2020-21 minutes thread - or is this redundant

[CDu]

I still have questions about Coleman's athleticism, but he seems to - at a minimum - have a strong body, great nose for the ball, nice touch around the basket, and to run the floor very well.

Yeah, I don't see him as an athletic style of player. But at the 4/5 in college, you can get away with that with strength/toughness/tenacity. Which Coleman seems to have.

I don't expect a huge role or anything for him, but I could see a role nonetheless.

[flyingdutchdevil]

From the Steve Wiseman Charlotte Observer article linked on the DBR front page
https://www.charlotteobserver.com/sp...247085217.html

He says the initial starters will probably be the small ball line-up of Goldwire, Roach, Hurt, Johnson and Moore. There is so much buzz around Coleman that he seems destined for minutes. Nate James also called out Tape as someone who seems to have accepted his defend, screen, rebound role as a big.

Per CDu's comments about expanded playmaking options, it will be interesting to see how the scoring gets divided among those starters. Goldwire's shot has really improved, and he was a much better finisher in the lane last year, but the baseline was so low. Roach looks like he can shoot on a limited sample. We know Hurt can shoot but I'll be interested to see if he can become more of a scorer. Johnson seems, by what I read, like a demon on the break but more of a playmaker in the half court. Wendell is a driver, we'll see if he's expanded his offensive repertoire.

Like Troublemaker, I have a feeling about Steward. The kid just feels like someone who is going to get buckets, no matter his build. There has also been very little chatter about Baker, who I'd like to see on the court with all of these playmakers.

Obviously, there will be minutes for guys who can produce on both ends, it'll be fun to find out who they are...I hope.

This feels like a very Coach K starting line-up: multiple ball handlers (including multiple PGs), a small ball 5, upperclassmen leadership, highest rated freshman starting.

What's interesting is the plethora of players who can play the 5: Johnson, Tape, Coleman, Williams, Brakefield, etc. There are a lot of options. This line-up has also convinced me that Johnson is going to paly a lot of minutes as he's going to slide over the 4 a lot. 32+ minutes isn't out of the question.

[JasonEvans]

Yeah, I don't see him as an athletic style of player. But at the 4/5 in college, you can get away with that with strength/toughness/tenacity. Which Coleman seems to have.

I don't expect a huge role or anything for him, but I could see a role nonetheless.

Ummm, I am currently on a media availability with Wendell Moore and... well... lets just say that he just said something about Coleman's athleticism that will leave your jaw on the floor. I guarantee we will play it on the podcast this weekend.

[Truth&Justise]

Footage from the Saturday scrimmage

https://youtu.be/x1Jq2H5fK3A

From the Steve Wiseman Charlotte Observer article linked on the DBR front page
https://www.charlotteobserver.com/sp...247085217.html

He says the initial starters will probably be the small ball line-up of Goldwire, Roach, Hurt, Johnson and Moore.

To me, the biggest moment of the entire video was the three-second clip at the 4:34 mark. In semi-transition, Wendell Moore gets a screen on the wing, sees his defender goes under, and without hesitation he rises for a three. Swish. If Moore's starting and playing big minutes, as we expect, then his ability to shoot the 3 will go a long way to determining this team's ceiling.

As a high school senior, Moore shot 80% from the FT line and 36% from 3. That three-point percentage had risen each of his four years in high school, from 27% on low volume as a freshman to 31%, 32%, and finally 36%.

Last year as a college freshman, he maintained that stellar 80.6% from the FT line, but shot a ghastly 21.1% from three. Yikes. If he can turn the corner to being somewhere in the range of 32-37% from three, then it really opens up options for the team.

I'm not saying Moore will be a sharpshooter, but being good enough that teams can't ignore you goes a long way. I look at it like Justise Winslow's three point shooting--not a main weapon the team relied on, but something that helped turn a good team into a great team.

[Billy Dat]

As a high school senior, Moore shot 80% from the FT line and 36% from 3. That three-point percentage had risen each of his four years in high school, from 27% on low volume as a freshman to 31%, 32%, and finally 36%.

