Page 10 of 19 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 200 of 366

Thread: next season

  1. #181
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Quote Originally Posted by Dukehky View Post
    You're right. Just a better recruiting class. He's not some can't miss prospect though.
    Even "can't miss" prospects miss. Like, for instance, our one from this year.

  2. #182
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Quote Originally Posted by Hartford Dukie View Post
    This is why I don't understand why everyone on the 2021 recruiting thread is dismissive of Keels starting or getting major minutes IF he comes.
    Keels does address one problem: he has a reputation as a great shooter. The problem is, he's more of a scorer/off guard than a playmaker/shot creator. Our biggest need on this team both currently and going forward is a reliable ball handler who can create offense for himself and others. Tre Jones was that guy for us last year, and RJ Barrett the year before. That guy doesn't exist on this team. The closest thing right now is Jordan. I'm worried we may not have that guy next year, too. Jeremy Roach seems like more of a long term project to me at this point. DJ has shown some flashes, but both his and Jeremy's decision making with the ball in close games has been pretty questionable.

    It's just painful watching this team trying to generate offense in close games. If we aren't up by at least 8-10 down the stretch in a competitive game, I just assume we're going to lose.
    Last edited by kAzE; 03-03-2021 at 03:01 AM.

  3. #183
    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    We have discussed this previously, maybe even in this thread though I'm not sure about that. But sorry guys, I still just don't buy Jaemyn as a 3 point shooter. He may improve and prove me wrong, but after tonight's o-fer, he's now down to 33% on the season, and after his hot start over a few games in December, he's 3 for 20 (15%) since.

    Although, to be fair, after tonight's clunker, DJ is also at 33%, on a lot more attempts.

    Jeremy is now at an unsightly 28%.

    There are obviously a lot of areas in which this team needs to improve next year, but given the fact that we're very likely to lose our (only?) reliable three point shooter off this year's team, we really, really are going to need our returning guards to improve their shooting. I am confident they can do it, but wow, will we need it.

    And it sure would be nice to get a surprise commitment from Patrick Baldwin Jr. He might change the entire picture in terms of shooting next year.
    There was a degree of smoke and mirrors to our run of victories last month, in that we had several games in a row with very good three point shooting. Whether guys were in the zone, defenders were out of position, or someone ate their Wheaties in the morning - it was a big factor in getting those victories.

    Now everyone except Hurt has come back to earth. Suddenly, there's not as much room to make initial moved and find lanes to the basket.

  4. #184
    My views on next season:

    Probable Leaving:
    Tape
    Goldwire
    Johnson
    Buckmire
    Hurt (many on the board think so)

    Probable Returning (Barring xfers if any)
    Moore
    Roach
    Steward
    Brakefield
    Williams
    Baker
    Coleman
    Worthington
    Savarino

    Recruits:
    Banchero
    Griffin
    Keels (probable)
    Baldwin (not likely)

    Needs:
    PG (need a playmaker and no freshmen available but experience would help. Any transfers available?)
    Additional size (Bediako might help to bolster team against FSU,UNC and other teams known for size inside. Williams injury puts us at a disadvantage)

    I don't see how Moore, Steward and Roach turn into play making guards next year. Best to hope for is they can penetrate and finish around the rim. They also can improve their defense although Moore is good with that. We need a PG type to make plays for others.

  5. #185
    Quote Originally Posted by Saratoga2 View Post
    My views on next season:

    Probable Leaving:
    Tape
    Goldwire
    Johnson
    Buckmire
    Hurt (many on the board think so)

    Probable Returning (Barring xfers if any)
    Moore
    Roach
    Steward
    Brakefield
    Williams
    Baker
    Coleman
    Worthington
    Savarino

    Recruits:
    Banchero
    Griffin
    Keels (probable)
    Baldwin (not likely)

    Needs:
    PG (need a playmaker and no freshmen available but experience would help. Any transfers available?)
    Additional size (Bediako might help to bolster team against FSU,UNC and other teams known for size inside. Williams injury puts us at a disadvantage)

    I don't see how Moore, Steward and Roach turn into play making guards next year. Best to hope for is they can penetrate and finish around the rim. They also can improve their defense although Moore is good with that. We need a PG type to make plays for others.
    I think your analysis is spot on, and as you point out, the problem with the composition of next year's team is very similar to the composition of this year's team, even if JGold returns AND Keels comes: no PG. If JGold stays and Keels come, then we'd have 4 players for 2 (maybe 2.5) positions. An additional problem for next year's team is: who's gonna make 3s? Based on production from this year, there's not a single high-quality 3pt shooter on that team, in addition to not having a play-making PG. Maybe both DJ and Roach have a Luke Kennard-esque Fr. to So. transformation, DJ for shooting Jeremy for playmaking. Absent that, it seems like next year's team would be in for some struggles as well. Experience and strength will probably lead to fewer errors and better finishing thru contact, and therefore a slightly better team. Losing Hurt to the draft would cripple the team in other ways though.

