Trey Zeigler

[airowe]

This is a guy we might want to keep in mind:

http://scouthoops.scout.com/2/921314.html

[Huh?]

So I'm guessing we dialed his digits?

[Tim1515]

It does have Duke on his list...maybe we did call. Being a son of a coach is typically a good sign. I'm not sure at 6'5 he's a typical wing player...but who knows.

[mj2345]

has said he won't commit till the late signing period. Being mentioned with Michigan St and Oklahoma. half of these guys are sons of coaches. doesnt mean anything.

duke recruits smart players regardless of their fathers professions.

[AlaskanAssassin]

Did we come in late? Dukes not even listed on rivals. And his interest is low. Don't tell me we're in desperate mode.

[airowe]

Did we come in late? Dukes not even listed on rivals. And his interest is low. Don't tell me we're in desperate mode.

Come on Alaskan. Desperate? Not even close. Try covering all bases mode. And yes, we came in late.

[jimsumner]

The guy is an uncommitted, top 30-35 prospect at a position of need. Why would touching base with him be considered desperate?

I find it curious that Krzyzewski is criticized for not casting a wide net and not having back-up options until he does, when he's criticized for being desperate.

[AlaskanAssassin]

Come on Alaskan. Desperate? Not even close. Try covering all bases mode. And yes, we came in late.

hehe, good. Just don't want to see us down to that level.

[SBell]

Duke has contacted Trey. U-M, MSU, UCLA, CMU main competition. He's a very good all-around player, can play all three perimeter. Don't know that "half of these guys are coaches' sons." In fact, hardly any are the sons of Division I head coaches, and it does matter.

http://www.bankhoops.com

[El_Diablo]

Duke has contacted Trey. U-M, MSU, UCLA, CMU main competition. He's a very good all-around player, can play all three perimeter. Don't know that "half of these guys are coaches' sons." In fact, hardly any are the sons of Division I head coaches, and it does matter.

http://www.bankhoops.com

Excerpt on Zeigler, from link above:

Trey Zeigler 6-5 Sr Mount Pleasant
"Not much to say about Trey because he’s such a known commodity," a coach said. "He possesses a natural instinct and ability to play a high-level brand of basketball. Has a cool and calming influence on the court. Doesn’t get rattled and brings it whether or not he’s made five shots in a row or missed them. Ball handling and shot have improved. With his skill, handle and size he should be able to swing from 1-3 comfortably in college."

[ChicagoCrazy84]

The guy is an uncommitted, top 30-35 prospect at a position of need. Why would touching base with him be considered desperate?

I find it curious that Krzyzewski is criticized for not casting a wide net and not having back-up options until he does, when he's criticized for being desperate.


I was going to say the same thing. Calipari loses out on Kyrie so he jumps on Knight, Selby, etc, but it isn't thought of as desperate. This is great strategy in my mind. It's a position we need to fill so I think we'll get either of them.

[ChicagoCrazy84]

On reading up on the guy's recruitment, it's surprising that he didn't already commit and sign with UCLA. His dad is a friend of Ben Howland's and was an assistant under him for UCLA and Pitt. The Bruins are near the top of his list, but if he didn't commit, I would think we have a decent shot. I am sure he knows all that UCLA has to offer and Michigan as well. Can we get Shane Battier to talk to the kid? :D

[SBell]

Trey's situation is different. His dad being a head coach, there are various reasons he hasn't committed early, all involving his dad's job/job security. Other than the Capels, most kids I can think of end up playing for their dads, even when it is NBA talent at a mid-major (Bryce Drew at Valpo, Tony Bennett at Green Bay, Ricky Berry at San Jose State).

Trey's been to our camps for years and I've coached against him in AAU, never quite understood why Duke wasn't in on him years ago.

[dukemsu]

I've heard many of the same things posted above, that Trey's decision is possibly linked to his dad's future, and that's contributing to the delay.

FWIW, most people who are well informed about this stuff in Michigan have him as a tossup between UCLA and UM at this point. Izzo is holding a scholly in case he changes his mind, but MSU is a longshot. UCLA seems to be gaining steam according to some UM posters.

