Sure it is, but unlike the 16 team, if that's the one you're referring to, this past team was pretty highly ranked before him, and we had all you need before he came in. Big men, check. Point guard, check. Plus shooting would have been better due to ball movement. Having Bagley took away what others could have done. Basically, we had too many choices. It goes back to what I've said before, not everyone can cook, someone has to wash the dishes. The 5-6 without him, our team looked a little more together.
Duke, Kentucky lead the race for top 2019 class
- Thread starter dukiejay
- Start date
Nope just meant that this year's team would have lost the Syracuse Sweet-16 game without Bagley, resulting in a bigger failure than what proceeded after. He was great in that game, everyone else had an off night.
22 and 7 on 8-12 shooting doesn't even tell the whole story. He had some alley-oop dunks (great Grayson passes btw) that completely swung the momentum when it looked like Syracuse was gonna take the lead.
Last edited:
Rivers was really, really good his lone season at Duke, but there was definitely a disconnect with his teammates. I was in Maui for the invitational in both 2007 and 2011....and I saw it both years just from those few days. Austin was rarely with his teammates there, either. Same can be said for Greg Paulus in 2007. Could be total coincidence, but then when you hear stories after the fact it kind of it what it is. (I also remember walking back to our hotel late one night in 2007 with my wife, and Taylor King was laying in a hammock sucking on a heater and drinking a beer.
The one thing I will defend with Austin is that he was clearly the best player on that 2012 team. Clearly. There's also some teammates who took exception to that. At the end of the day a season is ultimately graded on how you finish....and losing to a 15-seed is how that team will always be remembered. But I think some of the good moments get forgotten. That group was 8-0 on the road in ACC play and 13-3 overall. The last time Duke pulled that off was 1999. They've done it twice total in K's time at Duke. But again, that season is judged on how they finished, and rightly so, I guess.
The one thing I will defend with Austin is that he was clearly the best player on that 2012 team. Clearly. There's also some teammates who took exception to that. At the end of the day a season is ultimately graded on how you finish....and losing to a 15-seed is how that team will always be remembered. But I think some of the good moments get forgotten. That group was 8-0 on the road in ACC play and 13-3 overall. The last time Duke pulled that off was 1999. They've done it twice total in K's time at Duke. But again, that season is judged on how they finished, and rightly so, I guess.
I can't argue with how good Bagley is, and in that game, maybe you're right. I'm looking at the season as a whole, and how we would have been a different team. Roles would have been defined for others to fill in, and it's just as possible that we played better. Who knows? If I'm not mistaken, isn't Duke the only team to beat Clemson at Clemson? That was during his injured time.
I see this different than you do. Nothing wrong with your stance, I just happen to think our team would have been fine. Remember the team I'm talking about was the one that was set to go to the Dominican to play a few games. That got scratched, I believe, to bring Bagley on board. He wouldn't have been able to make the trip.
I cant help but say I have often wondered how this year's team would have fared w/o Bagley. Now mind you, I know what we're missing on the offensive end, but in that sample size of games w/o him our D seemed much better. We WON. Grayson averaged twice as many free throws (less of a clogged post) and we just appeared better.
Wonder if the team minus "Bags," had taken that Dominican trip and REALLY DEVELOPED chemistry???? I am not saying we would have been better, but chemistry plays a kingsized role. Would chemistry have been better w/o two alphas? (MB and GA)...OFC
Wonder if the team minus "Bags," had taken that Dominican trip and REALLY DEVELOPED chemistry???? I am not saying we would have been better, but chemistry plays a kingsized role. Would chemistry have been better w/o two alphas? (MB and GA)...OFC
Everyone seems to think Rivers was a poor leader. Well what do we expect from a 18 year old freshman who was asked to be the Point Guard and also make plays for others. He was a natural scorer not a natural leader. Imagine if we had to depend on Nolan Smith as a freshman or Quinn Cook when he was a freshman to play that role on there teams. Neither player came to Duke as superior leaders it developed over time. Not all players develop the same. Rivers was a one and done talent surrounded by 4 year players..... look at that team All 4 year players Curry, Cook, Dawkins, Kelly, Plumlee 2x, no true small forward super star or dominate big. That team lacked leadership all around it just seemed that because Rivers was a 5 star he was expected to do everything. That team was just not talented and Rivers seems to get the back lash a lot...... FYI sorry for the rant. Rivers will always have a great memories for that shot against UNC.
