Shane Ryan says Saturday is as good as it's going to get

[OldPhiKap]

And our bench wasn't developed enough. K only played 7 guys, so in was inevitable that we were going to get bounced by a deeper team that ran us off the court.

True. We were the softest #1 seed ever, should have been a two behind [random Big East team].



And, if we are fortunate enough to get a top seed this year,vwe will hear the same argument from some. Comes with the territory.

[Lid]

Go back and read the blog post he wrote in the wake of our 2010 national championship.

I'm with you on this. No matter what he writes now, this is the piece I can't shake, and which describes my feelings as a Duke fan perfectly. He's earned a lot of passes from me because of it.

[jcastranio]

Any basketball team will have games where some players "show up" and some don't. Some players match up poorly against some teams and some match up well. Seth Rasheed, and Quinn don't seem to "match-up" well against Miami this year, at least offensively. Two games worth of results would indicate that. Miami had success in the first half driving into the lane for the pass or the floater. They seemed to make every floater. We were looking to take away the three (and we did). We were looking to take away the pass off the drive for a layup or dunk (and we generally did). We were looking to make them take the more difficult shot on the move or to pick up the charge. They seemed to make all the shots and we couldn't get there in time on the charge. We actually seemed to fix that in the second half.

With less than 2:00 to go in the second half, Miami only had 29 points in the half. Only 11 points in the last 2 minutes on three unlikely threes got them to 76. That is impressive on their part, but those were "desperation" three-pointers. They just went in (bounced in, in one case). We missed some free throws. I think we were so relieved at the ten point lead and taking control of the game, that we just let up. It is an excusable error, not necessarily a team trend or characteristic.

Reggie Johnson has done very well against us. How did he do? Nothing. Not a bad game by Reggie, but a good game defensively by Mason.

We didn't just win because Ryan had a great game. We took what Miami gave us. If they played Ryan tighter, then someone else would have been open. It's a long season and a team game. We beat Miami because we are a better team. Believe. (Cue theme song from "The Polar Express, get Tom Hanks in here).

[Dev11]

Hate on Shane Ryan all you want, but just remember that HE is the first national media guy to use the name The White Raven. So, we DO owe him that..

Well he invented the name, so there's that.

[slower]

I'm with you on this. No matter what he writes now, this is the piece I can't shake, and which describes my feelings as a Duke fan perfectly. He's earned a lot of passes from me because of it.

Shane Ryan gets a lifetime pass for two things:

1.The invention of The White Raven

http://sethcurrysavesduke.blogspot.c...e-of-time.html

2. This

http://sethcurrysavesduke.blogspot.c...ng-champs.html

[David]

I don't have a problem with Shane Ryan's negativity. Whether you agree or disagree with him, the great part is that this is not a theoretical discussion. With Ryan Kelly back in the lineup, we get a chance to see all of this play out over the next few weeks. Will Duke have a strong senior night vs Va Tech? Will Duke beat UNC at the Whine & Cheeser? Will Duke win the ACC Tourney? Will Duke have a long run in the NCAA tourney? Will Mason Plumlee consistently bring it? Etc.

If Duke/Plumlee finish strong, it will be fun to link to Shane Ryan's article. If Duke/Plumlee don't finish strong, I am willing to admit Ryan was correct and start thinking about next season.

[David]

Wow! Shane Ryan certainly changed his tune:

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...atest-collapse

[killerleft]

Wow! Shane Ryan certainly changed his tune:

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...atest-collapse

He's like one of those little yappy dogs; one minute he's hopping and grinning, the next he's biting your ankle bone.

[Mudge]

It's kind of funny-- Ryan says that Coach K "still managed to be kind of snippy with the press, somehow"... and then points out how Coach K was patient, non-cliched, quote-worthy, and even funny, all at the same time, with one of the reporters...but when it comes to Boeheim, who regularly loses it with reporters and treats them like mud on his shoe, Ryan says that if that's the way he's going to be "maybe it is time for him to retire"... maybe?... somehow?

How Coach K draws this kind of journalist disdain, and Boeheim doesn't get universally derided/reviled (especially after his ill-conceived defense of Assistant Coach Bernie's child molestation transgressions) by journalists, I'll never know. Add Calhoun's treatment into that equation too-- Coach K looks like Mother Teresa, compared to these two guys... and to be honest, you could probably add John Thompson (the elder) in there too, among the people who get/got a free pass for bad public behavior, while Coach K gets "the hairdryer treatment" (as they say over in the Britain), for virtually nothing. And this list could go on and on (Clem Haskins, Calipari, Bob Huggins, John Cheney, etc.)

[Turk]

He's like one of those little yappy dogs; one minute he's hopping and grinning, the next he's biting your ankle bone.

I think Shane is like a lot of Duke fans - when he's down, he's really really down, and after a game like Saturday when it all comes together, he thinks there's no one who can beat Duke. Hate to admit it, but I might have had that once or twice over the years...

Must have been fun to be in the Dean Dome watching that first half. And since I'm confessing mode (must be a Lent thing), I also have to admit I giggled when his friend called it "basketball porn". I can see why Shane got all excited writing his blog post for this morning...

[cptnflash]

I think Shane is like a lot of Duke fans - when he's down, he's really really down, and after a game like Saturday when it all comes together, he thinks there's no one who can beat Duke. Hate to admit it, but I might have had that once or twice over the years...

Must have been fun to be in the Dean Dome watching that first half. And since I'm confessing mode (must be a Lent thing), I also have to admit I giggled when his friend called it "basketball porn". I can see why Shane got all excited writing his blog post for this morning...

Shane is exactly like a lot Duke fans, in that he's exactly like most humans. He hedges his emotional investments by overestimating the probability of adverse outcomes, and he is heavily influenced by recency bias. In his "Hardcourt Shuffle" article from Friday, he offered these predictions prior to the Duke/UNC (I'm paraphrasing, the link is below if you want to reread it).

1 - The game will hinge on Ryan Kelly (it didn't).
2 - Dexter Strickland and Reggie Bullock will shut Seth Curry down (he even used the word unavoidable to describe this outcome... uh, yeah)
3 - Mason Plumlee can only be expected to disappoint in big games (um...)
4 - PJ Hairston is the kind of player that Duke can't handle (PJ had a decent game, but 4 for 12 from the field hardly suggests that we couldn't handle him)
5 - UNC is a hot team with the tools to exploit Duke's weaknesses, and will win the game by 6 (hey, he was only off by 22... pretty close!)

I don't mean to pick on Shane, especially after defending him earlier in this thread (and earning yet another helping of DBR derision in the process). My point is that he is a good writer who knows absolutely nothing about what's going to happen in any given Duke basketball game in the future. That makes him different from most of the media, in that he's a good writer.

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...top-10-games-2

[Des Esseintes]

Shane is exactly like a lot Duke fans, in that he's exactly like most humans. He hedges his emotional investments by overestimating the probability of adverse outcomes, and he is heavily influenced by recency bias. In his "Hardcourt Shuffle" article from Friday, he offered these predictions prior to the Duke/UNC (I'm paraphrasing, the link is below if you want to reread it).

1 - The game will hinge on Ryan Kelly (it didn't).
2 - Dexter Strickland and Reggie Bullock will shut Seth Curry down (he even used the word unavoidable to describe this outcome... uh, yeah)
3 - Mason Plumlee can only be expected to disappoint in big games (um...)
4 - PJ Hairston is the kind of player that Duke can't handle (PJ had a decent game, but 4 for 12 from the field hardly suggests that we couldn't handle him)
5 - UNC is a hot team with the tools to exploit Duke's weaknesses, and will win the game by 6 (hey, he was only off by 22... pretty close!)

I don't mean to pick on Shane, especially after defending him earlier in this thread (and earning yet another helping of DBR derision in the process). My point is that he is a good writer who knows absolutely nothing about what's going to happen in any given Duke basketball game in the future. That makes him different from most of the media, in that he's a good writer.

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...top-10-games-2

I don't know. I think there are many good writers out there who have something better than a cretin's understanding of basketball. Al Featherston is a gifted writer who COMPLETELY called the excellence of this year's team in the preseason. (Various posters on this board felt similarly.) Jim Sumner writes strong game recaps. Nationally, Luke Winn is always interesting and rarely makes unconsidered, emotional predictions. At the NBA level, you have Zach Lowe, Kelly Dwyer, Mark Deeks and a legion of others, who can all write a clever sentence that also happens to be true. Knowledge and entertainment do not have to be mutually exclusive. Just because Ryan lacks historical perspective, game insight, and--most importantly--the curiosity to fix either shortcoming does not mean the affliction is universal.

