Bolden trending for Duke
- Thread starter jrpross
- Start date
- Status
"dominate" is a verb
this is a pet peeve of mine
"dominate" is a verb
this is a pet peeve of mine
Apparently capitalizing, commas and periods don't mean much to you. Ha.
Used to be a hot dog cart on campus. Got mustard, kraut, and hot sauce. Otherwise I'm pretty boring with ketchup and mustard.
That was a great cart. I go Chicago style to spice it up on occasion. Slice of tomato, mustard, pickle slice and poppy seed bun. It's a nice change of pace from ketchup and mustard.
@Jnood I've heard tell of cream cheese on a hot dog. That good?
DH -- I love this thread as well.
1. I agree a lot with @Crank_it_loud . Not a true PG -- is it a big deal? Doesn't really matter, he's what we got and that OK with me.
2. "not being able to pass..." is not the same and "not wanting to pass..." -- I think that is the point that Crank is trying to make.
3. I AGREE with YOU completely -- "Good or bad, let's pump the brakes and put some faith in this staff". Amen brother.
I think the only one on this board that has access to the uber-secret, direct K-Phone is @GARY4plus3 -- and I am pretty sure he is in-the-know and very comfortable with the whole-deal-o!
Made a hotdog pizza. Sliced the hotdogs thin used mustard as the sauce. Put chilli and onions on it. Topped with cheddar cheese. Was pretty tasty. My kids loved it.
"dominate" is a verb
this is a pet peeve of mine
I'm gonna try really hard to make my grammar right. I use spell check on just about every post I post. It's alright with me if you see where I didn't use a word properly to correct me. I don't want to sound uneducated on this board. We probably all need a grammar monitor here. Some more than others. I want be offended at all when you correct me. But with all respect. Shouldn't it be " Bond, James Bond ? "
OFC
There's lots of ways you can eat hot dogs. There's plain hot dogs, hot dogs with mustard, hot dogs with ketchup, hot dogs with mustard and ketchup, hot dogs with mayo, hot dogs with mayo and ketchup, hot dogs with mustard, ketchup and onions, hot dogs with relish, hot dogs with relish and mustard, hot dogs with relish and ketchup, hot dogs with relish, mustard and ketchup, hot dogs with chili, hot dogs with mustard and chili, hot dogs with ketchup and chili, hot dogs with mustard ketchup and chili, hot dogs with onions, hot dogs with onions and chili, hot dogs with mustard ,onions and chili, hot dogs with mustard, onions, slaw and chili which is called "all the way " where I'm from., hot dogs with pickles and tomato, ketchup and mustard, hot dogs with cheese on all of the above. That's about all I can think of right now. If any of you would like to add on just hit reply and this could be an endless thread. OFC
I get that. Frank doesn't strike as the not want to pass type, but it is certainly an adjustment. I'm not saying there won't be issues at all. True point guard or not, there's a learning curve. We'd have issues regardless. A team full of freshmen and sophomores in key positions will lead to trouble for a few games at least. Our ACC schedule is rough this year. Nonetheless this team has talent and having good talent can aid a learning curve.
I just think, and this has been my argument the whole time, Frank or Grayson or even Luke will be more than capable to run the point of a championship team by March after having a whole spring an summer of it. Don't forget Frank won't be on campus this summer, he's coming in a week.
There are certainly a lot of variables at play here in the Bolden recruitment and the parents have essentially shut their son's recruitment down for whatever reason. The parents are clearly running the show now and it is my opinion that they have always been running it. With both being pro-Duke there is reason to be optimistic. Lots of things can change in the course of a recruitment but in the end Bolden seems to be a good kid and he will make a well informed decision whether it is in our favor or not. That being said, I feel that Duke wins out.
Frank will be the key; Duke will him to develop quickly as Grayson and Luke aren't that capable of running the point for a championship-caliber team, IMO.
As for Bolden; they are waiting for a scholly to open up @ UK (for Lee to officially leave) so he can pull the trigger. AFAIK they are maxed out, unless I am missing something?
With all due respect, perhaps our definitions of capable are different. Regardless I'm done with this topic and will let the season play out. I stand by my thought that DT will be missed at some points this year.
Did you see this somewhere, or is this just your best guess?
Some can't see the forest from the trees. I don't think anyone has ever suggested that we're better off now that DT left -- or that there may not be situations where his departure may hurt us. Certainly I would have liked to have kept him. But, this notion that DT's departure suddenly creates a gaping void that we can't possible fill -- is frankly a bit much. Every team has some weaknesses. Even the Golden State warriors, for instance, don't have any real back-to-the-basket offense -- which most of would have thought is a major weakness. The Miami Heat didn't really have a PG or a C during their championship run. The Duke 01 team had no real rim protection other than a 6'8 SF (Battier) who was playing as PF -- please don't say Carlos Boozer offered rim protection. Say what you want about Scheyer now, but that Duke 2010 team didn't have anyone we would have called a true PG entering that season -- and that was why we made a last second, desperation run at Wall in the spring before the 2010 season. And that doesn't even get into the fact that the team literally only had one backup (early enrollee Dawkins) for the 3 perimeter spots.
