Addition by Subtraction: the McRoberts factor

[DukeCO2009]

With 11 guys who look to play significant minutes (once Dave comes back), where would Josh have fit on this team? Seems to me his only function would have been to steal minutes from guys like Singler and King, and I'm not sure they're both not more valuable assets than he was. Singler has touch, can do things other than dunk, crashes the boards, and is incredibly smooth with the ball. King is a nasty shooter who can also rebound and put the ball on the floor.

Josh's issue was that he was a 6/10 at a lot of things but a 10/10 at nothing--a jack of all (most) trades but master of none. There always seemed to be a disclaimer at the end of any statement made about him. He was a good ball-handler--for a big man. He could shoot OK--for someone who's 6'11". You get the idea. I also got the impression that he wasn't a great "locker room guy." Forgive the political analogy from a bitter North Carolinian, but he had John Edwards syndrome--just as Johnny Boy appeared to use his Senate seat as a mere springboard to bigger and better things, Josh looked like he cared about Duke only to the extent that he knew it was an avenue to the NBA.

The team lacked chemistry last year, and it clearly has found it this go-round. One would assume that 3 freshmen playing significant minutes would produce the exact opposite situation, so I have to attribute this--at least in part--to Josh's departure. K looked to him to be a leader, and he didn't step up. As a result, the rest of the team looked a bit lost at times. I really believe Duke's a better team this seasonn without Josh than it would've been with him. Thoughts?

[EarlJam]

With 11 guys who look to play significant minutes (once Dave comes back), where would Josh have fit on this team? Seems to me his only function would have been to steal minutes from guys like Singler and King, and I'm not sure they're both not more valuable assets than he was. Singler has touch, can do things other than dunk, crashes the boards, and is incredibly smooth with the ball. King is a nasty shooter who can also rebound and put the ball on the floor.

Josh's issue was that he was a 6/10 at a lot of things but a 10/10 at nothing--a jack of all (most) trades but master of none. There always seemed to be a disclaimer at the end of any statement made about him. He was a good ball-handler--for a big man. He could shoot OK--for someone who's 6'11". You get the idea. I also got the impression that he wasn't a great "locker room guy." Forgive the political analogy from a bitter North Carolinian, but he had John Edwards syndrome--just as Johnny Boy appeared to use his Senate seat as a mere springboard to bigger and better things, Josh looked like he cared about Duke only to the extent that he knew it was an avenue to the NBA.

The team lacked chemistry last year, and it clearly has found it this go-round. One would assume that 3 freshmen playing significant minutes would produce the exact opposite situation, so I have to attribute this--at least in part--to Josh's departure. K looked to him to be a leader, and he didn't step up. As a result, the rest of the team looked a bit lost at times. I really believe Duke's a better team this seasonn without Josh than it would've been with him. Thoughts?

My thought is that you are dead-on accurate with this assessment. I believe this year's team will have a much stronger personality and identitiy as a whole vs. being "The Josh McRoberts Show." Some players can pull that off, (see 1994 and "The Grant Hill Show"). But McRoberts just didn't possess the skill set to be MC.

Josh of all trades, McMaster of none indeed.

He's a good guy I'm sure, and his mom rocks. I wish him well but agree that this year's team will be much stronger.

-EarlJam

[MChambers]

My thought is that you are dead-on accurate with this assessment. I believe this year's team will have a much stronger personality and identitiy as a whole vs. being "The Josh McRoberts Show." Some players can pull that off, (see 1994 and "The Grant Hill Show"). But McRoberts just didn't possess the skill set to be MC.

Josh of all trades, McMaster of none indeed.

He's a good guy I'm sure, and his mom rocks. I wish him well but agree that this year's team will be much stronger.

-EarlJam

While I don't disagree with the points the two of you have made regarding some of his weaknesses, or at least a lack of strengths, I certainly think you need to slow down here before you jump to conclusions based on one exhibition. It's a little early to decide that this year's team has better chemistry. It certainly helps having two healthy point guards.
Moreover, while Josh did not have top notch skills on the offensive end of the floor, he was our best post defender. I thought his defense last year was excellent. As I recall, he was named to one of the all-ACC defensive teams (I can't remember he was first-team or second-team). We could use that this year.

