Page 102 of 148 FirstFirst ... 25292100101102103104112 ... LastLast
Results 2,021 to 2,040 of 2944
  1. #2021
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Blakes is in an interesting range of recruit that we haven't really explored much. He's right around 100, which is a bit better than Thornton (who has been listed at 144 according to DraftExpress) and a lot higher than guys like White, Buckner, Vrankovic, and Goldwire, but lower than guys like Tucker, O'Connell, Mason Plumlee, Olek Czyz, etc. So it's hard to say how good he'll be.

    It's probably safe to assume he's not going to play a major in-game role at Duke next season. It's quite possible that he could be useful - even a key starter - with time though. Some of that may depend upon Jeremy Roach's progression, and obviously it will depend upon whom we recruit in the coming years.

    I do like the theoretical benefit that he could be around for the 2022-23 season. That's one area in which we're looking extremely iffy at the moment. There is a real chance that the 2022-23 season has no seniors remaining and a nonzero chance it has no juniors. So simply from a continuity standpoint, it'd be really nice to increase the number of players who could conceivably be here for that season.

  2. #2022
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    Yeah, but Andre Buckner was probably a better prospect than Goldwire was too. Despite Coach K's success with Jordan Goldwire and Tyler Thornton, this sort of recruit can very easily fail to work out.
    There’s a bit of a chasm between the “type of recruit” Buckner and Goldwire were, and they type of recruit Blake’s is, no?

    Doesnt mean it’s guaranteed to work out but idk who the proxy is for Blakes other than Tyler Thornton (140 ish nationally) and Miles Plumlee (101 nationally).

    Duke just doesn’t get many guys below about 70th or so.

    So yes, it might not work out (plenty of guys ranked in the 40s and 50s that didn’t exactly work out), but I’d argue this is a bit of a new frontier for Duke and though it’s a small sample size, they’ve never had a player in this tier who was a) unwilling to stick it out and work hard and b) able to carve out a rotational spot.

    So I’d have to agree with Jason that this is almost a perfect fit for what Duke needs to pair with Roach, unless you were to find an elite combo guard who could start alongside him.

  3. #2023
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    NC Raised, DC Resident
    Quote Originally Posted by bshrader View Post
    But that can be said about any recruit. (i.e. Johnson, Jalen)
    Welcome to "Fun with False Equivalencies!" Let's compare the success rates in college basketball among top-15 players with those in the 100+ and 300+ ranges.
    Haters gonna hate.

  4. #2024
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    Yeah, but Andre Buckner was probably a better prospect than Goldwire was too. Despite Coach K's success with Jordan Goldwire and Tyler Thornton, this sort of recruit can very easily fail to work out.
    Based on what we've seen in the articles and pieces posted in this thread, this seem like a good signing even if he doesn't ever play more than mop-up minutes in his whole career. Everything about this guy suggests he is an enthusiastic leader and a stand-up guy. This seems pretty likely to "work out" from a team point of view, even if it doesn't on the court. If I'm judging things right, a character guy like this can be worth his weight in gold. Or at least in scholarship money.

  5. #2025
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    Garden State guards have a way of working out for our Blue Devils...i'm going with heritage on this one.

  6. #2026
    Quote Originally Posted by English View Post
    Welcome to "Fun with False Equivalencies!" Let's compare the success rates in college basketball among top-15 players with those in the 100+ and 300+ ranges.

    Ok ok, so maybe I committed a fallacy there But the general point still stands. Thornton would be the proper comparison here in terms of ratings. Thornton was somewhere in that 100+ range. Goldwire was well behind that (Somewhere in the mid-300s IIRC). There are a plethora of reasons why recruits may or may not work out. Some recruits rated highly, occasionally, will not pan out. And other recruits who may not have come in with a stellar rating can become studs. Or very important role players. I just dont want to see him dismissed cause he isnt a "5 star" recruit.

  7. #2027
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by bshrader View Post
    Ok ok, so maybe I committed a fallacy there But the general point still stands. Thornton would be the proper comparison here in terms of ratings. Thornton was somewhere in that 100+ range. Goldwire was well behind that (Somewhere in the mid-300s IIRC). There are a plethora of reasons why recruits may or may not work out. Some recruits rated highly, occasionally, will not pan out. And other recruits who may not have come in with a stellar rating can become studs. Or very important role players. I just dont want to see him dismissed cause he isnt a "5 star" recruit.
    I'm not sure any of us are.

