. I tend to focus on kids who are still here or coming here. Good luck Mike, as long as it isn't when you are playing Duke!

GO DUKE!

ArtVandelay
04-17-2012, 02:02 PM
After Rasheed played PG for most of a recent high school all-star game, he was quoted as saying Coach K asked him to work on playing point in preparation for the coming season. Don't know how well he'll do, but I bet we see him stealing a few minutes a game at PG next season.



Ryan played some C this past season, on a team that had both Mason and Miles. I remember him guarding Sullinger and doing a creditable job. Personally, I think Ryan can guard most college centers better than he can guard quicker college PFs. I expect Ryan to pick up at least 5 minutes a game at C next season, maybe as many as 10.



Well, you might be right, but if Coach K asked Rasheed to get prepared to play some PG, my guess is you also might be wrong. Having said that, I doubt we'll see this particular lineup very often, if at all, but I like that Coach K will have that club in his bag.



That's a valid concern. We'll have to wait and see if he's capable there.



In a lineup containing Rasheed, Seth, Andre, and Ryan, I'm not sure it matters how well Alex can shoot from the outside. As far as Seth at PG is concerned, while he stopped being our primary PG in early December this past season, he still played several minutes at PG in almost every game. I suspect that trend will continue.



My basis for assuming Rasheed is a plus defender is his well-reported reputation as a plus defender (at least in high school). My basis for Alex is that Coach K has said he's a potential four-year starter and it's hard to imagine him making such a statement if Alex wasn't pretty good on D. Also, assuming Rasheed actually is a good defender, and that Tyler continues his hard-nosed off-ball D, Alex's size alone makes him a defensive asset unless he has very slow lateral footspeed and, again, if that was the case I doubt Coach K would have made such glowing comments about Alex. As far as Ryan is concerned, I think he's a better defender than most on this board seem to believe. Even if I'm wrong about that, if Rasheed, Tyler, Alex, and Mason perform as well defensively as I hope they will, then Ryan's help-side shot-blocking and charge-taking is all we'll really need from him in that lineup.

I wasn't aware of Coach K's comments regarding Rasheed and the PG position, so I stand corrected on that. That said, we certainly will have to see when the rubber hits the road next year. I suppose it's possible that both Curry and Rasheed CAN play PG next year, but I think we agree that the best case scenario is a healthy and productive Quinn starting and logging starter minutes at the PG next year.

As for your point about Ryan's defense, I agree that he's probably better off guarding a 5, which is actually my point. I don't love the idea of him guarding a 4, particularly one like, say, McAdoo. He's really a "big" in terms of body type and agility, except with a more perimeter-oriented offensive skillset.

Between Seth's lack of size at the 2, Dawkins' lack of size and occasional lapses at the 3, and Kelly's lack of quickness at the 4, there is quite a lot of potential for problems on the defensive side. Plus we lack that wing offensive punch (particularly sans Rivers) -- someone who can play a mid-range game, attack the basket, get some points on the offensive glass, etc. I thought an improved Silent G could help address both of those problems, which is why i was lamenting his loss. Hopefully Murphy fills that niche on both sides of the ball, but there is a lot more pressure on him to perform now, IMO.

Kedsy
04-17-2012, 02:18 PM
I wasn't aware of Coach K's comments regarding Rasheed and the PG position, so I stand corrected on that. That said, we certainly will have to see when the rubber hits the road next year. I suppose it's possible that both Curry and Rasheed CAN play PG next year, but I think we agree that the best case scenario is a healthy and productive Quinn starting and logging starter minutes at the PG next year.

As for your point about Ryan's defense, I agree that he's probably better off guarding a 5, which is actually my point. I don't love the idea of him guarding a 4, particularly one like, say, McAdoo. He's really a "big" in terms of body type and agility, except with a more perimeter-oriented offensive skillset.

Between Seth's lack of size at the 2, Dawkins' lack of size and occasional lapses at the 3, and Kelly's lack of quickness at the 4, there is quite a lot of potential for problems on the defensive side. Plus we lack that wing offensive punch (particularly sans Rivers) -- someone who can play a mid-range game, attack the basket, get some points on the offensive glass, etc. I thought an improved Silent G could help address both of those problems, which is why i was lamenting his loss. Hopefully Murphy fills that niche on both sides of the ball, but there is a lot more pressure on him to perform now, IMO.

I agree that Michael could possibly have helped our versatility next season. I also acknowledge that my arguments rely on two unproven players (Rasheed and Alex) providing the versatility that was largely missing from the 2011-12 Duke team. I look forward to seeing if they can pull it off.

superdave
04-17-2012, 02:19 PM
I don't think Sulaimon, Dawkins, or Thornton would function well in a switch against most PF on any sort of regular basis. I do think each could function on a switch against most PG, SG, and most SF. They wouldn't be ideal at all of those spots, but they could handle it. Murphy is the one guy with the size and athleticism to not be a complete fish out of water in a switch onto any position (though I agree I wouldn't really want to see him often on a C or PG).

And I certainly don't mean to suggest that Gbinije would certainly have addressed this issue. But he's one of the few guys who could conceivably address it. It's one of the reasons that I like Coach K's efforts in going after Hood, Parker, and Randle next year and Wiggins the year after (or next year if he reclassifies) especially now that we know Gbinije is transferring.

One of the things that made the 2010 Champs so special defensively was that Singler and Thomas were both essentially 3/4 combos. Both could switch onto any player on the court with a reasonable degree of success, except for Ty Lawson the year before. Also, Scheyer was big enough to switch onto players at multiple positions and Nolan was an A+ on the ball defender by then. Each of those factors contributed to the success of the whole team and made everyone better. Once Zoubek started hedging well and eating up space inside, the whole thing worked. The defensive chemistry was amazingly good.

