PDA

View Full Version : unCHEATs Justin Jackson To Return For Jr Season



Newton_14
05-16-2016, 09:18 PM
http://www.wralsportsfan.com/jackson-to-return-to-unc-for-junior-season/15708546/

Shocking. Just shocking. Roy convinces yet another 5 Star Recruit to pass on the NBA draft for 3 straight years in order to grow old and lose draft spots in college. Imagine that.

Karl Beem
05-16-2016, 09:23 PM
Hard to pass on another year on Cheater Hill.

El_Diablo
05-16-2016, 09:27 PM
The free rental car was just scheduled for delivery.

NashvilleDevil
05-16-2016, 09:35 PM
http://www.wralsportsfan.com/jackson-to-return-to-unc-for-junior-season/15708546/

Shocking. Just shocking. Roy convinces yet another 5 Star Recruit to pass on the NBA draft for 3 straight years in order to grow old and lose draft spots in college. Imagine that.

Is Barnes the only #1 overall recruit in a class to stay a 2nd year in the OAD era?

UrinalCake
05-16-2016, 09:44 PM
All of the reports coming out of the combine were that he hadn't improved at all in two years. One of them specifically called out the CHeats program for their lack of player development. We're not talking about Duke and State fans here, these are actual professional NBA scouts. Don't forget, this is a guy who was ranked higher than Winslow coming out of high school. He, Pinson, and Isaiah Whitehead (still undecided) are the only members of the top 15 from the class of 2014 who are still in school.

Newton_14
05-16-2016, 09:45 PM
Is Barnes the only #1 overall recruit in a class to stay a 2nd year in the OAD era?
I can't recall another?
OlyFan has compiled a lot of stats on this phenomenon so maybe he can answer definitely.

Jackson was what, a Top 10 recruit? I remember he was ranked higher than Winslow... not sure which spot exactly...

Kedsy
05-16-2016, 10:25 PM
I can't recall another?
OlyFan has compiled a lot of stats on this phenomenon so maybe he can answer definitely.

I'm not Oly, but the last #1 recruit other than Barnes to stay more than one year was Josh McRoberts, who was #1 in the last season that high school kids could go directly to the NBA (so, one year before the "OAD era").


Jackson was what, a Top 10 recruit? I remember he was ranked higher than Winslow... not sure which spot exactly...

According to RSCI, Jackson was #9 in 2014.

jipops
05-16-2016, 11:32 PM
All of the reports coming out of the combine were that he hadn't improved at all in two years. One of them specifically called out the CHeats program for their lack of player development. We're not talking about Duke and State fans here, these are actual professional NBA scouts. Don't forget, this is a guy who was ranked higher than Winslow coming out of high school. He, Pinson, and Isaiah Whitehead (still undecided) are the only members of the top 15 from the class of 2014 who are still in school.

Is there a link to actual quotes to this effect? Now I'm one of the last people to come to the defense of the cheats, but I just don't buy this notion that some major programs churn out better or worse NBA talent than others. If Barnes had gone to Duke he would still be the same terrible ball handler he is today. If Kyrie had gone to UK he would be the same terrific player he is right now, and continue to have the same defensive lapses and ball sharing issues. If Anthony Davis had gone somewhere else, he would still be the same genetic freak with guard skills that he is today. Durant and Aldridge came from Texas.

Coaches in major programs know the game. That is why they are in the position they are in. Players develop at the rate they are able. Coaches can't really change that. Obviously some NBA scout is going to know better than me. But I just don't buy the notion that a major college program doesn't know how to "develop" talent, whatever that means.

Jackson not improving is on him, not the cheats. I mean we know by now that the cheats are giving him all the available time in the world to do so.

Olympic Fan
05-16-2016, 11:35 PM
Kedsy has it right ... since the one-and-done era began with the prep class of 2006, Harrison Barnes is the only No. 1 prospect (based on the rsci) that has not been one-and-done.

But it's more than that -- of the 50 top five prospects over the last 10 years -- 41 have been one-and-done. Three of the nine who have not been one-and-done (counting Ivan Rabb this year) played for UNC, including the only two top five players to stay three years (Ty Lawson and John Henson).

That's 82 percent of the top five ranked prospects in the one and done era that go after one year. At Kentucky, it's been 9 of 10 (all but No. 5 Andrew Harrison in 2014). At Duke, it's been five of five. At UNC, its been 1 of four.

It's the same with top 10 prospects. Of the 100 top 10 prospects in the one-and--done era, 69 (obviously, 69 percent) have been one-and-done. Kentucky has been 13 of 18 (and one of the misses was Patrick Paterson, who was there when Cal got there). At Duke, it's six of eight (No. 10 Gerald Henderson in 2006 and No. 6 Kyle Singler in 2007 are the exceptions). At UNC, it's one of eight.

UNC's unique inability to get top prospects into the pros is astonishing.

Let me point out something else.

With Jackson's decision today, that means UNC will have the top two-ranked prospects from the Class of 2014 (No. 9 Justin Jackson and No. 15 Theo Pinson) that are still in school ... AND the top ranked prospect from the prep Class of 2013 that is still in school (No. 14 Isaiah Hicks)

Mull on that.

Of course, we're not the only ones who can see that. Roy's inability to get top players into NBA isn't going unnoticed. It's a big story on the recruiting trail. It's probably hurt his recruiting more in the last two years than the looming scandal.

Jackson's fate is going to be important. One of the comments I read about his play in the NBA combine was the observation that he's the same player he was coming out of high school. He's not any stronger. His shooting hasn't come around and he remains a shaky ballhandler. He would have been a solid first round pick after his freshman year, based on his potential. Chad Ford had him on the borderline between the first and second round this year. If he doesn't show improvement next season at UNC, he probably won't be drafted.

His career arch is starting to resemble James Michael McAdoo, the No. 6 prospect in the class of 2011, who went from being a borderline lottery pick as a freshman to a borderline first round pick after his sophomore year to being undrafted after he finally came out after his junior year.

No wonder that Rashad McCants once complained that playing for Roy was like being in prison!

tbyers11
05-16-2016, 11:38 PM
Is there a link to actual quotes to this effect? Now I'm one of the last people to come to the defense of the cheats, but I just don't buy this notion that major some programs churn out better or worse NBA talent than others. If Barnes had gone to Duke he would still be the same terrible ball handler he is today. If Kyrie had gone to UK he would be the same terrific player he is right now, and continue to have the same defensive lapses and ball sharing issues. If Anthony Davis had gone somewhere else, he would still be the same genetic freak with guard skills that he is today. Durant and Aldridge came from Texas.

Coaches in major programs know the game. That is why they are in the position they are in. Players develop at the rate they are able. Coaches can't really change that. Obviously some NBA scout is going to know better than me. But I just don't buy the notion that a major college program doesn't know how to "develop" talent, whatever that means.

This Draft Express article on 11 underclassmen who should go back to school (http://www.draftexpress.com/article/Underclassmen-Who-May-Need-To-Return-After-Middling-Combine-Showings-5482) says about Justin Jackson "The 21-year-old forward is, for all intents and purposes, the same player, both physically and skill wise, that he was as a freshman at North Carolina."

Wander
05-17-2016, 12:54 AM
This solidifies UNC as a very good team next year, which I'll define as Top 15. Of course, we should still be much better.

sagegrouse
05-17-2016, 09:06 AM
Kedsy has it right ... since the one-and-done era began with the prep class of 2006, Harrison Barnes is the only No. 1 prospect (based on the rsci) that has not been one-and-done.

But it's more than that -- of the 50 top five prospects over the last 10 years -- 41 have been one-and-done. Three of the nine who have not been one-and-done (counting Ivan Rabb this year) played for UNC, including the only two top five players to stay three years (Ty Lawson and John Henson).

That's 82 percent of the top five ranked prospects in the one and done era that go after one year. At Kentucky, it's been 9 of 10 (all but No. 5 Andrew Harrison in 2014). At Duke, it's been five of five. At UNC, its been 1 of four.

It's the same with top 10 prospects. Of the 100 top 10 prospects in the one-and--done era, 69 (obviously, 69 percent) have been one-and-done. Kentucky has been 13 of 18 (and one of the misses was Patrick Paterson, who was there when Cal got there). At Duke, it's six of eight (No. 10 Gerald Henderson in 2006 and No. 6 Kyle Singler in 2007 are the exceptions). At UNC, it's one of eight.

UNC's unique inability to get top prospects into the pros is astonishing.


Incredible! Incroyable! There has to be an underlying cause behind this phenomenom. How about?

a. Players were over-rated in high school:
(1) because their ratings soared after being signed by UNC. This wasn't true of Barnes but could possibly be true of the others; or,
(2) the players were over-rated, but Roy didn't notice and recruited them anyway.

b. Their physical preparation was deficient, due either to coaching or lack of preparation. Guys didn't put on muscle and get rid of fat like they should have; therefore, they didn't improve as much as players on other teams.

c. Their five-on-five skills did not improve as much as they should have because of Roy's helter-skelter substitution patterns, mirrored -- I suppose -- by deficiencies in the same drills in practice..

d. The UNC players did not pay adequate attention to development of their games because of the temptations of "wine, women and song" -- a category I would expand to include illegal substances.

e. I think we can leave out -- "spent too much time in the library and labs, and it detracted from their player development."

Duke79UNLV77
05-17-2016, 09:36 AM
Kedsy has it right ... since the one-and-done era began with the prep class of 2006, Harrison Barnes is the only No. 1 prospect (based on the rsci) that has not been one-and-done.

But it's more than that -- of the 50 top five prospects over the last 10 years -- 41 have been one-and-done. Three of the nine who have not been one-and-done (counting Ivan Rabb this year) played for UNC, including the only two top five players to stay three years (Ty Lawson and John Henson).

That's 82 percent of the top five ranked prospects in the one and done era that go after one year. At Kentucky, it's been 9 of 10 (all but No. 5 Andrew Harrison in 2014). At Duke, it's been five of five. At UNC, its been 1 of four.

It's the same with top 10 prospects. Of the 100 top 10 prospects in the one-and--done era, 69 (obviously, 69 percent) have been one-and-done. Kentucky has been 13 of 18 (and one of the misses was Patrick Paterson, who was there when Cal got there). At Duke, it's six of eight (No. 10 Gerald Henderson in 2006 and No. 6 Kyle Singler in 2007 are the exceptions). At UNC, it's one of eight.

UNC's unique inability to get top prospects into the pros is astonishing.

Let me point out something else.

With Jackson's decision today, that means UNC will have the top two-ranked prospects from the Class of 2014 (No. 9 Justin Jackson and No. 15 Theo Pinson) that are still in school ... AND the top ranked prospect from the prep Class of 2013 that is still in school (No. 14 Isaiah Hicks)

Mull on that.

Of course, we're not the only ones who can see that. Roy's inability to get top players into NBA isn't going unnoticed. It's a big story on the recruiting trail. It's probably hurt his recruiting more in the last two years than the looming scandal.

Jackson's fate is going to be important. One of the comments I read about his play in the NBA combine was the observation that he's the same player he was coming out of high school. He's not any stronger. His shooting hasn't come around and he remains a shaky ballhandler. He would have been a solid first round pick after his freshman year, based on his potential. Chad Ford had him on the borderline between the first and second round this year. If he doesn't show improvement next season at UNC, he probably won't be drafted.

His career arch is starting to resemble James Michael McAdoo, the No. 6 prospect in the class of 2011, who went from being a borderline lottery pick as a freshman to a borderline first round pick after his sophomore year to being undrafted after he finally came out after his junior year.

No wonder that Rashad McCants once complained that playing for Roy was like being in prison!

In fairness, on average the UNC recruits have attended fewer classes in their 3-4 years of college than the one-and-dones from other schools.

sammy3469
05-17-2016, 09:44 AM
Incredible! Incroyable! There has to be an underlying cause behind this phenomenom. How about?

a. Players were over-rated in high school:
(1) because their ratings soared after being signed by UNC. This wasn't true of Barnes but could possibly be true of the others; or,
(2) the players were over-rated, but Roy didn't notice and recruited them anyway.

b. Their physical preparation was deficient, due either to coaching or lack of preparation. Guys didn't put on muscle and get rid of fat like they should have; therefore, they didn't improve as much as players on other teams.
c. Their five-on-five skills did not improve as much as they should have because of Roy's helter-skelter substitution patterns, mirrored -- I suppose -- by deficiencies in the same drills in practice..

d. The UNC players did not pay adequate attention to development of their games because of the temptations of "wine, women and song" -- a category I would expand to include illegal substances.

e. I think we can leave out -- "spent too much time in the library and labs, and it detracted from their player development."

I'd also add that as a general statement Roy's top-level recruits haven't had high basketball IQ's. Yeah they haven't progressed physically, but the Hicks, Pinson, Jackson group of guys doesn't seem to have even a decent feel of the game. McAdoo, Hairston, and Bullock didn't either and Barnes still struggles with it at times even on the greatest show on earth (it's the reason teams are sort of hesitant to make him a max player this offseason).

More than anything, besides for Paige and Berry, Roy's managed to consistently recruit non-high basketball IQ guys in an age where that trait is exceedingly important especially when you have teams like Duke that run pro-sets or Virginia that runs their system to a T.

I do sort of wonder if this is a trait Roy just doesn't factor in his recruiting or if the culture (you can define that however you want) at UNC is more attractive to these type of guys.

The Gordog
05-17-2016, 09:45 AM
Incredible! Incroyable! There has to be an underlying cause behind this phenomenom. How about?

a. Players were over-rated in high school:
(1) because their ratings soared after being signed by UNC. This wasn't true of Barnes but could possibly be true of the others; or,
(2) the players were over-rated, but Roy didn't notice and recruited them anyway.

b. Their physical preparation was deficient, due either to coaching or lack of preparation. Guys didn't put on muscle and get rid of fat like they should have; therefore, they didn't improve as much as players on other teams.

c. Their five-on-five skills did not improve as much as they should have because of Roy's helter-skelter substitution patterns, mirrored -- I suppose -- by deficiencies in the same drills in practice..

d. The UNC players did not pay adequate attention to development of their games because of the temptations of "wine, women and song" -- a category I would expand to include illegal substances.

e. I think we can leave out -- "spent too much time in the library and labs, and it detracted from their player development."

I would suggest that recruits who are not likely to put in the effort needed to improve are the same as recruits who like the idea of going to a school where they don't have to go to class. UNCheat is suffering from self-selection by bums. Couldn't happen to a finer program!

PackMan97
05-17-2016, 10:10 AM
I would suggest that recruits who are not likely to put in the effort needed to improve are the same as recruits who like the idea of going to a school where they don't have to go to class. UNCheat is suffering from self-selection by bums. Couldn't happen to a finer program!

Yup. When you get guys that want a shortcut in one area, that quickly turns into shortcuts elsewhere.

gus
05-17-2016, 10:43 AM
Rather than "Junior season" perhaps we should say "third season", as "junior" implies a member of some sort of academic institution.

jipops
05-17-2016, 12:44 PM
This Draft Express article on 11 underclassmen who should go back to school (http://www.draftexpress.com/article/Underclassmen-Who-May-Need-To-Return-After-Middling-Combine-Showings-5482) says about Justin Jackson "The 21-year-old forward is, for all intents and purposes, the same player, both physically and skill wise, that he was as a freshman at North Carolina."

Interesting quote but it does nothing to dispel my opinion on this. The quote does not say he is the same player as a freshman because he is at unc. It's just that he is. In my opinion that is all on him and his ability to improve. And you can't coach body type. The cheats are known to have a great weight training program so if Jackson is still struggling to gain strength then there are obviously limitations to how his body can develop.

And please don't get me wrong, I feel I must qualify, I am not sticking up for the cheats here. I just believe this whole notion that some major programs produce better players than others is a complete myth. Certain programs have different philosophies, sure. But coaches and staff at major programs know the sport and know how to work players out. And while there are many nuances, it's not rocket science.


Edit: note that a similar comment was made about Marcus Lee...and Cal doesn't exactly have a reputation for failing to get guys drafted.

Olympic Fan
05-17-2016, 12:59 PM
Incredible! Incroyable! There has to be an underlying cause behind this phenomenom. How about?

a. Players were over-rated in high school:

Interesting observations, but allow me to address this point.

I don't see these players as overrated coming out of high school -- maybe one or two, but not many.

Take Ty Lawson -- the No. 1 PG and No. 5 overall prospect in the prep class of 2006. He was every bit as good as advertised, a quick, decisive leader who won ACC player of the year honors as a junior. He is one of just two top 5 prospects in the last 10 years to play three years in college.

