General question about recruiting

[DavidBenAkiva]

I feel like I have been following recruiting more and more each year. This year, my head is spinning. We have seen, with 247 Sports' Crystal Ball, two complete whiffs (Okonoboh and Looney) from those following recruiting. In the past, we have felt really good about a player or two only to see them skype Daggum Roy and commit to UNC or spurn Duke for schools perceived to be better at developing big men. With twitter adding a fun little twist in that players can now broadcast their thoughts and musings to the world, this has got me wondering about a few things that I hope more seasoned and experienced followers of high school students may be able to explain to me.

1) Lists and ordering the schools: A lot of kids have a top 5 or final 3. As a fan of Duke, I see us agonize over these lists and orders. Why do kids have lists and do any kids actually have a "leader?"
2) Perceptions about schools: I'll be blunt - I don't get it when someone says Duke can't produce big men. Compared to who? Kansas? Since Wilt, what good post player has succeeded in the NBA from Kansas? Raef LaFrentz? I know not all of Duke's big men have become NBA all stars (but a couple have!), but who creates these lies? The truth is that NO SCHOOL consistently produces good big men. Maybe Florida of late (Lee, Horford, Noah, etc.), but then you look at a guy like Patric Young and wonder why he hasn't developed into a consistently high-performing post player at the college level. When was the last time UNC produced a good post player in the NBA? I get it that some people try to negatively recruit, but who fuels the lie that Duke can't develop bigs and how did it take hold?
3) Do other schools miss as many recruits as Duke seems to miss? Kentucky missed on Emmanuel Mudiay and seems to be out of the running for Tyus Jones and Jahlil Okafor. These are recent "losses" following a string of enormous recruiting success. Still, it obviously happens to the best of the best. I am just wondering if Duke's fan base is needlessly feeling lost when other schools feel just as lost or moreso than we do from time to time.

It would be nice if these questions could be discussed here in this thread. I would love to hear other questions non-experts have about the whole recruiting process, too.

[jimsumner]

I feel like I have been following recruiting more and more each year. This year, my head is spinning. We have seen, with 247 Sports' Crystal Ball, two complete whiffs (Okonoboh and Looney) from those following recruiting. In the past, we have felt really good about a player or two only to see them skype Daggum Roy and commit to UNC or spurn Duke for schools perceived to be better at developing big men. With twitter adding a fun little twist in that players can now broadcast their thoughts and musings to the world, this has got me wondering about a few things that I hope more seasoned and experienced followers of high school students may be able to explain to me.

1) Lists and ordering the schools: A lot of kids have a top 5 or final 3. As a fan of Duke, I see us agonize over these lists and orders. Why do kids have lists and do any kids actually have a "leader?"
2) Perceptions about schools: I'll be blunt - I don't get it when someone says Duke can't produce big men. Compared to who? Kansas? Since Wilt, what good post player has succeeded in the NBA from Kansas? Raef LaFrentz? I know not all of Duke's big men have become NBA all stars (but a couple have!), but who creates these lies? The truth is that NO SCHOOL consistently produces good big men. Maybe Florida of late (Lee, Horford, Noah, etc.), but then you look at a guy like Patric Young and wonder why he hasn't developed into a consistently high-performing post player at the college level. When was the last time UNC produced a good post player in the NBA? I get it that some people try to negatively recruit, but who fuels the lie that Duke can't develop bigs and how did it take hold?
3) Do other schools miss as many recruits as Duke seems to miss? Kentucky missed on Emmanuel Mudiay and seems to be out of the running for Tyus Jones and Jahlil Okafor. These are recent "losses" following a string of enormous recruiting success. Still, it obviously happens to the best of the best. I am just wondering if Duke's fan base is needlessly feeling lost when other schools feel just as lost or moreso than we do from time to time.

It would be nice if these questions could be discussed here in this thread. I would love to hear other questions non-experts have about the whole recruiting process, too.

1.You kind of have to narrow it down, because you can only take five official visits. Official as in school pays for it. So, that rule does tend to concentrate things.

2.Danny Manning might disagree with your post-Wilt appraisal. But Duke is the victim of lots of negative recruiting and a lot of it focuses on big men. You're correct. Elton Brand, Carlos Boozer, Shelden Williams, Mason Plumlee somehow don't count. But teenagers can be impressionable and if multiple schools are trying to sell the Duke-doesn't-develop-big-men narrative, then some of it is going to sink in.

