Way Premature 2012-13 top 25

[FerryFor50]

Serious question-- has a team in the recent past finished at the top of the ACC and *not* been top 10 in the country anytime in the recent past?

<intentionally ambiguous about how you define "top team in the ACC">

Hmm... closest I can find is the 2002-2003 where Duke and Maryland finished 9-10.

Every year since then, the ACC has had a 30+ win team, which nearly guarantees a top 10 finish.

If NCSU hits 30 wins while being the top ACC team, I could see them finishing top 10.

But that's a big if...

[sporthenry]

I don't think we're a top 25 team, FWIW, unless we get some surprises in recruiting. We'll probably be ranked because of our name, but I don't think we're actually a top 25 team. Too many questions. Too many limitations.

I think Duke has a lot less questions than most other top 25 teams. Duke will more than likely start 3 seniors who can each put up 25 points on any given night (assuming Mason leaves). Additionally, our questions will most likely revolve around sophomores (RS-Freshmen as well) and juniors while most other teams will be relying upon freshmen to make the transition to college basketball. And that is assuming we don't get any more recruits. Who would you rather rely upon, players like Brice Johnson, Perry Ellis, TJ Warren, or Will Cauley who will either start or play meaningful minutes for other top 25 teams or players like Gbinije, Hairston, Marshall Plumlee, and Murphy who were ranked around the same position in last year's class and now have one year under their belt. Not even mentioning Murphy was 15th in the 2012 class.

[gofurman]

IU will be a top 5 team. They lose little and bring in a great class.

MSU will probably be a top 10 team, even losing Draymond Green.

I think NC State should be the preseason pick frbthe ACC and a top 10ish team.

UK, if the close in recruiting will be up there again.

I don't think we're a top 25 team, FWIW, unless we get some surprises in recruiting. We'll probably be ranked because of our name, but I don't think we're actually a top 25 team. Too many questions. Too many limitations.

--- You really dont think we will be top 25? You could name 24 teams better than us.? I dont think we are some juggernaut - I get the D limitations and need of a great wing player but I dont know that there are 24 better teams - just experience of Senior Curry, Dawkins, Junior Thrton, Soph Cook (I think that could be Key), Junior Kelly, Senior Plum (?) ; RS Freshman Plum, RS Freshman Murphy and Soph Gbinije and Junior Hairston should be better than most. Plus fr Sheed. Heck, if we arent top 25 with that many McD AAs that's bad - how many is that? Cook, Kelly, Plumlee Senior (?) if he stays, Freshman Plumlee, Sheed; at least 4 ... Murphy would have been if he had stayed in HS I think

[Chicago 1995]

We may be ranked if Mason leaves because we're Duke, but we have no business being ranked. And no, I don't think we're a top 25 team with what we bring back. Our experience has limitations that are significant.

I think you are drastically overrating our seniors, and are discounting losing our two post defenders and rebounders and the only offensive player we have who could creat our own shot. We should have concerns about the team defensively next year, and offensively, there's no post presence and at most one guy who can create off the dribble.

Absent a surprise addition or two, I don't think we'd be the best team in the A10 or CUSA, let alone a team near the tip of the ACC deserving of a Top 25 ranking.

25 teams that will be better?

OSU, MSU, Michigan, Indiana, Wisconsin, NC State, UNC, UK, UF, Arizona, Stanford, Syracuse, Louisville, Cincinnati, Texas, Kansas, Memphis

That's 17. I want to look at some Big East, Pac 10 and A10 rosters and recruiting classes.

[hurleyfor3]

Duke - More experience than most though not super-athletic.

As per the DBR Stylebook, that should be remarkably unathletic.

[sporthenry]

We may be ranked if Mason leaves because we're Duke, but we have no business being ranked.

I think you are drastically overrating our seniors, and are discounting losing our two post defenders and rebounders and the only offensive player we have who could creat our own shot. We should have concerns about the team defensively next year, and offensively, there's no post presence and at most one guy who can create off the dribble.

Absent a surprise addition or two, I don't think we'd be the best team in the A10 or CUSA, let alone a team near the tip of the ACC deserving of a Top 25 ranking.

