Better team on paper: 2003-2004 Duke (final four) or next year's team?

[houstondukie]

For what it's worth, I think next year's Duke team is better on paper. More depth, more experience. Hopefully that means we finally get back to the final four.

2003-2004
PG C. Duhon - Sr.
SG J.J. Redick - So.
SF D. Ewing - Jr.
PF L. Deng - Fr.
C S. Williams - So.
Bench:
S. Dockery - So.
S. Randolph - So.
L. Melchionni - So.
N. Horvath - Sr.

2008-2009
PG G. Paulus - Sr.
SG J. Scheyer - Jr.
SF G. Henderson - Jr.
PF K. Singler - So.
C L. Thomas - Jr.
Bench:
N. Smith - So.
B. Zoubek - Jr.
E. Williams - Fr.
D. McClure - Sr.
M. Pocious - Jr.
O. Czyz - Fr.
Mi. Plumnee - Fr.

[monkey]

2004. Shelden Williams was a defensive juggernaut.

[phaedrus]

08-09 gives up a lot at point guard and down low (especially defensively). however, i think 08-09 is actually a bit better at the wing. more importantly, college basketball pretty much gets progressively weaker every year so if a lot of things go right we could end up even with 03-04 next year.

[Lord Ash]

03-04, with NO QUESTION. Any paper with JJ and Williams on it will almost always look better. Then add Chris Duhon, one of the best points in Duke history, and Luol, an NBA all-Star, and Ewing, one of the better guards around? Come on; no competition. There is not a single player on the current roster on the level of JJ or Shelden, and I don't think there is one on the level of Luol either. Maybe there is one CLOSE to CDuhon, but I don't think so... maybe Hendo and Singler will be there eventually, but I don't think they are there yet.

[DukeBlood]

For what it's worth, I think next year's Duke team is better on paper. More depth, more experience. Hopefully that means we finally get back to the final four.

2003-2004
PG C. Duhon - Sr.
SG J.J. Redick - So.
SF D. Ewing - Jr.
PF L. Deng - Fr.
C S. Williams - So.
Bench:
S. Dockery - So.
S. Randolph - So.
L. Melchionni - So.
N. Horvath - Sr.

2008-2009
PG G. Paulus - Sr.
SG J. Scheyer - Jr.
SF G. Henderson - Jr.
PF K. Singler - So.
C L. Thomas - Jr.
Bench:
N. Smith - So.
B. Zoubek - Jr.
E. Williams - Fr.
D. McClure - Sr.
M. Pocious - Jr.
O. Czyz - Fr.
Mi. Plumnee - Fr.

PG: Duhon- I would say Chris was just about better in every aspect in the game except for shooting.

SG: Scheyer- I know Redick was a great scorer, but IMO Scheyer is a better player overall.

SF: Henderson- Ewing was good but Henderson is already better and possibly on his way to great.

PF: Deng- I think Singler has a chance to be just as good at the college level if not better, but I would still take Deng. Ask me in about 7 months and I more then likely will choose Singler. They both have special written all over them!

C: Williams- Thomas isn't in the same league.

Bench: Current Duke team. Smith and McClure are proven ACC players. Elliot Williams has a chance to be special. The two big FR have a chance to contribute more then Horvath. Pocious has proved he has alot of offensive skill. I BELIEVE Zoubek has a chance to contribute more then Randolph.

Just cuz I see them being better on Paper, Doesn't mean they will perform better. I would be happy if they reached the Final Four.

[roywhite]

03-04 with the better starting five (each with at least 2 years in the NBA), but 08-09 with the better bench. Probably the nod goes to 03-04, but we really need to see the progress this season before answering definitely.

[jimsumner]

An interesting intellectual exercise and something to keep the mind occupied in July.

But-it is simply impossible to make a valid comparison here. We know how the 2004 season turned out, we don't know how the 2009 season will turn out.

How did the 2003-'04 season look in July 2003? Shelden Williams was coming off a freshman season in which he averaged 8 points and 6 rebounds per game. We hoped he would do better as a soph, thought he would, but we didn't know. Shelden was most likely better in '04 than any Duke post player in '09 but he wasn't the A-A Shelden. Not yet.

Duhon was coming off a disappointing junior year, in which he made third-team All-ACC (same as Palus, fwiw). Who knew he would be second-team All-America as a senior?

J.J.? Remember, we talking about the sophomore J.J. here, 15.9 ppg, second-team All-ACC, not the icon he later became. Is it unrealistic to expect Scheyer to duplicate that this season?

Deng? Great freshman season. Second-team All-ACC, 15.1 ppg, 6.9 . Anybody think those numbers are beyond Singler's reach? I certainly don't. I expect Singler to be better but I can't guarantee it. BTW, I'm pretty sure Deng has never been an NBA All-Star.

Ewing? Nice player but hardly one of the best guards around. Better in '04 than Henderson or Scheyer in '09? We don't know but I suspect not.

Randolph and Dockery were the only reserves to get major minutes in '04; Horvath and Melchionni combined for less than 10 mpg and much of that was mop-up minutes. I suspect Duke will have a deeper bench this season but that remains to be seen. Many people, btw, expected Shav to make a big jump that season. Didn't happen. Nor did it happen with Thompson, who played sparingly and bailed at Christmas. Dock averaged 3 points and less than 2 assists per game. Think Smith or Williams will be happy with that?

I can see Singler > Deng and Henderson >Ewing, Scheyer =Redick, Paulus < Duhon, bigs < Williams and '09 bench > '04 bench but until we know who make the big Duhon and Williams jumps and who stagnates like Shav or Dock, it's just guesses.

[mo.st.dukie]

This thread doesn't make sense to me. 03-04 is in the past, 08-09 hasn't happened yet. Basically what this is doing is comparing 03-04 with the 07-08 team along with each persons assumption of how good Williams, Plumlee, Czyz will be. The future is never certain, so while a freshman Deng is a better than a freshman Singler, which is what we all think of when we think of Kyle because that's what we know, a sophomore Singler may be as good or better. Same thing could be said for the point guard spot, Paulus or Smith could emerge next year to be as good or at least close to Duhon, as well as other positions.

It's fun to compare different Duke teams but a little unfair to compare a Final Four team to a team that hasn't played a single game yet. We also know now that J.J. and Shelden were two Duke legends while the players on this team are still in the process of becoming good/great players. Bring this up again in March/April.

[godukerocks]

BTW, I'm pretty sure Deng has never been an NBA All-Star.


I really thought he should have made it his third year. He almost averaged 20 a game, and was really playing well.

[CameronCrazy'11]

It's still interesting even if it's only speculation. 90% of posts on DBR are just speculation anyway, at least during the off-season. This comparison affirms what I already thought, that our team should have a good shot at the Final Four next year and a chance for a National Championship.

[houstondukie]

This thread doesn't make sense to me. 03-04 is in the past, 08-09 hasn't happened yet. Basically what this is doing is comparing 03-04 with the 07-08 team along with each persons assumption of how good Williams, Plumlee, Czyz will be. The future is never certain, so while a freshman Deng is a better than a freshman Singler, which is what we all think of when we think of Kyle because that's what we know, a sophomore Singler may be as good or better. Same thing could be said for the point guard spot, Paulus or Smith could emerge next year to be as good or at least close to Duhon, as well as other positions.

It's fun to compare different Duke teams but a little unfair to compare a Final Four team to a team that hasn't played a single game yet. We also know now that J.J. and Shelden were two Duke legends while the players on this team are still in the process of becoming good/great players. Bring this up again in March/April.

You mean, when we already know the outcome? Wow, that's a lot of fun.

The point is to hopefully make you realize that we have a team returning next year that had a lot more going for them than the 2003-2004 team.

Remember, the great names on that 2003-2004 team were also very young: Redick and Shelden were only sophomores, and Deng was only a freshmen. They still had a lot of room for improvement.

Scheyer as a junior can easily match Redick's numbers as a sophomore (and could be even better). Deng and Ewing were great, but I think I'll take Henderson the junior and Singler the sophomore.

