I agree. But there are about 25 5* recruits and I would venture that at least half think of themselves as OAD's. Therein lies the rub, as Bill Shakespeare said.
Garrison Brooks
- Thread starter _B5
- Start date
They do and it's sad..I think they should let them come out of high school or commit stay until after junior year of college.
Roy goes after 5* players, but the ones he gets are mostly those who need some development and are self-aware enough to realize it. If they don't realize it, they go to UK or Duke.... And some of them later transfer when it doesn't get them to the NBA right away.
I like Roy's approach, but I wish more kids were self-aware enough to realize UNC offers what they need.
Very astute. This whole OAD thing is a house of cards. I'm glad we still build this program with bricks.
I think this is exactly what's going on. I agree with Cota's post right above as well.
I have to disagree slightly.
Remember that the top talent back in the day used to elect to stay more than a year. Some didn't but it was pretty varied.
For example, Sheed, Stack, Jamison and Carter could all have been easily one and done but they elected to stay longer. They were still successful in the NBA. Same with Tim Duncan and others that stayed longer.
Point is, the way things are going now is that kind of talent doesn't stay 3-4 years like Jordan, Olajuwon, Kareem, or even old Carolina and dook players. They want to go to the league ASAP, and I believe we need to facilitate that somewhat. As much as I loathe to admit it, dook and Kentucky have been doing pretty well for themselves in recent years.
Would any of us be complaining if Roy had managed to get Brandon Ingram, Andrew Wiggins, Harry Giles, or others of their caliber? No way.
True, guys like sheed, stack, jaimeson and carter likely would have been OAD. Point is they weren't.
So is it the tail wagging the dog - should the program change to suit top talent or is it better for Roy to find and sign players who're willing to stay longer?
Of course, there'd be no argument from this fan if Knox spent 9 months in Chapel Hill, but I'd be upset if Roy changed his whole method to facilitate it.
Personally I was glad Ingram went elsewhere. Would have been a disruption to our chemistry.
Ideally we'd get one or two top 25 guys per years along with a solid core of 4 star players. It's not that I have a problem with what Roy wants, it's that what he wants isn't coming to fruition at this particular time in this era.
If Roy decided to change his method to get OAD talent, I wouldn't be against it at all. Other programs have adapted to it. I'd say it's about time we did too.
And what if Ingram had helped us to a natty and encouraged other OADS to come here?
And that's what a lot of this discussion comes down to: some fans would like Roy to change his approach, others don't want change. Two different views and that's what it is.
In the end, what we want doesn't matter, Unless you're cutting some super sized cheques to the program they ain't going to listen to you.
What if aliens landed tomorrow? The chances he would have made us a better team are about the same as that... but extremely likely it makes us worse. And the point being made here quite effectively is that OADs (unless it's that right situation) can be fool's gold.
Yes, there have been some examples of top 15 players not living up to their full potential. Not every OAD becomes an NBA star. But UK and duke get enough of them that a few become stars. And that translates to more success with future recruits.
And I believe Ingram would have made the team better. I also believe he could have changed the lingering bad perception about Roy. With Ingram on our team we would've been damn near unbeatable.
That is pure fantasy. Ingram is a talented offensive player, but not a team player by any means and he can't defend his momma. Who's PT would he have taken? And what would that have done to the chemistry of a group that matured into the best team in the country? Ingram would not in any universe have made our team better. Basketball is not about rankings and perception, and reliance on OADs means dumbing down the system. NO THANK YOU.
I guarantee you right now if we had landed Ingram no one on this board would have complained about him potentially messing up our chemistry.
Why don't you ask dook and Kentucky if landing OADs has made them worse or dumbed down their system? Truly their programs have suffered the last 5 years
Would any of us be complaining had we landed these OADs? F**k no, don't even try to deny it.
I can understand people not wanting a roster full of OADS, but OAD type talent is integral to the system that Roy runs, even if it's just one or two. Don't bullshit me and say that Platek, Huffman or Manley are anywhere near the level of talent that we've come to expect over the years. Top talent equals results.
From 2003 to 2012, we reeled in this kind of talent. Now that we're digging deeper into the pool and whiffing on the top 25, all of a sudden you guys think that it's that we can reply on 'diamonds in the rough' to carry on our program for the next 3-4 years?
No. That is not acceptable. A program such as ours needs the same kind of talent other blue bloods expect. Not goddamn 3 star players. We shouldn't settle for less. And I for one am sick and tired of losing out on top recruits to our rivals. You know as well as I do Roy wouldn't have needed to recruit Huffman or Manley 7 years ago because he was landing 5 STAR RECRUITS.
