The Way Too Early 2013-2014 Top 25

[luburch]

ESPN just released the top-25 for 2013-2014.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/9147684/very-early-top-25-2013-14-season-ncaa-men-college-basketball

They have Duke at #5.

Obviously a lot will change, and more will be known after everyone declares, but I'm not sure how much I agree with this. Yes, I realize this means absolutely nothing, but it helps me get through the off-season.

Louisville at #2? SportsCenter just reported that Smith's dad said he will turn pro, Dieng is more than likely gone as well, and Siva graduates. They should probably be around 15.
Michigan State at #3, seems a little high to me. I expect Gary Harris to declare and that certainly won't help the cause.

Also a nice little surprise seeing Stanford on the list at #24.

[NashvilleDevil]

Are they just going to continue making Kentucky #1 in these meaningless not even 24 hours after the title game polls? Kentucky's title team had players who had been on the Final Four team in 2011, so they had an idea of what it took to get there. Next year's team will have players who were part of the most dysfunctional Kentucky since Calipari showed up.

[CDu]

The only thing I disagree with in the Top-10 is MSU, and that's because I can't see Harris and Payne deciding to come back. Without those two, MSU is not very good next year.

Similarly, if Dieng and/or Smith decide to go pro, Louisville takes a big hit too.

I think the description of Duke is dead on though.

[Ichabod Drain]

Are they just going to continue making Kentucky #1 in these meaningless not even 24 hours after the title game polls? Kentucky's title team had players who had been on the Final Four team in 2011, so they had an idea of what it took to get there. Next year's team will have players who were part of the most dysfunctional Kentucky since Calipari showed up.

They have Wiltjer who was on the National Championship team, and they have as much talent coming in as the past two years combined almost, maybe more if they land Wiggins. It's all about chemistry, if they have it they'll have people's heads spinning. If they don't, it will be a huge letdown.

[flyingdutchdevil]

They have Wiltjer who was on the National Championship team, and they have as much talent coming in as the past two years combined almost, maybe more if they land Wiggins. It's all about chemistry, if they have it they'll have people's heads spinning. If they don't, it will be a huge letdown.

Huge risk, huge reward. It's always that simple with Kentucky.

[NashvilleDevil]

They have Wiltjer who was on the National Championship team, and they have as much talent coming in as the past two years combined almost, maybe more if they land Wiggins. It's all about chemistry, if they have it they'll have people's heads spinning. If they don't, it will be a huge letdown.

The guys on the 2012 title team who had been on the 2011 final four team were rotation players. I do not recall Wiltjer being much of a player in 2012 and with all the talent coming in and staying next year what is he going to provide for them?

[Ichabod Drain]

The guys on the 2012 title team who had been on the 2011 final four team were rotation players. I do not recall Wiltjer being much of a player in 2012 and with all the talent coming in and staying next year what is he going to provide for them?

He averaged 12 minutes and 5 points. Not saying he was a huge factor just that he was a part of that team and he probably has an idea what it takes to get there.

[flyingdutchdevil]

He averaged 12 minutes and 5 points. Not saying he was a huge factor just that he was a part of that team and he probably has an idea what it takes to get there.

In the tournament, Kyle averaged 5.8 minutes and 2.3 points. Plus, this is a guy who's all offensive, 0 defense. He isn't the same as a Doron Lamb, Darius Miller, or Terrence Jones in the slightest.

Kentucky will be good next year. Actually, they'll be excellent. But they will be extremely inconsistent (like this year pre-Noels injury), and that will be attributed to the lack of experience.

[NashvilleDevil]

He averaged 12 minutes and 5 points. Not saying he was a huge factor just that he was a part of that team and he probably has an idea what it takes to get there.

He knows it takes players like Anthony Davis, Michael Kidd-Gilchrist and Terrence Jones to win a title. All the players coming in may be supremely talented but I do not think they have guys coming in like Davis and MKG.

[flyingdutchdevil]

He knows it takes players like Anthony Davis, Michael Kidd-Gilchrist and Terrence Jones to win a title. All the players coming in may be supremely talented but I do not think they have guys coming in like Davis and MKG.

Wiggins - please don't go to Kentucky, please don't go to Kentucky, please don't go to Kentucky...

[NashvilleDevil]

Wiggins - please don't go to Kentucky, please don't go to Kentucky, please don't go to Kentucky...

He is the most talented player in this class but Davis and MKG were team first guys it seemed like. Couple that with veterans, for Kentucky, and that is a recipe for success. Plus Davis and MKG did not need the ball to impact the team. Who is going to do that next year for Kentucky?

