Harry Giles to Alter UNC Visit Date; Coach Says He Remains Open in Recruitment
- Thread starter preacher_tom
- Start date
I give you a hard time dude but I agree with you completely on this. Really strange.
I'm curious if the Duke fans here will admit that Duke has fundamentally changed there program's model to emulate Kentucky following our championship in 2012?? I am very respectful of Duke's program and even have to admit that Coach K is the best coach in the country. However I believe he used to subscribe to the belief that you needed a mostly upperclassmen driven team with a sprinkling of elite talent to win a championship. K's recruiting history backs this up like the time he took Austin Rivers, or Loul Deng or Kyrie Irving. He had mostly upperclassmen driven teams and he inserted one elite freshmen talent into the mix. However after we won the title in 2012 it is my contention that Coach K realized that instead he needed to follow Cal's plan of simply signing as much elite talent as possible and prioritizing talent over experience and abandoning the notion that you must have an upperclassman driven team to win a title. Again all the respect in the world to Duke and Coach K but my frustration stems from the fact that nobody will acknowledge that Duke is emulating Cal's model without giving him ANY credit.
Last edited:
I said noone develops elite talent like Cal. The Harrisons werent elite. Sad, but true. Even so, those were the only two well regarded players that didnt see their stock increase. K has a list a mile long. Austin Rivers? Trajon Langdon? Or how about 75% of the players drafted from Duke?
Look what Cal did with Harrelson. NOONE else couldve accomplished that level of development.
Listen. Youre offering up players like Lance Thomas and Shav Randolph as examples that your coach is a better developer of talent.
I dont even have to say anything else.
Lance Thomas and Shavlik Randolph were mentioned because a poster above posted what he thought was a list of every big K had coached. Turns out he missed a bunch of them, ranging from NBA All Stars (the poster missed three of those) to journeymen/bench guys. Shav and Lance have both played in the league. In fact, Lance Thomas might be an excellent example of development. Look at the guys who are ranked around the same as he was coming out of college (18th per RSCI.). How many are in the league? Very, very few, especially if those guys averaged like six and six as college seniors. So I don't see what the issue is there.
Here is the thing: how do we tell who has been developed?
If a guy is a top-ten talent and goes lottery in the NBA draft, did you really develop a player? A guy like Okafor or Wall... How much did they really get developed?
What about top guys who DONT end up "making it?" Do we really think they were some SUPER talent who got just ruined by a college coach? Or is it more likely they were over ranked when they were in high school, when they are playing against inferior opponents and often have a huge physical advantage over them?
What about the lower ranked guys who make it? Again, was it all thanks to their college coach, and without that coach they never would have made it? Or were they simply undervalued when in high school?
This is a big issue, but one that often gets overwhelmed by bias. Duke fans look at a guy like Grant Hill or Elton Brand or Kyrie Irving, guys who were huge talents in college and then became stars in the League, and see development. Duke fans look at a guy like Lance Thomas or Mason Plumlee and see lower ranked guys, guys in spots that rarely make the NBA, who are winning Newell awards and playing in the league... And we see development. Duke fans also see guys like Shav Randolph or Josh McRoberts, guys who were ranked very high in high school but who we saw as not being as good as expected in college, who didn't have the attitude you need to be "the man" and didn't have the physicality or skill to be top draft picks, and we see it more of a case of them not really being as good, ultimately, as their high school rankings.
You guys are very much the same. For every KAT or John Wall or Demarcus, guys who were superstars start to finish, and for every guy like WCS or even Jorts, who developed into successes, there are James Youngs and Harrison twins and Poy, guys who were top ranked recruits but who didn't really succeed as expected... But often, you say it is because they were over ranked and weren't as good as their rankings suggest.
So until there is some real consensus on how to measure development, it just seems incredibly homerific to say that Cal is some flawless developer of top talent except in cases where the guys weren't that good to begin with, and K is some ruiner of talent except where the talent is so good nobody could ruin it. Surely most of you see this, no?
Here is the thing: how do we tell who has been developed?
