Henry Coleman to Texas A&M

[Kedsy]

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

True, but they're much more talented.

[lotusland]

All this transfer portal business has obscured the other huge change on the horizon - Name, image licensing. I’m totally against the bogus proposition that 90% of college player’s NIL has significant intrinsic value apart from their affiliation with an NCAA school. I confess I don’t even know if the details or timeline has been announced. But it occurred to me that the NIL contracts may actually limit movement during the contract period. While the whole sham repels me, I’m curious if that is a legit possibility?

[hustleplays]

What are you even arguing at this point?

Your idea that players should "b[e] patient and wai[t] for opportunities that typically present themselves" is historically inaccurate; the number of Duke players in the last 20+ seasons who played less than 10 mpg as freshmen and sophomores but then went on to play 20+ mpg (or whatever other measure you want) as juniors and/or seniors is a very short one.

But even if it were true, apparently Henry Coleman didn't want to take that risk. You seem to me to be saying that represents some sort of character flaw on Henry's part (though of course that could just be another failure in my "reading comprehension skills"). To the extent that you are saying that, I find it offensive. If that's not what you're saying, then what?

I don't think anybody can blame Henry for transferring after the coaching staff decided to bring in Theo John. I can't believe people were surprised by this, and I don't understand how this could be the basis for anyone's fandom to be less. And while I'm venting about things I don't understand, I don't get how anybody can be anti-OAD and also in favor of bringing Theo John in as a grad-transfer. I don't understand how people think that bringing in recruits solely in the #20 to #60 range could possibly get better results (on a consistent basis) than what we've been doing. I don't understand how people can be against bringing in the best possible players but then get upset when we don't bring in top 10 players and the team isn't as good. I'm flabbergasted that anybody believes players like Nolan Smith, Kyle Singler, Mason Plumlee, Jason Williams, Carlos Boozer, JJ Redick, Shelden Williams, Shane Battier, Bobby Hurley, Christian Laettner, Grant Hill, Danny Ferry, Johnny Dawkins, etc, etc, etc, would stay around to be seniors (or in most cases, juniors) if they played today. I believe that almost every complaint in almost every DBR thread is really a thinly veiled dissatisfaction that Duke isn't in the Final Four every year like we were in the late 80s/early 90s.

So there.

Kedsy, I’m overall anti-OAD but i have accepted the reality of our now three types of OADs. I have been diligently working at acting like a grownup and not keep whining on this board about losing the high quality of games we used to see due to seasoned players and cohesive teams. Someone moved my cheese. So, in that context, it makes sense to bring in experienced players. (Moderately curious about what Duke school/program they enroll in. Fuqua seems to be a popular school for Duke grads and transfers.)

I can only speak for myself, of course, but as thrilling as it is to make it to the Final Four, I would much prefer watching a high quality TEAM of highly skilled, seasoned players who also stay in school long enough (at least two years) so as not to render the concept of student-athlete fraudulent. Same with other performers, such as musicians — great to be a professional musician, but why call the person a student-musician if their sole purpose at college is to perform better, do very little at college other than their music and leave school as soon as they can get a great gig? I prefer the genuine student-athlete model, where students also play sports. As St Augustine said, “Nothing in human life is incorruptible” but the Ivy League model is what I have come to prefer, given how big-time college sports has evolved. Amateurs don’t play as well as pros, but they can deliver a good product if they have time to develop together.

Don’t know if I am the only DBR poster with this view, but that’s okay.

[1991 duke law]

Kedsy, I’m overall anti-OAD but i have accepted the reality of our now three types of OADs. I have been diligently working at acting like a grownup and not keep whining on this board about losing the high quality of games we used to see due to seasoned players and cohesive teams. Someone moved my cheese. So, in that context, it makes sense to bring in experienced players. (Moderately curious about what Duke school/program they enroll in. Fuqua seems to be a popular school for Duke grads and transfers.)

I can only speak for myself, of course, but as thrilling as it is to make it to the Final Four, I would much prefer watching a high quality TEAM of highly skilled, seasoned players who also stay in school long enough (at least two years) so as not to render the concept of student-athlete fraudulent. Same with other performers, such as musicians — great to be a professional musician, but why call the person a student-musician if their sole purpose at college is to perform better, do very little at college other than their music and leave school as soon as they can get a great gig? I prefer the genuine student-athlete model, where students also play sports. As St Augustine said, “Nothing in human life is incorruptible” but the Ivy League model is what I have come to prefer, given how big-time college sports has evolved. Amateurs don’t play as well as pros, but they can deliver a good product if they have time to develop together.

Don’t know if I am the only DBR poster with this view, but that’s okay.

Well - with one move to Oklahoma, one to San Francisco and one to Ole Miss, our former student athletes are not migrating to academic powerhouses (admittedly SF has a great medical school). Let's see if Henry can break the mold and find a Duke academic equivalent.

