MBB: (18) UNC-CH 82, (11) Kentucky 77

[Duvall]

The game is close. Kentucky is dominating the boards, UNC is forcing turnovers. Both teams will try to press those advantages in the second half.

[FerryFor50]

The game is close. Kentucky is dominating the boards, UNC is forcing turnovers. Both teams will try to press those advantages in the second half.

UK is in some foul trouble, too. Not surprising in the Dean Dome...

[g-money]

PJ who?

Carolina looks pretty good.

But at least it's coming against Kentucky.

[Duvall]

Carolina looks pretty good.

Do they, though?

[FerryFor50]

Do they, though?

Not really. Less sloppy, maybe?

[Duvall]

Not really. Less sloppy, maybe?

I guess. Kentucky just never looked like they wanted to be there.

[FerryFor50]

I guess. Kentucky just never looked like they wanted to be there.

Well to be fair, most of them are just stopping by for the year...

[g-money]

Do they, though?

Certainly better than I expected. How about you?

[-jk]

Exam games are so tough! (Unless you you take no-show classes!)

-jk

[dukelifer]

PJ who?

Carolina looks pretty good.

But at least it's coming against Kentucky.

UNC is better than people think and KY is not as good. All these teams will be better in March. That said, UNC is among the early contenders for the title and probably ahead of Duke at this point.

[FerryFor50]

Even with as disinterested and sloppy UK has been, they are still within striking distance.

[53n206]

UNC is better than people think and KY is not as good. All these teams will be better in March. That said, UNC is among the early contenders for the title and probably ahead of Duke at this point.

Give us a little time. Ky just lousy today.

[OldPhiKap]

Exam games are so tough! (Unless you you take no-show classes!)

-jk

UNC and Kentucky worried about classes? Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

[devildeac]

If my old eyes don't deceive me, I swear I just saw that 43 FT had been attempted in the game. For each team. 86 FT!!! Are you kidding me?

[Des Esseintes]

Do they, though?

I hear you, but at some point the wins against ranked teams start to add up. I mean, it's *possible* UL, UK, and Michigan State are all seriously overrated this year, but Occam's razor says it's more likely that Carolina has a pretty good team. Which I will be the first to admit I did not expect.

[FerryFor50]

If my old eyes don't deceive me, I swear I just saw that 43 FT had been attempted in the game. For each team. 86 FT!!! Are you kidding me?

Could have been many more, too, given how much they were pounding on Randle all game.

[devildeac]

Could have been many more, too, given how much they were pounding on Randle all game.

Final tally: 88 FT with 57 PF (ky at 67% and unc with a "torrid" 58%) in the game with Randle shooting 6. Good point about them pounding him. Jabari might need body armor when we play them:rolleyes:.

[jipops]

I hear you, but at some point the wins against ranked teams start to add up. I mean, it's *possible* UL, UK, and Michigan State are all seriously overrated this year, but Occam's razor says it's more likely that Carolina has a pretty good team. Which I will be the first to admit I did not expect.

I expected them to be this good with PJ, not without.

[dukelifer]

Give us a little time. Ky just lousy today.

UNC has made three highly ranked teams look lousy. UNC has size and depth and that can wear on teams. They are legit. They are beatable but they can hold their own against anyone. Duke is one of many young teams- lots of work before March.

[kAzE]

UNC has made three highly ranked teams look lousy. UNC has size and depth and that can wear on teams. They are legit. They are beatable but they can hold their own against anyone. Duke is one of many young teams- lots of work before March.

These teams were highly ranked, but preseason rank means almost nothing nowadays. It's turned into wild speculation based mostly on kids coming out of high school now. UK and MSU were 1 and 2 when they played each other, but since then, haven't done much to justify that preseason hype, so I wouldn't put too much stock into that. However, Louisville is legit top tier team by all indications. Despite the fact that MSU and UK have been struggling of late, I agree that UNC is a good team. Paige is a totally different player than last year. He's the major factor in this resurgence. They could be a title contender if Hairston returns.

[FerryFor50]

These teams were highly ranked, but preseason rank means almost nothing nowadays. It's turned into wild speculation based mostly on kids coming out of high school now. UK and MSU were 1 and 2 when they played each other, but since then, haven't done much to justify that preseason hype, so I wouldn't put too much stock into that. However, Louisville is legit top tier team by all indications. Despite the fact that MSU and UK have been struggling of late, I agree that UNC is a good team. Paige is a totally different player than last year. He's the major factor in this resurgence. They could be a title contender if Hairston returns.

Hard to say L'ville is legit when they've only played UNC as a quality team... Rest of their schedule has been pretty weak. I say let the season play out before we start judging teams.

[kAzE]

Hard to say L'ville is legit when they've only played UNC as a quality team... Rest of their schedule has been pretty weak. I say let the season play out before we start judging teams.

Wow, you're right, I hadn't looked at their schedule. They are 332 on SOS, by far the worst in kenpom's top 25. What's up with that? I just saw 7th in offense and 2nd in defense, but against that schedule, I'm not surprised.

[DukeFanSince1990]

I kind of want UNC to be good.....Its sweeter when Duke beats them. So I am going to say they are good.

[BD80]

UNC is better than people think and KY is not as good. All these teams will be better in March. That said, UNC is among the early contenders for the title and probably ahead of Duke at this point.

Ky has that Harrison kid. Man he must have scored close to 40 points and pulled down close to 10 boards, but he had a bunch of turnovers and I swear more than 5 fouls. Really aggressive in taking the ball to the hoop. I hope Sheed and Quinn were watching.

Randle kinda took a big step backwards in the rookie of the year debate.

[kAzE]

Ky has that Harrison kid. Man he must have scored close to 40 points and pulled down close to 10 boards, but he had a bunch of turnovers and I swear more than 5 fouls. Really aggressive in taking the ball to the hoop. I hope Sheed and Quinn were watching.

Randle kinda took a big step backwards in the rookie of the year debate.

Nah, Randle is still the man on that team. Other teams are just keying on him more in the scouting report. Actually, UK fans are pretty disappointed in the twins so far. They did have a decent game against UNC, but their entire body of work thus far is probably the biggest reason UK isn't as good as they were expected to be.

[Wander]

If only Kentucky had Duke's back-ups and walk-ons starting for them, they could have beaten UNC eleven out of ten times.

[Kedsy]

If only Kentucky had Duke's back-ups and walk-ons starting for them, they could have beaten UNC eleven out of ten times.

Or maybe the starters from Belmont or UAB.

[Troublemaker]

Wow, you're right, I hadn't looked at their schedule. They are 332 on SOS, by far the worst in kenpom's top 25. What's up with that? I just saw 7th in offense and 2nd in defense, but against that schedule, I'm not surprised.

Those offensive and defensive rankings are schedule-adjusted, but I do suspect a talented pressing team like Louisville is particularly skilled at drilling woeful teams, so even their schedule-adjusted O and D rankings could be overrating them right now. We'll see what happens in conference season when the schedule stiffens a bit.

As for UNC, at this point I've pretty much abandoned the hope that they'll miss the NCAA tournament. They're probably a good team.

[brevity]

UNC has made three highly ranked teams look lousy. UNC has size and depth and that can wear on teams. They are legit. They are beatable but they can hold their own against anyone. Duke is one of many young teams- lots of work before March.


These teams were highly ranked, but preseason rank means almost nothing nowadays. It's turned into wild speculation based mostly on kids coming out of high school now. UK and MSU were 1 and 2 when they played each other, but since then, haven't done much to justify that preseason hype, so I wouldn't put too much stock into that. However, Louisville is legit top tier team by all indications. Despite the fact that MSU and UK have been struggling of late, I agree that UNC is a good team. Paige is a totally different player than last year. He's the major factor in this resurgence. They could be a title contender if Hairston returns.

If you like, throw out the rankings. Then tell us if any college team this season has a set of 3 wins that are more impressive.

Arizona has Duke, Michigan, and... San Diego State. (Actually, that's not bad.) Syracuse has Baylor, Indiana, and... Cal. Villanova has Kansas, Iowa, and... St. Joseph's. Connecticut has Florida, Indiana, and... Maryland. Well, any win over Maryland is pretty sweet. But still less impressive.

I don't think a legit UNC team should strike fear in us, but allow us to be disappointed that their complete collapse hasn't immediately come to fruition. Their personnel issues have made them lean and hungry. Well, maybe not lean, but less overweight and hungry, like you know who. Now we have to hope that they fold in the face of success, or are unable to gel once their exiled starters return.

[Troublemaker]

Final tally: 88 FT with 57 PF (ky at 67% [FT shooting] and unc with a "torrid" 58% [FT shooting])

If Duke had been in that game playing either team, we would've won comfortably under those referee-ing conditions. That was obviously a tightly-called game, and Duke's 74% FT shooting would have given us a huge advantage.