Of course, Lawson shouldn't have been around as a junior. He declared for the NBA draft after his sophomore season and was told he was going to be drafted No. 1 by the Denver Nuggets (I understand that such guarantees are not airtight, but he did get the guarantee). Then, a week before he had to make his final decision to stay or go, Lawson was arrested for drunk driving in Chapel Hill. The Nuggets withdrew their guarantee and Lawson returned to UNC to lead the Tar Heels to 2009 national title. Now, I don't subscribe to the conspiracy theories floating around (although its true that quite a few prominent UNC athletes are not charged in such a situation -- provided they still have eligibility left). And Lawson does have a major drunk driving issue that's continued in the NBA.

Just saying, it was a mighty convenient circumstance.

Then there is John Henson. A slender, but amazingly athletic power forward who spent (wasted?) his first year at UNC playing wing forward. Now, Henson can do a lot of things very well, but he couldn't shoot and he couldn't handle. He had a frustrating freshman year (as UNC went to the NIT). The next year he's at power forward where he always belonged and begins his development as the player he was supposed to be out of high school. There have always been rumors that Henson wanted to play small forward and that Roy had to promise him that role as a freshman to sign him. Either way, the year wasted at small forward certainly delayed his development and helped Henson become just the second or two top 5 prospects in the last 10 years to stay three years.

You can also talk about some talented players that Roy held back early in their careers by limiting their early playing time -- Marvin Williams (who went one-and-done anyway), Ed Davis, James Michael McAdoo. Justin Jackson? All of those decisions are debatable, but the pattern is interesting.

There is also the question of the advice Roy gives his kids. He told Reggie Bullock not to go because he wouldn't be drafted -- Bullock ended up being a late first-round pick. To be fair, he told JP Tokoto not to go and Tokoto was only a second-round pick.

So, obviously lots of reasons for Roy's problem getting guys to the NBA.

But one theory -- the one perpetrated at IC and other UNC circles -- is BS. They argue that Roy doesn't want one-and-done talent and that he only recruits kids who want to stay and "develop" (like McAdoo or Jackson?). They ignore the fact that Roy has tried -- and failed -- to land a boatload of OAD prospects in recent years, including Brandon Ingram, Harry Giles, Bam Abedeyo and Dennis Smith from in-state.

PackMan97
05-17-2016, 01:04 PM
And please don't get me wrong, I feel I must qualify, I am not sticking up for the cheats here. I just believe this whole notion that some major programs produce better players than others is a complete myth. Certain programs have different philosophies, sure. But coaches and staff at major programs know the sport and know how to work players out. And while there are many nuances, it's not rocket science.

Except that as explained abover, 69% of the top 10 over the past decade are gone after a year. At UNC-CH that is 12.5%. That's a huge difference! If you take out UNC's 8 players, that becomes 67/92 = 73%. So, you are telling me that UNC is just as good at developing their players when they one and done them at a 12.5% clip while everyone else is hitting 73% gone? You are right, this isn't rocket science. Don't go to Carolina if you want to be one and done.

Wander
05-17-2016, 01:15 PM
Take Ty Lawson -- the No. 1 PG and No. 5 overall prospect in the prep class of 2006. He was every bit as good as advertised, a quick, decisive leader who won ACC player of the year honors as a junior. He is one of just two top 5 prospects in the last 10 years to play three years in college.

Of course, Lawson shouldn't have been around as a junior. He declared for the NBA draft after his sophomore season and was told he was going to be drafted No. 1 by the Denver Nuggets (I understand that such guarantees are not airtight, but he did get the guarantee). Then, a week before he had to make his final decision to stay or go, Lawson was arrested for drunk driving in Chapel Hill. The Nuggets withdrew their guarantee and Lawson returned to UNC to lead the Tar Heels to 2009 national title. Now, I don't subscribe to the conspiracy theories floating around (although its true that quite a few prominent UNC athletes are not charged in such a situation -- provided they still have eligibility left). And Lawson does have a major drunk driving issue that's continued in the NBA.


I assume you mean he would be "drafted in the first round" by Denver, not drafted no 1, because Ty Lawson was never anywhere close to the discussion for the top pick of the draft.

I don't know how we can criticize Ty Lawson for skipping the draft as a sophomore when he would have been a first round but not a lottery pick when Grayson Allen just did the same thing.

luvdahops
05-17-2016, 01:19 PM
Is there a link to actual quotes to this effect? Now I'm one of the last people to come to the defense of the cheats, but I just don't buy this notion that some major programs churn out better or worse NBA talent than others. If Barnes had gone to Duke he would still be the same terrible ball handler he is today. If Kyrie had gone to UK he would be the same terrific player he is right now, and continue to have the same defensive lapses and ball sharing issues. If Anthony Davis had gone somewhere else, he would still be the same genetic freak with guard skills that he is today. Durant and Aldridge came from Texas.

Coaches in major programs know the game. That is why they are in the position they are in. Players develop at the rate they are able. Coaches can't really change that. Obviously some NBA scout is going to know better than me. But I just don't buy the notion that a major college program doesn't know how to "develop" talent, whatever that means.

Jackson not improving is on him, not the cheats. I mean we know by now that the cheats are giving him all the available time in the world to do so.

I think Roy does have some culpability on this. More than any other top-tier coach, with perhaps the notable exception of Tony Bennett, Roy remains very system-based in his approach, especially with regard to offense. Positions are more rigidly defined, and there is much more structure (e.g. sets and plays) than you generally see in college hoops these days. IMHO, part of Jackson's lack of development can clearly be traced to the role to which Roy has confined him thus far in this structure. With position-less basketball being taught at all levels these days, and the NBA increasingly seeking versatile guys who can play all over the floor, Roy's approach has become an increasingly tougher sell to recruits. But I don't see him changing his spots anytime soon.

flyingdutchdevil
05-17-2016, 01:22 PM
I assume you mean he would be "drafted in the first round" by Denver, not drafted no 1, because Ty Lawson was never anywhere close to the discussion for the top pick of the draft.

I don't know how we can criticize Ty Lawson for skipping the draft as a sophomore when he would have been a first round but not a lottery pick when Grayson Allen just did the same thing.

Or McRoberts. Or Singler.

Lawson came back (although I agree he came back because of the DUI) and was numero 1 why UNC won the title. If that happened to any Duke player, said Duke player would be put on a mantle of greatest Dukies of all time.

I don't think Lawson is a good comp for the recent, crappy UNC-lack of NBA talent correlation. If anything, Lawson is a good model for "come back to school, win a championship, and improve your draft stock" story. Hey - maybe that's what Roy tells his current players!

sagegrouse
05-17-2016, 01:44 PM
I think Roy does have some culpability on this. More than any other top-tier coach, with perhaps the notable exception of Tony Bennett, Roy remains very system-based in his approach, especially with regard to offense. Positions are more rigidly defined, and there is much more structure (e.g. sets and plays) than you generally see in college hoops these days. IMHO, part of Jackson's lack of development can clearly be traced to the role to which Roy has confined him thus far in this structure. With position-less basketball being taught at all levels these days, and the NBA increasingly seeking versatile guys who can play all over the floor, Roy's approach has become an increasingly tougher sell to recruits. But I don't see him changing his spots anytime soon.

"A leopard doesn't change its spots," and Ol' Roy will never change his offensive scheme, especially at age 66 (as of August 1).

ncexnyc
05-17-2016, 01:45 PM
And to think just a few short months ago we were all breathing a sigh of relief when the Cheats barely lost in the title game.

I know we all love to have some fun at Ol' Roy's expense, but I think in this case we are off base. The talent just isn't there like it used to be and what players they do land tend to be overrated.

Olympic Fan
05-17-2016, 02:08 PM
Please, I'm not ripping Lawson for coming back ... I was merely explain the interesting circumstances of his return, trying to explain the reason why Roy's kids stay in college MUCH longer than similarly rated players at Duke, Kentucky and Kansas.

There are exceptions at every school ... but when the exceptions become the rule (as they have at UNC), then it's worth talking about.

As for Singler and McRoberts (and Gerald Henderson, a top 10 guy who stayed three years at Duke), I contend that K changed his approach after 2010. Before 2010, he was not interested in preparing and pushing even his top prospects out to the NBA quickly. But one of his great strengths as a coach is his ability to adapt to the changing world. He saw the changing landscape and, starting with Kyrie Irving, he welcomed, encouraged and featured one-and-done talent. Since the prep class of 2010, he's had six top 10 prospects and all six have been one-and-done.
He has two more next year -- and I'll b shocked if Giles and Tatum aren't one and done.

Frank Jackson will be interesting ... he's still No. 13 in the rsci, which is just outside the probable one-and-done range. Of course, Justise Winslow was also No. 13 in his class and he was one-and-done (Chase Jeter was No. 14 and he was not close to one-and-done).

PS I did mean that Lawson would have been a first-round pick (not the No. 1 pick) after his sophomore year. The Nuggets were picking No. 20 in the first round (they ended up trading the pick). A year later, Lawson went No. 18 to the Timberwolves, but was traded on draft night to Denver.

DBFAN
05-17-2016, 02:38 PM
I think it is just hard for those guys at UNC to put on a lot of weight and muscle.. You know because adderall is constantly speeding up metabolism 😎

monkey
05-17-2016, 02:48 PM
Great ... so now a bunch of folks leaving as "one and done"s is a sign of something awesome and we should make fun of programs where people return to school (if only because they couldn't make it to the NBA).

This is really troubling to me (as is the one and done phenomenon). It used to be that one and done players happened and you suffered though it (but we were not trying to recruit people who were intending to just stay a single year). I don't like Duke being made a pure minor league system. We are a top notch university. If people happen to leave to pursue their dreams, great. But that's not what we should be trying to achieve and I'm really troubled by folks that seems to be gleefully putting down UNC (which has plenty of other issues to make fun of) because it isn't happening to them.

I seem to recall being on the other side of this debate a few years back when Duke players were staying four years and K was accused of using mind tricks to keep them to stay. I liked us being on that side of the fence instead of the Kentucky side.

Spanarkel
05-17-2016, 02:49 PM
[QUOTE=sammy3469;887659] ... the Hicks, Pinson, Jackson group of guys doesn't seem to have even a decent feel of the game.



Pinson averaged 6.2 apg(per 40min), with an A/TO ratio of 2.4 this past season. His 115 assists for unc are close to Grayson Allen's team-leading 127. I realize Pinson's FG%/3P-FG% figures aren't great, but I think he has a "decent feel for the game."

oldnavy
05-17-2016, 03:22 PM
The other interesting thing about this topic to me is, what Roy has done with his talent. He has been to what, one title game since 2009? Now, that isn't really that bad when compared to other programs, but for UNC to miss so many final fours in a row while Duke is winning two... well we all know how well that goes over in CH. The last time Duke won two NC's is such a short time period, UNC invented a way to cheat that is unprecedented in NCAA history, so one can only wonder what they have cooking over there now...

So, either Roy isn't developing the talent, OR his methods are flawed. I would suggest both are true. I believe that Roy is a one trick pony. He plays an inside out game with two bigs, and he likes to run. When he has the talent for that game, it works pretty well. But, I have never seen him do anything that remotely resembles adjusting his methods to the strengths of his players.

As far as not being interested in OAD talent, well we all know that Roy would give his golf clubs to land a recruit like Ingram, Parker, Okafor, Winslow, Jones, Irving and yes even Grayson Allen. I'm too lazy to go back and look, but I'd bet that he offered Ingram, Parker, Okafor, Irving... all scholarships.

I realize that most of the IC crowd are completely irrational, and the rest are just clueless but I would love to hear how they reconcile Roy's offering, and begging the OAD recruits to come to Chapel Hill for at least a visit with the "he doesn't want them anyway" bull they shovel.

I guess they would say he is being polite to them by honoring them with an UNC offer.

Wander
05-17-2016, 03:40 PM
As for Singler and McRoberts (and Gerald Henderson, a top 10 guy who stayed three years at Duke), I contend that K changed his approach after 2010. Before 2010, he was not interested in preparing and pushing even his top prospects out to the NBA quickly. But one of his great strengths as a coach is his ability to adapt to the changing world. He saw the changing landscape and, starting with Kyrie Irving, he welcomed, encouraged and featured one-and-done talent. Since the prep class of 2010, he's had six top 10 prospects and all six have been one-and-done.
He has two more next year -- and I'll b shocked if Giles and Tatum aren't one and done.


I agree about K adapting his philosophy. But I think the simpler answer with Roy is that he simply is not as good as recruiting or coaching as we are, not that he's quasi-intentionally holding people back. It may seem like quibbling to distinguish between a Top 3 recruit and a Top 10 recruit, but there really is a big talent difference between Giles/Tatum/Okafor/Parker/Ingram and McAdoo/Jackson/Pinson. I believe if you switched all of Duke's recruits with all of UNC's recruits over the past 5 years, UNC would have a ton of one-and-dones and we would have a bunch of highly rated recruits coming back to school (I don't think the win/losses results would be the same though, because K is a much better coach).

The one exception to the above where I agree with your idea is Harrison Barnes. The kid IMO has attitude issues that I think held him back under Roy, and I think there's a good chance that a no-nonsense coach like K would have stomped out all his garbage about "branding" and gotten him to focus solely on basketball instead, and he would have become a much better player (and maybe a 1-and-done as a result).

sandinmyshoes
05-17-2016, 04:07 PM
The notion that Williams and his staff cannot develop players has about as much validity that the notion long held by UNC fans that Coach K could not develop big men had. That would be none. In Williams defense he got a guy like Kendal Marshall into the NBA. I thought Marshall was destined to be a very good four year player/nuisance. One of those guys who annoy by with their craftiness.

I'm not sure Williams has had many, if any, OAD players since Barnes. I think as a result of the scandal he has been having to settle on guys who have some glaring NBA flaw in their skills, or physical attributes. Brice Johnson was terrific in his final season, but just showed flashes of it earlier. I'd say he improved but still carries the tendency to drift mentally and is still and always going to have a frame that will only accept so much muscle/strength. Justin Jackson has the same kind of build and will need to develop a skill set to counter that. Or so it seems to me in the games I've seen him play.

-jk
05-17-2016, 04:14 PM
Great ... so now a bunch of folks leaving as "one and done"s is a sign of something awesome and we should make fun of programs where people return to school (if only because they couldn't make it to the NBA).

This is really troubling to me (as is the one and done phenomenon). It used to be that one and done players happened and you suffered though it (but we were not trying to recruit people who were intending to just stay a single year). I don't like Duke being made a pure minor league system. We are a top notch university. If people happen to leave to pursue their dreams, great. But that's not what we should be trying to achieve and I'm really troubled by folks that seems to be gleefully putting down UNC (which has plenty of other issues to make fun of) because it isn't happening to them.

I seem to recall being on the other side of this debate a few years back when Duke players were staying four years and K was accused of using mind tricks to keep them to stay. I liked us being on that side of the fence instead of the Kentucky side.

Except Jahlil is spending this summer at Duke working towards his degree. K does try to get players to give more than lip service to the college experience... (Ok, not sure what Tyus or Justice plan to do.)

-jk

Olympic Fan
05-17-2016, 04:22 PM
I agree about K adapting his philosophy. But I think the simpler answer with Roy is that he simply is not as good as recruiting or coaching as we are, not that he's quasi-intentionally holding people back. It may seem like quibbling to distinguish between a Top 3 recruit and a Top 10 recruit, but there really is a big talent difference between Giles/Tatum/Okafor/Parker/Ingram and McAdoo/Jackson/Pinson. I believe if you switched all of Duke's recruits with all of UNC's recruits over the past 5 years, UNC would have a ton of one-and-dones and we would have a bunch of highly rated recruits coming back to school (I don't think the win/losses results would be the same though, because K is a much better coach).

The one exception to the above where I agree with your idea is Harrison Barnes. The kid IMO has attitude issues that I think held him back under Roy, and I think there's a good chance that a no-nonsense coach like K would have stomped out all his garbage about "branding" and gotten him to focus solely on basketball instead, and he would have become a much better player (and maybe a 1-and-done as a result).

It might be a quibble ... but 69 percent of the top 10 prospects nationally over the last 10 years are one-and-done ... at UNC, it's 12.5 percent. The percentage of top 5 guys going is 82 percent ... at UNC its 25 percent.

And Roy has had potential one-and-done's that he held back (besides Barnes) ...both James Michael McAdoo and Justin Jackson would have been first round picks if they had come out after their freshman years. So would Ed Davis, who returned for his sophomore year and had a terrible, injury plagued year in 2010, then went No. 13 in the 2010 draft.