Plus, the bench comparison is not even close. I'll take next year's Nolan Smith over Sean Dockery the senior, much less Dockery the sophomore (no slight against Dockery but Nolan could be special). Zoubek, McClure, Czyz, and Plumnee are better than Randolph and Horvath. And Lee Melchionni barely played his sophomore year, but Elliot Williams will contribute immediately.

[DeepBlue70]

For my money the greatest difference between a nice/good team and a great/championship team is that mental toughness and ability to perform in clutch situations when the chips are down. Each grat team needs one supreme competitor who just refuses to allow his team to lose and is willing to put his team on his back and will it to victory. It's an intangible but the great ones have it. Laettner was, of course, the epitomy of this. Had it in spades like perhaps no one else in the modern era of college ball. Do we have someone like that on the 08-09 squad? Remains to be seen, but that will be the difference between which of these two teams is better.

[DeepBlue70]

For my money the greatest difference between a nice/good team and a great/championship team is that mental toughness and ability to perform in clutch situations when the chips are down. Each great team needs one supreme competitor who just refuses to allow his team to lose and is willing to put his team on his back and will it to victory. It's an intangible but the great ones have it. Laettner was, of course, the epitomy of this. Had it in spades like perhaps no one else in the modern era of college ball. Do we have someone like that on the 08-09 squad? Remains to be seen, but that will be the difference between which of these two teams is better.

[Bluedog]

For what it's worth, I think next year's Duke team is better on paper. More depth, more experience. Hopefully that means we finally get back to the final four.

2003-2004
PG C. Duhon - Sr.
SG J.J. Redick - So.
SF D. Ewing - Jr.
PF L. Deng - Fr.
C S. Williams - So.
Bench:
S. Dockery - So.
S. Randolph - So.
L. Melchionni - So.
N. Horvath - Sr.

2008-2009
PG G. Paulus - Sr.
SG J. Scheyer - Jr.
SF G. Henderson - Jr.
PF K. Singler - So.
C L. Thomas - Jr.
Bench:
N. Smith - So.
B. Zoubek - Jr.
E. Williams - Fr.
D. McClure - Sr.
M. Pocious - Jr.
O. Czyz - Fr.
Mi. Plumnee - Fr.

Now compare these teams to the 2005-06 team, which made the Sweet Sixteen (but was ranked #1 going into it and had a better record than the '04 team...):

2005-2006
PG G. Paulus - Fr.
PG S. Dockery - Sr.
SG J.J. Redick - Sr.
PF J. McRoberts - Fr.
C S. Williams - Sr.
Bench:
D. Nelson - So.
L. Melchionni - Sr.

Although Deng + Duhon are clearly superior to Paulus/Dockery + McRoberts, I'd take the team with two senior All-Americans who later had their jerseys retired. Sometimes the "best team on paper" doesn't do the best in March. It's quite unpredictable. Everybody would say '04 was a more successful season than '06, though, b/c we made a FF...even though the '06 team was arguably better - they just couldn't deal with the physical LSU in that painful game...

[sagegrouse]

IMHO (remember, with the 'grouse' that the 'h' is always silent).

The proper exercise, as others have noted, is to consider the prospects "going into" 2003-2004 vs. what we think of the 2008-2009 team in July 2008.

I'll bite:

Duhon is a better PG than anyone on today's team. He was the PG on an NCAA championship as a freshman. Advantage 2004.

JJ was already the best player on the Duke team, coming off of a season in which he led Duke to an upset win in the ACC tournament (altho' D. Ewing was MVP). No one on the 2007-2008 team is as good an offensive player as JJ (and he was a heckuva lot better as a soph than as a freshman). Big advantage 2004.

Luol Deng looked to be really good as an incoming freshman, but not as good as Singler looks to be coming off an ACC ROY as a freshman. Advantage 2009.

Gerald Henderson is better than a really good Daniel Ewing, mostly because of size and athleticism. Advantage 2009.

Shelden Williams, who was a bit of a question mark going into 2004, still compares favorably with the "all-question-mark" front court of 2009 (Thomas, Czyz, Zoubek, Plumlee). Advantage 2004.

I would agree that the depth looks better in 2009. I expect E. Williams and N. Smith to make real contributions to the team. Also, there are just more scholarship players on the team, which will be important if injuries occur. Advantage 2009.

Intangibles: The 2004 team was really good and played exceptionally well throughout the season. But even befoer the season, you had a team coming off of five straight ACC championships. The 2009 team has proven nothing except the ability to play well until the middle of February. Big advantage for 2004.

I give the edge to the 2003-2004 team, although I would absolutely loved to be proven wrong.

sagegrouse

[mo.st.dukie]

You mean, when we already know the outcome? Wow, that's a lot of fun.

The point is to hopefully make you realize that we have a team returning next year that had a lot more going for them than the 2003-2004 team.

Remember, the great names on that 2003-2004 team were also very young: Redick and Shelden were only sophomores, and Deng was only a freshmen. They still had a lot of room for improvement.

Scheyer as a junior can easily match Redick's numbers as a sophomore (and could be even better). Deng and Ewing were great, but I think I'll take Henderson the junior and Singler the sophomore.

Plus, the bench comparison is not even close. I'll take next year's Nolan Smith over Sean Dockery the senior, much less Dockery the sophomore (no slight against Dockery but Nolan could be special). Zoubek, McClure, Czyz, and Plumnee are better than Randolph and Horvath. And Lee Melchionni barely played his sophomore year, but Elliot Williams will contribute immediately.

My post was directed more to those who have a more negative outlook on next years team. I understand that it's fun for people to make comparisons (especially on a bball message board in July) but people also have to realize that we don't know how good (or bad) certain players will be this season. And yes, I do realize we have a lot of returning talent and that 08-09 possibly could have more going for it than 03-04. But some people don't have that outlook and I'm pointing out that we don't know how things might turn out (who might become a star, who might become the leader, etc.).

[mgtr]

I think the earlier team had by far the better starters, but the current team has by far the better bench. I am optimistic about this years team. In fact, if we had Williams in place of Thomas, we would be world beaters. Then again, if pigs had wings ...... Bottom line? I thin we progress much further into the tournament than we have recently. Final four? Quite possible. National chanpionship -- possible.

[Lord Ash]

SG: Scheyer- I know Redick was a great scorer, but IMO Scheyer is a better player overall.

SF: Henderson- Ewing was good but Henderson is already better and possibly on his way to great.


I'll be honest, you lost me trying to compare Jon to JJ (Jon is a great sixth man, JJ was one of the best all-time) but then Hendo to Daniel? Eh, not in my book. Maybe by the time Gerald finishes... Their equivalent stats are pretty similar, but at this point... eh, I don't Hendo as being better......

[Ignatius07]

I'll be honest, you lost me trying to compare Jon to JJ (Jon is a great sixth man, JJ was one of the best all-time) but then Hendo to Daniel? Eh, not in my book. Maybe by the time Gerald finishes... Their equivalent stats are pretty similar, but at this point... eh, I don't Hendo as being better......

As has been mentioned before, the only fair way to do this is to judge general expectations of the upcoming team versus general expectations of the 03-04 team in the summer prior. If that is the guide, I am definitely taking Henderson over Ewing - both of whom were rising juniors on their respective teams. Henderson has a bit better size and considerably better athleticism, as well as much higher perceived potential. Henderon's improvement from freshman to sophomore year would project (to many observers) a better junior season than Ewing was expected to have.

As for Scheyer and Redick, I would take Scheyer even knowing how great JJ became as well as the rest of his career, though it's a close call. JJ's improvement from freshman to sophomore year was not staggering by any means - he made an enormous jump from sophomore to junior year and a considerable one from junior to senior. I think many were pleasantly surprised by JJ's freshman season, meaning IMO his sophomore year might have been the most "disappointing" in that it was the year in which he exceeded expectations the least. I realize I am really parsing words here, but I think it's relevant.

In reality both 09 Scheyer and 04 Redick were/are what their team needed. Next year's team won't really be lacking for offense, but a mediocre (04 Redick) rather than solid (09 Scheyer) defender would kill them. We would be too susceptible to athletic teams. Scheyer is just a fabulously well-rounded player.

