2021 Men's Basketball Recruiting Thread

[flyingdutchdevil]

If Baldwin commits, which would be awesome, I think there's a pretty clear top 7 in the rotation, including:

Roach
Griffin
Baldwin
Bancerho
Williams

Moore
Keels

My expectation is that would be the starting lineup for the first game of the season, depending upon health (please have a healthy year, pretty please). Moore might end up starting at some point during the year, so the team would have, in essence, 6 starters plus Keels getting a lot of time.

John, Baker, and Blakes are the next guys filling out the rotation. I wouldn't be surprised to see John and Baker get decent minutes early in the season, especially if Coach K doesn't like the defense. Baker might not be a big improvement on defense, but he really tries and slots in well enough for either Griffin or Baldwin. Playing in his 4th year at Duke will certainly help. John, I expect to play more than Patrick Tapé, but not a whole heck of a lot. He is a rim protector and provides toughness. I could see Coach K turning to John if he feels like the team isn't playing sufficiently tough enough. As for Blakes, there are a lot of unknowns about him given the lack of a senior season and short recruiting timeframe. I hope he plays some, in blowouts, but he's a bit of a wildcard in my mind.

When the rotation shortens in big games, these are the top 7 I see getting most of the minutes.

Now, one way to get a deeper rotation is to just blow the socks off of opponents. If the team has as much offensive firepower as it projects, John, Baker, and Blakes might get a lot of minutes because the team is up big so often. That's what I'm hoping to see.

That top 7 sounds right. I would love to add John there as well, but I thought Tape was a surefire rotation player this part year and I couldn't be more wrong. Given John is a Power 6 guy, maybe he is more likely to crack the rotation and create a surefire "top 8". A top 7 could reemerge if Keels has issues finding his shot (possible, like Steward and Kennard) or is a disaster on defense (also very possible, given he's a frosh).

I'm not bullish on Baker. Yes, he tries on D. But he is not effective on defense (0.2 defensive win shares and a 0.1 defensive box plus/minus last year) and an utter disaster on offense (-0.1 OWS and -2.0 OBWS). I really hope Baker improves, cus he wasn't productive last year. As for Blakes, I see him playing minutes if and only if Roach cannot be effective on defense. But if Duke plays a zone 90%+ next year (which I would expect with PBJ on board), Roach should be better suited than M2M and make it really hard for Blakes to earn minutes.

[UrinalCake]

It always surprises me when many of the same fans who bemoan the OAD culture and say they want a team full of four year players will then turn around and claim that our OAD's are better than our veterans. If you think that a former top-30 player who is now a junior is more valuable than a top-10 freshman, then you should also want to start that top-30 junior over the top-10 freshman.

[flyingdutchdevil]

It always surprises me when many of the same fans who bemoan the OAD culture and say they want a team full of four year players will then turn around and claim that our OAD's are better than our veterans. If you think that a former top-30 player who is now a junior is more valuable than a top-10 freshman, then you should also want to start that top-30 junior over the top-10 freshman.

I think bemoaning OAD culture and not recognizing OAD talent are two very different things.

[UrinalCake]

But if Duke plays a zone 90%+ next year (which I would expect with PBJ on board)

I don't see us playing much zone, and certainly not 90%+ of the time. I get that Baldwin is not known as a good defender but I don't see K going that around except in extreme cases (like having Bagley and Carter) or when he needs a temporary shakeup (like in 2015). We'll stick with the pressure man to man and have to hope that the freshmen learn the system fast enough.

[flyingdutchdevil]

I don't see us playing much zone, and certainly not 90%+ of the time. I get that Baldwin is not known as a good defender but I don't see K going that around except in extreme cases (like having Bagley and Carter) or when he needs a temporary shakeup (like in 2015). We'll stick with the pressure man to man and have to hope that the freshmen learn the system fast enough.

Even without PBJ, we have an incredibly long team next year. 3 of the top 7 rotation players will be freshman (and another will be a transfer). We lost our best (and only) perimeter defender and penetration was our main weakness. Moore and Williams are the only players with both experience and defensive chops (Roach wasn't very good last year on D).

