(2021) C Logan Duncomb to IU, to Winthrop

[WayneFleekHoosier]

Duncomb isn't going to be a high scorer.  That's not his niche.  He isn't that on his HS team.  His strengths are fundamentals, IQ, team first mentality, do what it takes to win, etc.  I know this is all cliche but its true.  I think the Brunk comparisons are quite good.  

None of that says he's a bad signing.  I'm excited about it.  Now, he won't be Zeller or TJD out of the gate.  That i'm confident to say.  I also have no clue what he can turn himself into.  To me though, personally, I love fundamental players but i love physical, intimidating, shot blocking bigs more.  

For example, say we got a Kofi Cockburn type player.  Kid was dynamic and made a huge impact on every game.  He was more impactful than Duncomb will be as a frosh.  BUT Kofi is leaving after one year, and likely doesn't have all those positive attributes i described of Duncomb above. Say Duncomb is patient, and works hard and can overcome some athletic/strength type deficiencies maybe that's a better get in the long run.

So a Cockburn type signing, much more exciting on the front end but a Duncomb signing COULD be a better type signing in the long run.  

[Loaded Chicken Sandwich]

Duncomb isn't going to be a high scorer.  That's not his niche.  He isn't that on his HS team.  His strengths are fundamentals, IQ, team first mentality, do what it takes to win, etc.  I know this is all cliche but its true.  I think the Brunk comparisons are quite good.  
None of that says he's a bad signing.  I'm excited about it.  Now, he won't be Zeller or TJD out of the gate.  That i'm confident to say.  I also have no clue what he can turn himself into.  To me though, personally, I love fundamental players but i love physical, intimidating, shot blocking bigs more.  
For example, say we got a Kofi Cockburn type player.  Kid was dynamic and made a huge impact on every game.  He was more impactful than Duncomb will be as a frosh.  BUT Kofi is leaving after one year, and likely doesn't have all those positive attributes i described of Duncomb above. Say Duncomb is patient, and works hard and can overcome some athletic/strength type deficiencies maybe that's a better get in the long run.
So a Cockburn type signing, much more exciting on the front end but a Duncomb signing COULD be a better type signing in the long run.  

How could you be so negative?


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

[Honkyman]

I started this out several pages ago by saying Duncomb is ranked about where Joey Brunk was ranked coming out of high school so we can expect that Duncomb will be roughly the kind of player Brunk is. After all, he was recruited to replace Brunk who completes his eligibility in a year. Some took offense at that but I think Brunk is a good player who plays hard and has shown some important leadership qualities. Brunk may not start all of next year as Race Thompson develops but he will still get decent playing time and will likely contribute important minutes. If that's what we get out of Duncomb, that's a solid recruit and as LCS says it probably also means we have recruited a 5-star at Trayce Jackson Davis' level to replace TJD when he leaves. I think everyone is sort of agreeing although some predict starting numbers by Duncomb's 3rd or 4th year. It could happen. We'll see. There is good reason to be pleased either way.

[Loaded Chicken Sandwich]

I started this out several pages ago by saying Duncomb is ranked about where Joey Brunk was ranked coming out of high school so we can expect that Duncomb will be roughly the kind of player Brunk is. After all, he was recruited to replace Brunk who completes his eligibility in a year. Some took offense at that but I think Brunk is a good player who plays hard and has shown some important leadership qualities. Brunk may not start all of next year as Race Thompson develops but he will still get decent playing time and will likely contribute important minutes. If that's what we get out of Duncomb, that's a solid recruit and as LCS says it probably also means we have recruited a 5-star at Trayce Jackson Davis' level to replace TJD when he leaves. I think everyone is sort of agreeing although some predict starting numbers by Duncomb's 3rd or 4th year. It could happen. We'll see. There is good reason to be pleased either way.

They are just butthurt because I said it lol.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

[hoosierfan6157]

I just read an article from Inside the Hall about how Logan is young for his class and will be just 18 his entire freshman year! A lot of time for physical and mental growth!

[VO5]

I think Duncomb is going to be better than Brunk. Duncomb is 6’9 with a 7’4 wingspan and is 16 years old, with the possibility to keep growing. That wingspan will allow him to be a more versatile defender than Brunk could ever be. He’s also more athletic than Brunk. I like Brunk, but I think Duncomb is a notch above him for the reasons stated. 

[NashvilleHoosier]

10 hours ago, Loaded Chicken Sandwich said:

Joey Brunk was ranked 107 in his class. Averages 5.6 points and 3.5 rebounds for his career. So we are going to be mad if Duncomb turns out to be about the same?


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners

By your logic, its equally as likely we have just landed a guy who will average 24 points and 10 rebounds and be a national player of the year candidate by his junior season. 

[Feathery]

10 hours ago, Loaded Chicken Sandwich said:

So he’ll be doing what Vonleh and TJD as freshman, as a senior? Honestly, by the time he’s a senior, we should still be recruiting McDonalds All-American bigs who will start over him. Now if he wants to average 10-12 off the bench, that’d be great.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

You do realize that the model is changing in college sports in the next 2 years. The McD 1 and dones will be going straight to the NBA, not college. So you need guys who can develop over years. LD could average 15-8 his senior year, all depends on development. Think the Wisconsin model for big men, that’s what we are going to. Then sprinkle in a TJD and KL a yea. Then you have yourself a final four caliber team. But when those guys leave after 2 years, you need guys like LD ready to step in and produce. That’s how you sustain success and not have the highs and lows where you miss the NCAA’s. 

I highly doubt we are done recruiting big. Be happy we got a guy who could be a very solid piece down the road. Hell maybe he blows up over the next year and becomes a top 50 recruit. Who knows. 
 

Also, you expect LD to be a bench player but his actual rating score is higher than Leal who you have as a starter. Leal is a .9522 on 24/7, LD is a .9556 on 24/7. I think both will be starts by their junior years but not expecting it as freshmen. 

[woodenshoemanHoosierfan]

“How dare you be optimistic and believe we can recruit people better than Duncomb!”


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners

It's not that. We should always strive to recruit the best. It is your other opinions that you present as facts, that people argue with. You don't know he is going to be 5 point 5 rebound guy. Yet you present it as fact

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[Uspshoosier]

Really solid get for IU. Duncomb is one of the top centers in the class of 2021. Once Furst decided he wanted to be a 4 then Logan became the staffs top center priority. Regardless of what us fans think, Starter, non starter or backup the staff prioritized him and landed him. Ranked top 50, top 100, outside the top 100 it’s irrelevant. The staff wanted him and they got him. Hard telling where a 16 year old kid ends up when the ranking are all said and done. Archie went into Ohio and landed a top Ohio recruit that Xavier and Ohio St prioritized just as much as IU. Looking forward to tracking his progress.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners

[Loaded Chicken Sandwich]

It's not that. We should always strive to recruit the best. It is your other opinions that you present as facts, that people argue with. You don't know he is going to be 5 point 5 rebound guy. Yet you present it as fact

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

No I said we’d be lucky to get that over his career. Meaning he could average 2 points a game his freshman year and grow from there. It’s an average. And it means that we are still recruiting top talent. I’ve alert said it was a good get that adds depth.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

[IUc2016]

Just now, Loaded Chicken Sandwich said:

No I said we’d be lucky to get that over his career. Meaning he could average 2 points a game his freshman year and grow from there. It’s an average. And it means that we are still recruiting top talent. I’ve alert said it was a good get that adds depth.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

 I agree with you that most likely he won't be a statistical beast.

I just think people disagree with the "we'd be lucky" statement. I think to be lucky means Logan turns into an all BIG player and stays four years. The career averages you posted are the realistic expectations IMO, which are perfectly fine. Shows by his upperclassman years he is averaging like 10 and 7 or something. This counteracts his low averages as an underclassman

[Class of '66 Old Fart]

In a perfect world, I think he'd be an ideal candidate to redshirt to give his body more time to develop as he is young for his grade level.

On another note regarding his scoring average this past high school season.  The biggest share of Moeller's games were blowouts and its starting 5 got lots of bench time as a result.  3 of the 5 averaged right at the 14 ppg level, one of whom was a senior.  The entire team's stats are available at the link below.  Interesting to follow next year to see if he becomes more of a focal point in the Moeller offense.

http://gcls.gclsports.com/bkTeamStats.aspx?satc=159&year=2019&schoolid=17

[Uspshoosier]

In a perfect world, I think he'd be an ideal candidate to redshirt to give his body more time to develop as he is young for his grade level.
On another note regarding his scoring average this past high school season.  The biggest share of Moeller's games were blowouts and its starting 5 got lots of bench time as a result.  3 of the 5 averaged right at the 14 ppg level, one of whom was a senior.  The entire team's stats are available at the link below.  Interesting to follow next year to see if he becomes more of a focal point in the Moeller offense.
http://gcls.gclsports.com/bkTeamStats.aspx?satc=159&year=2019&schoolid=17

He is probably going to play major minutes early on. IU is going to be able to offer minutes at the 5 with Brunk, and most likely Jackson-Davis gone. Definitely a plus for IU when compared to other rosters.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

[HoosierDYT]

47 minutes ago, Class of '66 Old Fart said:

In a perfect world, I think he'd be an ideal candidate to redshirt to give his body more time to develop as he is young for his grade level.

On another note regarding his scoring average this past high school season.  The biggest share of Moeller's games were blowouts and its starting 5 got lots of bench time as a result.  3 of the 5 averaged right at the 14 ppg level, one of whom was a senior.  The entire team's stats are available at the link below.  Interesting to follow next year to see if he becomes more of a focal point in the Moeller offense.

http://gcls.gclsports.com/bkTeamStats.aspx?satc=159&year=2019&schoolid=17

The GCl, his high school conference, is also notorious for playing really slow-paced basketball because of the pack-line defense. Could contribute to his point production. 

[Loaded Chicken Sandwich]

He is probably going to play major minutes early on. IU is going to be able to offer minutes at the 5 with Brunk, and most likely Jackson-Davis gone. Definitely a plus for IU when compared to other rosters.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

That’s why Archie has to continue recruiting top notch talent.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

[Trish]

Talking to someone in the know of his program, him as a player, and the state of Ohio basketball --- "it's a great pick-up that fits what Archie WANTS to do at Indiana". 

 

 

[Uspshoosier]

That’s why Archie has to continue recruiting top notch talent.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

every D-1 power 5 coach should continue recruiting top notch talent despite landing their top targets. Thats the name of the game


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

[BGleas]

9 hours ago, Honkyman said:

I started this out several pages ago by saying Duncomb is ranked about where Joey Brunk was ranked coming out of high school so we can expect that Duncomb will be roughly the kind of player Brunk is. After all, he was recruited to replace Brunk who completes his eligibility in a year. Some took offense at that but I think Brunk is a good player who plays hard and has shown some important leadership qualities. Brunk may not start all of next year as Race Thompson develops but he will still get decent playing time and will likely contribute important minutes. If that's what we get out of Duncomb, that's a solid recruit and as LCS says it probably also means we have recruited a 5-star at Trayce Jackson Davis' level to replace TJD when he leaves. I think everyone is sort of agreeing although some predict starting numbers by Duncomb's 3rd or 4th year. It could happen. We'll see. There is good reason to be pleased either way.

You can't really compare him to Brunk simply because they were both ranked around the same spot and are both bigs. Luka Garza was ranked #105, so right around the same spot. You'd have to compare him to all of the bigs of similar type/skill that have been ranked around that spot to really come up with a prediction of what he might become. 

I think the real difference here will be skill and shooting and whether he can develop those things. Obviously, Garza is an outlier in averaging 23 ppg as a big ranked #105, though you could also point to guys like Frank Kaminsky (ranked #204) or Ethan Haap (ranked #152). All three are extremely skilled, fundamental players that also add in intensity and passion, and with Garza and Kaminsky they were able to extend their shooting out to the 3pt line. A guy like Brunk is less skilled, certainly hasn't been able to extend his range really at all, though he does bring the hustle and passion. 

This isn't me saying that Duncomb is going to turn into an All-American. I'm just saying, immediately comparing him to Brunk because they were both ranked around the same spot isn't really a strong analysis. How skilled and fundamental is Duncomb? He's be described as both. Will he be able to extend his range as he develops? We don't know. Does he bring an innate propensity for working and playing hard? We don't know. 

If he's able to work hard, play hard, is naturally skilled and fundamental, and is able to develop a perimeter game along with his inside game, then he'll be much better than Brunk. If he can only do 1-2 of those things and never develops range, then yes he'll probably be in the Brunk range as you said. 

[woodenshoemanHoosierfan]

Great tweet

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk