I don't know how the Duke kid goes early.  Wow in fact.  How would he be fast enough to get a shot up in the NBA?  He isn't even in fast/quick enough for a SF...

Posted by jpmills3 on 8/28/2012 7:45:00 AM (view original):
I don't know how the Duke kid goes early.  Wow in fact.  How would he be fast enough to get a shot up in the NBA?  He isn't even in fast/quick enough for a SF...

I think this is a big stretch, I mean I just won a national title and went 31-3 when my SG and SF both had sub 60 speed. 

Posted by kmasonbx on 8/28/2012 9:15:00 AM (view original):

Posted by jpmills3 on 8/28/2012 7:45:00 AM (view original):
I don't know how the Duke kid goes early.  Wow in fact.  How would he be fast enough to get a shot up in the NBA?  He isn't even in fast/quick enough for a SF...

I think this is a big stretch, I mean I just won a national title and went 31-3 when my SG and SF both had sub 60 speed. 

I think you haven't looked at the Duke player in question.... 

The Duke kid has 60 ATH and 79 SPD.  He is below average in both important categories.

Your team set-up is not standard, so it is hard to compare guys really... but...

The SF (who must have played SG for you) you are talking about has a 99 ATH (!) to go with 57 SPD.     His ATH makes up for SPD issues.  The Duke kid has neither.

Then you have PFs (like Wright and Ladson) for your 3 spot, and who also made up for their lack of SPD with ATH's of 97 and 99.  Also, with that ATH, their 50's level speed is more than enough to compete at the 3.

 

Posted by jpmills3 on 8/28/2012 10:01:00 AM (view original):

Posted by kmasonbx on 8/28/2012 9:15:00 AM (view original):

Posted by jpmills3 on 8/28/2012 7:45:00 AM (view original):
I don't know how the Duke kid goes early.  Wow in fact.  How would he be fast enough to get a shot up in the NBA?  He isn't even in fast/quick enough for a SF...

I think this is a big stretch, I mean I just won a national title and went 31-3 when my SG and SF both had sub 60 speed. 

I think you haven't looked at the Duke player in question.... 

The Duke kid has 60 ATH and 79 SPD.  He is below average in both important categories.

Your team set-up is not standard, so it is hard to compare guys really... but...

The SF (who must have played SG for you) you are talking about has a 99 ATH (!) to go with 57 SPD.     His ATH makes up for SPD issues.  The Duke kid has neither.

Then you have PFs (like Wright and Ladson) for your 3 spot, and who also made up for their lack of SPD with ATH's of 97 and 99.  Also, with that ATH, their 50's level speed is more than enough to compete at the 3.

 

I'm with you jp. I find it hard to see how kmason (or anyone for that matter) can make the case that this guy's core ratings are good for D1. 

Kmason's guy is 99/57/95, a combined 156 for ath/spd, 251 for ath/spd/def. That blows the duke guy out of the water. 

do players have an attitude rating?  where they desire to leave early?  could frustration with the current team or coach bring about leaving early?  does WE play into the decision?

I'm in no way saying the Duke kid matches up well with my 2 guys, but JPmills specifically stated that he wasn't fast/quick enough and that just isn't true. You can say he's not athletic enough, but his speed is perfectly fine. I've had plenty of guys with about his speed be really good perimeter players. For example the #5 pick in last seasons draft in Tark was a SF on my squad with 56 speed I believe, and his rebound was only in the 60s so he was definitely looked at as a SF. 

hey now kmason.  lets not get all semantical on a forum post!  i barely use english on these things.  i think saying "fast/quick" indicates an ATH/SPD combo.  rascal!

The kid isn't mediocre, let's not get hung up on that one comment, but I don't think that he's EE worthy at all, and certainly not from a PIT team.

Possibly, some of this may still be the aftermath of the guard correction. Since Rupp has only had one recruiting cycle since the changes. And I agree that the kid in question as well as the team he was taken from is questionable... however, if you're going to take 31 EE's... and still have some randomness in the top 25 as to whether they go or not....you're going to get some crap coming in at 30 and 31.
If you take 25 or so... no-one is complaining about how so and so should not have been taken while this kid stayed.
31 kids... with randomness involved ... so some of the top 20 get skipped over is the culprit.
If you don't take more than 24-25... this kid and this team are never in the equasion.
And with 60 kids drafted... who thinks 31 EE's is a bright idea any way?

This is Rupp's 2nd go around with the EE changes (if I recall correctly).  

 You do bring up a good question Mizzou, and that is should there be a limit as to the number of underclassmen EE's.  I don't know the answer to that, but it is an interesting thought to be sure.  Perhaps a hard and fast limit for underclassmen declaring would be beneficial.  Though determining the "appropriate" number (or even a "max" number) would certainly be a fun train wreck to watch on the forums...