Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 53
  1. #1

    Duke and Georgetown basketball recruiting...

    Hi,

    I am curious, did Sean Dockery have better credentials than the kid in question here? I hope so.

    GO DUKE! (I think this link is OK to post, if it isn't please remove.)

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/30/sp...ts&oref=slogin

  2. #2
    I hope JJ Redick, Greg Paulus and Taylor King had/have better credentials as well.

    1. Can we please stop referring to Dock as if he were stupid and had poor grades when there is no evidence of that?

    2. How is anyone going to confirm for you what Dock's grades were? There are folks who post here with sources, but I doubt they have access to Dock's transcripts.

  3. #3

    I didn't say he was stupid...

    Quote Originally Posted by Troublemaker View Post
    I hope JJ Redick, Greg Paulus and Taylor King had/have better credentials as well.

    1. Can we please stop referring to Dock as if he were stupid and had poor grades when there is no evidence of that?

    2. How is anyone going to confirm for you what Dock's grades were? There are folks who post here with sources, but I doubt they have access to Dock's transcripts.

    Hi,

    Past articles, of course now I can't find them, alluded to the fact that Coach K had to fight with admissions to allow Dock to enter Duke. Perhaps those articles were wrong or I am remembering incorrectly. That is always a possibility too. Dock was one of my favorite players.


    GO DUKE!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Durham, NC
    I had Sean in class, and he did well to very well as a senior.

  5. #5

    This would be a different thread, but...

    Quote Originally Posted by DukeDevilDeb View Post
    I had Sean in class, and he did well to very well as a senior.

    Hi,

    What you have written shows how some things like grades in high school and SAT scores are indicators, but not the whole story when it comes to college success. For example, I am sure that there are kids who score 1500 or better on their SATs, but sit around, don't apply themselves and actually do worse by their senior year than kids who did significantly worse on their SATS, but applied themselves. My question at the root of this thread had to do with matriculation, I was just curious if Sean did significantly better in high school than the guy from Georgetown before entering Duke. There are TONS of reasons why he might not of (then again he might have done better)--Chicago can be a rough place and simply surviving and wanting to do well at Duke might be more of an indicator of future success than any scores or grades. I am, in some ways, sorry I started the thread because I think it was taken the wrong way.

    So, for the record. I am glad Sean Dockery matriculated at Duke. I don't think he is stupid. It is wonderful to hear that he did well in his classes. From what I heard he was a model citizen.

    GO DUKE!

  6. #6
    You might be able to predict where I stand on this.

    We could have had Anthony Roberson.

    Great call, Coach K!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Having read the article, I feel safe saying that there was nothing in Dockery's background which came close to the GU player's stats. If I remember correctly, Dockery was a fairly decent student who had good grades, but didn't do as well on the SAT as the average Duke student. I don't know what score he got, but I think the concern was that it wasn't good for Duke, not that it didn't qualify him for Div 1 athletics. He had a good work habit, just a poor school system which didn't prepare him well for the SAT. I'm sure that posters on this board have heard the argument that the SAT is an inherently racist test, with questions based upon social circumstances and preconceptions that are more easily understood/accepted by both the wealthier portions and often the white portions of society. There are many stereotypes in the written sections of the test, and it also helps to have attended a school which prepares you.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by Clipsfan View Post
    Having read the article, I feel safe saying that there was nothing in Dockery's background which came close to the GU player's stats. If I remember correctly, Dockery was a fairly decent student who had good grades, but didn't do as well on the SAT as the average Duke student. I don't know what score he got, but I think the concern was that it wasn't good for Duke, not that it didn't qualify him for Div 1 athletics. He had a good work habit, just a poor school system which didn't prepare him well for the SAT. I'm sure that posters on this board have heard the argument that the SAT is an inherently racist test, with questions based upon social circumstances and preconceptions that are more easily understood/accepted by both the wealthier portions and often the white portions of society. There are many stereotypes in the written sections of the test, and it also helps to have attended a school which prepares you.
    you have to be kidding me? if not doing "as well on the SAT as the average Duke student" was a cause for concern for basketball recruiting, then nearly every player would have major issues. i really don't think you understand how off basketball players numbers are to those of the "average duke student." we are talking 400 or 500 points off -- not 50. here is an article that has some key facts in it:

    http://www.dukechronicle.com/home/in...f-bb1e86da7a76

    note that the average male non-athlete has an average sat of 1438 and the average male basketball player had an average sat of 997! btw, dockery's stats are in there too: 2.3 gpa and 15 on the act (i don't know acts scores but i assume that that is extremely low). yeah, a 2.3 gpa qualifies as a "fairly decent student" in my book.

    with that being said, it is an absolute disgrace that georgetown, which certainly considers itself to be one of the top schools in the country, would let an absolute academic zero in like the guy in the article. it is stories like that that make you want to vomit over college sports. i am curious as to how much georgetown throws academics out the window in recruiting and if that player was just an isolated incident.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Quote Originally Posted by dukie8 View Post
    with that being said, it is an absolute disgrace that georgetown, which certainly considers itself to be one of the top schools in the country, would let an absolute academic zero in like the guy in the article. it is stories like that that make you want to vomit over college sports. i am curious as to how much georgetown throws academics out the window in recruiting and if that player was just an isolated incident.
    Georgetown has a long history of taking kids who are big academic question marks on the basketball team. But, it has a reputation for working fairly hard to try to get those kids to go to class and get a degree too.

