How did we get to this point?

[Mudge]

Coach K says that Duke was "limited" without Ryan Kelly-- how is that Duke got to such a state, after the loss of just one decently good player? UNC, Syracuse, Louisville, and Michigan State all managed to win at least two games in the tournament, despite the loss of at least one key player... it does not feel like Duke should be left in such a vulnerable position, after the loss of just one good player (who did not even start all of Duke's games this year).

It feels to me like Duke is experiencing another lull in its capabilities, due to some unfortunate setbacks in recruiting... much like the 2007 and 2008 teams had problems, due to some players not being able to play at the level necessary for Duke to be a realistic competitor for national championships. Other coaches perceive Coach K and Duke as being able to simply name which players they want, and they get them-- putting aside the accuracy of this urban legend, it is clear that Duke gets considerably more top players than Lehigh (or even Arizona), so the losses of the last two years give the feeling of substantive underperformance by the players that Duke did manage to get.

Dan Dakich (famous for his defensive performance on Michael Jordan, despite his Indiana team being allegedly overmatched against the reputed finest team in the land, back in 1984) says that Austin Rivers was the most notable underperformer in this tournament, and that Duke was the biggest disappointment in the tournament (and Dakich says that he is a "huge Duke fan")-- and he bases that assessment on the fact that even without Ryan Kelly, Duke still had far, far more talent on the floor than Lehigh, and thus had no business losing that game. Dakich pointed out that Duke's guards (and Rivers in particular) had no idea how (or at least no intention in that game) to get the ball to their big men on the pick and roll play that was the central staple of Duke's offense this year-- how do we get to this point in the season with that being the case?

How do we get to this point where Duke has several guards who have spent 3 years in the program, and still have no ability to play decent on-the-ball defense on their man? How did we get to this point where Duke has a number of players who have spent 3-4 years in the program who still do not understand the need, let alone the proper method, for boxing out opponents on defensive rebounding situations? How did we get to this point where our most athletic big men, who have spent 3-4 years in the program, still do not have the kind of footwork, clarity of decision-making, and low post moves that would allow them to regularly (not once in a blue moon) get off coordinated, balanced, high percentage shots from low block before they are double-teamed (a` la Mark Alarie, Elton Brand, Carlos Boozer, Shelden Williams)?

Duke fans need to face the fact that Duke is trying to compete at the highest level right now, with some players that pretty obviously are trying to punch above their weight. Given that we hear all the time that Coach K can get the majority of the players that he goes after, one has to wonder: why has he gone after some of these players? I am not interested in seeing Coach K bringing in the same kind of players that Calipari brings in to Kentucky (DeMarcus Cousins strikes me as a bad apple, all the way around), but certainly some of the players they are bringing in are ones that Duke wanted (do John Wall and Patrick Patterson ring any bells?)... but I don't see Calipari trying to compete at the highest level with his gun loaded with rubber bullets... it took UNC losing THREE backcourt players to injury, before Roy Williams had to resort to a player that is at the level of several players that played substantial minutes for Duke all year this year.

Why are we going down this road again that didn't work out in the mid-2000's? Certainly, Coach K should be able to hold his own with Roy Williams and John Calipari and Jim Boeheim, in the recruiting wars-- but on the latest evidence, Duke appears to have settled for some players that are probably not sufficiently talented to play for those schools. I know that people are going to bring up one-year players, like Kyrie Irving (and Austin Rivers?), and certainly, the addition of Kyrie Irving to this team would have changed its entire complexion-- I think Duke would have been one of the national title favorites all year, and would likely still be playing... but it was known from the outset last year that Kyrie was not likely coming back this year (as it was with Rivers this year), and yet Duke really does not seem to have had an even halfway suitable replacement in the queue for either of those players. Contrast that situation with Kentucky, which has lost at least as much talent as Duke has the last couple of years, and yet Kentucky appears unphased by its early departures, as Calipari is stacking up top-ranked (and top-performing) recruits year after year, like firewood for the winter. Why is the most successful college (and arguably, international pro) coach seeming to settle for recruits whose talents do not appear to allow him to reach his stated ambition of competing for a national championship every year? (I'll leave the topic of whether his coaching staff appears to have the demonstrated ability to quickly, efficiently, consistently develop the low-post offensive moves of big men for another day.)

[Mudge]

I will throw this one bone to Duke, on the deflating way that this season ended-- I kept hearing today that "it was a shame that Syracuse had to compete without Fab Melo, and that UNC had to compete without Kendall Marshall, and that Michigan State had to compete without one of their key players who went down with a knee injury recently, because those are all top-ranked teams that could have made a championship run, but for the loss of that one player"-- but not once did I hear anyone say that it was a shame that Duke lost Ryan Kelly just before the tournament started, seeing as they had been a likely #1 seed, before his loss probably cost them the loss to Florida State in the ACC tournament (and thus their shot at a #1 seed)... what's fair is fair, and perhaps Duke-haters should take a short break from their gloating over Duke's loss to Lehigh, and recognize that Duke suffered a loss that was probably at least the equal of Michigan State's and Syracuse's losses, if not UNC's (which to be fair, actually lost 3 players, not one)...

[duke09hms]

I will throw this one bone to Duke, on the deflating way that this season ended-- I kept hearing today that "it was a shame that Syracuse had to compete without Fab Melo, and that UNC had to compete without Kendall Marshall, and that Michigan State had to compete without one of their key players who went down with a knee injury recently, because those are all top-ranked teams that could have made a championship run, but for the loss of that one player"-- but not once did I hear anyone say that it was a shame that Duke lost Ryan Kelly just before the tournament started, seeing as they had been a likely #1 seed, before his loss probably cost them the loss to Florida State in the ACC tournament (and thus their shot at a #1 seed)... what's fair is fair, and perhaps Duke-haters should take a short break from their gloating over Duke's loss to Lehigh, and recognize that Duke suffered a loss that was probably at least the equal of Michigan State's and Syracuse's losses, if not UNC's (which to be fair, actually lost 3 players, not one)...

Even with Kelly, we struggled quite badly the last few games Kelly played. His absence was simply the last nail in the coffin for a team that had been discombobulated on both ends of the floor all season. Weak defense and an offense overly reliant on perimeter shooting leads to a very small margin of error.

[m g]

chill out. we were pretty good this year, and there is a lot of talent on the roster. things change pretty quickly in college basketball. theres no reason to think duke won't be back up to your standards in the near future

[IBleedBlue]

The difference between Duke and other three teams stated in this thread is those other three teams still had length and athleticism to overcome deficits and win. On the other hand, the last time I saw athletic wings on the same Duke team was when Henderson and Elliott Williams were the on the floor at the same time.
If we had lengthy and atheltic wings, loss of Ryan Kelly would have hurt less. Those qualities can make up for all the clanking three point shots. I sure hope Michael Gbnije brings much needed athleticism to next years team.

[Mudge]

The difference between Duke and other three teams stated in this thread is those other three teams still had length and athleticism to overcome deficits and win. On the other hand, the last time I saw athletic wings on the same Duke team was when Henderson and Elliott Williams were the on the floor at the same time.
If we had lengthy and atheltic wings, loss of Ryan Kelly would have hurt less. Those qualities can make up for all the clanking three point shots. I sure hope Michael Gbnije brings much needed athleticism to next years team.