Last year as a college freshman, he maintained that stellar 80.6% from the FT line, but shot a ghastly 21.1% from three. Yikes. If he can turn the corner to being somewhere in the range of 32-37% from three, then it really opens up options for the team.

I'm not saying Moore will be a sharpshooter, but being good enough that teams can't ignore you goes a long way. I look at it like Justise Winslow's three point shooting--not a main weapon the team relied on, but something that helped turn a good team into a great team.

It has been discussed on DBR and elsewhere that that college FT shooting is a better predictor of how a player will shoot from 3 point land in the NBA than their college 3pt %. So, hopefully some extension of that theory will result in Wendell being a good 3 point shooter this year, enough that teams can't sag off and we can maintain space for those drive and kicks.

[JasonEvans]

I look at it like Justise Winslow's three point shooting--not a main weapon the team relied on, but something that helped turn a good team into a great team.

Justise shot 41.8% from three his lone year at Duke while averaging just under 3 3FGA per game. That is like the 3rd highest 3FG% rate at Duke over the past half decade (among players who made at least 1 3FG/game).

I expect this to be Duke's best outside shooting team since 2015 with Baker, Hurt, Steward, and perhaps Moore and Goldwire able to hit 35%+ of their threes on a reasonable volume of shots.

Duke team #FG% by season:
2010 - .385
2011 - .374
2012 - .371
2013 - .399
2014 - .395
2015 - .387
2016 - .385
2017 - .378
2018 - .372
2019 - .308
2020 - .352

-Jason "whew, could that 2019 have used a reliable outside shooter or what? Not to rag on Cam, but if Kennard had been on that team instead of him we cut down the nets with ease" Evans

[JasonEvans]

Doing a media avail with Nate James right now and he is raving about Henry Coleman and Jeremy Roach. Calls Roach the most talented player on the team and says Coleman is the energy guy who lifts his team every time he comes into the game. When asked who the "Nate James bada** on this team," he did not hesitate a moment before saying it is Coleman.

Look, things can always develop in ways you do not anticipate, but I would be a little bit shocked at this point if Coleman is not a rotation player this season.

[DavidBenAkiva]

Doing a media avail with Nate James right now and he is raving about Henry Coleman and Jeremy Roach. Calls Roach the most talented player on the team and says Coleman is the energy guy who lifts his team every time he comes into the game. When asked who the "Nate James bada** on this team," he did not hesitate a moment before saying it is Coleman.

Look, things can always develop in ways you do not anticipate, but I would be a little bit shocked at this point if Coleman is not a rotation player this season.

Coleman is sort of like the antithesis to the projected frontcourt starters, Johnson and Hurt. He's going to be a defense-for-offense substitute or someone that comes in and plays when the team needs an emotional lift. I could see him being a late game substitute at the 5 to hold a lead on account of his rebounding and versatility. KenPom did an analysis a couple years ago and found that teams tend to go smaller as the game goes on. Coleman is ideal in that role as an undersized defensive post player that will fight to get the rebound or cut off a driving lane.

I do love the idea of a Roach, Goldwire, Moore, Coleman, and Williams in the game when the team needs a stop. That could be a really good defensive unit and not so bad offensively since three of those guys are capable of handling the ball and distributing.

[Jaks19]

Roach must really be separating himself from JGold and DJ if he is getting comments like that from Nate.
At this point, I could imagine that Roach has earned being a starter. IMPO, I'd like to see Roach and Moore as the starting back court with Johnson as the 3/4 with Hurt and Williams at the 5. The bench would be so explosive with JGold running the show and DJ, Baker, Coleman, Brakefield and Tapé …. all scorers.

[jimsumner]

Doing a media avail with Nate James right now and he is raving about Henry Coleman and Jeremy Roach. Calls Roach the most talented player on the team and says Coleman is the energy guy who lifts his team every time he comes into the game. When asked who the "Nate James bada** on this team," he did not hesitate a moment before saying it is Coleman.

Look, things can always develop in ways you do not anticipate, but I would be a little bit shocked at this point if Coleman is not a rotation player this season.

That's not what I got on Roach. I thought he was saying between Roach and Goldwire that Roach was the more talented.