3. Everybody loses recruits. Everybody. Kentucky wanted Kyrie Irving, Austin Rivers and Amile Jefferson. Kansas wanted Kyle Singler, Ryan Kelly and Rasheed Sulaimon. Ohio State desperated wanted Rodney Hood. And so forth. Guys like Jabari Parker represented huge recruiting victories for Duke. You don't spend a generation in the top 10 without winning a lot of recruiting battles.

[TexHawk]

2) Perceptions about schools: I'll be blunt - I don't get it when someone says Duke can't produce big men. Compared to who? Kansas? Since Wilt, what good post player has succeeded in the NBA from Kansas? Raef LaFrentz? I know not all of Duke's big men have become NBA all stars (but a couple have!), but who creates these lies? The truth is that NO SCHOOL consistently produces good big men.


Since 2006, Kansas has had a lottery pick in every NBA Draft except for 2009, all but two of those lottery picks were big men.

Every "big man" that Bill Self has recruited to Kansas in 10 years has been drafted (and that doesn't count Wayne Simien, who he coached but didn't recruit). The list: Julian Wright, Darrell Arthur, Darnell Jackson, Sasha Kaun, Cole Aldrich, Morris (x2), Thomas Robinson, Jeff Withey. It is actually easier to list the frontcourt players who have played for KU that have NOT been drafted: Christian Moody (2005 walk on) and Kevin Young last year.

I know your point is that nobody produces NBA All-Star big guys on a consistent level, and guys like Jackson and Kaun haven't even come close, but to a high school recruit, that stat above has to sound nice.

[Duvall]

Since 2006, Kansas has had a lottery pick in every NBA Draft except for 2009, all but two of those lottery picks were big men.

Every "big man" that Bill Self has recruited to Kansas in 10 years has been drafted (and that doesn't count Wayne Simien, who he coached but didn't recruit). The list: Julian Wright, Darrell Arthur, Darnell Jackson, Sasha Kaun, Cole Aldrich, Morris (x2), Thomas Robinson, Jeff Withey. It is actually easier to list the frontcourt players who have played for KU that have NOT been drafted: Christian Moody (2005 walk on) and Kevin Young last year.

I know your point is that nobody produces NBA All-Star big guys on a consistent level, and guys like Jackson and Kaun haven't even come close, but to a high school recruit, that stat above has to sound nice.

Succeeding in the NBA draft is not the same as succeeding in the NBA.

[TexHawk]

Succeeding in the NBA draft is not the same as succeeding in the NBA.

Agreed, which I attempted to qualify with my final sentence there. If the point is to only talk about NBA All-Star big men in the context of recruiting, well, the 2013 NBA All-Star team featured five big guys who didn't go to college at all.

[jimsumner]

Since 2006, Kansas has had a lottery pick in every NBA Draft except for 2009, all but two of those lottery picks were big men.

Every "big man" that Bill Self has recruited to Kansas in 10 years has been drafted (and that doesn't count Wayne Simien, who he coached but didn't recruit). The list: Julian Wright, Darrell Arthur, Darnell Jackson, Sasha Kaun, Cole Aldrich, Morris (x2), Thomas Robinson, Jeff Withey. It is actually easier to list the frontcourt players who have played for KU that have NOT been drafted: Christian Moody (2005 walk on) and Kevin Young last year.

I know your point is that nobody produces NBA All-Star big guys on a consistent level, and guys like Jackson and Kaun haven't even come close, but to a high school recruit, that stat above has to sound nice.

That may explain why Kansas has a rep for developing big men. But in the last decade, former Duke 4s and/or 5s Luol Deng, Shavlik Randolph, Shelden Williams, Josh McRoberts, Lance Thomas, Kyle Singler, Miles Plumlee, Mason Plumlee and Ryan Kelly have played in the NBA. And that doesn't include Elton Brand and Carlos Boozer. So, other than negative recruiting, how to you explain the perception that Duke doesn't develop big men?

[Kedsy]

It is actually easier to list the frontcourt players who have played for KU that have NOT been drafted: Christian Moody (2005 walk on) and Kevin Young last year.

To back up Jim Sumner's point, during the same time period you've described I believe the only Duke big man who didn't make an NBA roster (not counting walkons) was Brian Zoubek, who had a legitimate shot before getting hurt. So Duke and Kansas appear to be even using that criteria.