    Truth be told, Duke hasn't really recruited a lot of these players in the OAD era (and arguably before). But I love this strategy. At a ~100 ranking, Blakes will likely have a little more patience. Also, he seems incredibly academically inclined (according to Rivals, he is considering Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Georgetown, and Stanford in addition to Duke and bunch of other schools).

    If he's a bench role player in his couple of years and then a starter as an upperclassman, great! If he doesn't work out and transfers, so be it! But the risk seems fairly low, especially given that Coach K rarely uses anywhere near the 13 allocated scholarships.

    Also, at this point, guard depth would be nice.
    Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things. - Winston Churchill

    President of the "Nolan Smith Should Have His Jersey in The Rafters" Club

  8. #2028
    Quote Originally Posted by budwom View Post
    Garden State guards have a way of working out for our Blue Devils...i'm going with heritage on this one.
    I like that thought!

  9. #2029
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Athens, GA
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    Blakes is in an interesting range of recruit that we haven't really explored much. He's right around 100, which is a bit better than Thornton (who has been listed at 144 according to DraftExpress) and a lot higher than guys like White, Buckner, Vrankovic, and Goldwire, but lower than guys like Tucker, O'Connell, Mason Plumlee, Olek Czyz, etc. So it's hard to say how good he'll be.

    It's probably safe to assume he's not going to play a major in-game role at Duke next season. It's quite possible that he could be useful - even a key starter - with time though. Some of that may depend upon Jeremy Roach's progression, and obviously it will depend upon whom we recruit in the coming years.

    I do like the theoretical benefit that he could be around for the 2022-23 season. That's one area in which we're looking extremely iffy at the moment. There is a real chance that the 2022-23 season has no seniors remaining and a nonzero chance it has no juniors. So simply from a continuity standpoint, it'd be really nice to increase the number of players who could conceivably be here for that season.

    Not trying to nitpick, but I am sure you really didn't mean Mason, who was RSCI no. 18 in '09.
    "Play and practice like you are trying to make the team." --Coach K

  10. #2030
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Spanarkel View Post
    Not trying to nitpick, but I am sure you really didn't mean Mason, who was RSCI no. 18 in '09.
    Brain fart, yes. Marshall was who I meant. Although Blakes is slightly closer in recruiting ranking to Miles than he is to Marshall.

  11. #2031
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingdutchdevil View Post
    I'm not sure any of us are.

    Truth be told, Duke hasn't really recruited a lot of these players in the OAD era (and arguably before). But I love this strategy. At a ~100 ranking, Blakes will likely have a little more patience. Also, he seems incredibly academically inclined (according to Rivals, he is considering Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Georgetown, and Stanford in addition to Duke and bunch of other schools).

    If he's a bench role player in his couple of years and then a starter as an upperclassman, great! If he doesn't work out and transfers, so be it! But the risk seems fairly low, especially given that Coach K rarely uses anywhere near the 13 allocated scholarships.

    Also, at this point, guard depth would be nice.
    100% agree with everything you just said, and I really like that you used the term "low risk". Because he is. He isnt going to prevent us from landing other talented players at the position, reportedly he loves playing aggressive defense, seems to have a fantastic work ethic. And if he can come in, spell the guards for maybe 8-10 a game, then it works out. Very low risk here and maybe develops into a starter if he hangs around, but if he doesnt then there shouldnt be too much damage.

  12. #2032
    Quote Originally Posted by bshrader View Post
    But that can be said about any recruit. (i.e. Johnson, Jalen)
    First of all, I don't think Jalen Johnson can fairly be categorized as failing to work out. While quitting on the team might not have been a great look, while he was on the court his stats compared favorably to those of Roach, Stanley, Hurt, Moore, Reddish, Duval, Trent, Giles, Jackson, D Thornton, Jeter, Kennard, and Allen, and were pretty close to Winslow and Steward, which as a group represent the vast majority of Duke's highly rated but outside the top five freshmen of the past seven seasons. Jalen may not have been at the same level as most of Duke's top 5 recruits, but that makes sense since he wasn't a top 5 recruit.