  6. #186
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by DukieInBrasil View Post
    I think your analysis is spot on, and as you point out, the problem with the composition of next year's team is very similar to the composition of this year's team, even if JGold returns AND Keels comes: no PG. If JGold stays and Keels come, then we'd have 4 players for 2 (maybe 2.5) positions. An additional problem for next year's team is: who's gonna make 3s? Based on production from this year, there's not a single high-quality 3pt shooter on that team, in addition to not having a play-making PG. Maybe both DJ and Roach have a Luke Kennard-esque Fr. to So. transformation, DJ for shooting Jeremy for playmaking. Absent that, it seems like next year's team would be in for some struggles as well. Experience and strength will probably lead to fewer errors and better finishing thru contact, and therefore a slightly better team. Losing Hurt to the draft would cripple the team in other ways though.
    I think folks are underselling the potential improvements we could/should see from Steward and Roach. It's easy to write those guys off, but they have been pretty decent for freshmen in this crazy year and the freshman-to-sophomore leap is a real thing. I expect big things from them next year. I think Steward will become a lethal 3pt threat, and Roach will become more consistent off the dribble.

    I also think people are sleeping on the playmaking ability of Griffin. That guy is going to create a lot of shots for himself and others.

    Also, Banchero should be an impact scorer in place of Hurt. Not the same, obviously; Hurt is the better pure shooter and Banchero a better scorer off the dribble and in the post. But he should be really good.

    I'm really not worried about our ability to create next year. This year's team (due to the inexperience at guard and the lack of ballhandling at other positions) has more limitations in terms of shot creation than next year's team will have. We'll be much more versatile with that team than this one is.

  7. #187
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Wherever the wind blows and the leaves dance.
    Looking forward to Paolo Banchero next year. Here is Evan Tomes evaluation from NBAdraft.net:

    NBA Comparison: Wendell Carter

    Strengths: 6’9 forward … Good length with a 7’0.5 wingspan … Good strength and physical profile. Great mobility and very well coordinated … Good athlete, elevates well at the rim with good timing and body control that translates well in games … Can score from anywhere on the floor, inside and out with a sound jump shot and midrange scoring ability … Good footwork and uses eurosteps when appropriate.

    Good scorer and very efficient. Averaged 21.8 points per game on 51.5% FG% over the Nike EYBL in 2019. Finished 2nd in scoring at the NBPA Top 100 with 17.2 points per game on 65.3% FG% in 2019 … Draws fouls at a high rate and reliable free throw shooter. Shot 7.2 free throws per game on 80.9% FT% over the Nike EYBL in 2019. Shot 87.5% FT% at the NBPA Top 100 in 2019 …

    Good rebounder. Led the Nike EYBL in rebounding with 11.2 per game in 2019 … Sees over the defense, reads double teams and help defense well. Good passing ability and court vision, especially at his size.

    Good timing on lead passes and knows where his teammates are at all times, utilizing his options well. Doesn’t over-dribble. Averaged 4.2 assists per game over the Nike EYBL in 2019 …

    Versatile defender, guarding both perimeter and post at the high school level. Good shot blocker. Averaged 2.1 blocks per game over the Nike EYBL in 2019. Averaged 3 steals per game at the NBPA Top 100 in 2019 … Mature and polished, contributed at the highest levels of high school at a young age … Smart shot selection, doesn’t force his scoring or hunt for shot opportunities. Plays well within himself and has a well-rounded game, contributing in multiple categories … Plays poised, balanced, and always under control … Doesn’t have many glaring weaknesses …

    Weaknesses: Good form and shooting mechanics but can improve consistency. Shot 25% (5-20) 3PT% over the Nike EYBL in 2019. Shot 20% (1-5) 3PT% at the NBPA Top 100 in 2019 … Can cut down on turnovers. Averaged 3.2 per game over the Nike EYBL in 2019 … Versatile defender but lateral quickness isn’t great, defending quick players on the perimeter at the next levels may be an obstacle … Can’t argue with his scoring efficiency but still has room to improve finishing against length at the rim and operating in traffic … Outlook: Duke commit … 2020 Washington Gatorade Player of the Year … Scored 14 points in the 2019 Underclassman All-American Game … Evan Tomes 12/8/20

