Which Season Would You Rather Have?

[pfrduke]

There has been an undercurrent running through a variety of threads talking about expectations/desires for a "better" season next year and/or ruminating on a "disappointing" season this year. For me, this raises the question of where posters put their emphasis on defining the success of a season. Below are the resumes of 5 teams - for sake of the poll, I'm not including team names, but it wouldn't take much effort to figure out who these teams are. If you had to pick one of the below as the most successful season, which one would you take. Please feel free to post describing your reasoning. Also, while I certainly have my own opinion, I don't think that there is a right or wrong answer here, as people's views of success necessarily vary.

Team A:
28-10, 13-5 in conference (1st place regular season), conference tournament champions, NCAA 8 seed, national runner-up.

Team B:
29-9, 10-6 in conference (3rd), conference tournament champions, NCAA 4 seed, final four.

Team C:
28-12, 12-6 in conference (4th), conference tournament runner-up, NCAA 11 seed, final four

Team D:
32-5, 13-3 in conference (2nd), conference tournament champion, NCAA 1 seed, Sweet 16

Team E:
29-8, 13-3 in conference (1st), conference tournament runner-up, NCAA 2 seed, Elite 8

[Duvall]

Can we really assess Team B's season without knowing how many players they put in the first round of the NBA Draft?

[Cell-R]

I voted A before I finished reading the original post.

Team A's statistics in the poll (Team A (28-5,13-3 (1st) CT champ, 8 seed, runner-up)) vary from the stats in the post. I would definitely change my vote to Team D if the post has the correct stats.

[pfrduke]

I voted A before I finished reading the original post.

Team A's statistics in the poll (Team A (28-5,13-3 (1st) CT champ, 8 seed, runner-up)) vary from the stats in the post. I would definitely change my vote to Team D if the post has the correct stats.

Sorry, the poll was wrong, post was right. It's been fixed now. Don't know if I can change your vote.

[Greg_Newton]

I'd certainly suffer through another five losses if it meant we won the ACC regular season and ACC championship and made it to the title game (A).

However, a Duke team that did that would never be an 8-seed, even if they had 10 losses. So I guess it's kind of unrealistic.

[Duvall]

I'd certainly suffer through another five losses if it meant we won the ACC regular season and ACC championship and made it to the title game (A).

But then, we aren't talking about the ACC championship. Does that make a difference? How much credit do Teams A, B and C get for success in a mid-major conference?

[ThePublisher]

Team F: 39-1, 15-1 (1st) Conference champs and conference tournament champs. National title.
My dream for this 10-11 season had Irving not gone down.

[Greg_Newton]

But then, we aren't talking about the ACC championship. Does that make a difference? How much credit do Teams A, B and C get for success in a mid-major conference?

Aren't we? I just assumed by "we" he meant Duke, with the given statistics.

[1 24 90]

I voted for D because I know it is Duke and I wouldn't trade the Duke team for any other team no matter what the results.

[Exiled_Devil]

But then, we aren't talking about the ACC championship. Does that make a difference? How much credit do Teams A, B and C get for success in a mid-major conference?

They get 100% credit. It's about being a champion. If you notice, Coach K celebrates preseason championships, regular season championships, tournament championships, regional championships and national championships. That team won at least 3 championships. That becomes a habit. Good for this year, good for years to come.

In these hypothetical/blind item seasons count 100%, because you can't win a conference tournament that you aren't in. If I'm a Bucknell fan, I'm psyched to win the Patriot League. I'm not bummed that I didn't get to win the ACC or Big East.

[ncexnyc]

All of the listed seasons are nice, however without knowing what the expectations were for each team it's difficult to answer the poll. I think that is why you're seeing the undercurrent of so called disppointment on this board. People had such high expectations for a team with 2 preseason All American level players and the top incoming PG.

[NovaScotian]

no duke fan worth their weight in salt should not be able to correctly identify the team in this poll.

[Reilly]

Team A had the better season: it won three championships. To me, considering the seed is a silly criterion for measuring success. That is valuing yourself/season based on others' opinion of you.

[brevity]

no duke fan worth their weight in salt should not be able to correctly identify the team in this poll.

So far, after 30 votes, I think they have. More people are voting for Butler and Kentucky, but at least no one is voting for UNC.

[sporthenry]

I thought this was the best place to put this,
http://isportsweb.com/2011/04/11/barnes-returning/

While it says Barnes is coming back, I was more surprised that an E8 appearance was a 'stellar' season.

'The University of North Carolina Tar Heels basketball program seems to be gearing up to monumental status. The Tar Heels are coming off of a stellar 2010-11 year in which they made an appearance in the Elite 8 of the NCAA Tournament, finishing off with a 29-8 record, 14-2 in the ACC regular season.'

I figured these types of seasons were expected with 10 McDonald's AA in the last 3 years. But those stats are only brought up against Duke. But it is funny to try to hear UNC fans try to play off a preseason top 10 team winning the ACC and making the E8 as a stellar year only to be topped by a blue blood going through a monumental season, in which they will be the preseason favorite? I guess Duke is just used to these expectations?

[Duke: A Dynasty]

I dont think this is the correct way to do this. I do not see what I consider a great season up there. For me to not be dissapointed it depends on the makeup of the team in one solid year. This year for example I wanted nothing worse than 4 or 5 losses and a final four berth.

[JasonEvans]

I voted for Kentucky, because I put so much weight on reaching the Final Four. Duke's season was a very close 2nd for me.

-Jason

[Duvall]

Team A had the better season: it won three championships.

Two championships. And I disagree - I think who you played and who you beat to win those championships matters. Did Belmont have a better season than Pittsburgh?

[rsvman]

The poll isn't useful because it pretends to present the reader with a disinterested choice, but everybody on this board can easily identify the teams. Therefore, you may as well have simply asked "Which teams season was best?" and then listed the names of the schools.

[pfrduke]

Aren't we? I just assumed by "we" he meant Duke, with the given statistics.


The poll isn't useful because it pretends to present the reader with a disinterested choice, but everybody on this board can easily identify the teams. Therefore, you may as well have simply asked "Which teams season was best?" and then listed the names of the schools.

Yes, by "we" I intended to mean Duke, with the given statistics (although I agree that it's hard to envision an ACC regular season and tournament champion getting an 8 seed). I used the numbers from other teams this season because a) I figured that was better than me just making scenarios up and b) this was a season that had a lot of disparity between regular season and post-season success, which gave a good barometer for where on the "how do we define a successful season" line people fall - of the final four teams, only Butler finished first in the conference regular season and won the conference title, but it also traded that against 10 losses. I probably could have phrased it better (in fact, looking back at the initial post, I'm certain I could have phrased it better). But the idea I was intending to convey was, given a choice of 5 potential season results, which would we most prefer for Duke.


So far, after 30 votes, I think they have. More people are voting for Butler and Kentucky, but at least no one is voting for UNC.

That's actually Florida's results, although their resumes are nearly identical this year.

[Reilly]

Two championships. And I disagree - I think who you played and who you beat to win those championships matters. Did Belmont have a better season than Pittsburgh?

By my count, Team A had three championships: 1st place regular season, conference tournament, and an NCAA Regional championship (in other words, Final Four berth). That's three times some nets could've been cut down.

[Reilly]

In determining the relative success of any year, I've always found a fair rule of thumb is to simply count championships.

Look at Duke's seasons over the years to see this rule in practice:

Counting championships (conference reg season, conference tourney, regional, national)

4 champ years: 2010, 2001, 1992

3 champ years: 1999, 1991, 1986, 1966, 1964, 1963

2 champ years: 2006, 2004, 2000, 1994, 1988, 1978, 1942

1 champ years: 2011, 2009, 2005, 2003, 2002, 1998, 1997, 1990, 1989, 1980, 1979, 1965, 1960, 1958, 1954, 1946, 1944, 1943, 1941, 1940

Just applying the "count the championships" rule puts the years in pretty much the order that a bar argument/qualitative discussion would rank them, it seems.

[hurleyfor3]

Final Four above all else. Whatever happens before is just preparation. Whatever happens afterward is gravy.

[nocilla]

I think Team A had a very good season. But I still vote Team D and I think you left out one of the most important factors. Team D beat their arch-rivals twice which is pretty important to me.

[mikegismynewhero]

if you don't win the national championship when you are a duke or unc type of team then the season is wasted...wins is next important along with conference championship

[Jeff Frosh]

if you don't win the national championship when you are a duke or unc type of team then the season is wasted...wins is next important along with conference championship

I will leave it to Kedsy or someone else with the time and patience and desire to say why this is so wrong.

[DukieinSoCal]

I know we can be spoiled as a fan base and expect ACC and NCAA championships every year but it's really not realistic. Some years, we will just have to be reloading/rebuilding a bit and other years, all the pieces look to be in place for a special year.

That's why, for me personally, my satisfaction with a season is often couched in terms of expectations, both coming into the year and evolving as the season progresses. Like this past season, coming into the year, it looked like everything was in place for a 1-2 loss season and another NCAA title. But after Kyrie went down, my expectations changed a bit and the same results/ending to the season had a very different effect on me than what it would have pre-injury.

Fortunately, we can at least expect to have a decent chance at ACC titles and deep runs in the NCAAT every year as long as coach K is at the helm. We should consider ourselves blessed.

[mgtr]

I voted for D because I know it is Duke and I wouldn't trade the Duke team for any other team no matter what the results.

Best post of the thread! I would rather be Duke and lose than ___ (fill in blank) and win. Now, I would also prefer to be Duke and win, but my preference is for Duke above all others under any reasonable conditions.

[Newton_14]

In determining the relative success of any year, I've always found a fair rule of thumb is to simply count championships.

Look at Duke's seasons over the years to see this rule in practice:

Counting championships (conference reg season, conference tourney, regional, national)

4 champ years: 2010, 2001, 1992

3 champ years: 1999, 1991, 1986, 1966, 1964, 1963

2 champ years: 2006, 2004, 2000, 1994, 1988, 1978, 1942

1 champ years: 2011, 2009, 2005, 2003, 2002, 1998, 1997, 1990, 1989, 1980, 1979, 1965, 1960, 1958, 1954, 1946, 1944, 1943, 1941, 1940

Just applying the "count the championships" rule puts the years in pretty much the order that a bar argument/qualitative discussion would rank them, it seems.

I think this is very close, but has one flaw. Your system values the ACC Reg Season and ACC Tourney over the Regional Title/Made Final Four. Thus some of the teams in your "1 Champ" list were Final Four teams, and some in your "2 Champ" list were not Final Four teams. I would have to place the Final Four team above the non Final Four team in some circumstances.

The "Boozer/Newton_14 List of Goals"

1. National Title
2. Regional Title/Made Final Four (Note: No extra credit for winning only 1 game in the FF)
3. ACC Championship
4. ACC Regular Season 1st Place
5. Pre-Season NIT Championship
6. Any Other Prestigious Pre-Season Tourney (Maui/Great Alaska/etc)

Those are the goals starting at the bottom and working up. It is difficult though when ranking seasons, when comparing a team that say won goals 6/5, 4, and 3, but got upset and missed the FF, to a team that maybe achieved none of 6/5, 4, and 3, but won the Regional and made the FF. I would probably have to go with the team that won everything but fell short of the FF as having the better season.

If however, Team A won just the ACC Regular Season or just the ACC Championship, but missed the FF, and Team B, won zero conference titles but made the FF, I would h say Team B had the better season.