Duke will be fine with Zoubek and Thomas

[duketaylor]

Patterson would be a huge addition to the Devils, even if it's only for depth. Remember, Zou and Lance were fouls waiting to happen so we need some big bodies. Singler's more of a 3/4 although he looked good against Koufos (sp).
I'm very cautiously optimistic with PP.

[Bay Area Duke Fan]

Patterson has something that very few others have. He wins championships. His HS team won the WVA state championship three times. That indicates to me that he possesses that intangible factor that leads his team to victories. That's more important than many of the physical and athletic factors that make a great player.

It will be a big disappointment if PP doesn't come to Duke. Duke will be very good in 2007-08 without him. He is not THE savior. But he is a real winner and could make Duke a terrific team in the coming seasons.

[Olympic Fan]

Let's not go nuts in either direction. Clearly, Duke will be better next year with Patrick Patterson. He brings a strength and a level of athleticism to the post that nobody else on the team offers (very simply -- he's a lot stronger than Lance and a lot quicker than Zoubs).

But don't make him out to be the savious of the program either. Duke will be fine without him -- okay in the short run and excellent in the long run.

Just a few observations:

-- As for expectations for Patterson ... he does not have a very developed offensive game. He's not going to be a big scorer as a freshman. On the other hand, he's a born rebounder and a very good shotblocker. If he comes, I would "expect" his freshman numbers to look much like Shelden's (another raw offensive player): 8.2 ppg., 5.9 rpg., 1.8 blocks in 19.2 mpg. I'm not saying that PP would develop into the same kind of monster Shelden became -- I don't know if he has that kind or work ethic or will stay four years -- but in terms of physical ability, they are similar. Comparisons with Brand and/or Boozer are silly -- they were very different kinds of players who both arrived with MUCH more polished offensive post skills.

-- Don't be surprised to see Taylor King play a lot of post defense. He's a husky 6-7/6-8 (I've seen him listed both heights) with very long arms. I've seen him play a good deal of post defense on the AAU circuit and IMO, he's a better post defender than AAU teammate Kevin Love (who is a great offensive center with the best outlet pass since Walton). It would be fun to see him match up with somebody like Dion Thompson ... I think he could hold his own on the offensive end, then give Thompson fits chasing him at the other end. King, with his lack of foot quickness (I almost just wrote quickness, but while King may run relatively slowly, his hands are amazingly quick -- kind of like Jim Spanarkel), is actually better suited to defend in the post than on the wing.

-- I expect to see Lance Thomas made a significant jump in his level of play. His freshman year was disrupted twice -- once with an ankle injury and once with a lingering case of the flu. That's the kind of thing a veteran can play through, but it's tough on a freshman to sustain his learning curve when he's sidelined or just below par physically. Plus, I suspect a year in the weight room will help him immeasurably.

-- I expect Zoubek to be better too, but I think he's got a little longer to go. I think Patterson's decision will impact his minutes more than anybody else on the team ...

[crote]

As others have pointed out, even if Patterson isn't as talented as some make him out to be he would still be huge addition just for depth purposes. Connecticut '04 ring a bell?

Plus, I'd also throw in toughness. We need some nastiness down low, someone who will make other teams work hard for boards and pay the price if they go inside. I don't see Singler or Thomas being that player. Z is a possibility, but I doubt it. From what I gather, though, Patterson fits that mold nicely.

[Classof06]

Whether or not we get Patterson, I think Duke will be in a position to contend for a title within the next 2-3 seasons. That being said, I think having Patterson will quicken the process of becoming a contender. Zoubek will be good when it's all said and done, but he will not become a star overnight. I think Lance will make a bigger jump over this offseason than maybe anybody on the team and we'll need that. But at the end of the day, this team is missing a legitimate post presence and until Zoubek becomes what we think he can be, there's no getting around that need; it's a need I believe Patterson would satisfy very effectively.

To be fair, many of us are putting the same unrealistic expectations on Patterson that we did on Lance Thomas this time last year. Lance Thomas didn't have a bad freshman year whatsoever, but given the expectations many Duke fans had for him, there are probably many that would disagree with me. You can't expect Patterson to dominate right away when we've never seen him play a college-level game.

Contrarily, it's hard to judge Patterson's ability and say he's overrated when OJ Mayo is taking 90% of the shots on his HS team and every player on the floor is gunning in these HS all-star games. So, to be impartial to both sides, we as college bball fans obviously don't have an accurate grasp of what this kid can really do. However, I feel pretty good about his prospects if Krzyzewski has been after him this long and didn't go after one other post player in this year's recruiting class (and I am aware of Greg Monroe). Krzyzewski's giving this kid attention for a reason, and I'm willing to give Mike the benefit of the doubt.

[Classof06]

Plus, I'd also throw in toughness. We need some nastiness down low, someone who will make other teams work hard for boards and pay the price if they go inside. I don't see Singler or Thomas being that player. Z is a possibility, but I doubt it. From what I gather, though, Patterson fits that mold nicely.