If a guy is a top-ten talent and goes lottery in the NBA draft, did you really develop a player? A guy like Okafor or Wall... How much did they really get developed?
What about top guys who DONT end up "making it?" Do we really think they were some SUPER talent who got just ruined by a college coach? Or is it more likely they were over ranked when they were in high school, when they are playing against inferior opponents and often have a huge physical advantage over them?
What about the lower ranked guys who make it? Again, was it all thanks to their college coach, and without that coach they never would have made it? Or were they simply undervalued when in high school?
This is a big issue, but one that often gets overwhelmed by bias. Duke fans look at a guy like Grant Hill or Elton Brand or Kyrie Irving, guys who were huge talents in college and then became stars in the League, and see development. Duke fans look at a guy like Lance Thomas or Mason Plumlee and see lower ranked guys, guys in spots that rarely make the NBA, who are winning Newell awards and playing in the league... And we see development. Duke fans also see guys like Shav Randolph or Josh McRoberts, guys who were ranked very high in high school but who we saw as not being as good as expected in college, who didn't have the attitude you need to be "the man" and didn't have the physicality or skill to be top draft picks, and we see it more of a case of them not really being as good, ultimately, as their high school rankings.
You guys are very much the same. For every KAT or John Wall or Demarcus, guys who were superstars start to finish, and for every guy like WCS or even Jorts, who developed into successes, there are James Youngs and Harrison twins and Poy, guys who were top ranked recruits but who didn't really succeed as expected... But often, you say it is because they were over ranked and weren't as good as their rankings suggest.
So until there is some real consensus on how to measure development, it just seems incredibly homerific to say that Cal is some flawless developer of top talent except in cases where the guys weren't that good to begin with, and K is some ruiner of talent except where the talent is so good nobody could ruin it. Surely most of you see this, no?
How many top 20 HS players are in the league? Id say quite a few actually.
Its pretty easy. Are they better than they were when they arrived? And by how much?
Wall had probably the least noticeable development of any elite Cal player, imo. He was just so physically advanced. But he learned to be a great teammate, run an offense, and play consistent defense. He was drafted #1 overall, but he was so elite he wouldve been drafted there no matter where he went.
A better example would be Cousins. Or KAT. Both came in with tools. Their growth during the season was incredible to watch. Cousins was in the running for #1 overall by seasons end, and KAT was taken #1 overall. Neither were anywhere close to that when they came to UK.
Davis is another example. A dominating defensive force, whos only offense was the lob. Cal developed an entire offense around the lob, and developed Davis' unstoppable jump hook and gave him a great stroke out to about 16 feet.
Okafor was dominant in the post coming in. Was dominant in the post when he left. Still couldnt hit a free throw, or any shot outside of 5 feet. No real improvement at all.
Young was 2nd in scoring for UK as a freshman. He was drafted in the lottery and is a millionaire. Hes in his second season.
The Harrisons both made rosters and are millionaires. Poy wouldve been in a similar spot had he not tore an ACL. Either way, his college career isnt even over.
Funny thing - this is about as close as it gets to a Cal "failure". A lottery pick whos yet to play 3 seasons in the league and is developing into a good player, or two other millionaires who are on NBA rosters.
Noone said hes flawless. Noone said K is a "ruiner of talent". Those are poor strawman attempts. What we're saying, is Cal is better at developing talent than anyone else. K is good too. But not as good as Cal. Thats not homerism. Thats just a fact.
Duke has a beautiful campus, no doubt, and it's a great academic institution, but let's not pretend it's perfect. For all the blather about Rupp's supposed racism from 50 years ago - all accusations by the way leveled at a dead man who could no longer defend himself - there have been some very ugly incidents in the last few years at Duke involving racism - the noose on campus, the racist comments from the Duke professor. Then there have been the ugly incidents involving sexism, rape allegations, etc (the Lacrosse team, Sulaimon). Hardly Shangri-La. Duke has emerged unscathed from all that because the media just doesn't want to expose them. You guys operate under a media cloak of silence that most other universities simply don't.
