Nerlens Noel

[OrangeDW]

Where did Moqui trash Noel? He was complimentary, just stated that he didn't like the fit.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

I wasn't referring to moqui.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

My bad.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[NineOneSeven]

You don't like our sour grapes???? Nerlens Noel is god awful, he'll never make money in the NBA or any organization around the world... but mainly because he didn't come to Syracuse.

He's decent and will have a long NBA career. But it's quite clear he isn't the best player in this class. He didn't match the hype.

He's played 3 games?

 

[moqui]

I think it's funny when people justify us not getting Noel by saying we're better off without him. At the end of the day, everyone on this board wanted him to come here. It's a lot easier to find faults with players when they aren't on your team.

I was open (and ridiculed) during the recruiting process that I didn't think he was the best fit and that we would actually be better off without him (while allowing of course that JB knows what he is doing better than I ever will)

 

[MyMeloMyMan]

I was open (and ridiculed) during the recruiting process that I didn't think he was the best fit and that we would actually be better off without him (while allowing of course that JB knows what he is doing better than I ever will)

Why is that Moqui? With the way we are recruiting, I wouldn't think a one and done couldn't really hurt us much.

 

[Knicks411]

I was open (and ridiculed) during the recruiting process that I didn't think he was the best fit and that we would actually be better off without him (while allowing of course that JB knows what he is doing better than I ever will)

I respect your opinion but I disagree with you on this one.

 

[RF2044]

I respect your opinion but I disagree with you on this one.

Personally speaking, I think Moqui is spot on with that assessment. And that is not a knock against Noel's potential. Where do people see him getting PT on this team, with the frontcourt we have?

We already had Coleman in the fold. Rak looks to have taken a signficant step forward as a sophmore in terms of ability to contribute. CJ and Southerland are going to play a ton, even together, of minutes at forward. Keita is an experienced junior. And Grant is no slouch for a frosh. Again, not disputing Noel's pro potential down the road, but who does he play / start ahead of? And I'm not talking about the CONCEPT of Noel, as the preseason projected #1 pick in the draft, I'm talking about where Noel currently is on his developmental curve today.

Seems to me like at best he'd be a wash with Rak. Noel would have been a great pickup from a publicity standpoint, but he was way more of a nice to have than a need to have. I contend--and I'm fairly certain that Moqui shares this belief to varying degrees--that we might have the top frontcourt in the nation with the guys we already have. Without Noel.

 

[PoppyHart]

Personally speaking, I think Moqui is spot on with that assessment. And that is not a knock against Noel's potential. Where do people see him getting PT on this team, with the frontcourt we have?

We already had Coleman in the fold. Rak looks to have taken a signficant step forward as a sophmore in terms of ability to contribute. CJ and Southerland are going to play a ton, even together, of minutes at forward. Keita is an experienced junior. And Grant is no slouch for a frosh. Again, not disputing Noel's pro potential down the road, but who does he play / start ahead of? And I'm not talking about the CONCEPT of Noel, as the preseason projected #1 pick in the draft, I'm talking about where Noel currently is on his developmental curve today.

Seems to me like at best he'd be a wash with Rak. Noel would have been a great pickup from a publicity standpoint, but he was way more of a nice to have than a need to have. I contend--and I'm fairly certain that Moqui shares this belief to varying degrees--that we might have the top frontcourt in the nation with the guys we already have. Without Noel.

I think Noel is much further along the developmental curve than people give him credit for.

 

[Knicks411]

I think any time you have a chance to get the top recruit in the country you go for it and then figure the rotation out later. And this seems to be what we were doing, since as far as I know we were in on Noel the entire way, yes?

We already had Coleman in the fold. Rak looks to have taken a signficant step forward as a sophmore in terms of ability to contribute. CJ and Southerland are going to play a ton, even together, of minutes at forward. Keita is an experienced junior. And Grant is no slouch for a frosh. Again, not disputing Noel's pro potential down the road, but who does he play / start ahead of?

