UNC not in Brandon Randolph's final 4 schools
- Thread starter dadika13
- Start date
Not great, but considering the immense depth Roy has accumulated in back court and wing players I don't see it as disastrous.
Ozzie has the correct answer IMHO . . when you're loaded at his position, and knowing Roy's allegiance to upperclassmen . . well, what else would you expect . . ?
Excuses Excuses. Everytime we miss on a recruit which has been a bunch lately there is some excuse. We've got a ton of playing time to offer in the post and our last offers have been Stokes,Huffman and Brooks. All guys that are either out of the top 100 or borderline at best. Come on guys Old Roy is struggling with recruiting. If not for Felton having close ties with the program we wouldn't be smelling a top 25 recruit in the 2017 class.
So when we miss on a top guy Roy sucks, but when we get a Top 25 guy Roy still sucks? Man some of you folks are hard to please.
Nah mate, not my place to make excuses for Roy. I was just expressing an opinion.... I reckon Roy has done a brilliant job and stacked the back court and wings for the future. So, if a top player doesn't want to be a Heel, so be it.
We're loaded at the point, I wouldn't call us loaded at the 2. We've got a good group but Randolph would have started in 2018.
Normally I don't like the "we don't need this guy" chatter right after a cut/commitment elsewhere, but I truly think we'll be fine (not better, but fine) without. Felton and Woods would more than likely be our 1/2 in 2017, and I'd much rather push for Vanderbilt/Knox at the 3. Having Randolph would probably make that a lot harder IMO.
I hope to see huge improvements in both BRob and Kenny Williams by 2017 that they won't even need to be consider back ups. And I don think that's very Plus, chances are he's not OAD. and with 2 Top 30 and potentially more talented guards already on board, why would he want to compete the very year after. He'd be sandwiched in almost either way.
BTW, Do I even need to point out the complete whiff by the 24/7 crystal ball or are we finally seeing the point. TBH, I don't think they even had a clue to begin with, as Louisville was the 2nd front runner and their gone too...but no one mentioned that so far
I hope to see huge improvements in both BRob and Kenny Williams by 2017 that they won't even need to be consider back ups. And I don think that's very Plus, chances are he's not OAD. and with 2 Top 30 and potentially more talented guards already on board, why would he want to compete the very year after. He'd be sandwiched in almost either way.
BTW, Do I even need to point out the complete whiff by the 24/7 crystal ball or are we finally seeing the point. TBH, I don't think they even had a clue to begin with, as Louisville was the 2nd front runner and their gone too...but no one mentioned that so far
what I was trying to say but you've done a much better job of it.Normally I don't like the "we don't need this guy" chatter right after a cut/commitment elsewhere, but I truly think we'll be fine (not better, but fine) without. Felton and Woods would more than likely be our 1/2 in 2017, and I'd much rather push for Vanderbilt/Knox at the 3. Having Randolph would probably make that a lot harder IMO.
I hope to see huge improvements in both BRob and Kenny Williams by 2017 that they won't even need to be consider back ups. And I don think that's very Plus, chances are he's not OAD. and with 2 Top 30 and potentially more talented guards already on board, why would he want to compete the very year after. He'd be sandwiched in almost either way.
BTW, Do I even need to point out the complete whiff by the 24/7 crystal ball or are we finally seeing the point. TBH, I don't think they even had a clue to begin with, as Louisville was the 2nd front runner and their gone too...but no one mentioned that so far
In front of who?
Even assuming Felton is OAD, You'd have Coby White, BRob, Kenny Williams, and Platek. Hell, with Black anywhere from 6'5 to 6‘9 by the time he gets here, even he may see some time at SG.
It's a fools bet to say none of them would have been able to start over Randolph.
Btw, for those complaining about our recent big offers, Stokes is now in the top 100 in updated rankings, and analysts have said that Brooks could be a Ben Bentil type of player. The type of guy that some would have complained about if we had signed him in 2014.
Huffman would be a decent glue guy in the long run. But if he turns out like Joel James, so be it. James didn't keep any scholarships from those who wanted to commit to UNC as some had anticipated.