[flyingdutchdevil]

He is the most talented player in this class but Davis and MKG were team first guys it seemed like. Couple that with veterans, for Kentucky, and that is a recipe for success. Plus Davis and MKG did not need the ball to impact the team. Who is going to do that next year for Kentucky?

You're right, but Wiggins is special. He is a more athletic version of MKG and I'm sure Cal will teach him how to play similar defense. I am a Wiggins fan - he is down to earth, insanely talented, and looking to win and get better. He may need the ball in his hands to be 100% effective, but he'll get that ball in Kentucky.

[NashvilleDevil]

You're right, but Wiggins is special. He is a more athletic version of MKG and I'm sure Cal will teach him how to play similar defense. I am a Wiggins fan - he is down to earth, insanely talented, and looking to win and get better. He may need the ball in his hands to be 100% effective, but he'll get that ball in Kentucky.

And here is problem for them next year.

[luburch]

Here is USA Today's slightly different rankings. Has Duke at #2.


http://m.usatoday.com/article/news/2061989

[flyingdutchdevil]

And here is problem for them next year.

Agreed. And also a problem for opposing teams. I haven't bought into the hype of the Harrison twins or Randle, for that matter. But Wiggins is something special. His freshman impact may indeed be Melo / Davis-esque.

[NashvilleDevil]

Agreed. And also a problem for opposing teams. I haven't bought into the hype of the Harrison twins or Randle, for that matter. But Wiggins is something special. His freshman impact may indeed be Melo / Davis-esque.

Do you think Calipari can get everyone to buy into Wiggins being the man and still allow the rest of the guys to audition for the NBA? That's going to be quite a tightrope next year.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Do you think Calipari can get everyone to buy into Wiggins being the man and still allow the rest of the guys to audition for the NBA? That's going to be quite a tightrope next year.

High risk, high reward!!! ;)

I have no idea. I have learned a few lessons over the years about Calipari, the main one being that Calipari is filled with surprises both good and bad.

[jay]

How in the world is Michigan not in the top 25?? All I heard after last night's game is the sky is the limit for this young Michigan team next year.

[NashvilleDevil]

How in the world is Michigan not in the top 25?? All I heard after last night's game is the sky is the limit for this young Michigan team next year.

Burke, Hardaway, McGary and Robinson may all leave

[DukeAlumBS]

He has them one as well. Sounds like another Fab 5 again, just like this year for Kentucky. At least win the NIT is my thoughts.
I am shying away from ESPN. But sometimes you have no choice, just to get a chuckle.
This will change as players move on and all.
I like what we have here. At least they will graduate.
Have nice day my friends,

Jimmy

[CDu]

Here is the NBC take: http://collegebasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/04/09/the-way-too-early-preseason-top-25/

Much more reasonable, in my opinion, than ESPN's take.

[Ichabod Drain]

Burke, Hardaway, McGary and Robinson may all leave

FWIW McGary laughed at the question of him leaving this year the other day, but we all know that means squat.

[NashvilleDevil]

FWIW McGary laughed at the question of him leaving this year the other day, but we all know that means squat.

I saw that but this is a pretty weak draft and if those guys leave all the pressure would be on him and his stock may go down.

[mccollums]

McGary backtracked since he made the comment about staying...

Even though he's a frosh, he turns 21 on June 6th. That might factor into his decision along with his stock being really high right now.

"Mitchell Neil William "Mitch" McGary (born June 6, 1992)[1] is a college basketball player from Porter, Indiana,[2] who is playing his freshman season for the 2012–13 Michigan Wolverines men's basketball team."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitch_McGary

I think Florida could be very very good next season. They should look pretty good on paper next season with their two 5 star recruits (Chris Walker, Kasey Hill) along with Wilbekin, Frazier, Prather, P. Young, and Yeguete. I'm pretty sure the other freshman from last year were all regarded as extremely good shooters, so if the 5 star freshman play well and a sophomore steps up - they should have a solid team with good depth.

[DavidBenAkiva]

First of all, that NBC ranking states "Quinn Cook is not a great point guard." I'm sorry, but did they only watch the Duke-MSU Sweet 16 game? The dude averaged a 204 assist-to-turnover ratio, shot nearly 40% from 3, and ran that offense like a great point guard. Sheesh! I hope he uses this article as offseason motivation.

First off, Kentucky is probably going to have a lot of talent. It will be exciting to see how how so many pieces that haven't played together before come together or don't. I mean, they will have 9 McDonald's All Americans on their team, 10 if Wiggins commits there. That's just a ton of talent.

