Kennard

[53n206]

Like in hugh school.

[Doria]

I am not exactly certain what this was supposed to say, but yes... (I like Kennard, too.)

[Brockt10]

I like Luke, too!!

[Tripping William]

Like is a force. Or uses it. :o

[53n206]

I am not exactly certain what this was supposed to say, but yes... (I like Kennard, too.)

Luke was a fantastic score in high school. Just as he was today.

[subzero02]

2nd all time leading scorer in the history of Ohio high school basketball(2900+ points)... a few slots ahead of Lebron. After it was announced that Frank and Grayson were out, I jokingly said that Luke would break Ferry's single game scoring record on another thread.

[duke4ever19]

Lukes jumper is wetter than water and pure as the driven snow.

[Indoor66]

What the hell does that mean?

[ChillinDuke]

Lukes jumper is wetter than water and pure as the driven snow.

You should talk to Sage about maple hardwood.

- Chillin

[norduck]

Injury free body.

[rsvman]

Injury free body.

For all you know. And, for now.


Oh, and please don't tempt fate. K.thnx.bye

[norduck]

For all you know. And, for now.


Oh, and please don't tempt fate. K.thnx.bye

I prefer his style of play over fate.

[phaedrus]

Has anyone decided if he is a good shooter yet?

[Indoor66]

Has anyone decided if he is a good shooter yet?

No one knows until KenPom is updated.

[duke4ever19]

No one knows until KenPom is updated.

That's Our Sovereign Lord, Protector and Possessor of Absolute Knowledge, Ken Pomeroy to the likes of you!

[79-77]

Well, I appreciate that the thread has been fairly whimsical until this point, but I've been thinking something for a while now, and I'm just gonna say it: Kennard is better than JJ Redick was.

Flame away.

[-jk]

Well, I appreciate that the thread has been fairly whimsical until this point, but I've been thinking something for a while now, and I'm just gonna say it: Kennard is better than JJ Redick was.

Flame away.

Tough standard to uphold.

I hope he can - we'll be great!

-jk

[uh_no]

Well, I appreciate that the thread has been fairly whimsical until this point, but I've been thinking something for a while now, and I'm just gonna say it: Kennard is better than JJ Redick was.

Flame away.

did JJ have an accurate three off the dribble? If so, that's a major thing that Luke is weak on. Luke has better handles though. Luke also has a better surrounding cast right now.

[flyingdutchdevil]

did JJ have an accurate three off the dribble? If so, that's a major thing that Luke is weak on. Luke has better handles though. Luke also has a better surrounding cast right now.

I like the jj analogy. Mainly because both are so damn smart. Luke is by far the better driver and mid range shooter. Let's not compare 3pt shooting though; jj is muuuuuuch better and more consistent.

Also, Luke benefits from so much talent around him. Jj didn't have half this talent (duhon and Ewing were good, but they aren't Grayson or Jackson).

IMO, like is our most impactful guard since jj.

[Sluggo]

Not to mention, lefties are special.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Not to mention, lefties are special.

Exactly. Lefties are just better than all those damn righties;) were unique and incapable of using scissors

[Billy Dat]

Well, I appreciate that the thread has been fairly whimsical until this point, but I've been thinking something for a while now, and I'm just gonna say it: Kennard is better than JJ Redick was.

Flame away.

I am not sure we can put him ahead of the program's alltime leading scorer and POY but I will say Kennard has been our best player this season and is having an All American caliber year so far. He is an elite offensive talent and mind. On a first half Tatum end-to-end drive that ended in him getting fouled as he Eurostepped around the D, there was a TO and they showed Kennard - in seeming approval of Tatum's talent display - smiling and pumping his fish as if to say, "We are ready to wreck fools!!!"

[weezie]

Exactly. Lefties are just better than all those damn righties;) were unique and incapable of using scissors


OK, I'm in. Don't forget manual can openers.

[BLPOG]

Well, I appreciate that the thread has been fairly whimsical until this point, but I've been thinking something for a while now, and I'm just gonna say it: Kennard is better than JJ Redick was.

Flame away.

Well, I'm not going to flame away, but I do think that's garbage. I recall a conversation I had with a Duke alumnus when I was but a youth. It was October and we were both blown away by Redick's potential. Unless my math and memory have significantly deteriorated, JJ was far superior to Luke during his freshman year. I'm a big Kennard fan, but he has a long way to go before that comparison is appropriate, IMO (no pretense of 'H'). JJ was something else. Of course, having some other guys helped.

I am very optimistic about Luke, but I'm waiting to see how things play out before making any comparisons like that.

[79-77]

did JJ have an accurate three off the dribble? If so, that's a major thing that Luke is weak on. Luke has better handles though. Luke also has a better surrounding cast right now.


I like the jj analogy. Mainly because both are so damn smart. Luke is by far the better driver and mid range shooter. Let's not compare 3pt shooting though; jj is muuuuuuch better and more consistent.

Also, Luke benefits from so much talent around him. Jj didn't have half this talent (duhon and Ewing were good, but they aren't Grayson or Jackson).

IMO, like is our most impactful guard since jj.

Well, I'll agree with this when Giles, Tatum and Bolden are all fully online, but without those guys, I think the talent levels are in the same neighborhood. In addition to Duhon (who had a long NBA career) and Ewing, JJ also had Shelden Williams, who was a terrific college player.

To your list of qualities as to which Kennard has the edge, I'll add rebounding and finishing at the rim.



I am not sure we can put him ahead of the program's alltime leading scorer and POY but I will say Kennard has been our best player this season and is having an All American caliber year so far. He is an elite offensive talent and mind. On a first half Tatum end-to-end drive that ended in him getting fouled as he Eurostepped around the D, there was a TO and they showed Kennard - in seeming approval of Tatum's talent display - smiling and pumping his fish as if to say, "We are ready to wreck fools!!!"


Well, I'm not going to flame away, but I do think that's garbage. I recall a conversation I had with a Duke alumnus when I was but a youth. It was October and we were both blown away by Redick's potential. Unless my math and memory have significantly deteriorated, JJ was far superior to Luke during his freshman year. I'm a big Kennard fan, but he has a long way to go before that comparison is appropriate, IMO (no pretense of 'H'). JJ was something else. Of course, having some other guys helped.

I am very optimistic about Luke, but I'm waiting to see how things play out before making any comparisons like that.

I think JJ may actually be the ACC's all-time leading scorer, not just Duke's. And I know that undercuts my point, but that's kinda why I brought it to this forum -- i.e. I know it's kinda hard to justify, and you wouldn't be crazy to dismiss it as ridiculous, but this is the group of Duke fans who can soberly evaluate the claim.

As for their respective freshman seasons -- yes -- JJ's was better. (I was in Cameron when JJ set the all-time Duke record for freshman scoring in one game, with, I believe, 34 pts vs UVA.) And Kennard isn't going to score as much as JJ did in any season, because Kennard is (hopefully!) always going to play with at least one teammate who is going to be a top-5 NBA pick and who therefore will get a bigger share of the offense than any of JJ's teammates did.

But Kennard is better IMHO. He has a lot more game than JJ did and he can score just as much if he needs to.

[BLPOG]

Well, I'll agree with this when Giles, Tatum and Bolden are all fully online, but without those guys, I think the talent levels are in the same neighborhood. In addition to Duhon (who had a long NBA career) and Ewing, JJ also had Shelden Williams, who was a terrific college player.

To your list of qualities as to which Kennard has the edge, I'll add rebounding and finishing at the rim.






I think JJ may actually be the ACC's all-time leading scorer, not just Duke's. And I know that undercuts my point, but that's kinda why I brought it to this forum -- i.e. I know it's kinda hard to justify, and you wouldn't be crazy to dismiss it as ridiculous, but this is the group of Duke fans who can soberly evaluate the claim.

As for their respective freshman seasons -- yes -- JJ's was better. (I was in Cameron when JJ set the all-time Duke record for freshman scoring in one game, with, I believe, 34 pts vs UVA.) And Kennard isn't going to score as much as JJ did in any season, because Kennard is (hopefully!) always going to play with at least one teammate who is going to be a top-5 NBA pick and who therefore will get a bigger share of the offense than any of JJ's teammates did.

But Kennard is better IMHO. He has a lot more game than JJ did and he can score just as much if he needs to.

OK, getting slightly off topic here. But anybody remember the game against Miami when JJ beat Dawkins' scoring record? I was there and that shot was the single loudest moment I remember in Cameron.

[duke4ever19]

I think JJ may actually be the ACC's all-time leading scorer, not just Duke's.

Well, it was JJ until Hansbrough (sigh) caught up and passed him. Redick is currently second, with Singler in third.

[slower]

Well, it was JJ until Hansbrough (sigh) caught up and passed him. Redick is currently second, with Singler in third.

I don't think Singler is third. Do you mean Dawkins?

[slower]

Exactly. Lefties are just better than all those damn righties;) were unique and incapable of using scissors

Well, I'm a lefty. When it comes to scissors, I'm amphibious. I use them right-handed, but I run with them left-handed.

[Devilwin]

Well, I appreciate that the thread has been fairly whimsical until this point, but I've been thinking something for a while now, and I'm just gonna say it: Kennard is better than JJ Redick was.

Flame away.

All around game, I must agree. JJ was a better three point shooter however.

[dukelifer]

Well, I appreciate that the thread has been fairly whimsical until this point, but I've been thinking something for a while now, and I'm just gonna say it: Kennard is better than JJ Redick was.

Flame away.

Kennard has a lot of gifts. He is a better ball handler than JJ and has a clever game inside 12 ft. As many have said- JJ was a better 3 point shooter by a lot. Right now - people are discovering Kennard. By his senior year, Reddick was feared and the focus of every defensive game plan. That is not the case for Kennard. I don't think we have seen the best of Kennard on a consistent basis against top competition - but he is fully capable of explosive games. I doubt any team can key on him with Allen, Jackson and a healthy Tatum in the wings- that is about picking your poison.

[davekay1971]

Well, it was JJ until Hansbrough*** (sigh) caught up and passed him.

Fixed it for you.

(Note: Hansbrough gets three asterixes on his "all time scoring record". That's one asterix for the ridiculous number of free throw attempts Hans got from the refs, another for all of his Swahili independent study courses, and a third for his free-style rapping.)

[Indoor66]

Kennard has a lot of gifts. He is a better ball handler than JJ and has a clever game inside 12 ft. As many have said- JJ was a better 3 point shooter by a lot. Right now - people are discovering Kennard. By his senior year, Reddick was feared and the focus of every defensive game plan. That is not the case for Kennard. I don't think we have seen the best of Kennard on a consistent basis against top competition - but he is fully capable of explosive games. I doubt any team can key on him with Allen, Jackson and a healthy Tatum in the wings- that is about picking your poison.

He is also one of the ALL TIME FAVORITES of the spelling police.:cool:

[camion]

Well, I'm a lefty. When it comes to scissors, I'm amphibious. I use them right-handed, but I run with them left-handed.
I always buy left-handed scissors and leave them lying around just so I can watch righties try to use them. :)

[weezie]

Remember the collective crowd inhale whenever JJ launched a 3?

[sagegrouse]

Well, I appreciate that the thread has been fairly whimsical until this point, but I've been thinking something for a while now, and I'm just gonna say it: Kennard is better than JJ Redick was.

Flame away.

Maybe, but IIRC (and there is always a first time), when JJ scored 40 against Virginia, he took only 13 shots from the field. That's super hero terrritory.

[davekay1971]

Maybe, but IIRC (and there is always a first time), when JJ scored 40 against Virginia, he took only 13 shots from the field. That's super hero terrritory.

Just looking at offense, the argument for Kennard is that he's a better scorer mid-range and in than was JJ, at least when JJ was a sophomore. I think that's a fair statement. JJ didn't develop a really good mid-range or driving game until he was a senior.

But JJ's 3 pointer was filthy when he was a sophomore. It wasn't just a pretty shot, it was deadly from well beyond the 3 point line, and his release was lightning quick. The kid, even as a sophomore, was a, if not the, focal point of the other team's defense. He got their best perimeter defender, and he would just run that poor soul to death off screens until he got about one step of free space, which was enough for him to catch, square and shoot.

I love Kennard's game, and he's turning in a heck of a sophomore season. If there was never going to be a Giles/Bolden/Tatum trifecta joining the party, Luke would end up being a part nasty 1-2-3 perimeter combo with Allen and Jackson...so the elevation of his game from last year to this is remarkable. If he continues to grow like this, and he stays 4 years, Kennard could very well be challenging JJ for scoring records by the time he graduates.

I think it's too much, 9 games into a very strong sophomore campaign, to say that Luke's better than JJ, even trying to compare sophomore JJ to sophomore Luke. But I will go so far as to say that Redick's number is hanging in the rafters for good reason...and Luke's showing the potential to get his there, too...but it's a long way from here to there.

[dukelifer]

He is also one of the ALL TIME FAVORITES of the spelling police.:cool:

True- but at least I don't mispronounce the name as does Hubie Brown who constantly calls him Riddick or Ridick.

[CDu]

Just looking at offense, the argument for Kennard is that he's a better scorer mid-range and in than was JJ, at least when JJ was a sophomore. I think that's a fair statement. JJ didn't develop a really good mid-range or driving game until he was a senior.

But JJ's 3 pointer was filthy when he was a sophomore. It wasn't just a pretty shot, it was deadly from well beyond the 3 point line, and his release was lightning quick. The kid, even as a sophomore, was a, if not the, focal point of the other team's defense. He got their best perimeter defender, and he would just run that poor soul to death off screens until he got about one step of free space, which was enough for him to catch, square and shoot.

I love Kennard's game, and he's turning in a heck of a sophomore season. If there was never going to be a Giles/Bolden/Tatum trifecta joining the party, Luke would end up being a part nasty 1-2-3 perimeter combo with Allen and Jackson...so the elevation of his game from last year to this is remarkable. If he continues to grow like this, and he stays 4 years, Kennard could very well be challenging JJ for scoring records by the time he graduates.

I think it's too much, 9 games into a very strong sophomore campaign, to say that Luke's better than JJ, even trying to compare sophomore JJ to sophomore Luke. But I will go so far as to say that Redick's number is hanging in the rafters for good reason...and Luke's showing the potential to get his there, too...but it's a long way from here to there.

A minor quibble, but I wouldn't describe Redick's 3pt shot as lightning-quick, or even quick at all for that matter. Like Andre Dawkins, his jumper actually took a while to get off. But that wasn't a problem for him, just like it wasn't a problem for Dawkins. The reason? Both shooters had incredibly high release points. Redick would REALLY elevate on his shots.

Comparatively, I would actually say that Kennard's release is faster that Redick's was. Though Redick's 3pt shot was more reliable, and more versatile.

[YmoBeThere]

smiling and pumping his fish

Poor fish...

[gotoguy]

It's been mentioned before but Luke's game reminds me much more of Jimmy Spanarkel's

[Skitzle]

OK, getting slightly off topic here. But anybody remember the game against Miami when JJ beat Dawkins' scoring record? I was there and that shot was the single loudest moment I remember in Cameron.

Getting more off topic, seems like you weren't there for Dockery vs Vtech. :)

[DukieInBrasil]

Well, I'm a lefty. When it comes to scissors, I'm amphibious. I use them right-handed, but I run with them left-handed.


Just looking at offense, the argument for Kennard is that he's a better scorer mid-range and in than was JJ, at least when JJ was a sophomore. I think that's a fair statement. JJ didn't develop a really good mid-range or driving game until he was a senior.

But JJ's 3 pointer was filthy when he was a sophomore. It wasn't just a pretty shot, it was deadly from well beyond the 3 point line, and his release was lightning quick. The kid, even as a sophomore, was a, if not the, focal point of the other team's defense. He got their best perimeter defender, and he would just run that poor soul to death off screens until he got about one step of free space, which was enough for him to catch, square and shoot.

I love Kennard's game, and he's turning in a heck of a sophomore season. If there was never going to be a Giles/Bolden/Tatum trifecta joining the party, Luke would end up being a part nasty 1-2-3 perimeter combo with Allen and Jackson...so the elevation of his game from last year to this is remarkable. If he continues to grow like this, and he stays 4 years, Kennard could very well be challenging JJ for scoring records by the time he graduates.