[bbosbbos]

1. Cause some cheap schools need lies to promote themselves.

2. By the way, if I were Calipaaa, I have won 4 champs for UK already with all those top talents. :p


That may explain why Kansas has a rep for developing big men. But in the last decade, former Duke 4s and/or 5s Luol Deng, Shavlik Randolph, Shelden Williams, Josh McRoberts, Lance Thomas, Kyle Singler, Miles Plumlee, Mason Plumlee and Ryan Kelly have played in the NBA. And that doesn't include Elton Brand and Carlos Boozer. So, other than negative recruiting, how to you explain the perception that Duke doesn't develop big men?

[mgtr]

Props to the OP for raising an issue which has provided some great commentary.

[Henderson]

Succeeding in the NBA draft is not the same as succeeding in the NBA.

And playing in the NBA isn't the same thing as succeeding there.

As for me, I'd be thrilled to be drafted by an NBA team and would count it as a success. But when you're in your 50s, stand 5'11", can't run, jump, or shoot a basketball worth a darn, figuring out the buttons on the remote before the game starts thrills you.

[DavidBenAkiva]

Agreed, which I attempted to qualify with my final sentence there. If the point is to only talk about NBA All-Star big men in the context of recruiting, well, the 2013 NBA All-Star team featured five big guys who didn't go to college at all.

Look, I have a lot of respect for Kansas. Among the non-Duke teams, they rank right up there with other respectable programs like Michigan State in my mind. But let's be honest. Kansas, under Self and Williams, has developed a very clear track record of featuring one or more post players. But it can also be said that those post players have been less than successful if not outright busts in the NBA, and even moreso than Duke's bigs.

Here's the list of Duke post players that have made it to the NBA the past few years (playing within the lifetime of most recruits):
Mason Plumlee (1st Rd, 2013)
Ryan Kelly (2nd Rd, 2013)
Miles Plumlee (1st Rd, 2012)
Josh McRoberts (2nd Rd, 2007)
Shelden Williams (Lottery Pick, 2006)
Shavlik Randolph (Not drafted, 2004)
Carlos Boozer (2nd Rd, 2002)
Elton Brand (1st Overall Pick, 1999)

I count 4 starting players at some point in their career with Brand, Boozer being joined by McRoberts and Miles Plumlee this year. This list does not include Brian Zoubek (who probably would be on an NBA roster these days were it not for injuries), the main post player from a national championship team. With Zoubek, Every single featured post player (and Shavlik Randolph) have ended up in the NBA for the past 15 years. Some of the guys we recruited to be post players - Casey Sanders, Michael Thompson, and Jamal Boykin, among others - did not end up blossoming at Duke. Still, that list above is darn impressive.

Over this same time period, here are some players from other schools, just for comparison:

Kansas: (Cole Aldrich, Darrell Arthur, Nick Collison, Drew Gooden, Darnell Jackson, Raef LaFrentz, Marcus Morris, Markieff Morris, Thomas Robinson, Wayne Simien, and Julian Wright) I didn't include Danny Manning since he ended his playing career more than 10 years ago, when most recruits would not have been aware of him. Still, his career was comparable to Elton Brand. Collison is having a good career as a backup big and Gooden had a few ok years. The Morri are on track to at least stick around the NBA for a while. Besides that, though, this is an underwhelming group.

North Carolina: (Ed Davis, Tyler Hansbrough, Brendan Haywood, John Henson, Antawn Jamison, Sean May, Rasheed Wallace, Marvin Williams, Brandon Wright, and Tyler Zeller) Haywood started a lot earlier in his NBA career but was never a star, Jamison and Wallace were very good players for a long time, but that's about it with this group. Especially lately, perhaps with the exception of Henson, this group is not going to include a lot of high-end talent.

Florida: (Matt Bonner, Al Horford, David Lee, Vernon Macklin, Eric Murphy, Joakim Noah, Chris Richard, and Marreese Speights) Hoford, Noah, and to a lesser extent Lee are all very good if not great NBA players. Bonner has had a nice career given the expectations he had coming out of college, but the overall depth of talent is not there. Since Noah and Horford left, the cupboard has been bare, so to speak.