    More relevant to this conversation, guys of Johnson's recruiting rank work out a heckuva lot more than guys outside the top 100.

    Quote Originally Posted by DukieTiger View Post
    There’s a bit of a chasm between the “type of recruit” Buckner and Goldwire were, and they type of recruit Blake’s is, no?

    Doesnt mean it’s guaranteed to work out but idk who the proxy is for Blakes other than Tyler Thornton (140 ish nationally) and Miles Plumlee (101 nationally).

    Duke just doesn’t get many guys below about 70th or so.

    So yes, it might not work out (plenty of guys ranked in the 40s and 50s that didn’t exactly work out), but I’d argue this is a bit of a new frontier for Duke and though it’s a small sample size, they’ve never had a player in this tier who was a) unwilling to stick it out and work hard and b) able to carve out a rotational spot.

    So I’d have to agree with Jason that this is almost a perfect fit for what Duke needs to pair with Roach, unless you were to find an elite combo guard who could start alongside him.
    First of all, Miles Plumlee was RSCI #81, so even he may not be a good predictor. I agree that Duke hasn't explored this range of recruit very often (probably in the RSCI era, the only examples are Tyler Thornton, Lee Melchionni, Andre Sweet, and Nick Horvath). Though I also don't think there's any reason to believe the #100-ish guy would perform better than guys like Dave McClure (#71), Alex O'Connell (#69), Olek Czyz (#66), Marshall Plumlee (#61), Jamal Boykin (#60), Jordan Tucker (#59), Marty Pocius (#53), and Alex Murphy (#49), since all of them were rated significantly better. In fact, other than Thornton and O'Connell, no Duke freshman rated worse than #33 in the RSCI era has played more than a smattering of garbage time minutes. It's very unlikely a guy in this range would contribute anything other than practice as a frosh.

    As a practice player and future possible rotation piece, sure bring him in. Duke so rarely goes even close to the 13 scholarship limit that a guy with a good attitude can help even if he doesn't ever play.

    My point in my original post was simply to say that saying *this guy is rated so much better than Jordan Goldwire and look how good Goldwire became* is a bit of faulty logic.

  13. #2033
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    The three Duke insiders form TDD all registered crystal ball picks for Blakes to Duke today. The Pitt recruiting folks on the internet who all wanted Blakes quite badly are all conceding that he will likely commit to Duke in a matter of days.

    But it is worth noting that Jaylen has not committed yet.
    I don't know what you are doing right now, but if you aren't listening to the DBR Podcast, you're doing it wrong.

  14. #2034
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    New Jersey
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    Yeah, but Andre Buckner was probably a better prospect than Goldwire was too. Despite Coach K's success with Jordan Goldwire and Tyler Thornton, this sort of recruit can very easily fail to work out.
    Quote Originally Posted by MChambers View Post
    Andre Buckner was great against Matt Doherty!
    Could any Duke fan argue that that in itself wasn't enough to make it all worthwhile?
    Rich
    "Failure is Not a Destination"
    Coach K on the Dan Patrick Show, December 22, 2016

  15. #2035
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    if he spurns us we'll turn on him like a pack of jackals.

  16. #2036
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    First of all, I don't think Jalen Johnson can fairly be categorized as failing to work out. While quitting on the team might not have been a great look, while he was on the court his stats compared favorably to those of Roach, Stanley, Hurt, Moore, Reddish, Duval, Trent, Giles, Jackson, D Thornton, Jeter, Kennard, and Allen, and were pretty close to Winslow and Steward, which as a group represent the vast majority of Duke's highly rated but outside the top five freshmen of the past seven seasons. Jalen may not have been at the same level as most of Duke's top 5 recruits, but that makes sense since he wasn't a top 5 recruit.

    More relevant to this conversation, guys of Johnson's recruiting rank work out a heckuva lot more than guys outside the top 100.