I know we choked against KU in a similarly called game (although still less outrageous as 88 FTA), but I don't mind Duke getting involved in those kinds of games this season now that we've fixed our FT shooting. We're deep enough and we hit free throws well enough to win most of these types of contests. I hope to play UNC twice under those conditions.

[Papa John]

I hear you, but at some point the wins against ranked teams start to add up. I mean, it's *possible* UL, UK, and Michigan State are all seriously overrated this year, but Occam's razor says it's more likely that Carolina has a pretty good team. Which I will be the first to admit I did not expect.

Carolina is a good, young, schizo team. These games are showing the lack of maturity in a lot of the highly ranked teams due to youth. Carolina has a lot of raw talent that meshes well when they are playing in the comfort of home against a solid opponent, which is when the Dean Dome crowd actually gets into the games.

What was more telling to me last night was the fact that Kentucky has a lot of maturing to do. These guys have a ton of talent, but they were constantly being distracted by the way the game was being called. At some point, you have to quit whining about the officials and just play the game. They were so focused on how poorly they felt the fouls were being called that they simply weren't focusing on the most important thing--playing your game. Right now, that is Kentucky's Achilles... That and free throw shooting (that was the other thing that struck me about last night--those are two god-awful FT shooting teams). If UK can mature to the point where they stop worrying about how the game is being officiated and just play, they will be scary good. For the time being, though, it still seems relatively easy for a solid team to get into their collective heads and get them unfocused and out of their game.

We also have a couple of guys (Hood and Cook, primarily) who sometimes tend to whine a bit about how the game is being whistled to the point of losing their focus, so this maturation process is also a key component in our success this season.

[Wheat/"/"/"]

This UNC team is surprising, but some of you are in denial if your don't think they are a good team.

Coach Williams has them playing unselfishly and recognizing that defense matters, and this is a good defensive team.

When you look at each individual player, there are strengths, but also clear weaknesses in their games. (With the exception of Marcus Paige who is now clearly an All ACC player and will start showing up on AA lists soon).

But the sum of their parts has created a team with balance that is hard to beat.

I see team defense, and the play of Nate Britt spreading the court on offense as the key, so far. Also the steady play from Tokoto has been big.

UNC is taking care of the ball and limiting their TO's, but forcing opponent TO's.
Britt is a big help there. He's providing quickness and the ball handling in the backcourt that is taking some pressure off Paige. Tokoto is also handling it well and playing with discipline.

Add in UNC's aggressive attacking of the basket (especially McAdoo) and opposing defenses are under a lot of pressure from a UNC team that struggles to shoot it well away from the basket.

Credit Roy here for getting this group to understand their strength is defense and aggressiveness attacking the basket. He's now beaten, Calipari, Izzo, and Pitino with teams all higher ranked than his, with a team that many questioned would make the tournament.

Roy can coach. Always could. When is see the constant criticism, I just laugh. Overrated? Just the opposit.

[sagegrouse]

Roy can coach. Always could. When [I] see the constant criticism, I just laugh. Overrated? Just the opposition.

Fixed your typos. You're welcome.

sage

[Saratoga2]

Neither team shot free throws that well and Kentucky was often lost on defense, finding it hard to get back when UNC brought the ball down rapidly Neither side showed good 3 point shooting although Paige was limited by Kentucky from outside. Kentucky's lack of 3 point shooting allowed the zone to work pretty well against them. Both teams have size and athleticism and should improve with the season.

As far as Duke beating them, we lack size and quality depth at the center and PF positions. That might turn into an issue for us although our 3 point shooting should open interior lanes. I wonder how our guards would fare against the 2 6'6" Harrison boys. When we have lost to quality teams we seemed to stay with Hairston and Thornton and they made the team less dangerous on offense. Perhaps against Kentucky or Carolina we would see more Matt, Sheed and Marshall. We need to get better to be in contention and I see development of the bench as key to that progression.

[Troublemaker]

I know we choked against KU in a similarly called game (although still less outrageous as 88 FTA), but I don't mind Duke getting involved in those kinds of games this season now that we've fixed our FT shooting. We're deep enough and we hit free throws well enough to win most of these types of contests. I hope to play UNC twice under those conditions.

Hmm, late-night posting. With morning clarity upon me, I'll take back hoping the Duke-UNC contests are foul-fests. It's more like, I wouldn't hate that type of game since we shoot FTs much better than them, but an aesthetically pleasing game would be preferable. Also, I used "choked" as a synonym for "missed FTs" against KU, but in reality, I doubt Duke was feeling the pressure or anything. At the start of the season (including preseason games), we were in a fluky slump at the FT line and have since broken the slump and --knock on wood-- are now shooting like our normal selves for this season.

[hudlow]

Roy can coach. Always could. When is see the constant criticism, I just laugh. Overrated? Just the opposit.


Sure Roy has some flashes of brilliance. That and his ability to recruit keeps him in the higher echelon.

Losses to UAB and Belmont make his in game and preparation abilities suspect.

Consistency seems to be his problem.

hud

[dukebballcamper90-91]

Roy going zone on UK was huge. K might have to leave ego at the door and go zone against some teams like UK. Without PJ(PacmanJones), Paige is the only outside threat the turd heels have and zone would work against them if ran correctly.

[Wheat/"/"/"]

Sure Roy has some flashes of brilliance. That and his ability to recruit keeps him in the higher echelon.

Losses to UAB and Belmont make his in game and preparation abilities suspect.

Consistency seems to be his problem.

hud

I just don't see it that way.

Yes, he recruits talented players, all the top teams do.

Early season games are teaching opportunities and he will occasionally lose a surprise game when the opponent plays very well, like Belmont and UAB did, by being stubborn and demanding the players keep working on the things they have to get better at...instead of making a one game adjustment from what he wants his team to do just to get a win that really doesn't help the team grow.

The end game is to be ready for March.

[OldPhiKap]

The question is becoming -- will PJ and LMac disturb what is obviously a pretty cohesive team?

[Wheat/"/"/"]

The question is becoming -- will PJ and LMac disturb what is obviously a pretty cohesive team?

I hope we have that "problem".

[richardjackson199]

This UNC team is surprising, but some of you are in denial if your don't think they are a good team.

Coach Williams has them playing unselfishly and recognizing that defense matters, and this is a good defensive team.

When you look at each individual player, there are strengths, but also clear weaknesses in their games. (With the exception of Marcus Paige who is now clearly an All ACC player and will start showing up on AA lists soon).

But the sum of their parts has created a team with balance that is hard to beat.

I see team defense, and the play of Nate Britt spreading the court on offense as the key, so far. Also the steady play from Tokoto has been big.

UNC is taking care of the ball and limiting their TO's, but forcing opponent TO's.
Britt is a big help there. He's providing quickness and the ball handling in the backcourt that is taking some pressure off Paige. Tokoto is also handling it well and playing with discipline.

Add in UNC's aggressive attacking of the basket (especially McAdoo) and opposing defenses are under a lot of pressure from a UNC team that struggles to shoot it well away from the basket.

Credit Roy here for getting this group to understand their strength is defense and aggressiveness attacking the basket. He's now beaten, Calipari, Izzo, and Pitino with teams all higher ranked than his, with a team that many questioned would make the tournament.

Roy can coach. Always could. When is see the constant criticism, I just laugh. Overrated? Just the opposit.

In this case, I'll have to agree with Wheat. I'm excited about this year's Duke team. But Carolina fans should also be ecstatic about their Carolina team. UNC is missing their best player - reports from UNC practice are that PJ is improved from last year and he is by far their best player. With LMac is another guy who can address their outside shooting. With McAdoo they have a junior who has passed on being a certain first round draft pick 2 years in a row to return to UNC. His free throw shooting is suspect, but he's a pro and can be very difficult to stop with his quickness, size, and athleticism. Carolina has lots of young, quality depth inside & outside, and they have a higher ceiling to keep improving. Their inside depth could hurt Duke bigtime as we lack quality depth at the 4 & 5 positions. Their loss to UAB was a road loss to a team coached by one of Roy's former players and assistant coaches. UAB is decent, they were jacked to beat UNC, and they were at home. Belmont was very hot from outside & were also jacked to beat Carolina. With Carolina playing without its best player and a young team, one loss at home like that in November is not the end of the world. Duke came within half a second to losing at home to Vermont, and we were full strength. I'm excited about Duke this year, and we will get better. But UNC is very good, and they could get much better too. Young players rapidly improving with best player likely coming back in January. 2 definite pro's in McAdoo & PJ, with Paige playing like first team all ACC. And you can't argue with their 3 quality wins. They beat #3, defending national champ, Pitino-coached Louisville soundly on a neutral floor, breaking their win streak and looking quite good doing it. They beat #1 Michigan State AT Michigan State to even the ACC-Big 10 challenge, and they beat them soundly. They just beat a preseason #1 Kentucky team loaded with NBA talent. All without their best player. UNC is very good and likely getting much better. Carolina fans should be ecstatic about their team. Duke is very good and likely getting much better. We should be ecstatic. All is as it should be. Can't wait for the ACC to get going and a great season! Go Duke!

