Singler decision impact to others

[dukefan75]

clearly, singler returning makes the squad the pre-season top team-- but just for discussion sake-- what coincidental impact does this have to the other either current/future players?
questions to ponder:
1) does K remain committed to kyle at the 3 beyond just the start of the game. the talent dictates otherwise, does this pose any issues?
2) any growth of andre dawkins game now stunted? his chances for minutes are minimal. hate to bring it up, but the transfer conversation will return.
3)does felix follow through on his committment

all things factored in, this is a great decision for the program and the chnaces to repeat. Not focused on the negative, but thought its worth some air time.

[FireOgilvie]

I think Kyle will spend half his time at the 3 in a big lineup and half his time at the 4 in a small lineup, but have basically the same "role" in both lineups. Dawkins will get plenty of playing time. Felix was probably never going to get much playing time this year even if Kyle left. I think guarding an NBA talent like Singler in practice every day will help Felix slightly more than playing an additional few minutes a game in his first season.

[Oriole Way]

I think Felix came to Duke knowing he was going to fight for minutes and that he would be a role player his first couple seasons. I also think he wanted to join a powerhouse program with a chance to win D1 championships like Duke, as opposed to being a star player on a JUCO team.

Andre knows that he needs to work on his defense and movement without the ball on offense to get more minutes. If he does that, playing time will come. We also don't know how/if injuries and foul trouble will affect minutes from game to game. Furthermore, Dawkins will have a starring role starting his junior year once Smith and Singler graduate. He could play a hybrid 3 alongside a potential backcourt of Kryie Irving and Austin Rivers, which honestly is amazing just to think about.

[DangerDevil]

I'm happy that Kyle's back and we will undoubtedly be better based on his decision to stay next year.

[roywhite]

clearly, singler returning makes the squad the pre-season top team-- but just for discussion sake-- what coincidental impact does this have to the other either current/future players?
questions to ponder:
1) does K remain committed to kyle at the 3 beyond just the start of the game. the talent dictates otherwise, does this pose any issues?
2) any growth of andre dawkins game now stunted? his chances for minutes are minimal. hate to bring it up, but the transfer conversation will return.
3)does felix follow through on his committment

all things factored in, this is a great decision for the program and the chnaces to repeat. Not focused on the negative, but thought its worth some air time.

Hey, good thing you didn't focus on the negative. :confused:

[DeBlueDevil]

I know it is hard to sometimes factor this in. But is there any reason to believe that we will not DOMINATE almost every game on our schedule. Yes there will be a handful of games that will remain close but IMO I think that a majority of the games next year will be blow outs. With that said there will be plenty of opportunity for guys to get on the floor and play. I see K utilizing our depth to our advantage a lot next year. Why not? With the amount of talent and actual experience coming back next year I do not think we miss a beat when subing guys in and out. I truly don't think that playing time will be as much of a factor as many think.

Thank you Kyle....this is truly how a college bball program should be. Loyalty and team work above personal achievement....he won't regret his decision.

[MrBisonDevil]

Duke's line up (minutes played) is dictated by performance in practice. If the underclassmen improve by working their tails off then they will get minutes. Period.

[Newton_14]

There is no bad with this decision. Duke will have a deeper team. History has shown that when K has a deep TALENTED bench, he uses it. There will be no "Big 3" playing 36 minutes each next year. Not even Kyle and Nolan. Not that those two won't play a lot of minutes, because they will. But it won't be 36 night in and night out.

At crunch time of games we will have fresh legs on the court ready to finish it out. Too many weapons to count..

This is as good as it gets. No way I search for a negative in this decision...

[DeBlueDevil]

Also with that said about blow outs....There is no reason for me not to think that K will take into account that Kyle has a future in the NBA...if a game is well in hand..look to find Kyle on the bench. Kyle's presence off the court will be just as valuable as him on the court with his experience and leadership. Same goes for Nolan. No reason to be negative....only reasons to CELEBRATE!!!!

[roywhite]

Duke's line up (minutes played) is dictated by performance in practice. If the underclassmen improve by working their tails off then they will get minutes. Period.

Of Duke's 200 total minutes in the national championship game, 103 minutes were played by seniors. And who's to say that Kyle and Nolan will need to play so many minutes when there is greater overall depth.

Yes, there are opportunities to play for returning underclassmen and newcomers.

[RoyalBlue08]

I can't believe how quickly this thread started. LOL.

[DevilHorns]

I think Dawkins will be fine with minutes, likely not a starting role but a much more involved reserve role. Seth backs up Kyrie. Andre backs up Nolan, and is also backed up by Seth.

[NashvilleDevil]

I can't believe how quickly this thread started. LOL.

And the OP was making his 1st or 2nd post. But like roywhite pointed out at least he didn't focus on the negative.

[Wander]

The biggest impact he'll have on others is how much UNC fans will be crying themselves to sleep at night knowing how dominant we're going to be next year. :D

[RoyalBlue08]

The biggest impact he'll have on others is how much UNC fans will be crying themselves to sleep at night knowing how dominant we're going to be next year. :D

I work in Chapel Hill will all UNC fans. Every day they have been asking me (nervously) if Singler is coming back. I can't wait to go to work tomorrow!

[Big Pappa]

First off, I don't think there is any way that Kyle spends much time at the 4 next year. I'm sure he would do whatever he needs to in order to help the team (2008-2009) but his natural position and NBA position is the 3. I'm sure he and Coach K talked about where he would play and what his role would be before he decided to come back. Kyle has been quoted saying that he feels more comfortable at the 3.

Next, I think the starters are:

Kyrie
Nolan
Kyle
MP1
MP2

Andre and Seth will get plenty of time backing up the 1-3. Ryan and Josh should get time back up the Plumlees with Carrick and Tyler getting in here and there.

I can't begin to tell you how excited I am about next year. Go Duke!

[BattierBattalion]

I work in Chapel Hill will all UNC fans. Every day they have been asking me (nervously) if Singler is coming back. I can't wait to go to work tomorrow!

I texted my UNC buddy about this. His immediate response?

"F**K"

[RelativeWays]

I'm thinking Carrick sees the floor more than you think. I don't see why K brings in a Juco project that might play some his senior year. Instead, Carrick has good athleticism and if he can learn the defense he will be Kyle's primary back up at the 3. Miles and Mason and play both the 4 and 5 backing each other up, I see Josh and Ryan playing the 4, and both may play some at the 3 depending on line ups, game situations and team needs. Dre backs up Nolan, Tyler backs up Magnum KI.

[cspan37421]

Let's not forget that sometimes, injuries do happen, and you have to call upon that depth. We were lucky this year to be pretty healthy. Remember how thin we were at guard? Andre gave us a bit of breathing room, but still - if we had an ankle there or a stress fracture, it would have been very, very tough on us.

Remember how we thought Lance might be out for awhile after that, what was it, a knee-to-knee? Guy was tough as nails (I could tell he was playing hurt at first, though).

IMO we were very fortunate, health-wise, this year. It doesn't always work out that way. Should we revert to the mean next year, we'll need all that depth. Even if we stay healthy, there might be some different looks based on matchups.

I look forward to S & S leading this team. Would not mind some pressure D, uptempo play, either. Could be a lot of fun.

I think it'll also be interesting to see how all these early entry guys do. Will they end up making 3-4 year players at Duke look like better bets? I guess some depends on NBA rules, and whether it will continue to be a league that fosters one-on-one play.

[Bluedevil114]

I'm thinking Carrick sees the floor more than you think. I don't see why K brings in a Juco project that might play some his senior year. Instead, Carrick has good athleticism and if he can learn the defense he will be Kyle's primary back up at the 3. Miles and Mason and play both the 4 and 5 backing each other up, I see Josh and Ryan playing the 4, and both may play some at the 3 depending on line ups, game situations and team needs. Dre backs up Nolan, Tyler backs up Magnum KI.

Forget about Seth??

[Big Pappa]

I'm thinking Carrick sees the floor more than you think. I don't see why K brings in a Juco project that might play some his senior year. Instead, Carrick has good athleticism and if he can learn the defense he will be Kyle's primary back up at the 3. Miles and Mason and play both the 4 and 5 backing each other up, I see Josh and Ryan playing the 4, and both may play some at the 3 depending on line ups, game situations and team needs. Dre backs up Nolan, Tyler backs up Magnum KI.

I think these are all good points. I especially like Magnum KI, is that from my suggestion on the Player Nicknames thread? :D


After last night Kyrie deserves "The Closer" but my heart says it should be Magnum K.I. (Yesterday, 01:37 PM

[jipops]

Of Duke's 200 total minutes in the national championship game, 103 minutes were played by seniors. And who's to say that Kyle and Nolan will need to play so many minutes when there is greater overall depth.

Yes, there are opportunities to play for returning underclassmen and newcomers.

It's a safe bet that both Kyle and Nolan will not be averaging as many minutes as they did this past season.

[Welcome2DaSlopes]

First off, I don't think there is any way that Kyle spends much time at the 4 next year. I'm sure he would do whatever he needs to in order to help the team (2008-2009) but his natural position and NBA position is the 3. I'm sure he and Coach K talked about where he would play and what his role would be before he decided to come back. Kyle has been quoted saying that he feels more comfortable at the 3.

Next, I think the starters are:

Kyrie
Nolan
Kyle
MP1
MP2

Andre and Seth will get plenty of time backing up the 1-3. Ryan and Josh should get time back up the Plumlees with Carrick and Tyler getting in here and there.

I can't begin to tell you how excited I am about next year. Go Duke!

I'm way too excited right now about next year.

[ncexnyc]

I'm thinking Carrick sees the floor more than you think. I don't see why K brings in a Juco project that might play some his senior year. Instead, Carrick has good athleticism and if he can learn the defense he will be Kyle's primary back up at the 3. Miles and Mason and play both the 4 and 5 backing each other up, I see Josh and Ryan playing the 4, and both may play some at the 3 depending on line ups, game situations and team needs. Dre backs up Nolan, Tyler backs up Magnum KI.
And Seth?

[77devil]

I texted my UNC buddy about this. His immediate response?

"F**K"

Impact on others? Harrison Barnes, meet Kyle Singler.

[ElSid]

no chance in hades that felix sees this in a negative way. he is going to be on a national radar starting next year, a little, and the next two years, he will have a chance to prove himself to nba scouts and get a duke degree. that's why he came to duke. not to play immediately.

as for the other players, i posted this on a different thread already, but they saw how close this team was. some didn't play as many minutes (kelly, dawkins) but they saw what it took to get minutes. hard work in practice. they saw how far that positive attitude can take a team. coming off a success like 2010, that makes this job so much easier for the coaches. look what happens as a TEAM when you keep working hard, stay close, etc.

And the kids we have coming in, Irving, Thornton, and Hairston...they are all willing to work and aren't going to complain.

I honestly can't find anything bad to say about next year's team right now. It seems, on paper, just about every hole is filled.

[jipops]

I sure as heck would love to sit in on some practices next season. 2 pretty good ACC teams right there.

Oh yeah, and after Bullock's comments, I'm pretty sure K is going to give Andre plenty of pt against UNC.

[Rudy]

Are tickets to the Blue/White game available yet?:D

[DevilHorns]

First off, I don't think there is any way that Kyle spends much time at the 4 next year. I'm sure he would do whatever he needs to in order to help the team (2008-2009) but his natural position and NBA position is the 3. I'm sure he and Coach K talked about where he would play and what his role would be before he decided to come back. Kyle has been quoted saying that he feels more comfortable at the 3.

Next, I think the starters are:

Kyrie
Nolan
Kyle
MP1
MP2

Andre and Seth will get plenty of time backing up the 1-3. Ryan and Josh should get time back up the Plumlees with Carrick and Tyler getting in here and there.

I can't begin to tell you how excited I am about next year. Go Duke!

Agree with everything you said, except Josh getting time and Felix just rarely. If I had to guess now I would say the opposite. Felix is probably a much more ACC-ready defender than Josh and we won't need this position to score given our offensive talents in the other positions.

[airowe]

I think the "dukefan" part of dukefan75 should not be taken literally.

[proelitedota]

Starters:

Miles
Mason
Singler
Nolan
Kyrie

Complete team sub:

Ryan
Josh
Carrick
Dawkins
Seth/Thornton

There is enough talent here for 2 top 10 teams.

[Jderf]

Starters:

Miles
Mason
Singler
Nolan
Kyrie

Complete team sub:

Ryan
Josh
Carrick
Dawkins
Seth/Thornton

There is enough talent here for 2 top 10 teams.

I don't know about that, but you would think that second team at least had a decent shot at making the tourney. And it has certainly got to be a good thing to have for practice scrimmages.

[Big Pappa]

Agree with everything you said, except Josh getting time and Felix just rarely. If I had to guess now I would say the opposite. Felix is probably a much more ACC-ready defender than Josh and we won't need this position to score given our offensive talents in the other positions.

I think you're right about Carrick getting more playing time than people (even me) think, but I think that Josh will get a good amount of time for Mase and Miles because of their (and most big men's) tendency to foul.

[Lord Ash]

Starters:

Miles
Mason
Singler
Nolan
Kyrie

Complete team sub:

Ryan
Josh
Carrick
Dawkins
Seth/Thornton

There is enough talent here for 2 top 10 teams.

Uhm, just to point out...

Ryan was a top 20 overall recruit.
Josh is a top 20 overall recruit.
Carrick no, but athletic and good.
Dawkins was a top 20 recruit (in his original class.)
Seth was the top scoring freshman in the entire NCAA. Yes, the college NCAA. And Tyler was #20 at his position according to Scout.

That is a DAMN good "backup" team.

[RoyalBlue08]

I know that it isn't K's style, but I wonder if there would be any thought about talking to Thornton about a redshirt. Unless he is way ahead of the normal freshman curve, I can't see him getting many meaningful minutes next season.

[diveonthefloor]

As far as Singler's decision impact:

How bout Kyle's impact on Kyle's education? Poster said yesterday that Kyle was two summer classes away from his undergrad degree.
So......which grad school will Kyle attend while he's working on his masters?
(Or did he get accepted to law or med school while we were all watching the NCAA tourney? :cool:)

[RelativeWays]

And Seth?

Actually Seth can play some PG so he might be first off the bench for PG. Duke's back court will be the most versatile in the conference. Its possible Duke can go 3 guards ( how sweet it would be to ruin 'nova and give them a taste of their own medicine). In terms of a more traditional 3, Carrick is the more natural back up. Its entirely dependent in his athleticism and his ability to pick up the D but I DO NOT think Felix is a project. He's not Olek or Boateng, there is no need for Duke to get a Juco player for a project. K gets a Juco player because he thinks they have the ability to to realistically contribute NEXT year. Remember there was a good chance that Kyle wasn't coming back this year. I think K recruited Felix as a player that could help this team next year. He will not have to carry a scoring load, just play hard.

[IrishDevil]

I don't know about that, but you would think that second team at least had a decent shot at making the tourney. And it has certainly got to be a good thing to have for practice scrimmages.

Agreed. Depth like this is not only a great luxury with respect to dealing with injuries or foul trouble, but it also increases the quality of practices. It's the same benefit as all the wonderful things we heard about having Dahntay and Seth pushing the guys in practice during their year sitting out, but with the bonus of being able to put them in the game!

Next year Kyle (amazing to have you back, thanks!!) will be able to practice with the starters and develop chemistry with them while being defended by an arguably more athletic 6-6 Felix or a player more his size in Josh. Tyler, Seth, and Andre get to push Kyrie and Nolan (and they will). Ryan and Josh get to keep the Plumlees on their toes.

One of the things I enjoyed the most about our beloved 2010 champs was the near-steady improvement game to game. I think practices this coming season will be incredibly competitive and under the senior leadership of Smith and Singler we might very well see a similar upward trend!

It needs to be October NOW!

[Leck]

w/ all of the depth and experience coming back, plus the talent and inevitable hype, does next yr's squad remind anyone of the 1999 team that just dominated for all but a couple of games?

[wilson]

w/ all of the depth and experience coming back, plus the talent and inevitable hype, does next yr's squad remind anyone of the 1999 team that just dominated for all but a couple of games?The situation is much more analogous to 1992.

[basket1544]

This team has something the 99 team didn't. Experience on how to win it all and leadership on how to win it all. Again, thank you to our seniors for staying!

[Mudge]

First off, I don't think there is any way that Kyle spends much time at the 4 next year. I'm sure he would do whatever he needs to in order to help the team (2008-2009) but his natural position and NBA position is the 3. I'm sure he and Coach K talked about where he would play and what his role would be before he decided to come back. Kyle has been quoted saying that he feels more comfortable at the 3.

Next, I think the starters are:

Kyrie
Nolan
Kyle
MP1
MP2

Andre and Seth will get plenty of time backing up the 1-3. Ryan and Josh should get time back up the Plumlees with Carrick and Tyler getting in here and there.

I can't begin to tell you how excited I am about next year. Go Duke!

Until he proves otherwise (and this year doesn't count, as Duke had a shortage, not a plethora, of capable backcourt players), I don't believe for a second that K is going with a "three bigs" lineup, when he has three really talented guards that he can play-- he has always erred on the side of smaller, quicker, faster, more skilled, more scoring, more pressure defense, rather than bigger-- and I don't think he will ever give a damn about helping a player position himself for the NBA (cf.- Carlos Boozer's 3-year stint at center)-- and he sure as heck isn't going to do anything other than what he thinks is best for Duke University to win games-- and if that means Kyle Singler playing as the second-biggest guy next to one of the Plumlees, with 3 guards, then that is what we will see as the predominant set for next year... so, I see the starting lineup (if scouting reports are accurate as to their relative talents) for next year as:

Irving: PG
Smith: G
Curry: G
Singler: F
Plumlee: F

I expect this lineup to look a lot like the one that featured Boozer and Battier, plus 3 guards, or Brand and Battier, plus 3 guards (or maybe a G/F guy, like Carrawell-- suggests Felix or Dawkins may earn some time.)

Personally, I expect to see Mason surpass Miles as the starter, because of his better hands and vision, which leads to better rebounding and passing-- and because I think he is slightly more athletic, with at least an equal ability (and the same crying need) to develop low-post offensive moves and footwork... at this juncture, Mason reminds me an awful lot of McRoberts (both good and bad), including the exceptional athleticism, impressive passing ability, lack of low-post moves, and tendency to do some less desirable things outside of playing (whining with McRoberts; taunting with Mason).

[camion]

As far as Singler's decision impact:

How bout Kyle's impact on Kyle's education? Poster said yesterday that Kyle was two summer classes away from his undergrad degree.
So......which grad school will Kyle attend while he's working on his masters?
(Or did he get accepted to law or med school while we were all watching the NCAA tourney? :cool:)

I think Kyle will be taking advanced seminars in BADASS under Professor James. ;)

[ClassyBlue]

Holy Crap we're gonna be sooo good next year! Kyle is going to bring the toughness they will need next year to make another run in March. I just cant wait! Gotta slow down and enjoy the ride, we are the National Champs!!!

[Big Pappa]

Personally, I expect to see Mason surpass Miles as the starter, because of his better hands and vision, which leads to better rebounding and passing-- and because I think he is slightly more athletic, with at least an equal ability (and the same crying need) to develop low-post offensive moves and footwork... at this juncture, Mason reminds me an awful lot of McRoberts (both good and bad), including the exceptional athleticism, impressive passing ability, lack of low-post moves, and tendency to do some less desirable things outside of playing (whining with McRoberts; taunting with Mason).

I really think that Kyle will be primarily playing the 3 next year and one of the biggest reasons is that I don't see how you can sit one of the Plumlees. Mason is a MAJOR talent and has potential to be All-ACC next year. Miles, on the other hand, will provide great leadership for our frontcourt. He will be a Junior with 24 (I believe) starts under his belt when the season begins. He is also very talented but his athleticism gets overshadowed by Mason.

I do disagree completely that Mason doesn't have any post moves or even a lack of. He obviously didn't take many low post shots last year (no one did) but if you watched him at Christ School you know he can dominate in the post.

[Duvall]

The situation is much more analogous to 1992.

No, no, no, no, no, no, no.

The 1992 team returned its core players intact. Next year's team will have to replace three starters. There will be plenty of talent to work with, but Krzyzewski will have to rebuild the team from the ground up. Completely different situation.

[diveonthefloor]

I think Kyle will be taking advanced seminars in BADASS under Professor James. ;)

LMAO! That was classic!!!:D

But seriously....he will have to enroll in grad school....would be fascinating to know what he plans to study. How many grad students have ever been candidates for NPOY? Couldn't be more than a handful...does anyone know?

[Duvall]

LMAO! That was classic!!!:D

But seriously....he will have to enroll in grad school....would be fascinating to know what he plans to study. How many grad students have ever been candidates for NPOY? Couldn't be more than a handful...does anyone know?

I don't think he will, actually. He's only in year four; he can simply plan to graduate in spring 2011 and take light course loads next year (if he chooses).

[wilson]

No, no, no, no, no, no, no.

The 1992 team returned its core players intact. Next year's team will have to replace three starters. There will be plenty of talent to work with, but Krzyzewski will have to rebuild the team from the ground up. Completely different situation....as opposed to 1999, when the team returned to the Final Four for the first time in 5 years? While next year's situation is not the same as 1992, it is much more like 1992 than it is like 1999.

[diveonthefloor]

I don't think he will, actually. He's only in year four; he can simply plan to graduate in spring 2011 and take light course loads next year (if he chooses).

But won't he need to take at least 12 hours (3 courses) to be considered a full time student? I guess he could just skip his planned summer courses and graduate next spring with multiple excess credit hours....

[ACCBBallFan]

Until he proves otherwise (and this year doesn't count, as Duke had a shortage, not a plethora, of capable backcourt players), I don't believe for a second that K is going with a "three bigs" lineup, when he has three really talented guards that he can play-- he has always erred on the side of smaller, quicker, faster, more skilled, more scoring, more pressure defense, rather than bigger-- and I don't think he will ever give a damn about helping a player position himself for the NBA (cf.- Carlos Boozer's 3-year stint at center)-- and he sure as heck isn't going to do anything other than what he thinks is best for Duke University to win games-- and if that means Kyle Singler playing as the second-biggest guy next to one of the Plumlees, with 3 guards, then that is what we will see as the predominant set for next year... so, I see the starting lineup (if scouting reports are accurate as to their relative talents) for next year as:

Irving: PG
Smith: G
Curry: G
Singler: F
Plumlee: F

I expect this lineup to look a lot like the one that featured Boozer and Battier, plus 3 guards, or Brand and Battier, plus 3 guards (or maybe a G/F guy, like Carrawell-- suggests Felix or Dawkins may earn some time.)

Personally, I expect to see Mason surpass Miles as the starter, because of his better hands and vision, which leads to better rebounding and passing-- and because I think he is slightly more athletic, with at least an equal ability (and the same crying need) to develop low-post offensive moves and footwork... at this juncture, Mason reminds me an awful lot of McRoberts (both good and bad), including the exceptional athleticism, impressive passing ability, lack of low-post moves, and tendency to do some less desirable things outside of playing (whining with McRoberts; taunting with Mason).

Not sure if the 5th guy would be Curry, Dre or Kelly (many think Plumlee) but besides the lineup you suggested:

Irving: PG
Smith: G
Dawkins: G
Singler: F
Plumlee: F


Irving: PG
Smith: G
Singler: WF
Kelly: F
Plumlee: F

Irving: PG
Smith: G
Singler: WF
Plumlee: F
Plumlee: F

give coach K tremendous flexibility.

In terms of total minutes, I think the three new guys not named Irving pay their freshman dues:

Kyle Singler 30 MPG, running sum 30

Nolan, Kyrie and Plumlees 20-25 MG, running sum 120

Seth, Andre, and Kelly 20 MPG, sum 180

freshman 5-10 MPG, sum 200 MPG.

I know many will argue both Plumlees will average more PT both because they are the only true centers and other reasons, but they need to improve on their fouling tendencies for that to happen.

[Acymetric]

I don't think he will, actually. He's only in year four; he can simply plan to graduate in spring 2011 and take light course loads next year (if he chooses).

Yeah, thats what I would expect. Honestly thats probably a reason he's willing to come back (he'll be able to schedule his courseload around working out to prepare for the NBA).


But won't he need to take at least 12 hours (3 courses) to be considered a full time student? I guess he could just skip his planned summer courses and graduate next spring with multiple excess credit hours....

I expect that's exactly what he'll do, with the extra courses being extremely easy. Of course, he may be more ambitions academically, but I expect he'll use this to prepare for the NBA even more.

[Kedsy]

I think the premise behind the initial post of this thread is ridiculous. There are plenty of minutes to go around.

I'm not saying it will pan out exactly this way, but here's a possible example:

Kyle: 30 min
Nolan: 28
Kyrie: 26
Seth: 24
Andre: 20
MP1: 18
MP2: 22
Ryan: 17
Josh and Carrick: 12 combined (not sure how this will end up, although I suspect Josh will get the lion's share of these minutes; even if that's the case, the idea that Carrick won't "follow through" on his commitment seems ludicrous to me)
Tyler: 3

Now, obviously with the above distribution, two of our 11 scholarship players won't see a lot of minutes. But that's pretty much the way things go at Duke and in most other places. The other nine will see plenty, and the two who don't have two or three years more to become a contributing part of the rotation and undoubtedly will do so. Also, if any of Carrick, Josh, and Tyler prove themselves worthy of additional minutes, you could trim the top of the rotation down to 25 or 26 minutes and have 6 to 9 more minutes to hand out to the bottom of the rotation.

Yes, it's a deeper team than we usually have, but K has proven himself willing to go deep when he has the personnel. For example, in 89-90 nine of our players were used for 12 or more minutes per game, and another three combined for 8.5+.

I agree there's a possibility that the OP is a troll.

[Mudge]

w/ all of the depth and experience coming back, plus the talent and inevitable hype, does next yr's squad remind anyone of the 1999 team that just dominated for all but a couple of games?

Actually, I think this team now looks most like the 2000 team:
1) One highly experienced forward that has started since his freshman year (then Battier; now Singler);
2) One highly experienced senior off guard (then Carrawell; now Smith);
3) A freshman PG (then Williams; now Irving);
4) A relatively inexperienced center whose ability to develop as a low-post player with low-block offensive moves is as yet unknown-- but whose latent potential is enormous (then Boozer; now Mason- as noted earlier, I expect Mason to leapfrog Miles to start at center);
5) One experienced forward who had started for a while, then lost his starting spot -- and may not be a starter this coming year (then James; now Miles);
6) A third guard who is likely to surpass the lesser of the two experienced forwards in playing time (then Dunleavy; now Curry).

This team will go as Kyrie Irving goes-- I have said before that, if he is as good as advertised (and stays 2-3 years), he heralds the coming of the third "Golden Era" of Duke Basketball under Coach K-- if Irving is more mature and focused than Jason Williams was a freshman, then this team can (and maybe will) go farther than the 2000 team... but that is asking a lot of a rookie PG-- see, for reference, what happened with Kentucky this year-- Coach K is more capable at getting the most from his guys than Calipari is, but still, it is asking a lot of a rookie PG to win a championship... even Magic Johnson's Michigan State team didn't win anything when he was a freshman-- and he went on to lead the Lakers to an NBA championship as their PG, when he was 19-20 years old.

[Kedsy]

Actually, I think this team now looks most like the 2000 team:
1) One highly experienced forward that has started since his freshman year (then Battier; now Singler);
2) One highly experienced senior off guard (then Carrawell; now Smith);
3) A freshman PG (then Williams; now Irving);
4) A relatively inexperienced center whose ability to develop as a low-post player with low-block offensive moves is as yet unknown (then Boozer; now Mason- as noted earlier, I expect Mason to leapfrog Miles to start at center);
5) One experienced forward who had started for a while, then lost his starting spot -- and may not be a starter this coming year (then James; now Miles);
6) A third guard who is likely to surpass the lesser of the two experienced forwards in playing time (then Dunleavy; now Curry).

I strongly disagree. The 1999-2000 team had only six guys play double-figure minutes. It went down in the NCAAT in large part because Dunleavy got mono, and that meant they pretty much only played five guys. The 2010-11 team should be a whole lot deeper than that. And a whole lot better. Your analysis above completely ignores Andre, Ryan, Josh, Carrick, and Tyler, who as a bench unit are light years ahead of the 2000 team's bench (Horvath (Fr), Christensen (So), Sanders (Fr), and Buckner (Fr)).

Even more important is the 2000 team was very inexperienced. That team had two experienced starters (Carrowell (Sr) and Battier (Jr)), one experienced rotation player (James), six freshmen, and Christensen, who had played a total of 70 minutes in 1995-96 and was in 1999-2000 more or less starting over, even though he technically was a sophomore. This year's team has six guys who have been through the mill at least once, plus Seth who started at Liberty for a year and has practiced at Duke for a year, and Carrick who at least has some experience at a JC. I really don't think your comparison stands up at all.

Finally, Nate James had started exactly one (1) game in his career prior to the 1999-2000 season, so your #5 isn't really accurate.

[MADevil30]

Until he proves otherwise (and this year doesn't count, as Duke had a shortage, not a plethora, of capable backcourt players), I don't believe for a second that K is going with a "three bigs" lineup, when he has three really talented guards that he can play-- he has always erred on the side of smaller, quicker, faster, more skilled, more scoring, more pressure defense, rather than bigger-- and I don't think he will ever give a damn about helping a player position himself for the NBA (cf.- Carlos Boozer's 3-year stint at center)-- and he sure as heck isn't going to do anything other than what he thinks is best for Duke University to win games-- and if that means Kyle Singler playing as the second-biggest guy next to one of the Plumlees, with 3 guards, then that is what we will see as the predominant set for next year

Mudge, I see your point, but lets also give Coach K credit for being able to adapt his strategy when something works and when changes in the game dictate it. I think there is a pretty strong national consensus that the college game is a lot more physical than it was in the 90s; as such, it helps to have big guys who can stand up to that physical style of play. I think both Plumlees and Singler fit that bill pretty well. We also just won a national championship with a bigger line-up, and a huge reason for our late season success was an ability to out rebound opponents and play solid post defense. I think both the current style of the game and recent experience suggests that a bigger line up works well. Coach K is one of the best because he is willing to make adjustments to his style, I wouldn't count out the bigger line up so easily

[greybeard]

I think Kyle's return makes it less likely that you will see both MPs on the court at the same time for significant minutes. I do not think you will see 3 guards all that often either. I think Kyle's return makes it more likely that Ryan will be on the floor, as well as the other two forwards. There should be real competition among them for playing time; I give Ryan a real shot; the junior college transfer, in particular if he has a classic position, seal, catch and go game, could be a small four.

The possibilities are kind of exciting.

The kid from gonzaga and Smith on the court at the same time, that would shut some people down and put tremendous defensive pressure on the wings. You put the new point, Kyle and one of the MP3s, a lot of open court play will ensue, which will allow Kyle to develop, showcase his open court game. Even without the point, he, Smith and Kyle could be exciting in the open court.

I like the defensive game of the Gonzaga kid and his decision making. Could help create runnouts that feature Smith and Kyle as finishers. Look for Kyle to finish in ways other than getting all the way to the rim. To get inside the paint and show poise and diversity of short little shots.

[Big Pappa]

Until he proves otherwise (and this year doesn't count, as Duke had a shortage, not a plethora, of capable backcourt players), I don't believe for a second that K is going with a "three bigs" lineup, when he has three really talented guards that he can play-- he has always erred on the side of smaller, quicker, faster, more skilled, more scoring, more pressure defense, rather than bigger-- and I don't think he will ever give a damn about helping a player position himself for the NBA (cf.- Carlos Boozer's 3-year stint at center)-- and he sure as heck isn't going to do anything other than what he thinks is best for Duke University to win games-- and if that means Kyle Singler playing as the second-biggest guy next to one of the Plumlees, with 3 guards, then that is what we will see as the predominant set for next year.

I think you are calling Kyle "one of the bigs" here and that doesn't make any sense to me. Kyle is obviously an outside player that can (because of his height) play inside when needed. Calling him a "big" infers that his primary position is on the block and that is obviously not the case.

Two "bigs" and Kyle are how we won a National Championship this year and the two primary guys inside had very little offensive game. That will not be the case next year with MP1 and 2, they are both capable of scoring inside. If Kyle didn't need to be a low post scorer with Lance and Zoubs he certainly won't need to be with MP1 and 2.

[Mudge]

I think Kyle's return makes it less likely that you will see both MPs on the court at the same time for significant minutes. I do not think you will see 3 guards all that often either. I think Kyle's return makes it more likely that Ryan will be on the floor, as well as the other two forwards. There should be real competition among them for playing time; I give Ryan a real shot; the junior college transfer, in particular if he has a classic position, seal, catch and go game, could be a small four.

The possibilities are kind of exciting.

The kid from gonzaga and Smith on the court at the same time, that would shut some people down and put tremendous defensive pressure on the wings. You put the new point, Kyle and one of the MP3s, a lot of open court play will ensue, which will allow Kyle to develop, showcase his open court game. Even without the point, he, Smith and Kyle could be exciting in the open court.

I like the defensive game of the Gonzaga kid and his decision making. Could help create runnouts that feature Smith and Kyle as finishers. Look for Kyle to finish in ways other than getting all the way to the rim. To get inside the paint and show poise and diversity of short little shots.

Who is this "Gonzaga kid" of whom you speak?

[Mudge]

I think you are calling Kyle "one of the bigs" here and that doesn't make any sense to me. Kyle is obviously an outside player that can (because of his height) play inside when needed. Calling him a "big" infers that his primary position is on the block and that is obviously not the case.

Two "bigs" and Kyle are how we won a National Championship this year and the two primary guys inside had very little offensive game. That will not be the case next year with MP1 and 2, they are both capable of scoring inside. If Kyle didn't need to be a low post scorer with Lance and Zoubs he certainly won't need to be with MP1 and 2.

You can call Singler whatever you want-- bottom line for me is: I expect him to be the second-biggest player on the floor for Duke much of the time next year, including the starting lineup-- with only one Plumlee making the starting lineup (for me, its Mason).

[Welcome2DaSlopes]

Who is this "Gonzaga kid" of whom you speak?

Tyler Thornton, although I think he should have shown a little more respect and mention the young man by his name.

[Mudge]

Mudge, I see your point, but lets also give Coach K credit for being able to adapt his strategy when something works and when changes in the game dictate it. I think there is a pretty strong national consensus that the college game is a lot more physical than it was in the 90s; as such, it helps to have big guys who can stand up to that physical style of play. I think both Plumlees and Singler fit that bill pretty well. We also just won a national championship with a bigger line-up, and a huge reason for our late season success was an ability to out rebound opponents and play solid post defense. I think both the current style of the game and recent experience suggests that a bigger line up works well. Coach K is one of the best because he is willing to make adjustments to his style, I wouldn't count out the bigger line up so easily

We'll see-- a leopard doesn't change his spots.

[Mudge]

Tyler Thornton, although I think he should have shown a little more respect and mention the young man by his name.

I don't think we'll know his name much better this time next year, as that kid doesn't seem likely to be a big factor this coming year, if I know K's propensity to concentrate minutes in the persons of his best players.

[Big Pappa]

We'll see-- a leopard doesn't change his spots.

I'm not sure what you are saying here. Are you saying that Coach K will stick with the bigger lineup that won him the ship this last year?

If you are saying that he doesn't adapt to the players on his team you are flat out wrong. Coach K is known for exactly that. I think the 2010 championship team is a perfect example.

[Welcome2DaSlopes]

I don't think we'll know his name much better this time next year, as that kid doesn't seem likely to be a big factor this coming year, if I know K's propensity to concentrate minutes in the persons of his best players.

He will be in practice, I've heard and seen in the couple games I've watched of him, his defense is top notch, He will be the guy to push kyrie, nolan, and seth everyday in practice, which will make the team better as the year goes on.

