2020 Duke men's basketball recruiting

[DavidBenAkiva]

Still wondering what the back up plan for the front court is, since it sounds like we aren't getting Dickinson. Hopefully a center from the grad transfer market emerges? If our only option at the 5 next year is a freshman Mark Williams (maybe Brakefield?), it might be a little rough. I don't personally envision Matthew Hurt being able to play center, if he even sticks around for year 2.

The more things remain silent on the Dickinson front, the more I am convinced the insiders have no real inside information with regards to this particular recruitment. And it doesn't change the situation for Duke one way or the other. If he commits to Duke in the next couple of months, great! If he doesn't, a new name will emerge as either a reclass candidate. And then the grad transfer market is there in the summer, after April. I am not worried about Duke's depth at C next season and won't be until June if it comes to it.

[SkyBrickey]

ESPN updated their rankings for the Class of 2020 (http://www.espn.com/college-sports/b...ank/class/2020). Here are the Duke commits. I haven't found their previous ranking to compare the rise/fall.

4. Jalen Johnson, SF
22. Jeremy Roach, PG
23. DJ Steward, SG
28. Jaemyn Brakefield, PF
29. Mark Williams, C
44. Henry Coleman, PF

FWIW, Hunter Dickinson is at 35 in this updated ranking. If memory serves, Jalen Johnson was more like 6 or 7, so that's a rise for him up to 4. Brakefield also went from around 35-40 up to 28 with Mark Williams making a similar rise. I think Henry Coleman fell a few slots to 44th while Jeremy Roach also slipped from inside to just outside the top 20.

Absolutely love this class. Great to see some of these guys moving up the rankings.

Next year could be a bit of a dip depending on Jeremy Roach's health and who comes back (Hurt/Moore/Stanley) and what other depth we can bring to the 5 (grad transfer/Brakefield/Johnson/Hurt). But after next year, with this foundational class and assuming we continue to bring in 1-2 top 10 players each class, we should be very, very good over the near term.

When this group are juniors/seniors, watch out!

[bullettoothtony]

I know Kuminga and Banchero have said they're not reclassifying but I wouldn't be surprised if one of them changes his mind... probably Kuminga. If he does I wonder if we'll make a push.

I'm sure it would depend in part on who ends up leaving. Right now Carey would seem like the only lock to be one and done.

[SouthernDukie]

I know Kuminga and Banchero have said they're not reclassifying but I wouldn't be surprised if one of them changes his mind... probably Kuminga. If he does I wonder if we'll make a push.

I'm sure it would depend in part on who ends up leaving. Right now Carey would seem like the only lock to be one and done.

I think Cassius is all but a lock to leave after this year if for no other reason than his age. At 20, the clock is already ticking in the new NBA where youth and potential is everything (and that means being under the age of 20). Moore and Hurt? Who knows at this point.

[kAzE]

I think Cassius is all but a lock to leave after this year if for no other reason than his age. At 20, the clock is already ticking in the new NBA where youth and potential is everything (and that means being under the age of 20). Moore and Hurt? Who knows at this point.

I completely agree that Cassius will be one and done. He plays like he'll become a first round pick, and his age/injury situation will most likely push him to go pro.

However, unless a dramatic transformation happens, Wendell Moore will probably go undrafted if he leaves after this season. He has good size, but he's a below average athlete in the NBA, and he doesn't possess a single NBA ready skill. Matthew Hurt is currently projected to be drafted in the early second round, so he's more of a toss up. Based on what we've seen through this point in the season, I'm optimistic those two guys will be back for at least 1 more season. Hurt has a good chance to significantly increase his stock with another year of development, perhaps play his way into the lottery.

[DavidBenAkiva]

I completely agree that Cassius will be one and done. He plays like he'll become a first round pick, and his age/injury situation will most likely push him to go pro.

However, unless a dramatic transformation happens, Wendell Moore will probably go undrafted if he leaves after this season. He has good size, but he's a below average athlete in the NBA, and he doesn't possess a single NBA ready skill. Matthew Hurt is currently projected to be drafted in the early second round, so he's more of a toss up. Based on what we've seen through this point in the season, I'm optimistic those two guys will be back for at least 1 more season. Hurt has a good chance to significantly increase his stock with another year of development, perhaps play his way into the lottery.