Clemson starting point guard was out. Saying we would’ve been better with Bagley is like saying the 1993-94 Bulls were better without Jordan.
Bagley situation is different. I do feel that the team would have relied more on a 4 around 1 offense more w/o him. Grayson would have more space to drive which he seemed to differ from doing a lot in the NCAA tournament. Duval would have more of the keys and not become a spot shooter. At time's I felt coach K was wavering on who the alpha dog was on the team and didn't feed Bagley down the stretch against Kansas which came back to hurt us in OT. Both there bigs had foul trouble and started to settle for jumpers.
Austin Rivers was one of my least favorite Duke players in recent history... I watched the HS videos and thought I would welcome him and his talents to Duke.
Once at Duke, he seemed to be all about himself... He dominated the ball... the ball stuck in his hands and he was a gunner.
He was talented and hit one big shot against UNC... BUT... I was hoping a coach's son would have been more of a leader/team player and less of a detriment... Some players just get built up and buy into how good people are telling them they are. He got humbled early on in his NBA career, but seems to be playing better lately... Just curious if he would get anywhere near as much PT if his dad wasn't the coach... I for sure don't think he is worth the 11 plus Million that he made last year... Crazy for a guard off the bench.
Definitely creates some trouble/resentment in the locker room that he has a favored status. If his dad stops coaching or being team president, he will quickly be out of a job.
Once at Duke, he seemed to be all about himself... He dominated the ball... the ball stuck in his hands and he was a gunner.
He was talented and hit one big shot against UNC... BUT... I was hoping a coach's son would have been more of a leader/team player and less of a detriment... Some players just get built up and buy into how good people are telling them they are. He got humbled early on in his NBA career, but seems to be playing better lately... Just curious if he would get anywhere near as much PT if his dad wasn't the coach... I for sure don't think he is worth the 11 plus Million that he made last year... Crazy for a guard off the bench.
Definitely creates some trouble/resentment in the locker room that he has a favored status. If his dad stops coaching or being team president, he will quickly be out of a job.
OK. It is debatable, and I know it's not a popular thought. But I feel that way. He was a late, late signee. K had assembled a pretty good team already, and I don't think we had the typical K spaced team with him. I stand by that. Some of you guys only look at what his numbers were. Yes they were good, but I fully believe everyone else would have helped fill in. Duval, Carter, Grayson and Trent would all have had slightly better numbers. Plus the energy from others would have been a plus. Our defense was slightly better in his absence as well.
Last edited:
I think it's fine to say he's one of your least favorite players ever based on your perceptions....but I don't think our perceptions always equate to the truth.
For one, I'd ask how he was all about himself? He came to Duke as a ball dominant guard. That was known beforehand. And yes, I do think he often dribbled too much, but I still don't think he was a gunner. We've had guys in more recent years where I think the 'gunner' definition applied more. Both Grayson and Brandon were gunners in 2016....but they had to be, much like I think Austin had to be at times in 2012.
Second, I don't think all of the blame can be placed on Austin. Yes, he had an ego. That's not necessarily always bad. There's also people close to the program who say some of his teammates weren't very accepting of him, either....and actually were jealous of him. Maybe the blame should be placed on both parties?
Third, Austin is a very suitable NBA player. He got humbled early on in the same way others before and after him have, too. And while, on the surface, I understand the sentiment about his dad, Austin is a very serviceable NBA player who would be playing whether his dad was present or not. As for the money, I won't argue with you about whether he's worth it or not....but the $11 million he pockets every year is pretty much standard for his talents, in regards to the NBA. Everyone is overpaid.
Yeah 11 million for a 3rd guard is pretty standard. Evan Turner makes 20 mil a year for example, and Austin is better than him.
Austin's dad probably did help revitalize Austin's career, he gave him a 2nd chance when it seemed like he may flame out of the league. However..to Austin's credit, he took advantage of that 2nd chance and will now be a long-time NBA player.
He reminds me of Brunson but he’s at Brunson’s Sophomore level at Nova going into his Sr year of High School.
