Early 2021 Draft Chatter

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Let’s see...

He was the most talented player ever to play here, and we would have gone undefeated if he had stayed healthy. He’s the best point guard in the NBA, he does a ton of work for the community, and every Duke alumn should support him forever.

And/or

He barely played here. One and done aren’t real Duke guys anyway. He’s a disruptive locker room presence, and says things that embarrass the university.

Did I get everything and save us from 5 pages of Kyrie discussion?

Well done! You should write Clif Notes.

[UrinalCake]

I don’t love the Kelly comparison for Hurt. I understand why people make it, but Hurt has a much more diverse offensive game. Aside from that awesome game against Miami in his return from injury, Kelly was primarily a tall dude who stood on the perimeter and shot threes. As a senior he averaged 12.9ppg, a far cry from Hurt’s 18.3. He never had anything resembling Hurt’s fadeaway midrange jumper.

[CDu]

Kyrie?

Yep, I’m‘ll co-sign this. The signature skill for each of those two guys was that they had the ball on a string. Their dribbling skills are/were Uber-elite. Irving is a better shooter/scorer than Anderson, while Anderson was the better passer. But the overlap in style is pretty substantial.

[CDu]

I don’t love the Kelly comparison for Hurt. I understand why people make it, but Hurt has a much more diverse offensive game. Aside from that awesome game against Miami in his return from injury, Kelly was primarily a tall dude who stood on the perimeter and shot threes. As a senior he averaged 12.9ppg, a far cry from Hurt’s 18.3. He never had anything resembling Hurt’s fadeaway midrange jumper.

Also co-sign this. Hurt’s scoring skills are WAY more diverse than Kelly. He is also a fair bit smaller than Kelly, who had NBA center height. But Hurt’s offensive skill set is way beyond that of Kelly.

[DavidBenAkiva]

Sam Vecenie of The Athletic released his Top 100 Draft Board, version 1.0 this morning and there are a few interesting nuggets in there. I find Vecenie to be one of the best NBA draft writers out there. He is thorough.

Jalen Johnson is currently sitting at 22
Matthew Hurt is currently at 35
No other Duke players appear in the top 100

Around the ACC and college basketball, some other interesting players:
- Florida State looks to have another lottery pick this year in Scottie Barnes. He sits at #7 and would be the second lotto pick to come off the bench for FSU.
- Day'Ron Sharpe of UNC appears at #19.
- David Johnson of Louisville is also in contention for the first round at #27
- BJ Boston (33) and Terrence Clarke (34) are right around the bubble of the late 1st/early 2nd round. This would be the first year, I think, since Coach Cal arrived in Lexington without a 1st round pick.
- Justin Champagnie of Pitt (52), Trey Murph (54) and Jay Huff (68) of Virginia, Carlick Jones of Louisville (59), Moses Wright of Georgia Tech (64), Quincy Guerrier of Syracuse (81), Aamir Simms of Clemson (86), MJ Walker of FSU (92), and Keve Aluma of Virginia Tech (96)
- Earl Timberlake of Miami appears on the Deep Watch List

This fits with my expectations for the most part. Duke is going to lose Hurt, already lost Johnson, and will probably lose one or both of Tapé and Goldwire (I feel more certain about this than most on this board with my thinking being that these players are ready to move on with their lives and playing another year in college might not be the thing they want to do - it's why I think Tapé has a better chance of staying than Goldwire since Tapé came to Duke in part to earn a graduate degree). Everyone else should return. Steward, Moore, and Roach, in particular, have a lot to prove to get on the NBA radar.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Sam Vecenie of The Athletic released his Top 100 Draft Board, version 1.0 this morning and there are a few interesting nuggets in there. I find Vecenie to be one of the best NBA draft writers out there. He is thorough.

