How exactly would you refute a point that he never made?? I still have no clue what point if any , he was shooting for.
Garrison Brooks...
- Thread starter gary-7
- Start date
Seems like the point is not all McD's are good. Implying that the flip side is true, not all non-McD's are bad.
Both of which are true but since history tells us that the higher a player is ranked out of HS the better chance he will do well in college, his point might as well been "let's hope we get lucky with one of these guys".
CC
HF58 great question lol. I was actually waiting on a point myself, but chuck explained it well, if in fact that was the point.
Someone else said that's what his point might of been so I stated IF that's what it was it's pretty easy to refute.
I still have no clue what the original point was either though.
I'll take a Kris Lang career right now from any of the 3 freshmen big men.
I think getting Brooks is great. This is a guy that we could potentially watch grow and improve throughout his career. Those are the ones that I like to watch the most.
I believe we need talent like others have stated. I see some on the way and the potential for more.
Still baffles me that we cannot get a high quality big with the type of backcourt that we have. Makes me question the decision making of some of these guys. I would be begging to come to UNC if I was anywhere inside of the top 50. I can at least understand UK and to a certain degree Kansas or Dook based on past drafts. But as a big guy, it should really come down to UNC, UK (OAD), or Kansas if I am looking to win and get to the NBA.
If we can get another big that has talent, Brooks and his other 2 teammates coming in should be able to be a good Robin to that Batman.
I believe we need talent like others have stated. I see some on the way and the potential for more.
Still baffles me that we cannot get a high quality big with the type of backcourt that we have. Makes me question the decision making of some of these guys. I would be begging to come to UNC if I was anywhere inside of the top 50. I can at least understand UK and to a certain degree Kansas or Dook based on past drafts. But as a big guy, it should really come down to UNC, UK (OAD), or Kansas if I am looking to win and get to the NBA.
If we can get another big that has talent, Brooks and his other 2 teammates coming in should be able to be a good Robin to that Batman.
Didn't our own Brandon Huffman dominate McCormack when Word of God matched up with Oak Hill back in Dec? I believe he did.
Recruiting and college basketball has changed. Guys that are ranked over 100 today have a better shot at becoming a legit player than they did 20 years ago. Because all the guys ranked in the top 50 don't stay around long making way for a lower ranked guy to get the quality gametime PT and the attention from the staff to flourish. Y'all are underselling our guys. I'm a believer in all of them, including Manley and Playtek. I listened to Clint talk on some podcast recently about Playtek and I've watched some film on him. If he has a PG that can drive and kick and a couple big men to draw a double team every now and then, this kid is going to make a bunch of shots for us. His shot is pure. Manley will struggle early on because he looks slow. But he's a smart kid with good instincts. He'll be one of those guys that you don't really understand how he gets the job done. He won't be a star. But he'll be a significant player for us his last 2 years.
Huffman and Brooks will be counted on next year. And by the end of the year, some of y'all will be eating your words. Huffman is an aggressive, athletic BIG kid. He just doesn't understand how to play. Roy and the staff will be able to mold him into exactly what we need - a rim protector and glass cleaner. Brooks is more refined but less athletic. He'll be the big that we actually throw it into on the block. He has pretty good footwork and a few nice moves. All he has to do is perfect the jump hook over both shoulders and he'll be a double digit scorer his last two years with us.
Felton will be a star and I think he'll show off from the jump. I also believe that he would be a top 10 kid if he had his uncle's heart. He doesn't so Roy and the staff will have to instill that competitive fire in him. If he develops that, he's an All-ACC level talent in year 2.
I'm excited about the next few years. I actually like watching the team building process. That's why I'm so against the OAD model. That's not to say I would be against a OAD player every now and then. But I don't want them annually and I don't want more than one at a time.
Micky D kids are assumed to be very talented and many one and done. In fact a Micky D kid is not assumed to be a kid that will be in the college game for ore than 2 seasons. The question becomes who gives you the more value, the one or two yr and gone kid or the kid that sticks around for 4 yrs that may not have the pro upside of the one & doner but is a solid contributor for his 4 yrs.
How much value did duke get from that monster frosh class, their season ended at the hands of a 8 seed? And yet we won it all with major contributions from JRs and Srs and very little from freshmen.
Point is there is a lot of fools gold with this one & done stuff, some can be game changers but some are really more fool than gold. Example, I have been arguing Knox vs Whitman, I take Whitman, give me the experienced big man that really wants to play for UNC because he loves UNC over the one & done kid that I do not think is a game changer as a freshman. Now if we were talking Bamba different story because I think guys like Bamba, Carter, or Bagley are game changer level talents as frosh. To me Knox should be on a path similar to Justin Jackson, maybe 2 but ore likely 3yrs, I think Tony Bradley should be on that same path.
We just played in back to back natty games and won the last one, not sure things are so bad broke that we need one & done frosh to fix them. I am not opposed to our getting one & done guys but I don't want them just for the sake of sayin we to are a one & done U...