You can say that Roy hasn't had that many one-and-done candidates ... but how much of that is him holding guys back? Somebody mentioned Kendell Marshall, but Roy even held him back -- bringing him off the bench while Larry Drew started for more than half a season. The best thing that happened to UNC's program was that Drew left in February and Roy was forced to start Marshall, who was spectacular. And BTW Marshall was another kid that left despite Roy's advice that he stay. Marshall was the No. 13 pick in the 2012 draft.

weezie
05-17-2016, 04:42 PM
...As for Singler and McRoberts...

Interesting to see both with their new hairdos in the playoffs.
'Hairdos' is such a fun word.
McRoberts seems to have settled on a fairly successful look.

Kyle might need to keep trying.

luvdahops
05-17-2016, 04:43 PM
The notion that Williams and his staff cannot develop players has about as much validity that the notion long held by UNC fans that Coach K could not develop big men had. That would be none. In Williams defense he got a guy like Kendal Marshall into the NBA. I thought Marshall was destined to be a very good four year player/nuisance. One of those guys who annoy by with their craftiness.

I'm not sure Williams has had many, if any, OAD players since Barnes. I think as a result of the scandal he has been having to settle on guys who have some glaring NBA flaw in their skills, or physical attributes. Brice Johnson was terrific in his final season, but just showed flashes of it earlier. I'd say he improved but still carries the tendency to drift mentally and is still and always going to have a frame that will only accept so much muscle/strength. Justin Jackson has the same kind of build and will need to develop a skill set to counter that. Or so it seems to me in the games I've seen him play.

Here's the thing. 10-20 years ago, with the game and talent he has, and the productivity he showed as a senior, Brice Johnson would have probably been a surefire Top 10 pick. But at his size, his game is not a great fit for today's NBA. He is not a center, and is definitely not a stretch 4. So teams are looking at him as a rotation guy with limited downside, which still gets him picked at 20+/-, but not a potential star. And IMHO, that has a lot to do with Roy's system and structure, which continues to emphasize playing two 2 true post guys together. I am not saying that Roy and staff flat out cannot develop players. What I am saying is that the UNC system is an increasingly bad fit for the way the game is evolving, for both recruits and the NBA.

The flip side is that even without top tier talent, the system can still win at the NCAA level, particularly when you have the right mix of experience, including experience playing together and in that system, and depth of talent. Which was the case this year.

Nosbleuatu
05-17-2016, 07:50 PM
I think the blame for failing to develop is shared equally by Roy and his players. The numbers are startling and suggest more than just a run of bad luck in scouting talent. It's almost as if uNC is attracting players who don't expect to put in a lot of work. I can't imagine why that might be the case. 😋

El_Diablo
05-17-2016, 08:06 PM
It might be a quibble ... but 69 percent of the top 10 prospects nationally over the last 10 years are one-and-done ... at UNC, it's 12.5 percent. The percentage of top 5 guys going is 82 percent ... at UNC its 25 percent.

As someone pointed out earlier, those national numbers are dragged down by including UNC (because UNC's players are being double counted). If you split them out between UNC and non-UNC, the differences are even more stark.

UNC top 10 guys = 1/8 = 12.5%
Non-UNC top 5 guys = 68/92 = 74%

UNC top 5 guys = 1/4 = 25%
Non-UNC top 5 guys = 41/46 = 89%

jipops
05-17-2016, 08:59 PM
I think Roy does have some culpability on this. More than any other top-tier coach, with perhaps the notable exception of Tony Bennett, Roy remains very system-based in his approach, especially with regard to offense. Positions are more rigidly defined, and there is much more structure (e.g. sets and plays) than you generally see in college hoops these days. IMHO, part of Jackson's lack of development can clearly be traced to the role to which Roy has confined him thus far in this structure. With position-less basketball being taught at all levels these days, and the NBA increasingly seeking versatile guys who can play all over the floor, Roy's approach has become an increasingly tougher sell to recruits. But I don't see him changing his spots anytime soon.

The cheats scandal has caused the tough sell on the recruiting trail, not Roy's coaching philosphy. Where is there any specific evidence of this?

And I don't buy this position-less basketball either. Yes, versatility is at a premium. But Amile Jefferson is not going to be getting any burn playing on the perimeter.

And how exactly has Jackson been confined? With all of the cheats' capable front court guys should he have still played more pf? He's really not a 2 guard either. Justin gets plenty of looks in the cheat offense and seems to do well putting it on the floor. I'm all for versatility but I also applaud coaches for not trying to make a player someone he isn't.

Look, I absolutely detest Roy. But coaching is not his issue.

jipops
05-17-2016, 09:31 PM
Here's the thing. 10-20 years ago, with the game and talent he has, and the productivity he showed as a senior, Brice Johnson would have probably been a surefire Top 10 pick. But at his size, his game is not a great fit for today's NBA. He is not a center, and is definitely not a stretch 4. So teams are looking at him as a rotation guy with limited downside, which still gets him picked at 20+/-, but not a potential star. And IMHO, that has a lot to do with Roy's system and structure, which continues to emphasize playing two 2 true post guys together. I am not saying that Roy and staff flat out cannot develop players. What I am saying is that the UNC system is an increasingly bad fit for the way the game is evolving, for both recruits and the NBA.

The flip side is that even without top tier talent, the system can still win at the NCAA level, particularly when you have the right mix of experience, including experience playing together and in that system, and depth of talent. Which was the case this year.

I think you are offering more narrative than proof here. Yes Roy's approach may seem antiquated with the direction the game is going in terms of front court play. But nowhere does this correlate to getting guys to the league.

Newton_14
05-17-2016, 11:08 PM
Or McRoberts. Or Singler.

Lawson came back (although I agree he came back because of the DUI) and was numero 1 why UNC won the title. If that happened to any Duke player, said Duke player would be put on a mantle of greatest Dukies of all time.

I don't think Lawson is a good comp for the recent, crappy UNC-lack of NBA talent correlation. If anything, Lawson is a good model for "come back to school, win a championship, and improve your draft stock" story. Hey - maybe that's what Roy tells his current players!

Fair points on Grayson, Singler, McBob, but it still doesn't change the glaring stats that Oly has put together on this. Also with the case of Bullock, there is no Duke Comp, at least not in the defined era, that being the years since players could no longer go straight from High School. I am not aware of any player that K stated should not go, the kid went anyway, and ended up being drafted in Rd 1.

The story on Lawson is accurate as well (with the correction Wander pointed out that Denver promised to take Lawson with their first pick in Rd 1, which was something like 16th or 17th). Unlike Grayson, Lawson was a stud from Day 1, playing heavy minutes as a Freshman, and then again as a Soph. I will leave the argument of where or not Lawson should have went after one year to another day. After the 2008 Season, Lawson, Danny Green, and Wayne Ellington all declared for the draft, using the "testing the waters rule". All 3 desperately wanted to go Pro per their own admissions, and our boy ol roy desperately wanted all 3 to join Hanswalk in returning for another season so "Late Night With Ol Roy" could chase himself another title (and hey, no matter the choice they made, college classrooms were not in their futures). However, Danny Green sprained his ankle badly during the NBA sessions, Lawson got the aforementioned DWI, and Ellington was told he wasn't good enough and needed another year in college. So, Voila, ol roy got his way, despite the close call of losing at least one of them and possibly all three.

So I am firmly in Oly's camp on this one. I'm happy Grayson, Singler, and McBob all stayed longer than the NBA Money Logic says they should have. I'll take that all day everyday over being able to say Duke hasn't had any kids "stay too long".

Newton_14
05-17-2016, 11:19 PM
Here's the thing. 10-20 years ago, with the game and talent he has, and the productivity he showed as a senior, Brice Johnson would have probably been a surefire Top 10 pick. But at his size, his game is not a great fit for today's NBA. He is not a center, and is definitely not a stretch 4. So teams are looking at him as a rotation guy with limited downside, which still gets him picked at 20+/-, but not a potential star. And IMHO, that has a lot to do with Roy's system and structure, which continues to emphasize playing two 2 true post guys together. I am not saying that Roy and staff flat out cannot develop players. What I am saying is that the UNC system is an increasingly bad fit for the way the game is evolving, for both recruits and the NBA.

The flip side is that even without top tier talent, the system can still win at the NCAA level, particularly when you have the right mix of experience, including experience playing together and in that system, and depth of talent. Which was the case this year.

Great post! I do have one nit to pick, but it goes to the heart of what we are saying. Brice Johnson can shoot. I fully believe that. Had he been at Duke, he would have been shooting 3's as a stretch 4 or stretch 5, as well as scoring in all the ways we saw him score at unCheat. . K loves bigs that can shoot the 3, and gladly helps them develop that part of their game. Ol roy? Not so much.

I may be wrong, but I think we will see Brice's true shooting range at the next level, and learn it is quite a bit further from the hoop than Roy ever dared let him shoot it. It will be interesting to follow and watch.

jipops
05-17-2016, 11:27 PM
Great post! I do have one nit to pick, but it goes to the heart of what we are saying. Brice Johnson can shoot. I fully believe that. Had he been at Duke, he would have been shooting 3's as a stretch 4 or stretch 5, as well as scoring in all the ways we saw him score at unCheat. . K loves bigs that can shoot the 3, and gladly helps them develop that part of their game. Ol roy? Not so much.

I may be wrong, but I think we will see Brice's true shooting range at the next level, and learn it is quite a bit further from the hoop than Roy ever dared let him shoot it. It will be interesting to follow and watch.

Then why didn't Lance Thomas shoot 3's while at Duke? He's been doing it for the Knicks.

cato
05-17-2016, 11:44 PM
Then why didn't Lance Thomas shoot 3's while at Duke? He's been doing it for the Knicks.

Could Lance Thomas shoot 3s while at Duke? He has been out of school since 2010 -- he had a lot of time to work on his shot (more than his entire college career).

Also, those teams did not lack for perimeter shooting.

K embraced the 3 early, and featured a stretch 5 before stretch 4s were even cool. If Lance could shoot then the way he has learned to shoot in the NBA, I suspect K would have given him the opportunity.

jipops
05-17-2016, 11:55 PM
Could Lance Thomas shoot 3s while at Duke? He has been out of school since 2010 -- he had a lot of time to work on his shot (more than his entire college career).

Also, those teams did not lack for perimeter shooting.

K embraced the 3 early, and featured a stretch 5 before stretch 4s were even cool. If Lance could shoot then the way he has learned to shoot in the NBA, I suspect K would have given him the opportunity.

I fully agree. I was intentionally cheeky there. And using another example to prove my point. Lance didn't develop that 3 point shot at Duke. He did it mostly on his own volition. Basically, he worked his butt off and things have ended up working out well for him.

Wheat/"/"/"
05-18-2016, 12:07 AM
I stop by for then first time in a while and I get to read a laughable take on Jackson and Roy...again.

UNC has no talent? Players are overrated? Roy can't recruit? Then Roy must be some great coach to dominate the ACC and come within a whisker of a title like he did last season, right?

Players can't develope, the game has passed him by...due to Roy's "old system"? Take a look at his wins and where he got Brice Johnson this year from where he was as a freshman. Look at how much improvement he got out of a marginal talent like Joel James...who's gonna make a nice living somewhere playing ball. Roy is putting together teams to win college games and titles. If a top player wants to play his system, he certainly wants them, and he will make them even better players...but they will share the ball and play disciplined, team basketball if they chose UNC.

Roy is holding Jackson back? Puleeeeze...the kid is just physically immature and a slow developer, he has definitely gotten better each year, especially on defense and with his ball handling since he arrived. He will have a long career in the NBA someday, no rush. Forget rankings, everybody puts way too much stock in them. After about the top 3 guys each year...nobody is a sure OAD and each individual player walks his own path.

Just a few short years ago this board and Duke fans in general snubbed their noses at the idea of OAD...but many of those same fans are now quick to claim the development strength of the program for the one year exceptional talent guy like Kyrie, Okafor, Winslow, Parker...when the truth is those guys would have excelled anywhere and gone to the NBA. Good for Duke to get great players...but let's be real...give coach K credit for teaching them to act like men and play with great intensity, but their skill set was already in place when they arrived and they were getting to he NBA quick if they played for Little Sisters of the Poor.

The guy who can't recruit and can't keep up with the times will put another top ten team on the court again next year...proving once again that those who continually disrespect him and his accomplishments don't have a clue in understanding that there is more than one way to build a winning team.

gumbomoop
05-18-2016, 02:48 AM
Look at how much improvement he got out of a marginal talent like Joel James...who's gonna make a nice living somewhere playing ball.

I just don't think this helps your case for Roy. James was RSCI-ranked #58 in the class of 2012. That was one spot lower than Tokoto, and ahead of such players as Jordan Adams, James Robinson, Jake Layman, Georges Niang, Rosco Allen, A.J. Hammons, Terry Rozier, Nik Stauskas, Montrezl Harrell, Denzel Valentine, Marcus Georges-Hunt, and Mike Tobey.

The gurus obviously missed on James, overrating him pretty substantially coming out of HS.

James's numbers didn't improve at all -- at all -- over 4 years under Roy. Here are the stats, which strongly (or if you will only go so far as to admit that they seem to) suggest both that James did not improve over 4 years, and that he just didn't contribute much even as a senior. Statistically speaking.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/player/_/id/61651/joel-james

You've posted many times your admiration for Britt and James. Britt's stats show no real O-improvement, either; but I agree with you that he's a solid backup, and a decent on-ball defender. But James ... I myself thought just every once in a while over the last two years -- eye test -- that he did have a little talent. But really, it's a big stretch to get your dander up about "how much improvement" James showed under Roy's tutelage. Maybe James did "develop" into a valuable practice player, pushing both Hicks and Meeks. Maybe Roy tried to get him to get his weight down a bit, but he couldn't do it. He seems a nice guy, always upbeat, good teammate. Once in a while he hit a soft jumper and grabbed a rebound. Once in a great while. Maybe he led the nation in blocking out, thus allowing Paige or Berry to crash the boards for the rebound.

More than a few commentators thought pretty much all of James's minutes might have gone to Hicks. It just looks -- seems -- that James didn't improve much, if any; and further, that in continuing to give James 7-10 mpg, Roy has held back Hicks's development.

I follow neither the NBA nor the European leagues. I don't know, maybe James is a sleeper, and will make money somewhere. He'll have to lose 20 pounds, and keep it off. You agree?

Your insistence that Roy got a lot of improvement out of James is so unpersuasive that -- in a sort of guilt-by-association way -- it harms your broader defense of Roy's coaching.

Do your UNC friends agree with you about James, or do they think you a bit loony on this (one) subject?

fgb
05-18-2016, 07:50 AM
Great ... so now a bunch of folks leaving as "one and done"s is a sign of something awesome and we should make fun of programs where people return to school (if only because they couldn't make it to the NBA).

This is really troubling to me (as is the one and done phenomenon). It used to be that one and done players happened and you suffered though it (but we were not trying to recruit people who were intending to just stay a single year). I don't like Duke being made a pure minor league system. We are a top notch university. If people happen to leave to pursue their dreams, great. But that's not what we should be trying to achieve and I'm really troubled by folks that seems to be gleefully putting down UNC (which has plenty of other issues to make fun of) because it isn't happening to them.

I seem to recall being on the other side of this debate a few years back when Duke players were staying four years and K was accused of using mind tricks to keep them to stay. I liked us being on that side of the fence instead of the Kentucky side.

i don't think most of the folks here are celebrating the one and done era, so much as pointing out that the shortest path to a payday is what most top 15 kids want these days, and the relatively high percentage of top 15 players who's draft status had moved downwards at unc is having a negative impact on their recruiting of such players.

fgb
05-18-2016, 07:59 AM
Forget rankings, everybody puts way too much stock in them.

you know who's not going to forget about player rankings, ever? top ranked players.

oldnavy
05-18-2016, 08:11 AM
I stop by for then first time in a while and I get to read a laughable take on Jackson and Roy...again.

UNC has no talent? Players are overrated? Roy can't recruit? Then Roy must be some great coach to dominate the ACC and come within a whisker of a title like he did last season, right?

Players can't develope, the game has passed him by...due to Roy's "old system"? Take a look at his wins and where he got Brice Johnson this year from where he was as a freshman. Look at how much improvement he got out of a marginal talent like Joel James...who's gonna make a nice living somewhere playing ball. Roy is putting together teams to win college games and titles. If a top player wants to play his system, he certainly wants them, and he will make them even better players...but they will share the ball and play disciplined, team basketball if they chose UNC.

Roy is holding Jackson back? Puleeeeze...the kid is just physically immature and a slow developer, he has definitely gotten better each year, especially on defense and with his ball handling since he arrived. He will have a long career in the NBA someday, no rush. Forget rankings, everybody puts way too much stock in them. After about the top 3 guys each year...nobody is a sure OAD and each individual player walks his own path.