Duke's late pursuit reminds me a bit of when K inquired on LaVell Blanchard after Maggette split unexpectedly. You never know.

dukemsu

[CDu]

The guy is an uncommitted, top 30-35 prospect at a position of need. Why would touching base with him be considered desperate?

I find it curious that Krzyzewski is criticized for not casting a wide net and not having back-up options until he does, when he's criticized for being desperate.

Well, I wouldn't call this an example of casting a wide net or having a backup option. This sounds a lot more like throwing our hat in late in the game. When I think of casting a wider net, I think of recruiting multiple players somewhat simultaneously, more like the Roscoe Smith situation.

Don't get me wrong, though. I wouldn't call this situation getting desperate, either.

[Franzez]

Word is also circulating that Duke has been on the phone with Trey Zeigler (http://florida.rivals.com/viewprospect.asp?Sport=2&pr_key=54919) since losing out on Barnes. Zeigler, the No. 26-ranked prospect in the Rivals150, is the son of Central Michigan coach Ernie Zeigler and is waiting until the spring to sign.
http://duke.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1018862

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROnaRyY7Btg

Looks pretty good, hopefully we can land this guy since he comes from a good pedigree with his father as a Head Coach.

I think we could use a guy like Zeigler who could play the 2 and 3, rather than just a 3 like Roscoe Smith. Of the guys we'll have next year in our backcourt, none of them could play some minutes at the 3 if needed.

[Kedsy]

http://duke.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1018862

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROnaRyY7Btg

Looks pretty good, hopefully we can land this guy since he comes from a good pedigree with his father as a Head Coach.

I think we could use a guy like Zeigler who could play the 2 and 3, rather than just a 3 like Roscoe Smith. Of the guys we'll have next year in our backcourt, none of them could play some minutes at the 3 if needed.


Didn't a thread start yesterday on this exact topic?

[NSDukeFan]

http://duke.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1018862

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROnaRyY7Btg

Looks pretty good, hopefully we can land this guy since he comes from a good pedigree with his father as a Head Coach.

I think we could use a guy like Zeigler who could play the 2 and 3, rather than just a 3 like Roscoe Smith. Of the guys we'll have next year in our backcourt, none of them could play some minutes at the 3 if needed.

If our roster does not change before next year, and Kyle leaves, I expect we would see a lot of Andre Dawkins at the 3.

[El_Diablo]

If our roster does not change before next year, and Kyle leaves, I expect we would see a lot of Andre Dawkins at the 3.

...to go along with Kelly and Czyz.

[Kedsy]

...to go along with Kelly and Czyz.

Depending on matchuups, you'll even see some Nolan at the 3, in an ultra-quick three guard lineup with Seth and Kyrie.

[jesus_hurley]

Depending on matchuups, you'll even see some Nolan at the 3, in an ultra-quick three guard lineup with Seth and Kyrie.

Why not just throw Irving, Smith, Curry AND Dawkins out there and play some DDMO.....
:D

[Duvall]

...to go along with Kelly and Czyz.

Kelly guarding small forwards and wing guards? I hope it never comes to that.

[El_Diablo]

Kelly guarding small forwards and wing guards? I hope it never comes to that.

It already has.

[CDu]

It already has.

Not really. Most of the time Kelly has seen so far has been at the 4. I suspect that will only increase next year when he's a little bigger and when Thomas and Zoubek leave. I'll be pretty surprised if Kelly is getting substantive time at the 3 next year with all of the wing players we'll have. I'd expect him to instead be part of a 3-man rotation with the Plumlees up front, with Hairston playing the 3/4.

[El_Diablo]

Not really. Most of the time Kelly has seen so far has been at the 4. I suspect that will only increase next year when he's a little bigger and when Thomas and Zoubek leave. I'll be pretty surprised if Kelly is getting substantive time at the 3 next year with all of the wing players we'll have. I'd expect him to instead be part of a 3-man rotation with the Plumlees up front, with Hairston playing the 3/4.

You're saying he hasn't guarded any wing players at all? Duke switches on screens, so even if he's "playing" the 4, Kelly will be matched up a lot against guards/wings on the switch. We're also playing a lot of zone, which requires everyone to close out and contain. He will be guarding smaller players a lot this year, and it's already started.

