Hubert Davis Catch-all

[rodoheel]

The most recent data is usually the most valuable data.

I agree. But that doesn't mean it's the only relevant data.

 

[Icky Mettle]

I'm not sure Veesaar is a first round pick. He's too soft. If he can get bullied in college, he will get even more bullied in the pros. He's not a strong rebounder. If he was a freshman that might be understandable. But as a junior, I don't know.

I would actually be surprised if Veesaar is a first round pick, though I do think it’s possible. But I don’t know how much that matters with the way these guys and their agents seem to think.

 

[uncjhodges]

I don't see any way we are bringing in a portal PG (or at least not anything other than a depth PG) with Mingo and Dixon on the roster. Those guys can cover all the PG minutes and play next to each other some, too.

We need a big-time wing. Right up there with a big-time portal C, IMO. That's the biggest thing we have been missing for years and are missing on this current team. Ideally we get a big-time win and Luka/Powell (if they both are back) are covering the rest of the minutes at the 2 and backing up the wing at the 3.

Also I'd be really surprised if Adams starts over Stevenson.

I wasn’t really making a decision on who was starting there, more just putting the guys down. Ideally, imo, we’d be getting both a big time wing and a point. I am not as enamored with Dixon as others seem to be and think his ceiling could be pretty low and given Mingos injury history, i’m not keen on just relying on those 2.

 

[Bigs23]

I agree. But that doesn't mean it's the only relevant data.

Agreed, but there's also a risk of selling at the exact wrong moment.

 

[thebruinbleedstarheelblue]

Unfortunately, with some, he will always be coaching for his job. I suspect that for some people, it's more than his coaching. Some didn't want him to begin with and will never accept him.

Meh - the miss tournament as preseason #1 and last year's play in team are the main factors.

Next level are the wild swings within the season.

Lastly is style of play... from the rosters to style of play(bunch of 3s and combo guards)... not aesthetically pleasing but fine if it works.

I think all of those are ahead of race.

 

[uncjhodges]

I would actually be surprised if Veesaar is a first round pick, though I do think it’s possible. But I don’t know how much that matters with the way these guys and their agents seem to think.

Especially given that Veesaar turns 22 this month

 

[sringwal]

Looking ahead a bit, we know Caleb is going pro and it’s safe to assume Veesaar is as well. So not including those two, of all the players on our current roster with eligibility left, who should be our top 3 priorities to keep. I’m going with:
1. Dixon
2. Stevenson
3. Luka

After those 3 I might prioritize High and Powell. I actually really like Powell. He doesn’t get a lot of minutes, but he seems to hustle and is a legit 3-point threat. High has shown improvement with his increased minutes, and would provide an experienced, serviceable backup big for next season.

Priority 1:
Getting at least two of the Dixon/Stevenson/Luka group back. Benefits to each. Each is capable of playing the 3 and at least one other position.

Priority 2:
Getting a star point guard, and two elite bigs in the portal.

Priority 3:
Getting both Powell and High to return, at the right price. If Stevenson does not return, then High becomes a bigger priority.

Low priority: Kyan Evans, James Brown, Jaydon Young, Isaiah Denis. Of this group, I'd probably prioritize Young first, but a lot of that is situational, depending on both who returns and also who we pick up elsewhere.

Portal Point Guard, Powell, Young
Mingo, Dixon
Luka, Adams
Portal Big 1, Stevenson
Portal Big 2, High

The above is probably more than we should expect as far as returning players being willing to come back without being guaranteed starting spots, but I haven't seen enough consistency from any of the potential returners to state that they have earned a starting spot for next year (assuming, of course, that Veesaar doesn't return). Regardless, I'm hopeful that that is essentially what we will see. A lot is dependent on picking up key portal pieces, but the potential is there for the above group to grow together.

 

[CRHeel94]

I'm not sure Veesaar is a first round pick. He's too soft. If he can get bullied in college, he will get even more bullied in the pros. He's not a strong rebounder. If he was a freshman that might be understandable. But as a junior, I don't know.