I don't think Keita and Grant are even in the conversation re: Noel. Those guys shouldn't take a second of playing time from him. Even if you say that Rak is a wash with Noel, as you do below (this is debatable; you very may well be correct, it's just obviously too early to say either way) any minute than Keita plays is one that Noel could be playing, and I believe pretty easily we'd be better off with Noel playing those minutes.

And if we had Noel then my guess is you wouldn't see James and CJ play too many minutes together.

Noel would have been a great pickup from a publicity standpoint, but he was way more of a nice to have than a need to have

Sure, and I don't think anyone said he was a need to have. But I don't think we'd be worse off for having the #1 recruit in the country, even if we do have a lot of guys who can play his position.

Also, the fact that we're having this conversation probably tells you a lot of the reason Noel ended up going to Kentucky. He's going to get all the playing time he wants there and that may or may not have been the case here.

And the fact of te matter is it's way too early for us to be deciding any of this. I'm very bullish on Rak, I think he's going to be a really good player and I've been saying that since about February of last year. Coleman is hopefully going to give them a dimension (low post scoring) that neither Noel or any of the other big guys on the roster can give us. But let's also not forget Coleman couldn't even crack 10 minutes in the first game of the season yet. Noel took some flack on this board for how he looked in the first game of the season and how he isn't ready; I can't imagine what people would've been saying about him if he played 9 minutes in the first game of the year. And even back to Rak; he scored 3 points in the first game of the season. It's just one game, but I'm just saying it's not like our big guys came out of the gate looking like All Americans or anything.

My larger point isn't to knock any of the guys we have. You say we might have the best frontcourt in the country without Noel, and we very well could. But I think it would be better with him. He was definitely a luxury though.

 

[RF2044]

I think any time you have a chance to get the top recruit in the country you go for it and then figure the rotation out later. And this seems to be what we were doing, since as far as I know we were in on Noel the entire way, yes?

We did go for him. And were a finalist.

I don't think Keita and Grant are even in the conversation re: Noel. Those guys shouldn't take a second of playing time from him. Even if you say that Rak is a wash with Noel, as you do below (this is debatable; you very may well be correct, it's just obviously too early to say either way) any minute than Keita plays is one that Noel could be playing, and I believe pretty easily we'd be better off with Noel playing those minutes.

Okay, so your point is that the #1 recruit in the country would come here and be improve our backup center play? Okay...I guess I'll concede that point.

People need to disavow themselves of the notion that Noel is on par with Anthony Davis. He may prove to be comparable as a shot blocker--emphasis on "may"--but is significantly behind as both a rebounder and as an offensive player. In that last regard, he isn't really even in the same league as Davis. Which is why I think his contributions would be comparable to what Rak will provide this year. Time will tell.

And if we had Noel then my guess is you wouldn't see James and CJ play too many minutes together.

Completely disagree on this one. Again, I think you need to account for where Noel is on the developmental curve. The guys he would be contending with playing time would be Coleman / Rak. Whether he took minutes away from either of them [which is debatable], he wouldn't siphon time away from two of our most prolific scorers. CJ and Southerland are going to play a TON this season, and often play together with one of the bigs.

Sure, and I don't think anyone said he was a need to have. But I don't think we'd be worse off for having the #1 recruit in the country, even if we do have a lot of guys who can play his position.

And the fact of te matter is it's way too early for us to be deciding any of this. I'm very bullish on Rak, I think he's going to be a really good player and I've been saying that since about February of last year. Coleman is hopefully going to give them a dimension (low post scoring) that neither Noel or any of the other big guys on the roster can give us. But let's also not forget Coleman couldn't even crack 10 minutes in the first game of the season yet. Noel took some flack on this board for how he looked in the first game of the season and how he isn't ready; I can't imagine what people would've been saying about him if he played 9 minutes in the first game of the year. And even back to Rak; he scored 3 points in the first game of the season. It's just one game, but I'm just saying it's not like our big guys came out of the gate looking like All Americans or anything.