Just a few short years ago this board and Duke fans in general snubbed their noses at the idea of OAD...but many of those same fans are now quick to claim the development strength of the program for the one year exceptional talent guy like Kyrie, Okafor, Winslow, Parker...when the truth is those guys would have excelled anywhere and gone to the NBA. Good for Duke to get great players...but let's be real...give coach K credit for teaching them to act like men and play with great intensity, but their skill set was already in place when they arrived and they were getting to he NBA quick if they played for Little Sisters of the Poor.

The guy who can't recruit and can't keep up with the times will put another top ten team on the court again next year...proving once again that those who continually disrespect him and his accomplishments don't have a clue in understanding that there is more than one way to build a winning team.

I read this board almost daily and I have not seen where anyone here thinks that these players got to the NBA as a result of playing at Duke.

What you have not done in your comment is address the question of why Roy's players lag so far behind other programs in getting into the league as compared to like players from other schools.

Do you have any explanation or theory about this?

You defend Roy's record which no one is attacking. Yes he does win a lot of games, that is not the question here. The question is why doesn't the players he recruits get to the league at the same pace that other teams players do? And, I will add another question, is Roy winning enough given that he has been to one FF in the past 7 years with these players you love how Roy is using and building his program? Is an ACC championship and FF trip once a decade the new standard at UNC?

And Joel James is your example of how Roy develops players? Next you'll be telling us how Kennedy Meeks has blossomed under Roy. And anyone who saw Brice Johnson play 3 years ago could have told you that he needed to be a stretch 4 and not a back to the basket post player. I would bet that his staying at UNC cost him millions in guaranteed money, but that is not something that we can ever truly know is it?

PackMan97
05-18-2016, 08:26 AM
...proving once again that those who continually disrespect him and his accomplishments don't have a clue in understanding that there is more than one way to build a winning team.

I could care less whether something about UNC is true or not (though, it's even better when it is). I'm going to keep throwing poop at them until something sticks and then tell people like you how much Carolina stinks!

In this case, the truth hurts. Roy has been particularly awful at getting the elite players into the pros after one year. That poop is sticking and stinking and you aren't washing it off.

sagegrouse
05-18-2016, 08:36 AM
I stop by for then first time in a while and I get to read a laughable take on Jackson and Roy...again.

UNC has no talent? Players are overrated? Roy can't recruit? Then Roy must be some great coach to dominate the ACC and come within a whisker of a title like he did last season, right?


.

OK, mon ami, but I am searching for a reason that UNC is unique in the college basketball world of retaining top five and top ten HS stars, who elsewhere are one-and-done. That's Part One. Part Two is that such highly rated players coming out of HS are not typically high draft picks when they do come out. Perhaps Part Two is evidence of back-sliding.


As someone pointed out earlier, those national numbers are dragged down by including UNC (because UNC's players are being double counted). If you split them out between UNC and non-UNC, the differences are even more stark.

UNC top 10 guys = 1/8 = 12.5%
Non-UNC top 5 guys = 68/92 = 74%

UNC top 5 guys = 1/4 = 25%
Non-UNC top 5 guys = 41/46 = 89%

Earlier, I speculated on some reasons, such as:

Over-rated in HS
Lack of commitment to physical development
Style of play and substitution patterns not helping players develop NBA skills or hard-nosed commitment
"Wine, women, and song" as a Carolina basketball player


What's your explanation?

Kindly,
Sage Grouse

Wheat/"/"/"
05-18-2016, 08:56 AM
I just don't think this helps your case for Roy. James was RSCI-ranked #58 in the class of 2012. That was one spot lower than Tokoto, and ahead of such players as Jordan Adams, James Robinson, Jake Layman, Georges Niang, Rosco Allen, A.J. Hammons, Terry Rozier, Nik Stauskas, Montrezl Harrell, Denzel Valentine, Marcus Georges-Hunt, and Mike Tobey.

Sort of proves my point on rankings doesn't it? James had all kinds of issues with his game straight out of HS. Everybody could see that. You guys ridiculed me from day one when I insisted he had some talent that just had to be coached up. But he's made great improvement over the years.


James's numbers didn't improve at all -- at all -- over 4 years under Roy. Here are the stats, which strongly (or if you will only go so far as to admit that they seem to) suggest both that James did not improve over 4 years, and that he just didn't contribute much even as a senior. Statistically speaking.

Lies, damn lies and statistics. Anybody who watched James over his 4 years saw his improvement.


You've posted many times your admiration for Britt and James. Britt's stats show no real O-improvement, either; but I agree with you that he's a solid backup, and a decent on-ball defender. But James ... I myself thought just every once in a while over the last two years -- eye test -- that he did have a little talent. But really, it's a big stretch to get your dander up about "how much improvement" James showed under Roy's tutelage. Maybe James did "develop" into a valuable practice player, pushing both Hicks and Meeks. Maybe Roy tried to get him to get his weight down a bit, but he couldn't do it. He seems a nice guy, always upbeat, good teammate. Once in a while he hit a soft jumper and grabbed a rebound. Once in a great while. Maybe he led the nation in blocking out, thus allowing Paige or Berry to crash the boards for the rebound.

My take on James and Britt is more appreciation than admiration. I've never claimed they are star material, but I've always claimed they are good players. You'll see Britt's game a lot more next season as a Sr. leader, and no doubt in my mind be a leader with his play on a top ten team

More than a few commentators thought pretty much all of James's minutes might have gone to Hicks. It just looks -- seems -- that James didn't improve much, if any; and further, that in continuing to give James 7-10 mpg, Roy has held back Hicks's development.

Commentators are often more clueless than fans. They don't see the nuance of most players, they try to watch too many and speak in cliff notes.
Hicks is a thoroughbred colt of a player. The opposite of a player like Justin Jackson. His body is mature, but his mental game hasn't caught up to where it needs to be...but he's getting there..

I follow neither the NBA nor the European leagues. I don't know, maybe James is a sleeper, and will make money somewhere. He'll have to lose 20 pounds, and keep it off. You agree?

No. He's been in great shape his whole career at UNC. He's just a huge, strong guy. It's probably his greatest asset.

Your insistence that Roy got a lot of improvement out of James is so unpersuasive that -- in a sort of guilt-by-association way -- it harms your broader defense of Roy's coaching.

Again, if Roy is so bad, has marginal players, an outdated system, yada, yada, yada,...how does he keep winning? Somebody's assessments are just plain wrong on Roy William's coaching is what I see.

Do your UNC friends agree with you about James, or do they think you a bit loony on this (one) subject?

I actually don't have any UNC friends. I'm stuck in basketball hell in South Florida. When I do get a chance to talk basketball with people that follow UNC closely, some average fans do miss the big picture on a player like James. Students of the game don't.


The bold above is how I see it...

gumbomoop
05-18-2016, 09:14 AM
The bold above is how I see it...

Ok, we see James-things almost totally differently. I did see a little improvement, but nothing like what you saw. But you're a student of the game, I'm not.

You'll perhaps concede, however, that there are quite a number of students of the game on EK, and that one or two might stop by to challenge your perspective on how significantly James improved.

I'm not sure whether condolences or congratulations are in order re the fact -- unless it's a lying statistic -- that you have no UNC friends.

Wheat/"/"/"
05-18-2016, 09:31 AM
What you have not done in your comment is address the question of why Roy's players lag so far behind other programs in getting into the league as compared to like players from other schools.

Do you have any explanation or theory about this?

Yes. You are wrong. The latest list I saw has UNC 4th among schools with players in the NBA. And he's doing it without the padded stats of sure OAD's some other schools have had. Hardly "far behind".

You defend Roy's record which no one is attacking. Yes he does win a lot of games, that is not the question here. The question is why doesn't the players he recruits get to the league at the same pace that other teams players do? And, I will add another question, is Roy winning enough given that he has been to one FF in the past 7 years with these players you love how Roy is using and building his program? Is an ACC championship and FF trip once a decade the new standard at UNC?

Again, your premise starts out wrong about getting players to the league. You're relying on your perception, not facts.
You conveniently forget years like the Creighton cheap shot on Marshall that probably cost UNC a title. I don't have time to look up records and stats, but I'm confident UNC is right up there with other top programs the past seven years. .

And Joel James is your example of how Roy develops players? Next you'll be telling us how Kennedy Meeks has blossomed under Roy. And anyone who saw Brice Johnson play 3 years ago could have told you that he needed to be a stretch 4 and not a back to the basket post player. I would bet that his staying at UNC cost him millions in guaranteed money, but that is not something that we can ever truly know is it?

Meeks is improving. Where have all the fat jokes gone now that Roy has him in better shape? He's had injury issues and some head issues, but he's getting better.
Brice Johnson was hardly a sure thing out of HS and is now getting to the NBA. He's a better prepared, more well rounded player due to his coaching at UNC.


Here's my bolded response...

Wheat/"/"/"
05-18-2016, 09:38 AM
I could care less whether something about UNC is true or not...

And there we have it...spoken from high atop the mountain of the very feces that you sling daily.

Wheat/"/"/"
05-18-2016, 09:44 AM
Ok, we see James-things almost totally differently. I did see a little improvement, but nothing like what you saw. But you're a student of the game, I'm not.

You'll perhaps concede, however, that there are quite a number of students of the game on EK, and that one or two might stop by to challenge your perspective on how significantly James improved.

I'm not sure whether condolences or congratulations are in order re the fact -- unless it's a lying statistic -- that you have no UNC friends.

There used to be quite a few students of the game on the board...And I appreciated them all...now all I usually see is the same talking point crap from axe grinders. It really is a shame.

PackMan97
05-18-2016, 09:54 AM
And there we have it...spoken from high atop the mountain of the very feces that you sling daily.

You take this anonymous internet message board thing WAY too seriously. Besides, I'm just trying to get through to folks that amount of disgust and disdain I have for a program so lacking in honor and integrity as Carolina's. When I'm not playing "internet tough guy" I really do care that allegations against Carolina are truthful. The truth is so awful and saddening, that there is no reason to make stuff up.

Troublemaker
05-18-2016, 09:54 AM
Many people thought that Kinston kid Brandon Ingram would attend UNC instead of Duke. It would be interesting to take a peek at the alternate reality where that played out.

My take: Brandon started at the 2 at UNC and spent a lot of time making entry passes into Brice, Meeks, and Hicks. UNC fans are excited about the flashes of talent that Brandon displayed and hope that with an expanded role his sophomore season, he can make 3rd-team ACC and be a great complement to star big man and Senior Isaiah Hicks. And then, UNC fans believe Brandon will really take off his junior year to become 1st-team ACC after having spent 3 years building up strength on that wiry body. Under Roy and his strength and conditioning staff, UNC fans have complete confidence that Brandon will make the aforementioned amazing strides from freshman to junior years. Brandon will then leave for the draft after his junior year to become a late lottery pick. Afterall, Roy encourages his players to leave when it's time, unlike Rat-face K in Durham.

And scene. LOL - that's exactly how Brandon's career at UNC would've played out, right? I can't even find a counterargument.

Wheat/"/"/"
05-18-2016, 09:57 AM
OK, mon ami, but I am searching for a reason that UNC is unique in the college basketball world of retaining top five and top ten HS stars, who elsewhere are one-and-done. That's Part One. Part Two is that such highly rated players coming out of HS are not typically high draft picks when they do come out. Perhaps Part Two is evidence of back-sliding.



Earlier, I speculated on some reasons, such as:

Over-rated in HS
Lack of commitment to physical development
Style of play and substitution patterns not helping players develop NBA skills or hard-nosed commitment
"Wine, women, and song" as a Carolina basketball player


What's your explanation?

Kindly,
Sage Grouse

I think UNC's philosophy is to play system/team basketball first, (as opposed to highlighting an individual player) no matter a players talent level. And to prepare players for the long term, not just "get them to the league" as fast as possible. And that's a reason some players go elsewhere.

It's an instant gratification society we have these days, and I like that Roy and UNC steadfastly look at the bigger picture with all their players.

oldnavy
05-18-2016, 10:06 AM
Here's my bolded response...

Again, you are not addressing the primary question.

Why are players of similar rankings at various different programs going to the NBA sooner than players that attend UNC?

One theory is that they progress slower at UNC... I know you disagree with that, but how do you explain the statistical differences? You say I'm wrong, but then refer to an unrelated stat to support your argument.

Surely you understand the difference between, total number of players in the NBA and the question of when those players leave college to get to the NBA, and that is the question you do not even attempt to answer.

Why do players with similar rankings at other schools get drafted earlier than UNC players? What is your theory or explanation? Is it as simple as they love UNC so much they choose to forego the draft??? That answer would at least be relevant.

Wheat/"/"/"
05-18-2016, 10:10 AM
Many people thought that Kinston kid Brandon Ingram would attend UNC instead of Duke. It would be interesting to take a peek at the alternate reality where that played out.

My take: Brandon started at the 2 at UNC and spent a lot of time making entry passes into Brice, Meeks, and Hicks. UNC fans are excited about the flashes of talent that Brandon displayed and hope that with an expanded role his sophomore season, he can make 3rd-team ACC and be a great complement to star big man and Senior Isaiah Hicks. And then, UNC fans believe Brandon will really take off his junior year to become 1st-team ACC after having spent 3 years building up strength on that wiry body. Under Roy and his strength and conditioning staff, UNC fans have complete confidence that Brandon will make the aforementioned amazing strides from freshman to junior years. Brandon will then leave for the draft after his junior year to become a late lottery pick. Afterall, Roy encourages his players to leave when it's time, unlike Rat-face K in Durham.

And scene. LOL - that's exactly how Brandon's career at UNC would've played out, right? I can't even find a counterargument.

Ingram is a really unique talent, at least to me. I think he's the best player to come along since Anthony Davis.
Duke was a better fit for him for his obvious one year in college, and I had no problem with that. I don't know why it always seems to be a mark against one school or the other when a kid chooses the best situation for them.

oldnavy
05-18-2016, 10:16 AM
I think UNC's philosophy is to play system/team basketball first, (as opposed to highlighting an individual player) no matter a players talent level. And to prepare players for the long term, not just "get them to the league" as fast as possible. And that's a reason some players go elsewhere.

It's an instant gratification society we have these days, and I like that Roy and UNC steadfastly look at the bigger picture with all their players.

So, Roy is interested in grooming his players into a system that they will never see once in the NBA, and you think that this is in the best interest of the player? I tend to believe it is that Roy is too fixated on a system that was in vogue 20 years ago and either can't change or will not change.

Also, your statement implies that coaches that see players with unique talents and skills and who adapt their "system" to allow those players to excel and showcase those skills are less concerned about the players and more concerned with winning now, that instant gratification thing?

Am I reading you right?

Troublemaker
05-18-2016, 10:52 AM
Ingram is a really unique talent, at least to me. I think he's the best player to come along since Anthony Davis.
Duke was a better fit for him for his obvious one year in college, and I had no problem with that. I don't know why it always seems to be a mark against one school or the other when a kid chooses the best situation for them.

Yeah, but you guys recruited him HARD and he might very well have chosen UNC because of community ties (e.g. Stackhouse) and you wouldn't have had the hindsight of seeing how things worked out for him at Duke. Alternate Reality Wheat does not think Brandon Ingram is the best talent since Anthony Davis (which, while I love Brandon, is a stretch to me anyway). A.R.Wheat in two years is praising Roy for developing "stick figure" frosh Ingram into a mid-first round pick by his junior year.

Wheat/"/"/"
05-18-2016, 10:53 AM
Again, you are not addressing the primary question.

Why are players of similar rankings at various different programs going to the NBA sooner than players that attend UNC?

One theory is that they progress slower at UNC... I know you disagree with that, but how do you explain the statistical differences? You say I'm wrong, but then refer to an unrelated stat to support your argument.

Surely you understand the difference between, total number of players in the NBA and the question of when those players leave college to get to the NBA, and that is the question you do not even attempt to answer.

Why do players with similar rankings at other schools get drafted earlier than UNC players? What is your theory or explanation? Is it as simple as they love UNC so much they choose to forego the draft??? That answer would at least be relevant.

How many of those players you mention rush to the NBA and flame out when they could have been better prepared for a long career?

It's about how a coach chooses to run a program. His program. UNC is not focused on the one and done mentality. It's fine if other schools want to, but it's not they way Roy wants to do it. He has remained competitive doing it his way, so why not just live with it?

Wheat/"/"/"
05-18-2016, 10:57 AM
Yeah, but you guys recruited him HARD and he might very well have chosen UNC because of community ties (e.g. Stackhouse) and you wouldn't have had the hindsight of seeing how things worked out for him at Duke. Alternate Reality Wheat does not think Brandon Ingram is the best talent since Anthony Davis (which, while I love Brandon, is a stretch to me anyway). A.R.Wheat in two years is praising Roy for developing "stick figure" frosh Ingram into a mid-first round pick by his junior year.