He's been rising in draft projections. Last mocks I've seen have him in the late first round, which is always a dangerous territory. Very easy to slip from first round gurateed money to second round (less money, no guarantee). I would rule him out coming back. Can make good money, get stronger and be better positioned in a weaker draft the following year.

If Luka returns, he will start over Powell. Personally, I hope we keep him (and Dixon and Stevenson). I believe in the benefit of continuity.

We will still need another banger inside. If Vasaar stays, that gives us flexibility position wise. If Vasaar leaves, it will need to be a 5.

 

[Enigma94]

Perhaps things are changing, but it seems that when players in positions similar to Veesaar think longterm (in consultation with their agents), going the pro route is preferred. And perhaps with Veesaar’s background he would be comfortable making a lot of money playing professionally in Europe.

Look at Harrison Ingram, for example. He was projected as a second round pick. While UNC may not have had as much NIL money to work with two years ago, I am sure they were willing to throw a lot of money at Ingram if he were willing to come back. I’m sure other college teams would have been willing to do the same. But he decided to go pro, despite being projected as a second rounder.

Sure if he's just dead set on going on with his professional career then you can't stop him from doing so. I would just try to make it a difficult decision. It's pretty clear that he can make more money at UNC next year than at any of his "professional" options and for that reason I think there's always a chance to keep him.

 

[superrific]

Meh - the miss tournament as preseason #1 and last year's play in team are the main factors.

Next level are the wild swings within the season.

Lastly is style of play... from the rosters to style of play(bunch of 3s and combo guards)... not aesthetically pleasing but fine if it works.

I think all of those are ahead of race.

There are many reasons to be concerned about HD's performance, but the #1 preseason ranking isn't one of them. It's not HD's fault that the rankings dramatically overrated the Heels after a big tourney run. This happens often. In 1986, Louisville won the title with a bunch of seniors and Pervis Ellison. Pervis was great in the title game and maybe the whole NCAA tournament, but he was one guy. The next season L'ville started as #2, and missed the NCAA tournament. It was utterly ridiculous to have them #2 to begin with.

I knew the #1 ranking for UNC that year was suspicious and I would not have put them anywhere near that. Because obviously what made the whole team work was Brady's outside shooting. He wasn't the best player, but he was indispensable. I get that we had Nance coming in and he was supposed to have that same effect, but that was hardly a sure thing. Second, while Caleb had a hot stretch at the end of the season, over his two years he had shown himself to be a very inefficient player. It was optimistic to assume that he was going to continue with that NCAA form instead of his career stats.

So I would have -- and I said at the time -- put UNC outside the top 10. Maybe like 15, with the proviso that the team could be awesome If a) no injuries; b) Nance replicated Brady's shooting; and c) Caleb's hot streak reflected genuine improvement and not just getting hot.

That team didn't have close to #1 talent, so it's bullshit to hold that against HD. Now, you could say that it still should have made the tournament, and I'd agree with that, but the underperformance was missing the tournament with a R32 or R16 squad, not a title challenger. And the chemistry on that team was so bad.

 

[Bigs23]

There are many reasons to be concerned about HD's performance, but the #1 preseason ranking isn't one of them. It's not HD's fault that the rankings dramatically overrated the Heels after a big tourney run. This happens often. In 1986, Louisville won the title with a bunch of seniors and Pervis Ellison. Pervis was great in the title game and maybe the whole NCAA tournament, but he was one guy. The next season L'ville started as #2, and missed the NCAA tournament. It was utterly ridiculous to have them #2 to begin with.

I knew the #1 ranking for UNC that year was suspicious and I would not have put them anywhere near that. Because obviously what made the whole team work was Brady's outside shooting. He wasn't the best player, but he was indispensable. I get that we had Nance coming in and he was supposed to have that same effect, but that was hardly a sure thing. Second, while Caleb had a hot stretch at the end of the season, over his two years he had shown himself to be a very inefficient player. It was optimistic to assume that he was going to continue with that NCAA form instead of his career stats.