[Kedsy]

Carolina has a lot of raw talent ...



Credit Roy here for getting this group to understand their strength is defense and aggressiveness attacking the basket. He's now beaten, Calipari, Izzo, and Pitino with teams all higher ranked than his, with a team that many questioned would make the tournament.

Roy can coach. Always could. When is see the constant criticism, I just laugh. Overrated? Just the opposit.

I don't know why people keep saying this UNC team has "a lot of raw talent." The truth is, for a top program, they have somewhat of a dearth of raw talent. Recruiting rankings don't tell us everything about whether a guy is a good player, but if nothing else they're usually a pretty good indicator of "raw talent." So let's look there.

The current roster that beat Louisville, Michigan State, and Kentucky has just two top 25 recruits, McAdoo (#6), who isn't playing very well, and Hicks (#14), who isn't playing much at all. And other than those two guys, the Heels only have two other top 50 recruits, Paige (#28) and Brice Johnson (#40).

In comparison, Duke has nine top 50 guys. Kentucky has seven top 20 guys. That's a lot of raw talent.

The bottom line is Wheat is right. Roy is doing a helluva job with this team to get them to play well above their talent level. Personally, I don't think it's going to last and (unless PJ comes back) they're going to get beat around in ACC play, but that won't change the fact that Roy is doing an amazing job with possibly his least talented team at UNC, or at least his least talented team since he did another amazing coaching job with the 2005-06 team.

[moonpie23]

unc is good….they are legit, and they are without two of their best players……i'd suggest toning down the "when we beat them" stuff…….there's nothing i've seen on either team to suggest that outcome….

they've laid 3 top ten (at the time) teams to rest….


they are, and always will be dangerous…..

[CDu]

I don't know why people keep saying this UNC team has "a lot of raw talent." The truth is, for a top program, they have somewhat of a dearth of raw talent. Recruiting rankings don't tell us everything about whether a guy is a good player, but if nothing else they're usually a pretty good indicator of "raw talent." So let's look there.

The current roster that beat Louisville, Michigan State, and Kentucky has just two top 25 recruits, McAdoo (#6), who isn't playing very well, and Hicks (#14), who isn't playing much at all. And other than those two guys, the Heels only have two other top 50 recruits, Paige (#28) and Brice Johnson (#40).

In comparison, Duke has nine top 50 guys. Kentucky has seven top 20 guys. That's a lot of raw talent.

The bottom line is Wheat is right. Roy is doing a helluva job with this team to get them to play well above their talent level. Personally, I don't think it's going to last and (unless PJ comes back) they're going to get beat around in ACC play, but that won't change the fact that Roy is doing an amazing job with possibly his least talented team at UNC, or at least his least talented team since he did another amazing coaching job with the 2005-06 team.

While I don't disagree with you and Wheat that Williams is doing a great job, I do disagree with the argument that they don't have raw talent. I guess it depends on whether the emphasis is on talent or on raw, because if the emphasis is on raw (as in undeveloped), I'd certainly say they have plenty of raw talent. I'd also say they have plenty of actual talent, too, but the raw talent argument is stronger.

They have 4 top-30 recruits (you forgot Meeks), another top 50 recruit and two more top-60 recruits (Tokoto and James). The argument that UNC has lots of raw talent probably stems from the idea that Tokoto and James have loads of physical potential but are quite raw (which is why they fell down the rankings).

So 7 of their 10 regulars are top-60 recruits. That's better than probably 98% of programs nationwide: probably only Duke, UK, Arizona, and UCLA have more, and teams like Michigan State, Ohio State, and Kansas probably have fewer.

Now, I'm sure that Williams wasn't intending to have to rely so heavily on guys like Britt, Tokoto, and Simmons. But guys like McAdoo, Paige, Meeks, Hicks, and Johnson were all considered high-value recruits.

[tbyers11]

unc is good….they are legit, and they are without two of their best players……i'd suggest toning down the "when we beat them" stuff…….there's nothing i've seen on either team to suggest that outcome….

they've laid 3 top ten (at the time) teams to rest….


they are, and always will be dangerous…..

Not to specifically single you out moon pie, but the "they've laid 3 top ten (at the time) to rest" is a big misnomer. UK, Mich St and Louisville have big names but (other than when MSU beat Kentucky) ZERO top 50 Pomeroy wins to date this season. All 3 of those teams may be very good by the end of the year (though I have my doubts that MSU and UK will live up to their hype) but have not shown that ability in games.

By the same token, when we handily beat Michigan at home, many on this board discredited the win because the Wolverines just weren't that good. I think Michigan (evidenced by their almost beating Arizona yesterday) is pretty much the same level of UK, MSU and Louisville.

All that being said winning all three of those games by UNC is very impressive and way above where I thought they would be without PJ and LMac right now. I never thought UNC would be bad enough to miss the tourney even if PJ and LM were out all year. However, I still don't think they seriously challenge for the ACC title either.

[Kedsy]

While I don't disagree with you and Wheat that Williams is doing a great job, I do disagree with the argument that they don't have raw talent. I guess it depends on whether the emphasis is on talent or on raw, because if the emphasis is on raw (as in undeveloped), I'd certainly say they have plenty of raw talent. I'd also say they have plenty of actual talent, too, but the raw talent argument is stronger.

They have 4 top-30 recruits (you forgot Meeks), another top 50 recruit and two more top-60 recruits (Tokoto and James). The argument that UNC has lots of raw talent probably stems from the idea that Tokoto and James have loads of physical potential but are quite raw (which is why they fell down the rankings).

So 7 of their 10 regulars are top-60 recruits. That's better than probably 98% of programs nationwide: probably only Duke, UK, Arizona, and UCLA have more, and teams like Michigan State, Ohio State, and Kansas probably have fewer.

Now, I'm sure that Williams wasn't intending to have to rely so heavily on guys like Britt, Tokoto, and Simmons. But guys like McAdoo, Paige, Meeks, Hicks, and Johnson were all considered high-value recruits.

Well, first of all, Meeks was ranked #56 by the RSCI, so I didn't forget him. So UNC has 3 top 30 recruits and one of them doesn't play much. Kansas also has 7 top 60 guys (#1 Wiggins, #13 Selden, #16 Embiid, #31 Ellis, #40 Frankamp, #52 White, #59 Black). Looking at their group vs. UNC's, I'd say there's no doubt Kansas has more "raw talent" than UNC, though I admit it's a little closer than I thought it was.

Finally I agree with you that the key is whether the OP was emphasizing "raw" or "talent." I've always had the impression that when people say "raw talent," they mean very talented but not necessarily great basketball players yet, that if they lived up to their talent level they'd be awesome, and I'd say that's the opposite of what we're seeing with UNC. Roy is getting more from them basketball-wise than their talent level would suggest.

[MChambers]

My take is much the same as Kedsy's. I look at UNC and don't see much star power or offensive talent, but the team is playing solid defense and doing much better than I expected. I'm not quite sure why teams aren't able to expose UNC's weaknesses.

The silver lining is that every UNC win improves our strength of schedule. ;-)

[CDu]

Well, first of all, Meeks was ranked #56 by the RSCI, so I didn't forget him. So UNC has 3 top 30 recruits and one of them doesn't play much. Kansas also has 7 top 60 guys (#1 Wiggins, #13 Selden, #16 Embiid, #31 Ellis, #40 Frankamp, #52 White, #59 Black). Looking at their group vs. UNC's, I'd say there's no doubt Kansas has more "raw talent" than UNC, though I admit it's a little closer than I thought it was.

Whoops, I was looking at the summer rankings which had Meeks at #30. Apparently he dropped 26 spots over his senior year. Still, 7 guys in the top-60, 3 in the top 25, just like Kansas. Not exactly bereft of talent.


Finally I agree with you that the key is whether the OP was emphasizing "raw" or "talent." I've always had the impression that when people say "raw talent," they mean very talented but not necessarily great basketball players yet, that if they lived up to their talent level they'd be awesome, and I'd say that's the opposite of what we're seeing with UNC. Roy is getting more from them basketball-wise than their talent level would suggest.

When I think of raw talent, I think of a guy with all the physical tools but lacking in the skills department, such that if the skill/understanding of the game comes, the talent is off the charts. Someone like Tokoto is a perfect example of raw talent. His athleticism is on par with just about anybody. He's just not a good shooter or ballhandler. If he can learn how to use his athleticism and develop even a bit of shooting touch, he'd be devastating. McAdoo is another perfect example of raw talent. He is extremely athletically gifted, but can't shoot worth a lick.