We did not get there this past year. Our perimeter guys got broken down off the dribble at every position and were under-sized across the board. Our bigger guys were not quick enough to guard well away from the basket and they were good leapers, but not second-leapers or space eaters. I'm not exactly sure how well this past year's team communicated, but I cannot imagine it was up to par historically at Duke.

Sulaimon may be the Nolan-style defender we're lacking, so I'm really looking forward to that.

I think the loss of Gbinije would have hurt more if Alex Murphy was not projected to get a solid amount of minutes at the 3. If we run more, we'll miss Gbinije more. We shall see.

MulletMan
04-17-2012, 02:52 PM
I think that the front page piece is a bit of a reaction to the ever-present sentiment from a lot of Duke fans and posters on this board that Gbinije was some kind of cure-all to this season's ills who just couldn't get off the bench for some mysterious reason. There is a long list of Duke players who fans shouted for... Mike being the latest... who would have, should have made a difference. The reason that it gets old is because people seem to think that the staff isn't putting the best team on the floor to give us a chance to win. These cries for Player X are usually based on a high school highlight video (see Czyz, Olek) and have nothing to do with what the coaches are seeing in practice every day.

However, we do know that in several cases, Duke players haven't gotten onto the court for their lack of defensive prowess or inability to communicate. In recent memory, Elliot Williams actually played his way ON to the court by focusing solely on his defensive game under the tutelage of Nate. This was a case where we saw a player work his way onto the court... there is actual evidence.

It would stand to reason that there was a, or multiple, reason(s) that Mike didn't see PT this season. The front page article is analyzing those possible reasons in the context of what we know about K's program over the course of 30 years. There's no need to coddle the kid on his way out the door. He seems like a good kid, and we can wish him well, but we can also speculate as to why he didn't get onto the floor and why he felt that Duke was not a good fit for him. We can do this especially in light of the fact that we are also crowning him an All-ACC caliber talent without evidence to support that assertion.

PaIronDuke
04-17-2012, 03:01 PM
You sure about that? Because Taylor King managed to get into games and I can't remember him playing much D, even at Nova. :)

You're right that he didn't play much "D"-kind of a constant scrambling around- and he, of course, bailed out of there, too. Never was sure if he took the initiative, or was pushed, but in fairness the extraneous factors probably had as much to do with it as anything............

MulletMan
04-17-2012, 04:08 PM
Several of you had posts deleted in this thread, and while moderators who are posting on a topic try to refrain from moderating said topic, there were clear flames from a troll that I could just not leave up until another mod had time to deal with them. I am sorry that some of you had your responses deleted, and be assured that I thank you for getting after the flamer in a constructive and pretty darn polite manner. However, since a number of the posts actually quoted the flame, I took them down.

No need to give further air time to idiocy.

BD80
04-17-2012, 05:02 PM
... I had similar expectations for Mike ... I expected his game to transfer well ...

Looks like you nailed it :rolleyes::rolleyes: Now, where to?


An important thing to remember about playing for K: it's a team sport and players must work together (cf, "fist"), and without rigid structure imposed on offense or defense.

A player should know where his four teammates are. And where all five opponents are. And anticipate where the play is headed. And do all this without using a lot of set plays, but rather creating and adapting as each possession develops. It's tricky and subtle and very hard to learn. We struggled with this all year on D, and now and then on O.

Communication and awareness are vital. Calling - and hearing - a switch vs. hedge being the most obvious one on D; miss on that and someone's left really open for an easy shot. Anticipating where a player will be on O without a diagrammed play - Irving was a savant <sigh>. Seeing the entirety of the game flow, being ready to help on D, ... I think Andre often struggled to see the whole game, then would get out of position, miss an assignment, and sit. ...

G seemed to have a hard time adapting to this broader game K requires, ...-jk

The key is how QUICKLY these decisions and adjustments must occur. I was recently talked into a Zumba class, and got a first-hand lesson in how Andre must feel. I always seemed to be a half-step out of rythym, or on-beat but in the wrong spot. I can imagine the frustration of someone like Mike, seeing inferior athletes playing while he sits, and watching them make the same mistakes that are keeping him off the floor. I would bet that Mike felt that he was AT LEAST as good as the other SFs in practice, and yet he still sat. And how do you learn to deal with the speed of real games when there is nobody in practice who causes sudden switches or the need to slide like Kendall Marshall? Some guys just have a better feel for the court ans speed of the game - its hard - and frustrating - to learn.


After Rasheed played PG for most of a recent high school all-star game, he was quoted as saying Coach K asked him to work on playing point in preparation for the coming season. Don't know how well he'll do, but I bet we see him stealing a few minutes a game at PG next season. ...

... As far as Seth at PG is concerned, while he stopped being our primary PG in early December this past season, he still played several minutes at PG in almost every game. I suspect that trend will continue. ...

I really don't think Tyler played point guard. He was rarely the primary ball-handler. He has woeful skills at creating offense. Austin or Seth would typically play "point guard" on offense. Tyler may defend the point, but our SG will be tasked with offensive point duties until Tyler raises his offensive skill level.

ncexnyc
04-17-2012, 07:15 PM
DBR prides itself as being several notches above the competition. Its members are some of the brightest individuals around, who exhibit a solid knowledge of college basketball. You’ll find some extremely well presented cases for or against the various positions, which come up in the many different threads throughout this board. With all the intellectual prowess, which is often on display here at DBR you would think that the people running this site would have some home spun wisdom to fall back on. Namely the old saying, “If you can’t say something nice, don’t say anything at all.”

