Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 78
  1. #41
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by uh_no View Post
    4 of the 5 numbers were on the optimistic side of the average you think is reasonable. Why do you think that is?
    Because they think Banchero and Griffin are going to be studs and Williams is going to continue his growth from late last year.

    I think anywhere from 5-15 is totally reasonable. I would say 5-8 myself.

    I don't think it has anything to do with "prestige."

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Question:

    When will everyone’s roster be set so we can realistically discuss these things? Nothing against these “too early” threads and article — we need something to talk about in the off-season — but it’s way too nebulous now for me to get my head around it.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    Question:

    When will everyone’s roster be set so we can realistically discuss these things? Nothing against these “too early” threads and article — we need something to talk about in the off-season — but it’s way too nebulous now for me to get my head around it.
    Probably after the NBA draft, and we see which players didn't get drafted and come back to school. That would be late July / probably early August. I'd assume the transfer market has hashed itself out by then as well.
    Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things. - Winston Churchill

    President of the "Nolan Smith Should Have His Jersey in The Rafters" Club

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cary, NC
    Definitely Williams, I would argue that he is our most important player. Getting Hurt back would be amazing but there are reasonable questions of fit alongside the other pieces. Without Williams we are forced to play Banchero at the 5 and that has a Jabari Parker playing-out-of-position feel to it.

    If our roster holds, the freshmen perform to expectations, and the returnees make the normal offseason jump, then I don't think top-10 is unreasonable. But that's a lot of if's. The other thing that nags at me is that Baker will be the only guy on our roster who has played in an NCAA tournament game. I looked it up and he played 7 minutes in our opening round game three seasons ago. Other than that the only postseason experience on our roster consists of the two ACCT games we just played.

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Durham
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    Because they think Banchero and Griffin are going to be studs and Williams is going to continue his growth from late last year.

    I think anywhere from 5-15 is totally reasonable. I would say 5-8 myself.

    I don't think it has anything to do with "prestige."
    and 40% of those number still exceed your reasonable range. and another is on the boundary. It's hard to argue that the numbers that the media throws out are very generous...and likely far more than most other schools would get in our position. Not all of them...
    basketball is back, baby!

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by UrinalCake View Post
    Definitely Williams, I would argue that he is our most important player. Getting Hurt back would be amazing but there are reasonable questions of fit alongside the other pieces. Without Williams we are forced to play Banchero at the 5 and that has a Jabari Parker playing-out-of-position feel to it.

    If our roster holds, the freshmen perform to expectations, and the returnees make the normal offseason jump, then I don't think top-10 is unreasonable. But that's a lot of if's. The other thing that nags at me is that Baker will be the only guy on our roster who has played in an NCAA tournament game. I looked it up and he played 7 minutes in our opening round game three seasons ago. Other than that the only postseason experience on our roster consists of the two ACCT games we just played.
    Parker didn't play out of position; he played the 4 which is his natural position in both college and the NBA (he's a little too chunky and slow to be an SF). Amile played a lot of 5.

    I am siding more with Williams, but I do love Hurt. That kid can score from nearly everywhere. But the one thing I know about Coach K's OAD era is he can create an elite offense (our worse offensive ranking since the start of Duke's OAD era was last year, and we were #18). The one thing that is unpredictable is our defense. And Hurt, although a great offensive player, is a terrible defender. So gimme Williams due to his defense and I'm sure Coach K can replace some, if not all, of Hurt's offense.
    Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things. - Winston Churchill

    President of the "Nolan Smith Should Have His Jersey in The Rafters" Club

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    I wouldn't criticize either of them, but would note that when his shots aren't falling, Hurt's contribution is pretty limited. Even when he's not scoring, Williams rebounding and defensive presence are significant. (of course I'm referring to the latter season Williams here).

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by uh_no View Post
    and 40% of those number still exceed your reasonable range. and another is on the boundary. It's hard to argue that the numbers that the media throws out are very generous...and likely far more than most other schools would get in our position. Not all of them...
    I'm not sure that 4 vs 5 is meaningfully different.