As to my original point, I said that Andre Dawkins would get time at the 3 next year...along with Kelly and Czyz. But I agree that Dawkins would get most of the time there, and Kelly will be more of an interior player. But he can be used at the 3 if we want to go big. He would create mismatches for the opponent. I didn't really think of Hairston...he may be more suited for defending a college 3, but I don't really know. Just saying that Andre would not be our only option if Singler leaves. :)

[airowe]

Dec. 12
Trey Zeigler, SG
Mt. Pleasant, MI
Mt. Pleasant H.S.

Scouts Grade: 96
ESPN100 Rank: 26
Position Rank: 5

Trey Zeigler gets 21 but Mt. Pleasant goes down

Uncommitted ESPNU 100 guard Trey Zeigler scored 21 points and added eight rebounds but Mt. Pleasant was no match for Saginaw Arthur Hill, falling 65-38 on Friday night.

[CDu]

You're saying he hasn't guarded any wing players at all? Duke switches on screens, so even if he's "playing" the 4, Kelly will be matched up a lot against guards/wings on the switch. We're also playing a lot of zone, which requires everyone to close out and contain. He will be guarding smaller players a lot this year, and it's already started.

There's a big difference between occasionally having to occasionally guard a wing player on a switch and being primarily responsible for guarding the wing player by playing as a wing. Kelly has played exclusively at the 4 spot to this point, not the wing. Zoubek and Miles Plumlee have been forced to guard a wing on rare occasions due to switches. That doesn't mean they play the wing.


As to my original point, I said that Andre Dawkins would get time at the 3 next year...along with Kelly and Czyz. But I agree that Dawkins would get most of the time there, and Kelly will be more of an interior player. But he can be used at the 3 if we want to go big. He would create mismatches for the opponent. I didn't really think of Hairston...he may be more suited for defending a college 3, but I don't really know. Just saying that Andre would not be our only option if Singler leaves. :)

Next year we'll have Irving, Curry, Dawkins, Thornton, Hairston (who is supposedly a PF/SF, not a PF/C), and likely Smith. That ignores the possibility that we'll add another wing player. We'll also have potentially 2-3 fewer guys available to play the frontcourt (if Singler goes as well). Given those facts and the fact that Kelly is not suited to play the wing in the first place, I don't think we'll see Kelly at the 3 at all next year.

[Kedsy]

Next year we'll have Irving, Curry, Dawkins, Thornton, Hairston (who is supposedly a PF/SF, not a PF/C), and likely Smith. That ignores the possibility that we'll add another wing player. We'll also have potentially 2-3 fewer guys available to play the frontcourt (if Singler goes as well). Given those facts and the fact that Kelly is not suited to play the wing in the first place, I don't think we'll see Kelly at the 3 at all next year.

Well, if Singler leaves and we don't get another wing recruit, and we're playing a team with a big "3" (like Wake's Aminu, although I don't think he will personally be around, or maybe like Harrison Barnes), then we'll either have to defend the other team's 6'8" wing with Dawkins (or one of the other smallish guards) or one of: Kelly, Hairston, Czyz. In that situation, depending on his defensive development, I could easily see Kelly playing the "3." He has as much chance to be defensively ready for that scenario as Hairston or Czyz, and probably a bit more of a chance.

I agree with you that in "normal" scenarios, where the opposing team's wing forward is not too large or strong for one of our guards (e.g., Dawkins, N Smith) to defend, then Kelly won't see much if any time there.

Also, if we do happen to get a Trey Zeigler or Roscoe Smith (or TaShawn Mabry), then I think that player will be in the wing rotation ahead of Kelly, who would then play almost exclusively in the big man rotation (along with MP1, MP2, Hairston, & Czyz, plus possibly the Zeigler/R Smith/Mabry recruit).

[BlueintheFace]

You're saying he hasn't guarded any wing players at all? Duke switches on screens, so even if he's "playing" the 4, Kelly will be matched up a lot against guards/wings on the switch. We're also playing a lot of zone, which requires everyone to close out and contain. He will be guarding smaller players a lot this year, and it's already started.

Actually, this argument is silly since Duke plays zone 95% of the time Kelly is in the game (presumably because of his defensive liabilities). I've actually only seen Duke play man to man for a few possessions with Kelly in the game early this season. Perhaps as he gets better that will change.