Anyway. More later.

[Kedsy]

Look, things can always develop in ways you do not anticipate, but I would be a little bit shocked at this point if Coleman is not a rotation player this season.

How long do you think the rotation will be by mid-season? If you say 7 or 8 (as would be historically the case), who are the three or four players you think will be out of the rotation (if Coleman is in it)?

Almost definitely in: Roach, Steward, Johnson, Moore, Hurt, Goldwire. So (unless you think Steward or Goldwire won't be in the rotation) if Coleman is in the rotation that means the rotation will include at most one out of: Tapé, Williams, Baker, and Brakefield, and quite possibly none of them (in a 7-man rotation). Which makes no sense to me.

Even if the rotation is 9-deep, that means Coleman would be playing ahead of Brakefield (possible, I guess) and one of Tapé or Baker or Williams (seems unlikely to me, but I suppose you never know).

Last season the rotation stayed around 9-deep until late February (at which point it tightened), so if Coach K has truly changed his stripes, your idea is possible if Tapé or Baker or Williams ends up glued to the bench. I just think it's more likely that Tapé and Baker and Williams play rotation minutes ahead of Coleman and Brakefield. I certainly wouldn't be "a little bit shocked" if Coleman was behind those three guys.

And if you think the rotation will be 10-deep (or 11-deep), then Coleman's inclusion is not the shocking part of the prediction.

[DukieTiger]

How long do you think the rotation will be by mid-season? If you say 7 or 8 (as would be historically the case), who are the three or four players you think will be out of the rotation (if Coleman is in it)?

Almost definitely in: Roach, Steward, Johnson, Moore, Hurt, Goldwire. So (unless you think Steward or Goldwire won't be in the rotation) if Coleman is in the rotation that means the rotation will include at most one out of: Tapé, Williams, Baker, and Brakefield, and quite possibly none of them (in a 7-man rotation). Which makes no sense to me.

Even if the rotation is 9-deep, that means Coleman would be playing ahead of Brakefield (possible, I guess) and one of Tapé or Baker or Williams (seems unlikely to me, but I suppose you never know).

Last season the rotation stayed around 9-deep until late February (at which point it tightened), so if Coach K has truly changed his stripes, your idea is possible if Tapé or Baker or Williams ends up glued to the bench. I just think it's more likely that Tapé and Baker and Williams play rotation minutes ahead of Coleman and Brakefield. I certainly wouldn't be "a little bit shocked" if Coleman was behind those three guys.

And if you think the rotation will be 10-deep (or 11-deep), then Coleman's inclusion is not the shocking part of the prediction.

@Kedsy - it's been a while since I've reviewed your classic playing time analyses. I know you have a lot of insight into projected playing time that factors in talent (via RSCI rank) and experience. Do you ever take into account positional (or skill set) scarcity?

Like, it seems to me that in a year where there's little separation (yet), K might be forced to play a deeper lineup?

Factors I'm looking at if I consider your "almost definitely in" list, which I'm assuming was informed by your typical analytical framework...

1. The list excludes both Duke's centers and (probably) its 3 best post defenders
2. It also excludes Duke's best shooter
3. It only really includes 2 guys (out of 4 or 5) who can defend bigger wings

It seems to me that one of Williams or Tape, along with Baker and one of Coleman/Brakefield will almost definitely see substantial time, even in competitive games. It almost feels like it has to when 3 of your top 6 players are 6'3 and under, and a fourth is 6'5.

If I had to wager, I'd predict the regular rotation - even into Feb/Mar, looking something like:

• Goldwire
• Roach
• Steward
• Moore
• Baker
• Johnson
• Hurt
• Flex spot #1: Either Williams or Tape playing significant minutes, but this spot getting regular minutes each game
• Flex spot #2: Same as above but this time with Coleman and Brakefield

That's cheating a bit but it's a 9 man rotation with a few guys filtering in and out. I'd argue last year was a similar situation.