The guy's a twit. Maybe he once pulled you from a burning building, or maybe he's engaged to your sister, and you have to be nice. The rest of us are not similarly bound, and to us he remains a twit.

[Greg_Newton]

The guy's a twit. Maybe he once pulled you from a burning building, or maybe he's engaged to your sister, and you have to be nice. The rest of us are not similarly bound, and to us he remains a twit.

Agreed. I thought he was funny on his SCSD blog, but that's all he really is - a humor writer. His basketball knowledge is very limited. There are a laundry list of his past "articles" about Duke alone I could drum up to prove this point, if he were worth the effort.

[MartyClark]

Agreed. I thought he was funny on his SCSD blog, but that's all he really is - a humor writer. His basketball knowledge is very limited. There are a laundry list of his past "articles" about Duke alone I could drum up to prove this point, if he were worth the effort.

I have read all of two articles by the guy. Last year's article about the Duke win in Chapel Hill was hugely entertaining. I thought the recent article about this year's win was fun and entertaining. I guess I'm in the minority here. I can recall also being in the minority when Malcom Gladwell was being discussed. I thought his series of essays in "What The Dog Saw" was great. I don't think I'm all that easily entertained but I admire a writer who can capture and keep my attention.

[cptnflash]

The guy's a twit. Maybe he once pulled you from a burning building, or maybe he's engaged to your sister, and you have to be nice. The rest of us are not similarly bound, and to us he remains a twit.

I thought we weren't into name calling on DBR. Or do we make exceptions for people who say things we don't agree with?

[Greg_Newton]

I agree that he can be entertaining as a humor writer. I just don't think he merits being taken seriously whatsoever.

Just off the top of my head - he picked UNC to win the conference preseason for moronic reasons, wrote several articles about how horrible "Plumble[censored]" was, how he was lucky to have "actually held his own" with Nerlens Noel, hadn't improved during his career, etc., he posted and tweeted the "Tyler Lewis Grandma Chant" video - which was, of course, NOT that - which nonetheless went viral and really damaged Duke's image, largely thanks to him, he wrote that Coach K talks like a child molester... etc. Some of it's funny, some not, but I can't think of a single worthwhile basketball observation he's made.

[-jk]

I thought we weren't into name calling on DBR. Or do we make exceptions for people who say things we don't agree with?

We don't call each other names.

Incivility. You are free to disagree with other posters; all we ask that you respectfully disagree. Challenge the content of the post: point out flaws in their logic, dispute facts, or counter the argument respectfully. Attacking the poster by being snarky, name-calling, or engaging in a flame war is not tolerated. Avoid "gotcha" posts.

Within reason, it's open season on the press. (None of us get paid for this. They do.)

-jk

[MartyClark]

I agree that he can be entertaining as a humor writer. I just don't think he merits being taken seriously whatsoever.

Just off the top of my head - he picked UNC to win the conference preseason for moronic reasons, wrote several articles about how horrible "Plumble[censored]" was, how he was lucky to have "actually held his own" with Nerlens Noel, hadn't improved during his career, etc., he posted and tweeted the "Tyler Lewis Grandma Chant" video - which was, of course, NOT that - which nonetheless went viral and really damaged Duke's image, largely thanks to him, he wrote that Coach K talks like a child molester... etc. Some of it's funny, some not, but I can't think of a single worthwhile basketball observation he's made.

Not having read any of that, I can't disagree with yoru conclusions. I think the guy has talent. Maybe he hasn't shown sufficient responsibility with that talent.

[CDu]

Not having read any of that, I can't disagree with yoru conclusions. I think the guy has talent. Maybe he hasn't shown sufficient responsibility with that talent.

The guy is a talented writer of humor. He has, however, no basketball knowledge. He just writes from the perspective of a fan. He certainly has written some entertaining stuff. And if you ignore his actual basketball discussion, he can be a fun read. If you look for any insight on basketball, you're barking up the wrong tree with him.

[cptnflash]

The guy is a talented writer of humor. He has, however, no basketball knowledge. He just writes from the perspective of a fan. He certainly has written some entertaining stuff. And if you ignore his actual basketball discussion, he can be a fun read. If you look for any insight on basketball, you're barking up the wrong tree with him.

This was exactly my point. Somehow my rendition of the same sentiment resulted in Shane being called a twit, not once, but twice. The vagaries of DBR continue to puzzle me.