[EarlJam]

While I don't disagree with the points the two of you have made regarding some of his weaknesses, or at least a lack of strengths, I certainly think you need to slow down here before you jump to conclusions based on one exhibition. It's a little early to decide that this year's team has better chemistry. It certainly helps having two healthy point guards.
Moreover, while Josh did not have top notch skills on the offensive end of the floor, he was our best post defender. I thought his defense last year was excellent. As I recall, he was named to one of the all-ACC defensive teams (I can't remember he was first-team or second-team). We could use that this year.

Agreed to a degree, but I came to my conclusion about one minute after Josh announced he was going pro.

I liked Josh. I really did. He starred in numerous highlight reels but it seemed obvious to me last year that with each game, Duke fans and perhaps the players were continually looking to Josh to "step it up," "have the break out game." For better or worse, it was HIS team last year and for whatever reasons, it just didn't work for the 2006-2007 Blue Devils, relatively speaking.

-EarlJam

[Jeffrey]

Josh's issue was that he was a 6/10 at a lot of things but a 10/10 at nothing--a jack of all (most) trades but master of none. There always seemed to be a disclaimer at the end of any statement made about him. He was a good ball-handler--for a big man. He could shoot OK--for someone who's 6'11". You get the idea.

Hi,

I think Josh had more talent, potential, and skills than you have stated. He may end up being a very good complimentary player in the NBA.

K looked to him to be a leader, and he didn't step up. As a result, the rest of the team looked a bit lost at times. I really believe Duke's a better team this seasonn without Josh than it would've been with him.

Here's where I could not agree with you more! Josh did not want to be the go-to-guy and he had to be on last year's team. Sorry, but that is a major part of being a team player. Coach assigns you a role and you refuse (through actions and/or words), then you need to move on for the good of all.

-Jeffrey

[Fish80]

This thread is a little too harsh. Sure, things didn't work out for Josh nor for the team last year as many of us hoped. And I'm sure Josh would agree with that. But what's the point of bashing him now? He gave tremendous effort, did what he could.

Next Play.

[johnb]

I have no idea of the personality issues behind the scenes, or whether he would have resented another year of college basketball, but I have to think that the team would be better off with an additional All ACC level guy in the paint.

Having said that, I don't really think about his presence on this year's team and am happy we have who we have.

[BD80]

Josh has great skills, and played great post D. He would have led the team in minutes played, and he and Kyle would have been a tremendous post duo, with Josh having no problem deferring to and feeding Kyle. Lance and Zoubek would have played a bit less (and Singler too). Josh would have thrived in the up-tempo offense. Nelson would still be the sole captain, and Josh would be happy just being one of the guys. We would have been a serious championship contender.

But Josh is gone, and best wishes to him. And to his mom; I'll miss her most of all.

This team will be fun as hell to watch, and will be a tough out in the tournament. It will take a bunch of good luck and a real hot streak, but we could be playing in April.

[jimsumner]

With all due respect, I'm not sure how one can come to the conclusion that a player who was second in the ACC in rebounding and blocked shots didn't do anything well.

There's no question that McRoberts would have started on this year's Duke team had he elected to return.

[lavell12]

you guys are crazy if it is an addition by losing josh that means we have to play two unproven players at C and one who is uncoordinated and isn't very good. josh problem is he is built for a run-n-gun game like Duke has this year,
if we had Josh I think we would be a serious NCAA Championship contender.

[3rd Dukie]

you guys are crazy if it is an addition by losing josh that means we have to play two unproven players at C and one who is uncoordinated and isn't very good. josh problem is he is built for a run-n-gun game like Duke has this year,
if we had Josh I think we would be a serious NCAA Championship contender.

I think this might be the best post of them all.
That is a very interesting thought.

Good call!

[Jeffrey]

I think this might be the best post of them all.

Hi,

I think this might be the best thread of them all. It does and excellent job of revealing the depth of posters information about the program. Some very serious Duke fans watch every second of every game on TV and read what others write to gain insight & views. Other very serious fans actually go to school at Duke and hear directly from players what is happening behind the scenes. And yet others hear directly from current & former people in the program. Dependent upon one's sources, their views/opinions can be (and in this case are) very different.

-Jeffrey

[Classof06]

I'm tempted to say this team would be better without McRoberts, and I thought that for much of the offseason. But I changed my mind. The reasons I think we'd be better with McRoberts are:

1) He's 6-10. I still don't think we're as "small" on our frontline as many experts think we are, but there's no denying that an athletic 6-10 player would help Duke out immensely. We're a consensus top-10 team with Josh; right now, people have us anywhere from 10 to 19 or 20.