So I think UNC does have raw talent. I mean MSU (with just 4 guys in the top-75) would probably kill for that kind of depth of talent. But UNC's talent is very raw, and thus the coaching job that Williams is doing is amazing to get these results.


My take is much the same as Kedsy's. I look at UNC and don't see much star power or offensive talent, but the team is playing solid defense and doing much better than I expected. I'm not quite sure why teams aren't able to expose UNC's weaknesses.

Oh I completely agree that UNC lacks star power. That's not the argument at all. What they have is a team of players with either great physical tools but underdeveloped skills (Tokoto, McAdoo, Hicks) or guys with skill but underdeveloped bodies (Paige, Johnson, Meeks). It's raw talent, not polished star talent.

[Kedsy]

Still, 7 guys in the top-60, 3 in the top 25, just like Kansas.

This may be nitpicking, but Paige was #28, not in the top 25. He's a lot closer to Ellis (Kansas' 4th guy at #31) than he is to Embiid (Kansas' 3rd guy at #16).

Kansas' spread is 1, 13, 16, 31, 40, 52, 59, 89, 91

UNC's spread is 6, 14, 28, 40, 56, 57, 58, 93, unranked

As I said, they're closer than I expected, but it's not equivalent. In pretty much every meaningful range, Kansas is a guy ahead. Of course, that guy is PJ (#11), at which point the talent looks reasonably equivalent. And if you throw in LMac (#44), UNC would probably have a slight edge. Although due to the failure of JMM to live up to his lofty ranking, I'd rate Kansas as a better team than UNC (with PJ), despite the small "raw talent" difference.

[jv001]

Having watched most of the last two unc games, I'll have to say, they are way better than I thought they were going to be. Last night old roy just plain out coached Cal. Since I can't tell Aaron Harrison from Andrew Harrison, I'll just say that #5 is not as good a point guard as made out to be by recruiting gurus. He is doing little to help his team win. But his brother(#2) is a player. But back to unc. They are big and pretty athletic. They play good defense and are not selfish. We will have to play very well to beat them. It's going to be interesting to see if pj does in fact return to the unc program. If it were left up to Dick Vitale, pj would be captain of the team and student body president. GoDuke!

[CDu]

This may be nitpicking, but Paige was #28, not in the top 25. He's a lot closer to Ellis (Kansas' 4th guy at #31) than he is to Embiid (Kansas' 3rd guy at #16).

Kansas' spread is 1, 13, 16, 31, 40, 52, 59, 89, 91

UNC's spread is 6, 14, 28, 40, 56, 57, 58, 93, unranked

As I said, they're closer than I expected, but it's not equivalent. In pretty much every meaningful range, Kansas is a guy ahead. Of course, that guy is PJ (#11), at which point the talent looks reasonably equivalent. And if you throw in LMac (#44), UNC would probably have a slight edge. Although due to the failure of JMM to live up to his lofty ranking, I'd rate Kansas as a better team than UNC (with PJ), despite the small "raw talent" difference.

Yes: UNC is certainly a bit less talented than Kansas, which is one of the deepest and most talented teams in the country. That's hardly lacking in talent, no?

[Kedsy]

Yes: UNC is certainly a bit less talented than Kansas, which is one of the deepest and most talented teams in the country. That's hardly lacking in talent, no?

First you said that UNC's 7 guys in the top 60 was probably more than Kansas had, and I pointed out that it wasn't. Then you said UNC's distribution was "just like Kansas," and I pointed out that it wasn't. Now you say UNC is "certainly a bit less talented than Kansas," but you make that out to disprove my point? OK, I give up.

My take on it is that having just two top 25 guys (including one that doesn't play) is not that talented for a top tier program. If you disagree with that, then fine. You can pick top 60 in order to scoop in UNC's #56, #57, and #58 recruits, but it feels like cherry-picking to me.

Put another way, in an earlier thread I was ridiculed when I said I thought Duke's reserves were more talented than UNC's regulars and would win 6 of 10 games. But here's Duke's reserves' recruiting rank (including Alex, who was on the roster when we were having this conversation):

#14, #21, #25*, #32, #34, #49, #61.

That's 7 top 60 guys (OK, 61), just like UNC, and more top 25 guys and more top 40 guys than UNC has. So I just don't see this year's UNC roster (without PJ and LMac) as being so exceptionally talented. I certainly wouldn't say that their success so far this season has been because of their wealth of talent.

Anyway, my main point in this thread was that Roy's done a pretty great job coaching one of his least talented UNC teams this season, and I gather that you don't disagree with that, so at least we're in synch on that.


* - Andre Dawkins did not have an RSCI rank, due to the timing of his reclassification, but he was ranked between 20 and 25 in all the recruiting rankings I could find, so I listed him as #25.

[Wheat/"/"/"]

I like to look at players in terms of their "ceiling". Looking at their "raw" talent and try to consider how high they can take that talent.

Roy has always had a good eye for players that have a much higher ceiling from the point of their skills when recruited.

Sometimes he'll get the players like Lawson or Hansbrough that are pretty much already at their ceiling when they arrive, but he recruits well the players that he feels can get much better over time.

All these current UNC players have talent. Some have great potential.

Paige is closest I see now to reaching the ceiling of his talents. He's got room to get stronger and better as his experience grows, but he's not going to take a big step to another talent level. He's already playing at a very high level.

McAdoo, Tokoto and James have probably reached their physical ceiling, but still have plenty of upside to go to reach their understanding of the game and tune their skills.

Brice Johnson has a much higher ceiling he can reach. He can be All AA good as his body catches up to his skill. Plenty of room to grow in his understanding of how to play too.

Meeks also has plenty of upside, his body is really holding him back, but steadily getting better.

Hicks is another kid with great upside. He's like a colt out there now, but he has the potential to be a stallion.

As for recruit rankings, that's an effort to quantify a player at a point in time, and a terrible judge of some players future potential.

[CDu]

First you said that UNC's 7 guys in the top 60 was probably more than Kansas had, and I pointed out that it wasn't. Then you said UNC's distribution was "just like Kansas," and I pointed out that it wasn't. Now you say UNC is "certainly a bit less talented than Kansas," but you make that out to disprove my point? OK, I give up.

Your original point was that they had a dearth of talent. My counterpoint was that they have more talent than all but a handful of teams in the country (at least based on recruiting rankings). So yes, that they're even in the same discussion as Kansas proves my point. It doesn't matter whether they have more talent than Kansas (as you've proved, I was incorrect about that), the same (again, edge Kansas), or close but not quite as much. Only a handful of teams can turn their noses up and UNC's recruiting success over the past 2-3 years.


My take on it is that having just two top 25 guys (including one that doesn't play) is not that talented for a top tier program. If you disagree with that, then fine. You can pick top 60 in order to scoop in UNC's #56, #57, and #58 recruits, but it feels like cherry-picking to me.

For a top-tier program, UNC is certainly on the lower end of the scale. That still puts them well ahead all but a handful of teams in the country. They are short on talent for their standards, but they are not short on talent.

And by the way, cutting off at 25 is just as much cherry picking as allowing top-60, because it excludes UNC's best active player at #28. Don't call me on the rug for cherry picking when you're doing the same.


Put another way, in an earlier thread I was ridiculed when I said I thought Duke's reserves were more talented than UNC's regulars and would win 6 of 10 games. But here's Duke's reserves' recruiting rank (including Alex, who was on the roster when we were having this conversation):

#14, #21, #25*, #32, #34, #49, #61.

That's 7 top 60 guys (OK, 61), just like UNC, and more top 25 guys and more top 40 guys than UNC has. So I just don't see this year's UNC roster (without PJ and LMac) as being so exceptionally talented. I certainly wouldn't say that their success so far this season has been because of their wealth of talent.

Yes, we have WAY more talent on our roster than UNC. Again, that does not mean UNC lacks for talent. It just shows how incredibly deep and talented we are this year.


Anyway, my main point in this thread was that Roy's done a pretty great job coaching one of his least talented UNC teams this season, and I gather that you don't disagree with that, so at least we're in synch on that.

Yes, I said in my initial post on the topic that I agreed with the main point that Williams has done a great job this year. My only disagreement was with the viewpoint that they are low on talent. They are only low on talent compared to their crazy-high standards or compared to a handful of teams (Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, maybe Arizona, maybe UCLA). They still have lots of talent, though.

In fact, I'd venture to say that they have more talent (at least based on recruiting rankings) on their roster than 2 of their 3 biggest scalps this season.

[kAzE]

Seriously guys? Who cares about high school rankings? These guys aren't in high school anymore. Just because a player wasn't ranked highly in high school doesn't mean he doesn't have talent. Paul George was a 3 star recruit in high school and now he's the 3rd best player in the NBA.