Here's what I think: people pointing to what Coleman or Noel did in their first games and drawing definitive conclusions about what they are capable of are operating from a very small data set. In Noel's case, this is based upon watching a ton of game footage when we were actively recruiting him, and not seeing much different in the first few games. Again, I'm not saying that he won't be a good pro, that he can't be a top draft pick, that he won't improve exponentially in a year or two or three, etc. -- my only point is that RIGHT NOW his game is unrefined. I don't think there are many who would agree with that assessment.

In our player's case, he was getting his first taste of game action against a ranked team in a hostile venue in bizarre weather conditions. I don't read anything into the amount of PT he got--JB went with veteran guys because he trusts those guys. Let's see how many minutes Coleman is earning a few games into the schedule, after he gets his sea legs [pun intended] and earns JB's trust a little.

My larger point isn't to knock any of the guys we have. You say we might have the best frontcourt in the country without Noel, and we very well could. But I think it would be better with him. He was definitely a luxury though.

I don't agree with that conclusion. If you want to say that we'd be better off with Noel over Coleman [for example], then that is an interesting debate point, one I don't necessarily agree with. I just don't think that Noel brings anything appreciably different to the table than some of our other guys, Rak in particular, and as you state above I think his path to PT this season was much more advantageous at UK than it would be if he'd come here. That says a lot.

 

[RF2044]

I think Noel is much further along the developmental curve than people give him credit for.

Based upon what exactly? Because I see very little evidence to back that up after watching the majority of his first two games [and he was much better in the second game, for the record].

 

[Knicks411]

Okay, so your point is that the #1 recruit in the country would come here and be improve our backup center play? Okay...I guess I'll concede that point.

Not really; if Noel came here I think he'd be playing starters minutes, but the Moqui's point was that we might be better off without Noel. So even if Noel just improved on the back up C minutes, then we'd be better with him than without.

People need to disavow themselves of the notion that Noel is on par with Anthony Davis. He may prove to be comparable as a shot blocker--emphasis on "may"--but is significantly behind as both a rebounder and as an offensive player. In that last regard, he isn't really even in the same league as Davis. Which is why I think he is comparable to what Rak will be this year. Time will tell.

I would 100% agree with this. Davis was one of the best freshmen in NCAA history. It may be worth mentioning though that it isn't like Davis was putting up huge offensive numbers right away. (He did score 23 points in 23 minutes in his first game, but that was Morehead St). His second career game was Kansas (similar to UK's second game this year, against Duke). He put up 14 points; Noel scored 16 against Duke. The point is less that I think Noel will be Davis, because I don't, but that young big men can improve pretty quickly. (Note- this is also true for our guys as well)

Completely disagree on this one. Again, I think you need to account for where Noel is on the developmental curve. The guys he would be contending with playing time would be Coleman / Rak. Whether he took minutes away from either of them [which is debatable], he wouldn't siphon time away from two of our most prolific scorers. CJ and Southerland are going to play a TON this season, and often play together with one of the bigs.

It's unknowable at this point, but if we had Noel I think he'd probably be getting time at both the 4 and the 5.

This might be one we can revisit in Jan-February.

 

[edowd26]

He's played 3 games?

how longs it take? i knew poythress was better sine last hs season.

 

[PoppyHart]

Based upon what exactly? Because I see very little evidence to back that up after watching the majority of his first two games [and he was much better in the second game, for the record].

For starters, I base it on the perception of where he currently is on the curve. He was referred to as being Conrad McRae as a freshman raw. Other perceptions/assessments were that he was not worthy of playing 8 minutes a game on our bench, not ready for primetime, and has next to nothing offensively.

Set against that backdrop, his first three games would have to be deemed a major success.

On the other hand, he's been compared to Anthony Davis, and I get the sense that he's subconsciously assessed against the standard of what we expect #1 overall prospects to achieve down the ride; i.e. HOF-type careers, ASG appearances, etc... He's unlikely to equal Davis' contribution, and only time will tell on the long term predictions.