    Also looking forward to Adrian Griffin Jr. Here are some excerpts from The Stepien's Ross Homan article on why Adrian should be a candidate for the number 1 player in 2022:

    He shows no issues reading plays in advance, uses his length (6-7, 7-0 wingspan) in a very functional way, and has good closing speed and two-foot explosion. This allows him to show upside as a secondary rim protector also, which is huge for a wing. The motor is also something that impresses me, as it’s not unusual to see high-level recruits at this age coast on that end.

    Overall, I think the defensive upside is very real, especially off-ball. I haven’t watched a ton of the 2021 class outside of the top guys, but he’s without a doubt (in my opinion) the best defender of the players in discussion for top 10.

    Griffin Jr. also has a fairly advanced handle at this stage of his career. There isn’t flash involved, but he controls the ball well while using body movements to get to his spots. He has the ability to shoulder dip and sell in-and-out moves, good body balance on hang dribbles, and the strength to dislodge defenders on drives.

    These decisive moves with the ball in his hands will only make his shooting more dangerous. That combined with his natural ability to change direction, shift weight well, stay low to the ground with his handle, and stop on a dime gives him really good athleticism traits functionally as a scorer.

    I don’t want to get too far ahead of myself, but Griffin Jr. is incredibly underrated as a shooter and overall shot-maker. It is rare to find somebody with his intersection of size, athleticism, age, shooting numbers and form. And yet nobody seems to be talking about it in regards to him as a player. He has ELITE upside as a shooter.

    First, we can take a look at his numbers during the last two years and see that they are very good. During 48 high school games, 4 EYBL games, and 4 FIBA U16 games, Griffin Jr. has shot 78 percent from the line on 176 attempts. We also have to keep in mind it’s fairly common for free throw percentage to improve continuously at this age, especially for guards and good shooters. Now we look at his 3-point shooting, where he’s shot 46 percent on 216 attempts in this 56-game sample size. That’s 3.8 attempts per game and a 0.348 3PTr, both good numbers for his age and size. Of course looking at numbers that good probably has you questioning the degree of difficulty on his shot attempts, which is fair. It’s not normal to shoot 46 percent from 3 on high volume.

    He’s more than capable creating and rising off the dribble, he has very good range that’s already near the NBA 3-point line, and he uses step-backs, side-steps, and hard dribble pull-ups. He often doesn’t touch the rim, as he has very good aim and touch.

    Griffin Jr. has very high-level touch on floaters, scoop finishes, and, of course, shooting in general. He’s able to use the soft touch at different speeds and angles, and this is something that translates into shooting.

    Next we can get into his passing, because although he isn’t advanced, there are promising glimpses. Griffin Jr. is a willing and capable passer, which is the first step in the right direction. He can hit shooters off short rolls, find teammates spotting up in transition, make hit-ahead passes, and dump-offs on drives.

    We can look at his ceiling outcome as a Paul George or Jimmy Butler type (not a direct comp). We are looking at elite shooting, positional size and athleticism, combined with a defensive motor, good instincts, a handle that is decisive, strong and quick, plus a willingness to pass with good improvement indicators. He might not be the best player in his class currently, although you can argue he is. But all signs point toward him blowing up very soon.

    Something to look forward to for next year after last night.

  8. #188
    I love Matthew Hurt, but honestly, where would he go in next year's draft? I just don't see him translating to the NBA well, certainly not first round.

    Am I missing something?

  9. #189
    Quote Originally Posted by DevilYouKnow View Post
    I love Matthew Hurt, but honestly, where would he go in next year's draft? I just don't see him translating to the NBA well, certainly not first round.

    Am I missing something?
    No, you aren't missing anything. But if Matthew has any NBA aspirations (and why wouldn't he?) then he pretty much has to strike while the iron is hot, so to speak. The NBA drafts young and on potential now more than ever. He's had a great year and now's the time to go if the League is his dream.

    Having said all that, I doubt he makes it into the first round (even with the great season he's had), and I have serious doubts about him being anything more than a 10-12 bench guy. He just doesn't' have the fluidity and athleticism that NBA forwards need nowadays.

