Giles to Duke.

[Rage4CUSE]

Giles and his partially torn MCL heading to Duke. Wonder how many games they get from him in his only year there.

 

[jdubs30]

Still love our squad next year

 

[Zelda Zonk]

No. 1 and No. 2. Sick. Scary.
The move to the ACC is not going to be good for us, long-term.

 

[Dave85]

No. 1 and No. 2. Sick. Scary.
The move to the ACC is not going to be good for us, long-term.

I don't know if I agree with this sentiment. Short or long term is about the same result. As long as our recruiting is solid the program will be fine. We have good history, nice facilities, high profile TV games, and the Dome playing experience. We will continue to draw great players and have great teams for a very long time in my opinion.

 

[orange79]

No. 1 and No. 2. Sick. Scary.
The move to the ACC is not going to be good for us, long-term.

Right, because the old BE was a cake walk.

 

[Dave85]

Still love our squad next year

At some point, the 2-3 zone is going to enable the Orange to beat a few teams they would otherwise have no chance of beating. It's been long time since we had a really good fast break team off of defensive turnovers. At some point the Orange will return to their fast break glory and beat some really good teams. I just can't imagine how our zone will look with 7'2" guy at center!

As long as DC2 remains strong this season may have some good moments too!

 

[Rage4CUSE]

No. 1 and No. 2. Sick. Scary.
The move to the ACC is not going to be good for us, long-term.

I have a feeling this #1 recruit is more like Shabazz Muhammed then Jahlil Okafor.

 

[Brooky03]

Upperclassmen Top 40 recruit > Freshman Top 5 recruit

 

[SUintheVille]

Even if Duke is getting great recruits, this is good for SU. Keep top talent in the ACC, it's good for the whole league, and makes other top recruits want to play in ACC, SU included.

Sick of UK getting all the top recruits too.

 

[orange79]

Even if Duke is getting great recruits, this is good for SU. Keep top talent in the ACC, it's good for the whole league, and makes other top recruits want to play in ACC, SU included.

Sick of UK getting all the top recruits too.

A rising tide...

 

[two3zone]

Upperclassmen Top 40 recruit > Freshman Top 5 recruit

Who would you have taken over Okafor last year? Wiggins the year before? Anthony Davis the year before that? It's a lazy statement as most top 5 freshman are collecting pay checks by the time the rest of the top 40 from their HS class is still in college. There's a reason these guys are top 5 coming into college, they're insanely good players. You'd take DC2 over Ben Simmons?

 

[wallacecuse]

No. 1 and No. 2. Sick. Scary.
The move to the ACC is not going to be good for us, long-term.

But the AAC would be good? Can't look at this in a vacuum.

 

[Brooky03]

Who would you have taken over Okafor last year? Wiggins the year before? Anthony Davis the year before that? It's a lazy statement as most top 5 freshman are collecting pay checks by the time the rest of the top 40 from their HS class is still in college. There's a reason these guys are top 5 coming into college, they're insanely good players. You'd take DC2 over Ben Simmons?

Anthony Davis is a once in a generation talent unlike the others, so it's safe to call him the exception to the rule. Even so, the NBA drafts on potential more than anything else, so NBA draft position means little to nothing in this argument. It's a lazy argument to say there weren't juniors and seniors playing at the same time as the players you listed who were just as valuable or more valuable to their teams. I'm not going to dig through stats, but maybe somebody here is willing to do the leg work. I'm confident with my position regarding this topic.

 

[wallacecuse]

Anthony Davis is a once in a generation talent unlike the others, so it's safe to call him the exception to the rule. Even so, the NBA drafts on potential more than anything else, so NBA draft position means little to nothing in this argument. It's a lazy argument to say there weren't juniors and seniors playing at the same time as the players you listed who were just as valuable or more valuable to their teams. I'm not going to dig through stats, but maybe somebody here is willing to do the leg work. I'm confident with my position regarding this topic.

A players value to their team, and being the better player are two separate arguments. I love Rakeem, and he was our most important player last year, but we all saw what happened when he went h2h with Okafor. Remember, you said top 40 upperclassmen>top 5 freshmen.

 

[orangefan13]

Okafor was a superior physcial specimen as well.
Most freshmen need to put some weight on.
Very very rare you see freshmen bigs with that much weight ready to dominate.

 

[Brooky03]

A players value to their team, and being the better player are two separate arguments. I love Rakeem, and he was our most important player last year, but we all saw what happened when he went h2h with Okafor. Remember, you said top 40 upperclassmen>top 5 freshmen.

I was saying teams had upperclassmen who gave them as much or more value than those freshman would have given them. I'm aware of my argument.

 

[kirbivore]

No. 1 and No. 2. Sick. Scary.
The move to the ACC is not going to be good for us, long-term.

Not it won't. It's all about the dollars

 

[Oakland]

I think the NCs last season started 3 frosh and not all of them were top 5.

Upperclassmen Top 40 recruit > Freshman Top 5 recruit

 

[two3zone]

I was saying teams had upperclassmen who gave them as much or more value than those freshman would have given them. I'm aware of my argument.

Without Melo and Gmac we wouldn't have a title.

Top 5 freshman are usually AMAZING talent who are normally lottery picks after their first year. They're also incredibly valuable to their respective teams. I understand your argument but you're underestimating these guys.

 

[two3zone]

I was saying teams had upperclassmen who gave them as much or more value than those freshman would have given them. I'm aware of my argument.

I would take Ben Simmons over any player on our team this year. That's not a knock on our team, that's recognizing a great player.

 

[Brooky03]

Without Melo and Gmac we wouldn't have a title.

Top 5 freshman are usually AMAZING talent who are normally lottery picks after their first year. They're also incredibly valuable to their respective teams. I understand your argument but you're underestimating these guys.

Nobody's arguing freshman aren't valuable. Yes, they can obviously be big parts of a successful team.

For being amazing talents though, they don't typically outpace the best upperclassmen in statistical performance by a wide margin. The usual thought when watching them is, 'Holy crap, this guy is amazing for a freshman'. If a senior put up 18 and 9 on great shooting, what's the thought? 'Wow, this guy is really good; too bad he couldn't do this before. Both players are equally good college players however. One probably has significantly more talent; the other makes up for it with significantly more experience.

NCAA All-Americans last year: 3 upperclassmen not considered top-tier (top 5 or 10 or whatever) recruits, 2 freshman. 2 of the upperclassmen were more like top 100 recruits than top 40, depending on the site you use, but that only further proves my point.

 

[Brooky03]

I would take Ben Simmons over any player on our team this year. That's not a knock on our team, that's recognizing a great player.

I'd take Gbinije over him, but that's personal preference. Not every above average (top 40 or however you want to quantify it) recruit is going to be better as an upperclassman than every top 5 (or 10, or whatever 'elite' is) OAD freshman, and vice versa.

 

[two3zone]

Nobody's arguing freshman aren't valuable. Yes, they can obviously be big parts of a successful team.

For being amazing talents though, they don't typically outpace the best upperclassmen in statistical performance by a wide margin. The usual thought when watching them is, 'Holy crap, this guy is amazing for a freshman'. If a senior put up 18 and 9 on great shooting, what's the thought? 'Wow, this guy is really good; too bad he couldn't do this before. Both players are equally good college players however. One probably has significantly more talent; the other makes up for it with significantly more experience.

NCAA All-Americans last year: 3 upperclassmen not considered top-tier (top 5 or 10 or whatever) recruits, 2 freshman. 2 of the upperclassmen were more like top 100 recruits than top 40, depending on the site you use, but that only further proves my point.

You're putting up 5 guys who play one year against around 35 other guys that are playing up to 4 years. Of course there are most likely going to be more AA are not freshman. The fact there are two freshman on the list says a lot about freshman talent.

 

[two3zone]

I'd take Gbinije over him, but that's personal preference. Not every above average (top 40 or however you want to quantify it) recruit is going to be better as an upperclassman than every top 5 (or 10, or whatever 'elite' is) OAD freshman, and vice versa.

You're right, it goes both ways, but the majority of top 5 guys that come into college ball do really really well and are an asset to whatever team they play on. They're far more a sure thing than the rest of the pool.

 

[Brooky03]

You're putting up 5 guys who play one year against around 35 other guys that are playing up to 4 years. Of course there are most likely going to be more AA are not freshman. The fact there are two freshman on the list says a lot about freshman talent.

Then expand the range to include all OAD talents, which is like 10+ each year.

The only reason I used specific numbers was to make a succinct statement. We're talking about OAD vs 'non-OAD but expected to be really good' upperclassmen, basically.