Big Man Comparison

[keithg]

Can anyone explain to me how Zoubek and Thomas were both ranked higher than Thompson and Stephenson at UNC? Is it just poor evaluation by the experts (I'm looking at RSCI) or lack of development by the coaching staff?

[CDu]

Can anyone explain to me how Zoubek and Thomas were both ranked higher than Thompson and Stephenson at UNC? Is it just poor evaluation by the experts (I'm looking at RSCI) or lack of development by the coaching staff?

Well, it's not really fair to compare Zoubek to anybody, because he's been injured throughout his career. So, he hasn't had a chance to develop.

As far as Thomas versus Thompson/Stepheson, I don't know. Perhaps it's a combination of factors, including:

1. poor evaluation by the experts
2. difficulty in evaluating players that develop at different rates
3. playing in different systems with different teammates
4. the DBR-favorite topic lack of a big-man coach
5. players just developing later
6. random chance

I don't think there's one magical right answer. Hopefully, Thomas and Zoubek prove the talent evaluators/scouts right next year.

[kydevil]

Can anyone explain to me how Zoubek and Thomas were both ranked higher than Thompson and Stephenson at UNC? Is it just poor evaluation by the experts (I'm looking at RSCI) or lack of development by the coaching staff?

We can't really compare "Z" to either since he has been banged up. Also, I don't think it's fair to compare Lance either. Lance in high school was a different player than we are forcing him (due to lack of size) to play. He is not a banger that we need him to be, therefore before we question his ability think of what a team player he is being by playing out of position.

[sundown]

Also, I don't think it's fair to compare Lance either. Lance in high school was a different player than we are forcing him (due to lack of size) to play. He is not a banger that we need him to be, therefore before we question his ability think of what a team player he is being by playing out of position.

What else would he be, though, if he weren't a banger? He doesn't shoot or handle near well enough to play on the perimeter.

[DevilCastDownfromDurham]

The difference (as is so often the case when comparing us to UNC this season) is Hansblahblah. He draws a tremendous amount of attention that leaves the other post players with more space and lets them play against other posts that are tired and in foul trouble. Great players make those around them better simply by occupying defensive attention. Switch either one with Lance and Lance is a "great role-player" while Stephenson/Thompson are "underpreforming."

[Jumbo]

What else would he be, though, if he weren't a banger? He doesn't shoot or handle near well enough to play on the perimeter.

He was more of a face-up player than we've been able to see at Duke, because of the role he has been asked to face. Thompson and Stephenson, by contrast, have always been power players.

[kramerbr]

Why was so and so, ranked higher than so and so?

Maybe the boards should of been shut down for a little longer...

[sundown]

He was more of a face-up player than we've been able to see at Duke, because of the role he has been asked to face. Thompson and Stephenson, by contrast, have always been power players.

I can see that. He showed some signs of that game early in his freshman year: facing up, giving a shot-fake, then driving by. Why is it, do you think, that the role Duke needs him in forecloses him playing that way? It seems like Duke could use that sort of option.

[wisteria]

I am getting tired of hearing that somebody is not playing their natural position. Lance isn't, Kyle isn't, Nolan isn't, Last year's Jon wasn't. I know, I know, we've missed out a couple recruits other wise the situation would be different. Looks like they are just gonna keep playing the unnatural positions for a year or more.

[Jumbo]

I can see that. He showed some signs of that game early in his freshman year: facing up, giving a shot-fake, then driving by. Why is it, do you think, that the role Duke needs him in forecloses him playing that way? It seems like Duke could use that sort of option.

Honestly, I'm not sure. I don't get to see practice, so I don't know what he looks like there. Maybe he's lost confidence in that part of his game. The other issue is that when he is in with Singler, someone has to fill the role of screening and balancing the floor. So, often he's just not in position to drive or shoot from the perimeter. Think of how little we saw of Boozer's face-up game in college, for instance. (Obviously, he was a great power player.) If Lance still has these skills, though, it would be great to see him use them against bigger, slower players.

[Jumbo]

I am getting tired of hearing that somebody is not playing their natural position. Lance isn't, Kyle isn't, Nolan isn't, Last year's Jon wasn't. I know, I know, we've missed out a couple recruits other wise the situation would be different. Looks like they are just gonna keep playing the unnatural positions for a year or more.

I don't know what else to say. I do think Kyle is a natural 4 in Duke's system, so I don't worry about him as much. Jon's fine. But it's obvious that Lance isn't a 5. I think Nolan will learn to play the point, but it will take a little time. The important thing is putting good players on the court. I don't worry so much about "positions," because I think there are multiple ways to win games. We just need to take advantage of the strengths we have (and there are many). I'd love to have a conventional inside scorer/shot blocker, but I don't think we're destined to lose without one.

