PDA

View Full Version : Lance is committed to Duke



rthomas
03-13-2007, 05:07 PM
http://www.nj.com/columns/ledger/politi/index.ssf?/base/columns-0/11737642374550.xml&coll=1

Nice article on Lance Thomas and speculation on a possible transfer. Lance says no. He is committed to being a Dukie and loves everything about Duke except that he wants to get better and make Duke better.

RepoMan
03-13-2007, 05:13 PM
Nice article. Everthing I have heard LT say suggests that he is a determined hard-worker who will stick it out and do everything he can to improve at Duke. I expect a solid career at Duke, with Lance providing valuable leadership to a championship contender in 2 years.

Dukefan4Life
03-13-2007, 05:18 PM
I guess time will tell how good lance can be for us. I think with an offseason of weights and developing inside game he could be huge for us! id like to see him come back

duke03
03-13-2007, 05:38 PM
If Lance is going to become a factor, he's going to have to stop averaging one foul for every 5.5625 minutes he plays.

Troublemaker
03-13-2007, 05:44 PM
Good to hear. Here's how he may be able to get minutes in the coming seasons...

2008:
Paulus, Smith
Scheyer, Pocius
Henderson, Nelson
Singler (30 min), McClure (10 min), King (0 min)
Zoubek (20 min), Thomas (20 min)

2009:
Paulus, Smith
Scheyer, Pocius
Henderson, McClure
Singler (30 min), Thomas(10 min), King (0 min)
Monroe (25 min), Zoubek (15 min)

2010:
Smith, 2009 PG
Scheyer, 2009 SG
Henderson
Thomas (30 min), King (10 min), 2009 PF
Zoubek (30 min), 2009 C

Lance's toughest time getting minutes will be his junior year.

JasonEvans
03-13-2007, 05:48 PM
If Lance is going to become a factor, he's going to have to stop averaging one foul for every 5.5625 minutes he plays.

Well, he would still be available 23 minutes a game at that pace ;)

If, as many big men do, Lance shows improvement in his freshman to soph seasons then I expect big things out of him. The kid has amazing defensive instincts. If he can figure out a way to be more dangerous on offense, he is going to play a major role in Duke's future.

The transfer rumors, from what I hear, were never coming from Lance but were the product of some misguided folks back home who expected Lance to play more from day one.

-Jason "if we get some scoring out of our '5th starter' in the next few weeks then the season will last a few weeks longer ;) " Evans

OZZIE4DUKE
03-13-2007, 05:48 PM
Good to hear. Here's how he may be able to get minutes in the coming seasons...

2008:
Paulus, Smith
Scheyer, Pocius
Henderson, Nelson
Singler (30 min), McClure (10 min), King (0 min)
Zoubek (20 min), Thomas (20 min)



No McRoberts? No Patterson? You pessimist!

As Lance develops he will get plenty of minutes.

SoCalDukeFan
03-13-2007, 05:55 PM
The minutes analysis is very premature.

We could get Patterson and McRoberts could stay.

Singler and King could play one of outside positions as well.

SoCal

Bob Green
03-13-2007, 05:56 PM
Lance Thomas has the potential to be very good. Take a look at his Freshman numbers and compared them to Al Thornton's Freshman numbers:

L. Thomas 14.8 minutes/4 points/2.4 rebounds

A. Thornton 7.9 minutes/2.8 points/1.8 rebounds

Sometimes fans (including myself) are guilty of expecting everyone to produce immediately. I believe LT has the potential to develop into a 1st Team All-ACC performer. He is approximately the same size as Thornton and his Freshman numbers are better than Thornton's numbers. As many posters have said over and over - patience is required.

Bob Green
Yokosuka, Japan

duke03
03-13-2007, 05:57 PM
If he can figure out a way to be more dangerous on offense, he is going to play a major role in Duke's future.


This is undoubtedly true, but it's also the exact same thing that was said about Shavlik and Casey Sanders, to name two. Both were foul machines, and neither one seemed to be able to find his groove offensively.

Moreover, K doesn't have the best track record (at least recently) of developing guys who don't play much early on. With King and Singler playing roughly the same role as Lance, history would suggest that they will get every opportunity to get minutes before Lance will. For the past several seasons, the only guys who really saw a material increase in minutes that I can think of are Melchionni last season and Casey his senior year, and both were really due to necessity more than anything else -- the same reason why Zoubek will likely get minutes next year if McRoberts leaves.

DukeBlood
03-13-2007, 06:02 PM
Lance Thomas has the potential to be very good. Take a look at his Freshman numbers and compared them to Al Thornton's Freshman numbers:

L. Thomas 14.8 minutes/4 points/2.4 rebounds

A. Thornton 7.9 minutes/2.8 points/1.8 rebounds

Sometimes fans (including myself) are guilty of expecting everyone to produce immediately. I believe LT has the potential to develop into a 1st Team All-ACC performer. He is approximately the same size as Thornton and his Freshman numbers are better than Thornton's numbers. As many posters have said over and over - patience is required.

Bob Green
Yokosuka, Japan

Nice find on Thorton minutes.

Not sure if he will ever turn out that good, But we can hope ! :)

Troublemaker
03-13-2007, 06:03 PM
No McRoberts? No Patterson? You pessimist!

As Lance develops he will get plenty of minutes.

Everyone's a pessimist compared to you Ozzie. There are some people "in the know" who would predict the same.

Troublemaker
03-13-2007, 06:09 PM
The minutes analysis is very premature.

We could get Patterson and McRoberts could stay.

Singler and King could play one of outside positions as well.

SoCal

Well, any minutes analysis could be premature because situations can change. In a thread dealing with Lance's future contribution, I think it's relevant to see how he may be able to attain minutes in the coming seasons. And I don't believe Singler and King will ever play more than spot minutes at the 1, 2, or 3 because of the roster structure. We have a lot of guards that are going to get minutes as well.

phaedrus
03-13-2007, 06:38 PM
With King and Singler playing roughly the same role as Lance, history would suggest that they will get every opportunity to get minutes before Lance will.

not to say that their presence won't limit lance's minutes, but i don't think either king or singler's role will be at all similar to lance's. they are both perimeter-oriented players, no (at least for bigger guys)?

Clipsfan
03-13-2007, 06:47 PM
not to say that their presence won't limit lance's minutes, but i don't think either king or singler's role will be at all similar to lance's. they are both perimeter-oriented players, no (at least for bigger guys)?

King is definitely a perimeter oriented guy, and while Singler can take it outside I'm hoping that he'll hang out aroung the basket as well. I think that their ability to play outside will actually be a reason that they may limit Lance's minutes even more, as they'll probably be guarding the same sorts of players, but they'll be able to provide more versatility on the offensive end. We won't be able to really guess defensive assignments until we see what Patterson and McRoberts choose to do, not to mention until we see whether Zoubek puts on some weight and grows into his body more. However, at this time, it appears that the 1-3 will be occupied by people not named Lance, so he'll be competing for time at the 4 (mainly) and 5 (hopefully not) against guys like Singler and King.

Bob Green
03-13-2007, 06:56 PM
Good to hear. Here's how he may be able to get minutes in the coming seasons...

2008:
Paulus, Smith
Scheyer, Pocius
Henderson, Nelson
Singler (30 min), McClure (10 min), King (0 min)
Zoubek (20 min), Thomas (20 min)

2009:
Paulus, Smith
Scheyer, Pocius
Henderson, McClure
Singler (30 min), Thomas(10 min), King (0 min)
Monroe (25 min), Zoubek (15 min)

2010:
Smith, 2009 PG
Scheyer, 2009 SG
Henderson
Thomas (30 min), King (10 min), 2009 PF
Zoubek (30 min), 2009 C

Lance's toughest time getting minutes will be his junior year.

Troublemaker,

Your numbers show zero minutes for Taylor King in his Freshman and Sophomore years. I would love to hear your reasoning behind that theory. King is 6'8" and has a deadly outside shot with a quick release. He also has the ability to go inside and mix it up on the boards. I'm no expert but I enjoy following the progress of Duke recruits. In an AAU game last summer, Kevin Love got into foul trouble so T. King moved inside to the 5 spot and led the team to victory. The only knock on his game (that I've heard) is he is not the quickest player on the court. I just cannot fathom him earning no playing time his first two years at Duke. He may play a limited role as a freshman but by his Sophomore year he should be a solid member of the rotation. He can rebound and he can score!

If anyone out there knows something I don't know, please enlighten me. Thanks!

Bob Green
Yokosuka, Japan

Troublemaker
03-13-2007, 07:11 PM
Troublemaker,

Your numbers show zero minutes for Taylor King in his Freshman and Sophomore years. I would love to hear your reasoning behind that theory. King is 6'8" and has a deadly outside shot with a quick release. He also has the ability to go inside and mix it up on the boards. I'm no expert but I enjoy following the progress of Duke recruits. In an AAU game last summer, Kevin Love got into foul trouble so T. King moved inside to the 5 spot and led the team to victory. The only knock on his game (that I've heard) is he is not the quickest player on the court. I just cannot fathom him earning no playing time his first two years at Duke. He may play a limited role as a freshman but by his Sophomore year he should be a solid member of the rotation. He can rebound and he can score!

If anyone out there knows something I don't know, please enlighten me. Thanks!

Bob Green
Yokosuka, Japan

King may not get literally 0 minutes, but I don't see how he gets more than 5 to 10 minutes his first two seasons. (And remember, these projections are without McRoberts or Patterson). I may be completely off -- maybe King is as good as Singler, maybe he can play center better than either Zoubek or Thomas or the "3" better than Henderson or McClure... but more than likely, I don't see him getting any more than spot minutes his first couple of seasons. There will be too many players ahead of him that are either better, more experienced, better suited to play a position, or some combination of all three. King may be a fine player but ultimately you have to divide 200 minutes somehow and Duke has a lot of fine players.

VaDukie
03-13-2007, 07:14 PM
I really like Lance's potential as a player.

Here's a question I have for everyone out there: Remember how effective Lance was in the Air Force game? We got him the ball on the baseline and he would either drive to the hoop or knock down a nice midrange jumper. I think he had about 14 that game. Why don't we run similar plays for him now? He's clearly not much of a back to the basket player, but why not give him other opportunities offensively?

watzone
03-13-2007, 08:30 PM
Everyone's a pessimist compared to you Ozzie. There are some people "in the know" who would predict the same.

Who would that be? Do all the insiders think the same ... that Josh is gone and we have no chance for PP? I would like to know who is in the know. A name ... a site. When you make those kind of statements it is good to include the source, unless it is double top secret;)

Troublemaker
03-13-2007, 08:46 PM
Who would that be? Do all the insiders think the same ... that Josh is gone and we have no chance for PP? I would like to know who is in the know. A name ... a site. When you make those kind of statements it is good to include the source, unless it is double top secret;)

Nobody said we have "no chance" at PPat, watzone. For the purposes of projecting future rosters, I'm leaving him out since there are 4 schools involved with him. As for Josh, this same question has already been asked a couple of times in the past week (by me even), but you obviously haven't been reading the boards. There are people whose opinion/sources I trust who tell me not to be optimistic on that front. BTW, you are the last person in the universe who should lecture anyone about being cryptic, which I wasn't even trying to be.

OZZIE4DUKE
03-13-2007, 09:48 PM
Everyone's a pessimist compared to you Ozzie.

I am the paradigm! Thanks Troublemaker!:D

OZZIE4DUKE
03-13-2007, 09:53 PM
I am the paradigm! Thanks Troublemaker!:D

Check it out!

Bob Green
03-13-2007, 10:06 PM
even without McRoberts and Patterson. I have no idea whether McRoberts is returning or not and likewise I have no idea where Patterson is going. Even without those two, Duke will have 11 scholarship players next year compared to nine this year. I just cannot fathom T. King riding the bench for two years and only playing 10 a game as a Junior. I would expect him to see 5 - 10 minutes as a Freshman, 10 - 15 as a Sophomore, and 20+ as a Junior & Senior. But, I'm just guessing:) . I'll limit my guessing to next year:

PG - Paulus (35), Smith (5)
SG - Scheyer (25), Pocius (5)
WG - Nelson (25), Henderson (25)
SF - Singler (25), King (10), McClure (15)
PF - Zoubek (15), Thomas (15)

Because of the mix of different line-ups, each position doesn't have to add up to 40 minutes, but of course the total cannot exceed 200. I see the big losers for minutes next year as McClure & Pocius. McClure isn't going to play if he doesn't learn to score and Pocius has bad Mojo or something. He can score but he doesn't play this year and with the incoming talent he won't play next year either. I'm not saying he doesn't deserve to play or anything like that, I just do not see him getting major minutes next year. But then again, what do I know?

With the extended bench, I don't expect anyone other than Paulus to average over 30 minutes a game. Therefore, Nelson and Scheyer's minutes will decrease to the mid 20s.