Absolutely Roy wanted Ingram, who wouldn't? Roy always recruits the top players hard, and if the fit is right he gets his share. But he is not one to compromise his system/principles to get a single player, that's for sure.

Wheat/"/"/"
05-18-2016, 11:10 AM
So, Roy is interested in grooming his players into a system that they will never see once in the NBA, and you think that this is in the best interest of the player? I tend to believe it is that Roy is too fixated on a system that was in vogue 20 years ago and either can't change or will not change.

Also, your statement implies that coaches that see players with unique talents and skills and who adapt their "system" to allow those players to excel and showcase those skills are less concerned about the players and more concerned with winning now, that instant gratification thing?

Am I reading you right?

I think Roy is a college coach, not and NBA coach.
He wants players that he can win games with in college and enjoy coaching, ones that will accept his teachings to become better players. And he wants to prepare them for the future.
There are plenty of other opportunities out there for players who want a different approach than the system Roy has in place.

When Roy's players get to the NBA they are prepared for whatever system the NBA coach has.

flyingdutchdevil
05-18-2016, 11:37 AM
I think Roy is a college coach, not and NBA coach.
He wants players that he can win games with in college and enjoy coaching, ones that will accept his teachings to become better players. And he wants to prepare them for the future.
There are plenty of other opportunities out there for players who want a different approach than the system Roy has in place.

When Roy's players get to the NBA they are prepared for whatever system the NBA coach has.

Like Tyler Hansbrough, James McAdoo, Reggie Bullock, Kendall Marshall, and Tyler Zeller? All multi-year UNC players who "learned the system" at UNC only to underperform in the NBA?

Your narrative is really coming across as "it's not that Coach Roy can't recruit OADs, it's that he prefers multi-year players who under-achieve".

You know who used to carry that philosophy? Duke fans around a decade ago. We looked down on UK and KU for their OAD approach, and it turns out they were right all along. Coupled with veterans here and there (who aren't likely to be high-impact players in the NBA), it's a winning approach.

PackMan97
05-18-2016, 11:47 AM
I think Roy is a college coach, not and NBA coach.

When Roy's players get to the NBA they are prepared for whatever system the NBA coach has.

LOL!

How was the last NBA all-star that UNC has produced? Heck, when was the last solid NBA starter that UNC produced? Heck, only two UNC players currently in the NBA averaged over 10 point a game for their team and that was just barely.

Coaches are great because they adapt, they change and they keep winning. We all know the only reason Roy has won anything is because he and Carolina cheat.

Coach K is a coach that adapts as the game adapts. It's what makes him so successful.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
05-18-2016, 11:53 AM
I feel there's a level of dis-ingenuity going on here - Wheat's not totally wrong. If Duke were recruiting top tier talent that was sticking around for 2 or more years, we would be extolling K's ability to find "Duke guys" who value the right things. But since Duke is churning out OADs, we point to K's ability to mold talent and get them NBA ready.

Reality is probably somewhere in the middle. There's a lot of compromises that get made on all sides.

Channing
05-18-2016, 12:04 PM
Absolutely Roy wanted Ingram, who wouldn't? Roy always recruits the top players hard, and if the fit is right he gets his share. But he is not one to compromise his system/principles to get a single player, that's for sure.

Bull Hockey.

Roy recruits the highest ranked players he can find. He just hasn't been able to close the deal recently. The reason is not that he "won't compromise his system" (because we all know he would have taken those guys in a second. So, what is the reason? Is it the cheating scandal? Probably. Is it the fact that similarly ranked players go to the nba faster from other schools? probably.

Just looking at the current crop of high school seniors, Roy (and U(sic)NC) heavily recruited and would have loved:

Harry Giles
Dennis Smith
Bam Adebayo
Rawle Alkins
Sacha Killeya Jones

These players all decided they would be better off elsewhere (and...can you blame them?)

flyingdutchdevil
05-18-2016, 12:05 PM
I feel there's a level of dis-ingenuity going on here - Wheat's not totally wrong. If Duke were recruiting top tier talent that was sticking around for 2 or more years, we would be extolling K's ability to find "Duke guys" who value the right things. But since Duke is churning out OADs, we point to K's ability to mold talent and get them NBA ready.

Reality is probably somewhere in the middle. There's a lot of compromises that get made on all sides.

Like a decade ago? I'm willing to argue that Duke arguably held players a little too long and Coach K didn't like OAD because they didn't fit his philosophy, but the man has changed.

UNC, a decade ago, was like Duke now in terms of recruiting: getting nearly everyone they wanted, top 10 recruits left, right, and center, and players bolting to the NBA (Wright, Lawson, M Williams, etc). And we, as Duke fans, argued that Coach K was building a better program with kids who wanted to stay all four years and not recruit OADs. But we reversed that thinking with Austin Rivers (Kyrie was the first and set the precedent, but it didn't really hit until Rivers, IMO).

UNC is using the same argument that we used a decade ago.

Wheat/"/"/"
05-18-2016, 12:06 PM
Like Tyler Hansbrough, James McAdoo, Reggie Bullock, Kendall Marshall, and Tyler Zeller? All multi-year UNC players who "learned the system" at UNC only to underperform in the NBA?

Your narrative is really coming across as "it's not that Coach Roy can't recruit OADs, it's that he prefers multi-year players who under-achieve".

You know who used to carry that philosophy? Duke fans around a decade ago. We looked down on UK and KU for their OAD approach, and it turns out they were right all along. Coupled with veterans here and there (who aren't likely to be high-impact players in the NBA), it's a winning approach.

Yes, and they all prove my point. I don't think they've underperformed at all. Just done about what was reasonably expected of them as professionals.

None of the guys you mention are exceptionally talented NBA players, never were, just very solid, and they were well prepared by Roy to have long blue collar careers.

You might think "they were right all along" with a OAD approach...I don't happen to agree.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
05-18-2016, 12:09 PM
Like a decade ago? I'm willing to argue that Duke arguably held players a little too long and Coach K didn't like OAD because they didn't fit his philosophy, but the man has changed.

UNC, a decade ago, was like Duke now in terms of recruiting: getting nearly everyone they wanted, top 10 recruits left, right, and center, and players bolting to the NBA (Wright, Lawson, M Williams, etc). And we, as Duke fans, argued that Coach K was building a better program with kids who wanted to stay all four years and not recruit OADs. But we reversed that thinking with Austin Rivers (Kyrie was the first and set the precedent, but it didn't really hit until Rivers, IMO).

UNC is using the same argument that we used a decade ago.

Right... that's my point. Both sides have conveniently moved the goalposts to match the circumstances. It's what fans do, I suppose.

PackMan97
05-18-2016, 12:14 PM
I feel there's a level of dis-ingenuity going on here - Wheat's not totally wrong. If Duke were recruiting top tier talent that was sticking around for 2 or more years, we would be extolling K's ability to find "Duke guys" who value the right things. But since Duke is churning out OADs, we point to K's ability to mold talent and get them NBA ready.

I've always felt that Duke was able to get top talents to stay because the could recruit the upper middle class stars with great academics that didn't need the money.

Guys like Grant Hil, Shane Battier, Trajan Langdan, Seth Curry, Mike Dunleavy, JJ Reddick, the Plumlees. Let's face it, if you are a top 15 talent from a well off family and good at school...chances are you'll be a Duke player :)

It's rare for other schools to land these types of players when Duke comes calling. Think of all the "NBA" guys that State lands. Heck, we have guys leave early even when they aren't NBA prospsects because they need to get to Europe and start making what money they can make. Carolina occassionally gets guys like this with Jon Henson (whose dad is a very succesful corporate executive) or sometimes they create them buy giving Hansboroughs mom and very nice job "fund raising" while flying around the country watching her kid's games for free.

tl;dr - When a duke players stays four years it's because they value education, don't need the money and are enjoying the college experience. When Carolina gets a kid to stay four years, it's because they cheat. When state gets a players to stay for four years it's because they suck. I think that sums it up :)

Wheat/"/"/"
05-18-2016, 12:15 PM
Like a decade ago? I'm willing to argue that Duke arguably held players a little too long and Coach K didn't like OAD because they didn't fit his philosophy, but the man has changed.

UNC, a decade ago, was like Duke now in terms of recruiting: getting nearly everyone they wanted, top 10 recruits left, right, and center, and players bolting to the NBA (Wright, Lawson, M Williams, etc). And we, as Duke fans, argued that Coach K was building a better program with kids who wanted to stay all four years and not recruit OADs. But we reversed that thinking with Austin Rivers (Kyrie was the first and set the precedent, but it didn't really hit until Rivers, IMO).

UNC is using the same argument that we used a decade ago.

I'm not arguing UNC is building anything better by not going the OAD route hard...just that they are doing just fine doing it their way.

RepoMan
05-18-2016, 12:38 PM
UNC is not focused on the one and done mentality. It's fine if other schools want to, but it's not they way Roy wants to do it.

Ha Ha Ha Ha. Good one.

RepoMan
05-18-2016, 12:42 PM
When a duke players stays four years it's because they value education, don't need the money and are enjoying the college experience. When Carolina gets a kid to stay four years, it's because they cheat. When state gets a players to stay for four years it's because they suck. I think that sums it up :)

Dude, you are on a roll!!!

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
05-18-2016, 01:00 PM
I'm not arguing UNC is building anything better by not going the OAD route hard...just that they are doing just fine doing it their way.

It is curious the everyone seems to be piling on Roy's ineffective system when you were one miracle shot away from a national championship.

flyingdutchdevil
05-18-2016, 01:07 PM
It is curious the everyone seems to be piling on Roy's ineffective system when you were one miracle shot away from a national championship.

I'll be the first to admit that Roy was super successful today and that the recruiting players for four years (a la Nova and UVa) is incredibly successful. But Wheat - who I normally support - seems to think that Roy would rather have it this way and that it leads to players thriving in the NBA. Rather, it's that a) Roy can't get OADs anymore despite trying really hard and b) his players get better but rarely get better to be impactful in the NBA.

And now, with good talent next year and arguably not so good talent the year after, UNC will continue this false narrative of "Roy likes to build programs and players rather than renting OADs" nonsense.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
05-18-2016, 01:11 PM
I'll be the first to admit that Roy was super successful today and that the recruiting players for four years (a la Nova and UVa) is incredibly successful. But Wheat - who I normally support - seems to think that Roy would rather have it this way and that it leads to players thriving in the NBA. Rather, it's that a) Roy can't get OADs anymore despite trying really hard and b) his players get better but rarely get better to be impactful in the NBA.

And now, with good talent next year and arguably not so good talent the year after, UNC will continue this false narrative of "Roy likes to build programs and players rather than renting OADs" nonsense.

Which, sounds quite similar to what Duke fans said, pre-Kyrie/Austin/Jabari, et al.

jipops
05-18-2016, 01:51 PM
How many of those players you mention rush to the NBA and flame out when they could have been better prepared for a long career?

It's about how a coach chooses to run a program. His program. UNC is not focused on the one and done mentality. It's fine if other schools want to, but it's not they way Roy wants to do it. He has remained competitive doing it his way, so why not just live with it?

You have made some reasonable counter-arguments in your array of posts to the "axe-grinders", but this one is a total load of garbage. Just because Roy didn't land all the guys he wanted (likely due to the scandal) doesn't mean he didn't want them in the first place.

Roy, like every other major program coach, first and foremost wants to win. Period. That pretty much means going after the best available talent on the recruiting trail. Roy is not withholding a recruiting offer to a kid just because he might be too talented to stay more than one year. If you think that is true you are deluding yourself.

He has remained competitive by continuing to have very talented players that have the advantage of experience. It also helps to have college tweeners who are exceptionally talented at the college level yet are either too small or slow for their corresponding position at the next level. This is the type of benefit Duke reaped in 2010.

But, puhlease. Don't pretend there is some sort of righteousness in Roy's methods.

MChambers
05-18-2016, 02:11 PM
It is curious the everyone seems to be piling on Roy's ineffective system when you were one miracle shot away from a national championship.
One great shot (not a miracle) away from overtime. Game was tied.

jipops
05-18-2016, 02:30 PM
It is curious the everyone seems to be piling on Roy's ineffective system when you were one miracle shot away from a national championship.

Yea, no kidding. If that shot doesn't go down and the cheats win in overtime, then a lot of people would have been forced to come up with different narratives. He still wins and he continues to have very talented teams with experience. He's not doing anything special compared to other coaches and he's not failing in ways that other coaches aren't (other than off the court stuff and the scandal of course). There is likely a large pool of major program coaches who could be plugged in to Roy's role and produce similar results. Likewise, you can plug Roy in to UK or Duke (nausea rising, the HORROR!!!) and the W/L results wouldn't change much from what we see today, despite changes in philosophy and offensive approach.

DukieInBrasil
05-18-2016, 02:39 PM
Yes, and they all prove my point. I don't think they've underperformed at all. Just done about what was reasonably expected of them as professionals.

None of the guys you mention are exceptionally talented NBA players, never were, just very solid, and they were well prepared by Roy to have long blue collar careers.

You might think "they were right all along" with a OAD approach...I don't happen to agree.

McAdoo is barely an NBA player, hardly plays at all. Mega-talented physically but not all that good as an NBA level player.
Hansbrough is the all-time ACC scoring leader (overtaking JJ Redick), and is a reasonable sub (while JJ is a starter on a playoff team).
Marshall was brilliant at UNC largely b/c he played with some good college players and in the NBA is a moderately useful reserve.
Zeller was always highly regarded as a prospect had a great career at UNC and is a useful bench player.
Bullock leveraged a couple of excellent years at UNC into the NBA draft and is a marginally useful bench player.

Which of them is accomplishing what was reasonably expected of them in the NBA?
McAdoo and Marshall probably, but not if you compare that expectation with their pre-UNC laurels or even with their UNC performance.
Bullock was drafted in the 1st round, i would say being buried on the bench averaging 3ppg is not living up to expectations.
The all-time leading scorer in ACC history has never been a starter for a full season but has had a solid, lucrative NBA career, as a mid-level backup player.
Zeller is the only one of the bunch i would say comes even close to your standard: a 1st round pick, was a starter for much of one season, and is a +bench player.

PackMan97
05-18-2016, 02:43 PM
Yea, no kidding. If that shot doesn't go down and the cheats win in overtime, then a lot of people would have been forced to come up with different narratives.

I need no other narrative other than UNC is the biggest cheater in the history of college basketball*

*modern era

jacone21
05-18-2016, 03:25 PM
I need no other narrative other than UNC is the biggest cheater in the history of college basketball*

*modern era

Agreed. My feelings are summed up perfectly in devildeac's sig line, which reads,

"[redacted] them and the horses they rode in on."

jv001
05-18-2016, 03:25 PM
One great shot (not a miracle) away from overtime. Game was tied.

Paige's shot was more of a miracle in my eyes :cool:. That's the shot that tied the game. GoDuke!

Wheat/"/"/"
05-18-2016, 03:57 PM
You have made some reasonable counter-arguments in your array of posts to the "axe-grinders", but this one is a total load of garbage. Just because Roy didn't land all the guys he wanted (likely due to the scandal) doesn't mean he didn't want them in the first place....

But, puhlease. Don't pretend there is some sort of righteousness in Roy's methods.


Where did I ever say Roy didn't want them in the first place? (OAD's he recruited).

Of course he did, he recruited them. But he also makes it clear to them their role and how they will play in his system. He's a system coach and wants players to fit that system, the more talented players he can get, the better. But he will run his system. It's his way, and I'm not trying to claim it's any better or worse than any other way.

Boheim at Syracuse is the same way. Self too, and even Pitino looks for players to fit specific notions what he wants them to be able to do.

Coach K and Calipari for example, are more interested in getting the top talents and then coach to the players strengths more so over a system. That's fine and its successful too. The sure fire OAD's like that these days because they know their strengths will be showcased for their one year.

It's all good. There's no need no need for people to trash Roy just because he's taking a different path than coach K to successfully coach his team.

weezie
05-18-2016, 04:27 PM
One great shot (not a miracle) away from overtime. Game was tied.

Soooo close, yet so verrrrry far away....:cool:

jipops
05-18-2016, 05:50 PM
I need no other narrative other than UNC is the biggest cheater in the history of college basketball*

*modern era

That may be more fact than narrative.

jipops
05-18-2016, 05:56 PM
Where did I ever say Roy didn't want them in the first place? (OAD's he recruited).

