Anyone else think we could be REALLY good this year?

**VaDukie** · 10-22-2007, 02:59 PM

My name is VaDukie, and I am a serial optimist.

However, the more I read about this team the more excited I get. I don't expect us to be a top-5 team that's blowing people out (but I do expect it to happen from time to time).

But does anyone else get the vibe from the preseason interviews and early player comments that the players feel like they're the only ones in on the secret of how good we could be? Nelson for one, is constantly using the phrase 'championship' caliber team. And those of you who went to the banquet last year may remember that K all but predicted us to go to the Final Four.

I'm not sure I'll go that far, but does anyone else get this vibe?

**riverside6** · 10-22-2007, 03:17 PM

There is certainly potential. The more I look at this roster, it reminds me a lot of the 97-98 team (without Elton Brand).

I'm certainly not saying that they are the same, but after Brand went down that team became very small with a two-headed point guard in Wojo and Avery. Notice how no one on that roster averaged more than 30 minutes per game.

**Classof06** · 10-22-2007, 04:05 PM

There's no doubt in my mind Duke is going to be rock solid this year. They're not going to be a sexy preseason pick given their finish last season, but look at the roster and you can't deny there's a lot of talent on this team. The fact that Henderson might not (probably won't, IMO) start should tell you what kind of team we'll have. I never thought I'd say this, but Duke is going to surprise a lot of people.

The two things that excite me the most are that 1) Duke has re-committed itself to transition basketball and 2) the fact that we have the personnel to orchestrate the transition game. Between a healthy Paulus and Smith, I expect to have two guards capable of getting the ball up the floor and distributing it.

IMO, I still don't think we're as weak down low as people make us out to be. Between Zoubek at 7-1, Singler at 6-9, Lance at 6-7/6-8 and King at 6-7, that's adequate height for the college game. The issue there will be foul trouble, particularly for Zoubek and Lance; Singler's game is too versatile to have him stuck on the block for 30 minutes a game.

**Bob Green** · 10-22-2007, 04:26 PM

This time of year, every year, I think we are going to be extremely good! If we can stay healthy and run, run, run, then we have a chance to force other teams to adjust to our game, which will be a big advantage. So yes, I do think we will be very good.

**Patrick Yates** · 10-22-2007, 04:34 PM

But, for that to happen, Singler and Henderson will have to blow up. I mean, Singler has to be in SERIOUS contention for national ROY, and Hendo would have to be mentioned as a lottery pick caliber player by Christmas. We know that Nelson will be solid, and I think we all agree on what we will get from Scheyer and Paulus. The variables are Singler and Henderson. They have the potential to push us to great heights, but both have to be beyond good to achieve this.

The problem with the above posters' projections (and my blurb above) is that it assumes a best case scenario. I am frequently guilty of "chicken little" mentality, but being a Pollyanna is just as wrong.

We are not, repeat ARE NOT, going to get stellar play out of every position. Someone will have a dissappointing year. Someone important. It might be shooting, Defense, passing, ball handling, or free throw shooting, but something will go south for the team. It happens to every team, every year. If Lance or BZ struggle, the team will be fataly flawed, at least as far as post season success is concerned.

Also, we will probably not go through the season unscathed. Someone will get hurt. The only question is whether that injury will be serious (losing a big chunk of, or the entire, season), or minor (costing only a few games).

Even K's three national title teams had major things they had to overcome, each season. They were talented enough to absorb the hit and win anyways (really the 99 and 03 squads of the recent era fall under this, losing in the NC or FF sucks, but we gave it the ol' college try both times).

I simply think that this team is NOT talented enough to absorb a major hit. Most of our established talent is on the wing. A loss, or dissappointing year, would be easier to absorb here, but it would affect depth. Any injury or subpar year by a big or at the PG and the season tops out in the Sweet 16, tops, or worse.

Sure, if everyone, and I do mean absolutely everyone, gets hot from 3 land in the tourney, we could go on a thrill ride deep into March. But, as the refs let Defenders body up come March, we will have an off shooting night (or at least 2 or so players will), and Duke will be out. That could happen anywhere in the ACCs or NCAAs.

No one, even me, can deny the potential of this team. But to assume that absolutely every thing will work out in some best case possible scenario is every bit as wrong headed as being a chicken little.

Patrick Yates

**SMO** · 10-22-2007, 04:40 PM

Originally Posted by VaDukie

My name is VaDukie, and I am a serial optimist.

However, the more I read about this team the more excited I get. I don't expect us to be a top-5 team that's blowing people out (but I do expect it to happen from time to time).

But does anyone else get the vibe from the preseason interviews and early player comments that the players feel like they're the only ones in on the secret of how good we could be? Nelson for one, is constantly using the phrase 'championship' caliber team. And those of you who went to the banquet last year may remember that K all but predicted us to go to the Final Four.

I'm not sure I'll go that far, but does anyone else get this vibe?

YES!

**Wander** · 10-22-2007, 04:42 PM

I think there's an unusually wide range of potential for this team. Neither being in the Top 5 or completely out of the Top 25 would surprise me (I wouldn't say that about all the other teams with similar preseason rankings, like Texas A&M, Pitt, or Southern Illinois).

At best, we can be Villanova from '06 - a team loaded on the perimeter that is a serious Final Four threat. At worst, we'll be in the same place as last year - a middle of the pack ACC team that makes the tournament and doesn't make any serious noise.

**CDu** · 10-22-2007, 04:54 PM

Any team with as many McDonald's All-Americans has this year's team has SHOULD be really good. Yes, I'm aware that those high-school honors don't guarantee college success, but they are an indicator that the players on the roster have exhibited star talent at some point.

If a number of the following things go right, this team has the potential to be very fun:

- If Paulus can handle the point guard duties better along with his improved scoring game.
- If Thomas or Zoubek (or both) can contribute consistent quality minutes at the center position.
- If Henderson or Scheyer (or both) can continue to develop and become a consistent offensive threat.
- If Singler is as good as advertised and can become an impact player as a freshman.
- If King can provide a dangerous 3-point threat while being able to defend the big forward spot (aka the 4, or the power forward).
- If Nelson can figure out how to convert his athleticism into more finishes on offense and go from just being a solid offensive contributor to being an upper-echelon scorer.
7. If we can get healthy and stay healthy.

Not all of these things have to happen (if they did, we'd be VERY good). But I think that at least a few need to happen to make that jump. Remember - we weren't elite last year and we lost a big part of our team in McRoberts.

I'm most interested to see what Singler and King can do, but the development of Scheyer, Henderson and Thomas interests me as well.

**jlear** · 10-22-2007, 05:11 PM

Originally Posted by VaDukie

My name is VaDukie, and I am a serial optimist.

However, the more I read about this team the more excited I get. I don't expect us to be a top-5 team that's blowing people out (but I do expect it to happen from time to time).

But does anyone else get the vibe from the preseason interviews and early player comments that the players feel like they're the only ones in on the secret of how good we could be? Nelson for one, is constantly using the phrase 'championship' caliber team. And those of you who went to the banquet last year may remember that K all but predicted us to go to the Final Four.

I'm not sure I'll go that far, but does anyone else get this vibe?

I think we can go Final Four with a shot at the title and next year we are the team to beat! Of course I have similar feeling most years. LGD! That said I am looking forward to one game at a time and I will enjoy each and every win!

We will be in the NCAAs longer than UNC...in fact i bet on it!

**ACCBBallFan** · 10-22-2007, 05:19 PM

Originally Posted by CDu

Any team with as many McDonald's All-Americans has this year's team has SHOULD be really good. Yes, I'm aware that those high-school honors don't guarantee college success, but they are an indicator that the players on the roster have exhibited star talent at some point.

If a number of the following things go right, this team has the potential to be very fun:

- If Paulus can handle the point guard duties better along with his improved scoring game.
- If Thomas or Zoubek (or both) can contribute consistent quality minutes at the center position.
- If Henderson or Scheyer (or both) can continue to develop and become a consistent offensive threat.
- If Singler is as good as advertised and can become an impact player as a freshman.
- If King can provide a dangerous 3-point threat while being able to defend the big forward spot (aka the 4, or the power forward).
- If Nelson can figure out how to convert his athleticism into more finishes on offense and go from just being a solid offensive contributor to being an upper-echelon scorer.
7. If we can get healthy and stay healthy.

Not all of these things have to happen (if they did, we'd be VERY good). But I think that at least a few need to happen to make that jump. Remember - we weren't elite last year and we lost a big part of our team in McRoberts.

I'm most interested to see what Singler and King can do, but the development of Scheyer, Henderson and Thomas interests me as well.

All good points but you left off perhaps the most important one. For Villanova guard oriented small ball to work, need constant on the ball pressure that Nolan Smith and Nelson in tandem can bring. He, along with Singler might be the missing ingredient from last year along with a healthy Greg Paulus and Gerald Henderson.

That would be quite a bench with (Henderson and Scheyer) or (Paulus and Scheyer) or (Paulus and Henderson) both anxious to sub in and show they can play the pressure defense needed to regain a starting spot.

**ACCBBallFan** · 10-22-2007, 05:31 PM

Originally Posted by riverside6

There is certainly potential. The more I look at this roster, it reminds me a lot of the 97-98 team (without Elton Brand).

I'm certainly not saying that they are the same, but after Brand went down that team became very small with a two-headed point guard in Wojo and Avery. Notice how no one on that roster averaged more than 30 minutes per game.

Yes, I see some similarities, but as you mention Brand and also Burgess do not have clones, and on the flip side, not sure Taylor King does.

Several current year guys seems a bit shorter or less muscular.

Trajan - perhaps combo of Scheyer/King/Nelson
Wojo - Paulus
Batteir - Singler
McLeod - Henderson
Brand -
Carrawell - Lance
Avery - Nolan
Chapelle - perhaps combo of Nelson/Scheyer
Burgess -
Domzalski - Zoubek
Price - Marty ??/Nelson
Nate James - McClure/Nelson
??- King

**weezie** · 10-22-2007, 05:44 PM

It all depends on LT. Lance has a good year, Duke has a good year.

**VaDukie** · 10-22-2007, 05:48 PM

Originally Posted by weezie

It all depends on LT. Lance has a good year, Duke has a good year.

I agree. I think Lance's development may be the most important of any other player. I'm confident we know what we're getting in a lot of other guys - Nelson, Singler, Henderson, Paulus, etc. - but Lance could go either way.

The CNNSI article has a comment by Scheyer that Lance had 'come out of his shell'. If he has, watch out.

**CDu** · 10-22-2007, 05:57 PM

Originally Posted by ACCBBallFan

Yes, I see some similarities, but as you mention Brand and also Burgess do not have clones, and on the flip side, not sure Taylor King does.

Several current year guys seems a bit shorter or less muscular.

Trajan - perhaps combo of Scheyer/King/Nelson
Wojo - Paulus
Batteir - Singler
McLeod - Henderson
Brand -
Carrawell - Lance
Avery - Nolan
Chapelle - perhaps combo of Nelson/Scheyer
Burgess -
Domzalski - Zoubek
Price - Marty ??/Nelson
Nate James - McClure/Nelson
??- King

There are some parallels, but I see some key differences between the 1997-1998 team and this year's team:

1. That 1997-1998 team was very experienced. We had a senior point guard, an elite junior shooting guard and a senior power forward. This year's team has a senior shooting guard who's had just one season as a major contributor and an inconsistent junior point guard.
2. The freshman class was on the short list of strongest classes in history (Brand, Battier, and Burgess were all national POY of some sort, and Avery was an impact point guard).
3. The 1997-1998 team was a lot bigger. We had Brand, Battier, McLeod, Chappell, Burgess, and Domzalski all 6'8" or taller. And we had James and Carrawell who were both 6'6". This year's team has three guys over 6'8", and just four at least 6'6". And in spite of that added size, we were still REALLY athletic. The Brand team probably had more athleticism from their bigs.
4. Largely due to point #3, the Brand team was much better inside. Brand was probably the best post player in the country not named Jamison that year, despite the injury. But not counting Brand, we still had McLeod and Burgess, both of whom could score in the paint. This year's team just doesn't have an inside scoring presence yet.
5. We had more proven consistent scorers. Langdon and McLeod were both top-tier scorers. Brand proved to be pretty good too. This year's team has Nelson (a decent scorer) and a bunch of potential, but no proven weapons yet.

That's not a reason to despair - that 1997-1998 team was one of the better teams I've seen (just bad fortune that we ran into UK who exploited Wojo). That team was so good that a senior McD's All-American and 1,000 point scorer (Price) didn't crack the regular rotation, and we had a 3rd-string junior center who was a McD's all american. We could do a lot worse than not quite living up to the results of that 1997-1998 team and I'd still be pleased.

**mepanchin** · 10-22-2007, 06:10 PM

I think this team has the potential to beat any team in the country this year.

I also think this team has the potential to lose to teams we should really beat.

**mgtr** · 10-22-2007, 07:47 PM

The one thing I believe is certain -- we will be much better than last year. How good is that -- well, pretty good, in my view.