I was extremely disappointed to read the DBR article about Gbinije’s transfer. Ol’ Roy would blush with envy over the character assassination that took place in the article. I’m sure if Roy reads it he’ll be taking notes for use in the upcoming season at UNC. Not only did DBR throw Mike under the bus, they popped the clutch several times, spinning the wheels over Mike’s still warm body.

As I read the article all I could think of were the phrases damage control and spinmeister. Surely Mike deserved better than this hatchet job. Was it really necessary for DBR to get its pound of flesh?

tendev
04-17-2012, 07:51 PM
340 minutes out of a possible 6,800 is 5%. That would be slightly less than Quinn but more than Josh. Position doesn't really factor into it.

Assuming 900 players enter D1 each year, Mike's top 30 ranking puts him in the top 4% of all entering players. How unreasonable is it to expect an athletic top 30 recruit who happens to fill a glaring area of need to play 340 minutes over the course of a season.

Playing time is not a statistical analysis. And expectations are meaningless once you lace'em up. If after all those hours of practice MG could not convince the coaches that he should be playing more then I assume that he just wasn't getting it done. As for whether he thought that was going to continue next year, I don't know. But I guarantee darn tee you that the coaches and all the players know down to the last guy on the bench who will be playing the most minutes next year assuming no one else shows tremendous improvement over the summer. It's not that complicated. MG probably saw the proverbial handwriting on the wall and decided that if he wanted to play more, he should transfer. There is nothing wrong with that. Good luck to him wherever he ends up.

tendev
04-17-2012, 08:00 PM
DBR prides itself as being several notches above the competition. Its members are some of the brightest individuals around, who exhibit a solid knowledge of college basketball. You’ll find some extremely well presented cases for or against the various positions, which come up in the many different threads throughout this board. With all the intellectual prowess, which is often on display here at DBR you would think that the people running this site would have some home spun wisdom to fall back on. Namely the old saying, “If you can’t say something nice, don’t say anything at all.”

I was extremely disappointed to read the DBR article about Gbinije’s transfer. Ol’ Roy would blush with envy over the character assassination that took place in the article. I’m sure if Roy reads it he’ll be taking notes for use in the upcoming season at UNC. Not only did DBR throw Mike under the bus, they popped the clutch several times, spinning the wheels over Mike’s still warm body.

As I read the article all I could think of were the phrases damage control and spinmeister. Surely Mike deserved better than this hatchet job. Was it really necessary for DBR to get its pound of flesh?

What part of the article was a hatchet job? The jist of the article was that playing good defense will earn you playing time. That point is fairly self-evident and hardly character assassination.

ACCBBallFan
04-17-2012, 08:27 PM
I'm guessing this is somewhat overstated. While the team might not have anyone with Alex's exact body type to send him against in practice, there is certainly plenty of talent with which to contend. Murphy can hone guard skills against our guard horde and post skills against the likes of Hairston and Ryan. And we might get Jefferson or Hood, rendering the issue moot. Even if we don't, we very likely bring in a wing the following year, so at worst we are talking a single season here. He will find plenty of practice challenges.Individually, sure.

I was thinking in context of a 5 vs. 5 scrimmage with all ACC caliber players, not walk-ons, though coaches are still a work around possibility.

With the current makeup of 5 guards, 4 bigs and one tweener it cannot be optimized.

If Alex is getting the practice against guys his own size as a PF vs. Ryan, Josh or Mason with MP3 one of the centers and one of the 3 the other center, the team he is competing vs. has an out of position WF, be it Josh or Ryan or Mason matched up with a small at WF.

If he is practicing with Mason defended by his bro, with Ryan defended by Josh and with Seth at one of the combo slots, Alex as the WF he can be guarded by Tyler who is not much of an offensive threat, by Dre who tends to camp out beyond 3 point line, or by Sheed who may be too small to really push Alex.

An 11th player be it Tony or Amile or Rodney at least for preactices, could alleviate this. So I agree in that case the point is moot.

Also agree it is likely a one year problem but an important year being Alex's first as a player rather than a red-shirt.

Hard to say after Mason and Ryan depart whether Alex will be a WF or a PF next year but this year he is the only bona fide WF.

Duke did do very well vs. top teams in early season last year with Dre as the WF and Seth as the PG, albeit with Austin too. So Dre as a starter with Alex as both Dre's backup and Ryan's backup is another possibility in games. These could both be replicated by Alex practicing with Dre to emulate the PF sub role and practicing vs. Dre (or Tyler or Sheed with 4 bigs already occupied agaisnt each other) in the Dre' sub role.

So you are right, almost invisible from a game perspective but has some potential prelude impact in practice that likely could be avoided if Mike were not transferring.

greybeard
04-18-2012, 01:50 AM
As for your point about Ryan's defense, I agree that he's probably better off guarding a 5, which is actually my point. I don't love the idea of him guarding a 4, particularly one like, say, McAdoo. He's really a "big" in terms of body type and agility, except with a more perimeter-oriented offensive skillset.


zproperly rested, I think Kelly will more than hold his own against 4's, perhaps not so much against a sure fire pro like McAoo, but perhaps not so little either. Keep in mind the thinly stretched issue, and the concurrent need to stay out of foul trouble. Kelly is much smarter than the average bear in sizing up an opponent, seeing where the opponent is going with the ball given court configuration, his tendances, and what his strengths and ability to see options are. I think many players see those things before they are manifest, just before--call it ESP like if you want--but not "basketball IQ," at least in my view. If there is such a thing as IQ, what it measures I shouldn't know. Like they say in baseball, if you can't see it you can't hit it, and, if you know what is coming, your odds just increased.