But, confining it to the college game, on the McRae to Davis spectrum, I think the perception leans toward the former, and reality leans toward the latter.

As to specifics about his game, I've been extremely impressed with his defensive motor, his ability to play major minutes against top competition while staying out of foul trouble, his willingness to play within the system and the confines of his own game offensively, his handle in the open court, and his general upbeat attitude on the floor.

While you'll probably be able to count the number of baskets he converts from outside 10 feet this year on one hand, he's shown a level of composure and craftiness around the rim that belies the scouting report coming into the season. He'll get his fair share of gimme baskets, no doubt, but I disagree that he's merely a dunk machine.

His greatest attribute, imo, is his defensive intensity. From the parts of the 3 games I've seen, I'd guess I've scene him on the floor 8-10 times. He appears to have very quick hands and the ability to disrupt his opposite number when away from the basket, and he's shown a level of anticipation on passes that usually comes from guards and small forwards. This motor (or hyper-ness if you view it as a negative) will likely limit his blocks per game and block percentage, but I think he'll create enough turnovers via deflections and steals to compensate.

He's shown improvement in each game,( albeit the latter against Lafayette), and that says something.

 

[moqui]

the big difference I see is that I expect all three of our current bigs to be here next year, while I am certain that NN has always intended to be one-and-done. So, you get NN and all the developmental time pays dividends for a single year only - and it lessens varying amount of time from each of the other three who are likely going to be here again.

Of course, I am not against taking one-and-done players, and I am certainly aware that we owe our one and only NCAA title to one, but I don't think NN is that kind of player. I think SU is going to prove to have the very best frontcourt in the nation without NN in the fold, and he was not going to be the difference between a really good year and a national title (for which we will contend anyway) . . . but as good as our frontcourt is this year, it will be even that much better next year when they all return with such a wealth of experience, some of which would have been "robbed" from them if development time had been devoted to NN.

 

[Tony DeFranco]

How can someone be considered the #1 overall recruit and be considered raw offensively which turns out to be spot on? and where is this guy gonna play in the NBA unless his offense drastically improves? there aren't a lot of 6-9 centers with success

 

[RF2044]

For starters, I base it on the perception of where he currently is on the curve. He was referred to as being Conrad McRae as a freshman raw. Other perceptions/assessments were that he was not worthy of playing 8 minutes a game on our bench, not ready for primetime, and has next to nothing offensively.

Set against that backdrop, his first three games would have to be deemed a major success.

On the other hand, he's been compared to Anthony Davis, and I get the sense that he's subconsciously assessed against the standard of what we expect #1 overall prospects to achieve down the ride; i.e. HOF-type careers, ASG appearances, etc... He's unlikely to equal Davis' contribution, and only time will tell on the long term predictions.

But, confining it to the college game, on the McRae to Davis spectrum, I think the perception leans toward the former, and reality leans toward the latter.

As to specifics about his game, I've been extremely impressed with his defensive motor, his ability to play major minutes against top competition while staying out of foul trouble, his willingness to play within the system and the confines of his own game offensively, his handle in the open court, and his general upbeat attitude on the floor.

While you'll probably be able to count the number of baskets he converts from outside 10 feet this year on one hand, he's shown a level of composure and craftiness around the rim that belies the scouting report coming into the season. He'll get his fair share of gimme baskets, no doubt, but I disagree that he's merely a dunk machine.

His greatest attribute, imo, is his defensive intensity. From the parts of the 3 games I've seen, I'd guess I've scene him on the floor 8-10 times. He appears to have very quick hands and the ability to disrupt his opposite number when away from the basket, and he's shown a level of anticipation on passes that usually comes from guards and small forwards. This motor (or hyper-ness if you view it as a negative) will likely limit his blocks per game and block percentage, but I think he'll create enough turnovers via deflections and steals to compensate.

He's shown improvement in each game,( albeit the latter against Lafayette), and that says something.