So, to re-state my question, I'm wondering if you've ever looked at lineup height as a factor when predicting the Duke rotation?... Or shooting ability as a similar predictive factor. (yeah, yeah, I know Demarcus Nelson played small ball 4 for a while there... )

[flyingdutchdevil]

How long do you think the rotation will be by mid-season? If you say 7 or 8 (as would be historically the case), who are the three or four players you think will be out of the rotation (if Coleman is in it)?

Almost definitely in: Roach, Steward, Johnson, Moore, Hurt, Goldwire. So (unless you think Steward or Goldwire won't be in the rotation) if Coleman is in the rotation that means the rotation will include at most one out of: Tapé, Williams, Baker, and Brakefield, and quite possibly none of them (in a 7-man rotation). Which makes no sense to me.

Even if the rotation is 9-deep, that means Coleman would be playing ahead of Brakefield (possible, I guess) and one of Tapé or Baker or Williams (seems unlikely to me, but I suppose you never know).

Last season the rotation stayed around 9-deep until late February (at which point it tightened), so if Coach K has truly changed his stripes, your idea is possible if Tapé or Baker or Williams ends up glued to the bench. I just think it's more likely that Tapé and Baker and Williams play rotation minutes ahead of Coleman and Brakefield. I certainly wouldn't be "a little bit shocked" if Coleman was behind those three guys.

And if you think the rotation will be 10-deep (or 11-deep), then Coleman's inclusion is not the shocking part of the prediction.

Can I ask where the optimism from Steward comes from? He can handle the ball, but we don't need that. He can get to the rim, but do you really trust a 163 lb combo guard driving in ACC traffic? He can shoot, which we clearly need. But he's tiny and will undoubtedly get pummeled on D (he'll be up against players 20-40 lbs heavier).

I agree that Roach, Johnson, Moore, Hurt, and Goldwire are rotation locks. You'd like to think a junior Baker is also a lock (he offers a lot of necessary shooting), but I'm not so sure. At least one of the big men (Tape, Williams, Coleman, Brakefield) will be in the rotation. Maybe even two of those cats.

So, to sum up, we have 5 starters + at least 1 of Baker/Steward + at least 1 big man + the other of Baker/Steward or another big man for a total of 8 true rotation players. Bottomline, choose 3 of Baker/Steward/Tape/Wiliams/Coleman/Brakefield.

FOr the record, I agree with your rotation approach, but I'm just not sold on Steward as a guaranteed rotation player.

[DavidBenAkiva]

Regarding Steward, I don't think we should be too concerned about his size in college. There are just not that many teams that run a traditional PG, SG, SF, PF, and C lineup anymore. You see a lot of teams with a 4-out style of play. Take Illinois, Duke's opponent on December 8th. The Illini are one of the few teams with a true center in Kofi Cockburn (7'0" 275 lbs). But their starting "4" most of last season was Da'Monte Williams, a 6'3" 190 lb "G/F." UNC is probably going to run out RJ Davis, all of 5'11" 170 lbs as their SG for a lot of the season. And if the Duke offense is really going to play 5-oout with Hurt and Johnson in the front court, that is going to pull defenders away from the rim and allow Steward to get easy driving lanes to the rim with few defenders.

[Troublemaker]

From the Steve Wiseman Charlotte Observer article linked on the DBR front page
https://www.charlotteobserver.com/sp...247085217.html

He says the initial starters will probably be the small ball line-up of Goldwire, Roach, Hurt, Johnson and Moore. There is so much buzz around Coleman that he seems destined for minutes. Nate James also called out Tape as someone who seems to have accepted his defend, screen, rebound role as a big.

Very excited that we're going to give the two-forwards look a shot in starting Matthew and Jalen as the bigs. I think given Jalen's passing acumen, his best offensive role will be to play as a Draymond-Green-like smallball center. More on that in a second.

First, though, the most interesting quote from Coach James in that article was him talking about Jeremy Roach: "He’s terrific in the ball screen. That’s something that we really haven’t had in a while."

One thing Duke fans may not realize is that we actually run way fewer pick-n-rolls than most teams around the country. From Synergy:



Maybe Jeremy changes that. And if he does, then I think having Jalen set the screen and end up in "short roll" situations while surrounded by shooters like DJ, Matt, and Joey would be very fun to watch and very effective offense.

