MBB: Will the 17-18 team be better than the 16-17 team?

[Kedsy]

All the shiny new toys.

Which "old toys" did you think we should play with?

[uh_no]

Follow up question: How many of you that voted that this team would be better SWORE this year that you'd never be over-confident in incoming freshman before ever seeing them play a college game?

Duke has had a lot of monster recruiting classes, with varying degrees of working out. By (i'd guess) most metrics, last years team was completely middle of the road. Some good, some bad. And yet, an overwhelming majority of DBR is sure that this team will be better? That's like rolling a 7, and then betting the next number will be higher 66% of the time.

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised by the optimism, but apparently the commitment to not over-hyping "new shiny" has lasted little more than a month.

Maybe this team will be better, maybe it won't....but given past duke teams of this nature, I can't see how anyone can be particularly confident in either direction.

Questions I'd need to see answered before I could entertain thoughts that this team will be better:
1) is there anyone on this team who can play defense? We lost our two best defenders from a relatively mediocre defensive team. Our star freshman have traditionally not defended well.
2) is there anyone on this team who can rebound? We lost our best rebounder from a thoroughly mediocre rebounding team. This is concerning given the presumed starting center seems to have been a net negative in rebounding (I'm not sure I 100% agree, but kedsy has made strong arguments in the past)
3) Has grayson gotten over his ails? He's the only really experienced guy out there. Someone's gotta be the on the floor leader.

Reasons for optimism:
1) a "true" PG...Clearly teams can win without them, but it'll be nice to have. Seeing as we don't seem to play team defense well lately, having a guard who may be quicker will be nice.
2) fewer injuries...we can't have more, can we?
3) another 5 star forward. they seem to succeed in duke's system, especially on offense (jabari, brandon, justice, tatum).

[richardjackson199]

CBS Sports is updating their "way too early" rankings as major offseason personnel additions/subtractions occur: http://www.cbssports.com/college-bas...op-25-and-one/

Duke is now ranked #6 after adding Duval.

Quote:

The new No. 6? That's Duke -- thanks to the mid-May commitment of Trevon Duval , a 6-foot-3 McDonald's All-American who will give Mike Krzyzewski an elite and natural point guard for the first time since Tyus Jones left campus following the 2015 NCAA Tournament. Duval's presence will allow Grayson Allen to play away from the ball, which is where he's most comfortable and effective. So now Allen can worry less about running a team and more about just scoring.

Yes, Duke will lack a deep bench. And that's not ideal. But, remember, the Blue Devils only had six players who averaged double-digit minutes on that 2015 team that finished 35-4 and won the national title. So Krzyzewski has done big things without great depth before. And it should surprise nobody if he does big things again.

Thanks for posting that link. So if Parrish is right, once again Roy will have managed to convince what appeared to be a certain OAD to return to the cheats. I don't know how Roy does it. Bradley just won a natty and seemed hell-bent on hiring an agent. UNC may not even have a post-season next year. Of course this year's draft is deep and Bradley would likely be more certain of being first round next year, possibly lottery. I get it. (That type reasoning didn't slow down Frank, so hopefully he got a guarantee). I just don't get how the cheats keep dudes so much longer than their peers. Once again we out-recruit the hell out of Roy. And once again, they'll be better than us because dudes who might leave usually decide to return. Hopefully we'll continue to dominate them head-to-head anyway.

Of course maybe Gary Parrish saying that a guy is returning to school means the announcement he's leaving is imminent.

[arnie]

CBS Sports is updating their "way too early" rankings as major offseason personnel additions/subtractions occur: http://www.cbssports.com/college-bas...op-25-and-one/

Duke is now ranked #6 after adding Duval.

Quote:

The new No. 6? That's Duke -- thanks to the mid-May commitment of Trevon Duval , a 6-foot-3 McDonald's All-American who will give Mike Krzyzewski an elite and natural point guard for the first time since Tyus Jones left campus following the 2015 NCAA Tournament. Duval's presence will allow Grayson Allen to play away from the ball, which is where he's most comfortable and effective. So now Allen can worry less about running a team and more about just scoring.

Yes, Duke will lack a deep bench. And that's not ideal. But, remember, the Blue Devils only had six players who averaged double-digit minutes on that 2015 team that finished 35-4 and won the national title. So Krzyzewski has done big things without great depth before. And it should surprise nobody if he does big things again.

So Tony Bradley is expected to come back despite higher mock draft status than our Jackson. Roy's incentives for staying must be logarithmically increasing.

[NSDukeFan]

So Tony Bradley is expected to come back despite higher mock draft status than our Jackson. Roy's incentives for staying must be logarithmically increasing.

Incentives aren't necessarily increasing, but if the school work responsibilities are the same and pay and benefits are similar, what's the rush to go to the NBA?

[Troublemaker]

Follow up question: How many of you that voted that this team would be better SWORE this year that you'd never be over-confident in incoming freshman before ever seeing them play a college game?

Duke has had a lot of monster recruiting classes, with varying degrees of working out. By (i'd guess) most metrics, last years team was completely middle of the road. Some good, some bad. And yet, an overwhelming majority of DBR is sure that this team will be better? That's like rolling a 7, and then betting the next number will be higher 66% of the time.

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised by the optimism, but apparently the commitment to not over-hyping "new shiny" has lasted little more than a month.

Is that the right lesson to take from last season, though? When healthy, Duke's highly-ranked freshmen have historically delivered. And let me add that when they've arrived with a defensive rep (Winslow, Derryck, Shelden, Battier, etc.), they've delivered defensively as freshmen as well. Last season, through a combination of injuries and not recruiting enough good defensive players, we didn't have the personnel to play good defense. In particular, we lacked size on the inside and someone who could reliably defend quick point guards. (It's also possible that Coach K is now a bad defensive coach, but I'd want to see him fail with a healthy team first before I conclude that.) I also believe, although some disagree, that the lack of a PG played a significant role in the disappointing season, even though it wasn't our biggest problem (injuries and lack of enough good defenders).

It's a long offseason, and I'm sure I'll get plenty of chances to go into detail in the upcoming months. But my initial thought is if they stay reasonably healthy, I like next season's personnel better. I think there's a better chance to play good defense with this group. I like the size, and I like that we have a point guard.

Also, why did you vote "roughly equal"? Your post is more consistent with "I want to see them play first." We don't know enough to predict "better" but we know enough to predict "roughly equal"?

[CDu]

Will we be better than last year's team? Hard to say. This year's team should have more top-end players than last year's team (Giles was unfortunately not the guy who earned the #1 recruit ranking at one point; Bolden wasn't either). But it will also have much less experience, and much less individual offensive brilliance.

I am excited about Having a PG, and I am excited about having a post scorer. I am nervous about defense, but hopeful that we will be better equipped at PG (Duval is an athletic specimen with great size and quickness) and on the glass (Jefferson and Giles were terrific individual rebounders, but we should be bigger this year by necessity). And I am hopeful that a healthy Bolden (a willing and capable hedge-and-recover guy and a shotblocker) and a willing Carter (a BIG body in the lane) will be effective.

I am also looking forward to seeing a healthy Allen return to his role as a gunner rather than trying to be a facilitator. If he can get back to where he was as a sophomore, things will be quite nice.

[Kedsy]

I think there's a better chance to play good defense with this group.

Here's why I'm hopeful we can play some D next season:

WINGSPAN
Marques Bolden, 7'6"
Wendell Carter, 7'3"
Javin DeLaurier, 7'0"
Trevon Duval, 6'9 1/2"
Gary Trent, 6'8 1/2"
(and if we somehow get Mohamed Bamba: 7'9")

All measurements are the most recent listed on DraftExpress.com.

[plimnko]

i'm not so worried which team is better. i'm hoping the 2017-18 team will be LUCKIER!! last year was just weird. i've never seen so much happen to so few.

[Ultrarunner]

Put me on the "Better" side of the ledger. The past is past, the future is wide open, and possibilities abound.

How long until the season starts?

[msdukie]

Better just means going better than 2-1 against UNC
Worse means going worse than 2-1 against UNC.

This isn't rocket science.

[NYBri]

No idea. Complete team turnover (except Grayson) as opposed to last year's injuries. Like I said, I haven't a clue, which speaks more about the OAD era than rooting for a college basketball team.

I will watch and I will cheer, but it is different. Not unlike when free agency struck baseball. You become more of a fan of the general manager than then players and the team. Recruiting is more important than skill development. Sigh.

[OldPhiKap]

Better just means going better than 2-1 against UNC
Worse means going worse than 2-1 against UNC.

This isn't rocket science.

My name is OPK, and I endorse this post.

[camion]

Let's see.

Assuming a healthy team:

Regular season - Better record.
ACC tournament - Worse, the ACC tourney is tougher to win than the first two rounds of the NCAA.
NCAA Tourney - Better, at least sweet sixteen.

[Olympic Fan]

So Tony Bradley is expected to come back despite higher mock draft status than our Jackson. Roy's incentives for staying must be logarithmically increasing.

Expected by whom (besides the Cheat faithful)?

From what I see and read and hear, the consensus is that when Bradley pulled out of the combine scrimmages, it was a sign that he was likely to stay.

Nothing guaranteed until he hires an agent or pulls out, but I think the majority of non-partisan expectations are that he stays in the draft.

He told a UNC reporter last weekend that he was waiting for a firm first-round commitment ... too bad he's not as well informed as some posters on this board who would tell him there is no such thing as a first round commitment.

[arnie]

Expected by whom (besides the Cheat faithful)?

From what I see and read and hear, the consensus is that when Bradley pulled out of the combine scrimmages, it was a sign that he was likely to stay.

Nothing guaranteed until he hires an agent or pulls out, but I think the majority of non-partisan expectations are that he stays in the draft.

He told a UNC reporter last weekend that he was waiting for a firm first-round commitment ... too bad he's not as well informed as some posters on this board who would tell him there is no such thing as a first round commitment.

Gary Parrish in the CBS link I responded to seems convinced Bradley will remain in high school another year. Hope you're right.

[MarkD83]

Gary Parrish in the CBS link I responded to seems convinced Bradley will remain in high school another year. Hope you're right.

Of course if there is any justice that high school might not be allowed to play in the post season next year.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Gary Parrish in the CBS link I responded to seems convinced Bradley will remain in high school another year. Hope you're right.

He would learn more there...

[Indoor66]

He would learn more there...

Yeah. He would have to go to real classes. 👿😈😍

[Troublemaker]

Moving these posts below into this more appropriate thread...

Given so many youngsters and roster turnover, I dunno how I would categorize Duke. I guess maintains feels more accurate than improves to me at this point, though certainly there is tremendous potential to improve and one could argue that the roster is better constructed (positions and player expectations) than last year's team.

As far as preseason predictions goes between last year's and this, Duke is by far in the "Declines". Of course that doesn't mean much, but if you were able to in theory pit this team's talent against last year's, I'd pick last year's 10 times out of 10. On paper, we were an absolute mammoth last season.

I would say last season's team had much better "on paper depth" but I think next season's "on paper starters" can match up well with last season's "on paper starters."

yup, last year our bench could beat up your bench, even if they didn't get to play.

Plus, we know how good last year's team actually was, so we don't need to talk about them "on paper". In the end they were a good team but nothing special, and for the coming season I think we will exceed their results, even if it's only because odds are we won't be as injury-riddled. I am firmly in the "Improves" camp.

I agree with brlftz. If healthy, we're going to have better big men next season and a better point guard situation (with Trevon starting and a senior Grayson playing PG when Trevon rests). That makes me confident we'll be a better team.

Not that player-by-player comparisons are all that meaningful, but they ARE fun offseason fodder. So...

	2018 team	<=>	2017 team	Comment
PG	Duval	>>	2017 Allen	PG trueness and PG defense
SG	2018 Allen	>>	Kennard	defense
SF	Trent	>	MJones	the 3 in 3-and-D
PF / C	Carter	>	Jefferson	size/talent
C	2018 Bolden	>>	2017 Giles / Bolden	easily
PF / SF	DeLaurier / White	<<<	Tatum	but only need bench minutes from Javin/Jack
Perimeter Sub	Tucker	<<<	Jackson	Frank could and did start

Oh boy, I've made some controversial judgments, I'm sure. Will be back to defend them later.

But the basic idea is that the starters should be good, and we'll need some bench guys to come through.