Perspective

[Philadukie]

I just thought it useful to point out two specific examples from tonight that might help provide a little perspective about our team and season so far.

Missouri (#3) lost at home by 10 to a decent but unranked K-State team. G-Town (#9) lost to an unranked Seton Hall team on the road by almost 20. (Also, as I write this Michigan (#11) is losing to a very mediocre Northwestern team at the half by 7).

What I've often noticed in discussions about Duke (and not just this year, but over the past several) is that we fans, particularly after a loss, tend to magnify the flaws of our team while simultaneously magnifying the perceived dominance of other teams in comparison. "We'll never be able to compete with teams a,b,c becasue of fatal flaws x,y,z with our team." However, what we're really comparing our team against is, for the most part, some mythical dominant team that doesn't really exist. Many assume that there are 10 UNLV circa-1990 teams out there just waiting to eat our lunch in the tourney if we don't somehow fix all the things perceived as hopelessly wrong.

Syracuse and Kentucky this year notwithstanding, I don't see any teams that are better than Duke. The field is pretty much open for teams 3-15 or even 20. And even Syracuse and Kentucky have flaws (rebounding and youth respectively) that can be exploited in the right circumstances and match-ups.

All of this is to say that, whatever happens on Thursday, some perspective is in order as tonight's examples show. This team may (or may not) make a great run in the Touney. As it often does, it will depend greatly on match-ups and even a little luck. In the meantime, let's enjoy the ride! Go Duke!

[throatybeard]

Uh-oh.

Usually when someone starts a thread called "perspective," there is an avalanche of posts that lack any perspective, berating the OP for having some perspective.

[FerryFor50]

I just thought it useful to point out two specific examples from tonight that might help provide a little perspective about our team and season so far.

Missouri (#3) lost at home by 10 to a decent but unranked K-State team. G-Town (#9) lost to an unranked Seton Hall team on the road by almost 20. (Also, as I write this Michigan (#11) is losing to a very mediocre Northwestern team at the half by 7).

What I've often noticed in discussions about Duke (and not just this year, but over the past several) is that we fans, particularly after a loss, tend to magnify the flaws of our team while simultaneously magnifying the perceived dominance of other teams in comparison. "We'll never be able to compete with teams a,b,c becasue of fatal flaws x,y,z with our team." However, what we're really comparing our team against is, for the most part, some mythical dominant team that doesn't really exist. Many assume that there are 10 UNLV circa-1990 teams out there just waiting to eat our lunch in the tourney if we don't somehow fix all the things perceived as hopelessly wrong.

Syracuse and Kentucky this year notwithstanding, I don't see any teams that are better than Duke. The field is pretty much open for teams 3-15 or even 20. And even Syracuse and Kentucky have flaws (rebounding and youth respectively) that can be exploited in the right circumstances and match-ups.

All of this is to say that, whatever happens on Thursday, some perspective is in order as tonight's examples show. This team may (or may not) make a great run in the Touney. As it often does, it will depend greatly on match-ups and even a little luck. In the meantime, let's enjoy the ride! Go Duke!

I've said the same in several posts in post game and in game threads. Most people like to play chicken little, though. :)

[Lunchab1es]

Syracuse and Kentucky this year notwithstanding, I don't see any teams that are better than Duke. The field is pretty much open for teams 3-15 or even 20. And even Syracuse and Kentucky have flaws (rebounding and youth respectively) that can be exploited in the right circumstances and match-ups.


Speaking of, UK is currently down 13 at the half to Miss St. If the Bulldogs can pull this off, it would certainly do a good bit towards keeping that invincible aura of UK in check (and maybe even curtail the ego of UK fans on the ESPN message boards...nah!)

[Newton_14]

I just thought it useful to point out two specific examples from tonight that might help provide a little perspective about our team and season so far.

Missouri (#3) lost at home by 10 to a decent but unranked K-State team. G-Town (#9) lost to an unranked Seton Hall team on the road by almost 20. (Also, as I write this Michigan (#11) is losing to a very mediocre Northwestern team at the half by 7).

What I've often noticed in discussions about Duke (and not just this year, but over the past several) is that we fans, particularly after a loss, tend to magnify the flaws of our team while simultaneously magnifying the perceived dominance of other teams in comparison. "We'll never be able to compete with teams a,b,c becasue of fatal flaws x,y,z with our team." However, what we're really comparing our team against is, for the most part, some mythical dominant team that doesn't really exist. Many assume that there are 10 UNLV circa-1990 teams out there just waiting to eat our lunch in the tourney if we don't somehow fix all the things perceived as hopelessly wrong.

Syracuse and Kentucky this year notwithstanding, I don't see any teams that are better than Duke. The field is pretty much open for teams 3-15 or even 20. And even Syracuse and Kentucky have flaws (rebounding and youth respectively) that can be exploited in the right circumstances and match-ups.

All of this is to say that, whatever happens on Thursday, some perspective is in order as tonight's examples show. This team may (or may not) make a great run in the Touney. As it often does, it will depend greatly on match-ups and even a little luck. In the meantime, let's enjoy the ride! Go Duke!

Great post. Someone give this man trident points. College hoops is a fickle deal these days. All teams have flaws, yet all have talent. Davidson wins at Kansas, yet Ohio St loses there. Boston College beats Florida State, yet Florida St beats UNC by 33 points. Think about that one for a minute. NC State wins at Miami, but Miami wins at Duke, but Duke wins at UNC who lost at Florida St by 33 (yes I said that twice on purpose :cool:).

If you only read this board and did not know Duke's record, you would swear they are below .500 on the season, yet here they are at 23-4, with wins over UNC, Kansas, Mich St (all top 5 teams recently) with none of those wins in Cameron, and tied for the ACC lead. I know it works both ways, but they could easily be 25-2 and undefeated in ACC play.

These are crazy times. Like K always says, "Enjoy the journey". The "journey" is what it is all about. I have not even thought one second on March Madness yet. Will deal with that when it gets here. For now I am content to enjoy yet another Duke team that is winning games at a high rate. Winning 25+ games never gets old, and never gets boring. Nor should it.

