2020 Duke men's basketball recruiting

[Steven43]

I don't have time to address everything in your post and my position can be summed up by addressing your final sentence/question:

"But even so, your last question makes little sense to me -- depending on the rest of the roster, replacing three guys in the 30 to 50 (or even 25 to 50) range with three OAD talents couldn't help but make the team better, right?"

Replacing 3 recruits in the 30-50 (25-50) range like Steward/Williams/Coleman with 3 more OAD might, might make us better that year, but it leaves the cupboard completely bare for future years. We've got to bring in 6-7 more OAD's the following year. Not sustainable. And personally, not fun for me as a 35 year Duke basketball fan.

Replacing those 3 recruits with top100 guys sets us up for what we have this year with 50-100 guys like Jack, Alex, and Jordan playing key rotation minutes for us. Again, I love all three of those guys and I'm not saying we can't have a great team with them, but I don't think it's ideal (if I could wave a magic wand - which I don't have and the coaches don't have).

Back to my original point. I think Steward, Williams and Coleman are key recruits for us - top50 guys who will hopefully stick around and play multiple years. I'm just as excited to land those guys as I am the other OADs on our target list...

I agree with your wished-for approach to Duke recruiting. I think it makes more sense — both for sustained success on the court and, more importantly, enjoyment for the true fans who live and die with Duke Basketball and value program continuity over players who only want to use Duke as a one-year stepping-stone to the NBA.

[Hartford Dukie]

Not sure if this has been reported - Evan Daniels put in pick for Steward to Duke yesterday and apparently he has cancelled his planned visit to Louisville. Three other picks to Duke in past 24 hours. Speculation about a commitment shortly.

[DavidBenAkiva]

Not sure if this has been reported - Evan Daniels put in pick for Steward to Duke yesterday and apparently he has cancelled his planned visit to Louisville. Three other picks to Duke in past 24 hours. Speculation about a commitment shortly.

That's an exciting development. Louisville and, to a lesser degree, Texas were considered the other two schools in the hunt for Steward. For what it's worth, UofL has been getting a lot of picks on the ol' Crystal Ball for 2021 guard Devin Askew, one of the top players in that class. Perhaps the Cardinals have decided to go in a different direction in their backcourt.

I like the fit between Steward and Duke. He gives the Blue Devils a versatile backcourt player with at least one high-level skill, shooting. Duke has had a lot of success with "combo guards" like him, including Quinn Cook, Seth Curry, and even Grayson Allen. Steward could be a valuable contributor to the team from Day 1 and hopefully for a couple of years.

[arnie]

I agree with your wished-for approach to Duke recruiting. I think it makes more sense — both for sustained success on the court and, more importantly, enjoyment for the true fans who live and die with Duke Basketball and value program continuity over players who only want to use Duke as a one-year stepping-stone to the NBA.

My exact thoughts. Prefer to see more long term players and watch their development over several seasons. I’ll take my chances with the statistical differences discussed above.

[English]

I agree with your wished-for approach to Duke recruiting. I think it makes more sense — both for sustained success on the court and, more importantly, enjoyment for the true fans who live and die with Duke Basketball and value program continuity over players who only want to use Duke as a one-year stepping-stone to the NBA.

Please tell us more about what these true Duke basketball fans want. The rest of us are living in a dull ignorance, watching the players in the program last year tarnish the name on the front of their jerseys. /Eye roll

We missed the last two Final Fours by a combined two possessions. We finished as the No.1 overall seed last season. We won a natty four years ago. Please explain what sustained success means in this program, if it's not what the current recruiting strategy is delivering.

[mkirsh]

Please tell us more about what these true Duke basketball fans want. The rest of us are living in a dull ignorance, watching the players in the program last year tarnish the name on the front of their jerseys. /Eye roll

We missed the last two Final Fours by a combined two possessions. We finished as the No.1 overall seed last season. We won a natty four years ago. Please explain what sustained success means in this program, if it's not what the current recruiting strategy is delivering.

I'm not trying to pick sides here, but there are a lot of people talking past each other, and I think it's due to what people value. We all are fans because we enjoy Duke basketball, but we may enjoy it for different reasons. Some care mostly about the journey, and therefore put a lot of emphasis on watching players develop over the years. Some care more about the destination and focus mainly on NCAA tournament success and banners.