What does a "short roll" look like? Here's a long compilation of Draymond Green, a forward with excellent passing and handling skills, performing out of the "short roll". Hopefully Jalen can mimic this if PnR becomes more of a staple of Duke's offense.



Like I said, it's a long video, and the highlights are arranged in this order -- (1)Lobs, (2)Dropoffs, (3)Kickouts, (4)Finishes, (5)Floaters -- if you want to skip around. Besides floaters, I suspect Jalen can execute the rest out of the "short roll."

[DukieTiger]

Man, it's bonkers that the Zion team utilized PnR so little, even relative to other recent Duke teams.

Agree that this team has some PnR potential though - finally got the potential for good spacing for the first time since what? 2017?

[Troublemaker]

Roach must really be separating himself from JGold and DJ if he is getting comments like that from Nate.
At this point, I could imagine that Roach has earned being a starter. IMPO, I'd like to see Roach and Moore as the starting back court with Johnson as the 3/4 with Hurt and Williams at the 5. The bench would be so explosive with JGold running the show and DJ, Baker, Coleman, Brakefield and Tapé …. all scorers.

It'd be very surprising at this point to see Williams starting. Have you been doing your reading? For example, here are quotes from a recent Wendell Moore presser:

"I would say the strength of our team is our quickness. Coach mentions to us all the time that we're not going to be the biggest team on the floor. There's probably going to be one or two guys on the other team that are always bigger than us, so we have to use our quickness to our advantage, whether it's in transition or whether it's on the defensive end. We just have to pick out mismatches. Like I said, if we have Matt Hurt at the five, there's a chance he's going to have a 6'11 center on him. If he's able to stretch him out to the three-point line, I think we can pick apart our mismatches very easily."

Duke seems intent on playing small and fast this season. Also, playing Jalen as a SF would be a waste of his skills (as would playing Draymond Green at the 3 on offense). What makes him an interesting prospect is that he's a big body who can pass and handle. Have him be one of our "bigs" so he can "grab and go" on rebounds and torture opponents in transition as well as potentially be a tough cover in the halfcourt (perhaps out of the "short roll" and/or perhaps at the elbows when we run Horns). As Wendell alluded to in his presser, opposing centers will have to cover either Matt or Jalen.

Even if the rotation is 9-deep, that means Coleman would be playing ahead of Brakefield (possible, I guess) and one of Tapé or Baker or Williams (seems unlikely to me, but I suppose you never know).

Last season the rotation stayed around 9-deep until late February (at which point it tightened), so if Coach K has truly changed his stripes, your idea is possible if Tapé or Baker or Williams ends up glued to the bench. I just think it's more likely that Tapé and Baker and Williams play rotation minutes ahead of Coleman and Brakefield. I certainly wouldn't be "a little bit shocked" if Coleman was behind those three guys.

FWIW, when we submit for the minutes contest, I'll probably have a 9-man rotation with Coleman playing ahead of Brakefield and Williams.

I do love the idea of a Roach, Goldwire, Moore, Coleman, and Williams in the game when the team needs a stop. That could be a really good defensive unit and not so bad offensively since three of those guys are capable of handling the ball and distributing.

Love ya DBA, but that lineup would be pretty bad offensively, imo.

[Kedsy]

Can I ask where the optimism from Steward comes from? He can handle the ball, but we don't need that. He can get to the rim, but do you really trust a 163 lb combo guard driving in ACC traffic? He can shoot, which we clearly need. But he's tiny and will undoubtedly get pummeled on D (he'll be up against players 20-40 lbs heavier).

I agree that Roach, Johnson, Moore, Hurt, and Goldwire are rotation locks. You'd like to think a junior Baker is also a lock (he offers a lot of necessary shooting), but I'm not so sure. At least one of the big men (Tape, Williams, Coleman, Brakefield) will be in the rotation. Maybe even two of those cats.

So, to sum up, we have 5 starters + at least 1 of Baker/Steward + at least 1 big man + the other of Baker/Steward or another big man for a total of 8 true rotation players. Bottomline, choose 3 of Baker/Steward/Tape/Wiliams/Coleman/Brakefield.