Kentucky: (DeMarcus Cousins, Anthony Davis, Josh Harrellson, Terrance Jones, Enes Kanter, Jamaal Magloire, Nazr Mohammed, Nerlens Noel, Daniel Orton, Patrick Patterson, and Antoine Walker) Obviously, the level of talent coming out of Kentucky went way up when Calipari moved there. Davis seems destined to be a superstar for several years. Cousins could be, but we will have to wait to see about him and Noel. Still, with Jones, Orton, and Patterson, even Kentucky has had some struggles in the NBA.

Connecticut: (Hilton Armstrong, Josh Boone, Andre Drummond, Donyell Marhsall, Emeka Okafor, Hasheem Thabeet, Charlie Villanueva, and Jake Voshkul) Now here is a disappointing group. Drummond appears to be the only one with any sort of future in the NBA. Okafor has had a nice career, but being drafted #2 out of college did him no favors (other than a paycheck). On the upside, he was traded to Phoenix this year, giving Mile Plumlee the chance to show his stuff. Speaking of being drafted #2 overall, Thabeet is one of the biggest disappointments in the draft, ever.

UCLA: (Dan Gadzuric, Ryan Hollins, Kevin Love, Luc Mbah a Moute) This list was much shorter than I thought it was going to be. Obviously, Love is the one bright star from this group.

Georgetown: (Ruben Boumtje-Boumtje, Patrick Ewing, Jr., Othella Harrington, Roy Hibbert, Greg Monroe, Alonzo Mourning, Dikembe Mutombo, Otto Porter, Mike Sweetney) I guess if there is one school that can consistently produce big men, it is Georgetown. Hibbert is still getting better, as is Monroe. I included Mourning and Mutombo as they played significant portions of their careers in the 2000s. I also included Ruben Boumtje-Boumtje since that is just a fun name.

Anyway, is there a school that I am missing? Given the schools above, how could anyone say that Duke is much worse at producing NBA talent at the 4 and 5 spot than nearly anyone else?

[Newton_14]

Calling Looney a whiff/miss is fair. He was considered an almost lock for Duke for several months. Calling Okobonoh a whiff/miss is revisionist history. Duke showed interest late but was never in this kid's top 3, maybe even not top 5. He should not fall in the category of a miss for Duke. Jones/Okafor would be big misses if they end up going elsewhere. Not every kid considering Duke or even being considered by Duke is actually in the running.

[TexHawk]

That may explain why Kansas has a rep for developing big men. But in the last decade, former Duke 4s and/or 5s Luol Deng, Shavlik Randolph, Shelden Williams, Josh McRoberts, Lance Thomas, Kyle Singler, Miles Plumlee, Mason Plumlee and Ryan Kelly have played in the NBA. And that doesn't include Elton Brand and Carlos Boozer.

Well, when I say "big men", I am talking about back-to-the-basket post players. While I don't have nearly the same context as you all, I am not sure I would count Deng or Singler in that group, and maybe not even Ryan Kelly. Because if we start to expand that group to wing players, KU could throw out Brandon Rush, Xavier Henry, and depending how hard you squint, Ben McLemore. Georgetown could claim Otto Porter, Florida could claim Corey Brewer, and so on.


So, other than negative recruiting, how to you explain the perception that Duke doesn't develop big men?

No idea. I am sure you can find a bunch of non-Duke fans that love pushing that perception, because they think it's funny to throw out the whole "Wojo is the big man coach and he's not a big man" thing. I find it silly, the numbers/draftees speak for themselves.


Personally, I was just responding to the OP that didn't see Kansas producing NBA big men, my post really had nothing to do with Duke.

[throatybeard]

Did we actually "feel pretty good about" Harrison Barnes? I don't remember any consensus that Duke was in the lead for him.

[jimsumner]

Did we actually "feel pretty good about" Harrison Barnes? I don't remember any consensus that Duke was in the lead for him.

Duke was regarded as the clear leader for Barnes for some time and for good reason. But the good feelings had soured by a few weeks short of the announcement.

[MarkD83]

Calling Looney a whiff/miss is fair. He was considered an almost lock for Duke for several months. Calling Okobonoh a whiff/miss is revisionist history. Duke showed interest late but was never in this kid's top 3, maybe even not top 5. He should not fall in the category of a miss for Duke. Jones/Okafor would be big misses if they end up going elsewhere. Not every kid considering Duke or even being considered by Duke is actually in the running.

In reading the earlier post I think the "whiff/miss" was refering to the Crystal Ball site whiffing on their predictions not Duke whiffing on a prospect.