Point being... Kelly hasn't really "matched up" with anybody this season.

[El_Diablo]

Wow. I'll reiterate. In response to the claim that we'll have to use Andre at the '3' a lot next year if Kyle leaves...

Yes, that's likely what will happen. But we'll also have Olek, Kelly, and Josh available to fill some SF minutes (as matchup and player development dictate).

I think Kelly can play some at the '3' spot if we want to go big. Regarding his ability to guard people outside of the paint, it will depend on the matchup. Obviously, if we're playing someone with multiple bigs on the floor (like UNC), then Andre might be overmatched at the '3' at times and we might need a bigger player out there. But I don't see how anyone can say, "bah, Ryan won't be capable of guarding small forwards next year." He's capable of it; it's just a matter of doing it consistently. And he's certainly capable of playing the wing on offense.

And so what if Ryan plays in a zone a lot this year? Did Coach K say he's going to abandon it after this season? Isn't it possible that if Ryan has to play the '3' at times next year that we might be in a zone then too? :confused:

Bottom line...I didn't say he will be the primary option at the '3,' but he is an option. He may be the fourth option, depending on Josh's abilities and Olek's development, but he is an option. If you disagree with that, then I think we're at an impasse.

I personally think it's possible to have Irving, Dawkins, Kelly, Plumlee, Plumlee on the court at the same time if we had to do it. Others don't think so? Okay. I guess we can revisit in March 2011 and see how it turned out. But until then...I would still like to see Roscoe Smith or Trey Zeigler join the team. :) It would make this point a moot one.

[BlueintheFace]

Actually, this argument is silly since Duke plays zone 95% of the time Kelly is in the game (presumably because of his defensive liabilities). I've actually only seen Duke play man to man for a few possessions with Kelly in the game early this season. Perhaps as he gets better that will change.

Point being... Kelly hasn't really "matched up" with anybody this season.

clarification: I meant the argument over whether or not Kelly should guard wings. Not one specific argument or the other.

[Devilsfan]

How much weight do Freshmen typically lose getting in shape to play and compete in the faster college game in the ACC?

[Coastal Devil]

Also, if we do happen to get a Trey Zeigler or Roscoe Smith (or TaShawn Mabry), then I think that player will be in the wing rotation ahead of Kelly, who would then play almost exclusively in the big man rotation (along with MP1, MP2, Hairston, & Czyz, plus possibly the Zeigler/R Smith/Mabry recruit).

I agree, if Singler leaves I would imagine (depending on the teams we play and match ups) we will play a lot of 3 Guard line ups with Irving, Seth, (Smith & Dawkins) then MP1 & MP2. Hopefully though we will land Zeigler, R Smith or Mabry. I'd be happy with any one of them. We will need to fill the void left by Kyle meaning an athletic 6-5 - 6-7 wing player. Go Coach K and the coaches for pushing hard to make it happen.

Go Duke!

[Devilsfan]

Me too. We need a very athletic wing. If the staff has picked out three candidates that fill this need, I would be in favor of taking the first one that commits and not waiting on our number one choice like in the many past. I like the zeal of our current recruiting, now let's close the deal.

[Kedsy]

Me too. We need a very athletic wing.

See, here's the thing. It would be nice to have a 6'5" to 6'8" wing option but we certainly don't "need" one. How many teams out there will have wing forwards too big/tall/strong for Andre to guard and too quick for Ryan/Josh/Olek to guard? A few, but not many. So against those teams we'll have to find another option to guard that player, possibly some zone. Ideal? Perhaps not. Critical problem? I don't think so.

Assuming Kyle leaves (and no other non-seniors) and we get no additional recruits, we're going to have between 8 and 10 ACC-caliber players. We're going to have one or more excellent players at PG, and we're going to have good, playable size up front. We're going to have lots of scoring options, and should be solid defensively.

It's true our wing players will not be particularly tall (although not really shorter than last year's Villanova team), but if that's our only weakness the team is going to be Final Four-contender good.

Adding any of R Smith, Zeigler, Mabry should allow us to deal with our one potential matchup issue, but they'll also be freshmen, so you never know how quickly they'll get up to speed defensively. Even assuming they'll be adequate, would any of these three players get more than 15 mpg their freshman year at Duke? Personally, with the rest of our roster looking the way it does, I doubt it. Which is a major reason this final recruit should be described as much more of a luxury than a need.