Kelly's strength is that he knows what the offensive guy is going to want to do before the guy does, and understands how, also a function of when, to act to impede--to make the guy to do something different, that makes a high percent play to a crap shoot. To do this well, you not only need to see things others don't but create "tells", subtle ones that the really good players pick up and act upon, only the tells are phony and you are reay to move to take away what you lead the offensive player to commit to, with the intent to utilizing a style, perhaps a way of ringing the ball up to shooting, that you then cause the guy to alter and distrupt his rhythm and make a shot the guy has practiced a million times just enough different to make all the difference.

This is a big part of kelly's defensive game, that and those long arms, timing, and ability to get to shots from behind or from the side, so as to avoid fouls.

To play defense like this effectively, and defensive rebound, and shoot the three and be responsible for running the offense, and to do them effectively, Ryan needs more time, especially more time that he can count on, to rest and rejuvanate, and in the meantime, assess from the sidelines what is going out in the court and how he can improve play when he returns.

If Ryan sees less time, and if this new guy Sheed presents the speed, size, temperment, and arrange of skills that short snippets suggest to me he might well have, Ryan I think wiol do much better on the defensive end and will have the energy to play inside the three line as well. Sheed, in the meantime, might greatly contribute to Duke's offense: he has the body, smarts, and disposition to both defend very well on the exterior, get long rebounds, compete well for rebounds among the trees,shoot the passing lanes, and pose enough of a threat to get inside and hurt people that he will draw help defenders off shooters like Curry and generously give the ball up when he does. Getting inside the defense and 3 or 5 steps closer to the lane than guards commited to the three, I think that Sheed will create the type of passing lanes that will test Mason's ability to move without the ball and set defenders up so he will be able to make perentages in the paint that lead to easy scoring chances. I expect Sheed to get out on the break, show real speed but also the ability to make runers and finishers of his teammates. I really like this guy, and think that he will be very good.

Finally, when K said that G would have got more playing time if he showed better as a defender, might notK have been saying that he had a large array of outside players and therefore the only way for G to have gotten on the court to present as McClure-like on defense (You might recall that McRob's last year, Duke had a sufficating efense and that McClure did not switch off screens when guarding the other team's best exterio player but would switch when it would mean picking up that player. So, McClure would be guarding the best outside players the opponent possessed and would be dogging them far into the shop clock. McClure got plenty of minutes. Perhaps G did not have no McClure in him, McClure was a phenom in his own right, and saw no future in tryin to must an offense that had lots of skilled exterior players, all of whom could shoot the three ball. Just speculation on my part, but that is how I hear what K had to say about G; not that he didn't satisfy on defense, but that he could ot push Curry, Ryan, Dre or Tyler aside because he wasn't exceptional on the defensive side of the ball and there was no space for him that he could earn based upon his potential contributions on offense.

If what I just said approximates meaningfully the facts on the ground than G might not have seen anything changing for him anytime soon or perhaps at all during his time at 'Duke." That takes nothing away from G's game, nor do I think it dtracts from G's character or anyone else's. For players who have investe so much of themselves and self idenfications in being a basketball player, not being willing to consider transferring a program where there services were needed is, I should think being out of integrity with who you are. I think that few things could be worse than compromising on so important a matter without considering an attractive offer from another program, and taking it if the player likes and trusts what he sees. Playing ball in college, especially on a high level, is a big part of these kid's dreams. Giving up on them for a lesser role on a storied program for some might work best for some. For others it woul simply depriving one a real shot, probably not otherwise available, to live one's dreams. How can you be hatin on a young man for doing that.

Slackerb
04-18-2012, 09:19 AM
What part of the article was a hatchet job? The jist of the article was that playing good defense will earn you playing time. That point is fairly self-evident and hardly character assassination.

Here's how DBR authors do character assassination:

-Duke's way is defense and trust.
-If you do those things, you earn playing time.
-Gbinije didn't earn playing time, so he must either be lazy in practice and games and/or play bad defense
-Since he's so bad at those things, it's no big deal he left.

It's verbose and slightly subtle, but it's definitely still sour grapes. I never read these criticisms before his departure, and writing them after is the very definition of sour grapes and character assassination after the fact.

Here are some quotes from the article that are downright presumptive, snarky, etc.


We’re not quite sure why Gbinije never got there on defense
I'm not sure how you're sure he is bad at defense. They go on some ramble about the Kentucky game and Ricky Price, basically implying that Silent G failed to embrace some moment. Why don't you just blame the Lehigh loss on the kid and get it over with.


We’re not ripping him. It’s just a quiet realization. Duke needed defenders;
You're right Duke needed defenders. But to lay it at the feet of a freshman that he didn't step up his first year on campus is really lame. How many freshmen across the country sit the bench and go on to be not only good players but good defenders? Hell, how many Duke players do this? Zoubek didn't see much of the floor his freshman year. Surely he was bad at hustling and was doomed to play sorry defense.

I'm sorry, but when a player transfers, you don't rip him and say he must have been a bad defender and shown no intensity. Maybe you should have played hard and you could have saved our season. Goodbye, but we'll hardly miss you. That's just wrong.

MulletMan
04-18-2012, 10:34 AM
Here's how DBR authors do character assassination:

-Duke's way is defense and trust.
-If you do those things, you earn playing time.
-Gbinije didn't earn playing time, so he must either be lazy in practice and games and/or play bad defense
-Since he's so bad at those things, it's no big deal he left.

It's verbose and slightly subtle, but it's definitely still sour grapes. I never read these criticisms before his departure, and writing them after is the very definition of sour grapes and character assassination after the fact.