I think it's too much, 9 games into a very strong sophomore campaign, to say that Luke's better than JJ, even trying to compare sophomore JJ to sophomore Luke. But I will go so far as to say that Redick's number is hanging in the rafters for good reason...and Luke's showing the potential to get his there, too...but it's a long way from here to there.

JJ averaged about 15 ppg his Fr and So years. He averaged about 21 his Jr year and 27 his Sr. year. So unless Kennard absolutely blows up from here on out, ima have to disagree. He's already way behind, and as others have mentioned, Luke is currently surrounded by much more talent than JJ was, and is likely to be surrounded by very high level talent (that is looking to score a lot due to OAD players) for the rest of his time at Duke. I just don't see a path for Luke to break JJs Duke scoring record.

[OldPhiKap]

Poor fish...

I dunno. Maybe the fish enjoy it.

[Fish80]

Now I'm confused. What's better, a wet jumper or a filthy jumper?

[pamtar]

A lot of talk in this thread about Luke v JJ but I think the more pertinent comparison is Luke v Grayson. I know Grayson is hurt but Luke has been much more productive this year. I've been saying since last year that he needs his touches to get going and he just isn't getting them with Grayson in the game. I think Coach will find a balance as the season progresses but for now I'd wouldn't be disappointed if Grayson has to nurse that toe for a few more games.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

One thing I appreciate about Kennard's game is his rather old school workmanlike "coolness." He doesn't have the emotional up and down displays of JJ or Grayson. I have never been a fan of the yelping and chest-thumping (get off my lawn) which I associate with Vince Carter and a certain era of Tar Hole basketball.
Act like you've been there before. Luke doesn't seem disengaged, but seems more interested in "next play" than in "look at me."

[FadedTackyShirt]

It's been mentioned before but Luke's game reminds me much more of Jimmy Spanarkel's

Still my all-time favorite Duke player. Immediately transformed into a giddy fan boy when I spotted him at the Washington Duke before a game a few years ago.

Kinda think that Grayson and Kennard will end up like Spanarkel: beloved fan favorites whose jerseys won't hang in the rafters. Grayson already has at least one NCAA title as a consolation prize and hopefully Luke will top that.

Very tough in the OAD era for a Duke player to win NPOY and earn a degree before turning pro.

[Jarhead]

Well, I appreciate that the thread has been fairly whimsical until this point, but I've been thinking something for a while now, and I'm just gonna say it: Kennard is better than JJ Redick was...

Oh, yeah. Keep it up, Luke.

[flyingdutchdevil]

One thing I appreciate about Kennard's game is his rather old school workmanlike "coolness." He doesn't have the emotional up and down displays of JJ or Grayson. I have never been a fan of the yelping and chest-thumping (get off my lawn) which I associate with Vince Carter and a certain era of Tar Heel basketball.
Act like you've been there before. Luke doesn't seem disengaged, but seems more interested in "next play" than in "look at me."

Agreed. Kennard scored 35 points yesterday and acted like me scored 8 points off 3-14 shooting.

With Kennard, the pros are impressive:
-creativity and craftiness
-mid range
-getting to the rim
-decent 3pt shot
-rebounding
-solid playmaking (not great though. I still think grayson is better at this)

Cons:
-defense (he'll never be a defensive stopper. But solid like JJ? Very tough to achieve)
-inconsistent 3
-may need the ball to be impactful (TBD on this one)

And he's just a sophomore. He will be the 'man' next year. Carter is going to love playing with Kennard as Kennard will demand so much attention.

IMO, Kennard has the opportunity to be our best scorer since JJ. That's amazing.

[DtrainBuckshot]

Luke reminds me more of Scheyer than JJ. More of a scorer than pure shooter.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Luke reminds me more of Scheyer than JJ. More of a scorer than pure shooter.

JJ was not a pure shooter. He may have started like that, but JJ was the best scorer in modern Duke history. Scheyer was a better playmaker; JJ was a better scorer and shooter.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Even my Tar Heel Neighbor begrudgingly admires Luke's game. Not so much for Grayson. For that, I blame ESPN constantly reminding us of mistakes from last year as well as the "Naismith Finalist" graphic that always seems to pop up immediately after Allen forces something in the lane and looks around for a foul call while play moves down the court.

[devildeac]

Fixed it for you.

(Note: Hansbrough gets four asterixes on his "all time scoring record". That's one asterix for the ridiculous number of free throw attempts Hans got from the refs, another for all of his Swahili independent study courses, and a third for his free-style rapping.)

FIFY-again. ;)


You forgot all the buckets he scored after changing his pivot foot repeatedly that went ignored before he was awarded his ridiculous # of FTA. :mad:

[jimsumner]

It's been mentioned before but Luke's game reminds me much more of Jimmy Spanarkel's

Old school!!

Me like.

Or we could go even further back. The next Jack Marin?

[COYS]

Old school!!

Me like.

Or we could go even further back. The next Jack Marin?

I can't pretend to be able to compare him to anyone back this far, but I actually think that Singler is a better comparison for Luke than Scheyer, Grayson, or Redick. The guys even run the elbow curl play for Luke that K drew up for Singler time and time again. Luke is shorter, but not by all that much. Luke, like Kyle, is a danger to hit from three even if neither is exactly automatic. They can both put the ball on the deck and score without getting all the way to the rim by using their size to shoot little jumpers or floaters. Singler was sneaky good in the post, and while Luke doesn't post up, exactly, he is able to take advantage of smaller guards in the paint and make a move to get to the rim. None of Scheyer, Redick, or Grayson really did/does any of those things all that frequently.

Anyway, the depth of offensive talent on this team is just ridiculous. Sophomore Redick played with some insanely talented people (Williams, Deng, Duhon and Ewing were no slouches at all), so the fact that there is a consensus that this year's team has so much more offensive firepower really says something. Despite all that, I think that even as the freshman come along, Luke will still get plenty of chances to score. He's just too good.

[DrChainsaw]

Getting more off topic, seems like you weren't there for Dockery vs Vtech. :)

Way, way off topic, but that was the only Duke game my wife ever attended. I got some awesome seats and told her I didn't think it was going to be much of a game, but at least she could see the players and experience CIS.

She says her system can't handle any more Duke games.

[BigWayne]

Getting more off topic, seems like you weren't there for Dockery vs Vtech. :)

Or Gene Banks last second shot on senior night.

[Edouble]

Home game against UNC in 1998 was the loudest the place has ever been.

[westwall]

I am very optimistic about Luke, but I'm waiting to see how things play out before making any [JJ]comparisons like that.

I grew up about 15 minutes from Franklin OH and thus have been a strong supporter of Luke from the time he committed, but also believe the comparisons with JJ, and even Grayson, should wait. Luke will run his own race.

[Philadukie]

It's been mentioned before but Luke's game reminds me much more of Jimmy Spanarkel's

There's definitely an old school quality to his game. You don't see a lot of crafty mid-range shots anymore in college like you do with Luke. Not saying he's as good as these guys, but it's the kind of play you frequently saw with Jerry West and Pistol Pete and Larry Bird. Before the three point shot in college it was much more common.

With the three point shot, the probabilities say if you're a guard shooting from midrange you may as well shoot from three to pick up the extra point. You either drive to try to draw a foul or you pull up from 3, like Grayson's game.

There aren't many shooters who are substantially better shooting a midrange 2 than a 3. Luke might be one of the few who is.

[duke4ever19]

I don't think Singler is third. Do you mean Dawkins?

Yes, you are correct. Not sure what I was looking at when I wrote that. :confused:

Heck, Singler is even behind Laettner, 7th on the list.

[dukelifer]

It's been mentioned before but Luke's game reminds me much more of Jimmy Spanarkel's

Without the pigeon toes.

[killerleft]

There's definitely an old school quality to his game. You don't see a lot of crafty mid-range shots anymore in college like you do with Luke. Not saying he's as good as these guys, but it's the kind of play you frequently saw with Jerry West and Pistol Pete and Larry Bird. Before the three point shot in college it was much more common.

With the three point shot, the probabilities say if you're a guard shooting from midrange you may as well shoot from three to pick up the extra point. You either drive to try to draw a foul or you pull up from 3, like Grayson's game.

There aren't many shooters who are substantially better shooting a midrange 2 than a 3. Luke might be one of the few who is.

Getting warm. In the spirit of this thread, there can be only one answer. Just call him - 'Hondo'.

[jv001]

Old school!!

Me like.

Or we could go even further back. The next Jack Marin?

Good comparison and wasn't Jack left handed as well? GoDuke!

[Indoor66]

Good comparison and wasn't Jack left handed as well? GoDuke!

I imagine he still is! :cool:

[FerryFor50]

I just don't see a path for Luke to break JJs Duke scoring record.

Never underestimate the electoral college.

[norduck]

Getting warm. In the spirit of this thread, there can be only one answer. Just call him - 'Hondo'.
Absolutely and a fellow Ohioan.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Well, it was JJ until Hansbrough (sigh) caught up and passed him. Redick is currently second, with Singler in third.
Walked right on by.

[BandAlum83]

Home game against UNC in 1998 was the loudest the place has ever been.

That was the last game I've seen at Cameron. I was privileged to be there. It's a great story how I ended up there for the game. #1 vs. #3

Wojo was amazing, and I got to talk to him at the hideaway after the game. Even for an alum, it was a thrilling evening.

[Indoor66]

Walked right on by.

Kinda like this? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijhL9Y7skQs)

[ChillinDuke]

Getting more off topic, seems like you weren't there for Dockery vs Vtech. :)

Amen.

My ears literally stopped functioning. At the time I remember it being a scary feeling - thinking I had gone deaf. But scared mixed with uncontrollable euphoria as the entire student section went into the definition of a frenzy, so it was this feeling of "oh my god I may be deaf but it's worth it!" I liken it to those scenes in Saving Private Ryan where he sees everything but there is no sound. That is how loud it was in Cameron that day.

For the record, the other time it happened to me in Cameron was during a Duke-UNC game (Duke went 0-4 during my tenure at the home UNC games). I believe it was one of the years with Demarcus. We were down the entire game and largely outplayed, and at one point late we were down I think 9. Duke hit a 3, made a stop, and hit another 3 to cut the lead to 3 with a couple minutes left. I Saving-Private-Ryan'd again.

- Chillin

[53n206]

I don't know about all the comparisons with past players. I only know that Kennard is "devilishly" good.

[gotoguy]

Old school!!

Me like.

Or we could go even further back. The next Jack Marin?



Ahhhh...to have been there in the 60's for the Bubas run and the Beatles for that matter. Starting middle school then.

[atoomer0881]

I imagine he still is! :cool:


Never underestimate the electoral college.

Hahahah both of these actually just made me laugh out loud. Well done!


That was the last game I've seen at Cameron. I was privileged to be there. It's a great story how I ended up there for the game. #1 vs. #3

Wojo was amazing, and I got to talk to him at the hideaway after the game. Even for an alum, it was a thrilling evening.

I wanna hear this great story! Unless I missed it in another post haha

[Tappan Zee Devil]

Ahhhh...to have been there in the 60's for the Bubas run and the Beatles for that matter. Starting middle school then.

The 60s were a different world.
It was the only other time I have been worried about whether the country would survive (although IMHO the chaos was created by the good side then).
And the music was infinitely better and Duke b'ball was Duke b'ball (although slipping a little while I was there (66-70)).

[kAzE]

A minor quibble, but I wouldn't describe Redick's 3pt shot as lightning-quick, or even quick at all for that matter. Like Andre Dawkins, his jumper actually took a while to get off. But that wasn't a problem for him, just like it wasn't a problem for Dawkins. The reason? Both shooters had incredibly high release points. Redick would REALLY elevate on his shots.

Comparatively, I would actually say that Kennard's release is faster that Redick's was. Though Redick's 3pt shot was more reliable, and more versatile.

Yep, he shoots a bit quicker now, and has a few different off balance releases after years in the NBA, but he's never had a lightning quick trigger. He just jumps incredibly high in the air when he shoots.

[MChambers]

Yep, he shoots a bit quicker now, and has a few different off balance releases after years in the NBA, but he's never had a lightning quick trigger. He just jumps incredibly high in the air when he shoots.

But I thought JJ wasn't athletic? Or is he "sneaky athletic"? :-)

[BandAlum83]

Hahahah both of these actually just made me laugh out loud. Well done!



I wanna hear this great story! Unless I missed it in another post haha

Really?

Well, I had a former client who had moved to Durham to work for CCB (central Carolina bank). He was a duke grad also and we had gotten very friendly at his former employer.

He came into two upper level nidcourt tickets (crusty territory) for that game. I was still in Atlanta, but he called and asked me if I wanted to go to the game. What a great offer and what a great opportunity. I mean #1 duke with # 3 cheats coming in.

But I had a meeting at 9:00 am in Chicago the next day. How could I?

Well, I rerouted through RDU, got a hotel in durham and planned a 6:00 am flight in the morning. With the cheeper hotel in Durham than chicago, it cost me no extra combined with airfare.

Everyone was so pumped that I got maye 45 minutes sleep after hanging at the Hideaway and having to be at the airport early.

Some sleep on the plane, but it was a long day with the client.

I never did tell my wife about my detour. She was home with young kids and I didn't want to rub it in that I was going to have so much fun without her :( I was already getting to do all this glamorous travel afterall.


But it was so worth it!

[sagegrouse]

Really?

Well, I had a former client who had moved to Durham to work for CCB (central Carolina bank). He was a duke grad also and we had gotten very friendly at his former employer.

He came into two upper level nidcourt tickets (crusty territory) for that game. I was still in Atlanta, but he called and asked me if I wanted to go to the game. What a great offer and what a great opportunity. I mean #1 duke with # 3 cheats coming in.

But I had a meeting at 9:00 am in Chicago the next day. How could I?

Well, I rerouted through RDU, got a hotel in durham and planned a 6:00 am flight in the morning. With the cheeper hotel in Durham than chicago, it cost me no extra combined with airfare.

Everyone was so pumped that I got maye 45 minutes sleep after hanging at the Hideaway and having to be at the airport early.

Some sleep on the plane, but it was a long day with the client.

I never did tell my wife about my detour. She was home with young kids and I didn't want to rub it in that I was going to have so much fun without her :( I was already getting to do all this glamorous travel afterall.


But it was so worth it!

Can you still be blackmailed on the escapade or has the statute of limitations run out?

[OldPhiKap]

Can you still be blackmailed on the escapade or has the statute of limitations run out?

Statutes of limitations are legal safe harbors. They do not apply to wives, for whom the limitation is when they darn well tell you what the limitation is. And then, still don't believe it.

Free legal advice for the day.

[MChambers]

Statutes of limitations are legal safe harbors. They do not apply to wives, for whom the limitation is when they darn well tell you what the limitation is. And then, still don't believe it.

Free legal advice for the day.

You're assuming they are still married?

[Edouble]

Yep, he shoots a bit quicker now, and has a few different off balance releases after years in the NBA, but he's never had a lightning quick trigger. He just jumps incredibly high in the air when he shoots.

I actually dislike his current release. His body jackknifes, which he did not do during his college years, when he went straight up and down. His college form was one of the prettiest shots I've ever seen. His new form, while effective, ain't what it used to be.

[OldPhiKap]

You're assuming they are still married?

Ex-wives are even tougher.

[phaedrus]

I actually dislike his current release. His body jackknifes, which he did not do during his college years, when he went straight up and down. His college form was one of the prettiest shots I've ever seen. His new form, while effective, ain't what it used to be.

You may watch him more than me, but my perception is that he is now more capable of hitting weird, off-balance shots and has realized that sometimes those are the only shots he's going to be able to get off. If he gets a clean look - a rarity - he's the same JJ.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Are we still playing the "who is Luke" game? He is so smart with the ball and so rarely makes mistakes. He and Amile are my favorite parts of this team.

[79-77]

I was at the Duke - Florida game tonight in MSG. I'm sure I don't need to say it, but Kennard was fantastic.

Would anyone care to join me in the "he's better than Redick" bunker? We have cookies! The big chocolate chip ones from Costco!

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

I was at the Duke - Florida game tonight in MSG. I'm sure I don't need to say it, but Kennard was fantastic.