Huffman would be a decent glue guy in the long run. But if he turns out like Joel James, so be it. James didn't keep any scholarships from those who wanted to commit to UNC as some had anticipated.
I have talked a lot about Randolph in recent weeks here and I think you could see from that tact I was taking that I was not really on board with Randolph. Now if we are not already loaded at the 2 then I would sure like to know what being loaded at a position is. The kid was measured at 6'4.5" and not the 6'6-7" that we have seen so often used. Another 2 guard, we just flat do not, did not, and for a while will not need another 2 guard. ANY of the big men we have offered, including Huffman/Stokes/Brooks I take over another 2 guard, because we desperately NEED big men, we do not need more bodies at the 2 guard spot. As talented as Randolph is he would not help us at the small forward position, the center position, or the power forward position.
I don't like to use words like I don't want when we are recruiting a kid and hesitate to use words similar when a kid picks another program, in most classes, with most rosters we have had, I would have wanted Randolph very badly because as I said, kid is very talented. But he is just not what we need at this point with who we already have both on roster as well as already committed and on the way. So no, our being out of his top what ever is not to me bad news, if anything it is the other side of the coin and I felt that way when I thought the kid was 6'6", knowing now that he is only 6'4.5: sure has not changed my mind.
So when we miss on a top guy Roy sucks, but when we get a Top 25 guy Roy still sucks? Man some of you folks are hard to please.
There's my boy, tell it brother! Our fan base is sure something else...
He's a better prospect than all of those players you mentioned, none of whom are top 50 in their class. I get that we love our own and talk down on those that don't commit to us, but as I mentioned, I've seen him play a ton and he's VERY good.
Huffman is a good bit more advanced than Joel was at the same stage, IMO by a lot...
We aren't getting Vanderbilt so we shouldn't be happy someone didn't commit to free up a spot for him.
I do not see how Brooks is being compared by the experts to Bentil, I don't see that at all. I would LOVE TO however!
I agree, it would be a huge surprise to me and the rest of the college BB world if we ended up with Vanderbilt, for me I would be nearly as shocked if we got Knox. I would love for us to get either but I just don't see it. The freed up spot that does make me happy is for a big man, looks more and more like we will snag 3 big men in this class and that is what I have preferred all along. I would be fine with a wing that could swing down, Knox and Vanderbilt could for sure do that at 6'8".
If we come out of this class with Huffman/Stokes/Brooks to all go along with Tony and Luke, we will be fine with the extreme talent we have lined up in our back court. Those are 3 big men already at college playing weight, no one needs to lose down or eat up to be able to play at this level. That is 3 college ready live bodies with really great frames. I would rather have 2 of those guys and PJ, not gonna lie but I would be fine with the 3 of them.
I disagree on two points. First, we're VERY much in the game with Knox. All of the good sources out there have us with a good shot based on what Knox and his family are looking for in their college choice.
Second, I'll feel ok with a Huff/Stokes/Brooks/Jalek/Platek class, but not feel overly confident in it. I think we need that big time player in Knox or PJ to really feel good about the short term future. Not concerned at all long term, 2018 is shaping up to be a monster class for us.
Not disagreeing, many experts and in fact many duke insiders think we have a better shot at Knox than they do so I will not disagree that the experts feel that way, I just do not agree with the experts. Not trying to say I am smarter than them, just sharing my personal opinion being that I do not see our shot at the kid being good at all.
Think about it, what is the likely-hood of Tatum being one & done at duke, IMO is is way over 90% and I am being kind, I think it is real close to 100%. Now if Tatum does in fact be one & done, who is duke's projected wing? Knox is real clear, he wants to be a wing and not a 4 so who is the wing when Tatum is gone? IDK, I don't see one, maybe Jackson swings down, doubt it cause he knows his NBA spot is at the point or at worse the 2. My point is there is wide open starting spot and PT at the wing for KNox and Tatum will be gone.
