Coach K says that Duke was "limited" without Ryan Kelly-- how is that Duke got to such a state, after the loss of just one decently good player? UNC, Syracuse, Louisville, and Michigan State all managed to win at least two games in the tournament, despite the loss of at least one key player... it does not feel like Duke should be left in such a vulnerable position, after the loss of just one good player (who did not even start all of Duke's games this year).
It feels to me like Duke is experiencing another lull in its capabilities, due to some unfortunate setbacks in recruiting... much like the 2007 and 2008 teams had problems, due to some players not being able to play at the level necessary for Duke to be a realistic competitor for national championships. Other coaches perceive Coach K and Duke as being able to simply name which players they want, and they get them-- putting aside the accuracy of this urban legend, it is clear that Duke gets considerably more top players than Lehigh (or even Arizona), so the losses of the last two years give the feeling of substantive underperformance by the players that Duke did manage to get.
Dan Dakich (famous for his defensive performance on Michael Jordan, despite his Indiana team being allegedly overmatched against the reputed finest team in the land, back in 1984) says that Austin Rivers was the most notable underperformer in this tournament, and that Duke was the biggest disappointment in the tournament (and Dakich says that he is a "huge Duke fan")-- and he bases that assessment on the fact that even without Ryan Kelly, Duke still had far, far more talent on the floor than Lehigh, and thus had no business losing that game. Dakich pointed out that Duke's guards (and Rivers in particular) had no idea how (or at least no intention in that game) to get the ball to their big men on the pick and roll play that was the central staple of Duke's offense this year-- how do we get to this point in the season with that being the case?
How do we get to this point where Duke has several guards who have spent 3 years in the program, and still have no ability to play decent on-the-ball defense on their man? How did we get to this point where Duke has a number of players who have spent 3-4 years in the program who still do not understand the need, let alone the proper method, for boxing out opponents on defensive rebounding situations? How did we get to this point where our most athletic big men, who have spent 3-4 years in the program, still do not have the kind of footwork, clarity of decision-making, and low post moves that would allow them to regularly (not once in a blue moon) get off coordinated, balanced, high percentage shots from low block before they are double-teamed (a` la Mark Alarie, Elton Brand, Carlos Boozer, Shelden Williams)?
Duke fans need to face the fact that Duke is trying to compete at the highest level right now, with some players that pretty obviously are trying to punch above their weight. Given that we hear all the time that Coach K can get the majority of the players that he goes after, one has to wonder: why has he gone after some of these players? I am not interested in seeing Coach K bringing in the same kind of players that Calipari brings in to Kentucky (DeMarcus Cousins strikes me as a bad apple, all the way around), but certainly some of the players they are bringing in are ones that Duke wanted (do John Wall and Patrick Patterson ring any bells?)... but I don't see Calipari trying to compete at the highest level with his gun loaded with rubber bullets... it took UNC losing THREE backcourt players to injury, before Roy Williams had to resort to a player that is at the level of several players that played substantial minutes for Duke all year this year.
Why are we going down this road again that didn't work out in the mid-2000's? Certainly, Coach K should be able to hold his own with Roy Williams and John Calipari and Jim Boeheim, in the recruiting wars-- but on the latest evidence, Duke appears to have settled for some players that are probably not sufficiently talented to play for those schools. I know that people are going to bring up one-year players, like Kyrie Irving (and Austin Rivers?), and certainly, the addition of Kyrie Irving to this team would have changed its entire complexion-- I think Duke would have been one of the national title favorites all year, and would likely still be playing... but it was known from the outset last year that Kyrie was not likely coming back this year (as it was with Rivers this year), and yet Duke really does not seem to have had an even halfway suitable replacement in the queue for either of those players. Contrast that situation with Kentucky, which has lost at least as much talent as Duke has the last couple of years, and yet Kentucky appears unphased by its early departures, as Calipari is stacking up top-ranked (and top-performing) recruits year after year, like firewood for the winter. Why is the most successful college (and arguably, international pro) coach seeming to settle for recruits whose talents do not appear to allow him to reach his stated ambition of competing for a national championship every year? (I'll leave the topic of whether his coaching staff appears to have the demonstrated ability to quickly, efficiently, consistently develop the low-post offensive moves of big men for another day.)