There is also no proven formula to winning. We have had great years with senior laden teams without OAD talent (2010), and we have had similarly constructed teams fizzle out. Similarly we have had disappointing seasons with OAD loaded teams, and we won a national title in 2015 relying heavily on Freshman. Single elimination tournaments with 18-21 year old players leads to erratic results. Personally, as someone who may lean towards post season success as the metric that matters to me, I think the approach of the last few years of re-loading with elite OAD talent has given us the best chance to win titles, as we were within a bucket of the FF two years in a row as English noted in their post. While other programs have had short runs of great success, like Villanova winning 2 titles in 3 years or UNC going to back to back Final Fours, I don't think anyone has had the sustained excellence of Duke over an extended period of time. To me, the OAD heavy model works as it keeps you in contention each year and gives you the most bites at the apple, but it does trade-off against great player arcs like Ryan Arcidiacono or Ty Jerome. In sum, I don't think there is a proven "right" way, but a set of trade-offs that need to be balanced where opinions will differ.

[SkyBrickey]

I like the OADs and I like the mix of targets we have for next year - all top50 players. I started this discussion by saying how important I thought Steward, M Williams and Coleman are as recruits - more important in my mind than adding more OADs. Let me frame it another way. Without these three guys, who is left on the roster after next season? Maybe Baker, maybe Stanley? Possibly Roach? These 3 guys are huge recruits for future success, so great to hear Coleman and Steward may be leaning our way.

[Kedsy]

Replacing 3 recruits in the 30-50 (25-50) range like Steward/Williams/Coleman with 3 more OAD might, might make us better that year, but it leaves the cupboard completely bare for future years. We've got to bring in 6-7 more OAD's the following year. Not sustainable. And personally, not fun for me as a 35 year Duke basketball fan.

I can't speak to how much fun you have, but as far as "Not sustainable," it seems to me Coach K has been sustaining it for the entire OAD era so far. Perhaps at one point the house of cards may fall apart, but the same thing can happen if you can't get enough 30 to 50 guys to come, or if they don't pan out so well (e.g., Josh Hairston).

But a bigger issue I see with your approach is there's no guarantee that a 30 to 50 guy will stay around and be an ACC-level starter.

The following table shows how many recruits we've had in various ranges since the one-and-done rule went into effect. There's really not much difference between how many guys in the 11 to 30 range stick around (55% of them at least started their junior year) vs. how many guys in the 31 to 60 range stick around (57% if them at least started their junior year). (Note: I made it 60 instead of 50 to include #59 Jordan Tucker, our only recruit in the 51 to 60 range). The average years each group stayed is also pretty close (and if you discounted Josh Hairston a little, which may or may not be appropriate though he was never an ACC-level starter, the years would be virtually identical).

Admittedly, the sample sizes (especially for 31 to 60) are pretty small, and maybe the 30 to 60 guys don't stick around because there are so many 1 to 30 guys ahead of them, but based on the actual numbers you might as well shoot for the better players, because they appear to stick around just as long.


SINCE THE 2006 HIGH SCHOOL CLASS (the year they started OAD)

		Total	OAD	2AD	Tfr w/in 2	Stayed 2.5+	Stayed 4	Avg years
11 to 20	12	3	1*	2		6*		4		2.5
21 to 30	8**	1**	1	1		5		5		3.0
--------
11 to 30	20	4	2	3		11		9		2.7
31 to 60	7	0	0	3		4		4		2.9

* counting #13 Tre Jones as 2AD, though we don't know for sure he won't stick around further.
** counting #27 Rodney Hood as OAD, even though he was a transfer in and not a recruit out of high school.

[Kedsy]

These 3 guys are huge recruits for future success, so great to hear Coleman and Steward may be leaning our way.

I just saw a report that DJ Steward (#26 in the Summer RSCI) verbally committed to Duke this afternoon, so I guess we can all be happy.

[superdave]

We missed the last two Final Fours by a combined two possessions.

Coach K needs to go back to wearing the old lucky socks he wore from 1988-1992 when we went to the Final Four every year.

