Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 145
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Winston Salem, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingdutchdevil View Post
    And he isn't. But this is a kid who, 24 months ago, wasn't a 5 star HS recruit. This is a kid who, 3 months ago, got publicly berated by scouts and journalists for a lack of effort and talent in the pre-season. This is a kid who got punched in the throat, vomited, and somehow still played the next possession of an ACC game.

    As a Duke fan for 20 years, I can't think of another player who completely and utterly destroyed pre-season expectations of him. I get the RSCI top 5 ranking, but everyone - myself included - crapped on Flip's ability to produce this pre-season. And now? He's got a mixture of 5 statistical categories that no freshman has ever accomplished. I think that's incredible.
    I agree Flip is a special player. I guess his biggest talent is getting rebounds. That's the stat he was listed in front of Zion, but he can do many things on the court. It's great to see those media types that saw him in practice be proved wrong.

    GoDuke!

  2. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by jv001 View Post
    I agree Flip is a special player. I guess his biggest talent is getting rebounds. That's the stat he was listed in front of Zion, but he can do many things on the court. It's great to see those media types that saw him in practice be proved wrong.

    GoDuke!
    The kid can rebound at a high level and is tough. His offensive game is still very rough- bull in a China shop rough. He has shown an ability to focus in pressure moments and make a key play. That is a good trait. As he develops - he could turn into a smoother player. Just not sure yet. But he can be a great college player. His NBA prospects are less clear in my mind- at least at this point.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Once we start arguing about a players NBA potential it means he has one foot out the door

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingdutchdevil View Post
    I don't think it's useless at all. It shows how Flip is in such rare territory. It's not just scoring and rebounding, but he can do a few other things well too. I mean, look at the names you researched to find someone who tops Flip. That's an insane list!!!!!
    I think it is an insane list, too, but perhaps for slightly different reasons than you do. I'd wager that you could make *exactly* the same claim about most of the number lines Jason posted. If you pick very specific numbers in a given set of five stats, there's a decent chance you can find a combo that "nobody has topped". People do this in baseball all the time. Nobody has ever hit x average/y slugging/z hit by ptich/q steals/r assists before!!! It tells you very little about a player's value in any sport. It tells you more about cherry picking than about the player.

    It is a terrible use of statistics.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Santa Clara, CA
    Lively and Whitehead have been gone since before they stepped foot on campus. I don't know a mock draft out there that doesn't have them listed. It doesn't matter how they play this season, considering the injuries. Just remember Giles.

    I think Flip could stay another year, but the money is too great. He could work on his outside shot and improve his footwork quickness-wise. I don't know how good a pro he will be. Better than Miles Plumlee, but perhaps not better than Mason? He's shown flashes, but the bullying he does in college won't be anywhere as easy for him in the pros. He will also need to be faster.

    Mitchell is a wildcard to me. He's got that Winslow-like array of Swiss army knife skills. But he's never broken out offensively, really. It may be that if Duke advances far in the NCAAs, his stock goes up. And if he stays, he will have to fight for his minutes with the excellent class coming in.

    Proctor is similar to me as Mitchell, in that it could be that if Duke advances, his stock also goes up. He's shown great improvement throughout the season, and if that continues, a team could bet that continues next year. And Foster is coming in, so there will be competition. But Proctor is so young, I wonder what his advisors will say to him.

    I do expect we will see transfers from this team. Could be Schutt, Reeves, Blakes or all of them. Reeves may stay, Duke doesn't have a 7-footer signed.

    9F
    I will never talk about That Game. GTHC.

  6. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingdutchdevil View Post
    You're comparing the OAD failures with the returnee successes.

    How about the Zions/Tatums/Kyries of the world (OAD successes) or the Boldens/Derryck Thorntons/Chase Jeters of the world (top 25 players who returned to college basketball and didn't get drafted)?