I'll be happy if we get one of these three recruits, but if we miss on all three (which is a distinct possibility at this point) I won't be particularly upset.

[FireOgilvie]

See, here's the thing. It would be nice to have a 6'5" to 6'8" wing option but we certainly don't "need" one. How many teams out there will have wing forwards too big/tall/strong for Andre to guard and too quick for Ryan/Josh/Olek to guard? A few, but not many. So against those teams we'll have to find another option to guard that player, possibly some zone. Ideal? Perhaps not. Critical problem? I don't think so.

Assuming Kyle leaves (and no other non-seniors) and we get no additional recruits, we're going to have between 8 and 10 ACC-caliber players. We're going to have one or more excellent players at PG, and we're going to have good, playable size up front. We're going to have lots of scoring options, and should be solid defensively.

It's true our wing players will not be particularly tall (although not really shorter than last year's Villanova team), but if that's our only weakness the team is going to be Final Four-contender good.

Adding any of R Smith, Zeigler, Mabry should allow us to deal with our one potential matchup issue, but they'll also be freshmen, so you never know how quickly they'll get up to speed defensively. Even assuming they'll be adequate, would any of these three players get more than 15 mpg their freshman year at Duke? Personally, with the rest of our roster looking the way it does, I doubt it. Which is a major reason this final recruit should be described as much more of a luxury than a need.

I'll be happy if we get one of these three recruits, but if we miss on all three (which is a distinct possibility at this point) I won't be particularly upset.

There's a reason why Coach K has gone after 4 athletic wings for next season; we need one.

We need one if we want to have the best chance possible to win the ACC or make the Final Four. UNC is one of the teams that we won't be able to match up well against without an athletic wing. Andre can't guard Barnes. Roscoe or Trey or another athletic wing would give us the best shot.

[COYS]

There's a reason why Coach K has gone after 4 athletic wings for next season; we need one.

We need one if we want to have the best chance possible to win the ACC or make the Final Four. UNC is one of the teams that we won't be able to match up well against without an athletic wing. Andre can't guard Barnes. Roscoe or Trey or another athletic wing would give us the best shot.

Personally, i think we get too hung-up on worrying about one on one matchups like this. UNC won the title without an athletic wing in the 6-5 to 6-8 range. The reason was because they forced other teams to bend to their will in every game. They put the ball in Ty Lawson's hand and played as fast as possible. Ultimately, that worked out. Anyway, enough talk about last year's UNC team. Next year's Duke team, even without Singler or an incoming recruit, will be very quick and very deep. The Plumlees + Kelly and Hairston will handle the 4-5 spots, most likely with Olek and possibly a little of Hariston backing up Dawkins/Curry as the third guard. The team will have elite shooters in Dawkins and Curry, an elite point guard in Irving, veteran leadership and strong play from an even more improved Smith, and Thornton ready in case he is needed (that is, if he doesn't surprise and jump right into the rotation). We will be very good next year, regardless of what any of our current targets decide to do, and it's definitely premature to say that the team can't make the final four because we don't have a specific type of small forward.

[Indoor66]

it's definitely premature to say that the team can't make the final four because we don't have a specific type of small forward.

I agree with you, but I doubt that you can convince the gloom, doom and boom posters.

[CDu]

Personally, i think we get too hung-up on worrying about one on one matchups like this. UNC won the title without an athletic wing in the 6-5 to 6-8 range. The reason was because they forced other teams to bend to their will in every game. They put the ball in Ty Lawson's hand and played as fast as possible. Ultimately, that worked out. Anyway, enough talk about last year's UNC team. Next year's Duke team, even without Singler or an incoming recruit, will be very quick and very deep. The Plumlees + Kelly and Hairston will handle the 4-5 spots, most likely with Olek and possibly a little of Hariston backing up Dawkins/Curry as the third guard. The team will have elite shooters in Dawkins and Curry, an elite point guard in Irving, veteran leadership and strong play from an even more improved Smith, and Thornton ready in case he is needed (that is, if he doesn't surprise and jump right into the rotation). We will be very good next year, regardless of what any of our current targets decide to do, and it's definitely premature to say that the team can't make the final four because we don't have a specific type of small forward.

Actually, they did have an athletic wing in the 6'5"-6'8" range (Danny Green). But regardless - yes, it is possible to win a title without a tall, athletic wing player. But it's really nice to have one if you can get one. Not as nice as having a go-to low post option or an explosive playmaking PG, but nice nonetheless.

[FireOgilvie]

We will be very good next year, regardless of what any of our current targets decide to do, and it's definitely premature to say that the team can't make the final four because we don't have a specific type of small forward.


I agree with you, but I doubt that you can convince the gloom, doom and boom posters.

Just so we're clear, I said "We need one if we want to have the best chance possible to win the ACC or make the Final Four."

The fact is that Coach K has gone after not just 1, but 4 athletic wing players. He certainly thinks we need one.

The real "doom and gloom" posters are the ones that constantly and prematurely prepare for Duke not to land any of its targets so we won't be disappointed. Excuse me if I have high hopes for the program and am not content with the constant excuses for why the team doesn't make it to the Final Four (or Elite 8).

[Kedsy]

Just so we're clear, I said "We need one if we want to have the best chance possible to win the ACC or make the Final Four."

Well, the "best chance" would really be if we signed the top five prospects every year, wouldn't it? Obviously that's rarely if ever going to happen, but if you come off of that idea and get all the way down to having the four new guys we'll have next year (including Curry along with Irving, Thornton, and Hairston) vs. having those guys plus one of these bigger wings, the more accurate way to say it would be we'll have a slightly better chance with the wing but a pretty good chance either way. This does not suggest the word "need" to me.


The fact is that Coach K has gone after not just 1, but 4 athletic wing players. He certainly thinks we need one.

Or he might just think the team would be a little bit better if we get one of those players and if that's the case why not try? It doesn't say anything about what he thinks we "need."

For that matter, how hard have we gone after any of these guys (other than HB)? None of them have had an official visit. Has Roscoe even had an in-home visit? I'm almost certain Zeigler and Mabry haven't. Making a phone call to see if there's any interest (which is as far as I've heard we've "gone after" Mabry), or even sending an assistant coach to Michigan to watch Trey Zeigler play doesn't really show that we're going hard after them. It doesn't show any feeling of desperate need among the coaching staff.


Excuse me if I have high hopes for the program and am not content with the constant excuses for why the team doesn't make it to the Final Four (or Elite 8).

If a team makes the Final Four (or Elite Eight), it's a cause for celebration. If they don't get that far, it's not a matter of "excuses," because the word excuses suggests we should be there and should expect to be there and if we don't make it we badly screwed up. I know the word "entitlement" is overused around here but your statement's getting awfully close. Sometimes the other team just plays better. Sometimes our team has an off game. You call it excuses, but I say it's just the way things happen in a one-and-done tournament. We were incredibly lucky (as well as skillful) from 1986 to 1994, but a lot of people seem to take that for granted while ignoring the possibility that we may have been unlucky from 2005 to 2009.

I guess what I'm saying is there's a difference between hopes and expectations. I would expect any fan to have the former; once you get to the latter I think it's a murky area. And this should apply both to how many games we win in the NCAAT as well as how many top recruiting targets we can sign.

[COYS]

Actually, they did have an athletic wing in the 6'5"-6'8" range (Danny Green). But regardless - yes, it is possible to win a title without a tall, athletic wing player. But it's really nice to have one if you can get one. Not as nice as having a go-to low post option or an explosive playmaking PG, but nice nonetheless.

I guess Danny Green does check in at 6-5. I had thought he was 6-4. I wouldn't consider him elite in terms of his quickness or leaping ability, though he was solid in those areas. My post was definitely not meant to imply that it's not nice to have a tall wing with great physical tools. However, not having one definitely does not preclude us from reaching the final four.

[Greg_Newton]

I agree with you, but I doubt that you can convince the gloom, doom and boom posters.

Ugh... that's such a condescending way to squelch what is a very reasonable discussion.

And I mean, there are exceptions to every rule. Sure, we have a chance to reach the promised land without a true PG this year. Yes, we could be an elite team next year without a contributor between 6'4 and 6'9. However, elite teams that fit that description are certainly the exception, rather than the rule. I don't think it's a stretch to say we need a player in that range to be a truly complete team in a traditional sense next year.

(And just to nitpick, Danny Green is actually 6'6, 208 with a 6'10 wingspan, http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Danny-Green-504/)

[verga]

and i believe Danny Green was a McDonalds AA, its not like he was unknown, plus he's a marvelous dancer.

[gotham devil]

http://twitter.com/TreyZeigler32

Good practice coach k and coach James were in the building at team dinner playin some college football
about 9 hours ago from Echofon

[UrinalCake]

http://twitter.com/TreyZeigler32

Good practice coach k and coach James were in the building at team dinner playin some college football
about 9 hours ago from Echofon

This is why handheld devices need to have a comma on the main keyboard :)

[cbnaylor]

Does anybody have the latest on this recruit?

[Osiagledknarf]

Does anybody have the latest on this recruit?

According to Duke's Scout page there is still a mutual intrest with Duke but the intrest is low. I'm guessing because of our depth at SG, and he is also getting looking at the two Michigan schools where I guess will he will end up at one of them.

http://duke.scout.com/a.z?s=167&p=8&c=1&nid=3313056

[jimsumner]

Duke likes Zeigler a lot. But they recognize that it might be difficult to get him out of the Midwest. Hence the recent interest in Haynes.

[Osiagledknarf]

Duke likes Zeigler a lot. But they recognize that it might be difficult to get him out of the Midwest. Hence the recent interest in Haynes.

Haynes and Zeigler play two different positions. Zeigler is a shooting guard, who is one of the better in the 2010 class. Haynes is a PF who is a rebounder and defensive banger in the middle. They have nothing to do with one another.

Coach K would be going after someone like this even if he had Zeigler.

[jimsumner]

As I've stated in another thread, Duke is recruiting Haynes with the expectation that he will become a wing.

Zeigler is properly described as a 2/3, Haynes as a 3/4. I'm pretty sure we can see the overlap here.

Duke wants to bring in no more than two of Felix, Zeigler and Haynes. They have a lot to do with each other.

[Osiagledknarf]

As I've stated in another thread, Duke is recruiting Haynes with the expectation that he will become a wing.

Zeigler is properly described as a 2/3, Haynes as a 3/4. I'm pretty sure we can see the overlap here.

Duke wants to bring in no more than two of Felix, Zeigler and Haynes. They have a lot to do with each other.


You can't compare them. There to different players. Haynes can't shoot from the outside and doesn't have the quickness to cover other 3's. His shot is from about 5-10 feet, if that.He is being brougt in here to be a 4, not a 3.

Zeigler is a shooter who is more of a 2 or 3. Unlike at the 4 or the 5, we have plenty of depth with Singler, most likely Carrick Felix, and Andre Dawkins.

You are comparing two players that have nothing in common on how they play or what there purpose is on a team.

They are nothing alike.

[JaMarcus Russell]

Do you think they are going to try to bring in 2 for sure? It seems like people are reading way too much into Haynes already.

[MChambers]

It's nice to have someone who knows the facts weigh in on these things.

[jimsumner]

Duke has a limited number of scholarships available for players that they hope can play on the wing. Zeigler is one of these. Haynes is another. They don't have to be exact analogs in either size or skill sets to be in competition for those spots.

I understand that Zeigler does some things better than Haynes and Haynes does some things better than Zeigler. But Duke is recruiting both. They would bring different things to the same position.

Let me give you an example. Mike Chappell, Nate James and Chris Carrawell were members of the same class at Duke. They were three very different players. Yet at various times, they competed for PT at Duke. At other times, they complemented each other. But they all played a lot of small forward at Duke. This illustrates how a program can recruit complementary players in the same class for the same position.

Next year, Duke could play Singler at the 3, Felix at the 3, Dawkins at the 3. Different players, different abilities at the 3. Would you maintain that Singler, Felix and Dawkins have nothing to do with each other because they aren't the same player?

FWIW, I strongly suspect Duke will end up with neither Zeigler nor Haynes.

[dukemsu]

is that he's down to either MSU or UM. MSU's hopes of getting him seem to have increased this year given the mess in Ann Arbor and the increasing chances that Lucas declares for the draft, which would open up a spot and considerable backcourt playing time. Michigan had been considered the leader for quite awhile, but that seems to have been muddled.

