Player Tarik Black

[rome8180]

I'm thinking my posts are coming off as a lot less hostile than yours. If that's thinly veiled snark, so be it.

You're welcome to address my points if you disagree. Or you can speak in one sentence generalities.

 

[rome8180]

BTW, the reason I said "the reasoning has been explained at length elsewhere" was because I didn't think it was worth having a 100-page Black thread like TDD did, especially after he's already committed elsewhere. But then I figured I'd go ahead and put my full position down one last time. So I guess I opened that Pandora's Box back up.

 

[dukebluedevils05]

Saying that you don't want a player on the team because he'd be the 13th member of the "squad" is "weird" to moi. You disagree? Cool. I find it weird. [Hypothetically], if Mitch McGary asks to transfer tomorrow so he can play at Duke next season and if his request was [hypothetically] granted, I'm assuming, based on his post, that 'childress' isn't up for him being a part of the team because he'd be the 13th player on the "squad." That is, unless I'm missing some sarcastic back and forth from earlier.

 

[rome8180]

And I adressed that distinction in my post. Now I can't speak for Childress, but I doubt he's against all possible 13th players. I, for one, just don't believe Black is good enough to justify that kind of logjam.

McGary certainly is.

 

[dukebluedevils05]

Now maybe we're making it somewhere. I took the comment at face value, assumed he's against having 13 players on a team and thus wouldn't take anyone, which was "weird" reasoning.

As for your post from earlier, I do disagree with most of it and perhaps will respond later when I've got more time (then maybe I can speak in something longer than one sentence generalities).

 

[SeanMayTriedToEatMe]

There are now zero Tarik Black-focused threads on the internet that did not ultimately turn nasty. At least we got to about 100 posts before it happened.

 

[SeanMayTriedToEatMe]

I would've preferred to have added Black. I don't think any addition can hurt unless (i) he is any kind of cancer for chemistry purposes or (ii) the head coach is too stupid to play his best players, so he would've played Black over superior players for irrational reasons (like Jim Leyland in baseball). I don't think either of those would've been true in this case. I don't mind seeing/knowing that 4 of the scholarship players aren't playing at all. Jefferson will be my favorite player next season, but if Black turns out to be more valuable in those minutes, I would've preferred Black. Having him would've at least opened up that possibility, though I doubt he will be better than Jefferson next season, even at the center position where apparently being 250 lbs is necessary in college, where there are actually very few decent 250+ lb players.

I don't think it would've made much difference even in the best case scenario, so it was just weird when everyone went from thinking that Duke was going to be a top 3 team next season without any transfers, to thinking that Duke was going to be shit without Tarik Black after it became known that Tarik Black was available.

 

[rome8180]

I would've preferred to have added Black. I don't think any addition can hurt unless (i) he is any kind of cancer for chemistry purposes or (ii) the head coach is too stupid to play his best players, so he would've played Black over superior players for irrational reasons (like Jim Leyland in baseball). I don't think either of those would've been true in this case. I don't mind seeing/knowing that 4 of the scholarship players aren't playing at all. Jefferson will be my favorite player next season, but if Black turns out to be more valuable in those minutes, I would've preferred Black. Having him would've at least opened up that possibility, though I doubt he will be better than Jefferson next season, even at the center position where apparently being 250 lbs is necessary in college, where there are actually very few decent 250+ lb players.

I don't think it would've made much difference even in the best case scenario, so it was just weird when everyone went from thinking that Duke was going to be a top 3 team next season without any transfers, to thinking that Duke was going to be shit without Tarik Black after it became known that Tarik Black was available.

This is how I feel, only I am more worried that you are about the chemistry issues and possible transfers that result from having too many players. It seems to me that what we have can be made to work just fine. It also seems that even the players who don't seem great right now can improve with playing time (which is not the same as practice, no matter what anyone says). I believe team cohesion improves with tight rotations, players being heavily relied upon, and no one feeling dispensable.

For those reasons, even twelve scholarship players is more than I'd like. While I welcome Dawkins back, I'm not sure that was a net gain for our team. I only want to add players if they are so good they outweigh the risks to team chemistry which, I believe, result from too deep a roster.