2) Like someone said earlier, transition basketball suits McRoberts well. We were a halfcourt team last year and McRoberts' struggles were on full display; he didn't have one reliable back-to-the-basket move (which is inexcusable, IMO). Simply put, this is a player that is at his best in the open court, which is where Duke wants to spend most of its time this year.

3) With the style we're playing this year and the scorers we have (Demarcus, a healthy Paulus, a healthy Gerald, Scheyer, Nolan Smith, Taylor King, SINGLER), Josh wouldn't have to be "the man"; at least not every single night. I still say Duke struggled last year because they needed McRoberts to be the go-to guy and he was incapabale/uncomfortable/whatever you want to say with that role. This year, we have enough health and talent on this team where he wouldn't have to be that guy. Having someone like Singler would take a load of pressure off of him. I think Duke will be the kind of team that has 3-4 different leading scorers every 5 games; this would have been ideal for Josh.


All this being said, McRoberts was not exactly the best teammate and believe what you want to believe, chemistry was an issue on last year's team. I'll leave it at that. If you want more info, PM me.

[johnnydakota]

you guys are crazy if it is an addition by losing josh that means we have to play two unproven players at C and one who is uncoordinated and isn't very good. josh problem is he is built for a run-n-gun game like Duke has this year,
if we had Josh I think we would be a serious NCAA Championship contender.

Man, that is dead-on. With more depth, scoring options, and a combo guard who can defend and run, Josh would've been in his element. W/O him, Duke will be top 10 by year's end. With him, final four. As for him eating up shots, what a joke. Last year he was ridiculed for not shooting enough. He would much prefer the assist. This year, there are more options. I also noticed zero blocked shots as a team against NCCU. Duke will miss his interior D, as well. His so-called "attitude" was being unhappy with both he and his team not meeting HIS expectations. It would've been a positive this year.

[jimsumner]

"I also noticed zero blocked shots as a team against NCCU."

Zero blocked shots? Where did you get that? Duke had nine blocked shots against Central.

[johnnydakota]

"I also noticed zero blocked shots as a team against NCCU."

Zero blocked shots? Where did you get that? Duke had nine blocked shots against Central.

From the rivals Duke site. It listed 10 steals, but it reads zero blocks. Any opinion on McRoberts?

[devildeac]

From the rivals Duke site. It listed 10 steals, but it reads zero blocks. Any opinion on McRoberts?

Josh did not have any blocks/steals/points/boards or TO in the game vs NCCU last PM. But I hope his ankle is healed and he starts playing again for the Jail, err, Trail Blazers(could not resist-that's always the way my brother and father described them over the last several years)

[jimsumner]

Well, I've already expressed my opinion on Josh earlier in the thread. Mike Krzyzewski says he would love to have had McRoberts come back this season. Who am I to disagree? With his head on straight, he would have been a significant asset to this year's team.

[dukestheheat]

My $.02 on Josh:

He was a hot/cold player for Duke and I never could really figure out why that was! There were many stretches in games and even some whole games where Josh would just TOTALLY disappear. Then, he'd come up with a good game and get some tremendous blocks or rebounds or even power dunks....but then he'd go dormant again and he did this consistently throughout his time at Duke. He seemed frustrated most of the time he was on the team. He didn't seem happy to be out there most of the time. His up and down demeanor and performance had to wear on K and his teammates and ultimately, on Josh.

I'm thankful that he gave us what he did, and some stuff put up here on this thread may indeed explain his totally inconsistent play; I'm not sure about the addition by subtraction points but one must agree that something was amiss with the guy.

I'd agree with Jim Sumner and others in this thread; with a level-headed, mature Josh we'd contend for national honors and again, I'm thankful for what he was able to give to Duke.

GO DUKE!

dth.

[mapei]

With all due respect, I'm not sure how one can come to the conclusion that a player who was second in the ACC in rebounding and blocked shots didn't do anything well.

There's no question that McRoberts would have started on this year's Duke team had he elected to return.

Thank you. Taking over last year from a team led by two all-Americans (among 4 seniors in the rotation) with their jerseys in the rafters was no small task, and Singler couldn't have done it either. Everyone has strengths and weaknesses but Josh was our best player last year IMO.