    But I get it. You clearly don't think highly of our team's chances next year, and clearly the media is only saying they think Duke will be good because of prestige. Not because they are doing a more in-depth assessment than "but 13-11 this year..."

  9. #49
    USA Today has us at #2 but with the assumption Hurt returns.

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...25/7076060002/

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingdutchdevil View Post
    Parker didn't play out of position; he played the 4 which is his natural position in both college and the NBA (he's a little too chunky and slow to be an SF). Amile played a lot of 5.

    I am siding more with Williams, but I do love Hurt. That kid can score from nearly everywhere. But the one thing I know about Coach K's OAD era is he can create an elite offense (our worse offensive ranking since the start of Duke's OAD era was last year, and we were #18). The one thing that is unpredictable is our defense. And Hurt, although a great offensive player, is a terrible defender. So gimme Williams due to his defense and I'm sure Coach K can replace some, if not all, of Hurt's offense.
    I'd argue that Parker DID play out of position a fair amount. He played a fair amount of center that year, because we didn't really have an option there. Hairston and Plumlee combined for around 15mpg, and the other 25 mpg were split between PFs Jefferson and Parker. So Parker played some out of position and Jefferson played some out of position, but the combination played a LOT out of position.

    I mean, we even spent a fair amount of time (~10mpg) with Rodney Hood as our PF.

  11. #51
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by mo.st.dukie View Post
    USA Today has us at #2 but with the assumption Hurt returns.

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...25/7076060002/
    And if Hurt returns with the rest of the guys staying, I think that sounds about right.

    Worth noting that the #3 at SI seems to include some possibility of Hurt returning factored in. The #7 (Goodman) and #13 (ESPN) assume Hurt is gone.

    Of course, I think Hurt returning is highly unlikely, which is why I think #5-8 feels like a good starting point assuming everything else holds as is.

  12. #52
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    I'd argue that Parker DID play out of position a fair amount. He played a fair amount of center that year, because we didn't really have an option there. Hairston and Plumlee combined for around 15mpg, and the other 25 mpg were split between PFs Jefferson and Parker. So Parker played some out of position and Jefferson played some out of position, but the combination played a LOT out of position.

    I mean, we even spent a fair amount of time (~10mpg) with Rodney Hood as our PF.
    Jefferson started 26 or 35 games; Hairston started 9 of 30. That adds up to 35 games (Jabari started 35 of 35 and Marshall 0 of 30).

    Hairston, Jefferson, and MP3 totaled 1,333 minutes, or equivalent to ~33.3 games at the 5. I'm not sure why Jabari would have played a lot of 5 which the exception of those remaining equivalent 1.7 games, unless Hairston, Jefferson, and MP3 played some 4 (which may have happened, but why do that?).

    Not arguing Jefferson is out of position at the 5, but that Jabari didn't play a lot of 5.
    Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things. - Winston Churchill

    President of the "Nolan Smith Should Have His Jersey in The Rafters" Club

  13. #53
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingdutchdevil View Post
    Jefferson started 26 or 35 games; Hairston started 9 of 30. That adds up to 35 games (Jabari started 35 of 35 and Marshall 0 of 30).

    Hairston, Jefferson, and MP3 totaled 1,333 minutes, or equivalent to ~33.3 games at the 5. I'm not sure why Jabari would have played a lot of 5 which the exception of those remaining equivalent 1.7 games, unless Hairston, Jefferson, and MP3 played some 4 (which may have happened, but why do that?).

    Not arguing Jefferson is out of position at the 5, but that Jabari didn't play a lot of 5.
    Because Parker was bigger and stronger than Jefferson, who was still rail-thin at that time. Because neither was suited to do it and because the other options were not good enough anyway, both of our top PFs played a fair amount of time at C that year, taking turns doing so.

    And Hood played a fair amount of time at PF (~10 mpg).

  14. #54
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cary, NC
    Since I brought it up, I will say that I do remember Parker playing a lot at the 5 and getting worn down as a result. I also remember Singler playing a lot at the 5 as a freshman and the same thing happening. Even though Banchero is a big strong guy I think we are much better suited having him at the 4 and Griffin at the 3. Hopefully Williams will announce his return soon so we can all breathe a sigh of relief and render this discussion moot. If he decides to put his name in without hiring an agent (which is probably the most likely path) then it's going to be a LOOONG summer and we won't really be able to recruit a replacement out of the portal until we know for sure his decision.

