Is This Our Next 2001 Team?

[TwoDukeTattoos]

I went to Duke Stores last night to freshen up my gear stock. When I arrived, several flat screens were displaying the last few minutes of the 2001 Title game. What an incredible feeling for me as a fan to be amid tons of royal blue gear and memorabilia while reminiscing to the sounds of Duke’s most recent Title victory. And then I started thinking, maybe this year’s team isn’t much different than that team.

Kyle Singler is Shane Battier
Nolan Smith and Greg Paulus are Jason Williams and Chris Duhon
Jon Scheyer is Mike Dunleavy
Lance Thomas is Nate James

The biggest difference between these two teams is that we have no Carlos Boozer. But perhaps that isnâ??t as concerning as it seems. Recall that Boozer missed several weeks late in the season due to an injury and left Duke without a pure post presence. All the critics assumed that Boozerâ??s injury would be the demise of Duke, however, Coach K masterfully reworked his lineup. He went to a smaller, quicker lineup by allowing Battier to play more in the lane (Singler) and using Sanders to grab a few rebounds and scores (Zoubek). Using this strategy, Duke went to Chapel Hill and ran a clinic, and the rest is history.

Please understand, I am certainly not suggesting that this year’s Duke team is as talented or as polished as the 2001 team. The season is very young and there is much to learn. And I am certainly not suggesting that this Duke team will win the Title. However, it would be difficult to disagree that there aren’t at least some significant similarities between the two teams.

Already this year’s team is proving to be a legit contender. We’re deep, balanced on offense, playing incredible defense, and we’re out rebounding our opponents by 10. And we’ve not yet seen the best to come.

[jv001]

I went to Duke Stores last night to freshen up my gear stock. When I arrived, several flat screens were displaying the last few minutes of the 2001 Title game. What an incredible feeling for me as a fan to be amid tons of royal blue gear and memorabilia while reminiscing to the sounds of Duke’s most recent Title victory. And then I started thinking, maybe this year’s team isn’t much different than that team.

Kyle Singler is Shane Battier
Nolan Smith and Greg Paulus are Jason Williams and Chris Duhon
Jon Scheyer is Mike Dunleavy
Lance Thomas is Nate James



While I agree these two teams are similar, Nolan and Greg are not even close to Jason and Chris. Jason at times took over games and both were very good at running the team and playing good defense. Nolan can play good d but Greg cannot. Nolan has the potential to reach the stardom Jason had but it remains to be seen if he can. I believe if we are to reach the FF our team defense will have to do it. Not impossible. Go Duke!

[dukelifer]

I went to Duke Stores last night to freshen up my gear stock. When I arrived, several flat screens were displaying the last few minutes of the 2001 Title game. What an incredible feeling for me as a fan to be amid tons of royal blue gear and memorabilia while reminiscing to the sounds of Duke’s most recent Title victory. And then I started thinking, maybe this year’s team isn’t much different than that team.

Kyle Singler is Shane Battier
Nolan Smith and Greg Paulus are Jason Williams and Chris Duhon
Jon Scheyer is Mike Dunleavy
Lance Thomas is Nate James

The biggest difference between these two teams is that we have no Carlos Boozer. But perhaps that isnâ??t as concerning as it seems. Recall that Boozer missed several weeks late in the season due to an injury and left Duke without a pure post presence. All the critics assumed that Boozerâ??s injury would be the demise of Duke, however, Coach K masterfully reworked his lineup. He went to a smaller, quicker lineup by allowing Battier to play more in the lane (Singler) and using Sanders to grab a few rebounds and scores (Zoubek). Using this strategy, Duke went to Chapel Hill and ran a clinic, and the rest is history.

Please understand, I am certainly not suggesting that this year’s Duke team is as talented or as polished as the 2001 team. The season is very young and there is much to learn. And I am certainly not suggesting that this Duke team will win the Title. However, it would be difficult to disagree that there aren’t at least some significant similarities between the two teams.

Already this year’s team is proving to be a legit contender. We’re deep, balanced on offense, playing incredible defense, and we’re out rebounding our opponents by 10. And we’ve not yet seen the best to come.

I think they are similar in that K tries to always build his teams with similar players- that can run his system. That is why you can make the comparison. But the 2001 team was led by a senior star. This team is not. That is a huge difference. If we had a senior Singler leading this team- it might be close to 2001- maybe more like 1994- with senior Grant Hill leading the team.

