Why this season ain't like other seasons

[JasonEvans]

I came across a couple ESPN articles today that were really nice on Duke. Sadly they are both only for ESPN Insiders.

The first one (http://insider.espn.go.com/ncb/insider/news/story?id=3836211) lays out a series of reasons that Duke is better this year than in past seasons. I think it ran in ESPN The Magazine this month. I particularly liked a portion of it that points out that, unlike recent Duke teams, this Duke club has not peaked yet. The author points to our poor -- so far -- 3 point shooting but then looks at the roster and figures that we are going to be a good 3-point shooting team by year-end. He says this means that Duke's best games are in the future not the past. I like the sound of that!

The second piece (http://insider.espn.go.com/ncb/insider/news/story?id=3836393) is longer and only discusses our depth this year. I thought it showed a great deal of research and was well written. He specifically addresses the matchup with GTown and talks about how kids who are key reserves for GTown (like Clark and Simms) are basically no better than Plumblee and EWill-- two guys who can barely get off the bench for Duke.

But, the best part is the following paragraph. I know it is hidden behind Insider status, but I am only gonna quote a couple lines from it and -- seeing as I provided a link to the article itself-- I figure this is ok. It is after the author pointed out how versatile Duke's bench is (he watched the GaTech game and saw Pocius give us a key lift in the first half):


Think of a bench as a failsafe, an emergency lever, a doctor on call. Heck, think of those subs as a set of spare keys, each capable of unlocking a door to victory, if necessary. And if you recognize that as the real definition of depth, you'll see that Coach K's keychain is full.

I think that is a particularly clever and well-conceived analogy.

-Jason "the author of both is a dude named Jordan Brenner... I like his stuff" Evans

[Ian]

Good reads, but I can recall quite a few similar, "why we won't fade this year" articles written in January and February the last few years only for team to fade in March.

The team will have to prove it.

[MChambers]

We don't have any depth, or we aren't using it correctly, or something like that!

[OldPhiKap]

We don't have any depth, or we aren't using it correctly, or something like that!

Yeah, and K can't recruit a big man.



(Did I mention that fact that NO ONE is talking about us?!? Bracket buster special, baby!!!)

[Ignatius07]

Good reads, but I can recall quite a few similar, "why we won't fade this year" articles written in January and February the last few years only for team to fade in March.

The team will have to prove it.

I think this is the best mind-set to have - not in any negative way, but just because teams should have to earn the viewer's trust. I do think the point Jason and the author make is interesting though - that this team has not peaked yet, pointing to 3-point % as an indicator. This team is basically the same as last year in that category, after all. Taylor King hit a good percentage early in the year but finished as (believe it or not) only the fifth-best on the team. And DeMarcus turned into a good shooter his senior year, but Henderson has more or less replaced him by shooting 43 (!) % so far. I would expect Scheyer's average of 38% to stay mostly the same, but I think we will see improvements from guys like Singler (34%), Nolan (32%), and Paulus (33%).

[KyDevilinIL]

I am cautiously optimistic that this Duke is as soundly built for postseason success as it's been since the 2003-04 season.

I am exceptionally nervous, however, about the status and outlook for the offense. There's what, six weeks or so until we hit the real crunch time? Sounds like a long time, but it'll fly by, and I worry that the semiweekly grind of ACC play isn't the best environment to find an offensive flow. Fact is, the offense has ticked backwards a bit since conference play began. That's to be expected somewhat, but the Georgia Tech game was painful on multiple levels.

That said, the strength of our defense gives hope, since good defense often begets points. GH's emergence is promising. Kyle has been steady. BZ and Lance must find their mojo again. I think Jon will get his shot back, but GP desperately needs to embrace and find comfort in his role. If GP's shots start falling consistently, I have a feeling it will have a tremendous influence on the rest of the guys.

I don't know. I like the fact that this season feels like it's building toward something, and I don't sense a wall approaching. But with each passing game, I fear more and more that our less-than-smooth offense will be the downfall.

I'm a pessimist by nature, though. Probably worth noting.

[Kedsy]

The team will have to prove it.

Prove what? And to whom?

And why would such person or persons be entitled to proof or anything else?

[Ian]

Prove they won't fade in March, that this season isn't like the last few season. To themselves and to the fans and to the world.

Because basketball isn't played on paper. It's played on the court. A million write-up about how good they are/will be don't mean a thing.

[jv001]

Prove they won't fade in March, that this season isn't like the last few season. To themselves and to the fans and to the world.

Because basketball isn't played on paper. It's played on the court. A million write-up about how good they are/will be don't mean a thing.

This years team is built differently than our last two. We have 3 players that are as good as any in the conference. Zoubek, Thomas and McClure are healthy. We hang our hat on defense and not on making 3 pointers. The great thing about this team is they can improve and there are signs that they will. And this team should not try to prove anything. They need to have fun and enjoy the year. Go Duke!

[JasonEvans]

Good reads, but I can recall quite a few similar, "why we won't fade this year" articles written in January and February the last few years only for team to fade in March.

The team will have to prove it.


Prove they won't fade in March, that this season isn't like the last few season. To themselves and to the fans and to the world.

Because basketball isn't played on paper. It's played on the court. A million write-up about how good they are/will be don't mean a thing.

Ummmm-- no duuuuh.

Of course they will have to prove it. That is a tiny bit like saying, "we won't know who is best until the end of March."

Yes, we all know that by the end of the NCAA Tourney we will have a good idea which teams were really special and which were just pretenders. Still, there is value for all of us fans in taking some time now (and throughout the season) to figure out which teams really will be contenders and which ones won't.

Toward that end, articles like the ones linked above that look at past seasons and examine trends that may be different in this one are worthwhile and notable. At least I think so.

One last thing that bugs me. The one-and-done format of the NCAA tourney makes it pretty much impossible to say with any degree of confidence that we have found the best team. I mean, it is more than a little unfair-- even a 10-1 favorite loses 10% of the time. College basketball history is littered with teams that were supposedly great during the regular season but ran into that one bad game or that one hot opponent and lost much earlier than expected in the NCAAs. For many of these teams the losing game showed some fatal flaw that had been hidden all season or something like that. But, I firmly believe that on some occasions, all that happened was a great team ran into a night of bad luck and lost when it shouldn't have. It is unfair that history judges these teams to be inferior when all they were was unlucky.

--Jason "I babble... sorry" Evans

[77devil]

One last thing that bugs me. The one-and-done format of the NCAA tourney makes it pretty much impossible to say with any degree of confidence that we have found the best team. I mean, it is more than a little unfair-- even a 10-1 favorite loses 10% of the time. College basketball history is littered with teams that were supposedly great during the regular season but ran into that one bad game or that one hot opponent and lost much earlier than expected in the NCAAs. For many of these teams the losing game showed some fatal flaw that had been hidden all season or something like that. But, I firmly believe that on some occasions, all that happened was a great team ran into a night of bad luck and lost when it shouldn't have. It is unfair that history judges these teams to be inferior when all they were was unlucky.

--Jason "I babble... sorry" Evans

Fair point Jason but it sure beats the BCS.

[Bay Area Duke Fan]

"One-and-done" format is one of the things what makes the NCAA tourney so exciting. In many sports, the championship often goes to a team that's not the best but happens to play better that game. Sort of like the NFL championship. I like it that way. And that's why I think the 1991 NCAA title was Duke's best. It's a lot more fun to win when you beat a "better" team.

[EarlJam]

Good reads, but I can recall quite a few similar, "why we won't fade this year" articles written in January and February the last few years only for team to fade in March.

The team will have to prove it.

True dat.

If memory serves, we peaked when we beat UNC in early Feb. last year and looked unstoppable.

Then, "IT" happened.

-EarlJam

[JasonEvans]

Back on point-- this ESPN author was pretty dead on target when it came to his assessment of the GTown game.



The first one (http://insider.espn.go.com/ncb/insider/news/story?id=3836211) lays out a series of reasons that Duke is better this year than in past seasons. I think it ran in ESPN The Magazine this month. I particularly liked a portion of it that points out that, unlike recent Duke teams, this Duke club has not peaked yet. The author points to our poor -- so far -- 3 point shooting but then looks at the roster and figures that we are going to be a good 3-point shooting team by year-end. He says this means that Duke's best games are in the future not the past. I like the sound of that!

Against Gtown, we hit 38% of our 3s, not lights out but significantly above our season average of 33%. Worth noting that we pulled away in the first half when we drained a few threes in a row.


The second piece (http://insider.espn.go.com/ncb/insider/news/story?id=3836393) is longer and only discusses our depth this year. I thought it showed a great deal of research and was well written. He specifically addresses the matchup with GTown and talks about how kids who are key reserves for GTown (like Clark and Simms) are basically no better than Plumblee and EWill-- two guys who can barely get off the bench for Duke.

But, the best part is the following paragraph. I know it is hidden behind Insider status, but I am only gonna quote a couple lines from it and -- seeing as I provided a link to the article itself-- I figure this is ok. It is after the author pointed out how versatile Duke's bench is (he watched the GaTech game and saw Pocius give us a key lift in the first half):


Think of a bench as a failsafe, an emergency lever, a doctor on call. Heck, think of those subs as a set of spare keys, each capable of unlocking a door to victory, if necessary. And if you recognize that as the real definition of depth, you'll see that Coach K's keychain is full.

I think that is a particularly clever and well-conceived analogy.

-Jason "the author of both is a dude named Jordan Brenner... I like his stuff" Evans

But, I think it is the depth discussion in which the author really showed his chops. When Zoubek (normally a starter) and Lance were poor matchups for the mobile GTown bigs, McClure and Plumlee became significant players. We also got a fabulous game from Paulus off the bench, allowing us to go small and spread the floor on Gtown. The bench (including McClure, who is usually a reserve) may not have been the main reason we beat GTown, but it was a big part of it.

--Jason "I do think Zoub will get more time in the games this coming week-- we will need him against McFarland for sure" Evans