FOr the record, I agree with your rotation approach, but I'm just not sold on Steward as a guaranteed rotation player.

Steward was the #24 recruit and is one of our three proven shooters. In the scrimmages from which we have film, he looked like he should live up to the hype. Whatever his weight, I'll be very surprised if he's not in the rotation.

@Kedsy - it's been a while since I've reviewed your classic playing time analyses. I know you have a lot of insight into projected playing time that factors in talent (via RSCI rank) and experience. Do you ever take into account positional (or skill set) scarcity?

My projections split the players into "perimeter" and "interior" players. Not counting last season (for the moment), K generally plays 4 perimeter players and 3 interior players in his post-January 1, close game rotation. If he has 5 outstanding perimeter options (in my system that's 3.0 rating or better), then he plays 5 perimeter and 3 interior players.

Exceptions were 2010, when we only had four perimeter players so he played four perimeter and four interior (three of whom were 2.0 or better, plus surprise rotation player Miles Plumlee, who the system didn't predict would play so perhaps there is hope for Henry Coleman); and 2020, when K seemed to play a 9-man rotation (although the last six or so games (mid-February on) it was tightening and then the season was cut short so we didn't necessarily get a full picture).

We don't know if last season's longer rotation represents a harbinger for this year and the future. Adding to the uncertainty are Patrick Tapé, as the only grad-transfer Duke has ever had, and Jordan Goldwire's progression despite his extremely low rank coming out of high school. In the RSCI era, we've only had four non-walk-on recruits outside the high school top 150. Two of them (Goldwire and Jack White have progressed as if they were top 150 players and two of them (Andre Buckner and Antonio Vrankovic) have progressed as if they were walk-ons, so it's hard to judge how players like Jordan should be initially ranked. For now, let's initially rank Goldwire and Tapé as if they were halfway between the two.

My numeric system says: for freshmen, 1 to 10 is 1.0; 11 to 20 is 2.0; 21 to 35 is 3.0; 36 to 150 is 4.0. For non-freshmen, subtract half a point for each year in the program.

Like I said, let's rank Goldwire and Tapé as if they came into college as 4.5. Then, putting it all together, here's what we have:

PERIMETER PLAYERS:
Roach 2.0, Moore 2.5, Goldwire 3.0, Baker 3.0, Steward 3.0

INTERIOR PLAYERS:
Hurt 1.5, Johnson 2.0, Tapé 3.0, Williams 3.0, Brakefield 3.0, Coleman 4.0


Note that this is the **only** year in the RSCI era (going back to 1998 or so) where we haven't had one or more players ranked 1.0 or better. In fact, it's only the fifth season in which we haven't had at least three such players (2013 (2, plus senior Seth Curry); 2014 (1); 2016 (1), 2020 (1), and now 2021 (0)). It's only the third season in which we haven't had at least three players ranked 1.5 or better (2013 (2, plus senior Seth Curry); 2016 (1, not counting injured Amile Jefferson); and now 2021 (1)).

Assuming 2020 was an anomaly, the system would predict five perimeter players (we only have five, and they're all 3.0 or better) and three interior players (Hurt, Johnson, and *one of* Tapé, Williams, or Brakefield). Ties usually go to the player with more experience, though none of the three (or four, if you count Coleman) have any experience at Duke. If Ivy League experience ends up counting, the guess would be the tie would go to Tapé; if it doesn't count then it could be any of the three and my money would be on Williams.

The system isn't always right (though it most often is), but in every scenario (even a 9-man rotation), the system would predict Henry Coleman to be outside the main rotation. I guess we'll just have to see.

[DukieTiger]

Steward was the #24 recruit and is one of our three proven shooters. In the scrimmages from which we have film, he looked like he should live up to the hype. Whatever his weight, I'll be very surprised if he's not in the rotation.



My projections split the players into "perimeter" and "interior" players. Not counting last season (for the moment), K generally plays 4 perimeter players and 3 interior players in his post-January 1, close game rotation. If he has 5 outstanding perimeter options (in my system that's 3.0 rating or better), then he plays 5 perimeter and 3 interior players.