Would anyone care to join me in the "he's better than Redick" bunker? We have cookies! The big chocolate chip ones from Costco!

I am not joining your fringe cult yet, but I am certainly paying attention and not ridiculing you.

[BandAlum83]

You're assuming they are still married?

We are still married :)

I never told my employer either. It was pretty important client meeting on 45 minutes sleep.

If I told her today, she'd probably just sake her head.

That's not true...I'd probably catch he'll for keeping stuff from her. Either way, totally not worth it!

[flyingdutchdevil]

I am not joining your fringe cult yet, but I am certainly paying attention and not ridiculing you.

Nope, nope. Definitely not ridiculing the idea. It Kennard finds consistency, I think it's a no-brainer to say Sophomore Kennard > Sophomore JJ. The question is whether a consistent Sophomore Kennard > Junior JJ. I'm not so sure.

[ricks68]

The 60s were a different world.
It was the only other time I have been worried about whether the country would survive (although IMHO the chaos was created by the good side then).
And the music was infinitely better and Duke b'ball was Duke b'ball (although slipping a little while I was there (66-70)).

Verga, Verga, Verga! Two! (or was that toga, toga, toga!-------both, actually.)

ricks

[DukieInBrasil]

Nope, nope. Definitely not ridiculing the idea. It Kennard finds consistency, I think it's a no-brainer to say Sophomore Kennard > Sophomore JJ. The question is whether a consistent Sophomore Kennard > Junior JJ. I'm not so sure.

So. Kennard (to date) is better than Jr. JJ (full year). Scoring is about the same, but Kennard is a better 2pt shooter, while they are about the same in 3FG% and FT%. Kennard is a WAAAAAAAAYYY better rebounder than JJ ever was, and Luke is also a better distributor than JJ was. Neither was/is a defensive guru.
Soph. Kennard may not be able to maintain these numbers for the full season, as i'm sure Jr. JJ's numbers were inflated by early season patsies.

[cato]

So. Kennard (to date) is better than Jr. JJ (full year). Scoring is about the same, but Kennard is a better 2pt shooter, while they are about the same in 3FG% and FT%. Kennard is a WAAAAAAAAYYY better rebounder than JJ ever was, and Luke is also a better distributor than JJ was. Neither was/is a defensive guru.
Soph. Kennard may not be able to maintain these numbers for the full season, as i'm sure Jr. JJ's numbers were inflated by early season patsies.

By his junior year, JJ was a decent defender.

[flyingdutchdevil]

By his junior year, JJ was a decent defender.

Yup. JJ was never a stopper, but he wasn't a liability either. He was extremely solid, and used his intelligence to make up for his complete lack of length.

[devildeac]

The 60s were a different world.
It was the only other time I have been worried about whether the country would survive (although IMHO the chaos was created by the good side then).
And the music was infinitely better and Duke b'ball was Duke b'ball (although slipping a little while I was there (66-70)).

Now get off your own lawn.

;)

[Fish80]

Yup. JJ was never a stopper, but he wasn't a liability either. He was extremely solid, and used his intelligence to make up for his complete lack of length.

JJ suffers from a mild case of T-Rex syndrome, his wingspan at 6'3" is an inch shorter than his height.
Luke is proportional a la da Vinci, 6'5" wingspan and height.

[53n206]

Luke looks to me that he is some taller than I remember JJ. Maybe because he spends more time mixing it up inside with the big guys than I remember JJ having done.

[English]

Luke looks to me that he is some taller than I remember JJ. Maybe because he spends more time mixing it up inside with the big guys than I remember JJ having done.

Your memory is serving you well here...JJ is ~6'4-6'5 and Luke is 6'6.

[Saratoga2]

By his junior year, JJ was a decent defender.

JJ was always moving without the ball and he tended to be the primary scoring option on the team. Luke will have to share that honor with many.

[Saratoga2]

Your memory is serving you well here...JJ is ~6'4-6'5 and Luke is 6'6. At the predraft camp JJ was measured at 6'4" without shoes. Kennard appears to be taller but unless the cinder blocks tell the story, you can't believe anything published in the roster about height.

[Jeff Frosh]

I will play the "Luke = who" game. In the spirit of UCLA's win at Kentucky and the Lakers' attempt to return to relevance, how about Gail Goodrich? For those of you not old enough to remember Goodrich, he was a lefty who could fill it from deep and also had a crafty 15 feet and in scorer's game. Another similarity: He was often the leading scorer on his team (he is still the 3rd highest lefty scorer in NBA history despite the lack of a 3-point shot, which would have been his specialty), but, at least in the NBA, was not considered to be one of the best two or three players on his team (Chamberlain, West, Baylor). Goodrich also was an underrated passer and not considered a stellar defender. It seems like a pretty good comparison to me.

[dukebluesincebirth]

I will play the "Luke = who" game. In the spirit of UCLA's win at Kentucky and the Lakers' attempt to return to relevance, how about Gail Goodrich? For those of you not old enough to remember Goodrich, he was a lefty who could fill it from deep and also had a crafty 15 feet and in scorer's game. Another similarity: He was often the leading scorer on his team (he is still the 3rd highest lefty scorer in NBA history despite the lack of a 3-point shot, which would have been his specialty), but, at least in the NBA, was not considered to be one of the best two or three players on his team (Chamberlain, West, Baylor). Goodrich also was an underrated passer and not considered a stellar defender. It seems like a pretty good comparison to me.

I don't know Goodrich, but Luke reminds me of Chris Mullin.

[Indoor66]

Why can't we accept Luke Kennard as Luke Kennard and not attempt to find a pigeon hole for him?

[English]

Why can't we accept Luke Kennard as Luke Kennard and not attempt to find a pigeon hole for him?

Are basketball comparisons really pigeon holing to a player--on an internet fan site? Player comps are about as common a tool for sports analysis as strengths/weaknesses or any other. I absolutely accept Luke's game (especially the way he's playing it lately) and "running his own race" (or whatever cliche you prefer), but this is a forum for chitting the chat about basketball players and their respective games. Making connections to other players, current and past, is part of the fun.*


*As long as those comparisons stay within ethnic and racial swim lanes. Otherwise, the universe of sports punditry will have a conniption.

[devildeac]

Why can't we accept Luke Kennard as Luke Kennard and not attempt to find a pigeon hole for him?

Please don't use the word pigeon in the same sentence as Luke, or any Duke player for that matter :rolleyes: ;) .

[brevity]

Why can't we accept Luke Kennard as Luke Kennard and not attempt to find a pigeon hole for him?


Are basketball comparisons really pigeon holing to a player--on an internet fan site? Player comps are about as common a tool for sports analysis as strengths/weaknesses or any other.

Player comparisons made by a DBR member limit the DBR member more than the player.

But what do I know? I'm basically Jason Evans with fewer shot attempts and a better completion percentage.

[Indoor66]

Player comparisons made by a DBR member limit the DBR member more than the player.

But what do I know? I'm basically Jason Evans with fewer shot attempts and a better completion percentage.

...and no parenthetical.

[DisplacedBlueDevil]

Lee Melchionni near the end of his career? (Anyone?)

[Billy Dat]

The Ringer has a college sports podcast feed called "Ringer University" and within it is a College Basketball pod co-hosted by Mark Titus of Club Trillion/Grantland/"Don't Put Me in Coach" fame and Tate Frazier who seems to be an entry level podcast engineer for the Ringer - and he's also a huge Heel fan and Duke basher. The pod is called "T'd Up".

But...

They make the case for Luke Kennard as current Player of the Year leader in this pod:

https://soundcloud.com/ringeruniversity/ep-27-td-up-upsets-and-the-stories-of-the-early-season-with-mark-titus-and-tate-frazier

You will also have to wade through them trashing Grayson and making jokes about Duke, so listen at your own risk.

[flyingdutchdevil]

The Ringer has a college sports podcast feed called "Ringer University" and within it is a College Basketball pod co-hosted by Mark Titus of Club Trillion/Grantland/"Don't Put Me in Coach" fame and Tate Frazier who seems to be an entry level podcast engineer for the Ringer - and he's also a huge Heel fan and Duke basher. The pod is called "T'd Up".

But...

They make the case for Luke Kennard as current Player of the Year leader in this pod:

https://soundcloud.com/ringeruniversity/ep-27-td-up-upsets-and-the-stories-of-the-early-season-with-mark-titus-and-tate-frazier

You will also have to wade through them trashing Grayson and making jokes about Duke, so listen at your own risk.

Interesting perspective. I agree with some of what they say about Grayson (definitely not all), but guarantee the vast majority of DBRers will have a visceral reaction to every comment about Grayson.

[Spanarkel]

I will play the "Luke = who" game. In the spirit of UCLA's win at Kentucky and the Lakers' attempt to return to relevance, how about Gail Goodrich? For those of you not old enough to remember Goodrich, he was a lefty who could fill it from deep and also had a crafty 15 feet and in scorer's game. Another similarity: He was often the leading scorer on his team (he is still the 3rd highest lefty scorer in NBA history despite the lack of a 3-point shot, which would have been his specialty), but, at least in the NBA, was not considered to be one of the best two or three players on his team (Chamberlain, West, Baylor). Goodrich also was an underrated passer and not considered a stellar defender. It seems like a pretty good comparison to me.


I think there are some significant similarities, but Goodrich was 6'1'' and Luke is 6'5"+ and a superior rebounder. At the risk of incurring the wrath of other DBR posters, I offer the following historical player as reminding me of Luke: former UK and Washington Bullets(and Milwaukee Bucks)big guard Kevin Grevey. He hailed from Hamilton, OH, a medium sized town 25 miles from Luke's Franklin, OH, and both were Ohio Mr. Basketball. Grevey's UK career(sophomore to senior)was marked by an increase in scoring each year, from 18 to 21 to 23ppg(and IF he had played varsity as a frosh he would have probably averaged ~11ppg just like Luke :))and consistent 6-7 rpg, similar to Luke. As the 3 point shot was not in use until midway through Grevey's NBA career(and his career 3 point average wasn't the greatest at ~33%), I'll refrain from commenting on that aspect of their games. Grevey was a very solid, smooth southpaw 6'5" guard with a rugged/physical side to his game IIRC. Grevey's NBA career of 10+ seasons averaging 11ppg is nothing to sneer at and one could reasonably imagine Luke's NBA career in the same ballpark. Grevey now owns/runs Frozenyo(the name says it all) in the DC area so the next time I'm in DC I plan to ask him if he sees any of his game in our stellar Luke's play.

[luvdahops]

I think there are some significant similarities, but Goodrich was 6'1'' and Luke is 6'5"+ and a superior rebounder. At the risk of incurring the wrath of other DBR posters, I offer the following historical player as reminding me of Luke: former UK and Washington Bullets(and Milwaukee Bucks)big guard Kevin Grevey. He hailed from Hamilton, OH, a medium sized town 25 miles from Luke's Franklin, OH, and both were Ohio Mr. Basketball. Grevey's UK career(sophomore to senior)was marked by an increase in scoring each year, from 18 to 21 to 23ppg(and IF he had played varsity as a frosh he would have probably averaged ~11ppg just like Luke :))and consistent 6-7 rpg, similar to Luke. As the 3 point shot was not in use until midway through Grevey's NBA career(and his career 3 point average wasn't the greatest at ~33%), I'll refrain from commenting on that aspect of their games. Grevey was a very solid, smooth southpaw 6'5" guard with a rugged/physical side to his game IIRC. Grevey's NBA career of 10+ seasons averaging 11ppg is nothing to sneer at and one could reasonably imagine Luke's NBA career in the same ballpark. Grevey now owns/runs Frozenyo(the name says it all) in the DC area so the next time I'm in DC I plan to ask him if he sees any of his game in our stellar Luke's play.

I had lunch recently with a friend who works in the NBA who made the same comparison. I think it is pretty spot on.

[Ichabod Drain]

Interesting perspective. I agree with some of what they say about Grayson (definitely not all), but guarantee the vast majority of DBRers will have a visceral reaction to every comment about Grayson.

I've listened to a few of their episodes. They're pretty good but Titus is a Big 10 guy and the other one is a UNC guy so there's not to much in depth knowledge of Duke. They did conference previews leading up to the season that were pretty good.

[Indoor66]

I hate Kevin Grevey AND anyone who likes him.

[JasonEvans]

But what do I know? I'm basically Jason Evans with fewer shot attempts and a better completion percentage.

Holy !@#%^, that is good!

A far, far, far better completion percentage.

[Spanarkel]

I hate Kevin Grevey AND anyone who likes him.


Doan be hatin'. Any reason other than Grevey's UK lineage?

[NSDukeFan]

Holy !@#%^, that is good!

A far, far, far better completion percentage.

I would argue it might even be more spork-worthy than the news report out of Chapel Hill post. He also has far, far, far fewer shot attempts. 😄

[OldPhiKap]

I would argue it might even be more spork-worthy than the news report out of Chapel Hill post. He also has far, far, far fewer shot attempts. 😄

Brevity and StrayGator have crazy good post:spork ratios.



How do I get mine? Volume, volume, volume!!!!

[JasonEvans]

They make the case for Luke Kennard as current Player of the Year leader...

Love me some Luke but if I had to pick a POY right now, Josh Hart, Lonzo Ball, and Frank Mason II would all be ahead of him. Markelle Fultz might be in the running too, though he is following the Ben Simmons path of playing amazing basketball and putting up gaudy numbers for a team that may not even sniff the NIT.

-Jason "it is just too early, and I suspect Luke's numbers will really start to level off once there are more guys to share the scoring load" Evans

[Indoor66]

Doan be hatin'. Any reason other than Grevey's UK lineage?

I was there in '78.

[westwall]

I think there are some significant similarities, but Goodrich was 6'1'' and Luke is 6'5"+ and a superior rebounder. At the risk of incurring the wrath of other DBR posters, I offer the following historical player as reminding me of Luke: former UK and Washington Bullets(and Milwaukee Bucks)big guard Kevin Grevey. He hailed from Hamilton, OH, a medium sized town 25 miles from Luke's Franklin, OH, and both were Ohio Mr. Basketball. Grevey's UK career(sophomore to senior)was marked by an increase in scoring each year, from 18 to 21 to 23ppg(and IF he had played varsity as a frosh he would have probably averaged ~11ppg just like Luke :))and consistent 6-7 rpg, similar to Luke. As the 3 point shot was not in use until midway through Grevey's NBA career(and his career 3 point average wasn't the greatest at ~33%), I'll refrain from commenting on that aspect of their games. Grevey was a very solid, smooth southpaw 6'5" guard with a rugged/physical side to his game IIRC. Grevey's NBA career of 10+ seasons averaging 11ppg is nothing to sneer at and one could reasonably imagine Luke's NBA career in the same ballpark. Grevey now owns/runs Frozenyo(the name says it all) in the DC area so the next time I'm in DC I plan to ask him if he sees any of his game in our stellar Luke's play.

I am on record as saying "let Luke run his own race", but having said that, the Gail Goodrich comparison is appealing. Height is not a salient distinction; ALL players today are substantially taller than their counterparts of the early 60's (yes, there were exceptions but look at the heights of UCLA starters in their Final Four years of 62 - 64, or Duke's starters in the same period).
But apart from height, the comparisons are good: lefties, good ball-handlers, crafty passers, and scorer mentalities. I saw Goodrich in the NCAA's several times and can only hope that Luke eventually can do for Duke what Goodrich did for UCLA.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Player comparisons made by a DBR member limit the DBR member more than the player.

I already got in trouble for snarking about this just yesterday, but needless to say, I agree.

[Spanarkel]

I was there in '78.



Since you were there in '78, I trust you remember that Kevin Grevey wasn't there. Jack "Goose" Givens was the left-handed guard who did the Devils in with his crazy, Bootsy Thornton-like 41 points. I don't dislike all the great Lousville players(Wes Unseld, Junior Bridgeman, Darrell Griffith, etc.)because Pervis Ellison played the best game of his life to help Louisville beat Duke in the '86 Finals. I was just giving Kevin Grevey his due as an outstanding player, and saying that Luke's current skills evoke(at least for me)Kevin Grevey's game. It should be possible to appreciate outstanding players without condoning the programs they play for.

