<p>You serious? He can't create shots off the dribble? Its insane how much he has improved that from previous years, watch more Duke games to see that in action. I will agree that his athleticsm may be poor, in terms of a basketball player, but his defense does not lack. You just dont play under Coach K for 4 years and have terrible defense, also its not like defense is played in the NBA anyway.</p>
<p>I don't think Redick will match up with the athleticism of the NBA. His defense isn't terrible, but when he has to guard a guy like Dwayne Wade or Kobe, he'll be in trouble.</p>
<p>Both play pretty miserable defense and aren't really very athletic. JJ would never even have to pretend to guard one of those guys unless his coach is an idiot. Morrison's ability to score is much more diverse, where JJ's method of scoring is basically rolling off pick after pick after pick...</p>
<p>well... only 40% of JJs points this year are off of 3s... he drives, pulls up, makes his own shots. he averages around 4 3s a game and averages 29 points.</p>
<p>but come on people, give some respect / praise to the returning player of the year! JJ could have left for the NBA, but he came back to win. that alone has to count for something.</p>
<p>Left for the NBA? He probably wouldn't have been drafted, maybe late second round? Do you honestly think he's going to be driving in in the NBA, against much bigger and better defenders? He'll be a steve kerr.</p>
<p><em>sigh</em> Has there every been a co-player of the year or outright player of the year gone undrafted in the modern era? Id wager and say no.</p>
<p>To honestly think that one of the greatest shooters in all of basketball, ever, would not make it in the NBA somewhere, is absurd.</p>
<p>Here's a Mom's view....</p>
<p>I really like JJ. However, my heart goes out to Morrison for being such a wonderful role model to younger athletes with diabetes. I have a daughter with diabetes who is an athlete. It really is a huge handicap for these kids, and adds an extra level of effort to deal with the inconvenience and uncertainties of the disease. These athletes must be very well conditioned in order to maintain their blood sugar levels under intense exercise.</p>
<p>It's great that Morrison has succeeded with the diabetes. His height will likely make him a better NBA player than Redick, but Redick is frequently called one of the 3-5 best shooters in the history of college basketball, is within two games of becoming the leading scorer in the history of the ACC, and he plays for Duke, and
Duke is the #1 team in the country,
Duke plays in a leading conference, and
Duke is on tv more often than Law and Order.</p>
<p>I really don't think the POY voting will be close.</p>
<p>As for the why can't Duke players make it in the NBA?</p>
<p>There are a bunch of Duke players who are currently excellent NBA players: Brand, Battier, Duhon, Boozer, Maggette, Dunleavy, and Ewing come to mind, in addition to Hill and Jayson Williams (who would have been a great NBA player and may still recover from the accident) as well as a couple of guys who would have gone to Duke if they hadn't bypased college (Kobe Bryant and Shaun Livingston). Shav Randolph plays for the 76ers, and he wouldn't have even been a starter for Duke this year.</p>
<p>Cleareyed guy, of those players you listed, how many are all-stars? They are very average talent in the NBA. Think of all the great players coming through Duke and haven't gone on to do well in the NBA; Bob Hurley and Laettner for starters.</p>
<p>Did anyone see Adam Morrison today?!?! He was insane! He outscored Loyola-Marymount BY HIMSELF in the second half. He was hitting fading threes left and right.</p>
<p>Also, Duke may be the #1 ranked team in the country after this week, but they're not the best team. UConn and Villanova would both beat Duke. I think that POY voting is going to be a lot closer than you think. Redick gets caught up in his own hype too much and takes ridiculous shots. Morrison has been known to take "heat check" shots to see just how ridiculously hot he really is, but at least he admits it. Morrison still shoots better overall and from behind the arc than Redick this year. POY is going to be a lot closer than you think, Morrison is capable of throwing that team on his back, where JJ mysteriously disappears in big games, and I think that will hurt him.</p>
<p>I also can't believe you called Daniel Ewing an excellent NBA player.</p>
<p>A couple of responses to the above guys (by the way, isn't this a Duke thread?)</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Redick doesn't take very many ridiculous shots. He scored 40 against Virginia, for example, off 13 shots from the field. That is amazing. In big games, he steps it up. Name a 'big game' in which he played fewer than 37 minutes or in which he wasn't running around the court like a man possessed? In most of these big games, he was either the main man or, sometimes, a decoy, but he was never mailing it in.</p></li>