Bob Green
Yokosuka, Japan

mgtr
03-13-2007, 10:09 PM
I have been critical of LT this season, for failing to meet my expectation of what he could bring to the table. Nothing would please me more than for him to make a contribution in the NCAAs and then become a great player over the next three years. Someone posted that a summer in the weight room would help, and that may be right. It may also be a lack of confidence. Look how GH's talent has bloomed during the season as his confidence in making moves has increased. I am optimistic.

phaedrus
03-13-2007, 10:11 PM
when was the last time duke had only one guy playing 30+ minutes a night? seems rare, but we will have a deeper team than usual next year even without patterson and mcroberts.

gep
03-13-2007, 10:28 PM
I'm not sure that Dave will not get minutes next year, as he will have the experience that the freshmen will not... and he is a tough defender and good rebounder. I agree he's got to score a bit more, though.

FewFAC
03-13-2007, 11:25 PM
L. Thomas 14.8 minutes/4 points/2.4 rebounds

A. Thornton 7.9 minutes/2.8 points/1.8 rebounds


Forget the minutes. There won't be enough ball for Lance to produce like Thornton. Though if there was enough ball, I fully believe Lance can.

shadycharacter
03-14-2007, 12:00 AM
troublemaker, why take a totally unnecessary cheap shot at watzone on this? All he suggested was that when you refer to "people in the know" we all on here want to see one or more links. We ask all the time for links. Otherwise, whoever says it can be just starting idle rumors or trolling. Watzone doesn't need me to defend his post, but I would like to say I thought he made a reasonable request.

Bob Green
03-14-2007, 03:56 AM
when was the last time duke had only one guy playing 30+ minutes a night? seems rare, but we will have a deeper team than usual next year even without patterson and mcroberts.

In 1997/98 season not one player averaged 30 minutes per game. In 1996/97season Wojo was the only player to average 30 or more mpg. The real evidence that destroys the popular myth that Coach K refuses to develop his bench and play a deep rotation is the five seasons 87/88 through 91/92. Over these five seasons, Duke went to five straight final fours and won two national championships.

87/88: 8 players averaged double digit minutes (Ferry, Strickland, Brickey, Snyder, Smith, Henderson, King, Koubek). Only Danny Ferry (32.5) averaged above 30 mpg.

88/89: 8 players averaged double digit minutes (Ferry, Henderson, Brickey, Laettner, Abdelnaby, Snyder, Smith, Koubek). Ferry (33.2) & Snyder (30.4) averaged more than 30 mpg.

89/90: 9 players averaged double digit minutes (Henderson, Laettner, Abdelnaby, Brickey, Hurley, McCaffrey, Davis, Koubek, T. Hill). Hurley (33.4) & Henderson (31.5) averaged more than 30 mpg.

90/91: 9 players averaged double digit minutes (Laettner, McCaffrey, T. Hill, Hurley, G. Hill, Davis, Koubek, Lang, Palmer). Hurley (34.7) & Laettner (30.2) averaged more than 30 mpg.

91/92: 7 players averaged double digit minutes (Laettner, T. Hill, G. Hill, Hurley, Davis, Lang, Parks). Five players averaged more than 30 mpg (Laettner, T. Hill, G. Hill, Hurley, Davis). Billy McCaffrey & Crawford Palmer transferred.

With the talent we will have available next year, I am confident Coach K will spread the minutes around like he has done in the past.

Bob Green
Yokosuka, Japan

CMS2478
03-14-2007, 08:28 AM
anything about Marty returning oversees to play next year and not coming back to Duke. A friend was telling me he read that on the internet yesterday and I didn't know if there was any truth to it. The sad thing is, bc I like Marty, I really don't see him getting any more minutes next year. He might actually get less with all the recruits coming in. So it wouldn't surprise me to see him leave. Anybody got the scoop on this :confused:

feldspar
03-14-2007, 09:18 AM
troublemaker, why take a totally unnecessary cheap shot at watzone on this? All he suggested was that when you refer to "people in the know" we all on here want to see one or more links. We ask all the time for links. Otherwise, whoever says it can be just starting idle rumors or trolling. Watzone doesn't need me to defend his post, but I would like to say I thought he made a reasonable request.

shady, you obviously haven't been around long. Hinting at rumors regarding Duke basketball without substantiation and without links is Watzone's MO* (and please note that I'm not passing judgement on this fact), which is why I'm even more confused at his taking issue with Troublemaker's comments.