I'm not sure how you're sure he is bad at defense. They go on some ramble about the Kentucky game and Ricky Price, basically implying that Silent G failed to embrace some moment. Why don't you just blame the Lehigh loss on the kid and get it over with.


You're right Duke needed defenders. But to lay it at the feet of a freshman that he didn't step up his first year on campus is really lame. How many freshmen across the country sit the bench and go on to be not only good players but good defenders? Hell, how many Duke players do this? Zoubek didn't see much of the floor his freshman year. Surely he was bad at hustling and was doomed to play sorry defense.

I'm sorry, but when a player transfers, you don't rip him and say he must have been a bad defender and shown no intensity. Maybe you should have played hard and you could have saved our season. Goodbye, but we'll hardly miss you. That's just wrong.

Somebody wake up on the wrong side of the bed? Its pretty clear that, and you seem to agree with this point, that Duke needed perimeter defenders in a baaaaaad way this season. No one is blaming Mike for our lack of defensive prowess, the front page article is simply stating that if he was a good enough defender, considering our area of need, he would have been on the court. He wasn't showing the staff that he was that solid stopper, so he didn't get on the court. That's all.

I have seen many people bemoan DBR's assessment of why Mike may have left, yet I haven't seen anyone else offer an alternative hypothesis for why he didn't get on the court this season. There must have been a reason, right? Don't you think that its conceivable that Mike didn't pick up the intricacies of Duke's D as a frosh? This has been the case for many players. Its not character assassination, its simple fact. That's part of what makes his transfer so disappointing, in that he probably would have made a nice jump with another year in the system.

The Ricky Price analogy is pretty apt, if you have any memory of the Kentucky game. Duke got up big and then couldn't stop Kentucky from getting into the lane and getting kick outs for open threes as they made their comeback. What would have been ideal was having a larger, quicker player to relieve Wojo on the defensive end. Ricky Price should have fit that bill, but wasn't used... most likely because he hadn't shown that he could be a lock down defender through the course of his career. We could have used a lock down defender on the perimeter this season, but it would seem that if MikeG had shown this ability in practice, he'd have gotten the opportunity to do this in a game. Don't you think?

And well it is unfortunate, it is very true that few players that have transferred from Duke have gone on to significant things at the schools they transferred to. Billy McCaffrey is probably the best example of a player who went on to big things, but in recent memory, which of our transfers even ended up starting? Boykin at Cal? Olek at Nevada? These aren't to speak poorly of these kids because they left or because of what they did later, these are simple facts. (Frankly, I will always be disappointed that Jamal needed to leave because he played with so much passion and energy and was exciting to watch. But did losing him cost us the National Title? Not so much.)

The front page article is a pretty reasonable assessment of what we know about the MikeG situation. There may be other things that we don't know. You need to check your attitude and go back and re-read the article.

Jderf
04-18-2012, 10:50 AM
While the timing of the front page article was a little, let's say, "obvious," I can't think of anything presented in it which was egregiously inaccurate.

To add to MulletMan's good points, I'm not sure why people keep saying we haven't seen enough of Gbinije to make any judgments about his defense. He saw the court this year for a grand total of two hours (1:51). True, that's not much in terms of a season's playing time. But it is more than enough tape to show that Gbinije had not yet become the lockdown defender we so badly needed last year. I have no doubt he will eventually get there -- he has all the tools -- but he simply was not ready yet as a freshman. That's not a knock on Gbinije; it's true for 99.9% of freshmen. And I don't think it is "character assassination" to acknowledge that fact.

Must admit, I do wish he stuck around, since I suspect he's going to be really, really good. But that doesn't make it forbidden to say that he wasn't quite ready this year.

But hey, that's my take. There's always the possibility that I just really am bitter. **shrugs**

UrinalCake
04-18-2012, 10:55 AM
I remember that Kentucky game in 1998 and after the game a lot of people thought that a.)Avery should have played more instead of Wojo, and b.)we should have gone to a zone defense. Once again reminiscent of the current Cook-Thornton debate. I don't recall thinking that Price should have been guarding the point, he wasn't that kind of player at all and besides he had long since entered Coach K's doghouse.

Also the point guard for Kentucky was Wayne Turner (the front page story had it wrong). Turner was a punk of the highest degree and is one of the primary reasons I hate Kentucky. He shouldn't have even been in the game. Shortly before the tournament he was accused of committing a hit-and-run. He was brought before a judge who decided to postpone the case until after the tournament so that Turner could play. When questioned about the Turner case, the judge responded something to the effect of "I love Turner, he can shoot, he can dribble, he can pass..." even though the question was clearly made in reference to the legal process.

CDu
04-18-2012, 11:10 AM
The Ricky Price analogy is pretty apt, if you have any memory of the Kentucky game. Duke got up big and then couldn't stop Kentucky from getting into the lane and getting kick outs for open threes as they made their comeback. What would have been ideal was having a larger, quicker player to relieve Wojo on the defensive end. Ricky Price should have fit that bill, but wasn't used... most likely because he hadn't shown that he could be a lock down defender through the course of his career. We could have used a lock down defender on the perimeter this season, but it would seem that if MikeG had shown this ability in practice, he'd have gotten the opportunity to do this in a game. Don't you think?

This is tangential to the point, but Price was not relevant here. Price wasn't an option to replace Wojo because Price wasn't a PG. Wayne Turner would have taken Langdon's or Price's lunch if they tried to play PG. The correct answer was Avery. He had the size and quickness to match up with Turner. But Coach K was committed to his senior PG, and wasn't willing to rely on the freshman Avery in such a big game. And Wayne Turner had his way with Wojo in the second half, beating him off the dribble and creating for others as Kentucky made up a huge second-half deficit to win the game.