[buzz]

The situation is much more analogous to 1992.

Let's hope so.

[gumbomoop]

Realizing the "intent" of the OP is to discuss impact of KS's return on playing time for others, I'll resist that - for now, knowing I'll have dozens of opportunities to post on that interesting issue - to say these things:

1. national impact - consensus preseason #1, with a few "experts" being contrary enough to argue that Mich St will be #1. [Probably no pundit will be contrary enough to put UNC as #1, but maybe Stuart Scott will begin halucinating.] Anyhow, on paper it's Duke, easy.
2. impact on UNC fans - dangerous, depression-inducing, possibly even more than watching KI in all-star games. [Again, pray for Stuart Scott.]
3. impact on K's multiple strategies - positive in so many ways that even K will be hard pressed not to be even more "giddy" than was Roy at HB's Skype-hype.
4. impact on opponents in '10-'11 - one would perhaps be too, too confident to predict either an undefeated season or another NC, so I won't, at least in this post. I will predict, however, that a whole bunch of teams will get KISSSED [KI,Singler, Smith,SEth,Dre], and if they don't like it, they can expect to get stuffed [by the MPs].

[FireOgilvie]

I think the premise behind the initial post of this thread is ridiculous. There are plenty of minutes to go around.

I'm not saying it will pan out exactly this way, but here's a possible example:

Kyle: 30 min
Nolan: 28
Kyrie: 26
Seth: 24
Andre: 20
MP1: 18
MP2: 22
Ryan: 17
Josh and Carrick: 12 combined (not sure how this will end up, although I suspect Josh will get the lion's share of these minutes; even if that's the case, the idea that Carrick won't "follow through" on his commitment seems ludicrous to me)
Tyler: 3

Now, obviously with the above distribution, two of our 11 scholarship players won't see a lot of minutes. But that's pretty much the way things go at Duke and in most other places. The other nine will see plenty, and the two who don't have two or three years more to become a contributing part of the rotation and undoubtedly will do so. Also, if any of Carrick, Josh, and Tyler prove themselves worthy of additional minutes, you could trim the top of the rotation down to 25 or 26 minutes and have 6 to 9 more minutes to hand out to the bottom of the rotation.

Yes, it's a deeper team than we usually have, but K has proven himself willing to go deep when he has the personnel. For example, in 89-90 nine of our players were used for 12 or more minutes per game, and another three combined for 8.5+.

I agree there's a possibility that the OP is a troll.

It's almost a given that Singler and Nolan will average 30 to 35 minutes a game over the course of the season. I don't see Kyrie playing less than 28 either. After that, I think Curry will get the highest amount, then it's up in the air.




4) A relatively inexperienced center whose ability to develop as a low-post player with low-block offensive moves is as yet unknown-- but whose latent potential is enormous (then Boozer; now Mason- as noted earlier, I expect Mason to leapfrog Miles to start at center);


Miles is our 3rd returning scorer, 2nd returning rebounder, and shot 56% from the field last year. He'll be a junior next year. I'm almost positive that at no point in little brother Mason's life has he averaged more points than Miles when they were on the same team (all of high school+). Miles is also a better leaper than Mason (which Mason readily admits although some people on this board forget). Don't sleep on Miles; I don't think he's ready to let Mason leapfrog him just yet.

[Big Pappa]

Realizing the "intent" of the OP is to discuss impact of KS's return on playing time for others, I'll resist that - for now, knowing I'll have dozens of opportunities to post on that interesting issue - to say these things:

1. national impact - consensus preseason #1, with a few "experts" being contrary enough to argue that Mich St will be #1. [Probably no pundit will be contrary enough to put UNC as #1, but maybe Stuart Scott will begin halucinating.] Anyhow, on paper it's Duke, easy.
2. impact on UNC fans - dangerous, depression-inducing, possibly even more than watching KI in all-star games. [Again, pray for Stuart Scott.]
3. impact on K's multiple strategies - positive in so many ways that even K will be hard pressed not to be even more "giddy" than was Roy at HB's Skype-hype.
4. impact on opponents in '10-'11 - one would perhaps be too, too confident to predict either an undefeated season or another NC, so I won't, at least in this post. I will predict, however, that a whole bunch of teams will get KISSSED [KI,Singler, Smith,SEth,Dre], and if they don't like it, they can expect to get stuffed [by the MPs].

That is absolutely FANTASTIC.

[Mudge]

I strongly disagree. The 1999-2000 team had only six guys play double-figure minutes. It went down in the NCAAT in large part because Dunleavy got mono, and that meant they pretty much only played five guys. The 2010-11 team should be a whole lot deeper than that. And a whole lot better. Your analysis above completely ignores Andre, Ryan, Josh, Carrick, and Tyler, who as a bench unit are light years ahead of the 2000 team's bench (Horvath (Fr), Christensen (So), Sanders (Fr), and Buckner (Fr)).

Even more important is the 2000 team was very inexperienced. That team had two experienced starters (Carrowell (Sr) and Battier (Jr)), one experienced rotation player (James), six freshmen, and Christensen, who had played a total of 70 minutes in 1995-96 and was in 1999-2000 more or less starting over, even though he technically was a sophomore. This year's team has six guys who have been through the mill at least once, plus Seth who started at Liberty for a year and has practiced at Duke for a year, and Carrick who at least has some experience at a JC. I really don't think your comparison stands up at all.

Finally, Nate James had started exactly one (1) game in his career prior to the 1999-2000 season, so your #5 isn't really accurate.

We'll see-- you're welcome to disagree-- nothing like finding fault with one really minor aspect of the comparison (i.e.- the amount of quality-- which is an entirely subjective proposition for the 2011 team, at this point, as I am highly unimpressed by what a bench of Dawkins, Kelly, Thornton, Felix, et al, brings to the table-- and the experience of the benches for the two teams) and then contending that the comparison doesn't hold up-- even though I matched up the capabilities and experience of what I perceive to be the likely top 6 players almost exactly between 2000 and 2011.

Unless Singler, Smith, Irving, Curry, and Mason Plumlee do not end up being the 2011 prevailing starting lineup (with Miles as the sixth man) and getting the lion's share of the minutes, your analysis does not strike me as particularly insightful. Also, I think you are incorrect on how many games James had started before 2000, but I await data to support your contention.

[Mudge]

I'm not sure what you are saying here. Are you saying that Coach K will stick with the bigger lineup that won him the ship this last year?

If you are saying that he doesn't adapt to the players on his team you are flat out wrong. Coach K is known for exactly that. I think the 2010 championship team is a perfect example.

I don't think I could have been any clearer: When Coach K has at least 3 really good backcourt players, he tends to play them (a lot) at the same time-- this team will not feature Singler with two Plumlees very often, in my estimation-- K will revert to small ball, because that is his preferred mode of operation... he didn't do it last year, because nobody else but Scheyer and Smith was ready for Prime Time-- that won't be the case next year with Smith, Irving, and (I hear) Curry.

[gep]

I don't know about that, but you would think that second team at least had a decent shot at making the tourney. And it has certainly got to be a good thing to have for practice scrimmages.

I just hope the "second team" doesn't beat up on the "first team" too much... (see Kyle, elbow to his face with stitches, black eye, etc) :D

[Duvall]

We'll see-- you're welcome to disagree-- nothing like finding fault with one really minor aspect of the comparison (i.e.- the amount of quality-- which is an entirely subjective proposition for the 2011 team, at this point, as I am highly unimpressed by what a bench of Dawkins, Kelly, Thornton, Felix, et al, brings to the table--

Be unimpressed by whatever you like, but Dawkins and Kelly very nearly matched the 2000 production of Horvath, Christensen, Sanders and Buckner last season - and that was as freshmen at the end of a talented roster. And that's not considering what Hairston, Felix and Thornton may bring next year.

It's a better bench, okay?


Also, I think you are incorrect on how many games James had started before 2000, but I await data to support your contention.

Check the database (http://goduke.statsgeek.com/basketball-m/seasons/). One start in an injury-plagued three season, one of which was lost to a medical redshirt.

[-bdbd]

First off, I don't think there is any way that Kyle spends much time at the 4 next year. I'm sure he would do whatever he needs to in order to help the team (2008-2009) but his natural position and NBA position is the 3. I'm sure he and Coach K talked about where he would play and what his role would be before he decided to come back. Kyle has been quoted saying that he feels more comfortable at the 3.

Next, I think the starters are:

Kyrie - Nolan - Kyle - MP1 - MP2

Andre and Seth will get plenty of time backing up the 1-3. Ryan and Josh should get time back up the Plumlees with Carrick and Tyler getting in here and there.

Oddly very negative string for a second-time poster to be starting....

This is nothing but WONDERFUL news for real Duke fans. It all-but-guarantees Duke is the preseason #1 pick, and clearly a very strong contender for the 2011 National Championship. Great, great stuff.

No, I don't see this as negatively impacting on any other player. For any "negative" implications Dukefan75 wants to infer for any individual player you can also infer an equal or better positive starting with THIS MAKES THE DUKE TEAM MUCH BETTER FOR 2010-2011. And this effectively addresses for next year what I perceived as potentially an achillies heel - front court depth.

And Dawkins still has the potential to play a very unique roll for this next season on this squad -- he is our strongest experienced player in that "swing range" 6'4" - 6'7" with the quicks/athleticism to match up versus the HB's of the world. Given that uniqueness, and the amount of outside attention Kyle (and Nolan and Curry) should get, I see Dre having some great open shots and see his overall scoring going up. K tends to lean on experience with players (and somewhat so with time distribution).

Gotta disagree with Big Pappa too, at least somewhat. No doubt K has assured KS of much opportunity/time to play out at the wing (regardless of whether you call him a 3 or a 4), but given K's oft-stated preference for playing "the best five, regardless of position," I see us starting 3 G's, plus Kyle and a Plumlee (most likely MP2 I think). Expect to see starters KI, Nolan and Curry (or AD) starting a lot at the beginning, but lots of rotations that allow Kyle to spend time on the perimeter - such as playing the Plumlees together or a Plumlee with Ryan. This will be a very DEEP team with a lot more players than normal getting into the rotation - could easily go 9 deep.

No way this can be interpreted negatively by Duke fans - whether you label it '92 redux, or '99 or 2002, this will be a VERY talented team. Now, very talented teams do lose in the NCAAT, as KA and KY demonstarted just a few weeks ago. But if you are looking ahead to next year you just HAVE to be really excited now...

Defend that crown Devils!!!

:D:D:D:D

[gumbomoop]

.... as I am highly unimpressed by what a bench of Dawkins, Kelly, Thornton, Felix, et al, brings to the table

Unless Singler, Smith, Irving, Curry, and Mason Plumlee do not end up being the 2011 prevailing starting lineup (with Miles as the sixth man) and getting the lion's share of the minutes....

I hope in extracting these 2 points I have not taken your views out of context. That's not my intent, for I think I have a substantive enough disagreement that I don't need to mislead.

Here goes: If I read your 2d point above, you think those 6 will get the minutes. Just for argument's sake, may I assume you mean those 6 will get at least, say, 170 of the 200 mpg [say, KS,NS,KI,SC = 30 each; MPs, given foul proclivities, = 25 each]. Now, I happen to agree that these 6 will get the most minutes [absent injuries]. Further, I'm willing to agree with you that TT, CF, and JH [whom you don't mention, but is the "et al"] will be last 3 in mpg, and toward season's end probably not play a lot. Maybe one of those 3 will surprise me [and you], and under other circumstances would certainly play more. But they're all new, and none of them is KI. I don't much cotton to your phrase "highly unimpressed," and think something more like "The verdict's out on these 3" would be more charitable.

OK, that leaves players #7-8, DD and RK. Now really, did Dawkins not show you enough to think he can play 15 mpg [others will scream, "More!"]? And Kelly, do you not agree that he can probably shoot, high-post-pass, block a shot and get a rebound or 2? Really? Wouldn't virtually every team in the country like to have these 2 at #7-8 and 12-15 mpg each? And wouldn't they be perfectly sensible in drooling at such a gift? So, "highly impressed" does strike me as over the top.

[Big Pappa]

No doubt K has assured KS of much opportunity/time to play out at the wing (regardless of whether you call him a 3 or a 4), but given K's oft-stated preference for playing "the best five, regardless of position," I see us starting 3 G's, plus Kyle and a Plumlee (most likely MP2 I think). Expect to see starters KI, Nolan and Curry (or AD) starting a lot at the beginning, but lots of rotations that allow Kyle to spend time on the perimeter - such as playing the Plumlees together or a Plumlee with Ryan. This will be a very DEEP team with a lot more players than normal getting into the rotation - could easily go 9 deep.

No way this can be interpreted negatively by Duke fans - whether you label it '92 redux, or '99 or 2002, this will be a VERY talented team. Now, very talented teams do lose in the NCAAT, as KA and KY demonstarted just a few weeks ago. But if you are looking ahead to next year you just HAVE to be really excited now...



I understand the point about the best 5 but I am not convince that the best 5 will not be Kyrie, Nolan, Kyle, MP1 and MP2. Either way we can agree to disagree and know that this is a GREAT problem to have. Basically, IMO, 7 guys (previously mentioned 5 plus Seth and Dre) that could start for virtually any team in the country next year.

The biggest concern I have is my patience for waiting until the tip of the first game.

[SoCalDukeFan]

I admit I do not know the rules but I think that Matt Leinart took only a dance class his 5th year at USC. Kyle may be able to get by with a very light course load.

Generally when Duke plays there is a bulls eye on its back. Beat Duke and you make your season. Next year will be that only much more so. I think that teams will be very physical against us and we will need to be physical also. There could easily be a role for Felix.

I will let K and staff figure out the starters and the minutes. The team will be a lot of fun to watch.

Two weeks ago we won the National Championship. I can't figure out if I am more excited for winning the championship or for next year to begin.

SoCal

[west_coast_devil]

We'll see-- you're welcome to disagree-- nothing like finding fault with one really minor aspect of the comparison (i.e.- the amount of quality-- which is an entirely subjective proposition for the 2011 team, at this point, as I am highly unimpressed by what a bench of Dawkins, Kelly, Thornton, Felix, et al, brings to the table-- and the experience of the benches for the two teams) and then contending that the comparison doesn't hold up-- even though I matched up the capabilities and experience of what I perceive to be the likely top 6 players almost exactly between 2000 and 2011.

Unless Singler, Smith, Irving, Curry, and Mason Plumlee do not end up being the 2011 prevailing starting lineup (with Miles as the sixth man) and getting the lion's share of the minutes, your analysis does not strike me as particularly insightful. Also, I think you are incorrect on how many games James had started before 2000, but I await data to support your contention.

I really like this line up. Although it appears that the popular opinion on this board is replacing Curry for Mase/Mason; and that placing Kyle in the "4" would only do him a diservice to his future NBA spot at the "3". I think that K finds a way to tailor the offense to keep Kyle on the perimeter as often as possible, which in most cases will cause a mismatch for the opposing team. Cant be more excited for November!!

[Kedsy]

We'll see-- you're welcome to disagree-- nothing like finding fault with one really minor aspect of the comparison (i.e.- the amount of quality-- which is an entirely subjective proposition for the 2011 team, at this point, as I am highly unimpressed by what a bench of Dawkins, Kelly, Thornton, Felix, et al, brings to the table-- and the experience of the benches for the two teams) and then contending that the comparison doesn't hold up-- even though I matched up the capabilities and experience of what I perceive to be the likely top 6 players almost exactly between 2000 and 2011.

Unless Singler, Smith, Irving, Curry, and Mason Plumlee do not end up being the 2011 prevailing starting lineup (with Miles as the sixth man) and getting the lion's share of the minutes, your analysis does not strike me as particularly insightful.

Well, it may not be insightful, but you took a team that essentially played six guys and had only three players with college game experience out of ten, and compared it to a team that will probably go nine deep and has eight players with college game experience out of eleven. Whether or not the starting lineups look similar (which they don't, in my opinion, but that's an argument for another day), the two teams are not comparable.

And, by the way, I don't in any way think that depth and experience can fairly be called "really minor aspect[s]" of a comparison like this. They are two of the most critical characteristics of any college team.


Also, I think you are incorrect on how many games James had started before 2000, but I await data to support your contention.

Well, I looked it up before I posted, which apparently you didn't, twice, so I'm not sure why the burden is on me to "support my contention," but here are the numbers:

In 1996-97, Nate played 17 games, starting 1.
In 1997-98, Nate played 6 games, starting none.
In 1998-99, Nate played 39 games, starting none.

And those are all the seasons he played prior to 1999-2000. There you go. (My source, if you're interested in looking it up this time, is http://goduke.statsgeek.com/basketball-m/)

[Big Pappa]

According to GoDuke.com:

Singler and head coach Mike Krzyzewski will address the media on Tuesday, April 20 in the media room of Cameron Indoor Stadium. The press conference will begin at 10:30 a.m. eastern and will be streamed live exclusively on GoDuke.com.

[amazinballer323]

To those who question Kyle ever playing the 4 because his pro position is the 3 and he will need to play on the outside:

Is it not possible for him to benefit from playing the 4 too? He'll have bigger guys guarding him and he'll flash outside and be able to go right by them.

Is it also inconveivable that the offense could be a little different with 4 guys on the perimeter at times or with a motion that allows Kyle more flexibility outside?

In his frosh and soph years, he was counted on inside to bang because nobody else was skilled to do it. His role at the 4 I feel would be different than when he was playing the 4-5 in the first half of his career

[LSanders]

Impact on others? Harrison Barnes, meet Kyle Singler.


DUDE!!

What a beautiful sentiment!! :D

[bjornolf]

The only weakness I see on this team is the lack of a true center. We might miss Zoubek a LOT next year. We'll still have PLENTY of forwards to throw at a big center, but that's the one position we might have trouble with. Luckily, we have several BIG forwards, unlike some of the teams we played, like Butler, who didn't even have that.