While I am as hopeful as the rest that certain players morph into highly capable and valuable players in the future ("hope springs eternal"), I somehow have my doubts that players who were so little used that they barely played for this not awe-inspiring Duke team (or, in the case of Murphy, were even red-shirted-- a first-time occurrence for a non-injured player for Duke under Coach K, as far as I can tell-- although there may have been a couple of big men back in the late '80's) will suddenly become these stellar players that some here have forecast.

[sporthenry]

While I am as hopeful as the rest that certain players morph into highly capable and valuable players in the future ("hope springs eternal"), I somehow have my doubts that players who were so little used that they barely played for this not awe-inspiring Duke team (or, in the case of Murphy, were even red-shirted-- a first-time occurrence for a non-injured player for Duke under Coach K, as far as I can tell-- although there may have been a couple of big men back in the late '80's) will suddenly become these stellar players that some here have forecast.

What made this team not awe-inspiring? They were ranked #4 at some points and were a top 10 team all season. Quite the accomplishment. Apart from the Kyries or Rivers of the world, many freshman don't play much at Duke. Gerald Henderson only averaged 7 points in 19 minutes on a Duke team that was unranked at points and earned a 6 seed (and he was a lottery pick in the NBA). Zoubek averaged 3 points on 7 minutes on the same team. Lance Thomas 4 points on 15 minutes. Nolan Smith scored 6 points in 14 minutes. Ryan Kelly averaged 1.2 points in 6 minutes, Mason had 3.7 minutes in 14.1 minutes.

The fact is this was a very good team and many contributors to Duke's teams throughout the years were not used much as freshman. I see no reason why the freshman will not develop both offensively and defensively and get K's trust. Personally, I think Quinn Cook will be even more important next year to get a true PG out there but we have a very talented roster as it stands now.

[heyman25]

Good point for this read. Shane Ryan the writer of this analysis I believe went to Duke.

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/21148/the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-of-tobacco-road

Duke is the BAD part of the story.

I think it all boils down of the inability to recruit enough talent to make Duke strong at every position.

[OldSchool]

Dan Dakich (famous for his defensive performance on Michael Jordan, despite his Indiana team being allegedly overmatched against the reputed finest team in the land, back in 1984) says that Austin Rivers was the most notable underperformer in this tournament, and that Duke was the biggest disappointment in the tournament (and Dakich says that he is a "huge Duke fan")-- and he bases that assessment on the fact that even without Ryan Kelly, Duke still had far, far more talent on the floor than Lehigh, and thus had no business losing that game. Dakich pointed out that Duke's guards (and Rivers in particular) had no idea how (or at least no intention in that game) to get the ball to their big men on the pick and roll play that was the central staple of Duke's offense this year-- how do we get to this point in the season with that being the case?

Rivers came to Duke as a scorer, not a point guard. Sheesh, will we stop bashing him for not racking up assists in his freshman year like the second coming of Steve Nash. (Speaking of which, Steve Nash and Austin Rivers had about the same assists per game as college freshmen. Nash went on to become one of the most proficient feeders of the big man on the pick and roll in basketball history.)

Austin made great strides this year in many phases of his game. No one can ever accuse him of not bringing it in any of our games. He has been nothing but class and has had nothing but the highest compliments for Duke University, Coach K, the Crazies and our fans in general.

No one is claiming Austin's game is fully developed, certainly not Austin himself, and no doubt he will drive to improve himself in passing and court vision and other areas.

I say good luck to him whether he does that at Duke or in the NBA.

[Mudge]

Rivers came to Duke as a scorer, not a point guard. Sheesh, will we stop bashing him for not racking up assists in his freshman year like the second coming of Steve Nash. (Speaking of which, Steve Nash and Austin Rivers had about the same assists per game as college freshmen. Nash went on to become one of the most proficient feeders of the big man on the pick and roll in basketball history.)

Austin made great strides this year in many phases of his game. No one can ever accuse him of not bringing it in any of our games. He has been nothing but class and has had nothing but the highest compliments for Duke University, Coach K, the Crazies and our fans in general.

No one is claiming Austin's game is fully developed, certainly not Austin himself, and no doubt he will drive to improve himself in passing and court vision and other areas.

I say good luck to him whether he does that at Duke or in the NBA.

I did not bash Rivers-- "huge Duke fan" Dakich sort of did... that said, I was not expecting Rivers' game to be "fully developed"-- I was simply saying that I don't think it was too much to ask that he be able to competently execute option 1B of our offense, by the end of the season. In the Lehigh game, all he ever seemed to try was option 1A (for Austin)...

[Mudge]

What made this team not awe-inspiring? They were ranked #4 at some points and were a top 10 team all season. Quite the accomplishment. Apart from the Kyries or Rivers of the world, many freshman don't play much at Duke. Gerald Henderson only averaged 7 points in 19 minutes on a Duke team that was unranked at points and earned a 6 seed (and he was a lottery pick in the NBA). Zoubek averaged 3 points on 7 minutes on the same team. Lance Thomas 4 points on 15 minutes. Nolan Smith scored 6 points in 14 minutes. Ryan Kelly averaged 1.2 points in 6 minutes, Mason had 3.7 minutes in 14.1 minutes.

The fact is this was a very good team and many contributors to Duke's teams throughout the years were not used much as freshman. I see no reason why the freshman will not develop both offensively and defensively and get K's trust. Personally, I think Quinn Cook will be even more important next year to get a true PG out there but we have a very talented roster as it stands now.

If you think that Gbinje showed anything like what Henderson did as a freshman or that he is likely to end up as capable as Henderson, then you have a much better crystal ball than I... likewise, if you think that Gbinje shows the potential that Smith or even Kelly or Mason did as frosh, then again, you are a better seer than I... also, I am not one that was impressed with the contributions of Zoubek or Thomas as seniors, so those are not comparisons that give me much comfort-- those players depended heavily on much more skilled players around them, to make up for their shortcomings-- and I don't know yet whether Gbinje or Murphy or Marshall or Thornton or Hairston will have similarly skilled peers to rely on.

As for not being awe-inspiring, I think we can put that one to rest, by virtue of the fact that all season Duke was being dismissed as the highly ranked (and likely high-seeded) team most likely to lose early, with the alarmingly unintelligent Doug Gottlieb, Digger Phelps, Dick Vitale, and Jimmy Dykes all voicing the sentiment during the season that Duke would be ripe for a first-round upset, depending on the matchup, and whether Duke was making three-pointers. Notice how quickly, after the loss in the ACC tournament, Duke went from being a potential #1 seed, to the lowest ranked of the #2 seeds (paired with top seed Kentucky) in the estimation of the NCAA tournament committee... I don't think this Duke team struck much fear into opponents this year-- shock and awe was in short supply, when compared with the great Duke teams of the Coach K era.

[Mudge]

Good point for this read. Shane Ryan the writer of this analysis I believe went to Duke.

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/21148/the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-of-tobacco-road

Duke is the BAD part of the story.

I think it all boils down of the inability to recruit enough talent to make Duke strong at every position.

I hate to admit it, but this writer makes a number of valid points about Duke's recent recruiting... Shelden Williams is the last elite big man that Duke has had-- and he graduated in 2006-- not quite a decade, but still, far, far tooo long.

[loldevilz]

I feel like recruiting is only one part of the story. The other is that Duke's teams have not played with a tradition 1-5. This year we didn't have a small forward and we didn't really have a powerforward (both Plumlees are college centers). We basically played with 2 shooting guards, two centers, and a "point guard" if you can call him that.