Duhon over Paulus, hands down. Sure, we don't "know" that he's going to be a 2nd-team AA, but our inflated expectations - which existed/exist for both 04 Duhon and 09 Paulus - for Duhon were based on performance on the college level, as opposed to Paulus. Not to be a dead horse, but we also knew at the very least that Duhon could be a lock-down defender and provide athleticism, unlike Paulus.

Singler and Deng are even, though obviously Singler is more of a proven commodity than 04 Deng. Singler had a great freshman year, but Deng was even high-regarded out of high school.

Shelden over ZOUBEK and post-by-committee. First of all, I don't know why the original question put Shelden versus Lance. To me it seems obvious that K prefers Zoubek if healthy. I realize that's a big if, but in all likelihood Z will be healthy in November. Still, Zoubek is the only true 5 and he is a question mark because of his health, even though I think he will be a very solid player this year. Shelden was a space-eater with good rebounding and defense, though he fouled (both his freshman and sophomore year) WAY too much. At the very least, we didn't question (as much as we do with Lance and anybody else other than Z) whether he was out of position.

This year's bench is better in the backcourt, but 04's was better in the frontcourt. Our frontcourt reserves this year include two freshman who are not projected by most analysts to be impact players their freshman (and possibly sophomore) years.

That said, at this point I would probably go with the 09 team as this point. The 04 team benefited from having a player at a crucial position (PG) make a huge improvement, and getting solid improvements elsewhere. If we can get a huge improvement out of PG (only possibility for a huge improvement here is Nolan, though I do expect improvement from Paulus) or C (Zoubek), we could match the 04 team's postseason accomplishments.

[Edouble]

I hate to be so simplistic, but by position, all five starters on the 2003-04 team are superior. The 2003-04 team was VERY VERY VERY close to winning the national championship and was ranked #1 or #2 pretty much all year. The leader on that team already had a National Championship under his belt. The leader on this year's team has only been as far as the Sweet 16 one time in three tries.

[bhd28]

Okay... so are people comparing what people THOUGHT the 2003-4 team would be to what the 2008-9 team could be... or what the 2003-4 team WAS to what 2008-9 could be?

2003-4 had Shelden/Shav/Thompson average 21.9pts/13.3rbds/4.9blks. If this year's team averages that in the post (Duke 5 position), then I feel comfortable that they will be looked at as a VERY STRONG Final 4 contender entering the tourney. How likely is that, though? The other 4 positions could end up evening out to be relatively close on the two teams (with backups included). Down low, though? I hope they end up similar, but it will take some solid improvement.

[VaDukie]

The biggest problem with this comparison is that no one can look past the names "Redick" & "Williams" on 2004. If we're honest about it, we can say that those two were nowhere near the level of greatness they achieved by their senior (and to a lesser extent junior) seasons.

[Edouble]

The biggest problem with this comparison is that no one can look past the names "Redick" & "Williams" on 2004. If we're honest about it, we can say that those two were nowhere near the level of greatness they achieved by their senior (and to a lesser extent junior) seasons.

All five starters wer awesome that season--you can't get to a Final Four otherwise. Shav was possibly the most effective player in the tournament that year. Loul was ridiculous and Duhon was the best player in the ACC. I have not seen a player control every single game like he did that year since.

For me, Duhon and Deng are the names that stand out to me as unparralled in the comparison between the two teams.

[ice-9]

Bluedog, I'd take the 03-04 team over the 05-06 team and the main reason is because of Luol Deng who was a HUGE difference maker. On the 03-04 team you had several capable scorers whereas on the 05-06 team we were just way too reliant on JJ and Shel.

jimsumner makes an excellent point as to why it's impossible to compare the two teams (because performance for the 03-04 team is known whereas the future is uncertain for our current team). But if you HAD to compare...come on, can anyone with a straight face say you'd take Scheyer as he is now instead of JJ, one of the all-time great scorers in college basketball??

[mgtr]

But if you HAD to compare...come on, can anyone with a straight face say you'd take Scheyer as he is now instead of JJ, one of the all-time great scorers in college basketball??

IK loved JJ, in fact I still think of him, but not as a great scorer, but as a great three point shooter and a great free throw shooter. I don't think he was a great scorer. Scheyer may go down as a great scorer, we will have to wait and see.

[CameronCrazy'11]

IK loved JJ, in fact I still think of him, but not as a great scorer, but as a great three point shooter and a great free throw shooter. I don't think he was a great scorer. Scheyer may go down as a great scorer, we will have to wait and see.

This reminds me of how announcers love to talk about how Scheyer is "not a good shooter, but a great scorer". Now someone's gonna have to explain this to me. I seem to remember that most of Scheyer's points came from...(wait for it)...TAKING SHOTS, whether they be 3-pointers, midrange, or free throws. I know he did have some layups (no dunks that I can remember), but it's not as if most of his points came from in the paint. It seems to me that the poor shooter/ good scorer label would apply more to low post players and real slashing guards who score most of their points at the basket (more Nelson than Scheyer). How the second best 3-point shooter and best free throw shooter on one of the best-shooting teams in the country got stuck with the bad shooter label is beyond me.

[Lord Ash]

Disagree about JJ, at least as far as over his career. By his senior year he was doing EVERYTHING with the ball; his ability to drive and finish was, at times, breathtaking. He certainly was not just a three point shooter by the end. Frosh and Soph year, maybe, but he really grew.

[jimsumner]

"All five starters wer awesome that season--you can't get to a Final Four otherwise. Shav was possibly the most effective player in the tournament that year."

Excluding the Alabama State game, Shav averaged 7.8 points and 4.3 rebounds in the 2004 NCAAs. That includes a 15-minute, 3-point game against Xavier in the regional finals. I'm pretty sure that he wasn't Duke's most effective player in the NCAAs.

I'm also pretty sure that all five Duke starters weren't awesome that year, at least as I would define the term. If Ewing was awesome in '04, then so were Nelson, Singler, Paulus, and Scheyer last year, with Henderson as a maybe.

It's nice to have five awesome players but lots of Duke teams have made Final Fours without five awesome starters, unless we're including Bilas in '86, Snyder in '88 and '89, Hurley in '90 (35.7 fg%, 4.4 topg), Koubek '91, and Capel '94 et. al. as awesome, in which case the term pretty much loses meaning).

Look, the '09 Duke team isn't likely to be perfect. But perfect teams don't come around very often and a Final Four is a realistic goal for imperfect but talented teams, which this one promises to be. The NCAA Tournament is likely to be the measuring stick but the NCAA Tournament is a crap shoot, in which the best teams don't always win. I think the WVU game has caused some to forget how good Duke was last year and how good they can be this year.

I trust we can all agree that it should be fun to find out.

[roywhite]

Disagree about JJ, at least as far as over his career. By his senior year he was doing EVERYTHING with the ball; his ability to drive and finish was, at times, breathtaking. He certainly was not just a three point shooter by the end. Frosh and Soph year, maybe, but he really grew.

Agree, but unfortunately it didn't carry over to NCAA Tournament performance in his junior and senior years. A little fatigue threw his shot off a bit, I believe, and defenses geared up to stop him.

[phaedrus]

But if you HAD to compare...come on, can anyone with a straight face say you'd take Scheyer as he is now instead of JJ, one of the all-time great scorers in college basketball??

I would take Scheyer as a junior over JJ as a sophomore in a heartbeat. Scheyer is a far superior defender, ballhandler, and playmaker, and probably close to sophomore JJ's equal as an all-around scorer.

Of course I would take JJ as a junior and senior, but that's not what we're talking about.

[sagegrouse]

I would take Scheyer as a junior over JJ as a sophomore in a heartbeat. Scheyer is a far superior defender, ballhandler, and playmaker, and probably close to sophomore JJ's equal as an all-around scorer.

Of course I would take JJ as a junior and senior, but that's not what we're talking about.

I guess JJ is in that unhappy time between "I can't believe he's gone" and "fond memory," a la Christian, Artie, and Grant.

JJ's jersey is in the rafters because of his accomplishments on the court. Scheyer's won't be. There's probably a reason for it.

sagegrouse

[Faison1]

"All five starters wer awesome that season--you can't get to a Final Four otherwise. Shav was possibly the most effective player in the tournament that year."