[DeBlueDevil]

Lee Melchionni near the end of his career? (Anyone?)

I can't go with a Lee comparison, only because he wasn't nearly as good with the ball in his hands as Luke is. I would even go as far to say Lee wasn't nearly the shooter Luke is either. Although, I guess you could give Lee a slight edge defensively?

Lee was always a fav of mine just because of his fire.

[westwall]

I think there are some significant similarities, but Goodrich was 6'1'' and Luke is 6'5"+ and a superior rebounder. At the risk of incurring the wrath of other DBR posters, I offer the following historical player as reminding me of Luke: former UK and Washington Bullets(and Milwaukee Bucks)big guard Kevin Grevey. He hailed from Hamilton, OH, a medium sized town 25 miles from Luke's Franklin, OH, and both were Ohio Mr. Basketball. Grevey's UK career(sophomore to senior)was marked by an increase in scoring each year, from 18 to 21 to 23ppg(and IF he had played varsity as a frosh he would have probably averaged ~11ppg just like Luke :))and consistent 6-7 rpg, similar to Luke. As the 3 point shot was not in use until midway through Grevey's NBA career(and his career 3 point average wasn't the greatest at ~33%), I'll refrain from commenting on that aspect of their games. Grevey was a very solid, smooth southpaw 6'5" guard with a rugged/physical side to his game IIRC. Grevey's NBA career of 10+ seasons averaging 11ppg is nothing to sneer at and one could reasonably imagine Luke's NBA career in the same ballpark. Grevey now owns/runs Frozenyo(the name says it all) in the DC area so the next time I'm in DC I plan to ask him if he sees any of his game in our stellar Luke's play.

I am on record as saying "let Luke run his own race", but having said that, the Gail Goodrich comparison is appealing. Height is not a salient distinction; ALL players today are substantially taller than their counterparts of the early 60's (yes, there were exceptions but look at the heights of UCLA starters in their Final Four years of 62 - 64, or Duke's starters in the same period).
But apart from height, the comparisons are good: lefties, good ball-handlers, crafty passers, and scorer mentalities. I saw Goodrich in the NCAA's several times and can only hope that Luke eventually can do for Duke what Goodrich did for UCLA.

[jacone21]

I can't go with a Lee comparison, only because he wasn't nearly as good with the ball in his hands as Luke is. I would even go as far to say Lee wasn't nearly the shooter Luke is either. Although, I guess you could give Lee a slight edge defensively?

Lee was always a fav of mine just because of his fire.

I've always thought that Lee should have marketed his own brand of nose plugs. Seems like he had at least one in his nose at some point in every game. :D

[flyingdutchdevil]

Lee Melchionni near the end of his career? (Anyone?)

I'm curious as to whether this is sarcasm. Lee's best offensive year - saw him score 253 points in the whole season. Luke, thus far, has scored 204 points. And we're 10 games in.

Comparing Lee to Kennard is like comparing Marvin Williams to Kevin Durant; sure, they play the same position and are roughly the same size, but that's where the comparisons end.

[English]

I already got in trouble for snarking about this just yesterday, but needless to say, I agree.

Yeah! Because player comps are for the lowest common denominator! No real basketball mind would stoop to something so rudimentary and dim.

/Looks around
//Notices that every professional basketball scout uses player comps to talk about basketball players' skillsets
///Notices that every NBA front office executive uses player comps to talk about basketball players' games
////Notices that every coach uses player comps to describe how a player might practically fit into his/her coaching style
/////Blushes

[Indoor66]

Yeah! Because player comps are for the lowest common denominator! No real basketball mind would stoop to something so rudimentary and dim.

/Looks around
//Notices that every professional basketball scout uses player comps to talk about basketball players' skillsets
///Notices that every NBA front office executive uses player comps to talk about basketball players' games
////Notices that every coach uses player comps to describe how a player might practically fit into his/her coaching style
/////Blushes

How sensitive, Snowflake.

[NSDukeFan]

Brevity and StrayGator have crazy good post:spork ratios.



How do I get mine? Volume, volume, volume!!!!

I agree with your stats and might add devil84 and nugget to your list of high spork:post ratios.
Volume, volume, volume makes me thin of the old SNL commercial with Kevin Nealon about the change bank that made its business due to volume. Sorry, couldn't find a link for it quickly.

[English]

How sensitive, Snowflake.

I resemble that remark. :mad:

[Spanarkel]

I'm curious as to whether this is sarcasm. Lee's best offensive year - saw him score 253 points in the whole season. Luke, thus far, has scored 204 points. And we're 10 games in.

Comparing Lee to Kennard is like comparing Marvin Williams to Kevin Durant; sure, they play the same position and are roughly the same size, but that's where the comparisons end.



Since "DisplacedBlueDevil"(who made the Melchionni-Kennard comparison)attended the '72 Duke Basketball Camp, he may be referring to Gary Melchionni, and not Lee.

[79-77]

Since I appear to have initiated the player comparison tempest in a teapot with my wanton and reckless comparison to Redick, I will clarify that I don't think Redick is a great comparable for Kennard in terms of style of play. IMHO, Scheyer is a better comparable for Kennard, while Richard Hamilton is a better comparable for JJ (although the 3 is of course a much bigger part of JJ's game than it was of Hamilton's).

I mentioned Redick because he is the modern-day gold standard for high-scoring Duke shooting guards, and because Kennard's game is closer to Redick's than it is to Dawkins' (who is the all-time gold standard for Duke shooting guards) -- and, most importantly, because I think Kennard is turning into an all-time great Duke player.

I go back to the all-important "if you were constructing your all-time Duke team to play an all-time UNC team for permanent bragging rights, with the players chosen based solely on what they showed in college, who ya got?" standard. I've never had JJ in my starting 5, and I don't think Kennard will get there either, but I think I'm bringing Kennard in off the bench before I bring in JJ.

[CDu]

I am on record as saying "let Luke run his own race", but having said that, the Gail Goodrich comparison is appealing. Height is not a salient distinction; ALL players today are substantially taller than their counterparts of the early 60's (yes, there were exceptions but look at the heights of UCLA starters in their Final Four years of 62 - 64, or Duke's starters in the same period).
But apart from height, the comparisons are good: lefties, good ball-handlers, crafty passers, and scorer mentalities. I saw Goodrich in the NCAA's several times and can only hope that Luke eventually can do for Duke what Goodrich did for UCLA.

Can't say that I ever saw Goodrich play (I'm familiar with his career, but not the intricacies of his game). But this is one of the reasons I love this board. Quite a wide range of experiences being contributed by our posters.

[Lar77]

Since I appear to have initiated the player comparison tempest in a teapot with my wanton and reckless comparison to Redick, I will clarify that I don't think Redick is a great comparable for Kennard in terms of style of play. IMHO, Scheyer is a better comparable for Kennard, while Richard Hamilton is a better comparable for JJ (although the 3 is of course a much bigger part of JJ's game than it was of Hamilton's).

I mentioned Redick because he is the modern-day gold standard for high-scoring Duke shooting guards, and because Kennard's game is closer to Redick's than it is to Dawkins' (who is the all-time gold standard for Duke shooting guards) -- and, most importantly, because I think Kennard is turning into an all-time great Duke player.

I go back to the all-important "if you were constructing your all-time Duke team to play an all-time UNC team for permanent bragging rights, with the players chosen based solely on what they showed in college, who ya got?" standard. I've never had JJ in my starting 5, and I don't think Kennard will get there either, but I think I'm bringing Kennard in off the bench before I bring in JJ.

Interesting standard and I agree JJ and Luke (assuming his evolution continues) probably do not start that game, but they do (may) have jerseys hanging from the rafters.

Which leads to another discussion, given our team (with Giles coming back as good as anticipated), who starts against this year's unc team (assuming that Pinson and Berry are back). There are several combinations that are all very favorable to us. Giles-Jefferson-Tatum-Jones-Allen with Kennard first off the bench? Or Bolden-Jefferson-Tatum-Kennard-Allen (I like the Bolden-Meeks matchup) with Giles-Jones subbing in for Bolden-Kennard? Then bring in Jackson to lead the press?

Thoughts?

[flyingdutchdevil]

Interesting standard and I agree JJ and Luke (assuming his evolution continues) probably do not start that game, but they do (may) have jerseys hanging from the rafters.

Which leads to another discussion, given our team (with Giles coming back as good as anticipated), who starts against this year's unc team (assuming that Pinson and Berry are back). There are several combinations that are all very favorable to us. Giles-Jefferson-Tatum-Jones-Allen with Kennard first off the bench? Or Bolden-Jefferson-Tatum-Kennard-Allen (I like the Bolden-Meeks matchup) with Giles-Jones subbing in for Bolden-Kennard? Then bring in Jackson to lead the press?

Thoughts?

Starters against UNC will be starters throughout Jan and Feb, assuming everyone healthy.

Pencil in Grayson, Kennard, Tatum, and Amile. Fifth will depend on fit. My guess is Matthew Jones from Dallas, TX.

[subzero02]

Yeah! Because player comps are for the lowest common denominator! No real basketball mind would stoop to something so rudimentary and dim.

/Looks around
//Notices that every professional basketball scout uses player comps to talk about basketball players' skillsets
///Notices that every NBA front office executive uses player comps to talk about basketball players' games
////Notices that every coach uses player comps to describe how a player might practically fit into his/her coaching style
/////Blushes

"Generalizations and stereotypes should be avoided at all costs when describing a player's skill set; player to player comparisons are much more effective in keeping me employed."- Danny Ferry

[niveklaen]

"Generalizations and stereotypes should be avoided at all costs when describing a player's skill set; player to player comparisons are much more effective in keeping me employed."- Danny Ferry

I think he was fired for stating something that was not a player to player comparison...

[Kedsy]

...but I think I'm bringing Kennard in off the bench before I bring in JJ.

I don't agree with this. What you may not be factoring in is the fact that JJ Redick was the focal point of every opponents' defense. He was routinely double-covered; he was bumped and grabbed practically every step he took; he reportedly went through several jerseys a season because defenders pulled on his shirt so often. Luke Kennard has never been the focal point of our opponents' defenses, not even now that he's scoring so much. And he probably won't be, not with Grayson and Jayson and Amile and (hopefully) Harry on the floor with him.

If JJ had received the same level of opposing defensive attention that Luke receives, I think you might be singing a different song.

[79-77]

I don't agree with this. What you may not be factoring in is the fact that JJ Redick was the focal point of every opponents' defense. He was routinely double-covered; he was bumped and grabbed practically every step he took; he reportedly went through several jerseys a season because defenders pulled on his shirt so often. Luke Kennard has never been the focal point of our opponents' defenses, not even now that he's scoring so much. And he probably won't be, not with Grayson and Jayson and Amile and (hopefully) Harry on the floor with him.

If JJ had received the same level of opposing defensive attention that Luke receives, I think you might be singing a different song.

This is very fair, and I of course have no way to disprove it. I just think Luke has more game than JJ did -- he can score in more ways, from more spots on the floor, he can pass it better, both in tight and from distance, and he can rebound better. And while Kennard probably isn't quite as good at the 3 as JJ was, he's in JJ's neighborhood.

And it's going to take a multi-talented squad to beat that UNC team.

[niveklaen]

This is very fair, and I of course have no way to disprove it. I just think Luke has more game than JJ did -- he can score in more ways, from more spots on the floor, he can pass it better, both in tight and from distance, and he can rebound better. And while Kennard probably isn't quite as good at the 3 as JJ was, he's in JJ's neighborhood.

And it's going to take a multi-talented squad to beat that UNC team.

I agree that Luke has a more varied offensive game than JJ. I would not put his 3pt shooting in JJ's neighborhood unless by neighborhood you mean the western hemisphere.

[Wander]

Redick is the best shooter in Duke history, and the 2nd best 3 point shooter in college basketball history (after Curry). This conversation is a little silly to me.

I expected to come to this thread and have all the discussion be about comparing Kennard to Scheyer.

[Tripping William]

Redick is the best shooter in Duke history, and the 2nd best 3 point shooter in college basketball history (after Curry). This conversation is a little silly to me.

I expected to come to this thread and have all the discussion be about comparing Kennard to Scheyer.

And where is Jumbo when we need him?

[79-77]

Redick is the best shooter in Duke history, and the 2nd best 3 point shooter in college basketball history (after Curry). This conversation is a little silly to me.

I expected to come to this thread and have all the discussion be about comparing Kennard to Scheyer.


Well, I'm not sure why the conversation needs to be dismissed as silly, especially when it wasn't really about who the better shooter is/was. My point, which I made in a good-faith attempt to converse with fellow knowledgeable Duke fans, is that I think Kennard will end up being a better player (not shooter) than JJ was.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Well, I'm not sure why the conversation needs to be dismissed as silly, especially when it wasn't really about who the better shooter is/was. My point, which I made in a good-faith attempt to converse with fellow knowledgeable Duke fans, is that I think Kennard will end up being a better player (not shooter) than JJ was.

It's possible, but in my opinion unlikely. And it has nothing to do with talent but rather the NBA draft. If Kennard continues his insane efficiency, he will leave this year. If not, definitely next year. There is too much risk to stay (see Allen, Grayson. He was a surefire first round pick last year and decided to stay. His injury has absolutely cost him many draft spots. Hopefully he's able to gain it back).

What made JJ so unique (other than his talent) is that he stayed for 4 years. That is unheard of for players who are 1st Team All-American (of which JJ was his junior year).

[NSDukeFan]

It's possible, but in my opinion unlikely. And it has nothing to do with talent but rather the NBA draft. If Kennard continues his insane efficiency, he will leave this year. If not, definitely next year. There is too much risk to stay (see Allen, Grayson. He was a surefire first round pick last year and decided to stay. His injury has absolutely cost him many draft spots. Hopefully he's able to gain it back).

What made JJ so unique (other than his talent) is that he stayed for 4 years. That is unheard of for players who are 1st Team All-American (of which JJ was his junior year).

Do you really believe that NBA GMs would draft Grayson lower this year because he was injured for a few games at the beginning of this year? I expect it is way too early to even be thinking that Grayson could be drafted lower. Unless he is permanently hurt and will never recover, I can't see a league drafting a lot on potential downgrading him.

[fuse]

Love this thread.
One of the most pleasant surprises of the season.

Quite simply, Luke Kennard has been our most important player this season to date.

It will be interesting to continue to see how the season unfolds.

[dukelifer]

Since I appear to have initiated the player comparison tempest in a teapot with my wanton and reckless comparison to Redick, I will clarify that I don't think Redick is a great comparable for Kennard in terms of style of play. IMHO, Scheyer is a better comparable for Kennard, while Richard Hamilton is a better comparable for JJ (although the 3 is of course a much bigger part of JJ's game than it was of Hamilton's).

I mentioned Redick because he is the modern-day gold standard for high-scoring Duke shooting guards, and because Kennard's game is closer to Redick's than it is to Dawkins' (who is the all-time gold standard for Duke shooting guards) -- and, most importantly, because I think Kennard is turning into an all-time great Duke player.

I go back to the all-important "if you were constructing your all-time Duke team to play an all-time UNC team for permanent bragging rights, with the players chosen based solely on what they showed in college, who ya got?" standard. I've never had JJ in my starting 5, and I don't think Kennard will get there either, but I think I'm bringing Kennard in off the bench before I bring in JJ.

When Kennard becomes the focus of the other team's D, then he moves into Redick territory. Scheyer is a better comp as he had Singler and Smith to take some of the defensive attention. Kennard has Allen and now Tatum. However, Kennard is beginning to have big games as a sophomore- so we shall see how this develops.

[Tappan Zee Devil]

Redick is the best shooter in Duke history, and the 2nd best 3 point shooter in college basketball history (after Curry). This conversation is a little silly to me.

I expected to come to this thread and have all the discussion be about comparing Kennard to Scheyer.

uhh - Bobby Verga says "hello"

- although he was not allowed to make 3 point shots, MANY - many, many of his 2 pointers were three pointers by todays rules

[westwall]

And where is Jumbo when we need him?

On the bench.

[Reilly]

The recruiting chatter about Luke coming out of h.s. was Joey Beard-esque; he's showing a Ricky Price-esque sophomore soar; and he'll probably be an NBA starter on day 1, like DeMarcus Nelson.