I agree with everything you said, but after watching Singler play a couple of times, I believe he has the competitive spirit and mean streak that Duke has been missing for the past couple of years. Jimmy Dykes and whoever else called the Jordan All-Star game on ESPN said the EXACT same thing. Patterson's addition, combined with Singler, Paulus' grit and Lance Thomas' enthusiasm would do wonders for this team. This is one of the reasons I'm so high on Singler besides his obvious skills.

[mepanchin]

Patterson is actually probably taller than Boozer. Remember that while Boozer dominated at a college level, his draft stock severely slipped because scouts measured him at 6'7" with a moderate wing span.

[Boston Dukie]

We have no idea how good PP will be in college, but he does seem to have a much higher talent level and mix of size and athleticism than Thomas or Zoubek.

We DO know what to expect from Zoubek and Thomas because we have seen them for a year.

Thomas needs to get much, much stronger, cut down on his fouls, cut down on turnovers, and fix his mid-range shot. This is a lot to ask for a kid to fix over one summer especially when thrown into a postion (the 5) that he is undersized for and not used to playing to begin with. I think Thomas will eventually be very good, but it could be his junior or even senior year. This is the benefit of recruiting a 4 year player.

In Zoubek, you have size and decent post moves (albeit very, very slow moves) and that is it. He needs to improve his strength, his hands, his handle, adjust to the pace of the game, work on his footwork, gain a better understanding on the defensive scheme, and fix his shot. Plus, he has no athleticism at all (how many 7-1 players go an ENTIRE season without dunking the ball?). This is a lot to ask a kid to fix over 1 summer. I worry he will never be a very good player, but hope I am wrong.

With all of the improvements we are hoping for from Thomas and Zoubek, the team is taking a huge risk by relying on this to happen. They absolutely need PP to lower this risk (giving them 3 players to bet on rather than 2), to give them more depth, and to provide a big upgrade in the size/athleticism department.

[mepanchin]

I worry he will never be a very good player, but hope I am wrong.

Duke's history is full of players like Zoubek. Big men who did not play much their first year, but by their 2nd or 3rd year were legitimate productive offensive players. Erik Meek logged 70% of total minutes his senior year and contributed 10.3 points a game at a 116.5 efficiency. Greg Newton played 73.4% of the minutes his junior year and contributed 11.4 points at a 112.4 efficiency. These are not overwhelming numbers (as compared to, say, Brand's 99 season or Boozer's 02 season) but they are solid big man numbers. To add, they were both good defensively.

Zoubek will be fine. The guy has to be adjusting still even to just being 7'1", but a summer of weight lifting and just constantly learning about the game at this level and about his position will help him tremendously.

[dkbaseball]

I don't find Meek or Newton to be particularly reassuring prototypes for Zoubs. Meek played as a senior only because the cupboard was a bit bare in the lost season of '94-'95. (Somebody was asleep at the recruiting switch for a while there -- it's really hard to believe that following a national championship our next two entering classes consisted of Parks, Meek, Collins and Tony Moore). Newton came to school touted as an unusually athletic four man. A very different type of player from Meek.

More apt comparisons would be Nessley, Palmer, Burgess, Domzalski, Christiansen and Thompson, none of whom ever played much. That said, I'm not down on Zoubs. The guy is huge, a real space eater, who can score when he gets the ball down low. Great work ethic. His contribution, I think, will hinge on how flexible the coaching staff is with defensive schemes. He can't be chasing guys all over the perimeter.

[mepanchin]

Looking over the numbers for that 94-95 season, it was not Meek's fault that the team was 13-18. He had a very good season in spite of Duke's struggles (which were strange - we were a much better team than our record indicated that year). Looking over numbers of floor %, stop %, points produced per game, % of possessions, and offensive/defensive efficiency for individuals, Jeff Capel and Chris Collins were the biggest liabilities for that team. Capel had a 99 offensive efficiency and a 108 defensive efficiency while consuming 25% of our possessions and playing substantial minutes. Collins was even worse, with a 91 offensive efficiency and a 110 defensive efficiency consuming 17.5% of our possessions.

Cherokee Parks had a solid season, as did Langdon and Meek.

Maybe Domzalski is a better fit. Nonetheless, Domzalski had productive seasons at Duke, but sadly, his career was mostly marred by injury. It's hard to make a statistical comparison.

As a freshman, Zoubek logged some encouraging minutes. Offensively, he struggled. His floor % (chance to score whenever he tried) was only 47%, and his offensive rating was only 89, but while on the court he consumed 28.6% of the team's possessions (a very high number). If he fits more into the 18-20% range, you will probably see him producing a lot more offensively. Defensively, however, he was pretty solid. 66.9 stop%, and 87.5 defensive rating. Very good numbers, though in limited minutes. In more substantial minutes, I would expect those both to dip, but not substantially. Maybe a 93-95 defensive rating at worst - which is not great, but it is not awful, especially if his offense picks up a little in a more limited offensive role.

It's also worth noting that he is a pretty good rebounder as you'd expect from someone his size.

