PDA

View Full Version : The State of Duke B-ball



Vincetaylor
07-05-2008, 03:40 AM
If you have been a Duke B-ball since the beginning of the Coach K era, it's hard to deny that the last few years have been very disturbing. A loss to a crappy LSU team, a barely D-1 VCU team, and near loss to another barely D-1 Belmont team. This website is notorious for looking at the program through rose tinted glasses, but eventually the glare becomes so obvious that even naive fans have to face the truth.

Duke basketball is at the lowest point it has been since the early 80's. The recruiting is poor under Coach K standards. Tourney performance is absolutely terrible. We get excited about mediocre recruits. What is wrong? Maybe even the DBR will acknowledge after at a minimum of 2 butt whippings by UNC, that Coach K isn't what he used to be.

Uncle Drew
07-05-2008, 05:40 AM
If you have been a Duke B-ball since the beginning of the Coach K era, it's hard to deny that the last few years have been very disturbing. A loss to a crappy LSU team, a barely D-1 VCU team, and near loss to another barely D-1 Belmont team. This website is notorious for looking at the program through rose tinted glasses, but eventually the glare becomes so obvious that even naive fans have to face the truth.

Duke basketball is at the lowest point it has been since the early 80's. The recruiting is poor under Coach K standards. Tourney performance is absolutely terrible. We get excited about mediocre recruits. What is wrong? Maybe even the DBR will acknowledge after at a minimum of 2 butt whippings by UNC, that Coach K isn't what he used to be.


First Vince Taylor was one of my favorite Blue Devils as a kid, I have to at least admire your choice in names. I'll go ahead and tell you by posting this you're opening up a can of worms inside a hornets nest and I can already tell you it will be deemed "demonstratively negative". As they say opinions are like ex-wives and everyone has a couple so I'll share mine. Part of me agrees with your post to a certain extent. But I have to say the reason it seems so magnified has to do with the success of a team down the road wearing a nausiating shade of blue. Truth be told in my opinion if one certain player had decided to attend another school besides UNC things wouldn't look as grim to the pessimists. It's really not fair for the Duke players that have played in his era and will play again next year. But his dominance at his position and Dukes inability (and truthfully every team in the country's inability) to counter that dominance makes a scratch look like a gaping wound.

The fans looking through "rose colored" lenses see Duke's misses at recruiting as nothing really out of the ordinary. Nobody gets every player they recruit and I will be the first to say the cliche about "selecting not recruiting" rings hollow until you see how easily the heels are reeling in quality players left and right. While I was firmly in the sky is falling camp, I have been talked off the ledge by Sumner and Watzone. But I have to admit as much as I want to believe everything is alright part of me sees writing on the wall that is hard to ignore. It's not that I dislike any of the players Duke has or has gotten to commit. But the misses, especially when it comes to certain bigmen has had me perplexed for quite a while now. And honestly I have yet to hear anyone take the recent misses and give an honest evaluation of why they chose school X, Y or Z over Duke. As Duke fans we are biased and think any player given the opportunity to put on a Duke uniform and chooses not to needs to see a shrink. And in my opinion any player who chooses to wear light blue needs electroshock therapy.

I firmly realize that some players couldn't pass a basket weaving class at Duke so they are automatically off the list of potential recruits. What troubles me is the players who can, who Duke has shown early interest in and seemed to lead for their services have left Duke at the altar. The Patterson and Monroe incidents still rub me raw. But I also realize that certain players going pro early or never showing up to Duke at all has left voids where the coaching staff anticipated having players A, B and C at least one or two years. The manditory one year rule has benefitted schools like Memphis and USC for a season and I appreciate the fact Duke would like to get more out of their recruits than just one year. But UNC seems to have a revolving door recruits are fighting their way to enter and for reasons I can not comprehend it seems like recruits are having to be lured, proded and pushed through the Duke door.