It's a very fuzzy picture, but there doesn't appear to be buzz for him leaving the state.

dukemsu

[-bdbd]

Duke has a limited number of scholarships available for players that they hope can play on the wing. Zeigler is one of these. Haynes is another. They don't have to be exact analogs in either size or skill sets to be in competition for those spots.

I understand that Zeigler does some things better than Haynes and Haynes does some things better than Zeigler. But Duke is recruiting both. They would bring different things to the same position.

...Next year, Duke could play Singler at the 3, Felix at the 3, Dawkins at the 3. Different players, different abilities at the 3. Would you maintain that Singler, Felix and Dawkins have nothing to do with each other because they aren't the same player?

FWIW, I strongly suspect Duke will end up with neither Zeigler nor Haynes.

My understanding was that TZ was also looking closely at his dad's (head coach) small school in Michigan. Have read more than one recruitinbg site saying if he doesn't go to play for dad, that MSU is the most likely destination. In any event he's not expected to make an early decision. Hence, it behoves us to us work had at getting another '3' in the truck (i.e. can't wait on TZ's decision b/c it'll then be too late).

I agree with Jiumsumner that while Felix seems like a pretty good Duke lean, that I wouldn't really expect either of the other 6'4" - 6'6" guys to have high-probability to play for Duke next year. Anybody else thinking that Ndiaye getting an offer could hinge on Kyle's status, or leanings? Personally, I'd be very happy with those two guys from Idaho - Felix at the 3 and Ndiaye at the 5.

FWIW, while the discussion has centered on the differing OFFENSIVE traits of the three wing players, it has ignored the D end. These three guys are more similar on D than on O, and frankly, that is the greater part of their value brought to the table for Duke in 2010-2011. Think about this: If Kyle is gone, who on the projected roster is best suited to guard Harrison Barnes (and players like him -- 6'7" athletic wings who can shoot) next year? In that context, Felix, TZ and Haynes are VERY similar.


:o

[AlaskanAssassin]

Where does Zeigler fit best?

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/recruiting/basketball/mens/news/story?id=4988882

[Saratoga2]

Scheyer's defense was too much against this kid.

[Welcome2DaSlopes]

Scheyer's defense was too much against this kid.

HUH?

[sivartrenrag]

Scheyer's defense was too much against this kid.

Are you thinking of Zeglinski?

[Osiagledknarf]

Scheyer's defense was too much against this kid.

What are you smoking? Zeigler is someone for the class of 2010. Duke played Virginia today, a team in the ACC. Are you confusing this with someone else?

[Channing]

What are you smoking? Zeigler is someone for the class of 2010. Duke played Virginia today, a team in the ACC. Are you confusing this with someone else?

my guess is he confused ziegler with zeglinsky - not an unforgiveable sin. no need to come down so hard on the guy.

[Welcome2DaSlopes]

Hahahaha that's really fun, but hey it happens, give the guy a break. And yea Jon did shut Zeglinsky down, he had 0 points after a 21 point game the day before.

[BD80]

my guess is he confused ziegler with zeglinsky - not an unforgiveable sin. no need to come down so hard on the guy.


Hahahaha that's really fun, but hey it happens, give the guy a break. And yea Jon did shut Zeglinsky down, he had 0 points after a 21 point game the day before.

I wonder how the ofer performance in the ACC tournament will affect his recruiting rankings?

I wonder how it will affect his high school eligibility next year?

[Welcome2DaSlopes]

Update? Are we still recruiting him?

[dukemsu]

Update? Are we still recruiting him?

Duke's still interested, but supposedly Trey is still between UM and MSU, with UM slightly in the lead.

dukemsu

[JohnGalt]

...just updated his formspring saying "Duke isn't on the list anymore."

[Osiagledknarf]

He just commited to Central Michigan..

http://www.mlive.com/sports/saginaw/index.ssf/2010/04/trey_zeigler_will_choose_centr.html

[NYC Duke Fan]

He just commited to Central Michigan..

http://www.mlive.com/sports/saginaw/index.ssf/2010/04/trey_zeigler_will_choose_centr.html

Makes perfect sense wanting to play for your father.