Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!

Player Ryan Young

Not excited in the least for this guy. I’ll be shocked if he averages more than 8 mpg all season. He looks like a poor man’s Mark Madsen out there.
 
Grit said:
More offense than defense but marginal improvements to both: https://barttorvik.com/rostercast.php?run=1&team=Duke&player=Ryan Young;Northwestern.

It also predicts Duke to have a worse offense if you subtract Jaylen Blakes. As that simply can't be true, I've gone ahead and run the numbers plus Young minus Blakes and we can all rest easy because Duke maintains the 6 spot: https://barttorvik.com/rostercast.php?run=1&team=Duke&player=-Jaylen Blakes;Duke|Ryan Young;Northwestern.
Click to expand...

It's a fun tool. Three observations I have:

1. I think Duke's starting point is too high. Torvik (and Kenpom) use a formula to account for how impactful a recruit will be based purely on his ranking but we have enough evidence from scouts, etc. to expect these particular top 5 recruits that Duke has to not be as good as the typical top 5 recruits. Duke's ranking would obviously go up with either Keels or a good shooting guard, but there's no way it should have been 8th going into today.

2. Related to the first point, I think the tool is more valuable to evaluate teams that aren't freshman-laden as you have more data on the non-freshman. UNC's ranking is reflective of the massive value that Manek had. While it's not consistent with some of the national writers who are putting them at 1/2, it's much more consistent with what some of the more analytically engaged college basketball guys think. I was listening to a podcast with one of the guys from the Three Man Weave (super knowledgable guys) who just cautioned not to fall into the trap of overvaluing March results, especially when their wins were so dependent on low percentage shots falling.

3. The UCLA rank, if you were to add back Jacquez (already confirmed coming back but not reflected on here) and Bernard (likely coming back but not confirmed), jumps from 15 to 2. Them and Houston are probably my favorite teams at the moment but Houston has some pending NBA decisions too.
 
Sure would have been nice if UCLA had finished off UNC in the Sweet 16. Fucking Jacquez will be on my shit list forever for going full 2017 Gonzaga Polish fatass and missing his last 9 shots against them.

I think Self would’ve ripped us apart in the second half for 50 and won the title anyway, but damn.
 
I was at that game. UCLA's problem is that their coach is from the Neolithic era of basketball.
 
I expect him to play more than we'd probably expect on the surface. I expect foul trouble to be a problem early in the season with the two freshmen big men as they adjust to the college level. I'm not expecting great stats by any means but it wouldn't surprise me if he gave some valuable minutes in a big game or two when foul trouble hits.
 
I’m hopeful Mitchell is good enough to play 32-35 mpg at the 4 once Duke reaches the meat (or meat substitute) of its schedule. I want to see Flip and Lively on the floor together as little as possible. I’m good with Young in a Bates Jones role - played very limited minutes in ~2/3 of the games. And don’t let Young get cooked in the S16.
 
Yeah, that's my thought. Because Mitchell is effectively a big, I don't foresee foul trouble being an issue. If you're playing Mitchell and Lively, and Lively gets in foul trouble, you go to Flip before you'd go to Young. If it's Mitchell who gets in foul trouble, you go to Flip and Lively together. If two of the three get in foul trouble, and it forces you to put Young in, we're losing that game anyway.
 
I'm more curious who backs up Mitchell 1) if Flip turns out to not be very viable at the 4, and/or 2) we're playing a team that makes lineups with two freshman bigs untenable. 6'4ish Joey Baker, I guess?

Edit: Ah yes, forgot about Kale cuttings.
 
Last edited:
Pantone287 said:
I'm more curious who backs up Mitchell 1) if Flip turns out to not be very viable at the 4, and/or 2) we're playing a team that makes lineups with two freshman bigs untenable. 6'4ish Joey Baker, I guess?
Click to expand...
Depending on how good/bad he is, I would probably play the Harvard guy at the 4 before Baker or before playing Young together with Flip or Lively.
 
physicsfactor said:
I’m hopeful Mitchell is good enough to play 32-35 mpg at the 4 once Duke reaches the meat (or meat substitute) of its schedule. I want to see Flip and Lively on the floor together as little as possible. I’m good with Young in a Bates Jones role - played very limited minutes in ~2/3 of the games. And don’t let Young get cooked in the S16.
Click to expand...

Yeah the ACC is a fucking Beyond Burger.
 
Baker isn't 6'4". I hate to pull the "I've seen him in person" thing, but I've seen him up close many times standing beside other players. His listed height is accurate. He's also pretty thicc. Hopefully we get another guard. I'd go Roach, guard, Whitehead, Baker, big man.

Also, if Mitchell is not viable at the 4 it means he's not viable at all, because there's no way in hell he's a 3. We've got bigger problems in that case.
 
Last edited:
I'd also play Whitehead at the 4 before I'd play Young. But that just means putting Baker at the 3, so it's not a huge difference.

I see no reason to think Kale Dressing is better than Baker, btw. I would lean toward the guy with 4 years of experience playing in the ACC, and with the better 3pt percentage. I'm fairly confident Baker could have averaged 9 ppg on average efficiency at Harvard.
 
In the McDAA game (both) and Iverson Classic (Mitchell), both Whitehead and Mitchell looked a lot more capable of playing their smaller position than I expected going in.

I'd still guess Whitehead plays more 2 than Mitchell plays 3, but neither seemed like a disaster.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Chat users

  • No one is chatting at the moment.

Chat rooms

  • General chit-chat 0

Forum statistics

Threads
1,066
Messages
424,781
Members
624
Latest member
Bluegrass Blue Devil
Back
Top Bottom