I do not understand how all these experts are picking Michigan State to be a top 3 team. I know they are only losing one guy, but he's a big (pun!) piece of their most recent team. Payne, if he stays, will have to slide over to the center position. He was their leading rebounder, but we all saw how a similar player - James Michael McAdoo - did as the main post player over in Chapel Hill. That slides everyone out of position except for their lead guard, Appling, who is not so much a point guard. Duke should be more talented, bigger, and with better shooters. I like MSU and their coach, but I struggle to see how they will be top 5. Top 10? Sure.

The same can be said for Louisville and Michigan: I would really like to see how they will perform without their guards. Burke, Siva, and probably Smith are all gone. Smith should stay, but it's his decision. That dude can score the basketball. How does Louisville work if they can't pressure the ball without Siva and Smith? Will Michigan be able to score the way they did without the Player of the Year? Lists with either of those teams ahead of Duke really make me scratch my head.

As for Duke, the Blue Devils should be #3 or #4 at worst. I've seen many question the lack of a post. But I ask - who has had a dominant post player in the college game (outside of North Carolina in 2005 and 2009)? Dieng of Louisville was hardly dominant. Davis of Kentucky in 20120 was more an all-over player than a post player. Jefferson can be that kind of player. The combination of three guys 6'8" or taller on the court all the time makes me think we'll be just fine rebounding, blocking shots on help defense, and scoring near the basket. Duke won't have one dominant big (unless Marshall Plumlee goes beast mode, hopefully). They will have an effective team of forwards that will be fun to watch at the very least.

[Newton_14]

McGary backtracked since he made the comment about staying...

Even though he's a frosh, he turns 21 on June 6th. That might factor into his decision along with his stock being really high right now.

"Mitchell Neil William "Mitch" McGary (born June 6, 1992)[1] is a college basketball player from Porter, Indiana,[2] who is playing his freshman season for the 2012–13 Michigan Wolverines men's basketball team."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitch_McGary

I think Florida could be very very good next season. They should look pretty good on paper next season with their two 5 star recruits (Chris Walker, Kasey Hill) along with Wilbekin, Frazier, Prather, P. Young, and Yeguete. I'm pretty sure the other freshman from last year were all regarded as extremely good shooters, so if the 5 star freshman play well and a sophomore steps up - they should have a solid team with good depth.

Dang! I thought the dude was just 19. I heard today for the first time about the "1 to 2" years in prep schools as the article put it, and they stated he was 19 but did not list his Bday, so I was not sure when he would turn 20. If he truly turns 21 this June that puts him solidly in the Tyler Hanswalk category of being totally in the wrong class which to me makes the accomplishments a little less impressive. He was certainly not even close to a "true freshman" this season if he is indeed 20 years old already. How many of our Duke players were 20 years old in game 1 this year and what class were they? Tyler? Josh?

[sagegrouse]

Dang! I thought the dude was just 19. I heard today for the first time about the "1 to 2" years in prep schools as the article put it, and they stated he was 19 but did not list his Bday, so I was not sure when he would turn 20. If he truly turns 21 this June that puts him solidly in the Tyler Hanswalk category of being totally in the wrong class which to me makes the accomplishments a little less impressive. He was certainly not even close to a "true freshman" this season if he is indeed 20 years old already. How many of our Duke players were 20 years old in game 1 this year and what class were they? Tyler? Josh?

No wonder my college athletic accomplishments were limited to IM teams -- by the time I was freshman McGary's age, I had graduated from Duke.

sagegrouse

[Newton_14]

No wonder my college athletic accomplishments were limited to IM teams -- by the time I was freshman McGary's age, I had graduated from Duke.

sagegrouse

Exactly! Whatever happened to the High School rule of losing your eligibility at age 18? I would have been a perfect candidate for "High School Redshirt year". I turned 18 in April of my Senior year, and proceeded to grow 3 inches and gain 30 pounds over the summer after graduating in June at 18. I suppose had I repeated 9th grade I could have still played hoops that 5th year as I would have still been 18 when the hoops season ended, but I would have been unable to play on the baseball team in that 5th year as I would have turned 19 during the season making me ineligible per the NC HS rules at the time of having to be 18 yrs old throughout the entire baseball season including playoffs.

Do states now let 19 year olds compete in High School? In McGary's case he would have been 19 his entire High School "Senior year". Seems odd. Or do these "prep schools" have different age limit rules than normal High Schools?

[licc85]

Wait, so McGary was 20 years old as a high school senior?? How did this not come up more often when we were recruiting him??

