Developing Talent in today's NCAA

[jamsession3]

I'm really proud of the 4 teams in the Final Four this year. What really stands out is each team is not only led by upperclassmen, but they are led by players who developed over a period of 3 to 4 years.

Jay Williams and Courtney Alexander said last night during the McD game, there were no standout one and done players this year.

So here's my question, do you see Final Four teams from this point on having players who have developed over a course of 3 to 4 years? And does it matter if they have stayed with the same program? Zag is doing it with a 5th year senior and 3 transfers with 3 years of experience apiece.

 

[RanDEVILman]

How long have each of the Zags transfers been there? That is something I have wondered myself a few times this year and never researched. If it's their first year how is that different from really good OADs? I get they are older and more mature and therefore better, but that doesn't mean all 4th and 5th year guys are better than all freshmen. I think what this FF shows is that there are lots of ways to win....The most important thing is getting hot at the right part of the year.

 

[HeLooks2MuchLikeDave]

Feels like we are beating a dead horse here. Most final fours aren't going to have many OADs unless Duke or Kentucky make it because just about every other school has at most, 1 OAD.
2016 had 1 OAD (no Duke or UK)
2015 had 7 OADs (both Duke and UK)
2014 had 2 OADs (UK)
2013 had no OADs (no Duke or UK)
2012 had 4 OADs (UK)
2011 had 1 OAD (UK)
2010 had no OADs (Duke)

So of the 15 OADs that have played in the Final Four the last 8 years, 10 have gone to UK, 3 have gone to Duke, and 2 have gone elsewhere. Without Duke or UK, that's one OAD every four years.

 

[Laettner]

Feels like we are beating a dead horse here. Most final fours aren't going to have many OADs unless Duke or Kentucky make it because just about every other school has at most, 1 OAD.
2016 had 1 OAD (no Duke or UK)
2015 had 7 OADs (both Duke and UK)
2014 had 2 OADs (UK)
2013 had no OADs (no Duke or UK)
2012 had 4 OADs (UK)
2011 had 1 OAD (UK)
2010 had no OADs (Duke)

So of the 15 OADs that have played in the Final Four the last 8 years, 10 have gone to UK, 3 have gone to Duke, and 2 have gone elsewhere. Without Duke or UK, that's one OAD every four years.

Great breakdown! If K misses on Duval, Knox & Bamba, bet our recruiting philosophy changes next year b/c 2015 was a lightning in a bottle scenario.

 

[jamsession3]

Great breakdown! If K misses on Duval, Knox & Bamba, bet our recruiting philosophy changes next year b/c 2015 was a lightning in a bottle scenario.

None of those players are OAD, and really the one we need the most is Duval.

 

[Duke It Out]

I think we are doing a bunch of overreacting. Duke landed potential one and dones, but to say Duke was a one and done team this season is completely false. Tatum was the only freshman that played a significant role. Outside of Tatum, Duke was led by 2 seniors, a junior, and a sophomore with plenty of experience.

If you look at the final four teams, more went into them getting there than having 3/4 year players. All of them have gotten good guard play. Felder for SC is a freshman PG, but has really been a difference maker down the stretch for them. Oregon has multiple guards, but Dorsey has been on fire for them. Williams -Goss and Berry have been steady all season.

All of the teams in the final 4 rank in the top 25 defensively, which Duke didn't do all year. SC and Gonzaga rank 1st and 2nd in team defense.

They all avoided nightmare matchups and had some luck along the way. I know SC had to play teams with better seeds, but that isn't always a definitive measure. SC shot below 30% the first half against Duke, and over 60% in the second. Those type of things are hard to measure. They had a handful of shots bounce around the rim and fall in against Duke in the second half. Gonzaga could've lost their last game, but WVU didn't even get a shot up on the last play. The Zags also benefited from the refs against Northwestern on a missed goaltending call. UNC won on a last second shot, and overcame a late game deficit to Arkansas(with some help from the refs). Oregon avoided death on a last second shot from Michigan that rimmed out.

SC has ridden a formula that has shown success in the past. They have one really, really good player in Thornwell. They play tough, rugged defense. Most importantly, they play hard and play together. SC destroyed Baylor at the Garden, and Baylor had a week to prepare. If you think Duke didn't get outworked by SC in the second round, then you didn't watch the game. For lack of a better term, they have just wanted it more than their opponents. Their play on the court supports that.

Duke suffered a similar fate in the mid/late 00's when they weren't getting any one and dones. There is no exact science to getting to a final four. The best team doesn't always win, and the most talented team doesn't either. That doesn't mean you have a better chance if you aren't the best team or the most talented team, which some of you seem to think it does.

 

[McCantsTranscript]

Good luck convincing those kids that they're not one and done.

 

[Mac9192]

Yes it's important because you never know if a kid will have a great season that maybe wasn't projected to leave early. That is the case with Kennard. Now the bench Duke has in unproven, and a few what ifs are in place. Duke is still going to be good, but may be youngest team K has ever had

 

[McCantsTranscript]

I'm really proud of the 4 teams in the Final Four this year. What really stands out is each team is not only led by upperclassmen, but they are led by players who developed over a period of 3 to 4 years.

Jay Williams and Courtney Alexander said last night during the McD game, there were no standout one and done players this year.

So here's my question, do you see Final Four teams from this point on having players who have developed over a course of 3 to 4 years? And does it matter if they have stayed with the same program? Zag is doing it with a 5th year senior and 3 transfers with 3 years of experience apiece.

Probably didn't help that all of the one and dones were pretty much in one region of the bracket with Duke being the only one on the left side.

 

[hart2chesson]

Yes it's important because you never know if a kid will have a great season that maybe wasn't projected to leave early. That is the case with Kennard. Now the bench Duke has in unproven, and a few what ifs are in place. Duke is still going to be good, but may be youngest team K has ever had

True. Luke really saved us when you go back to the Wake game, and he just blossomed beautifully this year- so much so he stands on the cusp of the draft!

I share your concerns about next year- a possible FAB FIVE the second, yes, but scary from a youth standpoint. If only Vrank, White, etc had gotten a little more experience this year I would feel better about leadership in case GA and Luke leave....

OFC