[The Gordog]

Patterson has something that very few others have. He wins championships. His HS team won the WVA state championship three times. That indicates to me that he possesses that intangible factor that leads his team to victories. That's more important than many of the physical and athletic factors that make a great player.

It will be a big disappointment if PP doesn't come to Duke. Duke will be very good in 2007-08 without him. He is not THE savior. But he is a real winner and could make Duke a terrific team in the coming seasons.

McClure won 4 State Championships. He's a gamer for sure but at the next level it means little.

[SMO]

This reminds me of something Shaq said early in his NBA career along the lines of:

"I've won at every level, except college and pro."

I think given his HS championship we should recruit his entire HS team. You can mark us down for the next 4 NCAA championships.

Patterson has something that very few others have. He wins championships. His HS team won the WVA state championship three times. That indicates to me that he possesses that intangible factor that leads his team to victories. That's more important than many of the physical and athletic factors that make a great player.

It will be a big disappointment if PP doesn't come to Duke. Duke will be very good in 2007-08 without him. He is not THE savior. But he is a real winner and could make Duke a terrific team in the coming seasons.

[rsvman]

McClure won 4 State Championships. He's a gamer for sure but at the next level it means little.

This is blatantly unfair. McClure IS a winner, even at the college level. McClure is the "glue guy" who contributes all the intangibles; he gets the extra offensive rebound when we really need it, the extra loose ball that changes the outcome of the game, the extra blocked shot when it's tight, etc. He plays like a winner, even in college.

In the midseason when we won five ACC games in a row, McClure was an important factor in each and every one of them. Things changed after he injured his knee in the Boston College game. If his knee heels up properly and he gets back to 100%, you will again see McClure do every little thing the team needs him to do.

[awich1]

the problems for duke next year are the same as this past year- even more pronounced will be the obvious lack of an inside game. one thing about zoubek is that while i agree he has some promise, he has to be able to stay on the floor- it seemed like every time he stepped on the floor he had 2 fouls before he'd worked up a sweat. thomas is not big enough to be an effective 5. we're going to have even more trouble matching up with the hansboroughs of the world than last year. the other issues were lack of defense against athletic back courts and lack of back-up for paulus. hopefully nolan smith will help in both of those areas but i don't think enough. we have a lot of talent, but too much of it is at the same positions. missing out on patterson is the difference between a really good top 10 type team and another relatively disappointing year in my opinion.

[Lulu]

ugh, we have become so spoiled.

[Lord Ash]

I don't think it is spoiled to say "I would like our team to have a center who has shown he has decent footwork and can score," especially when our team is at the caliber of Duke. IMHO the point guard and center positions are key to having a good team, and at the moment we only have one of those positions covered.

I am afraid next year won't be too flashy. Zoubek hasn't shown me, at least, that he will be able to shoulder the load on a championship caliber team, and Thomas simply isn't a center, and asking him to BE a center would be unfair. We have to hope that the year after is the year we get back into the title hunt.

[dball]

Patterson is actually probably taller than Boozer. Remember that while Boozer dominated at a college level, his draft stock severely slipped because scouts measured him at 6'7" with a moderate wing span.

Boozer was 6'9 1/2" with shoes and a 7' 2 1/4" wingspan (which is wide).
Dunleavy, for example, was the same height with a 3 1/4 inch shorter wingspan. Uche Okafur, Yao Ming, Nene, Melvin Ely and maybe 1 or 2 other guys were a bit wider. Even then, Boozer's reach is longer than Nene's.

Reach is usually the most important since you're rarely using the top of your head in b-ball, except when some goof bounces it off your noggin in the rookie game.

[Olympic Fan]

You are absolutely right about reach being more important than height ... you do play with your arms extended, not with the top of your head.

However, for the average human being the breath of his reach is almost exactly equal to his height -- that's the point of Leonardo Da Vinci's famous drawing of the man with his arms extended inscribed inside a circle.

A few unique individuals have longer arms than usual and have a significantly longer reach than their height. That translates into a higher "reaching Height"

I haven't seen their reach measured, but I've seen both Kyle Singler and Taylor King play numerous times and both have exceptionally long arms -- I'm sure their reach is significantly longer than their height (especially King!).

But Patrick Patterson's arms are even longer -- I would guess that he has the longest arms I've seen since Sam Perkins -- and he's the all-time chimp ... er, champ.

[dball]

You are absolutely right about reach being more important than height ... you do play with your arms extended, not with the top of your head.

However, for the average human being the breath of his reach is almost exactly equal to his height -- that's the point of Leonardo Da Vinci's famous drawing of the man with his arms extended inscribed inside a circle.

A few unique individuals have longer arms than usual and have a significantly longer reach than their height. That translates into a higher "reaching Height"

Not sure if Leo relates to this since there are few average humans in the NBA. Draft camp measures the reach (which you appear to call 'reaching height') and wing span (which would be the da Vinci picture). Because of differences in body types, Boozer has a higher reach than Nene but a shorter wingspan. My response was to the notion that Boozer's wing span was somehow 'moderate' when it is indeed a good deal greater than his height.
I suspect a significant portion of NBA players have above average wingspan (meaning greater than their already above average height).