Life without Noel

As Clemson's basketball team has made major improvement over a stretch of a month and a half, enough improvement to put itself into the conversation for a fourth-straight NCAA Tournament appearance, my mind often drifts to the early-December transfer of Noel Johnson.

The big question: Was his departure addition by subtraction?

At the time Johnson's transfer was announced, his loss was viewed as a substantial loss. How could it not be? Even though he wasn't as good as Oliver Purnell's staff anticipated when they recruited him in the wake of his departure from Southern Cal, he was still a player with some skill who could theoretically flourish in Brad Brownell's offense.

When you're Clemson and talent is hard to come by, it's seldom wise to view the loss of talent as a good thing. When Terrence Oglesby left the program in a snit two years ago, Purnell and Co. deemed it more positive than negative because of Oglesby's allegedly selfish ways and his proven liabilities on defense. But that position ended up backfiring, because the loss of the ACC's most feared outside shooter certainly hurt during the 2009-10 season.

(And as a brief aside ... gosh, how valuable would Oglesby be this year as a senior at Clemson? I've no doubt he'd be lighting it up under Brownell.)

In Johnson's case, it's hard to really say whether Clemson is better off without him, and whether Brownell would now deem his loss beneficial.

On the "good riddance" hand, Johnson gave off unmistakable prima donna vibes in his seven games with the Tigers this season. He didn't play much defense, and he seemed to be playing his own system on offense. His attitude was one of entitlement, and the reason he left is because he wasn't playing the minutes to which he and his father believed he was entitled.

On the "not so fast" hand, you'd always prefer to have the extra body -- particularly through the rigors of ACC play. Johnson's frame and his skills made him a good fit for Brownell's offense, coming off screens and curls to hit mid-range jumpers. And while Johnson's attitude and commitment were in serious question, it should be noted that some other players weren't all there mentally at that point, either. As Brownell noted recently, often it takes some individual success for some players to truly buy in to a new coach and his philosophy.

I'm going give a slight edge to the former position, and the opponent for Saturday's monster game in Littlejohn Coliseum presents some strong support for that position.

The abrupt departure of Larry Drew II hurts North Carolina's depth at point guard, and on the surface it can't be good when you lose a substantial contributor at this point in the season. But the Tar Heels have seemed almost liberated in their last two games, including last night's loss at Duke.

Kendall Marshall is now the unquestioned guy at point guard, and he has been a spectacular distributor even if he has problems finishing near the rim. We cannot yet conclusively say the Tar Heels are better off without Drew II, but the case can be made.

And I'd bet that, if you asked Clemson's coaches privately whether they'd rather face North Carolina with or without Drew II, they'd say without. Because whenever you have someone griping and complaining, or simply not totally invested in the team concept, you're a lesser team as a result.

LW