Challenges for Duke next year

[CrazieDUMB]

Wow, this is awesome. Duke is returning their two best players (averaging over 34 PPG together last year), each of which have a decent shot at taking NPOY honors as seniors. In addition, they’re finally bringing an elite, pass-first point guard the likes of which they haven’t seen since Shaun Livingston bolted to the draft. They also bring in a very highly regarded forward. They have a sophomore that seems ready to break out after a promising freshman season. Sure they lose a great senior guard, but they’ll still be starting mostly juniors and seniors, with just a few key new faces to fill out the gaps. We’ll undoubtedly start the season ranked number 1 and ride it all the way to the championship. Right?

Wrong. The scenario above refers to the 2006 Duke Blue Devils, who lost in the sweet 16 to LSU. That team had Sheldon and JJ both coming back for senior seasons, while losing Daniel Ewing. In addition, they had one of the highest ranked PGs in the country coming in Greg Paulus. Don’t forget the plethora of role players: Lee Melchionni the 3 pt specialist, Dockery the defensive stopper, Demarcus Nelson the breakout sophomore, McBob the athletic guy with hops and a series of players with potential (Martynas Pocius the slasher, Jamal Boykin the California Mr. Basketball, and the giant beast Eric Boateng). Remember this? http://i.cnn.net/si/si_online/covers/images/2005/1121_large.jpg.

As we found out, that team had weaknesses. Paulus couldn’t create off the dribble and was a liability on defense. There was no third scorer. There was no depth in the frontcourt after the Landlord and McBob. The lack of depth made them susceptible to truly athletic teams that could harass the passing lanes and press on D.

I’m not here to go all doomsday ya. In fact, I do believe that Duke has the best chance to win the whole thing next year. My only point is that while it seems trite and obvious, nothing is guaranteed in college basketball. This is especially true in today’s game; as Jay Bilas pointed out on Simmons’ podcast, 20 years ago you always knew who the best 5 teams were going to be before the season. Players stayed four years, so you had a better handle on what each team was going to put on the floor. These days, there are too many variables. How talented are these incoming freshmen? How long will it take for teams to find the right chemistry and for players to learn their roles? How will players develop over the season, and how will the team adapt to take advantage of those new strengths? Teams today are certainly more questionable than they were a year ago.

Without futher ado, here’s the ways Duke may not win a national championship.

1) Jon Scheyer. Forget for a second his team-leading 18 PPG we won’t have. The biggest thing we’ll miss is his smart play and care of the basketball. He only coughed up the ball 65 times in 40 games, while handling it on almost every possession. Don’t think for a second that his care of the basketball didn’t directly lead to higher defensive efficiency numbers; by putting the ball in the right place he limited fast breaks for the other team while also orchestrating one of the most efficient offenses in the league.
For all the hoopla about Kyrie Irving, even if everything goes perfectly for him it’s going to be very difficult to put up those kinds of numbers. Let’s go overboard and say definitively that he is the second coming of Jay Williams. As a freshman, Jay averaged 14.5 points, 6.5 assists to 4.1 TO, and 4.2 rebounds. Compare that to Jon's 18.2 PPG, 3.6 APG to 1.6 TO and 4.9 REB. While certainly less flashy, ’10 Scheyer scored more, had a better AST/TO ratio, rebounded better, shot the 3 (.383 to .354) and free throws (.878 to .685) better than the legend Kyrie is supposed to emulate as a freshman. Believe it or not, we’re almost certainly taking a step down at the point in terms of production.

2) Nolan Smith and Kyle Singler are not upgrades over Nolan Smith and Kyle Singler. Let’s start with Nolan – yes he made a huge jump last year, getting more aggressive and raising his PPG from 8.4 to 17.4. That said, he also hoisted over twice as many shots and his PPS actually went down from 1.24 to 1.22. I’m not going to say he was less efficient; he certainly got to the line more (twice as often last year as the year before), and dished more dimes than he did two years ago. Also, by taking a bigger part of the offense he also had the responsibility to take some of the worse shots, whereas the year before he only had to take shots he knew he could make and leave the rest for Gerald, Kyle and Jon. My only point is that right now I think we know what we’re going to get.

The same is true for Kyle. He’s increased his stats incrementally and steadily over three years, but he’s also taken a bigger role in the offense every year. One of the reasons he decided to stay is that his draft stock isn’t going to change; like Tyler Hansborough, he’s a known commodity and he might as well enjoy another year in college and take another shot at the title. Next year has a weaker draft anyway, with so many bolting this year. He is what he is (which is great), but there’s not a whole lot of room for improvement.

3) How will the Plumtrees compare to Zoubek and Lance? This is by far the biggest question mark for next year. Lance was an all-ACC defender that could defend 3 positions, and Zou was the best screener and offensive rebounder in the NCAA last year. While certainly the big 3 were the engine, they would have gone nowhere without the play of these seniors down the stretch. Remember, we had a similar big 3 two years ago in Gerald, Jon and Kyle but got trounced by Villanova. Z and LT didn’t fill the stat sheet, but they were almost perfect role players and did all the dirty work asked of them.

I’m excited about Miles and Mason. Both have great athletic ability and baseline to baseline speed for big men, which should be more on display next year with a faster game plan. Miles took a huge jump between his freshman and sophomore season, and Mason did very well despite his early development been taken away with a wrist injury in the beginning of the season. However neither is a top quality defender and both have trouble getting called for fouls. It’s also unknown how they will take on a leadership role. In his exit interview Lance said in practice the bigs almost came to blows in fighting for rebounds. Will the Plumlees bring that same intensity to practice? Will they follow in the seniors’ example and bang with Ryan Kelly and newcomer Josh Hairston? All I’m gonna say is filling those shoes completely will be a tall order.