And well it is unfortunate, it is very true that few players that have transferred from Duke have gone on to significant things at the schools they transferred to. Billy McCaffrey is probably the best example of a player who went on to big things, but in recent memory, which of our transfers even ended up starting? Boykin at Cal? Olek at Nevada? These aren't to speak poorly of these kids because they left or because of what they did later, these are simple facts. (Frankly, I will always be disappointed that Jamal needed to leave because he played with so much passion and energy and was exciting to watch. But did losing him cost us the National Title? Not so much.)

I'd say that Elliot Williams did okay for himself at Memphis after transferring from Duke.

BlueDevilCorvette!
04-18-2012, 11:58 AM
Seriously, I don't think that Mike G could not have done "any worse" than some of the other players on any given night. However, for whatever reason he wasn't given the opportunity to do so (meaningful minutes not garbage minutes) even in the wake of a Ryan Kelly's injury. If he had so many weaknesses to his game, I'm sure the coaches noticed his deficits during his recruitment? Hence why not redshirt him and allow him to develop versus basically losing a year of eligibility riding the pine. I wholeheartedly bid the guy farewell and hope he find happiness somewhere but I will not spew out sour grapes simply because he seeks happiness elsewhere. Heck, life is wayyyyyy to short to be unhappy whether it's at Duke or some other university. I just truly regret not seeing him have the opportunity to swat away a Black Falcon jumper or flush down a dunk in transition on a UNC's player's head! (I still think he would have been a good match-up against HB and other 6-7 or 6-8 players that wreak havoc on our undersized perimeter players)

Norman Pfyster
04-18-2012, 12:05 PM
A few comments:

1. I wish Michael the best at his next school.
2. The DBR story was a bit of a cheap shot because it implied his is transferring because he couldn't hack it at Duke and offered no support for that being the motivation.
3. I was puzzled reading people all season long who wanted to have him play more. As much as I would have wanted to have athletic wings out on the floor, he looked lost on both ends of the court. That said, there is no reason to think he would not have improved the next season.

tommy
04-18-2012, 12:06 PM
I remember that Kentucky game in 1998 and after the game a lot of people thought that a.)Avery should have played more instead of Wojo, and b.)we should have gone to a zone defense. Once again reminiscent of the current Cook-Thornton debate. I don't recall thinking that Price should have been guarding the point, he wasn't that kind of player at all and besides he had long since entered Coach K's doghouse.

Also the point guard for Kentucky was Wayne Turner (the front page story had it wrong). Turner was a punk of the highest degree and is one of the primary reasons I hate Kentucky. He shouldn't have even been in the game. Shortly before the tournament he was accused of committing a hit-and-run. He was brought before a judge who decided to postpone the case until after the tournament so that Turner could play. When questioned about the Turner case, the judge responded something to the effect of "I love Turner, he can shoot, he can dribble, he can pass..." even though the question was clearly made in reference to the legal process.

If that judge made that comment at that time and in that context, not only is (or was) he ethically unfit to serve in that role, but he also doesn't know anything about basketball. Wayne Turner couldn't shoot a lick. What he was, was a big, physical point guard who could overpower opponents and get into the lane for shots inside of 10 feet, and for dish-offs to a very talented cast of teammates who would have a better chance to put it in the hole than Turner had himself. And Turner pushed it very well on the fastbreak. He did all of those things to dominate Wojo in the second half of that game.

And there's nothing that a callow freshman like Will Avery, who was no lockdown defender to begin with, would've been able to do about it either.

ACCBBallFan
04-18-2012, 12:09 PM
Count me on the side that says the front page article was unnecessarily harsh on Mike Gbinije.

His defesne was no worse that most incoming frosh, and it smacks of sour grapes.

The only redemption is the prior article hoped the transfer rumors were not true.

As for the joke about being one and done, with the transfer Mike cannot play next season and is assured of being at least 3 years in college. So no way to attribute that joling to reason why he requested the transfer.

Whole thing puzzles me. He could have accomplished the same thing by red-shirting this coming year and having 3 years of eligibility in a system he then had two years experience in, rather than starting anew, unless the desire was to be closer to VA home with Nova or G-town.

DUKIE V(A)
04-18-2012, 12:11 PM
This is tangential to the point, but Price was not relevant here. Price wasn't an option to replace Wojo because Price wasn't a PG. Wayne Turner would have taken Langdon's or Price's lunch if they tried to play PG. The correct answer was Avery. He had the size and quickness to match up with Turner. But Coach K was committed to his senior PG, and wasn't willing to rely on the freshman Avery in such a big game. And Wayne Turner had his way with Wojo in the second half, beating him off the dribble and creating for others as Kentucky made up a huge second-half deficit to win the game.

Okay the Bandaid has been ripped off. Duke/Kentucky is one of my top 3 most painful Duke losses. How many times did Wayne Turner "carry" the ball that game to get to the basket? Brutal officiating. If those calls are made, Duke likely wins that game easily and has a pretty good shot at winning the National Championship (perhaps changing the 1999 roster depending on whether Elton Brand decided to go pro after winning the title).

sagegrouse
04-18-2012, 12:18 PM
By the way, let me propose the "Silent G Transfer" as the perfect storm in terms of a high ratio of heat (passion) to light (insight).

A. Silent G was a highly regarded recruit.

B. He had obvious length and possible quickness not present on the roster and seemingly useful on a team whose defensive skills and intensity were often lacking.