    I'll be rooting hard for him if he decides to go, but I'm not expecting him to be an NBA starter or even a solid bench contributor. Here's to hoping I'm wrong.

    Of course, I'd love to see him come back to Duke next season. We could surely use him!

  10. #190
    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernDukie View Post
    No, you aren't missing anything. But if Matthew has any NBA aspirations (and why wouldn't he?) then he pretty much has to strike while the iron is hot, so to speak. The NBA drafts young and on potential now more than ever. He's had a great year and now's the time to go if the League is his dream.

    Having said all that, I doubt he makes it into the first round (even with the great season he's had), and I have serious doubts about him being anything more than a 10-12 bench guy. He just doesn't' have the fluidity and athleticism that NBA forwards need nowadays.

    I'll be rooting hard for him if he decides to go, but I'm not expecting him to be an NBA starter or even a solid bench contributor. Here's to hoping I'm wrong.

    Of course, I'd love to see him come back to Duke next season. We could surely use him!
    He is certainly an elite shooter- and you need at least one elite skill. But he will play a lot in the G league if he decides to leave. He will need to decide where he would rather develop- at Duke or on a G league team. I of course would like to see him back at Duke- for at least one more season.
    dukelifer

  11. #191
    Quote Originally Posted by Saratoga2 View Post
    Needs:
    PG (need a playmaker and no freshmen available but experience would help. Any transfers available?)
    Additional size (Bediako might help to bolster team against FSU,UNC and other teams known for size inside. Williams injury puts us at a disadvantage)
    I'm not sure why you've decided to bold everything recently. It's like shouting.

    A talented, "pure" PG is always welcome, but you can have a very good team without one (e.g., Duke in 2018, 2010, 1999, 1994, 1989, 1988). Or, put another way, a drive-and-dish, eyes-in-the-back-of-his-head PG is a weapon, an offensive advantage, which is important, but it's not the only kind of offensive advantage. Banchero and Griffin, at least, will have offensive abilities that opposing defenses will have to do something special to stop. Banchero, Griffin, and even Williams are all good passers/playmakers for their position, while Roach, Steward, and Moore all have basic playmaking skills that hopefully will mature over the offseason. If we get Keels, he'd seem be another guard with playmaking potential. It's unlikely a grad transfer PG will provide sufficiently high level skills to be better than what we should already have.

    And more size? Coach K usually plays three guys in his big man rotation. We'll have a very crowded big-man rotation including Banchero, Williams, Coleman, Brakefield, and Griffin (who will usually play SF but K likes his SFs to move up a position sometimes; plus Moore and Baker, who can both play PF, and possibly Baldwin, though that seems less likely). How much more size do you want?

  12. #192
    Quote Originally Posted by dukelifer View Post
    He is certainly an elite shooter- and you need at least one elite skill. But he will play a lot in the G league if he decides to leave. He will need to decide where he would rather develop- at Duke or on a G league team. I of course would like to see him back at Duke- for at least one more season.
    I can't imagine Hurt returning. I don't see how him and Paolo Banchero both fit on a team. I agree with some that Roach and Steward will get better. It's not a perfect comp but I remember many assuming Kennedy Meeks wouldn't get better around 2015 (alas he did get better) players improve - it happens. I also don't see a grad transfer coming in to play PG next year - K has made it pretty clear he isn't down with that route.

  13. #193
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    I'm not sure why you've decided to bold everything recently. It's like shouting.

    A talented, "pure" PG is always welcome, but you can have a very good team without one (e.g., Duke in 2018, 2010, 1999, 1994, 1989, 1988). Or, put another way, a drive-and-dish, eyes-in-the-back-of-his-head PG is a weapon, an offensive advantage, which is important, but it's not the only kind of offensive advantage. Banchero and Griffin, at least, will have offensive abilities that opposing defenses will have to do something special to stop. Banchero, Griffin, and even Williams are all good passers/playmakers for their position, while Roach, Steward, and Moore all have basic playmaking skills that hopefully will mature over the offseason. If we get Keels, he'd seem be another guard with playmaking potential. It's unlikely a grad transfer PG will provide sufficiently high level skills to be better than what we should already have.