I'll take Knox over whitman any day. Especially since Whitman only can play one season and the talent level. Also, how can we judge if whitman "Loves" UNC?
However, I do agree I don't see Knox being a sure OAD.
I love that Whitman would be a guy that occupied a scholly for 1 season and we can go look for bigs in the 2019 class. Look, assume we lose Tony, would you really prefer us to have Luke and 4 freshmen big men that have never played a single college game or lose one of the frosh and add a 6'9" 235lbs skilled big man with 3 years of college under his belt that has already scored double digits in a game vs duke?
Without Knox we move Theo back to his natural position at the 3 and Brob backs him up and when Theo grads, Hamilton will be in the wings, get Knox and say goodbye to Hamilton.
Tell me, who would you prefer at the wing next season, the freshman Knox or a senior Theo Pinson, I will take Theo. I prefer senior experienced good sized big man over the frosh that plays at Theo's natural position, especially now that we have Joel back so that Jalek may be more a 2 and battle Kenny for the starting role beside Joel (kinda takes Theo out of the 2 guard role IMO).
Last edited:
I understand what you are saying. I like to see Whitman stats vs Top Teams. He hasn't seen ACC big man, game after game. His biggest advantage over Knox is experience however.
If Tony leaves, I still rather Knox. Roy has proven he can go small like he did with PJ.
1-Berry
2-Felton/Kenny
3-Knox
4-Theo
5-Luke
Not saying you wrong however, just my preference.
And that could be a very dangerous fast break team. Roy, "fast, fast and faster"
lol, that was greatPoint was whether or not "I" am this boards greatest poster of all time sir.
Sorry guys, @ Duke, hard to focus sometimes.
Long list of MickeyD's who never did that great, much less the ones we've had. Meanwhile there is story after story of guys who did not make it and have outstanding college careers.
Think Huffman-Brooks may well have as good of careers as Lang. Only time will tell.
Still think Huffman is going to surprise some folk. Raw as all get our but has the tude and want-to we need.
I ALWAYS have a point, sorry if you miss it sometimes.
The list of McD's that were great is pretty long. The 5 guys that you listed were back in the day when all we had was Bob Gibbons and the Poop sheet.
Long list of recent guys who were NOT picked who had great college careers too.
Don't think I'd add Kris Lang to that list. He came in right away and averaged like 11 and 6 or something like that. Dude also always shot near 60% from the field every single year at Carolina. For a HS big man he had 2 pretty fundamentally sound/ advanced low post moves (that right hand hook he had was money even as a FR). None of our current big men recruits have the low post game that Lang had at their age.
Glov=legend in his own mind.
Thanks Mike!
Both sides of my brain salute you my friend!
Which ones played at carolina?
(Talking big men here)
Brice(still top 40 recruit on another level than any of huff man or brook)
Joel James (top 80-below average career)
Jackson Simmons
Desmond hubery(both strictly spot min role players)
Luke(solid backup)
I can't think of any outside them that recently have made any impact. Perhaps I'm missing someone. and obviously Brice is by far the standout and he was borderline on being a 5 star.
Last edited:
If you take the top five D1 leaders in PPG, RPG, SPG, APG, BPG, and FG%, only 2 of them were McDonalds All Americans. The point being that there are a very limited number of MAAG spots, which means that every year there are a ton of very good players who didn't sniff that game.
Sorry you missed the whole point I'm trying to make. Give the kids a chance FIRST, then if they don't work out, we can fret and pull our hair out (to late for me).
Here's a more recent highlights mix, apologies if previously posted.
Anyone who watches that video should be excited about this young man. He has quickness/athleticism, timing on his shot blocks, multiple post moves, very good hands, a 15 foot jumper, and very good passing ability for a big man. IOW, he possesses all the tangibles necessary to be successful at the next level. I am more impressed with each successive video. He will play serious minutes from the git go.
well-said. watching these kids develop as players and as men is what i like best about college basketball, and no program does that better than roy's tar heels! GO HEELS!!!
Not sure why you posted this --- irrelevant to the topic, but if Desmond could have put the ball in the basket in any way other than dunking/tipping he could have been a player. Brooks has no such offensive limitations.
Last edited:
Correct Gary. He's comparing apples to oranges. Plus, Hubert's hands weren't all that good. All three of our freshman bigs will far outshine Hubert.
Similarly ranked, similar mix tapes. Except in the Hubert and James tapes, they are competing vs very high level competition. Just pointing out that if we rewound the clocks back 6-7 years and put these tapes on a thread it would be very easy to draw similar conclusions as some of you are about brooks.
I hope Brooks ends up being better than both, quite obviously. But it's fair to admit that his upside could be around where these guys ended up.
I hope Brooks ends up being better than both, quite obviously. But it's fair to admit that his upside could be around where these guys ended up.