 

[DrKlahn]

The Kansas roster for next year on Wikipedia has 18 dudes. What the hell, I wanted Duke to have the most dudes

 

[rome8180]

On a more personal level, and one I don't expect anyone to agree with, I'm quite attached to the players we have. I think the odds are against Duke winning another title...ever. Maybe that sounds ridiculously pessimistic. But K's won four. Except for the back-to-backs, there's been nine years between each title. No other Duke coach has won a title. Whoever we get to replace K will likely be a step down. So with that thinking -- that titles are a rarity and we're lucky to have four -- I just want to build attachments to players and watch them develop for four years. It doesn't mean I'm against one-and-dones, or against taking transfers, or against competition for playing time. It means I've grown especially loyal to the players who have put in the time and work. Maybe they are "owed nothing," but I'd like to see them plunged into the fire nonetheless. All transfers break my heart a little, unless the kid is a clear attitude/work ethic problem (Taylor King).

This is also why it makes me so annoyed when people say things like Hairston is horrible. Anyway, all this is fairly off-topic. But I thought, in the interest of full disclosure, I should explain this recent shift in my feelings, since it could certainly have an impact on my reasoning.

 

[Pantone287]

There are now zero Tarik Black-focused threads on the internet that did not ultimately turn nasty. At least we got to about 100 posts before it happened.

If he's anywhere near as much of a chemistry cancer to basketball teams as he is to message boards, we dodged a bullet.

 

[DurhamSon]

For what it's worth, he's considered an absolute bum on memphis message boards wrt to his focus and intensity. Not quite Taylor King levels, but close.

 

[DukeNukem05]

For what it's worth, he's considered an absolute bum on memphis message boards wrt to his focus and intensity. Not quite Taylor King levels, but close.

Some of you guys brought this up when the transfer speak first popped up. I never understood why it didn't gain more traction. Oh wait, because he was going to bring us a title...

 

[DurhamSon]

His dad supposedly clashed with the coaching staff big time; constantly complaining about his son not getting more PT, etc. Even went on the local sports radio stations to complain about it and criticize pastner.

Personally, I think we dodged a bullet.

 

[StopThePumpFakesShav]

It could have been ugly, for sure. But if there are two coaches in the sport that could get something out whatever talent he has while preventing disaster from a cohesiveness perspective*, I'd say Black at least narrowed his school choices to two of the best in that regard.



*This statement excludes the 2011-2012 version of Mike Krzyzewski.

 

[rome8180]

Yeah, I also heard that he wanted to be a focal point in the offense. If that's the case, he's going to be disappointed at Kansas just like he would have been at Duke.

Obviously, you do need to take anything on the Memphis boards with a grain of salt. There could certainly be some sour grapes.

 

[torontoduke]

@ JonRothstein 45s
Big men that will practice for Kansas next year: Tarik Black, Perry Ellis, Joel Embiid, Hunter Mickelson, Jamari Traylor, Landen Lucas. Wow.

I was pretty impressed with what Ellis did in relatively minimal playing time. He played very well in the NCAAs

 

[rome8180]

I like him and wouldn't have minded landing him (though I don't think he provides anything that Jefferson won't).

 

[WorldStar HipHop]

On a more personal level, and one I don't expect anyone to agree with, I'm quite attached to the players we have. I think the odds are against Duke winning another title...ever. Maybe that sounds ridiculously pessimistic. But K's won four. Except for the back-to-backs, there's been nine years between each title. No other Duke coach has won a title. Whoever we get to replace K will likely be a step down. So with that thinking -- that titles are a rarity and we're lucky to have four -- I just want to build attachments to players and watch them develop for four years.

I wanted to focus on this part...it has nothing to do with Tarik Black but since you brought it up, we might as well discuss it in thread.

It's true that no other Duke coach has ever won a title. (I've seen this fact be mentioned on other message boards about Duke's blueblood status - many (which is to say the young ones) think Duke is built entirely by Coach K.)

But Duke has had title-caliber teams under other coaches - Vic Bubas had a 3-4 year window where he could've won multiple titles. And that's without the benefit of Bill Bradley who had a change of heart.

And then there was Bill Foster's 1978 team. (Just from reading the names on the roster of that team, I think this would be a top-3 favorite Duke team after 2001 Duke and 1992 Duke. I hope to get as many of the games from that season on VHS as possible.)

So while NCs will probably be exceedingly rare...Final Fours should be easier to come by but still rare.

Duke's next 1-2 hires after Coach K will have a lot to do with if Duke can maintain its blue blood status.

 

[rome8180]

I'm not saying we can't be relatively elite. But the list of active coaches who have won titles is pretty short. It's far from a sure thing that we get a coach capable of doing that. Even if we do, the likelihood is that we win one title or two under that coach...not four.

Some blue bloods have been fortunate...UNC and Kentucky come to mind. Some have not been...see UCLA. They did have the one title after Wooden, but one in 40 years is a huge dropoff. Indiana has had to wait a long time as well and it remains to be seen whether Crean can win one.