Contrast that to us, we don't know that Justin is gone, the longer a kid stays in school it seems his draft spot takes a hit but lets assume Justin is gone after next season, in steps Theo, backed up by BRob, and the band plays on. We have offers out now to 2 great 2018 wings in Zion and Hamilton, Theo finishes up and in steps one of those 2 fellas that we are in great shape for. Do we sit Theo and start Knox or does Theo start ahead of Jalek/Kenny/7th at the 2? LOL
It would take Theo having his jump shot totally retooled and he begin hitting jumpers like you expect from a 2 guard and that ain't a bet I would take. I don't know that I would want to bet that anyone not named Joel Berry will start over Jalek and I do think Joel Berry will start in Jaleks freshman season.
I really don't see Berry sticking around for a senior year "if" he has the year that everyone is projecting. His stock will not get any higher by sticking around. Please realize that European players are now taking approximately 1/3 of the NBA first round. This leaves only about 20 slots left for college players. Berry may be looking at the second round whether he leaves after this season or sticks around for his senior season. Also, I don't see Jackson sticking around for a senior season.
If Knox signs with the Heels, I see this as the starting line-up in 2017:
Woods (at the 1)
Felton
Pinson
Knox
Bradley
There is talk that if Roy signs Knox he may abandon his two big man strategy and go with a smaller line-up. Thus, I see Pinson as the 4 in the above line-up.
If Knox signs with the Heels, I see this as the starting line-up in 2017:
Woods (at the 1)
Felton
Pinson
Knox
Bradley
There is talk that if Roy signs Knox he may abandon his two big man strategy and go with a smaller line-up. Thus, I see Pinson as the 4 in the above line-up.
Last edited:
Wouldn't be a bit surprised to see that kind of strategy sooner than next year Steat and by the way, thanks for your positivity!!
Have a blessed day.
Have a blessed day.
Interesting points all around, agree with most of them. The one thing I'll say is that Knox is going to start in 2017-18 no matter where he ends up.
For Duke's wing, Trent Jr. and O'Connell have/will commit and Kennard is probably a 4 year guy. They aren't exactly thin there.
I think all these recruits are assuming Justin is gone after this year. Personally, I see him averaging 18ppg this year and bolting. Which is fine. We have a wing spot open for him.
For Theo, I won't buy a "retooled" jump shot until I see it this season. He will never be a consistent jump shooter based on his shoulders pre shot and feet post shot. I think Theo's destiny for us is to be a very solid 4 year player who gives us defense, passing, and the occasional athletic move along with great leadership. Which is not taking anything away from him at all, I love those types of players.
You make it sound as if this he's an elite OAD prospect. Slow your roll. Randolph is a consensus top 40. Woods and Robinson were consensus top 60. Not really that far off based on ranking alone.
To claim he's better than 2 experienced + 1 actual elite player is assuming far too much. If he's as good as you said, then UNC wouldn't have been the spot for him anyway, seeing he will 100% sit behind Felton. The schools on his list will more than likely have a bigger need and give him a chance to start before we could.
No way he's a better prospect than Coby White or Rechon Black. Both are ranked higher than him in their respective classes. And have a better upside.
Fair enough, switch Vanderbilt to Knox, who we have more than a shot with. The point is that I'd rather spring for an Elite Top 10 player vs. a decent top 40. Especially with how many dog Roy for not landing elite recruits.
As I said...higher ranked than all of those guys. Never said an elite OAD, simply said a better recruit than all of them. Which is true based on rankings (which is all we really have to go on since none of them have played meaningful minutes).
You said assuming Felton is OAD, which I did in this argument. So my argument to that is he is a better prospect than White, Woods, BRob, and Platek. I stick by this.
White is a PG who can't shoot. Black is a SF/PG hybrid who can't shoot. Randolph is a SG who can shoot. These 3 are very different players.
But P.S...he's a better prospect than White.
So you don't want Randolph for the 33.33% chance we get Knox? Remind me not to have you do anything involving statistical analysis for me.
Basically, I stand by everything I said and nothing you've said really contradicts anything I brought up in that post.
I'm sure someone else has probably poasted this but I'm not the least bit bothered by this news. I thought it was bizarre that we were even going after another guard/wing. The roster for the next few years is deep at his position and Randolph is not a blue-chipper. Before anyone questions that sentiment by bringing up the recruitment of Knox, let me nip that in the bud. Knox is a blue-chipper. Randolph isn't. So while I would love to keep recruiting Knox and hopefully sign Knox, I am not anywhere near as enamored with Randolph and thought his recruitment was overkill.
And oh yeah, more room for Bigs.
And oh yeah, more room for Bigs.
Just an honest question...have you seen Randolph play aside from highlight tapes?
Most people are basing an opinion on him by hearsay and youtube clips. As someone from about 15 min from where he grew up and watched at least 7 of his games in person, I can tell you he's REAL good. He's not Knox, but only 6-7 guys in the country are. Randolph can ball.
So can Felton, Woods, White and Black. And they're already in the fold. And then we have these other guys like Williams, BRob and Platek that are going to at least get some crumbs. I haven't seen Randolph play and I don't doubt that he's a baller. He could be better than every guy I listed. But if that's the case, we should have signed him first. At this point with what we have on board, his commitment to us ends up being a wasted scholarship somewhere - whether that's his or someone he pushed out of the way.
And oh yeah, we need some Bigs.
Confused by what you mean by "signed him first". Doesn't really work that way...
What I mean is that if we were so high on him, why did we push for commitments from White, Black and Platek? Or why did we offer those three if we liked Randolph better? Or at least, why did we offer those guys so early if we liked Randolph better?
It's a moot point now because we didn't make the final four for him. But I'm just wondering how Roy feels about it. If I had to guess, I think he feels like I do - no big deal as we have White and Black coming on board the following year and we have Felton and Woods to hold it down until then.
Couldn't agree more. Randolph was a luxury recruit, not a necessity. We need bigs!
And I asked you who he starts in front of? Obviously he doesn't get the nod the first year. Not even a guarantee Felton is gone in one year, which is what I was alluding to.
So ranking determines skill? Then I guess White is automatically better than Randolph. LOL!
And you misunderstood. It was implying the idea that Felton may not be OAD which is not a definite guarantee.
Even if Felton is gone in 1 year, you can't say he gets the starting job over Senior KWilliams, Junior BRob, AND White. Rechon may even become a "positionless" player for us.
Oh and White is ranked above Randolph, which seems to be very important in assessing skill.
So just shooting? That makes him a better prospect? By that logic, Platek is better than him, as he shot the 3 better than him at EYBL. lol.
And P.S. Nice opinion! Provide Facts next time.
He also has zero strength.
Dumbest quote I've seen all day.
No, I did not say I don't want Randolph. My first post in this thread was "we'll be fine without him". If he decided he wanted to commit tomorrow, I'd have been fine with that. But he didn't, which is why I said it does open up opportunities for our chances with Knox.
Who the hell would take a mid-level ranked guy when we have plenty of opportunities to develop the guys on our roster as well as potentially pulling in a big time recruit? As I've already said, we'll be fine without him. With a shot at Knox, we're far better off.
Perhaps you have zero faith in UNC's coaching staff to develop talent, but I don't really see the need to crowd up a position with more guys who haven't even stepped on the court yet, vs taking time with the ones we have.
You were certain that he'd start in 2018 and I asked you in front of who, while reminding you of our current roster of guards. You then claimed since he was ranked higher than all of them, he is the better prospect. You also claimed he's better than Coby White, but White is ranked higher than Randolph in his respective class. I don't need to contradict anything, you're doing it yourself.
You're more than entitled to believe whatever you'd like, but you've provided me with nothing worth countering. All I'm trying to figure out why this is so "obviously not good". The only reason why you said we need this guy is because he can "shoot".
So because he's a pure shooter we should take a guy that may not even make a solid contribution his first year to take us out of the running for an elite player who could change our program's direction?
Yep, I won't touch any of your precious "statistical analysis" as long as you don't touch any recruiting operations at UNC.
Last edited:
