2020 Duke men's basketball recruiting

[DavidBenAkiva]

Does this bode well for us with the football team playing VA Tech that night? Would he choose Duke and then dare be at the game??

I have never once heard of a recruit committing to play basketball at a school because of the outcome of one football game.

[quahog174]

I have never once heard of a recruit committing to play basketball at a school because of the outcome of one football game.

1) He's announcing before the game.
2) I am just pointing out the fact that we play VA Tech that night. Seems like more than just a coincidence to me.

[BD80]

I have never once heard of a recruit committing to play basketball at a school because of the outcome of one football game.

Now that would be something: "I will sign a letter of intent with the school that wins this afternoon's football game!"

[JasonEvans]

Now that would be something: "I will sign a letter of intent with the school that wins this afternoon's football game!"

Duke is expected to be a small favorite in the game with Va Tech.

[budwom]

Duke is expected to be a small favorite in the game with Va Tech.

yeah, just like last year when we were ranked, undefeated, on national TV, and laid a massive turd egg against VT...I hope they learned something from that. Maybe it helps that it's at VT...great atmosphere at last year's game, then our performance just sucked the life out of the crowd...a truly abysmal performance.

[arnie]

Duke is expected to be a small favorite in the game with Va Tech.

Who is expecting this? I’m not and doubt the Vegas opening line will have us favored. We shall see😏

[Troublemaker]

I see Coleman and Steward and M Williams as huge recruits in this class. Players ranked in that 30-50 range who are quality ACC starters, maybe even all-ACC caliber, but who are not heading for the NBA exit after one year. If I could wave my magic wand, these types of players would be the backbone of the program with 1-2 one-and-dones sprinkled in each year. I know recruiting that mix is easier said than done. Top 50 players want to come into a situation where they get court time right away. I also understand M Williams may now be tracking as a potential oad.

Coleman and maybe MWilliams, but I personally wouldn't group Steward in with them as expected multi-year players, considering how valuable shooting is in the NBA. I sort of think Steward would come in, start and be OAD at this point. But I'll make that case more extensively in the "Welcome to Duke..." thread if it is created, so effort isn't wasted if he commits elsewhere.

[Kedsy]

If I could wave my magic wand, these types of players would be the backbone of the program with 1-2 one-and-dones sprinkled in each year.

You mean like in 2013-14? We had nine players with recruiting ranking between 21 and 61, plus a #12 and a #3. Careful what you wish for.

[phaedrus]

You mean like in 2013-14? We had nine players with recruiting ranking between 21 and 61, plus a #12 and a #3. Careful what you wish for.

That team wasn't so bad, until the last game of the season. And a few of those players went on to play key roles the next season. That turned out well.

[SkyBrickey]

You mean like in 2013-14? We had nine players with recruiting ranking between 21 and 61, plus a #12 and a #3. Careful what you wish for.

I’m not necessarily claiming it pays off in year 1 but it potentially creates more sustainable excellence.

And, no, out of Jack, Javin, Alex and Jordan, my recollection is that only Javin was a top 50ish recruit. Don’t misread me - I love all those guys and am very happy we have them. They are all contributors and represent Duke very well.

[UrinalCake]

The other glaring example of an experienced team with a single OAD was of course 2012, another season with great moments that ended in humiliating fashion.

[Kedsy]

I’m not necessarily claiming it pays off in year 1 but it potentially creates more sustainable excellence.

And, no, out of Jack, Javin, Alex and Jordan, my recollection is that only Javin was a top 50ish recruit. Don’t misread me - I love all those guys and am very happy we have them. They are all contributors and represent Duke very well.

Javin was #35, according to RSCI. The next closest of the four to the top 50 was Alex at #69.

But if it's "sustainable excellence" that you want, I'd argue that realistically, you can't do any better than Duke has done with K's existing strategy. In the last 23 years, Duke has been in the top 10 in the AP final poll 21 times (and top 20 in one of the others), including 11 times in the top 5 and six times at #1. If you only want to count the last 10 years (the OAD era, since Calipari arrived at UK), Duke has been in the final AP top 10 nine times (top 20 the other time), including four top 5 and one #1.

I'd also note that in Duke's best NCAA tournament performances of the 21st Century (Elite Eight or better), our successful formula has been to load up on top 10 and top 20 guys, and to rely very little on 30 to 50 guys. So, while you may be right that relying on 30 to 50 guys might be a successful formula, there isn't any evidence for it. Or at least there isn't any evidence that it would work at Duke.

Year	top 10	top 15	top 20	top 25	top 30	30 to 50
2001	4	4	5	5	7	0
2004	3	5	5	6	8*	1*
2010	1	2	5	6	7	0
2013	0	3	3	4	4	3
2015	2	4*	4*	6*	6*	3*
2018	3	5	5	6	6	1
2019	3	5	5	5	5	2

* - #30 Michael Thompson (2004), #12 Rasheed Sulaimon (2015), and #32 Semi Ojeleye (2105) did not finish the season or play in the NCAA tournament in their respective seasons.

[BD80]

Javin was #35, according to RSCI. The next closest of the four to the top 50 was Alex at #69.

But if it's "sustainable excellence" that you want, I'd argue that realistically, you can't do any better than Duke has done with K's existing strategy. In the last 23 years, Duke has been in the top 10 in the AP final poll 21 times (and top 20 in one of the others), including 11 times in the top 5 and six times at #1. If you only want to count the last 10 years (the OAD era, since Calipari arrived at UK), Duke has been in the final AP top 10 nine times (top 20 the other time), including four top 5 and one #1.

I'd also note that in Duke's best NCAA tournament performances of the 21st Century (Elite Eight or better), our successful formula has been to load up on top 10 and top 20 guys, and to rely very little on 30 to 50 guys. So, while you may be right that relying on 30 to 50 guys might be a successful formula, there isn't any evidence for it. Or at least there isn't any evidence that it would work at Duke.

Year	top 10	top 15	top 20	top 25	top 30	30 to 50
2001	4	4	5	5	7	0
2004	3	5	5	6	8*	1*
2010	1	2	5	6	7	0
2013	0	3	3	4	4	3
2015	2	4*	4*	6*	6*	3*
2018	3	5	5	6	6	1
2019	3	5	5	5	5	2

* - #30 Michael Thompson (2004), #12 Rasheed Sulaimon (2015), and #32 Semi Ojeleye (2105) did not finish the season or play in the NCAA tournament in their respective seasons.

Never get involved in a land war in Asia.

And NEVER go against Kedsy when stats are on the line!

[JasonEvans]

Who is expecting this? I’m not and doubt the Vegas opening line will have us favored. We shall see😏

All the computer models say Duke is favored. Sagarin's computer says we should be a 4 point favorite, even though the game is in Blacksburg.

That said, because bettors are trained to think Va Tech is good and Duke is bad, I expect the game will open very close to break-even... and I expect the sharps to be eyeing this game as one where they may be able to make some real money if the line is too pro-Va Tech.

[SkyBrickey]

You mean like in 2013-14? We had nine players with recruiting ranking between 21 and 61, plus a #12 and a #3. Careful what you wish for.

Yes, exactly like 2013-14. A good year, not a great year, but look what happened the following year when we were able to pair up Quinn Cook, Amile Jefferson, Marshall Plumlee, and Matt Jones with 3 OAD talents.

I think we have a higher ceiling when we have top50 upperclassmen starters/key reserves mixed in with OAD talent. This debate started when I said how key I thought Coleman, Steward and M Williams are for next year’s class. Is that debatable? Would anyone argue to replace them with top100 or even OAD talent?

[jimsumner]

The 2012-13 team started three seniors, did not have a single top-10 recruit and did not have anyone who left for the NBA with eligibility remaining. And went to the Elite Eight, which is as far as any Duke team has advanced since 2015.

Of course, 2012-13 was a lifetime ago as these things go.

[lotusland]

The 2012-13 team started three seniors, did not have a single top-10 recruit and did not have anyone who left for the NBA with eligibility remaining. And went to the Elite Eight, which is as far as any Duke team has advanced since 2015.

Of course, 2012-13 was a lifetime ago as these things go.

A championship caliber team. Despite significant injuries to Ryan and Seth, that team had the horses to win it all. If those guys were 95% I think they win it.

[Kedsy]

Yes, exactly like 2013-14. A good year, not a great year, but look what happened the following year when we were able to pair up Quinn Cook, Amile Jefferson, Marshall Plumlee, and Matt Jones with 3 OAD talents.

I think we have a higher ceiling when we have top50 upperclassmen starters/key reserves mixed in with OAD talent. This debate started when I said how key I thought Coleman, Steward and M Williams are for next year’s class. Is that debatable? Would anyone argue to replace them with top100 or even OAD talent?

This is a major relocation of the goal posts.

First of all, there is a huge difference between "3 OAD talents" and "1-2 one-and-dones sprinkled in." Could anyone seriously argue that we would have won the championship with only one or two of our 2015 OADs? Also, in Duke history, we've only had more than three OADs once (2018, when we had four, although since one of those four wasn't drafted you could possibly argue he wasn't really an OAD talent). So if three OADs is OK, how could filling in the rest of the team with guys ranked 30 to 50 be better than filling it in with mostly top 25 talent like Coach K has been doing for at least the recent past? How is your proposed model different/better than what we did in 2017, 2018, or 2019?

Second, in 2015 those three OADs were supported by three former top 25 recruits, rather than the 30 to 50 level players you suggested were ideal (and if you're now arguing that the supporting players should be "top50 upperclassmen," that again is very different from your original preference for players in the "30-50 range"). If you don't count Semi Ojeleye (who transferred out after playing 63 total minutes), the 2015 team only had two players ranked at the 30 to 50 level (and at #31 and #34, those two were a lot closer to 30 than 50), plus Marshall Plumlee in the 60s (like Alex O'Connell, who you dismissed in an earlier post as not being ranked highly enough to fit your model).

Of course this may all be academic, since in the Summer RSCI, Mark Williams and DJ Steward were both ranked in the 20s, and not in the 30 to 50 range that you prefer. 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?

[budwom]

All the computer models say Duke is favored. Sagarin's computer says we should be a 4 point favorite, even though the game is in Blacksburg.

That said, because bettors are trained to think Va Tech is good and Duke is bad, I expect the game will open very close to break-even... and I expect the sharps to be eyeing this game as one where they may be able to make some real money if the line is too pro-Va Tech.

The computer models mean very little this early in the season...I think Sagarin would readily concede this...yes, we could be favored, but I wouldn't put money on our chances at this point...

[SkyBrickey]

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...