You won't think it's all fine and dandy when our only 5 star recruits are Bradley and Jalek in 2017. This was a crucial class, and so far, there's no indication any 5 star other than Felton's nephew is going to choose us.
That sort of hypothetical is impossible to discuss. Maybe we win the ship with him... maybe we flame out early because of him.. but we would have never known what we would have done without him to properly assess it anyways.
For everyone who says, man Ingram messed up chemistry, we would have won the ship without him. There would be 10x more saying yeah yeah say what you want but without Ingram we weren't even a tourney team (in a first weekend flame out scenario).
I mean, let's just leave it what it is. He didn't come. We did mightily fine without him and were one stop from taking the championship to overtime and likely winning.
And, we would have been happy if he came also. But, he didn't so who cares.
For everyone who says, man Ingram messed up chemistry, we would have won the ship without him. There would be 10x more saying yeah yeah say what you want but without Ingram we weren't even a tourney team (in a first weekend flame out scenario).
I mean, let's just leave it what it is. He didn't come. We did mightily fine without him and were one stop from taking the championship to overtime and likely winning.
And, we would have been happy if he came also. But, he didn't so who cares.
I guarantee you right now if we had landed Ingram no one on this board would have complained about him potentially messing up our chemistry.
Why don't you ask dook and Kentucky if landing OADs has made them worse or dumbed down their system? Truly their programs have suffered the last 5 years
Would any of us be complaining had we landed these OADs? F**k no, don't even try to deny it.
I can understand people not wanting a roster full of OADS, but OAD type talent is integral to the system that Roy runs, even if it's just one or two. Don't bullshit me and say that Platek, Huffman or Manley are anywhere near the level of talent that we've come to expect over the years. Top talent equals results.
From 2003 to 2012, we reeled in this kind of talent. Now that we're digging deeper into the pool and whiffing on the top 25, all of a sudden you guys think that it's that we can reply on 'diamonds in the rough' to carry on our program for the next 3-4 years?
No. That is not acceptable. A program such as ours needs the same kind of talent other blue bloods expect. Not goddamn 3 star players. We shouldn't settle for less. And I for one am sick and tired of losing out on top recruits to our rivals. You know as well as I do Roy wouldn't have needed to recruit Huffman or Manley 7 years ago because he was landing 5 STAR RECRUITS.
You won't think it's all fine and dandy when our only 5 star recruits are Bradley and Jalek in 2017. This was a crucial class, and so far, there's no indication any 5 star other than Felton's nephew is going to choose us.
You frame this as if Roy has not recruited one & done players but last I checked he did recruit Ingram, he recruits multiple one & done players every year. So not sure I understand your point, is it just to vent that you want us to get the players that Roy has recruited?
An understanding of the game shows uk and dook HAVE dumbed down their systems to accomodate OADs. That's really not an arguable point. That 's the inherent trade-off, and they've had some success... although I could also ask where all the OADs were last Spring? They sure weren't in Houston for the Final 4.I guarantee you right now if we had landed Ingram no one on this board would have complained about him potentially messing up our chemistry.
Why don't you ask dook and Kentucky if landing OADs has made them worse or dumbed down their system? Truly their programs have suffered the last 5 years
Would any of us be complaining had we landed these OADs? F**k no, don't even try to deny it.
I can understand people not wanting a roster full of OADS, but OAD type talent is integral to the system that Roy runs, even if it's just one or two. Don't bullshit me and say that Platek, Huffman or Manley are anywhere near the level of talent that we've come to expect over the years. Top talent equals results.
From 2003 to 2012, we reeled in this kind of talent. Now that we're digging deeper into the pool and whiffing on the top 25, all of a sudden you guys think that it's that we can reply on 'diamonds in the rough' to carry on our program for the next 3-4 years?
No. That is not acceptable. A program such as ours needs the same kind of talent other blue bloods expect. Not goddamn 3 star players. We shouldn't settle for less. And I for one am sick and tired of losing out on top recruits to our rivals. You know as well as I do Roy wouldn't have needed to recruit Huffman or Manley 7 years ago because he was landing 5 STAR RECRUITS.
You won't think it's all fine and dandy when our only 5 star recruits are Bradley and Jalek in 2017. This was a crucial class, and so far, there's no indication any 5 star other than Felton's nephew is going to choose us.
And for the record while we were still recruiting Ingram I posted to be careful what you wish for, and I didn't want Jaylen Brown either. Both those guys were preset OADs, neither of whom played a position of need for us. So all that would have done is muck up a potentially special chemistry. Unlike many who were wringing hands I saw a FF team if the right pieces came together, and with JB starting and once Marcus got right we were good to go.
