Let me hear your thoughts on this one...If you're out there in the cyberspace constellation, jump in...
First off, I respect the Duke Blue Devil basketball tradition. I respect the high level of talent that Mike Krzyzewski procures each year, and undeniably they have been the powerhouse of ACC basketball this past season.
However, I was in a huge argument last night with a guy (to be unamed) who played for Eddie Fogler at South Carolina. He insisted that rankings aside...The reason that why Duke basketball is special is because Duke receives players who are not elite talent level players, but yet they develop into solid college basketball players.
My nemesis prefaced this by stating. "Of course, they are McDonalds' and Parade Magazine All-Americans. Yet, they become rated higher because Duke starts recruiting them in their junior year.
As a result, despite their average talent, high basketball I.Q. and mental states, they become rated higher because they're Duke recruits or better yet, average talent with the Duke brand stamped upon them. When it comes down to it, they still are sub-par the elite level of high-school players that year that would go to UNC or other elite schools. My guess is that he is referring to the one or two elite level players that a UConn, Georgia Tech, Texas, or a Louisville receives each year.
The bottom line is that is argument states Coach Mike Krzyzewski gets the most out of his average talent players in the college game.
I told him that he was having too many scotches...But I really thought is this true? Are the players that he recieves really average talent in the overall scheme of recruiting, and is he choosing average players?
I listed a number of guys that were considered elite level players who did not live up to full potential (Ricky Price, Joey Beard, Will Avery) and guys who were considered elite level players (Christian Laettner, Shane Battier, Bobby Hurley, Jason Williams) that have made up Duke teams in years past.
He ignored the latter, and his reply to Beard, Price, and Avery was that despite the McDonald's ratings, they were average players going in and rankings puffed players real potential...His examples were: (Mike Dunleavy, Trajan Langdon, Chris Duhon, Crawford Palmer, Chris Collins, Sean Dockery, and Steve Wojciechowski).
My response to this is that regardless of that talent level. A coach at that level is chooses to go with a particular target in the elite level of class. And there is not a coach in America that would not slay a chancellor in cold blood to receive a recruiting talent such as Dunleavy, Collins, or a Duhon. Keep in mind, that each of the aforementioned was highly coveted and by the end of the year were at the top of their position ranks.
Now, what sparked me was that he stated at UNC, the coaches choose a different type of elite level of player a la Felton, Wallace, McInnis, Carter. One that is highly talented going in and should be leaving with hardware coming out.
So, I know my answers, but please assist me with this one.
Are the high school player rankings lying most of the time? Are Duke recruits just marginal players and rated higher because they're coachable and well-rounded kids?
Comments are appreciated, and feel free to post them here.
Later note to keep in mind...We left on non-speaking terms when we argued for twenty minutes or so whether or not Grant Hill was soft in the NBA. I argued there is not much a difference between Vince Carter and Hill. The dude went "Bronco"...That's a whole other story.
Touch on if you will...It goes to show you the level of female talent in my local haunt last night...
Last Call for You,
IronDog