I see--so you've created an arbitrary scale between Conrad McRae, who barely played as a frosh, and Anthony Davis, who was the #1 pick in the draft, and you're comparing them based upon their relative frosh contributions.

I think a better comparison would be to gauge how Noel's productivity would stack up against McRae if he'd been a starter versus Davis who was a starter. McRae was parked on the bench behind DC / LeRon Ellis, so let's play the "what if" game. If DC had gone pro after his junior year, then it is feasible that McRae might have started his freshman year. Different era, and it is pointless to speculate about stats blah blah blah, but the point of the comparison is whether Noel compares more favorably to what McRae might have contributed as a frosh starer versus what Davis did last year en route to emerging as the eventual #1 pick in the NBA draft. Totally speculative, I admit that up front, but I'd say that Noel projects closer to the McRae end of THAT continuum than he does with Davis, in terms of refinement.

 

[RF2044]

Not really; if Noel came here I think he'd be playing starters minutes, but the Moqui's point was that we might be better off without Noel. So even if Noel just improved on the back up C minutes, then we'd be better with him than without.



I would 100% agree with this. Davis was one of the best freshmen in NCAA history. It may be worth mentioning though that it isn't like Davis was putting up huge offensive numbers right away. (He did score 23 points in 23 minutes in his first game, but that was Morehead St). His second career game was Kansas (similar to UK's second game this year, against Duke). He put up 14 points; Noel scored 16 against Duke. The point is less that I think Noel will be Davis, because I don't, but that young big men can improve pretty quickly. (Note- this is also true for our guys as well)





It's unknowable at this point, but if we had Noel I think he'd probably be getting time at both the 4 and the 5.

This might be one we can revisit in Jan-February.

No. If Noel came here, he wouldn't necessarily be playing starters minutes. That's a truism based upon the notion that he was identified pre-season as the likely #1 pick in the draft--a prediction that doesn't necessarily seem to be a given after the first few games. He might have beaten out Coleman or Rak, but then again maybe he wouldn't have. Again, I believe that his path to PT is much easier at UK than it would have been at SU this year.

Also, I believe that you are misconstruing Moqui's point. Him suggesting that we're "better off" without Noel wasn't saying that landing Noel wouldn't have been a good "get." He was very clear about what he meant by that--last year's team's biggest flaws were low post scoring and rebounding--both attributes that Coleman ostensibly excels at and Noel does not, which made him a better addition given team need than Noel would have been.

 

[PoppyHart]

I see--so you've created an arbitrary scale between Conrad McRae, who barely played as a frosh, and Anthony Davis, who was the #1 pick in the draft, and you're comparing them based upon their relative frosh contributions.

I think a better comparison would be to gauge how Noel's productivity would stack up against McRae if he'd been a starter versus Davis who was a starter. McRae was parked on the bench behind DC / LeRon Ellis, so let's play the "what if" game. If DC had gone pro after his junior year, then it is feasible that McRae might have started his freshman year. Different era, and it is pointless to speculate about stats blah blah blah, but the point of the comparison is whether Noel compares more favorably to what McRae might have contributed as a frosh starer versus what Davis did last year en route to emerging as the eventual #1 pick in the NBA draft. Totally speculative, I admit that up front, but I'd say that Noel projects closer to the McRae end of THAT continuum than he does with Davis, in terms of refinement.

Can you give me the objective scale?

 

[RF2044]

Can you give me the objective scale?

There is no objective scale. But I gave you a better framework for comparison than the one you were using.

 

[PoppyHart]

I see--so you've created an arbitrary scale between Conrad McRae, who barely played as a frosh, and Anthony Davis, who was the #1 pick in the draft, and you're comparing them based upon their relative frosh contributions.

