You all, understandably, have questions.
That’s what happens when nine players from an Elite Eight roster all leave in the span of a few weeks. Kyle Filipowski and Jared McCain were expected draft departures for Duke, but seven other players — including two-time captain Jeremy Roach — entering the transfer portal? That’s new territory for the Blue Devils.
Advertisement
So, what’s going on?
With these decisions for players to transfer out, how much of it is the player simply deciding to depart, and how much — if at all — is Scheyer encouraging players to seek other opportunities? — Teddy T.
Every transfer decision is different, but there is never a situation where a player “simply” decides to leave. Lots of factors are at hand here, like:
• Projected role/minutes: Will I start? What position does the staff see me as? Which of my skills do you need most … and which are less of a priority?
• Projected depth chart (which, yes, is different): How many other players are at my position? Am I guaranteed time because there aren’t other options, or will I have to earn my minutes?
• NIL: Do I stand to make more elsewhere?
Every player weighs those things and more. Mark Mitchell, for example, was going to see a decreased role next season as a non-shooter who plays the same position as incoming No. 1 recruit Cooper Flagg. That’s not a slight at Mitchell, a two-year starter and arguably Duke’s most versatile defender — but it is reality. So he opted to transfer closer to home to Missouri, where he’ll be much more of a focal point (and seemingly, cash in more from an NIL perspective than he would’ve as a rotational Duke player).
Uncomfortable as it may be, it’s Jon Scheyer’s job to communicate those expectations to Mitchell (and all of Duke’s potential returnees). To tell him something along the lines of, “Mark, I love you… but these are the facts, and you’re not going to have the same role if you return.” Is that Scheyer “encouraging” players to seek other opportunities, as Teddy’s question posited? No. It’s being honest and transparent, even if Scheyer knows that isn’t what a player wants to hear. I’d argue that telling someone something upfront like that — rather than lying to them or not communicating clearly, then having an unhappy player — is best for all involved parties. Now, is that to say that players can’t disagree? Of course they can. Guys may think they’re capable of more than Scheyer and his staff do … in which case, they’re free to pursue other opportunities that align better with their aspirations.
Advertisement
I’m not going to get into every departure — mostly because it’s unfair to drag teenage kids through the mud — but I can say that someone like Sean Stewart, even with his five-star pedigree, was not going to play significant minutes next season with Flagg and Khaman Maluach incoming. He had easily the worst fouling rate on the team, per KenPom, in addition to the third-worst turnover rate; plus, per Synergy, he rated as “poor” in his most frequent offensive action, cutting, where he ranked in just the ninth percentile nationally. Stewart is an awesome athlete who offers rebounding and rim protection … but he wasn’t ready to help this year’s roster, and the development window he both needs and deserves wouldn’t have been there next season either.
I don’t think anyone is saying that Duke should be turning away talented teenagers, but it’s becoming a familiar pattern of each iteration of a Duke roster being bullied and defeated in the tournament by older and more mature teams … How does Scheyer find the right roster balance to win in March and April on the court and not just in the recruiting rankings each year? — Chris P.
First, by ignoring pedigree, like the rest of the college basketball world does. Do you know how many five-stars were in this season’s Final Four? One — Stephon Castle at UConn, who was (at best) his team’s fourth offensive option. Some unsolicited advice on being a smarter fan during portal season: If someone’s high school recruiting ranking is the first thing you see about them, that’s not a good thing. The best programs care about your impact, how you contribute to winning — not how many stars you had. I’ve seen a lot of fans lamenting how many “talented” players Duke lost … but are those sentiments based on production and play, or recruiting rankings? Duke’s two portal additions so far — forwards Maliq Brown and Mason Gillis — fit that bill. Neither is a “star” in name, but both were productive players last season who contributed to winning — and who fit what Scheyer wants next season: length to build another dominant defensive team.
Secondly, Duke has to get older. That’s non-negotiable, and another area where Gillis and Brown help. The last four national championship teams since the pandemic — 2021 Baylor, 2022 Kansas, 2023 and 2024 UConn — have started a combined one true freshman, and that was Castle this season. College basketball has never been older, and while the COVID-19 year will cycle out next season — more on that in a second — it does matter as it pertains to building around a generational talent like Flagg. You know he and Maluach are going to start; but in Tyrese Proctor and Caleb Foster, you’ve got a junior and sophomore, respectively, with college experience. That’s hugely important — and why Scheyer, who has four other incoming freshmen, recognized the need to get older with his available scholarship spots.
Lastly, the best teams today don’t necessarily have the best talent. They have the best combination of talent, of different players with different skills who fit together seamlessly. Some who shoot, others who drive, others who cut, others who screen, others who jump out of the gym. You need all those different, complementary pieces — which Duke has access to — instead of just a collection of high-profile names whose games may not fit together. Last offseason, for instance, I lamented Duke’s lack of a true big who could offer rim protection … and while Filipowski was better than most expected defensively, that was in some ways a fatal roster flaw. Scheyer understands that fit matters more than just accruing ill-fitting stars, which is why you saw him target two specific role players with his first two scholarships.
