Duke at Miami post-game thread

[devildeac]

Could be off-base, but perhaps K was referring to this when he said that it feels like something has invaded the player's body this past week.

if it was the flu, then they get a HUGE pass...

if it was last year's team, then we are in SERIOUS trouble...

[mapei]

That is rather silly, as according to your definition a #1 seed cannot "exceed expectations", and so of course Duke has not exceeded expectations since they were #1 in 4 of the 6 years. Never mind that "expecting" a #1 to reach the FF is ridiculous. A while ago someone on this board calculated the odds based on what precentage of #1's, #2's, etc have historically reached the SS, FF, etc. IIRC, Duke really didn't come out as underperforming in recent years.
And goodness, we did have a FF (and nearly an NC) in '04. We are spoiled if 3 whole years of no FF mean that we stink now.
The team needs to get well, go play with some intensity, and give SJU a beatdown.

I don't think GMR's post was silly at all. It's saying that, for whatever reason, we didn't reach the level that the seeding committee felt we were capable of. We're hardly the only team to be upset along the way - that's what the tourney is all about - but when we don't win the region four straight times as a #1 seed, that suggests to me that we've been overrated going in to the tournament. And the reason we were overrated may be that too much weight was given to our early season successes when we were playing better.

Thanks for those stats, GMR. Nothing is completely telling, obviously, but I appreciate the perspective. I've personally been very disappointed (embarrassed, even) by our last seven NCAA tourney performances, save for 2004.

[dukie8]

That is rather silly, as according to your definition a #1 seed cannot "exceed expectations", and so of course Duke has not exceeded expectations since they were #1 in 4 of the 6 years. Never mind that "expecting" a #1 to reach the FF is ridiculous. A while ago someone on this board calculated the odds based on what precentage of #1's, #2's, etc have historically reached the SS, FF, etc. IIRC, Duke really didn't come out as underperforming in recent years.
And goodness, we did have a FF (and nearly an NC) in '04. We are spoiled if 3 whole years of no FF mean that we stink now.
The team needs to get well, go play with some intensity, and give SJU a beatdown.

why is it silly to state that if a 1 seed loses to a team in its region (which has to be seeded lower), then that team has not exceeded expectations and has not even met them. for a 1 seed to meet/exceed expectations, it needs to get to the final 4. it might not be easy but they will be favored in the 4 games leading up to the final 4. this isn't rocket science.

i can't tell if you are serious or just trolling by claiming that duke "really didn't come out as underpeforming in recent years." were the vcu, lsu, mich st and indiana losses meeting or exceeding your expectations? i'm confused.

[crimsondevil]

Okay, several points to clarify:
1. First, let's get facts straight. We have not "failed" 4 consecutive times as a #1 seed. We were seeded #1 4 times, and one of those times we went to the FF.
2. The definition given for "meeting expectations" was playing to your seed, and "NC's don't count". Therefore, according to that definition, a #1 seed can, at best, only "meet" not "exceed" expectations. That is setting up an unfair comparison. Just about any team with Duke's run of #1 seeds will "underperform" by those standards.
3. It is not realistic to "expect" a #1 to win the region. We all know that frequently they do not. It is/would be more fruitful to compare Duke's record to the historical averages of seeds reaching various levels. As I said, there was a discussion on this board about this some time ago - I guess some don't remember it/didn't see it (I can't find it, may have been before the boards changed).
4. The choosing of dates here (starting from '02) is essentially cherry-picking your data. If you go back to '01, you add another "met expectations" year as a #1. Or I think you could make the case that '03 began a new era for Duke BB, with J-Will, Boozer, Dunleavy gone and Redick, Shelden, et al. in. In which case, the loss to Indiana is eliminated. Either way, you're picking the dates so as to make us look as bad as possible. After all, UNC has "significantly underperformed" since their last NC also (not performed to seed last 2 years).
5. Trolling?! I'm the one defending Duke here. Believe me, I'm plenty disappointed, to put it mildly, every year when we lose in the tourney. But let's not succumb to the "Duke is going downhill" bandwagon.

[crimsondevil]

were the vcu, lsu, mich st and indiana losses meeting or exceeding your expectations? i'm confused.

And to be honest, I think I would have picked VCU and MSU to win had I not had the blue-colored glasses on. Also Kansas in '03.

Not to mention that the signs were there for the LSU and UI losses also.

[wilko]

I disagree. I would be talking about Miami's collapse AND what happened to Duke.

On THIS board, you are absolutely right.

But in the larger sense.. Duke winning is not newsworthy. Duke Losing is.

Prior to the last 2 games Triangle AM sports radio has been showering Duke with love. Uncommon, I know. But the team had dictated that conversation by being undefeated in ACC play... but of course the point to that buildup of love was to tear them down when they fall.

Which is now happening (the tearing down; Im not sold on the Falling). A local TV station has this segment a Power in Decline or some such drivel. A 2 game slide is a decline?.. Bah!!

I still say we win that game.. the focus shifts to Miami's collapse.

[dukie8]

And to be honest, I think I would have picked VCU and MSU to win had I not had the blue-colored glasses on. Also Kansas in '03.