[TwoDukeTattoos]

I think they are similar in that K tries to always build his teams with similar players- that can run his system. That is why you can make the comparison. But the 2001 team was led by a senior star. This team is not. That is a huge difference. If we had a senior Singler leading this team- it might be close to 2001- maybe more like 1994- with senior Grant Hill leading the team.

IMHO, I actually think that a Soph Singler is comparable to a Junior Battier, and by season's end, perhaps a Senior Battier. Singler's game and hoops IQ is so much more advanced at this point in his career than was Shane's.

[Kedsy]

Kyle Singler is Shane Battier
Nolan Smith and Greg Paulus are Jason Williams and Chris Duhon
Jon Scheyer is Mike Dunleavy
Lance Thomas is Nate James


Sorry, I like this year's team, but in the matchups above I'd take all five of the 2001 players and none of the decisions are even close. PLUS they had Boozer.

[Kedsy]

IMHO, I actually think that a Soph Singler is comparable to a Junior Battier, and by season's end, perhaps a Senior Battier. Singler's game and hoops IQ is so much more advanced at this point in his career than was Shane's.


Your memory is deceiving you. Shane's "hoops IQ" was incredibly advanced, probably one of the best ever at Duke. He was the national player of the year in 2001 (as well as a two-time national defensive player of the year) and as good as Kyle is he's not even close to that.

[Devilsfan]

2001 might be UNC 2008 but much better than Duke 2008 although I love the D this squad is playing. Kyle is the only player of the stardom of 2001 although Jon has all the intangibles and our bench with Dave, Lance, and Greg is probably stronger in 2008.

[dukelifer]

IMHO, I actually think that a Soph Singler is comparable to a Junior Battier, and by season's end, perhaps a Senior Battier. Singler's game and hoops IQ is so much more advanced at this point in his career than was Shane's.
Hard to know- they had different roles on their teams- but senior Shane had played in more wars than soph Singler has. But as for bball IQ's- they are similar although Battier was a better defender- while Kyle is a better slasher/driver.

[roywhite]

I don't think this 2008/9 team is the equal of the 2001 squad, though it does have more depth. Remember the 2001 team had 5 NBA starters.

The good news (or perhaps bad news if you look at the talent level in college basketball generally) is that we don't have to be as good to go the Final Four, or possibly win it all. There are fewer elite teams.

Comparison to past years aside, I really like this team and will enjoy following them all year.

[Jeffrey]

Sorry, I like this year's team, but in the matchups above I'd take all five of the 2001 players and none of the decisions are even close. PLUS they had Boozer.

Hi,

I agree with your point and would add the 2001 team had two unanimous first team All-Americas and the NPOY. The 2008 team will probably have none.

Best regards,
Jeffrey

[Kedsy]

2001 might be UNC 2008

This year's UNC team isn't close to Duke's 2001 team. Again, maybe you take Hansbrough over Boozer (although maybe you don't), and this year's UNC team probably has a better bench than that Duke team (although Nate James off the bench was pretty strong). But you take Battier, Williams, Duhon, and Dunleavy over their Carolina counterparts. By a lot. It really isn't close.

[Jeffrey]

This year's UNC team isn't close to Duke's 2001 team. Again, maybe you take Hansbrough over Boozer (although maybe you don't), and this year's UNC team probably has a better bench than that Duke team (although Nate James off the bench was pretty strong). But you take Battier, Williams, Duhon, and Dunleavy over their Carolina counterparts. By a lot. It really isn't close.

Hi,

Agree, again, and would add we have/had substantially better coaching.

Best regards,
Jeffrey

[davekay1971]

This year's UNC team isn't close to Duke's 2001 team. Again, maybe you take Hansbrough over Boozer (although maybe you don't), and this year's UNC team probably has a better bench than that Duke team (although Nate James off the bench was pretty strong). But you take Battier, Williams, Duhon, and Dunleavy over their Carolina counterparts. By a lot. It really isn't close.

Absolutely. I'd take Boozer over Hansbrough, though I can definitely see arguments in the other direction based on numbers alone. Duhon vs. Lawson - even or slight edge Carolina. Jay Williams vs Ellington - not remotely close. Dunleavy vs. Green - I'm starting to laugh. Battier vs. Thompson - are we done yet? That 2001 team was absolutely dominant.

That being said, I think, by year's end, we'll see that Duke 08-09 and UNC 08-09 match up very well. We don't have an answer for Hansbrough. They don't have an answer for Singler. The other positions match up pretty well, some with a lean toward them, some toward us.

I'd love to see our team this year accomplish what the 2001 team did. They definitely have a chance. But, while our talent level is certainly very good, and this team is incredible in terms of effort and chemistry, it's not the dominant force at positions 1-5 that 2001 was.

2001 ranks up there with our 1999 and 1992 teams, as well as other great teams such as NCSU 1975, UNC 1982, UNLV 1990-91, Houston 1983, Georgetown 1984, etc, in the discussions of all-time great ones.

[Dukiedevil]

A good question to ask yourself when trying to compare to the 2001 team is who on this years team would crack the rotation (much less the starting lineup). Singler, while a fantastic player, is not going to start over Battier or Dunleavy. Nolan is not more than a serviceable backup to Williams. I guess you could make the argument that Scheyer and/or Henderson may steal some minutes from a freshman Duhon but that's about it. I don't think Lance or Zoubs move ahead of even Casey Sanders in the rotation.

[Kedsy]

Absolutely. I'd take Boozer over Hansbrough, though I can definitely see arguments in the other direction based on numbers alone. Duhon vs. Lawson - even or slight edge Carolina. Jay Williams vs Ellington - not remotely close. Dunleavy vs. Green - I'm starting to laugh. Battier vs. Thompson - are we done yet? That 2001 team was absolutely dominant.

That being said, I think, by year's end, we'll see that Duke 08-09 and UNC 08-09 match up very well. We don't have an answer for Hansbrough. They don't have an answer for Singler. The other positions match up pretty well, some with a lean toward them, some toward us.

I'd love to see our team this year accomplish what the 2001 team did. They definitely have a chance. But, while our talent level is certainly very good, and this team is incredible in terms of effort and chemistry, it's not the dominant force at positions 1-5 that 2001 was.

2001 ranks up there with our 1999 and 1992 teams, as well as other great teams such as NCSU 1975, UNC 1982, UNLV 1990-91, Houston 1983, Georgetown 1984, etc, in the discussions of all-time great ones.

I agree with everything you say -- I think we match up better with them than most people believe.

Regarding the 2001 Duke/2008 UNC comparison, if you match J Williams with Lawson and Duhon with Ellington (which is the way I was originally thinking for some reason), it looks even more lopsided in 2001 Duke's favor.

[VaDukie]

I think the talent gap between college basketball as a whole in 2001 compared to this year in itself was huge. This team has a chance to be special, but they haven't shown much to warrant comparison with 2001. I'm excited to see how this team develops on its own course.

[Dukie4Life]

The biggest similarity I see is the senior leadership and a bench presence! Although i'm not sure that a title is a sure thing I'm excited to say that I feel good that this year more so than the past few look better to bring the title back home to Durham!

[KyDevilinIL]

I can't bring myself to make this argument yet. This year's bunch is fully capable of reaching a Final Four, but a national title might be asking too much without some major, major breaks in our favor.

The 2000-01 team, though – almost from Game 1 – was clearly a title-or-bust group. Sure, UNC, Arizona, Terps, etc. were all in the mix, but the 2001 team was built to raise a banner.

Plus, they had four, maybe five, guys who could consistently drop 25 or 30 on a given night, making them almost impossible to guard as a unit. Right now, we've got two, maybe three, who could do that at all, much less on command.

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

While Coach K has developed a very detailed system which tends to influence the identity of each year's team, I enjoy seeing how each one develops and differentiates over the course of the season. Reliving past championships, just like seeing the retired jerseys hanging overhead, is all a connection to the past. In a way, this discussion reminds me of how General Patton viewed the role of history in planning for the next battle.

[roywhite]

A good question to ask yourself when trying to compare to the 2001 team is who on this years team would crack the rotation (much less the starting lineup). Singler, while a fantastic player, is not going to start over Battier or Dunleavy. Nolan is not more than a serviceable backup to Williams. I guess you could make the argument that Scheyer and/or Henderson may steal some minutes from a freshman Duhon but that's about it. I don't think Lance or Zoubs move ahead of even Casey Sanders in the rotation.

Some of the comparisons are debatable, but I'd definitely take Singler over Dunleavy (and both are sophomores in the years in question). Better rebounder, better defender, tougher overall.

[cato]

Some of the comparisons are debatable, but I'd definitely take Singler over Dunleavy (and both are sophomores in the years in question). Better rebounder, better defender, tougher overall.

Without Dunleavy dropping 9 points on Arizona in roughly 60 seconds, not sure Duke has a third championship banner hanging in Cameron.

[cbfx3]

I want to see this years team come from 10 down with less than a minute ..

[COYS]

I want to see this years team come from 10 down with less than a minute ..

Or overcome a 20+ point half time deficit to win by more than 10. I would love this team to come together like that. But seriously, let's not get carried away yet.

[JDev]

If I am not mistaken, Duke 2001 is the only team in the modern era to win all of its tournament games by double figures. Very special team. I love Duke 08-09, but they aren't close.

[DukieBoy]

Not to be Devil's Advocate or anything like that, but can we really start making these comparisons these early in the year when we have played one top 25 team all year (albeit an impressive win). I was only 10 when Duke won in '01, but I have read enough about them and seen enough to know that they were a truly special team that, when they all were on their games, couldn't be beat. Duke 08-09 nearly lost to Rhode Island. I would love to see the 08-09 team win a national championship, but it seems like we are jumping at possibilities a little to quickly

[dukeballer2294]

I think 2001 was one of our best... and i think this team has chance to be very good. In order for our team to make the final four barring injury i think Nolan SMith has to contain his sore back. As of right now 2001>2008... for now. :)

[smklin]

IMHO, I actually think that a Soph Singler is comparable to a Junior Battier, and by season's end, perhaps a Senior Battier. Singler's game and hoops IQ is so much more advanced at this point in his career than was Shane's.

no way. the big difference is that battier had the ability, on a big possession, to get the ball on the wing, get isolation, and just score. he was a great leader and a HUGE clutch performer. i just dont think singler has that sense yet. he's a hard worker but he cant lead the way that battier could.

[Jeffrey]

no way. the big difference is that battier had the ability, on a big possession, to get the ball on the wing, get isolation, and just score.

Hi,

IMO, the big difference is that Shane was the best defender in the college game!

Best regards,
Jeffrey

[umdukie]

I think this team defensively is on par with the 2001 team. Offensively though, we're not even close.

[SilkyJ]

IMHO, I actually think that a Soph Singler is comparable to a Junior Battier, and by season's end, perhaps a Senior Battier. Singler's game and hoops IQ is so much more advanced at this point in his career than was Shane's.

Uh, in a word, NO. Shane wasn't asked to score as a soph b/c we had elton, trajan, avery and maggette, but his hoops IQ is off the charts, so if you want to say Singler's is comparable then fine, but "MUCH MORE ADVANCED" you are out of your freaking mind. You are most likely just equating singler having a more prominent role in the offense at an earlier stage in his career with meaning that his IQ is/was ahead of Battier's at the same stage. You would be wrong.

Oh and p.s. we don't have two national players of the year on this team.

[CDu]

Uh, in a word, NO. Shane wasn't asked to score as a soph b/c we had elton, trajan, avery and maggette, but his hoops IQ is off the charts, so if you want to say Singler's is comparable then fine, but "MUCH MORE ADVANCED" you are out of your freaking mind. You are most likely just equating singler having a more prominent role in the offense at an earlier stage in his career with meaning that his IQ is/was ahead of Battier's at the same stage. You would be wrong.

Oh and p.s. we don't have two national players of the year on this team.

Agreed. This team has very little real similarity to the 2001 team. This team doesn't have a 3-time defensive player of the year like Battier. This team doesn't have a dominant post presence like Boozer. As you said, this team doesn't have two national players of the year like Battier and Jason Williams.

This team has some very nice players, but discussing it in the same breath as the 2001 team (in any way other than to say that that team was WAY better) is ridiculous.

Now, it may be reasonable to discuss our chances of winning a title, as there also aren't many teams of the quality of 2001 Maryland, 2001 Arizona, etc. Aside from UNC, I don't see any team that I'd say is clearly better than Duke right now. So I'd say we have a shot at the title if we continue to improve. But I would not compare this team to the 2001 team. It's not fair to this team.

[cato]

Every now and then, I think back to just how good that '01 team was, and this thread (not to mention the hyperventilating about UNC) has me in that mode. It is amazing to think that, by the end of the year, Duke was starting 5 future NBA starters -- and still could have easily lost to Maryland and Arizona.

The stars really do have to align just right to get a team like that put together. And, to reiterate what was said above, it is unfair to compare this team to any previous Duke team.

[TwoDukeTattoos]

As I feared would happen, a large number of readers are suggesting that my comparison between 01 and 09 is insane given the talent level disparity. I tried to head off this reaction in my original post by saying:

"Please understand, I am certainly not suggesting that this year’s Duke team is as talented or as polished as the 2001 team. "

Yet, it appears that many folks didn't pay attention that bit of text, or have misunderstood me in some way. All other posts (the ones that don't compare talent levels) have provided excellent feedback. Primarly, the message I was trying to convey is that the MAKE-UP of the two teams is similar, NOT the talent level. And note that I used the word, "SIMILAR", not, "EXACT".

