2021 Men's Basketball Recruiting Thread

[FerryFor50]

I see Griffin is ranked #12 in this year's recruiting class. At face value, that's not the type of ranking that makes it automatic that he'd start over a junior Moore, right? More similar ranking to Bolden/Hurt/Tre Jones/Trent Jr rather than Zion/Barrett/Bagley etc.

Largely depends on:

a) how Griffin looks and plays in practices
b) how fast Griffin picks up the defensive schemes
c) if Wendell struggles early

I'll maintain that Moore will be starting at least when the season begins, with Griffin and Keels as first two off the bench. Moore offers way too much versatility on defense and K has been known to give upperclassmen starting spots even if there may be more talent on the bench.

SR Tyler Thornton started over guys like SO Rasheed Sulaimon (#12 RSCI) and FR Semi Ojeleye (#32 RSCI) in 2013-2014
JR Matt Jones started over guys like FR Derryck Thornton (#12 RSCI) and FR Luke Kennard (#21 RSCI) in 2015-2016
SR Matt Jones started over FR Frank Jackson (#14 RSCI) in 2016-2017

K trusts his upperclassmen and I'd argue that Wendell is better right now than Matt and Tyler were at any point of their careers.

[CDu]

I see Griffin is ranked #12 in this year's recruiting class. At face value, that's not the type of ranking that makes it automatic that he'd start over a junior Moore, right? More similar ranking to Bolden/Hurt/Tre Jones/Trent Jr rather than Zion/Barrett/Bagley etc.

Griffin is an interesting case. Pretty much everyone had him in the #6-8 range, and then suddenly ESPN dropped him to #27. That is the reason he is now #12 in the composite. Conversely, ESPN has their mock-draft for 2022 and has him at #6 (obviously different people doing the mock draft from those doing the recruiting rankings). So I'm not sure what to make of ESPN's recruiting ranking. He missed about half of his junior year with an ankle injury, and he hasn't played this year (not injury related). So maybe they are penalizing him for that? Who knows. All we know is that at this time that #27 ranking by ESPN is a huge outlier.

That said, if he's really in the #6-8 range in quality and ESPN is just bonkers, then he'd be a surefire starter. If #12 is accurate, then he's more of a 50/50 proposition to start.

Either way, though, I'd expect all of Griffin, Moore, and Keels to play a lot of minutes next year if all are here, regardless of whether Baldwin comes. If Baldwin comes, I think it's Blakes and Baker who suffer most, with John losing minutes as well.

[scottdude8]

Largely depends on:

a) how Griffin looks and plays in practices
b) how fast Griffin picks up the defensive schemes
c) if Wendell struggles early

I'll maintain that Moore will be starting at least when the season begins, with Griffin and Keels as first two off the bench. Moore offers way too much versatility on defense and K has been known to give upperclassmen starting spots even if there may be more talent on the bench.

SR Tyler Thornton started over guys like SO Rasheed Sulaimon (#12 RSCI) and FR Semi Ojeleye (#32 RSCI) in 2013-2014
JR Matt Jones started over guys like FR Derryck Thornton (#12 RSCI) and FR Luke Kennard (#21 RSCI) in 2015-2016
SR Matt Jones started over FR Frank Jackson (#14 RSCI) in 2016-2017

K trusts his upperclassmen and I'd argue that Wendell is better right now than Matt and Tyler were at any point of their careers.

Good point. We could see a scenario where Griffin (and/or Keels) play starter-level minutes off the bench, rather than the other way around with Wendell.

To the others looking purely at RSCI, from everything I've gleaned it seems like AJ's ranking has been artificially deflated by the fact that he hasn't been able to play during the pandemic. From what I saw he was squarely in the Top 10 of most rankings before COVID hit, so he's more of an intermediate between a Cam Reddish level talent and a Frank Jackson level talent if we're going off of rankings, and I think given his measurables his ceiling is on the high end of that spectrum. But as mentioned above, considering how much uncertainty the pandemic year has wrought, a lot will depend on the early season practices and how accurate various evaluations are of these freshmen.

As long as Wendell sticks around, figuring out how to get all those guys minutes would certainly be a good problem to have.

[DavidBenAkiva]

I see Griffin is ranked #12 in this year's recruiting class. At face value, that's not the type of ranking that makes it automatic that he'd start over a junior Moore, right? More similar ranking to Bolden/Hurt/Tre Jones/Trent Jr rather than Zion/Barrett/Bagley etc.

AJ Griffin is ranked in the top 10 by both 247Sports and Rivals and he's an early candidate for an NBA Draft lottery pick next June. The reason he is ranked 12th on the 247Sports composite is that, for some reason, ESPN thinks he's the 27th ranked high school recruit. That's the only ranking service of which I am aware that thinks he's not among the top 10 players in his class. We'll see who was right.

I'm with CDu on this one, should Duke be so lucky as to land Baldwin. It seems pretty obvious that Williams, Roach, and Banchero are locks for the starting spot, at least to begin the season. I think Moore and Griffin are clearly the next two unless Baldwin commits. So let's assume that for a moment.

Starters: Roach, Griffin, Baldwin, Banchero, Williams
Bench: Moore, Keels, Baker, John, Blakes

If Coach K tightens up the rotation, I still see Moore and Keels getting a ton of minutes. You can slide Griffin and Baldwin up or down between the 2 and 4, switch every screen, and expect a reasonable result on defense. Williams and Banchero are there for rim protection when the wings gamble for steals and deflections. Baldwin solves a (small, in my mind) problem of shooting. Keels and, to a lesser extent, Griffin are considered good shooters. Baldwin is considered a great shooter, and not just at his size. This allows Duke to have at least two guys that can shoot on the perimeter most of the time. If Roach and Moore improve in that area (I expect at least some improvement from both), you don't have to sacrifice offense for defense quite as much. One of the big problems last year was that so many guys on the roster only provided offense OR defense. There just weren't as many two-way players. The proposed roster with Baldwin gives a lot more flexibility in that regard. If Banchero can shoot, and there's reasons to believe that, then watch out. This team could be really special on offense. The baseline would be top 10 in efficiency, but Banchero's shooting is the X factor between good and great.

I think the offense would be ahead of the defense to begin the season. The length of the team would be intriguing. Theo John reportedly has a 7'4" wingspan, comparable to Mark Williams. Moore, Griffin, Baldwin, Banchero, John, and Williams would all have 6'11"+ wingspans. The team can afford to gamble in the passing lanes so long as Williams, John, and Banchero are there to protect the rim. It could be a great defense if Moore, Keels, and Griffin are as good as advertised in that department. There are a lot of exciting roster combinations and matchups with that roster.

I'm starting to get too excited, so I'll just pour a little cold water on this by noting that only one Duke insider has switched their pick and only with moderate confidence. Until more movement happens and Baldwin actually commits, it's all speculation.

[Kedsy]

I see Griffin is ranked #12 in this year's recruiting class. At face value, that's not the type of ranking that makes it automatic that he'd start over a junior Moore, right? More similar ranking to Bolden/Hurt/Tre Jones/Trent Jr rather than Zion/Barrett/Bagley etc.

Griffin is an interesting case. Pretty much everyone had him in the #6-8 range, and then suddenly ESPN dropped him to #27. That is the reason he is now #12 in the composite. Conversely, ESPN has their mock-draft for 2022 and has him at #6 (obviously different people doing the mock draft from those doing the recruiting rankings). So I'm not sure what to make of ESPN's recruiting ranking. He missed about half of his junior year with an ankle injury, and he hasn't played this year (not injury related). So maybe they are penalizing him for that? Who knows. All we know is that at this time that #27 ranking by ESPN is a huge outlier.

That said, if he's really in the #6-8 range in quality and ESPN is just bonkers, then he'd be a surefire starter. If #12 is accurate, then he's more of a 50/50 proposition to start.

Either way, though, I'd expect all of Griffin, Moore, and Keels to play a lot of minutes next year if all are here, regardless of whether Baldwin comes. If Baldwin comes, I think it's Blakes and Baker who suffer most, with John losing minutes as well.

What's especially weird about ESPN's huge drop in AJ's ranking (from #9 last summer to #27 now) is that other recruiting services haven't followed suit. Rivals recently moved him from #7 to #6, while 247 recently moved him from #6 to #7 (the #12 on 247 is their composite service, which includes ESPN as part of the composite). Unless other evaluators start to drop AJ, I expect he'll perform more like a #6/#7 guy than a #12 or #27 guy. But obviously, we'll have to wait and see.

[JasonEvans]

Don't forget how young AJ Griffin is. When he steps foot on the Duke campus later this summer, he will still be just 17 years old. We have not seen him play any basketball at all in more than a year. It is not at all hard to imagine that his game may have changed, perhaps significantly as he aged from a 15/16 year old to being 18 when the Duke season starts. I don't think any of us have a good handle on what kind of player he will be.

Trevor Keels is also pretty young, almost the same age as Griffin. Banchero and Baldwin are 15 months older than both of them.

As long as I am talking about ages, Wendell Moore is another one who is really young. He's only a couple months older than Roach and Mark Williams. Matthew Hurt is nearly 2 years older than Moore (Hurt is also like 6 months older than Joey Baker).

[DavidBenAkiva]

Don't forget how young AJ Griffin is. When he steps foot on the Duke campus later this summer, he will still be just 17 years old. We have not seen him play any basketball at all in more than a year. It is not at all hard to imagine that his game may have changed, perhaps significantly as he aged from a 15/16 year old to being 18 when the Duke season starts. I don't think any of us have a good handle on what kind of player he will be.

Trevor Keels is also pretty young, almost the same age as Griffin. Banchero and Baldwin are 15 months older than both of them.

As long as I am talking about ages, Wendell Moore is another one who is really young. He's only a couple months older than Roach and Mark Williams. Matthew Hurt is nearly 2 years older than Moore (Hurt is also like 6 months older than Joey Baker).

Banchero, Griffin, and Keels are all scheduled to participate in the Iverson Classic May 7-8. I am not sure if the game will be broadcast. I hope it is as I would love to see the three of them play.

[JasonEvans]

It seems pretty obvious that Williams, Roach, and Banchero are locks for the starting spot, at least to begin the season.

I'm not saying it is going to happen, but are we all really certain that Roach will start? Is it that hard to imagine Moore playing a ton of PG for this team, especially if we have a bevy of non-traditional ball handlers like Baldwin and Banchero also in the starting lineup?

[Kedsy]

I'm not saying it is going to happen, but are we all really certain that Roach will start? Is it that hard to imagine Moore playing a ton of PG for this team, especially if we have a bevy of non-traditional ball handlers like Baldwin and Banchero also in the starting lineup?

As has been Coach K's norm over the past several seasons, I suspect we'll see multiple and varied starting lineups over the early part of the season.

[scottdude8]

I'm not saying it is going to happen, but are we all really certain that Roach will start? Is it that hard to imagine Moore playing a ton of PG for this team, especially if we have a bevy of non-traditional ball handlers like Baldwin and Banchero also in the starting lineup?

If our shortened ACCT was any indication, it isn’t hard to imagine at all.

[JasonEvans]

By the way...

I FORBID ANYONE FROM DOING A MINUTES DISCUSSION regarding Baldwin until he has committed. Are we all agreed? Good!

-Jason "PG- Roach 25, Moore 10, Blakes 5; SG - Griffin 15, Keels 15, Moore 10; SF - Baldwin 15, Griffin 10, Moore 5, Baker 10... stop it, Jason!!!" Evans

[plimnko]

By the way...

I FORBID ANYONE FROM DOING A MINUTES DISCUSSION regarding Baldwin until he has committed. Are we all agreed? Good!

-Jason "PG- Roach 25, Moore 10, Blakes 5; SG - Griffin 15, Keels 15, Moore 10; SF - Baldwin 15, Griffin 10, Moore 5, Baker 10... stop it, Jason!!!" Evans

ABSOLUTELY the BEST post in YEARS!!!!

[WillJ]

Overtime Sports just raised $80 million from, among others, Jeff Bezos, Drake, and Devin Booker. One part of its business model is a pro sports league....for high school students. Basic idea seams to be that 30-40 rising juniors and seniors would "enroll" and get paid $100k, and get professional training. They would also benefit financially from any marketing of their likenesses. Now *this* could be the death of college basketball as we know it.

[JasonEvans]

I'm starting to get too excited, so I'll just pour a little cold water on this by noting that only one Duke insider has switched their pick and only with moderate confidence. Until more movement happens and Baldwin actually commits, it's all speculation.

Worth noting the above. Watzone's pick is with just a "5" for confidence, which is historically pretty darn low. Almost all the crystal ball picks I see come with a 6-9 confidence. Trevor Keels had 1 person who picked him to Duke with a confidence of 4. Paolo Banchero had every single pick at a "6"... even though every single one of them was wrong. Paolo was not picked to Duke by any of the 5 pickers on 247 (3 Washington, 1 UK, 1 Tenn).

[JasonEvans]

Overtime Sports just raised $80 million from, among others, Jeff Bezos, Drake, and Devin Booker. One part of its business model is a pro sports league...for high school students. Basic idea seams to be that 30-40 rising juniors and seniors would "enroll" and get paid $100k, and get professional training. They would also benefit financially from any marketing of their likenesses. Now *this* could be the death of college basketball as we know it.

Dissent...

I don't watch college ball because I want to see the guys who are almost good enough to play in the pros. I watch because I care about how Duke will do relative to other college basketball team in the ACC and nationally. So long as the players don't look like buffoons out there, it really does not matter to me how close or far these guys are from being pros. Chop off the 30 best high schoolers every year and I'm still going to be very interested in whether Duke or Kentucky gets #31 and am going to obsess over how player ranked #43 fits on next year's Duke roster and how he will fare against Carolina's similar recruit who is ranked #47.

[simplyluvin]

I'm not saying it is going to happen, but are we all really certain that Roach will start? Is it that hard to imagine Moore playing a ton of PG for this team, especially if we have a bevy of non-traditional ball handlers like Baldwin and Banchero also in the starting lineup?

I was thinking the same thing. Arguments aside that Roach is a true point guard, there have been examples of Coach K running without a traditional PG in the starting lineup (e.g., 2017 with Grayson at the point; last year; maybe pretty much any non-Jones, non-Quinn year in the last decade). If we get PBJ, how good could we be in a 4-out offense with Mark in the middle and possibly 5-out without Mark (or Theo)? Thinking both PBJ and Paulo off dribble-drive from high post with space is going to be scary. (Don't want to count our chickens...)

[WillJ]

Dissent...

I don't watch college ball because I want to see the guys who are almost good enough to play in the pros. I watch because I care about how Duke will do relative to other college basketball team in the ACC and nationally. So long as the players don't look like buffoons out there, it really does not matter to me how close or far these guys are from being pros. Chop off the 30 best high schoolers every year and I'm still going to be very interested in whether Duke or Kentucky gets #31 and am going to obsess over how player ranked #43 fits on next year's Duke roster and how he will fare against Carolina's similar recruit who is ranked #47.

I hope you're right, and of course these "30-40" would be people that would be pretty disengaged with college basketball even under the current model (which includes the G League's "freshman" team). Still, it is yet another step towards taking kids out of the college pipeline at earlier ages.

I have no problem with this - kids have been doing this in my other favorite sport, tennis, for decades....but I do foresee a further diminution in my enthusiasm for CB...which is sad to me.

[bullettoothtony]

Overtime Sports just raised $80 million from, among others, Jeff Bezos, Drake, and Devin Booker. One part of its business model is a pro sports league...for high school students. Basic idea seams to be that 30-40 rising juniors and seniors would "enroll" and get paid $100k, and get professional training. They would also benefit financially from any marketing of their likenesses. Now *this* could be the death of college basketball as we know it.

I hope the pro sports league part of their business is an absolute bust.

[DavidBenAkiva]

I'm not saying it is going to happen, but are we all really certain that Roach will start? Is it that hard to imagine Moore playing a ton of PG for this team, especially if we have a bevy of non-traditional ball handlers like Baldwin and Banchero also in the starting lineup?

I feel confident in saying Jeremy Roach is going to start the season at PG for Duke. Coach K went after no other top point guard (under the assumption that Jaylen Blakes is going to be a backup for at least a year) in the transfer portal or the Class of 2021. That, to me, is a big sign that Coach K is putting his trust in Jeremy Roach.

Now, will he be the starter all season? That's a different question.

[jv001]

Dissent...

I don't watch college ball because I want to see the guys who are almost good enough to play in the pros. I watch because I care about how Duke will do relative to other college basketball team in the ACC and nationally. So long as the players don't look like buffoons out there, it really does not matter to me how close or far these guys are from being pros. Chop off the 30 best high schoolers every year and I'm still going to be very interested in whether Duke or Kentucky gets #31 and am going to obsess over how player ranked #43 fits on next year's Duke roster and how he will fare against Carolina's similar recruit who is ranked #47.

If every Duke player performs like Steve Gray, It'll be ok as long as all the opposing players play like Steve Gray.

GoDuke!