Of course he did, he recruited them. But he also makes it clear to them their role and how they will play in his system. He's a system coach and wants players to fit that system, the more talented players he can get, the better. But he will run his system. It's his way, and I'm not trying to claim it's any better or worse than any other way.

Boheim at Syracuse is the same way. Self too, and even Pitino looks for players to fit specific notions what he wants them to be able to do.

Coach K and Calipari for example, are more interested in getting the top talents and then coach to the players strengths more so over a system. That's fine and its successful too. The sure fire OAD's like that these days because they know their strengths will be showcased for their one year.

It's all good. There's no need no need for people to trash Roy just because he's taking a different path than coach K to successfully coach his team.

Nice course correction there.

I think there are other reasons for fans to trash Roy that don't have anything to do with his on-court coaching philosophy. And you shouldn't be remotely surprised at a Duke fan board trashing him, even one as above grade as this one.

I personally don't feel like K and Roy are trying to build their teams as differently as you and others on this board let on. But yes, there are of course nuanced differences. Neither one is wrong and neither has anything to do with determining how a kid is going to get drafted.

CarmenWallaceWade
05-18-2016, 08:16 PM
ESPN 2014 recruit rankings. Interesting when you look at how many of the top 20 are still playing in college. I'm sure Jackson, Pinson and Berry all value their college experience and team basketball more than a lucrative NBA contract, because obviously UNC's program has already developed them to make the leap.

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/basketball/recruiting/playerrankings/_/class/2014/order/true

UrinalCake
05-18-2016, 11:19 PM
Interesting quote but it does nothing to dispel my opinion on this. The quote does not say he is the same player as a freshman because he is at unc. It's just that he is.

How about this one:


He kind of became one-dimensional at North Carolina. I'm not a Hall of Fame coach, but I think a lot of his offensive instincts got suppressed within that system, or within his head. He just wasn't the same guy.

Said an ACC coach: "I think he's a good shooter. Their system is so different. Everything they do is a little bit different. A lot doesn't translate from their system to the NBA, other than they learn to play with other good players."

http://www.nba.com/news/features/david_aldridge/david-aldridge-big-board-small-forwards-2016-nba-draft/index.html

oldnavy
05-19-2016, 06:42 AM
I think Roy is a college coach, not and NBA coach.
He wants players that he can win games with in college and enjoy coaching, ones that will accept his teachings to become better players. And he wants to prepare them for the future.
There are plenty of other opportunities out there for players who want a different approach than the system Roy has in place.

When Roy's players get to the NBA they are prepared for whatever system the NBA coach has.

So the closest thing you have said that remotely looks like an answer to the question is that Roy is a college coach and not an NBA coach.

I realize that most of us didn't go to UNC, but I think we had that one figured out already, but thanks for clearing it up for us internet idiots.

Based on your defense, one has to assume that you feel that the players at UNC although rated as high or higher than players at other colleges choose to stay in college longer than their peers to become better prepared for the future and better teammates for their future NBA teams.

This fits with what we on the outside of the UNC fandom like to call the UNC BS. Basically what you are saying is UNC players and their system just have higher goals and more lofty ambitions than the rest of the BB world... news flash, this is the same old crap that has been coming out of CH for decades, most of us weren't buying it then and we sure as hell aren't buying it now!

UNC's system which includes Dean, and Roy (forget the other two, nobody care about them) designed a way to keep students OUT of class rooms and away from any real preparation for the future for the sole purpose of producing winning BB teams. They either endorsed the cheating or at the minimum looked the other way. I'll go with the former.

So, forgive us if we laugh at your attempt to place UNC back up on that pedestal... that ship has sailed, never to return. But you conveniently like to dodge that issue despite it being of supreme importance in any discussion of the UNC system.

Oh, and I am happy with how Roy is running his system and the players he recruits... they are "just" good enough to keep hope alive and produce one FF team in what was a very down year in men's college basketball. Roy was voted most overrated coach by his peers for a reason...

Jimmy Valvano told a funny story about his barber commenting on "what Dean Smith could have done with Norm Sloan's two teams that went 50 something and 1 and won a NC"...

My question would be.... imagine what Jimmy Valvano could have done with the talent that has run through CH in the past 8 years?

I will give you loyalty points though. I know a TON of UNC fans and not a single one I have spoken to in the past several years has anywhere near the level of respect for Roy that you do. I have actually wondered at times if you are a close relative of his, seriously.

You are a very, very good fan.

elvis14
05-19-2016, 09:47 AM
It is curious the everyone seems to be piling on Roy's ineffective system when you were one miracle shot away from a national championship.

Going into last year, you could look at all the top programs, like Duke and UK, and see two things: first the better teams lost lots of guys to the draft or as seniors and second, there weren't any great teams in CBB. As the year played on we saw an unprecedented number of losses by top ranked teams. Why? Because there weren't any great teams. So yes, the cheaters did make it to the finals. But they weren't a great team, just an experienced team in the right place at the right time. And with the loss of Paige and Johnson, and continued 2nd rate recruiting they will be worse this year and even worse the year after.

Note, UNCheat will be pretty good next season. After that their recruiting misses will start to catch up with them as they take on the mid-major model of a team that's good every couple of years as their better players become seniors and they have men playing against kids. Sadly, it appears that the toothless, gutless NCAA is going to let them skate on 20+ years of cheating so we won't see the appropriate loss of scholarships or post seasons bans (or vacated, ill begotten wins). 9F, cheaters!

Back in the day, Cheater fans accused Coach K of only caring about Duke winning and that's why he 'made' players stay additional years. Now Cheater fans accuse Coach K of only caring about Duke winning and that's why he does the OAD. Whatever.

tux
05-19-2016, 10:03 AM
Every college coach would happily take the very best players every year (if they qualify academically -- and many would be more than happy to find a way to still take them). But there's no reason to spend a ton of time, energy, and resources recruiting top-20 talent if the probability is very low of getting a commitment. Duke, UK, Kansas, Michigan St, and UNC (until the scandal) were more than happy competing for that top-20 (or top-10) talent. Beyond that, I'm sure coaches also evaluate players on overall fit (and need), and also decide how likely they are to get a commitment.

When teams start losing out on OAD talent (like UNC), their fans start to claim that's all just part of some master plan. When teams start getting more OAD talent that leaves early, their fans of course claim that's all just part of some master plan. It's an ongoing propaganda war among fan bases, more than a reflection of the coaches. They absolutely want the best talent, b/c that's how you win consistently and win big. And it turns out that winning consistently and winning big is good for a coach's career and bank account...

sammy3469
05-19-2016, 10:07 AM
Just to add some fuel to the argument, here's the draftexpress write-up on Marcus Paige. It's sort of gotten lost in the last couple of pages, but one of the initial criticisms of Roy was that his guys don't develop physically. Seems like that problem afflicts Paige as well.


Paige isn't an exceptional athlete and his measurables are average for a NBA guard, so he will have to prove he is skilled enough to impact the game on a regular basis against more physically gifted players. He was last measured at 6'2”, (albeit with a solid 6'6” wingspan) and still possesses a narrow 164 pound frame which hasn't added much weight since our first measurement back in 2011 (156 pounds).


http://www.draftexpress.com/article/Marcus-Paige-Updated-NBA-Draft-Scouting-Report-5490/

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
05-19-2016, 10:16 AM
Going into last year, you could look at all the top programs, like Duke and UK, and see two things: first the better teams lost lots of guys to the draft or as seniors and second, there weren't any great teams in CBB. As the year played on we saw an unprecedented number of losses by top ranked teams. Why? Because there weren't any great teams. So yes, the cheaters did make it to the finals. But they weren't a great team, just an experienced team in the right place at the right time. And with the loss of Paige and Johnson, and continued 2nd rate recruiting they will be worse this year and even worse the year after.

Note, UNCheat will be pretty good next season. After that their recruiting misses will start to catch up with them as they take on the mid-major model of a team that's good every couple of years as their better players become seniors and they have men playing against kids. Sadly, it appears that the toothless, gutless NCAA is going to let them skate on 20+ years of cheating so we won't see the appropriate loss of scholarships or post seasons bans (or vacated, ill begotten wins). 9F, cheaters!

Back in the day, Cheater fans accused Coach K of only caring about Duke winning and that's why he 'made' players stay additional years. Now Cheater fans accuse Coach K of only caring about Duke winning and that's why he does the OAD. Whatever.

This is precisely my point. I'm certainly not defending Roy's coaching or development of players. I'm just noting that since we and the Holes fans have conveniently flipflopped our narratives on one-and-dones v. player development that it doesn't really ring true for either fan base. How about Grayson Allen? Is he a talent that K has failed to develop properly? Or is he a "Duke guy" who loves being in school and understands the value of an education? How about Marcus Paige? Did Roy fail to advise him properly to go pro a few years ago, or does he just value academics and loves the college life?

Toe-May-Toe, Toe-Mah-Toe.

It's fun to poke at Roy and his refusal to use timeouts or make in game adjustments, but saying UNC was within a shot of a natty only because it was a down year just sounds silly.

flyingdutchdevil
05-19-2016, 10:29 AM
This is precisely my point. I'm certainly not defending Roy's coaching or development of players. I'm just noting that since we and the Holes fans have conveniently flipflopped our narratives on one-and-dones v. player development that it doesn't really ring true for either fan base. How about Grayson Allen? Is he a talent that K has failed to develop properly? Or is he a "Duke guy" who loves being in school and understands the value of an education? How about Marcus Paige? Did Roy fail to advise him properly to go pro a few years ago, or does he just value academics and loves the college life?

Mtn Devil, we are on the same page (and maybe the same Paige as well). Narratives have definitely changed. But what makes me upset is the denial from fans.

UNC fans: admit that while your model works, it only works because you can't get OADs. Furthermore, you have a poor track record of getting players to the NBA who are either highly-ranked recruits or performed well in college.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
05-19-2016, 10:35 AM
Mtn Devil, we are on the same page (and maybe the same Paige as well). Narratives have definitely changed. But what makes me upset is the denial from fans.

UNC fans: admit that while your model works, it only works because you can't get OADs. Furthermore, you have a poor track record of getting players to the NBA who are either highly-ranked recruits or performed well in college.

As devil's advocate, here's my retort... Duke HAS to hustle on the recruiting trail every year because their top tier talent leaves for the NBA and their next-tier guys transfer to get out of the way of the next group coming in behind them.

At any rate, neither model is perfect. Ours certainly seems to be rolling, but to suggest that UNC is a complete wash is just absurd considering the success they had last year.

Of course, I'll take K over Roy any day of the week and twice on Sundays.

English
05-19-2016, 10:37 AM
This is precisely my point. I'm certainly not defending Roy's coaching or development of players. I'm just noting that since we and the Holes fans have conveniently flipflopped our narratives on one-and-dones v. player development that it doesn't really ring true for either fan base. How about Grayson Allen? Is he a talent that K has failed to develop properly? Or is he a "Duke guy" who loves being in school and understands the value of an education? How about Marcus Paige? Did Roy fail to advise him properly to go pro a few years ago, or does he just value academics and loves the college life?

Toe-May-Toe, Toe-Mah-Toe.

It's fun to poke at Roy and his refusal to use timeouts or make in game adjustments, but saying UNC was within a shot of a natty only because it was a down year just sounds silly.

While your point certainly has merit, using Grayson and Paige as supporting examples isn't super helpful since both of these guys were sub-20 recruits. Grayson was RSCI #24, so him staying multiple years isn't some indicting anomaly on K's resume. Guys in that range frequently stay in CBB multiple years (and Grayson found his way onto the 1st rd mocks of several NBA draft sites across two years). Similarly, Paige was RSCI #28.

Better examples would be Singler...and the LOOOONG list of UNC guys in the top-15 that stayed beyond their expected departure date.

And I also agree that saying CBB was down last year, and that's the only reason UNC made the natty title game is disingenuous...they also had a historically easy path to the title game, too. #KindaSortaSarcasm

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
05-19-2016, 10:42 AM
While your point certainly has merit, using Grayson and Paige as supporting examples isn't super helpful since both of these guys were sub-20 recruits. Grayson was RSCI #24, so him staying multiple years isn't some indicting anomaly on K's resume. Guys in that range frequently stay in CBB multiple years (and Grayson found his way onto the 1st rd mocks of several NBA draft sites across two years). Similarly, Paige was RSCI #28.

Better examples would be Singler...and the LOOOONG list of UNC guys in the top-15 that stayed beyond their expected departure date.

And I also agree that saying CBB was down last year, and that's the only reason UNC made the natty title game is disingenuous...they also had a historically easy path to the title game, too. #KindaSortaSarcasm

Fair, but my point was more toward how perspective skews our narrative in regards to "us" and "them."

UrinalCake
05-19-2016, 10:46 AM
A few points in response to the current discussion:

- Grayson was ranked RSCI #24 coming out of high school, one spot above Joel Berry. A player in that range staying three years is to be expected. He did, however, make the single greatest increase in scoring from his freshman to sophomore years in ACC history, so I'd say K has done a pretty good job developing him. And yes, he does fit the mold of a guy who loves school and chose to come back when he could have gone, but I think he was a borderline first round pick at best, so he was kind of on the edge of whether or not he should go.

- Roy has recruited and offered all of the top players, he's just not getting them. On one of the other boards, someone posted that out of the 50 players who comprise the top 25 in the 2015 and 2016 classes, Roy has offered 28 of them and landed none. UNC fans have created this dialog that Roy CHOOSES not to go after one and done's because he cares so much about education, but the reality is that they are not choosing him.

- If Villanova's miracle shot hadn't gone in, the score would have been TIED. UNC fans seem to forget this. They keep claiming that they would have won the title if not for that shot, whereas in reality the game was yet to be decided.

flyingdutchdevil
05-19-2016, 10:52 AM
A few points in response to the current discussion:

- Grayson was ranked RSCI #24 coming out of high school, one spot above Joel Berry. A player in that range staying three years is to be expected. He did, however, make the single greatest increase in scoring from his freshman to sophomore years in ACC history, so I'd say K has done a pretty good job developing him. And yes, he does fit the mold of a guy who loves school and chose to come back when he could have gone, but I think he was a borderline first round pick at best, so he was kind of on the edge of whether or not he should go.

- Roy has recruited and offered all of the top players, he's just not getting them. On one of the other boards, someone posted that out of the 50 players who comprise the top 25 in the 2015 and 2016 classes, Roy has offered 28 of them and landed none. UNC fans have created this dialog that Roy CHOOSES not to go after one and done's because he cares so much about education, but the reality is that they are not choosing him.

- If Villanova's miracle shot hadn't gone in, the score would have been TIED. UNC fans seem to forget this. They keep claiming that they would have won the title if not for that shot, whereas in reality the game was yet to be decided.

Yes! A point that really irritates me. "Ingram, Giles, Dennis Smith? We don't want them! We like our own players!" Although, same thing could be said for Duke fans a few years back with Harrison Barnes, amongst other players.

Also, from what I have gathered, Grayson and Paige are academic studs. School is very important to them. This is unlike most recruits at either school (it's not to say that academics aren't important, it's that getting your degree trumps basketball on the next level). They probably aren't the greatest examples of players who should leave early because, in fairness, school is very important to them.

English
05-19-2016, 10:58 AM
Yes! A point that really irritates me. "Ingram, Giles, Dennis Smith? We don't want them! We like our own players!" Although, same thing could be said for Duke fans a few years back with Harrison Barnes, amongst other players.

Did this really happen WRT Barnes? I don't recall that at all for Duke fans. I recall everyone was super salty at the way the commitment went down, but at no point do I remember anyway saying 'eh, we didn't want the #1 recruit, that K recruited for five years, anyway."

Now, it probably did happen for Pat Patterson and Greg Monroe, which is obviously laughable, but Barnes is another (horror) story.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
05-19-2016, 11:06 AM
Yes! A point that really irritates me. "Ingram, Giles, Dennis Smith? We don't want them! We like our own players!" Although, same thing could be said for Duke fans a few years back with Harrison Barnes, amongst other players.

As pointed out below, again, the same could be said for Duke fans. Many here thought that losing Barnes was going to signify the end of the universe. As soon as he chose the cheaters, he became public enemy number one, and if you read the NBA threads, he c

Also, from what I have gathered, Grayson and Paige are academic studs. School is very important to them. This is unlike most recruits at either school (it's not to say that academics aren't important, it's that getting your degree trumps basketball on the next level). They probably aren't the greatest examples of players who should leave early because, in fairness, school is very important to them.[/QUOTE]

I chose them because they seem to be clear parallels in the two programs. Certainly, I hope that Grayson transcends over the next year (or two!) and becomes an NBA stud like Paige could never match. My point wasn't the players, it was the skewed narratives that we, as fans choose.