Carolina might not have a ton of guys who were ranked highly coming out of high school, but guys like Paige, Johnson, and Tokoto are playing really well NOW, in college. (Not high school) These guys are talented, and I'd wager all three of them play in the NBA. Tokoto and Johnson are efficient from the floor (though terrible from the foul line) and are both playing great defense. Paige is averaging 19.2 points, 4.2 assists, 1.7 steals and shooting 45%. He had 32 against Louisville. They have at least 4 guys who are going to the play in the NBA on the roster (probably more), not even including Hairston. Just because they weren't McDonalds AAs doesn't mean they aren't talented.

[kAzE]

This whole thread feels dirty . . . did I really just spend 5 minutes defending UNC players? I need to wash my keyboard.

[Kedsy]

Tokoto and Johnson are efficient from the floor (though terrible from the foul line) and are both playing great defense. Paige is averaging 19.2 points, 4.2 assists, 1.7 steals and shooting 45%. He had 32 against Louisville. They have at least 4 guys who are going to the play in the NBA on the roster (probably more), not even including Hairston.

Tokoto's oRtg is 97. His eFG% is 50% and his true shooting pct is 48%. He is not at all efficient from the floor. I agree that Brice Johnson is having a good season so far.

As far as UNC having at least 4 NBA players -- not including PJ -- well, I don't agree with that, but I suppose it's too early to tell for sure.

[sagegrouse]

I like to look at players in terms of their "ceiling". .

You Carolina guys never get it! It's "cinderblocks," not "ceiling." But they have some of the same letters.

Good fishing,

Sage

[kAzE]

Tokoto's oRtg is 97. His eFG% is 50% and his true shooting pct is 48%. He is not at all efficient from the floor. I agree that Brice Johnson is having a good season so far.

As far as UNC having at least 4 NBA players -- not including PJ -- well, I don't agree with that, but I suppose it's too early to tell for sure.

Ok, well, true shooting % factors in free throw shooting, so that's obviously dragging Tokoto down in that statistic. From the floor, he's shooting 48.1% overall and 33% from deep. That's really not bad, considering what he brings defensively. Still, I suppose I misspoke regarding Tokoto. He's not super efficient from the floor, but 48% is pretty good for a perimeter guy.

Also, I think he's the type of guy who can improve his shooting stroke eventually. The free throw struggles are clearly a mental barrier that he can overcome, and if he develops a decent outside shot, he's basically a lock to play in the NBA with his size, athleticism, and defensive abilities. McAdoo and Paige are probably 1st rounds picks, and Brice Johnson has the potential to become Jon Henson lite. That's 4 guys who are probably going to play in the league. Hicks and Meeks may develop into pros as well. I don't see how there's any way that there's less than 4 pros out of those 6 guys.

[Wheat/"/"/"]

As far as UNC having at least 4 NBA players -- not including PJ -- well, I don't agree with that, but I suppose it's too early to tell for sure.

My guess is you'll see Paige, McAdoo, Johnson and James make a NBA roster some day, maybe Tokoto, less likely Meeks and juries out on Hicks,

[tommy]

Neither team shot free throws that well and Kentucky was often lost on defense, finding it hard to get back when UNC brought the ball down rapidly Neither side showed good 3 point shooting although Paige was limited by Kentucky from outside. Kentucky's lack of 3 point shooting allowed the zone to work pretty well against them. Both teams have size and athleticism and should improve with the season.

As far as Duke beating them, we lack size and quality depth at the center and PF positions. That might turn into an issue for us although our 3 point shooting should open interior lanes. I wonder how our guards would fare against the 2 6'6" Harrison boys. When we have lost to quality teams we seemed to stay with Hairston and Thornton and they made the team less dangerous on offense. Perhaps against Kentucky or Carolina we would see more Matt, Sheed and Marshall. We need to get better to be in contention and I see development of the bench as key to that progression.

I was wondering how many posts it was going to take for this thread, like seemingly every other thread does, to get turned into a debate on the relative merits of Thornton, Hairston, and Plumlee, and K's use of the bench.

[jv001]

My guess is you'll see Paige, McAdoo, Johnson and James make a NBA roster some day, maybe Tokoto, less likely Meeks and juries out on Hicks,

Why is that in your opinion Duke's front court players(Mason, Miles, Kelly and Singler) have a very low ceiling for an NBA roster and you unc front court guys have such a high ceiling? GoDuke!

[Wheat/"/"/"]

Why is that in your opinion Duke's front court players(Mason, Miles, Kelly and Singler) have a very low ceiling for an NBA roster and you unc front court guys have such a high ceiling? GoDuke!

The "ceiling" discussion, for me, wasn't really about the NBA, it was about how much better the player could become.

That said, I liked Mason and Miles NBA potential, they both have NBA ready bodies/athleticism and still have a higher ceiling than where they are now, but I always felt they didn't focus enough on the back to the basket skills that, IMO, could have taken them to that higher level.

I would have coached them, Mason especially, to play under the basket pretty much like Hansbrough did. Mason would have been great in an offense like that. He's a much better athlete than TH, and just as strong. He would have owned the glass, been a defensive stopper, and generally been a load if he set camp up under the basket with a team that made entry passes a priority.

Instead, he spent the majority of his career playing the high post.

I'm not slamming Duke here. That's how coach K likes to play and he knew it going in. He seemed happy with that, he is playing in the NBA, and he had a fine college career and has a bright NBA future. Good for him.

It was always just my opinion he could have been better, an even bigger impact player, playing a more traditional center role.

Kelly is essentially the same player he was when he came into college. He got better, stronger, but his skill set never changed. His ceiling to improve was was not that high. With his physical limitations, he's just not going to be able to take his game to a higher level, IMO.

I look at Meeks the same way. He's going to get better as his body improves, and be a very good player, but his ceiling is just not that much higher than where he is now.

Singler has reached his ceiling, did so his Jr. year, but he has intangibles. He's versatile, a tough "gamer" and can just play the game.

[jv001]

The "ceiling" discussion, for me, wasn't really about the NBA, it was about how much better the player could become.

That said, I liked Mason and Miles NBA potential, they both have NBA ready bodies/athleticism and still have a higher ceiling than where they are now, but I always felt they didn't focus enough on the back to the basket skills that, IMO, could have taken them to that higher level.

I would have coached them, Mason especially, to play under the basket pretty much like Hansbrough did. Mason would have been great in an offense like that. He's a much better athlete than TH, and just as strong. He would have owned the glass, been a defensive stopper, and generally been a load if he set camp up under the basket with a team that made entry passes a priority.

Instead, he spent the majority of his career playing the high post.

I'm not slamming Duke here. That's how coach K likes to play and he knew it going in. He seemed happy with that, he is playing in the NBA, and he had a fine college career and has a bright NBA future. Good for him.

It was always just my opinion he could have been better, an even bigger impact player, playing a more traditional center role.

Kelly is essentially the same player he was when he came into college. He got better, stronger, but his skill set never changed. His ceiling to improve was was not that high. With his physical limitations, he's just not going to be able to take his game to a higher level, IMO.

I look at Meeks the same way. He's going to get better as his body improves, and be a very good player, but his ceiling is just not that much higher than where he is now.

Singler has reached his ceiling, did so his Jr. year, but he has intangibles. He's versatile, a tough "gamer" and can just play the game.

It sounds to me that you are doing just that. You may not be slamming Coach K but none the less, you're certainly criticizing him(K). When Mason came out of high school, he envisioned himself an 4 with the ability to shoot the basketball from outside. He eventually found that not to be the case. Yes, Coach K did use him at the post position for much of his career, but his senior year he played mostly in the low block. While at Duke he developed the jump hook and by his senior year, he was pretty good at that. Mason, Miles and Ryan were all set back with injuries that came into play while at Duke and those injures had a lot to do with their development. Coach K and old roy play their big men differently. I look at the unc big men like this: James looks like he could eventually be a very good player. Meeks will probably have to fight his weight problem like Mays did, but will not be the player Mays was. Johnson is a pretty good offensive player if he stays near the basket for lobs and put backs. That alone will not assure him a place on an NBA roster. His defense is not up to par unless you count his shot blocking of smaller players. Don't get me wrong, because I think the strength of this tarheel team is their front line. That part of the team will probably give Duke fits. But outside of paige, I don't see a good outside shooter on this team. But like I said in my previous post, this edition of your tarheels is much better than I thought. GoDuke!

[tbyers11]

I would have coached them, Mason especially, to play under the basket pretty much like Hansbrough did. Mason would have been great in an offense like that. He's a much better athlete than TH, and just as strong. He would have owned the glass, been a defensive stopper, and generally been a load if he set camp up under the basket with a team that made entry passes a priority.

Instead, he spent the majority of his career playing the high post.