Jalen Johnson is currently sitting at 22
Matthew Hurt is currently at 35
No other Duke players appear in the top 100

Around the ACC and college basketball, some other interesting players:
- Florida State looks to have another lottery pick this year in Scottie Barnes. He sits at #7 and would be the second lotto pick to come off the bench for FSU.
- Day'Ron Sharpe of UNC appears at #19.
- David Johnson of Louisville is also in contention for the first round at #27
- BJ Boston (33) and Terrence Clarke (34) are right around the bubble of the late 1st/early 2nd round. This would be the first year, I think, since Coach Cal arrived in Lexington without a 1st round pick.
- Justin Champagnie of Pitt (52), Trey Murph (54) and Jay Huff (68) of Virginia, Carlick Jones of Louisville (59), Moses Wright of Georgia Tech (64), Quincy Guerrier of Syracuse (81), Aamir Simms of Clemson (86), MJ Walker of FSU (92), and Keve Aluma of Virginia Tech (96)
- Earl Timberlake of Miami appears on the Deep Watch List

This fits with my expectations for the most part. Duke is going to lose Hurt, already lost Johnson, and will probably lose one or both of Tapé and Goldwire (I feel more certain about this than most on this board with my thinking being that these players are ready to move on with their lives and playing another year in college might not be the thing they want to do - it's why I think Tapé has a better chance of staying than Goldwire since Tapé came to Duke in part to earn a graduate degree). Everyone else should return. Steward, Moore, and Roach, in particular, have a lot to prove to get on the NBA radar.

I'm 99% sure Hurt is gone, but there is a little part of me holding out hope. Assuming Baldwin is gone, a line-up of Roach, Steward, Griffin, Hurt, and Banchero is beautiful. That does mean Williams doesn't start (and neither would Keels if he came).

I think Tape is definitely gone (I'm putting that also at 99%). He doesn't even play and likely isn't next year either (given all of our 5s are staying and Banchero is coming in). The only circumstance I can think of Tape staying is a 2-year masters program. I'm optimistic on Goldwire (51%). He doesn't have a future in the NBA and he'll be a role player in Europe. Given that, he may be interested in a free masters and playing hyper competitive basketball for one more season. Plus, he will get minutes. With his defense, that is a certainty.

The one player I'm unsure of is Moore. With Griffin and Banchero on board, I'm convinced he isn't starting. Is he okay with that?

[FerryFor50]

I'm 99% sure Hurt is gone, but there is a little part of me holding out hope. Assuming Baldwin is gone, a line-up of Roach, Steward, Griffin, Hurt, and Banchero is beautiful. That does mean Williams doesn't start (and neither would Keels if he came).

I think Tape is definitely gone (I'm putting that also at 99%). He doesn't even play and likely isn't next year either (given all of our 5s are staying and Banchero is coming in). The only circumstance I can think of Tape staying is a 2-year masters program. I'm optimistic on Goldwire (51%). He doesn't have a future in the NBA and he'll be a role player in Europe. Given that, he may be interested in a free masters and playing hyper competitive basketball for one more season. Plus, he will get minutes. With his defense, that is a certainty.

The one player I'm unsure of is Moore. With Griffin and Banchero on board, I'm convinced he isn't starting. Is he okay with that?

I would be shocked if Moore wasn't starting. Would a freshman Griffin or Banchero be better than a junior year Moore? Especially when you factor in:

- strength/physicality
- experience
- defense (capability and understanding of the scheme)
- communication skills

[Kedsy]

I would be shocked if Moore wasn't starting. Would a freshman Griffin or Banchero be better than a junior year Moore? Especially when you factor in:

- strength/physicality
- experience
- defense (capability and understanding of the scheme)
- communication skills

In a word, yes. Whether you factor that stuff in or not.

[FerryFor50]

In a word, yes. Whether you factor that stuff in or not.

K has shown again and again that he values defense, leadership, communication and experience over raw talent.

We saw it with Wojo. Tyler Thornton. Matt Jones. Jordan Goldwire.

I don't see indications that Griffin/Banchero are going to be Zion/RJ/Tatum level talents, so if they're more of the Jalen Johnson talent level, I don't see them bumping Moore from the starting lineup.

[UrinalCake]

I agree, I think Moore will start unless he goes through another swoon where he shoots 1/20 like he did earlier this season. He does so much on the defensive side that goes unnoticed in the box score, and he has a lot of leadership qualities. I would elector to him to be a captain. I certainly don’t see Banchero taking his spot as they are such different players.

[JasonEvans]

In a word, yes. Whether you factor that stuff in or not.

If Hurt does not return, Duke could easily go small and start Moore at the PF. They've gone with him in that role a fair bit this year already. Griffin (6-7, 220) could also play PF a bit.

Starter or not, Wendell Moore will play a very large role on next year's team and is almost certain to be one of the team captains. I would expect Roach, DJ, AJ, Wendell, Williams, Banchero, and Hurt/Goldwire (if they return) to all comfortably play 20+ minutes per game next season.

[DavidBenAkiva]

I agree, I think Moore will start unless he goes through another swoon where he shoots 1/20 like he did earlier this season. He does so much on the defensive side that goes unnoticed in the box score, and he has a lot of leadership qualities. I would elector to him to be a captain. I certainly don’t see Banchero taking his spot as they are such different players.

I am in agreement that Moore starts under the assumption that Baldwin decides to stay in Milwaukee. Both Moore and Griffin are long with nearly 7'0" wingspans and both move their feet extremely well. They give positional versatility on defense and offer complimentary skillsets on offense, especially if Moore's jumper continues to develop. A player with Moore's FT shooting acumen should eventually develop that jumper. We've seen him improve throughout the year. Griffin has shown promise in that area, but we'll see if it shows up in games. Either way, both have the physical profile to defend 1-4.

My assumption for Duke's starting lineup next year is Roach, Steward, Moore, Griffin, and Banchero with a bench of Keels, Williams, Brakefield, Coleman, and Baker. That's as many as 8 future NBA players in the regular rotation. Not bad.

[Kedsy]

K has shown again and again that he values defense, leadership, communication and experience over raw talent.

We saw it with Wojo. Tyler Thornton. Matt Jones. Jordan Goldwire.

I don't see indications that Griffin/Banchero are going to be Zion/RJ/Tatum level talents, so if they're more of the Jalen Johnson talent level, I don't see them bumping Moore from the starting lineup.

Nobody's a Zion-level talent, but as far as the others I think you're probably wrong (talking about college Tatum, for example, not NBA Tatum). Both of next year's freshmen should be significantly better than Jalen Johnson (who, by the way, still started most of his games). In 1991, freshman Grant Hill started ahead of junior Brian Davis and senior Greg Koubek. I'm not saying these guys are Grant Hill, but the situation is similar.

As far as defense goes, both of next year's frosh are reputed to be good at it. This is not a Matt Jones starting over defensively-challenged Luke Kennard situation. I read about some U16 championships in which AJ Griffin averaged 7 steals per game over four games. But more importantly when it comes to your examples, none of the scrappy guards you mention started ahead of anyone who was close to top 10. As noted, Matt Jones started ahead of #21 freshman Kennard (but #21 isn't really close to top 10) and Wojo started ahead of Avery (who though there was no RSCI back then was not particularly close to top 10, either), but this year, for example, #20 Roach and #24 Steward, also not close to top 10, have both started more games than Goldwire (most of Goldwire's starts came at Moore's expense). Freshman Sulaimon (#12) started ahead of junior Thornton. And the other years, to the extent your guys started, they didn't even have top 25 freshman competition.

I'm not saying Moore won't start (he might, if K decides to bring Williams and (hopefully) Keels off the bench). I'm saying he won't start at the expense of Griffin or Banchero. Or Baldwin, if he chooses Duke (though if Baldwin comes, I guess I am saying Moore won't start, unless he beats out Roach or Steward). The only Duke top 10 freshmen since they invented the RSCI who didn't start the vast majority of their games were Harry Giles (and if he hadn't had significant injury issues, he would have) and Gerald Henderson (who was barely in the top 10 at #10 and still started 10 games, just not the vast majority).

[flyingdutchdevil]

...or in a Kedsy-esque fashion, has a top 10 freshman recruit ever not started for Coach K? And if the answer is 'yes', what decade are the talking about?

Griffin is RSCI #6; he'll start.

And don't say Harry Giles. The kid had no knees coming into college.

[FerryFor50]

Nobody's a Zion-level talent, but as far as the others I think you're probably wrong (talking about college Tatum, for example, not NBA Tatum). Both of next year's freshmen should be significantly better than Jalen Johnson (who, by the way, still started most of his games). In 1991, freshman Grant Hill started ahead of junior Brian Davis and senior Greg Koubek. I'm not saying these guys are Grant Hill, but the situation is similar.