Excluding the Alabama State game, Shav averaged 7.8 points and 4.3 rebounds in the 2004 NCAAs. That includes a 15-minute, 3-point game against Xavier in the regional finals. I'm pretty sure that he wasn't Duke's most effective player in the NCAAs.

I'm also pretty sure that all five Duke starters weren't awesome that year, at least as I would define the term. If Ewing was awesome in '04, then so were Nelson, Singler, Paulus, and Scheyer last year, with Henderson as a maybe.

It's nice to have five awesome players but lots of Duke teams have made Final Fours without five awesome starters, unless we're including Bilas in '86, Snyder in '88 and '89, Hurley in '90 (35.7 fg%, 4.4 topg), Koubek '91, and Capel '94 et. al. as awesome, in which case the term pretty much loses meaning).

Look, the '09 Duke team isn't likely to be perfect. But perfect teams don't come around very often and a Final Four is a realistic goal for imperfect but talented teams, which this one promises to be. The NCAA Tournament is likely to be the measuring stick but the NCAA Tournament is a crap shoot, in which the best teams don't always win. I think the WVU game has caused some to forget how good Duke was last year and how good they can be this year.

I trust we can all agree that it should be fun to find out.

Thanks, Jim. As with your previous post on this subject, I think you are right on the money. We forget that the 03-04 team looked VERY average early in the season when they lost their pre-season tournament. There were big question marks for that team, yet big HOPES in the talent level of Luol, the rise of JJ, and the resurgence of Duhon. If the upcoming season goes well this year, we will probably look back at this year's roster as that of a great stock pick....like microsoft in the 70's/80's.

And you're right about imperfect teams.....didn't Marty Clarke and Alla Abdelnabey (sp?) contribute quite a bit to some successful teams? Those guys were far from awesome......

[phaedrus]

I guess JJ is in that unhappy time between "I can't believe he's gone" and "fond memory," a la Christian, Artie, and Grant.

JJ's jersey is in the rafters because of his accomplishments on the court. Scheyer's won't be. There's probably a reason for it.

sagegrouse

All of that is completely unrelated to what I posted above, but I laud you for your ability to predict how unremarkable the second half of Jon's career will be.

Compare Jon's accomplishments thus far with JJ's halfway through his career. They are not so far apart. Still, I'm awestruck how many are failing to distinguish between JJ as a senior and JJ in 03-04, which is all that is relevant to this thread.

[jimsumner]

"JJ's jersey is in the rafters because of his accomplishments on the court. Scheyer's won't be. There's probably a reason for it."

Sure. But J.J.'s jersey isn't in the rafters because of what he did in 2004, which was the original reference point. J.J. averaged 15.9 ppg and was second-team All-ACC in 2004. He had 58 assists and 70 turnovers that year. Scheyer's not likely to score that much but I suspect he won't be too far short. And Scheyer is a better ball-handler and defender than Redick was that year. The success that Redick had in 2005 and 2006 bears no relevance to the comparision with 2004. I don't think equating '09 Scheyer to '04 Redick requires any leaps of faith or logic.

[Edouble]

Excluding the Alabama State game, Shav averaged 7.8 points and 4.3 rebounds in the 2004 NCAAs. That includes a 15-minute, 3-point game against Xavier in the regional finals. I'm pretty sure that he wasn't Duke's most effective player in the NCAAs.

I'm also pretty sure that all five Duke starters weren't awesome that year, at least as I would define the term. If Ewing was awesome in '04, then so were Nelson, Singler, Paulus, and Scheyer last year, with Henderson as a maybe.

So, you're excluding Shav's best game, and including detailed info. on his worst game? That hardly seems fair. How about noting that he put in 13 points in 14 minutes against Connecticut? For the record, Shav averaged 10 points, 5 boards, and 1 block during the NCAAs, and Coach K himself noted that after Okafur, no player had been better in the tournament that year than Shav.

I would say Ewing in '04 was awesome, as were Nelson, Paulus, Singler, and Scheyer last year. Maybe "solid" is a word you are more comfortable with. Ewing in '04 was definitely more solid and dependable for his position than Lance Thomas or Brian Zoubek were last season.

[Wander]

For me, Duhon and Deng are the names that stand out to me as unparralled in the comparison between the two teams.

I'll take sophomore Singler over freshman Deng seven days of the week.

[Ignatius07]

Still, I'm awestruck how many are failing to distinguish between JJ as a senior and JJ in 03-04, which is all that is relevant to this thread.

A case could be made for JJ, but so far everybody picking him has pointed only to his career and not expectations of him in summer 2003, or even his sophomore year performance!

I don't think it's a reach to predict Zoubek will be "solid" next year - I don't think he'll be awesome. He well could be worse than any starter on the 03-04 team. But I think next year's team might overall have slightly better talent at this pre-season point.

All of that could be moot, though, as I mentioned before, as the 04 team had more potential at the two most important position: PG and C.

[jimsumner]

Here are Randolph's stats from the 2004 NCAA Tournament

Alabama State 25 minutes, 20 points, 8 rebounds
Seton Hall 17 minutes, 8 points, 5 rebounds
Illinois, 12 minutes, 7 points, 3 rebounds
Xavier, 15 minutes, 3 points, 3 rebounds
UConn, 14 minutes, 13 points, 6 rebounds

Inasmuch as Duke led Alabama State by 21 at the half on the way to a 35-point win, I'm not sure how high in the pantheon we place Shav based on this game. Mop-up minutes. He played very well against the Huskies, excluding the five fouls in 14 minutes part, which opens up another whole can of worms (several actually). His other three games were distinctly unremarkable. Solid bench performances, nothing more, nothing less.

Now let's look at Mr. Deng. 88 points in 5 games, including a game-high 19 in a nail-biter win over Xavier. Regional MVP. And yes, 16 points and 12 boards against Calhoun's guys; 37 rebounds for the tournament, 17.6 points, 7.4 rebounds per game;

Shelden had 59 points, 43 rebounds, Duhon 27 assists.

I don't recall K saying that Randolph had the best NCAAT except for Okafor but if he did, he was mistaken. The facts simply don't support that view.

[Jaymf7]

JJ's jersey is in the rafters because of his accomplishments on the court. Scheyer's won't be. There's probably a reason for it.

sagegrouse

As others have noted, it is unsound to let our memories of what the 2003-2004 players ultimately accomplished influence the comparison of their talents in that year. College players improve -- at times exponentially.

JJ was one of the most exciting players I ever watched at Duke. His number is retired because (i) he was a phenomenal (perhaps peerless) shooter, and just as importantly (ii) he played 4 years. Additionally, his ability greatly improve AFTER 2004, when he committed himself to improving his conditioning and physical shape. Only then did his numbers expand dramatically.

Comapring JJ and Scheyer in a vacuum is a bit unfair becuase this year's team will have many other talented wings to contribute and give the team what JJ provided. Nevertheless, I have no doubt that Scheyer will be in better shape, a better defender, and a more versatile threat this year than JJ was in 2003-2004. Scheyer has great game experience, starting virtually all games as a frosh and playing huge minutes as a sparkplug 6th man last year. To the extent that JJ's shooting madse him a better player (which is debatable), Scheyer's bench support (assuming he starts) evens out this position.

I'll take Singler over Deng, but that is very close. Singler has a full year under his belt. Both are incredibly talented and are very similar players in my view.

Ewing did not contribute anything that Henderson, Smith and others cannot provide. He was a solid player, but still a role player in my view.

The trickier comparisons are at PG and C. Duhon was very talented, but not a phenomenal playmaker or shooter IIRC -- defense was his trademark. Duhon was a warrior and great leader by his senior year, but he did not create like JWill or even Avery). This year, if one of Smith or Williams or Henderson becomes a great defender I do not think we lose much at this position.

Similarly, Shel was incredibly rough on offense his first several years. He provided defense. I would rather take him than our current C by committee. But as the 2004 Final Four proved, the committee is nice to have when foul trouble arises. This year we will have great depth, which we did not have in 2004.

At the end of the day, the only advantages I see in the 2004 team are more established defensive players at the PG and C. These are critical assets to have. That said, one could argue that our team last year (at least until the year-end collapse) was one of the really great defensive Duke teams. I'd like to see the defensive statistical comparisons between the two teams we are comparing.

