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

[David]

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.

I agree with CDu's point. Ryan's style (which I happen to like) is about humor and entertainment from a Duke fan perspective. He is far from a basketball expert, but I like that he was able to convey the feeling of watching the Duke win over UNC in the Dean Dome.

Indeed, Grantland founder Bill Simmons has this same style. Simmons is funny but rarely offers any great sports insights. The big takeaway (The Secret) from his 700pp basketball book is that great teams consist of great teammates. Really??? Simmons tells an entertaining story in his book about how Isiah Thomas revealed The Secret to him at a topless pool in Las Vegas. Fun story but not much of a secret.

[Des Esseintes]

And also, Myron Medcalf is clueless. This is the same guy who said confidently that we would win at NC State when Ryan first got injured because... well, I'm not exactly sure what his line of reasoning was, other than that Coach K is a great coach. As if that means we should never lose. Seriously, ignore everything Mr. Medcalf says about college basketball, and you'll be the wiser for it.

For the record guys (and gals), Shane Ryan is just as much a Duke basketball fan as any of you. Go back and read the blog post he wrote in the wake of our 2010 national championship. He is a passionate Duke fan, just like you and me. He is not anti-Duke in any way. He just has his eyes open. There were a LOT of red flags in the Miami game. Ryan Kelly is not Larry Bird, even though he played like him for one game. He is still hurt. Mason is still way too passive. Our perimeter defense is still terrible. Granted, all of these things can be fixed... but they also might not get fixed. Whether they actually get fixed or not is a matter of conjecture, and just because someone has a different (i.e., less optimistic) expectation doesn't mean they are biased, any more than you are.

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

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.

1. Look, man. You said yourself upthread that the dude "just has his eyes open." It's pretty obvious that the silent addendum to that statement is that not everyone has their eyes open, that some of the rest of us are blinkered by hyperactive optimism. Two games later, Ryan's predicting a national title, and you're saying FOR ENTERTAINMENT PURPOSES ONLY. So I'm having some trouble divining what is "exactly [your] point."

2. Consider the "twit" comment rescinded. Please amend my statement to read as follows: "The guy's clueless. Maybe he turned in a killer sack race time to help your scrappy summer camp team beat the rich kids from across the lake, or maybe you know Shane Ryan is afflicted by Imminent Death Syndrome, and you have to be nice. The rest of us are not similarly bound, and to us he remains a cypher whom we would all be wiser simply to ignore going forward."

[cptnflash]

1. Look, man. You said yourself upthread that the dude "just has his eyes open." It's pretty obvious that the silent addendum to that statement is that not everyone has their eyes open, that some of the rest of us are blinkered by hyperactive optimism. Two games later, Ryan's predicting a national title, and you're saying FOR ENTERTAINMENT PURPOSES ONLY. So I'm having some trouble divining what is "exactly [your] point."

2. Consider the "twit" comment rescinded. Please amend my statement to read as follows: "The guy's clueless. Maybe he turned in a killer sack race time to help your scrappy summer camp team beat the rich kids from across the lake, or maybe you know Shane Ryan is afflicted by Imminent Death Syndrome, and you have to be nice. The rest of us are not similarly bound, and to us he remains a cypher whom we would all be wiser simply to ignore going forward."

First, thanks for all of the quotations (including the extra step of bolding some of the parts). No one has ever gone to such lengths before. Frankly, I have often considered abandoning DBR because it seems like no one pays attention to anything I post, so it's nice to see that my input is at least making some kind of impact.

Second, for the record, the two Shane Ryan articles in question were actually only one game apart, sandwiched around the Virginia Tech game. I said before it happened that the VT game was meaningless and should be ignored. Unfortunately, as usual, people (including Shane) ignored my post, rather than the game outcome. The lengthy passage you quoted, in which I dissected Shane's poor prognosticating of the UNC game, was referencing his Grantland article from Friday, March 8th. In fact, the link is still there in your quote. So good job quoting it, but maybe next time, try reading it too.

Otherwise, some general thoughts:

Yes, many people on this board are "blinkered by hyperactive optimism" (since you said "us", I'll assume you're one of them, although obviously I'm in no position to judge).

But even more than that, many people on this board overreact to the most recent data point (win, loss, or otherwise). This is called recency bias. It's a human trait that will not change for so long as this board is in existence. I try to lean against it sometimes with my commentary, but frankly that often earns me a helping of derision and just seems pointless.

Since you're having trouble understanding my point about Ryan, I'll try to spell it out as clearly and concisely as possible:
1) He's as much of a Duke fan as anyone on this board.
2) Much like most of the people on this board, he knows basically nothing about what will happen in the future.

Finally... I don't know Shane Ryan from a hole in the wall, and just like you (and apparently "the rest of us", since you chose to speak for everyone), I'm not bound by anything.

[killerleft]

There is a test. If Shane Ryan is really a twit, he should probably have mannerisms and look something like these chaps.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCyr1ugzxXM

I'm pretty sure the one in the tweed jacket is a relative of his.

[Billy Dat]

As the guy who started this thread, it has been interesting to read the debate and has changed my thinking on Shane Ryan.

First off, I like some of the other stuff he's done on Grantland, especially the daily preview he did everyday during the Summer Olympics which I used to figure out what to watch. Secondly, he's managed to get hired at Grantland which, whatever you think about it, boasts a really impressive roster young writing talent. He's earned his place.

As a reader, I wanted him to express a more narrow emotional range and to strike a more balanced long term view - e.g., maybe Mason just had a bad game rather then "Mason stinks". But, I think this debate has shown me that he writes more from the fan perspective - which is closer to the wild swings of joy and pain we see expressed on these boards from game to game. Considering him from that perspective makes reading him a less angst-filled experience for me.

[Kedsy]

Since you're having trouble understanding my point about Ryan, I'll try to spell it out as clearly and concisely as possible:
1) He's as much of a Duke fan as anyone on this board.
2) Much like most of the people on this board, he knows basically nothing about what will happen in the future.

I agree that Shane Ryan, like most people everywhere (not just on this board), knows "basically nothing about what will happen in the future." The point others here appear to be trying to make is Shane Ryan also knows next to nothing about what happened in the past. Or at least that's the way he writes. I agree he's kind of funny, but his basketball observations are almost always either overly simplistic or just dead wrong. He tends to stick to his narrative long after it has proven false. He consistently sacrifices accuracy for cheap laughs, which is fine for a humor writer but not so fine for a supposed basketball writer.

[airowe]

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

For the record, I like Shane as a person, not a huge fan of his writing.

While the two pieces above are examples of his talent (and he's written many other good pieces) this one has always left a bad taste in my mouth: http://sethcurrysavesduke.blogspot.c...ouse-yall.html

As someone who occasionally writes down my thoughts for others to see, what's struck me with Shane's writing more than anything is the fact that it resonates with people for so long. For better or worse, he's got that writing talent down pat.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Wow, there's a LOT of thin skins and hostility on the boards this week. I'm going to chalk it up to getting antsy before the tournaments, but man, I hope we can regain some manners here.

There's not even a ACC tourney or first round games thread here yet, but there's plenty of yapping about LeBron, #1 seeds, and Duke hate in the media.

Shane Ryan is very upfront about exactly what he is. I agree with those on this thread who say that he's just like this board - he overreacts in both directions. We're going all the way, we will be lucky to get out of the first round.

Go Duke! Let's talk basketball!

[CDu]

For the record, I like Shane as a person, not a huge fan of his writing.

While the two pieces above are examples of his talent (and he's written many other good pieces) this one has always left a bad taste in my mouth: http://sethcurrysavesduke.blogspot.c...ouse-yall.html

As someone who occasionally writes down my thoughts for others to see, what's struck me with Shane's writing more than anything is the fact that it resonates with people for so long. For better or worse, he's got that writing talent down pat.

Wow, a pedophile and rat reference attached to Coach K in the same paragraph? And then a gay reference and a racism reference to boot? Classy, Shane. Classy.

I hadn't read this blogpost before, but I've read some of his other stuff. He typically just comes across as a fan of his guys (read: Curry) and a hater of his dislikes (Rivers, the Plumlees). And he clearly knows very little about basketball - that much is evident in all of his posts (including this one, where he seems to think that a fast break offense is the only way one can play offense with any freedom).

But this post is just extraordinarily offensive. And it's disappointing that it comes from a Duke student. It should be worth noting that this post came before the 2010 championship and the successful recruitment of Irving, Rivers, and Parker. So at that time, the "Coach K might have lost his touch just like Coach Knight did" argument was more en vogue among overreacting fans (of which Shane clearly is a member).

[CDu]

Wow, a pedophile and rat reference attached to Coach K in the same paragraph? And then a gay reference and a racism reference to boot? Classy, Shane. Classy.

I hadn't read this blogpost before, but I've read some of his other stuff. He typically just comes across as a fan of his guys (read: Curry) and a hater of his dislikes (Rivers, the Plumlees). And he clearly knows very little about basketball - that much is evident in all of his posts (including this one, where he seems to think that a fast break offense is the only way one can play offense with any freedom).

But this post is just extraordinarily offensive. And it's disappointing that it comes from a Duke student. It should be worth noting that this post came before the 2010 championship and the successful recruitment of Irving, Rivers, and Parker. So at that time, the "Coach K might have lost his touch just like Coach Knight did" argument was more en vogue among overreacting fans (of which Shane clearly is a member).

All that said, I do agree with Ryan's general sentiment that the "How we Hoop" video was a pretty lame attempt at hipness. I think the more recent Duke Blue Planet stuff has been much better though. It's just he took that reasonable argument and peppered it with some really offensive commentary.

[Greg_Newton]

Idiot:

If Duke gets a 1 over Miami, we're judging on November games. Not saying it's right or wrong, but Miami has been stronger for 3 months

— Shane Ryan (@ShaneRyanHere) March 17, 2013

[uh_no]

Idiot:

why is he an idiot? he's right...miami has been stronger since the start of the conference season...now whether we'd equal them with kelly, who knows...

if we get a 1 seed, much of it will be based by our great OOC run...obviously HE doesn't think that it should be a good criteria, and yes, I think he's a bit silly to simply discard that...but what he says is certainly true

(and yeah, he's an idiot...just not because of what he said there)

[Des Esseintes]

why is he an idiot? he's right...miami has been stronger since the start of the conference season...now whether we'd equal them with kelly, who knows...

if we get a 1 seed, much of it will be based by our great OOC run...obviously HE doesn't think that it should be a good criteria, and yes, I think he's a bit silly to simply discard that...but what he says is certainly true

(and yeah, he's an idiot...just not because of what he said there)

Since the end of November, Miami has lost 5 times, including a home loss to dreadful Georgia Tech, a road whupping by dreadful Wake Forest, and a neutral court loss to 18-14 Indiana State.

Since the end of November, Duke has lost 5 times, not one of which is as bad as any of the above three of Miami's.

To suggest that if Duke gets a #1 over Miami "only November games count": idiotic. The problem, as always, isn't that Ryan is wrong. It's that his reasoning is so flimsy. You can absolutely make the argument that Miami deserves the #1 instead of us without insulting everyone's intelligence. Ryan never manages to quite clear that bar.

[Greg_Newton]

Yeah, going into the ACCT, Miami was 3-3 in their last six, including aforementioned whupping by Wake, a home loss to GT, and a loss to Duke. Duke was 5-1 during that same span, only loss coming at UVA, and including a dominating win at UNC and win vs. Miami. I wouldn't say Miami has clearly been better than Duke during that span. I would also say that Duke was clearly the superior team until Kelly went down 2 months ago.

And on that note, he also completely ignores Kelly's injury. Miami was clearly better than Duke without Kelly; with him, not at all true.

Also, he's sort of implying that OOC games shouldn't factor into seedings, which is stupid. Like, of course Duke's incredible OOC run will factor into their seeding; those games aren't meaningless. When included in Duke's overall body of work, they have, statistically, a superior resume than that of Miami. If he wants to make the argument that our resume is impacted by the first half of the season, that's fine, but it's not really a revelatory point, and he phrased this "point" in an intentionally provocative and slightly misleading way, like he always does.