[whereinthehellami]

Redick was one of the best 3-point/FT shooters in college basketball. He was so determined to get his shot and really well-conditioned/relentless at running around screens. But it was a single minded greatness (deflectors up).

IMO Kennard is a more complete player. It starts with his basketball IQ and creativity. Kennard is one of those players that seems to know where the ball is going before other players. Which allows Kennard to be a better rebounder and passer than Redick was. And his creativity in the lane speaks of potential greatness. I love watching him in the lane, he is so at ease and crafty. He just understands spacing and angles. I think it is really special when a player can operate like that in the lane, keep in mind he is doing this against longer and more athletic guys. There is not a lot of daylight down there.

[JasonEvans]

Can I just say there is a heck of a lot of recency bias happening in this thread. Luke is on a hot steak lately and we are loving the ride, but comparing him to JJ is beyond absurd at this point. I thinks folks are forgetting how great JJ was in college.

Similarly, the idea that Grayson has hurt his NBA stock because of 10 games played in November while injured is just as ludicrous. I urge you to
Listen to the podcast where former ESPN NBA editor Jordan Brenner laughs at the notion that NBA Draft stock actually fluctuates all that much. He points out that NBA talent evaluators are actually smart enough to not be swayed by a few clearly aberrant games.

Jason "I'm betting that Luke, like most shooters, soon has some games where he is less than great from the field... just the reality of the game" Evans

[jv001]

I agree that the talk of Luke being as good or better than JJ is way off base. JJ was great at moving without the ball and taking a beating as well. Sort of like Grayson last year. Luke is making a name for himself and who knows how great he'll be by the time he leaves Duke. I'm just going to enjoy all of our players this season. It's ok to compare players but way too early to say one of our freshmen or sophomore players are going to have their number hung in the rafters. GoDuke!

[English]

Can I just say there is a heck of a lot of recency bias happening in this thread. Luke is on a hot steak lately and we are loving the ride, but comparing him to JJ is beyond absurd at this point. I thinks folks are forgetting how great JJ was in college.

Similarly, the idea that Grayson has hurt his NBA stock because of 10 games played in November while injured is just as ludicrous. I urge you to
Listen to the podcast where former ESPN NBA editor Jordan Brenner laughs at the notion that NBA Draft stock actually fluctuates all that much. He points out that NBA talent evaluators are actually smart enough to not be swayed by a few clearly aberrant games.

Jason "I'm betting that Luke, like most shooters, soon has some games where he is less than great from the field... just the reality of the game" Evans

Agree with nearly all of this. One minor (and slightly off-topic) quibble--NBA talent evaluators have been fairly open to admitting a tendency to over-inflate the significance of a hot streak in the NCAAT. Self-awareness is the first step in avoiding this pitfall, but it's not gone away. As it goes these days, a few clearly aberrant games in March/April can sway plenty of draft boards. See Williams, Derrick. See Thomas, Tyrus. See Allen, Grayson circa 2015.

As it relates to Grayson, an irritating injury in November, and a swoon in scoring stats and effectiveness, this isn't meaningful at all barring this nagging toe sticking around a few months.

[Ggallagher]

No way I'm jumping into the JJ/Luke debate, but since I have an inside source related to Luke's hair-fiddling, I thought I'd throw some actual factual information into the thread :)

The trainer I work with at the gym is from Franklin (Luke's home), went to an opposing high school, and played against him in pick up games. Since early high school (and possibly earlier), Luke has always messed with his hair while he played. He had longer hair in high school and was always pushing it back out of his face - even as he dribbled sometimes. Apparently this really annoyed some of the opposing teams - see, maybe Luke is like JJ.

So maybe what we see him do now is just a habit he can't get away from. Anyhow it's been going on for four or more years so it's not likely to stop all of the sudden.

[Indoor66]

No way I'm jumping into the JJ/Luke debate, but since I have an inside source related to Luke's hair-fiddling, I thought I'd throw some actual factual information into the thread :)

The trainer I work with at the gym is from Franklin (Luke's home), went to an opposing high school, and played against him in pick up games. Since early high school (and possibly earlier), Luke has always messed with his hair while he played. He had longer hair in high school and was always pushing it back out of his face - even as he dribbled sometimes. Apparently this really annoyed some of the opposing teams - see, maybe Luke is like JJ.

So maybe what we see him do now is just a habit he can't get away from. Anyhow it's been going on for four or more years so it's not likely to stop all of the sudden.

Some people pick their cuticles, some chew their nails, some pick their nose. I'll take fiddling with hair!

[79-77]

Can I just say there is a heck of a lot of recency bias happening in this thread. Luke is on a hot steak lately and we are loving the ride, but comparing him to JJ is beyond absurd at this point. I thinks folks are forgetting how great JJ was in college.

Similarly, the idea that Grayson has hurt his NBA stock because of 10 games played in November while injured is just as ludicrous. I urge you to
Listen to the podcast where former ESPN NBA editor Jordan Brenner laughs at the notion that NBA Draft stock actually fluctuates all that much. He points out that NBA talent evaluators are actually smart enough to not be swayed by a few clearly aberrant games.

Jason "I'm betting that Luke, like most shooters, soon has some games where he is less than great from the field... just the reality of the game" Evans


Well, "beyond absurd" seems a bit strong. If you're saying that we haven't seen enough of Kennard yet to speculate as to whether he can achieve all-time Duke great status -- I suppose that's reasonable enough -- but I think 1.25 seasons is enough time to allow us to indulge in sports fan talk as to how his career will compare with JJ's when all is said and done.

And if you're saying that JJ was so great that the notion of Kennard eclipsing him is "beyond absurd" -- well, it's a large nation, with many different POVs.

Separately, I thought Jordan Brenner was great on your podcast (which I've been listening to for a while and enjoy -- thanks for taking the time to do it and to moderate this board).

[niveklaen]

Agree with nearly all of this. One minor (and slightly off-topic) quibble--NBA talent evaluators have been fairly open to admitting a tendency to over-inflate the significance of a hot streak in the NCAAT. Self-awareness is the first step in avoiding this pitfall, but it's not gone away. As it goes these days, a few clearly aberrant games in March/April can sway plenty of draft boards. See Williams, Derrick. See Thomas, Tyrus. See Allen, Grayson circa 2015.

As it relates to Grayson, an irritating injury in November, and a swoon in scoring stats and effectiveness, this isn't meaningful at all barring this nagging toe sticking around a few months.

I think this is what everyone who worries about Grayson's draft stock are focusing on. If Grayson regains his efficiency from last year and swaps a slightly lower volume for slightly higher assists, then his draft stock will be fine. But if his turf toe nags him all year long and his efficiency never rebounds he could easily fall to the 2nd round.

[DukieInBrasil]

The recruiting chatter about Luke coming out of h.s. was Joey Beard-esque; he's showing a Ricky Price-esque sophomore soar; and he'll probably be an NBA starter on day 1, like DeMarcus Nelson.

I loved Demarcus's game while he was at Duke, and i really wish he had gotten more looks from the NBA before he had to journey to Europe for a very lucrative career there. However, he only played 13 total games in the NBA before getting waived. His 5 starts for Golden State (pre-Curry wasteland) were essentially a gimmick as Don Nelson wanted to shake his team up.
I would be quite sad if Luke's NBA career turned out like that. I think Luke's got a lot more skill to his game than Demarcus had, although his lack of obvious explosive athleticism may keep him out of the show. It's hard to say how it will all end up, but Luke may discover that consistent 3pt shot that made Lebron James the #2 all-time HS scorer in Ohio. Although Luke has lots of skills and is good at many things, if a player doesn't have at least one exceptional skill, he won't make it. Look at Quinn Cook, he's above average in lots of things and is destroying professional competition in the D-League both last year and this year, and he STILL hasn't gotten a look from an NBA team.
I think i'm gonna try to focus on enjoying this year and let all the professional stuff sort itself out later. Luke is playing great right now and i hope he keeps it up for the next 30 games ;-)

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Luke is playing great right now and i hope he keeps it up for the next 30 games ;-)

30 games? Geez that's a lot of...

Oh... I see what you did there...

[Troublemaker]

One thing I thought of about Luke.

Sometimes, it's not just the recruiting battles over the top-5 or top-10 prospects that are important. Luke was a top-25 prospect, and he was a crucial battle to win.

Could you imagine him on Kentucky right now, starting beside Fox and Monk, providing Calipari with a much-needed boost in shooting and creativity? They would be a much more threatening team (especially once you remove Luke from Duke's roster), and they're pretty darn good right now.

[Reilly]

So basically, if Luke keeps this up, he'll end up being who Marty Pocius was supposed to be, or who Nick Horvath was (in practice).

[slower]

It's hard to say how it will all end up, but Luke may discover that consistent 3pt shot that made Lebron James the #2 all-time HS scorer in Ohio...

Actually, Lebron was #3, Luke was #2, and Jon Diebler was #1. Although, Wikipedia lists Jay Burson as #2 (shifting Luke to #3 and Lebron to #4).

[Edouble]

One thing I thought of about Luke.

Sometimes, it's not just the recruiting battles over the top-5 or top-10 prospects that are important. Luke was a top-25 prospect, and he was a crucial battle to win.

Could you imagine him on Kentucky right now, starting beside Fox and Monk, providing Calipari with a much-needed boost in shooting and creativity? They would be a much more threatening team (especially once you remove Luke from Duke's roster), and they're pretty darn good right now.

Yes, I can. He'd just be hanging around the perimeter like Kyle Wiltjer did. Cal wouldn't know what to do with Luke.

[Edouble]

Some discussion of Luke as "Duke's NPOY Candidate" during the Kansas/Nebraska game on ESPN right now.

Miles Simon says that Kennard is one his his favorite players to watch in college basketball this year, and that Luke has "the complete package".

[BandAlum83]

Can I just say there is a heck of a lot of recency bias happening in this thread. Luke is on a hot steak lately and we are loving the ride, but comparing him to JJ is beyond absurd at this point. I thinks folks are forgetting how great JJ was in college.

Similarly, the idea that Grayson has hurt his NBA stock because of 10 games played in November while injured is just as ludicrous. I urge you to
Listen to the podcast where former ESPN NBA editor Jordan Brenner laughs at the notion that NBA Draft stock actually fluctuates all that much. He points out that NBA talent evaluators are actually smart enough to not be swayed by a few clearly aberrant games.

Jason "I'm betting that Luke, like most shooters, soon has some games where he is less than great from the field... just the reality of the game" Evans

Agreed, Jason. The only thing that I think will drive Grayson's draft stock down (measured by draft position) is the seemingly ridiculous talent that will be available this year.

[DisplacedBlueDevil]

I'm curious as to whether this is sarcasm. Lee's best offensive year - saw him score 253 points in the whole season. Luke, thus far, has scored 204 points. And we're 10 games in.

Comparing Lee to Kennard is like comparing Marvin Williams to Kevin Durant; sure, they play the same position and are roughly the same size, but that's where the comparisons end.

No sarcasm intended (perhaps a poor attempt at humor, parenthetically speaking). I was trying to come up with another Duke lefty in the Luke debate besides Jack Marin and Lee came to mind. Other than those two, I'm out...and I was not referring to Gary (Lee's dad, lefty?), who, to my recollection, did not come to the '73 camp, which had Jerry West, Sam Jones, and Duke's Steve Vacendak.

I remember watching Jack Marin on film during camp, as well as the '72 NBA ASG - he was the real deal on the court. And I've heard he's a helluva golfer. Unless Luke has a very low HDCP, I'm going to say Jack is the greatest lefty cager/golfer combination in Duke history...

[79-77]

Here's something else about Kennard: I think he's earned the rare and coveted "I want him on the floor at all times" status from Coach K.

Despite the team having plenty of bodies at this point, in a game yesterday that wasn't competitive, I am pretty sure Kennard didn't come out of the UNLV game until true garbage time (ie late in the 2nd half).

[jimsumner]

No sarcasm intended (perhaps a poor attempt at humor, parenthetically speaking). I was trying to come up with another Duke lefty in the Luke debate besides Jack Marin and Lee came to mind. Other than those two, I'm out...and I was not referring to Gary (Lee's dad, lefty?), who, to my recollection, did not come to the '73 camp, which had Jerry West, Sam Jones, and Duke's Steve Vacendak.

I remember watching Jack Marin on film during camp, as well as the '72 NBA ASG - he was the real deal on the court. And I've heard he's a helluva golfer. Unless Luke has a very low HDCP, I'm going to say Jack is the greatest lefty cager/golfer combination in Duke history...

Other Duke lefties would include Johnny Dawkins, Thomas Hill, Gary Melchionni, Pete Kramer, Josh McRoberts, Rodney Hood, Hack Tison, Justise Winslow, Joe Kennedy, Steve Vandeberg, Dick DeVenzio, Lefty Driesell, Elliott Williams, Jim Suddath, Greg Wendt, Taylor King, and anyone I forgot and anyone other than Lefty from before 1960 that I omitted because I don't remember back that far.

[arnie]

Other Duke lefties would include Johnny Dawkins, Thomas Hill, Gary Melchionni, Pete Kramer, Josh McRoberts, Rodney Hood, Hack Tison, Justise Winslow, Joe Kennedy, Steve Vandeberg, Dick DeVenzio, Lefty Driesell, Elliott Williams, Jim Suddath, Greg Wendt, Taylor King, and anyone I forgot and anyone other than Lefty from before 1960 that I omitted because I don't remember back that far.

Oh, Pete Kramer. Sort of remember he was a capable but undersized forward - but unfortunately do remember the missed 1&1.

[DisplacedBlueDevil]

Other Duke lefties would include Johnny Dawkins, Thomas Hill, Gary Melchionni, Pete Kramer, Josh McRoberts, Rodney Hood, Hack Tison, Justise Winslow, Joe Kennedy, Steve Vandeberg, Dick DeVenzio, Lefty Driesell, Elliott Williams, Jim Suddath, Greg Wendt, Taylor King, and anyone I forgot and anyone other than Lefty from before 1960 that I omitted because I don't remember back that far.

If Johnny has a golf game, Jack could be in trouble...

[whereinthehellami]

Kennard is quickly becoming an excellent passer. Kennard has a great understanding of angles and spacing. When he is passing, he is looking to make plays and be aggressive (something Jackson needs to work on). Couple that with the game slowing down for Luke and he is really becoming a load to handle. There is almost an artisan quality to his play, a creative expression coming out before our eyes. He has strung together quite a few jaw dropping passes the last few games. A lot of fun to watch!

[Ima Facultiwyfe]

Fixed it for you.

(Note: Hansbrough gets three asterixes on his "all time scoring record". That's one asterix for the ridiculous number of free throw attempts Hans got from the refs, another for all of his Swahili independent study courses, and a third for his free-style rapping.)

Add another for his Chicken Licken reading skill. *
Love, Ima

[Skitzle]

Add another for his Chicken Licken reading skill. *
Love, Ima

Don't give him too many stars though..

1. Tyler hansbrough*****
2. JJ
3. ?

"C all da stars next 2 my nam meens I am da best!" - Tyler Hansbrough

[Spanarkel]

Other Duke lefties would include Johnny Dawkins, Thomas Hill, Gary Melchionni, Pete Kramer, Josh McRoberts, Rodney Hood, Hack Tison, Justise Winslow, Joe Kennedy, Steve Vandeberg, Dick DeVenzio, Lefty Driesell, Elliott Williams, Jim Suddath, Greg Wendt, Taylor King, and anyone I forgot and anyone other than Lefty from before 1960 that I omitted because I don't remember back that far.


Greg Wendt is on the very short list of Coach K's recruited players who didn't win an NCAA Tourny game: Jabari, Rodney, Austin, and Silent G. Did I leave anyone else off?

[jimsumner]

Greg Wendt is on the very short list of Coach K's recruited players who didn't win an NCAA Tourny game: Jabari, Rodney, Austin, and Silent G. Did I leave anyone else off?

Doug McNeely.

Bill Jackman.

Andre Sweet.

Semi Ojeleye.

I'm assuming that winning an NCAA Tournament game means being on the roster when the game was played. If we require actually playing in a winning game, then the list would likely lengthen.