In any event, our team defense should be BETTER this year -- I will take a years worth of experience in K's system and an influx of new athletes over the loss of Markie (even though he was great). If that is the case, then there is no reason why the comparison to our 2004 is not fair and the Final Four cannot be a realistic goal for this team.

[Ignatius07]

The trickier comparisons are at PG and C. Duhon was very talented, but not a phenomenal playmaker or shooter IIRC -- defense was his trademark. Duhon was a warrior and great leader by his senior year, but he did not create like JWill or even Avery). This year, if one of Smith or Williams or Henderson becomes a great defender I do not think we lose much at this position.

Similarly, Shel was incredibly rough on offense his first several years. He provided defense. I would rather take him than our current C by committee. But as the 2004 Final Four proved, the committee is nice to have when foul trouble arises. This year we will have great depth, which we did not have in 2004.

I think Henderson, Smith, and Williams will all be good defenders next year. The problem is I highly doubt we see much of Henderson or Williams there, so saying we won't lose much compared to Duhon is misleading. Paulus is going to see a lot of minutes at PG, whether or not he starts, and Scheyer (a good but not Duhon-like defender) will see some as well. The only way next year's team approximates the defense of the 04 team at the PG spot is if Smith starts (hopefully but unlikely) and continues to improve on defense. Even then, Paulus will still see enough minutes where 09 Duke could never be equal to 04 Duke at PG defense.

Our post-by-committee could and should provide good defense next year though. Zoubek can be a good defender on post guys, and LT is a good defender at the 4. Plumlee's height should give him an advantage. Nobody will be as able a defender as Shelden though.

[langdonfan]

03-04, with NO QUESTION. Maybe there is one CLOSE to CDuhon, but I don't think so... maybe Hendo and Singler will be there eventually, but I don't think they are there yet.

Uhm... you had me up until you said that. I agree, at first glance 03-04 is a better team on paper, and you are right on about Redick and Williams, but there are certainly players on this team on the level of Duhon. Duhon was a good starting point guard who I enjoyed watching, but he certainly wasn't a college star. Henderson and Singler could easily be two of the best players in the ACC next season. I'd compare Duhon's significance more to that of Scheyer or Paulus.

[Classof06]

I'll take sophomore Singler over freshman Deng seven days of the week.

Based off of what? The sophomore year Singler hasn't had yet? You should either compare their respective freshman seasons or what you project their sophomore seasons would've been/will be. In either scenario, I can't understand picking Singler over Deng. Deng had the better freshman season and any objective projection would justifiably predict Deng having a better sophomore season.

Last season, Singler averaged 13.3 and 5.8 on a decent team. In '04, Deng averaged 15.1 and 6.8 on a Final Four team with substantially more talent and experience. Where Deng got better as his freshman season progressed, Singler did the exact opposite. Duke has not gone past the Sweet 16 since Deng was here. Duke has not swept Carolina since Deng was here. For as great as Shelden and JJ are, they never got past the Sweet 16 without Deng.

Nobody on Duke's current roster has yet had a college season (statistically) like Luol's freshman year. Luol's 6.9 rebounds per game is a full 1.1 rebounds more than anyone on Duke's roster last season. Simply put, based off of his freshman year, I would take Luol Deng over any current Duke player coming into this season, period. Seven days a week and twice on Sunday ;).

[Ignatius07]

The comparison is not between Deng's and Singler's freshman years. It is between the expected value of Deng's freshman year versus the expected value of Singler's sophomore year.

And I would say Deng had a better freshman year than Singler, but not by a large margin.

[sagegrouse]

Based off of what? The sophomore year Singler hasn't had yet? You should either compare their respective freshman seasons or what you project their sophomore seasons would've been/will be. In either scenario, I can't understand picking Singler over Deng. Deng had the better freshman season and any objective projection would justifiably predict Deng having a better sophomore season.

.

Although I am losing interest in this exercise, the question was, if you had to choose between Luol Deng coming out of high school into his freshman year or Kyle Singler entering his sophomore year, whom would you pick? (I think you may have read the Q differently, but it was related to the broader Q: are the prospects for 2008-2009 as good as the prospects for 2003-2004 before the respective seasons start.)

Seems to me the answer is easy. Singler was an ACC star as a freshman and ROY. Deng looked to be a phenomenal talent but had never played a college game. Therefore, I said "Singler."

I guess, at the end of 2009 season we will have a basis for comparison. :)

sagegrouse

[Classof06]

Although I am losing interest in this exercise, the question was, if you had to choose between Luol Deng coming out of high school into his freshman year or Kyle Singler entering his sophomore year, whom would you pick? (I think you may have read the Q differently, but it was related to the broader Q: are the prospects for 2008-2009 as good as the prospects for 2003-2004 before the respective seasons start.)

Seems to me the answer is easy. Singler was an ACC star as a freshman and ROY. Deng looked to be a phenomenal talent but had never played a college game. Therefore, I said "Singler."

I guess, at the end of 2009 season we will have a basis for comparison. :)

sagegrouse


Thank you for clearing that up for me. In that case, I'm losing interest in this exercise too, haha. I would hope that the answer would be Singler.

[jimsumner]

"Duhon was a good starting point guard who I enjoyed watching, but he certainly wasn't a college star."

A lot of people in 2004 would have disagreed with this assessment. Duhon was second (behind Julius Hodge) in the voting for ACC POY and made all the All-America teams, usually on second team. Sounds like a star to me, at least for that one season.

[6th Man]

Duhon's stats didn't make him look like a star, but his impact on a game could not be seen through his stats. He was an excellent defender and had great quickness to get into the lane. He could be clutch also....Wake floater and UNC reverse come to mind. I think he was definitely a star and was a terrific PG. Not on the scale of Hurley or J-Will, but definitely a star player. Besides Hurley and J-Will are legends.

[Wander]

Based off of what? The sophomore year Singler hasn't had yet?

Yup, based only on my personal idea of how Singler will be in his sophomore year. Which is no worse than the 2nd best player in the conference, and no worse than say 10th best player in the country. Still, maybe seven days of the week was a little exaggeration.... but no less than five and very likely six.

[ForeverBlowingBubbles]

Yup, based only on my personal idea of how Singler will be in his sophomore year. Which is no worse than the 2nd best player in the conference, and no worse than say 10th best player in the country. Still, maybe seven days of the week was a little exaggeration.... but no less than five and very likely six.

Singler is a great player, but I don't think I've seen anything (not too much last year, and would have expected him to have a monster game or a monster review from his current summer league play) that would lead me to believe he is going to step up and be the man (top 10 players in the country). I think it helped Deng that we had Williams banging down low. Deng was extremely athletic and could blow by slower PF and finish with entusiastic dunks. Singler (last year) was usually the strongest player we had on the floor and had to play with his back to the basket a little too much. I don't know how much that is going to change this year. I'd like to see him be less content with being a role player.

It also seems like Ewing is being underestimated.

Daniel Ewing was one of the smoothest players Duke's had in a while. He was a different kind of player then Henderson completely. He allowed us to have 3 players that could handle the ball well that could all shoot the trey. His 3 was better and more consistent then Geralds - and he also had a much better handle. Gerald is a much better NBA prospect... but Mr. Ewing was a great college player and really allowed our system to work.

Without a powerfull post threat and a dominating PG,
I think its safe to say the 03-04 team had much better chemistry, had better game breakers (players that had a 6th gear they turned on more frequently, aka players that knew/ and would take over a game), and had a better idea of who they were compared to this years team.

This year I'm having a tough time projecting how our pieces are going to fit together as opposed to our 03-04 team.

[mo.st.dukie]

Singler is a great player, but I don't think I've seen anything (not too much last year, and would have expected him to have a monster game or a monster review from his current summer league play) that would lead me to believe he is going to step up and be the man (top 10 players in the country). I think it helped Deng that we had Williams banging down low. Deng was extremely athletic and could blow by slower PF and finish with entusiastic dunks. Singler (last year) was usually the strongest player we had on the floor and had to play with his back to the basket a little too much. I don't know how much that is going to change this year. I'd like to see him be less content with being a role player.