I bring this up because when we talk about Duke missing on a prospect it is because an expert has said Duke should get someone and they don't. That has nothing to do with the program actually missing getting someone.

[johnb]

Calling Looney a whiff/miss is fair. He was considered an almost lock for Duke for several months. Calling Okobonoh a whiff/miss is revisionist history. Duke showed interest late but was never in this kid's top 3, maybe even not top 5. He should not fall in the category of a miss for Duke. Jones/Okafor would be big misses if they end up going elsewhere. Not every kid considering Duke or even being considered by Duke is actually in the running.

I'd go further and say that we don't know if either of these guys was a whiff. If we had gotten both of them, we would presumably have had to withdraw or defer our offers to almost everyone else until our scholarship situation clarified itself in the spring. "Whiff" would mean missing on Okafor and Jones, definitely, and not getting one of the remaining guys. But if they went elsewhere, and we got, say, two or even one of the others (among Travis, Winslow, Turner) to go along with Grayson, I would call this an excellent recruiting year...

[DavidBenAkiva]

I'd go further and say that we don't know if either of these guys was a whiff. If we had gotten both of them, we would presumably have had to withdraw or defer our offers to almost everyone else until our scholarship situation clarified itself in the spring. "Whiff" would mean missing on Okafor and Jones, definitely, and not getting one of the remaining guys. But if they went elsewhere, and we got, say, two or even one of the others (among Travis, Winslow, Turner) to go along with Grayson, I would call this an excellent recruiting year...

I was referring to the Crystal Ball and experts predictions. I get it that some kids decide to go elsewhere. What I don't understand is how a large group of people that follow recruiting so closely could be so wrong. I never got the sense from the 'insiders' that Okonoboh was a Duke lean. Certainly, a lot of people thought Looney was going to commit to Duke. However, in both instances, the national consensus was WAY off. How could that be?

[Eakane]

I think the focus here is wrong. The competition between Duke and KU, at least for Okafor (btw, is he related to UConn's former player?), will not come down to who he thinks will give him a better chance at being a lottery pick/successful player in the NBA. That point has taken care of itself. Given his size and skills, he'd have to really bomb, like Joey-Beard-like bomb) no matter where he goes, to not go in the top five. And playing for K or Self or Izzo or Cal isn't going to change that. However, I'll take K in a Pepsi challenge with ANY OTHER coach when it comes to turning boys into men. That is a categorical and undeniable plus for any recruit to consider.

I've given up trying to read 18-yr old minds, at least since my own son went through that age, but I don't see him thinking "geez, if I go to Duke, with its bad rep at developing bigs, I might not make it in the NBA." Rather, my guess is he's more interested in where he will get the best college experience, albeit only for a year or two, and, where he has an excellent chance at winning a national championship. I'm really excited about this year, but if he and Tyus come next year, and Hood and/or Parker stay, along with the other upperclassmen, we'll be the consensus pre-season No. 1, and be favored to win it all. Of course, the argument can be made that if he and Tyus go to KU, that makes them the odds on favorite in 2014'15 too. So if that's a push, and likely-to-succeed-in-the-NBA is immaterial, then it comes down to college experience, and he can take this to the bank -- there is no coach like K, no arena like Cameron, and there is no place like Duke.

EA "been a long time since I've posted" Kane

[Li_Duke]

I'm not sure that the perception is all due to negative recruiting. ESPN magazine had an interesting chart about what kind of shots each school emphasizes in their NCAA preview this year. The past few years, Kansas has had about 400 shots on post-up attempts each year while Duke has had about 150-200 shots on post-up attempts (that includes last year with Mason). If recruits watch NCAA basketball games, I'm sure they'd notice that Self's teams tend to emphasize posting up while Coach K emphasizes the 3-ball. (Statistically, emphasizing the threes gives you the best chance to win, so I'm not going to lose any sleep over Coach K's offensive style. The three-ball also opens up the paint, and I believe Duke had a higher percentages of makes on post-ups than Kansas over the past few years.)

[Kedsy]

However, in both instances, the national consensus was WAY off. How could that be?

What's your real question? Because when the only accurate information is in the hands of one person (or possibly three, if the parents know, although a lot of times they don't) and that one person (or whoever's privy to the answer) doesn't speak publicly on the matter, it seems pretty obvious that nobody else can possibly know the true answer. The consensus is just guessing. I'm sure you know this, but I'm not sure what you're trying to find out.