Did I mention that Florida St beat UNC by 33?

[barely]

Here's another (positive) view: when the regular season is over in a week and a half or so, we might well have beaten the regular season champs of the Big 10 (possibly the top two teams in the league), the Big 12, the Pac whatever, the Southern and the Atlantic Sun as well as the runners-up in the ACC (UNC, right?) and the Ivy. All this is reflected in our top 3 SOS and our RPI, but it is a another way to perspective on a very good season so far, a stellar season when measured against our talent and considering our lack of a classic PG, lack of a lockdown perimeter defender and lack of a long wing player to guard scoring small forwards. Notwithstanding his frustation at times, this might be one of Coach K's best coaching jobs.

Go Duke!

[Newton_14]

Here's another (positive) view: when the regular season is over in a week and a half or so, we might well have beaten the regular season champs of the Big 10 (possibly the top two teams in the league), the Big 12, the Pac whatever, the Southern and the Atlantic Sun as well as the runners-up in the ACC (UNC, right?) and the Ivy. All this is reflected in our top 3 SOS and our RPI, but it is a another way to perspective on a very good season so far, a stellar season when measured against our talent and considering our lack of a classic PG, lack of a lockdown perimeter defender and lack of a long wing player to guard scoring small forwards. Notwithstanding his frustation at times, this might be one of Coach K's best coaching jobs.

Go Duke!

I likely won't get the numbers exactly right on this so forgive me, but on the coaches show tonight, Wojo made the comment that something like 11 or 12 of non-conference opponents Duke has played this year is in the Top 3 of their league with a chance to win their league regular season crown. I think he said 11 or 12 but it was a high number either way. Wojo said it was the strongest schedule he could ever remember Duke playing. The current record is impressive no matter how you slice it.

[-bdbd]

I just thought it useful to point out two specific examples from tonight that might help provide a little perspective about our team and season so far.

Missouri (#3) lost at home by 10 to a decent but unranked K-State team. G-Town (#9) lost to an unranked Seton Hall team on the road by almost 20. (Also, as I write this Michigan (#11) is losing to a very mediocre Northwestern team at the half by 7).

What I've often noticed in discussions about Duke (and not just this year, but over the past several) is that we fans, particularly after a loss, tend to magnify the flaws of our team while simultaneously magnifying the perceived dominance of other teams in comparison. "We'll never be able to compete with teams a,b,c becasue of fatal flaws x,y,z with our team." However, what we're really comparing our team against is, for the most part, some mythical dominant team that doesn't really exist. Many assume that there are 10 UNLV circa-1990 teams out there just waiting to eat our lunch in the tourney if we don't somehow fix all the things perceived as hopelessly wrong.

Syracuse and Kentucky this year notwithstanding, I don't see any teams that are better than Duke. The field is pretty much open for teams 3-15 or even 20. And even Syracuse and Kentucky have flaws (rebounding and youth respectively) that can be exploited in the right circumstances and match-ups.

All of this is to say that, whatever happens on Thursday, some perspective is in order as tonight's examples show. This team may (or may not) make a great run in the Touney. As it often does, it will depend greatly on match-ups and even a little luck. In the meantime, let's enjoy the ride! Go Duke!

Hear, hear!

Great perspective, that will no doubt be lost on many the moment we fall behind in any game again...

This team has at least met expectations to date. We're tied for first in the ACC, beat NC@CH in dramatic, crushing fashion, and are ranked in the top-5 at present. Probably most importantly, at this point we are possibly in-line for a #1 seed in the NCAAT. Life is good.

Are there things that we can still hope to improve? Most certainly YES. But when has that ever NOT been the case? This season has been a good, entertaining "journey" so far. There's no reason these guys won't be one of a handful of favorites come mid/late-March to make the FF and a threat to win it all. Now, should we fall short of a NC, no doubt the "Chicken Littles" will be out in force once again... But I like where we are, overall, and where we seem to be headed.



:) :D :p



Now about that darned Miss State collapse at the end vs KY...
:mad:

[ricks68]

Now about that darned Miss State collapse at the end vs KY...
:mad:

Are you referring to the way they lost their cool after being collapsed upon by the refs?

ricks

[uh_no]

Are you referring to the way they lost their cool after being collapsed upon by the refs?

ricks

That was atrocious.....i don't think there's a better instance of the refs being influenced by the fact that UK is "supposed" to be better.....

[ricks68]

That was atrocious.....i don't think there's a better instance of the refs being influenced by the fact that UK is "supposed" to be better.....

I try to honestly go along with the refs, as I do not know how they are supposed to call a game. Don Shula used to always say that if his team lost a game because of what was supposedly a bad call, then they didn't deserve to win, anyway. This game, however, appeared to have multiple bad calls against Miss State during the last half of the 2nd period. Miss State hung in there by continuously coming back after the bad calls-----a tremendous display of playing through it. But, in my opinion, the refs kept on doing it until a few of the Miss State players finally couldn't talke it anymore. As one attempted a layup, two Kentucky players smashed his arm and hand while almost pinning the ball against the backboard. (I played it back on my recorder) Kentucky came down with the rebound, and while the fouled Miss State played turned to the ref and complained, a Kentucky player ran past him and brushed his body against the Miss State player. Consequently, the Kentucky player "tripped" on the Miss State players leg, resulting in a technical foul call against the Miss State player. I think that was at least a four point turnaround with Kentucky having the ball possession again. I do not remember if the Kentucky player actually hit the floor, or was just "bumped" off stride (maybe someone could clarify this------and also comment on why an intentional "trip" would be called considering that the Miss State player wasn't even facing the Kentucky player at the time, and it appeared that the Kentucky player actually initiated the contact.), but it came across to me as an obvious payback for turning toward the ref in the first place. Interestingly, it also came across to me that when some of these serious calls went against Miss State, they were usually followed by an over-the-back call against Kentucky on the other end that didn't have an equal effect because Miss State had ended up with the defensive rebound anyway.

Just my two cents on this one. I don't like to get on the refs because I believe that the calls usually even out over time, and have always taken the Don Shula approach, myself, even when some people think that we lost a game because of the refs. I also believe that "it is what it is", and we should not be making excuses if we "think" calls go against us. This game, however, just seemed a little strange in the foul-calling department. Anyone else see it this way?:confused:

ricks

[bob blue devil]

i agree that duke is unquestionably a top 10 team and arguably a top 5 team - we've got as good a chance as anyone to make a run (with the exception of kentucky who looks a bit better than the field; and some would argue syracuse). we all should be happy with what this team has accomplished and where it stands.

however, i think a lot of the angst is that this team could just as easily pull an oh-fer for the rest of the season as do something special. oh-fer being no more wins vs. unc, no acc regular season "champ", no acc championship, no final four. these are the things we (at least i) care about. is it an unfairly high bar? absolutely. has it been met more often than not over the past decade +? you betcha. thankfully, to-date, the team has won every thing i care about and we've put ourselves in a good position - won maui, beat unc, co-leader of acc, arguably leader for an ncaa #1 seed (i'd love to have added some weeks at #1 in the polls, but that's getting super greedy).

so what drives that angst/why does it feel like we might not add any more notches to our belt? well, look at how we've done against at-large tourney caliber teams (particularly recent results, as teams have polished themselves and are closer to postseason form than preseason form):

11/15 - handled michigan state (they closed at end, but we controlled h2)
11/22 - handled michigan
11/23 - eeked kansas (behind with ~1.30 left)
11/29 - embarassed by ohio state
12/10 - handled washington (they closed at end, but we controlled)
------
1/4 - handled by temple
1/12 - won a tight one vs. uva
1/21 - lost at buzzer to fsu
2/5 - lost in OT to miami
2/8 - beat unc at buzzer
2/16 - miraculous comeback vs. state

it's basically a coin flip for the past 6. are we favorite to beat unc at cameron? no. are we the leader to "win" acc regular season? no (we've got the toughest remaining schedule). are we better than 50/50 to even advance to the acc title game? that's close and obviously depends on the draw, but involves 2 wins agains tourney caliber teams, so maybe not. are we better than 50/50 to advance beyond the sweet 16? again, maybe not (we'd need 2 wins over temple/uva/fsu/miami/state caliber or better teams).

i think this team is still improving - it's apparent in a lot of ways. that will be what really drives this team's ultimate outcomes and is very satisfying to watch. but when i think about adding notches to our belt, it will definitely require a meaningful step up (and/or some luck - i'm not proud i'll, take luck too).

[Kedsy]

it's basically a coin flip for the past 6. are we favorite to beat unc at cameron? no. are we the leader to "win" acc regular season? no (we've got the toughest remaining schedule). are we better than 50/50 to even advance to the acc title game? that's close and obviously depends on the draw, but involves 2 wins agains tourney caliber teams, so maybe not. are we better than 50/50 to advance beyond the sweet 16? again, maybe not (we'd need 2 wins over temple/uva/fsu/miami/state caliber or better teams).

Let me start by saying I loved your use of "eeked" as an active verb. However, since this is a thread about perspective, the things you say you want here are not particularly reasonable. Especially the last one. To be "better than 50/50" to win three games against tough competition, you have to be an overwhelming favorite. Every year Pomeroy publishes odds (based on his rating system) of each team advancing, and I've never seen more than two or three teams that have better than 50/50 odds of advancing beyond the Sweet 16. I suppose you can angst on whatever pleases you, but to be disappointed because we may not be one of the top two or three teams in the country seems to be setting an unrealistic expectation.

[Jderf]

All of this is to say that, whatever happens on Thursday, some perspective is in order as tonight's examples show. This team may (or may not) make a great run in the Touney. As it often does, it will depend greatly on match-ups and even a little luck. In the meantime, let's enjoy the ride! Go Duke!

I have to agree. We have a fantastic team this year, by any standard (including our own). Sure, there are areas for improvement, but we are far from doomed. If anyone thinks otherwise, then I have to say that they are just delusional. Plus, they need to relax or they aren't going to have any fun. But unfortunately, the fans with the least perspective are often also the loudest. Oh well.


If you only read this board and did not know Duke's record, you would swear they are below .500 on the season, yet here they are at 23-4, with wins over UNC, Kansas, Mich St (all top 5 teams recently) with none of those wins in Cameron, and tied for the ACC lead. I know it works both ways, but they could easily be 25-2 and undefeated in ACC play.

I agree that it is dangerous, but I too would like to play the what-if game for a bit here, mostly out of curiosity. Let's pretend we hit our free throws against Miami and play suffocating defense for an extra five seconds against FSU. This is only a change of two possessions or so, which I think is acceptable. Our team would then be, as you said, 25-2 and undefeated in ACC play. We would currently be ranked only one spot higher (#3 instead of #4), but the talking heads would be discussing us as one of the three juggernauts this season (with UK and Cuse), we would be a virtual lock for a 1-seed, the ACC regular season would be all-but-guaranteed, and our fans would probably be expecting no less than ACC Championship and Final Four appearances, at the very least. There would probably be a small but vocal minority of posters arguing that we weren't as good as everybody thinks (probably the same group that is currently arguing that we are actually a little better than everybody thinks), but for the most part, that team would be doomed to failure and unfulfilled expectations. Despite being essentially the same team. Instead, people are questioning whether this team can even make the Sweet 16. I just find it interesting how a few possessions can sway these things.

[bob blue devil]

However, since this is a thread about perspective, the things you say you want here are not particularly reasonable. Especially the last one. To be "better than 50/50" to win three games against tough competition, you have to be an overwhelming favorite. Every year Pomeroy publishes odds (based on his rating system) of each team advancing, and I've never seen more than two or three teams that have better than 50/50 odds of advancing beyond the Sweet 16. I suppose you can angst on whatever pleases you, but to be disappointed because we may not be one of the top two or three teams in the country seems to be setting an unrealistic expectation.

i think we're in general agreement - elite 8 is a worthy accomplishment despite the media making the final 4 a seemingly remarkably greater accomplishment. i originally had a simple 'no' instead of 'maybe not' for it being a 50/50 bet, but feared getting jumped on for being overly pessimistic, which i am not... :rolleyes:

it might be interesting to turn this around a bit. let's say this team finishes fine by any reasonable measure - beats FSU, beats VaTech, beats Wake, but then loses to UNC at Cameron. meanwhile UNC beat UVa and Maryland, so we're #2 in the acc regular season. then we do okay in the acc tourney - beating, say, wake and avenging miami before losing to fsu (or even beating fsu, but losing in the title game), so no acc title. then, with a #2 seed in the ncaa tourney, we advance to the sweet 16, but lose there to baylor or georgetown. how would you feel? in the big picture, against any reasonable measure (including that of an elite basketball program), that's a very impressive season (30 wins no less, including many impressive scalps). but, gosh, it wouldn't feel that way.

my point was not that we (i) have reasonable expectations, it's that having 'perspective' is much easier said than done. it's fun to dismiss others for their lack of perspective, but i think any good duke fan lacks it to some degree.

[toooskies]

However, what we're really comparing our team against is, for the most part, some mythical dominant team that doesn't really exist. Many assume that there are 10 UNLV circa-1990 teams out there just waiting to eat our lunch in the tourney if we don't somehow fix all the things perceived as hopelessly wrong.


I wholeheartedly agree with the post... But as I read this line it struck me. This team isn't competing on the national stage; any reasonable person would be happy with a top 5 ranking and positive outcomes against national competition. But, we're not competing with Kentucky, Syracuse, or Mizzou. The 2012 team is competing with the 2010 team, the 2001 team, the 1991-92 teams. We look at Seth Curry, Austin Rivers, Andre Dawkins, Ryan Kelly, and the Plumlees, and we wonder how they can compete with the legends of Duke's past. We don't see legends yet. Rivers might have legend potential (and a legendary moment under his belt), but he's a year away from either the legend status or the NBA. We see Seth and think he's no Stephen, or Dell. We look at Andre and wish he could do more than shoot a 3-pointer. We look at Kelly and wish he was tougher; we look at Miles and wish he'd put things together; we look at Mason and think, good but not consistently great. This isn't Battier/Williams/Dunleavy/Boozer/Duhon. There isn't a Laettner, a Hurley, a Hill. Heck, this team can't even play D the way every Duke team has for the past 25 years.

But this team Wins. Capital W.

Some fans are waiting for the commentary to talk about a Big Three plus Z, a shooter like Redick, a phenom like Brand. And even if we lose, if we had a player like that, a team whose path was cut short because of an unlucky break, we'd remember them. And we don't see ourselves remembering this team yet, just like we don't really try to remember 2003 or 2007. But this team is better than those teams, and this team has a great chance to win a lot. Because even though Seth isn't Stephen, he's one of the best guards in the conference. Austin has greatness in him and it comes at the best times. Dawkins may only have one reliable shot, but despite the other team knowing that, he still gets it off effectively and efficiently. Ryan may not have the greatest athletic ability, but makes up for it with his basketball IQ. Miles has quietly turned into one of the best rebounders in the country while we've been waiting for him to "put it together". And Mason is frequently the best player on the floor.

And I don't mean to leave out Thornton, Cook, or Hairston, solid role players who can contribute to this team; but will make their impacts in the future.

Perhaps the best thing about 2012 Duke is that for all the games shown on ESPN, no one really knows how to compliment this team. They can't believe how we stay on the national stage, how we beat really good teams. Because this team isn't marketable. They don't have a player of the year candidate; not a single player in the top 100 of ESPN's college PER. Commentators get disappointed that Rivers didn't take over the team after UNC; but that's what this team does. And so, you never hear how well we function as a team.

It's a really good team. You don't end up 23-4 against high quality competition. It's not a collection of legends, but for me that actually makes it better.

It's very much a Team. Capital T.

There are probably past Duke teams that would beat this one seven times out of ten, but just like against this year's competition, 2012 would win more than you expect.

[SupaDave]

The only perfect team I've ever witnessed was UNLV in 1990. They destroyed all comers. Those days aint coming back. If you can find a way to be upset about 4 losses after losing your team captains and starting point guard to the NBA draft then your "perspective" may be a bit out of wack. Those losses have made this team stronger without a doubt. It seems that many have settled down and bought in and now they are building on their roles (most noticeably Austin making sure Dre gets to shoot his 3 and the increased number of lobs to the bigs). I've got a good feeling about this team.

[Monmouth77]

Let me start by saying I loved your use of "eeked" as an active verb. However, since this is a thread about perspective, the things you say you want here are not particularly reasonable. Especially the last one. To be "better than 50/50" to win three games against tough competition, you have to be an overwhelming favorite. Every year Pomeroy publishes odds (based on his rating system) of each team advancing, and I've never seen more than two or three teams that have better than 50/50 odds of advancing beyond the Sweet 16. I suppose you can angst on whatever pleases you, but to be disappointed because we may not be one of the top two or three teams in the country seems to be setting an unrealistic expectation.

I have to say that I don't find your responsive post fair at all to the essential countervailing view bob is expressing.

I think the original poster made the excellent point that this Duke team (particularly given the loss of two All-Americans and the soon-to-be NBA rookie of the year, and the strength of our schedule this season) is exceeding reasonable expectations and giving Duke fans and alumni a lot to cheer about. We are in a position to win the ACC regular season, and certainly have at least a puncher's chance of winning the ACC T and maybe even winning a number 1 seed. That is hard to beat. And the NCAA T is always kind of a crapshoot based on matchups.

But the essence of bob's point, and a countervailing view I share, is that we have showed more growing pains as the season has progressed. It is fair to wonder whether Duke has the chops to beat FSU in Tallahassee or to beat Carolina in Cameron, and I don't know that I'd consider us favorites to do either. Same goes for making the Sweet Sixteen.

So I think a bit of angst is fair and not incompatible with recognizing some nice accomplishments to date. Every Duke fans wants the team to win in March, and I think a victory over FSU on Thursday would probably build the confidence of the team and the fanbase in that regard.

[Kedsy]

it might be interesting to turn this around a bit. let's say this team finishes fine by any reasonable measure - beats FSU, beats VaTech, beats Wake, but then loses to UNC at Cameron. meanwhile UNC beat UVa and Maryland, so we're #2 in the acc regular season. then we do okay in the acc tourney - beating, say, wake and avenging miami before losing to fsu (or even beating fsu, but losing in the title game), so no acc title. then, with a #2 seed in the ncaa tourney, we advance to the sweet 16, but lose there to baylor or georgetown. how would you feel? in the big picture, against any reasonable measure (including that of an elite basketball program), that's a very impressive season (30 wins no less, including many impressive scalps). but, gosh, it wouldn't feel that way.

I am always disappointed when Duke loses, but honestly I'd feel fine in your scenario. I felt fine last year, even though the Arizona loss was a disappointment. It took me a couple days after our first round exit, but I even felt fine in 2007.

Perhaps it comes from my own student days. In my four years, we only had an appreciably better season than 2007 once out of four. But I rooted like crazy for the team, even when we finished 10-17 my senior year. I felt good about winning a couple games in the NIT my junior year. Compared to those years, a Sweet 16 finish is amazing.

I try to look at it this way: I invest myself in following the team and the players; no matter how they perform on the court, they provide valuable entertainment for me and give me something to get excited about. That's all I can expect from them. The wins and the titles and the accomplishments make it more fun, but are not requirements for my fandom.

[Kedsy]

The only perfect team I've ever witnessed was UNLV in 1990. They destroyed all comers. Those days aint coming back. If you can find a way to be upset about 4 losses after losing your team captains and starting point guard to the NBA draft then your "perspective" may be a bit out of wack. Those losses have made this team stronger without a doubt. It seems that many have settled down and bought in and now they are building on their roles (most noticeably Austin making sure Dre gets to shoot his 3 and the increased number of lobs to the bigs). I've got a good feeling about this team.

Actually, the 1990 UNLV team lost 5 games, including 2 in the Big West. They almost didn't get past the Sweet 16, beating Ball State by just 2 points. They were far from perfect.

The 1991 UNLV team was a near-perfect team. Until they ran into Duke in the Final Four, that is.

The rest I agree with. I have a good feeling about this team, too.

[dyedwab]

and really helpful to me as I sort through what I think about this team. If you look at a the many mock brackets that are being put together by hoop head commentators, Duke regularly ends up as a 1 or a 2 seed. As a long time Duke fan, I think I know what a Duke #1 or #2 looks like and this team doesn't pass that eye test....even though they win. But then I look at all the other teams who could take their spot - and I think, well, they aren't really any better then us, and a lot of them are worse. So it makes sense.

I agree with the posters who say that this team is competing against our memories of great Duke teams/players of the past. But I would also argue that this team is competing against its own potential. We see sparks of greatness from almost all of our players sometimes, only to have them regress/disappear soon thereafter. I think the angst about this team has to due with inconsistency that we are not used to seeing.

that said, we also have talent that allows for a team to have a different hero every night.

Again incredibly useful perspective.

[Kedsy]

So I think a bit of angst is fair and not incompatible with recognizing some nice accomplishments to date. Every Duke fans wants the team to win in March, and I think a victory over FSU on Thursday would probably build the confidence of the team and the fanbase in that regard.

Fair to whom? I'm not saying people shouldn't be nervous about whether we can win this big game or that big game. I'm not saying we should all think we're going to win the national championship -- I don't think our chances of winning it all are particularly high. I'm saying we should enjoy the team and the ride whether we win the games or not. I'm saying we shouldn't overly criticize a bunch of teenagers because they might not beat the pre-season #1 team more than once this season or might "only" end up a Sweet 16 team.

Having said that, I'll say something else that may seem contradictory: why would beating FSU on Thursday change your perception of the team? If you don't think we're "a favorite" to get to the Sweet 16 now, why would one win change your mind? Other than slightly raising our chance at a #1 seed (which we still won't get if we don't win the ACC tournament and maybe not even then), I don't think a victory in Tallahassee changes our chance of gaining any of the other achievements we've been talking about (beating UNC, winning the ACCT, making the Elite Eight). We're just as likely to miss those achievements if we win at FSU as we are if we lose.

Really, this is why we're talking about perspective. The Miami game and the NC State game were essentially the same game. we played poorly in the first half of both games, then made huge second half comebacks in both. We missed a few free throws against Miami, so we lost, and the tone was incredibly negative around here. We managed to come away with a win against State, and those same people seemed more hopeful. But the two games were the same. I was just as proud of our comeback against Miami as I was against State. It's just that luck was a little more with us against State than it was against Miami. Similarly, if we play a back-and-forth game against FSU this week, but our last few shots go in and theirs don't, so we reverse what happened in Cameron, why would a win this week tell me any more about the team than the loss a few weeks ago?

[Jderf]

Really, this is why we're talking about perspective. The Miami game and the NC State game were essentially the same game. we played poorly in the first half of both games, then made huge second half comebacks in both. We missed a few free throws against Miami, so we lost, and the tone was incredibly negative around here. We managed to come away with a win against State, and those same people seemed more hopeful. But the two games were the same. I was just as proud of our comeback against Miami as I was against State. It's just that luck was a little more with us against State than it was against Miami. Similarly, if we play a back-and-forth game against FSU this week, but our last few shots go in and theirs don't, so we reverse what happened in Cameron, why would a win this week tell me any more about the team than the loss a few weeks ago?

This right here is just a damn fine paragraph, Kedsy. One of the best I've read in a while. Echoing my earlier post, it's amazing how tiny stochastic events can completely invert the way we look at a 40-minute game, or even a whole season.

[Reilly]

... why would a win this week tell me any more about the team than the loss a few weeks ago?

I agree it doesn't tell you a whole lot more. Both say we're a talented team that can hang around, for sure. So a win doesn't tell much more about our talented team.

A win can, however, spur marginally more confidence, and buoy spirits, and those emotional gains can have a difference, in my opinion. Think if Austin's shot had not gone in against UNC ... we're still the same team, but it's a different feel, and that different feel can have consequences.

After reviewing the Kenpom v. RPI thread, I went and looked at Duke's final placement in the sports-reference SRS total team rankings over several years. The 1995 team was #22 in the nation. A team with talent that could hang. What if that team had won a few more games in the middle of the season rather than losing. It's still the same team, same talent, who could hang ... could the difference between 13-18 and an ACCT exit, and 18-20 wins and an NCAA berth, just be the emotional edge from a victory or two earlier? Plays into it somewhat, I think. I believe I see this in football -- a team that's middling starts stringing together wins, and then becomes a good team. Hopefully this 2012 Duke b'ball team should be in fine spirits no matter what happens Thursday night -- we can hang, and we've had games that went our way to help keep our spirits up.

[SupaDave]

Actually, the 1990 UNLV team lost 5 games, including 2 in the Big West. They almost didn't get past the Sweet 16, beating Ball State by just 2 points. They were far from perfect.

The 1991 UNLV team was a near-perfect team. Until they ran into Duke in the Final Four, that is.

The rest I agree with. I have a good feeling about this team, too.

Oh you know who I meant!! ;) That's just how unmistakably dominant that team was. Other than Florida's back to back I can't think of a recent team that's even come close to that standard. They WANTED UNC to be but we see how that has turned out.

I look at the ride Murray State is on - and wonder what the expectations are for that team. They are normally a one and done in tourney. Are they shooting for the second round? And is it a triumph of a season if so?

[Wander]

I look at the ride Murray State is on - and wonder what the expectations are for that team. They are normally a one and done in tourney. Are they shooting for the second round? And is it a triumph of a season if so?

Well, Murray's only been in the tournament once the past few years, and they beat Vandy in the first round (with some of the same players on the current roster). So if we have to put a benchmark for what a successful season is for them, it'd probably be Sweet 16.

[vick]

This right here is just a damn fine paragraph, Kedsy. One of the best I've read in a while. Echoing my earlier post, it's amazing how tiny stochastic events can completely invert the way we look at a 40-minute game, or even a whole season.

Or an entire coaching career. I've had this argument, here and elsewhere, but people talk about how much better Duke and Coach K were in the tournament back in the 1986-1994 range vs. 2002-2009, and just sort of ignore how much this hangs on a few somewhat random (sorry Christian!) buzzer beaters and defensive possessions going one way or another. No, it must be that K shortened the bench, or the players dive too much, or something like that! It can't possibly be luck!

Heck, look at this year's defense. Pomeroy has us at .943 points allowed per possession and a tempo of 68.8 possessions per game, so you'd expect to give up roughly 65 points per game. And in 2010? Well, the defensive efficiency was .859 points per possession, so at the same pace...59 points per game (this is based on figures after the tournament, so the difference is probably inflated). Two three pointers, in 40 minutes of basketball, is the difference. Is that an issue? Yes. Is this team as likely to win it all as it was in 2010? No. Is this some insurmountable gap that means this team will inevitably flame out before the Sweet 16? Most definitely not.

[Monmouth77]

Fair to whom? I'm not saying people shouldn't be nervous about whether we can win this big game or that big game. I'm not saying we should all think we're going to win the national championship -- I don't think our chances of winning it all are particularly high. I'm saying we should enjoy the team and the ride whether we win the games or not. I'm saying we shouldn't overly criticize a bunch of teenagers because they might not beat the pre-season #1 team more than once this season or might "only" end up a Sweet 16 team.

Having said that, I'll say something else that may seem contradictory: why would beating FSU on Thursday change your perception of the team? If you don't think we're "a favorite" to get to the Sweet 16 now, why would one win change your mind? Other than slightly raising our chance at a #1 seed (which we still won't get if we don't win the ACC tournament and maybe not even then), I don't think a victory in Tallahassee changes our chance of gaining any of the other achievements we've been talking about (beating UNC, winning the ACCT, making the Elite Eight). We're just as likely to miss those achievements if we win at FSU as we are if we lose.

Really, this is why we're talking about perspective. The Miami game and the NC State game were essentially the same game. we played poorly in the first half of both games, then made huge second half comebacks in both. We missed a few free throws against Miami, so we lost, and the tone was incredibly negative around here. We managed to come away with a win against State, and those same people seemed more hopeful. But the two games were the same. I was just as proud of our comeback against Miami as I was against State. It's just that luck was a little more with us against State than it was against Miami. Similarly, if we play a back-and-forth game against FSU this week, but our last few shots go in and theirs don't, so we reverse what happened in Cameron, why would a win this week tell me any more about the team than the loss a few weeks ago?

Fair to fans who follow Duke closely and enjoy maintaining some critical perspective on the prospects of the team. And I don't think you'll find any posts in which I have "unfairly criticized teenagers."

My post was to defend another poster's citation to the growing body of evidence that despite big wins at the begining of the season (and more recently, the remarkable and historically awesome UNC win) the team has some continuing vulnerabilities (defending dribble penetration, inconsistent post play) that will keep us on the edge of our seat the rest of the season. That's not bad. In some ways it is more exciting than say, last year, when, even without Kyrie, the team seemed strong enough that perhaps it *should* (not just *could*) make the Final Four (and probably would have without an amazing performance by Derrick Williams that probably made that kid a lot of money). So I agree that it is fun to watch the team develop.

I also agree with you about the vagaries of lady luck, and generally agree that the Miami game and State game share some similarities. I actually think we played a lot better against State in the first half of that game, and got the Pack in foul trouble, which is a big part of why Duke pulled ahead down the stretch. I think we showed growth and poise against State that was perhaps borne of the confidence the team gained by coming back and beating Carolina.

And that is part of why I say that winning the FSU game on the road is an important harbinger for the rest of the season. Here is a team that we know will get a decent seed in the NCAAs and which beat Duke at home. Are we better now? Can we beat them on the road with first place in the conference on the line? I think a win against the best defensive team in our conference tells us a lot -- and yes, makes it more likely that Duke will suceed in the postseason. Not just by raising the likelihood of a 1 or 2 seed, but by building confidence.

[Philadukie]

i agree that duke is unquestionably a top 10 team and arguably a top 5 team - we've got as good a chance as anyone to make a run (with the exception of kentucky who looks a bit better than the field; and some would argue syracuse). we all should be happy with what this team has accomplished and where it stands.

however, i think a lot of the angst is that this team could just as easily pull an oh-fer for the rest of the season as do something special. oh-fer being no more wins vs. unc, no acc regular season "champ", no acc championship, no final four. these are the things we (at least i) care about. is it an unfairly high bar? absolutely. has it been met more often than not over the past decade +? you betcha. thankfully, to-date, the team has won every thing i care about and we've put ourselves in a good position - won maui, beat unc, co-leader of acc, arguably leader for an ncaa #1 seed (i'd love to have added some weeks at #1 in the polls, but that's getting super greedy).

so what drives that angst/why does it feel like we might not add any more notches to our belt? well, look at how we've done against at-large tourney caliber teams (particularly recent results, as teams have polished themselves and are closer to postseason form than preseason form):

11/15 - handled michigan state (they closed at end, but we controlled h2)
11/22 - handled michigan
11/23 - eeked kansas (behind with ~1.30 left)
11/29 - embarassed by ohio state
12/10 - handled washington (they closed at end, but we controlled)
------
1/4 - handled by temple
1/12 - won a tight one vs. uva
1/21 - lost at buzzer to fsu
2/5 - lost in OT to miami
2/8 - beat unc at buzzer
2/16 - miraculous comeback vs. state

it's basically a coin flip for the past 6. are we favorite to beat unc at cameron? no. are we the leader to "win" acc regular season? no (we've got the toughest remaining schedule). are we better than 50/50 to even advance to the acc title game? that's close and obviously depends on the draw, but involves 2 wins agains tourney caliber teams, so maybe not. are we better than 50/50 to advance beyond the sweet 16? again, maybe not (we'd need 2 wins over temple/uva/fsu/miami/state caliber or better teams).

i think this team is still improving - it's apparent in a lot of ways. that will be what really drives this team's ultimate outcomes and is very satisfying to watch. but when i think about adding notches to our belt, it will definitely require a meaningful step up (and/or some luck - i'm not proud i'll, take luck too).

First, thanks all for reading and responding to my post!

On the above, I certainly hear your point about the source of fan angst and the close games we've had. But consider this. One of the teams I mention from this year as being very good and probably better than Duke -- Syracuse -- has also had a string of very close games recently.

In their 7 games since their loss at Notre Dame, they beat an unranked Cincy team only by 7; an unranked WVU team only by 2 (at home); a good Gtown (#11) team only by 3 in OT (at home); and a good Louisville (#17) team only by one. Further, in their last game against a very mediocre Rutgers team (4-10 in the Big East), they were only up 2 with three minutes left to play. One could say Rutgers is the equivalent to BC (3-10 in ACC). Could you imagine the negative in-game comments if we were only up 2 against BC with three minutes left to play? Even if we won the game, many would have seen it as a sign of our weaknesses and inability to compete with other perceived superior teams. I wonder how many Syracuse fans are stressed about such a close call at Rugters and what it means for the team's prospects in March? I ask that neutrally -- I really don't know. Maybe many of them are.

The general point though is that as fans we often tend to magnify the flaws and mistakes of our own team while magnifying the superiority of other teams. The reason for this is inherently obvious. We watch every game of our team, closely looking for piecemeal clues from every play and trying to interpret what they mean about the team as a whole. But how many games have you watched, say, of Syracuse? Or Kansas? Have you seen all the stupid plays made by Jardine? He's made quite a few. Have you seen all the missed easy shots by Joseph (who, by the way, is averaging 14 points a game -- not a heroic number)? It's happened. In other words, many of the flaws we might see in this team, we would also see in other teams (or rather different flaws) if we watched as closely as we watch Duke. Layer on top of it the emotional investment of being a fan, and every bad play, every mistake, every flaw can get magnified and seem "fatal" in comparison to the assumed greatness of other teams. But there are very few teams who are much better than Duke this year, and in most years. So in this sense, the perspective I guess I'm discussing is the broader one of realizing where this team is in comparison to the other good teams out there. We're in a great spot.

[Kedsy]

I look at the ride Murray State is on - and wonder what the expectations are for that team. They are normally a one and done in tourney. Are they shooting for the second round? And is it a triumph of a season if so?


Well, Murray's only been in the tournament once the past few years, and they beat Vandy in the first round (with some of the same players on the current roster). So if we have to put a benchmark for what a successful season is for them, it'd probably be Sweet 16.

I would say it certainly would be a triumph and a very successful season for Murray State if they make the 2nd round. The school has only won two games ever in the NCAA tournament. A Sweet 16 appearance would be much more than a successful season -- it would be the most successful season in the history of the program. Perspective, indeed.


A win can, however, spur marginally more confidence, and buoy spirits, and those emotional gains can have a difference, in my opinion.


I think a win against the best defensive team in our conference tells us a lot -- and yes, makes it more likely that Duke will suceed in the postseason. Not just by raising the likelihood of a 1 or 2 seed, but by building confidence.

OK, yes, I grant that if we win it will help our team confidence. And confidence (or lack thereof) is something that can snowball. In many cases it's a short term gain, however. By the time we get to the ACC tournament or the NCAA tournament, a lot of other confidence building (or destroying) events will have occurred that will trump whatever happens at FSU.

So while I agree with you in general, I still don't think a win at FSU will have more than a negligible effect, positive or negative, on the UNC game, our ACC tournament success, or our NCAA tournament success.


My post was to defend another poster's citation to the growing body of evidence that despite big wins at the begining of the season (and more recently, the remarkable and historically awesome UNC win) the team has some continuing vulnerabilities (defending dribble penetration, inconsistent post play) that will keep us on the edge of our seat the rest of the season.

As I said in an earlier post, I don't deny (and I wasn't arguing with) the idea that this team has vulnerabilities nor the truth that we may or may not win the important games. I was simply attempting to say that we shouldn't be down on the team just because we don't have a better than 50/50 chance to beat UNC again, to win the ACC tournament, or to reach the Elite Eight. In my opinion, it's not right to judge the team based on those things.


And I don't think you'll find any posts in which I have "unfairly criticized teenagers."

I wasn't suggesting that you did, and I'm sorry if I wasn't clear about that. My reference to unfairly criticizing teenagers was an effort to explain my earlier post and why I think some fans expectations are unrealistic.

[Wander]

I would say it certainly would be a triumph and a very successful season for Murray State if they make the 2nd round. The school has only won two games ever in the NCAA tournament. A Sweet 16 appearance would be much more than a successful season -- it would be the most successful season in the history of the program. Perspective, indeed.


They already have the most successful season in the history of the program, regardless of what happens in the tournament. My post was meant to say what a reasonable goal for the tournament would be, if one was forced to pick a round.

[Des Esseintes]

Well, Murray's only been in the tournament once the past few years, and they beat Vandy in the first round (with some of the same players on the current roster). So if we have to put a benchmark for what a successful season is for them, it'd probably be Sweet 16.


They already have the most successful season in the history of the program, regardless of what happens in the tournament. My post was meant to say what a reasonable goal for the tournament would be, if one was forced to pick a round.

But "reasonable goal" and "successful season" are very different things. Of course it's reasonable that Murray State should shoot for the Sweet 16. That doesn't mean an otherwise successful season is spoiled if they fail. It simply means they came up short of a goal. Successful teams (and people, for that matter) come up short of some of their goals all the time. Given Murray State's history and conference, it would be monstrously unfair to expect two wins the tournament. In fact, should they make the Sweet 16, I believe it would be overachieving relative to what they've shown thus far. Remember that this team, despite all the wins, is ranked #56 in kenpom's system, one ahead of N.C. State. If the Wolfpack righted the ship, made it in as one of the last four at-larges, and went out by 13 in the fake first round, many State fans would be extremely happy with how things turned out. As well they should be. After the first two (real) games, 52 of the 68 tournament teams are gone. It is always an honor, for any team, to be left standing at that point.

[Wander]

But "reasonable goal" and "successful season" are very different things. Of course it's reasonable that Murray State should shoot for the Sweet 16. That doesn't mean an otherwise successful season is spoiled if they fail. It simply means they came up short of a goal. Successful teams (and people, for that matter) come up short of some of their goals all the time. Given Murray State's history and conference, it would be monstrously unfair to expect two wins the tournament. In fact, should they make the Sweet 16, I believe it would be overachieving relative to what they've shown thus far. Remember that this team, despite all the wins, is ranked #56 in kenpom's system, one ahead of N.C. State. If the Wolfpack righted the ship, made it in as one of the last four at-larges, and went out by 13 in the fake first round, many State fans would be extremely happy with how things turned out. As well they should be. After the first two (real) games, 52 of the 68 tournament teams are gone. It is always an honor, for any team, to be left standing at that point.

You're right, I should have used different language in my first post. But I disagree that conference or history should matter for Murray State fans in setting their goals and expectations right now for this year's team - just like I don't think we should artificially inflate our goals/expectations/measures for success of this year's Duke team based on past Final Fours and championships.

[NSDukeFan]

Thanks for starting this thread. I have been enjoying the posts.
I wonder if one of the biggest issues in terms of perspective is how a season is judged. If the sole determinant of a successful season is how the team does in the final game of the season, that greatly impacts how a person watches the games all year long. In that case, all weaknesses are looked at; how prior Duke teams didn't advance as far in the NCAA tournament as seeded; how other Duke teams have lost; this all leads to angst about how the present Duke team might not advance as far as the fan would like in the NCAAs.

If a fan enjoys the process along the way and considers a 20 or more win season successful no matter what happens in the final game of the year, then a championship in the preseason becomes very exciting. Beating other top 10 teams during the year becomes very exciting. Starting ACC play with a road win (which the previous two great Duke teams were unable to do) becomes exciting. Having thrilling final possession victories vs. good teams can be very exciting. Beating Carolina in the Dean Dome on an epic buzzer beater that will be one of the rivalries great highlights guarantees that there will be great memories of this season. Watching these players grow into new roles, improve as compared to last year, or earlier this year can be very exciting. Preparing for a potential revenge match-up vs. one of the top 5 defensive teams in the country in their hostile arena for a team that has yet to lose on the road in conference play becomes exciting. Defending an ACC title becomes exciting. Playing in the NCAA tournament where an upset can happen at any time and end a season is very exciting, and nerve wracking.

Perspective can certainly change depending on whether a successful season depends on the results of the final game or not.

[Kedsy]

One of the teams I mention from this year as being very good and probably better than Duke -- Syracuse -- has also had a string of very close games recently.

In their 7 games since their loss at Notre Dame, they beat an unranked Cincy team only by 7; an unranked WVU team only by 2 (at home); a good Gtown (#11) team only by 3 in OT (at home); and a good Louisville (#17) team only by one. Further, in their last game against a very mediocre Rutgers team (4-10 in the Big East), they were only up 2 with three minutes left to play. One could say Rutgers is the equivalent to BC (3-10 in ACC). Could you imagine the negative in-game comments if we were only up 2 against BC with three minutes left to play? Even if we won the game, many would have seen it as a sign of our weaknesses and inability to compete with other perceived superior teams. I wonder how many Syracuse fans are stressed about such a close call at Rugters and what it means for the team's prospects in March? I ask that neutrally -- I really don't know. Maybe many of them are.

The general point though is that as fans we often tend to magnify the flaws and mistakes of our own team while magnifying the superiority of other teams.

Great point. Today, Syracuse continued their string of close games at home against so-so competition, beating unranked USF by 8 in the Carrier Dome. Kansas beat unranked Texas A&M by 8. Michigan State beat unranked Minnesota by 6.