I think a better comparison would be to gauge how Noel's productivity would stack up against McRae if he'd been a starter versus Davis who was a starter. McRae was parked on the bench behind DC / LeRon Ellis, so let's play the "what if" game. If DC had gone pro after his junior year, then it is feasible that McRae might have started his freshman year. Different era, and it is pointless to speculate about stats blah blah blah, but the point of the comparison is whether Noel compares more favorably to what McRae might have contributed as a frosh starer versus what Davis did last year en route to emerging as the eventual #1 pick in the NBA draft. Totally speculative, I admit that up front, but I'd say that Noel projects closer to the McRae end of THAT continuum than he does with Davis, in terms of refinement.

My point is not to compare McRae to Noel, b/c there is no comparison to anyone whose ever watched one basketball game in their life. Unfortunately, that was the floor that was set.

 

[PoppyHart]

I see--so you've created an arbitrary scale between Conrad McRae, who barely played as a frosh, and Anthony Davis, who was the #1 pick in the draft, and you're comparing them based upon their relative frosh contributions.

I think a better comparison would be to gauge how Noel's productivity would stack up against McRae if he'd been a starter versus Davis who was a starter. McRae was parked on the bench behind DC / LeRon Ellis, so let's play the "what if" game. If DC had gone pro after his junior year, then it is feasible that McRae might have started his freshman year. Different era, and it is pointless to speculate about stats blah blah blah, but the point of the comparison is whether Noel compares more favorably to what McRae might have contributed as a frosh starer versus what Davis did last year en route to emerging as the eventual #1 pick in the NBA draft. Totally speculative, I admit that up front, but I'd say that Noel projects closer to the McRae end of THAT continuum than he does with Davis, in terms of refinement.

I do'n't understand the repeated references to Anthony Davis though. Can a guy not excel without being Anthony Davis?

 

[PoppyHart]

There is no objective scale. But I gave you a better framework for comparison than the one you were using.

Why is your framework for reference better htan the next persons?

 

[RF2044]

My point is not to compare McRae to Noel, b/c there is no comparison to anyone whose ever watched one basketball game in their life. Unfortunately, that was the floor that was set.

Dumb post. McRae was a McDonald's all american--on a different team, with different circumstances, he would have been a contributor earlier in his career than he was here, where he barely got off the bench his first two seasons due to having the likes of all time program greats Derrick Coleman and Billy Owens playing ahead of him.

A real comparison would be whether Noel compares refinement wise and physically to frosh Conrad McRae--and he does on both accounts. What was Conrad's physical dimensions his freshman year? What are Noel's? Noel's offense is pretty much limited to dunks only, he can't score outside of the shadow of the basket, he has no perimeter touch, and he is a poor free throw shooter--just like McRae So despite your insistance to the contrary, he is pretty unrefined. He is also a tad scrawny, but a pretty good wiry athlete who is reputedly a good shot blocker--dare I say it?

Again, the McRae comparison holds up on every dimension except for those who decided in advance that Noel was the second coming of Davis and the surefire #1 pick in the 2013 draft. Which now seems questionable--at best.

 

[PoppyHart]

Dumb post. McRae was a McDonald's all american--on a different team, with different circumstances, he would have been a contributor earlier in his career than he was here, where he barely got off the bench his first two seasons due to having the likes of all time program greats Derrick Coleman and Billy Owens playing ahead of him.

A real comparison would be whether Noel compares game wise and physically to frosh Conrad McRae--and he does on both accounts. His offense is pretty much limited to dunks only, he can't score outside of the shadow of the basket, he has no perimeter touch, and he is a poor free throw shooter. So despite your insistance to the contrary, he is pretty unrefined. He is also pretty scrawny, but a pretty good wiry athlete who is reputedly a good shot blocker.

Again, the McRae comparison holds up on every dimension except for those who decided in advance that Noel was the second coming of Davis and the surefire #1 pick in the 2013 draft. Which now seems questionable--at best.

"
Dude, quit with the condescending "dumb post" remark.

Of course circumstances were different. Can you identify identical circumstances to compare players, regardless of time gaps?

Again, I never said he was Davis, at least not yet. But he's much much better than you give him credit for.