We will host Michigan State in the ACC/Big Ten this year

[CDu]

To be honest, I think all this "Number One" talk is a set-up . We weren't that good last year, and we lost our second-best player and three of our top seven. Only Grayson and Luke, among the returnees, are reliable offensive players. I think the new recruits are outstanding, but will that translate into a powerful team? If so, when? At the beginning, middle or end of the season?

I think we'll be a powerful team from day 1:
- We have the best returning player in the country in Allen
- We get Jefferson and lose Plumlee, which is a substantial gain (no offense intended to Plumlee)
- We lose Ingram but get Tatum AND Giles, which is a huge gain for this year
- We get Jackson and lose Thornton, which is at least a push if not a gain
- We get a more experienced Kennard and Jones
- We get a year of physical development for Jeter
- We have options at backup C with a sophomore Jeter and a more highly regarded freshman Bolden
- We have depth, and depth was one of our biggest limitations last year
- We have size/length, and size/length was also one of our biggest limitations last year
- We have versatility (can play big or small), which we didn't have last year
- Despite having no proven scorers going into last season, we were one of the top 2 or 3 offenses in the country last year
- Even with all those limitations, we were still a top-15 or top-20 team last year

[Indoor66]

I think we'll be a powerful team from day 1:
- We have the best returning player in the country in Allen
- We get Jefferson and lose Plumlee, which is a substantial gain (no offense intended to Plumlee)
- We lose Ingram but get Tatum AND Giles, which is a huge gain for this year
- We get Jackson and lose Thornton, which is at least a push if not a gain
- We get a more experienced Kennard and Jones
- We get a year of physical development for Jeter
- We have options at backup C with a sophomore Jeter and a more highly regarded freshman Bolden
- We have depth, and depth was one of our biggest limitations last year
- We have size/length, and size/length was also one of our biggest limitations last year
- We have versatility (can play big or small), which we didn't have last year
- Despite having no proven scorers going into last season, we were one of the top 2 or 3 offenses in the country last year
- Even with all those limitations, we were still a top-15 or top-20 team last year

Nice summary. I can't (and don't want to) argue with any of this. All I can do is SMILE!

[Olympic Fan]

To be honest, I think all this "Number One" talk is a set-up . We weren't that good last year, and we lost our second-best player and three of our top seven. Only Grayson and Luke, among the returnees, are reliable offensive players. I think the new recruits are outstanding, but will that translate into a powerful team? If so, when? At the beginning, middle or end of the season?

My biggest argument with your statement is the line "we weren't that good last year"

Wow, talk about ridiculous expectations!

Duke was good enough to beat the national runnerups on their home court ... to win 25 games and to reach the Sweet 16. Duke finished in the top 20 of both major polls.

The biggest problem with last year's team was lack of depth in the frontcourt after Jefferson was hurt (and neither Jeter nor Obi was able to step up). With Jefferson, Duke was a top 10 team and maybe a national title contender. But even without him -- Duke was very good last season.

As for the coming year, I think CDu summed it up very well.

Yes, there will be question marks ... but EVERY team has question marks every year. Duke returns a very solid four-man core of proven players. Yes, Grayson and Luke are the only two proven scores of the four (and how many college teams go into next season with two proven scorers of that quality), but Matt and Amile are very good college players -- both rotation players on a national championship team. Your add a freshman class that includes four five-star players, including two of the top three prospects in the country (1 and 2 according to ESPN's final rankings; 1 and 3 according to the current RPI). It's likely that we may have a disappointing freshman -- that happens -- but it would be unprecedented for two or three of them to disappoint. When has that ever happened at Duke (for five-star recruits)?

Duke has issues -- how will K structure the team to play without a true point guard? Will there be chemistry issues? Injuries are a concern for any team, but unlike last year, this team appears to have enough depth of talent to withstand an injury or two.

I understand the desire to downplay expectations, but on paper, there is no doubt that Duke is the preseason odds on favorite to be No. 1. I know that ranking doesn't guarantee anything, but it is certainly deserved.

[MChambers]

Yes, there will be question marks ... but EVERY team has question marks every year. Duke returns a very solid four-man core of proven players. Yes, Grayson and Luke are the only two proven scores of the four (and how many college teams go into next season with two proven scorers of that quality), but Matt and Amile are very good college players -- both rotation players on a national championship team. Your add a freshman class that includes four five-star players, including two of the top three prospects in the country (1 and 2 according to ESPN's final rankings; 1 and 3 according to the current RPI). It's likely that we may have a disappointing freshman -- that happens -- but it would be unprecedented for two or three of them to disappoint. When has that ever happened at Duke (for five-star recruits)?

Duke has issues -- how will K structure the team to play without a true point guard? Will there be chemistry issues? Injuries are a concern for any team, but unlike last year, this team appears to have enough depth of talent to withstand an injury or two.

I agree with your issues, but think the biggest question mark is whether Duke can play defense at a high level next year.

[whereinthehellami]

I agree with your issues, but think the biggest question mark is whether Duke can play defense at a high level next year.

On paper Duke's D looks great. Size, length, and a lot of great athletes. But how long will it take for the team to play together and communicate effectively? There will no doubt be a ton of easy layups and open 3s at the start of the year.

I really like the idea of Coach implementing more zone this year. I think it takes too long to implement his M2M and with the recent rule changes it looks difficult to play the pressure D that he typically likes to go with. I think if Coach focuses on mixing up different zone looks it will help cover up the inexperience and highlight the teams size, length, and athleticism(closeouts).

[gurufrisbee]

I'm disappointed we didn't get a matchup with Purdue this time. They'd be my co-favorite to win the Big 14.

Painter plays 9-10 guys, and has 7 of his top 10 returning, plus in-conference grad transfer Spike Albrecht and a redshirt player of some promise (Smotherman). They're strong D and rebounding team, 4 good 3-bombers (38-41%), good FT. Their two best players (Edwards, Swanigan) tested the waters, but both sensibly returned. Painter needs his very tall center (Haas) to lose a few pounds and up his PT from 14 to ~20 mpg.

Top 2, with Wisconsin, in a so-so Big 14, I'll guess.

Yup, I think Purdue has a very good team next year - and with Lville losing it's top three players and only bringing in one recruit - I don't see that as a great match up for the ACC at all.

[luburch]

Yup, I think Purdue has a very good team next year - and with Lville losing it's top three players and only bringing in one recruit - I don't see that as a great match up for the ACC at all.

Purdue's problem will remain the same. Poor guard play. I think relying heavily on Albrecht could be an issue, because no one knows how he will recover form a major injury. Also Swanigan needs to vastly improve his offensive game. They'll likely finish 6ish in the Big Ten. A solid team, likely not a top-25 team.

[gep]

On paper Duke's D looks great. Size, length, and a lot of great athletes. But how long will it take for the team to play together and communicate effectively? There will no doubt be a ton of easy layups and open 3s at the start of the year.

I really like the idea of Coach implementing more zone this year. I think it takes too long to implement his M2M and with the recent rule changes it looks difficult to play the pressure D that he typically likes to go with. I think if Coach focuses on mixing up different zone looks it will help cover up the inexperience and highlight the teams size, length, and athleticism(closeouts).

From what I remember, Amile is a very good communicator on defense. And with him in the "back" of the defense, he can see everything happening... all in front of him... that he could direct the defense and move them along.

[-jk]

In fairness, is anyone going to be a threat in a neutral or home game? There is only one great team next year on paper. And it's Duke.

UK, KU, and Nova will all be good/really good, but Duke has this ridiculous blend between returning players (1 superstar, 2 excellent role players, 1 "can he find his shot consistently"?) and incoming recuits (2 clear OADs, 1 young Grayson, 1 back-to-the-basket stud). It's ridiculous.

I'm usually very pessimistic about our chances. But not next year.

Yeah, we're loaded. But I'd be a lot more sanguine with a true point guard. Especially an experienced one.

And, yeah, we've won without one before... But we generally do better with one...

-jk

[Troublemaker]

I don't get the Kentucky love. Their recruiting class isn't any better than it was last year when they lost in the 2nd round. Or the year before, when they had a stacked team there already, but they played in a terrible conference and were totally unprepared when they hit March Madness and faced real competition. This year they have nothing there and will once again play in a terrible conference. It's like the worst parts of the last two seasons combined into one.

I don't think highly of UK's chances, honestly, as they will be extremely young, extremely shallow in the backcourt, and entirely reliant on freshman/sophomores with no returning upperclassmen of significance. They'll do well in the SEC because it is the SEC, but I think nationally they are at least two steps behind the top guys.

Interestingly, Calipari has not downplayed his team as much as you guys have here. Calipari refers to his incoming class as "maybe the best I've ever had" and a "super team". Interesting, because he's had the AD/MKG class and the Wall/Cousins class prior, and those guys were definitely threats to win it all as freshmen, with the AD/MKG class actually accomplishing it.

I tend to lean more towards giving UK the benefit of the doubt here. This high school class of 2016 is superb, and from that class, UK plucked five 5-star recruits and in composite ranking is only slightly behind Duke for top class; really, top billing could've gone either way. I think Duke deserves to be ranked ahead of UK, but I do believe in the Wildcats as a top-3 team, especially by the end of the season, and as possibly Duke's biggest threat nationally.