C. Yet he played only 111 minutes in 34 games (3.3 MPG), so no fan could guage how good he was.

D. He transferred after his freshman year and will not surface as a player until November 2013.

Now, I ask you, what useful insights could any poster possibly offer on this topic?

sagegrouse
'But, of course, we all tried'

UrinalCake
04-18-2012, 12:49 PM
Okay the Bandaid has been ripped off. Duke/Kentucky is one of my top 3 most painful Duke losses. How many times did Wayne Turner "carry" the ball that game to get to the basket? Brutal officiating. If those calls are made, Duke likely wins that game easily and has a pretty good shot at winning the National Championship (perhaps changing the 1999 roster depending on whether Elton Brand decided to go pro after winning the title).

If my somewhat hazy memory serves correctly, with a few minutes left Roshown McCloud got called for an intentional foul for committing a moving screen, or something absurd like that. Gave them shots and the ball. And that doesn't even count Wojo getting bent in half; the fact that no technical was called there is beyond comprehension.


As for Turner, I couldn't find a link to the judge's quote, but here's (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1012799/index.htm) a rundown of the basic story

Starter
04-18-2012, 01:09 PM
I rarely think about that game -- I was a freshman, and I was crushed -- but I always thought a definitive turning point was when Magloire stretched Wojo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97u3CPEY1Rw). I recall thinking Wojo just wasn't the same after that, and in that sense, Avery might have been a better option down the stretch. But I'd have to watch the whole thing over to remember, and I have no desire to do so.

Personally, I liked the idea of Gbinije and wanted to see what he was made of, though I'm not particularly fanatical about it. I didn't think we saw enough to really make any sort of conclusions one way or another about his defense, though I tend to think his athleticism and size could have been an asset on a team that was short on both. And a potential time investment definitely had upside, especially when Duke got late in the season and didn't have any actual small forwards. But when it comes down to it, very few really know what goes down behind the scenes.

Billy Dat
04-18-2012, 01:18 PM
It's clear that today's highly recruited player wants lots of PT right away, and will often transfer if it doesn't happen his first year.

It makes me wonder if Kentucky's current run is 100% predicated on all of Cal's best players leaving every year? Getting the best talent, although he claims to not promise PT, may be tied to immediate meaningful playing time. His magic touch seems 100% tied to finding the sweet spot between a huge advantage in talent and a huge disadvantage in experience. After recruiting, his master talent has been creating a system that seasons those raw recruits rapidly, almost like the drugs they shoot into preemies to rapidly mature their lungs. Would he be as effective a recruiter if he didn't generate 3-5 first round draft picks every year?

I say all of this because it really surprises me that more top 100 recruits don't go the "big fish small pond" route. Why battle for playing time at Duke when you could potentially be an instant headliner at Wichita State or Southern Illinois. Find that young coach on the fast track and basically decide that you and the coach are going to be one-and-done together....you'll get 25 shots a game and be an instant star as ESPN and their 20 college bball writers miss no one anymore, and your coach will show the next big boy school with an opening that he is a winner and a big time recruiter (Illinois comes to mind). I am not saying that's where it should go, it just surprises me that it hasn't gone that way. It's kind of like kids trying to get into the top colleges...is your chance of getting into Duke better if you are at a highly competitive high school with 50 kids shooting for the top 10 schools or if you are class valedictorian with great SATs from some lesser public school that never sends anyone to Duke...in Idaho.

MulletMan
04-18-2012, 02:17 PM
This is tangential to the point, but Price was not relevant here. Price wasn't an option to replace Wojo because Price wasn't a PG. Wayne Turner would have taken Langdon's or Price's lunch if they tried to play PG. The correct answer was Avery. He had the size and quickness to match up with Turner. But Coach K was committed to his senior PG, and wasn't willing to rely on the freshman Avery in such a big game. And Wayne Turner had his way with Wojo in the second half, beating him off the dribble and creating for others as Kentucky made up a huge second-half deficit to win the game.

I'd say that Elliot Williams did okay for himself at Memphis after transferring from Duke.

I will agree that you could have had Avery on the floor. Absolutely. However, comparing Price and Gbinije is relevant in my mind because you could see a situation where either of those players was on the floor and was called on to guard a more athletic PG or SG, even while our starting PG was still on the floor. You need look back no further than Elliot Williams to see this. Williams often guarded the opposing team's PG with Paulus on the floor while Paulus took the reigns on the offensive end. Either way works I think.

And I'll grant that Williams did fine at Memphis, however, I don't know that Duke missed him or that he did anything truly amazing. But I've voiced my opinion on that here before. Let's agree that Williams did OK.


Count me on the side that says the front page article was unnecessarily harsh on Mike Gbinije.

His defesne was no worse that most incoming frosh, and it smacks of sour grapes.



So in analyzing why he didn't see more court time, DBR notes that his defense may not have been up to par. You acknowledge that many frosh don't play defense up to Duke's standards. Many frosh don't get off the bench for Duke because their D is not up to par. How is this sour grapes?


It's clear that today's highly recruited player wants lots of PT right away, and will often transfer if it doesn't happen his first year.

It makes me wonder if Kentucky's current run is 100% predicated on all of Cal's best players leaving every year? Getting the best talent, although he claims to not promise PT, may be tied to immediate meaningful playing time. His magic touch seems 100% tied to finding the sweet spot between a huge advantage in talent and a huge disadvantage in experience. After recruiting, his master talent has been creating a system that seasons those raw recruits rapidly, almost like the drugs they shoot into preemies to rapidly mature their lungs. Would he be as effective a recruiter if he didn't generate 3-5 first round draft picks every year?

I say all of this because it really surprises me that more top 100 recruits don't go the "big fish small pond" route. Why battle for playing time at Duke when you could potentially be an instant headliner at Wichita State or Southern Illinois. Find that young coach on the fast track and basically decide that you and the coach are going to be one-and-done together....you'll get 25 shots a game and be an instant star as ESPN and their 20 college bball writers miss no one anymore, and your coach will show the next big boy school with an opening that he is a winner and a big time recruiter (Illinois comes to mind). I am not saying that's where it should go, it just surprises me that it hasn't gone that way.