[DavidBenAkiva]

What's your real question? Because when the only accurate information is in the hands of one person (or possibly three, if the parents know, although a lot of times they don't) and that one person (or whoever's privy to the answer) doesn't speak publicly on the matter, it seems pretty obvious that nobody else can possibly know the true answer. The consensus is just guessing. I'm sure you know this, but I'm not sure what you're trying to find out.

I go back to my original questions:

1) Why do kids have lists and is there really any order to the lists? Those that follow recruits pay way too much attention to list, IMO. I get that kids need to narrow down their choices and can only visit 5 schools. Beyond that, do most or at least some of the recruits ever have "leaders."
2) Where does this perception about Duke come from? Are other coaching staffs putting it out there? AAU coaches? Shoe companies?
3) Do other schools miss on recruits the way Duke seems to consistently miss on big men?

Now that I mentioned shoe companies, that reminds me of Tony Parker and Shabbazz Muhammed recruitment. Did they really pick UCLA because Adidas wanted them to go there?

[loran16]

I was referring to the Crystal Ball and experts predictions. I get it that some kids decide to go elsewhere. What I don't understand is how a large group of people that follow recruiting so closely could be so wrong. I never got the sense from the 'insiders' that Okonoboh was a Duke lean. Certainly, a lot of people thought Looney was going to commit to Duke. However, in both instances, the national consensus was WAY off. How could that be?

Because these are teenagers and some of them don't let their feelings known to outsiders.

The problem with the 24/7 crystal ball is that nearly all of the people voting on it don't have any inside information and are going off reports of others. In some cases, basically none of the people have inside info (Looney). As a result, any consensus is illusory.

[Wander]

I think the perception about Duke big men isn't so much about whether they'll get drafted - as people have pointed out here, we've put plenty of big guys into the NBA. It's more about how post players are used in the offense while they're at Duke. The negative recruiting by other schools is more along the lines of "If you go to Duke, you'll just set screens for the guards" rather than "If you go to Duke, you'll never make it in the NBA."

The perception is overblown and the quote I have above about only setting screens is stupid, but I do think there's a thoughtful case to be made that Duke, on average, is better with guards or combo forwards than with post players (which I'm fine with).

[Kedsy]

Beyond that, do most or at least some of the recruits ever have "leaders."

Think back to your own college decision. Did you have a leader? Did you change your mind at all? Was it hard to make up your mind when you had several great options? Just because these kids can play basketball doesn't mean they stopped being kids.


3) Do other schools miss on recruits the way Duke seems to consistently miss on big men?

Well, first of all, in the past 10 years, by my count Duke has had 8 guys 6'8" or taller make an NBA roster. Jabari Parker will be #9 (and Rodney Hood will be #10, although he's really more of a wing and we didn't recruit him as a high school player). We successfully recruited all those guys, so I'm not sure why you think we "consistently miss on big men." Second, everyone wants the top guys; when they choose a school in essence it means 300+ teams "missed" on them, so I'd say it's not just Duke.

Finally, there are a very small number of top 20 big men in each high school class. Of those, Duke can only recruit a much smaller number (due to academics or other issues). How many are left? I don't know, maybe one or two a year? And everybody wants them. Do you think Duke should get them all? If there have been 20 big guys who fit the Duke profile in the past 10 years (I just made that number up, but I'm sure it's not too far off) and we got 8 (or 9 or 10 or even 4 or 5 or 6), that doesn't sound like consistently missing to me. That sounds like a pretty good percentage.

So it's possible the "missing on big men" issue is really a matter of fans' perceptions and not an actual issue.

Just my opinion, of course.

[Li_Duke]

I go back to my original questions:

1) Why do kids have lists and is there really any order to the lists? Those that follow recruits pay way too much attention to list, IMO. I get that kids need to narrow down their choices and can only visit 5 schools. Beyond that, do most or at least some of the recruits ever have "leaders."
2) Where does this perception about Duke come from? Are other coaching staffs putting it out there? AAU coaches? Shoe companies?
3) Do other schools miss on recruits the way Duke seems to consistently miss on big men?

Now that I mentioned shoe companies, that reminds me of Tony Parker and Shabbazz Muhammed recruitment. Did they really pick UCLA because Adidas wanted them to go there?