[gumbomoop]

ESPN's Jason King, Andy Katz, and Dana O'Neil discuss post-NBA-decisions early top 25.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/9222871/an-updated-look-top-25-2013-14-season-ncaa-men-college-basketball

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/blog/_/name/katz_andy/id/9223177/a-rebuttal-early-top-25-ranking-2013-14-college-basketball

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/9222256/if-thought-college-basketball-season-was-good-just-wait-2013-14

King and Katz have identical top 5s: UK, UL, MichSt, Arizona, Duke. Katz offers some friendly "corrections" to King's overall choices. Interestingly, in Katz's "teams ranked too low" [by King], he nitpicks King's placing OKSt 2 spots too low; yet Katz doesn't note that King has the Heels at #11, whereas Katz pegs them as early-#7. King has 'Cuse at #8, Heels at #11; Katz has Heels at #7, 'Cuse at #10. Both list UVa as among "others to watch," and King lists ND among that group, too.

O'Neil offers this thought on Wiggins: "When Wiggins makes his choice, the college basketball landscape for 2013-14 could shift seismically. If he joins Kentucky, the Cats will have five of the top seven freshmen in America. If he joins Florida State, the Seminoles will be considered ACC contenders. If he joins North Carolina or Kansas, those two will be in the Final Four conversation."

I think FSU should be "watched," and agree with O'Neil that, with Wiggins, they will "contend" for top 2-3 in ACC. Also agree that Wiggins to CH moves UNC up to, say, a tie with Duke nationally and in conference.

Go 'Noles.

[Double DD]

Dang! I thought the dude was just 19. I heard today for the first time about the "1 to 2" years in prep schools as the article put it, and they stated he was 19 but did not list his Bday, so I was not sure when he would turn 20. If he truly turns 21 this June that puts him solidly in the Tyler Hanswalk category of being totally in the wrong class which to me makes the accomplishments a little less impressive. He was certainly not even close to a "true freshman" this season if he is indeed 20 years old already. How many of our Duke players were 20 years old in game 1 this year and what class were they? Tyler? Josh?

I enjoyed making fun of Hansbrough's age until the Plumlees came along. Miles was 20 his entire freshman year and Mason turned 20 in March of his freshman year.

[gumbomoop]

The always interesting and informative Luke Winn offers his post-draft-deadline rankings.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college-basketball/news/20130430/post-nba-draft-deadline-power-rankings/

He's got UK at #3, so that's different. Duke's at #4 ["an intriguing team" with "perimeter firepower," needing "serviceable role players" up front], Heels at #9. But most interesting is that he's got UVa at #12, ahead of 'Cuse at #14 ["zone ... should be good enough" for "a third-or-fourth-place finish in the new ACC"]. Winn lists ND and Pitt among "next 16."

Go 'Noles.

[brevity]

More speculation at ESPN. This time it's an extremely early look (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/9226839/way-too-early-all-americans-2013-14-college-basketball) at the Preseason (Offseason?) All-Americans.

First Team: Marcus Smart, Russ Smith, Doug McDermott, Mitch McGary, Andrew Wiggins
Second Team: Gary Harris, Cleanthony Early, Adreian Payne, Patric Young, Jabari Parker
Third Team: Shabazz Napier, Aaron Craft, Aaron Gordon, Chane Behanan, Julius Randle

So, three freshmen and no returning ACC players. (C.J. Fair and P.J. Hairston were among the honorable mentions, if you can call Fair a returning ACC player.) Sort of makes the ACC Player of the Year race wide open, especially for the preseason.

[sagegrouse]

More speculation at ESPN. This time it's an extremely early look (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/9226839/way-too-early-all-americans-2013-14-college-basketball) at the Preseason (Offseason?) All-Americans.

First Team: Marcus Smart, Russ Smith, Doug McDermott, Mitch McGary, Andrew Wiggins
Second Team: Gary Harris, Cleanthony Early, Adreian Payne, Patric Young, Jabari Parker
Third Team: Shabazz Napier, Aaron Craft, Aaron Gordon, Chane Behanan, Julius Randle

So, three freshmen and no returning ACC players. (C.J. Fair and P.J. Hairston were among the honorable mentions, if you can call Fair a returning ACC player.) Sort of makes the ACC Player of the Year race wide open, especially for the preseason.

Ludicrous! Ridiculous! Truly unfair! What the heck are Andrew Wiggins, Jabari Parker, and Julius Randle doing on a Pre-Season All-American team? Didn't the guys who voted H. Barnes to preseason NPOY learn a lesson?