Is the PG position a bit of a relative weakness? Sure. But it's one marginal weakness on a roster that is about as deep, talented, and experienced as you'll ever see in the OAD era of college basketball. If Giles gets close to around 100% by around the time the ACC season begins, the combination of Allen, Tatum, and Giles will be about as dynamic a triumverate as we've had here in decades -- and the talent / experience level of our rotation guys are about as high as it's been here in over a decade. Luke Kennard (Soph.), Matt Jones (Sr.), Jefferson (Sr.), and Jeter (Soph.) are all guys who, assuming they progress, would normally be likely starters here -- and that doesn't even mention Frank Jackson, who won the McD AA MVP and slam dunk contest. In the end of the day, there's just so much good with this roster that this PG situation really shouldn't pose an insurmountable obstacle to us dominating the ACCs and winning the NCAAs. Now, am I proclaiming us national champs? No. And, if we lose, that doesn't certainly prove the hypothesis that DT's departure is what did us in. Because, reality is that the field is always a better bet than any individual team. But, even with the PG situation in mind, this is by far the deepest wealth of talent we've had on a single team since the 98-99 Duke squad. As long as this current group stays healthy, we don't need to add anyone in order to field a team that K would describe as "worthy of winning a national championship."
Is the PG position a bit of a relative weakness? Sure. But it's one marginal weakness on a roster that is about as deep, talented, and experienced as you'll ever see in the OAD era of college basketball. If Giles gets close to around 100% by around the time the ACC season begins, the combination of Allen, Tatum, and Giles will be about as dynamic a triumverate as we've had here in decades -- and the talent / experience level of our rotation guys are about as high as it's been here in over a decade. Luke Kennard (Soph.), Matt Jones (Sr.), Jefferson (Sr.), and Jeter (Soph.) are all guys who, assuming they progress, would normally be likely starters here -- and that doesn't even mention Frank Jackson, who won the McD AA MVP and slam dunk contest. In the end of the day, there's just so much good with this roster that this PG situation really shouldn't pose an insurmountable obstacle to us dominating the ACCs and winning the NCAAs. Now, am I proclaiming us national champs? No. And, if we lose, that doesn't certainly prove the hypothesis that DT's departure is what did us in. Because, reality is that the field is always a better bet than any individual team. But, even with the PG situation in mind, this is by far the deepest wealth of talent we've had on a single team since the 98-99 Duke squad. As long as this current group stays healthy, we don't need to add anyone in order to field a team that K would describe as "worthy of winning a national championship."
Last edited:
do we entertain a possible 5th year pg esp if we dont get bolden and have the scholly available?
Actually, from what I've read, Grayson really wants to work on his ball handling and passing skills this year and develop his game better for the next level. He certainly has the talent to be another Jon Scheyer. I think he'll improve in that area and will need to. He's going to struggle to be a pure 2 at the NBA level with so many 6'6, 6'7 athletic players there. He'll need to be more "combo" to get PT.
And, as long as the team is willing to pass as a team, they don't actually need a true point guard, imo. They will need ball handling skills - and I think they will have that enough. But, I suspect K can take a page (albeit small one) out of Golden State's book. They are the best team passing unit on the planet when they are in their zone.
It really comes down to unselfish play. Last year, we really had two legit scoring options (Grayson and Ingram); with Luke Kennard as a decent spot up 3rd option. Ostensibly the offense was Grayson and Ingram going one-on-one and either driving and shooting; or dishing; or shooting a 3.
But, this year, with Grayson, Kennard, and at least 3 of the entering freshmen as legit scoring options, plus the ability of Jefferson, Jones, and Jeter to score here and there off the pass on wide open looks - I think we'll be okay without a true PG. Would be nice; but not totally necessary.
It will really come down to 1) how quickly the freshmen can mature; and 2) how well they mesh as a team. Amile, Grayson, and Jones will be a key to that happening.
Interesting. I suspect that's right. Good thing that bet didn't happen!
I learned a long time ago (long before the Barnes situ) that there are no certainties in recruiting until signed; even then, in some cases until a kid actually shows up on campus!
... lesson to be learned - regardless of the Bolden decision.This is absurd. I don't know how you guys feel (maybe I'm in the minority) but both Fanbases are acting like Bolden is a golden goose. Don't get me wrong, I think he is a quality player but I don't see him as a significant piece for either team. He adds depth and a big body down low. I don't know what he is holding out on, unless one school has his commitment and they told him they have to move some things around. Who knows???? I just wish the kid would decide already
I do think we need him for depth more than Duke but I think either school will be fine either way
I do think we need him for depth more than Duke but I think either school will be fine either way
The moment someone compares college basketball (and not having a PG) to an NBA team without a PG.......SMFH.
I've heard and read it, but who knows. I do know that my go-to's who switched Bolden to Duke from UK, have all gone back to UK.
- Status