    And more size? Coach K usually plays three guys in his big man rotation. We'll have a very crowded big-man rotation including Banchero, Williams, Coleman, Brakefield, and Griffin (who will usually play SF but K likes his SFs to move up a position sometimes; plus Moore and Baker, who can both play PF, and possibly Baldwin, though that seems less likely). How much more size do you want?
    My only quibble is with the bolded part, and only a partial quibble. I think there are certainly examples of high-level PG play from grad transfer. Carlik Jones this year is a prime example of that. You can find first-team All-ACC level players in grad transfers. But, in terms of how Duke has fared with the grad transfer market, it's probably fair to say that it is unlikely that Duke will find such a grad transfer, given how little consideration Coach K has given that market over the years and how unsuccessful he was with it this year with Tape.

    I do think that the hope needs to be that Roach and Steward (and heck, Moore too) make big strides over the offseason and that Banchero and Griffin are as advertised. Because it doesn't seem that Coach K has the grad transfer market figured out.

  14. #194
    Quote Originally Posted by Natty_B View Post
    I can't imagine Hurt returning. I don't see how him and Paolo Banchero both fit on a team. I agree with some that Roach and Steward will get better. It's not a perfect comp but I remember many assuming Kennedy Meeks wouldn't get better around 2015 (alas he did get better) players improve - it happens. I also don't see a grad transfer coming in to play PG next year - K has made it pretty clear he isn't down with that route.
    I don't think Hurt will be back either, but if SCOTUS rules in favor of athletes profiting off of their image and likeness, then how much would that influence guys like Hurt to stay? I understand that there should be a ruling by July, which will probably be too late for Hurt, since he would have already entered the draft and been drafted by then (presumably). This is probably fodder for another thread, but if D1 athletes could profit off their likeness, then would guys like Duval and Frank Jackson have stayed another year or two? I know it's all about the second NBA contract, but that's no guarantee. Someone smarter has probably already done the math, but would a Duke basketball player that's borderline 2nd round possibly make more staying in such a world than leaving?

  15. #195
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    My only quibble is with the bolded part, and only a partial quibble. I think there are certainly examples of high-level PG play from grad transfer. Carlik Jones this year is a prime example of that. You can find first-team All-ACC level players in grad transfers. But, in terms of how Duke has fared with the grad transfer market, it's probably fair to say that it is unlikely that Duke will find such a grad transfer, given how little consideration Coach K has given that market over the years and how unsuccessful he was with it this year with Tape.

    I do think that the hope needs to be that Roach and Steward (and heck, Moore too) make big strides over the offseason and that Banchero and Griffin are as advertised. Because it doesn't seem that Coach K has the grad transfer market figured out.
    Yes, I'm sorry, I agree with you. I meant it was unlikely that Duke and such a PG would find a good match. But it's also true that stories like Carlik Jones are fairly rare. Most players coming from low-major conferences to high-major conferences wouldn't be talented enough to give us much (if any) more than we'll get from, e.g., Roach and Steward. So my original comment saying it's "unlikely" is still true.

  16. #196
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Skinker-DeBaliviere, Saint Louis
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    I'm not sure why you've decided to bold everything recently. It's like shouting.
    I'm not sure why you've decided to "well, actually" everyone every single day about everything. It's like shouting.

    A little boldface is no real problem.

  17. #197
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Maryland
    Quote Originally Posted by simplyluvin View Post
    I don't think Hurt will be back either, but if SCOTUS rules in favor of athletes profiting off of their image and likeness, then how much would that influence guys like Hurt to stay? I understand that there should be a ruling by July, which will probably be too late for Hurt, since he would have already entered the draft and been drafted by then (presumably). This is probably fodder for another thread, but if D1 athletes could profit off their likeness, then would guys like Duval and Frank Jackson have stayed another year or two? I know it's all about the second NBA contract, but that's no guarantee. Someone smarter has probably already done the math, but would a Duke basketball player that's borderline 2nd round possibly make more staying in such a world than leaving?
    I have seen this take about the stakes in the NCAA case currently pending before the Supreme Court. But as is often true with cases in front of the Supreme Court, the issue SCOTUS will decide is actually fairly limited. I'll try to avoid too much lawyer-talk (but that may be hard, since I am a lawyer and this is my area of expertise). The case does not focus on whether the NCAA is entitled to restrict compensation and benefits unrelated to education. Specifically, there is no dispute that the NCAA may prevent schools from paying student-athletes something akin to salaries seen in professional sports. Instead, the question is whether the NCAA is permitted to place limits or prohibitions on benefits related to education, such as "tutoring, graduate school tuition, and paid internships." Thus, if the athletes prevailed, schools will be permitted to provide some additional education-related benefits to athletes, but I do not expect that it will open the door to athletes being able to receive unlimited payments for their image and likeness.