[chrisheery]

Well, it's not really fair to compare Zoubek to anybody, because he's been injured throughout his career. So, he hasn't had a chance to develop.

As far as Thomas versus Thompson/Stepheson, I don't know. Perhaps it's a combination of factors, including:

1. poor evaluation by the experts
2. difficulty in evaluating players that develop at different rates
3. playing in different systems with different teammates
4. the DBR-favorite topic lack of a big-man coach
5. players just developing later
6. random chance

I don't think there's one magical right answer. Hopefully, Thomas and Zoubek prove the talent evaluators/scouts right next year.


I always wonder if guys get rated higher because we are looking at them. Clearly, Thompson and Stephenson are athletic, powerful big guys. I know that one of them, Stephenson, i think, was extremely overweight and lost 40 pounds or so between his senior year and getting to Carolina. That may have explained his lower ranking. Still, having a guy that feels comfortable rebounding, guarding post players, and catching and delivering down low is always something valuable and should probably be ranked that way by these "experts."

[RelativeWays]

I don't think Thompson would help us that much, his game is a bit more finesse, honestly I could see Kyle, maybe even Lance doing those same jump hooks and short jumpers he shoots.

Stepheson is another matter. I think the guy would start at almost any other school. He's large, athletic, a good defender, great rebounder and probably doesn't get the appreciation he deserves at UNC. He won't be the offensive workhorse that Beaker is or even Thompson, but he'll get you 8-10 pts consistently And I'd love to have a player like that on the post right now. He may get to shine next year if Beaker leaves, but I think Davis and Zeller come in and I think both of them are over 6-10 and highly touted.

[gofurman]

I can see that. He showed some signs of that game early in his freshman year: facing up, giving a shot-fake, then driving by. Why is it, do you think, that the role Duke needs him in forecloses him playing that way? It seems like Duke could use that sort of option.

I don't see how Lance could be that good at that option - he travels if he is not right under the basket. I can't speak to his shot but his dribble concerns me.

[mcdukie]

I have been waiting for a post on big man recruiting. I agree with the person that started this thread questioning how our bigs were rated over UNC's? The person who said that Lance is playing out of place has got to be joking. Face-up?? All he does is foul in the post, are you saying he is a Singler type of player? What Lance shows you is when you play for certain high school programs often you get more hype than you deserve. I agree that with big men we put all of our eggs in the basket marked "MCDAA". When have we gotten a really tough big recently that wasn't a MCDAA? It seems to me that our assistants have to beat the bushes a little more for some names that every "expert" doesn't know. What if we had one of the athletic bigs from Clemson? Heck, Gist at MD could have helped us out this year and next year Wake is bringing in 2 MCDAAs that are post players. Zoub is and will always be a good back up. I know he hasn't been healthy but his physical attributes are what they are. I hope he proves me wrong.

[Jumbo]

I have been waiting for a post on big man recruiting.

Really? How long have you been reading the board? There's a new one every week!


The person who said that Lance is playing out of place has got to be joking. Face-up?? All he does is foul in the post, are you saying he is a Singler type of player?
Uh, no. I said he came into college as a forward who played facing the basket a lot. I never said he was like Kyle Singler. But he was also 6'8" and barely over 200 pounds, which isn't exactly traditional "power" size.


What Lance shows you is when you play for certain high school programs often you get more hype than you deserve.
What does that mean? Most of the evaluation takes place on the AAU/camp circuit. His high school program had nothing to do with his ranking.


I agree that with big men we put all of our eggs in the basket marked "MCDAA". When have we gotten a really tough big recently that wasn't a MCDAA?
Brian Zoubek? Also, when we start recruiting kids, how do we know whether they will be one of 24 kids selected to the McDonald's team?


It seems to me that our assistants have to beat the bushes a little more for some names that every "expert" doesn't know. What if we had one of the athletic bigs from Clemson?
Do you have any idea whether Booker or Mays would have qualified academically at Duke? I don't have the answer either, but that's an important part of the equation. I'm all for bush-beating (I love the addition of Olek Czyz, for instance), but we should continue to chase the best players we can reasonably get. It's unfortunate that we missed out on Blake Griffin, Gary Johnson and Patrick Patterson, for example.


