My preference

[SoCalDukeFan]

I could not figure which thread to add this to, so I started my own.

I would much much much rather support a team that wins then NC and has no players drafted than one who does not make the FF and has 5 players drafted.

I would not want to support a coach who regards having 5 players drafted early, 4 being none and dones, as a great day for the school.

SoCal

[DukieInKansas]

I could not figure which thread to add this to, so I started my own.

I would much much much rather support a team that wins then NC and has no players drafted than one who does not make the FF and has 5 players drafted.

I would not want to support a coach who regards having 5 players drafted early, 4 being none and dones, as a great day for the school.

SoCal

I would agree with this even if the 4 players were one and dones.

[-bdbd]

Re Calipari, it is all about posturing for the next batch of high school superstars. That is his recruiting pitch after all -- so no coincidence he's there hugging them on TV as they get selected...

But I obviously agree that I like our scenario much better.

As a matter of fact, I've long wondered why NC@CH gets away so easily with their misdirection over "UNC's superior track record to the pros." It seems to me, that that obviously, if true, would have a lot more to do with recruiting better super-athletes out of HS than any development work done while at the school. A big state school recuiting more successfully - say b/c of humongous athletic resources or stadiums or huge fan following or media bias, etc - as compared with a school that recruits more good-but-not-awesome team-oriented players and WHO ACCOMPLISH MORE IN COLLEGE THAN DO THOSE NBA-DESIGNATED SUPER ATHLETES," that this scenario reflects very poorly on that mega-school. After all, if you have the best talent coming out of HS year in and year out, then you SHOULD win most of the time. To me it isn't a credit that NC's players do well in the NBA (a bit of a misnomer since they really ride heavily on the achievements of one 3-year player of theirs) , but rather HOW COME THEY CAN'T ACCOMPLISH MORE THAN NEARBY SCHOOLS WITH NBA-ASSESSED "LESS TALENT???"

Apparently these "superior althletes/players" need to LEAVE said school before their greatness can truly show (in the NBA)??? How is that a positive statment for that school??!

In the end, Calipari's methods will not last. Be proud of what we stand for as much as the NC's we achieve gang!

[killerleft]

-bdbd says:

"As a matter of fact, I've long wondered why NC@CH gets away so easily with their misdirection over "UNC's superior track record to the pros." It seems to me, that that obviously, if true, would have a lot more to do with recruiting better super-athletes out of HS than any development work done while at the school."

Q. Who was the only guy who could hold Michael Jordon to less than 30 points in a game?

A. Dean Smith

[shoutingncu]

I thought of this last night, as well... taking petty pleasure in the outcome... Of course, that's a disservice to the team, given that next year, two of this year's team should be drafted, and two to four more sometime after that.

And the championship trumps all anyway... I have way more admiration for what Carmello did at Syracuse than what Durant did at Texas, regardless of how their pro careers turn out.

I do take some issue with the assessment of North Carolina and its pros. For one thing, Jordan personally credits Dean and Carolina repeatedly. For another, the Carolina Lakers add up to as many championships as MJ has, one of whom was pretty instrumental and a big name in his own right, so it's not just the Jordan influence.

Lots of ABC'ers like to point to the "done less with more" argument for Dean; that is, with all those future NBA players, how could he not win the big one more? There's a flip side to that that surely Duke fans can see the "humor" in, which is that for all his coaching brilliance, how has only one Coach K player gone on to win an NBA championship? I mean, come on, Carolina matches that with Rasheed.

But the reality is that they're both great coaches, and with K soon to pass Dean in wins, already doubling him up in championships and taking some of the shine off that '76 gold... NBA success (championships, not salaries) is one of the last things we can hold on to...

[MarkD83]

I do take some issue with the assessment of North Carolina and its pros. For one thing, Jordan personally credits Dean and Carolina repeatedly. For another, the Carolina Lakers add up to as many championships as MJ has, one of whom was pretty instrumental and a big name in his own right, so it's not just the Jordan influence.

Lots of ABC'ers like to point to the "done less with more" argument for Dean; that is, with all those future NBA players, how could he not win the big one more? There's a flip side to that that surely Duke fans can see the "humor" in, which is that for all his coaching brilliance, how has only one Coach K player gone on to win an NBA championship? I mean, come on, Carolina matches that with Rasheed.

But the reality is that they're both great coaches, and with K soon to pass Dean in wins, already doubling him up in championships and taking some of the shine off that '76 gold... NBA success (championships, not salaries) is one of the last things we can hold on to...

I agree with the last paragraph that both are great coaches. They are both great coaches based on what they have done while "coaching" (ACC championships, NC Final 4s, Olympic Gold). However, NBA championships (and salaries) are based upon how well the GM of an NBA franchise does his job, not necessarily due to individual player talent. (Early in his career, MJ had a lot of playoff games where he scored 50+ points and the Bulls never made it out of the first round.)

[RoyalBlue08]

I could not figure which thread to add this to, so I started my own.

I would much much much rather support a team that wins then NC and has no players drafted than one who does not make the FF and has 5 players drafted.

I would not want to support a coach who regards having 5 players drafted early, 4 being none and dones, as a great day for the school.

SoCal

I'd take it a few steps further. I would rather support a team that wins a NC after sticking it out four years and has no one drafted than support a team that wins a NC and all the players go to the NBA after 1-2 seasons.

Another way to say this is I doubt I will ever have a team that I enjoyed the journey with more than last year's Duke's team...even though there will probably be more "NBA talented" teams in the future.

[oldnavy]

I'd take it a few steps further. I would rather support a team that wins a NC after sticking it out four years and has no one drafted than support a team that wins a NC and all the players go to the NBA after 1-2 seasons.

Another way to say this is I doubt I will ever have a team that I enjoyed the journey with more than last year's Duke's team...even though there will probably be more "NBA talented" teams in the future.

Well as long as they play the tournament and crown an NCAA champion, I really could not care less how many Duke players make it to the NBA. That is a red herring argument to me for teams that do not win the championship. College basketball is not about how many future NBA players you have, but about working together as a team to accomplish something bigger than individual goals. In some way if we value that aspect (making the NBA) wouldn't it devalue the accomplishments of the players that don't make the NBA? Sounds very sappy and old school, but hey I am OLDnavy for a reason.

[killerleft]

shoutingncu says:

"Lots of ABC'ers like to point to the "done less with more" argument for Dean; that is, with all those future NBA players, how could he not win the big one more? There's a flip side to that that surely Duke fans can see the "humor" in, which is that for all his coaching brilliance, how has only one Coach K player gone on to win an NBA championship? I mean, come on, Carolina matches that with Rasheed."

I think you've painted yourself into a corner.

1) You more or less admit that UNC has won with a healthy advantage of manpower relative to Duke...
2) Which means that Coach K has somehow done more with less talent overall, indicating that he is either a super-good coach (or is it that Dean kinda sucked?).

Which way do you want it? Coach K has done more with less? Or several UNC coaches have done less with more? Last time I checked neither Duke nor Carolina have banners up for what their guys did or do in the pros.

So where is the humorous part? I guess the fun is you making the argument that K obviously outcoaches any Heel past or present.

[CBDUKE]

Two things stand out to me about the draft. First, you don't have to have a lot of draft picks to win the NC, just a "team". Second, K is head and shoulders above Cal as a coach.

[shoutingncu]

I think you've painted yourself into a corner.

1) You more or less admit that UNC has won with a healthy advantage of manpower relative to Duke...
2) Which means that Coach K has somehow done more with less talent overall, indicating that he is either a super-good coach (or is it that Dean kinda sucked?).

Which way do you want it? Coach K has done more with less? Or several UNC coaches have done less with more? Last time I checked neither Duke nor Carolina have banners up for what their guys did or do in the pros.

So where is the humorous part? I guess the fun is you making the argument that K obviously outcoaches any Heel past or present.


I think it's an incredibly valid criticism of Dean that he couldn't win more championships with the players that he had. And I think it's admirable that K has won consistently with "less" manpower... although Hurley, Laettner and Hill are hardly lesser (I mean, if Dean recruited them, they had to be pro potential, right?) , they just came through at a time when early entry was still a rarity (although who knows how long they'd stay if they were born into this generation, ahem, Singler).

And though I did not use the same words as you, I have stated elsewhere that Coach K has cemented himself ahead of any Heel. We've had ten years to come to terms with him having more championships, so number four just erases any doubt. As I've said, I'll use words like "successful" and "accomplished," but I certainly wouldn't argue with "best."

For the sake of further biased objectivity, another criticism of Dean I agree with is one that has been mentioned recently on this board, and that is his lowering standard toward recruiting... not just in Makhtar, but in NBA Champion Rasheed (sorry, just wanted to reference him again ;))

What I find amusing as a hater is that over a thirty year Hall of Fame career, only one K player has gone on to win a championship at the next level... I know it's easy to separate college and NBA (except when it serves Duke's purpose, like pointing out that Roy hasn't put many successful wings into the NBA or Duke alum are the highest paid group of NBA'ers), but at some point, I'm sorry, I just think it becomes funny that none of those players have won the next prize. It's petty and a borderline critique at best, but it's also an objective fact.

Consider the flip side... Had Dean not won the two championships, wouldn't outsiders have a chuckle at all that talent going through but not winning the national championship? I mean, it's kind of funny now, just with the two, right?

[MarkD83]

The coach from Lower Merion High School has produced player(s) with more NBA Championships than either Dean or Coach K. Does that make him the best coach among the three?

[killerleft]

The coach from Lower Merion High School has produced player(s) with more NBA Championships than either Dean or Coach K. Does that make him the best coach among the three?

Phil Woolpert would have quite a few if you figured it that way.