Now this time the remaining 5*s on our board (esp. PJ) could fit right in. Either way give me a Burger Boy or two every cycle and some other good fits and we'll be fine.
Last edited:
I feel like the angst is coming for good reason-
We have kept our stud recruits from 13-14 around until their jr and sr seasons, so the drop in recruiting hasnt appeared on the court..yet. But, just humor me for a moment...
We will lose:
Britt
Hicks
Meeks
More than likely>90 percent gone
Jackson
More than likely 60-70%
Joel Berry
Possible:
Theo pinson
Tony Bradley.
Lets say we get super lucky and berry and pinson and bradley stay.
(I think Berrys going bye bye)
We will replace those 4 and 5 stars, if everything continues trending where it is, with
Jalek(5 star)
Huffman
Manley
Platek
Brooks/stokes??
I do wonder those who are trying to tell us that nothings wrong when that product takes the floor next year would very quickly realize things had gone south in a bad way. Unc and roys system in particular demands that talented athletes take the court to run his beautiful system. This isnt UVA where they play methodical basketball. THose kids at schools like that werent recruited here for a reason, Roy needs talent to implement the type of play he wants to run, as he should.
If anyone here tries to pretend at any point in Roys time at unc we have run out a frontcourt even resembling what will most likely be on the floor next year, youve lost your mind.
We have kept our stud recruits from 13-14 around until their jr and sr seasons, so the drop in recruiting hasnt appeared on the court..yet. But, just humor me for a moment...
We will lose:
Britt
Hicks
Meeks
More than likely>90 percent gone
Jackson
More than likely 60-70%
Joel Berry
Possible:
Theo pinson
Tony Bradley.
Lets say we get super lucky and berry and pinson and bradley stay.
(I think Berrys going bye bye)
We will replace those 4 and 5 stars, if everything continues trending where it is, with
Jalek(5 star)
Huffman
Manley
Platek
Brooks/stokes??
I do wonder those who are trying to tell us that nothings wrong when that product takes the floor next year would very quickly realize things had gone south in a bad way. Unc and roys system in particular demands that talented athletes take the court to run his beautiful system. This isnt UVA where they play methodical basketball. THose kids at schools like that werent recruited here for a reason, Roy needs talent to implement the type of play he wants to run, as he should.
If anyone here tries to pretend at any point in Roys time at unc we have run out a frontcourt even resembling what will most likely be on the floor next year, youve lost your mind.
Last edited:
Gary, I find it actually funny, so many are hand wringing over our recruiting as if recruiting just now started tailing off. News flash folks, we didn't just start to not get one & done players, been that way for a while now. And yet, with our "feeble" recruiting, we were 1 of only 2 teams that played in the very last game played last season? Yep, time to panic, we are ranked what, 6 in pre-season polls, yep, time to go find a rope & a tall tree for sure, we have already for 2017 a 5 star and a couple 4 stars already committed, yep, the sky sure is fallin! LOL
Now I don't know what would have happened had we got Ingram or Brown, I do know what did happen with our not getting them. I know what did happen with that duke team that was ranked top 5 pre-season last year, how about that top 5 Ky super team last season? LOL
The results of our recruiting are in a large proportion influenced by the fact that they stayed. If they left, we would have more playing time and peeps would see a clear path to starting...chicken meet egg!
Recruiting with playing time has already shown improvement!
Recruiting with playing time has already shown improvement!
Well, Id love if that were the case. But judging by our results and prognostications for next years class, a class where all the PT in the world will be available, Im not so sure thats true.
I love Roy's recruiting style. Build your program on 3-4 year guys and sprinkle in the occasional OAD if they wish to join the Family. But if getting to the next level is of paramount concern to them, then go do your obligatory 9 month sentence at dook or UK.
Now I realize some of our fans don't like to hear a UNC fan say this, it's tantamount to blasphemy to some of you, especially some of the younger fans who've grown up in an era of instant gratification and OAD'S. But if you're expecting Roy to start selling UNC as another fast track to the riches of the NBA, I think you're going to be disappointed.
One day Roy Williams will retire and you may get a coach who goes all in on the OAD approach, like Cal and Krazywhiskey. Maybe that will make some of you happy. Personally, I'm content with Roy's approach.
Now I realize some of our fans don't like to hear a UNC fan say this, it's tantamount to blasphemy to some of you, especially some of the younger fans who've grown up in an era of instant gratification and OAD'S. But if you're expecting Roy to start selling UNC as another fast track to the riches of the NBA, I think you're going to be disappointed.
One day Roy Williams will retire and you may get a coach who goes all in on the OAD approach, like Cal and Krazywhiskey. Maybe that will make some of you happy. Personally, I'm content with Roy's approach.
