Here is a fun fact. Since 2005, when the NBA implemented its rule that led to "one and done" players, only two NCAA champions have had a one year player. Kentucky in 2012 and Duke in 2015
New 2017 post player offer
- Thread starter CarolinaMagic
- Start date
Here is a fun fact. Since 2005, when the NBA implemented its rule that led to "one and done" players, only two NCAA champions have had a one year player. Kentucky in 2012 and Duke in 2015
I say this to every dook fan who tries to come here and sell the OADU system that Cal and K have adopted. If you like having OAD's go in and out the door every year, fine. Then K's approach is perfect for you. When you take the court with the best talent every year, it does give you a chance to win the title every year.
But I prefers Roy's method of building the team on 4* players, with 3* role players and the occasional 5* sprinkled in. It doesn't give you a chance to win the title every year, but you can count on a serious run every 3-4 years and very solid teams in between. I prefer watching players develop over 3-4 years to the OAD wonders. I prefer Brice Johnson and Marcus Paige, four year guys, to Jones and Ingram. It seems to astound dook fans when I say this and I'm not quite sure why. But the bottom line is, I like our approach and I assume you like your coach's approach.
Fair enough?
Arch, I'll only add one modification (IMO) --- Roy's approach actually gives us a chance nearly every year as long as there isn't an unforeseen gap that bites us in a given season (like losing PJ or the Drew/Wears debacle). Otherwise Roy will regularly field a team in March that can beat anyone they play and with some breaks can make a nice run, and yeah, every few years take it all the way. In other words Mercer Bears don't tend to bite us so much
.On a related note, last season I felt pretty danged good in March --- not just because we were peaking --- but because I laughed at the media nonsense that UK was somehow the team to watch (and Calipari's bluster was comical as well). I believe I posted on here that UK had no chance of a Final Four run, much less a Natty, especially when they put them in our bracket. I didn't think they would get past Indiana and if they did we would have trounced them just like we did Indy.
dook's flame-out was nearly as predictable. Now granted the Rat has an impressive combo of talent over there coming up this season, with a mix of veterans and elite frosh, and I'm sure they will be a force to reckon with. But I still wouldn't bet on UK's chances despite their sick freshman class. Of course the most important note is, meanwhile in Chapel Hill, our veteran crew of Burger Boys and friends will take a back seat to no one.
the sarcasm detector in this one is weak
Maybe you should try one of these next time
,we know how some fball posters feel about bball.Like I said I see benefits to both systems and agree more young guys tend to lead to boom or bust years. Honestly I think its really finding a healthy middle ground that I would prefer. I have no issue with 1 OAD per year as I think there are obviously players who are at a talent level where even out of high school they are better than most college players. That said I'm not a huge fan of the major turnover. 2015 was different than most of Dukes OAD years because it was more than just 1 player. Likely this was in part to the rise in stock of Wilson and Jones due to tournament play. I have no issue with them leaving when their stock was high, but I don't think most people had them leaving early when they signed. I do agree its fun to watch guys grow and find their place amongst the great names of those schools. I have enjoyed watching Jefferson, Jones, Allen, Plumlees, Scheyer, Smith and many others over the years in many ways more than Iriving, Wilson, Parker, Okafor....etc.
I think what "astounds" Duke fans (its a message board so...) is when some people say flat our statements that apply to everyone. "I don't want any one and dones"
Both OAD teams that have won titles did have a few veteran leaders, both for Duke and UK. I don't think you will see the title runs without them as despite their obvious overall talent the 2015 UK team showed inexperience when trailing late against Wisconsin, and even some the game before against ND.Arch, I'll only add one modification (IMO) --- Roy's approach actually gives us a chance nearly every year as long as there isn't an unforeseen gap that bites us in a given season (like losing PJ or the Drew/Wears debacle). Otherwise Roy will regularly field a team in March that can beat anyone they play and with some breaks can make a nice run, and yeah, every few years take it all the way. In other words Mercer Bears don't tend to bite us so much
On a related note, last season I felt pretty danged good in March --- not just because we were peaking --- but because I laughed at the media nonsense that UK was somehow the team to watch (and Calipari's bluster was comical as well). I believe I posted on here that UK had no chance of a Final Four run, much less a Natty, especially when they put them in our bracket. I didn't think they would get past Indiana and if they did we would have trounced them just like we did Indy.
dook's flame-out was nearly as predictable. Now granted the Rat has an impressive combo of talent over there coming up this season, with a mix of veterans and elite frosh, and I'm sure they will be a force to reckon with. But I still wouldn't bet on UK's chances despite their sick freshman class. Of course the most important note is, meanwhile in Chapel Hill, our veteran crew of Burger Boys and friends will take a back seat to no one.
I see this mentioned by dook fans but I never seem to be able to find it posted by an actual UNC fan. Perhaps you can find a couple of examples to cite.