Heck, Gist at MD could have helped us out this year and next year Wake is bringing in 2 MCDAAs that are post players.
I thought you wanted to beat bushes? Gist was a highly regarded H.S. player but wasn't exactly an academic star. Duke signed two bigs in the class after him. One was the supposed best player in his class (McRoberts). Another was supposed to be a raw/development type (Boateng).


Zoub is and will always be a good back up. I know he hasn't been healthy but his physical attributes are what they are. I hope he proves me wrong.

I hope he proves you wrong, too. What did you think of Aaron Gray at Pitt after two years?

[Edouble]

I don't see how Lance could be that good at that option - he travels if he is not right under the basket. I can't speak to his shot but his dribble concerns me.

My thoughts exactly. I don't see how you can say that his skill set is one suited to play further out when he travels so much. I think he needs to gain 20 lbs and play the 5. He's so fast, I don't think even 20 lbs would slow him down that much that he wouldn't still have a quickness edge.

[kexman]

Any thought on red shirting our big men. Not directed at any current players and our lack of inside depth doesn't make it currently possible. However, it seems like it would not be a bad idea to red shirt our interior players that are not likely early entrants to the NBA. They would have a year to mature, bulk up, and learn the program. Seems like that would be a benefit to everyone. I assume that must be a tough sell to a high school star (even a top 150 player is a star at the high school level). We generally have a scholarship left most years. We could probably afford to red shirt one player a year? Thoughts...

[CDu]

Any thought on red shirting our big men. Not directed at any current players and our lack of inside depth doesn't make it currently possible. However, it seems like it would not be a bad idea to red shirt our interior players that are not likely early entrants to the NBA. They would have a year to mature, bulk up, and learn the program. Seems like that would be a benefit to everyone. I assume that must be a tough sell to a high school star (even a top 150 player is a star at the high school level). We generally have a scholarship left most years. We could probably afford to red shirt one player a year? Thoughts...

Except in rare circumstances, you just don't see players redshirt for non-medical reasons in college basketball. Moreover, in this case, it doesn't seem to be an issue. Our bigs who haven't redshirted but haven't played haven't exactly made leaps and bounds in their progress, anyway. I'm not sure that redshirting would make a huge difference. But the fact that it's just not done in college basketball makes it a moot point.

[gw67]

Just an observation or two:

Having a strong inside presence is still important in the college game. Eleven of the remaining sixteen teams play with a back-to-the-basket center/forward and I expect that four of the five teams that don't will lose in the third round. Except for Hansbrough and Love, most of these frontcourt players are rebounders and inside defensive players and were not McDonalds All Americans.

Like all Duke fans, I hope that Zoubek and Thomas improve over the summer but the most important big man issue for the Devils next year, IMO, will be replacing the "little" big man, Demarcus Nelson. He, not Singler or Thomas, led the team in rebounding. I expect that Scheyer or Smith can replace his scoring and passing but replacing his rebounding and defense will an issue that needs to be addressed.

Like many other on this board I look forward to the day when I read that a youngster has committed to Duke who plays down low and wants to stay there. The youngster who committed a few weeks ago is 6-10 and made no secret of the fact that he wants to play away from the basket. This is no knock on this youngster. He sounds like a high quality kid with a good future as a college player.

gw67

[greybeard]

This might be slightly off the main focus here, but it is not a hijack.

Big men are effective when the team wants them to be. Take the Wizzards. Gil is a terrrific player. The next time he makes an effective entry pass will be his first. People were saying the same things about Heywood that many people have been saying about Lance and Zoubek. They aren't this year. This year Heywood had a miraculous turnaround. Gil ain't playing. This is not a coincidence.

Am I saying that the kids or coaches at Duke don't want Lance and Zoubek to succeed. Absolutely not!

This is what I am saying: this year's team was not focused on getting play on the offense out of the pivot position, as that position is commonly understood, be the pivot a "center" or power foreward (someday, I will understnad the difference). This year there was a novel experiment that in my opinion worked terrifically. It diminished the ability of Lance to succeed, because getting him a number of touches in good spots was not what the team was after.

I am not saying that playing through Lance (I don't mention Z because he has a broken foot) would have produced an all-ACC performance or would have been a wise choice. However, you put Lance in a system where he is regarded as a main piece of the offense, and he will show why he was rated as high as he was.

This year he had to fit in with an offense that was geared to maximize the effectiveness of some very, very high end wing players; have them play the penetration role usually put in the hands of a single point guard and the pivot role for inside out distribution usually put in the hands of a big.

Singler showed brilliance in being able not just to fit into such a system but to flourish in it. All that we know is that Lance is not that guy.