Duke is also - let's be real - Rich Kid University. UK on the other hand is an "everyman" public university representing kids from all walks of life. Some recruits - like Okafor - might love the idea of rooming with a millionaire, but there are also plenty of recruits who'd rather go to school with regular kids.
Maybe Giles is of the latter mindset - or maybe the opportunity to play with his BFF will win out. Whatever - don't come over here crowing about how awesome Duke is - the reality is that Duke and UK typically inhabit different stratospheres when it comes to attracting recruits. You guys are going to get white collar kids like Tatum, Okafor, Parker, Jackson, Jones, and Rivers. We're going to get blue-collar kids like Wall, Cousins, Davis, Randle, Towns, Ulis, etc. I'm okay with that.
Duke is also - let's be real - Rich Kid University. UK on the other hand is an "everyman" public university representing kids from all walks of life. Some recruits - like Okafor - might love the idea of rooming with a millionaire, but there are also plenty of recruits who'd rather go to school with regular kids.
Maybe Giles is of the latter mindset - or maybe the opportunity to play with his BFF will win out. Whatever - don't come over here crowing about how awesome Duke is - the reality is that Duke and UK typically inhabit different stratospheres when it comes to attracting recruits. You guys are going to get white collar kids like Tatum, Okafor, Parker, Jackson, Jones, and Rivers. We're going to get blue-collar kids like Wall, Cousins, Davis, Randle, Towns, Ulis, etc. I'm okay with that.
See, you are doing exactly what I said we can't do, if we want to have any sort of objective conversation.
You say you judge development by just watching players. You talk about how Demarcus Cousins, the 3rd ranked recruit in the country (and not #2 because there was a guy named John Wall in that class), came in "with tools" and somehow then developed into the fifth pick in the draft, and that this was some amazing example of development, although Okafor... he didn't develop or something. And then you go on to display the point I was making; every one of your guys who WASN'T a top pick despite being a top high school recruit has some OTHER reason they are successful... they made money, so that is success, or they are still early in their career even though they've spent a bunch of time in the D league, or whathaveyou.
And in this same thread you have Kentucky fans calling a NPOY candidate, best big in the country, NBA Rookie-All teamer in his second year a bust of a big, bashing guys like Josh McRoberts, who has made a TON of dough and is a valuable NBA player, and saying K cannot really prepare bigs for the League.
That's the problem; you guys only REALLY watch your own guys, just like Duke fans watch their own guys and Kansas fans watch THEIR own guys. You love your own school and own coach and own players, and will find reasons the ones who succeeded succeeded because of Cal and Kentucky, and reasons why the ones who DIDN'T succeed... well, that isn't really on Cal. And when you compare, uou guys don't really know how players on other teams develop. You certainly don't know how Mason Plumlee came in as a barely-top-20 talent who couldn't catch a damn ball, couldn't shoot, and couldn't play a LICK of D, and left as literally the best big in the nation. Instead, you call him a bust. You don't see that Lance Thomas, a barely-top-20 talent who couldn't do ANYTHING on the basketball floor, turned into a reliable NBA player and part-time starter.
And yet you are quick to judge every other coach in the country by saying that YOUR coach is the best. Hell, you've had guys in this very thread say that K can't develop NBA bigs despite the fact that he's put a BUNCH, including All-Stars, into the league.
It is just such ridiculous homerism. I guess if that is as far as the conversation can go, so be it.
Oh, and I won't even get into the ridiculousness that is the list of "white collar" kids that Duke has recruited. You CLEARLY don't know a thing about a lot of the kids who have played at Duke, including a bunch of the ones you listed. And your crazy idea about what Duke is? Yikes. Talk about stereotyping. You clearly just believe whatever BS you read on nonsense websites. Having spent four years at Duke, and having a HUGE network of insanely diverse friends who also went there, there are only three true commonalities between them: 1) They are all WICKED smart, 2) They are all super, super driven people, and 3) They all work HARD. And you wonder why a kid who has worked and sacrificed his whole life to make it to the NBA might want to be around those type of people? Really?
Last edited:
Giles is likely going to Duke. I hate it, but it's looking that way.
I am just hoping we get Fox, Monk, and Bridges. I'm good with that. Those guys and one more elite big and we are in good shape.
Duke will be tough next season, but with that trio and another elite big, we will be right there in the thick of the title race in 2016-17.
I am just hoping we get Fox, Monk, and Bridges. I'm good with that. Those guys and one more elite big and we are in good shape.
Duke will be tough next season, but with that trio and another elite big, we will be right there in the thick of the title race in 2016-17.
Well the way you, TUL, and Mark post in succession is infinitely creepy, so there's that.
Uhm okay, I know this is a losing battle, but I can't resist, because some of you are SO strange.
Yes, Cameron is one of the most beautiful damn arenas on the planet. I don't need big video boards, I don't need blaring music, I don't need expensive lounges, I don't need luxury boxes. Real fans don't need that nonsense. I need actual fans on the court instead of big money ticket holders, a beautiful court, classic lines, rich wood, brass accents, and lots of lots of banners, all in a most intimate of arenas. Most of the people who have been to Cameron and who really appreciate basketball know how special of a place it is. Maybe some of you are too young and too much in the video game generation to understand... you think what makes an arena is fitting lots of people and having rap music blaring during the game and having bars to stand in while a game is going on. But there is a reason Cameron is considered by many to be the best basketball arena on the planet. Sorry if that gets a few of the more wacked out KY fans in an uproar, but that is fact, as much as you'd like to deny it.
And Duke campus is awe-inspiring. Having spent four years there, lying in the shade of the Chapel, sitting on the benches on the middle of West, walking through the arches of the library... I've been to the cement mess that is NC State, I visited the mish-mosh that is Chapel Hill during my recruitment, and nothing compared to Duke. Duke campus is often rated as among the most beautiful of all college campuses, and heck, even Durham recently got named a top five college town.
Anyway, I know this might be pointless because some of you are SOOOO deep into your "OMG Duke sucks Cameron sucks arrgghh!" crazytime that facts won't matter, but...
Hilarious!
"Start up the bus" It may be time for the latest greatest guest to go.Uhm okay, I know this is a losing battle, but I can't resist, because some of you are SO strange.
Yes, Cameron is one of the most beautiful damn arenas on the planet. I don't need big video boards, I don't need blaring music, I don't need expensive lounges, I don't need luxury boxes. Real fans don't need that nonsense. I need actual fans on the court instead of big money ticket holders, a beautiful court, classic lines, rich wood, brass accents, and lots of lots of banners, all in a most intimate of arenas. Most of the people who have been to Cameron and who really appreciate basketball know how special of a place it is. Maybe some of you are too young and too much in the video game generation to understand... you think what makes an arena is fitting lots of people and having rap music blaring during the game and having bars to stand in while a game is going on. But there is a reason Cameron is considered by many to be the best basketball arena on the planet. Sorry if that gets a few of the more wacked out KY fans in an uproar, but that is fact, as much as you'd like to deny it.
And Duke campus is awe-inspiring. Having spent four years there, lying in the shade of the Chapel, sitting on the benches on the middle of West, walking through the arches of the library... I've been to the cement mess that is NC State, I visited the mish-mosh that is Chapel Hill during my recruitment, and nothing compared to Duke. Duke campus is often rated as among the most beautiful of all college campuses, and heck, even Durham recently got named a top five college town.
Anyway, I know this might be pointless because some of you are SOOOO deep into your "OMG Duke sucks Cameron sucks arrgghh!" crazytime that facts won't matter, but...
Cal has had to do it the hard way imo. He has been portrayed very unfairly by some journalists who had an axe to grind. The Durham darling on the other hand gets the golden child treatment.
Cal overcame all of that and made it to the HOF in spite of some unethical "journalists". The guy in Durham amazingly changed his view and opinion when Cal was killing it in recruiting and getting all the attention. Before he was all about "doing it the right way". Complete phony
Cal overcame all of that and made it to the HOF in spite of some unethical "journalists". The guy in Durham amazingly changed his view and opinion when Cal was killing it in recruiting and getting all the attention. Before he was all about "doing it the right way". Complete phony
i agree that it is borderline creepy
but it is no more borderline creepy then a rival fan coming to this board talking about his sexual activities
Splinter.