One thing I used to loathe about Dean Smith was how UNC fans viewed him as infalable and I think some Duke fans have come to view Coach K the same way. God bless the man, when I was a kid the idea of Duke winning one national championship seemed like a pipe dream yet alone three. But last years offensive inovations at least let me realize he is not a stick in the mud and can change with the times. Others will be able to list in detail Duke's recruiting guidelines as to how they select possible recruits, how many targets they go after and how soon the offer. But it seems the evil empire casts it's nets early and wide giving several recruits the chance to jump at the opportunity to don light blue. Unfortunately it also seems their nets are coming back full with quality marine life. And in some peoples eyes Duke is reeling them in one by one and having a hard time getting them in the boat without the line breaking. As they say there are other fish in the sea (don't you love how I worked that in there?) and our resident experts are quick to calm our fears by reasuring us the second and third fish we actually do get will feed us for four years instead of just one or two. Or that fish has an even bigger upside than the fish we lost and is actually going to grow once we get it back to shore.

I don't mean any of this to be sarcastic, and I TRULY appreciate their inside information and break downs of potential recruits strengths and weaknesses. But I am starting to see two schools of thought, not pessimists and optimists pertaining to Duke basketball. But I think there is a group that focuses primarily (if not entirely) on Duke and how well Duke can do and how good they might be. The other school right or wrong looks at Roys boys and their basis of success is based mostly in comparrison to them. Let's face it, in spite of the VCU, LSU and West Virginia disappointments most schools would kill to have those seasons. We Duke fans are spoiled rotten especially from 1999 to 2003, I'll be the first to admit my dissappointment wouldn't be as bad if not for the incredible success from those years.

I guess my chief concern, and probably Vince's concern is for Duke to become an also ran nationally and in the ACC. I don't think anyone expects a Final Four every year and certainly not a national championship. I just don't want to see Duke fighting for third or fourth place in the regular season, ending their ACC tournament on Saturday on a regular basis and not making it past the first weekend of the NCAA tournament. Some great coaches lost their edge as their careers wound down. Bobby Knight stopped being able to recuit the Isaiah Thomas type player and in my opinion it helped contribute to his downfall. (Sure Knight crossed the line WAY too many times, but it's amazing what schools will put up with when you're winning big.) I don't think Coach K is there by any means, and I'm not in the school that thinks the whole olympic experience has hurt recruiting. I hated to see Dawkins leave, but perhaps a change in roles will help breathe new zeal into recruiting among the assistant coaches. And as the optimists say Duke has potential if the puzzle pieces fall into place. I can totally understand your viewpoint. But the truth is either the nay sayers are right or the rose colored lenses crowd is correct. Time will tell who is more on the money, the bad part is we all have to wait and see. (Some genius Duke student needs to invent a crystal ball!) I don't think if things go Duke's way over the next few seasons the nay sayers will have any dismay about being wrong, and I hope the optimists are right.

Bob Green
07-05-2008, 06:03 AM
If you have been a Duke B-ball since the beginning of the Coach K era, it's hard to deny that the last few years have been very disturbing.

I'm gonna have to go ahead and disagree with ya on this one. I've been a Duke fan since the Vic Bubas era and I consider the last few years disappointing but not disturbing.


This website is notorious for looking at the program through rose tinted glasses, but eventually the glare becomes so obvious that even naive fans have to face the truth.

The glass half full/half empty debate occurs on DBR all the time. I'm not naive and do not wear "Duke Blue tinted glasses" when discussing Duke basketball.


Duke basketball is at the lowest point it has been since the early 80's.

Sorry the facts do not support this claim. Duke was not invited to the NCAA tournament in 1995. We've been invited every year recently. For me, the nadir of Duke basketball was 1974 and the team has been fantastic lately when sized up against that (abysmal) standard.


The recruiting is poor under Coach K standards. Tourney performance is absolutely terrible. We get excited about mediocre recruits. What is wrong?

Proponents of the "Duke recruiting is slipping" theory are not objectively observing the results. We just received a verbal commitment from the #12 ranked player in the Class of 2010 (Andre Dawkins). We've received a verbal commitment from the #14 ranked player in the Class of 2009 (Mason Plumlee). Elliot Williams, the #16 ranked player in the Class of 2008, signed with Duke and is on campus. Miles Plumlee (#40) and Olek Czyz (#93) also signed and are on campus. Rising sophomore Kyle Singler was the #6 player in the Class of 2007 and Nolan Smith was the #26 ranked player. The 2006 Class was very strong with Gerald Henderson (#15), Lance Thomas (#18), Jon Scheyer (#20), and Brian Zoubek (#38). I could go on but I think I've made my point.

There is nothing "wrong" with Duke basketball. We were in the Final Four in 2004 with Sweet 16 appearances in 2005 & 2006, but have been in the down side of the cycle the past two years. The upside of the cycle is just around the corner.

Uncle Drew
07-05-2008, 06:34 AM
Bob, just out of curiosity because it was a little before my time (and so I don't have to research it) what made 1974 rock bottom for Duke basketball in your opinion. Neat to think rock bottom was followed four years later by the first Duke game I ever watched in the national championship.

CameronCrazy'11
07-05-2008, 07:04 AM
The feelings of Duke's "downfall" definitely have a lot to do with Carolina's recent success. Imagine if Carolina had been a lot worse this year. Imagine if they were 8th in the ACC and hadn't even gotten into the tournament. How would you feel about Duke basketball then?

The other reason people get so down on Duke is because of post-season flameouts. Yes, we all know a team is measured by how it does in March, but sometimes the better team just loses when it shouldn't. If you really want to judge whether the program is really going downhill or not, you have to look at the seasons in totality. In the end, we have the players, we have the coach, and we will get back to the final four.

Bob Green
07-05-2008, 07:12 AM
Bob, just out of curiosity because it was a little before my time (and so I don't have to research it) what made 1974 rock bottom for Duke basketball in your opinion. Neat to think rock bottom was followed four years later by the first Duke game I ever watched in the national championship.

1974 is the year of the infamous "Eight points in 17 seconds" game. Carolina scored eight points in the last 17 seconds of regulation to force overtime and go on to defeat Duke. This was the only year for Coach Neill McGeachy and Duke ended the season with a 10-16 (2-10) record.

roywhite
07-05-2008, 08:57 AM
1974 is the year of the infamous "Eight points in 17 seconds" game. Carolina scored eight points in the last 17 seconds of regulation to force overtime and go on to defeat Duke. This was the only year for Coach Neill McGeachy and Duke ended the season with a 10-16 (2-10) record.

http://goduke.statsgeek.com/basketball-m/seasons/season-stats.php?season=1973-74

...and then there were the warm-ups, and the coaches' sport jackets...

gw67
07-05-2008, 09:18 AM
Bob,

The 1974 team is as good a choice as any but the period 1973-1977 was a difficult time for Duke basketball. I went to several games at Cole during that time period and the Devils were definitely considered an also ran. Duke's ACC record during this time period was 13-47. Melchionni led the team for a year or two. He was followed by Armstrong and then some talented players (Spanarkel and G-man) joined the team but even then it took a couple of years to turn it around.

I agree with you that most Duke alums have been disappointed (rather than disturbed) in the team's NCAA performance in recent years. I believe that most realize that the last 20 years has been a very special time for Duke basketball and that Coach K and his staff have done a remarkable job at keeping the program at a high level. Given the "one and dones" and the small sliver of high school players that are a fit for Duke, it is impressive that the coaching staff wins as many recruiting battles as they do. Singler, Henderson and Scheyer could start for almost any team in the country and Paulus, Smith and Williams would be welcomed with open arms by most. The big men haven't developed as fast as many of us hoped but it appears that the staff is bringing in some quality post players.

You don't have to be wearing rose-colored glasses to forsee a very good year upcoming. Will this team make the Final Four? I realize that there are alums and fans who feel entitled but who knows? They will be very capable but the beauty of the NCAAT is tha there are a number of schools who can play over their head for a game and defeat even the best teams.

gw67

CameronBornAndBred
07-05-2008, 09:41 AM
1974 is the year of the infamous "Eight points in 17 seconds" game. Carolina scored eight points in the last 17 seconds of regulation to force overtime and go on to defeat Duke. This was the only year for Coach Neill McGeachy and Duke ended the season with a 10-16 (2-10) record.

1974 was one of my favorite Blue Devil years. My parents were friends with McGeachy, and they invited him for dinner. He and most of the team showed up. As a 5 year old kid I was star struck, seeing the likes of Terry Chili dunking on our basketball hoop, and having to duck to come in the door.

As far as McGeachy being the coach, he was a quick replacement for Bucky Waters at a time when, believe it or not, Duke was not a prime job in the basketball world. (They had signed on Adolph Rupp, but in the end he withdrew)

But for me, that's when I started becoming "Duke aware", I don't think I have any direct Duke memories before that year, I was just too young.

yancem
07-05-2008, 01:01 PM
Bob,

The 1974 team is as good a choice as any but the period 1973-1977 was a difficult time for Duke basketball. I went to several games at Cole during that time period and the Devils were definitely considered an also ran. Duke's ACC record during this time period was 13-47. Melchionni led the team for a year or two. He was followed by Armstrong and then some talented players (Spanarkel and G-man) joined the team but even then it took a couple of years to turn it around.

I'll have to check with my parents, I but I have vague memories of them going to CIS for an Iron Dukes event, during this time period, to paint the seats. If that doesn't speak volumes about the state of the basketball program than I don't know what does. Could you imagine something like that happening now!

Edouble
07-05-2008, 01:52 PM
Singler, Henderson and Scheyer could start for almost any team in the country and Paulus, Smith and Williams would be welcomed with open arms by most. The big men haven't developed as fast as many of us hoped but it appears that the staff is bringing in some quality post players.


Yeah, our guards and forwards are as good as anyone's. Unfortunately, we've missed on our elite big man targets, notably Patterson and Monroe. Those are some big misses, and it's somewhat shocking, to me, that we missed on both. We have a respectable group of guys that are gonna try to fill the void in the middle this year. If they can do even a half decent job, we should be a Top 3 or 4 team again soon. So many huge questions about our big guys, most notably 1) Will Z be healthy, and will he be what we think he can be if he is? and 2) Is Olek an immediate, high level contributor?

DevilDan
07-05-2008, 02:29 PM
As a lifelong DUKE fan, since the days of Howard Hurt and Coach Bradley, I coil (ha!) when I think there's undue criticism of my BOYS. Sure, I'm as disappointed as the next guy when I see the season end against teams like VCU and West Virginia. We Blue Devil fans are accustomed to a greater prize at the end.

In a ten-year period, this program won 3 National Championships. Since 2001, we have mounted a serious challenge several times to win it again. There will always be naysayers, that's part of the deal.

Two years ago, we had a sophomore (JMcR) with limited offensive skills, to build around. That got us an NCAA berth, and a 22-11 year. Last year, with no inside game, and a brand new system, we go 28-6 and challenge for the ACC title.

Now we bring in the makings (Czyz & Plumlee) of a frontcourt that will begin to make us a more challenging opponent. With Mason in the fold for next year, my interest and faith in this program is growing every day. So I'll take the 50-17 record, for the past two rebuilding years.

The "pollsters" in all their expertise, have probably rated us way too high during the last two regular seasons, basing their votes on the history of the program rather than the quality of the team. I'd rather see us start out around 10-15, gain some momentum in Dec-Jan, then make a run to challenge for the Final Four. This team has many more tools to do that, than the past two teams.

Also ran? Looking thru rose-colored glasses? I THINK NOT. go DUKE !

Jumbo
07-05-2008, 03:08 PM
The original post is the textbook defintion of "destructively negative" at a minimum, and could probablly qualify as "rational sounding but trolling," too. Thread's closed, folks.