Comments on: Team of the 2000s: #4 – Duke http://rushthecourt.net/2009/08/17/team-of-the-2000s-4-duke/ the ubiquitous college basketblog Fri, 19 Mar 2010 14:30:42 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: jtruman37 http://rushthecourt.net/2009/08/17/team-of-the-2000s-4-duke/comment-page-1/#comment-13508 jtruman37 Sat, 22 Aug 2009 14:15:02 +0000 http://rushthecourt.net/?p=10933#comment-13508 Let's not overlook the fact that high school rankings are adjusted often, & often adjusted once a kid declares for a particular school. Further, coaches & universities do a lot of politicing for their guys to become McDonalds All Americans. For example, Ben Gordon was not a highly sought after recruit, in terms of national ranking. It was b/c he didn't attend the "right" summer camps & so on. It makes sense. I suppose those that rank the recruits need to base their assessments on what they see. But Ben Gordon was a better player, from day 1, than any guard Duke has had, save for J-WIll (& spare me the argument about JJ, "One Trick Pony" Reddick). My point is that arguing player rankings & which schools get how many guys between X & Y in a particular set of rankings is little more than fodder for the message boards. Duke gets plenty of All Americans, that is not the problem. The problem is that many of the "All Americans" Duke gets just don't really pan out. Some trends: Duke has been largely harmless outside of the ACC. I'm not begrudging the ACC, it's right @ the top, in terms of conferences, but it's one thing when you're successful against the guys you see all the time. But a team needs to compete across conferences, & develop a style that can win regardless of opponent or venue. To me that is where Duke has come to fall short. I say blame the system. It's evolved into a gimmic. There hasn't been a post prescience in Durham since Carlos Boozer. & before him it was Elton Brand. That's two guys in 10 seasons. & zero guys in the past.., what, 8 seasons..? I don't think Coach K is necessarily slipping as a recruiter. I think his system is failing him. I think he's slipping b/c of the system. He's like the mad scientist who's slaving away in his lab, feverishly trying to do it "his way", trying to recreate Laettner, & he'll show the rest of us. Meanwhile, the system is not attractive to bigs, b/c it doesn't reward them, doesn't feature them. & in case you haven't been looking, the basketball players of today are getting much bigger, & rebounding is kind of an important part of the game. & that's essentially why I think we should, collectively, stop drinking the Kool Aid. What has Coach K managed to do lately, apart from win a Gold Medal w/ the best players on the planet? Interesting coincidence, too, that he has chosen to stick w/ the Team USA job. Winning feels good, I know. & K won't be cutting any nets down, on the college level, any time soon. Or, I'll have to see it to believe it, we'll say. Stephan Curry's brother is not Stephan Curry. Genes don't count just b/c their similar. Michael Jordan has two sons, whoopty doo. I'll believe these Plumlees when I see them. Until then I'm thinking Josh McRoberts, or any number of the Duke "big men" who's names are escaping me. I think slowly we're starting to see through the polished Duke facade to see it isn't the program it was 10 years ago. & without alteration in style of play, without changing to fit a changing sport, who knows how far things could slip. Coach K has already planned his exit strategy. He's already secured another job. Maybe he sees the writing on the walls too. Let’s not overlook the fact that high school rankings are adjusted often, & often adjusted once a kid declares for a particular school. Further, coaches & universities do a lot of politicing for their guys to become McDonalds All Americans. For example, Ben Gordon was not a highly sought after recruit, in terms of national ranking. It was b/c he didn’t attend the “right” summer camps & so on. It makes sense. I suppose those that rank the recruits need to base their assessments on what they see. But Ben Gordon was a better player, from day 1, than any guard Duke has had, save for J-WIll (& spare me the argument about JJ, “One Trick Pony” Reddick).

My point is that arguing player rankings & which schools get how many guys between X & Y in a particular set of rankings is little more than fodder for the message boards. Duke gets plenty of All Americans, that is not the problem. The problem is that many of the “All Americans” Duke gets just don’t really pan out.

Some trends: Duke has been largely harmless outside of the ACC. I’m not begrudging the ACC, it’s right @ the top, in terms of conferences, but it’s one thing when you’re successful against the guys you see all the time. But a team needs to compete across conferences, & develop a style that can win regardless of opponent or venue. To me that is where Duke has come to fall short.

I say blame the system. It’s evolved into a gimmic. There hasn’t been a post prescience in Durham since Carlos Boozer. & before him it was Elton Brand. That’s two guys in 10 seasons. & zero guys in the past.., what, 8 seasons..? I don’t think Coach K is necessarily slipping as a recruiter. I think his system is failing him. I think he’s slipping b/c of the system. He’s like the mad scientist who’s slaving away in his lab, feverishly trying to do it “his way”, trying to recreate Laettner, & he’ll show the rest of us. Meanwhile, the system is not attractive to bigs, b/c it doesn’t reward them, doesn’t feature them. & in case you haven’t been looking, the basketball players of today are getting much bigger, & rebounding is kind of an important part of the game.

