One and Done Results

[Kedsy]

I would think so, yes. It's not about how the Cheaters down the road are doing. Yes, it's sickening that they were able to hold players back enough to buy time and win but this thread is about Duke and how we are doing with our OAD players.

I'm with CoachJ10 on this. It's true this thread is ostensibly about Duke, it's really about UNC playing two championship games in a row with veteran teams while our young teams have floundered.

[English]

I'm with CoachJ10 on this. It's true this thread is ostensibly about Duke, it's really about UNC playing two championship games in a row with veteran teams** while our young teams have floundered.

**Even though these heel teams have played heavy minutes with players consistently ranked higher than Duke players who have left early for the League (e.g., Justin Jackson, Theo Pinson, Isaiah Hicks), who in other programs, are likely to be long gone.

Recency bias is strong in this thread.

[ipatent]

Of course injuries are part of the game. I think the point is that injuries, which are beyond the control of the coaching staff, have contributed to the "disappointing tournament results" just as much if not more than the chosen recruiting strategies.

Absolutely, and how could I have forgotten Robert Brickey in the '89 Seton Hall game.

Tough for the sports quants to analyze Duke's injuries over the years versus other top programs, but several potential titles could have swung in the balance.

[Wander]

Tough for the sports quants to analyze Duke's injuries over the years versus other top programs, but several potential titles could have swung in the balance.

I guess, but I think for Duke, everything sort of balances out. Duke probably has the number of titles that we "deserve." Injuries decimated our season last year... but we were also very fortunate with health in 2010. We were probably the best team in 1999, but also needed a miracle shot in 1992. 2011 to me felt more like a regular upset where the inferior team shoots the lights out rather than anything injury related. We've won the championship more than 25% of the time we've been in the Final Four. And so on. Contrast that to say, UConn/Arizona, who have had way more/less tournament success than they probably should.

The only other thing I'll say is that injuries and the OAD stuff aren't necessarily completely disconnected. Giles gets majorly injured and you've basically wasted all your basketball resources because he's gone. Jefferson gets injured and you know he's coming back as a great player to be an important part of the team. That's part of why I think the most efficient tactic might be to keep recruiting 5 star talent, but not the guys who you know with 100% certainty would only be there one year.

[Olympic Fan]

That's part of why I think the most efficient tactic might be to keep recruiting 5 star talent, but not the guys who you know with 100% certainty would only be there one year.

Except that our last championship was built around a guy that we were 100 percent sure was OAD. Sure, we had two more five stars that weren't locks to be OAD that did after we won our title. But going into the season, he through Winslow was maybe 50-50 and Tyus was less than that. Frank Jackson was nowhere close to a certain OAD ... heck, this time last year, Bolden was a better bet to go OAD. I KNOW that he never thought Corey Maggette or Luol Deng were OAD when he signed them.

I think that K has recruited seven players that he knew when he recruited them that they were 100 percent OAD or close to it:

Kyrie Irving (and even he, I'm not sure was a certain OAD when he signed in the fall of 2009 ... he was a lock OAD when he got here in the summer of 2010)
Austin Rivers
Jabari Parker
Jahlil Okafor
maybe Brandon Ingram
Jayson Tatum
Harry Giles

Of that group, Irving got hurt, but was a GREAT player. Giles didn't contribute much, but the other five were all major contributors. If I had the power to go back in time and change things, the only one I might have not have recruited was Giles.

We have two pretty certain OADs in the incoming class -- Carter and Duval. Let's see how they do. (Note: Trent is possible, but I don't think he's regarded as a certain OAD at the moment).

But I disagree with your point -- I hope he keeps recruiting sure-fire OADs -- Bagley and/or Williamson for next year would be nice.

[sagegrouse]

I guess, but I think for Duke, everything sort of balances out. Duke probably has the number of titles that we "deserve." Injuries decimated our season last year... but we were also very fortunate with health in 2010. We were probably the best team in 1999, but also needed a miracle shot in 1992. 2011 to me felt more like a regular upset where the inferior team shoots the lights out rather than anything injury related. We've won the championship more than 25% of the time we've been in the Final Four. And so on. Contrast that to say, UConn/Arizona, who have had way more/less tournament success than they probably should.

The only other thing I'll say is that injuries and the OAD stuff aren't necessarily completely disconnected. Giles gets majorly injured and you've basically wasted all your basketball resources because he's gone. Jefferson gets injured and you know he's coming back as a great player to be an important part of the team. That's part of why I think the most efficient tactic might be to keep recruiting 5 star talent, but not the guys who you know with 100% certainty would only be there one year.

Man, you are much more tlerant of the past than I am:

• Duke lost in 1964 because we had a tough emotional Friday night semi against Cazzie Russell and Michigan -- then had a 24-hour turn-around to play UCLA, which had an easier route.
• Duke failed to win in 1966 'cuz Bob Verga had the flu and scored only four points against Kentucky.
• Duke was the best team in 1986, and had some tough luck against Louisville.
• Duke shoulda won in 1994 -- we had Arkansas locked down in a tie game, and Scotty Thurman got an open shot off a fluke play.
• Duke shoulda won EASILY in 1999, and I still don't know why we didn't.
• In 2004 we played in the worst-officiated Final Four game in recorded history. It hurt both teams, but it hurt Duke more than UConn (all three Duke centers fouled out on ticky-tack calls and there was an egregious non-call on JJ's drive in the last minute).

I'll stop now, but I think we should have 11 titles.

[Olympic Fan]

Man, you are much more tlerant of the past than I am:

• Duke lost in 1964 because we had a tough emotional Friday night semi against Cazzie Russell and Michigan -- then had a 24-hour turn-around to play UCLA, which had an easier route.
• Duke failed to win in 1966 'cuz Bob Verga had the flu and scored only four points against Kentucky.
• Duke was the best team in 1986, and had some tough luck against Louisville.
• Duke shoulda won in 1994 -- we had Arkansas locked down in a tie game, and Scotty Thurman got an open shot off a fluke play.
• Duke shoulda won EASILY in 1999, and I still don't know why we didn't.
• In 2004 we played in the worst-officiated Final Four game in recorded history. It hurt both teams, but it hurt Duke more than UConn (all three Duke centers fouled out on ticky-tack calls and there was an egregious non-call on JJ's drive in the last minute).

I'll stop now, but I think we should have 11 titles.

I will say that, yes, we had some near misses and, yes, we had some close calls in years we won. But in my lifetime, I think injuries cost us most in (in order of likelihood of title):

-- 2011: K said he thought that team could have been unbeaten if Kyrie doesn't get hurt. I agree.

-- 1966: No question Duke beats Kentucky with a healthy Verga. The title game against Texas Western would have been epic, but Duke had a better ball-handling team than Kentucky (which they proved in two routs of UCLA), a big man to match up with Lattin and with Flournoy hurt, Texas Western had nobody to guard Jack Marin. I like Duke's chances.

-- 1989: It was the combination of the loss of Brickey and the foul trouble to Laettner that cost Duke the semifinal game to Seton Hall. A healthy Brickey and Duke wins that game and IMHO beats Michigan two nights later

-- 2004: For all the officiating gaffes, we forget that Chris Duhon was playing that Final Four with cracked ribs (suffered in the ACC title game). A healthy Duhon makes a big difference in the semis with UConn and, of course, the winner of that game was a lock to beat Georgia Tech in the finals.

-- 2013: Duke was the best team in the country in November and December -- undefeated against the toughest schedule in the country (including a neutral court win over Louisville). The injury to Ryan Kelly spoiled that. And even after he returned, Duke was not the same team (as evidenced in the Elite Eight loss to Louisville).

-- 1979: I know the loss was in the round of 32, but that Duke team was a perfect balance of talent and experience -- almost the same team that played in the title game in 1978. But they were without Bender and Dennard and Gminski played through a bout of food poisoning -- and Duke still took St. John's to the wire. Win thay game and they cruise to the FF, where they could easily have prevented the Magic-Bird showdown.

There are other years where injuries hurt (2012, 2016, 2017), but except maybe 2017, I'm not sure any of those teams would have won it all, although they would have gone deeper.

PS Sage, I don't know if I'd call Thurman's shot an "open" shot ... Tony Lang is in his face -- the joke is that the only reason he didn't block it was that he clipped his nails before the game. It was a remarkable (lucky") shot at a key moment ... answered by a (unlucky) 3 by Chris Collins that rimmed out. But I don't blame injuries for that loss ... or 64 or 99 or 86.

[Wander]

Except that our last championship was built around a guy that we were 100 percent sure was OAD. Sure, we had two more five stars that weren't locks to be OAD that did after we won our title. But going into the season, he through Winslow was maybe 50-50 and Tyus was less than that. Frank Jackson was nowhere close to a certain OAD ... heck, this time last year, Bolden was a better bet to go OAD. I KNOW that he never thought Corey Maggette or Luol Deng were OAD when he signed them.

Yeah, I recognize that OADs would still happen, like all the examples you cite. But I suspect you could mitigate some of the downsides of the OAD model (like the injury risk) by only recruiting guys who are open to leaving after one year, but not 100% locked into that idea.

You're right that 2015 is the obvious response to my strategy, but I'm not ceding that national championship. I think my team would still have had a great chance to win the national championship. You wouldn't have Okafor, but it's not as simple as just deleting him from the team - you'd have a different freshman big man AND a sophomore big man from the previous year instead of Jabari Parker (and, in theory, possibly a senior from 2012 replacing Austin Rivers, though for the sake of the argument I'll assume whoever replaced him would have gone pro by 2015 anyway).

[Wander]

Man, you are much more tlerant of the past than I am:

• Duke lost in 1964 because we had a tough emotional Friday night semi against Cazzie Russell and Michigan -- then had a 24-hour turn-around to play UCLA, which had an easier route.
• Duke failed to win in 1966 'cuz Bob Verga had the flu and scored only four points against Kentucky.
• Duke was the best team in 1986, and had some tough luck against Louisville.
• Duke shoulda won in 1994 -- we had Arkansas locked down in a tie game, and Scotty Thurman got an open shot off a fluke play.
• Duke shoulda won EASILY in 1999, and I still don't know why we didn't.
• In 2004 we played in the worst-officiated Final Four game in recorded history. It hurt both teams, but it hurt Duke more than UConn (all three Duke centers fouled out on ticky-tack calls and there was an egregious non-call on JJ's drive in the last minute).

I'll stop now, but I think we should have 11 titles.

You're only considering one side of the argument, though. If you give Duke the 1999 title because they were the best team in the regular season, you have to take away the 1991 title for the same reason.

[ipatent]

I will say that, yes, we had some near misses and, yes, we had some close calls in years we won. But in my lifetime, I think injuries cost us most in (in order of likelihood of title):

-- 2011: K said he thought that team could have been unbeaten if Kyrie doesn't get hurt. I agree.

-- 1966: No question Duke beats Kentucky with a healthy Verga. The title game against Texas Western would have been epic, but Duke had a better ball-handling team than Kentucky (which they proved in two routs of UCLA), a big man to match up with Lattin and with Flournoy hurt, Texas Western had nobody to guard Jack Marin. I like Duke's chances.

-- 1989: It was the combination of the loss of Brickey and the foul trouble to Laettner that cost Duke the semifinal game to Seton Hall. A healthy Brickey and Duke wins that game and IMHO beats Michigan two nights later

-- 2004: For all the officiating gaffes, we forget that Chris Duhon was playing that Final Four with cracked ribs (suffered in the ACC title game). A healthy Duhon makes a big difference in the semis with UConn and, of course, the winner of that game was a lock to beat Georgia Tech in the finals.

-- 2013: Duke was the best team in the country in November and December -- undefeated against the toughest schedule in the country (including a neutral court win over Louisville). The injury to Ryan Kelly spoiled that. And even after he returned, Duke was not the same team (as evidenced in the Elite Eight loss to Louisville).

-- 1979: I know the loss was in the round of 32, but that Duke team was a perfect balance of talent and experience -- almost the same team that played in the title game in 1978. But they were without Bender and Dennard and Gminski played through a bout of food poisoning -- and Duke still took St. John's to the wire. Win thay game and they cruise to the FF, where they could easily have prevented the Magic-Bird showdown.

There are other years where injuries hurt (2012, 2016, 2017), but except maybe 2017, I'm not sure any of those teams would have won it all, although they would have gone deeper.

PS Sage, I don't know if I'd call Thurman's shot an "open" shot ... Tony Lang is in his face -- the joke is that the only reason he didn't block it was that he clipped his nails before the game. It was a remarkable (lucky") shot at a key moment ... answered by a (unlucky) 3 by Chris Collins that rimmed out. But I don't blame injuries for that loss ... or 64 or 99 or 86.

I'd put 1994 and Park's ankle at #3. Michigan had the basketball gods on its side in 1989.

[sagegrouse]

You're only considering one side of the argument, though. If you give Duke the 1999 title because they were the best team in the regular season, you have to take away the 1991 title for the same reason.

Wander, you assume I am prepared to be reasonable. Of course, not. I am not giving up any of our five championships.

Kindly,
Sage

[Olympic Fan]

I'd put 1994 and Park's ankle at #3. Michigan had the basketball gods on its side in 1989.

Actually, Parks had a sore knee that he suffered while playing 40 minutes in the semifinal win over Florida.

He ended up playing 30 minutes against Arkansas (which was exactly his season average) and finished with 14 points (exactly his season average) and 7 reboundfs (slightly less than his 8.4 average).

I don't remember his knee being much of a factor in the title game, although I suppose you can project that he does better than his season average without the sore knee. And a little better from Parks and Duke wins.

When you mention ankle, are you sure you are not confusing that with the 1993 NCAA loss to Cal? Cherokee suffered a severe ankle injury late in the first half and didn't play in the second half of that narrow loss. That team obviously goes farther with a healthy Parks, but I don't think they win it all. Of course, what do I know -- here's a nice bit of trivia -- the '93 Duke team is the first Duke team to beat the national champion (a 14-point victory over UNC in Cameron).

Since then we've beaten 2002 Maryland, 2005 UNC, 2013 Louisville and 2017 UNC (the first time we beat the national champs twice)

[ipatent]

Actually, Parks had a sore knee that he suffered while playing 40 minutes in the semifinal win over Florida.

He ended up playing 30 minutes against Arkansas (which was exactly his season average) and finished with 14 points (exactly his season average) and 7 reboundfs (slightly less than his 8.4 average).

I don't remember his knee being much of a factor in the title game, although I suppose you can project that he does better than his season average without the sore knee. And a little better from Parks and Duke wins.

You may be right about the knee. Duke should have had a matchup advantage at his position in that game... he seemed fine but a few more baskets and rebounds could have made a difference.

[chriso]

Wander, you assume I am prepared to be reasonable. Of course, not. I am not giving up any of our five championships.

Kindly,
Sage

Interesting thread. I remember watching the '99 game with my dad. End of the game Langdon dribbles up and trips or something. I kneel down in front of the tv, hands on head, wondering why Avery didn't take the last shot. That one still hurts.

[CDu]

-- 2013: Duke was the best team in the country in November and December -- undefeated against the toughest schedule in the country (including a neutral court win over Louisville). The injury to Ryan Kelly spoiled that. And even after he returned, Duke was not the same team (as evidenced in the Elite Eight loss to Louisville).

The 2013 example is a bit misleading. Yes, we played a very tough schedule to start that year. But the win over Louisville was without their starting center and future NBA starter Gorgui Dieng. Dieng was back when we met in the Elite-8.

Now, if you want to mention that Seth Curry was playing on a bum shin all season, that's probably fair. But I don't know that we were actually better than Louisville that year.

[rsvman]

The 2013 example is a bit misleading. Yes, we played a very tough schedule to start that year. But the win over Louisville was without their starting center and future NBA starter Gorgui Dieng. Dieng was back when we met in the Elite-8.

Now, if you want to mention that Seth Curry was playing on a bum shin all season, that's probably fair. But I don't know that we were actually better than Louisville that year.

I think the gruesome injury that happened in the Elite Eight game against Louisville had the somewhat counterintuitive effect of giving Louisville an edge in that game. We were playing well and were ahead of them at the time, as I recall. You might surmise that a season-ending injury to a starter should hurt the team, but in my opinion what happened is that it galvanized the team and made them play harder and more together. It also seemed to almost unite a portion of the audience. None of this is quantifiable, but it almost seemed that Louisville was "willed to win" by the injury.

Would we have won the game if the injury had not occurred? Dunno. But I feel like we would have had a better chance.

[English]

I think the gruesome injury that happened in the Elite Eight game against Louisville had the somewhat counterintuitive effect of giving Louisville an edge in that game. We were playing well and were ahead of them at the time, as I recall. You might surmise that a season-ending injury to a starter should hurt the team, but in my opinion what happened is that it galvanized the team and made them play harder and more together. It also seemed to almost unite a portion of the audience. None of this is quantifiable, but it almost seemed that Louisville was "willed to win" by the injury.

Would we have won the game if the injury had not occurred? Dunno. But I feel like we would have had a better chance.

Major co-sign on this. That was the very stark sense I got during the game, as well. Plus, we were playing very well to that point, and the pause in the game coupled with the intense emotion accompanying the injury served to suck all of the rhythm and momentum out of the game (again, to that point, Duke's advantage).

Another unshakable sense I had during that game, post-injury, was that I cared slightly less about the outcome because I felt so badly for Kevin Ware. Anywho, a really bizarre fluke injury and circumstance.

[cato]

Yeah, I recognize that OADs would still happen, like all the examples you cite. But I suspect you could mitigate some of the downsides of the OAD model (like the injury risk) by only recruiting guys who are open to leaving after one year, but not 100% locked into that idea.

You're right that 2015 is the obvious response to my strategy, but I'm not ceding that national championship. I think my team would still have had a great chance to win the national championship. You wouldn't have Okafor, but it's not as simple as just deleting him from the team - you'd have a different freshman big man AND a sophomore big man from the previous year instead of Jabari Parker (and, in theory, possibly a senior from 2012 replacing Austin Rivers, though for the sake of the argument I'll assume whoever replaced him would have gone pro by 2015 anyway).

But Tyus and Justise were tied up with Jah. Seems reasonable to me that recruits who aren't quite good enough to be sure-fire OAD want to play with the best kids in their class.

[Olympic Fan]

But Tyus and Justise were tied up with Jah. Seems reasonable to me that recruits who aren't quite good enough to be sure-fire OAD want to play with the best kids in their class.

Absolutely ...

Actually, Okafor and Tyus Jones were a package deal -- the one real package deal we've seen in recent years.

Winslow was not that strong, but he definitely wanted to play with Okafor and Jones.

So, no Okafor means no Jones ... and probably no Winslow.

And no championship in 2015.

PS Wander, I'm curious. If we pass on Parker in 2013, just what multi-year big man do you see us signing who could have done as much as a sophomore as Okafor did as a freshman? The top big man in that class who didn't go OAD was Dakari Johnson, who went to Kentucky and came off the bench for two seasons, never averaging more than 6.4 points or 4.9 rebounds.

[Wander]

PS Wander, I'm curious. If we pass on Parker in 2013, just what multi-year big man do you see us signing who could have done as much as a sophomore as Okafor did as a freshman?

No one - you're right that we would not be as good without Okafor, no question. My contention is that we still may have won the national championship anyway even by taking a downgrade to, for example, a sophomore Isaiah Hicks and a freshman Domantas Sabonis. I don't see a single NCAA tournament game that we couldn't have won without him - Jefferson was better than Okafor against Wisconsin, and we could have lost any single player and still beaten Michigan State. And our defense would have been better overall (sidenote: this is something I was completely wrong about a couple years ago - I thought the criticism of Okafor's defense was over the top and everyone would look back and think it was idiotic that he wasn't drafted #1, but he's been completely exposed). We would probably just need to avoid Kentucky in the bracket (which we, of course, did anyway).

You guys have made some good points, so I'll revise my earlier statement and say I'm not opposed to making exceptions for specific situations. I forgot about the Tyus-Jahlil package deal, so fair point. But I would rather those situations be the exception and not the rule. Going after these guys every single year leaves us too prone to injuries and wasted resources from fluky upsets IMO.