    Tough to make any generalizations, given it's impossible to predict how players who didn't return would fare if they did.
    I really meant guys that were questionable as to whether they should go. A lot of our guys have been no brainers. I was legitimately trying to think if we've had any guys that left when it seemed really "iffy" and it panned out well for them? I considered the guys I mentioned as "iffy" though Hurt played 2 years so he is a bad example. It is tough to make generalizations on players who would be in that "iffy" category. I agree. My "iffy" list is probably different than everyone else's.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by 6th Man View Post
    I really meant guys that were questionable as to whether they should go. A lot of our guys have been no brainers. I was legitimately trying to think if we've had any guys that left when it seemed really "iffy" and it panned out well for them? I considered the guys I mentioned as "iffy" though Hurt played 2 years so he is a bad example. It is tough to make generalizations on players who would be in that "iffy" category. I agree. My "iffy" list is probably different than everyone else's.
    Gary Trent Jr is probably one of the few examples. Maybe Frank Jackson, but Jackson is basically done in the NBA and never got a lucrative third contract.

    I hear what you're saying. To me, the iffy ones are DJ Steward, Trevor Keels, and possibly Frank Jackson.

    They left despite having a position the year after and didn't find much success in the NBA. I think they would have helped themselves if they stayed another year.
    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

  8. #68
    Reeves wanted to play with Foster, that is one of the reason he chose Duke. Also, as was mentioned, Duke doesn't have another 7 footer, that could contribute next season. He has Lively like skills just no where near as athletic etc... So Reeves could find his minutes defensively.

    Schutt is the guy that would be in the rotation next year, provided he can add some more strength and figure things out defensively. The back court will only have Foster, McCain and Blakes who should return.

  9. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingdutchdevil View Post
    They left despite having a position the year after and didn't find much success in the NBA. I think they would have helped themselves if they stayed another year.
    When we say "helped themselves," we mean "helped their draft stock," right? Does anybody really think there's a basketball skill that can be developed better in college than it can in the NBA?

    If you agree with the above, then the question for guys like Steward, Keels, Hurt, et al. is would coming back to college another year have gotten them a better draft position. Frankly, I don't think it would have for Hurt or Steward. Probably not for Frank Jackson, either. What skill that he possesses would he have shown his sophomore season that he didn't show his freshman season? Not sure about Keels. Would showing off a better shot have moved Keels into the first round? Possibly. It's hard to say. On the other hand, if he came back and his shot didn't improve he might have gone undrafted entirely.

    Guys like Tre Jones (who wouldn't have been drafted after his freshman year), Wendell Moore (probably wouldn't have been drafted after his freshman or sophomore seasons), and Mark Williams (would have probably gone second round after his freshman year) clearly did improve their draft position by returning, so it was the right decision for them.

    What does that say for Duke's current players? Assuming he plays well down the stretch, I can't imagine Lively being able to improve his draft stock with another college season. Same for Filipowski, really.

    Mitchell and Proctor are more difficult cases. If Proctor plays like an NBA point guard for the rest of the season, I'd say it would be difficult to improve his stock by doing more of the same as a sophomore. If he goes back to inconsistent shooting and questionable decision making, then a full season as "the man" could move him up (as it did for Tre Jones). I'd guess the only way for Mitchell to improve his stock would be to show he can shoot. That would involve an off-season in which he completely revamps his form, which may or may not be successful in just a few months. And like Keels, if he returned and remained an inconsistent shooter, he might lose any chance he had of getting drafted. If someone gives him a promise this year, it would probably make sense for him to go.

    Oddly, the one player who could probably improve his draft stock by returning would be Whitehead. But he could also completely tank his draft stock by coming back. Since he's a probably first rounder, either way, probably not worth the risk in his case.

    As far as how NIL affects the equation, I continue to wonder whether a lot of you guys are vastly overrating how much NIL money is available for most of these players. People state things like, "Jeremy Roach is most assuredly making considerably more from playing basketball this year than DJ Steward is," but how do we know that's actually true? If DJ thought he'd at least get a two-way contract ($450 K), why do we think he'd make even close to that much from NIL? (These are honest questions; I have no idea how to find out how much the players make from NIL.)

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    When we say "helped themselves," we mean "helped their draft stock," right? Does anybody really think there's a basketball skill that can be developed better in college than it can in the NBA?

