Henry Coleman to Texas A&M

[Music man55]

We really only gave up one year of Henry, not three.

With the rate of attrition in college basketball, it's only reasonable to expect one year at a time from today's players.

I am resigned to the fact that from now on, let’s just go all out and recruit the very best players like we’ve been doing and also go get the best transfers available. Nobody has any way of knowing who will leave and when, even if they are a projected 3 or 4 year player like we all thought Henry was. Not any more. That being said, c’mon Patrick Baldwin and commit to Duke. From now on, roll the dice baby!

[miramar]

We really only gave up one year of Henry, not three.

With the rate of attrition in college basketball, it's only reasonable to expect one year at a time from today's players.

Things are so bad we should consider giving varsity letters after half a season. We can call it the Jalen rule.

[Bob Green]

With the NCAA lifting the requirement for transfers to sit out a year, we’ve entered the wild, wild west era of college basketball. Players who are not at the OAD level but who are quality players become guns for hire. This is the new normal so fans have to adjust.

[amusedcupcake]

With the NCAA lifting the requirement for transfers to sit out a year, we’ve entered the wild, wild west era of college basketball. Players who are not at the OAD level but who are quality players become guns for hire. This is the new normal so fans have to adjust.

Wait...did I miss something? I thought this rule was only for this year? Yikes.

[freshmanjs]

Wait...did I miss something? I thought this rule was only for this year? Yikes.

Yes, you missed something. Going forward every player can transfer once without sitting out.

[Steven43]

Wait...did I miss something? I thought this rule was only for this year? Yikes.

Unfortunately, it’s the new transfer rule going forward. I think it’s a terrible decision by the NCAA. But I’ve basically lost interest in college basketball anyway. This new rule is just one more nail in the coffin.

I’ll continue to attend Duke games at CIS and cheer for the Devils while I’m there, but I pretty much could not care less about college basketball beyond that. Most of what I enjoyed about it has been almost completely taken away.

[Wander]

You guys are arguing that it's not possible anymore to consistently recruit lower ranked classes that result in your best players starting as junior/seniors and I just don't buy it. Whether that goldilocks zone is #20-60 or #40-80, you can find a sweet spot where the majority (not all) of the kids Duke would target are interested in getting a college education and are willing to play back-up minutes as freshman and sophomores knowing they have a great shot at starting and starring as juniors and seniors.

Would teams constructed this way have a shot at winning championships? That's the tougher question.

Well, I'd say it's pretty clear that teams constructed this way can win championships – in the past 6 years, there has only been ONE one-and-done starter on a team that won the national title. So clearly the OAD is not the only route to take.

The problem is that it's REALLY hard to figure out ahead of time which #20–60 guy is going to be Cassius Stanley (plays surprisingly well and jumps to the NBA), which is going to be DJ Steward (doesn't play that well but jumps anyway), which is going to be Joel Berry (not a great freshman, but sticks around and improves a ton), and which is going to stick around but just be a complete bust. I agree that if you could guarantee all the 20-60 guys would stick around for 4 years, that only recruiting them would be a superior approach.

[sagegrouse]

Duke seems to be trending to a tier system:

Star players are one-and-done
Non-star Duke freshmen increasingly go elsewhere after 1 year
Upper classmen in the program are players who have started elsewhere and developed, arriving at Duke through the transfer portal

Yep, I suspect that this will become the new normal: we continue to bring in the best recruiting classes we can, then fill in as needed from the transfer market. And there will continue to be a flow of players in and out.

At least until Coach K retires or there is some dramatic change in rules. After that? Who knows?

Did I miss the memo. Why do we think the sit-out year will not return? If players are required to wait before playing for another team, the calculus changes for potential transfers.

[freshmanjs]

Did I miss the memo. Why do we think the sit-out year will not return? If players are required to wait before playing for another team, the calculus changes for potential transfers.

Yes, you missed the memo. The NCAA has already made the change. Going forward, all players can transfer once without sitting out.

[WannabeDukie]

Was this not only for this year/covid related?

I never heard/read that it was permanent, but I will admit my attention waned drastically of recent.

[freshmanjs]

Was this not only for this year/covid related?

I never heard/read that it was permanent, but I will admit my attention waned drastically of recent.

There are two different things going on.

- This year, there is a Covid exception that no one has to sit out if they transfer and everyone gets an extra year of eligibility
- Going forward, all players can transfer once without sitting out

But, the idea that after this year, things go back to how they were in 2020 and prior is not true. It's changed.

[chrishoke]

Was this not only for this year/covid related?

I never heard/read that it was permanent, but I will admit my attention waned drastically of recent.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nca...es/ar-BB1fERr1

[Edouble]

Was this not only for this year/covid related?

I never heard/read that it was permanent, but I will admit my attention waned drastically of recent.

Here's a link:

https://www.espn.com/college-footbal...on-report-says

Starting next season, major college football and basketball players will be permitted to transfer one time before graduating without being required to sit out a year of competition.

The so-called one-time exception has been available to athletes in other NCAA sports for years, allowing them to transfer and play immediately. Athletes in football, men's and women's basketball, men's ice hockey and baseball have not had that available to them without asking the NCAA for a special waiver and claiming that a hardship caused the need for a transfer.