My explanation is actually a bit more benign. The voters don't know a lot of detail about college hoops. They are just voting for the names they know. Given the noise about Wiggins, Parker et al., it was a natural outcome.

The other benign explanation is that every celebrated player went to the NBA, so there are few well-known guys left except for the other four guys on the first team.

sagegrouse

[CDu]

The always interesting and informative Luke Winn offers his post-draft-deadline rankings.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college-basketball/news/20130430/post-nba-draft-deadline-power-rankings/

He's got UK at #3, so that's different. Duke's at #4 ["an intriguing team" with "perimeter firepower," needing "serviceable role players" up front], Heels at #9. But most interesting is that he's got UVa at #12, ahead of 'Cuse at #14 ["zone ... should be good enough" for "a third-or-fourth-place finish in the new ACC"]. Winn lists ND and Pitt among "next 16."

Go 'Noles.

Kudos to Winn for thinking outside of the box with his UVa pick. I'm less impressed with his UNC pick.


More speculation at ESPN. This time it's an extremely early look (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/9226839/way-too-early-all-americans-2013-14-college-basketball) at the Preseason (Offseason?) All-Americans.

First Team: Marcus Smart, Russ Smith, Doug McDermott, Mitch McGary, Andrew Wiggins
Second Team: Gary Harris, Cleanthony Early, Adreian Payne, Patric Young, Jabari Parker
Third Team: Shabazz Napier, Aaron Craft, Aaron Gordon, Chane Behanan, Julius Randle

So, three freshmen and no returning ACC players. (C.J. Fair and P.J. Hairston were among the honorable mentions, if you can call Fair a returning ACC player.) Sort of makes the ACC Player of the Year race wide open, especially for the preseason.


Ludicrous! Ridiculous! Truly unfair! What the heck are Andrew Wiggins, Jabari Parker, and Julius Randle doing on a Pre-Season All-American team? Didn't the guys who voted H. Barnes to preseason NPOY learn a lesson?

My explanation is actually a bit more benign. The voters don't know a lot of detail about college hoops. They are just voting for the names they know. Given the noise about Wiggins, Parker et al., it was a natural outcome.

The other benign explanation is that every celebrated player went to the NBA, so there are few well-known guys left except for the other four guys on the first team.

sagegrouse

I think it's a combination of your two explanations. Most of the obvious choices are headed to the NBA next year, and it's hard to predict which supporting player will become a star next year. So the top freshmen (who they've seen/heard about in starring roles) make easy targets. Note that Aaron Gordon (also a freshman) made the list too.

I am not sure why Patric Young got so much love, though. He's a good player, but very limited offensively (which explains why he didn't really improve his scoring this year). He's a good defensive player, but nothing spectacular. And he's not a great rebounder either. I mean, he LOOKS like a beast, but he doesn't produce like one.

I think Smith, McDermott, Harris, Payne, Napier, and Craft were somewhat obvious and/or rational selections. I don't think that Gordon and Randle were good picks, nor do I think Wiggins should be pre-season 1st team (nor Parker 2nd team). Similarly, I'm not sure whether McGary should be 1st team (as he'll be playing without Burke). I'd have added Joe Harris to the list. I suspect a Duke guy and a Kentucky guy will get on the list, but I just don't know which one. I wouldn't be shocked if Perry Ellis gets into the discussion for Kansas as well.

[Tappan Zee Devil]

Kudos to Winn for thinking outside of the box with his UVa pick. I'm less impressed with his UNC pick.




Well, on an Insider article on ESPN, John Gasaway lists unc as one of the three teams he thinks can challenge Kentucky for the championship.
So carolina is getting some love.

[dragoneye776]

Well, on an Insider article on ESPN, John Gasaway lists unc as one of the three teams he thinks can challenge Kentucky for the championship.
So carolina is getting some love.

Is that with or without Wiggins? Who were the other two teams he mentioned?

[Jarhead]

Well, on an Insider article on ESPN, John Gasaway lists unc as one of the three teams he thinks can challenge Kentucky for the championship.
So carolina is getting some love.

...and with that, I suppose, Carowiner is preparing a new banner to hang in the Dean Dome.

[Kedsy]

Is that with or without Wiggins? Who were the other two teams he mentioned?

Has to be with Wiggins. Without Wiggins, UNC is one of three teams that can challenge Notre Dame for 3rd place in the ACC.

[Tappan Zee Devil]

Is that with or without Wiggins? Who were the other two teams he mentioned?

MSU and Louisville.

And they do not mention Wiggins in their write up of uncch. :confused: I found it a little strange. I guess he is trying to set up a possible "I was the one who got it right" moment if unc exceeds expectations.