    If you agree with the above, then the question for guys like Steward, Keels, Hurt, et al. is would coming back to college another year have gotten them a better draft position. Frankly, I don't think it would have for Hurt or Steward. Probably not for Frank Jackson, either. What skill that he possesses would he have shown his sophomore season that he didn't show his freshman season? Not sure about Keels. Would showing off a better shot have moved Keels into the first round? Possibly. It's hard to say. On the other hand, if he came back and his shot didn't improve he might have gone undrafted entirely.

    Guys like Tre Jones (who wouldn't have been drafted after his freshman year), Wendell Moore (probably wouldn't have been drafted after his freshman or sophomore seasons), and Mark Williams (would have probably gone second round after his freshman year) clearly did improve their draft position by returning, so it was the right decision for them.

    What does that say for Duke's current players? Assuming he plays well down the stretch, I can't imagine Lively being able to improve his draft stock with another college season. Same for Filipowski, really.

    Mitchell and Proctor are more difficult cases. If Proctor plays like an NBA point guard for the rest of the season, I'd say it would be difficult to improve his stock by doing more of the same as a sophomore. If he goes back to inconsistent shooting and questionable decision making, then a full season as "the man" could move him up (as it did for Tre Jones). I'd guess the only way for Mitchell to improve his stock would be to show he can shoot. That would involve an off-season in which he completely revamps his form, which may or may not be successful in just a few months. And like Keels, if he returned and remained an inconsistent shooter, he might lose any chance he had of getting drafted. If someone gives him a promise this year, it would probably make sense for him to go.

    Oddly, the one player who could probably improve his draft stock by returning would be Whitehead. But he could also completely tank his draft stock by coming back. Since he's a probably first rounder, either way, probably not worth the risk in his case.

    As far as how NIL affects the equation, I continue to wonder whether a lot of you guys are vastly overrating how much NIL money is available for most of these players. People state things like, "Jeremy Roach is most assuredly making considerably more from playing basketball this year than DJ Steward is," but how do we know that's actually true? If DJ thought he'd at least get a two-way contract ($450 K), why do we think he'd make even close to that much from NIL? (These are honest questions; I have no idea how to find out how much the players make from NIL.)
    Yes. Improve draft stock. So that you can secure as high of a draft position as possible.

    And yes, I 100% believe there are skills Steward, Keels, and Jackson could have worked on to get increase their draft stock.

    Steward was a small combo guard. While he couldn't change his size, he easily could have improved his shot, improved his playmaking, and improved his overall scoring. Basically, become Nolan Smith 2.0. That would be the extreme goal (late first round pick), but getting drafted in the 2nd round is better than not being drafted at all.

    Keels was a bonafide shooter in HS but never showed that in college. Why not work on your shot, tighten your defensive skills, and become a first round pick? Because a $5.9M/3 year contract as the 30th pick is a lot more exciting than $500K a year. Also, because you're on the NBA's books, they invest more in your development as a 1st round vs 2nd round.

    Jackson was a highly athletic scorer who shot the ball well but didn't get much opportunity (21 min a game in ACC play). Why not stay another year, be the PG for a line up that included Grayson, Trent Jr, Carter Jr, and Bagley? This is before Duvall committed (Jackson declared April 25 or so, Duvall committed May 15). Jackson was a high second round pick; not out of the question for him to become a first round and get more development resources and a guaranteed 3-year contract.

    I don't think any of these are out of reach and require a little more patience.
    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

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by Phredd3 View Post
    I think it is an insane list, too, but perhaps for slightly different reasons than you do. I'd wager that you could make *exactly* the same claim about most of the number lines Jason posted. If you pick very specific numbers in a given set of five stats, there's a decent chance you can find a combo that "nobody has topped". People do this in baseball all the time. Nobody has ever hit x average/y slugging/z hit by ptich/q steals/r assists before!!! It tells you very little about a player's value in any sport. It tells you more about cherry picking than about the player.

    It is a terrible use of statistics.
    Sure, but it's the history of freshman in college basketball. Not just Duke basketball. That's a lot of samples. And when you take into consideration that Flip doesn't stand out in any one category (like Oscar T with rebounding), that shows how impressive his stats are.