Not to mention that the signs were there for the LSU and UI losses also.

did you take vcu or mich st in your bracket or take them with a real bet? if not, then ex post blathering means nothing. going out on a limb and taking kansas in '03 when they were favored and seeded higher isn't exactly earth shattering. '03 was one of the few recent years that the team played up to its seed.

[Surfsideron]

The great Duke teams were always able to turn up the heat by themselves and did not need Coach K to help them. I can't explain why Coach seems so passive, but maybe he is trying/hoping that the team will learn how to turn up the heat without his help. We still have a young team and it looks as if they have hit the wall. ACC coaches have found their weak spot and will use it against them for the rest of the year. Who is going to step up? Coach might be trying to get someone to do so on their own.

When a horse is down you don't beat him.

This is a young team that has been ambushed by something they haven't seen much of...zone defense. They haven't reacted to it well obviously. K seems passive because the team, especially the younger kids, is fragile and screaming and yelling won't improve that situation.

I think we saw our boys return to their old selves in the last 8 minutes of the game and I think the ship will be righted for the stretch drive!

[crimsondevil]

did you take vcu or mich st in your bracket or take them with a real bet? if not, then ex post blathering means nothing. going out on a limb and taking kansas in '03 when they were favored and seeded higher isn't exactly earth shattering. '03 was one of the few recent years that the team played up to its seed.

I always pick Duke to win it all so it's not really relevant what I "picked". However, many unbiased people were picking both MSU and VCU at the time - and I was "concerned", you might say, before each game (more than usual).

Anyways, I suggest moving this discussion to the Stewart Mandel thread. When GMR first posted I wondered if he WAS Mandel.

[DukePA]

When a horse is down you don't beat him.

This is a young team that has been ambushed by something they haven't seen much of...zone defense. They haven't reacted to it well obviously. K seems passive because the team, especially the younger kids, is fragile and screaming and yelling won't improve that situation.

I think we saw our boys return to their old selves in the last 8 minutes of the game and I think the ship will be righted for the stretch drive!

I have no idea how Coach K was feeling during the Miami game, but it has crossed my mind that perhaps he had a touch of the flu or something too? Just a thought.

[Madrasdukie]

if it was the flu, then they get a HUGE pass...

if it was last year's team, then we are in SERIOUS trouble...

Right. I agree.
I tend to think, given the abrupt drop in the quality of play, that it has to do with something more than just 'bad play and lack of effort'. Also, I remind myself that an inability to do things as well as one has done in the recent past (due to the supposed sickness), esp. for a young team, could be extrememly frustrating, thereby adversely affecting their game more than it would, shall we say an older team.

[Classof06]

Right. I agree.
I tend to think, given the abrupt drop in the quality of play, that it has to do with something more than just 'bad play and lack of effort'. Also, I remind myself that an inability to do things as well as one has done in the recent past (due to the supposed sickness), esp. for a young team, could be extrememly frustrating, thereby adversely affecting their game more than it would, shall we say an older team.

If there's anything good coming out of these two losses, it's that Duke didn't lose due to lack of effort or a false sense of security. The effort is there, things just aren't going our way. While I'm now a bit more concerned, I still think this team will be OK.

[GMR]

Thanks to Mapei and dukie8 for their posts which gave some support for my post not being "silly". In response to crimsondevils 5 points on post #164:

1. I didn't say we had "failed"...I stated that we did not meet seed expectations in 3 of those 4 years as a #1 seed. Using the seedings, a #1 seed indicates that given all the criteria that goes into the seedings, a #1 seed should get to the Final 4. Duke only did that in 2004.

2. I concur that a #1 seed, once it reaches the Final 4, cannot exceed expectations unless they win the semi-final game or the NC. Perhaps then they also do not meet expectations dependent on how all 4 of the #1 seeds are ranked by the Committee. For example, the top ranked team in the field could never exceed expectations, just meet them. The #2 ranked team could exceed expectations only by winning the NC. The #3 ranked team could only exceed expectations by winning the Final 4 semi game. Duke, in 2004, did not exceed expectations because the lost the semi game, but did meet expectations that year (unless they were ranked #1 or #2 in the country..I don't remember).

3. Perhaps it is not reasonable to "expect" a #1 seeded team to actually reach the Final 4. I stated that according to the SEEDINGS, a Final 4 berth is meeting seeding expectations.

4. I "cherry picked" the time frame only because that is when my intuition told me that Duke began this 6 year trend of playing better in the season/ACC tourney than in the NCAA tourney. I believe the stats listed help bear that belief.

5. Trolling?! Hell no. I am a huge Duke fan. I watch every game, and have been to many games in Cameron and to the Final 4 in each championship year (two in Minneapolis, one in Indy). I am from Indiana, and followed BB religiously, especially HS BB. In Indiana HS BB, the infamous HS BB coaches are the ones that would bring their team along at a pace during the season that would have them reaching their peak in March. In this 6 year Duke stretch, I don't believe this has happened in any years of this stretch. Duke has not performed in the NCAA tourney with the success that I hoped for or expected given their season performances in the last 6 years.

I have a daughter that graduated from Duke in 1993, one of the great tourney streaks in NCAA history (2 NC's, one runner-up). In only one of those years did Duke not perform to expectations according to seedings. I now live in San Diego, but still follow and cherish Duke BB religiously. I just hope that this past week is not the chink in the armor that indicates that our Devils are once again on a path of tourney performance of not meeting SEEDING expectations.AND GMR is NOT Mandel!

GMR

[_Gary]

I may be missing some posts, but I have a question. Where are all the "regulars" that normally post their thoughts about games? I will not name names, because my intent has nothing to do with being confrontational or mean-spirited. I sincerely wonder where some of our regulars, including mods, are at in the latest discussions. To be honest, I kinda figured we'd see some folks not post after this game because they don't like the negative posts, and surely don't won't to discuss anything that even smells of "the team looked tired" or what have you. I'm guessing these regulars are communicating among themselves via a different forum, and that's fine. I just think it's a shame that people seem to kinda jump ship simply because they don't want to deal with issues or questions that others have. Seems like there are newbies here that would benefit from the wisdom of old timers. And I'm being serious. What gives guys?


Gary

P.S. If my post is not appropriate I will understand if it needs to be modified or removed. I will not be offended. I just honestly wonder what's up.

[throatybeard]

Yes, it's all a huge conspiracy, Gary.

[_Gary]

Yes, it's all a huge conspiracy, Gary.

Come on, throaty. I didn't say that or even imply it. I was asking an honest question. Yes, I have my ideas as to why. But I don't believe in anything close to a conspiracy. I just wanted to know where some of the "regulars" were. I sincerely want to see everyone posting come what may. It's important that the regulars give us their thoughts during the good and bad times.

Some folks are sick and haven't posted. And I appreciate the info in that regard. Hopefully we can get everything back on track this weekend with a win. We need to keep "spreading the love".


Gary

[BDP]

It seems that our Devils have sunk coming down the stretch in February/March since our 2001 championship. It seems our weaknesses are exposed at the worst possible time; that is, in February/March.

The numbers are telling...the question is, are we limping to the finish line again this year after the two bad losses against Wake and Miami?

Since 2002, Duke has entered the NCAA's as the #1 seed in 4 of those 6 years. Despite that, we have performed only twice in those 6 years up to expectations set by the seedings, and have not exceeded expectations in any of those 6 years...in 2003, we were a #3 seed and advanced to the Regional semi-finals...just where the seedings indicated we should be. In 2004, as a #1 seed, we advanced to the final year before losing to UConn...just where we should have been.

In 2002, we were a #1 seed, and lost in the round of the sweet 16 to Indiana. In 2005, again a #1 seed, and lost to MSU in the regional semi-finals. Again, in 2006, a #1 seed and lost to #4 LSU in the regional semis. Last year, we were a #6 and lost to a #11 seed.

In November through January for the last 7 seasons, Duke has been 122-10, a .924 winning percentage. In February-March, we are 69-31, a .683 percentage. Of those 31 losses, more than half have been to teams that failed to qualify for the Big Dance.

Since 2002, Duke has played exactly 4 non conference road games in 7 seasons. Going back to the period 1986 through 2001, or 16 seasons, Duke played 34 non conference road games, or an average of 2.1 per season. In the last 7 years, our average is .6 games. Why the change?

It appears to me that Duke spends most of their season playing above their capabilities, then the reverse in the latter part of each season over the past 7 years. They appear to run out of gas each year, as K openly admitted last year. "We basically ran out of gas. And I could not put more gas in them, and so in the ACC and NCAA, you have a group of kids, I think they were really tired...If we were a military unit, we were on the front line too long. In evaluating things, how could I have done a better job of keeping them fresher? By the end, we were dead."

Following last night's loss to Miami, K said "Our team-there's something missing this week. We are not the same team these last two ballgames. It's almost like someone has come in and invaded their bodies".

I hate to portray negativity, but I have been saying all year-the key to Duke's year will be their ability to be playing their best ball in March, not December or January. It appears that this week may be the week in 2008 that Duke has again hit the wall.

GMR

Beautiful post!! making the sweet 16 is not good enough for a #1 seed, and I dont understand why all of a sudden we think this is ok. Duke has def not performed to my expectations in march. As a #1 seed I expect at least an elite 8!! I remember when Steve Lavin was at UCLA and he would always make it to the sweet 16. Everyone made a big deal out of UCLA making it to the sweet 16 for so many years in a row. I also remember saying to myself if duke ever gets to the point where the team and fans are satisfied with making the sweet 16 that it would be a sad day. I feel that this day has come, and I am sad. My question is how did this happen? Are we not recruiting like we used to? Has the game changed and K hasent adapted his recruiting to this change? I love Duke and still have faith that this team can turn it around, but I can not hide that this season looks like the past 6. We look great in the first half of the season, and then fall apart at the end when it counts. Again Im not here to troll or put down Duke, but something has been different the last 6 years and I want to know why. Go Duke!!