That wasn't the complete statement though. It was “who are ranked within the top 5 nationally coming out of high school and who then go on to play like future NBA All-Stars during their one season at Duke”.
The bolded part was a key part of the statement. It was one connected thought. Deleting it, or splitting it into separate thoughts, changes the entire statement. So of the list of guys you mentioned, only Deng and Irving make the cut of the actual statement. The rest do not, for various reasons (some weren't top-5 recruits, some didn't play like future NBA All Stars as freshmen, several weren't one-and-done).
Yep, I did specify “in their one season at Duke”. Thus, only OADs are able to meet the criteria.
Look, what I was really trying to say is that guys like Zion and Paolo are exceedingly rare. They entered Duke as heralded Top 5 national recruits and then became basically the best player in the nation as freshmen. That is virtually unheard of.
We’ve been spoiled as Duke fans to have had two of these sensational freshmen in just the past five years. And now we see Lively and Whitehead — who I believe were also elite Top 5 national recruits — struggling just to be contributors on a fairly average Duke team, much less playing on the level where they could be considered a strong contender for national player of the year.
That’s all I was trying to say, really — that Zion and Paolo were anomalies. It’s a hell of an ask to expect Whitehead and Lively to achieve anything remotely similar, though their ranking might trick you into believing that perhaps they should.
Maggette didn't play like a future NBA All Star during his one year at Duke. He was a backup (a very talented backup, but a backup). Neither did Ingram (not even 1st Team All-ACC) or Deng (not even 2nd Team All-ACC). The rest of those (acknowledging that Irving was perhaps playing like an All-American before his injury) were All-Americans, and thus meet any reasonable measure of the poster's statement.
Jayson Tatum.
Oh yes he did. He averaged 17 and 7 on a loaded team. Second in scoring to Kennard. This after a late start due to early injury which caused him to miss a bunch of games, which is probably why the writers only put him on third team. NBA stardom seemed pretty obvious to many.
IMO, Maggette (our first OAD) caused K to make a prudent future adjustment. During the OAD period, K could no longer demand a player play solid D before starting. For example, Maggette played substantially better D than Okafor.
I listed Deng because he was a future NBA All Star. Maggette should have been, but Deng was.
I thought Ingram played well at Duke? Wasn’t he the 2nd pick in the NBA draft?
That wasn't the criteria. It was "played like a future NBA All Star in their one-and-done year". Deng was very good as a freshman. But 3rd Team All-ACC doesn't scream future NBA All Star. And it wasn't for about a decade or so before Deng actually became an NBA All Star.
Ingram played well at Duke. That wasn't the criteria. It was "played like a future NBA All Star."
To simplify, maybe think about it in more concrete terms: top-5 recruit and All-American as a freshman. That's the idea that Steven43 was trying to convey. It's pretty rare for that to happen. We've been fortunate to have a few: Parker, Okafor, Bagley, Williamson, Barrett, and Banchero. We've had others who were good players, but not the type of players that Steven was referring to.
Wasn't Tatum the 3rd overall pick in the 2017 NBA draft?
[QUOTE=sagegrouse;1550008]Wasn't Tatum the 3rd overall pick in the 2017 NBA draft?[/QUOTe
Perhaps NBA scouts are better talent evaluators than ACC sportswriters.