Much like up above, making the point over and over the UNC wasn't going to win the Villanova game if the buzzer beater doesn't go in, that rather it would go to OT. It doesn't friggin matter - the point being made is that UNC was basically a coin flip from being the champion. But it is, of course, as a Duke fan, fun to remind the baby blues that it wasn't just a fluke.

We're Duke fans - we do it just as bad as everyone else when it comes to telling our story and our narrative in regards to our players and the players for our rivals. It's part of fandom on all sides.

devildeac
05-19-2016, 11:14 AM
While your point certainly has merit, using Grayson and Paige as supporting examples isn't super helpful since both of these guys were sub-20 recruits. Grayson was RSCI #24, so him staying multiple years isn't some indicting anomaly on K's resume. Guys in that range frequently stay in CBB multiple years (and Grayson found his way onto the 1st rd mocks of several NBA draft sites across two years). Similarly, Paige was RSCI #28.

Better examples would be Singler...and the LOOOONG list of UNC guys in the top-15 that stayed beyond their expected departure date.

And I also agree that saying CBB was down last year, and that's the only reason UNC made the natty title game is disingenuous...they also had a historically easy path to the title game, too. #KindaSortaSarcasm

And Kris Jenkins is still my hero ;) .

jipops
05-19-2016, 12:37 PM
How about this one:



http://www.nba.com/news/features/david_aldridge/david-aldridge-big-board-small-forwards-2016-nba-draft/index.html

The comment from the scout is notable. It does throw out a notion that the cheats' system could have affected Justin, not that he/she offers any specifics on how this may have happened. What about about the system "suppressed" him? And this comment does not acknowledge some pattern by unc that generally prevents a kid from developing, which has been the prevailing argument in this thread. However the scout did add that he got better this year. Also note the scout did add "in his head", which goes back to my point of it being on the player more so than being a product of some system. The comment from the ACC coach, I believe, you have to throw out. Or are we to believe that coaches don't have agendas? The basic critique theme for Justin is simply making shots.

I've beaten this horse but I'll beat it again. I have nothing but disdain for unc. My argument is on the basic premise that a kid's ability to get to the next level has little or nothing to do with what major college program that kid plays for. It's a sales pitch, narrative, or talking point. But it's not real.

I'll add this nugget to my argument: The major college program that a player chooses to attend is vastly more impactful to what that kid does in his life after basketball than what he does in life during basketball. But even then, a lot is up to him.

English
05-19-2016, 01:02 PM
The comment from the scout is notable. It does throw out a notion that the cheats' system could have affected Justin, not that he/she offers any specifics on how this may have happened. What about about the system "suppressed" him? And this comment does not acknowledge some pattern by unc that generally prevents a kid from developing, which has been the prevailing argument in this thread. However the scout did add that he got better this year. Also note the scout did add "in his head", which goes back to my point of it being on the player more so than being a product of some system. The comment from the ACC coach, I believe, you have to throw out. Or are we to believe that coaches don't have agendas? The basic critique theme for Justin is simply making shots.

I've beaten this horse but I'll beat it again. I have nothing but disdain for unc. My argument is on the basic premise that a kid's ability to get to the next level has little or nothing to do with what major college program that kid plays for. It's a sales pitch, narrative, or talking point. But it's not real.

I'll add this nugget to my argument: The major college program that a player chooses to attend is vastly more impactful to what that kid does in his life after basketball than what he does in life during basketball. But even then, a lot is up to him.

So basically, all college coaches are equal in terms of developing the players on their team? If you're a college coach, you know what you're doing WRT basketball, and so, you have no impact whatsoever on the development of the players in your program--whether they come to play for you for one, two, three, four, or five years is immaterial to the impact you, as his coach, have on a player making it to the next level? If a player doesn't make it, or gets drafted in the second round vs. the first round, or ends up in Europe, that has no reflection under any circumstance on the coach's ability to develop and utilize that player?

I respectfully disagree. I agree as far as guys like Andrew Wiggins, Anthony Davis, KAT, and Jahlil Okafor go--those guys were NBA bound in any program. However, those are the 0.0001%-ers.

blUDAYvil
05-19-2016, 01:09 PM
A few points in response to the current discussion:

- Grayson was ranked RSCI #24 coming out of high school, one spot above Joel Berry. A player in that range staying three years is to be expected. He did, however, make the single greatest increase in scoring from his freshman to sophomore years in ACC history, so I'd say K has done a pretty good job developing him. And yes, he does fit the mold of a guy who loves school and chose to come back when he could have gone, but I think he was a borderline first round pick at best, so he was kind of on the edge of whether or not he should go.


Not to take anything away from Grayson's historic improvement, but one could argue that Grayson was under-utilized as a freshman. In this argument, Coach K and Duke are blamed for "holding him back" as opposed to credited for developing him between his freshman and sophomore seasons. Just to be clear, I'm not making this argument. Just supporting the point being made by others here - we see the world through blue tinted glasses.

English
05-19-2016, 01:15 PM
Not to take anything away from Grayson's historic improvement, but one could argue that Grayson was under-utilized as a freshman. In this argument, Coach K and Duke are blamed for "holding him back" as opposed to credited for developing him between his freshman and sophomore seasons. Just to be clear, I'm not making this argument. Just supporting the point being made by others here - we see the world through blue tinted glasses.

If K utilized Grayson better as a freshman, Duke could've won TWO nattys!

PackMan97
05-19-2016, 01:54 PM
Not to take anything away from Grayson's historic improvement, but one could argue that Grayson was under-utilized as a freshman.

If you win a Natty, I think all is forgiven.

I don't disagree with the thought that K does hold some kids "back" because he doesn't play them as much as they might play on another team...but then again that's a choice a kid makes going to a team with a lot of talent. You trade minutes for visilbity and winning. In the end when a guy like Grayson steps up once those ahead of him are gone you see the devleopment or emergence if you will. Lately at Carolina that "stepping up" isn't happening. Guys aren't becoming "the man" at Carolina.

Indoor66
05-19-2016, 02:00 PM
If you win a Natty, I think all is forgiven.

I don't disagree with the thought that K does hold some kids "back" because he doesn't play them as much as they might play on another team...but then again that's a choice a kid makes going to a team with a lot of talent. You trade minutes for visilbity and winning. In the end when a guy like Grayson steps up once those ahead of him are gone you see the devleopment or emergence if you will. Lately at Carolina that "stepping up" isn't happening. Guys aren't becoming "the man" at Carolina.

But that's because it is all about the WOmen over there. Just ask Bubba. :cool:

elvis14
05-19-2016, 03:10 PM
And I also agree that saying CBB was down last year, and that's the only reason UNCheat made the natty title game is disingenuous...they also had a historically easy path to the title game, too. #KindaSortaSarcasm

I think if it was only AFTER UNCheat made a run that people were saying it was down year that would be disingenuous. But not when we looked at CBB scene BEFORE the season even started and recognized that it was going to be a down year and that someone might steal one (like a team full of guys that had lost 10+ games year in, year out and had brought in nobody). I think quite a few of us were worried about that scenario and it almost played out. Thank God for Chris Jenkins!

I've not said anything about their tournament path. Every year all I hear is that the NCAA loves Duke so much that they give us a free ride.

As for developing players. I think that Coach K does a very good job of developing both players and young men. Some players (Jahlil) are going to make the NBA no matter what, but I do think that having a college coach that works for you can make you a better player, a better NBA prospect and a better young man.

luvdahops
05-19-2016, 03:23 PM
As one of the instigators of this debate, let me offer a few things up:

-This is not, in my view, a value judgment on which “system” is better. Trust me when I say that I’ve spent plenty of time over the years screaming at K to put more structure in the offense (especially as we were blowing big second half leads), to play a deeper rotation/force-feed younger guys minutes and let them play through their mistakes, to not reflexively go small at the first sign of trouble, etc.

-I happen to believe that the track record of Roy and staff in terms of player development is generally pretty strong. IMHO, the vast majority of Carolina players improve during their time in the program. And the structure can still absolutely succeed at the NCAA level, especially with the right mix of talent and experience.

-Nonetheless, it should be crystal clear to most that Carolina has not been competing well for the truly elite recruits (i.e. top 5-10, depending on class) in recent years. We can argue over how much of this has to do with the system, versus the scandal, versus the increasingly unflattering data around getting top guys to the league quickly (and maybe even the occasional backing away due to character or academic or other “fit” issues). But the basic point can’t really be disputed, as underscored by the fact that the Heels were never a serious contender for elite in-state guys like Harry Giles and Dennis Smith.

-IMHO, while the scandal has undoubtedly been a factor, Carolina’s recruiting slide was already evident prior to the scandal breaking big (e.g. Wanstein, NOA). It has just accelerated, perhaps become more entrenched in the time since. From many of the recent stories on Ingram, it seems pretty clear that K selling Brandon on how he could be used at Duke was a huge and perhaps deciding factor in his decision to come here. It is virtually impossible to imagine Brandon, or any other non-guard for that matter, regularly initiating the offense, being used to break the press, given the same freedom with the ball or otherwise playing all over the floor as a Tar Heel. And again, that is not a value judgment, but rather recognition of stark differences in approach. Rest assured that opposing coaches use all 3 arguments - scandal, system, NBA track record - against UNC in recruiting these days. And that when the scandal no longer becomes topical, if we haven't reached that point already, the arguments on system and NBA track record will still be pressed hard with elite recruits.

-We are fortunate in that K’s more flexible approach is a generally better fit these days for the way the game as a whole is evolving. As an NBA fan and Bulls season ticket holder, I have observed clear, league-wide trends toward positional and lineup flexibility, and generally opening up the floor on offense. And as the father of a 10 year old who plays travel basketball, I can assure folks that “positionless basketball” is not just some catch-phrase; it is the way hoops is being taught these days (and they say K is not an innovator :)). All kids are now expected to handle the ball, shoot from the outside, make a variety of passes and catches, switch and defend anywhere on the floor, etc. It is no longer a given that the tallest kid plays center; if that kid is the most skilled player, he or she may very well be the de facto PG. Putting your best 5 on the floor and figuring out how they should play together is also an approach taken with increasing frequency at lower levels. The extent to which such trends are evident obviously varies widely, but there can be no disputing a general evolution away from the type of structured basketball that most of us grew up with.

-As it relates specifically to Justin Jackson, I said and continue to believe that the UNC system has been a factor in his perceived lack of development. Not the only or even primary factor – I generally tend to put more of that on the individual. But Jackson came to Chapel Hill with the rep as a good shooter with strong 1-on-1 and creative abilities. He has shown just that on occasion, but not with any consistency. But to me, part of that has to do with the extent of structure in the UNC offense. See my comments on Ingram above; Jackson is not as talented as Brandon, but he is a similar player in many respects. But not having the freedom to fully exploit his skills has put Jackson on a different trajectory.

Karl Beem
05-19-2016, 03:48 PM
Not to take anything away from Grayson's historic improvement, but one could argue that Grayson was under-utilized as a freshman. In this argument, Coach K and Duke are blamed for "holding him back" as opposed to credited for developing him between his freshman and sophomore seasons. Just to be clear, I'm not making this argument. Just supporting the point being made by others here - we see the world through blue tinted glasses.

GA averaged 9 mpg despite playing behind 2 1st round draft picks and our great leader Cook.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
05-19-2016, 04:16 PM
As one of the instigators of this debate, let me offer a few things up:

-We are fortunate in that K’s more flexible approach is a generally better fit these days for the way the game as a whole is evolving.


This is the money quote in the thread and really gets to the nut of what many of us are talking in circles around.

Coach K evolves with the game, Roy is very hesitant to. Roy is much like Bob Knight in that "This is how I was taught, this is how I have done things for 30 years, this is how we will continue to do things."

I would posit that this, also, might be the true advantage that K got from the Olympic team coaching - not the smokescreen of better recognition (like K could be more recognized) but rather learning from other coaches and players, opening himself up to the evolution of the game, and bringing that back to the college ranks.

jipops
05-19-2016, 04:25 PM
So basically, all college coaches are equal in terms of developing the players on their team? If you're a college coach, you know what you're doing WRT basketball, and so, you have no impact whatsoever on the development of the players in your program--whether they come to play for you for one, two, three, four, or five years is immaterial to the impact you, as his coach, have on a player making it to the next level? If a player doesn't make it, or gets drafted in the second round vs. the first round, or ends up in Europe, that has no reflection under any circumstance on the coach's ability to develop and utilize that player?

I respectfully disagree. I agree as far as guys like Andrew Wiggins, Anthony Davis, KAT, and Jahlil Okafor go--those guys were NBA bound in any program. However, those are the 0.0001%-ers.

For the coach of a major college program? No, I don't believe there to be much variance in terms of ability to develop a kid's basketball abilities. Notice that I have used the word "major". Now maybe that is a somewhat loose interpretive definition, but I have never have said all college coaches. These coaches made it to these positions for a reason.

Henderson
05-19-2016, 05:30 PM
So anyway, back to Justin Jackson's return to "U"NC-CH:

I'd watch out for him. He's a burger guy, and if he were a Duke player, I'd be looking for a break out year. But watching him the last two years, I'm not sure whether Roy knows how to use him or whether his pre-college impressions just don't translate. Or maybe he'll break out. Dangerous mystery.

oldnavy
05-20-2016, 12:19 PM
So anyway, back to Justin Jackson's return to "U"NC-CH:

I'd watch out for him. He's a burger guy, and if he were a Duke player, I'd be looking for a break out year. But watching him the last two years, I'm not sure whether Roy knows how to use him or whether his pre-college impressions just don't translate. Or maybe he'll break out. Dangerous mystery.

Justin is a good player and I expect he will be more utilized next year, so he should have better numbers.

He does not strike me as a kid that has the skills or even the mentality to take over a game and insert his will...

UNC is not going to have the depth this coming year that they had last year. Foul trouble and injury will be their major obstacle to having a very good year again. If they can avoid those two issues, they should do well.

flyingdutchdevil
05-20-2016, 12:52 PM
Justin is a good player and I expect he will be more utilized next year, so he should have better numbers.

He does not strike me as a kid that has the skills or even the mentality to take over a game and insert his will...

UNC is not going to have the depth this coming year that they had last year. Foul trouble and injury will be their major obstacle to having a very good year again. If they can avoid those two issues, they should do well.

But what happens when they face a team with more talent and more depth at every position? Twice?

That's really all I care about.

CDu
05-20-2016, 03:27 PM
They should have similar depth this year as last year. They lost three players (two bigs, one guard) and bring in three players (one big, two guards).

They do take a step back in talent, but will still be a really good team.

Henderson
05-20-2016, 03:58 PM
Justin is a good player and I expect he will be more utilized next year, so he should have better numbers.

He does not strike me as a kid that has the skills or even the mentality to take over a game and insert his will...


Jackson has taken a couple blows to his psyche recently. First, he was considered a terrific talent coming out of H.S., and I thought he showed well in the all-star games I watched. His fans at "U"NC-CH predicted he'd be better than Justise Winslow and told him so publicly. Ooops. He wasn't even close.

Then he went to the draft combine after more experience and learned he still wasn't good enough, while many of his classmates are successful pros already. Bummer.

Some guys react to "underperforming" by bearing down; others are kind of shell-shocked by their early inferiority to their peers.

Is he confident enough to become a mentally strong player? He doesn't really have that demeanor. He's what people derisively call "soft" as a player.

But some guys have breakout seasons and surprise people. I wouldn't dismiss his skills.

oldnavy
05-20-2016, 04:32 PM
They should have similar depth this year as last year. They lost three players (two bigs, one guard) and bring in three players (one big, two guards).

They do take a step back in talent, but will still be a really good team.

Yea, I don't think anyone should sleep on them. They will be good enough to keep the fan base excited, but I don't expect them to be as good or as successful as they were this past year.

CDu
05-20-2016, 06:12 PM
Yea, I don't think anyone should sleep on them. They will be good enough to keep the fan base excited, but I don't expect them to be as good or as successful as they were this past year.

I agree. A heckuva lot would have to go right for them to be as good as this year's team was. But they should still be a good team, even if they likely won't be as good as this year.

It is the 2017-2018 season when the wheels may start to come off altogether.

BD80
05-20-2016, 06:37 PM
Any chance we could get Wheat to chime in on the Civil War thread? Could be fun

ncexnyc
05-20-2016, 08:14 PM
I agree. A heckuva lot would have to go right for them to be as good as this year's team was. But they should still be a good team, even if they likely won't be as good as this year.

It is the 2017-2018 season when the wheels may start to come off altogether.

I'm not so sure about that. If you mean reach the title game, well yes as that doesn't happen here even with the superior talent Coach K. has been landing these past few years.