I've said this before and I think it bears repeating.

Carey is gone.

I think one of Hurt, Stanley, and Moore is gone, too, and probably 2 of them. If the decision was made today, I think Moore returns. Which would be great news for Duke's 2020-21 season. We'll see what the decision looks like when it counts, in April.

[JayZee]

I completely agree that Cassius will be one and done. He plays like he'll become a first round pick, and his age/injury situation will most likely push him to go pro.

However, unless a dramatic transformation happens, Wendell Moore will probably go undrafted if he leaves after this season. He has good size, but he's a below average athlete in the NBA, and he doesn't possess a single NBA ready skill. Matthew Hurt is currently projected to be drafted in the early second round, so he's more of a toss up. Based on what we've seen through this point in the season, I'm optimistic those two guys will be back for at least 1 more season. Hurt has a good chance to significantly increase his stock with another year of development, perhaps play his way into the lottery.

If you could blend the best of Moore and Hurt together, that'd be a lottery pick.

[SouthernDukie]

If you could blend the best of Moore and Hurt together, that'd be a lottery pick.

A high lottery pick.

[WV_Iron_Duke]

There was a short article in The Washington Post (D-6) today concerning Jeremy Roach and his season debut. He played great

[MChambers]

There was a short article in The Washington Post (D-6) today concerning Jeremy Roach and his season debut. He played great

Here's the link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/sport...ns-acl-injury/

[kAzE]

I've said this before and I think it bears repeating.

Carey is gone.

Was anybody not sure about this? I figured Vernon and Tre going pro were a given.

[bullettoothtony]

I think Cassius is all but a lock to leave after this year if for no other reason than his age. At 20, the clock is already ticking in the new NBA where youth and potential is everything (and that means being under the age of 20). Moore and Hurt? Who knows at this point.

Yeah I think you're right about Stanley, I keep forgetting about his age.

Also agree about Moore and Hurt at this point. It's certainly going to be interesting to see how they evolve.

[westwall]

ESPN updated their rankings for the Class of 2020 (http://www.espn.com/college-sports/b...ank/class/2020). Here are the Duke commits. I haven't found their previous ranking to compare the rise/fall.

4. Jalen Johnson, SF
22. Jeremy Roach, PG
23. DJ Steward, SG
28. Jaemyn Brakefield, PF
29. Mark Williams, C
44. Henry Coleman, PF

FWIW, Hunter Dickinson is at 35 in this updated ranking. If memory serves, Jalen Johnson was more like 6 or 7, so that's a rise for him up to 4. Brakefield also went from around 35-40 up to 28 with Mark Williams making a similar rise. I think Henry Coleman fell a few slots to 44th while Jeremy Roach also slipped from inside to just outside the top 20.

I recall that Johnson has been at # 4, so no change.
Roach has dropped about 8 points, perhaps due to concerns about last years injury. However, see post # 1570, supra.
Steward, Brakefield and Williams have moved up a spot or 2.
Coleman may have dropped a spot.

[yancem]

I think Cassius is all but a lock to leave after this year if for no other reason than his age. At 20, the clock is already ticking in the new NBA where youth and potential is everything (and that means being under the age of 20). Moore and Hurt? Who knows at this point.

While I understand that this is the current logic by most people, I really think it is faulty. Yes, players have a limited shelf life but if you wash out of the league because you aren't good enough/ready it will happen way before you get too old to play so age shouldn't matter. Plus, missing a year early in one's career to make sure you are good enough/ready to compete could easily add years to the back end of your career. Also, mileage is just as important if not more so than age. If you did a study of career length, I would imagine that the number of games played is better predictor than the age of retirement. Lastly, if you make it in the league (for say at least a few years) you've made an obscene amount of money, is the hundred grand or so you earn on a 2-way contract or as a second-round pick that first year really going to make a difference?

Now that's not to say that I think Stanley will or should stay. Assuming that he continues to improve as normal freshman do, he should be a first-round pick come April. He has elite athleticism, has proven himself to be a solid defender and is shooting a decent %. He still could show more in the shooting department and probably needs to keep working on his handle and passing but his raw skills and physical abilities are what nba execs are looking for.

[SouthernDukie]

While I understand that this is the current logic by most people, I really think it is faulty. Yes, players have a limited shelf life but if you wash out of the league because you aren't good enough/ready it will happen way before you get too old to play so age shouldn't matter. Plus, missing a year early in one's career to make sure you are good enough/ready to compete could easily add years to the back end of your career. Also, mileage is just as important if not more so than age. If you did a study of career length, I would imagine that the number of games played is better predictor than the age of retirement. Lastly, if you make it in the league (for say at least a few years) you've made an obscene amount of money, is the hundred grand or so you earn on a 2-way contract or as a second-round pick that first year really going to make a difference?

Now that's not to say that I think Stanley will or should stay. Assuming that he continues to improve as normal freshman do, he should be a first-round pick come April. He has elite athleticism, has proven himself to be a solid defender and is shooting a decent %. He still could show more in the shooting department and probably needs to keep working on his handle and passing but his raw skills and physical abilities are what nba execs are looking for.

I think your 2nd paragraph completely trumped your first one. Barring something unforeseen, Stanley will be one-and-done.

[TheOldBattleship]

While I understand that this is the current logic by most people, I really think it is faulty. Yes, players have a limited shelf life but if you wash out of the league because you aren't good enough/ready it will happen way before you get too old to play so age shouldn't matter. Plus, missing a year early in one's career to make sure you are good enough/ready to compete could easily add years to the back end of your career. Also, mileage is just as important if not more so than age. If you did a study of career length, I would imagine that the number of games played is better predictor than the age of retirement. Lastly, if you make it in the league (for say at least a few years) you've made an obscene amount of money, is the hundred grand or so you earn on a 2-way contract or as a second-round pick that first year really going to make a difference?

So, I think there are a few reasons why (for better or worse) players have motivation to leave early that you're missing here in this first paragraph. It's much less when you retire or about adding years on at the end of your career, and much more about getting two shots at non-rookie-scale contracts while you're still in your prime, at your best as a player and able to command a big payday. Rookie contracts for first-rounders last 4 years (last two team option years). The second contract is the first time first-round-drafted guys hit the open market, and they'll often end up taking long deals (better security, etc.). That puts a lot of guys' third contracts in their eight or ninth year in the league. There's a HUGE difference in having that third contract come when you're 27/28 vs. 29/30. A four-year deal for a 27 year-old guy that ends when he's 31 is just way less risky for a team than one for a 29 year old guy that ends when he's 33. The payscales for those two age windows are drastically different on average in the NBA these days. So that's a pretty sizable incentive for guys to go do their on-the-job training in the NBA early as opposed to later. (Questions about how much money anyone really needs aside.)

Second, there's the security (and attendant perks) of being drafted higher, combined with the fact that NBA teams do take into account age as a major factor in both a player's likely development curve and in a player's performance against similar players in a class. There's a constant worry that some guys in high school/college who look really outrageously good and are older just are just bigger and stronger because they are older than many of the guys they are competing with in their class. (As a Timberwolves fan, I have an easy exhibit A here: Shabazz Muhammed.) Again, this is very much a "for better or worse" situation, but player age is a significant factor in how NBA teams evaluate how high a player should be drafted, and younger is just about always better for teams.

So you have a group of hypercompetitive athletes who are given monetary incentives to be picked higher, along with a possible national close-up moment on the draft show, and pretty demonstrable evidence that, if they're likely to be drafted high one year, there's a very real chance that they will be drafted lower in the next year (and possibly cost themselves a lot of money both short- and long-term in the process). And all of this to about getting to play in the best basketball league in the world with guys you've been watching your whole life? There are obviously individual cases where it makes sense for a guy to come back to college, but this is why in general I don't question when guys enter the draft as soon as possible.

[Troublemaker]

I know Kuminga and Banchero have said they're not reclassifying but I wouldn't be surprised if one of them changes his mind... probably Kuminga. If he does I wonder if we'll make a push.

I smell a reclass/graduation from Kuminga as well. Sometimes a player like RJ Hampton will say he's not going to reclass to avoid all the distractions and noise of people constantly asking him where he's going to go. (Australia as it turned out for Hampton). Obviously, not sure Duke gets Kuminga if he reclasses. Not even sure he plays college ball. But I do think he will become part of the 2020 high school class.

Still wondering what the back up plan for the front court is, since it sounds like we aren't getting Dickinson. Hopefully a center from the grad transfer market emerges? If our only option at the 5 next year is a freshman Mark Williams (maybe Brakefield?), it might be a little rough.

With Jalen Johnson being a poor shooter, he ideally should spend some time as a small-ball 5 anyway, imo. For me, the allure of getting Dickinson is to spread the risk of "not good enough to start" across two top-35-ish prospects in Williams and Dickinson instead of just one of them. Typically players ranked where Williams and Dickinson are ranked aren't even in the rotation at Duke their freshman year, so I'm somewhat nervous about counting on one to be a quality starter as a freshman. That said, if you can guarantee me that Mark Williams will provide 25 mpg of consistent (i.e. stays healthy, usually avoids foul trouble), quality center play, I'm not really that concerned about having a backup center. As mentioned, Jalen Johnson should be playing some small-ball 5 in finishing lineups anyway. Something like Steward - Moore - Baker - Brakefield - Johnson would be intriguing.

But, as mentioned, since we can't guarantee that from Mark, then let's spread the risk across two prospects if possible.

[kAzE]

With Jalen Johnson being a poor shooter, he ideally should spend some time as a small-ball 5 anyway, imo. For me, the allure of getting Dickinson is to spread the risk of "not good enough to start" across two top-35-ish prospects in Williams and Dickinson instead of just one of them. Typically players ranked where Williams and Dickinson are ranked aren't even in the rotation at Duke their freshman year, so I'm somewhat nervous about counting on one to be a quality starter as a freshman. That said, if you can guarantee me that Mark Williams will provide 25 mpg of consistent (i.e. stays healthy, usually avoids foul trouble), quality center play, I'm not really that concerned about having a backup center. As mentioned, Jalen Johnson should be playing some small-ball 5 in finishing lineups anyway. Something like Steward - Moore - Baker - Brakefield - Johnson would be intriguing.

But, as mentioned, since we can't guarantee that from Mark, then let's spread the risk across two prospects if possible.

I'm not seeing this. Johnson isn't a knock down shooter, but he's actually got a nice shooting form, with a very high release, and he takes/makes a decent number of 3s. I don't see him being any worse than RJ Barrett as a perimeter shooter. I think he'll definitely play a lot at the 4, but he's basically the same size as a guy like Jayson Tatum or RJ Barrett, definitely not the type of guy we want banging with ACC centers down low.

Furthermore, he's basically a point forward. He's an athletic 6'8" forward with outstanding ball skills and passing vision. In fact, I think he will draw some Grant Hill comparisons next season. He's similar in size and skill set to Grant, who as far as I know, never played center at Duke. You don't want your center being at the top of the key or on the wing anyways, you want him in the post ready to catch and finish, fighting for offensive rebound positioning, or setting screens. Johnson's going to have the ball in his hands a lot next season, much like RJ Barrett did last season. I could see Brakefield MAYBE being the small ball 5/backup center, but he's essentially the same size as Johnson, although I have seen some places where Brakefield is listed at 230 pounds.

We're on the same page in that I'm also worried Mark Williams is probably going to be asked to start at center, which could be expecting too much from a 4-star freshman. Hopefully, he is much better than expected.

[golfinesquire]

So, I think there are a few reasons why (for better or worse) players have motivation to leave early that you're missing here in this first paragraph. It's much less when you retire or about adding years on at the end of your career, and much more about getting two shots at non-rookie-scale contracts while you're still in your prime, at your best as a player and able to command a big payday. Rookie contracts for first-rounders last 4 years (last two team option years). The second contract is the first time first-round-drafted guys hit the open market, and they'll often end up taking long deals (better security, etc.). That puts a lot of guys' third contracts in their eight or ninth year in the league. There's a HUGE difference in having that third contract come when you're 27/28 vs. 29/30. A four-year deal for a 27 year-old guy that ends when he's 31 is just way less risky for a team than one for a 29 year old guy that ends when he's 33. The payscales for those two age windows are drastically different on average in the NBA these days. So that's a pretty sizable incentive for guys to go do their on-the-job training in the NBA early as opposed to later. (Questions about how much money anyone really needs aside.)

Second, there's the security (and attendant perks) of being drafted higher, combined with the fact that NBA teams do take into account age as a major factor in both a player's likely development curve and in a player's performance against similar players in a class. There's a constant worry that some guys in high school/college who look really outrageously good and are older just are just bigger and stronger because they are older than many of the guys they are competing with in their class. (As a Timberwolves fan, I have an easy exhibit A here: Shabazz Muhammed.) Again, this is very much a "for better or worse" situation, but player age is a significant factor in how NBA teams evaluate how high a player should be drafted, and younger is just about always better for teams.

So you have a group of hypercompetitive athletes who are given monetary incentives to be picked higher, along with a possible national close-up moment on the draft show, and pretty demonstrable evidence that, if they're likely to be drafted high one year, there's a very real chance that they will be drafted lower in the next year (and possibly cost themselves a lot of money both short- and long-term in the process). And all of this to about getting to play in the best basketball league in the world with guys you've been watching your whole life? There are obviously individual cases where it makes sense for a guy to come back to college, but this is why in general I don't question when guys enter the draft as soon as possible.

Don't forget that the presence of the G league changes the calculation as well. Before the G league, players who needed time to develop had to do it in college. If they got to the league not ready to compete or unable to get ready to compete quickly, the clubs would let them go. Now the clubs can send players down and players who are not drafted can go the Quin Cook/Marquis
Bolden route and sign with a G league club and hope to get noticed. And, they are being paid for that development not developing for free (I am only talking about sheer dollars. I don't want this to get into a debate about whether and to what extent the players are getting a financial benefit for their time in school).

[DavidBenAkiva]

I'm not seeing this. Johnson isn't a knock down shooter, but he's actually got a nice shooting form, with a very high release, and he takes/makes a decent number of 3s. I don't see him being any worse than RJ Barrett as a perimeter shooter. I think he'll definitely play a lot at the 4, but he's basically the same size as a guy like Jayson Tatum or RJ Barrett, definitely not the type of guy we want banging with ACC centers down low.

Furthermore, he's basically a point forward. In fact, I think he will draw some Grant Hill comparisons next season. He's similar in size and skill set to Grant, who as far as I know, never played center at Duke. You don't want your center being at the top of the key or on the wing anyways, you want him in the post ready to catch and finish, fighting for offensive rebound positioning, or setting screens. Johnson's going to have the ball in his hands a lot next season, much like RJ Barrett did last season. I could see Brakefield MAYBE being the small ball 5/backup center, but he's essentially the same size as Johnson, although I have seen some places where Brakefield is listed at 230 pounds.

We're on the same page in that I'm also worried Mark Williams is probably going to be asked to start at center, which could be expecting too much from a 4-star freshman. Hopefully, he is much better than expected.

If we are going strictly off of recruiting rankings, Duke has been starting a 4-star freshman this season, Cassius Stanley, and he's looked just fine out on the court. Now, there are some 5-star freshmen that have been somewhat up and down as starters. So this is not to say that we should be unconcerned about the frontcourt next season.

At any rate, I think we're going to see some lineups without a true center next season and it will be just fine. There are a surprising number of high major teams that don't have one. Michigan State doesn't really have a center on their roster, for example. When it comes to most teams, I wonder if Duke would have trouble guarding a team that had a traditional center if both Brakefield and Johnson are out there. And I think that combo could work for about 10 or even 20 minutes a game by fronting and slapping at the ball, relying on superior hand-eye coordination, athleticism, and footspeed. They would struggle against the truly elite centers, like Vernon Carey, Jr., but there are so few of those in the college game.

I am just not concerned about the lack of a backup big man right now. The situation will works itself out by the spring or early summer.