& that’s essentially why I think we should, collectively, stop drinking the Kool Aid. What has Coach K managed to do lately, apart from win a Gold Medal w/ the best players on the planet? Interesting coincidence, too, that he has chosen to stick w/ the Team USA job. Winning feels good, I know. & K won’t be cutting any nets down, on the college level, any time soon. Or, I’ll have to see it to believe it, we’ll say.

Stephan Curry’s brother is not Stephan Curry. Genes don’t count just b/c their similar. Michael Jordan has two sons, whoopty doo. I’ll believe these Plumlees when I see them. Until then I’m thinking Josh McRoberts, or any number of the Duke “big men” who’s names are escaping me.

I think slowly we’re starting to see through the polished Duke facade to see it isn’t the program it was 10 years ago. & without alteration in style of play, without changing to fit a changing sport, who knows how far things could slip. Coach K has already planned his exit strategy. He’s already secured another job. Maybe he sees the writing on the walls too.

]]> By: rtmsf http://rushthecourt.net/2009/08/17/team-of-the-2000s-4-duke/comment-page-1/#comment-13454 rtmsf Fri, 21 Aug 2009 22:46:33 +0000 http://rushthecourt.net/?p=10933#comment-13454 The last true John Wall type of recruit Duke got was Luol Deng in 2003. Coincidentally, the last F4 Duke sniffed was his freshman (and only) year in Durham, 2004. I believe that's what the poster is referring to here. The last true John Wall type of recruit Duke got was Luol Deng in 2003. Coincidentally, the last F4 Duke sniffed was his freshman (and only) year in Durham, 2004. I believe that’s what the poster is referring to here.

]]> By: Schneider http://rushthecourt.net/2009/08/17/team-of-the-2000s-4-duke/comment-page-1/#comment-13452 Schneider Fri, 21 Aug 2009 21:39:09 +0000 http://rushthecourt.net/?p=10933#comment-13452 Ok, Duke has Seth curry with 3 years of eligibility, almost got John Wall(they still are capable of getting those type of recruits), Coach K is relatively young, and they have 2 prominent assistants and Jonny Dawkins as an alumni with college coaching experience. The future deserves atleast an A- Ok, Duke has Seth curry with 3 years of eligibility, almost got John Wall(they still are capable of getting those type of recruits), Coach K is relatively young, and they have 2 prominent assistants and Jonny Dawkins as an alumni with college coaching experience. The future deserves atleast an A-

]]> By: nvr1983 http://rushthecourt.net/2009/08/17/team-of-the-2000s-4-duke/comment-page-1/#comment-13372 nvr1983 Thu, 20 Aug 2009 22:38:37 +0000 http://rushthecourt.net/?p=10933#comment-13372 mg-- I'm not sure where I said they are having trouble getting recruits, but they certainly aren't getting the same caliber of recruits that they got a decade ago. Now it may be unrealistic to be that ridiculously good, but at Duke there is that expectation. On the 2010 recruits: - Barnes and Irving have lists of 10-12 schools right now. Even if Duke is the favorite I'd hardly consider that a done deal especially after what happened with Greg Monroe at Georgetown's Midnight Madness a few years ago. On Dawkins: - I'm not seeing where you are going with this shooting guard ranking argument. By my math, even if the position rankings are evenly split (and they usually aren't because there are so few quality centers--meaning there is heavier weighting for guards/forwards) then you would expect Dawkins to be in the #11-15 range, which last time I checked is top 20 (borderline top 10). Obviously this varies a little depending on the the relatives strengths of the different positions each year, but it's not like I was referring to a guy as "the #3 QB prospect in the nation" when he was actually the #5 overall recruit. In this case, I think it was a pretty fair description. mg–
I’m not sure where I said they are having trouble getting recruits, but they certainly aren’t getting the same caliber of recruits that they got a decade ago. Now it may be unrealistic to be that ridiculously good, but at Duke there is that expectation.

On the 2010 recruits:
- Barnes and Irving have lists of 10-12 schools right now. Even if Duke is the favorite I’d hardly consider that a done deal especially after what happened with Greg Monroe at Georgetown’s Midnight Madness a few years ago.

On Dawkins:
- I’m not seeing where you are going with this shooting guard ranking argument. By my math, even if the position rankings are evenly split (and they usually aren’t because there are so few quality centers–meaning there is heavier weighting for guards/forwards) then you would expect Dawkins to be in the #11-15 range, which last time I checked is top 20 (borderline top 10). Obviously this varies a little depending on the the relatives strengths of the different positions each year, but it’s not like I was referring to a guy as “the #3 QB prospect in the nation” when he was actually the #5 overall recruit. In this case, I think it was a pretty fair description.