[CrazyNotCrazie]

Here's a link:

https://www.espn.com/college-footbal...on-report-says

Starting next season, major college football and basketball players will be permitted to transfer one time before graduating without being required to sit out a year of competition.

The so-called one-time exception has been available to athletes in other NCAA sports for years, allowing them to transfer and play immediately. Athletes in football, men's and women's basketball, men's ice hockey and baseball have not had that available to them without asking the NCAA for a special waiver and claiming that a hardship caused the need for a transfer.

I guess we can count our blessings that they limited it to one free transfer. If multiple free transfers were allowed then it would truly get ridiculous...

[SkyBrickey]

Unfortunately, it’s the new transfer rule going forward. I think it’s a terrible decision by the NCAA. But I’ve basically lost interest in college basketball anyway. This new rule is just one more nail in the coffin.

I’ll continue to attend Duke games at CIS and cheer for the Devils while I’m there, but I pretty much could not care less about college basketball beyond that. Most of what I enjoyed about it has been almost completely taken away.

This. Coaches are now incentivized to steal first-time transfers from other teams over recruiting high school kids. And fans have even less reason to invest in getting to know the players.

[devilirium]

It doesn't matter if John would get more minutes. [**WARNING: minutes conversation to follow] With Williams and Banchero (each getting close to 30 mpg, with Griffin sliding down to PF for 5 to 10 mpg), there was only going to be 10 to 15 minutes available for a 3rd big who couldn't play out on the wing (probably closer to 10). Henry appeared to be sanguine about filling that 10 to 15 minute role. But bringing in anybody likely to get any minutes would reduce that role. Even if Henry clawed ahead of Theo and Theo's time was reduced to 5 mpg, that only leaves Henry with a maximum of 10 mpg and probably closer to 5 and apparently that was unacceptable to him.

And personally, I can't blame him. It's exactly because this guy isn't Charles Barkley that it probably felt like a slap in the face to Henry. I would feel exactly the same way, which is why this was so easy to see coming.

And for those who say Theo wouldn't be competing with Henry for minutes, that's just incorrect. Coach K historically has strongly preferred having a three-big rotation instead of one backup center and one backup PF (the only exception I can think of is 2010) In the case of next year's roster, when Mark sits, Paolo could easily have slid over to center with Henry (or AJ) guarding the opposing PF.

We actually may be a bit less flexible with Theo instead of Henry, because it's unclear to me that when Paolo sits that Theo can guard quicker opposing PFs. I guess in that case, it will be AJ sliding down to PF and another wing (Wendell or Trevor) subbing in.

Coleman was viewed as possible bolting well before John, though. I think Duke securing John was in response to Henry getting cold feet about playing behind Banchero/Williams. K was well aware of the flood of guys bolting weeks before their departure. He said so in his end of season presser. Having to go against the best classes weighs on a kid year after year.

[flyingdutchdevil]

This. Coaches are now incentivized to steal first-time transfers from other teams over recruiting high school kids. And fans have even less reason to invest in getting to know the players.

Yup. The really good news of rooting for top 10 HS players is you know they'll be gone after a year. Your heart will never be broken...

[SkyBrickey]

Well, I'd say it's pretty clear that teams constructed this way can win championships – in the past 6 years, there has only been ONE one-and-done starter on a team that won the national title. So clearly the OAD is not the only route to take.

The problem is that it's REALLY hard to figure out ahead of time which #20–60 guy is going to be Cassius Stanley (plays surprisingly well and jumps to the NBA), which is going to be DJ Steward (doesn't play that well but jumps anyway), which is going to be Joel Berry (not a great freshman, but sticks around and improves a ton), and which is going to stick around but just be a complete bust. I agree that if you could guarantee all the 20-60 guys would stick around for 4 years, that only recruiting them would be a superior approach.

A glimmer of support for this approach on this board? Thank you! You don’t have to know which ones are staying and which are going. You still lose kids to the NBA or transfer. But players like Coleman and Brakefield are MUCH more likely to stick with similarly ranked players recruited behind them, not OAD talents like Banchero and Griffin.

You reach an equilibrium point where, for example, you bring in 4-man classes and 3 are still around as juniors. It’s not a perfect science but it would create way more predictability and continuity than what we have now.

If Duke moves in the other direction and just mixes and matches teams every year with OAD recruits and transfers, this is one lifelong fan and alum who will be much less invested in Duke basketball.

[budwom]

^ it kind of shows that some teams who definitely recruit the very top OAD guys end up better by, ironically, not getting them...they get the top 50-ish guys who hang around.

[lotusland]

Like everything else, I think it's a balancing test. If we got Patrick Baldwin, for example, the risk of losing Henry would probably be justifiable to me. But to get one year of a guy like Theo John-- who in my opinion (which admittedly others disagree with) is only marginally better than Henry Coleman (and maybe not even that) for the role we need filled-- doesn't justify losing three or four years of Henry at Duke. So maybe I'm on the highway service road?

OK but just to clarify, OAD guys, by definition, are also one year guys.