Next year I expect to see Duke deploy similarly as to this year but to create more inside play with Lance, Zoubek, and Singler. If Lance and Zoubek are not made integral to the offense, their ability to defend and defensive rebound will be diminished. Without Markie's extraordinary skill set, that will not be acceptable.

So, look for more diversity in Duke's game set than ever. Also look for the mainstays to play more to the rhythms that Smith and King are most comfortable with, and for them to contribute much more.

I have said from early in the season that this year's Duke team was an extraordinary one. When we will see its like again is anyone's guess. My hat is off to them.

[Doctor Joe]

I would love to see Zoubek develop like that 7 foot redhead at Georgia Tech a few years ago. I'm drawing a blank on his name right now (Luke S---?). But as I recall, he was pretty much a project for Tech for a year or two and by his senior year played a key role in them making it to the Final Four.

[JasonEvans]

I would love to see Zoubek develop like that 7 foot redhead at Georgia Tech a few years ago. I'm drawing a blank on his name right now (Luke S---?). But as I recall, he was pretty much a project for Tech for a year or two and by his senior year played a key role in them making it to the Final Four.

You are thinking of Luke Schenscher, who got some run in the NBA and is currently in the Developmental league, I think.

Luke is a fine example of a big man who developed late. He played about 12 minutes per game as a soph at Tech, averaging a meager 3.7 ppg and only 3.1 rebounds. As a junior and senior, he blossomed and was a real candidate for All-ACC.

He is just one of many big men who develop from small-time role players into very significant studs in the post over the course of their 4 years in college. The list of guys who followed a similar path is extremely long.

I see no reason to think that Zoubek cannot do the same.

--Jason "if he can stay healthy, I think Zoub could be just what the doctor ordered for Duke next year" Evans

[RelativeWays]

Kyle Visser for Wake is another good example of a big who bloomed late. True that Wake didn't have many options in 07 but he took what was given his senior year and I think he was 2nd or 3rd team all ACC. I don't think anyone here would say no to a player like Visser if they knew how he would turn out by his senior year.

[dkbaseball]

Except in rare circumstances, you just don't see players redshirt for non-medical reasons in college basketball. Moreover, in this case, it doesn't seem to be an issue. Our bigs who haven't redshirted but haven't played haven't exactly made leaps and bounds in their progress, anyway. I'm not sure that redshirting would make a huge difference. But the fact that it's just not done in college basketball makes it a moot point.

I'm not sure this is true. Redshirting bigs for non-medical reasons seems to be a fairly standard practice at Wisconsin, and it has benefitted them. Mike Wilkinson and Brian Butch were first team Big Ten in their 5th years, after redshirting. Butch's development was slow but steady, and in his 5th year they have a better player than they had in any of his previous years. Also, a starter last year, Jason Chappell, was a 5th year redshirt. Wisconsin people regularly wring their hands that Greg Steimsma didn't redshirt and can't return next year. Same with a freshman this year who is expected to be a key power player next year but saw hardly any action this season -- Keaton Nankivil. I got the sense that it is routinely considered at Wisconsin for bigs not ready to contribute in their freshman years, and the decision is left up to the players.

On the subject of Duke's bigs, please folks, get at least a little excited about Olek Czyz. I don't know what his role will be next year, but he expects to start at the 5 right away. I do strongly believe, after seeing him play 12 times, that he will bring a physicality to Duke's post rotation lacking this year, and will be a very interesting addition. Joe Alexander reminded me a little bit of the type of player I think Olek can become. Alexander's maybe a tad taller, Olek more athletic. Similar ball skills, perhaps. The way Alexander led his teammates just the right amount on outlet passes reminded me of something I saw Olek do several times.

[Edouble]

Joe Alexander reminded me a little bit of the type of player I think Olek can become. Alexander's maybe a tad taller, Olek more athletic. Similar ball skills, perhaps. The way Alexander led his teammates just the right amount on outlet passes reminded me of something I saw Olek do several times.

Olek's listed as 6'7", 235lbs. on rivals.com and 6'10", 240 lbs. on NBAdraft.net. I have the idea that his size is closer to the lower set of numbers, but 6'7" 235 is a pretty nice center of gravity. While you can win without a big man, it certainly helps to have the versitility of beef in your line-up.

[Madrasdukie]

On the subject of Duke's bigs, please folks, get at least a little excited about Olek Czyz.

I'm pumped, don't have any significant expectations, but based on your posts just pumped.

I mean everytime our guys were getting pushed around I was just thinking of your posts on Olek.

I am just PUMPED !!