[SkyBrickey]

That’s super interesting analysis on how long guys stick around. I agree that there’s the added issue of some highly rated non OADS transferring if they aren’t getting playing time. We can all be happy w DJ Steward committing today. Love getting an elite shooter and seems like a great kid!

[Nugget]

I can't speak to how much fun you have, but as far as "Not sustainable," it seems to me Coach K has been sustaining it for the entire OAD era so far. Perhaps at one point the house of cards may fall apart, but the same thing can happen if you can't get enough 30 to 50 guys to come, or if they don't pan out so well (e.g., Josh Hairston).

But a bigger issue I see with your approach is there's no guarantee that a 30 to 50 guy will stay around and be an ACC-level starter.

The following table shows how many recruits we've had in various ranges since the one-and-done rule went into effect. There's really not much difference between how many guys in the 11 to 30 range stick around (55% of them at least started their junior year) vs. how many guys in the 31 to 60 range stick around (57% if them at least started their junior year). (Note: I made it 60 instead of 50 to include #59 Jordan Tucker, our only recruit in the 51 to 60 range). The average years each group stayed is also pretty close (and if you discounted Josh Hairston a little, which may or may not be appropriate though he was never an ACC-level starter, the years would be virtually identical).

Admittedly, the sample sizes (especially for 31 to 60) are pretty small, and maybe the 30 to 60 guys don't stick around because there are so many 1 to 30 guys ahead of them, but based on the actual numbers you might as well shoot for the better players, because they appear to stick around just as long.


SINCE THE 2006 HIGH SCHOOL CLASS (the year they started OAD)

		Total	OAD	2AD	Tfr w/in 2	Stayed 2.5+	Stayed 4	Avg years
11 to 20	12	3	1*	2		6*		4		2.5
21 to 30	8**	1**	1	1		5		5		3.0
--------
11 to 30	20	4	2	3		11		9		2.7
31 to 60	7	0	0	3		4		4		2.9

* counting #13 Tre Jones as 2AD, though we don't know for sure he won't stick around further.
** counting #27 Rodney Hood as OAD, even though he was a transfer in and not a recruit out of high school.

It's a little hard to judge whether, with a recruiting strategy focused more on guys in the 30-60 range we would or wouldn't have had more sustained success over the last decade during the 1 and done era since, as Kedsy notes, the already small sample size is further thrown out of whack by all the PT that has been taken up by our ridiculous haul of Top 15 talent.

But, anecdotally, it's hard to see how we would have been better off prioritizing lower tier players over potential one and dones and then hoping that (i) they'd be good and (ii) would stay.

Our Top 10 ranked (final RSCI) recruits since 2007 have all been either 1 and done or Kyle Singler:

#6 Kyle Singler, #2 Kyrie, #2 Austin Rivers, #3 Jabari Parker, #2 Jahlil Okafor, #7 Tyus Jones, #4 Brandon Ingram, #2 Harry Giles, #3 Jayson Tatum, #1 Marvin Bagley, #5 Trevon Duval, #7 Wendell Carter, #1 RJ Barrett, #2 Cam Reddish and #4 Zion.

Guys ranked #11-20 are all over the map, with a mix of one and dones with long-term contributors and some early transfers -- mostly a testament to how much of a crapshoot recruiting is even at what is darn close to the top of the class (in my view more supportive of the notion of get the best talent you can each year rather than figuring you can successfully game out who will be both good and stay):

1 and done: #13 Justise Winslow, #14 Frank Jackson,#14 Gary Trent [#13 Tre Jones will likely be 2 and done];
3-4 year contributors: #18 Nolan Smith, #14 Ryan Kelly, #18 Mason Plumlee, #12 Rasheed Sulaimon, #11 Marques Bolden;
Transfers: #15 Elliot Williams (albeit for family health reasons after starting), #13 Derryck Thornton, #14 Chase Jeter.

Guys ranked 21-30 have been a pretty even hit or miss split:

2 and done: #21 Luke Kennard;
4 year contributors: #21 Amile Jefferson, 24 Grayson Allen;
Transfers: #27 Taylor King, #28 Michael Gbinije.