The 2012 class was Roy's first class without any 5* players.
The 2015 class was Roy's second class without any 5* players - and if Shaka Smart hadn't gone to Texas it would have been Roy's first class without any 5* or 4* players.
So, yeah, this isn't new. But I think Butterbutt44 has a point when he says we have dodged the bullet so far because we have had good players who stuck around during those first stutter steps on the recruiting trail.
I don't think Butterbutt's worst case scenario will hit us, but it could still get rough. Most expect us to lose Justin and I while I think Joel, Theo and Tony are individually more likely to return than leave, when you sum the probabilities, we should probably expect to lose 1 of those 3.
Ironically, the guy we can probably afford to lose most is Joel. Ironic because he may be the most important guy on the team. But he's also the guy we have the easiest job of replacing - since Jalek and 7th will be on board and most expect at least one if not both of them to be good at point.
If we lose Theo or Tony, it's a lot harder to find replacements (remember, we're assuming no more 5* recruits in the 2017 class). If Theo leaves, we have no real SF - unless Brandon bulks up or Shea develops really well. And if Tony leaves we will be both short-handed and underpowered up front unless several guys make unexpected leaps in development.
Obviously we are really hurting if we lose 2 or more of those guys.
So that's the downside. But I don't really expect it to happen.
Gosh, lot there to talk about, first I don't think there is much to worry about when it comes to Tony or Theo leaving after this season. Could it happen yeah, 7th could go crazy and everything he shoots drops and go but I wouldn't bet on that either. Lets talk more about what we would all consider most likely to happen.
Let's take what many would consider to be an aweful thing, lets say Stokes visits us right after Manley commits to us and Stokes decides he wants to be a Heel, I say cool take him, I like birds in hand more than the ones in bushes and truthfully I like Stokes as a player. Brooks, not gonna lie and don't need to, I was not nearly as high on him as many others were, I did not want us to spend a scholly on him and I am glad we have with Huffman, like Manley and look forward to his commit, and in truth if Stokes wants to come to us I would take him in a flash. REASON, I truely believe in these 3 kids as players that can really contribute, players that yes, can start for us down the road. Said it so many times but it still applies, it does not matter where they are ranked, what matters is how they play for us. I think Huffman wil give us more in his career as a Tar Heel than Bamba/Carter/Porter give the programs they commit to. Not more as freshmen but more over the course of his career.
I read a post in the last day or so, don't recall where but the poster made the point that the difference between a 5 star top 10 big man and a 3 star kid that is not heavy recruited is that so often the 5 star has a really solid face up game that the 3 star kid doesn't. Such a simple point but it struck me in how true it was. Folks are down of Huffman, he does not have that face up game but the game is about so much more than just the ability of a big kid to hit a mid range jumper, yet far to often that is most of what folks look for?
BTW, let's say BOTH Theo and Justin do leave after this season, WTF will we do? Well, I think we would have 2 great options, first we could go with more of a back court wing look with Brob or even 7TH or kenny so we have a peremeter full of 3 shooting threats. But we could go back old school with Luke as a small FORWARD able to shoot really well and yet play the 3 more as a forward helping us rebound with size or Stokes if we were to get him, think of that front court size.
Tony isn't going anywhere, and if we win the chip Berry is gone, if not he's coming back.(not my words, His)
Well, Berry says that now but if he shows out like we know he can and is a guaranteed first round pick..well, I think you know where Im going with that.
As far as Bradley, if he develops the way roy big men tend to he has all the projectables necessary to be a OAD. I agree hes much less likely than Berry, though.
To be fair, a point that folks like you and @carolinablue34 are espousing is a quite valid one, i.e, that in the OAD era more elite prospects have the big head and we become less attractive. That is an unfortunate fact of life and a legit concern.
How to deal with that is a matter of discussion and we disagree. I think Roy will be fine in the long run without abandoning his system, and as Dave said he goes after some of them, as he must... I'm just saying it ain't necessarily that bad when we miss. But we don't want to always miss.
I'll just leave the issue by noting that we just graduated two terrific players whose jerseys will hang in the Dean Dome rafters, yet I feel confident in saying the team we put on he floor this season will be stronger than last season's. Why? Because all five of those starters plus the main subs will all be better and more experienced players than they were last season. That's the beauty of not having to rely on OADs.
Three star according to Rivals, Scout, and 247. Not numerically ranked by Rivals or Scout, #156 on 247.
Which raises a question: if we had landed a OAD in the 2016 class, which of our starters would be riding the bench or see their minutes significantly reduced?
Similar threads