  18. #198
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    I'm not sure why you've decided to bold everything recently. It's like shouting.

    A talented, "pure" PG is always welcome, but you can have a very good team without one (e.g., Duke in 2018, 2010, 1999, 1994, 1989, 1988). Or, put another way, a drive-and-dish, eyes-in-the-back-of-his-head PG is a weapon, an offensive advantage, which is important, but it's not the only kind of offensive advantage. Banchero and Griffin, at least, will have offensive abilities that opposing defenses will have to do something special to stop. Banchero, Griffin, and even Williams are all good passers/playmakers for their position, while Roach, Steward, and Moore all have basic playmaking skills that hopefully will mature over the offseason. If we get Keels, he'd seem be another guard with playmaking potential. It's unlikely a grad transfer PG will provide sufficiently high level skills to be better than what we should already have.

    And more size? Coach K usually plays three guys in his big man rotation. We'll have a very crowded big-man rotation including Banchero, Williams, Coleman, Brakefield, and Griffin (who will usually play SF but K likes his SFs to move up a position sometimes; plus Moore and Baker, who can both play PF, and possibly Baldwin, though that seems less likely). How much more size do you want?
    I am 80 years old and sometimes have problems seeing clearly so tend to bold messages. I won't this time.

  19. #199
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Quote Originally Posted by Saratoga2 View Post
    Needs:
    PG (need a playmaker and no freshmen available but experience would help. Any transfers available?)
    Additional size (Bediako might help to bolster team against FSU,UNC and other teams known for size inside. Williams injury puts us at a disadvantage)

    I don't see how Moore, Steward and Roach turn into play making guards next year. Best to hope for is they can penetrate and finish around the rim. They also can improve their defense although Moore is good with that. We need a PG type to make plays for others.
    I think we have plenty of size between Mark Williams and Paolo Banchero. If those two start together, that would be one of the biggest front courts in the ACC already. I think it's also possible to start Banchero at the 5 and have Mark back him up, but either route is fine, and I think we will see some of both depending on matchups. I don't another big is really that necessary. Between those 2, Henry, and Jaemyn, I think all the front court minutes are going to be spoken for. Unless we get Patrick Baldwin, those 4 will playing all of the minutes at the 4 and 5.

  20. #200
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    I think folks are underselling the potential improvements we could/should see from Steward and Roach. It's easy to write those guys off, but they have been pretty decent for freshmen in this crazy year and the freshman-to-sophomore leap is a real thing. I expect big things from them next year. I think Steward will become a lethal 3pt threat, and Roach will become more consistent off the dribble.

    I also think people are sleeping on the playmaking ability of Griffin. That guy is going to create a lot of shots for himself and others.

    Also, Banchero should be an impact scorer in place of Hurt. Not the same, obviously; Hurt is the better pure shooter and Banchero a better scorer off the dribble and in the post. But he should be really good.

    I'm really not worried about our ability to create next year. This year's team (due to the inexperience at guard and the lack of ballhandling at other positions) has more limitations in terms of shot creation than next year's team will have. We'll be much more versatile with that team than this one is.
    I'm aware of Griffin's capabilities. I would just rather there be 3-4 guys who can all makes plays. That's what made the 2018 team so much fun to watch. We constantly had 4 guys on the floor who could all create offense. That's much harder to defend than having only a couple of playmakers.

    If Griffin can approximate what RJ Barrett provided for us, that would be fantastic. At least we would have a go-to guy. Banchero also looks like a guy who can create off the dribble and from the high post. I'd still just prefer to have another guard available just in case. Regarding Roach and Steward, we can't just automatically assume every player is going to get way better every year. They probably will improve, but will it be enough to win a national championship? Maybe, maybe not. I'd just hope we have another option, especially if it's a highly regarded point guard. It might not work out, but also, it could work out. No harm in having another option in case things don't go as planned.

Similar Threads

  1. GT to play a regular-season game in China next season
    By jimsumner in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-11-2016, 01:03 PM
  2. CBS Pre-season Top 50 Big Men
    By Ultrarunner in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 10-26-2012, 01:09 PM
  3. Which early season tournament is Duke playing in next season?
    By WiJoe in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 04-06-2012, 02:55 PM
  4. 2012 AP All-Americans (post-season, not pre-season!)
    By superdave in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 03-27-2012, 12:02 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •