Friday Notes: Be Careful, Lee

-- Mike DeCourcy discusses NC State's possible interest in John Beilein:

Beilein runs a system that is a hybrid of sorts of the Princeton style that helped rejuvenate the Wolfpack in the early part of this decade but that eventually came to be viewed, correctly or not, as a hindrance to its progress. Beilein has a more engaging personality than previous State coach Herb Sendek, but he is not dynamic -- a salesman on the order of a Calipari or Barnes. Beilein and Sendek are similar enough that a couple of the guys the Pack signed in the fall, Dennis Horner and Dan Werner, also strongly considered WVU.

In his post, DeCourcy asks hypothetically if the reader would spend the money necessary to get Beilein. But the important question is: do circumstances allow you to spend that money? The answer is no. Even if NC State finds a way to avoid paying Beilein's large buyout, the answer is no.

It seems like common sense: you can't follow up an unpopular coach with someone who reminds fans of that unpopular coach. I never had a problem with Herb's system (because it is effective) and I don't have a problem with Beilein's, but most Wolfpack fans are sick of this style of play. You hire John Beilein, you invite the exact same criticism that was heaped onto Herb Sendek.

I think Lee Fowler understands these issues; they aren't easy to miss. He's been dealing firsthand with the atmosphere surrounding the basketball program over the last five years, and he of all people must realize how important a fresh start is for everyone. In-fighting and negativity have done enough damage already.

-- As frustrating as the coaching search has been, at least there are distractions: Major League Baseball, the NBA playoffs, and the Carolina Hurricanes' impending run to the Stanley Cup Finals. Go Canes!

-- Zam Fredrick is transferring from Georgia Tech. Fredrick only logged about 7 minutes/game in 2005 and nearly transferred after that season. His two years in Atlanta:

Zam Fredrick	O Rtg	%Poss	%Min	eFG%	FT%	3FG%	OR%	DR%	TO%	%Shots	PPWS
2005	83	19.3	9.8	36.5	50.0	27.8	4.4	5.6	22.8	20.0	0.76
2006	92	23.7	71.7	45.4	74.6	32.2	1.7	8.3	28.4	23.7	0.98