    I'm not saying Flip is the second coming of Zion or Carmelo or AD. I'm saying his stats are impressive, especially for a frosh who got crucified weeks before the season started.
    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

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingdutchdevil View Post
    Sure, but it's the history of freshman in college basketball. Not just Duke basketball. That's a lot of samples. And when you take into consideration that Flip doesn't stand out in any one category (like Oscar T with rebounding), that shows how impressive his stats are.

    I'm not saying Flip is the second coming of Zion or Carmelo or AD. I'm saying his stats are impressive, especially for a frosh who got crucified weeks before the season started.
    Yes, but it isnít unique in the history of freshmen. When we donít even have to go back more than 5 years to find multiple guys better in 3-4 of those 5 categories, it sort of invalidates the argument.

    Flip has a really impressive stat line. But it simply isnít true that he get count stats like none other in freshman history.

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Chapel Hill

    Seth Greenberg

    Did Seth Greenberg just offer his expertise on the subject of winning back to back NCAC tournament games????
    GTHC

  14. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingdutchdevil View Post
    Steward was a small combo guard. While he couldn't change his size, he easily could have improved his shot, improved his playmaking, and improved his overall scoring. Basically, become Nolan Smith 2.0. That would be the extreme goal (late first round pick), but getting drafted in the 2nd round is better than not being drafted at all.
    Steward was not only small, he wasn't super athletic. Not nearly as athletic as Nolan Smith. Plus he wasn't going to be our PG as a sophomore (and thus wouldn't have had that much opportunity to show off his playmaking), and I don't think he could have improved his shooting enough to overcome his flaws. If no NBA team was interested in him after his freshman season, he wasn't going in the first round after his sophomore season and probably wouldn't have been drafted at all. He'd have just been a year older.

    Quote Originally Posted by flyingdutchdevil View Post
    Keels was a bonafide shooter in HS but never showed that in college. Why not work on your shot, tighten your defensive skills, and become a first round pick? Because a $5.9M/3 year contract as the 30th pick is a lot more exciting than $500K a year. Also, because you're on the NBA's books, they invest more in your development as a 1st round vs 2nd round.
    I didn't see Keels shoot in high school, but his form in college was poor. His shot was way too flat. Also, while strong, he wasn't overly athletic. Unless he was going to overhaul his shooting mechanics (and succeed with the new mechanics, which is trickier than it sounds), he wasn't going to convince any scouts that he was a knockdown shooter, and thus was unlikely to break into the first round.

    Quote Originally Posted by flyingdutchdevil View Post
    Jackson was a highly athletic scorer who shot the ball well but didn't get much opportunity (21 min a game in ACC play). Why not stay another year, be the PG for a line up that included Grayson, Trent Jr, Carter Jr, and Bagley? This is before Duvall committed (Jackson declared April 25 or so, Duvall committed May 15). Jackson was a high second round pick; not out of the question for him to become a first round and get more development resources and a guaranteed 3-year contract.
    Frank Jackson DID get a guaranteed three-year contract, for $3.8 million (which was basically late first round money in 2017). I don't see what he would have gained by staying.


    You say "why not [whatever] and become a first round pick," as if that would have been easy for these guys to do. All the players we've been discussing (with the possible exception of Jackson) had major flaws. Coming back to college might have further exposed those flaws and actually damaged their draft stock (though obviously an undrafted guy like Steward couldn't have damaged it worse than it was).

    Jackson got a promise for a guaranteed contract. Keels obviously thought he had a chance at the first round, and Steward must have thought he'd be drafted somewhere. Maybe these guys were deluded, but with the uncertainty whether a second year of college would improve their stock (and that would have been up in the air for all three of them), it's hard to say they made the wrong decision, at the time they made it.

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Van Nuys, CA
    I am no expert on scouting,but Duke this year lacks any consistent player. Last night hopefully will never happen again. Proctor went back to December Tyrese. Flip was very careless and Mitchell could not out rebound Miami players.Lively is the only one of the freshman possibly gone because of potential. Whitehead may recover and show his skills.Not sold on any of these new guys.

    Power,Mgbako,Stewart,McCain, and Foster
    Add Mitchell,Schutt, Flip might want to come back to play with Power,Proctor and Reeves
    Blakes possibly Young and perhaps a TP like a Grandison SG/SF
    Last edited by heyman25; 02-07-2023 at 01:51 AM.

  16. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    Steward was not only small, he wasn't super athletic. Not nearly as athletic as Nolan Smith. Plus he wasn't going to be our PG as a sophomore (and thus wouldn't have had that much opportunity to show off his playmaking), and I don't think he could have improved his shooting enough to overcome his flaws. If no NBA team was interested in him after his freshman season, he wasn't going in the first round after his sophomore season and probably wouldn't have been drafted at all. He'd have just been a year older.



    I didn't see Keels shoot in high school, but his form in college was poor. His shot was way too flat. Also, while strong, he wasn't overly athletic. Unless he was going to overhaul his shooting mechanics (and succeed with the new mechanics, which is trickier than it sounds), he wasn't going to convince any scouts that he was a knockdown shooter, and thus was unlikely to break into the first round.



    Frank Jackson DID get a guaranteed three-year contract, for $3.8 million (which was basically late first round money in 2017). I don't see what he would have gained by staying.


    You say "why not [whatever] and become a first round pick," as if that would have been easy for these guys to do. All the players we've been discussing (with the possible exception of Jackson) had major flaws. Coming back to college might have further exposed those flaws and actually damaged their draft stock (though obviously an undrafted guy like Steward couldn't have damaged it worse than it was).

    Jackson got a promise for a guaranteed contract. Keels obviously thought he had a chance at the first round, and Steward must have thought he'd be drafted somewhere. Maybe these guys were deluded, but with the uncertainty whether a second year of college would improve their stock (and that would have been up in the air for all three of them), it's hard to say they made the wrong decision, at the time they made it.
    Spot on assessment of Steward and Keels. I donít think coming back to school and improving your draft position is as much of a thing anymore. It also seems like the goal of leaving early is to simply get drafted when the goal used to be lottery or first round.

    And yes, coming back to school can have the opposite effect. When youíre a freshman the excuse can be that youíre young. But if you have a poor sophomore year maybe the flaws were exposed as you stated and teams now avoid the player even further.

    One more point that you made that is true is that the NBA is the place to learn how to be an NBA player, contrary to popular belief. If Lively wants to learn how to be an NBA big man, he can only learn so much in college.

    An interesting case study will be Mitchell this year. How does he evaluate himself? He has only hit one three pointer in the last 9 games and looks to be a below level athlete. His natural position is 4 and he is showing he canít play the 3 in college. If he canít play the 3 in college then he certainly canít in the NBA. But at his size he will be too small for power forward, and not athletic enough to be a 3, while also not a good enough shooter for either position. If he stays does he run the risk of proving these statements even further? And are the freshmen we have coming in better?
    Last edited by kshepinthehouse; 02-07-2023 at 03:46 AM.

  17. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by kako View Post
    Lively and Whitehead have been gone since before they stepped foot on campus. I don't know a mock draft out there that doesn't have them listed. It doesn't matter how they play this season, considering the injuries. Just remember Giles.

    I think Flip could stay another year, but the money is too great. He could work on his outside shot and improve his footwork quickness-wise. I don't know how good a pro he will be. Better than Miles Plumlee, but perhaps not better than Mason? He's shown flashes, but the bullying he does in college won't be anywhere as easy for him in the pros. He will also need to be faster.

    Mitchell is a wildcard to me. He's got that Winslow-like array of Swiss army knife skills. But he's never broken out offensively, really. It may be that if Duke advances far in the NCAAs, his stock goes up. And if he stays, he will have to fight for his minutes with the excellent class coming in.

    Proctor is similar to me as Mitchell, in that it could be that if Duke advances, his stock also goes up. He's shown great improvement throughout the season, and if that continues, a team could bet that continues next year. And Foster is coming in, so there will be competition. But Proctor is so young, I wonder what his advisors will say to him.

    I do expect we will see transfers from this team. Could be Schutt, Reeves, Blakes or all of them. Reeves may stay, Duke doesn't have a 7-footer signed.

    9F
    Proctor will turn 19 in April. Thatís not going for a freshman.

    Unfortunately, Mitchell isnít half the athlete Winslow was. I donít think that a good comparison.

  18. #78
    Will NIL change who may stay vs who may leave?

  19. #79
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    Steward was not only small, he wasn't super athletic. Not nearly as athletic as Nolan Smith. Plus he wasn't going to be our PG as a sophomore (and thus wouldn't have had that much opportunity to show off his playmaking), and I don't think he could have improved his shooting enough to overcome his flaws. If no NBA team was interested in him after his freshman season, he wasn't going in the first round after his sophomore season and probably wouldn't have been drafted at all. He'd have just been a year older.



    I didn't see Keels shoot in high school, but his form in college was poor. His shot was way too flat. Also, while strong, he wasn't overly athletic. Unless he was going to overhaul his shooting mechanics (and succeed with the new mechanics, which is trickier than it sounds), he wasn't going to convince any scouts that he was a knockdown shooter, and thus was unlikely to break into the first round.



    Frank Jackson DID get a guaranteed three-year contract, for $3.8 million (which was basically late first round money in 2017). I don't see what he would have gained by staying.


    You say "why not [whatever] and become a first round pick," as if that would have been easy for these guys to do. All the players we've been discussing (with the possible exception of Jackson) had major flaws. Coming back to college might have further exposed those flaws and actually damaged their draft stock (though obviously an undrafted guy like Steward couldn't have damaged it worse than it was).

    Jackson got a promise for a guaranteed contract. Keels obviously thought he had a chance at the first round, and Steward must have thought he'd be drafted somewhere. Maybe these guys were deluded, but with the uncertainty whether a second year of college would improve their stock (and that would have been up in the air for all three of them), it's hard to say they made the wrong decision, at the time they made it.
    I disagree with your 2nd year predictions of Steward and Keels, but there isn't anyway to prove that. I think Steward easily could have been a 2nd round pick and Keels a guaranteed 1st round pick. But, we'll never know.

    And I agree there is risk with staying and improving your stock isn't a guarantee. See McRoberts or a half-dozen UNC players.

    I guess we'll have to disagree about players leaving early. I think some make bad decisions, and that's not "hindsight is 20/20". It looked bad then and it looks bad now.
    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

  20. #80
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Maryland
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    When we say "helped themselves," we mean "helped their draft stock," right? Does anybody really think there's a basketball skill that can be developed better in college than it can in the NBA?

    If you agree with the above, then the question for guys like Steward, Keels, Hurt, et al. is would coming back to college another year have gotten them a better draft position. Frankly, I don't think it would have for Hurt or Steward. Probably not for Frank Jackson, either. What skill that he possesses would he have shown his sophomore season that he didn't show his freshman season? Not sure about Keels. Would showing off a better shot have moved Keels into the first round? Possibly. It's hard to say. On the other hand, if he came back and his shot didn't improve he might have gone undrafted entirely.
    I am somewhat confused by this logic. Yes, it is true that if you are unlikely to ever be drafted (e.g., Hurt and Steward), then sticking around for another year is unlikely to improve your draft position. But why does that mean you should just leave after your freshman year. In fact, most college players stick around precisely because the NBA is not in their future. And that is true of even strong college players who are likely to make some money playing professional basketball, including Bacot, Timme, Edey, and others. One might think that if you are unlikely to ever be drafted by the NBA, then maybe you should enjoy the time you have playing for one of the best college basketball programs.

Similar Threads

  1. 2024 Men's Basketball Recruiting
    By JasonEvans in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 413
    Last Post: Today, 10:32 AM
  2. 2024 Duke Football Recruiting
    By johnb in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 05-21-2023, 07:55 AM
  3. Replies: 42
    Last Post: 07-20-2022, 11:18 AM
  4. 2022-2023 (a little too soon) roster thread
    By proelitedota in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 04-24-2022, 10:58 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
  •