    First of all, Miles Plumlee was RSCI #81, so even he may not be a good predictor. I agree that Duke hasn't explored this range of recruit very often (probably in the RSCI era, the only examples are Tyler Thornton, Lee Melchionni, Andre Sweet, and Nick Horvath). Though I also don't think there's any reason to believe the #100-ish guy would perform better than guys like Dave McClure (#71), Alex O'Connell (#69), Olek Czyz (#66), Marshall Plumlee (#61), Jamal Boykin (#60), Jordan Tucker (#59), Marty Pocius (#53), and Alex Murphy (#49), since all of them were rated significantly better. In fact, other than Thornton and O'Connell, no Duke freshman rated worse than #33 in the RSCI era has played more than a smattering of garbage time minutes. It's very unlikely a guy in this range would contribute anything other than practice as a frosh.

    As a practice player and future possible rotation piece, sure bring him in. Duke so rarely goes even close to the 13 scholarship limit that a guy with a good attitude can help even if he doesn't ever play.

    My point in my original post was simply to say that saying *this guy is rated so much better than Jordan Goldwire and look how good Goldwire became* is a bit of faulty logic.
    Ah, I was looking at an individual ranking for Miles, thanks for the clarification. He and Thornton are still probably the closest to Blakes in recent history.

    I don't see any reason to think he'd perform better than the McClure - O'Connell - Czyz - Plumlee - Boykin - Tucker - Pocius - Murphy crowd, but I think the argument is that he falls into a range with viable potential to be a rotation player in the ACC, but perhaps slightly more willing to be patient than the above group, of whom only 2 exhausted their eligibility at Duke, the most recent of whom was signed an even 10 years ago.

    Agreed about tempering expectations for this year's contributions and for whether or not he might exceed Goldwire. Mostly making the point that I think folks are (or at least I am) excited about a player who theoretically has a bit more upside than a sub-300 level recruit, but a bit more patience than a top 75 recruit.

  17. #2037
    Quote Originally Posted by DukieTiger View Post
    Ah, I was looking at an individual ranking for Miles, thanks for the clarification. He and Thornton are still probably the closest to Blakes in recent history.

    I don't see any reason to think he'd perform better than the McClure - O'Connell - Czyz - Plumlee - Boykin - Tucker - Pocius - Murphy crowd, but I think the argument is that he falls into a range with viable potential to be a rotation player in the ACC, but perhaps slightly more willing to be patient than the above group, of whom only 2 exhausted their eligibility at Duke, the most recent of whom was signed an even 10 years ago.

    Agreed about tempering expectations for this year's contributions and for whether or not he might exceed Goldwire. Mostly making the point that I think folks are (or at least I am) excited about a player who theoretically has a bit more upside than a sub-300 level recruit, but a bit more patience than a top 75 recruit.
    And as was mentioned earlier, having the capable, talented bodies for scrimmages is vital. That is where you improve. That is where you progress. You need to play against talent to improve.

  18. #2038
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Lewisville, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    The three Duke insiders form TDD all registered crystal ball picks for Blakes to Duke today. The Pitt recruiting folks on the internet who all wanted Blakes quite badly are all conceding that he will likely commit to Duke in a matter of days.

    But it is worth noting that Jaylen has not committed yet.
    A campus visit to seal the deal?

    When allowed?

    Division I Men’s Basketball Dead Periods
    November 9–12, 2020
    December 24–26, 2020
    April 1–8 (noon), 2021
    April 12–15 2021
    May 20–28, 2021
    July 6-31, 2021*

    https://www.ncsasports.org/ncaa-elig...rocery%20store.

  19. #2039
    Blakes would be a really nice addition. Very intrigued by his size - 6'8 wingspan and a 195 pound frame. He could eventually wreak havoc on opposing guards defensively.

  20. #2040
    Not sure if we actually offered, but TyTy Washington is going to release his top 5 this weekend.

Similar Threads

  1. 2018 Basketball Recruiting Thread
    By Duke95 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 2886
    Last Post: 08-09-2018, 07:53 PM
  2. 2017 Basketball Recruiting Thread
    By Henderson in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 4965
    Last Post: 12-06-2017, 04:02 PM
  3. 2016 Basketball Recruiting Thread
    By Ichabod Drain in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 3515
    Last Post: 08-01-2016, 11:01 PM
  4. 2014 Basketball Recruiting thread
    By jnastasi in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 3585
    Last Post: 10-24-2014, 10:00 PM
  5. 2012 Basketball Recruiting Thread
    By Osiagledknarf in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 3572
    Last Post: 03-13-2012, 08:25 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
  •