How did Singler not show much last year? He averaged 13 and 5, was ACC ROY, Maui MVP, put up a double-double in the Dean Dome against Hans. He certainly showed a lot of talent for a freshman, he's just a different type of player than Deng. As far as summer league play, that is hardly a good indicator of how a player will play during the college season. It highlights the more athletic, almost And1-type players and Singler's the type of player that shines in an organized team game.

Like I said, Singler and Deng are different players IMO. Singler is more cerebral and doesn't have the flashiness or athletic ability of Deng but is extrememly fundamental and understand the game so weill. He doesn't have Deng-like quickness but will out-smart an opponent and can get by defenders by using a jab step or head fake.

I do think Singler would benefit greatly if he had a bigger post player alongside him in the paint not another guy similar to him like LT. Hopefully Zoubek or one of Plumlee/Czyz can step and be that guy. I agree with your last statement that he will need to step out of being a role player and take on the role of being a star.

[roywhite]

It also seems like Ewing is being underestimated.

Daniel Ewing was one of the smoothest players Duke's had in a while. He was a different kind of player then Henderson completely. He allowed us to have 3 players that could handle the ball well that could all shoot the trey. His 3 was better and more consistent then Geralds - and he also had a much better handle. Gerald is a much better NBA prospect... but Mr. Ewing was a great college player and really allowed our system to work.



I liked Daniel and consider him to have been a good player, but I'm not sure he was a good ballhandler (if he were a really good ballhandler, he'd still be in the NBA). In 2003-04 Ewing had 69 assists and 64 turnovers; in the year previous to that, he had 45 assists and 67 turnovers. I recall some late game and pressure situations where Daniel looked unsteady handling the ball against good defense.

By comparison, last year Gerald 56 assists and 68 turnovers, playing the last part of the season with a broken wrist. I grant you that ball handling has not been Gerald's strongpoint, but I wouldn't be surprised to see him have improved assist/turnover numbers in 2008-09.

Granted, this is merely a speculative summer diversion, but I believe the 2008-09 team has an excellent chance to make the Final Four.

[ForeverBlowingBubbles]

I liked Daniel and consider him to have been a good player, but I'm not sure he was a good ballhandler (if he were a really good ballhandler, he'd still be in the NBA). In 2003-04 Ewing had 69 assists and 64 turnovers; in the year previous to that, he had 45 assists and 67 turnovers. I recall some late game and pressure situations where Daniel looked unsteady handling the ball against good defense.

By comparison, last year Gerald 56 assists and 68 turnovers, playing the last part of the season with a broken wrist. I grant you that ball handling has not been Gerald's strongpoint, but I wouldn't be surprised to see him have improved assist/turnover numbers in 2008-09.

Granted, this is merely a speculative summer diversion, but I believe the 2008-09 team has an excellent chance to make the Final Four.

He didn't have the best court vision in the world. He still was a decent handler with the ball and could penetrate.

Overall I think the 03-04 team had a better chance at making it than this years team.

[BD80]

The only "paper" where you can compare this squad to the 2003-4 is on rolling papers: you'd have to smoke something pretty strong to see the teams as comparable.

We are speaking with hindsight as to 2003-4 and with hopes for this year, but come on, get serious.

Shelden was a BEAST down low. We have no one to compare on low post defense or rebounding. I think Z will exceed most expectations and be "solid", but we have nothing to compare to Shelden's presence.

Luol was the third or fourth option on that team and still had stats comparable to Kyle who was a first option. Kyle is a true talent, but calling him even with Luol is a real complement and an expression of hope.

Our back court could certainly rise to the level of the 03-4 backcourt, but it will take a great year. I hope it happens. We will need to ratchet up the defense about 8 notches to compare. While Paulus will never be able to drive or defend like Duhon, I think he has as big a heart and can lead the team to the same level of success. Nolan, EMail, and G give us as much pure talent as we have had in the backcourt in years. Scheyer is much like Ewing was, able to fill whatever role Coach K asks him to fill and he makes plays.

Could this year's team be as good as the 03-4 team? Yep, and I'm rooting for it. Our chemistry should be great and there could be a giant improvement by several players (Z, Henderson, Smith) along with key contributions from freshmen. But right now, on paper - no way.

[DukieInBrasil]

hindsight vs. foresight is basically what this argument comes down to.
Duhon mos def gets the nod at the PG, whether it be Paulus or Smith or a Paulus/Smith hybrid combo thingy.
Shelden´s So. was solid, but there was very little depth behind him. There´s no reason to think that Z + 4 other post players can´t approximate very well the post play of ´04.
As great as JJ was as a Sr., and only slightly less so as a Jr., i would take Jr. Scheyer over So. JJ cuz a) So. JJ didn´t play much defense and b) So. JJ didn´t pass so much. Jon´s scoring could easily reach 16ppg, as JJ averaged as a So., if he decided to not play D and not pass the ball.
I´ll take Jr. Henderson over Jr. Ewing. Daniel was a fine player, but he never really approached the level that the Gerald found at times last year, with an injured wrist no less, of being able to totally dismantle the opposing D. He´s also got a nice knack for blocking shots.
I´ll take So. Singler over Fr. Deng, largely b/c part of what made Deng so special on that team, was that he could do what no one else on the team could do, get to the rim and finish, and this will be replicated on the ´09 team and in spades. Their Fr. numbers were pretty close, slight edge to Deng. Singler will do for the ´09 team what nobody else can offer, play both inside and outside, and will prob´ly end up with better stats than Deng. It´s almost better to compare So. Singler to So. Shelden in terms of post playeriness.
The bench is undoubtedly better for the ´09 squad, with quality players at the guard spots and many (at the very least) warm bodies for the post. Our reserve post players bring 6 years of experience (+ 2 Fr.) to the table compared to 4 years of experience for the ´04 quad and no Fr. reserves.
All in all, i vote for ´09.

[mgtr]

I think there are two keys for the 09 team: One, our players have to have all improved to some extent from last year, and two, Singler doesn't have to play the post. If he can play at PF, he will be outstanding, probably the #2 player in the ACC --and, he is less likely to run out of gas come tournament time. Unstated, I expect great performances from Henderson, Paulus, Scheyer, and Smith.
So, if the stars are aligned properly, and we all hold our mouths just so, we will live up to the stellar reputation of Duke basketball.
Is it October yet?

[houstondukie]

Bluedog, I'd take the 03-04 team over the 05-06 team and the main reason is because of Luol Deng who was a HUGE difference maker. On the 03-04 team you had several capable scorers whereas on the 05-06 team we were just way too reliant on JJ and Shel.

jimsumner makes an excellent point as to why it's impossible to compare the two teams (because performance for the 03-04 team is known whereas the future is uncertain for our current team). But if you HAD to compare...come on, can anyone with a straight face say you'd take Scheyer as he is now instead of JJ, one of the all-time great scorers in college basketball??

We're talking about JJ Redick, the sophomore.

I'll take Jon Scheyer, as a junior to be a better player than JJ was his sophomore year.

The same argument can be used in the Deng (freshmen) vs. Singler (sophomore, ACC FOY) comparison. Singler and Deng were both very impressive in the freshmen years, but even if you think Deng was a better player his freshmen year, don't you think next year's Kyle Singler will be better that Luol Deng the freshmen? Advantage Singler, in my opinion, and it's not even close if you expect Singler to really break-out next year.

Henderson vs. Ewing is not even close. Most of us are expecting Henderson to explode next year. Ewing never had that hype.

Nolan Smith and Elliot Williams could start on most top-25 teams. Can't say the same about Sean Dockery or Lee Melchionni in their sophomore years.

I agree, however, that Duhon gets the edge over Paulus, and Shelden/Shavlik get the edge over Lance/Zoubek/&company.

[Kishiznit]

PG: Duhon- I would say Chris was just about better in every aspect in the game except for shooting.

SG: Scheyer- I know Redick was a great scorer, but IMO Scheyer is a better player overall.

SF: Henderson- Ewing was good but Henderson is already better and possibly on his way to great.

PF: Deng- I think Singler has a chance to be just as good at the college level if not better, but I would still take Deng. Ask me in about 7 months and I more then likely will choose Singler. They both have special written all over them!

C: Williams- Thomas isn't in the same league.