<li><p>Morrison plays against weaker teams than does Redick. Morrison is great, but he simply isn't covered by the same level of player as is Redick. I watched part of that Loyola game, and Morrison went crazy in the second half but he was generally given more slack than Redick typically is.</p></li>
<li><p>While I'm not sure about Nova, I agree that U Conn probably has the most NBA talent in the NCAA this year (including one guy who should have been kicked off the team because of off-season illegalities, but, if they'd done the right thing, they wouldn't have a point guard, and there are priorities). Anyway, the polls are not based on potential NBA players but on wins and losses. Duke's only lost once, so they'll be number one in this week's poll. And, in a one-game tournament, I think Duke stands a very good chance against UConn. If Duke does win it all, I will be quite happy, but I still would think that the '99 Duke team was better (as in has the most NBA talent) even though they lost in the finals.</p></li>
<li><p>I agree. Ewing isn't an NBA standout.</p></li>
<li><p>This thing about Duke not producing NBA players is old, old news. My understanding is that Duke is the current number one feeder college into the NBA. More than Carolina. More than Kentucky. More than U Conn. </p></li>
<li><p>This reflects the reality that Duke has been recruiting its team almost exclusively from the top 20-30 high school players; they're the ones who have a chance to make the NBA.</p></li>
<li><p>I'd be more impressed if Duke had become the top college program over the past 20 years by using its typical undergraduate. The reality is, of course, that its hoops players (men and women) are elite athletes, almost all of whom play professionally after college (in the NBA or Europe).</p></li>
<li><p>The above means that Duke's teams tend to consist of a couple future NBA players and 5 guys who will play in France or Turkey. They generally get along, are well coached, and win lots of games. They're on tv constantly. They are well spoken and bright. Aside from the occasional dominant team (like '92 or '99, when the team was loaded with future NBA players), they are 5-10 points better than 40 other teams in the country. On average. And if the other team is hot, or they're not, they lose. They aren't the Globetrotters playing the Senators or the Spurs playing Loyola Marymount; Duke's a bit better than dozens of other good teams.</p></li>
<li><p>So, is the knock that Duke does extremely well with extremely good athletes who then become only average NBA players? To my mind, 'average NBA player' is almost an oxymoron. There is no NBA player who is an average basketball player; it's the most hypercompetitive league in sports. It might look easy, but notice that only a couple of dozen new people from around the world make the league in a given year (second round picks--like Ewing--are considered big successes if they even make the team, unlike in the NFL, when it is common for 7th round picks to make the team). It's as if AB Duke scholarships were being handed out from the only university in the country. That would be an impressive cast of characters.</p></li>
<li><p>The lack of all-NBA players amongst Duke alumni has more to do with statistics than with with something related to Duke. Most all stars are perennials. While difficult, elite basketball players tend to have fairly long careers. There are only a few dozen NBA players who are seriously considered for All Star balloting. That would be something like 3-6 people per graduating class on this list. At least a couple of these people skipped college. That leaves 1-4 people in each college class who could be considered all stars. Duke may have the best college program in the country, but it doesn't get the top player every year. Even so, there are several of the Duke players who would be considered at that top level and a bunch more who are "average NBA players." This is still the best record in the country. </p></li>
<li><p>Laettner was/is an excellent NBA player, but nobody thought he was going to be better than Shaq. And, I'm not sure what your point was about Bob Hurley. He was hit by a drunk driver in the early phase of his NBA career. He's fortunate to be breathing much less walking or dribbling a basketball. If you're a basketball fan who actually knows the story of that night in Sacramento, you should reconsider on whom you cast aspersions.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>For further info, try <a href="http://www.dukebasketballreport.com%5B/url%5D">www.dukebasketballreport.com</a></p>
<p>here's a professional discussing the issue.</p>