In 2009 we played Lance Thomas as a center. In 2008 it was worse. The only time in the last 7-8 years we've had anything that's looked like a true 1-5 is in 2010 where Scheyer was the point. We overcame this mainly because Nolan guarded the point, while Scheyer could initiate the offense.

I just think Duke is a lot better when we have a true small forward, a true athletic power forward (Mason doesn't count, he's a college center), a true point guard, a true center ect. I think that has a lot to do with our team's failures to gel and peak at the right time, than recruiting does.

The fact is that Duke hasn't been losing to the North Carolina's and Kentucky's in the tournament. Duke has been losing to Lehigh's, VCU's, West Virginia's, teams that they have no business losing to.

[heyman25]

Coach K needs to start recruiting positions, not players as he likes to say. Of all the perennial powers in College basketball, Duke seems the most likely to fade in March. We have serious matchup problems in the NCAA tournament, because Coach K likes to recruit "players". How about recruiting quicker guards and forwards and centers that have their fundamentals together before they enroll at Duke.


I heard we were spreading the net, but for 2012 we only have Sulaimon thus far. We may luck out with Bazz or Jefferson or Parker.Or we might get Zeigler or Oriahki. Most of the leaders in recruiting aren't clutching at straws like Duke.

[mkline09]

Good point for this read. Shane Ryan the writer of this analysis I believe went to Duke.

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/21148/the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-of-tobacco-road

Duke is the BAD part of the story.

I think it all boils down of the inability to recruit enough talent to make Duke strong at every position.

This is probably a very good read. I follow Shane Ryan on Twitter and he is a Duke grad and a very strong Duke fan. He does write for Grantland whose top editor, Bill Simmons is very anti-Duke. Ryan though is a pretty fair and reasonable sounding guy and not just some former Duke student turned journalist who is pretending to dislike Duke to avoid negative feedback from the anti-Duke folks. Like I said by following him on Twitter, he is clearly not hiding his position as a Duke fan though his writing tends to be a bit more fair and balanced but definitely worth a read.

[CTDukeFan]

I guess I'm wearing rose colored glasses this morning. Yes, it is embarrassing to lose to Lehigh this year (Missouri, another 2 seed got bumped as well this year). We're all certainly bummed about it. But if I'm not mistaken just two years ago Duke had a pretty good run in the tournament and beat some pretty good teams.

[Troublemaker]

I wouldn't use this year's UNC and Kentucky teams as baselines. Even those two programs don't have 4 or 5 lottery picks every year.

Yes, Duke hasn't recruited as well as those guys (but it's certainly not for lack of effort). Let's hope that changes with future classes. If not, I'll still enjoy Duke basketball.

[jdc75]

There are a few unique obstacles that are important to consider with Duke and Coach K's recruiting process.

1) Does the recruit have the grades/test scores to qualify academically? This alone I think eliminates a lot of players from being pursued.

2) Assuming they can get a player in academically, will they be able to cut it in the classroom once they are here and stay eligible to play?

3) Is the recruit willing to accept no guarantees of playing time, shots per game etc.? Are they a team player?.

4) Do they have baggage on or off the court to deal with. Basically are they a good person who is easy to get along with and WANTS to be coached by K and his staff. Do they have parents, family members, friends, AAU coaches , agent runners and others in their ear trying to maximize their draft status.

5) Do they WANT to come to Duke? There are simply some guys who would never come to Duke no matter what was offered to them. A lot of the negative stereotypes don't help I am sure. There's the whole Duke hate thing you know. The Fab Five documentary perpetuating the absurd uncle Tom myth. Duke can't develop big men etc., etc.,. Don't think coaches from other schools don't exploit these things.

The staff wants great players as much as we do I am sure. It is just not as simple as some may think.

[miramar]

I certainly can't disagree with anything Ryan says. In essence, the message is that the 2010 team was the exception that confirms the rule in that they came together in a way that absolutely no one expected (including Olek), but that other recent teams have not been nearly as good at the end of the season. IIRC, Duke is 1-4 in its last five sweet sixteens; this year's flameout was an absolute stunner and 2007 wasn't far behind.

The problem is not recruiting per se. If we concentrate on big men (since they are featured prominently in the story), McBob and Mason were supposed to be all world, but they never developed fully. This year's team was loaded with Mickey D's, but didn't strike fear into anyone's hearts the last half of the season (11 games with 80 or more points in December and January, and only once in February and March). I don't know how anyone can predict who will develop and who will not, but our yield rate is obviously way down.

But I remain optimistic that we have a core of talented players and new guys coming in who, if they jell in a way that this year's team did not, will do some damage late in the season.

[hq2]

I just think Duke is a lot better when we have a true small forward, a true athletic power forward (Mason doesn't count, he's a college center), a true point guard, a true center ect. I think that has a lot to do with our team's failures to gel and peak at the right time, than recruiting does.

Agree. I think teams kind of figured us out late in the season, and we didn't/couldn't respond. In the end, given the personnel limitations of this team, they did O.K. overall, but filling some of these holes will help a lot in the future.

[CDu]

I look at our team compared to UK, and I see the disparity pretty clearly. Kentucky has incredibly versatile players at the 2-4 spots on the floor. Jones can play either forward spot. Kidd-Gilchrest can play SG, SF, or PF. Miller can play SG or SF. Lamb off the bench can play PG, SG, SF. All five starters and their sixth man are capable of initiating transition offense once they get the ball (even Davis - the C).

It's that type of length, athleticism, and versatility that have been missing. This year, we had probably 3 players on the roster who had that type of length, athleticism, and versatility. One was Rivers. The other two were Murphy and Gbinije, but neither were apparently ready to contribute this year enough to oust the veteran wing players on the team. And while Rivers was versatile, he had his limitations too (couldn't play off the ball, couldn't distribute).

The rest of the team was pretty limited. The Plumlees were capable against bigs but lacked quickness and offensive polish. Kelly could shoot but struggled a lot against quicker players and didn't show much post game. Curry could shoot and occasionally drive but struggled against taller physical guards. Dawkins could shoot. Thornton could see the floor and was a great off-ball defender but struggled offensively. Cook showed offensive promise but was limited by height and perhaps lingering knee issues. And nobody outside of (occasionally) Rivers could consistently defend against dribble penetration.

The 2010 team was an anomaly, but only in that those senior bigs finally figured things out. We had defensive versatility at 4 spots with that team. We had offensive versatility from 3 players. We had no perimeter depth and thus were fortunate not to face adversity there, but the starters fit the ideals perfectly (tall, long, and defensively versatile). Had those guys figured it out a year or two earlier (and had we switched PG earlier as well), we might have made some tournament noise sooner.

I hope that some of the following things happen the next several months (in no particular order):
1. Gbinije and Murphy make big strides and emerge as key players
2a. We get Oriakhi (and he's eligible right away) to add athleticism and toughness in the absence of Miles and (presumably) Mason
2b. We get Mason back for his senior year
3. We get Zeigler (and he's eligible right away) or Muhammad
4. Sulaimon is an impact player on the wing both offensively and defensively
5. Dawkins gets MUCH stronger with the ball and improves his focus and defense
6. Curry gets stronger with the ball and can become a scoring PG
7. Cook gets healthy and can be an ACC-caliber starting PG

It would be REALLY nice if several of those things could happen so that we can improve our versatility and not be so much of a one-trick pony as we were this year (even though that trick was fairly effective for a while).

[duke79]

There are a few unique obstacles that are important to consider with Duke and Coach K's recruiting process.

1) Does the recruit have the grades/test scores to qualify academically? This alone I think eliminates a lot of players from being pursued.

2) Assuming they can get a player in academically, will they be able to cut it in the classroom once they are here and stay eligible to play?

3) Is the recruit willing to accept no guarantees of playing time, shots per game etc.? Are they a team player?.

4) Do they have baggage on or off the court to deal with. Basically are they a good person who is easy to get along with and WANTS to be coached by K and his staff. Do they have parents, family members, friends, AAU coaches , agent runners and others in their ear trying to maximize their draft status.

5) Do they WANT to come to Duke? There are simply some guys who would never come to Duke no matter what was offered to them. A lot of the negative stereotypes don't help I am sure. There's the whole Duke hate thing you know. The Fab Five documentary perpetuating the absurd uncle Tom myth. Duke can't develop big men etc., etc.,. Don't think coaches from other schools don't exploit these things.

The staff wants great players as much as we do I am sure. It is just not as simple as some may think.

Very valid points. I think the recruiting landscape has changed (and not for the better) when you're talking about recruiting the truly elite high school BB players - the ones who can step in and immediately produce at the highest levels of college bb and can make a college team compete for a NC. When I look at the rosters of Kentucky, UNC, Kansas, etc., how many of those players could qualify to be admitted to Duke (even at the much lower levels of standards that the BB player applicants must meet at Duke) or would even want to attend Duke. Let's face reality. Most of those kids are NOT going to college for the academics. The only thought on their mind is when can I get to the NBA and where will I be drafted and how much money will I make. We've already seen this trend at Duke (to a degree) with Kyrie and now with Austen. The truly talented players are not sticking around to get their Duke degree. I certainly don't blame Coach K, but I think it is going to be more difficult to recruit the type of players he will need to compete for NC's.

[Mudge]

I look at our team compared to UK, and I see the disparity pretty clearly. Kentucky has incredibly versatile players at the 2-4 spots on the floor. Jones can play either forward spot. Kidd-Gilchrest can play SG, SF, or PF. Miller can play SG or SF. Lamb off the bench can play PG, SG, SF. All five starters and their sixth man are capable of initiating transition offense once they get the ball (even Davis - the C).

It's that type of length, athleticism, and versatility that have been missing. This year, we had probably 3 players on the roster who had that type of length, athleticism, and versatility. One was Rivers. The other two were Murphy and Gbinije, but neither were apparently ready to contribute this year enough to oust the veteran wing players on the team. And while Rivers was versatile, he had his limitations too (couldn't play off the ball, couldn't distribute).

The rest of the team was pretty limited. The Plumlees were capable against bigs but lacked quickness and offensive polish. Kelly could shoot but struggled a lot against quicker players and didn't show much post game. Curry could shoot and occasionally drive but struggled against taller physical guards. Dawkins could shoot. Thornton could see the floor and was a great off-ball defender but struggled offensively. Cook showed offensive promise but was limited by height and perhaps lingering knee issues. And nobody outside of (occasionally) Rivers could consistently defend against dribble penetration.

The 2010 team was an anomaly, but only in that those senior bigs finally figured things out. We had defensive versatility at 4 spots with that team. We had offensive versatility from 3 players. We had no perimeter depth and thus were fortunate not to face adversity there, but the starters fit the ideals perfectly (tall, long, and defensively versatile). Had those guys figured it out a year or two earlier (and had we switched PG earlier as well), we might have made some tournament noise sooner.

I hope that some of the following things happen the next several months (in no particular order):
1. Gbinije and Murphy make big strides and emerge as key players
2a. We get Oriakhi (and he's eligible right away) to add athleticism and toughness in the absence of Miles and (presumably) Mason
2b. We get Mason back for his senior year
3. We get Zeigler (and he's eligible right away) Muhammad
4. Sulaimon is an impact player on the wing both offensively and defensively
5. Dawkins gets MUCH stronger with the ball and improves his focus and defense
6. Curry gets stronger with the ball and can become a scoring PG
7. Cook gets healthy and can be an ACC-caliber starting PG

It would be REALLY nice if several of those things could happen so that we can improve our versatility and not be so much of a one-trick pony as we were this year (even though that trick was fairly effective for a while).

I want all of those things too, and oh by the way (speaking of one-trick ponies), I want a pony for Christmas, too... but one question: Who is this Zeigler Muhammad guy, and is he really that good?

[CDu]

I want all of those things too, and oh by the way (speaking of one-trick ponies), I want a pony for Christmas, too... but one question: Who is this Zeigler Muhammad guy, and is he really that good?

I don't think any of those things are pipe dreams, so you can discard the "pony for Christmas" comments.

Sorry - I missed an "or" in there. Nice nitpick. I want either Zeigler or Muhammad, each of whom would provide a tall, athletic, tough, versatile wing player that we lacked this year. Fixed in my post, now.

[Matches]

When I look at the rosters of Kentucky, UNC, Kansas, etc., how many of those players could qualify to be admitted to Duke (even at the much lower levels of standards that the BB player applicants must meet at Duke) or would even want to attend Duke.

More than you think. I've had reason to be familiar with some of the HS grades, SATs etc of guys we have recruited, and academically they're not much different from those at other schools. So long as a recruit meets the NCAA's standards for admission, we'll let them in. The difference between Duke and some other schools is that we're much less likely than others to take chances on guys with questionable character (though with a few exceptions, UNC tends to shy away from those guys too). We will take academic chances but we tend to do so with high-character guys.

One problem we face is the rise of importance of AAU ball. SO many shady characters worming their way into these kids' lives at an early age these days, and "handlers" tend to direct kids toward schools with coaches they can control. Duke is not a preferred destination for a lot of these AAU guys (though to be fair, neither is UNC).

[Wander]

Shelden Williams is the last elite big man that Duke has had-- and he graduated in 2006-- not quite a decade, but still, far, far tooo long.

We have an elite big man on the roster right now, but we don't use him very well.

[COYS]

We have an elite big man on the roster right now, but we don't use him very well.

I disagree with the idea that Mason has gotten to the elite level. He's very good. However, even though I agree that we didn't get him the ball frequently enough, he has still not established himself as an elite offensive player. He has not reached anywhere close to the level of Shelden, Carlos, or Brand in his efficiency on the low block, even though he was much improved this year. When it comes to rebounding, Mason is perhaps superior to all those guys based simply on rebound rate. But his offensive ability is still a little raw and his movements still a little mechanical. We give Kendall Marshall a lot of credit for getting the ball to Zeller and others in a good position to score. But we also need to give credit to Zeller for being able to finish in a variety of ways to make those great passes turn into assists. I think Mason could definitely benefit from better passing into the post. But he would also have to improve his own offensive repertoire to become an elite scoring threat.

[CDu]

We have an elite big man on the roster right now, but we don't use him very well.

I'd say we have an occasionally elite big man, but one who is still very raw and thus very inconsistent. We haven't always used him well, but he also hasn't always made it easy to maximize his abilities.

[MaxAMillion]

We have an elite big man on the roster right now, but we don't use him very well.


You must be kidding. Duke doesn't have an elite big man on their roster. If they did he would be used properly. Coach K didn't all of a sudden become an idiot. Brand, Boozer, and Williams were elite big men and K made sure to get them the ball in the post routinely.

Look at most teams in college basketball and tell me how many of them have elite big men? You can count them on one hand. Most schools play offense just like Duke. They run lots of screens and picks to free up players and if that doesn't work they try and allow their players to slash to the basket. Coach K is not running some foreign offense that no one else uses.

If you are expecting Duke to have a roster like Kentucky then you are going to be disappointed every year. The standards that Duke uses to bring in players are not the same as a school like UK.

[Wander]

You must be kidding. Duke doesn't have an elite big man on their roster. If they did he would be used properly. Coach K didn't all of a sudden become an idiot. Brand, Boozer, and Williams were elite big men and K made sure to get them the ball in the post routinely.

It's not about coaching. You're making the same mistake that thousands of fans make every time they say something like "I don't understand why Roy wouldn't get the ball into Tyler Zeller for the last shot!" You need guards who are able to make solid entry passes and have good vision, and big men who put themselves in a position to receive said passes. And to be quite honest we were a pretty terrible passing team this year.



I'd say we have an occasionally elite big man, but one who is still very raw and thus very inconsistent. We haven't always used him well, but he also hasn't always made it easy to maximize his abilities.


You're probably right. But I can't get over how Mason went toe-to-toe with Sullinger and Robinson and shot 9-9 in the NCAA tournament. But I probably went a little too far.

[gumbomoop]

I will throw this one bone to Duke, on the deflating way that this season ended-- I kept hearing today that "it was a shame that Syracuse had to compete without Fab Melo, and that UNC had to compete without Kendall Marshall, and that Michigan State had to compete without one of their key players who went down with a knee injury recently, because those are all top-ranked teams that could have made a championship run, but for the loss of that one player"-- but not once did I hear anyone say that it was a shame that Duke lost Ryan Kelly just before the tournament started

On Sun eve [repeated several times overnight and this morn] College Gameday, Hubert Davis made exactly this - your - point. Now, clearly he was saying this in the immediate aftermath of Marshall's absence and UNC's defeat, but to be fair to his fairness, he said it was disappointing that 4 teams that might have gone far had to play without a key player. He specifically mentioned Duke/Kelly as that 4th team.

But the Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away. Jay Bilas, on the "disappointment" theme, said the most disappointing team was Duke, and said, twice and pointedly, that Duke "didn't compete" as they could and should have. He was clearly calling out the effort v. Lehigh.

So, in the spirit of this thread, Bilas might be understood to have been asking, how did Duke's effort, in an NCAAT game, get to this point? I didn't much "like" the comment, but I can't deny that I was disappointed with the way Duke played against Lehigh. Although it's true that anything can happen in a one-and-out tourney, the quality of Duke's play was, yes, dispiriting.

Although I agree that....


The only thing people will remember in 10 years will be Austin's shot in the House That Dean Built.

..... I suspect we'll remember the way this season ended for a couple more years, and definitely until CTC in October.

[Matches]

You're making the same mistake that thousands of fans make every time they say something like "I don't understand why Roy wouldn't get the ball into Tyler Zeller for the last shot!" You need guards who are able to make solid entry passes and have good vision, and big men who put themselves in a position to receive said passes. And to be quite honest we were a pretty terrible passing team this year.



Very true, and a point that many have missed when dissecting our season. Often I think it's assumed that a perimeter-oriented team (as we were) will be a good passing team. Wasn't true of us. Our best passer was Cook who wasn't on the floor much. After that, it was probably... Kelly? Actually Mason is a pretty good passer, but it's not like he can feed himself in the post.

The rest of our guards are not very good passers. Hopefully that's an area where they can improve over the summer, although to some extent passing is an instinctual skill that's hard to teach.

[CDu]

You're probably right. But I can't get over how Mason went toe-to-toe with Sullinger and Robinson and shot 9-9 in the NCAA tournament. But I probably went a little too far.

Oh I certainly believe he has the ability to be elite. And there have definitely been times when he looked the part of elite. But even in that 9-9 game, Mason showed the limitations, committing four bad turnovers and looking a bit lost when the defense finally started doubling him.

I think Coach K wanted nothing more than to utilize Mason as an elite big man this year. But I think it was a combination of things that prevented it from happening, some of them on Mason (still not fully comfortable in the post and very few moves) and some not (inability/unwillingness of guards to properly feed him in the post).

[sporthenry]

If you think that Gbinje showed anything like what Henderson did as a freshman or that he is likely to end up as capable as Henderson, then you have a much better crystal ball than I... likewise, if you think that Gbinje shows the potential that Smith or even Kelly or Mason did as frosh, then again, you are a better seer than I... also, I am not one that was impressed with the contributions of Zoubek or Thomas as seniors, so those are not comparisons that give me much comfort-- those players depended heavily on much more skilled players around them, to make up for their shortcomings-- and I don't know yet whether Gbinje or Murphy or Marshall or Thornton or Hairston will have similarly skilled peers to rely on.

As for not being awe-inspiring, I think we can put that one to rest, by virtue of the fact that all season Duke was being dismissed as the highly ranked (and likely high-seeded) team most likely to lose early, with the alarmingly unintelligent Doug Gottlieb, Digger Phelps, Dick Vitale, and Jimmy Dykes all voicing the sentiment during the season that Duke would be ripe for a first-round upset, depending on the matchup, and whether Duke was making three-pointers. Notice how quickly, after the loss in the ACC tournament, Duke went from being a potential #1 seed, to the lowest ranked of the #2 seeds (paired with top seed Kentucky) in the estimation of the NCAA tournament committee... I don't think this Duke team struck much fear into opponents this year-- shock and awe was in short supply, when compared with the great Duke teams of the Coach K era.

No, I didn't really compare Gbinije to Henderson but showed that it is possible for players to develop after lackluster Freshman years. Henderson was a lottery pick so while I don't think Gbinije will get to that level, there is no reason he can't be an athletic wing. As far as Murphy, the kid was a senior in high school so why waste him on the bench for a year when he can red shirt and have 4 more years of eligibility. Lance Thomas is an NBA player and Zoubek was on his way until his injuries flared up. I think you discount their capabilities all b/c they didn't play much on a very deep team. Nolan Smith as a freshman probably wouldn't have played much on this team behind Dre, Curry, Rivers, or even TT as a Sophomore. K doesn't trust many Freshmen mainly from a defensive standpoint and unless you are a lottery pick whose offense will make up for its defense, the Quinn Cooks won't see the floor as long as they are defense liabilities.

And Duke was actually the #2 2 seed as they were 6th on the S-curve. They were given the South based on regional preference. Additionally, the talking heads at ESPN always have Duke as the first team ripe for an upset. Correct me if I'm wrong, but we shared the distinction of being the 1st #1 seed out in 2010 on an "alarmingly unathletic" team. When you start using Vitale (who said Detroit would win this year) or Gottlieb as an argument, I fail to see your point.

[gumbomoop]

[1] I think Coach K wanted nothing more than to utilize Mason as an elite big man this year. But I think it was a combination of things that prevented it from happening, some of them [2] on Mason (still not fully comfortable in the post and very few moves) and some not [3] (inability/unwillingness of guards to properly feed him in the post).

We posters disagree a lot. I'm wondering whether CDu here gives us an opportunity at overwhelming consensus, even unanimity.