*actually, this isn't completely true. He'll substantiate them somewhat if you subscribe to his paid newsletter. But he rarely substantiate or links here at DBR.

whereinthehellami
03-14-2007, 11:06 AM
The earlier posts with possible lineups for this year got me thinking about how I did with my projected lineups for this year.

My pre-season starting lineup for this year was:

Paulus 6-1 So
Nelson 6-3 Jr
Henderson 6-5 Fr
Thomas 6-7 Fr
Mcroberts 6-10 So

I guess I was attracted to the nice mix of size that was in that lineup. Mcclure was definately a nice suprise, if only he can develop more offense/confidence. I should have known that starting two freshman wasn't likley to happen.

As far as next year goes (just for fun) with minutes (way too premature). Starters are in bold.

Paulus 32 min
Nelson 31 min
Smith 10 min
Scheyer 33 min
MCclure 15 min
King 8 min
Henderson 26 min
Thomas 9 min
Singler 30 min
Zoubek 6 min

I think Smith will see some time as he has good defense, decent ball handling, and an okay outside shot. I think Henderson should develop alot more confidence over the summer and the game will slow down for him even more than it has over the end of this year.

I think our size is gonna really be a problem next year, unless we get Patterson. Even then Duke is going to be succeptible to the big man isolation plays that are so painful to watch.

I do think that Duke will be a much more potent offense of team next year and will be able to outpace most opponents, especially with more depth and speed. I look for Paulus to show up a little faster next year and to make a Wojo type adjustment in terms of improvement and defense over the summer and fall.

watzone
03-14-2007, 12:37 PM
shady, you obviously haven't been around long. Hinting at rumors regarding Duke basketball without substantiation and without links is Watzone's MO* (and please note that I'm not passing judgement on this fact), which is why I'm even more confused at his taking issue with Troublemaker's comments.





*actually, this isn't completely true. He'll substantiate them somewhat if you subscribe to his paid newsletter. But he rarely substantiate or links here at DBR.

Oh please. Is this where I say you were in the top ten ignored posters at the former DBR?

My MO? Do we have to go there? Doesn't matter that's as far as I will go with that, but I will try to clarify why I posted.

If I had posted what troublemaker had said you would have thought a bomb went off. He is talking of some pretty sensitive issues concerning Duke basketball. Perhaps the information trickled off the premium section of my site ... perhaps there is some news that is different of late? What ifs and cryptic messages ... go figure.

Regardless, people know who I am making me accountable for my statements, specualtion and passing on of facts. They know where to go if they desire to read more. I have more than proven my sources are accurate over the years, actually having broken DeMarcus Nelsons surprise signing with Duke during the Bob Gibbons tournament right here at DBR! That was when I first started to fiddle about in the world of AAU basketball.

If I had come in and said I heard differently than troublemaker, you might have recquired a link. So, is there a double standard? I do offer a base for the information, that being the premium section of my site.

Indeed there are some issues I deem too sensitive in nature for free boards and that is why I rarely discuss them here. That is out of repsect to sources, subscribers and Duke University itself.

Some people have a problem with my claims, but I have done the leg work, established a network of sources, etc. My work doesn't make me a better Duke fan than others, but perhaps a more informed one at times.

I have seen Patrick Patterson play in 5 venues ... about 17 full AAU and HS games. I have interviewed him extensively and watched the process closely, updating the chase for his services weekly.

I can say that anybody claiming to know where he is leaning or where he might go needs to prove it with something other than what was said ... especially, again with how sensitive the McRobert's issue can be.

I pretty much know what every subscription site is saying, be it UF or West Virginia on the Patterson chase and none that I have seen or heard of claim there is a lean. In fact, they are all guessing, be it well known people in the business like Dave Telep or others. PP has played the entire process close to the vest. There is Clark Francis ... who claims PP has been in the bag for Kentucky since summer ... really?

As for roster speculation .... it is fun, but I personally think it is better served after the dust has cleared. What good is it to disect next years team with this one still playing? All that work goes for naught if there is a change.

I have no problem with troublemaker doing that ... fans love to do that, but to me it is like spending hours on the brackets before they are announced ... all that energy is wasted as soon as the real brackets are out. I see the roster specualtion the same way, but that is just me.