So I would have -- and I said at the time -- put UNC outside the top 10. Maybe like 15, with the proviso that the team could be awesome If a) no injuries; b) Nance replicated Brady's shooting; and c) Caleb's hot streak reflected genuine improvement and not just getting hot.

That team didn't have close to #1 talent, so it's bullshit to hold that against HD. Now, you could say that it still should have made the tournament, and I'd agree with that, but the underperformance was missing the tournament with a R32 or R16 squad, not a title challenger. And the chemistry on that team was so bad.

I agree, the season was certainly a complete failure but the preseason #1 thing doesn't make it any worse as a practical matter.

 

[superrific]

I would rule him out coming back. Can make good money, get stronger and be better positioned in a weaker draft the following year.

Would, or wouldn't? I mean, in the past it was always the smart play to go pro as soon as possible. But in the NIL era, not necessarily.

I don't see Henri as a guy who is ever going to get a big second contract -- at least not without improving considerably. Which he might do, and he might also do it better in the NBA. But if I were him, I'd focus on near-term earnings.

It's also true, though, that the career trajectory of an NBA washout -- i.e. two or three years in the league followed by Europe -- wouldn't necessarily be unattractive to him as a European.

 

[SnoopRob]

There are many reasons to be concerned about HD's performance, but the #1 preseason ranking isn't one of them. It's not HD's fault that the rankings dramatically overrated the Heels after a big tourney run. This happens often. In 1986, Louisville won the title with a bunch of seniors and Pervis Ellison. Pervis was great in the title game and maybe the whole NCAA tournament, but he was one guy. The next season L'ville started as #2, and missed the NCAA tournament. It was utterly ridiculous to have them #2 to begin with.

I knew the #1 ranking for UNC that year was suspicious and I would not have put them anywhere near that. Because obviously what made the whole team work was Brady's outside shooting. He wasn't the best player, but he was indispensable. I get that we had Nance coming in and he was supposed to have that same effect, but that was hardly a sure thing. Second, while Caleb had a hot stretch at the end of the season, over his two years he had shown himself to be a very inefficient player. It was optimistic to assume that he was going to continue with that NCAA form instead of his career stats.

So I would have -- and I said at the time -- put UNC outside the top 10. Maybe like 15, with the proviso that the team could be awesome If a) no injuries; b) Nance replicated Brady's shooting; and c) Caleb's hot streak reflected genuine improvement and not just getting hot.

That team didn't have close to #1 talent, so it's bullshit to hold that against HD. Now, you could say that it still should have made the tournament, and I'd agree with that, but the underperformance was missing the tournament with a R32 or R16 squad, not a title challenger. And the chemistry on that team was so bad.

If that team - which returned 4 starters from a team that played for the NC the previous year - had been ranked 10th or 15th in the preseason and missed the NCAAT, it would have been a failure. If that team would have squeaked into the field in Dayton and failed to progress far into the tournament it would have been a failure.

The #1 preseason ranking exacerbates the feelings of failure regarding that season, but it isn't the only or even main reason that season is viewed so poorly.

 

[superrific]

I agree, the season was certainly a complete failure but the preseason #1 thing doesn't make it any worse as a practical matter.

Sportswriters aren't very smart. If they were, they wouldn't be sportswriters. So yeah, the polls are usually quite stupid, and when the polls and the metrics disagree, the metrics are almost always right.

 

[Icky Mettle]

Sure if he's just dead set on going on with his professional career then you can't stop him from doing so. I would just try to make it a difficult decision. It's pretty clear that he can make more money at UNC next year than at any of his "professional" options and for that reason I think there's always a chance to keep him.

It’s certainly hard for me to wrap my head around the financial aspect of the decision-making process. The only job I ever turned down when I didn’t have another option already on the table was a job offering me about $16k for the year. That was 1998 right after I got out of college. I turned it down as I was waiting to hear back from about another job that would pay me $23k for the year. (I did get offered that job, and I took it, and I thought I was making bank!).