I know that last year you stated that much of your opinions on Mason where based off just a couple of games. I have to ask if your opinions of Hansbrough were based in the same manner. Watch some tape from Hansbrough's senior year. He spent WAY more time in the high post than Mason did last year. I bet Hansbrough scored more of his points in half court sets from elbow and baseline jumpers than from back-to-basket moves that year. He was money with that 15 foot jumper. Mason, OTOH, generated the majority of his points in the half court from back-to-basket moves. I know you don't count it as a "post" move unless he is within some unreasonably short distance from the hoop when receiving the ball but I still consider a running hook shot way more of a post move than an elbow jumper.

[CDu]

My guess is you'll see Paige, McAdoo, Johnson and James make a NBA roster some day, maybe Tokoto, less likely Meeks and juries out on Hicks,

I think James is a reach for the NBA. He doesn't have great athleticism and he isn't an effective scorer at all right now. If he improves A LOT (and loses more weight), maybe he has a shot. But I wouldn't count him as very likely to make it. I'd say that Meeks (similar size but much more skill) is a much more likely candidate to make an NBA roster.

Johnson is a tricky one. He's undersized for his position at the NBA level. I see him in about the same category as I see Jefferson: Lanky kid with good touch around the basket, but weak defensively and lacking the size to play PF while also lacking the skills to play SF. I don't think Jefferson is a sure bet to ever play in the NBA, and likewise I'm not sure that Johnson is either.

And to be honest, unless McAdoo improves his skills, he might not play in the NBA either. For all his athleticism, he is really lacking in the skill and feel of the game department.

I'd say that (aside from Hairston) UNC has 3 guys who will almost certianly play in the NBA (I'll give McAdoo the benefit of the doubt that someone will give him a look) and 2 guys who might have an outside shot at the league (but will likely not make it).

[dukelifer]

I think James is a reach for the NBA. He doesn't have great athleticism and he isn't an effective scorer at all right now. If he improves A LOT (and loses more weight), maybe he has a shot. But I wouldn't count him as very likely to make it. I'd say that Meeks (similar size but much more skill) is a much more likely candidate to make an NBA roster.

Johnson is a tricky one. He's undersized for his position at the NBA level. I see him in about the same category as I see Jefferson: Lanky kid with good touch around the basket, but weak defensively and lacking the size to play PF while also lacking the skills to play SF. I don't think Jefferson is a sure bet to ever play in the NBA, and likewise I'm not sure that Johnson is either.

And to be honest, unless McAdoo improves his skills, he might not play in the NBA either. For all his athleticism, he is really lacking in the skill and feel of the game department.

I'd say that (aside from Hairston) UNC has 3 guys who will almost certianly play in the NBA (I'll give McAdoo the benefit of the doubt that someone will give him a look) and 2 guys who might have an outside shot at the league (but will likely not make it).
McAdoo has a shot but this season will be critical to him. He is not an NBA star but he could have a role- but he needs to be a dirty work player and that may not be the way he sees himself.

[BD80]

McAdoo has a shot but this season will be critical to him. He is not an NBA star but he could have a role- but he needs to be a dirty work player and that may not be the way he sees himself.

He has definitely improved his aggressiveness, there used to be long stretches where you wouldn't realize he was on the court. As for the NBA, he will get out muscled by guards. His current lack of strength and his aversion to contact make him a long shot. JMM will need to bulk up and develop and readjust his attitude.

[Wheat/"/"/"]

It sounds to me that you are doing just that. You may not be slamming Coach K but none the less, you're certainly criticizing him(K). When Mason came out of high school, he envisioned himself an 4 with the ability to shoot the basketball from outside. He eventually found that not to be the case. Yes, Coach K did use him at the post position for much of his career, but his senior year he played mostly in the low block. While at Duke he developed the jump hook and by his senior year, he was pretty good at that. Mason, Miles and Ryan were all set back with injuries that came into play while at Duke and those injures had a lot to do with their development. Coach K and old roy play their big men differently. I look at the unc big men like this: James looks like he could eventually be a very good player. Meeks will probably have to fight his weight problem like Mays did, but will not be the player Mays was. Johnson is a pretty good offensive player if he stays near the basket for lobs and put backs. That alone will not assure him a place on an NBA roster. His defense is not up to par unless you count his shot blocking of smaller players. Don't get me wrong, because I think the strength of this tarheel team is their front line. That part of the team will probably give Duke fits. But outside of paige, I don't see a good outside shooter on this team. But like I said in my previous post, this edition of your tarheels is much better than I thought. GoDuke!

I'm not criticizing coach K. He's been very successfully using his big men how he likes for a long time, and Mason was happy to play that style.

I'm just saying I would have used him differently, and that I think he could have been a bigger impact player, a more dominating player, in a system like Izzo uses at MSU, or Matta uses at Ohio St., if you don't like a UNC example.

Brice Johnson has the most upside of any UNC player, the highest ceiling. He has the potential to be a star, but has a long way to go. His game is much more than just a put back scorer.

[flyingdutchdevil]

I think James is a reach for the NBA. He doesn't have great athleticism and he isn't an effective scorer at all right now. If he improves A LOT (and loses more weight), maybe he has a shot. But I wouldn't count him as very likely to make it. I'd say that Meeks (similar size but much more skill) is a much more likely candidate to make an NBA roster.

Johnson is a tricky one. He's undersized for his position at the NBA level. I see him in about the same category as I see Jefferson: Lanky kid with good touch around the basket, but weak defensively and lacking the size to play PF while also lacking the skills to play SF. I don't think Jefferson is a sure bet to ever play in the NBA, and likewise I'm not sure that Johnson is either.

And to be honest, unless McAdoo improves his skills, he might not play in the NBA either. For all his athleticism, he is really lacking in the skill and feel of the game department.

I'd say that (aside from Hairston) UNC has 3 guys who will almost certianly play in the NBA (I'll give McAdoo the benefit of the doubt that someone will give him a look) and 2 guys who might have an outside shot at the league (but will likely not make it).

I think McAdoo will absolutely play in the NBA. With his family pedigree, NBA-body, good defensive play, and decent rebounding numbers (over 7 last year), someone will give him a shot. But, like many UNC players of late, I do not see him sticking around at all. Like you said, he needs to either refine his game or improve greatly.

Some idiot GM will take a shot on McAdoo in the late first round. McAdoo will be in the league for 4-5 years and then play in Europe.

Paige, on the other hand, is an exciting player. He is offensively gifted, both as a scorer and a passer (4.6 assists last year). He's not the next Damian Lillard, but he can be a better Jeff Teague.

[Wheat/"/"/"]

He has definitely improved his aggressiveness, there used to be long stretches where you wouldn't realize he was on the court. As for the NBA, he will get out muscled by guards. His current lack of strength and his aversion to contact make him a long shot. JMM will need to bulk up and develop and readjust his attitude.

Huh?

McAdoo is a physical stud, strong and quick as anybody his size.

He still needs to get a better understanding of shot selection, and work on a softer touch around the basket and on his drives.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Huh?

McAdoo is a physical stud, strong and quick as anybody his size.

He still needs to get a better understanding of shot selection, and work on a softer touch around the basket and on his drives.

Gotta agree with JMM's size - it's NBA ready. As for what he needs to improve on, those are at the top of the list. He can't shoot well and I don't think he understands basketball concepts as well as most players playing for blue chip programs. He has a lot to improve, but some GM will take a shot on him and quickly send him to the D-League.

[flyingdutchdevil]

NBAdraft.net and Draftexpress have JMM going in the mid-second round. That's a fall from grace for a player once considered to be top 5.

I guess this is a similar story to McBob, though. And he turned out well in the NBA.

[oldnavy]

The "ceiling" discussion, for me, wasn't really about the NBA, it was about how much better the player could become.

That said, I liked Mason and Miles NBA potential, they both have NBA ready bodies/athleticism and still have a higher ceiling than where they are now, but I always felt they didn't focus enough on the back to the basket skills that, IMO, could have taken them to that higher level.

I would have coached them, Mason especially, to play under the basket pretty much like Hansbrough did. Mason would have been great in an offense like that. He's a much better athlete than TH, and just as strong. He would have owned the glass, been a defensive stopper, and generally been a load if he set camp up under the basket with a team that made entry passes a priority.

Instead, he spent the majority of his career playing the high post.

I'm not slamming Duke here. That's how coach K likes to play and he knew it going in. He seemed happy with that, he is playing in the NBA, and he had a fine college career and has a bright NBA future. Good for him.

It was always just my opinion he could have been better, an even bigger impact player, playing a more traditional center role.

Kelly is essentially the same player he was when he came into college. He got better, stronger, but his skill set never changed. His ceiling to improve was was not that high. With his physical limitations, he's just not going to be able to take his game to a higher level, IMO.

I look at Meeks the same way. He's going to get better as his body improves, and be a very good player, but his ceiling is just not that much higher than where he is now.

Singler has reached his ceiling, did so his Jr. year, but he has intangibles. He's versatile, a tough "gamer" and can just play the game.

I honestly try to be fair, so I will admit that Roy has shown me a side of him that I didn't know he had. He is adjusting to his talent and seems to be making better "in-game" decisions starting last year and continuing into this year.

However, I don't agree that this has always been the case. Who can forget the Kansas game a couple of years back in the NCAAT when UNC continually shot outside bombs and ignored feeding the post and Hansbrough who most likely would have scored or gotten fouled or both? I have never quite seen anything like that... well except when we allow quick guards to continually beat us off the dribble and shred our MTM defense.... :rolleyes:

So easy to coach from the couch isn't it!!

But hats off to Roy, he has this group playing very well and he is switching up defenses to keep the opponent off balance. He is in fact doing a good coaching job IMO and I have no illusions that UNC will be an easy out for us this year (they rarely are).

I do think that the true test will be the grind... ACC regular season, but there is no reason to think that UNC hasn't exercised the demons of Belmont and UAB and has moved forward. I think they are as good as any team in the ACC right now, time will tell...

[Wheat/"/"/"]

I think they are as good as any team in the ACC right now, time will tell...

The best team in the ACC, and in the country I've seen so far is Syracuse.

[Kedsy]

I think McAdoo will absolutely play in the NBA. With his family pedigree, NBA-body, good defensive play, and decent rebounding numbers (over 7 last year), someone will give him a shot. But, like many UNC players of late, I do not see him sticking around at all. Like you said, he needs to either refine his game or improve greatly.

Some idiot GM will take a shot on McAdoo in the late first round. McAdoo will be in the league for 4-5 years and then play in Europe.

Paige, on the other hand, is an exciting player. He is offensively gifted, both as a scorer and a passer (4.6 assists last year). He's not the next Damian Lillard, but he can be a better Jeff Teague.

More likely JMM will go in the 2nd round and have to fight his way onto a roster. He could make it, but not a lock.

I agree with CDu's assessment on Johnson, James, and Meeks, but there's a long way to go for all three.

I think Paige will probably be drafted, but I'd be shocked if any NBA GM looks at him as better than Jeff Teague. He's not as quick as Teague and (as small as Teague is) he's not as big as Teague.

[flyingdutchdevil]

More likely JMM will go in the 2nd round and have to fight his way onto a roster. He could make it, but not a lock.

I agree with CDu's assessment on Johnson, James, and Meeks, but there's a long way to go for all three.

I think Paige will probably be drafted, but I'd be shocked if any NBA GM looks at him as better than Jeff Teague. He's not as quick as Teague and (as small as Teague is) he's not as big as Teague.

I think you're selling these players way too short. I agree that JMM is probably headed for the second round, but he was a few valuable assets (body, defense, and potential - three things the NBA loves) that could launch him in the late, late first round.

As for JJM, it's way too early to tell. With the success that UNC has had with getting big men drafted, I could see all three going in the first round in 2015 and beyond (now, drafted is much different than succeeding. UNC has had a problem with this in the recent future. Henson may look to break that as he's playing out of his mind lately).

As for Paige, he may be smaller and slower than Teague, but he is 10x the shooter and is as good at distributing the ball. Paige will absolutely be drafted in the first round (maybe this year?) as a future back-up PG, which isn't a bad thing at all considering how important this position is to NBA teams.

[FerryFor50]

NBAdraft.net and Draftexpress have JMM going in the mid-second round. That's a fall from grace for a player once considered to be top 5.

I guess this is a similar story to McBob, though. And he turned out well in the NBA.

Gee, I wonder who gave him the advice to come back rather than go to the draft as a sure fire first rounder... Maybe Reggie Bullock told JMM he wasn't ready yet?

[Wheat/"/"/"]

I think James is a reach for the NBA. He doesn't have great athleticism and he isn't an effective scorer at all right now. If he improves A LOT (and loses more weight), maybe he has a shot. But I wouldn't count him as very likely to make it. I'd say that Meeks (similar size but much more skill) is a much more likely candidate to make an NBA roster.

Johnson is a tricky one. He's undersized for his position at the NBA level. I see him in about the same category as I see Jefferson: Lanky kid with good touch around the basket, but weak defensively and lacking the size to play PF while also lacking the skills to play SF. I don't think Jefferson is a sure bet to ever play in the NBA, and likewise I'm not sure that Johnson is either.

And to be honest, unless McAdoo improves his skills, he might not play in the NBA either. For all his athleticism, he is really lacking in the skill and feel of the game department.

I'd say that (aside from Hairston) UNC has 3 guys who will almost certianly play in the NBA (I'll give McAdoo the benefit of the doubt that someone will give him a look) and 2 guys who might have an outside shot at the league (but will likely not make it).

I see James as a Brendan Haywood clone, and Haywood has had a long NBA career. His hands are not as good but he's big and strong and likes to bang. NBA teams need guys like him.
He doesn't need to lose any more weight. Look at his body now, he's pretty ripped. He just needs to learn how to play. He's got a nice, soft touch on his face up shot and around the basket, and that is hard to teach.

As for McAdoo, I like his form on his face up jumper, he just takes too many bad shots under pressure.
The biggest concern I see is he lacks touch around the basket. On scoring moves off the dribble, he shoots a "hard" shot, nothing soft about his touch at the rim.

His ball handling has improved and will have to get better. I still see him as a late first round pick next year, because I think he comes back and knows he must improve his overall game.

Johnson has all the makings of a future NBA "stretch" PF to me. He's got to continue to work on his body and his ball handling, but he has that quick shot release and the hops to be a nightmare to defend someday.

[Kedsy]

I see James as a Brendan Haywood clone, and Haywood has had a long NBA career.

Haywood's sophomore year he averaged 30 mpg, 12 ppg, 7 rpg, and 1.8 bpg. James currently averages 14 mpg, 4 ppg, almost 5 rpg, and 0.2 bpg, and if this is what he's doing in the pre-ACC-season, it's unlikely those numbers will go up significantly once league play rolls around.

He has a ways to go before he's even close to Haywood. Maybe he gets there, probably he doesn't.

[FerryFor50]

I see James as a Brendan Haywood clone, and Haywood has had a long NBA career. His hands are not as good but he's big and strong and likes to bang. NBA teams need guys like him.
He doesn't need to lose any more weight. Look at his body now, he's pretty ripped. He just needs to learn how to play. He's got a nice, soft touch on his face up shot and around the basket, and that is hard to teach.

As for McAdoo, I like his form on his face up jumper, he just takes too many bad shots under pressure.
The biggest concern I see is he lacks touch around the basket. On scoring moves off the dribble, he shoots a "hard" shot, nothing soft about his touch at the rim.

His ball handling has improved and will have to get better. I still see him as a late first round pick next year, because I think he comes back and knows he must improve his overall game.

Johnson has all the makings of a future NBA "stretch" PF to me. He's got to continue to work on his body and his ball handling, but he has that quick shot release and the hops to be a nightmare to defend someday.

Johnson is the most NBA ready guy UNC has presently, IMO (other than PJ). McAdoo will carve out a role as an energy guy. Maybe a Brendan Wright-type of career.

[CDu]

I see James as a Brendan Haywood clone, and Haywood has had a long NBA career. His hands are not as good but he's big and strong and likes to bang. NBA teams need guys like him.
He doesn't need to lose any more weight. Look at his body now, he's pretty ripped. He just needs to learn how to play. He's got a nice, soft touch on his face up shot and around the basket, and that is hard to teach.

I think you're overstating James' skill level at this point. You are also failing to note that Haywood is 2 inches taller (NBA GMs have a fascination with 7'0"). And Haywood was much further along in terms of his skills at this point in his career. As a sophomore year stats (65% fg%, 12.0 ppg, 6.9 rpg, 1.8 bpg) dwarf those of James' sophomore numbers.

James has good size, but right now that's all he has. If he develops the skill, he could get drafted. But I would say that's an outside chance right now.


As for McAdoo, I like his form on his face up jumper, he just takes too many bad shots under pressure.
The biggest concern I see is he lacks touch around the basket. On scoring moves off the dribble, he shoots a "hard" shot, nothing soft about his touch at the rim.

I don't know why you like his form, because his results are just atrocious. He can't shoot. Maybe that's something he can improve, but right now he's just awful at it. He also lacks touch around the basket as you note. I'd just say that he lacks touch, period. Around the basket or out to 15-20 ft.


Johnson has all the makings of a future NBA "stretch" PF to me. He's got to continue to work on his body and his ball handling, but he has that quick shot release and the hops to be a nightmare to defend someday.

I don't see this at all. A "stretch PF" implies that the player has shooting range. Johnson is a poor FT shooter and has not ever attempted a 3pt shot at the college level, let alone the NBA level. His skills are most evident closer to the basket (in the 5-10ft range). And that will be much more difficult for him at the NBA level. So to become a stretch 4, he'll have to REALLY improve his shooting and shooting range. Because right now he's nothing like a stretch 4.

[Duvall]

Kelly is essentially the same player he was when he came into college. He got better, stronger, but his skill set never changed. His ceiling to improve was was not that high. With his physical limitations, he's just not going to be able to take his game to a higher level, IMO.

What is to be done with a post that includes statements like these?

[flyingdutchdevil]

What is to be done with a post that includes statements like these?

Duvall - don't you know that Duke players never improve in our system (and sometimes regress) but UNC players start as 12th men and become POYs?

Apparently that's what's happened to Kelly and is happening to JMM...

[FerryFor50]

Duvall - don't you know that Duke players never improve in our system (and sometimes regress) but UNC players start as 12th men and become POYs?

Apparently that's what's happened to Kelly and is happening to JMM...

Yea but how do you get better AND be essentially the same player when you graduate?

[Wheat/"/"/"]

What is to be done with a post that includes statements like these?

Reply maturely with some insight? Or at least an opinion.

Weren't you the guy who said last season that you couldn't see where Marcus Paige was going to be any good and didn't see what the fuss was about?

[Wheat/"/"/"]

Yea but how do you get better AND be essentially the same player when you graduate?

He didn't add any new skills that he didn't bring with him.

Edit: I shouldn't say none, but he didn't expand his game that much. He did improve on what he was already good at coming in.

[flyingdutchdevil]

He didn't add any new skills that he didn't bring with him.

Ummmm....stellar defense? The ability to effectively pass? Significantly better 3pt shooting? Better FT shooting? What didn't Ryan improve on?

Wheat, I respect your posts, but this comment is just waaaaaaaay off base. It's essentially the same as saying that Hansborough was only good because the refs were always on his side (and I think that is preposterous, despite a few posters here agreeing with it).

[CDu]

He didn't add any new skills that he didn't bring with him.

Edit: I shouldn't say none, but he didn't expand his game that much. He did improve on what he was already good at coming in.

I actually agree (somewhat) with Wheat on this point. Kelly was known as a great shooter coming into college. He struggled his first two years in large part because he wasn't physically ready for the college game (too slow, too weak). As he got stronger and got more familiar with the speed of the game, he got better. But his game remained that of a stretch 4 on offense. He didn't develop as a post scorer or anything like that.

The one place I'll disagree with Wheat on his assessment of Kelly is on the defensive side of the ball. By his senior year, Kelly was becoming a very good defensive player. That is not a skill he brought with him to Duke.

[Duvall]

He didn't add any new skills that he didn't bring with him.

Edit: I shouldn't say none, but he didn't expand his game that much. He did improve on what he was already good at coming in.

I guess becoming an elite help defender isn't really a skill anyway.

[Duvall]

Weren't you the guy who said last season that you couldn't see where Marcus Paige was going to be any good and didn't see what the fuss was about?

I doubt I said that. I probably said that Paige's play last season was brutally awful, which it was.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Edit: I shouldn't say none, but he didn't expand his game that much. He did improve on what he was already good at coming in.

Let me get this straight. According to you:

1) Player A adds a new skill(s) in college. Outcome: vastly different player from start to finish
2) Player B drastically improves current skillset in college. Outcome: essentially the same player from start to finish

Wow. Not only do I disagree with you about the above, but Kelly is both Player A and Player B: he both improve his original skillset and added new skills.

[Wheat/"/"/"]

Ummmm....stellar defense? The ability to effectively pass? Significantly better 3pt shooting? Better FT shooting? What didn't Ryan improve on?

Wheat, I respect your posts, but this comment is just waaaaaaaay off base. It's essentially the same as saying that Hansborough was only good because the refs were always on his side (and I think that is preposterous, despite a few posters here agreeing with it).

Speaking of TH, I'd say the exact same thing about him as Kelly. Of course they both got better, but we were talking about ceiling...how much better could they be and how much could they add to their game?

They both pretty much left with the same games they came in with, that's my call.

[sagegrouse]

FWIW (not much, I expect) here's my take on the UNC game. The big kids from across town come to the UNC playground to play the little guys who play there. The big kids get schooled. I mean, even the big guys on the UNC team (Meeks and MacAdoo and Hubert) look small in comparison to Kentucky. The UNC guards really do look like little kids -- although very skilled and moving at the speed of light.

I thought, based ont he first half, the "big kids" were gonna win -- they were getting all the loose balls. But UNC came on in the second half.

And I have no idea how either team will be playing in February and March.

And what's the deal with that yellow stuff on Cauley-Stein's head? It's like a teammate wearing a totally different uniform. I wouldn't play him until he got rid of it, but I guess it was a condition of recruiting.

sage

[flyingdutchdevil]

Speaking of TH, I'd say the exact same thing about him as Kelly. Of course they both got better, but we were talking about ceiling...how much better could they be and how much could they add to their game?

They both pretty much left with the same games they came in with, that's my call.

There is a huge, HUGE difference in stating that players come out essentially the same as they came in and players who drastically improved their overall skillset throughout college. Not everyone is going to be like Evan Turner (in terms of drastically changing your game).

Also, I don't understand how certain players with particular skillsets can add new skillsets. As a 4, you essentially have 3 options: a) be a stretch 4 (Kelly), b) be a power 4 (Trevor Booker), c) face-up, athletic 4 (John Henson). Players rarely can be 2 of these types, not to mention all 3. Kelly - with his body type - could only be a stretch 4, and I feel he left college with a great skillset for that position. I'm not sure what he could add (and that was physically possible) to his skillset.

[jv001]

Speaking of TH, I'd say the exact same thing about him as Kelly. Of course they both got better, but we were talking about ceiling...how much better could they be and how much could they add to their game?

They both pretty much left with the same games they came in with, that's my call.

Not even close. hans was a much better player coming out of high school than Ryan was. When I saw him play high school basketball, I told my unc buddies you have a great player coming your way. I thought Ryan would be a very good college basketball player coming out of high school, but I never thought he would be a great player. And as I said earlier, injuries took their toll on Ryan and slowed his development down. Especially his senior year. So Ryan got way better and hans got a little better, imo. But I'm talking about college careers not NBA. I'm far from being obsessed with the NBA. GoDuke!

[Wander]

The Ryan Kelly thing is silly - he may not have added much in the way of different shots or post moves, but he became a MUCH better all-around defender and passer. Those count as skills.

The best example to me of a Duke guy who didn't add THAT much to his game throughout his career is Kyle Singler. Compare his sophomore to senior year numbers. He's one of my favorite players, but like Hansbrough, he wasn't super athletic and came in as a freshman who was already really good in his first college game - both Hansbrough and Singler improved, but not nearly by as much as the average 4 year college player does.

[CDu]

The Ryan Kelly thing is silly - he may not have added much in the way of different shots or post moves, but he became a MUCH better all-around defender and passer. Those count as skills.

The best example to me of a Duke guy who didn't add THAT much to his game throughout his career is Kyle Singler. Compare his sophomore to senior year numbers. He's one of my favorite players, but like Hansbrough, he wasn't super athletic and came in as a freshman who was already really good in his first college game - both Hansbrough and Singler improved, but not nearly by as much as the average 4 year college player does.

Agreed. I would argue that Hansbrough improved very little during college. And the numbers tend to back that up. Very good player coming in, slightly better coming out.

[oldnavy]

Agreed. I would argue that Hansbrough improved very little during college. And the numbers tend to back that up. Very good player coming in, slightly better coming out.

But his reading skills jumped off the charts!! There is no way he could have read "Chicken Little" before spending 4 years at UNC! :p

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

This UNC team is surprising, but some of you are in denial if your don't think they are a good team.

Coach Williams has them playing unselfishly and recognizing that defense matters, and this is a good defensive team.

When you look at each individual player, there are strengths, but also clear weaknesses in their games. (With the exception of Marcus Paige who is now clearly an All ACC player and will start showing up on AA lists soon).

But the sum of their parts has created a team with balance that is hard to beat.

I see team defense, and the play of Nate Britt spreading the court on offense as the key, so far. Also the steady play from Tokoto has been big.

UNC is taking care of the ball and limiting their TO's, but forcing opponent TO's.
Britt is a big help there. He's providing quickness and the ball handling in the backcourt that is taking some pressure off Paige. Tokoto is also handling it well and playing with discipline.

Add in UNC's aggressive attacking of the basket (especially McAdoo) and opposing defenses are under a lot of pressure from a UNC team that struggles to shoot it well away from the basket.

Credit Roy here for getting this group to understand their strength is defense and aggressiveness attacking the basket. He's now beaten, Calipari, Izzo, and Pitino with teams all higher ranked than his, with a team that many questioned would make the tournament.

Roy can coach. Always could. When is see the constant criticism, I just laugh. Overrated? Just the opposit.
Oops! Texas with 53 first half points in the dome tonight...