Bench: Current Duke team. Smith and McClure are proven ACC players. Elliot Williams has a chance to be special. The two big FR have a chance to contribute more then Horvath. Pocious has proved he has alot of offensive skill. I BELIEVE Zoubek has a chance to contribute more then Randolph.

Just cuz I see them being better on Paper, Doesn't mean they will perform better. I would be happy if they reached the Final Four.

PG - agree with you
SG- scheyer is a better defender today than JJ was at this time but JJ was THE best SG overall compared to JS. Better passer and stronger legs for his shot....NO COMPARISON
SF - agree with you
PF - Deng, no doubt about it...strong frosh campaign
C- agree with you

Bench - no doubt, today's team

[ice-9]

houstondukie, here's another way of looking at it: if you were building a team over the next four years, who would you take?

Sophomore Redick, who you know FOR SURE is destined to be the all-time points leader in the ACC (until Hansblah at least)

OR

Junior Scheyer, who MAY improve, MAY stay the same or MAY actually regress (we don't know)

Come on. To me the answer is obvious. Scheyer may end up better than Redick, but that's a big assumption you're taking. (Putting aside that this is one useless academic exercise...but that's what bball fans do in the summer).

That's like saying which stock would you rather take (knowing what you know now): Google before they launched AdWords, or Cuil, who claims they have 3x Google's number of pages indexed but whose future is uncertain. I'd take Google any day of the week, and twice on Sunday. :D

[CameronCrazy'11]

houstondukie, here's another way of looking at it: if you were building a team over the next four years, who would you take?

Sophomore Redick, who you know FOR SURE is destined to be the all-time points leader in the ACC (until Hansblah at least)

OR

Junior Scheyer, who MAY improve, MAY stay the same or MAY actually regress (we don't know)

Come on. To me the answer is obvious. Scheyer may end up better than Redick, but that's a big assumption you're taking. (Putting aside that this is one useless academic exercise...but that's what bball fans do in the summer).

That's like saying which stock would you rather take (knowing what you know now): Google before they launched AdWords, or Cuil, who claims they have 3x Google's number of pages indexed but whose future is uncertain. I'd take Google any day of the week, and twice on Sunday. :D

You're missing the point. The question isn't who is going to be the better player eventually. The question is who is better between Sophomore Redick and Junior Scheyer. The fact that Sophomore Redick will become an all-time great in his Junior and Senior years is 100% irrelevant here.

[ice-9]

Ah, I see that I was answering a different question/proposition. In my mind I thought the debate was, "Who would you rather have?" and that meant projecting out several years.

But it's really "Who would you rather have for ONE SEASON," and in that case then sure, I can see how some might pick Junior Scheyer over Sophomore Redick.

[jimsumner]

"but JJ was THE best SG overall compared to JS. Better passer and stronger legs for his shot....NO COMPARISON"

Redick a better passer than Scheyer? Seriously?

FWIW, last season Scheyer had 83 assists and 37 turnovers. In 2004 Redick had 58 assists and 70 turnovers. For his Duke career Redick had 306 assists and 296 turnovers.

Scheyer has played a fair amount of PG for Duke over the past two seasons. JJ never played a second of point guard at Duke.

Scheyer will have to go a long way to match Redick's junior and senior years. But he is a better ball-handler and passer right now that Redick ever was at Duke. And again, assuming Scheyer doesn't have a dramatic and inexplicable fall off, the totality of Scheyer's '09 game and Redick's '04 game seems pretty close to me. And that was the original comparison.

[Edouble]

Scheyer has played a fair amount of PG for Duke over the past two seasons. JJ never played a second of point guard at Duke.

No one has ever played PG at Duke, we have players, not positions. Ha ha ;)

[Johnboy]

Ah, I see that I was answering a different question/proposition. In my mind I thought the debate was, "Who would you rather have?" and that meant projecting out several years.

But it's really "Who would you rather have for ONE SEASON," and in that case then sure, I can see how some might pick Junior Scheyer over Sophomore Redick.

Actually, that's not really it, either. The question, as I understand it, is as follows: based on what we knew about our team before the 2003-04 season and what we know about our team this coming season, which appeared to to be stronger team? It's a great question for speculation, because before that season, it appeared that Duhon and Shav were not meeting expectations, Redick was a gunner and Shelden was really good but not great, and we were excited about the heralded freshman Deng, but feared he might be a little raw - really super athletic, but otherwise an unknown quantity to most fans.

This season, on paper, we are deeper, we have a couple guys who look like they may blow up and we have a similar level of experience and athleticism outside the post. I might still go with the 03-04 team on paper, but only because I was pretty confident that Shelden would be a monster for us inside, especially on defense and the boards; I like this year's offensive balance much better than our prospects going into 03-04. For me, it's a close call, and it's been fun to think about - we might be scary good this season, and I think a tough out for anyone. As is often the case, every opponent will be circling their calendar and seeing our game as an opportunity to knock off one of the best teams in basketball.

[CDu]

I'll generally take the team with the better point guard and the better post presence unless that team has an unbelievable disadvantage at the wings. The 2003-2004 team was certainly not lacking in wing talent. The 2008-2009 team is probably better on the wings and is certainly deeper on the wings (although I think depth is overrated as Coach K tends to prefer to play his best 7-8 anyway). But the 2003-2004 team had the better point guard and the better post player and the advantage at the wings for the 2008-2009 teams is (in my opinion) small.

And I certailny don't mean this post to be a disparaging remark about the 2008-2009 team. That 2003-2004 team turned out pretty good. Hopefully this team will be close to as good but with better luck in the tournament.

[ForeverBlowingBubbles]

03-04 team look to 'fit' together better than the 08-09 team.

On paper this team is just harder to predict their success because we don't know how they are going to fit together. Looking at the 03-04 team it was pretty easy to see how they would operate. You knew who was going to do what and how the team was going to play. I have no clue with this years team.

[ForeverBlowingBubbles]

I'd take this kid as a soph.

I've never heard the net swish so sweetly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLQ_ULUMSY4

[Ignatius07]

Why are you so confused? In 03-04 we both lost our best player (Dahntay Jones) and added a top-5 prospect (Luol Deng). That is a bigger jolt than losing only our best player (DeMarcus Nelson), and adding a highly-regarded (but certainly not top-5) freshman who plays the position we are deepest at (Elliot Williams). The biggest questions are how much will the rising sophomores have improved and if Zoubek will stay healthy, but chemistry should not be a major issue. The starting line-up will include four players who have been major contributors and played with each other for two years.

[jimsumner]

"Looking at the 03-04 team it was pretty easy to see how they would operate."

In retrospect, yes. But there were some questions at the time. We forget how criticized Duhon was going into that season. He had been picked as pre-season ACC POY going into the 2003 season and then struggled quite a bit, ending as third-team All-ACC. More than a few fans hoped that sophomore Dockery would take over from the incumbent senior at the point. [hmm]

Then there was Randolph, who started like gang busters the year before but saw his PT drop off the shelf, amidst injuries and ineffectiveness. Now he was healthy and surely would take over as PF, with Deng playing the 3 and Ewing coming off the bench as the sixth man. Williams had shown promise over the second half of the 2003 season but would that improvement continue? Would Michael Thompson compete for PT? Would a reserve pout at a lack of PT and, oh, I don't know, transfer at mid-season?

It's easy to see how things fit together in hindsight. But there were some questions going into the season. Just because we now know the answers doesn't mean the questions didn't exist.

[Classof06]

Why are you so confused? In 03-04 we both lost our best player (Dahntay Jones) and added a top-5 prospect (Luol Deng). That is a bigger jolt than losing only our best player (DeMarcus Nelson), and adding a highly-regarded (but certainly not top-5) freshman who plays the position we are deepest at (Elliot Williams). The biggest questions are how much will the rising sophomores have improved and if Zoubek will stay healthy, but chemistry should not be a major issue. The starting line-up will include four players who have been major contributors and played with each other for two years.

It's a little deeper than that, though. The 08-09 team has questions littered across its frontcourt. Will Zoubek be healthy for the entire year? If he is healthy, how effective will he be? How will Czyz and MP1 adapt to the college game?

With the 03-04 team, you had players like Shelden, Shav and Michael Thompson, each of which would be the best big man on the current roster. And even if the 03-04 team lost its best player, they still had a national champion PG who has been there before, not a kid who hasn't gotten out of the first weekend of the tourney. And while EW is a big addition, you're right, it's at a position we're deep at; Luol Deng filled a void that Duke desperately needed; an athletic wing who could shoot from the perimeter and attack the rim, all while being able to defend multiple positions. Dahntay was pretty good in that role but Deng just seemed to complement the surrounding talent much better.

For me, it's hard to call a team that narrowly escaped consecutive first-round tourney exits a strong bet to make the Final Four. It's possible but I wouldn't bet on it. Not until I see that frontcourt.

[jimsumner]

"they still had a national champion PG who has been there before, not a kid who hasn't gotten out of the first weekend of the tourney"

If you're referring to Greg Paulus here, then you are factually incorrect.

FWIW, no one on the 1986 Duke team has ever made it out of the first weekend of the tourny either.

[Ignatius07]

I don't think 08-09 Duke is a strong bet for the Final Four either, I was just making the argument that it is not necessarily difficult to predict how this year's team will play together (see ForeverBlowingBubbles' post).

For the record, Paulus has been out of the first weekend of the tournament, but no, he's not as accomplished as Duhon was. Besides, I don't think Duke gets to the Final Four without Nolan either earning a starting position or at least getting Greg's equal in minutes.

Also, I take issue with saying that Shelden, Shav, or MT would start on this year's team. I would take (a healthy) Zoubek over MT hands down, first of all. Comparing summer 03 expectations of Shav to summer 08 expectations of Zoubek, I think I was higher on Shav, but KNOWING how Shav fared in 03-04 vs. my own predictions for Zoubek in 08-09, I would take Zoubek and the unknown.

[RepoMan]

Redick a better passer than Scheyer? Seriously?

FWIW, last season Scheyer had 83 assists and 37 turnovers. In 2004 Redick had 58 assists and 70 turnovers. For his Duke career Redick had 306 assists and 296 turnovers.

Scheyer has played a fair amount of PG for Duke over the past two seasons. JJ never played a second of point guard at Duke.

Scheyer will have to go a long way to match Redick's junior and senior years. But he is a better ball-handler and passer right now that Redick ever was at Duke.


Jumbo would be so proud.

[houstondukie]

houstondukie, here's another way of looking at it: if you were building a team over the next four years, who would you take?

Sophomore Redick, who you know FOR SURE is destined to be the all-time points leader in the ACC (until Hansblah at least)

OR

Junior Scheyer, who MAY improve, MAY stay the same or MAY actually regress (we don't know)

Come on. To me the answer is obvious. Scheyer may end up better than Redick, but that's a big assumption you're taking. (Putting aside that this is one useless academic exercise...but that's what bball fans do in the summer).

That's like saying which stock would you rather take (knowing what you know now): Google before they launched AdWords, or Cuil, who claims they have 3x Google's number of pages indexed but whose future is uncertain. I'd take Google any day of the week, and twice on Sunday. :D

You have completely misunderstood. I love Scheyer but even if he continues to improve, I don't think he will ever be as great as JJ Redick.

That said, the point I was making is that if we compare JJ Redick the sophomore (who averaged 15 ppg, mainly as a 3 point shooter, and played mediocre defense) to Jon Scheyer of next season, I think Scheyer will be the better player next year.

[rsvman]

I'll generally take the team with the better point guard and the better post presence unless that team has an unbelievable disadvantage at the wings. The 2003-2004 team was certainly not lacking in wing talent. The 2008-2009 team is probably better on the wings and is certainly deeper on the wings (although I think depth is overrated as Coach K tends to prefer to play his best 7-8 anyway). But the 2003-2004 team had the better point guard and the better post player and the advantage at the wings for the 2008-2009 teams is (in my opinion) small.

Spot. On.

[ForeverBlowingBubbles]

I don't think 08-09 Duke is a strong bet for the Final Four either, I was just making the argument that it is not necessarily difficult to predict how this year's team will play together (see ForeverBlowingBubbles' post).

For the record, Paulus has been out of the first weekend of the tournament, but no, he's not as accomplished as Duhon was. Besides, I don't think Duke gets to the Final Four without Nolan either earning a starting position or at least getting Greg's equal in minutes.

Also, I take issue with saying that Shelden, Shav, or MT would start on this year's team. I would take (a healthy) Zoubek over MT hands down, first of all. Comparing summer 03 expectations of Shav to summer 08 expectations of Zoubek, I think I was higher on Shav, but KNOWING how Shav fared in 03-04 vs. my own predictions for Zoubek in 08-09, I would take Zoubek and the unknown.

I understand what your saying in your last post and this one.

I still think there are a lot more questions about this years team.
Paulus could improve drastically. He could play worse than last year and give up his starting spot.
Nolan could be legitimately good enough to end up starting at PG.
E-Will could be too good to keep off the court. Maybe even Pocious.
Will Gerald or Kyle or both step up and consistently be 'the man'?
Will Lance average as many rebounds per minute as our 6'1 shooting guard did last year? Will Miles take some minutes? Has Zoubek learned to hold on to a basketball? Can anyone on our team slow down Hansbrough? Can our frontcourt stop any dominant big man? Who's going to make up for Nelsons' 6 rebounds per game? Are any of these questions relevant? Did the 04 team have bigger Q marks?

Will we keep the same style of play? How many will K fit in the rotation?


Just a few q's right off the top of my head.

[Bluedog]

For the record, Paulus has been out of the first weekend of the tournament, but no, he's not as accomplished as Duhon was. Besides, I don't think Duke gets to the Final Four without Nolan either earning a starting position or at least getting Greg's equal in minutes.

On a kind of unrelated note, but I didn't want to start a new thread. I just noticed that Paulus was voted as the Gatorade Player of the Year for all sports while in high school. The other recipients? LeBron James, Dwight Howard, Greg Oden, and Kevin Love. Quite elite company. This is not meant to bash Paulus as he clearly hasn't lived up to the hype of those others. I personally think Paulus has taken far too much unfair criticism - he works damn hard, is a fierce competitor, and a good shooter and passer. Yes, his quickness, speed, dribbling skills could be even better, but he's one of my fav on the teams, and one just has to watch the game in Chapel Hill last year to see what he can do. I just thought it was interesting who were the other players on the list. An important note though: Paulus was listed for football. I'd like to see Greg and Nolan split the duties, with Greg taking the minutes in crunch time, but being fresh since Nolan has also played significantly.

[Edouble]

The question, as I understand it, is as follows: based on what we knew about our team before the 2003-04 season and what we know about our team this coming season, which appeared to to be stronger team?

Is that the question... because I'm not sure that it is. Is seems to have turned into that, but the original question was asking us to compare this year's team on paper to the last Duke team to go to the Final Four. There was never any caveat saying that we should compare our perspectives of the 2003-04 team at this time of the year to our perspective of this year's current team.

[CameronCrazy'11]

Is that the question... because I'm not sure that it is. Is seems to have turned into that, but the original question was asking us to compare this year's team on paper to the last Duke team to go to the Final Four. There was never any caveat saying that we should compare our perspectives of the 2003-04 team at this time of the year to our perspective of this year's current team.

I read it that way too.

[Papa John]

Is that the question... because I'm not sure that it is. Is seems to have turned into that, but the original question was asking us to compare this year's team on paper to the last Duke team to go to the Final Four. There was never any caveat saying that we should compare our perspectives of the 2003-04 team at this time of the year to our perspective of this year's current team.

But the way I see it, you can only accomplish that comparison by speculating where this team will be at year's end (and thereby comparing your projection to the actuals of 2003-04) or to look at what you thought about the 2003-04 team going into that season compared to what you think about this team, based on the immediately preceding season's performance... Either way, it's all just fun speculation, of course...

Now, having said all that, I agree with CDu and have to go with the team that has the strong PG and established post presence, which would clearly be 2003-04... Of course, I will continue to optimistically hope that Gerald continues his development into a dominant talent ala Grant Hill and that Kyle blossoms into a gritty warrior with an uncanny ability to not let his team lose ala Laettner... Wouldn't that be nice?