[Saratoga2]

The coming 2010/2011 season poses both a dilemma and an opportunity for the coaches.
The dilemma is that the team has just come off a national championship season but has not lost a single player to early entry via the NBA draft. Perhaps prudent recruiting required the coaching staff to consider the possibility of losing Singler and even possibly Smith and Mason Plumlee. The prudent recruiting has added 5 players who have never played a single minute for the team. Curry, Felix, Hairston, Irving and Thornton. That has left the team with 11 players capable of either starting or playing significant minutes on many NCAA division I teams. We now have Singler, Smith, Mason and Miles Plumlee, Kelly, Dawkins, Curry, Felix, Hairston, Felix and Thornton coming into the season. Another way to state the dilemma is how do you get enough PT to develop players, keep them satisfied and avoid their transfer to other programs. It appears that early entry to the NBA draft is a real possibility with Irving, Mason Plumlee and Curry coming to mind.
The opportunity provided to the staff is to have a team which is very deep and can survive the inevitable injuries, illnesses and excess foul issues that can come up. Without those though the staff can go to a very up tempo game plan, pushing the ball up faster on offense and putting more emphasis on full court defensive pressure. The emphasis will still need to be on winning the games, but perhaps the starters would play a few less minutes in that style of play.
My view of starting, average PT at position and depth charting at positions is as follows:
1. Irving (25), Curry(13), Thornton(2)
2. Smith(32), Curry(5), Dawkins(3)
3. Singler(28), Dawkins(8), Felix(3), Hairston(1)
4. Mason P.(20), Hairston(10), Singler (5), Kelly(5)
5. Miles P.(25), Kelly(10), Mason P. (5)
Trying to suggest an apportionment of time without seeing them play is of course just a guess at best, but it does suggest the issues of finding PT for so many good players.

[Duke12]

Just thing of late game situations (ie 4 minutes to go up 3 possessions or more) with Kyrie, Seth, Andre, Nolan and Kyle on the flooor together.

[MChambers]

To those who question Kyle ever playing the 4 because his pro position is the 3 and he will need to play on the outside:

Is it not possible for him to benefit from playing the 4 too? He'll have bigger guys guarding him and he'll flash outside and be able to go right by them.

Is it also inconveivable that the offense could be a little different with 4 guys on the perimeter at times or with a motion that allows Kyle more flexibility outside?

In his frosh and soph years, he was counted on inside to bang because nobody else was skilled to do it. His role at the 4 I feel would be different than when he was playing the 4-5 in the first half of his career

don't' forget that in college ball a lot of 4s are guy who will be 3s in the NBA, like Hayward, in Duke's last game. (Remember that one?)

It won't hurt Kyle's NBA chances to play some 4 next year.

[MChambers]

Here's the starting lineup I favor, at least when Mike Patrick is doing the game

5-Kelly
4-Kyle
3-Carrick
2-Curry
1-Kyrie

Think of the possibilities for confusion!

[roywhite]

Here's the starting lineup I favor, at least when Mike Patrick is doing the game

5-Kelly
4-Kyle
3-Carrick
2-Curry
1-Kyrie

Think of the possibilities for confusion!

Very good. Poor Mike Patrick---he'd probably have to go to the jersey numbers.

Who else to coach such a team but K?

[weezie]

I work in Chapel Hill will all UNC fans. Every day they have been asking me (nervously) if Singler is coming back. I can't wait to go to work tomorrow!


Another day to sport the NC swag and smile benignly at the unwashed masses!:D

[mgtr]

Here's the starting lineup I favor, at least when Mike Patrick is doing the game

5-Kelly
4-Kyle
3-Carrick
2-Curry
1-Kyrie

Think of the possibilities for confusion!

Great! Too bad we don't have somebody named Czyz, then everybody would get messed up.

[amat1129]

i don't know if anyone has brought this up at all but seeing how nolan was able to bring the ball up and play the point effectively towards the end of the year i think nolan will have more time at point than curry, i think when they are both in the game and KI is out(however brief this may be) nolan will play the point over curry simply based on experience and curry's shooting ability on the wing. On another note did anyone hear in the jordan game when jwill said KI will be tested physically because he will be asked to guard the other teams pg full court? I assume nolan will always guard the other teams pg especially if it is a dynamic scoring or creating guard. I curious on what others think?

[TheBrianZoubekExperience]

To those who question Kyle ever playing the 4 because his pro position is the 3 and he will need to play on the outside:

Is it not possible for him to benefit from playing the 4 too? He'll have bigger guys guarding him and he'll flash outside and be able to go right by them.

Is it also inconveivable that the offense could be a little different with 4 guys on the perimeter at times or with a motion that allows Kyle more flexibility outside?

In his frosh and soph years, he was counted on inside to bang because nobody else was skilled to do it. His role at the 4 I feel would be different than when he was playing the 4-5 in the first half of his career

I don't think his draft stock will change much regardless but I do think it would benefit his development to play almost exclusively at the 3 and work on his outside game for the NBA. Playing some minutes at the 4 is likely but for his sake (and the team's) I hope he doesn't have to play too much inside and Kelly/Hairston are able to contribute big minutes if called upon.

[TruBlu]

VERSATILITY!

Okay, I changed my mind . . . more words:

Duke could get added income by charging admittance to "open practices". I would pay!

As gep said, the practices will be intense, but please guys, don't hurt each other!

[TheBrianZoubekExperience]

The coming 2010/2011 season poses both a dilemma and an opportunity for the coaches.
The dilemma is that the team has just come off a national championship season but has not lost a single player to early entry via the NBA draft. Perhaps prudent recruiting required the coaching staff to consider the possibility of losing Singler and even possibly Smith and Mason Plumlee. The prudent recruiting has added 5 players who have never played a single minute for the team. Curry, Felix, Hairston, Irving and Thornton. That has left the team with 11 players capable of either starting or playing significant minutes on many NCAA division I teams. We now have Singler, Smith, Mason and Miles Plumlee, Kelly, Dawkins, Curry, Felix, Hairston, Felix and Thornton coming into the season. Another way to state the dilemma is how do you get enough PT to develop players, keep them satisfied and avoid their transfer to other programs. It appears that early entry to the NBA draft is a real possibility with Irving, Mason Plumlee and Curry coming to mind.
The opportunity provided to the staff is to have a team which is very deep and can survive the inevitable injuries, illnesses and excess foul issues that can come up. Without those though the staff can go to a very up tempo game plan, pushing the ball up faster on offense and putting more emphasis on full court defensive pressure. The emphasis will still need to be on winning the games, but perhaps the starters would play a few less minutes in that style of play.
My view of starting, average PT at position and depth charting at positions is as follows:
1. Irving (25), Curry(13), Thornton(2)
2. Smith(32), Curry(5), Dawkins(3)
3. Singler(28), Dawkins(8), Felix(3), Hairston(1)
4. Mason P.(20), Hairston(10), Singler (5), Kelly(5)
5. Miles P.(25), Kelly(10), Mason P. (5)
Trying to suggest an apportionment of time without seeing them play is of course just a guess at best, but it does suggest the issues of finding PT for so many good players.

This seems pretty reasonable. I'd guess by the end of the year we'd have a trimmer rotation though and a couple of those guys might not play much. I'd guess K ends up getting a feel for the guys he thinks he can trust and those that he can't end up left out. I'd guess Thornton probably plays more minutes or not at all. Same with Felix.

I'm very interested to see what we get out of Kelly and Curry. I've been down on Kelly generally since we signed him (I remember seeing him and Mason play live in a couple of HS games and thinking there was no way Mason should be ranked so much lower before he eventually moved up on scout and rivals) but he'll have a tremendous opportunity to play if he is ready.

I'm also really interested in seeing what Curry can do. I'm trying to keep my expectations modest for now but a lot of posters here seem to think he is a sure stud. If so, then maybe less minutes for Dawkins or we play with a 3 guard lineup more often and have Singler at the 4. Either way, we should be in great shape next year.

[Indoor66]

Two weeks ago we won the National Championship. I can't figure out if I am more excited for winning the championship or for next year to begin.

SoCal

On this board your excitement should be about next year. Many here never seem to savor what has been, only what might be. It must be tough to live life so quickly.

[ReformedAggie]

Woo hoo

[wilson]

The only weakness I see on this team is the lack of a true center. We might miss Zoubek a LOT next year. We'll still have PLENTY of forwards to throw at a big center, but that's the one position we might have trouble with. Luckily, we have several BIG forwards, unlike some of the teams we played, like Butler, who didn't even have that.A good observation, but remember that true 5's are virtually extinct in college. We will play very few (if any) teams who throw out a middle-of-the-lane big that we can't serviceably counter with a committee of forwards.

[CrazieDUMB]

Let's not forget that sometimes, injuries do happen, and you have to call upon that depth. We were lucky this year to be pretty healthy. Remember how thin we were at guard? Andre gave us a bit of breathing room, but still - if we had an ankle there or a stress fracture, it would have been very, very tough on us.

That being said, even if our entire starting five overslept for a game, I'd feel pretty confident with our B team. Consider a starting lineup of Seth, Dre, Felix, Kelly, Hairston and Tyler coming off the bench. How many ACC teams would trade their lineup for that?

[MChambers]

I think this means that Duke will press a lot. It would seem to be a good way to use all this perimeter depth.

Having said that, I've always preferred Duke's aggressive half court schemes. Of course, I was skeptical about the compact pressure defense this year, and that worked out okay, I guess. ;) So maybe I'll learn to love the press.

[CDu]

I think this means that Duke will press a lot. It would seem to be a good way to use all this perimeter depth.

Having said that, I've always preferred Duke's aggressive half court schemes. Of course, I was skeptical about the compact pressure defense this year, and that worked out okay, I guess. ;) So maybe I'll learn to love the press.

We could also return to a more aggressive half-court defense on the perimeter, as we'll have more depth at the guard spots. I'm not saying we will definitely do that, but applying more full-court pressure isn't the only way we could make for a more up-tempo game defensively.

[rotogod00]

Since we're all having a bit of fun with this, this is how I see the minutes breaking down:

PG: Irving 25; Curry 15; Thornton 0
SG: Smith 30; Dawkins 10
SF: Singler 25; Felix 10; Dawkins 5
PF: MP1 10; Kelly 15; Hairston 10; Singler 5
C: MP2 25; MP1 15

Total minutes:
Singler 30
Smith 30
MP1 25
MP2 25
Irving 25
Curry 15
Dawkins 15
Kelly 15
Hairston 10
Felix 10
Thornton 0
(of course, Thornton will get a few minutes here and there but generally, he'll be riding the pine)

[Andy]

My starting line up is
1. Kyrie
2. Smith
3. Singler
4. Mas Plumlee
5. Mil Plumlee

I feel like Mason will really step up this year and show some of his potential, and if Miles can improve as much as he did from his freshmen year to his sophmore year this year then we will have a great down low presence. Also with Kelly and Hairston off the bench we should be stable when the plumlee's need a break.

Nolan and Singler can obviously play as many minutes as we need them to play and still be great players so giving them solid backups like Dawkins and Curry will still keep our scoring going but also keep our stars fresh.

I see Felix providing some energy off the bench with his athletic abilities (hopefully some sick dunks). And I see Thorton becoming a really good on ball defender, and putting some pressure on other teams pg.

[dukeimac]

Okay, I'll play coach K too.

Kyle - 40 minutes (top notch players don't sit)
Nolan - 40 minutes (top notch players don't sit)
Kyrie - 35 minutes (he'll be wearing #1, the first time in Coach K's history someone will wear #1)
Curry - 20 minutes
Dawkins - 15 minutes
Miles - Mason - Harriston - 40 minutes

Kelly is Kyles backup so when Kyle sits Kelly will play. He should hope for a lot of blow outs. His breakout year will be his junior year when he takes over for Kyle; he can shot the 3, dribble and pass.

Felix - work on your grades. Nothing shows this guy to be a star; more of a player for the future. Remember, he went the juco way, probably because of grades.

Thorton - PG of the future. Remember Dockery.

Kyle can guard a 4 (which will help sell his NBA game to the scouts) yet he can play like a SG, which possess all kinds of problems for other teams. Most teams that have athletic 4's also have dumb 4's. Kyle will eat them up. Henson played better late in the season but he didn't guard anyone. He just stood there and blocked shots. He reminds me of a poor man's Thabet.

Coach will do his usual, you have to match his team. This will cause all kinds of problems for most teams. Every team they play will need to match Duke's 3 point shooting. With Nolan, Curry and Kyle on the floor they will have 3 guys who can shoot 3's real well. Kyrie can dish the ball which creates all kinds of issues in defending the guys who stand out by the 3 point line. Then they will exhale when Dawkins comes in and he will light them up. He too will have a break out season his Junior year.

But seriously guys, Kyle is NBA talent and Nolan is about a half of step from NBA talent; no way these guys should see less time next year. The only way is if Duke blows out teams and I hope they do a lot of that. Especially when they play UNC.

Kind of a funny discussion, Coach will have them ready to play the way he thinks will be the best to win. He gets to see these guys every day and is in a much better position to judge their ability. I know, I know, the youtube videos are a great scout; yea right. I'm still waiting for those guys who questioned Coach's plan for playing time last year. A few of them have apologized but there were a lot more that have not. I'm waiting for that guy who ran a blog crying for Coach to play his bench more. Has he given to Duke diploma back yet?

[MChambers]

We could also return to a more aggressive half-court defense on the perimeter, as we'll have more depth at the guard spots. I'm not saying we will definitely do that, but applying more full-court pressure isn't the only way we could make for a more up-tempo game defensively.

I definitely think we'll have very aggressive half-court defense, but I think we'll try more full court pressing than ever. We'll see if it is effective against teams with good ballhandlers (e.g., Michigan State or Purdue).

[rotogod00]

Okay, I'll play coach K too.

Kyle - 40 minutes (top notch players don't sit)
Nolan - 40 minutes (top notch players don't sit)
Kyrie - 35 minutes (he'll be wearing #1, the first time in Coach K's history someone will wear #1)
Curry - 20 minutes
Dawkins - 15 minutes
Miles - Mason - Harriston - 40 minutes

Kelly is Kyles backup so when Kyle sits Kelly will play. He should hope for a lot of blow outs. His breakout year will be his junior year when he takes over for Kyle; he can shot the 3, dribble and pass.

Felix - work on your grades. Nothing shows this guy to be a star; more of a player for the future. Remember, he went the juco way, probably because of grades.

Thorton - PG of the future. Remember Dockery.

Kyle can guard a 4 (which will help sell his NBA game to the scouts) yet he can play like a SG, which possess all kinds of problems for other teams. Most teams that have athletic 4's also have dumb 4's. Kyle will eat them up. Henson played better late in the season but he didn't guard anyone. He just stood there and blocked shots. He reminds me of a poor man's Thabet.

Coach will do his usual, you have to match his team. This will cause all kinds of problems for most teams. Every team they play will need to match Duke's 3 point shooting. With Nolan, Curry and Kyle on the floor they will have 3 guys who can shoot 3's real well. Kyrie can dish the ball which creates all kinds of issues in defending the guys who stand out by the 3 point line. Then they will exhale when Dawkins comes in and he will light them up. He too will have a break out season his Junior year.

But seriously guys, Kyle is NBA talent and Nolan is about a half of step from NBA talent; no way these guys should see less time next year. The only way is if Duke blows out teams and I hope they do a lot of that. Especially when they play UNC.

Kind of a funny discussion, Coach will have them ready to play the way he thinks will be the best to win. He gets to see these guys every day and is in a much better position to judge their ability. I know, I know, the youtube videos are a great scout; yea right. I'm still waiting for those guys who questioned Coach's plan for playing time last year. A few of them have apologized but there were a lot more that have not. I'm waiting for that guy who ran a blog crying for Coach to play his bench more. Has he given to Duke diploma back yet?

but since kyle's never sitting because he's a "top notch player", guess kelly's never playing

also looks like we're gonna play 10 minutes of the game 4 on 5. should be interesting ;-)

[wilson]

Felix - work on your grades. Nothing shows this guy to be a star; more of a player for the future. Remember, he went the juco way, probably because of grades.It's been said a number of times, here and elsewhere, that Felix went JUCO not because of grades so much as a lack of D-1 programs recruiting him out of high school. He is said to be quite a good student, with a GPA in the high 3's. I think he'll be fine in Duke classrooms.

[roywhite]

dukeimac----the style of play is likely to be different for the 2010-11 team...more ball pressure, occasional full court defensive pressure, more transition offense. This team will likely have more possessions per game. So, with the style of play and the quality depth, it's simply not necessary to play even the best players 40 minutes or even 36-38.

Didn't care for your comments about Felix and academics; I doubt you have first-hand information on that.

If you'd like him to work on academics, maybe you could work on your spelling of our players' names...it's Thornton.

[airowe]

Dukiemac, once again you've left too little unspoken. Here's a quote from Nolan in regards to your PT assumptions.

"I'm sure I won't have to play 40 minutes per game next year," the starting junior point guard Nolan Smith said of the team's depth next season. "I'll have guys to keep me fresher."

[whereinthehellami]

Actually Seth can play some PG so he might be first off the bench for PG. Duke's back court will be the most versatile in the conference. Its possible Duke can go 3 guards ( how sweet it would be to ruin 'nova and give them a taste of their own medicine). In terms of a more traditional 3, Carrick is the more natural back up. Its entirely dependent in his athleticism and his ability to pick up the D but I DO NOT think Felix is a project. He's not Olek or Boateng, there is no need for Duke to get a Juco player for a project. K gets a Juco player because he thinks they have the ability to to realistically contribute NEXT year. Remember there was a good chance that Kyle wasn't coming back this year. I think K recruited Felix as a player that could help this team next year. He will not have to carry a scoring load, just play hard.

I've got a feeling that Carrick is going to get more minutes than alot of people are thinking. I see him carving out a niche as a strong defender on the wing (and to some extent down low) and a strong finisher on the break (more opportunities this year). I wouldn't be suprised to see him get minutes in the post when the Plumlees get in foul trouble. Kind of like how Carrawell did when he was here. I've liked his attitude from the quotes that I have seen from him. A good team player who embraces defense and plays with a chip on his shoulder because he was overlooked as a younger player.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Did you hear that the ACC is expanding? With all these minutes that all these Duke players are getting next year, apparently there is going to be another Duke team (titled Duke University Light) to cater to all of these minutes!

[DallasDevil]

Did you hear that the ACC is expanding? With all these minutes that all these Duke players are getting next year, apparently there is going to be another Duke team (titled Duke University Light) to cater to all of these minutes!

Just think about the following potential line-ups in the portion of the Blue-White game where Coach K tries to even the teams (whereas the other portion it's usually first 5 vs. second 5):

Blue-Irving, Smith, Felix, Kelly, MP2
White-Curry, Dawkins, Singler, Hairston, MP1

Each of those teams has at least 3 solid scorers, a potential Lance Thomas/Nate James type glue guy, and decent size at each position. I have to believe either of these line-ups is good enough to be the starting line-up of a Top 10 team next year. In fact, the Blue-White game may be more competitive and feature better basketball than 90% of Duke's games next year.

[rotogod00]

Just think about the following potential line-ups in the portion of the Blue-White game where Coach K tries to even the teams (whereas the other portion it's usually first 5 vs. second 5):

Blue-Irving, Smith, Felix, Kelly, MP2
White-Curry, Dawkins, Singler, Hairston, MP1

Each of those teams has at least 3 solid scorers, a potential Lance Thomas/Nate James type glue guy, and decent size at each position. I have to believe either of these line-ups is good enough to be the starting line-up of a Top 10 team next year. In fact, the Blue-White game may be more competitive and feature better basketball than 90% of Duke's games next year.

those are some NICE teams indeed

[CDu]

I definitely think we'll have very aggressive half-court defense, but I think we'll try more full court pressing than ever. We'll see if it is effective against teams with good ballhandlers (e.g., Michigan State or Purdue).

Here's where I think Coach K's flexibility as a coach comes in. I don't think we're going to turn into a Clemson-style, all-court press all the time team. I think we'll press a lot more, but I think we'll be judicious about it. I think Coach K will know when to go with the press and when to go more with the aggressive half-court defense. Teams like MSU or Purdue (whom we may not face at all next year) would be the types of teams that maybe we drop back to the half-court pressure approach to avoid giving away easy transition buckets.

[rotogod00]

Just think about the following potential line-ups in the portion of the Blue-White game where Coach K tries to even the teams (whereas the other portion it's usually first 5 vs. second 5):

Blue-Irving, Smith, Felix, Kelly, MP2
White-Curry, Dawkins, Singler, Hairston, MP1

Each of those teams has at least 3 solid scorers, a potential Lance Thomas/Nate James type glue guy, and decent size at each position. I have to believe either of these line-ups is good enough to be the starting line-up of a Top 10 team next year. In fact, the Blue-White game may be more competitive and feature better basketball than 90% of Duke's games next year.

does thornton get to at least toss the ball for the opening tip

[dukelifer]

With Singler staying, Duke is certainly in the conversation to be a Final Four participant and possibly winning the NC. I am keeping my expectations in check until I see these guys on the floor together as a team. There are a lot of new pieces and I have watched enough ACC basketball to know that pieces does not a team make. If this team wants to repeat- an extraordinary hard thing to do when you lose three members of your starting line up-they are going to all need to play as a team and make D a priority. This team could fall into the trap of trying to out score their opponent - which they will do on many nights- but in the heat of one game in the tourney- you need to make stops and get bounds. This team will need to get much more consistent in the front court. Thomas and Zoubek knew their jobs and did them very well- they will be hard to replace simply because they had many years and battles under their belt. Next years team has talent up front- but it is still raw. Duke's backcourt should be outstanding- deep and all excellent shooters- this should make it easier for the big guys to get some open dunks. But the young guys are going to need to play with their egos in check if they want to make a deep run. This Duke team should pressure much more and probably take chances with more steals- and perhaps more fast breaks than this year's team. There is a lot a reasons for excitement- but the front court is still unproven and in the end- the summer development of Miles, Mason and Kelly will be key for a repeat. They need to be consistent night in and night out- which was not the case this year.

As for Kyle's staying impacting others- it can only help. Teams often take on the personalities of their seniors. Besides being great players, Kyle and Nolan are high character guys and next year will give them more chances to lead on and off the court. I expect they will do a much better job than lets say Thompson and Ginyard did this year. Practices will be intense and all the other guys will get much better as a result. It is always good to have Seniors and when they are already excellent- all the better. The top of the ACC will be competitive all year long.

[DallasDevil]

does thornton get to at least toss the ball for the opening tip

Sure, why not. He'll get his chance next year when Blue sends Curry to take Smith's spot, and Thornton will be the PG on White. Then replace Kyle with Gbinije, and you may have the best back-to-back Blue-White games since '00 and '01.

[Edit to add that this is obviously assuming that Mason and Kyrie come back after next year.]

[ACCBBallFan]

Just think about the following potential line-ups in the portion of the Blue-White game where Coach K tries to even the teams (whereas the other portion it's usually first 5 vs. second 5):

Blue-Irving, Smith, Felix, Kelly, MP2
White-Curry, Dawkins, Singler, Hairston, MP1

Each of those teams has at least 3 solid scorers, a potential Lance Thomas/Nate James type glue guy, and decent size at each position. I have to believe either of these line-ups is good enough to be the starting line-up of a Top 10 team next year. In fact, the Blue-White game may be more competitive and feature better basketball than 90% of Duke's games next year.
I did it independently and came up with the same 5 vs 5. Seems very evenly matched.

Then when I had Tyler at PG and Carrick Felix 11th man

Kyrie-Nolan-Dre- Josh-Miles

vs.

Tyler-Seth-Kyle-Ryan-Mason

With Josh Hairston as 11th man

Irving-Smith-Felix-Kelly-Mason

vs.

Thornton-Curry-Dawkins-Singler-Miles.

So same basic lineup as primary one and just sub Josh in for Tyler or vice versa and slide Seth-Dre-Kyle one position to have two evenly matched teams

[CDu]

Sure, why not. He'll get his chance next year when Blue sends Curry to take Smith's spot, and Thornton will be the PG on White. Then replace Kyle with Gbinije, and you may have the best back-to-back Blue-White games since '00 and '01.

[Edit to add that this is obviously assuming that Mason and Kyrie come back after next year.]

Two points on which I might note:

1. (this is ENTIRELY nitpicky) isn't the blue team typically the second team?
2. that 2011-2012 scenario ignores the possibility that we also get Rivers, which is I believe still a reasonable possibility

[dukeimac]

I accounted for 190 of the 200 minutes.

Kyle - 40 minutes (top notch players don't sit)
Nolan - 40 minutes (top notch players don't sit)
Kyrie - 35 minutes (he'll be wearing #1, the first time in Coach K's history someone will wear #1)
Curry - 20 minutes
Dawkins - 15 minutes
Miles - Mason - Harriston - 40 minutes

I don't micro manage and I don't believe I or anyone else on this site can even come close to Coach K's pinkie in predicting time, thus I left about 10 minutes for whoever.

As far as Thornton goes - I'll care about his name when he is a factor for Duke. 20th ranking for PG tells me he is years away from any considerable time. I would not, not saying that it will happen, be shocked if he transfers. If Rivers comes his time is very very limited.

Nolan is being a diplomat when he talks about his time. Are you serious? Next year will go a long long way towards his NBA draft. Do you really think he or Coach K would settle for sitting him more. Coach knows next year will be very critical for Nolan to shine for the pros. No way he goes from almost 40 to 30 minutes. What would that tell potential recruits?

[CDu]

I accounted for 190 of the 200 minutes.

Kyle - 40 minutes (top notch players don't sit)
Nolan - 40 minutes (top notch players don't sit)
Kyrie - 35 minutes (he'll be wearing #1, the first time in Coach K's history someone will wear #1)
Curry - 20 minutes
Dawkins - 15 minutes
Miles - Mason - Harriston - 40 minutes

I don't micro manage and I don't believe I or anyone else on this site can even come close to Coach K's pinkie in predicting time, thus I left about 10 minutes for whoever.

As far as Thornton goes - I'll care about his name when he is a factor for Duke. 20th ranking for PG tells me he is years away from any considerable time. I would not, not saying that it will happen, be shocked if he transfers. If Rivers comes his time is very very limited.

Nolan is being a diplomat when he talks about his time. Are you serious? Next year will go a long long way towards his NBA draft. Do you really think he or Coach K would settle for sitting him more. Coach knows next year will be very critical for Nolan to shine for the pros. No way he goes from almost 40 to 30 minutes. What would that tell potential recruits?

I think there's very little chance that Smith and Singler play anywhere close to 40 minutes. And I think you're overlooking the fact that the style of play will dictate that they play a lot less than 40 minutes. We're going to push the tempo a lot more, which means we'll need to sub more than we did this year to keep guys fresh. That means fewer minutes.

Further, why do you assume that playing 40 minutes per game would be better for Smith's and Singler's pro prospects? The scouts aren't going to look at count stats and say "we should/shouldn't take that guy." They're going to take a look at what the players do in the minutes that they get. So playing fewer minutes with less concern about foul trouble may actually allow them to be more aggressive and really show their full capabilities. The reduction in minutes could be a good thing for their pro prospects.

[Big Pappa]

I accounted for 190 of the 200 minutes.

Kyle - 40 minutes (top notch players don't sit)
Nolan - 40 minutes (top notch players don't sit)
Kyrie - 35 minutes (he'll be wearing #1, the first time in Coach K's history someone will wear #1)
Curry - 20 minutes
Dawkins - 15 minutes
Miles - Mason - Harriston - 40 minutes

I don't micro manage and I don't believe I or anyone else on this site can even come close to Coach K's pinkie in predicting time, thus I left about 10 minutes for whoever.

As far as Thornton goes - I'll care about his name when he is a factor for Duke. 20th ranking for PG tells me he is years away from any considerable time. I would not, not saying that it will happen, be shocked if he transfers. If Rivers comes his time is very very limited.

Nolan is being a diplomat when he talks about his time. Are you serious? Next year will go a long long way towards his NBA draft. Do you really think he or Coach K would settle for sitting him more. Coach knows next year will be very critical for Nolan to shine for the pros. No way he goes from almost 40 to 30 minutes. What would that tell potential recruits?

I agree with CDu on his points about Kyle and Nolan not playing all 40 minutes because of the tempo and playing style. Even last year they average less than 36 a game each (that was with a MUCH slower style of play and only Dawkins coming in occaisonally). There is a big different between 40 and 36 for two players, that leaves 8 minutes for another guy, which is virtually 1/4 of the game.

I'm not sure if you mean that Miles, Mason, and Josh will split 40 minutes equally, but if you did that is about 13 minutes a game each. Last year Mason averaged over 14 mpg and Miles average almost 16.5 mpg. I really don't think there is any way that the Plumless play less than 45mpg put together and could very well average over 50mpg.

You also left out Carrick out completely, he is a guy who could surprise with his readiness to step in and contribute.

[rotogod00]

I accounted for 190 of the 200 minutes.

Kyle - 40 minutes (top notch players don't sit)
Nolan - 40 minutes (top notch players don't sit)
Kyrie - 35 minutes (he'll be wearing #1, the first time in Coach K's history someone will wear #1)
Curry - 20 minutes
Dawkins - 15 minutes
Miles - Mason - Harriston - 40 minutes

I don't micro manage and I don't believe I or anyone else on this site can even come close to Coach K's pinkie in predicting time, thus I left about 10 minutes for whoever.

As far as Thornton goes - I'll care about his name when he is a factor for Duke. 20th ranking for PG tells me he is years away from any considerable time. I would not, not saying that it will happen, be shocked if he transfers. If Rivers comes his time is very very limited.

Nolan is being a diplomat when he talks about his time. Are you serious? Next year will go a long long way towards his NBA draft. Do you really think he or Coach K would settle for sitting him more. Coach knows next year will be very critical for Nolan to shine for the pros. No way he goes from almost 40 to 30 minutes. What would that tell potential recruits?

That if you come to Duke, you'll be a part of a great TEAM; one where its star players don't have to play the whole game to win. For recruits who aren't exclusively using college as a springboard to the NBA, that'd work for me.

[pantone287]

From K-Singler presser this morning:

"He'll be in the post some, too; it just depends who we have ... I see using him in a lot of ways. I think Kyle would be very much like how I used Grant [Hill], [Shane] Battier, [Mike] Dunleavy, somewhat [Danny] Ferry — although Ferry was more of a perimeter guy -- where you just use him everywhere,'' Krzyzewski said. "And he can be in there with any lineup, being very versatile."

That leaves a lot of room for Dawkins, Curry and Felix to pick up solid minutes with Kyle at the 4.

To me in ACC play:

Starting
Kyrie: 30 min
Nolan: 32 min
Kyle: 34 Min
MP2: 25 min
MP1: 22 min

Bench:
Seth: 24 Min
Dre: 13 min
Kelly: 8 min
Hairston: 5 min
Felix: 5 min
Thornton: 2 min

[CDu]

dukeimac----the style of play is likely to be different for the 2010-11 team...more ball pressure, occasional full court defensive pressure, more transition offense. This team will likely have more possessions per game. So, with the style of play and the quality depth, it's simply not necessary to play even the best players 40 minutes or even 36-38.

Didn't care for your comments about Felix and academics; I doubt you have first-hand information on that.

If you'd like him to work on academics, maybe you could work on your spelling of our players' names...it's Thornton.

In addition, it's Hairston, not "Harriston."

[airowe]

From K-Singler presser this morning:

"He'll be in the post some, too; it just depends who we have ... I see using him in a lot of ways. I think Kyle would be very much like how I used Grant [Hill], [Shane] Battier, [Mike] Dunleavy, somewhat [Danny] Ferry — although Ferry was more of a perimeter guy -- where you just use him everywhere,'' Krzyzewski said. "And he can be in there with any lineup, being very versatile."

That leaves a lot of room for Dawkins, Curry and Felix to pick up solid minutes with Kyle at the 4.

To me in ACC play:

Starting
Kyrie: 30 min
Nolan: 32 min
Kyle: 34 Min
MP2: 25 min
MP1: 22 min

Bench:
Seth: 24 Min
Dre: 13 min
Kelly: 8 min
Hairston: 5 min
Felix: 5 min
Thornton: 2 min

This is probably the best one I've seen yet. Also, don't think we'll have the same starting 5 all year. Things shake out throughout the season.

[CDu]

This is probably the best one I've seen yet. Also, don't think we'll have the same starting 5 all year. Things shake out throughout the season.

Yeah, I think that's probably the closest to being accurate. Although there's certainly room for variation +/- 2-4 minutes for pretty much any of those guys (and of course assuming no injuries).

As for the same starting 5 all year, when is the last time we've had that happen (if ever)? The closest I've seen was 2001-2002, when there were a total of 4 starts by someone other than Williams/Duhon/Jones/Dunleavy/Boozer. And 2007-2008 had 8 starts by guys other than Paulus/Henderson/Nelson/Singler/Thomas. But other than that, we've typically had a lot of turnover at at least one starting spot.

[dukelifer]

From K-Singler presser this morning:

"He'll be in the post some, too; it just depends who we have ... I see using him in a lot of ways. I think Kyle would be very much like how I used Grant [Hill], [Shane] Battier, [Mike] Dunleavy, somewhat [Danny] Ferry — although Ferry was more of a perimeter guy -- where you just use him everywhere,'' Krzyzewski said. "And he can be in there with any lineup, being very versatile."

That leaves a lot of room for Dawkins, Curry and Felix to pick up solid minutes with Kyle at the 4.

To me in ACC play:

Starting
Kyrie: 30 min
Nolan: 32 min
Kyle: 34 Min
MP2: 25 min
MP1: 22 min

Bench:
Seth: 24 Min
Dre: 13 min
Kelly: 8 min
Hairston: 5 min
Felix: 5 min
Thornton: 2 min

You are playing your key guys too many minutes- they are going to get tired legs at the end of the season. :)

[blueprofessor]

One of the UNC "Truthers" (his early a.m. post appears to be his first after leaving the "Denial" bar) predicts shock and awe for Kyle at the hands of Bullock and Barnes!

Post: Posted: Today 12:17 AM
"I think Singler made a mistake..HB Factor
I believe Harrison Barnes and Reggie Bullock will make Singler regret his decision.. I think they are both perfectly equipped to limit and in could in fact shut him down..

I truly believe that we have the infancy stage of one of the best Tar Heel defensive teams of all time.. With an improved Henson and Zeller in the paint..and you cant tell me that Zeller can't be better than Zoubek.. and I have seen what John Henson can do to the Plumlees personally, before he got to the Hill...HB I firmly will have a "Carmello like effect" he causes guys to step up the their play by his example. The other day I told someone that Larry Drew will be one of the few to get two NCAA rings.. they thought I was crazy...lol But guys it is all about them getting and staying hungry (for success.. and in John Henson's case literally) all this summer.. It will take hard work all summer for our guys.. but we do have the horses to get the job done... count on it..."

What a great 13 days! Best--Blueprofessor:D

[Big Pappa]

You are playing your key guys too many minutes- they are going to get tired legs at the end of the season. :)

I'm sure you're being sarcastic but to those that don't know, Jon, Nolan and Kyle all played over 35 mpg last year. Worked out pretty well I'd say.

[Osiagledknarf]

This move with Singler coming back is obviously going to affect guys like Andre Dawkins and Carrick Felix.. I said a couple of days ago that I thought Felix would get a lot more playing time, now I do not believe that will be the case...

Here's how I see it breaking down:

PG: Irving: 25-30 minutes Curry:10-15

SG: Smith: 30-35 Dawkins: 5-15

SF: Singler: 25-30 Dawkins: 10-15 Felix: 0-5

PF: Miles: 20-25 Hairston: 5 minutes

C: Mason 25-30 Kelly: 10-15


I feel Mason will have a very good year and show off his great offensive skills and his rare athletic ability.. The offense was not suited to use the big man to score, but to get offensive rebounds and kick it back to the wing players.. Without Scheyer and with how good a passer Kyrie is, I expect Mason to have a lot more production at the offensive end..

We still have 4 deep threats in Smith,Singler Dawkins and Curry.. With Kyrie in the fold it should make these guys better.. Expect these guys to blossom as well with Kyrie at the point..

I see Kelly, Dawkins and Curry being the 3 main for coming off the bench... Kelly will be the main backup for Mason and Miles at the 4 and 5, while I expect Hairston to have some minutes sprinkled his way every now and then...

Thronton could be brought in in press situations and for defensive purposes towards the end of games... however, barring injuries, don't expect him to be seeing a lot of time this year..

[dukelifer]

I'm sure you're being sarcastic but to those that don't know, Jon, Nolan and Kyle all played over 35 mpg last year. Worked out pretty well I'd say.

exactly. The too many minutes in games leading to tired legs myth should now be officially over after this season.

[RoyalBlue08]

I love the stuff being said at IC right now. Comedy Central is right!

Looking at our own team for next year, I think objectively the two biggest question marks are Kyrie and Mason. Can they live up to the hype/potential. If they do, our starting five with Nolan and Kyle and Player X (Seth or Andre or Miles depending on how big we want to be) will be better than anything that was in college basketball this past season, and perhaps more talented than UNC from two seasons ago. And the NBA draft gurus have them both (Kyrie and Mason) in the lottery for next season. I honestly can't think of a single thing not to be excited about.

[Kedsy]

This move with Singler coming back is obviously going to affect guys like Andre Dawkins and Carrick Felix.. I said a couple of days ago that I thought Felix would get a lot more playing time, now I do not believe that will be the case...

Here's how I see it breaking down:

PG: Irving: 25-30 minutes Curry:10-15

SG: Smith: 30-35 Dawkins: 5-15

SF: Singler: 25-30 Dawkins: 10-15 Felix: 0-5

PF: Miles: 20-25 Hairston: 5 minutes

C: Mason 25-30 Kelly: 10-15



You're selling Curry way short. He'll average 20 to 25. Also, I don't think Mason will get as high as 30, and I'd be very surprised if Nolan gets even close to 35.

When K has a lot of quality depth he doesn't play the starters for megaminutes. For example, in 1991, only two players on the team averaged more than 25 minutes per game (Hurley 34.7 and Laettner 30.2). Even Grant Hill was under 25 mpg (24.6). And the only reason Hurley played that many minutes is we didn't really have a backup PG, which isn't quite the case this year so I'd be surprised if anyone on the team gets much higher than 32 or so.

Also, for some reason I don't understand, every time you post your opinions on lineups or minutes you persist in putting Miles at PF and Mason at C, when I don't think anybody but you thinks Miles will log even 1 minute at the PF spot. People seem to correct you every time, but you go ahead and do it the next time, anyway. Personally, I think it detracts from your credibility.

[Big Pappa]

This move with Singler coming back is obviously going to affect guys like Andre Dawkins and Carrick Felix.. I said a couple of days ago that I thought Felix would get a lot more playing time, now I do not believe that will be the case...

Here's how I see it breaking down:

PG: Irving: 25-30 minutes Curry:10-15

SG: Smith: 30-35 Dawkins: 5-15

SF: Singler: 25-30 Dawkins: 10-15 Felix: 0-5

PF: Miles: 20-25 Hairston: 5 minutes

C: Mason 25-30 Kelly: 10-15


I feel Mason will have a very good year and show off his great offensive skills and his rare athletic ability.. The offense was not suited to use the big man to score, but to get offensive rebounds and kick it back to the wing players.. Without Scheyer and with how good a passer Kyrie is, I expect Mason to have a lot more production at the offensive end..

We still have 4 deep threats in Smith,Singler Dawkins and Curry.. With Kyrie in the fold it should make these guys better.. Expect these guys to blossom as well with Kyrie at the point..

I see Kelly, Dawkins and Curry being the 3 main for coming off the bench... Kelly will be the main backup for Mason and Miles at the 4 and 5, while I expect Hairston to have some minutes sprinkled his way every now and then...

Thronton could be brought in in press situations and for defensive purposes towards the end of games... however, barring injuries, don't expect him to be seeing a lot of time this year..

I think this lineup is one of the best I've seen so far. Especially after what Coach K said in the press conference about Kyle playing primarily on the perimeter this year. The only thing I would change about this lineup is a few more minutes for Seth at the 2 position as well.

[Rich]

Here's the starting lineup I favor, at least when Mike Patrick is doing the game

5-Kelly
4-Kyle
3-Carrick
2-Curry
1-Kyrie

Think of the possibilities for confusion!

First round of subs at the 4-5 minute mark are Plumlee and Plumlee!

[Big Pappa]

Also, for some reason I don't understand, every time you post your opinions on lineups or minutes you persist in putting Miles at PF and Mason at C, when I don't think anybody but you thinks Miles will log even 1 minute at the PF spot. People seem to correct you every time, but you go ahead and do it the next time, anyway. Personally, I think it detracts from your credibility.

This is a pretty unfair thing to say because Miles and Mason played together a lot last year with Miles playing the high post. In the offense that we ran last year they were basically both PF. Although I agree with your points about Seth (as I stated), I think you are nitpicking about Miles' position here. There is no reason to attack his credibility.

[Tim1515]

Kyrie - 28
Nolan - 31
Kyle - 32
MP2 - 23
MP1 - 25
Seth - 19
Andre - 16
Kelly - 13
Hairston - 5
Felix - 5
Tyler - 3

[DallasDevil]

Two points on which I might note:

1. (this is ENTIRELY nitpicky) isn't the blue team typically the second team?
2. that 2011-2012 scenario ignores the possibility that we also get Rivers, which is I believe still a reasonable possibility

1. You're right, that is entirely nitpicky. ;) If you'll see my earlier post, I was referring to the second half when Coach K usually tries to make the teams more even. E.g., in the second scrimmage of the Countdown to Craziness last year the Blue team one with a line-up of Curry, Smith, Zoubek, Miles, and Czyz. If you're ranking the teams, I agree that in my 2011-2012 scenario the blue team is probably the better team, but since I was just switching out a couple players it made it easier to refer to the teams as I project they could be in the 2010 game.
2. Once again, I agree that this is a reasonable possibility (perhaps even probable), but I don't like to count my chickens before they hatch. If Rivers commits to Duke, I'll change the line-up accordingly. :D

[Dukeface88]

As far as Kyle's minutes/poitions go, I wouldn't be surprised to see K's "we don't have a 1 and a 2, just guards" philosophy from this year become "we don't have a 3 and a 4, just forwards" next year. I also tend to think people are overestimating KI's minutes. While he's certainly talented, and I expect him to be a starter, he'll still be a freshman who needs to learn a completely new system; I'd peg him at 25 minutes per game over the season (fewer at the start, more at the end). I also think Nolan will be the PG when Kyrie isn't in, not Seth. Nolan played point for his first two years, and often took a pointish role this season, so he knows the position, plus he'll want more development at his likely NBA spot.

[UrinalCake]

I also tend to think people are overestimating KI's minutes. While he's certainly talented, and I expect him to be a starter, he'll still be a freshman who needs to learn a completely new system; I'd peg him at 25 minutes per game over the season (fewer at the start, more at the end).

You know, I was thinking the exact same thing, but then I did a little research on Duke PG's who were starters their freshmen year. Here are their minutes per game, as provided by goduke.com

Greg Paulus 32.3
Jason Williams 34.0
Bobby Hurley 33.4

Granted, every team is different. Irving will have a lot of depth behind him - Smith, Thornton, and even Curry could run the point. We'll be running and pressing like crazy, so we'll need to rotate guys in and out to keep everyone fresh. But it's not beyond possibility that Irving could average 30+ minutes.

[CDu]

I also tend to think people are overestimating KI's minutes. While he's certainly talented, and I expect him to be a starter, he'll still be a freshman who needs to learn a completely new system; I'd peg him at 25 minutes per game over the season (fewer at the start, more at the end).

I agree. From what little I've seen of Irving, he looks REALLY good. But given that we'll probably push the tempo, and given that Irving will be a freshman and will probably still have some freshman learning curve going on, and given that we will have two very solid and more experienced options to take the pressure off of him, I'd be surprised if Irving averaged 30+ minutes next year. I think 25-30 is reasonable, though. Though anything between 24 and 32 mpg wouldn't shock me.


I also think Nolan will be the PG when Kyrie isn't in, not Seth. Nolan played point for his first two years, and often took a pointish role this season, so he knows the position, plus he'll want more development at his likely NBA spot.

I see Smith and Curry as very similar styles of player (though Smith is a better leaper). Both appear to be versatile, score-first guards who are capable of setting up others but are better as scorers. As such, I don't know that I'd peg either as the one backup PG.

In my vision of the team next year, I'd see Smith and Curry sharing ballhandling duties whenever Irving is off the floor.

[CDu]

You know, I was thinking the exact same thing, but then I did a little research on Duke PG's who were starters their freshmen year. Here are their minutes per game, as provided by goduke.com

Greg Paulus 32.3
Jason Williams 34.0
Bobby Hurley 33.4

Granted, every team is different. Irving will have a lot of depth behind him - Smith, Thornton, and even Curry could run the point. We'll be running and pressing like crazy, so we'll need to rotate guys in and out to keep everyone fresh. But it's not beyond possibility that Irving could average 30+ minutes.

One major difference between those three and Irving is that none of those three had strong options as backups. Hurley had a freshman SG in McCaffrey. Williams had Andre Buckner. Paulus had Dockery, who was really just a defensive specialist that didn't develop into a PG. It was pretty much sink or swim with those guys. Next year, we will have Smith, Curry, and Thornton available to handle the PG duties behind Irving.

[Zafort]

Harrison Barnes's response to Singler's return.

[rotogod00]

Harrison Barnes's response to Singler's return.

you have a link for that?

[Duvall]

you have a link for that?

No, but it's worth revisiting his reaction (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=arv-P1UyCyQ) when Reggie Bullock claimed that Kyle Singler couldn't guard Barnes.

[AnotherNYCDukeFan]

One major difference between those three and Irving is that none of those three had strong options as backups. Hurley had a freshman SG in McCaffrey. Williams had Andre Buckner. Paulus had Dockery, who was really just a defensive specialist that didn't develop into a PG. It was pretty much sink or swim with those guys. Next year, we will have Smith, Curry, and Thornton available to handle the PG duties behind Irving.

I thought the same thing, and then thought that perhaps William Avery and Wojo would be a good comparison. When looking at that 97-98 team, I think it shows how this year could possibly pan out. Six players averaging over 20 mpg (with Avery coming in at 19.3) and Wojo and Trajan leading at 28. Eleven guys played at least 21 games averaged more than 8 minutes. However, the missed time by Price and Brand does mean that some averages were inflated.

http://goduke.statsgeek.com/basketball-m/seasons/season-stats.php?season=1997-98

However, to get back to the OP's premise, Mike Chappell did choose to transfer after the season.

[Mudge]

Well, it may not be insightful, but you took a team that essentially played six guys and had only three players with college game experience out of ten, and compared it to a team that will probably go nine deep and has eight players with college game experience out of eleven. Whether or not the starting lineups look similar (which they don't, in my opinion, but that's an argument for another day), the two teams are not comparable.

And, by the way, I don't in any way think that depth and experience can fairly be called "really minor aspect[s]" of a comparison like this. They are two of the most critical characteristics of any college team.



Well, I looked it up before I posted, which apparently you didn't, twice, so I'm not sure why the burden is on me to "support my contention," but here are the numbers:

In 1996-97, Nate played 17 games, starting 1.
In 1997-98, Nate played 6 games, starting none.
In 1998-99, Nate played 39 games, starting none.

And those are all the seasons he played prior to 1999-2000. There you go. (My source, if you're interested in looking it up this time, is http://goduke.statsgeek.com/basketball-m/)

Depth and experience (of the bench) is far less important than the qualities of the top 6 players-- especially on a team, where in any important game, I expect the top 6 players to get 90-95% of the playing time. So, you just keep going on and on about how important Dawkins and Kelly and the rest are going to be next year-- when the chips are down, the six players I mentioned are going to be getting 90+% of the playing time (unless foul trouble gets somebody like Kelly in for a Plumlee, as it did for Dawkins this year in the final)...

You have decided that depth and experience of the bench matter more than the fact that the top 6 players are just better than the next 5-6 guys-- but that is all K cares about-- that is the reason why the Plumlees barely played against Butler, even with both Zoubek and Thomas with 4 fouls (and those guys were not hands-down better players than the guys behind them-- that will not be the case next year between Dawkins vs. Smith, Curry, and Irving, or the Plumlees vs. Kelly-- it will be a long time before Kelly can give anything like what the Plumlees can.) K gives the playing time to the best players, and it gets even more pronounced in tight, tough games-- neither of us will be proven correct until the late season league and tournament games are played next year, but I am very confident that I will be proven correct, and your vaunted bench (which doesn't begin to even compare with the 1999 bench, which K barely used against Conn in the final) will be an afterthought-- there ain't no Corey Maggette's or Mike Dunleavy's on that bench, after my top 6, so I think you are living in dreamland, if you think any of those guys is playing much in big-game situations, unless foul trouble/injuries dictates it.

As for Nate James, he was a starter (I thought it was more games, but injuries kept blowing him up, so although technically I was correct that he WAS a starter who lost his starting spot, substantively, you are correct that he hadn't started nearly as much as Miles did last year), and then he lost his spot-- very much like Miles Plumlee's situation going into next year.

My comparison of the top 6 from 2000 still looks very much like my top 6 projection for 2011, no matter what you say-- it's only wrong, if I turn out to be wrong about the top 6 being three guards (including a frosh PG, and two more experienced guards), and a highly experienced forward paired with a more unproven (but hugely talented) forward/center... with a former starter as a sixth man (instead of starting, as James did ahead of Dunleavy-- to be exactly like the 2000 team, Curry would have to be 6th man, with Miles starting-- but I don't expect that to be happen). I will eat my hat, if Dawkins or Kelly breaks into the starting lineup for any reason other than an injury.

[pfrduke]

My comparison of the top 6 from 2000 still looks very much like my top 6 projection for 2011, no matter what you say

Regardless of the merits of your comparison (which it doesn't appear to be worth debating with you since you're simply dismissing rational arguments to the contrary), if your pessimism equates to a comparison to the 2000 Blue Devils, that's a team that lost 3 games after November, went 15-1 in conference, and earned a #1 seed (and the AP #1 ranking going into the tournament). The 2000 team was a very good team that had a very good season and was absolutely in the title hunt.

[ACCBBallFan]

This move with Singler coming back is obviously going to affect guys like Andre Dawkins and Carrick Felix.. I said a couple of days ago that I thought Felix would get a lot more playing time, now I do not believe that will be the case...

Here's how I see it breaking down:

PG: Irving: 25-30 minutes Curry:10-15

SG: Smith: 30-35 Dawkins: 5-15

SF: Singler: 25-30 Dawkins: 10-15 Felix: 0-5

PF: Miles: 20-25 Hairston: 5 minutes

C: Mason 25-30 Kelly: 10-15


I feel Mason will have a very good year and show off his great offensive skills and his rare athletic ability.. The offense was not suited to use the big man to score, but to get offensive rebounds and kick it back to the wing players.. Without Scheyer and with how good a passer Kyrie is, I expect Mason to have a lot more production at the offensive end..

We still have 4 deep threats in Smith,Singler Dawkins and Curry.. With Kyrie in the fold it should make these guys better.. Expect these guys to blossom as well with Kyrie at the point..

I see Kelly, Dawkins and Curry being the 3 main for coming off the bench... Kelly will be the main backup for Mason and Miles at the 4 and 5, while I expect Hairston to have some minutes sprinkled his way every now and then...

Thronton could be brought in in press situations and for defensive purposes towards the end of games... however, barring injuries, don't expect him to be seeing a lot of time this year..

I think some people answer the total minutes question over course of season and others at tourney time. I am doing the former.

Yes I agree with BigPappa and Kedsy that Curry needs 5 more MPG offset by 5 less for Dawkins, and I would limit Nolan and Kyle to about 30 MPG.

I would also allocate as much of the missing 10 PF minutes to Ryan Kelly, but I suspect it was a typo you intended for Kyle. In that case 5 less for Mason to give Ryan 5 more since Mason will struggle to play that much without getting into foul trouble.

Last year paired with Jon and Zoubs and Kyle still learning the WF position, team composition could not leverage Ryan's plusses because his minus was magnified, plus Lance was needed for defense, Zoubs for rebounding, both for experience.

This year with Kyle having mastered the WF, Kyrie much quicker than Jon as Mason is over Zoubs, playing Kelly would be like having a senior Singler at WF paired with a freshman Singler at PF for about 15-20 MPG, all leveraging off Kyrie-Nolan and Mason/Miles in post.

Duke has so much flexibility with Singler and coach K does not even go by positions or numbers, so I would measure just total minutes

So I modified slightly what I had back on page 3 to incorporate some of your thinking

Kyle Singler and Nolan Smith 30 MPG, running sum 60

Kyrie Irving 25 MPG as frosh, sum 85

both Plumlees 20-25 MG, running sum 130

Seth Curry, Andre Dawkins, and Ryan Kelly 15-20 MPG, sum 180-195

Carrick Felix, Josh Hairston and Tyler Thornton 5 MPG, sum 195-200 MPG

with 5 MPG variable to accommodate each poster's individual preferences, whether that be a senior captain, Irving, Plumlees, Curry, Hairston, Felix, whatever, since total agreement on a message board is impossible

[Kedsy]

I think some people answer the total minutes question over course of season and others at tourney time. I am doing the former.

Yes I agree with BigPappa and Kedsy that Curry needs 5 more MPG offset by 5 less for Dawkins, and I would limit Nolan and Kyle to about 30 MPG.

I would also allocate as much of the missing 10 PF minutes to Ryan Kelly, but I suspect it was a typo you intended for Kyle. In that case 5 less for Mason to give Ryan 5 more since Mason will struggle to play that much without getting into foul trouble.

Last year paired with Jon and Zoubs and Kyle still learning the WF position, team composition could not leverage Ryan's plusses because his minus was magnified, plus Lance was needed for defense, Zoubs for rebounding, both for experience.

This year with Kyle having mastered the WF, Kyrie much quicker than Jon as Mason is over Zoubs, playing Kelly would be like having a senior Singler at WF paired with a freshman Singler at PF for about 15-20 MPG, all leveraging off Kyrie-Nolan and Mason/Miles in post.

Duke has so much flexibility with Singler and coach K does not even go by positions or numbers, so I would measure just total minutes

So I modified slightly what I had back on page 3 to incorporate some of your thinking

Kyle Singler and Nolan Smith 30 MPG, running sum 60

Kyrie Irving 25 MPG as frosh, sum 85

both Plumlees 20-25 MG, running sum 130

Seth Curry, Andre Dawkins, and Ryan Kelly 15-20 MPG, sum 180-195

Carrick Felix, Josh Hairston and Tyler Thornton 5 MPG, sum 195-200 MPG

with 5 MPG variable to accommodate each poster's individual preferences, whether that be a senior captain, Irving, Plumlees, Curry, Hairston, Felix, whatever, since total agreement on a message board is impossible

I think we have a winner.

[CrazieDUMB]

All this minutes-juggling is making my head hurt. Why can't we just have a blue team and a white team? You mean to tell me that in a 96-team tournament there's not enough room for two teams from Duke?

[Kedsy]

Actually, I think this team now looks most like the 2000 team:
1) One highly experienced forward that has started since his freshman year (then Battier; now Singler);
2) One highly experienced senior off guard (then Carrawell; now Smith);
3) A freshman PG (then Williams; now Irving);
4) A relatively inexperienced center whose ability to develop as a low-post player with low-block offensive moves is as yet unknown-- but whose latent potential is enormous (then Boozer; now Mason- as noted earlier, I expect Mason to leapfrog Miles to start at center);
5) One experienced forward who had started for a while, then lost his starting spot -- and may not be a starter this coming year (then James; now Miles);
6) A third guard who is likely to surpass the lesser of the two experienced forwards in playing time (then Dunleavy; now Curry).



Depth and experience (of the bench) is far less important than the qualities of the top 6 players--


Well, first of all, why do you think I was talking about experience of the bench? In 1999-2000, our top six players were: Sr, Jr, F, F, Jr, F.

In 2010-11, our top six players will be: Sr, Sr, F, So, Jr, So. Which is a LOT more experience than the 2000 team, and is a big thing which sets next year's team apart from the 2000 team.


...especially on a team, where in any important game, I expect the top 6 players to get 90-95% of the playing time. So, you just keep going on and on about how important Dawkins and Kelly and the rest are going to be next year-- when the chips are down, the six players I mentioned are going to be getting 90+% of the playing time (unless foul trouble gets somebody like Kelly in for a Plumlee, as it did for Dawkins this year in the final)...


90-95% of the playing time is 180 to 190 minutes, leaving 10 to 20 for the entire bench. But against Baylor, Andre and Mason combined for 28 minutes, and I'm pretty sure that was an important game. In 1991, against UNLV, our 7th through 9th men played 30 minutes (and they played 27 against Kansas in the championship game that year). If K has quality depth, he generally uses it. It may happen in one or two particular games, but I would be shocked if Andre, Ryan, Josh, Carrick, and Tyler averaged 20 or fewer minutes between them in important games.


K gives the playing time to the best players, and it gets even more pronounced in tight, tough games-- neither of us will be proven correct until the late season league and tournament games are played next year, but I am very confident that I will be proven correct, and your vaunted bench (which doesn't begin to even compare with the 1999 bench, which K barely used against Conn in the final) will be an afterthought-- there ain't no Corey Maggette's or Mike Dunleavy's on that bench, after my top 6, so I think you are living in dreamland, if you think any of those guys is playing much in big-game situations, unless foul trouble/injuries dictates it.


Well, if you're looking after the top 6, the 1999 bench was Chris Burgess, sophomore Nate James, and Taymon Domzalski. So, you're right: next year's bench doesn't begin to compare, but not in the way you seem to think.


As for Nate James, he was a starter (I thought it was more games, but injuries kept blowing him up, so although technically I was correct that he WAS a starter who lost his starting spot, substantively, you are correct that he hadn't started nearly as much as Miles did last year), and then he lost his spot-- very much like Miles Plumlee's situation going into next year.

Nate James started one game, in January 1997, against UNCG. He "lost his spot" in the next game, also in January 1997, which was a distant memory by 1999-2000. He didn't start any games the year before the season in question (or the year before that, for that matter). So you're not right technically or in any other way on this one. It's ironic that you say I'm living in dreamland and then you persist in trotting this one out.



My comparison of the top 6 from 2000 still looks very much like my top 6 projection for 2011, no matter what you say-- it's only wrong, if I turn out to be wrong about the top 6 being three guards (including a frosh PG, and two more experienced guards), and a highly experienced forward paired with a more unproven (but hugely talented) forward/center... with a former starter as a sixth man (instead of starting, as James did ahead of Dunleavy-- to be exactly like the 2000 team, Curry would have to be 6th man, with Miles starting-- but I don't expect that to be happen). I will eat my hat, if Dawkins or Kelly breaks into the starting lineup for any reason other than an injury.

Since you seem to think your wonderful comparison of the top six of next season against our top six next year trumps any other argument, let's take a look at it:

I will admit there appears to be a reasonable similarity between Jason Williams and Kyrie Irving. But is it possible to name two players more dissimilar than Mike Dunleavy and Seth Curry? Well, I'm not sure, Nate James vs. Miles Plumlee comes pretty close.

Going into the 1999-2000 season, Shane Battier was a defensive specialist power forward who had averaged 9.1 ppg and 4.9 rpg the year before, and had attempted 118 3-point shots in his career. Nothing at all like Kyle, who averaged 17.7 and 7.0, played primarily outside, and has attempted 543 3-point shots to date. Not even close. (Of course I'm talking about up until that season; in 1999-2000 and even more so in 2000-2001, Shane's game started to look a lot more like Kyle's game.)

Chris Carrawell was a 6'6" versatile forward who had averaged 9.9 ppg, 4.8 rpg, and 3.3 apg the year before. How is that similar to Nolan who is a 6'2" combo guard who averaged 17.4, 2.8, 3.0?

Finally, as far as I can tell, the only similarity between Carlos Boozer and Mason Plumlee is they're both relatively tall.

So, after analyzing the two teams in detail, they're completely different. Seems to me the only thing that's even close to the same is they both start lightning quick, freshmen PG from New Jersey. I suppose that's a lot more important than all the other stuff, right?

[greybeard]

Depth and experience (of the bench) is far less important than the qualities of the top 6 players-- especially on a team, where in any important game, I expect the top 6 players to get 90-95% of the playing time. So, you just keep going on and on about how important Dawkins and Kelly and the rest are going to be next year-- when the chips are down, the six players I mentioned are going to be getting 90+% of the playing time (unless foul trouble gets somebody like Kelly in for a Plumlee, as it did for Dawkins this year in the final)...

You have decided that depth and experience of the bench matter more than the fact that the top 6 players are just better than the next 5-6 guys-- but that is all K cares about-- that is the reason why the Plumlees barely played against Butler, even with both Zoubek and Thomas with 4 fouls (and those guys were not hands-down better players than the guys behind them-- that will not be the case next year between Dawkins vs. Smith, Curry, and Irving, or the Plumlees vs. Kelly-- it will be a long time before Kelly can give anything like what the Plumlees can.) K gives the playing time to the best players, and it gets even more pronounced in tight, tough games-- neither of us will be proven correct until the late season league and tournament games are played next year, but I am very confident that I will be proven correct, and your vaunted bench (which doesn't begin to even compare with the 1999 bench, which K barely used against Conn in the final) will be an afterthought-- there ain't no Corey Maggette's or Mike Dunleavy's on that bench, after my top 6, so I think you are living in dreamland, if you think any of those guys is playing much in big-game situations, unless foul trouble/injuries dictates it.

As for Nate James, he was a starter (I thought it was more games, but injuries kept blowing him up, so although technically I was correct that he WAS a starter who lost his starting spot, substantively, you are correct that he hadn't started nearly as much as Miles did last year), and then he lost his spot-- very much like Miles Plumlee's situation going into next year.

My comparison of the top 6 from 2000 still looks very much like my top 6 projection for 2011, no matter what you say-- it's only wrong, if I turn out to be wrong about the top 6 being three guards (including a frosh PG, and two more experienced guards), and a highly experienced forward paired with a more unproven (but hugely talented) forward/center... with a former starter as a sixth man (instead of starting, as James did ahead of Dunleavy-- to be exactly like the 2000 team, Curry would have to be 6th man, with Miles starting-- but I don't expect that to be happen). I will eat my hat, if Dawkins or Kelly breaks into the starting lineup for any reason other than an injury.

Kelly might well end up, minute for minute, the most productive offensive player Duke has. And, on that funny chart that Jumbo invented, his number might be off it.

How you see a guy who has a diversity of shots and ways to deliver them, who can put it on the floor way better than Kyle (in terms of diversity on the dribble), who sees the game better than anyone on the team, and consequently can create opportunity off the pass (which is different than that ridiculous stat they call somewhat arbitrarily an "assist") as well as any tall guy who has played for Duke, perhaps ever (move over Dannyboy, we hardly knew ye), as taking a subordinate roll to both Plumlees but I do think that rather than an ipsi dixie (a lawyer term for a sel-declared conclusion) we get some reasoning behind your statement.

I see Kelly potentially making either of the Plumlees much, much more potent offensive forces when he is on the floor than when they both are. Why? All the reasons identified above. He can shoot the ball, which makes the defense have to play tight on him which in turn creates space and passing lanes for the other big, Mason and Miles to operate in. He sees opportunities for others and knows how to lead them to it by the way he angles, lofts, presents the ball off the pass. He is a slitherer and I believe a diverse finisher, who once he passes it from the high post extended, can find little paths to slither through to catch a return pass and can continue to slither to the rim for a basket or a foul or both.

I do not think that Kyrie this next year will occupy the ball the way a Chris Paul or Lawsen did, penetrating and kicking. I think that the ball will still move a lot and that Nolan and Kyle will get to initiate as much if not more than Kyrie.

If either or both the Plumlees are deployed as inside scorers, I think a paring with Kelly might be as good a match as Duke can present. On the other hand, maybe not. Maybe Miles will show as a deadly 15-17 foot shooter and be deft at dumping it down to Mason and maybe they both can play lots of minutes and not get in foul trouble. Maybe.

But, we're a long way from sure things, in my opinion, and I would not be underestimating RYAN KELLY, no, no, no. I would not be underestimating him at all.

[Indoor66]

Kelly might well end up, minute for minute, the most productive offensive player Duke has. And, on that funny chart that Jumbo invented, his number might be off it.

How you see a guy who has a diversity of shots and ways to deliver them, who can put it on the floor way better than Kyle (in terms of diversity on the dribble), who sees the game better than anyone on the team, and consequently can create opportunity off the pass (which is different than that ridiculous stat they call somewhat arbitrarily an "assist") as well as any tall guy who has played for Duke, perhaps ever (move over Dannyboy, we hardly knew ye), as taking a subordinate roll to both Plumlees but I do think that rather than an ipsi dixie (a lawyer term for a sel-declared conclusion) we get some reasoning behind your statement.

I see Kelly potentially making either of the Plumlees much, much more potent offensive forces when he is on the floor than when they both are. Why? All the reasons identified above. He can shoot the ball, which makes the defense have to play tight on him which in turn creates space and passing lanes for the other big, Mason and Miles to operate in. He sees opportunities for others and knows how to lead them to it by the way he angles, lofts, presents the ball off the pass. He is a slitherer and I believe a diverse finisher, who once he passes it from the high post extended, can find little paths to slither through to catch a return pass and can continue to slither to the rim for a basket or a foul or both.

I do not think that Kyrie this next year will occupy the ball the way a Chris Paul or Lawsen did, penetrating and kicking. I think that the ball will still move a lot and that Nolan and Kyle will get to initiate as much if not more than Kyrie.

If either or both the Plumlees are deployed as inside scorers, I think a paring with Kelly might be as good a match as Duke can present. On the other hand, maybe not. Maybe Miles will show as a deadly 15-17 foot shooter and be deft at dumping it down to Mason and maybe they both can play lots of minutes and not get in foul trouble. Maybe.

But, we're a long way from sure things, in my opinion, and I would not be underestimating RYAN KELLY, no, no, no. I would not be underestimating him at all.

I agree with you analysis. The only problem is that Ryan doesn't pass the eye test. :o

[wilson]

To me, the Smith/Irving situation for 2010-11 has an analog in the Williams/Duhon situation from 2000-01, with a reversal of roles. Back then, Chris Duhon provided steady, precision freshman complements to Jason Williams' veteran firepower. Next season, I look for Kyrie Irving to add freshman firepower to Nolan Smith's steady, veteran precision.
It worked pretty well the last time, and I'm very excited at next season's prospects.

[NashvilleDevil]

To me, the Smith/Irving situation for 2010-11 has an analog in the Williams/Duhon situation from 2000-01, with a reversal of roles. Back then, Chris Duhon provided steady, precision freshman complements to Jason Williams' veteran firepower. Next season, I look for Kyrie Irving to add freshman firepower to Nolan Smith's steady, veteran precision.
It worked pretty well the last time, and I'm very excited at next season's prospects.

I have read this entire thread and this is the first time this has been brought up. Singler is going to be great next year but I really cannot wait to see what Nolan can do in a wide open attack. Next year is going to be fun.

[roywhite]

I have read this entire thread and this is the first time this has been brought up. Singler is going to be great next year but I really cannot wait to see what Nolan can do in a wide open attack. Next year is going to be fun.

His mid-range game and the use of the "floater" is lethal. Nolan was simply brilliant against Baylor.

[Vasherized]

Here are some thoughts on how Singler's decision affects Duke next year.

Another chance to grow eyebrows before heading to the League (http://marchtomarch.fantake.com/2010/04/20/kyle-singler-to-return-to-duke-for-senior-year/)

[greybeard]

Oh, one other thing, K said in his interview with Kyle that you can expect to see pressure on the defensive side of the ball, looking to create run outs off of steals. If there is a guy on next year's team who will be better at wing denial than Thornton, I wouldn't want to met him. Well, Smith might be better, but Thornton will be terrific at it.

He plays with tremendous intensity, is long and, now here's the rub, appears deceptively strong. Strong is a very good thing to have in overplay defense. He also can guard size in the half court, can defend people bigger than him, and he will rebound in a crowd.

Has a nice 3-ball, nothing insane but definitely has range on it (doesn't need his toes right near the line or nothing) and can get in the lane. In the Championship game against DeMatha, which had a for-real shot blocker, Thornton had trouble getting shots near the rim. However, so did the entire Gonzoga team.

I think that the guy is one of those players who might not do anything on offense off-the-charts enough to get real high accolades, but might well be a player that you can't get off the court once he's on.

Those other guys, Dawkins and Curry, better grow some intensity on defense and loose balls, or they might not get to shoot those pretty jump shots of theirs. Oh yes, there will be some competition for playing time next year. Anyone who thinks that anyone but Kyle and Smith are locks better think again.

K said one of the principal focuses for Kyle's development this year will be on leadership. They're gonna need it, if for no other reason than to keep the other guys from killing one another.

Don't tell Thorton he's only gonna get a few minutes in a press or something; you don't want him any more intense than he already is. ;)

[NashvilleDevil]

His mid-range game and the use of the "floater" is lethal. Nolan was simply brilliant against Baylor.

Yes he was!

Last year Nolan seemed to take a back seat to Scheyer and Singler in terms of defensive assignments. Is there anyway that happens again this year with Kyle and Kyrie?

[MChambers]

Yes he was!

Last year Nolan seemed to take a back seat to Scheyer and Singler in terms of defensive assignments. Is there anyway that happens again this year with Kyle and Kyrie?
Nolan was the one putting pressure on the other team's ballhandler. Remember what he did on Vasquez in Cameron? I think he'll do that a lot next year, although I'm sure Irving, Currie, and Thorton (just kidding on spelling, Roy) also will do that.

In fact, you can make a case that Nolan was Duke's most irreplaceable defender last year.

[DevilHorns]

Yes he was!

Last year Nolan seemed to take a back seat to Scheyer and Singler in terms of defensive assignments. Is there anyway that happens again this year with Kyle and Kyrie?

Maybe a good time to watch the Duke-Cal game again. Did you see what Nolan did to Randle? There's a lot of other examples if you need more.

[NashvilleDevil]

Maybe a good time to watch the Duke-Cal game again. Did you see what Nolan did to Randle? There's a lot of other examples if you need more.

I should have been much more clear. I meant the opposing team' defensive assignments. Sorry about that.

[Mudge]

Regardless of the merits of your comparison (which it doesn't appear to be worth debating with you since you're simply dismissing rational arguments to the contrary), if your pessimism equates to a comparison to the 2000 Blue Devils, that's a team that lost 3 games after November, went 15-1 in conference, and earned a #1 seed (and the AP #1 ranking going into the tournament). The 2000 team was a very good team that had a very good season and was absolutely in the title hunt.

I don't see any rational arguments to the contrary (about the similar nature of the 2000 and 2011 teams) that I am dismissing-- I am dismissing an argument that the reputed "depth and experience of the bench" of the 2011 team is going to matter at crunch time in big games-- that is a silly argument because it has never mattered for Coach K-- he is famous/notorious for shortening his bench to only his very best players when the chips are down--and he certainly never hesitates to go small to get his best players on the floor-- witness the 2001 team after his only true big man (Boozer) broke his foot-- K went to four guards and a (relatively) small forward (Battier) as his starting lineup, and kicked the arses of the brontosaurii down the road in Chapel Hill (and the rest of the country too!)

And where is the pessimism of which you speak? There was nothing wrong with the 2000 team that a more mature PG (and a sixth man without mono) couldn't have fixed-- I believe next year's team will be quite good-- and comparing them most closely to the 2000 team hardly is consigning them to the waste bin of history.

[Newton_14]

I don't see any rational arguments to the contrary (about the similar nature of the 2000 and 2011 teams) that I am dismissing-- I am dismissing an argument that the reputed "depth and experience of the bench" of the 2011 team is going to matter at crunch time in big games-- that is a silly argument because it has never mattered for Coach K-- he is famous/notorious for shortening his bench to only his very best players when the chips are down--and he certainly never hesitates to go small to get his best players on the floor-- witness the 2001 team after his only true big man (Boozer) broke his foot-- K went to four guards and a (relatively) small forward (Battier) as his starting lineup, and kicked the arses of the brontosaurii down the road in Chapel Hill (and the rest of the country too!)

And where is the pessimism of which you speak? There was nothing wrong with the 2000 team that a more mature PG (and a sixth man without mono) couldn't have fixed-- I believe next year's team will be quite good-- and comparing them most closely to the 2000 team hardly is consigning them to the waste bin of history.

So Casey Sanders was a guard? I somehow remember him as a 6'11 center. And count me in the group that believe's there is exactly one similarity in the 2000 team and next year's team. They both have a phenom freshman PG starting. After that there is not much else that is similar. 97-98 is a better comparison in terms of quality depth.

[Welcome2DaSlopes]

This team is different from all others, can we please stop trying to compare then argue, about it not being similar. HAHA we all have opinions but the fact of the matter this is a complete different team then those of the past.

[Mudge]

Well, if you're looking after the top 6, the 1999 bench was Chris Burgess, sophomore Nate James, and Taymon Domzalski. So, you're right: next year's bench doesn't begin to compare, but not in the way you seem to think.

Nate James started one game, in January 1997, against UNCG. He "lost his spot" in the next game, also in January 1997, which was a distant memory by 1999-2000. He didn't start any games the year before the season in question (or the year before that, for that matter). So you're not right technically or in any other way on this one. It's ironic that you say I'm living in dreamland and then you persist in trotting this one out.

Since you seem to think your wonderful comparison of the top six of next season against our top six next year trumps any other argument, let's take a look at it:

I will admit there appears to be a reasonable similarity between Jason Williams and Kyrie Irving. But is it possible to name two players more dissimilar than Mike Dunleavy and Seth Curry? Well, I'm not sure, Nate James vs. Miles Plumlee comes pretty close.

Going into the 1999-2000 season, Shane Battier was a defensive specialist power forward who had averaged 9.1 ppg and 4.9 rpg the year before, and had attempted 118 3-point shots in his career. Nothing at all like Kyle, who averaged 17.7 and 7.0, played primarily outside, and has attempted 543 3-point shots to date. Not even close. (Of course I'm talking about up until that season; in 1999-2000 and even more so in 2000-2001, Shane's game started to look a lot more like Kyle's game.)

Chris Carrawell was a 6'6" versatile forward who had averaged 9.9 ppg, 4.8 rpg, and 3.3 apg the year before. How is that similar to Nolan who is a 6'2" combo guard who averaged 17.4, 2.8, 3.0?

Finally, as far as I can tell, the only similarity between Carlos Boozer and Mason Plumlee is they're both relatively tall.

So, after analyzing the two teams in detail, they're completely different. Seems to me the only thing that's even close to the same is they both start lightning quick, freshmen PG from New Jersey. I suppose that's a lot more important than all the other stuff, right?

1) Yeah-- that '99 bench was just bereft of talent-- with 3 McDonald's All-Americans in Burgess, James, and Maggette (future key player on NBA playoff teams), and future overseas pro player in Domzalski... yeah, they don't begin to compare with these guys we'll have on the bench next year.

2) James being a starter and then losing his spot DOES make me technically correct-- whether you like it or not-- and James was likely to have started more games, had he not suffered a rash of injuries in his early years at Duke-- (there's a reason it seemed like he was around the program for 6 years or so).
3) For the rest of the comparisons, you don't seem to have read why I compared the players I did-- you can pick your reasons to say they're dissimilar-- I have given reasons they are alike:
A) Freshmen PGs: Irving and Williams (and for your purposes-- they're similar heights, since that seems to be a big thing for you).
B) 4-year senior starters at forward who will be on the floor most of every big game, who have played SF, PF, and C (at Duke), and have been asked to defend opposing centers at times, due to lack of frontcourt depth: Singler and Battier (and again, for you, they are the same height, and are likely to play the same position in the NBA).
C) 3+-year senior starters at off-guard, who have both, on occasion, been asked to play point guard at Duke: Smith and Carrawell (oops-- problem-- they're not the same height).
D) Centers with relatively little experience, but with big expectations/potential, due to their great hands, size, strength, athleticism, passing ability: Mason Plumlee and Boozer (again for you, the size comparison was dead-on coming in, with Boozer listed at 6'10" coming out of HS, but shrinking to 6'9" in the NBA, and Mason variously at 6'10" or 6'11"-- close enough for government work).
E) Another backcourt player (one a shooting guard; one a swingman) who has played a fair amount in the past, then been out of the playing rotation for a while (one due to redshirt transfer year; one due to redshirt injury year) but who are still far more experienced than freshmen: Curry and James (oops again-- they can't be compared because they aren't close enough in height).

The bottom line is this: you can say whatever you want now-- if next year's predominant starting/crunchtime lineup ends up being 3 guards (Irving, Smith, Curry) and two forwards (Singler and a Plumlee), it is going to look an awful lot like the 2000 lineup, and I am going to be correct-- and you, with your deep bench playing a lot, and your big playing time for Kelly and Dawkins, and your two Plumlees starting together, are going to be wrong... I am very comfortable with my bet (I'll put $20 on it, right now)-- how about you?

[Mudge]

So Casey Sanders was a guard? I somehow remember him as a 6'11 center. And count me in the group that believe's there is exactly one similarity in the 2000 team and next year's team. They both have a phenom freshman PG starting. After that there is not much else that is similar. 97-98 is a better comparison in terms of quality depth.

Sanders didn't start then, even after Boozer got hurt-- they played Duhon, Williams, Dunleavy (then a 6'6" g/f), James (6'6" g/f)... and Battier.

[Newton_14]

Sanders didn't start then, even after Boozer got hurt-- they played Duhon, Williams, Dunleavy (then a 6'6" g/f), James (6'6" g/f)... and Battier.

No offense intended. But you may want to look that one up. After the Boozer injury, Nate went to the bench in a 6th man role, with Duhon and Sanders moving into the starting line up. That line up started the last 10 games including the final 4 when Boozer came back.

K redesigned the offense and used Casey as a "dancing partner" for Battier and he set a ton of high ball screens to free Shane up for 3's. And you are right on one thing, they torched unc in the very first game with the brand new starting line up and brand new offense.

Ain't it cool that Duke won National Titles with Casey Sanders and then Zoubs as starting centers?

[Kedsy]

Sanders didn't start then, even after Boozer got hurt-- they played Duhon, Williams, Dunleavy (then a 6'6" g/f), James (6'6" g/f)... and Battier.

As Boozer pointed out, James didn't start after Boozer got hurt, and Dunleavy was never 6'6" at Duke. He was 6'6" during his recruitment, was reportedly 6'7" when he committed, and grew to 6'9" before his freshman year started at Duke.

[Kedsy]

1) Yeah-- that '99 bench was just bereft of talent-- with 3 McDonald's All-Americans in Burgess, James, and Maggette (future key player on NBA playoff teams), and future overseas pro player in Domzalski... yeah, they don't begin to compare with these guys we'll have on the bench next year.

Well, first of all, up until this moment you've been talking about the top six as if they matter and the others as the "bench" who don't matter, so it's inconsistent of you to all of a sudden include Maggette as part of the bench, since he was one of the 1999 team's top six. And your original statement was that the 2010-11 bench "doesn't begin to even compare with the 1999 bench," so your argument now that the 1999 bench can possibly compare to next year's bench is puzzling. Bottom line, though, next year's 7 through 10 is light years better than the 1999 7 through 10.



2) James being a starter and then losing his spot DOES make me technically correct-- whether you like it or not-- and James was likely to have started more games, had he not suffered a rash of injuries in his early years at Duke-- (there's a reason it seemed like he was around the program for 6 years or so).

Your original quote was that Nate James "had started for a while, then lost his starting spot." I don't know of any reasonable definition of "a while" that would include a single game, so whether you like it or not, your statement was absurd. Whether Nate would have started if he hadn't been injured is entirely irrelevant to the truth of your original statement.



3) For the rest of the comparisons, you don't seem to have read why I compared the players I did-- you can pick your reasons to say they're dissimilar-- I have given reasons they are alike:


I read your reasons -- I even quoted them a couple of times -- I just don't think they make any sense. The "similarities" you cite have nothing to do with how the players play, or how the teams played/will play. You might as well have mentioned the colors of their eyes.



A) Freshmen PGs: Irving and Williams (and for your purposes-- they're similar heights, since that seems to be a big thing for you).


Well, if you read my response, you would understand that I believe height is just one factor out of many to look at when comparing players. The main reason your comparisons fall flat is because the players you are comparing had dissimilar styles of play (the only exception to which is Irving vs. Williams, who seem to play similar styles, as I mentioned in my earlier post).



B) 4-year senior starters at forward who will be on the floor most of every big game, who have played SF, PF, and C (at Duke), and have been asked to defend opposing centers at times, due to lack of frontcourt depth: Singler and Battier (and again, for you, they are the same height, and are likely to play the same position in the NBA).


Well, let's try to get some facts straight. Going into the 1999-2000 season, Shane Battier was (a) a junior, not a senior; (b) had only started for one and a half years, not four; and (c) had never been required to play center (and had rarely if ever played SF). You seem to be confusing what happened in the 2000 season itself and the following championship season with what was known before the 1999-2000 season started. Notwithstanding height and possible NBA position, before his junior year started, Shane Battier did not play a similar style to Kyle and had not had anything close to the same offensive results. Shane was a defensive specialist, which Kyle most certainly is not (although his defense is strong).

And, by the way, Duke's teams in Shane's freshman and sophomore years had plenty of frontcourt depth. It was only in 1999-2000 and 2000-01 that frontcourt depth became somewhat of an issue. Once again you are confusing the facts.



C) 3+-year senior starters at off-guard, who have both, on occasion, been asked to play point guard at Duke: Smith and Carrawell (oops-- problem-- they're not the same height).


Again, the difference is a lot more than height. Carrawell played primarily SF the year before, not off-guard, and he had showed a completely different skillset than Nolan. Prior to 1999-2000 he was a complementary player who had scored around 10 ppg the previous two seasons. And he wasn't really a 3+ year starter, either, having started only 12 games and 10 games his first two years.



D) Centers with relatively little experience, but with big expectations/potential, due to their great hands, size, strength, athleticism, passing ability: Mason Plumlee and Boozer (again for you, the size comparison was dead-on coming in, with Boozer listed at 6'10" coming out of HS, but shrinking to 6'9" in the NBA, and Mason variously at 6'10" or 6'11"-- close enough for government work).


Again, my real issue here is Carlos and Mason play vastly different styles. Other than height there is almost no similarity to their games.



E) Another backcourt player (one a shooting guard; one a swingman) who has played a fair amount in the past, then been out of the playing rotation for a while (one due to redshirt transfer year; one due to redshirt injury year) but who are still far more experienced than freshmen: Curry and James (oops again-- they can't be compared because they aren't close enough in height).

Well, again you're switching things up. Your original post compared Nate James to Miles Plumlee and Seth Curry to Mike Dunleavy. And not only are the heights outrageously different in both cases, but the only similarities in their games are in your mind (if there). If you had tried to compare Seth to Nate, it still would have been silly but it would have been a lot closer.



The bottom line is this: you can say whatever you want now-- if next year's predominant starting/crunchtime lineup ends up being 3 guards (Irving, Smith, Curry) and two forwards (Singler and a Plumlee), it is going to look an awful lot like the 2000 lineup, and I am going to be correct-- and you, with your deep bench playing a lot, and your big playing time for Kelly and Dawkins, and your two Plumlees starting together, are going to be wrong... I am very comfortable with my bet (I'll put $20 on it, right now)-- how about you?

Actually, I haven't expressed an opinion on next year's starting lineup. All I've said is the 2010-11 team will go 9 deep, not 6, and the 2010-11 team bears little to no resemblance to the 1999-2000 team, no matter who starts. We can bet on that, if you want, but only if we can get an impartial referee.

[gumbomoop]

The bottom line is this: you can say whatever you want now-- if next year's predominant starting/crunchtime lineup ends up being 3 guards (Irving, Smith, Curry) and two forwards (Singler and a Plumlee), it is going to look an awful lot like the 2000 lineup, and I am going to be correct-- and you, with your deep bench playing a lot, and your big playing time for Kelly and Dawkins, and your two Plumlees starting together, are going to be wrong.

More than a few times in my life I have sat at a table with people who were vigorously, even angrily, disagreeing with each other. In most such cases, I, a wishy-washy-wimp, found myself agreeing with a few points on each side; occasionally I would suggest we see if the angry opponents agreed on anything. Anything. For when things got heated, it always seemed each side would ignore possible points of agreement, and focus only on points of disagreement.

So, somewhat nervously, I ask whether Mudge and opponents agree on the following, which I will generously label "friendly amendments" to the above quote-tag and previous Mudge-posts about next year's top 6 [KS, NS, KI, SC, MPs]:

1. Those 6 are likely to be top 6 in season mpg, and esp late-season "crunchtime."
2. It's possible that the mpg-difference between player #6 and player #7 - say DD or RK - will be small enough that one might refer to top 7 rather than top 6.
3. "Deep bench playing a lot" - By late-season, K will settle on [note that here I avoid the pejorative word "revert to"] 8/9 rotation, and that probably DD and RK, maybe one other, will still get significant minutes but will probably not be on floor last few "crunchtime" minutes.
4. Exception to #3 is that if, say DD is on fire, he'd probably be in at crunchtime instead of SC, including because he seems a good FT-shooter.
5. I wish I could think of another area of possible agreement - and in fact I bet there are others - but I'm brain-dead, so I'll hide under the covers until I [hope to] hear some agreement, however insignificant.

[Kedsy]

More than a few times in my life I have sat at a table with people who were vigorously, even angrily, disagreeing with each other. In most such cases, I, a wishy-washy-wimp, found myself agreeing with a few points on each side; occasionally I would suggest we see if the angry opponents agreed on anything. Anything. For when things got heated, it always seemed each side would ignore possible points of agreement, and focus only on points of disagreement.

So, somewhat nervously, I ask whether Mudge and opponents agree on the following, which I will generously label "friendly amendments" to the above quote-tag and previous Mudge-posts about next year's top 6 [KS, NS, KI, SC, MPs]:

1. Those 6 are likely to be top 6 in season mpg, and esp late-season "crunchtime."
2. It's possible that the mpg-difference between player #6 and player #7 - say DD or RK - will be small enough that one might refer to top 7 rather than top 6.
3. "Deep bench playing a lot" - By late-season, K will settle on [note that here I avoid the pejorative word "revert to"] 8/9 rotation, and that probably DD and RK, maybe one other, will still get significant minutes but will probably not be on floor last few "crunchtime" minutes.
4. Exception to #3 is that if, say DD is on fire, he'd probably be in at crunchtime instead of SC, including because he seems a good FT-shooter.
5. I wish I could think of another area of possible agreement - and in fact I bet there are others - but I'm brain-dead, so I'll hide under the covers until I [hope to] hear some agreement, however insignificant.

I can mostly agree with your compromise, although I think we'll be nine deep and all nine will play in big games. Obviously at crunch time at the end of a big game you play your best five or six.

It seems that the disagreement between Mudge and myself is spiraling down into incivility and I apologize to the extent that it's my fault. I will say that I originally responded to him because I had the impression that he was using the comparison to the 2000 team as a putdown toward next year's team, and I guess the hostilities escalated from there (on both parts). I saw when someone else directly said this to Mudge he said his comparison was not intended as a slight, and if I misunderstood him, I again apologize.

I still don't think it's a good comparison, however. Nor do I think K will "revert" to a six (or even seven) man rotation. Goodnight all.

[Mudge]

Well, first of all, up until this moment you've been talking about the top six as if they matter and the others as the "bench" who don't matter, so it's inconsistent of you to all of a sudden include Maggette as part of the bench, since he was one of the 1999 team's top six.

I am going to stop with the tit for tat, too-- except one remark: you can only start five guys-- anybody after that (even if it's Havlicek) is part of the bench-- so Maggette constitutes part of the bench for the 1999 team, even if he was in the top 6 players... if you want to focus on the top 5, my contention would be that 3 guards (Irving, Smith, Curry) and two forwards (Singler and a Plumlee) will get the lion's share of the important minutes in all close games (except when injuries or foul trouble dictate otherwise)-- and that those guys have lots of similarities with the 2000 team. It's going to be just like it was in the 2010 Championship, with everybody outside the top 5 seeing very little playing time... even in the face of severe foul trouble in the second half for both Zoubek and Thomas, the Plumlees barely saw the floor.

The only reason I even talked about a top 6 for next year, is that there is some ambiguity about whether Mason will move ahead of Miles to be the starting Plumlee-- I think it will be Mason, but it will definitely be one of them, and not Kelly-- and because I think the Plumlees will remain foul-prone, forcing K to use them essentially as one two-headed 40-minute player, with foul trouble dictating who gets the most playing time... I do not think Duke will start, nor feature (in close games), 3 big players very often next year-- despite all these people on here who are sure that K is going to play Kyle at "the 3"... this is not the NBA, and K don't play that game.

All this stuff from others about who will play "the 3" and who will play "the 4" and "the 5" is utter nonsense-- as K has made clear over and over again, and essentially underlined again yesterday, with his statements on his plans for Kyle-- K does not have "3's" and "4's" and "5's-- he basically has backcourt and frontcourt players (really, guards and forwards, although someone IS usually the functional equivalent of the PG).