Guys in the proposed ideal range of 31-60 have, not surprisingly been more to the "miss" side than "hit," on balance:

4 year contributors: #33 Quin Cook, #34 Matt Jones;
Stayed 4 years, with no major on-court impact: #32 Josh Hairston;
Transfers: #49 Alex Murphy, #32 Semi Ojeleye, #59 Jordan Tucker;
Jury's still out: #35 Javin DeLaurier, #37 Joey Baker.

I don't see a lot of track record to suggest we would be doing much better by emphasizing 31-60s in recruiting rather than Top 20s. But, from an aesthetic/"getting to know the guys" standpoint, I can see how some Duke fans might prefer an alternative world where we got 4 years of Semi Ojeleye rather than 1 each of Jabari Parker, Justise Winslow, Brandon Ingram and then Jayson Tatum at, roughly, Semi's position.

Just for kicks, I know many here think Carolina has had a more successful run of continuity in its recruiting, but it isn't from focusing on players in the 31-60 range (it's that they've been lucky to keep guys in the 11-30 range in school for longer than they "should") -- here's their recruits in the 31-60 range since 2007:

Transfers: Larry Drew (#44, 2008), David Wear & Travis Wear (#37 & 38, 2009), Seventh Woods (#40, 2016);
No impact: #58 Joel James (2012);
4 year role players: Leslie McDonald (#44, 2009),
4 year contributors/starters: Brice Johnson (#40, 2012), JP Tokoto (#57, 2012), Kennedy Meeks (#56, 2013);
Jury's still out: Brandon Robinson (#60, 2016), Leaky Black (#64, 2018).

[rocketeli]

I was looking over the offers listed in the ESPN 2020 top 100 for the players 1-30 and there were some interesting (to me) things. I was looking at recruiting offers by UNC KY and Duke

Most of these players had other offers from other programs as well, but I focused on these three programs as most interesting to me (and probably a lot of Duke fans as well, I think)

You'd think that basketball being the same basic game at all three schools and all the schools having an abundance of resources and skill in their coaching staffs and facilities and all being able to compete for any player (UNC might be a step behind KY and Duke recently in recruiting, if not, interestingly, in results, but they are still a legit recruiting threat at the highest level) that there would be significant overlap in recruiting at the offer level between the three schools.
But you'd be wrong.

For the top 30 ESPN listed players
only 1 player (BJ Boston who signed with KY) listed offers from all three programs
only 4 players had offers from UNC and Duke (Zaire Williams, Walker Kessler, Jeremy Roach (Duke signed) and DJ Steward (Duke signed)
only three other players had offers from both Duke and KY Jalen Johnson (Duke), Scottie Barnes and Terrence Clark (KY)

other interesting information
3 players had offers from UNC and KY but not Duke--Caleb Cunningham, Isaiah Todd and Greg Brown
4 had offers from UNC only, 4 had offers from KY only and 1 had an offer from Duke only

If you further break down the top 30 into 1-15 and 16-30 you see that the top 15 had 24 offers total from these three schools, including 10 with offers from more than one school and only 2 had no offers (and both seem to be players already focused on a particular geographic area)
the bottom 15 had only 8 offers with only one with two schools offering (Steward) and 7 players with no offers from any of these three schools.

What does it all mean? There are a lot of variables underlying these observations. There are "offers" and "offers." Some player's lists, at this point in time were obviously more curated than others. Schools have different needs, strategies and open scholarships. I just think it's interesting that one, there are fewer "recruiting battles" for the top talent between these schools than you might expect, and two, experts in basketball clearly differ significantly in what they consider the best options for adding talent to their teams.

[budwom]

Great start to the class...but it gets a bit stickier from here on out...evidently we are in a good position with Coleman, Kessler and M. Williams, and Kuminga could well be lurking in the weeds...can we get all seven to commit or will one or more be worried about not being a starter? Getting seven highly ranked guys in one class is a challenge...of course six wouldn't be too bad, either...

[907bluedevils]

Great start to the class...but it gets a bit stickier from here on out...evidently we are in a good position with Coleman, Kessler and M. Williams, and Kuminga could well be lurking in the weeds...can we get all seven to commit or will one or more be worried about not being a starter? Getting seven highly ranked guys in one class is a challenge...of course six wouldn't be too bad, either...