Tackling the last question, I remember seeing ESPN showing that over the last 10 years, Duke, UNC, and Kentucky have been the most successful recruiters (in terms of quality/quantity of who makes it to campus). I also remember seeing that of all the top schools, Duke tends to throw the smallest net. Combining the two points toward Duke having fewer misses than most top basketball schools in the long run.

Now, obviously, year-to-year, the number of misses is highly variable. I think it is too early to tell with this year.

(This doesn't address big men in particular but Kedsy has that covered.)

[jimsumner]

I go back to my original questions:

1) Why do kids have lists and is there really any order to the lists? Those that follow recruits pay way too much attention to list, IMO. I get that kids need to narrow down their choices and can only visit 5 schools. Beyond that, do most or at least some of the recruits ever have "leaders."
2) Where does this perception about Duke come from? Are other coaching staffs putting it out there? AAU coaches? Shoe companies?
3) Do other schools miss on recruits the way Duke seems to consistently miss on big men?

Now that I mentioned shoe companies, that reminds me of Tony Parker and Shabbazz Muhammed recruitment. Did they really pick UCLA because Adidas wanted them to go there?

I notice you've amended your original question three. Now Duke doesn't miss more on everyone, just big men.

Every school misses on recruits. Every single school. Every single coach. Wooden, Rupp, Knight, Smith, everyone. Yes, even Calipari and Self.

Mike Krzyzewski is a highly-selective recruiter and yet every single-season for a generation he's had a roster full of highly-recruited players, players also sought after by Kentucky, Kansas, North Carolina, UCLA, Michigan State, Indiana, Ohio State, Georgetown, Michigan, Louisville and so many others. Lots of programs missed on Kyle Singler. Lots of programs missed on Kyrie Irving. Lots of programs missed on Austin Rivers. Ohio State desperately wanted Rodney Hood, Kentucky wanted Amile Jefferson, Kansas wanted Matt Jones and Rasheed Sulaimon.

This season Duke has a 6-8, 235-pound freshman who may well contend for first-team All-America. Think no one else wanted Jabari Parker?

Duke's most recent starting center was an All-American and first-round draft pick. His predecessor was a first-round draft pick.

Let me throw out a couple of factoids. Excluding 1996--when Roshown McLeod was sitting out-- every Duke team beginning in 1983 has had at least one post player 6-8 or taller who went on to play in the NBA. If we count McLeod as being in the program that year, then the streak is unbroken. The 2010 title team had five players 6-8 or taller currently in the NBA.

Factoid two. Duke has signed at least one Parade and/or McDonald's All-American every single recruiting class since 1982.

Yet, you make it sound like Duke has fallen off the face of the recruiting planet. I realize fan bases can be myopic. But sometimes the glass really is half-full.

[Eakane]

The panic and frustration is engendered by "missing" on Looney and Okono. I admit it's hard for me to sit back and not be bothered: "how could anyone good enough to be given an offer pass on Duke??" In baseball, 2 out of 10 gets you relegated to the minors, while 3 out of 10 likely makes you a future hall of famer. Duke's average is more like the latter.

I guess in the end, there really isn't a bad decision Jones and Okarfor can make. The only ones who will be disappointed will be either us fans or KU devotees. I can make the argument why it's better to go to Duke than anywhere else for 15 different reasons, only more so if your a highly regarded bball recruit; but the truth is, these guys are going to be just fine either way. Maybe not in the this-just-in-department, but I thought t worth repeating.

[jimsumner]

The panic and frustration is engendered by "missing" on Looney and Okono. I admit it's hard for me to sit back and not be bothered: "how could anyone good enough to be given an offer pass on Duke??" In baseball, 2 out of 10 gets you relegated to the minors, while 3 out of 10 likely makes you a future hall of famer. Duke's average is more like the latter.


I think you've hit on a useful point. Most members of this board are Duke fans and can't imagine why anyone offered by Duke wouldn't sign with Duke. W We sure would. Incomprehensible.

So, missing on someone means someone made a mistake or cheated or something else went wrong. Because, otherwise, how could anyone turn down Coach K?

But teenagers have different imperatives. Proximity to home, available PT, social life, where's the girlfriend going to be.

Recruiting is as much art as science. You target guys you think will work at your school and program, recruit them as well as you can, let them make the decision that they think works for them and move on.

If you think you're doing it wrong, then you adjust. But it's worked pretty darn well for a pretty darn long time.