I think Berry will be a lot more consistent by himself than he was when paired with Paige and whoever they decide will be his backcourt mate will be decent enough.

Hicks is a beast and while he doesn't appear to be as smooth as Johnson, I believe the his physical skills are superior to those of Johnson. His main issue has been silly fouls.

Jackson should see his touches increase and the kid is a solid enough college player who should only improve this season.

Pinson is your glue man, something every team needs.

weezie
05-20-2016, 08:15 PM
Any chance we could get Wheat to chime in on the Civil War thread? Could be fun

:D:D:D

Ultrarunner
05-20-2016, 08:37 PM
But what happens when they face a team with more talent and more depth at every position? Twice?

That's really all I care about.

I bet I could tempt you to care more with on offer of not twice, not thrice, but four times. Provided, of course, the stars align and the correct shade of blue prevails. ;)

oldnavy
05-21-2016, 07:01 AM
I'm not so sure about that. If you mean reach the title game, well yes as that doesn't happen here even with the superior talent Coach K. has been landing these past few years.

I think Berry will be a lot more consistent by himself than he was when paired with Paige and whoever they decide will be his backcourt mate will be decent enough.

Hicks is a beast and while he doesn't appear to be as smooth as Johnson, I believe the his physical skills are superior to those of Johnson. His main issue has been silly fouls.

Jackson should see his touches increase and the kid is a solid enough college player who should only improve this season.

Pinson is your glue man, something every team needs.

Note that CDu was saying the year after next for the wheels to come off... not this coming year.

I think UNC will be a strong team this year, but I also think that they will not be as good as last year due to what they lost, and the fact that they are really not adding much (at least on paper). Sure the current players have the chance to improve (but that has been a topic of debate).

Berry is going to draw the opponents best perimeter defender this yeas as opposed to last year when Paige often did. So it will be interesting to see how he plays while gaining more attention. I suspect he will do well.

I think UNC will face better teams this year than last. The one thing about UNC is that they seem to routinely beat the teams that they should, but often do not beat the teams that are favored against them. This coming year I think they will face better teams up and down the ACC schedule.

Way early prediction is a top 10-14 team most of the year and a Sweet Sixteen exit from the NCAA. Not a bad year.

CDu
05-21-2016, 07:57 AM
Note that CDu was saying the year after next for the wheels to come off... not this coming year.

I think UNC will be a strong team this year, but I also think that they will not be as good as last year due to what they lost, and the fact that they are really not adding much (at least on paper). Sure the current players have the chance to improve (but that has been a topic of debate).

Berry is going to draw the opponents best perimeter defender this yeas as opposed to last year when Paige often did. So it will be interesting to see how he plays while gaining more attention. I suspect he will do well.

I think UNC will face better teams this year than last. The one thing about UNC is that they seem to routinely beat the teams that they should, but often do not beat the teams that are favored against them. This coming year I think they will face better teams up and down the ACC schedule.

Way early prediction is a top 10-14 team most of the year and a Sweet Sixteen exit from the NCAA. Not a bad year.

Yes, I think a top-15 season and Sweet-16 sounds about right for this coming season. It is - as you said - the following season where I think things start to fall apart. After Jackson, Meeks, Britt, and quite possibly Berry leave, they will be really short on talent.

gumbomoop
05-21-2016, 10:23 AM
Yes, I think a top-15 season and Sweet-16 sounds about right for this coming season. It is - as you said - the following season where I think things start to fall apart. After Jackson, Meeks, Britt, and quite possibly Berry leave, they will be really short on talent.

Friendly amendment -- Hicks is also a senior in 2016-17, so he's gone after next season. Hicks, Meek, and Britt are the seniors in Heels' 2016-17 top 7. Jackson likely gone with them, and as you say possibly Berry. Pinson and incoming frosh Bradley might be their best returning players for 2017-18. They really need a large and talented 2017 recruiting class.

arnie
05-21-2016, 11:41 AM
Friendly amendment -- Hicks is also a senior in 2016-17, so he's gone after next season. Hicks, Meek, and Britt are the seniors in Heels' 2016-17 top 7. Jackson likely gone with them, and as you say possibly Berry. Pinson and incoming frosh Bradley might be their best returning players for 2017-18. They really need a large and talented 2017 recruiting class.

I hear they're in the hunt for 1st through 6th Woods to team up with Seventh. If not a high quality bball class, would look good in Roy's golf bag.

gumbomoop
05-21-2016, 12:34 PM
I hear they're in the hunt for 1st through 6th Woods to team up with Seventh. If not a high quality bball class, would look good in Roy's golf bag.

I'll guess Seventh is 8th, or possibly 9th, as Maye may get 10 mpg backing up Hicks at the 4th.

Roy should figure out by January which of his young guards can help, and stick with a 9-man, at most. But I'm not sure playing any fewer than 11-12 is in his bag of tricks. Especially as he's got to find time for Stilman White, who surely won't be drafted unless he improves on his career 3-pt % of 13.6.

Roy is nothing if not loyal to his seniors.

English
05-23-2016, 10:33 AM
I'm not so sure about that. If you mean reach the title game, well yes as that doesn't happen here even with the superior talent Coach K. has been landing these past few years.

I think Berry will be a lot more consistent by himself than he was when paired with Paige and whoever they decide will be his backcourt mate will be decent enough.

Hicks is a beast and while he doesn't appear to be as smooth as Johnson, I believe the his physical skills are superior to those of Johnson. His main issue has been silly fouls.

Jackson should see his touches increase and the kid is a solid enough college player who should only improve this season.

Pinson is your glue man, something every team needs.

NC should have a nice foundation of 4-5 players (you've mentioned four above, but neglected Meeks). That could be a strong-ish starting lineup. We know that a rotation of 5 players doesn't really fly (not even 6.5 leaves any margin of error), AND we know that Roy loves distributing minutes like he's making it rain. I'm just seeing no quality depth behind these guys. Even with another offseason of improvement, who picks up the additional minutes? Surely you don't think Hicks (who fouls at an obscene rate) nor Meeks can legitimately play 35+min/gm next season. Even with their average recruiting class coming in, are you expecting all those guys to contribute? I'd LOVE to play them twice next year with Joel James and Luke Maye getting significant burn. Doesn't sound like a top-15 team to me, though.

gumbomoop
05-23-2016, 11:12 AM
NC should have a nice foundation of 4-5 players (you've mentioned four above, but neglected Meeks). That could be a strong-ish starting lineup. We know that a rotation of 5 players doesn't really fly (not even 6.5 leaves any margin of error), AND we know that Roy loves distributing minutes like he's making it rain. I'm just seeing no quality depth behind these guys. Even with another offseason of improvement, who picks up the additional minutes? Surely you don't think Hicks (who fouls at an obscene rate) nor Meeks can legitimately play 35+min/gm next season. Even with their average recruiting class coming in, are you expecting all those guys to contribute? I'd LOVE to play them twice next year with Joel James and Luke Maye getting significant burn. Doesn't sound like a top-15 team to me, though.

To Wheat's (and our, for different reasons) great distress, James has used up his four years.

Heels' top 8 in 2016-17 will probably be:

C -- Meeks, Bradley
PF -- Hicks, Maye
SF -- Jackson
SG -- Pinson
PG -- Berry, Britt

Pinson backs up Jackson at SF. Then probably 2 of 3 young guards -- Williams, Woods, Robinson -- will see some time at SG. Thus, 10-man rotation.

Bradley looks a good prospect to me, and should get 15 mpg. Yes, Hicks needs to stay out of foul trouble, and play close to 30 mpg, leaving 10 or so for Maye, who can do ok. If none of the 3 young guards is ACC-ready, Britt would have to play some SG. I think Britt will have a good senior season, on both O and D.

ncexnyc
05-23-2016, 11:41 AM
NC should have a nice foundation of 4-5 players (you've mentioned four above, but neglected Meeks). That could be a strong-ish starting lineup. We know that a rotation of 5 players doesn't really fly (not even 6.5 leaves any margin of error), AND we know that Roy loves distributing minutes like he's making it rain. I'm just seeing no quality depth behind these guys. Even with another offseason of improvement, who picks up the additional minutes? Surely you don't think Hicks (who fouls at an obscene rate) nor Meeks can legitimately play 35+min/gm next season. Even with their average recruiting class coming in, are you expecting all those guys to contribute? I'd LOVE to play them twice next year with Joel James and Luke Maye getting significant burn. Doesn't sound like a top-15 team to me, though.
Hey it's UNCheat and I get it that people love to undersell them, while we tend to oversell what we have, but the fact remains that year after year they are at the top or near the top of the ACC standings.

While I appreciate the talent of the OAD players we've landed the past few years, I also know the value that 4 year players bring to the table. As we've already discussed in this thread Roy runs a system which takes advantage of experienced players and he'll be returning 5 upperclassmen as starters this year. Yes, depth will be an issue for that team and a major injury to a starter could easily derail their season, but the lack of depth may keep Roy from tripping over his own feet as the starters will have to log more minutes.

As always we'll just have to wait and see how things play out. As the Hammer ads for their Dracula movies back in the 60's were fond of saying, "You can't keep a good man down."

phaedrus
05-23-2016, 11:52 AM
I bet I could tempt you to care more with on offer of not twice, not thrice, but four times.

How many times do I want to beat UNC next year? Not one, not two, not three, not four, not five, not six, not seven... yeah, at least eight times.

CDu
05-23-2016, 11:59 AM
To Wheat's (and our, for different reasons) great distress, James has used up his four years.

Heels' top 8 in 2016-17 will probably be:

C -- Meeks, Bradley
PF -- Hicks, Maye
SF -- Jackson
SG -- Pinson
PG -- Berry, Britt

Pinson backs up Jackson at SF. Then probably 2 of 3 young guards -- Williams, Woods, Robinson -- will see some time at SG. Thus, 10-man rotation.

Bradley looks a good prospect to me, and should get 15 mpg. Yes, Hicks needs to stay out of foul trouble, and play close to 30 mpg, leaving 10 or so for Maye, who can do ok. If none of the 3 young guards is ACC-ready, Britt would have to play some SG. I think Britt will have a good senior season, on both O and D.

I think this sums it up nicely. I think that the trio of Meeks, Hicks, and Bradley will be very solid. Maye will play, but more sparingly. I think that Jackson and Pinson will do quite well in the wing role, and Woods and Robinson will contribute off the bench solidly. And I think they will get more than adequate production from the PG combo of Berry and Britt.

I think that Hicks, Jackson, and Berry will compete for All-ACC status. Meeks and Pinson could get in the neighborhood with strong improvements. Bradley will compete for all-Freshman teams. Woods and Robinson will be adequate freshmen contributors. And Britt will fill his backup PG role adequately.

It'll be a very experienced, talented-enough, top-15 caliber team. If any of Hicks, Pinson, or Jackson make "the jump", they could be a top-10 team. If multiple of those guys make "the jump", they could be a top-5 team. I don't expect the latter scenario, but I think somewhere in the top-15 is a reasonable expectation.

oldnavy
05-23-2016, 12:10 PM
Hey it's UNCheat and I get it that people love to undersell them, while we tend to oversell what we have, but the fact remains that year after year they are at the top or near the top of the ACC standings.

While I appreciate the talent of the OAD players we've landed the past few years, I also know the value that 4 year players bring to the table. As we've already discussed in this thread Roy runs a system which takes advantage of experienced players and he'll be returning 5 upperclassmen as starters this year. Yes, depth will be an issue for that team and a major injury to a starter could easily derail their season, but the lack of depth may keep Roy from tripping over his own feet as the starters will have to log more minutes.

As always we'll just have to wait and see how things play out. As the Hammer ads for their Dracula movies back in the 60's were fond of saying, "You can't keep a good man down."

I love the bolded part. Reminds me of the whole LDII - Kendall Marshall deal.

UNC will be fine this year... I do agree that they are a bit thin and as so will need some "luck" with regards to health and perhaps surprising contributions from otherwise unexpected sources.

I will be SHOCKED if they have anything near the success they did this year (duh!, they had a pretty dang good year!)... Sweet Sixteen seems reasonable depending on the draw.

I just don't know enough about how the rest of the conference shakes out for this year. I know NCSU has gotten some good breaks with Abu coming back and the big Turkish dude who should be decent, and Smith is supposed to be healthy.... but how good will VT, FSU, ND, UVa, Cuse, etc... be?

My guess without knowing is that UNC will not have the success against the rest of the ACC this year as they did last year. I have made the comment that UNC seems to be very good at beating the teams they are supposed to beat, but they rarely rise up and defeat the teams that are just as good or better.

This year I think there will be more teams that are just as good, if not better than UNC...

I really like to watch UNC (and Duke) play about 10 games before making assessments, so like you said, time will tell.

oldnavy
05-23-2016, 12:19 PM
I think this sums it up nicely. I think that the trio of Meeks, Hicks, and Bradley will be very solid. Maye will play, but more sparingly. I think that Jackson and Pinson will do quite well in the wing role, and Woods and Robinson will contribute off the bench solidly. And I think they will get more than adequate production from the PG combo of Berry and Britt.

I think that Hicks, Jackson, and Berry will compete for All-ACC status. Meeks and Pinson could get in the neighborhood with strong improvements. Bradley will compete for all-Freshman teams. Woods and Robinson will be adequate freshmen contributors. And Britt will fill his backup PG role adequately.

It'll be a very experienced, talented-enough, top-15 caliber team. If any of Hicks, Pinson, or Jackson make "the jump", they could be a top-10 team. If multiple of those guys make "the jump", they could be a top-5 team. I don't expect the latter scenario, but I think somewhere in the top-15 is a reasonable expectation.

Outside of Berry, do they have any perimeter shooting to speak of? I know that kid from VCU had a reputation for shooting, but we didn't see much of him last year.

This could be an issue as well as talented depth...

CDu
05-23-2016, 12:53 PM
Outside of Berry, do they have any perimeter shooting to speak of? I know that kid from VCU had a reputation for shooting, but we didn't see much of him last year.

This could be an issue as well as talented depth...

Well, they haven't had a good 3pt shooting team since Bullock left, and that hasn't stopped them from being a perennial top-20 team in that stretch. In fact, last year was their worst 3pt shooting season in a while, and it was their best result in a while.

For better or for worse, UNC's offensive strategy simply doesn't rely on the 3pt shot. They play two bigs and rely heavily on the post. They don't shoot a high volume of 3s.

As for next year's team, Robinson is noted as a 3pt threat. Britt and Jackson are streaky at best. But, again, that's not the focus of UNC's offense, so not having a lot of options from 3pt range isn't necessarily a huge problem for them.

oldnavy
05-23-2016, 01:14 PM
Well, they haven't had a good 3pt shooting team since Bullock left, and that hasn't stopped them from being a perennial top-20 team in that stretch. In fact, last year was their worst 3pt shooting season in a while, and it was their best result in a while.

For better or for worse, UNC's offensive strategy simply doesn't rely on the 3pt shot. They play two bigs and rely heavily on the post. They don't shoot a high volume of 3s.

As for next year's team, Robinson is noted as a 3pt threat. Britt and Jackson are streaky at best. But, again, that's not the focus of UNC's offense, so not having a lot of options from 3pt range isn't necessarily a huge problem for them.


Yes it was, but it was also one of their more dominate inside teams in a while as well IMO. Johnson was really good... I think that is going to be a big drop off for them this year.

I agree with you on that they don't rely on the 3, I just would hate to think that they did have some gunners coming in that could open the inside up a little for them.

I know that they "can" fall in love with the 3 ball if they get a few to drop... but that's not normal for them.

CDu
05-23-2016, 01:48 PM
Yes it was, but it was also one of their more dominate inside teams in a while as well IMO. Johnson was really good... I think that is going to be a big drop off for them this year.

I agree with you on that they don't rely on the 3, I just would hate to think that they did have some gunners coming in that could open the inside up a little for them.

I know that they "can" fall in love with the 3 ball if they get a few to drop... but that's not normal for them.

Yeah, I agree that the loss of Johnson could be huge. Hicks was comparably productive per minute in limited minutes but will need to cut down on fouls to give them starter's minutes. And they will need Bradley to be at least adequate off the bench. There is a strong chance the frontcourt takes a decent step back.

There is certainly the potential for a bad season for the Heels. I just don't think that will be likely. I think they will end up fairly comfortably a ranked team, though almost definitely not as good as thi year's team was.

For them to perform comparably to this year's team, I think Berry has to build off last year's strong season and two of Jackson, Hicks, Meeks, and Pinson have to make the jump to stardom. If that happens and Bradley and one of the freshmen guards are even adequate, then UNC becomes elite.

Again, I think the last paragraph is highly unlikely. But given the recruiting pedigree of some of those players, it is far from out of the question.