Chronicle - comparing 1991-1992 Duke to 2010-2011 Duke

[nocilla]

It's impossible to say what next year's leadership situation will be, but we know that Duke will have two senior captain who between them have done everything a basketball player can be asked to do on the court.

Besides, leadership wasn't the biggest problem for the 2002 Duke team. Having to defend opposing power forwards with tall or athletic shooting guards was its biggest problem. Next year's Duke team should not have that kind of hole in its lineup.

You are assuming that the Plumlees have vastly improved on defense. We shouldn't have trouble with athletic SGs this year, but a good PF/C team could be trouble in the post. I have confidence in K coming up with good defensive game plans and I am optimistic that we will be able to counter a stong inside team with a fast uptempo team. But if you are looking for a weakspot, defense in the post would be it. At least until they prove otherwise.

[uh_no]

You are assuming that the Plumlees have vastly improved on defense.

we won't need defense next year when we're averaging 120 ppg... :P

[Duvall]

You are assuming that the Plumlees have vastly improved on defense. We shouldn't have trouble with athletic SGs this year, but a good PF/C team could be trouble in the post. I have confidence in K coming up with good defensive game plans and I am optimistic that we will be able to counter a stong inside team with a fast uptempo team. But if you are looking for a weakspot, defense in the post would be it. At least until they prove otherwise.

Not really. We still don't know if the Plumlees have yet acquired the skills and experience to be quality post defenders, but it's clear that they have the tools to do so. The 2002 team lacked players that even had the tools.

[nocilla]

we won't need defense next year when we're averaging 120 ppg... :P

I hope you are right. Although I would like to see a little better defense than say '09 UNC.

Duvall
Not really. We still don't know if the Plumlees have yet acquired the skills and experience to be quality post defenders, but it's clear that they have the tools to do so. The 2002 team lacked players that even had the tools.

Fair enough.

[BoozerWasFouled]

It was a huuuuuuge upset. I was at the game and we were all holding our breath for the full 40 minutes. It seemed if Duke made even one teensy, little mistake then UNLV would take control and crush us. When the game ended the entire stadium just stood there, stunned.

I occasionally watch a replay of that game, and I still think we're going to lose.

Kedsy, could you tell us more about your memories of going to that game? It was one of the first Duke games I ever watched (I was 9). I have been obsessed with that game for about twenty years. I'm sure a lot of people would like to have more of your first-person perspective and thoughts about how that group compares to the current one.

[gumbomoop]

In my mind there are few parallels between the 2011 and either the 1992 or 2002 teams. Both of those clubs returned the bulk of their squads (although obviously the 2002 team had lost Shane and Nate, which was a major loss).

The 1992 team kept their swagger and stayed hungry all year, although they seemed to run out of gas a little bit in the NCAAT (it wasn't just the Kentucky game; the Indiana game was a 3 point, come from behind win, and the Michigan game was tied at halftime, or it might have been 1 point either way, I can't entirely remember).

The 2002 team, to me, seemed a little lackadaisical and overconfident for much of the year, as if they believed they didn't need their full effort to win, if it was a close game all they needed to do is turn it on for the last few minutes and they'd win. And obviously for most of the year that was true, but the attitude failed them in the NCAAT. Personally, I think the overconfidence came from being too comfortable -- they'd been playing the same style and doing the same thing with more or less the same core for two years (maybe three), and they let their hunger fade.

I don't think the 2011 team will resemble either of those squads because there's more personnel change and the styles of play from 2010 to 2011 will be soooooo different. It will stay fresh longer, the hunger will remain. I'm not saying we'll win the championship next year because there are too many variables in play, but I do think that if we lose it won't be like 2002.

I've enjoyed and been informed by the back-and-forth in this thread re team similarities and differences. Suffice it to say that I'm a bit more persuaded than Kedsy on some of the parallels that several posters have drawn, but Kedsy's overall point is both interesting and persuasive, especially the bolded sentence. Even conceding some similarities, as I do, the big difference Kedsy notes may be more important.

For, thinking about the following pairs - '91 NC and '92 NC, '01 NC and '02, '10 NC and '11 ?? - despite important departures, the '92 and '02 teams had major-mpg core returnees and no newcomers remotely as significant as '11's KI and possibly SC. Further, as happenstance would have it, not only is KI's arrival significant in terms of astounding raw talent, but his assuming the PG requires - indeed, virtually demands - an entirely different mindset on O [Kedsy's "soooooo different"].

And I definitely like the prediction about "fresh hunger." If KS and NS still think they have a lot to prove and gain, if the MPs think they have even more to prove, and if KI, SC and others understand that this is a moment to be seized, then that's real good. Heaven knows, if anyone plays lackadaisically - unlikely, true - hungry others will, hungrily, grab some additional PT.

[jafarr1]

Looking back, it's hard to describe just how big an underdog we were. The 1991 championship video showed quips from various talking sports heads, asking how anyone would beat UNLV, and the sportscasters were pretty unanimous that UNLV would win unless someone tied their shoes together and chained their locker room door shut. Mike Francesa was the last one interviewed, and he said he didn't think there was any way anyone would beat UNLV that year.

Mike Francesa is not a good person to cite. If memory serves, he picked against Duke five times that tournament (he picked us to win either first or second round).

I distinctly remember Jim Nance and the other studio heads laughing at him when he picked against Duke in the finals after beating UNLV.

[uh_no]

Mike Francesa is not a good person to cite.

This is generally true always on any subject...does anyone here actually like his show?

the average call length is like 20 seconds and consists of mike saying 'yeah I can agree with that' or 'you're out of your mind: lemme spew my opinion of why you're wrong without backing it up for 30 seconds'

at least when mad dog was on the show it was INTERESTING...and they would have back and forth...now its just mike and its terrible

/rant

[Indoor66]

You are assuming that the Plumlees have vastly improved on defense. We shouldn't have trouble with athletic SGs this year, but a good PF/C team could be trouble in the post. I have confidence in K coming up with good defensive game plans and I am optimistic that we will be able to counter a stong inside team with a fast uptempo team. But if you are looking for a weakspot, defense in the post would be it. At least until they prove otherwise.

It seems you are assuming that they will not improve over last year. IMO, not a safe assumption.

[uh_no]

It seems you are assuming that they will not improve over last year. IMO, not a safe assumption.

especially after a) the huge gains miles made between freshman and sophoimore years and b) the fact that mason was quality for us as a freshman

[nocilla]

It seems you are assuming that they will not improve over last year. IMO, not a safe assumption.

I think it is safe to say that they will be better than last year just from experience and learning from the coaches. But the extent of that improvement won't be determined until we see them in action. I am not assuming that they will be a weakness defensively, but they had a lot of room for improvement.

[Indoor66]

I think it is safe to say that they will be better than last year just from experience and learning from the coaches. But the extent of that improvement won't be determined until we see them in action. I am not assuming that they will be a weakness defensively, but they had a lot of room for improvement.

Don't we all...

[Kedsy]

You are assuming that the Plumlees have vastly improved on defense. We shouldn't have trouble with athletic SGs this year, but a good PF/C team could be trouble in the post. I have confidence in K coming up with good defensive game plans and I am optimistic that we will be able to counter a stong inside team with a fast uptempo team. But if you are looking for a weakspot, defense in the post would be it. At least until they prove otherwise.

I completely disagree. Miles and Mason won't have trouble defending good post players one on one. If history is our guide (and it might not be, depending on how much they've improved), their problem (Mason more than Miles) is staying with their man when their man is running backdoor cuts and/or pick and pops. And also they were a little slow to rotate over in help defense when an opponent perimeter player beat his man.

With the quick hands we'll have next year, we'll be pushing opposing guards out of their comfort zone, which makes it hard to get off a shot over your opponent and hard to make a good entry pass. That defense is most prone to opposing ballhandlers driving past their man who is right in their face (which is why traditional Duke teams have had problems with "athletic SGs" but last year's team (who didn't play the traditional Duke defense) really didn't, despite many dire predictions that they would. When the opposing perimeter guy gets past his man, one Duke big has to step up and the other has to rotate over and stop the inside dish by the penetrator. If the big is slow to rotate, it means a layup/dunk.

So that's our potential weakness on D. Not what you said.

Heaven knows, if anyone plays lackadaisically - unlikely, true - hungry others will, hungrily, grab some additional PT.

This is a really good point. Our outstanding depth and the players vying for minutes should hopefully reduce the possibility of our players easing up on the court.

Kedsy, could you tell us more about your memories of going to that game? It was one of the first Duke games I ever watched (I was 9). I have been obsessed with that game for about twenty years. I'm sure a lot of people would like to have more of your first-person perspective and thoughts about how that group compares to the current one.

OK. Sorry I didn't answer this earlier, but I've been busy and it's somewhat of a long answer. Personally, I think the 1991 Duke/UNLV game was the most exciting game I've ever watched. More than the 1992 Duke/Kentucky game or the 2010 Duke/Butler game (both of which I attended).

The first reason is the UNLV game was gutwrenching from the opening tap. As I said before, the feeling was if we even made one tiny mistake we were toast. I don't think the margin ever got more than 5 points (although that's also true for the Butler game, I believe). The Kentucky game was unbelievable in the last 10 minutes of the second half and then the OT, but it wasn't particularly stressful before that. The Butler game was close, but I never once felt we were in any danger of being out of it.

The second reason is UNLV appeared to be so much better than us. They'd crushed us the year before (another game I attended, although I try not to remember it so much) and they just seemed to be men while we seemed to be boys. They had no apparent weaknesses, while we had a skinny center, a scrappy but turnover-prone sophomore PG (Hurley's A/TO ratio was pretty similar to Larry Drew's last year), a freshman wing playing out of position at PF, and a bunch of decent but not spectacular role players (T Hill, McCaffrey, Davis, Koubek). The idea that we could play with them, much less beat them, was hard to sustain, making the game that much more tense, while in the Kentucky and Butler games we were huge favorites and the stress was how long could our opponents hang around (which was pretty long in both games, I admit)? Put another way, it was exhilarating to win both the Kentucky game and the Butler game, but both games had a sort of feeling of relief element to them, while the UNLV game was more of a feeling of disbelief.

I'd been out of Duke for 9 years by 1991, but by coincidence my seats were right next to the Duke student section, which allowed me to stand up for the entire game, much different from the other 20 Final Fours I've attended. It certainly added to the excitement as well. I kept wincing at every mistake we made (which admittedly were not very many) and my friend kept saying "no negative vibes," a mantra I tried to adopt. The team played its best game of the year by far, especially defensively against Larry Johnson and Anderson Hunt, who'd killed us the year before.

When UNLV got up by 5 late in the 2nd half, I thought we were done, but then Bobby Hurley took the ball up the floor and seemingly just after he took it across half court he launched a three that was nothing but net, bringing us back within two. I couldn't believe he had the confidence to take it like that, but it was exactly what we needed, and very soon after that he drew a charge on Greg Anthony that fouled Anthony out of the game. UNLV lost their heart and their focus for a bit and we took the lead. It went back and forth for awhile and on the last play Larry Johnson had an open look from three that could have won it for them, but instead he panicked and passed it to Hunt who was not in a very good position to shoot. He missed, we rebounded and that was it.

My recollection is it was several seconds before the place exploded. It took us that long to realize it was over. Nobody left the arena, either. The Duke fans because we wanted to drink it all in and the UNLV fans because they still couldn't believe it.

I apologize if I got some minor facts wrong in this account; I'm reliving it from memory only and it was 20 years ago. But those were my impressions from the game.