Other than the aforementioned, how about we start with what is said with the new DBR. It is far too early for anyone to bring petty annoyances of the past up. It is much better for all of us to start anew. Again, just my opi.

As for McRobert's, TM is talking of a situation that may well go the way he says, but in the world of who is coming back and coming in, things change daily.

Patrick Patterson is like an up and down stock. I can tell all Blue Devils that his camp recently told me that he would trim the list of six schools to three at the end of this month and that Duke would likely make the cut. I was also told that his decision would be made just after April the tenth. That statement was prefaced with, you never know though. And that is the point, most of us never know for sure because recruiting and player retention is an inexact science.

Finally, I wasn't attacking a Duke fan, troublemaker. I was asking of more detail since I can't hold a person with a posting name accountable for such authoratative sounding comments, all of which may or may not be true.

The latest link on Patterson and a look at the fact that all the new Devils coming in played for top 15 HS teams in HS in in the vast free section of the Blue Devil Nation - The BDN Newsletter (which costs) isn't for everybody.
http://myblogdevils.eponym.com/blog

DukeBlood
03-14-2007, 12:52 PM
Watzone.

Who is TM? I have tried to figure this out and cannot. - Nevermind, I figured it out :)

Also, I havent been around these boards a long time. A week before the board change.. Maybe 2 weeks. With that being said, Your site is mybloddevils?

feldspar
03-14-2007, 12:52 PM
Oh please. Is this where I say you were in the top ten ignored posters at the former DBR?

I think everyone deserves a second chance. I've tried really hard to become a different poster, just as Jumbo has. In fact, he's been an example to me. (cue cheesy sitcom music).


If I had posted what troublemaker had said you would have thought a bomb went off.

If I had come in and said I heard differently than troublemaker, you might have recquired a link. So, is there a double standard? I do offer a base for the information, that being the premium section of my site.

No, actually, I wouldn't have. I understand and accept the fact that if people want to substantiate your claims, they know where to go, which is why i brought up your premium newsletter. I have no problem with you doing this, as I said before. I just wanted to point out that you have, in the past, also been cryptic about your sources and your information. So I don't understand the need for calling out Troublemaker for doing the same thing.


Indeed there are some issues I deem too sensitive in nature for free boards and that is why I rarely discuss them here. That is out of repsect to sources, subscribers and Duke University itself.

That's fine, but you should understand that not everyone subscribes to your standards.


Some people have a problem with my claims, but I have done the leg work, established a network of sources, etc. My work doesn't make me a better Duke fan than others, but perhaps a more informed one at times.

Agreed. I think you do a great job. I just can't justify the cost of your premium content to my wife. Otherwise, believe me, I'd sign up. :)



I can say that anybody claiming to know where he is leaning or where he might go needs to prove it with something other than what was said ... especially, again with how sensitive that and the McRobert's issue is.

I firmly disagree. People have the right to claim to know whatever they want as long as it falls within the bounds of decency. If someone hears a rumor, they hear a rumor, they repeat a rumor. It may not be true, but it doesn't make someone a bad fan or reckless or anything else. Casually commenting about rumors isn't a crime, and I don't believe in the end it causes any sort of damage. Someone going around and spreading false rumors all over the internet is a problem, but I seriously doubt that's what TM was trying to accomplish.

Either way, you can't be the rumor police, watzone. I admire you for wanting to be, but it just ain't gonna work.


As for roster speculation .... it is fun, but I personally think it is better served after the dust has cleared. What good is it to disect next years team with this one still playing? All that work goes for naught if there is a change.

I have no problem with troublemaker doing that ... fans love to do that, but to me it is like spending hours on the brackets before they are announced ... all that energy is wasted as soon as the real brackets are out. I see the roster specualtion the same way, but that is just me.

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, and I hope you would give as much credence to others' desires to talk about these things.


Other than the aforementioned, how about we start with what is said with the new DBR.

Sounds good to me. Although it seems awfully convenient to make this request after calling me out for being on the Top 10 most banned posters list on the "old" DBR.

watzone
03-14-2007, 01:00 PM
Come on feldspar ... who called who out? I just gave a little back to you. You know ... if you can dish it, you can take it. Oh, and it wasn't the most banned poster list ... I have no inside knowledge of that;) It was the most ignored list I was talking of.