[Troublemaker]

Agree with dukelifer -- you can compare any two Duke teams and find some similarities simply because the same person (Coach K) constructed all of them. We know what he likes to recruit. Versatile players, an NBA SF to play the 4, good defenders, high IQ, etc. But, beyond these superficial similarities, which can be true for almost any two Duke teams you pick, I don't see that 2001 vs 2009 are all that similar. 2001 had more talent, 2009 has more depth and experience. 2001 had one player, Jwill, who could easily create a shot for himself and teammates on any possession AND the entire lineup passed well in a motion offense. 2009 doesn't have a dominant creator and relies much more on the motion to get a good shot, and they're not as good a passing team. 2001 was deadly in transition, 2009 is still learning to take advantage of that aspect. The list could go on for quite a while to be honest. I love this 2009 team, though. It's a strong Final Four contender.

[DukeDevilDeb]

Without Dunleavy dropping 9 points on Arizona in roughly 60 seconds, not sure Duke has a third championship banner hanging in Cameron.

And you don't think Singler could do that? Look at your DVR of the Purdue game again! :D

[JDev]

The Singler-Battier comparison is close in some ways, or even the Singler-Dunleavy comparison. But after that, the two team make-ups are very different at every position. If a comparison is desired there are probably other Duke teams that might work better, but the 2001 team is not close.

[Kedsy]

As I feared would happen, a large number of readers are suggesting that my comparison between 01 and 09 is insane given the talent level disparity. I tried to head off this reaction in my original post by saying:

"Please understand, I am certainly not suggesting that this year’s Duke team is as talented or as polished as the 2001 team. "

Yet, it appears that many folks didn't pay attention that bit of text, or have misunderstood me in some way. All other posts (the ones that don't compare talent levels) have provided excellent feedback. Primarly, the message I was trying to convey is that the MAKE-UP of the two teams is similar, NOT the talent level. And note that I used the word, "SIMILAR", not, "EXACT".

Sorry, still don't see it.

[CDu]

As I feared would happen, a large number of readers are suggesting that my comparison between 01 and 09 is insane given the talent level disparity. I tried to head off this reaction in my original post by saying:

"Please understand, I am certainly not suggesting that this year’s Duke team is as talented or as polished as the 2001 team. "

Yet, it appears that many folks didn't pay attention that bit of text, or have misunderstood me in some way. All other posts (the ones that don't compare talent levels) have provided excellent feedback. Primarly, the message I was trying to convey is that the MAKE-UP of the two teams is similar, NOT the talent level. And note that I used the word, "SIMILAR", not, "EXACT".

I still don't see it. Singler is a crafty and versatile scorer, but he's not the ace defender that Battier is (capable of being a shutdown defender at four different spots on the floor). Williams is a more dominant offensive player than Smith, though not as good defensively. Duhon brings a lot more to the table defensively than Paulus and he could create off the dribble better than Paulus. And we don't have anyone similar to Boozer. And the 2001 team didn't have anyone similar to Henderson, nor did they rely on depth like this team may do. Even disregarding the talent disparity, I just don't see the similarities between the two teams.

[TwoDukeTattoos]

Based on the comments posted to my thread entitled "Is This Our Next 2001 Team?", most folks sharply disagree that 09 looks even remotely close to 01. So, let me ask this:

Player for player, which Duke team does 08-09 most closely resemble? Rememeber, it is impossible to find an exact match. Obviously, every team is different in many ways. BUT, if you HAD to pick ONE team, which team would you pick and why?

[SilkyJ]

And the 2001 team didn't have anyone similar to Henderson

Nate Dogg perhaps?

[Kedsy]

Nate Dogg perhaps?

Disagree. Completely different players, styles, and energy levels.

[Kedsy]

Based on the comments posted to my thread entitled "Is This Our Next 2001 Team?", most folks sharply disagree that 09 looks even remotely close to 01. So, let me ask this:

Player for player, which Duke team does 08-09 most closely resemble? Rememeber, it is impossible to find an exact match. Obviously, every team is different in many ways. BUT, if you HAD to pick ONE team, which team would you pick and why?

Well I would argue that the team has rarely used this much depth and that Singler (at least the way he's played so far this year) is somewhat unique, so I don't think this year's team resembles any past Duke teams all that much. If I was forced to pick a team, I might go for the 1989 team that lost to Seton Hall in the Final Four. Not that similar, but it's the best I could come up with.

[throatybeard]

The team that most resembles this team is the 2008-09 team.

[Kedsy]

Well I would argue that the team has rarely used this much depth and that Singler (at least the way he's played so far this year) is somewhat unique, so I don't think this year's team resembles any past Duke teams all that much. If I was forced to pick a team, I might go for the 1989 team that lost to Seton Hall in the Final Four. Not that similar, but it's the best I could come up with.

Thinking some more, perhaps the 1988 team that lost to Kansas in the Final Four? As I said before, there aren't really any great fits.

[CDu]

Nate Dogg perhaps?

Nah. Henderson is so much better a leaper than James, while James was probably a bit stronger. Because of the athleticism thing, Henderson is a bit more capable of creating his own shot, whereas James was more of a spotup three guy (especially from the corner) and a finisher of someone else's pass.

[JDev]

Nah. Henderson is so much better a leaper than James, while James was probably a bit stronger. Because of the athleticism thing, Henderson is a bit more capable of creating his own shot, whereas James was more of a spotup three guy (especially from the corner) and a finisher of someone else's pass.

That tip-in to beat Maryland in the 2001 ACC tournament was one hell of an athletic play!

[77devil]

Based on the comments posted to my thread entitled "Is This Our Next 2001 Team?", most folks sharply disagree that 09 looks even remotely close to 01. So, let me ask this:

Player for player, which Duke team does 08-09 most closely resemble? Rememeber, it is impossible to find an exact match. Obviously, every team is different in many ways. BUT, if you HAD to pick ONE team, which team would you pick and why?

What is your point? Each team is unique with a cast of different talents and personalities.

[CDu]

Based on the comments posted to my thread entitled "Is This Our Next 2001 Team?", most folks sharply disagree that 09 looks even remotely close to 01. So, let me ask this:

Player for player, which Duke team does 08-09 most closely resemble? Rememeber, it is impossible to find an exact match. Obviously, every team is different in many ways. BUT, if you HAD to pick ONE team, which team would you pick and why?

Well, I'm not sure it resembles any particular Duke team of the past all that much. I'm not really sure why I'd have to pick one (I've never been big on the random hypotheticals :)).

Maybe the 1997 team? That team had:
Price: sorta like Henderson in terms of being smooth and athletic
Wojo: sorta like Paulus, in that he was tenacious, a leader, lacking in quickness, struggled defensively against quicker guards
McLeod: somewhat similar to Singler in scoring versatility at the 4
Chappell: sort of like Lance Thomas, though more of a small forward
Capel: sort of like Scheyer in his versatility (a bit of a stretch, yes)
Newton: sort of like Zoubek
Domzalski: sort of like Plumlee

But even that's probably a bad comparison. This team doesn't have a Langdon (Paulus is more of a cross between Wojo and Langdon), and that team didn't really have a Nolan Smith.

The 1998 team had a more Nolan Smith type in Avery, but that team also had Battier, Brand, and Boozer.

[Jeffrey]

McLeod: somewhat similar to Singler in scoring versatility at the 4

Hi,

IMO, Singler takes McLeod on almost every comparison. I don't think their games are close to similar.



Newton: sort of like Zoubek

Please show more respect to Brian.



But even that's probably a bad comparison.

I completely agree with your overall point that this team really doesn't compare similarly to any former Duke team.

Best regards,
Jeffrey

[BlueintheFace]

Hi,

IMO, Singler takes McLeod on almost every comparison. I don't think their games are close to similar.



Please show more respect to Brian.

Best regards,
Jeffrey

Hi,

You must be seriously confusing Newton with somebody else if you believe the comparison is an insult. As a Junior, Newton started 31 games and averaged 12.2 ppg and 8.2 rpg. As a Senior he started 30 games and averaged 10.4 ppg and 6.1rpg.

Best regards,
Blueintheface

[Jeffrey]

Hi,

You must be seriously confusing Newton with somebody else if you believe the comparison is an insult. As a Junior, Newton started 31 games and averaged 12.2 ppg and 8.2 rpg. As a Senior he started 30 games and averaged 10.4 ppg and 6.1rpg.

Best regards,
Blueintheface

Hi,

Each of us are limited in our skills & abilities. IMO, in the end, effort may be the greatest separator of winners & losers. I think Brian gives us everything he has, all the time! I don't think we can ever ask, or expect, anything more from our players.

Best regards,
Jeffrey

[jimsumner]

The 2001 Duke team is a tough comparison for anyone. Battier won all the national POY awards except one and Jason Williams won that one. Not often a team has two NPOY-caliber players. This Duke team doesn't.

But still, I definitely would take either Scheyer or Smith over '01 Duhon and probably take both over '01 James. And '09 Singler is a better overall player than '01 Dunleavy and I don't see how that is debatable.

So, if we could combine the two teams, I would see a starting lineup of Boozer, Battier, Singler, Scheyer, and Williams. Not too shabby.

But does Duke have to be as good as '01 to advance deep into March? Let's look at 2004. I think most of us would agree that a more experienced group of officials might have led to K's fourth title in '04. That team didn't have a first-team All-America and the leading scorer averaged under 16 ppg. That team started five future NBA players, with a sixth coming off the bench. But I would take Singler over anyone off that team and think several current players are better than '04 Ewing.

But yes, it is way too early to make any definitive comparisons. Remember how the '01 team gagged away a huge lead against Stanford? Lost at home to UNC when the incredibly heady Battier made an incredibly bone-headed play?

I suspect this team will have some hiccups to. But I like the growth potential.

[-jk]

Hi,

Each of us are limited in our skills & abilities. IMO, in the end, effort may be the greatest separator of winners & losers. I think Brian gives us everything he has, all the time! I don't think we can ever ask, or expect, anything more from our players.

Best regards,
Jeffrey

K is great at getting that "everything" from the team for the entire season; we're up for (almost) every game - "big" game or little sisters of the poor. I think one of our recent troubles has been that, come March, everyone gives their "everything" and it no longer separates us from the rabble and the talent evens out.

K has been maximizing that talent for decades, though, so I'm not sure it's necessarily a bad thing. It is certainly one aspect of good coaching.

-jk

[CDu]

Hi, IMO, Singler takes McLeod on almost every comparison. I don't think their games are close to similar.

Please show more respect to Brian.

I completely agree with your overall point that this team really doesn't compare similarly to any former Duke team.

Best regards,
Jeffrey

Yeah, I didn't mean to suggest that the 1997 team and this team were GOOD comps. That was just the best I could come up with, and it's absolutely a reach. I'd say in general that finding two similar teams over time is difficult - I'd bet it's pretty uncommon that you see college basketball teams have incredibly similar makeups to a previous team.

[CDu]

But does Duke have to be as good as '01 to advance deep into March? Let's look at 2004. I think most of us would agree that a more experienced group of officials might have led to K's fourth title in '04. That team didn't have a first-team All-America and the leading scorer averaged under 16 ppg. That team started five future NBA players, with a sixth coming off the bench. But I would take Singler over anyone off that team and think several current players are better than '04 Ewing.

I'd say the biggest differences between this team and the '04 team is that the '04 team had a shut-down presence in the post and an elite true PG. I'd say Deng and Singler were comparable presences at the four spot. I think the '04 team had a more polished scoring twosome at the wings, but the '09 team has more depth (especially defensively), athleticism, and versatility. The '04 team had a better PG as well. I'd probably take the '04 team over this one, mainly because that team had better options at PG and C, and I tend to value skill at those spots most. But I could certainly see the '09 team winning their fair share against that '04 squad simply due to the depth of talent on this team.

[jimsumner]

CDU,

I think '09 Smith/Paulus is closer to '04 Duhon/Dockery than any of Duke's post are to '04 Williams. But still behind.

But I do think that the sophomore Singler clearly is better than the freshman Deng. Deng averaged 15.1 ppg and 6.9 rpg and was third-team All-ACC. I think we'd all agree that Singler is not going to be a third-team All-ACC player.

I also think Scheyer is significantly better than Ewing at the 2.

The 3? Henderson has to get it cranked up offensively but no question he trumps '04 Redick as a rebounder and defender. J.J. was second-team All-ACC in '04 and that is within Gerald's reach if he stops going 1-8.

As you noted, depth is the big edge for '09. We saw what happened to the
'04 team when foul trouble forced them to go deeper than seven.

But still, the '04 team accomplished a lot and the '09 team has the potential to accomplish a lot. Big difference.

[CDu]

That tip-in to beat Maryland in the 2001 ACC tournament was one hell of an athletic play!

I didn't say James wasn't an athletic player. Just that Henderson is MORE athletic.

[CDu]

CDU,

I think '09 Smith/Paulus is closer to '04 Duhon/Dockery than any of Duke's post are to '04 Williams. But still behind.

But I do think that the sophomore Singler clearly is better than the freshman Deng. Deng averaged 15.1 ppg and 6.9 rpg and was third-team All-ACC. I think we'd all agree that Singler is not going to be a third-team All-ACC player.

I also think Scheyer is significantly better than Ewing at the 2.

The 3? Henderson has to get it cranked up offensively but no question he trumps '04 Redick as a rebounder and defender. J.J. was second-team All-ACC in '04 and that is within Gerald's reach if he stops going 1-8.

As you noted, depth is the big edge for '09. We saw what happened to the
'04 team when foul trouble forced them to go deeper than seven.

But still, the '04 team accomplished a lot and the '09 team has the potential to accomplish a lot. Big difference.

I think the Deng/Singler comp is much closer than you give it credit. Comparing where players end up on the All-ACC teams in different years isn't really relevant. I'd say Deng was better than Marcus Melvin, who made Second-Team, and the first-team was all guards. And Deng's stats were limited by the fact that we had prolific guards and a dominant post presence. Take away Williams, and I guarantee that Deng puts up bigger numbers and makes second-team All-ACC. I'd say Deng was the third-best forward in the conference that year, behind Williams and May. I'd say that Singler will be second this year behind Hansbrough. But the ACC doesn't have two top-tier big men like they did in '04. Singler MAY be better, but I'd say it's a coin flip there.

As for the wings, I think Ewing is a wash with Scheyer personally. Scheyer's a better rebounder, both are/were good defenders, Ewing is a better shooter from distance, both were pretty good off the dribble. I'd say Henderson is clearly a better rebounder defender than Redick, but he's not nearly the offensive nightmare that Redick was (though he could eventually be). I'd say the wings are a wash on average.

That's not to say the '09 team can't make up ground. They can certainly improve to be better on the wings. But I think the advantage at PG and C is a huge deal in college basketball, and the wings are so close on average that the edge would go to the '04 team personally.

[jimsumner]

Good points, CDu (as usual).

I'm not dissing '04 Deng. I really wish we had seen an '05 and '06 Deng in Duke blue.

But I can see Singler making second-team, maybe even first-team All-America this season. I think he is breaking out into a truly elite college-basketball-player.

And we'll have to agree to disagree on Scheyer/Ewing. I just think JS is a very underrated player and a lot of the things he does don't show up on stat sheets.

[jv001]

I think that Singler is better than Deng because Kyle can do more things well. Better ball handler, better defender because he can guard multiple position players and just has that Christian attitude about him. Jon is also a better all round player than Daniel. Next to Singler probably our 2nd best player. This years team could be special. We just need to stay healthy and get some breaks along the way. Go Duke!

[CDu]

Good points, CDu (as usual).

I'm not dissing '04 Deng. I really wish we had seen an '05 and '06 Deng in Duke blue.

But I can see Singler making second-team, maybe even first-team All-America this season. I think he is breaking out into a truly elite college-basketball-player.

And we'll have to agree to disagree on Scheyer/Ewing. I just think JS is a very underrated player and a lot of the things he does don't show up on stat sheets.

I would love for Singler to be a first-team AA. I don't see it though. You can pencil in Hansbrough, Curry, and Griffin. That leaves two spots, which will likely be guards. Again, though, I'm not sure why Singler's performance relative to other players in '09 matters when comparing him to Deng in '04. I think if you put Deng on this team, he dominates, and if you put Singler on the '04 team, some of his luster is lost to Williams and Redick. We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

And I think Scheyer is a fantastic player. I just think that Ewing was underrated. I think they're both terrific, and that's why I think it's a coin flip between the two. My assessment of "coin flip" is a compliment to both players, who are very good.

[Diddy]

2001 did not lose to a team like Michigan.

[Duvall]

2001 did not lose to a team like Michigan.

I dunno. I think this Michigan team could be as good as Virginia 2001.

That said, I think we had already recognized that the comparison was ridiculous.

[CDu]

I think that Singler is better than Deng because Kyle can do more things well. Better ball handler, better defender because he can guard multiple position players and just has that Christian attitude about him. Jon is also a better all round player than Daniel. Next to Singler probably our 2nd best player. This years team could be special. We just need to stay healthy and get some breaks along the way. Go Duke!

I think you are either undervaluing the players on the '04 team or overvaluing the current players. Yes, this team COULD be special. But that '04 team WAS special. They were undisputedly one of the two best teams in the nation that year, and lost a heartbreaker in the Final Four to a team that boasted an incredible roster including two impact starters (and another regular starter) in the NBA. This year's team COULD have similar success, but they'll be fortunate to do so.

Nothing Singler has done (yet) makes me think he's better overall than Deng. He is better at some things and Deng is better at others. The same is true for Scheyer compared to Ewing. That's not to say that either of our current players couldn't eventually step into being greater. But I think it's easy to get wrapped up in the players we have now and discount past players (especially when those past players didn't win a championship). I think that's what's happening here.