Exceptions were 2010, when we only had four perimeter players so he played four perimeter and four interior (three of whom were 2.0 or better, plus surprise rotation player Miles Plumlee, who the system didn't predict would play so perhaps there is hope for Henry Coleman); and 2020, when K seemed to play a 9-man rotation (although the last six or so games (mid-February on) it was tightening and then the season was cut short so we didn't necessarily get a full picture).

We don't know if last season's longer rotation represents a harbinger for this year and the future. Adding to the uncertainty are Patrick Tapé, as the only grad-transfer Duke has ever had, and Jordan Goldwire's progression despite his extremely low rank coming out of high school. In the RSCI era, we've only had four non-walk-on recruits outside the high school top 150. Two of them (Goldwire and Jack White have progressed as if they were top 150 players and two of them (Andre Buckner and Antonio Vrankovic) have progressed as if they were walk-ons, so it's hard to judge how players like Jordan should be initially ranked. For now, let's initially rank Goldwire and Tapé as if they were halfway between the two.

My numeric system says: for freshmen, 1 to 10 is 1.0; 11 to 20 is 2.0; 21 to 35 is 3.0; 36 to 150 is 4.0. For non-freshmen, subtract half a point for each year in the program.

Like I said, let's rank Goldwire and Tapé as if they came into college as 4.5. Then, putting it all together, here's what we have:

PERIMETER PLAYERS:
Roach 2.0, Moore 2.5, Goldwire 3.0, Baker 3.0, Steward 3.0

INTERIOR PLAYERS:
Hurt 1.5, Johnson 2.0, Tapé 3.0, Williams 3.0, Brakefield 3.0, Coleman 4.0


Note that this is the **only** year in the RSCI era (going back to 1998 or so) where we haven't had one or more players ranked 1.0 or better. In fact, it's only the fifth season in which we haven't had at least three such players (2013 (2, plus senior Seth Curry); 2014 (1); 2016 (1), 2020 (1), and now 2021 (0)). It's only the third season in which we haven't had at least three players ranked 1.5 or better (2013 (2, plus senior Seth Curry); 2016 (1, not counting injured Amile Jefferson); and now 2021 (1)).

Assuming 2020 was an anomaly, the system would predict five perimeter players (we only have five, and they're all 3.0 or better) and three interior players (Hurt, Johnson, and *one of* Tapé, Williams, or Brakefield). Ties usually go to the player with more experience, though none of the three (or four, if you count Coleman) have any experience at Duke. If Ivy League experience ends up counting, the guess would be the tie would go to Tapé; if it doesn't count then it could be any of the three and my money would be on Williams.

The system isn't always right (though it most often is), but in every scenario (even a 9-man rotation), the system would predict Henry Coleman to be outside the main rotation. I guess we'll just have to see.

Thanks for the awesome post! This year feels tough to predict, not only because of the Goldwire/Tape dynamic, but also because the 2020 high school class had some unique variables.

• Johnson, Roach and Williams all coming off injuries
• No ASG circuit for late rankings movement

I'd have to think that there's a bit less certainty in the RSCI order than in past seasons, and there's an easy world where Johnson is a 1.0 - though admittedly, the ASG circuit probably wouldn't have done a ton to generate movement for the rest of the class.

You bring up an interesting point, that this Duke team has an abnormally low amount of 1.0 players (read: none)... The general fuzziness of this team's projections is reinforced in this chart I generated which maps % returning minutes against a talent metric. The diamond is 2021. (Source: Bart Torvik)

This Duke team's projection is... not favorable compared to any team in the Torvik era. We're depending on guys outperforming their projections, to a degree. Some of them have already done that, so it's not as though the season's outlook should be bleak. But I think it reinforces the idea that the rotation might be tough to predict, since we don't know who will or won't outperform.

Screen Shot 2020-11-12 at 5.34.22 PM.jpg

[DavidBenAkiva]

Love ya DBA, but that lineup would be pretty bad offensively, imo.

Tough, but fair