[CDu]

MSU and Louisville.

And they do not mention Wiggins in their write up of uncch. :confused: I found it a little strange. I guess he is trying to set up a possible "I was the one who got it right" moment if unc exceeds expectations.

I guess purely from a "how many key players are returning from a good team last year" perspective, one might be able to make that argument. And it certainly seems like that's the angle he's using with regard to Louisville and MSU. But I think UNC was sufficiently behind Duke to begin with, and I think we've added much more than they have (though we lost much more than they did). I wouldn't put UNC in the discussion of the elites unless they get Wiggins. I wouldn't even put UNC in the discussion of ACC elites without Wiggins.

[gumbomoop]

I wouldn't even put UNC in the discussion of ACC elites without Wiggins.

I think more highly of the Heels' way-early prospects than do you, and your "not even ... in the discussion" is pretty firm, but just for the sake of conversation .....

Duke seems logical way-early ACC #1, both among EK posters and national way-early predictions. So, assuming Wiggins chooses neither FSU nor UNC, do you have Duke, Syracuse, UVa, and ND as the elites clearly ahead of [= in the discussion that Heels aren't in] - UNC? Others, too?

Go 'Noles.

[Kedsy]

I think more highly of the Heels' way-early prospects than do you, and your "not even ... in the discussion" is pretty firm, but just for the sake of conversation .....

Duke seems logical way-early ACC #1, both among EK posters and national way-early predictions. So, assuming Wiggins chooses neither FSU nor UNC, do you have Duke, Syracuse, UVa, and ND as the elites clearly ahead of [= in the discussion that Heels aren't in] - UNC? Others, too?

Go 'Noles.

It possibly depends on your definition of "elites." Should UNC (w/o Wiggins) be in the conversation of teams that could finish 3rd or 4th in the ACC? Probably. But that doesn't sound like an "elite" to me.

[CDu]

I think more highly of the Heels' way-early prospects than do you, and your "not even ... in the discussion" is pretty firm, but just for the sake of conversation .....

Duke seems logical way-early ACC #1, both among EK posters and national way-early predictions. So, assuming Wiggins chooses neither FSU nor UNC, do you have Duke, Syracuse, UVa, and ND as the elites clearly ahead of [= in the discussion that Heels aren't in] - UNC? Others, too?

Go 'Noles.

I would put Duke, Syracuse, and possibly UVa above UNC without Wiggins. I don't know enough about what Notre Dame will put on the court next year (I know they lose a lot), so I wouldn't put them ahead of UNC.

I don't think UNC will be bad by any means. But I don't think they should be in the discussion of teams that could win the title. I mean, I'd say they have only an outside chance at winning the ACC regular season title.

[licc85]

It's interesting that most of these "way too early polls" have UNC in the 10-13 range. Still not sure what that's based on . . . I'm just not seeing the potential in McAdoo, I guess. He's been wildly overrated pretty much his entire career. PJ Hairston is the best guy on the team, and he'd be like the 4th best guy on Duke's team (If that). Paige is ok, but he's not even close to the same level as Lawson, Felton, or even Marshall. Dick Vitale wrote a rankings column and said they'd be top 5 is Bullock came back . . . hah . . . no. They should be better than last year, but probably more like in the #20-25 range.

[dukelifer]

It's interesting that most of these "way too early polls" have UNC in the 10-13 range. Still not sure what that's based on . . . I'm just not seeing the potential in McAdoo, I guess. He's been wildly overrated pretty much his entire career. PJ Hairston is the best guy on the team, and he'd be like the 4th best guy on Duke's team (If that). Paige is ok, but he's not even close to the same level as Lawson, Felton, or even Marshall. Dick Vitale wrote a rankings column and said they'd be top 5 is Bullock came back . . . hah . . . no. They should be better than last year, but probably more like in the #20-25 range.

Folks probably would have said the same about Mason after his sophomore year. Players get better. McAdoo will get better this summer and I expect that he will be a more consistent player next year. Hairston has already shown great improvement and is ACC player of the year caliber. Paige will be a much more confident player next season. Make no mistake, UNC has the makings to be a deep and excellent team. They have a ton of talent.

[TruBlu]

Folks probably would have said the same about Mason after his sophomore year. Players get better. McAdoo will get better this summer and I expect that he will be a more consistent player next year. Hairston has already shown great improvement and is ACC player of the year caliber. Paige will be a much more confident player next season. Make no mistake, UNC has the makings to be a deep and excellent team. They have a ton of talent.