If I wanted to be the rumor or thought police I would be a mod. Jumbo? He has built a reputation. While we have had our differences, I appreciate his basketball knowledge, especially his understanding of the way Duke Hoops works. This had nothing to do with him, I simply thought your statements were a bit pithy in nature.

I can only hope that people equate my comments on DBB as being accurate. I offer my track up as proof of what accuracy means to me. As for allowing others their fun ... I have no problem with that, but I will ask when people talk of major issues that they keep it based on something substantial.

Everybody loves to look at the future ... one of the most influentual Duke fans I know does this daily. I admit to doing the same thing in my head, but I realize that posting as if Josh and PP are a lost cause isn't my style. Again, while this could happen, it is far from a settled issue.

Oh, and TM is short for troublemaker. Lastly, I think my posting style has been much more cordial in the past year or better. If I was seen as questioning anything other than TM's assertions, you were looking for something that simply wasn't there.

CMS2478
03-14-2007, 01:04 PM
Your all just a bunch of POO-POO HEADS!!! :D


Can't we all just get along.........it seems I said that same line yesterday.;)

duketaylor
03-14-2007, 01:16 PM
Hadn't seen you around much. Hope you're well.
And Mr Bob Green, I thoroughly expect Nolan Smith to play at least 20 minutes/game next year. Not sure if you've seen him play, I have twice, dude is good. I think he may replace one of the current starters, FWIW.

DukeBlood
03-14-2007, 01:20 PM
Hadn't seen you around much. Hope you're well.
And Mr Bob Green, I thoroughly expect Nolan Smith to play at least 20 minutes/game next year. Not sure if you've seen him play, I have twice, dude is good. I think he may replace one of the current starters, FWIW.

Which starter? I cant see him replacing Demarcus(Defense!!!) or Paulus(Our floor leader and Shooter).. I think if anything changes it Henderson starting for Scheyer.

Troublemaker
03-14-2007, 01:26 PM
Thanks, feldspar.

watzone, I understand now that you weren't trying to patronize me. That's what I thought at first and I apologize if I was in any way rude to you. However, my one throwaway sentence about "people in the know" to Ozzie should not be in any way interpreted as me trying to be "authoritative" on the matter, nor should any events that transpire be interpreted as things "going the way I say" or not "going the way I say." I say nothing on the matter, and I don't claim to be an authority. I was just explaining to Ozzie that I'm not the only person predicting that roster for next season and joking with him that everyone is a pessimist compared to him. I'm not trying to be an authority at all. Like you and every other Duke fan, I do hope 1 or 2 more players are present on the real '08 roster than on my projected '08 roster.

watzone
03-14-2007, 01:30 PM
Hadn't seen you around much. Hope you're well.
And Mr Bob Green, I thoroughly expect Nolan Smith to play at least 20 minutes/game next year. Not sure if you've seen him play, I have twice, dude is good. I think he may replace one of the current starters, FWIW.

Que and brew baby, que and brew;)

Nolan plays for the mythical national HS champ ... that says a lot about his skills and prepardeness for the next level. I am scheduled to talk with him about his season in the coming week.

Here is a tip for you Devils ... Nolan will be on campus in July as will Singler, King and hopefuly Patterson. They will get an early start with summer school and yes I am looking forward to seeing them hoop it up with the returning players.

Troublemaker
03-14-2007, 01:32 PM
BTW, projecting a roster one way or another doesn't mean I consider anything to be a "lost cause." That's like saying my prediction of Kansas in the Final Four means I consider Duke's chances a lost cause.

watzone
03-14-2007, 01:40 PM
Thanks, feldspar.

watzone, I understand now that you weren't trying to patronize me. That's what I thought at first and I apologize if I was in any way rude to you. However, my one throwaway sentence about "people in the know" to Ozzie should not be in any way interpreted as me trying to be "authoritative" on the matter, nor should any events that transpire be interpreted as things "going the way I say" or not "going the way I say." I say nothing on the matter, and I don't claim to be an authority. I was just explaining to Ozzie that I'm not the only person predicting that roster for next season and joking with him that everyone is a pessimist compared to him. I'm not trying to be an authority at all. Like you and every other Duke fan, I do hope 1 or 2 more players are present on the real '08 roster than on my projected '08 roster.
No problems! Perhaps I overracted in my wording. In fact, I will admit that feldspar is right in that I am concerned with rumors, for there are many. I am in no way trying to be a rumor policeman tho - We all have to be held accounctable in some way tho, imo. Anyhow, the old DBR was not about rumors for there is too much opportunity for a poster to create one. I in no way thought you intended to do anything other than converse.