 

[superrific]

If that team - which returned 4 starters from a team that played for the NC the previous year - had been ranked 10th or 15th in the preseason and missed the NCAAT, it would have been a failure. If that team would have squeaked into the field in Dayton and failed to progress far into the tournament it would have been a failure.

The #1 preseason ranking exacerbates the feelings of failure regarding that season, but it isn't the only or even main reason that season is viewed so poorly.

It is why it's viewed SO poorly. Let's say a team is projected at the start of the season to be a 10 seed. It narrowly misses the tournament. In one sense, that's a failure. But it's not much of a failure, is it?

To put it another way, teams that are ranked 10-15 in a season miss the tournament with some frequency. Shit happens. Yes, they are failed seasons but they aren't unheard of. Being ranked #1, though, almost always makes the tournament. That's why it feels like such a disappontment -- but if the ranking was bullshit, it shouldn't.

It's like how people focus on the NC game that year, how we blew the biggest halftime lead etc. That is such a stupid narrative. It was a minor miracle for the team to be winning by so much at halftime. And with Mondo ineffective in the second half, the Iron Five was no more. Of course it would lose and lose big to the otherwise best team. Now, could the team have won? I mean, it could have. But it wasn't remotely a fair fight at that point.

 

[Enigma94]

It’s certainly hard for me to wrap my head around the financial aspect of the decision-making process. The only job I ever turned down when I didn’t have another option already on the table was a job offering me about $16k for the year. That was 1998 right after I got out of college. I turned it down as I was waiting to hear back from about another job that would pay me $23k for the year. (I did get offered that job, and I took it, and I thought I was making bank!).

That's very similar to my graduation experience! I was also offered a job paying $16k in 1995 and turned it down, but I didn't have another offer. After spending a few months living with my girlfriend I got a job offer at $28k and thought I was making the big bucks!

 

[SnoopRob]

It is why it's viewed SO poorly. Let's say a team is projected at the start of the season to be a 10 seed. It narrowly misses the tournament. In one sense, that's a failure. But it's not much of a failure, is it?

To put it another way, teams that are ranked 10-15 in a season miss the tournament with some frequency. Shit happens. Yes, they are failed seasons but they aren't unheard of. Being ranked #1, though, almost always makes the tournament. That's why it feels like such a disappontment -- but if the ranking was bullshit, it shouldn't.

You're correct that a team rated roughly 40th in the preseason is going to be viewed vastly differently than a team ranked #1 when they fail to make the tournament.

Also, in related news, an apple is going to be viewed very differently than an orange if one is making a caramel fruit snack.

That team may not have been fairly ranked #1 going into the season, but it shouldn't have been ranked outside the top 10 (at the most extreme) and certainly should have been within the group of teams expected to be NC contenders. Whatever the preseason ranking for that team, missing the tournament altogether (or even making it by the skin of their teeth and playing in Dayton to open the tournament) would have rightly been a significant disappointment.

 

[superrific]

would have rightly been a significant disappointment.

Yes. But not the disastrous disappointment that the "#1 ranking -> missing tournament" implies.

 

[rodoheel]

I wasn’t really making a decision on who was starting there, more just putting the guys down. Ideally, imo, we’d be getting both a big time wing and a point. I am not as enamored with Dixon as others seem to be and think his ceiling could be pretty low and given Mingos injury history, i’m not keen on just relying on those 2.

I mean in the portal era you can't really expect to be 3 deep at positions with guys who expect to play. Dixon may not have the highest upside but he's the starting PG for a very good, if not quite great, UNC team. He isn't coming back next year to be a depth option behind Mingo and a portal PG, nor should he. If we keep a combo like Evans around he can be the third PG in case someone is injured or ineffective. Or we can sign someone who knows he's probably the third option and will be cheap.

At the very least, a freshman Mingo and sophomore Dixon would be a pretty clear upgrade already on our PG rotation for this season. If we have the roster space and $$$ to add another quality player to that mix, great, but I would not be reserving big dollars for that the way I would a wing or a 5, both of which appear to be much more obvious needs (assuming Veesaar leaves).