But maybe next year, folks on DBR can refrain from giving Roy coaching tips . . . such as last year telling him that he should play "small ball".

[Kedsy]

Folks probably would have said the same about Mason after his sophomore year. Players get better. McAdoo will get better this summer and I expect that he will be a more consistent player next year.

Well, they may have said it, but the comparison isn't very apt. Mason's only big jumps between his sophomore and junior seasons were in usage rate (from 17.1 to 22.4) and free throw rate (from 48.9 to 70.4; note that I am NOT talking about FT%, but in the rate that Mason got to the line). JMM has already made the usage jump, as he was used an absurdly high 27.2% (absurdly high because of his very low offensive efficiency). In order to become a much better player, JMM would have to become much more efficient, and my guess is the only way that happens is if his usage goes way down, which would probably mean fewer counting stats for him. In other words, folks expecting a huge jump from JMM this season have a decent chance of being disappointed.

[CDu]

Well, they may have said it, but the comparison isn't very apt. Mason's only big jumps between his sophomore and junior seasons were in usage rate (from 17.1 to 22.4) and free throw rate (from 48.9 to 70.4; note that I am NOT talking about FT%, but in the rate that Mason got to the line). JMM has already made the usage jump, as he was used an absurdly high 27.2% (absurdly high because of his very low offensive efficiency). In order to become a much better player, JMM would have to become much more efficient, and my guess is the only way that happens is if his usage goes way down, which would probably mean fewer counting stats for him. In other words, folks expecting a huge jump from JMM this season have a decent chance of being disappointed.

I agree with everything you said except for the "only" part.

Here's my view of McAdoo as a player:
- very athletic with good size/strength for the PF spot (and enough size/strength for the C spot in a pinch)
- Minimal actual basketball skill (besides running and jumping)

When McAdoo has an uncontested path to the rim, he looks very impressive. If he has to make any sort of decision with the ball in his hands, he doesn't look impressive. He doesn't dribble well, doesn't pass well, and is possibly the worst shooter of any upper-tier player I've ever seen. I don't think I'm even being overly dramatic in saying that. I've honestly never seen a guy take and miss (by feet) so many 10-15 foot jumpers.

That being said, he has, occasionally, made some really nice jumpers. If he can figure out how to shoot more consistently and he can figure out a pump fake move then I think he could be a very effective post player. Being able to hit even 40% of those jumpers would require teams to at least respect the pump fake. And if players bite on the pump fake, then McAdoo has the athleticism to get to the rim.

Now, whether or not McAdoo can shoot better and master the use of the pump fake is a BIG if at this point. I mean, he's shown no offensive growth in his two years at UNC, so it would have to be a leap of faith to assume it'll happen this year. But IF he does, I think he could get much more efficient without reducing his usage rate.

[Kedsy]

I agree with everything you said except for the "only" part.

Here's my view of McAdoo as a player:
- very athletic with good size/strength for the PF spot (and enough size/strength for the C spot in a pinch)
- Minimal actual basketball skill (besides running and jumping)

When McAdoo has an uncontested path to the rim, he looks very impressive. If he has to make any sort of decision with the ball in his hands, he doesn't look impressive. He doesn't dribble well, doesn't pass well, and is possibly the worst shooter of any upper-tier player I've ever seen. I don't think I'm even being overly dramatic in saying that. I've honestly never seen a guy take and miss (by feet) so many 10-15 foot jumpers.

That being said, he has, occasionally, made some really nice jumpers. If he can figure out how to shoot more consistently and he can figure out a pump fake move then I think he could be a very effective post player. Being able to hit even 40% of those jumpers would require teams to at least respect the pump fake. And if players bite on the pump fake, then McAdoo has the athleticism to get to the rim.

Now, whether or not McAdoo can shoot better and master the use of the pump fake is a BIG if at this point. I mean, he's shown no offensive growth in his two years at UNC, so it would have to be a leap of faith to assume it'll happen this year. But IF he does, I think he could get much more efficient without reducing his usage rate.

You may be right. The "only" was preceded by "my guess is."

JMM's eFG% was essentially the same his first two years (43.3% and 44.4%), and as you suggest is pretty low for an interior player. Mason's jump in this area was between his freshman year (eFG% of 47.1%) to sophomore year (58.9%) and that happened without a change in usage. But, sure, if JMM suddenly learns how to shoot (and shoot under pressure), his efficiency would go up. My guess, however (and of course this is just a guess), is that if he continues to be used at a rate of 25+ he'll continue to take marginal shots and continue to miss them.