This is the Austin Rivers thread. How dare you talk about 2019 recruiting in here.
Yeah, I know I am being tough on Austin. Very few players am I glad to see leave Duke early, and he is at the top of the list. I just looked at his stats at Duke and my impression of his style of ball dominating play and couldn't figure how a low percentage shooter could be a OAD guy and 10th overall... (About 42 or 43% overall and 36.5% from 3 at Duke..., he average 15.5 ppg but on a high volume of shots) Probably a draft decision Charlotte regretted some but there have been worse picks...
I just have heard that some of the Clippers have a bit of a divide with Austin and that could be their problem, not his... I see the team is talking extension with Doc, so Austin isn't going anywhere and the other players will have to accept him or go elsewhere.
I just have heard that some of the Clippers have a bit of a divide with Austin and that could be their problem, not his... I see the team is talking extension with Doc, so Austin isn't going anywhere and the other players will have to accept him or go elsewhere.
I don't see much comparison between Brunson and Cole Anthony. Cole Anthony is ultra athletic and smooth, Brunson just knows how to play the game. If you could add those two together you have a super NBA player. I just think Brunson plays real sound fundamentally and Cole can get by on his athletic ability. Cole can dominate at the HS level and so can Brunson on the college level. I think Brunson s more NCAA game STAR and Cole has the IT factor to be an NBA star. Both are great, but I don think of Brunson when I see Cole, I think more of Kyrie when I see who Cole Anthony play.
We would’ve had many more losses and we wouldn’t have gotten that far because coach k still wouldn’t have unleashed Trevon. So we would’ve gotten the Tre of those 6 games without Bagley. Now if we played a more spread PNR game without Bagley then you have a point. But that’s not Coach K style. Plus we had no one that could fill that versatile stretch 4 spot that coach likes.
I agree we would have had more L’s. The reason I think the “we would have been better without Bagley” thesis is so stupid is because we didn’t have any better options. What last year’s team really could have used is a Stretch-4 (Ryan Kelly) to allow Carter to go to work down-low and also give Trevon room to attack the rim.
Javin- worse shooter than Bagley, actually would have shrinked the floor more than Bagley.
Marques- Same point as Javin.
Alex- couldn’t play him at the same time as Trevon, Grayson, Gary.
I don’t believe Jack or J-Rob we’re ready to be one of the “five guys” either. Though both of their skill sets did fit the other 4 starters pretty nicely.
Bagley wasn’t a clean fit. But take Bagley off the team and we’re a much less talented team with the same floor spacing issues.
Last edited:
Exactly! Bagley rebounding definitely was more of a plus than his floor spacing was a negative imo
Well your grammar is stupid, so there (the reason is because).
To play devil's advocate, you can get good looks by ball movement, screens, slashing, etc. It doesn't have to just be spreading out and shooting. We were able to do those things a lot more effectively when Marvin was out. It could have been the competition during his absence, or the lack of film on the team we put on the floor during the absence, but this argument is pointless nonetheless. It will never be answered. You have one view, others have another. Calling their view stupid does nothing to help the situation, and only further divides people on the issue.
Last edited:
The claim that we were able to do things more effectively when he was out is definitely false. Every offensive stat went down. Efficiency on offense dropped as well. Defensively we went to zone so there’s nothing to compare the defense to.
Cole Anthony is extremely talented. As a coach and a program, you always try to recruit the most talented players. Once those players commit, it's the coaching staff's job to make it work. Sometimes it does and other times it doesn't. Not every good or elite player is a good fit at a all programs.
Cole Anthony is one of those players that any program would covet, yet it's to be determined on how his game, his mentality and his personal goals might influence his cohesiveness with a team. He has the potential to impact a team like Kyrie but he might need to time, patience, and the willingness to adapt much like Tre Duval.
Cole Anthony is one of those players that any program would covet, yet it's to be determined on how his game, his mentality and his personal goals might influence his cohesiveness with a team. He has the potential to impact a team like Kyrie but he might need to time, patience, and the willingness to adapt much like Tre Duval.
That post was not meant to stir the pot. Just hoping to diffuse the situation. I like you as a poster. Your only fault seems to be that you're a Cavs fan.