[MChambers]

Greg Wendt is on the very short list of Coach K's recruited players who didn't win an NCAA Tourny game: Jabari, Rodney, Austin, and Silent G. Did I leave anyone else off?

Kris Humphries.

[jimsumner]

Kris Humphries.

Then why not Shaun Livingston?

Inasmuch as neither ever actually enrolled at Duke, let alone participated in a practice, I'm inclined to include both in the close-but-no-cigar category. In Humphries' case, perhaps the bullet-dodged-category.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Then why not Shaun Livingston?

Inasmuch as neither ever actually enrolled at Duke, let alone participated in a practice, I'm inclined to include both in the close-but-no-cigar category. In Humphries' case, perhaps the bullet-dodged-category.

Wait, are you saying you don't wish Kim Kardashian was part of the Duke family? ;)

[MChambers]

Well, Humphries arrived on campus, right? Not much of a distinction.

In the finest of Duke traditions, I was being a smart-a**.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Well, Humphries arrived on campus, right? Not much of a distinction.

In the finest of Duke traditions, I was being a smart-a**.

At least you were being smart. At UNC, they are just a**es.

[jimsumner]

Well, Humphries arrived on campus, right? Not much of a distinction.

In the finest of Duke traditions, I was being a smart-a**.

No, Humphries did not arrive on campus. He was released from his LOI while he was still in high school. Humphries never enrolled at Duke, never attended a class at Duke and never participated in a formal practice, film session or training program at Duke.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

At least you were being smart. At UNC, they are just a**es.

I don't care who you are, that there's funny.

[sagegrouse]

Wait, are you saying you don't wish Kim Kardashian was part of the Duke family? ;)

Well, she's no Doris Duke.

[CDu]

No, Humphries did not arrive on campus. He was released from his LOI while he was still in high school. Humphries never enrolled at Duke, never attended a class at Duke and never participated in a formal practice, film session or training program at Duke.

In fact, I'd be even less inclined to include Humphries than I would Livingston (and I wouldn't include Livingston either). At least Livingston only ever committed to Duke. Humphries (as you said) de-committed in May 2003 long before ever setting foot on campus as a student. He only ever enrolled as a college student at Minnesota.

[MChambers]

My memory was faulty, as increasingly is the case. But I still enjoy being a smart aleck!

[Indoor66]

My memory was faulty, as increasingly is the case. But I still enjoy being a smart aleck!

I get confused sometimes. Is this Denny Kennard of Kenny Dennard?:confused:

[Billy Dat]

Good Duke talk, and lots of gushing about Luke, on Sam Vecenie's rebooted "Game Theory" podcast

http://podbay.fm/show/1054081827/e/1481607189?autostart=1

The guest is Rob Dauster and they talk about the freshman across the country, and then go heavy on Duke and Duke's upside and then dive in on Luke for a love fest, including his NBA draft potential (Vecenie, a draft guru, has him as a potential 2017 first rounder, Dauster is not as sure)

I am sure it has been mentioned, but they way he is playing, Luke is no guarantee to be in a Duke uniform next year.

[MChambers]

I get confused sometimes. Is this Denny Kennard of Kenny Dennard?:confused:

I think it's either Brian Koubek and/or Greg Zoubek.

But, to get back on topic, Luke is having a wonderful year. I actually thought he'd be this good, but not until next season.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Good Duke talk, and lots of gushing about Luke, on Sam Vecenie's rebooted "Game Theory" podcast

http://podbay.fm/show/1054081827/e/1481607189?autostart=1

The guest is Rob Dauster and they talk about the freshman across the country, and then go heavy on Duke and Duke's upside and then dive in on Luke for a love fest, including his NBA draft potential (Vecenie, a draft guru, has him as a potential 2017 first rounder, Dauster is not as sure)

I am sure it has been mentioned, but they way he is playing, Luke is no guarantee to be in a Duke uniform next year.

I like this podcast. Recommend if you have a slow day.

[kAzE]

I like this podcast. Recommend if you have a slow day.

Checked it out and listened to the Duke stuff . . . I thought it was pretty interesting when they compared Luke and Grayson as NBA prospects. I agree that they are pretty close, but I'm still taking Luke's side.

I've always thought the most important thing for NBA role players (likely what both of these guys will be) to have is 1 or 2 elite attributes or skills. In my opinion, Luke's ability to create offense is elite. I believe his basketball IQ and handle are at a level that will allow him to be effective in the NBA, whereas Grayson's elite attributes at the college level (strength, athleticism) will be greatly diminished in relation to the competition at the NBA level.

Luke's mid range game right now is at an NBA level. I really believe he can get those same shots against NBA defenses. Grayson's game outside of shooting threes is usually trying to bully his way into the paint and get fouled. That will be significantly more difficult to do against faster and stronger NBA guards, and NBA big men waiting near the paint.

I'm not sure either of them are NBA starters, but at least Luke has the size to play the 2. He's probably never going to be a great defender, but like Vecenie mentioned, it will be easier to hide him on defense, because at 6'6", there will be more guys who he can be matched up with.

Both of them are good, but not elite 3 point shooters, although Luke has the quicker release, and is a better shooter off the dribble.

To me, Luke just seems like the better NBA prospect. I think he's slightly more skilled with the ball, and has much more deceptiveness and guile in his game, and that should allow him to compensate for whatever athleticism he lacks. I also think his game will age better than Grayson's.

I hope this post isn't seen as me throwing shade on Grayson. There's always a chance Grayson could get even better, and add these types of things to his game. And it wouldn't surprise me at all. He's proven doubters wrong his entire career. Hopefully, both of them succeed and become great NBA players, but if I were a GM, I'd definitely lean towards Luke based on where they are right now.

[niveklaen]

Checked it out and listened to the Duke stuff . . . I thought it was pretty interesting when they compared Luke and Grayson as NBA prospects. I agree that they are pretty close, but I'm still taking Luke's side.

I've always thought the most important thing for NBA role players (likely what both of these guys will be) to have is 1 or 2 elite attributes or skills. In my opinion, Luke's ability to create offense is elite. I believe his basketball IQ and handle are at a level that will allow him to be effective in the NBA, whereas Grayson's elite attributes at the college level (strength, athleticism) will be greatly diminished in relation to the competition at the NBA level.

I'm not sure either of them are NBA starters, but at least Luke has the size to play the 2. He's probably never going to be a great defender, but like Vecenie mentioned, it will be easier to hide him on defense, because at 6'6", there will be more guys who he can be matched up with.

Both of them are good, but not elite 3 point shooters, although Luke has the quicker release, and is a better shooter off the dribble.

To me, Luke just seems like the better NBA prospect. I think he's slightly more skilled with the ball, and has much more deceptiveness and guile in his game, and that should allow him to compensate for whatever athleticism he lacks. I also think his game will age better than Grayson's.

I hope this post isn't seen as me throwing shade on Grayson. There's always a chance Grayson could get even better, and add these types of things to his game. And it wouldn't surprise me at all. He's proven doubters wrong his entire career. Hopefully, both of them succeed and become great NBA players, but if I were a GM, I'd definitely lean towards Luke based on where they are right now.

I think Grayson will be the better pro for the opposite reason. NBA players are all orders of magnitude more game savvy than college kids - It often takes 2-3 years for even the best college players to adjust to the mental aspects of the NBA game - Grayson will lose less athletic edge than Luke will BBall IQ edge and Grayson can continue to improve his BBall IQ whereas Luke is basically stuck with his limited (by NBA standards) athleticism.

[kAzE]

I think Grayson will be the better pro for the opposite reason. NBA players are all orders of magnitude more game savvy than college kids - It often takes 2-3 years for even the best college players to adjust to the mental aspects of the NBA game - Grayson will lose less athletic edge than Luke will BBall IQ edge and Grayson can continue to improve his BBall IQ whereas Luke is basically stuck with his limited (by NBA standards) athleticism.

You could absolutely be right. It's just that outside of his amazing athletic displays, I rarely see Grayson make a move that screams "NBA scorer." I think he relies a bit too much on the refs to make foul calls, forcing the issue in the paint sometimes when it would be better to just pass it. Grayson does have the ability to change speeds at times, but I don't think he uses it enough. He's very predictable on his drives (mostly straight-line), which is okay when you're stronger and more athletic than everyone, but it won't be that easy in the pros.

When I see Luke dribble into traffic, quickly do 3 different subtle fakes to throw off multiple defenders and then put just the right touch on a floater to swish it through the bottom of the net, it makes me believe he can do it against NBA defenders.

[Atldukie79]

I get confused sometimes. Is this Denny Kennard of Kenny Dennard?:confused:

Now this is a sensitive subject as I, too, experience the aging process.

It is not enough that I commit the Kennard/Dennard faux pas, I also used to screw up the Weldon/Sheldon Williams reference.
And my kids enjoy pointing these and other transgressions out.

Sigh.

[Newton_14]

Kaze, I agree with you more often than not, but can't go with you or FlyingDutch on this one. I think Grayson is an elite 3 Point Shooter, and is a very good mid-range pullup jump shooter, and will carry those traits to the NBA. His athletic ability will translate well to the NBA in my opinion. That tomahawk dunk Saturday will count for two points in the NBA also. There are lots of guys in the NBA that can't make that play whether it be in a High School, College, or NBA gym.

Luke is not nearly as athletic, but he has a different skillset that will serve him well at the next level as will his size.

Both will be solid NBA Players and both will be better defenders than they are advertised to be, as was JJ before them and now.



Checked it out and listened to the Duke stuff . . . I thought it was pretty interesting when they compared Luke and Grayson as NBA prospects. I agree that they are pretty close, but I'm still taking Luke's side.

I've always thought the most important thing for NBA role players (likely what both of these guys will be) to have is 1 or 2 elite attributes or skills. In my opinion, Luke's ability to create offense is elite. I believe his basketball IQ and handle are at a level that will allow him to be effective in the NBA, whereas Grayson's elite attributes at the college level (strength, athleticism) will be greatly diminished in relation to the competition at the NBA level.

Luke's mid range game right now is at an NBA level. I really believe he can get those same shots against NBA defenses. Grayson's game outside of shooting threes is usually trying to bully his way into the paint and get fouled. That will be significantly more difficult to do against faster and stronger NBA guards, and NBA big men waiting near the paint.

I'm not sure either of them are NBA starters, but at least Luke has the size to play the 2. He's probably never going to be a great defender, but like Vecenie mentioned, it will be easier to hide him on defense, because at 6'6", there will be more guys who he can be matched up with.

Both of them are good, but not elite 3 point shooters, although Luke has the quicker release, and is a better shooter off the dribble.

To me, Luke just seems like the better NBA prospect. I think he's slightly more skilled with the ball, and has much more deceptiveness and guile in his game, and that should allow him to compensate for whatever athleticism he lacks. I also think his game will age better than Grayson's.

I hope this post isn't seen as me throwing shade on Grayson. There's always a chance Grayson could get even better, and add these types of things to his game. And it wouldn't surprise me at all. He's proven doubters wrong his entire career. Hopefully, both of them succeed and become great NBA players, but if I were a GM, I'd definitely lean towards Luke based on where they are right now.

[79-77]

Good Duke talk, and lots of gushing about Luke, on Sam Vecenie's rebooted "Game Theory" podcast

http://podbay.fm/show/1054081827/e/1481607189?autostart=1

The guest is Rob Dauster and they talk about the freshman across the country, and then go heavy on Duke and Duke's upside and then dive in on Luke for a love fest, including his NBA draft potential (Vecenie, a draft guru, has him as a potential 2017 first rounder, Dauster is not as sure)

I am sure it has been mentioned, but they way he is playing, Luke is no guarantee to be in a Duke uniform next year.

Thanks for this. I listened to it and enjoyed it. There was a solid 15-20 min of pretty knowledgeable discussion on Duke. I'd recommend it to anyone here who is so inclined.


Checked it out and listened to the Duke stuff . . . I thought it was pretty interesting when they compared Luke and Grayson as NBA prospects. I agree that they are pretty close, but I'm still taking Luke's side.

I've always thought the most important thing for NBA role players (likely what both of these guys will be) to have is 1 or 2 elite attributes or skills. In my opinion, Luke's ability to create offense is elite. I believe his basketball IQ and handle are at a level that will allow him to be effective in the NBA, whereas Grayson's elite attributes at the college level (strength, athleticism) will be greatly diminished in relation to the competition at the NBA level.

Luke's mid range game right now is at an NBA level. I really believe he can get those same shots against NBA defenses. Grayson's game outside of shooting threes is usually trying to bully his way into the paint and get fouled. That will be significantly more difficult to do against faster and stronger NBA guards, and NBA big men waiting near the paint.

I'm not sure either of them are NBA starters, but at least Luke has the size to play the 2. He's probably never going to be a great defender, but like Vecenie mentioned, it will be easier to hide him on defense, because at 6'6", there will be more guys who he can be matched up with.

Both of them are good, but not elite 3 point shooters, although Luke has the quicker release, and is a better shooter off the dribble.

To me, Luke just seems like the better NBA prospect. I think he's slightly more skilled with the ball, and has much more deceptiveness and guile in his game, and that should allow him to compensate for whatever athleticism he lacks. I also think his game will age better than Grayson's.

I hope this post isn't seen as me throwing shade on Grayson. There's always a chance Grayson could get even better, and add these types of things to his game. And it wouldn't surprise me at all. He's proven doubters wrong his entire career. Hopefully, both of them succeed and become great NBA players, but if I were a GM, I'd definitely lean towards Luke based on where they are right now.

Good post and I agree. Although neither Allen nor Kennard is a sure-fire NBA contributor, I think there is a higher risk of Allen getting lost at the NBA level than there is of Kennard doing so.

[atoomer0881]

Good Duke talk, and lots of gushing about Luke, on Sam Vecenie's rebooted "Game Theory" podcast

http://podbay.fm/show/1054081827/e/1481607189?autostart=1

The guest is Rob Dauster and they talk about the freshman across the country, and then go heavy on Duke and Duke's upside and then dive in on Luke for a love fest, including his NBA draft potential (Vecenie, a draft guru, has him as a potential 2017 first rounder, Dauster is not as sure)

I am sure it has been mentioned, but they way he is playing, Luke is no guarantee to be in a Duke uniform next year.

Gary Parrish over at CBS wrote an article yesterday about top the 30 NBA draft prospects for the the upcoming draft and had Kennard slotted in at 29 as well. http://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/duke-freshman-jayson-tatum-headlines-early-list-of-top-30-nba-draft-prospects/

Personally, I think Kennard is better off staying another year at least. I can't imagine next year's draft being as loaded as this year's, seeing how this year's freshman crop were some of the best ones in recent memory. I also think if Kennard continues to play at the level he is playing, and Duke goes deep into the Tournament, then he will return next year as the pre-season candidate for POY. Which would position him for a much better draft spot in the 2018. Plus I'm selfish and just don't want him leaving haha.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Gary Parrish over at CBS wrote an article yesterday about top the 30 NBA draft prospects for the the upcoming draft and had Kennard slotted in at 29 as well. http://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/duke-freshman-jayson-tatum-headlines-early-list-of-top-30-nba-draft-prospects/

Personally, I think Kennard is better off staying another year at least. I can't imagine next year's draft being as loaded as this year's, seeing how this year's freshman crop were some of the best ones in recent memory. I also think if Kennard continues to play at the level he is playing, and Duke goes deep into the Tournament, then he will return next year as the pre-season candidate for POY. Which would position him for a much better draft spot in the 2018. Plus I'm selfish and just don't want him leaving haha.

This is similar to the thinking about Grayson staying this year, but you'd be hard-pressed to say that Grayson has improved his stock thus far this year. He still has 2/3rds of a season to go, but he certainly hasn't been as dominant as one would have expected/hoped for several different reasons.

Point being, there are no "sure things," especially when it comes to draft prospects. I am a big fan of "stay in school," but it isn't always the easiest choice.

[phaedrus]

This is similar to the thinking about Grayson staying this year, but you'd be hard-pressed to say that Grayson has improved his stock thus far this year. He still has 2/3rds of a season to go, but he certainly hasn't been as dominant as one would have expected/hoped for several different reasons.

Point being, there are no "sure things," especially when it comes to draft prospects. I am a big fan of "stay in school," but it isn't always the easiest choice.

I think there's a big difference: last year's draft class was considered relatively weak and this year's is considered very strong. It would have been a good reason for Grayson to go last year, and now he's competing with a tougher draft class. All things being equal, Luke (or Grayson) may fare better against weaker competition in the 2018 draft - although I don't know how strong that class is considered.

[atoomer0881]

I think there's a big difference: last year's draft class was considered relatively weak and this year's is considered very strong. It would have been a good reason for Grayson to go last year, and now he's competing with a tougher draft class. All things being equal, Luke (or Grayson) may fare better against weaker competition in the 2018 draft - although I don't know how strong that class is considered.

Yea that's kind of what I was alluding to. Last year's draft class was considered pretty weak so Grayson coming back wasn't necessarily to improve his draft stock, but to finish his courses and graduate. Plus you can say coming into the season as the front runner for POY was certainly an improvement for him. I still think that as the season goes on, and we get our full compliment of players back, and everyone's healthy and rolling on all cylinders, that Luke's personal stats will see a slight decline. And while that won't matter for us as a team (because his decline in numbers would mean a potential rise in Tatum/Allen/Giles/etc.), I think by February and March he won't be talked about as much in the National conversation. Meaning us in the Duke circle will know just how valuable he is to us on any given night, but I don't think people will be discussing him as a first round pick or in POY conversation. And if by end of the year he's being talked about as being a 2nd round pick, then I think it'd be smart for him to come back and be the leader of our team next year. You're right that we don't know how strong next year's class is considered, but I think almost everyone can agree it won't be as strong as this year's class is.

Btw another article from a few hours ago on Luke if people haven't read yet: http://hoopshabit.com/2016/12/14/luke-kennard-duke-impressive-weapon/

[flyingdutchdevil]

Kaze, I agree with you more often than not, but can't go with you or FlyingDutch on this one. I think Grayson is an elite 3 Point Shooter, and is a very good mid-range pullup jump shooter, and will carry those traits to the NBA. His athletic ability will translate well to the NBA in my opinion. That tomahawk dunk Saturday will count for two points in the NBA also. There are lots of guys in the NBA that can't make that play whether it be in a High School, College, or NBA gym.

Luke is not nearly as athletic, but he has a different skillset that will serve him well at the next level as will his size.

Both will be solid NBA Players and both will be better defenders than they are advertised to be, as was JJ before them and now.

Wait, what did I say?

Didn't say anything before, but will say something now.

1) I don't think Grayson is an elite NBA 3 pt shooter. Yet. He is a really good college 3pt shooter and, more importantly, a great FT shooter (FT% translates better to NBA 3pt shooting than college 3pt shooting. Strange, I know). I think that bodes well for Grayson. But, this year, when you see Grayson shooting NBA threes, he's missing really, really badly. That percentage is very low. I think Grayson will be a good 3pt shooter in the NBA, but I do not think he will be elite.

2) Grayson may have a mid-range, but he doesn't use it much. And, based on last year, he wasn't that accurate with it. I don't see this as a weapon in Grayson's arsenal. I think Grayson will be a really good 3pt shooter and a distributor in the NBA with the ability to drive against slower guards.

3) I can't buy your take on their defense. With the exception of Winslow, every Duke player who entered the draft early since 2009 has been abysmal-to-mediocre on defense: Irving, Rivers, Parker, Hood, T Jones, and Okafor. I think Ingram will be a really good defender, but I'm not sure if any of the other players will ever consider defense to be better than "okay". With Allen, he may be okay. He's quick enough and strong enough to provide decent defense at the 2. Kennard? He's big, but that's really it. His wingspan isn't that impressive, he's not the quickest laterally, and he's getting destroyed by faster players in college. I know we all point to JJ and say, "hey, if JJ could do it, then why can't xyz?" JJ is great at team D, not individual D. Furthermore, JJ was good at D in college and it took him 3-4 years under van Gundy to become the defender that he is today. Odds are very against Kennard, and to a lesser extent Grayson, to become okay defenders that you don't need to hide.

[meowmix911]

I've always found the closest reasonable comparison to Kennard to be someone like Jeff Hornacek. Not ultra athletic, but deceptively so. Plenty of skill in getting the shot off, not getting it blocked. Not ultra speedy, but rarely stripped. Fundamental with an additional bit of flare.




Wait, what did I say?

Didn't say anything before, but will say something now.

1) I don't think Grayson is an elite NBA 3 pt shooter. Yet. He is a really good college 3pt shooter and, more importantly, a great FT shooter (FT% translates better to NBA 3pt shooting than college 3pt shooting. Strange, I know). I think that bodes well for Grayson. But, this year, when you see Grayson shooting NBA threes, he's missing really, really badly. That percentage is very low. I think Grayson will be a good 3pt shooter in the NBA, but I do not think he will be elite.

2) Grayson may have a mid-range, but he doesn't use it much. And, based on last year, he wasn't that accurate with it. I don't see this as a weapon in Grayson's arsenal. I think Grayson will be a really good 3pt shooter and a distributor in the NBA with the ability to drive against slower guards.

3) I can't buy your take on their defense. With the exception of Winslow, every Duke player who entered the draft early since 2009 has been abysmal-to-mediocre on defense: Irving, Rivers, Parker, Hood, T Jones, and Okafor. I think Ingram will be a really good defender, but I'm not sure if any of the other players will ever consider defense to be better than "okay". With Allen, he may be okay. He's quick enough and strong enough to provide decent defense at the 2. Kennard? He's big, but that's really it. His wingspan isn't that impressive, he's not the quickest laterally, and he's getting destroyed by faster players in college. I know we all point to JJ and say, "hey, if JJ could do it, then why can't xyz?" JJ is great at team D, not individual D. Furthermore, JJ was good at D in college and it took him 3-4 years under van Gundy to become the defender that he is today. Odds are very against Kennard, and to a lesser extent Grayson, to become okay defenders that you don't need to hide.

[kAzE]

The thing about Luke that just gives me the impression that he's going to be a good pro is how under control he always is. There's not much wasted motion in his game, and every move he makes has a sense of purpose. It's like he knows exactly how the defense will react every time. It's really fun to watch him play on the offensive end.

Grayson's game is much more frantic and you always feel like he just about to lose control of the situation, but most of the time, he bails himself out with his insane athleticism. He's definitely more of a risk taker. Sometimes, it works out, and sometimes, he ends up on the floor after getting rejected at the rim, or a no-call.

I do hope Luke stays at least another year though. He's definitely got a much better chance to get drafted in the first round next year, and he's got a ton of potential individual accolades to shoot for.

[NYBri]

I do hope Luke stays at least another year though. He's definitely got a much better chance to get drafted in the first round next year, and he's got a ton of potential individual accolades to shoot for.

I think Luke would go in the first round this year, but not lottery. Next year, maybe. Going to be a close call for him. It will certainly depend on what the team accomplishes this year and his role in it.

I can see him going and staying. I don't need to tell you all what I hope he does. He's just so much fun to watch and makes everyone else better.

[COYS]

I think Luke would go in the first round this year, but not lottery. Next year, maybe. Going to be a close call for him. It will certainly depend on what the team accomplishes this year and his role in it.

I can see him going and staying. I don't need to tell you all what I hope he does. He's just so much fun to watch and makes everyone else better.

Luke is a very interesting case when it comes to the NBA draft because he lacks some of the most coveted abilities (speed, quickness, length, leaping ability etc.) but is currently excelling in some of the stat categories often used as proxies to measure those abilities, especially rebounding. His college Player Efficiency Rating this year is an absolutely superb 27.9, a good portion of which is due to his excellent rebounding from the guard spot, which can sometimes be used to project how effectively athleticism will translate to the NBA. Also, his performances have actually been BETTER against higher levels of competition (granted, the season is still very young so it's still a very small sample size). Even if his raw shot and point totals dip a bit as Jayson, Harry, Marques, and Grayson all get healthy and acclimated, I'd expect NBA teams to be pretty keen on him as a late first rounder if he can keep up his really strong rebounding numbers. If he can overcome his relatively short wingspan and lack of elite NBA athleticism to grab some extra boards, suddenly his efficient offensive game becomes more valuable.

It's also worth looking at how insanely efficient his offensive game has been. With a usage rate of only 22.1% (good for 25th in the ACC), he is averaging 20ppg while also contributing a good number of assists. It is hard to score so much so efficiently while dishing out a good number of assists while ALSO not turning the ball over or needing the ball in your hands on every possession. For the college game, he's equally effective as a go-to guy or as a role player. His ability to play multiple roles on offense is really going to make fully integrating our injured players that much easier.

[NSDukeFan]

Wait, what did I say?



3) I can't buy your take on their defense. With the exception of Winslow, every Duke player who entered the draft early since 2009 has been abysmal-to-mediocre on defense: Irving, Rivers, Parker, Hood, T Jones, and Okafor. I think Ingram will be a really good defender, but I'm not sure if any of the other players will ever consider defense to be better than "okay". With Allen, he may be okay. He's quick enough and strong enough to provide decent defense at the 2. Kennard? He's big, but that's really it. His wingspan isn't that impressive, he's not the quickest laterally, and he's getting destroyed by faster players in college. I know we all point to JJ and say, "hey, if JJ could do it, then why can't xyz?" JJ is great at team D, not individual D. Furthermore, JJ was good at D in college and it took him 3-4 years under van Gundy to become the defender that he is today. Odds are very against Kennard, and to a lesser extent Grayson, to become okay defenders that you don't need to hide.
I thought Kyrie, Rodney and Ingram were all solid defenders during their time at Duke. I thought Okafor was strong at times and Tyus was mediocre to good. I tend to be a bit on the optimistic/positive side.

[English]

I thought Kyrie, Rodney and Ingram were all solid defenders during their time at Duke. I thought Okafor was strong at times and Tyus was mediocre to good. I tend to be a bit on the optimistic/positive side.

My recollection has Rodney as a plus-defender who was almost universally matched up against the opponent's best player because of his length and guard-like quickness. I've heard nothing of his time in the NBA to suggest that he's not, at the very least, a serviceable defender for a 2/3. Perhaps no Tony Allen or Bruce Bowen, but his offense is also miles ahead of those guys.

My limited memory of Kyrie was that he often took gambles on defense, so his team defense was shaky but his individual defense wasn't hopeless. Now, there is every indication from his time in the NBA that Kyrie values offense over defense, and doesn't give defense much mind. This is well-documented. However, what remains to be seen is whether this is a limitation of his abilities, or rather, a limitation of his priorities and effort. I'd wager the latter.

Ingram never seemed, to me anyway, to be a limited defender outside of his wiry frame and propensity to get pushed around a bit. His length is a tremendous asset on defense because, obviously even if he gets out of position or beaten, his long reach can alter a shot or push a penetrating guard off course more than desired.

Okafor and Stones...well, Tyus had great reflexes and an aptitude for steals, but both of these young gentlemen still need to learn the nuances of team defense. Again, this always seemed, from my eye, to be more a matter of teaching the fundamentals rather than simply being outclassed and without hope athletically.

[flyingdutchdevil]

I thought Kyrie, Rodney and Ingram were all solid defenders during their time at Duke. I thought Okafor was strong at times and Tyus was mediocre to good. I tend to be a bit on the optimistic/positive side.

The post was about these players' NBA defense, not college. And no one in their right mind thinks that Kyrie, Okafor, or Tyus plays solid defense in the NBA.

With regards to Rodney, here's a write up on his NBA defense: http://www.hashtagbasketball.com/utah-jazz/content/what-to-expect-from-rodney-hood-this-season
Here's another: http://purpleandblues.com/2016/08/24/deep-dives-rodney-hood/

[Bay Area Duke Fan]

Luke Kennard = Jeff Mullins. 2015-18 version.

[JetpackJesus]

Wait, what did I say?

3) I can't buy your take on their defense. With the exception of Winslow, every Duke player who entered the draft early since 2009 has been abysmal-to-mediocre on defense: Irving, Rivers, Parker, Hood, T Jones, and Okafor. I think Ingram will be a really good defender, but I'm not sure if any of the other players will ever consider defense to be better than "okay". With Allen, he may be okay. He's quick enough and strong enough to provide decent defense at the 2. Kennard? He's big, but that's really it. His wingspan isn't that impressive, he's not the quickest laterally, and he's getting destroyed by faster players in college. I know we all point to JJ and say, "hey, if JJ could do it, then why can't xyz?" JJ is great at team D, not individual D. Furthermore, JJ was good at D in college and it took him 3-4 years under van Gundy to become the defender that he is today. Odds are very against Kennard, and to a lesser extent Grayson, to become okay defenders that you don't need to hide.

Austin Rivers has actually developed into a good defender. I don't think he's elite or likely to make an All-Defense team (yet?), which is a goal he set for himself in the offseason, but he's certainly better than mediocre.

[NSDukeFan]

The post was about these players' NBA defense, not college. And no one in their right mind thinks that Kyrie, Okafor, or Tyus plays solid defense in the NBA.

With regards to Rodney, here's a write up on his NBA defense: http://www.hashtagbasketball.com/utah-jazz/content/what-to-expect-from-rodney-hood-this-season
Here's another: http://purpleandblues.com/2016/08/24/deep-dives-rodney-hood/

Sorry, my mistake. I thought you were referring to college defense.

[Troublemaker]

I think Ingram will be a really good defender,

Yep. Even as a 19-yr-old rookie, his length is making an impact (http://www.silverscreenandroll.com/2016/11/17/13634902/la-lakers-brandon-ingram-defense-stats-analysis-quotes-luke-walton-larry-nance-tarik-black) on the Lakers' vaunted second unit (http://www.latimes.com/sports/lakers/la-sp-lakers-report-20161114-story.html). (Seriously, re: the second unit (http://www.espn.com/blog/los-angeles/lakers/post/_/id/43508/lakers-second-unit-emerging-as-first-rate-performers)).

Brandon's not going to win ROY or come particularly close but it's still impressive that as a 19-yr-old, he can be a member of a plus 5-man unit in the NBA.

[DukieInBrasil]

Austin Rivers has actually developed into a good defender. I don't think he's elite or likely to make an All-Defense team (yet?), which is a goal he set for himself in the offseason, but he's certainly better than mediocre.

Austin just had himself an awesome game the other night, including 7-10 3FGs!!! Dude still can't shoot FTs. He's developing into a legit NBA player after struggling to adapt to the NBA for a couple of years. He even starts occasionally for the Clips. If he could get his FT% to 75% or so, he would be a starting quality combo guard.

[DisplacedBlueDevil]

Luke Kennard = Jeff Mullins. 2015-18 version.

Yes! His mirror image!!

Luke also reminds me of Scott Skiles with his ability to know where to be before he needs to be there and to put up amazing numbers with seemingly limited physical attributes... Skiles had success at every level before becoming a coach. Coach Kennard (rhymes with former Duke coach Gerard)? A future Coach K?

[JNort]

I'm just joining this conversation on this page without having read anything before page 11 so bare with me if I repeat what's already been said. I'm just gonna do this in a quick response format.

- Rivers I thought was a solid college defender and has become a solid NBA defender.

- Irving has always been a great (yes I mean great) individual defender but isn't a good team defender. His only problem is he doesn't care about defense. He played great defense when he needed to in the playoffs. Much like LeBron who won't play defense until the playoffs.

- Grayson I could see having a good NBA career. His 3pt shot will develop and will be a great role player.

- Luke I think has a better NBA future and could be a 6th man of the year type player year in and year out.

- Ingram to me is not a great individual defender but his length makes him appear better than what he is.

[rocketeli]

The post was about these players' NBA defense, not college. And no one in their right mind thinks that Kyrie, Okafor, or Tyus plays solid defense in the NBA.

With regards to Rodney, here's a write up on his NBA defense: http://www.hashtagbasketball.com/utah-jazz/content/what-to-expect-from-rodney-hood-this-season
Here's another: http://purpleandblues.com/2016/08/24/deep-dives-rodney-hood/

This is more in line with what I remember of Rodney Hood's defense--i.e. it wasn't good. A lot of times his idea of defense seemed to be to give the guy blowing past him a really dirty look... of course I would defer to the stats geeks, and maybe Rodney was getting burned after someone else had screwed up--that team just wasn't noted for their defense.