]]> By: mg http://rushthecourt.net/2009/08/17/team-of-the-2000s-4-duke/comment-page-1/#comment-13351 mg Thu, 20 Aug 2009 16:17:01 +0000 http://rushthecourt.net/?p=10933#comment-13351 Having trouble getting recruits?!? Duke is in the running or perceived to be leading for Irving, a top ten PG and Barnes, considered the top recruit in the country. In this incoming class Kelly and Plumlee are widely considered top 20 or top 10 recruits. Your jumping the gun just a bit on your theory that Duke doesn't recruit well anymore. Plus, Dawkins is a top 20 or 10 recruit, who just happens to be the #3 shooting guard because the other 2 SG in front of him are top 10 recruits as well. Having trouble getting recruits?!? Duke is in the running or perceived to be leading for Irving, a top ten PG and Barnes, considered the top recruit in the country. In this incoming class Kelly and Plumlee are widely considered top 20 or top 10 recruits. Your jumping the gun just a bit on your theory that Duke doesn’t recruit well anymore. Plus, Dawkins is a top 20 or 10 recruit, who just happens to be the #3 shooting guard because the other 2 SG in front of him are top 10 recruits as well.

]]> By: nvr1983 http://rushthecourt.net/2009/08/17/team-of-the-2000s-4-duke/comment-page-1/#comment-13226 nvr1983 Wed, 19 Aug 2009 02:44:22 +0000 http://rushthecourt.net/?p=10933#comment-13226 Tommy-- I included the warning in bold just before the clip. You can't blame me if you clicked on it anyways. Tommy–
I included the warning in bold just before the clip. You can’t blame me if you clicked on it anyways.

]]> By: Tommy http://rushthecourt.net/2009/08/17/team-of-the-2000s-4-duke/comment-page-1/#comment-13222 Tommy Wed, 19 Aug 2009 01:57:47 +0000 http://rushthecourt.net/?p=10933#comment-13222 Was that video necessary??? Whatever, I just watched the end of the 2004 ACC Tourney Championship game. The little crying Dookie was the icing on the effing cake. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MU6lXzsVXJo Was that video necessary??? Whatever, I just watched the end of the 2004 ACC Tourney Championship game. The little crying Dookie was the icing on the effing cake.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MU6lXzsVXJo

]]> By: nvr1983 http://rushthecourt.net/2009/08/17/team-of-the-2000s-4-duke/comment-page-1/#comment-13163 nvr1983 Tue, 18 Aug 2009 11:40:20 +0000 http://rushthecourt.net/?p=10933#comment-13163 I was referring to the criticism of the major that Jason Williams and Carlos Boozer picked up in 3 years not the department as a whole. I don't have anything against either of those guys and many Duke basketball players have pursued the degree (Google "Jon Siegel Not So Royal Blue Washington Times" for more stuff about it), but I'm pretty sure that those guys weren't taking classes on black swans (apparently the guys at Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers didn't either). (On a related note, I picked up my undergrad degree in 3 years, which I will readily admit is a joke, but the 2 degrees I have after that sort of make up for it.) I have talked to Duke students who say the major that the basketball players pick up is basically a joke not unlike the "General Studies" I see many players at other schools pursuing. Obviously Duke has some "student-athletes" who fit the example that the NCAA likes to portray such as Shane Battier, who probably has his name right next to the phrase in Roget's, and Trajan Langdon, but much like Notre Dame I think people attach too much weight to a school's overall academic reputation when talking about how brilliant their players are. I was referring to the criticism of the major that Jason Williams and Carlos Boozer picked up in 3 years not the department as a whole. I don’t have anything against either of those guys and many Duke basketball players have pursued the degree (Google “Jon Siegel Not So Royal Blue Washington Times” for more stuff about it), but I’m pretty sure that those guys weren’t taking classes on black swans (apparently the guys at Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers didn’t either). (On a related note, I picked up my undergrad degree in 3 years, which I will readily admit is a joke, but the 2 degrees I have after that sort of make up for it.) I have talked to Duke students who say the major that the basketball players pick up is basically a joke not unlike the “General Studies” I see many players at other schools pursuing. Obviously Duke has some “student-athletes” who fit the example that the NCAA likes to portray such as Shane Battier, who probably has his name right next to the phrase in Roget’s, and Trajan Langdon, but much like Notre Dame I think people attach too much weight to a school’s overall academic reputation when talking about how brilliant their players are.

]]> By: tallguy http://rushthecourt.net/2009/08/17/team-of-the-2000s-4-duke/comment-page-1/#comment-13159 tallguy Tue, 18 Aug 2009 10:40:27 +0000 http://rushthecourt.net/?p=10933#comment-13159 "infamous Sociology major" Please don't bring up that bullshit, sociology is the home of the markets and management certificate, which is the closest thing to a business degree Duke has (the Wall Street recruits are from the econ department, which has about as much to do with business as art history does). The easiest degrees at Duke are art history, women's studies, and african studies. “infamous Sociology major”

Please don’t bring up that bullshit, sociology is the home of the markets and management certificate, which is the closest thing to a business degree Duke has (the Wall Street recruits are from the econ department, which has about as much to do with business as art history does). The easiest degrees at Duke are art history, women’s studies, and african studies.

]]>