  15. #55
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by UrinalCake View Post
    Since I brought it up, I will say that I do remember Parker playing a lot at the 5 and getting worn down as a result. I also remember Singler playing a lot at the 5 as a freshman and the same thing happening. Even though Banchero is a big strong guy I think we are much better suited having him at the 4 and Griffin at the 3. Hopefully Williams will announce his return soon so we can all breathe a sigh of relief and render this discussion moot. If he decides to put his name in without hiring an agent (which is probably the most likely path) then it's going to be a LOOONG summer and we won't really be able to recruit a replacement out of the portal until we know for sure his decision.
    Not that long. With or without an agent, he needs to make a decision by the end of May to come back to school, does he not? My understanding is that the NCAA had not changed the withdrawal deadline, so a player won't actually know if they will go undrafted before they need to make a decision. You can test the waters, but you're either in or out of the pool before June. The rule change to allow undrafted players to return to school is pending an NBA rule change so that undrafted players can't get a mid-season "call up". The NBA has not changed their rule, so it is still a one-way ticket.

    There's a long time until June, but by then, we'll know. Which is better for your summer plans.

  16. #56
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by UrinalCake View Post
    Since I brought it up, I will say that I do remember Parker playing a lot at the 5 and getting worn down as a result. I also remember Singler playing a lot at the 5 as a freshman and the same thing happening. Even though Banchero is a big strong guy I think we are much better suited having him at the 4 and Griffin at the 3. Hopefully Williams will announce his return soon so we can all breathe a sigh of relief and render this discussion moot. If he decides to put his name in without hiring an agent (which is probably the most likely path) then it's going to be a LOOONG summer and we won't really be able to recruit a replacement out of the portal until we know for sure his decision.
    Singler definitely played a ton of 5 his freshman year. For some reason, I just don't recall Jabari doing that.

    As for Banchero, I agree he may be better suited for the 4. He's only 6'9" 235. Compare that with Wendell Carter who is 6'10" 260 (in college).

    Griffin is actually 'small' at 6'7" 200. Keels is a big boy at 6'5" 210.
    Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things. - Winston Churchill

    President of the "Nolan Smith Should Have His Jersey in The Rafters" Club

  17. #57
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingdutchdevil View Post
    Singler definitely played a ton of 5 his freshman year. For some reason, I just don't recall Jabari doing that.

    As for Banchero, I agree he may be better suited for the 4. He's only 6'9" 235. Compare that with Wendell Carter who is 6'10" 260 (in college).

    Griffin is actually 'small' at 6'7" 200. Keels is a big boy at 6'5" 210.
    ESPN lists Griffin at 6'7", 220lb, so I wonder if that 200lbs that 247 lists is an underestimate.

  18. #58
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    ESPN lists Griffin at 6'7", 220lb, so I wonder if that 200lbs that 247 lists is an underestimate.
    ESPN also lists Banchero at 225 (also different than 247 and only 5 lbs heavier than their listed Griffin weight).
    Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things. - Winston Churchill

    President of the "Nolan Smith Should Have His Jersey in The Rafters" Club

  19. #59
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingdutchdevil View Post
    ESPN also lists Banchero at 225 (also different than 247 and only 5 lbs heavier than their listed Griffin weight).
    Yup, Banchero seems fairly thin for his 6'9" or 6'10" listed height. He definitely looks thinner than Griffin to me.

  20. #60
    Andy Katz has Duke at #20 (below UNC) not sure I'm buying that one.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 48
    Last Post: 06-10-2020, 10:52 AM
  2. MLax: Way-Too-Early 2018 Rankings
    By burnspbesq in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-12-2017, 02:00 PM
  3. Way too early ACC rankings for next year
    By gofurman in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-16-2012, 09:38 AM
  4. Stupidly Early Preseason Rankings
    By DavidBenAkiva in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 04-07-2010, 09:42 AM

Posting Permissions

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