To not implement zone would mean lots and lots of issues on D next year, especially in the beginning. Maybe Coach K won't mind that as he'll be only focused on championships.

[gumbomoop]

If Baldwin chooses Duke, I see a Constant 6, but not a clear Constant 7. Whether Moore starts or not, he’ll play starter minutes.

Despite skeptical comments over the years by other posters about “shiny new objects,” I’m convinced that Banchero, Griffin, and Baldwin are legit from Day 1. It’s not clear to me, however, that Keels will play more than Baker; and I say that as an admitted if somewhat reluctant critic of Baker, whose handle and footwork must improve, substantially.

But this is Baker’s 4th year, so unless Keels quickly picks up K’s systems, Baker has that advantage. Between Baker and Keels, probably whoever gets hot from 3 in any particular game or stretch of games will play important minutes off the bench. Maybe Keels will be a solid defender. And Baker, for all his deficiencies, does hustle like crazy, and every so often makes an important disruptive play on D.

John should get 10-12 mpg as backup 5, so he’s in, if just at the “edge” of, the rotation. Will Keels or Baker clearly surpass the other, giving K his preferred 7.5-8-man rotation? Can all of John, Baker, and Keels offer enough, and consistently, to push K to something close to a 9-man rotation by ACC play?

I’d guess the answer is “No,” and that, instead, we’ll see the Constant 6, relief minutes from John, and, depending on circumstances, some of Keels or Baker from game to game.

[English]

If Baldwin chooses Duke, I see a Constant 6, but not a clear Constant 7. Whether Moore starts or not, he’ll play starter minutes.

Despite skeptical comments over the years by other posters about “shiny new objects,” I’m convinced that Banchero, Griffin, and Baldwin are legit from Day 1. It’s not clear to me, however, that Keels will play more than Baker; and I say that as an admitted if somewhat reluctant critic of Baker, whose handle and footwork must improve, substantially.

But this is Baker’s 4th year, so unless Keels quickly picks up K’s systems, Baker has that advantage. Between Baker and Keels, probably whoever gets hot from 3 in any particular game or stretch of games will play important minutes off the bench. Maybe Keels will be a solid defender. And Baker, for all his deficiencies, does hustle like crazy, and every so often makes an important disruptive play on D.

John should get 10-12 mpg as backup 5, so he’s in, if just at the “edge” of, the rotation. Will Keels or Baker clearly surpass the other, giving K his preferred 7.5-8-man rotation? Can all of John, Baker, and Keels offer enough, and consistently, to push K to something close to a 9-man rotation by ACC play?

I’d guess the answer is “No,” and that, instead, we’ll see the Constant 6, relief minutes from John, and, depending on circumstances, some of Keels or Baker from game to game.

So, out of curiosity, in your Keels-or-Baker scenario, you think that the rotation will have how many guards? I'd guess your Constant 6 assumes that Roach, Moore, and Griffin are capable of playing all of the 1 & 2 minutes and Keels or Baker will compete for wing minutes? I think where Keels has an advantage over Baker is that he's (from what I can tell) a prototypical SG. Griffin isn't really considered that, and Moore seems more suited to play the wing/3 or 4 than the 2. Baker can't guard SGs without some real believe-it-when-we-see-it improvement in lateral quickness and defensive acumen. This roster has a dearth of guards, and while he's definitely not a PG, Keels fits more naturally in the guard rotation than Baker.

I suppose one could argue that playing a zone could change things positionally, and you could always say we don't know that Keels can defend 2s any better than Baker at this point (although, my goodness, that would reflect some real defensive issues if that's true of Keels). I guess the TL;DR is that, to me, the competition for minutes seems tougher for Baker than Keels, because we have more wings and bigs than guards, and I'd consider Keels a guard.

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

I thought we were waiting for the minutes discussion...