4) The field. As we all know about the NCAA tournament, it’s almost completely decided by matchups. I think it’s fair to say that in every game in the ’10 tourney Duke played at or above their average ability. Remember, this team did lose to NC State and Ga Tech and got trounced by G’Town before putting it all together in the dance. Will that be true next year, or will they lay an egg like the ’09 team did against Villanova? Also, what other teams are going to emerge over the season, and will their strengths blow up our weaknesses? No matter who you are, the tournament is fickle business (See: Kentucky, Kansas and Syracuse 2010).

The reasons why next years’ team will be better have been discussed ad nauseum. They’ll play at a dominating pace, they bring back the most talent and have a very deep bench at all positions. Even if Duke is the team most likely to win, they are not even close to being a higher favorite than the Field. We’ll have a great season, but any time you expect a national championship more than likely you set yourself up for disappointment.

Any other challenges I'm missing?

[UrinalCake]

Staying healthy is always a factor. Last season we were fortunate to avoid any major setbacks, except for Mason's injury early on and then smaller injuries to Kyle's wrist and possibly Jon's back. One of the reasons the field opened up for us in the NCAA's is that WVU, Purdue, Syracuse, and MSU all lost key players to injury.

I wouldn't worry too much about point production from Irving. Our scoring will be MUCH more balanced next year by adding Curry, Dawkins having a bigger role, and the Plumlees providing more scoring than Lance and Z. Overall it's hard to do a player-by-player or position-by-position comparison between last year and next year because the playing styles will be so different. That said, I think the biggest challenges will be chemistry and leadership. We have the talent to repeat.

[billyj]

Kind of like NJ had the best chance winning the lottery.

Maybe if we do some statistical analysis, we will see #1 preseason team will have a, lets say, 18.7% chance winning the tile and #2 will have 13.6% etc. hehe

[houstondukie]

Wow, this is awesome. Duke is returning their two best players (averaging over 34 PPG together last year), each of which have a decent shot at taking NPOY honors as seniors. In addition, they’re finally bringing an elite, pass-first point guard the likes of which they haven’t seen since Shaun Livingston bolted to the draft. They also bring in a very highly regarded forward. They have a sophomore that seems ready to break out after a promising freshman season. Sure they lose a great senior guard, but they’ll still be starting mostly juniors and seniors, with just a few key new faces to fill out the gaps. We’ll undoubtedly start the season ranked number 1 and ride it all the way to the championship. Right?

Wrong. The scenario above refers to the 2006 Duke Blue Devils, who lost in the sweet 16 to LSU. That team had Sheldon and JJ both coming back for senior seasons, while losing Daniel Ewing. In addition, they had one of the highest ranked PGs in the country coming in Greg Paulus. Don’t forget the plethora of role players: Lee Melchionni the 3 pt specialist, Dockery the defensive stopper, Demarcus Nelson the breakout sophomore, McBob the athletic guy with hops and a series of players with potential (Martynas Pocius the slasher, Jamal Boykin the California Mr. Basketball, and the giant beast Eric Boateng). Remember this? http://i.cnn.net/si/si_online/covers/images/2005/1121_large.jpg.

As we found out, that team had weaknesses. Paulus couldn’t create off the dribble and was a liability on defense. There was no third scorer. There was no depth in the frontcourt after the Landlord and McBob. The lack of depth made them susceptible to truly athletic teams that could harass the passing lanes and press on D.

I’m not here to go all doomsday ya. In fact, I do believe that Duke has the best chance to win the whole thing next year. My only point is that while it seems trite and obvious, nothing is guaranteed in college basketball. This is especially true in today’s game; as Jay Bilas pointed out on Simmons’ podcast, 20 years ago you always knew who the best 5 teams were going to be before the season. Players stayed four years, so you had a better handle on what each team was going to put on the floor. These days, there are too many variables. How talented are these incoming freshmen? How long will it take for teams to find the right chemistry and for players to learn their roles? How will players develop over the season, and how will the team adapt to take advantage of those new strengths? Teams today are certainly more questionable than they were a year ago.

Without futher ado, here’s the ways Duke may not win a national championship.

1) Jon Scheyer. Forget for a second his team-leading 18 PPG we won’t have. The biggest thing we’ll miss is his smart play and care of the basketball. He only coughed up the ball 65 times in 40 games, while handling it on almost every possession. Don’t think for a second that his care of the basketball didn’t directly lead to higher defensive efficiency numbers; by putting the ball in the right place he limited fast breaks for the other team while also orchestrating one of the most efficient offenses in the league.
For all the hoopla about Kyrie Irving, even if everything goes perfectly for him it’s going to be very difficult to put up those kinds of numbers. Let’s go overboard and say definitively that he is the second coming of Jay Williams. As a freshman, Jay averaged 14.5 points, 6.5 assists to 4.1 TO, and 4.2 rebounds. Compare that to Jon's 18.2 PPG, 3.6 APG to 1.6 TO and 4.9 REB. While certainly less flashy, ’10 Scheyer scored more, had a better AST/TO ratio, rebounded better, shot the 3 (.383 to .354) and free throws (.878 to .685) better than the legend Kyrie is supposed to emulate as a freshman. Believe it or not, we’re almost certainly taking a step down at the point in terms of production.

2) Nolan Smith and Kyle Singler are not upgrades over Nolan Smith and Kyle Singler. Let’s start with Nolan – yes he made a huge jump last year, getting more aggressive and raising his PPG from 8.4 to 17.4. That said, he also hoisted over twice as many shots and his PPS actually went down from 1.24 to 1.22. I’m not going to say he was less efficient; he certainly got to the line more (twice as often last year as the year before), and dished more dimes than he did two years ago. Also, by taking a bigger part of the offense he also had the responsibility to take some of the worse shots, whereas the year before he only had to take shots he knew he could make and leave the rest for Gerald, Kyle and Jon. My only point is that right now I think we know what we’re going to get.

The same is true for Kyle. He’s increased his stats incrementally and steadily over three years, but he’s also taken a bigger role in the offense every year. One of the reasons he decided to stay is that his draft stock isn’t going to change; like Tyler Hansborough, he’s a known commodity and he might as well enjoy another year in college and take another shot at the title. Next year has a weaker draft anyway, with so many bolting this year. He is what he is (which is great), but there’s not a whole lot of room for improvement.

3) How will the Plumtrees compare to Zoubek and Lance? This is by far the biggest question mark for next year. Lance was an all-ACC defender that could defend 3 positions, and Zou was the best screener and offensive rebounder in the NCAA last year. While certainly the big 3 were the engine, they would have gone nowhere without the play of these seniors down the stretch. Remember, we had a similar big 3 two years ago in Gerald, Jon and Kyle but got trounced by Villanova. Z and LT didn’t fill the stat sheet, but they were almost perfect role players and did all the dirty work asked of them.

I’m excited about Miles and Mason. Both have great athletic ability and baseline to baseline speed for big men, which should be more on display next year with a faster game plan. Miles took a huge jump between his freshman and sophomore season, and Mason did very well despite his early development been taken away with a wrist injury in the beginning of the season. However neither is a top quality defender and both have trouble getting called for fouls. It’s also unknown how they will take on a leadership role. In his exit interview Lance said in practice the bigs almost came to blows in fighting for rebounds. Will the Plumlees bring that same intensity to practice? Will they follow in the seniors’ example and bang with Ryan Kelly and newcomer Josh Hairston? All I’m gonna say is filling those shoes completely will be a tall order.

4) The field. As we all know about the NCAA tournament, it’s almost completely decided by matchups. I think it’s fair to say that in every game in the ’10 tourney Duke played at or above their average ability. Remember, this team did lose to NC State and Ga Tech and got trounced by G’Town before putting it all together in the dance. Will that be true next year, or will they lay an egg like the ’09 team did against Villanova? Also, what other teams are going to emerge over the season, and will their strengths blow up our weaknesses? No matter who you are, the tournament is fickle business (See: Kentucky, Kansas and Syracuse 2010).

The reasons why next years’ team will be better have been discussed ad nauseum. They’ll play at a dominating pace, they bring back the most talent and have a very deep bench at all positions. Even if Duke is the team most likely to win, they are not even close to being a higher favorite than the Field. We’ll have a great season, but any time you expect a national championship more than likely you set yourself up for disappointment.

Any other challenges I'm missing?

Excellent post. However, I do disagree with your belief that Singler and Smith are more or less finished products. Here is what Coach K had to say about Singler at the end of the season:

"I don't think Kyle's completely there as a perimeter player. He's really good, don't get me wrong...but Kyle's got a chance to become very, very good."

I also read something similar regarding Nolan, who Coach K believes can improve even more especially in a up-tempo offense.

Keep in mind that Redick and Shelden improved significantly in their senior seasons too.

[BlueDvl817]

I agree on a lot of these points...losing the composed creative spark that Jon brought to the team is not going to be easy to replace. He was a huge part of why Duke won last year. And, of course, you can never pick any team to win it all against the field.

However, I can't see how you can say Kyle has no room for improvement. Coach K said this past season that one of his biggest problems was ball-handling, and how he lowered his profile and played smaller when making moves to the basket. I think that Kyle is a true baller with the drive to improve, and, knowing his deficiencies, what few there are, he will work on these this summer and emerge even better next year.

That being said, I agree with you that we shouldn't put undue pressure on this team to repeat as national champions, and enjoy them for what they are...an uber-athletic team with a high ceiling and lots of potential.

[roywhite]

The biggest challenge will be defining roles, esp. for newcomers, and finding the best lineup combinations. That's primarily a coaching challenge.

For the players, Nolan and Kyle have proved what they can do. We may have some ideas about the other players, but for the most part, they will have to prove in practice and in games just what they can do, and how they fit in. There will be competition for playing time.

[Osiagledknarf]

Here is how I see it:


- How do you Mason and Miles develop? This will be a huge factor in this team being as successful as they are supposed to be. Mason will need to be more of an offensive threat then he was last year, period. We need to be able to stay up defensively and be able to take that role of Zoubek on the defensive end and rebounding. Miles needs to be a stable force who plays good defense and rebounds. We need them to be big time factors down low on the glass. This was a big part of our offense last year... Offensive rebounds were a key thing in this offense last year.

- The offense production should be more then fine next season. With guys like Mason Plumlee, Andre Dawkins, Seth Curry, Nolan Smith, Kyle Singler, and Kyrie Irving running the show, I think that part of our game. If Dawkins and Plumlee develop like we think they will, you wont have to have 3 guys like last season scoring 60% of there points. You will have a bunch of weapons who can really fill it up. This I feel will be the least of our issues.

[CDu]

Without futher ado, here’s the ways Duke may not win a national championship.

1) Jon Scheyer.
2) Nolan Smith and Kyle Singler are not upgrades over Nolan Smith and Kyle Singler.
3) How will the Plumtrees compare to Zoubek and Lance?
4) The field.


The reference to the 2005-2006 team is interesting, but it's important to note some substantial differences. That 2006 team had a couple of particular similarities to this incoming 2011 team (as you mentioned). However, there are a lot of differences. That 2006 team had much less depth (especially big man depth), and much less talent after the top 5. This year's team simply has more able bodies at the 4/5 spots. We have at least 5 guys (the Plumlees, Kelly, Singler, and Hairston) for the 4/5 spots. And we have a sixth (Felix) who is either much bigger than our third "big" in 2006 (if you assume the third big was Nelson) or as big and much stronger and more athletic (if you assume the third big was Melchionni). And on the perimeter, while we're handing the ball to a freshman PG, we also have two very talented and experienced combo guards (Smith and Curry) who can provide support if needed. Paulus only had Dockery, who proved to be a very capable defender but limited offensive player for a PG at the college level. And we have more perimeter weapons than that 2006 team.

Not saying that the 2011 team will win it all, but the comparison to 2006 has more differences than similarities.

As for your reasons why we might not win, here are my thoughts:

1) the loss of Scheyer is huge. Have a senior PG makes a big difference, and Scheyer was a great organizer and leader. Irving has very big shoes to fill, but he's not doing it alone. Smith (a senior) and Curry (a third-year sophomore with a year's worth of practice with Duke) will provide support.
2) I'm less concerned about the improvement of Singler/Smith. For one, I think they'll still get better because both are very hard workers. But I don't think they have to get THAT much better, anyway.
3) The development of the Plumlees is definitely a potential key. But I don't think comparing them to Thomas and Zoubek is the way to look at it. They aren't likely to be asked to play the way the seniors did this year. And frankly, I don't think that would be the best use of their skills. I expect next year's team to play a lot differently than this year's team, in no small part due to the fact that we have a different style of PG and a different style of big men. So while their development will be important, I don't think we should be worried about whether or not they can turn into defensive stoppers or monster screener/rebounders.
4) This is the biggest key, and it's true for any team. Winning a National Championship is very difficult to do. Every single team is unlikely to win the title. It takes a lot of skill, but also a fair amount of good fortune (if you don't like the word "luck"). I'd say that more often than not, the team that played the best over the course of the season does not win the championship. And even at the onset of the tournament, there is rarely a team that has a better than 33% expected chance of winning it. Point #4 could really be point #1.

The things I'd add are:
5. injuries (let's pray they don't happen)
6. complete lack of readiness/development from our four non-Singler big men. Along with the progress of the Plumlees, it will be important for our incoming freshmen and sophomores to provide quality depth. Either we'll need one of Hairston and Kelly to be ready (assuming the Plumlees are solid) or we'll need Dawkins or Felix to be ready to step in on the wing to allow Singler to fill in as needed at the 4. If none of those guys are ready (and I consider this an unlikely scenario), then we could be really thin up front.
7. how well the team gels into a team with a focus and system. As I said, I expect next year's team to play a very different style than this year's team did. that's a challenge both for the players and the coaching staff to get (and keep) everyone on the same page.


But enough thinking about the ways we could not win. Let's think more about the ways we could win again! :)

[CrazieDUMB]

I agree that defining roles will be difficult. With so many players, I think it also remains to be seen how players will adapt to a constantly changing lineup on the floor. Also, with fewer minutes to each player, players may try to push themselves too hard when they are in, instead of just keeping a rythm they're used to that grows over the year.

It's stretching, I know, and of course a great problem to have, but every rose has its thorns.

[Kedsy]

Wrong. The scenario above refers to the 2006 Duke Blue Devils, who lost in the sweet 16 to LSU. That team had Sheldon and JJ both coming back for senior seasons, while losing Daniel Ewing. In addition, they had one of the highest ranked PGs in the country coming in Greg Paulus. Don’t forget the plethora of role players: Lee Melchionni the 3 pt specialist, Dockery the defensive stopper, Demarcus Nelson the breakout sophomore, McBob the athletic guy with hops and a series of players with potential (Martynas Pocius the slasher, Jamal Boykin the California Mr. Basketball, and the giant beast Eric Boateng). Remember this? http://i.cnn.net/si/si_online/covers/images/2005/1121_large.jpg.

As we found out, that team had weaknesses. Paulus couldn’t create off the dribble and was a liability on defense. There was no third scorer. There was no depth in the frontcourt after the Landlord and McBob. The lack of depth made them susceptible to truly athletic teams that could harass the passing lanes and press on D.

What we actually found out was the 2006 team was capable of losing a single game (by 8 points) if they shot 21 percentage points below their season average against an uber-athletic team who played their best game of the year. The Duke team averaged 48.7% that season and shot 27.7% against LSU -- they'd only shot less than 44.4% in four games all season prior to the LSU game. And they still only lost by 8 points.

The team was #1 in the polls every week except four and never dropped lower than #3 in the nation. We won both the regular season ACC championship and the ACC Tournament championship. We were #1 going into the NCAAT (and obviously were the overall #1 seed). We had two first-team All Americans.

The team may or may not have had the weaknesses you iterate above, but we lost to LSU because we had an off-night against a more athletic team who was playing at their best, not because of any of the things you list. Personally, I'm tired of people on these boards denigrating that team because they happened to lose one game after having one of the best (pre-NCAA tournament) seasons in Duke history.


Without futher ado, here’s the ways Duke may not win a national championship.

1) Jon Scheyer.

2) Nolan Smith and Kyle Singler are not upgrades over Nolan Smith and Kyle Singler.

3) How will the Plumtrees compare to Zoubek and Lance?

4) The field. As we all know about the NCAA tournament, it’s almost completely decided by matchups.

Matching up each of our five (presumed) starters next year against each of our (end of season) starters last year is never a good way to judge. If you were having this conversation in the summer of 2009, you would have said we already know what we have with Jon, Lance, Kyle, and Z and we have to replace Elliot and G with Nolan (who would probably improve in 2009-10 but he hadn't shown anything yet and would presumably never be as good as G) and Mason Plumlee, who would be a freshman. Unless Mason turned out to be an all-league type of player the 2009-10 team would have no chance to be as good as the 2008-09 team and look how the 2009 season ended? Woe is us.

In other words in college basketball it's rarely an apples to apples comparison from one season to the next. The reason why I don't think your first three points are particularly relevant is we'll be playing a completely different style in 2010-11, a style suited to Kyrie's game, and Seth's, rather than Jon's. A style where we find other ways to be efficient on both ends of the floor without Z's rebounding presence. You can say Kyrie will probably not match Jon's production, but who cares if the team produces more (which it most certainly will on offense)? The team will have many of the same players but it will look completely different than it did this past season.

If you insist on looking for "challenges," I suggest you think about defense, because that is (in my mind) the biggest unknown going into 2010-11. We will almost certainly be going back to the extended, half-court pressure D, clogging the passing lanes and looking to force turnovers. Will Kyrie be able to stop penetration from the top of the key? Will we be able to stop the dribble-drive but still keep our opponents from getting open looks from 3-point range? Will our inside players be an intimidating enough presence to stop drives to the hoop but also rotate quickly enough to stop the dish-and-dunk? These are the things that I think will determine whether next year's team is a really good team or a truly great one.

But the biggest hurdle to Duke being able to win the national championship is winning six consecutive games in a one-and-done tournament against the top teams in college basketball is incredibly hard and the best team often doesn't win. There's nothing anybody can do about that, so I say let's accentuate the positive and enjoy a season that should be a great deal of fun.

[CDu]

I agree that defining roles will be difficult. With so many players, I think it also remains to be seen how players will adapt to a constantly changing lineup on the floor. Also, with fewer minutes to each player, players may try to push themselves too hard when they are in, instead of just keeping a rythm they're used to that grows over the year.

It's stretching, I know, and of course a great problem to have, but every rose has its thorns.

To be honest, I don't see this being an issue. I don't see Coach K turning into a coach who shuttles guys in and out of the lineup. I think he'll (like he has often done) try to develop a fairly consistent rotation of 8-9 players. The major difference would be that the top-3 guys may see a few fewer minutes per game than this past year, while the #6-#9 guys in the rotation may see a few more minutes per game than this past year. And I think that'll be dictated more by tempo (I think we'll run more next year) rather than Coach K just trying to get guys on the floor.

[ElSid]

I love the healthy skepticism. And I think you're right to try to bring down our expectations. I read somewhere that the Danish people are the happiest in the world because they have relatively low expectations, so when good things happen, it means a lot more.

That's one reason why this season was so great.

However, some key differences between 2006 and 2010. Anyone with working eyes can see that Irving is several orders of magnitude better than Greg Paulus...no offense to Greg, it's just that Irving is a unique talent. The comparison to Jason Williams is apt, though. And the year 2000 team was stacked. I think this coming team will be similarly stacked. And I kind of think the 2000 team is a better comparison. Duke simply has more weapons in 2010 than they did in 2006. In 2000, they lost to Florida in the NCAAT but easily COULD have gone all the way. The tournament is a crap shoot. Doesn't mean we're wrong to expect to be in the picture.

I have concerns about the Plumlees and our low post production in general. But, you never know. I do think they will bring the passion and the effort. I don't know if they'll be able to make up for Lance Thomas switching on screens or Brian Zoubek rebounding. But, it's a pretty good bet that they will be very good. The Plumlees' athleticism is quite a bit better than Lance and Zoubs. Provided that they learned anything from those two seniors this year, they'll bring the same effort and hopefully make similar strides.

I like the post but I think it's pretty easy to objectively say that 2010 is a team with a lot more promise based on the talent of the roster.

[CrazieDUMB]

What we actually found out was the 2006 team was capable of losing a single game (by 8 points) if they shot 21 percentage points below their season average against an uber-athletic team who played their best game of the year.
...
Personally, I'm tired of people on these boards denigrating that team because they happened to lose one game after having one of the best (pre-NCAA tournament) seasons in Duke history.


I'm not trying to denigrate that team at all. By pointing out some weaknesses I'm not trying to say that team was a fraud, just that no matter how good the outlook is there's always going to be questions. Frankly I think the weaknesses of 2006 I listed we a reason LSU held us to such a low shooting percentage, but that's a question for a different day.



Matching up each of our five (presumed) starters next year against each of our (end of season) starters last year is never a good way to judge. If you were having this conversation in the summer of 2009, you would have said we already know what we have with Jon, Lance, Kyle, and Z and we have to replace Elliot and G with Nolan (who would probably improve in 2009-10 but he hadn't shown anything yet and would presumably never be as good as G) and Mason Plumlee, who would be a freshman. Unless Mason turned out to be an all-league type of player the 2009-10 team would have no chance to be as good as the 2008-09 team and look how the 2009 season ended? Woe is us.


The difference between Nolan and Kyle this summer and Lance, Z, and Nolan last summer is that the latter group all had significant room for improvement. Lance got better at defense every year, and had room to break out in that respect as a senior. In Z's case, we never had a chance to see him fully healthy. As far as Nolan goes, I remember always seeing a very athletic kid that could never really figure it out. Up until the last 10 games of the '09 season, he was our PG, a position that never really fit him despite his skill set as a good ballhandler, midrange shooter, and great first step. Towards the end of the season you could have made an argument that he was finally beginning to blossom off the ball. I think the upper limit for NS and KS this year is much more defined than it was for NS, Z and LT last year.

RE: defense, I agree completely. We'll be playing a much different style, much more aggressive. Priorities, mindsets and responsibilities will all change next year. I missed that in my first analysis, mainly because I was trying to deconstruct something I think we're taking for granted, that offense improve next year.

I don't think talking about the negatives is a bad thing. It doesn't mean I won't enjoy the team, and I'm sorry if bringing these things up bugs you. It's may and I think it's cool having this stuff to talk about, as well as plans for fixing it. Thats all :)

[Billy Dat]

-I echo the comments about the new offense and defense. We'll be running on offense and extending on D. Having not played that way for a year, at least, it will be a big change and we are likely to see some early turnover fests.

-To quote Pat Riley, as repeated by Bill Simmons, there is the post-championship "disease of more". Once the title is won, guys want to step into the spotlight. As far as shots go, Scheyer steps away and Irving, Curry and the Plumlees step up. Coach may have Miles convinced that he's a role player, but if Mason has been reading the NBA scouts clippings, he's looking at himself as a pro. Curry, obviously, transferred to Duke because he sees himself as an NBA player. Then there's Andre, who likes to pull the trigger. This year's team, outside of the Big 3, were content to screen, rebound, and defend. Next year, that's going to be a trickier balance to strike. I think Nolan's leadership will be important, because Singler doesn't strike me as a vocal type.

-Related to the above, especially after this year, I think the coaching staff will be challenged to design offensive strategies that get the Plumlees involved on a regular basis in the half court. We know they can run and will relish getting out on the break, but with all our perimeter talent, it will be important to make sure the big dogs get some plays run for them to keep them happy, and to open up the three point line.

-While Duke has always been in the spotlight, starting the year #1 is a new animal for all these guys. I am glad we are playing a non-conference schedule worthy of our potential so that they get tested early and often. Looking back, some of those early to mid season lumps we took (Wisconsin, Tech, G-Town) helped us a lot. I'll stop short of referencing the State game, by far the biggest head scratcher in the championship season.

[ElSid]

Having read Kedsy's post, I think I retract my statement about talent of the roster. We dominated that season and maybe just lost steam during the LSU game. Depth wise, 2010 should still be better.

Sticking to the point about Irving being a bigger factor. He'll be a top player next year. I don't think high expectations are misplaced with him. And I think disappointment has a very low probability.

[InSpades]

1. Finding room to hang all the new banners they will be getting....

2. Trying to look enthused about cutting down yet another pair of nets...

3. Finding enough "end of the bench" guys to play so they don't run up the score too much on lesser teams like Carolina...

4. Coming up with new and exciting ways to answer interview questions without saying "yah, we know we're the best"...

So many challenges for next year... I'm not sure if they will be up for all of them!

[Kedsy]

I'm not trying to denigrate that team at all. By pointing out some weaknesses I'm not trying to say that team was a fraud, just that no matter how good the outlook is there's always going to be questions. Frankly I think the weaknesses of 2006 I listed we a reason LSU held us to such a low shooting percentage, but that's a question for a different day.

I apologize, then, for suggesting you were denigrating the 2006 team. It's hard to tell sometimes because sooooo many posters around here do it. The 2006 team is often portrayed as an untalented disappointment, who didn't achieve anything, and it bugs me. Personally I think the 2006 team demonstrates your point 4, that it's really hard to make a Final Four or win a championship because practically any NCAAT team can beat you if you have a really bad day.


The difference between Nolan and Kyle this summer and Lance, Z, and Nolan last summer is that the latter group all had significant room for improvement. Lance got better at defense every year, and had room to break out in that respect as a senior. In Z's case, we never had a chance to see him fully healthy. As far as Nolan goes, I remember always seeing a very athletic kid that could never really figure it out. Up until the last 10 games of the '09 season, he was our PG, a position that never really fit him despite his skill set as a good ballhandler, midrange shooter, and great first step. Towards the end of the season you could have made an argument that he was finally beginning to blossom off the ball. I think the upper limit for NS and KS this year is much more defined than it was for NS, Z and LT last year.

Well, that's what it seems like now. An awful lot of posters kept saying over and over that we couldn't expect anything from Lance and Z because they'd been here three years and if they hadn't got better by now they weren't going to. Most people suspected Nolan was going to improve, but very few thought he could approach G's numbers (I remember a debate about whether it was too pie-in-the-sky to suggest Nolan could approach 15ppg or whether even 10ppg or 12ppg was overly optimistic). I don't remember anybody thinking Jon would have a major improvement (although he did).

You may be right about Kyle and Nolan next year, but I believe they both have as much potential for upside improvement as Jon and Lance had coming into this season.

I also think Ryan, Andre, Mason, and Miles all have the potential to make huge jumps. That's one reason I'm not crazy about these player-by-player assessments from year to year.


I don't think talking about the negatives is a bad thing. It doesn't mean I won't enjoy the team, and I'm sorry if bringing these things up bugs you. It's may and I think it's cool having this stuff to talk about, as well as plans for fixing it. Thats all :)

It didn't bug me at all. I just didn't agree with the framework you seemed to be setting up for evaluating the team, and I didn't like the implication (which possibly I imagined and if so, I apologize) that if you don't win the national championship there's something wrong with you.


Having read Kedsy's post, I think I retract my statement about talent of the roster. We dominated that season and maybe just lost steam during the LSU game. Depth wise, 2010 should still be better.


I agree the 2010 team will be both deeper and better than the 2006 team. But as both of us have said, the 2006 team was still a really, really good team.


3. Finding enough "end of the bench" guys to play so they don't run up the score too much on lesser teams like Carolina...

:D

[Newton_14]

1) Jon Scheyer.
2) Nolan Smith and Kyle Singler are not upgrades over Nolan Smith and Kyle Singler.
3) How will the Plumtrees compare to Zoubek and Lance?
4) The field.
Any other challenges I'm missing?

I would add 1 challenge:
5. Chemistry: There will be many new pieces/personalities. There will also be extreme competition for minutes. How the guys handle that competition, how they handle the expectations, and how they handle the relationships with each other will be key.

I feel optimistic on chemistry, because all of the returning players have shown us they can put team needs ahead of personal needs. Extremely close team last year. With the new guys coming in, they will have to show they can also put team first. At first glance, based on everything we have seen and heard about the new guys, it seems they are all good kids with good attitudes. But time will tell if that is an accurate assessment.

As for the 4 you listed:

1. Jon Scheyer- Special, special player. Pundits be damned, the stats and the hardware say that Jon was the best PG in the nation last year and should have been a 1st Team All American. We will most certainly miss what he brought to the table. No way that Kyrie matches Jon's numbers from last year, but the good news is he does not have to. I think Kyrie will be great on the offensive end of the floor. My only concerns are can he play Duke defense, and can he limit the turnovers freshman PG's are born to make?

2. Nolan Smith and Kyle Singler are not upgrades over Nolan Smith and Kyle Singler.
I have to disagree here. Nolan and Kyle can absolutely improve their games. On both ends. K is on record stating that he believes Nolan will make another big jump in his game this year. Think about how hard it is for Nolan to drive the lane with his head up looking for options other than him attacking the basket. I think he can greatly improve there. If Nolan can learn to be a better distributor it makes him much more dangerous. His passing can get better and his floor game can improve as well. Kyle can get better at ball handling, and like Nolan, can also improve as a distributor. I think his midrange game can get better as well. But both guys can absolutely improve their games.

3) How will the Plumtrees compare to Zoubek and Lance?

They don't need to be Brian and LT. They are totally different players. And while Brian and LT could do things the Plums can't, it works the other way as well. There is great talent here, much of it still in development. The style of play this coming year will be totally different than last year. The Plums will not have to emulate BZ and LT, as the schemes will be different on both ends. They will need to be able to defend, reduce their foul rate, and reduce mistakes. Right now, Miles is further along than Mason. But though I worry about both, I think they can become really good players. They won't need to defend as well as Brian and LT for the team to have great success, but they will need to be able to defend at a level that is acceptable to K.

While this is my biggest concern, I do believe we will see really good improvement from both Plum's, as well as Kelly. I also have a good feeling about Hairston as well. That is why I feel so strongly 2 of these 4 guys will be on the floor a lot with Kyle or Andre at the 3 spot.

4) The field.
We agree here.

[Waynne]

I apologize, then, for suggesting you were denigrating the 2006 team. It's hard to tell sometimes because sooooo many posters around here do it. The 2006 team is often portrayed as an untalented disappointment, who didn't achieve anything, and it bugs me.

Denigrating the '06 team is unfair. It was a great team with 2 All-Americans that finished 32-4 and 14-2 in the ACC, slightly better than this year's team. It was a thin team though, with a 7 player rotation that included 2 freshmen (Paulus and McRoberts) and a sophomore (DeMarcus) who suffered a serious mid-season ankle injury. We were all disappointed with the LSU loss, but it highlighted the fact there were no reliable scoring options after JJ and Sheldon. Shel had a great game but JJ was off, shooting 3-18 and scoring only 11 points. No one else broke double digits.

Given these limitations the '06 team had a remarkable season, accomplishing much more than many expected. The '11 team should not encounter any of these problems, having much more depth and multiple scoring options.

[flyingdutchdevil]

1. Finding room to hang all the new banners they will be getting....

2. Trying to look enthused about cutting down yet another pair of nets...

3. Finding enough "end of the bench" guys to play so they don't run up the score too much on lesser teams like Carolina...

4. Coming up with new and exciting ways to answer interview questions without saying "yah, we know we're the best"...

So many challenges for next year... I'm not sure if they will be up for all of them!

This is great. With the somber mood of this thread, this made me laugh. Great job.

I'd like to add a few:

5. Nolan and co. coming up with new ways to interact with teammates during the player intros.

6. Trying to find a game that will be as challenging as the blue v white practices

7. Coach K refraining from using the phrase "great team" before the 3rd week of the season

[Cisco]

Excellent post. However, I do disagree with your belief that Singler and Smith are more or less finished products. Here is what Coach K had to say about Singler at the end of the season:

"I don't think Kyle's completely there as a perimeter player. He's really good, don't get me wrong...but Kyle's got a chance to become very, very good."

I also read something similar regarding Nolan, who Coach K believes can improve even more especially in a up-tempo offense.

Keep in mind that Redick and Shelden improved significantly in their senior seasons too.

What the OP failed to mention, is that the team that lost in the sweet 16 had just lost Luol Deng, the dynamic Forward (Kyle Singler) That was very versatile.

If we would have had Luol Deng (Kyle Singler) in that '06 season, maybe we would have beaten LSU.

[DevilHorns]

I honestly think the key to next year is the bigs (as I posted probably a few months ago).

It was an incredible luxury to have 4 bigs and many fouls to spare last year. This coming year Miles and Mason need to improve and be ready for bigger contributions fast. By contributions, I don't mean points. Points should be plenty from all the offensive threats we have. By shape up I mean not fouling, defending well, not missing assignments, etc.

I'm excited for next year as well and echo the sentiment that entering the season as a favorite means absolutely squat in college basketball. Too many variables and questions at this point with too many green athletes.

[Saratoga2]

I really considered finding playing time for all of the gifted players on the team was the biggest challange for next season. With Carrick reportedly not coming to Duke next year, it does change the scene somewhat, making Andre Dawkins more likely to get additional PT.

Like Bob Green, I think the Plumlees will start at the big position with Singler, Smith and Irving getting the starting nod at the other positions. This is no knock at all on the other players. If Curry is as good as we think, he will get a lot of PT at both the point and the shooting guard positions. Andre could well get some time at shooting guard and is likely to be in at the 3 when Singler is not.

I really like Hairston in a role like Thomas last year, only I think Josh has additional offensive skills. Kelly is clearly a key backup at the 4 or 5. The concept of switching Singler down to the 4 at times, where there might be a matchup issue with speed, and playing a 3 true guard lineup also has merit.

I am sorry that Carrick won't be coming, but the team is deep and will do all right.

[MChambers]

I really considered finding playing time for all of the gifted players on the team was the biggest challange for next season. With Carrick reportedly not coming to Duke next year, it does change the scene somewhat, making Andre Dawkins more likely to get additional PT.

Like Bob Green, I think the Plumlees will start at the big position with Singler, Smith and Irving getting the starting nod at the other positions. This is no knock at all on the other players. If Curry is as good as we think, he will get a lot of PT at both the point and the shooting guard positions. Andre could well get some time at shooting guard and is likely to be in at the 3 when Singler is not.

I really like Hairston in a role like Thomas last year, only I think Josh has additional offensive skills. Kelly is clearly a key backup at the 4 or 5. The concept of switching Singler down to the 4 at times, where there might be a matchup issue with speed, and playing a 3 true guard lineup also has merit.

I am sorry that Carrick won't be coming, but the team is deep and will do all right.

Now everyone can redo their projected minutes distribution for next year! Gives us weeks more of posts.

I agree that Andre is the major beneficiary of Felix not coming, because he'll be the only backup with any size at all at the "3" (if Duke played positions). As far as whether he's big enough, seems to me he's about the same size as Gerald Henderson, so I'd say he's fine, except maybe against big 3s, but then they'll have to defend him, which won't be easy.

[IBleedBlue]

I believe with Carrick not coming next season, Andre Dawkins will have the opportunity to develop a more rounded game like Gerald Henderson and Elliott Williams. We need an athletic slasher who can throw it down and shoot it from deep. Andre will have the best opportunity to develop and show case his talents this coming and the future seasons. I believe he will be another lottery pick in the near future.

[left_hook_lacey]

This is an excellent post crazieDUMB. I think it's a good idea while we're at the top of the moutain to take a look down at the surrounding valley to see where we've been the past few seasons and not take anything for granted on the upcoming season. I'm very excited about the team we'll have next year, but your description of the current landscape of college basketball is spot on. As the Bilas quote you cited suggests, you never know what each team is going to put on the floor from year to year now-a-days. Take a look at UNC last year for example. We all know how that story went, it was a perfect storm of early depatures, injuries, a coach that was stubborn, young talent that didn't live up to expectations all combined to make a defending national champion end up in the cellar of the ACC. There's just a couple of points I want to add/elaborate on.

I agree with your assessment of Singler's draft stock. I feel like he is what he is. He plays as hard as he can every play, he can get hot from the outside, excellent free throw shooter, smart and able on defense. I just can't see his ceiling going much higher that it is right now.

Nolan on the other hand I think still has some room to grow. He was great last year, but I don't know if he's finished yet. Look how much he has improved every year since his freshman year. Nolan was phenomenal this past season and seemed to get better every game. Kyle on the other hand has remained pretty constant throughout, even slumping a little here and there before regaining his posture, but always a presence.

Also, the point you made about the Plumlee's output is correct. I think they are the biggest question mark this year. I really think they could explode and be a tandem that every team in the ACC dreads facing. In the same breath, I feel like that could go the other way as well. They have never faced the pressure at Duke of being the "it" guys inside as they will this year. Maybe it's just me, but they seemed to wilt a little last season if things weren't going exactly their way. Hopefully, they'll grow out of that and be the strong/explosive front court I think they can be.

Now the exit of Scheyer and entry of Irving. This is very intriguing to me and I think your analysis is accurate. If Kyrie, as a freshman, lives up to the hype as we all expect him to, I still feel that we taking a slight step down by losing some intangibles that Scheyer brought to the table. No one, including Nolan, can take care of the ball the way that Scheyer did last year. I really feel like he was the oil in the engine. When I say he "took care of the ball" I'm not just referring to making good passes, I mean he really got the players and the ball where it needed to be to get a good look. I think as the season plays out next year, Duke fans will feel the absence of Jon more and more, especially when we start getting out the cupcake games at the beginning of the year.

[AZLA]

This type of thread is important. With all the talent and potential heading into next season, it's good to stay grounded and to work hard at finding and improving upon any weaknesses. That being said, I just can't compare next year's team to 2006. The personnel and the expectations of the team are too different in my opinion. JJ was so good that year, the team's Achilles heal was relying too much on JJ and when he was contained (hacked/held) against LSU, the team couldn't adjust offensively. Next year's team is much more balanced and with a great bench. Plus, I feel there's plenty of versatile players who can cover multiple positions if there are any injuries. I have high expectations for the Plumlees -- always have. As good as Zoobs and LT were on defense and with rebounding, Mason and Miles will provide a more dynamic offense and will be effective on defense and with rebounds. I don't think one player will ever contribute in rebounds the way Zoubek did. His season was magic. But, now that Mason and Miles are a little more experienced and do not have to play behind two other "bigs," it's time for them to release the hounds and dominate the interior on both ends of the floor. I believe they can do so, almost like the Griffin brothers did at Oklahoma. Mason needs to get a little nasty and play with a chip on his shoulder. Lastly, with Kyrie coming in, next year's team can run a high-octane fast break any time and against any team. That's a dynamic we haven't seen in a while and one that I wouldn't associate with 2006 or even last season. Lastly, it comes down to leadership. When it's all said and done, I believe Nolan is a rock and will be remembered as one of the greatest leaders (by example) Duke's ever seen. And with Singler returning, it's hard to stay humble. Coach K will do a good job at ensuring everyone does.