[lotusland]

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.

It’s hard thread the needle but the best chance would be to consistently recruit outside the top 20 unless you don’t have a current 20-60 guy at that position on the team. Freshman come in believing they will earn PT because they always have. But sitting for a year and seeing the next OAD group signed for next year flips the light switch and they realize second verse, same as the first and it dawns on them that the next group of OADs will likely follow for the Junior and Senior year if they stay. Meanwhile they thought they’d be in the NBA following their second year at the latest. So Brakefield watched Hurt at the 4/5 and JJ at the 3/4 to start the season ahead of him only to see Williams come on to end season. Now he’s looking at Williams returning (fingers crossed) with Griffin and Banchero on deck. There is absolutely no reason he should expect to play more next year than this year especially after JJ bailed. Times 2 for Coleman. If you bring in more 20-60 guys then Brakefield probably think me he has a good shot to earn PT having the advantage of a year’s worth of experience. Some guys like Thornton and Silent G will inexplicably still leave. Best you probably can do is communicate with the guys you have. If coach knows he’s got Brakefield and new 20-60 at the 4 to work with next year, Brakfield may get more PT this year in preparation. Eventually you can cultivate more experienced teams. I wouldn’t guarantee more wins than grabbing the best recruits and transfers every year though. But to me it would be an improvement.

[Phredd3]

Same with other performers, such as musicians — great to be a professional musician, but why call the person a student-musician if their sole purpose at college is to perform better, do very little at college other than their music and leave school as soon as they can get a great gig?

FWIW, this was a fairly terrible analogy when it was first made, and it remains so. Nobody calls anyone in a college music program a "student-musician". They are a student. I've known only a handful of folks who dropped out of school to become a pro musician, and I regarded those few as fools. I've known plenty who played out-of-school gigs nights and weekends, but dropping out is a phenomenal risk for most. A musician making it big enough to not have to worry about a backup plan is a rare bird, indeed (MUCH more rare than a basketball player with million-plus earning potential), and most musicians know that the education *is* the backup plan. There's a huge crossover between musicians and mathematicians/scientists, and the vast majority of "student-musicians" will continue playing for many, many years while holding a day job in something that actually pays money.

They don't call them "starving artists" for nothing. Nobody refers to "starving athletes".

[CDu]

It’s hard thread the needle but the best chance would be to consistently recruit outside the top 20 unless you don’t have a current 20-60 guy at that position on the team. Freshman come in believing they will earn PT because they always have. But sitting for a year and seeing the next OAD group signed for next year flips the light switch and they realize second verse, same as the first and it dawns on them that the next group of OADs will likely follow for the Junior and Senior year if they stay. Meanwhile they thought they’d be in the NBA following their second year at the latest. So Brakefield watched Hurt at the 4/5 and JJ at the 3/4 to start the season ahead of him only to see Williams come on to end season. Now he’s looking at Williams returning (fingers crossed) with Griffin and Banchero on deck. There is absolutely no reason he should expect to play more next year than this year especially after JJ bailed. Times 2 for Coleman. If you bring in more 20-60 guys then Brakefield probably think me he has a good shot to earn PT having the advantage of a year’s worth of experience. Some guys like Thornton and Silent G will inexplicably still leave. Best you probably can do is communicate with the guys you have. If coach knows he’s got Brakefield and new 20-60 at the 4 to work with next year, Brakfield may get more PT this year in preparation. Eventually you can cultivate more experienced teams. I wouldn’t guarantee more wins than grabbing the best recruits and transfers every year though. But to me it would be an improvement.

The problem with that theory though is that if you have a bunch of 20-60 ranked freshmen, sophomores, juniors, and seniors, then the freshmen are likely to bail anyway seeing that they are blocked by the upperclassmen. It would be for a different reason though; instead of bailing because they were recruited over, they would bail because they wouldn’t start until their junior year.

[SkyBrickey]

Kedsy, I’m overall anti-OAD but i have accepted the reality of our now three types of OADs. I have been diligently working at acting like a grownup and not keep whining on this board about losing the high quality of games we used to see due to seasoned players and cohesive teams. Someone moved my cheese. So, in that context, it makes sense to bring in experienced players. (Moderately curious about what Duke school/program they enroll in. Fuqua seems to be a popular school for Duke grads and transfers.)

I can only speak for myself, of course, but as thrilling as it is to make it to the Final Four, I would much prefer watching a high quality TEAM of highly skilled, seasoned players who also stay in school long enough (at least two years) so as not to render the concept of student-athlete fraudulent. Same with other performers, such as musicians — great to be a professional musician, but why call the person a student-musician if their sole purpose at college is to perform better, do very little at college other than their music and leave school as soon as they can get a great gig? I prefer the genuine student-athlete model, where students also play sports. As St Augustine said, “Nothing in human life is incorruptible” but the Ivy League model is what I have come to prefer, given how big-time college sports has evolved. Amateurs don’t play as well as pros, but they can deliver a good product if they have time to develop together.

Don’t know if I am the only DBR poster with this view, but that’s okay.

You aren’t the only one. I happen to also believe we can hand select recruits in the 30-70 range and field experienced, competitive teams. It would be a 3-4 year transition of weaker teams to get there - won’t happen under Coach K but possibly under our next Coach.

[SkyBrickey]

The problem with that theory though is that if you have a bunch of 20-60 ranked freshmen, sophomores, juniors, and seniors, then the freshmen are likely to bail anyway seeing that they are blocked by the upperclassmen. It would be for a different reason though; instead of bailing because they were recruited over, they would bail because they wouldn’t start until their junior year.

The difference is those guys come in with their eyes wide open. Here’s who I need to beat out over the next year or two to earn playing time or to start. There’s no surprise guaranteed-starter OAD recruited behind them. Could a #30 freshman come in and beat out a #50 junior for a starting position causing #50 junior to transfer? Sure. But there would be way more continuity and experience than we’ve had since 2015.

[CameronDuke]

Well - with one move to Oklahoma, one to San Francisco and one to Ole Miss, our former student athletes are not migrating to academic powerhouses (admittedly SF has a great medical school). Let's see if Henry can break the mold and find a Duke academic equivalent.

Word on the playground is Henry is leaning towards VCU. You may not know, but VCU AIN’T Duke ...

[luvdahops]

Word on the playground is Henry is leaning towards VCU. You may not know, but VCU AIN’T Duke ...

"Virginia College for the Unfortunate" according to some UVA friends of mine...

[flyingdutchdevil]

Word on the playground is Henry is leaning towards VCU. You may not know, but VCU AIN’T Duke ...

And sitting on the bench AIN'T fun.

[CDu]

The difference is those guys come in with their eyes wide open. Here’s who I need to beat out over the next year or two to earn playing time or to start. There’s no surprise guaranteed-starter OAD recruited behind them. Could a #30 freshman come in and beat out a #50 junior for a starting position causing #50 junior to transfer? Sure. But there would be way more continuity and experience than we’ve had since 2015.

Yeah, I think you underestimate how quickly folks will transfer. Look just a bit North at UVa, who has had numerous players jump ship the last few years. It just doesn’t seem like a sustainable approach. And seems to be less and less likely to be sustainable now that the free transfer is a thing.

[tbyers11]

Well - with one move to Oklahoma, one to San Francisco and one to Ole Miss, our former student athletes are not migrating to academic powerhouses (admittedly SF has a great medical school). Let's see if Henry can break the mold and find a Duke academic equivalent.

I agree with your overall point. Do want to point out that the world renowned medical school in San Francisco is at UCSF (University of California @San Francisco) not at University of San Francisco (a Jesuit university that does not have a medical school).

[GGLC]

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.

This simply isn't true.

[CameronDuke]

And sitting on the bench AIN'T fun.

Not sure if you missed the point of the discussion we were most recently having, but it was in regard to the academic reputations and sides of Duke and VCU and had nothing to do with basketball lol ...

[roywhite]

The problem with that theory though is that if you have a bunch of 20-60 ranked freshmen, sophomores, juniors, and seniors, then the freshmen are likely to bail anyway seeing that they are blocked by the upperclassmen. It would be for a different reason though; instead of bailing because they were recruited over, they would bail because they wouldn’t start until their junior year.

Yeah, it seems like good teams do not turn down the top 20 guys when they have a chance.

Look at Gonzaga -- they have had great success with good players and generally did not attract the top 20. But they took McDonalds All-America Zach Collins in 2016, Jalen Suggs in 2020, and now Chet Holmgren in 2021. The lure of having the best players seems to be stronger than a desire for roster stability.

[1991 duke law]

I agree with your overall point. Do want to point out that the world renowned medical school in San Francisco is at UCSF (University of California @San Francisco) not at University of San Francisco (a Jesuit university that does not have a medical school).

I did not know that. Appreciate the clarification. Well - if we add VCU to the mix, we are then 0 for 4.

[sagegrouse]

The time appears to be coming when pro-level basketball players become pros out of high school and good basketball players become actual college students. The blue bloods have separated themselves largely by renting pros for a year or two, so the blue bloods might not be able to separate as much in the future. I think that's not a bad thing, although as a Duke grad and hoops fan, reality may sting a little at first.

You are parroting (or, more politely, echoing) Wisconsin coach Bo Ryan's gripe after losing to Duke in the Final Four in 2015.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

I did not know that. Appreciate the clarification. Well - if we add VCU to the mix, we are then 0 for 4.

We all have our narratives - he wants more exposure, he wants to be on a winner, he wants a great education, he isn't willing to put in the work, he is upset he was recruited over...