[bullettoothtony]

I don't see us playing much zone, and certainly not 90%+ of the time. I get that Baldwin is not known as a good defender but I don't see K going that around except in extreme cases (like having Bagley and Carter) or when he needs a temporary shakeup (like in 2015). We'll stick with the pressure man to man and have to hope that the freshmen learn the system fast enough.

I hope you're wrong but I don't think you are.

[Namtilal]

All speculation about Baker's minutes is thrown out the window if the stars of this team live up to their potential. He would gets a good chance to show his improvement if we can consistently build big leads.

That's a big if, but I feel like our potential is being undersold by the early rankings and over-reliance on last season as a historical predictor.

[tommy]

All speculation about Baker's minutes is thrown out the window if the stars of this team live up to their potential. He would gets a good chance to show his improvement if we can consistently build big leads.

That's a big if, but I feel like our potential is being undersold by the early rankings and over-reliance on last season as a historical predictor.

They're also thrown out the window if Joey himself can show significant improvement. If he can be the true knock-down shooter -- consistently -- that we've all been thinking/hoping he was going to be, there will be minutes for him on this team. He can be scrappy on D, hustle, etc., and all that is great of course. But it's very simple for him: either he knocks down shots, and he'll get minutes, or he doesn't, and he won't.

[gumbomoop]

So, out of curiosity, in your Keels-or-Baker scenario, you think that the rotation will have how many guards? I'd guess your Constant 6 assumes that Roach, Moore, and Griffin are capable of playing all of the 1 & 2 minutes and Keels or Baker will compete for wing minutes? I think where Keels has an advantage over Baker is that he's (from what I can tell) a prototypical SG. Griffin isn't really considered that, and Moore seems more suited to play the wing/3 or 4 than the 2. Baker can't guard SGs without some real believe-it-when-we-see-it improvement in lateral quickness and defensive acumen. This roster has a dearth of guards, and while he's definitely not a PG, Keels fits more naturally in the guard rotation than Baker.

I suppose one could argue that playing a zone could change things positionally, and you could always say we don't know that Keels can defend 2s any better than Baker at this point (although, my goodness, that would reflect some real defensive issues if that's true of Keels). I guess the TL;DR is that, to me, the competition for minutes seems tougher for Baker than Keels, because we have more wings and bigs than guards, and I'd consider Keels a guard.

You make several good points. This is probably a minor disagreement, if that. To some extent, inexact terminology complicates things.

I guess/assume that both Roach and Griffin have better handles than Keels; and we know that K seems to trust Moore [more than do most posters...] as a ballhandler. Further, Baldwin and Banchero may both possess handles/passing/vision superior or equal to that of Keels. I fully expect this — with Baldwin — to be a very good passing team, and an O-juggernaut.

I agree that we have a dearth of traditional guards, that Keels seems to be a traditional 2, and that Baker is a traditional 3. But these days 2s and 3s are also often referred to as wings; Keels and Baker are both wings. As you say, it might wind up being an advantage for Keels if, as is very likely, he's a better ballhandler than Baker. So I do think when Keels is on the floor, he will play, nominally, the 2; and when Baker is on the floor, he will play, nominally, the 3. But on O, that nominal difference seems unimportant to me. The most important thing, on O, is, who’s the better shooter?

I’ve no idea about Keels on D. I hope Baker will have worked hard on footwork (lateral movement on D) and handle. He’s not been a good defensive player — except that his hustle does occasionally result in a good play on D. And his lousy handle has limited his ability to get shots for himself. He hasn’t been able to do so.

I do see Baker and Keels competing for PT, as wings rather than guards. Although I’d speculate that neither will totally outshine the other as the season moves along, perhaps one will prove more consistent than the other, re shooting, handle, D. Ah, wait, and FT% — maybe both Baker and Keels will actually be on the floor together last 2-3 minutes, stall ball. Then again, we’ll hope for an O-juggernaut and some laughers.

One other, probably minor, thing: All this Baldwin talk sort of revolves around his very active recruitment by the 3 frosh on board. I’m glad Keels also has an important connection with Roach. I hope it’s a happy group of 11 (or 13), no cliques.

[CDu]

They're also thrown out the window if Joey himself can show significant improvement. If he can be the true knock-down shooter -- consistently -- that we've all been thinking/hoping he was going to be, there will be minutes for him on this team. He can be scrappy on D, hustle, etc., and all that is great of course. But it's very simple for him: either he knocks down shots, and he'll get minutes, or he doesn't, and he won't.

I will say that this year represents his best chance since the 2019 team for playing time. Like on that team, we are going to have multiple guys who are quite capable of creating off the dribble, (already Roach and Griffin, and Banchero relative to his position, add Baldwin if we were to get him), and also like that year we appear to be a bit leaner on shooting (less so if Griffin's shot is good and/or we get Baldwin). So having a guy who represents a legitimate spot-up, catch-and-shoot option to spread the floor will have some value. Now, it may not be a critical need, especially if guys like Roach, Griffin, Keels, and Moore can get up over 35% from 3. But it's a possible need. And because we have so many guys capable off the dribble, Baker's limitations as a ballhandler are less critical.

That said, the spot-up shooter would probably need to be a solid defensive option as well. Otherwise, it might not be worth the addition of a shooter at the expense of defense. But that's definitely a potential angle for Baker to find the floor. Sort of the "Jack White before he lost his stroke" role.

If I had to guess, I'd say Keels likely beats Baker out due to him having a better all-around skill set than Baker. But I won't completely rule out the possibility that Baker finds his way into the rotation.

[JasonEvans]

You know, basketball is a sport where when something succeeds, folks tend to copy it. The Warriors 3-point shot their way to NBA dominance while employing a small PF as their center and now centers are suddenly nearly worthless in the sport unless they can go outside and make it rain.

I bring this up because we are just a month from Baylor winning the national title with 3 PGs as their 3 best players (and Gonzaga employing 2-3 PGs in Suggs, Nemhardt, and Ayayi) and yet Coach K appears to be going after big big big players. If Duke lands PBjr, I think many of us expect the Blue Devils to spend lots of time next year with a pair of SFs (Moore and Griffin) as our 2 guards on the floor and there will be very few moments in games where Duke will not have at least 3 guys 6-9 or taller on the floor at the same time. It all is just contrary to what everyone else seems to be doing to succeed right now and I am very interested in seeing how it works.

[SlapTheFloor]

You know, basketball is a sport where when something succeeds, folks tend to copy it. The Warriors 3-point shot their way to NBA dominance while employing a small PF as their center and now centers are suddenly nearly worthless in the sport unless they can go outside and make it rain.

I bring this up because we are just a month from Baylor winning the national title with 3 PGs as their 3 best players (and Gonzaga employing 2-3 PGs in Suggs, Nemhardt, and Ayayi) and yet Coach K appears to be going after big big big players. If Duke lands PBjr, I think many of us expect the Blue Devils to spend lots of time next year with a pair of SFs (Moore and Griffin) as our 2 guards on the floor and there will be very few moments in games where Duke will not have at least 3 guys 6-9 or taller on the floor at the same time. It all is just contrary to what everyone else seems to be doing to succeed right now and I am very interested in seeing how it works.

Coach K is just reacting to all the posters on this board that complained about his small ball lineups.

[CDu]

You know, basketball is a sport where when something succeeds, folks tend to copy it. The Warriors 3-point shot their way to NBA dominance while employing a small PF as their center and now centers are suddenly nearly worthless in the sport unless they can go outside and make it rain.

I bring this up because we are just a month from Baylor winning the national title with 3 PGs as their 3 best players (and Gonzaga employing 2-3 PGs in Suggs, Nemhardt, and Ayayi) and yet Coach K appears to be going after big big big players. If Duke lands PBjr, I think many of us expect the Blue Devils to spend lots of time next year with a pair of SFs (Moore and Griffin) as our 2 guards on the floor and there will be very few moments in games where Duke will not have at least 3 guys 6-9 or taller on the floor at the same time. It all is just contrary to what everyone else seems to be doing to succeed right now and I am very interested in seeing how it works.

A very minor quibble, but Baylor's 3 best players were two PGs and a SG. And Gonzaga used just 2 PGs as their primary perimeter stars too. Ayayi and Teague were not PGs.

But that's only a quibble. The idea of your post I agree with: our lineup next year is going to run counter to the current trends in basketball, especially so if we get Baldwin.

[sagegrouse]

What's John Legend's RSCI? I just saw this in a Duke news update:

On Thursday morning, John Legend was interviewed on CBS Good Morning and shared his excitement about coming to Duke. And after meeting Duke men's basketball head coach Mike Krzyzewski, John Legend wrote on Instagram: “Unexpected perk of speaking at @dukeuniversity commencement: Coach K just recruited me!”

[Kedsy]

You know, basketball is a sport where when something succeeds, folks tend to copy it. The Warriors 3-point shot their way to NBA dominance while employing a small PF as their center and now centers are suddenly nearly worthless in the sport unless they can go outside and make it rain.

I bring this up because we are just a month from Baylor winning the national title with 3 PGs as their 3 best players (and Gonzaga employing 2-3 PGs in Suggs, Nemhardt, and Ayayi) and yet Coach K appears to be going after big big big players. If Duke lands PBjr, I think many of us expect the Blue Devils to spend lots of time next year with a pair of SFs (Moore and Griffin) as our 2 guards on the floor and there will be very few moments in games where Duke will not have at least 3 guys 6-9 or taller on the floor at the same time. It all is just contrary to what everyone else seems to be doing to succeed right now and I am very interested in seeing how it works.

This is a very good point, and I think our success (or not) will be governed by (a) the mobility of our big guys, which would appear to be pretty strong (at least on offense) with Banchero, Griffin, and (hopefully) Baldwin; and (b) how well our big guys can defend small, quick guards. In a man-to-man scheme, if Griffin and Baldwin can't handle quick wings, then we'll either have to come up with an effective zone or adjust our expectations. But if they can move their feet well enough to stay in front of smaller players, I would think their size would end up as a defensive advantage (and certainly an offensive advantage; what 6'3" shooting guard will be able to handle Griffin or Baldwin?). I mean, a team filled with guys like Magic Johnson, Grant Hill, LeBron James, and Kevin Durant would be incredibly effective, even though they're all tall. (And no, I'm not saying that's what we would have, I'm just pointing out that height is only a potential disadvantage if it's not mobile enough.)

[gumbomoop]

They're also thrown out the window if Joey himself can show significant improvement. If he can be the true knock-down shooter -- consistently -- that we've all been thinking/hoping he was going to be, there will be minutes for him on this team. He can be scrappy on D, hustle, etc., and all that is great of course. But it's very simple for him: either he knocks down shots, and he'll get minutes, or he doesn't, and he won't.

I can buy this bottom-line conclusion, but I contend that the odds that his shooting improves will increase if his handle and footwork are improved. I think he’ll be a better knock-down shooter if he can also get his own shot, just occasionally. But maybe he should do nothing but practice stand-still 3-bombs.

That seems to be CDu’s point, though I know CDu is also generally a big believer in the importance of handle for perimeter players.

... having a guy who represents a legitimate spot-up, catch-and-shoot option to spread the floor will have some value... Because we have so many guys capable off the dribble, Baker's limitations as a ballhandler are less critical.

That said, the spot-up shooter would probably need to be a solid defensive option as well. Otherwise, it might not be worth the addition of a shooter at the expense of defense. But that's definitely a potential angle for Baker to find the floor. Sort of the "Jack White before he lost his stroke" role.

I will say, I don’t see the Jack White comparison. Wasn’t Jack a stretch-4, who very rarely drove, hit 3s, then didn’t? But who was also a tough, tough defender, sneaky good shot-blocker. Which isn’t Baker.

[53n206]

So much recent discussion on this thread implies we have a lock on Baldwin. Is this true?