Is this year’s roster/transfer management a sign of things to come? Or is this just a one-year aberration as Scheyer looks to build a team from the ground up around Flagg? — Chris V.
Aberration is probably too strong a word, but the Flagg situation is unique. Remember that he and Maluach — the two highest-profile commits in this class — both reclassified up a year, after Duke already had the bulk of its freshman class committed. Scheyer said he didn’t want any more jumbo freshman classes, but was he going to say no to two of the three top recruits in the country? Of course not. So in that respect, Duke having a mega class is something of an anomaly. A six-person class won’t be the standard moving forward.
Advertisement
What will be? Duke will still have one-and-done high school talent … but also a more regular use of the portal, with outgoing and incoming players. Duke fans may not want to hear that, but developing guys for multiple years is simply not a realistic expectation in the modern landscape. Until NCAA rules change — or until college athletes become employees who can sign multi-year contracts, with consequences for breaking them — roster rebuilding is going to be an every-offseason thing.
The COVID year cycling out matters, too. Those five- and six-year players still hanging around college hoops will be gone for the 2024-25 campaign. Not competing against 25-year-olds should help 18- and 19-year-old freshmen make more of an immediate impact. (If the NCAA ratifies a fifth year of eligibility for all players, as some in the industry are predicting, then that’s a different story.)
With Proctor coming back, what do you think contributed to his up-and-down play this year? What should we expect from him in year 3? — Chris P.
Injuries definitely hurt Proctor and impacted his role. When Proctor returned from his ankle injury in December, he didn’t start his first four games back. Coming off the bench takes a different kind of adjustment. I also think Duke on the whole struggled with role definition this season; if you’d asked every player in the locker room who the best player on the team was, or the most important, I believe you’d get back three or four different responses, which isn’t ideal.
Proctor is a stout on-ball defender, which Duke will need next season. I’m more fascinated with his offense, where shot selection is the name of the game. As a freshman, per Synergy, Proctor’s most efficient offense was in transition; he averaged 1.146 points per possession, ranking in the 69th percentile nationally. This season? Proctor did not make a 2-pointer in transition until Duke’s home win over Notre Dame on Feb. 7. That’s staggering. He made seven of his 10 transition 2s to end the season thereafter. So what took so long? As a freshman, Proctor only shot 11 transition 3s all season, making 54.5 percent of them; this season, he took 26 such shots … but only made 34.6 percent. For a team that wanted to run and push the pace, those misfires were tough.
The good news is, Proctor was generally more efficient as a sophomore despite his injuries, and that bodes well for playing next to Flagg. He was much better as a spot-up shooter — per Synergy, he averaged 1.172 PPP, which ranks in the 90th percentile nationally — and that became his primary offense. He was also better, albeit marginally, as a pick-and-roll handler. He also eliminated some inefficient shots — namely non-paint midrange jumpers — from his diet; Proctor shot essentially the same percentage on non-paint middies as a freshman and sophomore, per CBB Analytics, but this season, he took almost eight percent fewer of his shots (only 11.3 percent) from those areas. The keys for Proctor next season are twofold:
- Build on the spot-up growth he showed this season, and hit closer to his ACC 3-point rate of 37.9 percent for the entire season;
- Do so without falling overly in love with the 3 — which is why he took so many fewer efficient shots (like at the rim, and transition 2s) as a sophomore.
Patrick Ngongba has seen some minutes in showcase games and the national tournament. Do you have any intel on expectations around his health next year since he missed so much of this one? — Evan O.
Duke is not planning on redshirting Ngongba, according to a program source, although he does still have rehab to complete from his broken foot this season. But Duke is expecting the 6-foot-11, 235-pound center — a five-star talent who is ranked 18th nationally, per the 247Sports Composite — not just to play next season, but to be impactful.
Who is the next person on Coach Scheyer’s staff that you see being in the hunt for a head coaching position? Do you anticipate any upcoming reshuffling with the staff? — Zachary B.
Jai Lucas, and there was chatter he’d be up for jobs this offseason. But as Duke’s de facto defensive coordinator — assuming the Blue Devils have another top-10 defense next season, with all the length they’ve accrued — I wouldn’t be surprised to see Lucas get his shot. The beauty of his current situation is that he doesn’t have to be in a rush to take the first role he’s offered; he can be picky, and even wait for a high-major where he feels he can win.
But I’m not expecting any movement from Lucas or any of Duke’s other coaches the rest of this offseason.
(Top photo of Jon Scheyer: Patrick Smith / Getty Images)