![[roll]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/roll.r191677.gif "roll [roll]")
Uhm okay, I know this is a losing battle, but I can't resist, because some of you are SO strange.
Yes, Cameron is one of the most beautiful damn arenas on the planet. I don't need big video boards, I don't need blaring music, I don't need expensive lounges, I don't need luxury boxes. Real fans don't need that nonsense. I need actual fans on the court instead of big money ticket holders, a beautiful court, classic lines, rich wood, brass accents, and lots of lots of banners, all in a most intimate of arenas. Most of the people who have been to Cameron and who really appreciate basketball know how special of a place it is. Maybe some of you are too young and too much in the video game generation to understand... you think what makes an arena is fitting lots of people and having rap music blaring during the game and having bars to stand in while a game is going on. But there is a reason Cameron is considered by many to be the best basketball arena on the planet. Sorry if that gets a few of the more wacked out KY fans in an uproar, but that is fact, as much as you'd like to deny it.
And Duke campus is awe-inspiring. Having spent four years there, lying in the shade of the Chapel, sitting on the benches on the middle of West, walking through the arches of the library... I've been to the cement mess that is NC State, I visited the mish-mosh that is Chapel Hill during my recruitment, and nothing compared to Duke. Duke campus is often rated as among the most beautiful of all college campuses, and heck, even Durham recently got named a top five college town.
Anyway, I know this might be pointless because some of you are SOOOO deep into your "OMG Duke sucks Cameron sucks arrgghh!" crazytime that facts won't matter, but...
How did one of the garbage players at Duke, remember now, enrolled at Duke and playing on the Saints team, buy over 100k worth of jewelry?
Enjoy that long ass sentence. (Drops mic).
False.Uh, does anyone go to college still a virgin? Shit, I had already had my first three way by the time I stepped foot on campusBut I guess everyone starts at a different age.
What youre missing, is that an objective conversation doesnt mean that you always win. Use the eyeball test, the NBA draft results, the current NBA contract value - use whatever method you want. Cal is still better at developing players. Period.
Your coach is better at winning titles. I dont have a problem admitting that. Thats being objective.
The only three-way he's experienced is the weird literary one he, Mark, and Neus engage in on a weekly basis here on this message board.
Sorry for the long post here but I just had to open a can on this arrogant Pukie.
I don't even know where to begin with this idiotic and biased post. You sit there and talk about us thinking we are the center on the universe? How about you take a good long look in the mirror because your post screams arrogance. Not to mention that it is COMPLETELY FULL OF HOLES and just untrue statements.
First, Towns was ranked #2 by 247 but did you see the composite rankings, which takes info from all the major services? Well, your boy Okafor was #1 with Towns at #5 and most every other service had Okafor at top. So, please spare me the speech that Towns was simply always really number 1 pick and thus it was supposed to happen when actually the opposite is true. Okafor was the projected #1 for FOREVER (years) and continued to be until about midway through the season. His weaknesses were exposed during the year and yet he never seemed to improve on those glaring weaknesses. Also, please explain to me what your point was by comparing the minutes of Towns and Okafor? That is completely irrelevant. Yes, Towns would have scored more and had a higher scoring average and rebound average if he played more but the league looks at your productivity while you are on the court, so comparing minutes doesn't mean shite. Towns did face double teams as well. It always amazes me how rival fans talk as though they have seen every UK game of the season when you probably have seen just a handful, including the tourney. But those double teams you speak of doesn't mean anything because Okafors weakness is on the other end of the court. He is an amazingly gifted offensive player but he needs serious work on the defensive end. As Okafor weaknesses began to glare, Towns was DEVELOPING and becoming a STUD in many different facets of the game. All you have to do is look at both players at the start of the season and the end of the season. That proves my point right there. Towns was a MUCH IMPROVED AND MORE DEVELOPED player when the season ended. Okafor was somewhat proved nut not nearly as much as Towns. So, please spare me the excuse Town's surge to #1 was simply a reflection of the times in the NBA with more teams going after the "new age" center like Towns. Centers like Okafor are still very much in demand and still command the top billing as a centerpiece of a team. That is just a typical excuse from a Duke fan. Just an EXCUSE! So, now that I shot that notion of yours all to hell, I'll be moving on to your other ridiculous points.