I was wondering the same thing, I imagine if we got Kuminga and Kessler, them 2 and Johnson would all be starters and play big minutes. With potential returners and 2 other 5* in Roach and Steward, minutes are going to be hard to come by.

[devildeac]

I was wondering the same thing, I imagine if we got Kuminga and Kessler, them 2 and Johnson would all be starters and play big minutes. With potential returners and 2 other 5* in Roach and Steward, minutes are going to be hard to come by.

Sooooo, who's transferring...

<ducks>

[MChambers]

Sooooo, who's transferring...

<ducks>

First, we have to debate the likely minutes distribution, ad nauseum!

[UrinalCake]

I was looking at recruiting offers by UNC KY and Duke...

Interesting breakdown. I guess it makes sense that most kids would entertain offers from two of the schools, but not all three. Zaire Williams to UNC is unfortunately picking up some buzz, as he just took another unofficial visit there. For non-PG UNC is a death knell to the draft stock of any OAD prospect, I don’t know why anyone would go there.

[English]

I was looking over the offers listed in the ESPN 2020 top 100 for the players 1-30 and there were some interesting (to me) things. I was looking at recruiting offers by UNC KY and Duke

Most of these players had other offers from other programs as well, but I focused on these three programs as most interesting to me (and probably a lot of Duke fans as well, I think)

You'd think that basketball being the same basic game at all three schools and all the schools having an abundance of resources and skill in their coaching staffs and facilities and all being able to compete for any player (UNC might be a step behind KY and Duke recently in recruiting, if not, interestingly, in results, but they are still a legit recruiting threat at the highest level) that there would be significant overlap in recruiting at the offer level between the three schools.
But you'd be wrong.

For the top 30 ESPN listed players
only 1 player (BJ Boston who signed with KY) listed offers from all three programs
only 4 players had offers from UNC and Duke (Zaire Williams, Walker Kessler, Jeremy Roach (Duke signed) and DJ Steward (Duke signed)
only three other players had offers from both Duke and KY Jalen Johnson (Duke), Scottie Barnes and Terrence Clark (KY)

other interesting information
3 players had offers from UNC and KY but not Duke--Caleb Cunningham, Isaiah Todd and Greg Brown
4 had offers from UNC only, 4 had offers from KY only and 1 had an offer from Duke only

If you further break down the top 30 into 1-15 and 16-30 you see that the top 15 had 24 offers total from these three schools, including 10 with offers from more than one school and only 2 had no offers (and both seem to be players already focused on a particular geographic area)
the bottom 15 had only 8 offers with only one with two schools offering (Steward) and 7 players with no offers from any of these three schools.

What does it all mean? There are a lot of variables underlying these observations. There are "offers" and "offers." Some player's lists, at this point in time were obviously more curated than others. Schools have different needs, strategies and open scholarships. I just think it's interesting that one, there are fewer "recruiting battles" for the top talent between these schools than you might expect, and two, experts in basketball clearly differ significantly in what they consider the best options for adding talent to their teams.

This is a fun post, and I love analysis like this. I find hoops recruiting fascinating (despite, ya know, being a grown man following the whims of teenage boys 3-12" taller than me), and I suspect it's because I enjoy game theory so much.

To the bolded, it makes me endlessly happy that a third of the players that KY and UNC are fighting over without Duke in the mix is, by all likelihood, committing to OKSt where his brother was hired as an assistant. Listen to Gary Parrish/Matt Norlander's pod from earlier this summer for some entertaining commentary from Parrish about it. (Spoiler alert: Parrish basically said it's a waste of time for any other program to spend a moment recruiting him outside of OKSt, and that, if he was the OKSt coach, he would've already fired Brother Cunningham for not getting the commit already.)

ETA: It's Cade Cunningham...and his brother is Cannen Cunningham.

[Billy Dat]

Listen to Gary Parrish/Matt Norlander's pod from earlier this summer for some entertaining commentary from Parrish about it. (Spoiler alert: Parrish basically said it's a waste of time for any other program to spend a moment recruiting him outside of OKSt, and that, if he was the OKSt coach, he would've already fired Brother Cunningham for not getting the commit already.)

Shouts to Devan Downey, shouts to Chester, SC, shouts to the homey Terry Teagle, he's the legend, shouts to Larnelle...