Time to take Duke seriously as a Final Four contender

[hq2]

possibly a more natural No. 1 seed, like say Ohio State, seem to be fading a bit.

Ahem. I suppose the selection committee won't look at how they played head-to-head?

[tommy]

I thought it was understood that we were discussing "against good team/en route to a Final Four" scenarios, in which case I stand by my assertion that Duke's defense is not good enough to survive a poor shooting night against most good teams.

I don't think there are many teams -- good or not good -- who are good enough to survive a poor shooting night against Duke. It's happened only once this year. In our four losses, here were the opponents' shooting percentages:

	FG%	3 point FG%
Ohio State	59.3%	57.1%
Temple	56.4%	50%
FSU	54%	50%
Miami	41%	30%

[Kedsy]

Ahem. I suppose the selection committee won't look at how they played head-to-head?

Does that mean Temple's ahead of us, too? And Miami?

Besides, if they use head-to-head, Ohio State may be ahead of us but we've got Kansas, Michigan State, and UNC covered.

[tommy]

Ahem. I suppose the selection committee won't look at how they played head-to-head?

Yes, they will look at that factor, along with how we played against Michigan State, Kansas, and UNC, all away from Cameron.

[OldPhiKap]

I dunno, depends on whether we're scoring by the half or the entire game.

I use Stableford Scoring (with handicap). Makes the game more interesting.

[OldPhiKap]

Ahem. I suppose the selection committee won't look at how they played head-to-head?

Point taken, although I think this would be more salient if it was one of the last 10 games of the season instead of the first 10. We don't get an advantage over Kansas, I do not think, because we beat them in Maui around Thanksgiving either.

[CDu]

We have won 24 games when we outscored our opponent by the end of regulation.

We are only 1-3 when we have failed to do so.


Pretty important stuff right there.

Not sure I quite understand your math here...

That said, if we win out through the ACC tournament, I think there's no way we aren't a #1 seed. We will have arguably as good a resume as anyone in the country (when you consider home/road/neutral and the quality of opponents), and there certainly won't be 4 teams with better resumes.

It's been a strange season. This has been arguably the worst defensive team in memory for Duke. There are lots of obvious flaws. But the team just keeps winning, and they keep doing it against very good competition. Really, really impressive.

That said, losing against UNC and in the ACC tournament would put us squarely back in #2 seed status. And if we lose to VT or Wake, the same applies (though winning against UNC and winning the ACC tourney might still be enough for a #1 seed).

[camion]

It is what it is. Unless it isn't.

[wilko]

No offense, but this is a pretty myopic statement. The last time Temple beat us (before this year) was 1996. And we play them a lot. Coach K is 11-2 against Temple in his Duke career.

Nah, no offense taken. It wasn't specifically about Temple, just teams like Temple.

I'm trying to think of other teams "like Temple" who have beaten us, but it's hard to do. St. John's, maybe? They beat us last year, and before that in 2003. Coach K is 15-3 against the Johnnies in his Duke career. So they hardly beat us "every time we play them." Who else? Michigan? Georgetown? Neither seem to be "like Temple" to me, and I'm pretty sure Coach K's Duke teams have beaten both of them more than they've beaten us, anyway.

When I say a team "like" Temple -what I am talking about is that lower ranked athletic team that can on a dime turn off a systematic, coordinated offense and go freelance/playground to seemingly eat us alive. That's why we have dudes like Bootsy, that Az. guy from last year, the Tyrus guy from LSU (Shleden & JJ's last yr), Purvis Ellison from Louisville, Nova... Its the "type" of team that can abandon a semblance of structure and go 1:1 to exploit match-ups. We do great when there is something to disrupt. remove that from the equation and we sputter a bit.

Last nights FSU game feels a lot like Baylor in 10' when we played them

And if you're talking about conference teams, that's even sillier. Except for 2007, we haven't won fewer than twice as many conference games as we've lost since 1996.

FSU is like a Temple, only better... tho we got last night... Quite a few of Valvanos State teams and Garylands teams fit this mold as well and gave us fits.

[Kedsy]

When I say a team "like" Temple -what I am talking about is that lower ranked athletic team that can on a dime turn off a systematic, coordinated offense and go freelance/playground to seemingly eat us alive. That's why we have dudes like Bootsy, that Az. guy from last year, the Tyrus guy from LSU (Shleden & JJ's last yr), Purvis Ellison from Louisville, Nova... Its the "type" of team that can abandon a semblance of structure and go 1:1 to exploit match-ups.

OK, now I understand. I'd still say you're employing selective memory, though. Obviously every big loss is etched in our memories, but for some reason we seem to forget all the wins against the same sorts of teams. I mean, St. John's has a team like that almost every year, but K is 15-3 against them (9-3 since the turn of the century). Baylor and West Virginia in 2010 were just as athletic as LSU in 2006 or Arizona last year, etc., etc.

[Genedoc]

Well, I stand by my assertion as well. Virginia, NC State, Miami, and Washington will all either play in the NCAA tournament or be on the bubble and be just as good as teams that play in the NCAA tournament. They are all the equivalent of a 2nd round, or even 3rd round tournament game.

You don't have to beat a collection of bubble/NIT teams to make it to the FF. You get one crack at a bubble team, 2 if you're lucky.

[Genedoc]

How many teams are there in the country that could have a poor shooting night and still beat a top-10 opponent?

Maybe 5-10 total, and I do not think we're one of them. I'd look at teams that defend and rebound like machines. Those types of teams can better survive a poor shooting night, be it from 2 or 3 because they defend and rebound.

[Genedoc]

Well, part of the problem is that this team simply hasn't had many poor shooting nights. So looking for counterpoints is going to be a problem.

Fair point, and Duke can clearly beat any team in the country given their shooting proficiency.

[phaedrus]

Not sure I quite understand your math here...

If I may, we didn't outscore Carolina in regulation, yet won.

[MChambers]

You don't have to beat a collection of bubble/NIT teams to make it to the FF. You get one crack at a bubble team, 2 if you're lucky.

Some years, a team gets quite lucky and plays 3 or 4 bubble teams to make the Final Four.

[CDu]

If I may, we didn't outscore Carolina in regulation, yet won.

Even in that scenario the math would be wrong. We would have 23 wins when we outscore the opponent in regulation and would be 1-4 when we don't.

In the more conventional interpretation we'd be 24-0 and 0-4, respectively.

[OldPhiKap]

If I was good at math, I'd be a doctor instead of a lawyer.

[throatybeard]

If I were good at math, I could tell you what our record by halves is.

OK, I'll stop now. I promise.

[SupaDave]

Maybe 5-10 total, and I do not think we're one of them. I'd look at teams that defend and rebound like machines. Those types of teams can better survive a poor shooting night, be it from 2 or 3 because they defend and rebound.

If only we had a guy that could get 20 plus rebounds in a game...

[mapei]

Even in that scenario the math would be wrong. We would have 23 wins when we outscore the opponent in regulation and would be 1-4 when we don't.

In the more conventional interpretation we'd be 24-0 and 0-4, respectively.

I'm having trouble following. Are you saying that we are undefeated except in overtime games??