CMS2478
03-14-2007, 01:48 PM
I should be a counselor...............I asked "can't we all get along" and now everyone is calm and compromising.


Group Hug People, Group Hug ;)

Bob Green
03-14-2007, 03:34 PM
Hadn't seen you around much. Hope you're well.
And Mr Bob Green, I thoroughly expect Nolan Smith to play at least 20 minutes/game next year. Not sure if you've seen him play, I have twice, dude is good. I think he may replace one of the current starters, FWIW.

DukeTaylor - I have only seen Nolan Smith play via film clips. He looked very good in the Les Scwab film clip featuring Oak Hill & South Medford. I based my opinion (limited PT freshman year) on our current depth in the backcourt. I have read that Smith can beat defenders off the dribble so that would address a weakness of our current rotation. If he his good enough to earn 20 minutes of PT, our backcourt will be very strong next year. I hope you are correct.

Bob Green
Yokosuka, Japan

watzone
03-14-2007, 03:51 PM
Don't think Duke will not run a three guard offense at times. Nolan will definately help from day one. I can see him getting 20 mpg.

RelativeWays
03-14-2007, 05:18 PM
I would think Lance would stay, even though he hasn't contributed to much offensively (the Duke inside game has largely been MIA this year) he's played some big minutes in just about every game. Its not like the Jamal Boykin scenario where he gets no PT at all 'cept when its scrub time. I hated to see Jamal go, I think he could have helped this year.

Cameron
03-14-2007, 05:20 PM
By no means am I trying to call you out, troublemaker, but it is laughable that you think Taylor King will average 10 minutes a game as a junior. He will be starting. And, IMO, will be playing five more minutes than that a game next season. I've said it over and over again. Coach K absolutely loves forwards who can stretch the D with long range shooting. Taylor will find plenty of playing time, no matter whether his defense is a little suspect at first or not. It didn't stop him from playing JJ did it? And not to mention, you don't even have Josh or Patterson on your projected squad for next season. Since Kyle would be pretty much forced into playing center all year, who would be giving David and Lance, both of whom have not yet shown to be consistent, a steady rest if Taylor is averaging 0 or 1 minute per game?

Could you please explain how that would work out? Also, why would we be keeping a 6-7 three-point specialist on the bench all season, when a 6-7 three-point specialist is perhaps the most perfect player for Coach K's offense? I just don't see the logic in this.

Troublemaker
03-14-2007, 05:32 PM
By no means am I trying to call you out, troublemaker, but it is laughable that you think Taylor King will average 10 minutes a game as a junior. He will be starting. And, IMO, will be playing five more minutes than that a game next season. I've said it over and over again. Coach K absolutely loves forwards who can stretch the D with long range shooting. Taylor will find plenty of playing time, no matter whether his defense is a little suspect at first or not. It didn't stop him from playing JJ did it? And not to mention, you don't even have Josh or Patterson on your projected squad for next season. Since Kyle would be pretty much forced into playing center all year, who would be giving David and Lance, both of whom have not yet shown to be consistent, if Taylor is averaging 0 or 1 minute per game?

Could you please explain how that would work out? Also, why would we be keeping a 6-7 three-point specialist on the bench all season, when a 6-7 three-point specialist is perhaps the most perfect player for Coach K's offense? I just don't see the logic in this.

King has way more folks to compete with for PT than Redick did. If you can find a way for King to get 15 minutes next season and be starting his junior season, I'd love to see it. Do a minutes breakdown like I did (although, of course, at this point, you just might want to postpone this conversation altogether with the NCAAs opening play tomorrow). Even if you succeed, I doubt my version is any more "laughable" than your version. We just don't know at this point. Zoubek was supposed to be the next Gminski and get lots of immediate playing time, remember? It could still happen, but G-Man and Z didn't have similar freshmen seasons for sure. I think it'll be difficult for King to get immediate playing time when Singler more or less possesses all the same skills and more.

Indoor66
03-14-2007, 05:35 PM
I should be a counselor...............I asked "can't we all get along" and now everyone is calm and compromising.


Group Hug People, Group Hug ;)

...and 4 choruses of Kum Bayah