I have said numerous times that I don't want to see UNC go the same route as UK and dook and have OAD's coming and going every year. I prefer 3-4 year players but certainly don't mind the occasional OAD, provided he's a good fit. UNC has only had two of them in the history of our program and one didn't even start. So OAD's simply don't see UNC as a OAD friendly program. Ergo, why I don't think we'll see a discernible increase in OAD's at UNC even when the investigation is finally resolved.
Yep and the difference was dominant big men. Davis and Okafor.
Basketball talent pool in this country and even globally is just so deep.
What's fball?LOL! Seriously? You think bball fans don't know what OL stands for in fball?
JK
To be fair, we have had a few OADs out of HS who stuck around for more than a year but could have gone after 1 year. And a couple more who looked like OADs but clearly weren't really OADs and stuck around to develop and then went pro.
Sometimes that gets used against us.
Barnes is the only one who comes to mind who possibly fits the former case. And don't forget, Barnes made it pretty clear he wasn't going to be a OAD before he even decided on a school.
I don't remember anyone who fits the latter description, with the possible exception of Henson.
But there's no doubt it gets used against us and the OAD's have drunk the koolaid.
Barnes, Hansbrough and Mac come to mind. All of them would have been drafted as frosh. A couple in the lottery.
Henson was the main one I was thinking of in the second category. But maybe Davis, Lawson, Ellington, Zeller, Bullock, and others, too. When you are a top 10 or top 20 player, lots of people think you ought to be OAD - especially the players themselves, these days.
Barnes is the only one that I heard any talk about being a OAD and as I said, he was upfront about wanting to pursue his education.
I do agree about top 10-15 players almost automatically thinking they're OAD material.
Thing is the NBA has only so many spots and so many teams. Compared to college, it's a real small number. Not everyone is going to get there. Even recruits within the top 20 or 30 aren't guaranteed to be NBA worthy, whether they go 1 year or 4 years. No one should assume that anyone is an automatic lock for a star unless you're that good like LeBron and Kobe were. But those are the exception not the rule.
There are cases to make to stay. Draymond Green, Damion Lillard, CJ McCollum, Curry, Thompson, Leonard, and a lot of other players stayed 3+ years
I think it's a myth that staying in college hurts your NBA prospects or career. But people look at Durant, Wiggins, Davis, Towns, Irving, and others as the top tier examples of staying one year and going. But it's not always the case. It may equal more money, but it doesn't equal a good career.
I think its more it hurts your draft stock is the prevailing thought. Oh if a senior is good enough they will be drafted high, but lets face it most GMs assume that the older you are the closer to your peak level you are. Its a high risk reward to draft younger guys who have higher ceilings. Mac is a good example. Talented but never really reached that next level. If he had left after year one or two people might have assumed it was still to come. Of course leaving early will not keep you in the league but too many kids see the dollars and forget that(though with a little smart invensting they could all easily put away enough to go back and get their degree...every school would take them back because it makes them look good)
247 has him as a 4* 74 or so but the composite is in the 130's. Rivals #146.
Last edited:
Thanks for the share, @HeelFan58 . .
This is another guy that UNC caught a glimpse of while watching another one of our targets. A better player than Isaiah Stokes, but, still a bit of a project . . and very worthy of an investment.
Holds offers from Texas, Ohio State, Florida, UCONN, VT and 18 other schools . .
Didn't Marvin Williams go after one year and a championship or am I misremembering?
Doesn't Roger Clemens hold a patent on misremembering? I think you are "remembering" correctly.
And you have won how many college basketball games and national championships troll?
He will have three mcdonald american big men in the lineup next year. Tony Bradley didnt commit to us until mid way througj his senior year. The kids in this class havent even started school, yet some are acting like the 2017 recruiting cycle is over. Get a grip, we just played in the national championship game
Yeah! Gonna keep this up and we will end up with another Brice Johnson or something.
Interesting that 247 doesn't show us as one of the teams recruiting Stokes, let alone offering him.
If you look closely his position is listed as DT. I think most of the offers were for that. His timeline shows an offer from UNC. I think the rest of his timeline is all for FB.
That's exactly what it is. My bad. I really hope we can get this young man on campus for a visit pronto. It's looking more and more like we're going to get shut out for PJ, the only top 20 recruit I felt we had a chance for. And with the Watson situation...
Kansas has beat us to the punch in offering Jericho Sims.
http://www.startribune.com/gophers-...s-kansas-offer-north-carolina-next/390248901/
http://www.startribune.com/gophers-...s-kansas-offer-north-carolina-next/390248901/
Recent chatter I've read suggest UK leads for PJ Washington. In a year we desperately need big men and have tons of playing time to offer, we're gonna strike out on all the big men in the top 25.
kind of been a trend. I guess this will put to rest the "they don't want to come here because of playing time".
Similar threads