Or a major power that is having a down period? See: Muhammad, Shabazz and UCLA.

CDu
04-18-2012, 02:53 PM
I will agree that you could have had Avery on the floor. Absolutely. However, comparing Price and Gbinije is relevant in my mind because you could see a situation where either of those players was on the floor and was called on to guard a more athletic PG or SG, even while our starting PG was still on the floor. You need look back no further than Elliot Williams to see this. Williams often guarded the opposing team's PG with Paulus on the floor while Paulus took the reigns on the offensive end. Either way works I think.

Paulus and Williams rarely shared the floor together. When Williams started playing more, Paulus was relegated to minimal time and Scheyer became the PG. And Price still isn't a good example, because Wojo wouldn't have matched up well with Kentucky's shooting guard (who had 4-5 inches and was a terrific leaper and shooter). I'm not sure that Avery could have stopped Turner, but Wojo clearly could not.


And I'll grant that Williams did fine at Memphis, however, I don't know that Duke missed him or that he did anything truly amazing. But I've voiced my opinion on that here before. Let's agree that Williams did OK.

I was being facetious when I said "okay." He did more than okay. He was very good. He was very efficient. He took a lot of shots, but he was very efficient. We had this discussion before, and I still think you're wrong about him.

The fact that we won a championship does not mean we didn't miss him. He was much better on both ends of the floor than Dawkins and Kelly (the backups at SG and SF that year). Obviously we won the title without him, and that is a testament to the players that were there. But make no mistake, he'd have made us better. And he'd probably have made Dawkins better (by having him come to school a year later). Imagine next year being Dawkins' junior year rather than his senior year.

MulletMan
04-18-2012, 04:46 PM
I was being facetious when I said "okay." He did more than okay. He was very good. He was very efficient. He took a lot of shots, but he was very efficient. We had this discussion before, and I still think you're wrong about him.

The fact that we won a championship does not mean we didn't miss him. He was much better on both ends of the floor than Dawkins and Kelly (the backups at SG and SF that year). Obviously we won the title without him, and that is a testament to the players that were there. But make no mistake, he'd have made us better. And he'd probably have made Dawkins better (by having him come to school a year later). Imagine next year being Dawkins' junior year rather than his senior year.


So you're telling me that Elliot Williams' transfer hurt Duke? Is that what you're telling me? He was a good player on a weak team in a very mediocre conference at Memphis. They had been totally decimated by the exodus with Cal to Kentucky. His transfer, while too bad, didn't mean anything to Duke in the long run. Sorry.

BlueDevilCorvette!
04-18-2012, 04:58 PM
By the way, let me propose the "Silent G Transfer" as the perfect storm in terms of a high ratio of heat (passion) to light (insight).

A. Silent G was a highly regarded recruit.

B. He had obvious length and possible quickness not present on the roster and seemingly useful on a team whose defensive skills and intensity were often lacking.

C. Yet he played only 111 minutes in 34 games (3.3 MPG), so no fan could guage how good he was.

D. He transferred after his freshman year and will not surface as a player until November 2013.

Now, I ask you, what useful insights could any poster possibly offer on this topic?

sagegrouse
'But, of course, we all tried'

In regards to "C" I just think that the variables listed in "B" would have made it more difficult for opposing 6-7 / 6-8 players to score versus allowing them to consistently shoot over the top of 6-1 / 6-2 Duke defenders. Heck, if other teams are going to score I'd rather make them earn it and not make it seems like they are shooting fish in a barrel...I guess all the whining on my part is because I (and other Duke fans) never got to see enough "C" thus "D" is now pounding us in the gut like a Mike Tyson body punch!

ChicagoCrazy84
04-18-2012, 04:59 PM
So you're telling me that Elliot Williams' transfer hurt Duke? Is that what you're telling me? He was a good player on a weak team in a very mediocre conference at Memphis. They had been totally decimated by the exodus with Cal to Kentucky. His transfer, while too bad, didn't mean anything to Duke in the long run. Sorry.


It didn't hurt us in the long run, that thinking is a little far fetched, but I don't disagree that he would've made us even better in 2010. Elliot is and was a dynamic player. A young freshman Andre Dawkins and a sophomore Elliot Williams, I would take the latter. Considering the guy is in the NBA now, I think it would've done wonders for Jon, Nolan, and Kyle.

Kedsy
04-18-2012, 05:01 PM
In regards to "C" I just think that the variables listed in "B" would have made it more difficult for opposing 6-7 / 6-8 players to score versus allowing them to consistently shoot over the top of 6-1 / 6-2 Duke defenders. Heck, if other teams are going to score I'd rather make them earn it and not make it seems like they are shooting fish in a barrel...I guess all the whining on my part is because I (and other Duke fans) never got to see enough "C" thus "D" is now pounding us in the gut like a Mike Tyson body punch!

Coach K didn't agree with you, and he's the one who allocates playing time. Mike Tyson body punch? Next play, already.

Kedsy
04-18-2012, 05:02 PM
It didn't hurt us in the long run, that thinking is a little far fetched, but I don't disagree that he would've made us even better in 2010. Elliot is and was a dynamic player. A young freshman Andre Dawkins and a sophomore Elliot Williams, I would take the latter. Considering the guy is in the NBA now, I think it would've done wonders for Jon, Nolan, and Kyle.

But he couldn't shoot from the outside very well. Impossible to say for certain, of course, but do we beat Baylor without Andre? Changing history is a risky business.