[gofurman]

Folks probably would have said the same about Mason after his sophomore year. Players get better. McAdoo will get better this summer and I expect that he will be a more consistent player next year. Hairston has already shown great improvement and is ACC player of the year caliber. Paige will be a much more confident player next season. Make no mistake, UNC has the makings to be a deep and excellent team. They have a ton of talent.

Agree with lifer - look at how much Hairston improved.. most to the others - Paige etc will improve a lot this summer. Any time you have 4 or your best 6 players returning its a good thing. Paige improves, Hairston improves - scary, McAdoo improves etc they are a v good team. Do not ever overlook Carolina. ever. And the thing they were missing - a center - all could improve... I think they have 3 options there now? One of them will at least fill the spot decently. Add all that up and you have a v good team. Not a National Champ but a v good team.

Look at our own improvement this year over last. Yes, I know, we had a semi-healthy Kelly this year and Cook and Suliamon but a lot was due to the improvement of Mason and Curry. I would almost always take a returning improved player over a hyped freshman. Austin Rivers, for all he did, wasnt the answer. There are exceptions - Kyrie, Brand, etc but most top 20 guys take a year to hit the college level. Good example is Amile - he was top 25ish - and I bet he is much better next year. We lost way more than UNC. I hope hood and Parker can hit the ground running.

[CDu]

You may be right. The "only" was preceded by "my guess is."

JMM's eFG% was essentially the same his first two years (43.3% and 44.4%), and as you suggest is pretty low for an interior player. Mason's jump in this area was between his freshman year (eFG% of 47.1%) to sophomore year (58.9%) and that happened without a change in usage. But, sure, if JMM suddenly learns how to shoot (and shoot under pressure), his efficiency would go up. My guess, however (and of course this is just a guess), is that if he continues to be used at a rate of 25+ he'll continue to take marginal shots and continue to miss them.

Oh I tend to agree, and I didn't mean that as a critique of your previous post (just wanted to expand off of your thoughts). It would be quite something for McAdoo to dramatically improve as a jumpshooter considering that he has not done so at all in his two years at UNC. I think that your guess is the odds-on favorite for most likely way that McAdoo can become more efficient.

Note that Mason's jump in FG% was partially due to his cutting down on shooting jumpshots. The guy took 8 threes and countless long twos as a freshman. As a sophomore, playing in double the minutes, he attempted only 2 threes and fewer long twos as well. By cutting down on his bad shots and focusing on his shots near the rim, Mason's FG% skyrocketed.

Of course, Mason had the benefit of being taller and a bit more post-capable than McAdoo (McAdoo has zero post game). So the decision to cut down on the jumpers and focus on play around the basket played to Mason's strengths. I'd argue that such a move WOULDN'T play to McAdoo's strengths, as he is not comfortable posting up. He's essentially a face-up player without a face-up game. As such, he'll either have to cut down on his usage (i.e., just play off the ball and only take catch-and-finish opportunities) or he'll have to develop his face-up game (which is not easy).

My suspicion is that we'll see similar (perhaps slightly less) inefficiency and similar count stats next year.

[CDu]

Agree with lifer - look at how much Hairston improved.. most to the others - Paige etc will improve a lot this summer. Any time you have 4 or your best 6 players returning its a good thing. Paige improves, Hairston improves - scary, McAdoo improves etc they are a v good team. Do not ever overlook Carolina. ever. And the thing they were missing - a center - all could improve... I think they have 3 options there now? One of them will at least fill the spot decently. Add all that up and you have a v good team. Not a National Champ but a v good team.

Look at our own improvement this year over last. Yes, I know, we had a semi-healthy Kelly this year and Cook and Suliamon but a lot was due to the improvement of Mason and Curry. I would almost always take a returning improved player over a hyped freshman. Austin Rivers, for all he did, wasnt the answer. There are exceptions - Kyrie, Brand, etc but most top 20 guys take a year to hit the college level. Good example is Amile - he was top 25ish - and I bet he is much better next year. We lost way more than UNC. I hope hood and Parker can hit the ground running.

We also gained way more than UNC (without Wiggins), both in terms of freshmen and Hood (and possibly a 5th-year transfer). And your argument that "well, UNC guys could improve" should also apply to our guys. Couldn't Sulaimon and Cook make the jump to stardom? Couldn't Jefferson or Murphy or Plumlee make a big jump? Couldn't someone else? I mean, if we're going to assume that anyone could improve by any amount, then virtually every team in the country has to be in the discussion. Or, we could just assume a reasonable uptick in performance from the returning players (similar across the board) and just instead focus on what was lost versus what is gained.