Really quick, other than Kyrie (does he actually claim going to Duke since he hardly played a game), please tell me these other Duke players that are in high demand for endorsements? Because I'm having a really hard time even coming up with 1 player. Grant Hill was too long ago to count. Jabari hasn't done anything to warrant a big endorsement and was helped by Dukes run in tourney. Duke's tourney runs, now that's a whole other beast to start on and I'm just going to pass on that for tonight. Let's just say I would love to be able to switch brackets with Duke come tourney time every year.
Touching on your comment that for every success that Cal has with a player, there is another that doesn't make it. Please, Please, PLEASE, provide some proof or some legit info that will prove your point. You mentioned the twins. Did it ever cross your mind that they were overrated coming out of HS? Most experts will agree an have said so themselves. However, for the sake of argument, lets say that they were complete busts for Cal at UK. Poythress has had disappointing years, as a top recruit anyway, but if he doesn't go down last year, he is a 1st rounder. Ok, with those 3 players out of the way, please tell me the other players that DiDNT develop and move on? Can you think of any others? You could possibly say Ryan Harrow but that's about it. Do we want to start naming players from Duke that didn't develop and fizzled out. At least the players you listed from UK we're drafted as sophomores and will be drafted after this year I'm Poythress. However, these coaches aren't perfect, ours included, and they're going to have players that don't develop as quickly as others. That's just human nature.
Lastly, do you honestly believe that anyone on this board is going to agree with you on any of your points? It was filled with holes and excuses for things that any typical college basketball fan see quite easily. If you had any legit facts then I could at least respect your post but it didnt, so I couldn't
Lol. It is very hard to argue that Cal is the very best in the busines at adapting his coaching, developing players quickly, and getting through to these young players to get the most out of their talent, which is an actual skill also. While there are others that do a good job, there is nobody better in this business than our coach and I wouldn't trade him for any, including yours. I find it funny that most Duke fans bitched about one and dones and how bad it was for college ball and how Coach K does it rhe right way and blah, blah, zippity do freakin da. Now that Coach K has taken a liking to our strategy, Dukies are singing a different tune. Please go back to your board with all your nonsense and arrogance because You're not convincing anyone here, I guarantee that.
And take your followers and likes with ya!!!
Last edited:
on another note......let's not forget that ALL 3 plumlees have natty rings......ALL 3......
It's a hell of a lot better than western NC I can tell you that. I prefer eastern NC BBQ over pork drowned in ketchup and mustard based sauce.
Vinegar based BBQ is Awesome, There is a lot of work to making it.. I have never had any one not like mine..
Hard to post on THR when the mods ban every poster that doesn't praise UNC. This board is a lot more welcoming to posters from other fanbases, though this thread is hardly an indication of that fact. Thankfully your mods are a lot more welcoming than several in this thread.
Well, you guys hate Kentucky and also represent the school whose players/coach play fall down/flop/sissy ball like no other can. Your team is a disgrace to the game.
Go away.
Perfect example of what I just talked about. Not surprising you aren't a mod.
![[winking]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/wink.r191677.gif "Winking [winking]")
PT, (Is that anything like ET?) While I agree with you about the Walleye I have to probably part ways with you on the vinegar BBQ(Especially as a base.). Like part of what Uncle Jed said; "It's edible".... I'd rather taste the meat. Vinegar in most amounts would ruin some good BBQ. ****(I would have to reserve final judgement until a proper taste test.)**** I can see a little for some tart but "very" little and not a base. (I'd rather add a little soy paste) I'd save the vinegar for the pickles...
Sorry OP....back on topic...