    I've got no problem with a school taking academic risks-- so long as it makes a strong effort to give that kid an education once he gets there. Temple and John Cheney were legendary for this and I have nothing but respect for Cheney's attitude about academics.

    The problem comes when a school takes kids who are so poor academically that they are unprepared for college and have no chance to getting through school.

    -Jason
    Last edited by JasonEvans; 03-31-2007 at 04:26 PM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North Carolina
    I agree with Jason, but it is hard to decide when a school is taking a good-faith academic risk with a kid and when they are just bringing in a kid solely for the fact that he is good at sports.

    Am I the only one who saw Dockery and Eddy Curry on the "Chicago Hoops" show on FSN about 6 or 7 years ago that featured Dockery sprinting around his high school gym when he found out he finally qualified for college? He was so unbelievably happy - if someone was only interested in sports you'd think they'd just pump their first when they found out they qualified, but he was so happy it, IMO, demonstrated how proud he was that he could go to school.
    Last edited by freedevil; 03-31-2007 at 01:58 PM.

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by freedevil View Post
    I agree with Jason, but it is hard to decide when a school is taking a good-faith academic risk with a kid and when they are just bringing in a kid solely for the fact that he is good at sports.

    Am I the only one who saw Dockery and Eddy Curry on the "Chicago Hoops" show on FSN about 6 or 7 years ago that featured Dockery sprinting around his high school gym when he found out he finally qualified for college? He was so unbelievably happy - if someone was only interested in sports you'd think they'd just pump their first when they found out they qualified, but he was so happy it, IMO, demonstrated how proud he was that he could go to school.
    My take is we're drawing arbitrary lines here. You either don't relax academic standards for athletes or you do. Once you've relaxed them, who's to say when you've relaxed them too far (assuming the kid still meets NCAA minimum requirements)? The bottom line is this: can the kid survive the academic rigors of the school? Can he interact and contribute positively to the environment and community when he enrolls? For all anyone knows, that Georgetown kid did just fine in those areas. You can't judge a person by some numbers on a sheet of paper. We should get off our high horse.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Chesapeake, VA.
    Quote Originally Posted by dukie8 View Post
    btw, dockery's stats are in there too: 2.3 gpa and 15 on the act (i don't know acts scores but i assume that that is extremely low).
    A 15 on the ACT is probably pretty close to the national average; maybe a couple of points low. The top score is 36. Anything over 20 is pretty good.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Skinker-DeBaliviere, Saint Louis
    First, I agree with Troublemaker. A collective high-horse dismount would be nice.

    Second, here are some ACT averages by state in 2004: http://www.act.org/news/data/04/states.html

    The national mean composite was 20.9 in 2004 and 21.1 in 2005.

    Illinois is in at 20.3 avg ACT composite for 2004. One ought to discount the states that have low percentages of kids taking the ACT. The kids who take the opposite qualifying test from the dominant one in their state tend to be above-average scorers who intend to go to college out of state.

    15 composite is pretty low. (I don't mean to criticize Dockery personally here; I'm just trying to give some context about the test and I'm assuming most of the people on this board are more familiar with the SAT, which dominates on the coasts. I didn't know anything about the ACT till I moved to MS).

    So for example, the IHL board that supervises all 8 public universities in Mississippi just lowered from 19 to 17 the Comp I cut-off on the English subsection. MS has your standard two-semester Frosh writing. Currently, you can get into Comp I at 19, but 18 puts you in Basic English, a non-credit class that catches you up before you take Comp I. Now, no one on the instructional side of this issue believes that the ACT is a great predictor of which Frosh writing a kid needs to be in, but we currently haven't the resources to administer diagnostic testing.

    Point being, 15 composite would mostly likely land you in Basic English at Mississippi State, which ain't Duke.
    Last edited by throatybeard; 03-31-2007 at 11:33 PM.

    A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
    ---Roger Ebert


    Some questions cannot be answered
    Who’s gonna bury who
    We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
    ---Over the Rhine

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    isn't 997 sat pretty low for most any school? i saw some listings of sat scores for some tiny colleges in sc that were better than that. i'm talking schools that were junior colleges less than 20 years ago. i can understand players from urban public schools having bad scores but we have way too many players from private schools and fairly well to do families that should be able to score 1000 without thinking about it. 1000 ain't what it used to be ya know.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Skinker-DeBaliviere, Saint Louis
    They re-normed it, twice. After a little while of near-universal access to the test (as opposed a few few to rich college-prep kids taking it in the 1940s), the verbal mean in particular had dropped, so they dinked with the scoring to make 500 the subsection mean again.

    Also remember that there's a third section now, in which you write essays. So it's out of 2400.
    Last edited by throatybeard; 03-31-2007 at 10:45 PM.

    A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
    ---Roger Ebert


    Some questions cannot be answered
    Who’s gonna bury who
    We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
    ---Over the Rhine

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    but those duke scores listed must not take into account the written section as the duke average is 1400 something. i read somewhere (in an article about the act being accepted everywhere now) where most schools are not officially including the written essay portion of the sat in their consideration.

    therefore, based on the new renormalization of scores, i guess 1000 is what it used to be. still it does seem we should have a better average. i guess we are not recruiting a few of the stellar scholar/athletes as we had in the past and instead have more stellar athlete/scholars.

    i just think our recruits should beat the mean at anderson university, formerly known as anderson junior college.

    http://education.yahoo.com/college/facts/5116.html
    http://www.ac.edu/pdf/diversity.pdf (states a requirement for 1000 sat score for acceptance but i'm sure their athletes have reduced requirements as well)

  17. #17
    Dock had to of scored above 15 on the ACT. KG will tell you that a player needs 17 to play in the NCAA.

    It's really not fair to compare Dock, or the basketball team, to the student body. I doubt Duke will release the info, but a more legit comparison would be to the non-athlete African American Duke student.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Skinker-DeBaliviere, Saint Louis
    Quote Originally Posted by badgerbd View Post
    I doubt Duke will release the info, but a more legit comparison would be to the non-athlete African American Duke student.
    That sentence just made me realize that Sean Dockery is, in fact, a former Duke athlete.

    A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
    ---Roger Ebert


    Some questions cannot be answered
    Who’s gonna bury who
    We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
    ---Over the Rhine

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by badgerbd View Post
    Dock had to of scored above 15 on the ACT. KG will tell you that a player needs 17 to play in the NCAA.

    It's really not fair to compare Dock, or the basketball team, to the student body. I doubt Duke will release the info, but a more legit comparison would be to the non-athlete African American Duke student.
    why is it not fair to compare basketball players to non-athletes? duke's mission, first and foremost, is education and not athletics. it's entirely fair and relevant to see how much duke throws out its academic standards to field a competitive basketball team (which i believe is a lot worse than most of the people on here want to admit). moreover, i am completely confused as to why you believe that we should be comparing the basketball team, which has both white and black players, to non-athlete blacks at duke.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    New Orleans

    What happened to the D.C. connection?

    Between 1986 and 1993 Duke had at least 12 players recruited from the Washington D.C. area on its roster -- Dawkins, Amaker, Billy King, Ferry, John Smith, Crawford Palmer, Brian Davis, GHill, Kenny Blakeney, Christian Ast, Tony Moore and Joey Beard (and Wojo if you count Baltimore). Since then I can think of only Nate James in '96.

    What happened? D.C. was a natural recruiting base for K since it had plenty of talent, his wife is from Alexandria and he coached for a time at Fort Belvoir. But once Duke became the most prominent program nationally, it's recruiting became more or less a matter of identifying which McDonald's all-Americans were academically eligible and signing them up.

    I think maybe we've lost something by forfeiting a recruiting base where the coaches know the territory and beat the bushes a bit to find diamonds in the rough such as Brian Davis. The way Wisconsin finished the season I hate to hold them up as an example, but consider their approach to recruiting. They spend far less money on it than any other team in the Big Ten, confine themselves for the most part to three states (Wisc., Minn,, Illinois), and sign almost all players ranked in the 65-125 range when they are juniors. Yet they stay competitive with anybody. The approach really puts a premium on talent evaluation, and the coaching staff keep their scouting chops well honed.

Similar Threads

  1. Georgetown vs. Duke?
    By Delaware in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 03-25-2008, 10:07 PM
  2. Critiques of Duke MBB recruiting
    By Billy Dat in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 325
    Last Post: 03-02-2008, 06:12 PM
  3. Duke WBB Recruiting
    By GopherBlue in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 02-09-2008, 01:04 AM
  4. Women's Basketball Recruiting
    By NYC Duke Fan in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-08-2007, 02:59 PM
  5. Go Gators! Go Dawgs! (Basketball Recruiting)
    By Patrick Yates in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10-04-2007, 03:53 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •