...but you have to scroll down past Roy calling TH "one of the greatest players to ever play [in college]." Hmm...
Katz says, "Now the Blue Devils have got the right mix on the court and are as legit a candidate to win the NCAA tournament as any of the other No. 1 or No. 2 seeds."
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/ncaato...ndy&id=3989260
I must say I was pretty surprised to see Katz say he thought we could win in all.
What do I feel? Honestly, I don't know what to expect from us. I think we're capable of making a final four but I also think we're capable of losing in the 2nd round.
I do think we're playing particularly well headed into the tournament and for that I'm very excited. What I do know is that for Duke to get as deep as we all want, they will have to consistently shoot well from the perimeter. If Duke does that, there's not a team in America we can't beat.
The best part about March Madness? Everything comes to the light.
We shall see..
It's always nice to hit jump shots, esp. 3-pointers, but Duke is hard to characterize as being about hitting outside shots.
In looking at our ranking vs other ACC teams in offensive categories (counting in-conference games only), we rank:
4th in scoring offense
8th in Free Throw % (though tied for 3rd in number of Free Throws made)
9th in FG %
8th in 3-pt FG %
8th in rebounding margin
7th in assists
What is Duke really good at?
Turnover margin---1st in the conference by a fairly wide margin; we force turnovers and do not generate turnovers, compared to our opponents. This is probably even more so since Scheyer has taken over at the point.
So what is a key path to victory---continue to take good care of the ball and generate good shots on offense; get to the free throw line; utilize our strong ball movement; on defense, force the other team into turnovers. Play smart and play hard.
These are some pretty shocking stats for a team as good as Duke is. We don't actually rely on the 3 as much as some people seem to think we do (I think we're around the middle of the pack for all Division I teams), but against some teams - like FSU - driving to the rack isn't as viable an option every play. I generally don't like us to shoot lots of 3s (unless it's off a drive that can't be finished), but sometimes it's necessary. Fortunately there are not many teams (actually, there aren't any other than Texas) in our half of the East that will pose this type of problem, meaning we should be able to reach the Elite 8 without having to rely on lights-out shooting.
I think what Andy Katz recognizes (and a lot of folks on this board don't) is that this Duke team is not the same Duke team that lost to Clemson and Boston College. This Duke team is on a roll, has a ton of confidence and is playing with a kind of focus and intensity we haven't seen yet.
In short, as opposed to the last few years, it appears that we are peaking going into the NCAA tournament, not the other way around.
And that makes me happy!
And i see that the President doesn't pick us to be in the final four, he picks all #1 seeds plus Memphis beating UConn. Probably a relatively safe pick for him, but not one on which a lot of money could be won.
I saw this as well and was so surprised because it seems like it is us against the world. Good to see somebody thinks we can maket he run.
- I agree -- for once we've got a team that's PEAKING in March
...so anything's possible.
- Also gotta like that we're playing with fresh legs this year.
- And with the #2 seed, hopefully, we won't get worn down in the first 2 rounds. We're a 22 point favorite Thursday night, and if we make Sat. we'll be about a 10-point favorite over either Minn or Texas. (My favorite line from "Officer and a Gentleman," was the Drill Seargent's bark, "From Texas??! Boy, there's only TWO things from Texas..." )
- And for the first time in a while we actually have real depth! Now, if we just can remember to use it...
We have a real chance in this one. I run an office pool and a lot of folks are picking Duke to make the FF -- really!
-BDBD
On the Kevin White show last night DeCourcy has Duke in the final four, but then he ruined it by saything they'd loose to the muddy feet.
Anyone else read that Katz piece and think "Wow, this guy is obsessed with coaches"? He hardly mentions the players on any of the teams he focuses on in the "could change perception" portion of the column. It's almost entirely about coaching legacies and reputations. More players, less suits, please!
Recency = Late occurrence, appearance, or origin.
Recency problem = Providing excessive weight to recent events.
There is a lot of that WRT Duke in the media and, unhappily, on this Board. In a sense, it is a free shot, since it is the objective truth that Duke has not made a FF in five years (like 300+ teams in Division I) but had made the FF ten times in the previous 19 years (like no one else and like only other team in history).
A single shower does not a monsoon make, nor do two losses before the Sweet Sixteen signal the decline and fall of a great basketball program.
sagegrouse
Mal wrote:
"Anyone else read that Katz piece and think "Wow, this guy is obsessed with coaches"?"
Yeah, I noticed that too. Most sportswriters/casters, including Katz are caught up in coach worship.
He is very rarely right and always lost out to Chris Russo in their NCAA Pools.