I'm sorry but I have to agree with a previous poster that you would struggle to name 24 better teams. I can't think of an A-10 team returning nearly the amount of talent with Temple losing Eric, Moore, and Fernandez, X losing Holloway and Frease, and St. Louis losing Conklin. Yes, we will have more questions than previous Duke teams but lets see, many teams would be happy to slot in a McD AA at Center, yet we get to slot in a red-shirt McD AA or Ryan Kelly. I think you underrate the importance of experience even if it was just weight training and practice at the college level. Quinn Cook got to go against the likes of Rivers and Curry everyday while Marcus Paige was practicing against who? UNC will slot into their starting PG slot a freshmen ranked around the same as Cook was last year with no experience. UNC is set to start a Center ranked around the same as Marshall was last year assuming they don't get Oriakhi.

[Chicago 1995]

And you are drastically overrating out returning talent. Experience only gets you so far. Talent matters too. KU had experience tonight sure, but also talent. Experience helped us in 2010, but we also had a lot of talent. And there are more ad more teams like UK that succeed without experience.

Our returning backcourt wouldn't have started for 40 of the NCAA tourney teams, including powerhouses like Lehigh and Ohio. We just don't have the talent to make the experience important.

I named 17 of the top of my head in the prior post, and did that without going into to many questions like UCLA or Tennessee for example/.

[sporthenry]

25 teams that will be better?

OSU, MSU, Michigan, Indiana, Wisconsin, NC State, UNC, UK, UF, Arizona, Stanford, Syracuse, Louisville, Cincinnati, Texas, Kansas, Memphis

That's 17. I want to look at some Big East, Pac 10 and A10 rosters and recruiting classes.

OSU is losing Buford and will more than likely lose Sullinger with possible departure of Thomas. They have Amir Williams and Craft but their roster of Thomas, Craft, and Williams with no recruits (as of now) is not better than Duke. Indiana is assuming Zeller stays. Wisconsin loses Jordan Taylor and doesn't really add anyone of note. Yes they return everyone else but Taylor made that team go. UF probably loses Beal and maybe Boynton and don't really add anyone of note. Still have Murphy, Young and Rosario. I'll admit to not knowing much about Stanford but not sure what they've done save for winning the NIT and not adding anyone of note. UNC will have more questions with Paige and Brice Johnson than Duke with Marshall/Kelly and Cook/Curry. Texas is losing Brown and will need Kabongo to really develop and probably needs to add another recruit.

[sporthenry]

And you are drastically overrating out returning talent. Experience only gets you so far. Talent matters too. KU had experience tonight sure, but also talent. Experience helped us in 2010, but we also had a lot of talent. And there are more ad more teams like UK that succeed without experience.

Our returning backcourt wouldn't have started for 40 of the NCAA tourney teams, including powerhouses like Lehigh and Ohio. We just don't have the talent to make the experience important.

I named 17 of the top of my head in the prior post, and did that without going into to many questions like UCLA or Tennessee for example/.

You are pretty much assuming freshmen will be able to come in for other teams and play better than Curry and company. Yes, DJ Cooper and McCollum (an NBA talent would probably start for us) but are you saying Curry doesn't start for Ohio State this year as the 2 guard. Again, you seem to be falling into the trap where somehow Marcus Paige who never played a college basketball game is instantly better than Cook, TT, and Curry.

[Chicago 1995]

Marcus Paige may or may not be better than our guards, but his surrounding cast is better. Frankly, he's better right now -- or at least more complete -- than TT. And Freshman, gasp, are increasingly better than more experienced players in college basketball. My endorsement if Paige, lukewarm as it may be is less an endorsement than it is condemnation of what we have coming back. Other than Quinn, expecting large developmental steps from TT and Andre an especially 5th year senior Seth Curry is unrealistic. What we see from those guys (and Ryan) is what we get. And that's not good enough to carry a top 25 team.

And yes, to be clear, I'm saying Seth Curry wouldn't have started at SG for OSU. Or a bunch of other teams. Seth's weak with the ball, has an unsure handle and responds poorly to physical D. He's a mediocre defender and he was far too inconsistent or a 4th year junior. His proper role at the highest level is a second guar off the bench brought in for shooting, not a guy you run an offense around and through like we'll be doing next year, it seems. Seth's just got limitations.

[Des Esseintes]

Marcus Paige may or may not be better than our guards, but his surrounding cast is better. Frankly, he's better right now -- or at least more complete -- than TT. And Freshman, gasp, are increasingly better than more experienced players in college basketball. My endorsement if Paige, lukewarm as it may be is less an endorsement than it is condemnation of what we have coming back. Other than Quinn, expecting large developmental steps from TT and Andre an especially 5th year senior Seth Curry is unrealistic. What we see from those guys (and Ryan) is what we get. And that's not good enough to carry a top 25 team.

And yes, to be clear, I'm saying Seth Curry wouldn't have started at SG for OSU. Or a bunch of other teams. Seth's weak with the ball, has an unsure handle and responds poorly to physical D. He's a mediocre defender and he was far too inconsistent or a 4th year junior. His proper role at the highest level is a second guar off the bench brought in for shooting, not a guy you run an offense around and through like we'll be doing next year, it seems. Seth's just got limitations.

Just so we're, like, super-clear here: you're talking about Duke University's men's basketball team next year? The one with so many top 30 recruits that a few of them will barely see the court, even if we sign no one else and Mason bolts? That team? Because if you are, Donny, I'm sorry but you're out of your element.

[Devilsfan]

Wait till the year after the year after next. We'll be back, IMO.

[dragoneye776]

Here is what Andy Katz thinks: http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bask...moving-2012-13

I don't think Michigan should be ranked that high and UNC definitely should not be ahead of Duke next year.

[Olympic Fan]

Wa-a-a-y too early to do this.

State top 10? You guys are nuts, especially since there's not 1 chance in 100 that Leslie is returning. In fact there is a better chance that Lorenzo Brown goes pro than Leslie returns (although I don't think that happens). They'll have a nice perimeter, but they'll be soft in the post.

Kentucky will be top 10, maybe top 5, if they get Muhammad, Noel and Bennett (the other top 10 guy they have a shot at).

But you know what? Duke will be top 10 if Mason stays and they get Muhammad (a better chance of that happening than State keeping Leslie).

UNC will be good -- borderline top 10 with McAdoo ... second 10 without him.

Syracuse, Indiana and Fllorida will have strong lineups next year. Michigan State will miss Green -- a lot. Kansas will lose a ton.

UCLA will be top 10 if they get Muhammad and maybe Parker. But I'll believe that when I see it. That's a disfunctional program.

As for the UNC love ... I think they will be good, but do you really think Bullock, Hairston, McDonald or Strickland is better than Curry? Do you think Paige is better than Rasheed Suliaman (for the record, I don't). McAdoo is a stud, but if he's gone, UNC's post position becomes filled by veterans Desmond Hubert and (walk-on) Jackson Simmons, plus two recruits that failed to make the McDonald's A-A game. Is that better than senior Ryan Kelly, junior Hosh Hairston and former McDonald's A-A Marshall Plumlee -- not to mention Alex Murphy? Over the course of the season, Carolina was a hair better than us -- one game overall and in the ACC/even head-to-head. Yet, they lost their four most productive players (and that doesn't count McAdoo). We've lost our single most productive player and maybe our second or third most productive (Mason). Do you really think that their outlook is better than ours. Yeah, they're bringing in five guys next year, but we're addiing three -- and I'd argue that Sulaiman, Murphy and MP3 are a better addition than their five-man-class.

Look, everybody is in flux for the next two weeks to a month. Come back to this topic at the end of April and look again. Yeah, if we finish the month with Mason gone and no additions, there might be cause for pessimism. But I'll be surprised if Duke strikes out with Mason, Muhammad, Parker, Jefferson and Ziegler. No, we won't get them all, but two or three are a real possibility.

I'm confident we'll be a top 25 team next year ... maybe a lot better than that.

[Dukehky]

Wa-a-a-y too early to do this.

State top 10? You guys are nuts, especially since there's not 1 chance in 100 that Leslie is returning. In fact there is a better chance that Lorenzo Brown goes pro than Leslie returns (although I don't think that happens). They'll have a nice perimeter, but they'll be soft in the post.

Kentucky will be top 10, maybe top 5, if they get Muhammad, Noel and Bennett (the other top 10 guy they have a shot at).

But you know what? Duke will be top 10 if Mason stays and they get Muhammad (a better chance of that happening than State keeping Leslie).

UNC will be good -- borderline top 10 with McAdoo ... second 10 without him.

Syracuse, Indiana and Fllorida will have strong lineups next year. Michigan State will miss Green -- a lot. Kansas will lose a ton.

UCLA will be top 10 if they get Muhammad and maybe Parker. But I'll believe that when I see it. That's a disfunctional program.

As for the UNC love ... I think they will be good, but do you really think Bullock, Hairston, McDonald or Strickland is better than Curry? Do you think Paige is better than Rasheed Suliaman (for the record, I don't). McAdoo is a stud, but if he's gone, UNC's post position becomes filled by veterans Desmond Hubert and (walk-on) Jackson Simmons, plus two recruits that failed to make the McDonald's A-A game. Is that better than senior Ryan Kelly, junior Hosh Hairston and former McDonald's A-A Marshall Plumlee -- not to mention Alex Murphy? Over the course of the season, Carolina was a hair better than us -- one game overall and in the ACC/even head-to-head. Yet, they lost their four most productive players (and that doesn't count McAdoo). We've lost our single most productive player and maybe our second or third most productive (Mason). Do you really think that their outlook is better than ours. Yeah, they're bringing in five guys next year, but we're addiing three -- and I'd argue that Sulaiman, Murphy and MP3 are a better addition than their five-man-class.

Look, everybody is in flux for the next two weeks to a month. Come back to this topic at the end of April and look again. Yeah, if we finish the month with Mason gone and no additions, there might be cause for pessimism. But I'll be surprised if Duke strikes out with Mason, Muhammad, Parker, Jefferson and Ziegler. No, we won't get them all, but two or three are a real possibility.

I'm confident we'll be a top 25 team next year ... maybe a lot better than that.

I don't think they're better, I know they're better. They are all 6'5 or taller wings with bigger builds who are WAY more athletic. Curry is barely six feet tall, I don't care what he's listed at, if you've seen him in person, he's little. Sure he's crafty, but that talent on both ends of the court, even the upside for those like Hairston, vastly outdoes Curry. I love Seth, but I couldn't agree more that his position for a good basketball program is 6th or 7th man, who comes in to shoot. You cannot run an offense around him, while his skills may improve, his biggest hindrance are his physical limitations because they're there.

I will trade a player of Seth Curry's caliber for any of the those listed above (not saying I would trade seth himself, because he's one of ours, but if we were doing this blind, and looking solely on skills and size, I'm not taking the one who looks like Seth Curry)

[KandG]

We may be ranked if Mason leaves because we're Duke, but we have no business being ranked. And no, I don't think we're a top 25 team with what we bring back. Our experience has limitations that are significant.

I think you are drastically overrating our seniors, and are discounting losing our two post defenders and rebounders and the only offensive player we have who could creat our own shot. We should have concerns about the team defensively next year, and offensively, there's no post presence and at most one guy who can create off the dribble.

Absent a surprise addition or two, I don't think we'd be the best team in the A10 or CUSA, let alone a team near the tip of the ACC deserving of a Top 25 ranking.

25 teams that will be better?

OSU, MSU, Michigan, Indiana, Wisconsin, NC State, UNC, UK, UF, Arizona, Stanford, Syracuse, Louisville, Cincinnati, Texas, Kansas, Memphis

That's 17. I want to look at some Big East, Pac 10 and A10 rosters and recruiting classes.

Whoa, I'm not real high on the team returning next year, but this is more negative than even I would be. ESPN's early line is Duke in the top 15, which isn't all that different from what you're proposing, granted. If Mason doesn't return and Duke adds no other players, I'd say things do look pretty grim -- hinging a bit too much on redshirts and possibly unrealistic leaps in play from the likes of Gbinje, Hairston and Cook. It's a good thing so many other schools are losing players as well.

If Mason does return (still a possibility) and Sulaimon is an impact freshman, then things look up. Shabazz coming to Duke is fairytale daydreaming -- sure it makes the team a title contender, but I'd rather focus on what's realistic.

[sporthenry]

Marcus Paige may or may not be better than our guards, but his surrounding cast is better. Frankly, he's better right now -- or at least more complete -- than TT. And Freshman, gasp, are increasingly better than more experienced players in college basketball. My endorsement if Paige, lukewarm as it may be is less an endorsement than it is condemnation of what we have coming back. Other than Quinn, expecting large developmental steps from TT and Andre an especially 5th year senior Seth Curry is unrealistic. What we see from those guys (and Ryan) is what we get. And that's not good enough to carry a top 25 team.

I find it hard to believe that you know enough about Marcus Paige to call him more complete than a guy who the best coach in the country decided to start for the second half of the season. As far as his surrounding cast, I would have to disagree as well. In the post, he may get McAdoo back while we may get Mason back. I'd say both seem around equally likely to stay if not Mason has more to stick around for. Additionally, everyone assumes UNC is getting Oriakhi but that is far from a done deal and Duke could easily add either TP or Amile on top of their McD AA from last year. So front court would you rather have Mason/Kelly/Marshall or McAdoo/Oriakhi/James. I'd probably prefer our front court b/c Marshall should be better than James, and b/c of Kelly's versatility. And that appears to be best case scenario for UNC (well apart from them somehow getting Noels) while for Duke could still easily add another body even with the loss of Mason.

As for the back court, well again, I would take Cook who was 31 according to RSCI compared to Paige who is 29 according to RSCI and a year behind. I think Cook is the key to our offense. That said, UNC has two guards who are coming off ACL injuries and Dexter had his occur in late January so it is unclear if he would be ready to start the season. So there are two big question marks for this team. But both teams will need their back courts to do a lot more but Duke has guys returning like Curry who have had to shoulder the load a lot more than Bullock and Hairston. Duke also has more versatility with Sheed, Dre, Curry, TT, and Gbinije than UNC where Bullock and Hairston seem to be identical players and McDonald not far behind. Overall, UNC might have a slight edge for the other 4 positions but I'll take a guy who had a 3.5 A/TO ratio in his freshmen year over an unproven guard going into a system that relies and may not have a dominant big man.

[sporthenry]

I don't think they're better, I know they're better. They are all 6'5 or taller wings with bigger builds who are WAY more athletic. Curry is barely six feet tall, I don't care what he's listed at, if you've seen him in person, he's little. Sure he's crafty, but that talent on both ends of the court, even the upside for those like Hairston, vastly outdoes Curry. I love Seth, but I couldn't agree more that his position for a good basketball program is 6th or 7th man, who comes in to shoot. You cannot run an offense around him, while his skills may improve, his biggest hindrance are his physical limitations because they're there.

I will trade a player of Seth Curry's caliber for any of the those listed above (not saying I would trade seth himself, because he's one of ours, but if we were doing this blind, and looking solely on skills and size, I'm not taking the one who looks like Seth Curry)

Strickland is only 6'3 and he doesn't use his size on the offensive end. Defensively, he has an edge over Curry but offensively I'd take Curry. Bullock showed some promise towards the end and McDonald was starting to shoot better but these were guys who struggled to hit wide open shots that will dry up without Henson and Zeller on the block. Hairston has more upside but this is college not the pros, heck Dre has more upside than if not for the sole reason he hasn't developed much but that isn't saying much.

You cannot run an offense around him but the guy could be a Daniel Ewing type player. I think if Cook becomes the PG we all hope that our offense won't be run around one guy like Rivers but instead can be run more as a true motion offense assuming Dre or more likely Gbinije, Murphy, or Sheed can also step in. I can easily see Curry being a guy averaging 25-30 minutes a game at 12-15 ppg shooting 40% from 3 and 43% from the field and I don't see how he will hurt the team. While his defense will never be amazing, he played pretty good defense when we also had Nolan and Kyle so I think he can be a valuable contributor.

[JNort]

We may be ranked if Mason leaves because we're Duke, but we have no business being ranked. And no, I don't think we're a top 25 team with what we bring back. Our experience has limitations that are significant.

I think you are drastically overrating our seniors, and are discounting losing our two post defenders and rebounders and the only offensive player we have who could creat our own shot. We should have concerns about the team defensively next year, and offensively, there's no post presence and at most one guy who can create off the dribble.

Absent a surprise addition or two, I don't think we'd be the best team in the A10 or CUSA, let alone a team near the tip of the ACC deserving of a Top 25 ranking.

25 teams that will be better?

OSU, MSU, Michigan, Indiana, Wisconsin, NC State, UNC, UK, UF, Arizona, Stanford, Syracuse, Louisville, Cincinnati, Texas, Kansas, Memphis

That's 17. I want to look at some Big East, Pac 10 and A10 rosters and recruiting classes.

Of all those you mentioned only NC State, Uk, UF and the Cuse would beat us in a series.

[NashvilleDevil]

In the 2009-10 preseason polls Duke was 8/9 and UNC was 4/6. That year Duke lost Henderson and Williams and UNC lost the top guys on a title team and we all know how that turned out. Next year Duke is losing Rivers and Miles, bringing in a top SG, adding the two redshirts, maybe adding a another top recruit and current players will improve. In Chapel Hill they're losing their top 4 players and maybe another one, they are bringing in a PG, will be returning two kids coming off ACL injuries, may add a transfer and will see current players improve. Honestly I don't see how some posters can be so certain that UNC will be higher ranked next year than Duke.