[cato]

This is more in line with what I remember of Rodney Hood's defense--i.e. it wasn't good. A lot of times his idea of defense seemed to be to give the guy blowing past him a really dirty look... of course I would defer to the stats geeks, and maybe Rodney was getting burned after someone else had screwed up--that team just wasn't noted for their defense.

Defense was certainly an issue that year. But the coaches disagreed with your assessment of Hood's defense. He won the Best Defensive Player award: http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?ATCLID=209469368

[subzero02]

Luke>Monk... but who wouldn't take a Jedi knight over an OCD detective?

[WillJ]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luke_Kennard


THE MURDERER
I take the murderer for coffee.
‘Make sure you don’t murder your coffee!’
I joke. He likes my jokes.

Later I swing a plank into his face:
This is to stop him enjoying himself –
Which is integral to the rehabilitation process.

His mouth trickles blood like a tap quarter-turned.
He likes my analogies. ‘Hey, Murderer!’
I yell, ‘Murdered anyone recently?’

The murderer likes to play badminton.
When he loses, I say, ‘That’s what you get for being a murderer.’
When he wins, I say,

‘I guess you got yourself in pretty good shape
Murdering all those people.’
I’m not about to let the murderer forget he’s a murderer.

When I dance with the murderer I let him lead
Because he is the more proficient dancer –
‘Just be careful not to murder me!’ I tease.

The prison sits on the horizon like a great ash-tray –
When we travel I give him the window seat.
‘Hey, murderer, would you like a sandwich?’ I say,

‘Or would you rather murder someone?’
The murderer eats his cheese and ham sandwich.
‘The forecast is for snow,’ I tell him.

[Furniture]

Luke shooting for fun...
https://mobile.twitter.com/DukeMBB/status/810574657799778304/video/1

He knew it was going in...

[sagegrouse]

Yes! His mirror image!!

Luke also reminds me of Scott Skiles with his ability to know where to be before he needs to be there and to put up amazing numbers with seemingly limited physical attributes... Skiles had success at every level before becoming a coach. Coach Kennard (rhymes with former Duke coach Gerard)? A future Coach K?


Luke Kennard = Jeff Mullins. 2015-18 version.

Sorry to disagree, but Jeff Mullins, as both an NBA and college player, resembles Grayson Allen more than Luke Kennard. Jeff was a dynamic and high-scoring shooting guard, mostly for the Warriors, who played in three NBA All-Star games. Jeff was a very athletic player and reached the semis of the NBA's one-on-one competition back in the 1970's (losing to Bob Lanier and his size-22 feet). Luke is more like Jack Marin from that era, including being left-handed. Jack Marin was a very quick small forward and also an all-star.

Kindly,
Sage
'Jeff was also my class president, succeeding Charlie Rose'

[Jim3k]

Sorry to disagree, but Jeff Mullins, as both an NBA and college player, resembles Grayson Allen more than Luke Kennard. Jeff was a dynamic and high-scoring shooting guard, mostly for the Warriors, who played in three NBA All-Star games. Jeff was a very athletic player and reached the semis of the NBA's one-on-one competition back in the 1970's (losing to Bob Lanier and his size-22 feet). Luke is more like Jack Marin from that era, including being left-handed. Jack Marin was a very quick small forward and also an all-star.

Kindly,
Sage
'Jeff was also my class president, succeeding Charlie Rose'

I agree with my classmate, Sage, regarding Luke's comparison with Mullins. Mullins was well-known as a driving layup guru. I think the Chronicle (where Sage was the editor) called Mullins something like "The man of a thousand layups." It is also true that Jeff was an outstanding outside shooter. He even copied Heyman's behind the head mid-range jumpshot. He was extremely versatile. IMO, Sage is right, Allen is more like Mullins than Kennard. But Allen has not gone to the mid-range game, (yet).

I'm not sure I agree that lefty Kennard is comparable to lefty Jack Marin. Like Luke, Jack was a deadeye shooter from the corner, something which would now be a 3-pointer. He was known for his flat shots from there. But Jack was a long-armed and lanky 6'-7" who played very good defense, mostly in a zone configuration. He matched up well with most of the players he found himself defending. He moved very well without the ball and could easily create his own shot. Kennard doesn't have Jack's wingspan and I'm not certain that he has Jack's quickness (quickness that kept Jack in the NBA for 11 seasons). Both, of course, were/are folks that opponents did not want to see at the free throw line. Jack was both an All-American at Duke and a two-time NBA All-Star (and all-Rookie team). Comparing Kennard to him is mainly worthwhile as a goal. Unfair to Luke at this point in his career. I will note that in college, Kennard so far has been the better rebounder. Jack averaged a little less than 10 per game, but the way possessions have increased over the years might shortchange Jack's capability. (No shot-clock, greater use of zones, plus he often played off-guard as a pro, so his rebounds went down at that level, but had been a forward in college.)

Anyway, I love Kennard's game. He's a sneaky dynamo. In that sense, Luke and Jack are comparable. ("Where did those 18 points come from, Pa?") Allen, OTH, is the visible dynamo. From the same era, Allen is more in the Heyman mould, always measuring whether he should attack the basket. And no, I'm not comparing Allen, a guard, with Heyman. Heyman was a forward and an A-1 badass.

[uh_no]

appropriately, kenpom's "most statistically similar" players are back

freshman kennard is similar to freshman jodie meeks or aaron harrison (and others)
sophomore kennard is similar to sophomore rodney hood or jeremy lamb (and others)

unfortunately, the comparisons are only against people of the same class, and it seems they don't go back very far....but there you go!

[79-77]

We are now accepting applications and deposits for slots in the "Kennard is better than Redick" bunker.

Corner stalls are still available, but don't dawdle -- all spots are filling up quickly!

[Kedsy]

We are now accepting applications and deposits for slots in the "Kennard is better than Redick" bunker.

Corner stalls are still available, but don't dawdle -- all spots are filling up quickly!

I still say you must not remember Redick very well.

[moonpie23]

We are now accepting applications and deposits for slots in the "Kennard is better than Redick" bunker.



i'm having trouble deciding whether or not you're joking....

[DukieInBrasil]

I still say you must not remember Redick very well.

I remember that as a So. Redick averaged about 16ppg. I remember that So. Redick was not a good passer. I remember So. Redick was not a good enough ball handler to get shots in the lane. I remember that So. Redick didn't have a drive-stop-step back mid-range shot. I rememember that Redick never rebounded as well as Kennard does now. So aside from 3pt shooting and the form on his shots, what is it that So. Redick did better than So. Kennard?
Granted, by the time JJ was a Sr. his game evolved quite a bit, and became much more effective off the dribble and as a passer. Those weren't skills that he was wowing people with as a So., whereas Kennard is. Luke is shooting 53% FGs and 42.3% 3FGs and ~89% FTs, w/3.1apg and 5.8rpg. So. JJ shot 39.5% FG, 42.3% 3FGs (identical to Kennard) and 95% FTs, w/ 1.6 apg and 3.1 rpg. Granted, So. Luke hasn't played the ACC or post-season yet and alot of those stats are likely to decline. I'm having a tough time seeing how the comparison between Luke and JJ is not a good one, or that by making the comparison one "must not remember Redick very well."

[Indoor66]

I remember that as a So. Redick averaged about 16ppg. I remember that So. Redick was not a good passer. I remember So. Redick was not a good enough ball handler to get shots in the lane. I remember that So. Redick didn't have a drive-stop-step back mid-range shot. I rememember that Redick never rebounded as well as Kennard does now. So aside from 3pt shooting and the form on his shots, what is it that So. Redick did better than So. Kennard?
Granted, by the time JJ was a Sr. his game evolved quite a bit, and became much more effective off the dribble and as a passer. Those weren't skills that he was wowing people with as a So., whereas Kennard is. Luke is shooting 53% FGs and 42.3% 3FGs and ~89% FTs, w/3.1apg and 5.8rpg. So. JJ shot 39.5% FG, 42.3% 3FGs (identical to Kennard) and 95% FTs, w/ 1.6 apg and 3.1 rpg. Granted, So. Luke hasn't played the ACC or post-season yet and alot of those stats are likely to decline. I'm having a tough time seeing how the comparison between Luke and JJ is not a good one, or that by making the comparison one "must not remember Redick very well."

I remember JJ ended his career as the leading scorer in Duke history as well as leader on the ACC.

[jv001]

I remember that as a So. Redick averaged about 16ppg. I remember that So. Redick was not a good passer. I remember So. Redick was not a good enough ball handler to get shots in the lane. I remember that So. Redick didn't have a drive-stop-step back mid-range shot. I rememember that Redick never rebounded as well as Kennard does now. So aside from 3pt shooting and the form on his shots, what is it that So. Redick did better than So. Kennard?
Granted, by the time JJ was a Sr. his game evolved quite a bit, and became much more effective off the dribble and as a passer. Those weren't skills that he was wowing people with as a So., whereas Kennard is. Luke is shooting 53% FGs and 42.3% 3FGs and ~89% FTs, w/3.1apg and 5.8rpg. So. JJ shot 39.5% FG, 42.3% 3FGs (identical to Kennard) and 95% FTs, w/ 1.6 apg and 3.1 rpg. Granted, So. Luke hasn't played the ACC or post-season yet and alot of those stats are likely to decline. I'm having a tough time seeing how the comparison between Luke and JJ is not a good one, or that by making the comparison one "must not remember Redick very well."

This is the problem when we compare current Duke players with former Duke players. One player is going to come away with negative views and 99% of the time it's the former player. In the past I've been guilty of putting current Duke players on a pedestal and giving too much praise to said player. Luke Kennard is a terrific player and JJ Redick was and is a terrific player. JJ worked his tail off to become the player he is today and I can't remember another player that took the beating he took game after game. Had all the fouls been called on his defenders, they would have fouled out in the first half. Luke has not seen that type of punishment yet and I hope he doesn't. I going to enjoy every player on this squad and root for all of them. GoDuke!

[79-77]

I still say you must not remember Redick very well.

I remember JJ very well. He was a great scorer at the college level and he carried the scoring burden for his teams.

But Luke has more game.


i'm having trouble deciding whether or not you're joking...

I'm as serious as a heart attack.

To be clear: my comparison to JJ is not about demeaning JJ, who well deserved having his jersey retired. It's about the sky being the limit for Kennard -- and about him already having progressed well towards that "limit." In other words, when I say that Luke is better than JJ, I mean that I think when his college years are done, Luke will have cleared a very, very high bar.

I do not mean to antagonize anyone -- I just want to engage in conversation with fellow travelers about a guy I believe is turning into a great Duke player this season.

[cato]

I remember JJ very well. He was a great scorer at the college level and he carried the scoring burden for his teams.

But Luke has more game.



I'm as serious as a heart attack.

To be clear: my comparison to JJ is not about demeaning JJ, who well deserved having his jersey retired. It's about the sky being the limit for Kennard -- and about him already having progressed well towards that "limit." In other words, when I say that Luke is better than JJ, I mean that I think when his college years are done, Luke will have cleared a very, very high bar.

I do not mean to antagonize anyone -- I just want to engage in conversation with fellow travelers about a guy I believe is turning into a great Duke player this season.

Wake me up when Kennard challenges for the scoring title, gets his jersey in the rafters and starts for an NBA contender. Until then you are just getting too excited by a remarkable start to a sophomore year.

[DukieTiger]

Wake me up when Kennard challenges for the scoring title, gets his jersey in the rafters and starts for an NBA contender. Until then you are just getting too excited by a remarkable start to a sophomore year.

Or when Luke single-handedly wins an ACC Tournament championship game :)

[elvis14]

Could we possibly keep this thread about Kennard? If people want to talk about Duke's all time leading scorer, that's fine too but this whole line of "who's better" or who has a bigger jock or whatever is tiresome at best and just leads to needless criticism often fueled by a heavy dose or recency bias.

Go Duke (and go JJ)

[Ichabod Drain]

Wake me up when Kennard challenges for the scoring title, gets his jersey in the rafters and starts for an NBA contender. Until then you are just getting too excited by a remarkable start to a sophomore year.

Wake me up when the Clippers make it out of the second round.

[kAzE]

Could we possibly keep this thread about Kennard? If people want to talk about Duke's all time leading scorer, that's fine too but this whole line of "who's better" or who has a bigger jock or whatever is tiresome at best and just leads to needless criticism often fueled by a heavy dose or recency bias.

Go Duke (and go JJ)

The fact that Luke is being compared to JJ on every page of this thread now speaks to how well he's been playing. I think the JJ comparisons are absolutely warranted.

And I'll throw in my 2 cents: sophomore Luke Kennard is a better player than sophomore JJ Redick. He just is. JJ made HUGE improvements to his game over his final 2 years, and then made HUGE improvements to his game again in the NBA. Kennard is amazing, but we don't know if he will continue to ascend like JJ did.

But with that said, I don't know how you could possibly say Luke isn't in the top 3 for NPOY. I don't know if this is just a hot streak, or if he's really become this consistent. Bottom line is: he's just on a whole other level offensively than pretty much anybody other than Malik Monk right now.

[WiJoe]

The fact that Luke is being compared to JJ on every page of this thread now speaks to how well he's been playing. I think the JJ comparisons are absolutely warranted.

And I'll throw in my 2 cents: sophomore Luke Kennard is a better player than sophomore JJ Redick. He just is. JJ made HUGE improvements to his game over his final 2 years, and then made HUGE improvements to his game again in the NBA. Kennard is amazing, but we don't know if he will continue to ascend like JJ did.

But with that said, I don't know how you could possibly say Luke isn't in the top 3 for NPOY. I don't know if this is just a hot streak, or if he's really become this consistent. Bottom line is: he's just on a whole other level offensively than pretty much anybody other than Malik Monk right now.

Finally, common sense. Must be the Wisconsin connection !!

:cool:

[UrinalCake]

Sophomore Redick was an amazing shooter but very one dimensional. The summer before his junior year he got himself into amazing shape and started expanding his game to become a more complete scorer, which is the player we remember now. Luke right now is way more versatile and complete than JJ was as a sophomore, but it's impossible to say who was "better" without some qualification as to what that means.

[cato]

Wake me up when the Clippers make it out of the second round.

Well, me too.

[kshepinthehouse]

Luke at this point isn't getting everyone's best shot. Luke also has more talent around him. He isn't drawing the other team's best defender night in and night out.

[DukieInBrasil]

Luke at this point isn't getting everyone's best shot. Luke also has more talent around him. He isn't drawing the other team's best defender night in and night out.

Yet his best performances are coming against Duke's best opponents. He's shooting ~70% 2FGs and ~55% 3FGs against our 4 best opponents/toughest games so far (MSU, URI, UF, TSU). They may not be game-planning specifically for him, but he is absolutely torching them. The biggest difference between them is 2pt FG shooting, at least during their So. campaigns. JJs overall FG% was 39.5% vs 42.3% from 3, so his 2FG% was worse. Luke's 2FG shooting actually raises his overall FG%. Luke can take it to defenders and force their defense to react to him. JJ couldn't do that, but sometimes his 3pt shooting was so devastating that it didn't matter if he could or not.
I'm not trying to say that Luke is a better player than JJ was, just that thru this point in their So. years Luke is in extremely favorable company in this comparison.

[cato]

Yet his best performances are coming against Duke's best opponents. He's shooting ~70% 2FGs and ~55% 3FGs against our 4 best opponents/toughest games so far (MSU, URI, UF, TSU). They may not be game-planning specifically for him, but he is absolutely torching them. The biggest difference between them is 2pt FG shooting, at least during their So. campaigns. JJs overall FG% was 39.5% vs 42.3% from 3, so his 2FG% was worse. Luke's 2FG shooting actually raises his overall FG%. Luke can take it to defenders and force their defense to react to him. JJ couldn't do that, but sometimes his 3pt shooting was so devastating that it didn't matter if he could or not.
I'm not trying to say that Luke is a better player than JJ was, just that thru this point in their So. years Luke is in extremely favorable company in this comparison.

JJ is the player he is in large part because of what he did after his sophomore year.

I love how Kennard is playing. Why don't we just enjoy this season, and worry about stacking Luke's career up against JJ's some time after he has had his second go at the ACC?