As far as defense goes, both of next year's frosh are reputed to be good at it. This is not a Matt Jones starting over defensively-challenged Luke Kennard situation. I read about some U16 championships in which AJ Griffin averaged 7 steals per game over four games. But more importantly when it comes to your examples, none of the scrappy guards you mention started ahead of anyone who was close to top 10. As noted, Matt Jones started ahead of #21 freshman Kennard (but #21 isn't really close to top 10) and Wojo started ahead of Avery (who though there was no RSCI back then was not particularly close to top 10, either), but this year, for example, #20 Roach and #24 Steward, also not close to top 10, have both started more games than Goldwire (most of Goldwire's starts came at Moore's expense). Freshman Sulaimon (#12) started ahead of junior Thornton. And the other years, to the extent your guys started, they didn't even have top 25 freshman competition.

I'm not saying Moore won't start (he might, if K decides to bring Williams and (hopefully) Keels off the bench). I'm saying he won't start at the expense of Griffin or Banchero. Or Baldwin, if he chooses Duke (though if Baldwin comes, I guess I am saying Moore won't start, unless he beats out Roach or Steward). The only Duke top 10 freshmen since they invented the RSCI who didn't start the vast majority of their games were Harry Giles (and if he hadn't had significant injury issues, he would have) and Gerald Henderson (who was barely in the top 10 at #10 and still started 10 games, just not the vast majority).

Yea but what top 10 recruit has displaced someone with Moore's talents? I listed Thornton, Jones, Goldwire, etc. but Moore has more talent than those examples and was #25 RCSI himself. If Griffin, Banchero and Baldwin are all significantly better than a junior year Moore, great! But I'll believe it when I see it.

And college Tatum was *very* good. Not NBA Tatum good, but better than Jalen Johnson was.

https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb...n-tatum-1.html

[FerryFor50]

...or in a Kedsy-esque fashion, has a top 10 freshman recruit ever not started for Coach K? And if the answer is 'yes', what decade are the talking about?

Griffin is RSCI #6; he'll start.

And don't say Harry Giles. The kid had no knees coming into college.

There's a first time for everything, right? :-D

I'm not saying Griffin/Banchero don't start. I'm saying that it won't be at the expense of Moore, especially early in the season.

If Moore struggles early on, then yea, he'll go back to the bench. But I think he earns a starting spot at the beginning of the year.

[flyingdutchdevil]

There's a first time for everything, right? :-D

I'm not saying Griffin/Banchero don't start. I'm saying that it won't be at the expense of Moore, especially early in the season.

If Moore struggles early on, then yea, he'll go back to the bench. But I think he earns a starting spot at the beginning of the year.

Granted, I will admit a Roach/Steward/Griffin/Hurt/Banchero is stupidly offensive-minded. I think may be able to score about that line-up.

Our 3 best defenders - Moore, Goldwire, and Williams - would be on the bench (I have heard wonderful things about Griffin's defense but I'm applying to freshman discount on defense here. Winslow/Tre are the exceptions, not the rule).

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

There's a first time for everything, right? :-D

I'm not saying Griffin/Banchero don't start. I'm saying that it won't be at the expense of Moore, especially early in the season.

If Moore struggles early on, then yea, he'll go back to the bench. But I think he earns a starting spot at the beginning of the year.

Yeah. Coach seems less and less committed to traditional one through five positions over time. Shuffle the pieces, find a starting role for Moore along with the new kids.

[throatybeard]

I'm not sure what the answer is here, but I'm pretty sure Wojo in college 23-26 seasons ago is relevant to virtually nothing in the current environment, whether Moore's situation or else wise.

[FerryFor50]

I'm not sure what the answer is here, but I'm pretty sure Wojo in college 23-26 seasons ago is relevant to virtually nothing in the current environment, whether Moore's situation or else wise.

It's completely relevant.

Senior Wojo started ahead of freshman Will Avery all season, despite Avery having more raw talent as an analog for Moore starting ahead of a higher ranked recruit because of leadership and defense. K still values those things as much now as he did 23 seasons ago.

As Kedsy mentioned, we didn't really have recruiting rankings back then, but I'd wager Avery would have been fairly high in the rankings.