Metaphorically, let's take a poll on these 3 points. To make it even more interesting, ask yourself whether you agree with every word in [1-3]. And don't piss me off by quibbling with something like "nothing more" in [1]. I'm watching you.

I agree with every word in [1-3]. So far it's unanimous.

[Duvall]

On Sun eve [repeated several times overnight and this morn]
..... I suspect we'll remember the way this season ended for a couple more years, and definitely until CTC in October.

I imagine that the players will - they only get so many chances at the NCAA tournament. Fans, less so.

[roywhite]

We posters disagree a lot. I'm wondering whether CDu here gives us an opportunity at overwhelming consensus, even unanimity.

Metaphorically, let's take a poll on these 3 points. To make it even more interesting, ask yourself whether you agree with every word in [1-3]. And don't piss me off by quibbling with something like "nothing more" in [1]. I'm watching you.

I agree with every word in [1-3]. So far it's unanimous.

Count me in. And disappointing that it didn't happen.

[_Gary]

Very true, and a point that many have missed when dissecting our season. Often I think it's assumed that a perimeter-oriented team (as we were) will be a good passing team. Wasn't true of us. Our best passer was Cook who wasn't on the floor much. After that, it was probably... Kelly? Actually Mason is a pretty good passer, but it's not like he can feed himself in the post.

The rest of our guards are not very good passers. Hopefully that's an area where they can improve over the summer, although to some extent passing is an instinctual skill that's hard to teach.

AMEN to all of this. While I'm with others in saying Mason is a very good, and on rare occasions played like an elite, big man, he didn't exactly have guards surrounding him that fed him the ball in the right place. Mason's athletic ability would have been an incredible asset this past season when coupled with a PG that could penetrate and either put the ball up on the rim and or dish off. I could see both Mason and Miles being monsters in that type of situation. But asking them to be solely traditional back to the basket bigs wasn't the way to utilize their natural talents. The only way to do that would be to have guards that could get out on the break well and penetrate in half-court sets. We just didn't have those type guards this year. I do think Quinn has the best shot at being that type of guard for us next year though.

[gumbomoop]

I imagine that the players will - they only get so many chances at the NCAA tournament. Fans, less so.

I probably wasn't quite as specific as I should have been. My phrase "we'll remember" was intended to refer to EK posters. My point was that we remember disappointing endings for awhile, bringing them up pretty regularly to prove this or that point about the [i.e., a future] team's flaws. So I'm thinking - unless Duke wins the NC for, say, 4 out of the next 6 years - more than one poster will refer to Lehigh for a few more years.

[_Gary]

Metaphorically, let's take a poll on these 3 points. To make it even more interesting, ask yourself whether you agree with every word in [1-3]. And don't piss me off by quibbling with something like "nothing more" in [1]. I'm watching you.

I agree with every word in [1-3]. So far it's unanimous.

Sorry, I was composing a post when you wrote this. I agree with every word as well, so add me to the list.

[Kedsy]

...how is [it] that Duke got to such a state...

How did we get to what state? We lost a first round NCAA tournament game. That's all. How does that mean all these other programs are outcompeting us?

Here are some top programs and their latest failures:

UNC missed the tournament entirely in 2010.
Kentucky missed the tournament entirely in 2009; had a first round loss in 2008.
Ohio State had 1st round loss in 2009; missed the tournament entirely in 2008.
UCLA missed the tournament entirely in 2012; missed the tournament entirely in 2010.
Florida had a first round loss in 2010; missed the tournament entirely in 2008 and 2009.
Syracuse had a 2nd round loss in 2011; missed the tournament entirely in 2008.
UConn had a first round loss in 2012; missed the tournament entirely in 2010; had a first round loss in 2008.
Louisville had a first round loss in 2010 and 2011.
Kansas had a 2nd round loss in 2010.
Georgetown had a 2nd round loss in 2012; 1st round loss in 2010 and 2011; missed tournament entirely in 2009.


If one embarrassing early round loss means you're not competing, there are a whole lot of teams who aren't competing these days.


It feels to me like Duke is experiencing another lull in its capabilities, due to some unfortunate setbacks in recruiting...

According to RSCI, here are Duke's recruiting class ranking since the mid-2000s:

2011: #2 in the country
2010: #9
2009: #8 (didn't include Andre when they ranked it, so it's really higher)
2008: #11
2007: #3
2006: #3
2005: #2

It just so happens that the 2008 recruiting class is this year's senior class. But putting that aside, where's the lull? Do you really expect us to be the top recruiting class every single year?

FWIW, our recruiting was unranked in 2000, 2001, and 2003, so you don't need to bring in the top class every year to succeed.


...it is clear that Duke gets considerably more top players than Lehigh (or even Arizona), so the losses of the last two years give the feeling of substantive underperformance by the players that Duke did manage to get.

Do you believe that the more talented team wins every game they play? If not, then you have to accept that the more talented team is going to lose sometimes.


Duke fans need to face the fact that Duke is trying to compete at the highest level right now, with some players that pretty obviously are trying to punch above their weight. Given that we hear all the time that Coach K can get the majority of the players that he goes after, one has to wonder: why has he gone after some of these players?

On the 2011-2012 team, out of our ten active scholarship players, we have eight (8) players who were ranked in the top 32 of their class, according to RSCI (I'm including Andre who was around #15 before he re-classified), plus a player who made 3rd team All-ACC this year.

We're recruiting at the highest level. Do you really expect every player we recruit to be top ten? If so, do you really expect we'll get them all?

[Chris Randolph]

A few observations:

#1: Every program/team in every sport has a low moment (as Coack K called it) at times. Fortunately for Duke, they don't have very many and even in a low moment still win over 25 games.

#2: All the comments about what Coach K needs to do recruiting are ridiculous. If you want to have so much say in Duke's recruiting, go ask Coach K if he will hire you as recruiting coordinator. I have no problem with whom he recruits. He recruits good to great basketball players that behave and graduate and represent the program in a great way. Sure, every fan wants their team to be ubber-talented but at what expense.

#3: Addressing why this Duke team crumbled down the stretch/fell apart a bit without Kelly when other teams lose players and still had success: I come back to my argument all year... Leadership/togetherness/fist. When teams face adversity, mentally tough teams with good leadership rise up to the challenge and come together. This Duke team was unable to do that

[BlueDevilCorvette!]

If Duke lacked lateral quickness on the perimeter and opposing teams could (and did) get in the paint at will, then why not play more zone defense? I mean I saw Notre Dame, who was similar to Duke in terms of quickness, play zone on Syracuse early in the season and win. Other teams are quite effective at playing zone against Duke especially when the shots are not falling as easily from the outside (Lehigh). In addition, even with all the defensive liabilities with this team, okay, if we can't stop anyone then let's out-score them...let's go with our best 5 offensive players and let them have at it. Yeah I know this isn't too realistic but it sure would have been interesting to watch.

[Mudge]

I don't think any of those things are pipe dreams, so you can discard the "pony for Christmas" comments.

Sorry - I missed an "or" in there. Nice nitpick. I want either Zeigler or Muhammad, each of whom would provide a tall, athletic, tough, versatile wing player that we lacked this year. Fixed in my post, now.

I keed, I keed...

[Mudge]

We have an elite big man on the roster right now, but we don't use him very well.

I can't think of whom you mean... the one guy who is being talked about as an early entrant to the draft will be making a huge mistake (from a career longevity perspective) if he does so-- he is likely to have less success than Josh McRoberts did initially, IMO, which means he will likely be digging himself a huge hole (of lowered evaluations and expectations) and then have to find a way to dig out of it, if he is to find a way to stick around long term-- much as McRoberts did-- and McRoberts had better hands and was as good or better as a passer... the rest of these two players' skills are roughly similar at college departure (if measured now).

[UrinalCake]

I will throw this one bone to Duke, on the deflating way that this season ended-- I kept hearing today that "it was a shame that Syracuse had to compete without Fab Melo, and that UNC had to compete without Kendall Marshall, and that Michigan State had to compete without one of their key players who went down with a knee injury recently, because those are all top-ranked teams that could have made a championship run, but for the loss of that one player"-- but not once did I hear anyone say that it was a shame that Duke lost Ryan Kelly just before the tournament started...

I think the difference is that Duke still has so much more talent that Lehigh, so losing Kelly shouldn't have mattered. It's another matter entirely to be playing against Kansas or OSU where talent levels start out being equal and so losing a key player puts you at a disadvantage. Maybe if we had advanced further the absence of Kelly would have garnered more attention...

As far as recruiting, Kentucky is just in another world from any other team in college basketball, so I wouldn't use them as a point of comparison. The guys they get have no interest in school and are just stopping by on their way to the NBA. I will give Coach Cal credit for getting them to play together as a team and even play pretty good defense, but I don't think we should try to compare our own recruiting to theirs when we're actually bringing in student athletes and maintaining some integrity.

With that said, I don't think we've had recruiting mistakes per se, just that things go in cycles and we're in a bit of a downward trend right now. No team can make the final four every single year, but we'll be back there soon.

[Mudge]

No, I didn't really compare Gbinije to Henderson but showed that it is possible for players to develop after lackluster Freshman years. Henderson was a lottery pick so while I don't think Gbinije will get to that level, there is no reason he can't be an athletic wing. As far as Murphy, the kid was a senior in high school so why waste him on the bench for a year when he can red shirt and have 4 more years of eligibility. Lance Thomas is an NBA player and Zoubek was on his way until his injuries flared up. I think you discount their capabilities all b/c they didn't play much on a very deep team. Nolan Smith as a freshman probably wouldn't have played much on this team behind Dre, Curry, Rivers, or even TT as a Sophomore. K doesn't trust many Freshmen mainly from a defensive standpoint and unless you are a lottery pick whose offense will make up for its defense, the Quinn Cooks won't see the floor as long as they are defense liabilities.

And Duke was actually the #2 2 seed as they were 6th on the S-curve. They were given the South based on regional preference. Additionally, the talking heads at ESPN always have Duke as the first team ripe for an upset. Correct me if I'm wrong, but we shared the distinction of being the 1st #1 seed out in 2010 on an "alarmingly unathletic" team. When you start using Vitale (who said Detroit would win this year) or Gottlieb as an argument, I fail to see your point.

Lance Thomas is an NBA player? I must have missed his promotion, as last I heard he was roaming the D-League somewhere... I can't imagine that he is playing any meaningful minutes for even the lower echelon teams in the NBA.

You don't see my point? OK, explicitly, many close observers of college basketball (including analysts of far more insight than the dunces cited above, people like Bilas and Hubert Davis) were not that impressed with Duke this year-- Duke was not awe-inspiring or fear-inducing as a team this year-- to Florida State, NC State, Virginia Tech, Temple, or even Lehigh-- those teams all looked forward to playing Duke this year, because they knew that Duke was vulnerable, and they wanted to get a famous scalp, when the getting was good-- nobody was afraid of playing Duke; they relished the opportunity-- is that clear enough?

[dcdevil2009]

I'm not sure if our problem is not having an elite big as much as it's that our back and front courts not having very complimentary skill sets. With the exception of free throw shooting, I'd say Mason is above average at most things, but in order to take advantage of that, he needs a guard who could get him the ball as soon as he got good position. On the other hand, our back court and defense would have been more successful if our bigs were better rebounders. If you look at the 2010 team, I wouldn't describe Scheyer as an elite passer (despite almost 5 assists/per game, it seems like most were to shooters on the perimeter), but having Zoubek there to extend possessions gave him more opportunities to get those assists. Even though this team didn't force bad shots very often, we were often limited to one shot possessions giving us a razor thin margin of error. Likewise, on defense we seemed to give up a lot of offensive boards that made exposing our defensive flaws even easier whereas the 2010 team looked better on defense because Zoubek's elite rebounding limited opponents to one shot per possession.

I've seen a lot of people describe this years team as having chemistry problems, but I think it really boils down to having too many players with the same strengths and weaknesses. We don't need an elite big or point guard to be successful, just players who are able to make each other better. Zoubek did that with his rebounding in 2010 and Kyrie did it with his speed and court vision last year. Hopefully next year someone will step up and make the team better than it's individual parts, but without a player whose skill set makes the guys around him better there's only so much Coach K can do to bring the team together.

[Indoor66]

Lance Thomas is an NBA player? I must have missed his promotion, as last I heard he was roaming the D-League somewhere... I can't imagine that he is playing any meaningful minutes for even the lower echelon teams in the NBA.

You have to re-key your imagination. Lance is with the New Orleans Hornets. Check the Roster here (http://www.nba.com/hornets/roster/).



2011-12 Roster


NUM
PLAYER
POS
HT
WT
DOB
Prior to NBA/Home Country
YRS


0
Al-Farouq Aminu (http://www.nba.com/playerfile/al-farouq_aminu/index.html?nav=page)
F
6-9
215
09/21/1990
Wake Forest / USA
1


1
Trevor Ariza (http://www.nba.com/playerfile/trevor_ariza/index.html?nav=page)
F
6-8
210
06/30/1985
UCLA / USA
7


15
Gustavo Ayon (http://www.nba.com/playerfile/gustavo_ayon/index.html?nav=page)
F-C
6-10
250
04/01/1985
Baloncesto Fuenlabrada / Mexico
R


8
Marco Belinelli (http://www.nba.com/playerfile/marco_belinelli/index.html?nav=page)
G
6-5
195
03/25/1986
Fortitudo Bologna / Italy
4


10
Eric Gordon (http://www.nba.com/playerfile/eric_gordon/index.html?nav=page)
G
6-3
215
12/25/1988
Indiana / USA
3


4
Xavier Henry (http://www.nba.com/playerfile/xavier_henry/index.html?nav=page)
G
6-6
220
03/15/1991
Kansas / USA
1


2
Jarrett Jack (http://www.nba.com/playerfile/jarrett_jack/index.html?nav=page)
G
6-3
197
10/28/1983
Georgia Tech / USA
6


20
Chris Johnson (http://www.nba.com/playerfile/chris_johnson/index.html?nav=page)
F
6-11
210
07/15/1985
Louisiana State / USA
1


35
Chris Kaman (http://www.nba.com/playerfile/chris_kaman/index.html?nav=page)
C-F
7-0
265
04/28/1982
Central Michigan / USA
8


24
Carl Landry (http://www.nba.com/playerfile/carl_landry/index.html?nav=page)
F
6-9
248
09/19/1983
Purdue / USA
4


50
Emeka Okafor (http://www.nba.com/playerfile/emeka_okafor/index.html?nav=page)
C
6-10
255
09/28/1982
Connecticut / USA
7


14
Jason Smith (http://www.nba.com/playerfile/jason_smith/index.html?nav=page)
F-C
7-0
240
03/02/1986
Colorado State / USA
3


42
Lance Thomas (http://www.nba.com/playerfile/lance_thomas/index.html?nav=page)
F
6-8
225
04/24/1988
Duke / USA
R


21
Greivis Vasquez (http://www.nba.com/playerfile/greivis_vasquez/index.html?nav=page)
G
6-6
211
01/16/1987
Maryland / Venezuela
1

[Kedsy]

Lance Thomas is an NBA player? I must have missed his promotion, as last I heard he was roaming the D-League somewhere... I can't imagine that he is playing any meaningful minutes for even the lower echelon teams in the NBA.

If you're going to be this condescending, you really ought to have at least some idea what you're talking about. Lance Thomas has played double-figure minutes for the Hornets for 12 consecutive games, averaging 18 minutes a game over that time and averaging almost 7 ppg and almost 3 rpg.

[Duvall]

Lance Thomas is an NBA player? I must have missed his promotion, as last I heard he was roaming the D-League somewhere... I can't imagine that he is playing any meaningful minutes for even the lower echelon teams in the NBA.

And yet. (http://www.nba.com/playerfile/lance_thomas/)

[davekay1971]

Lance Thomas is an NBA player? I must have missed his promotion, as last I heard he was roaming the D-League somewhere... I can't imagine that he is playing any meaningful minutes for even the lower echelon teams in the NBA.

You don't see my point? OK, explicitly, many close observers of college basketball (including analysts of far more insight than the dunces cited above, people like Bilas and Hubert Davis) were not that impressed with Duke this year-- Duke was not awe-inspiring or fear-inducing as a team this year-- to Florida State, NC State, Virginia Tech, Temple, or even Lehigh-- those teams all looked forward to playing Duke this year, because they knew that Duke was vulnerable, and they wanted to get a famous scalp, when the getting was good-- nobody was afraid of playing Duke; they relished the opportunity-- is that clear enough?

They may have relished the opportunity and thought Duke looked beatable (and they were right...we were beatable), but of the 31 times in the regular season the game tipped off, 26 times the other team went home with a loss.

There's a big difference between, "Hey, Duke has flaws, Duke is beatable" (both true this season), and Duke being a bad team with a poor season. With a healthy roster, during the regular season, we had really, really good results. Even our ACC tournament performance was nothing to be ashamed of - we lost a very close game to a very good FSU team that went on to beat an incredibly talented UNC team the next day (yeah, I know, Carolina without Henson...but Duke without Kelly).

In fact, there were exactly 4 times this season where I felt Duke really just got beaten...Ohio State (at that point healthy, and currently competing for the natty), Temple (a bad loss), Carolina (at that point with Marshall and Henson in the lineup, and had Marshall been in the lineup yesterday, a team that certainly could be competing for the natty), and Lehigh. Two games beaten badly by great teams, two games that were just bad, bad losses. The Miami loss was bad only in that we should have beaten Miami at home, but it was a good comeback and a couple Austin Rivers free-throws away from a win...that kind of thing happens.

I'm as disappointed as the next guy about ending our season with probably our worst peformance of our season. I don't like Duke going into the history books as one those memorable upset victims in the NCAAT. But that doesn't mean the season was a lousy season. Actually, it was a pretty good season with a terrible ending.

[Des Esseintes]

How did we get to what state? We lost a first round NCAA tournament game. That's all. How does that mean all these other programs are outcompeting us?

Here are some top programs and their latest failures:

UNC missed the tournament entirely in 2010.
Kentucky missed the tournament entirely in 2009; had a first round loss in 2008.
Ohio State had 1st round loss in 2009; missed the tournament entirely in 2008.
UCLA missed the tournament entirely in 2012; missed the tournament entirely in 2010.
Florida had a first round loss in 2010; missed the tournament entirely in 2008 and 2009.
Syracuse had a 2nd round loss in 2011; missed the tournament entirely in 2008.
UConn had a first round loss in 2012; missed the tournament entirely in 2010; had a first round loss in 2008.
Louisville had a first round loss in 2010 and 2011.
Kansas had a 2nd round loss in 2010.
Georgetown had a 2nd round loss in 2012; 1st round loss in 2010 and 2011; missed tournament entirely in 2009.


If one embarrassing early round loss means you're not competing, there are a whole lot of teams who aren't competing these days.



According to RSCI, here are Duke's recruiting class ranking since the mid-2000s:

2011: #2 in the country
2010: #9
2009: #8 (didn't include Andre when they ranked it, so it's really higher)
2008: #11
2007: #3
2006: #3
2005: #2

It just so happens that the 2008 recruiting class is this year's senior class. But putting that aside, where's the lull? Do you really expect us to be the top recruiting class every single year?

FWIW, our recruiting was unranked in 2000, 2001, and 2003, so you don't need to bring in the top class every year to succeed.



Do you believe that the more talented team wins every game they play? If not, then you have to accept that the more talented team is going to lose sometimes.



On the 2011-2012 team, out of our ten active scholarship players, we have eight (8) players who were ranked in the top 32 of their class, according to RSCI (I'm including Andre who was around #15 before he re-classified), plus a player who made 3rd team All-ACC this year.

We're recruiting at the highest level. Do you really expect every player we recruit to be top ten? If so, do you really expect we'll get them all?

Seriously. You can only write some of the stuff appearing in this thread if you forget the 2011 even existed. That was an absolutely monster team tripped up by bad injury luck. Kyrie stays healthy all year--we annihilate people and are the odds-on favorite to win the title. Kyrie doesn't come back--we might still have won the title. I cannot believe this stupid, overentitled thread exists.

[SoCalDukeFan]

If Kyrie had come back, then he would have driven and dished to Mason and Miles and we would be talking about their improvement.

If Austin would have passed more, maybe the same thing.

If Barnes and Henson go to the NBA then UNC-CH probably has a weak season.

Andre's shooting problems at the end of the season really hurt.

I know its a lot of ifs and if I had wings I could fly or something, but I am not as pessimistic as some.

It is hard in today's game to maintain a high level of play year after year with student-athletes.

My biggest concern about this year is that our play regressed at the end of the season and that our defense was not very good. I would hope that the coaching staff tries to figure out what happened and how to fix it.

SoCal

[Mudge]

How did we get to what state? We lost a first round NCAA tournament game. That's all. How does that mean all these other programs are outcompeting us?

Here are some top programs and their latest failures:

UNC missed the tournament entirely in 2010.
Kentucky missed the tournament entirely in 2009; had a first round loss in 2008.
Ohio State had 1st round loss in 2009; missed the tournament entirely in 2008.
UCLA missed the tournament entirely in 2012; missed the tournament entirely in 2010.
Florida had a first round loss in 2010; missed the tournament entirely in 2008 and 2009.
Syracuse had a 2nd round loss in 2011; missed the tournament entirely in 2008.
UConn had a first round loss in 2012; missed the tournament entirely in 2010; had a first round loss in 2008.
Louisville had a first round loss in 2010 and 2011.
Kansas had a 2nd round loss in 2010.
Georgetown had a 2nd round loss in 2012; 1st round loss in 2010 and 2011; missed tournament entirely in 2009.


If one embarrassing early round loss means you're not competing, there are a whole lot of teams who aren't competing these days.



According to RSCI, here are Duke's recruiting class ranking since the mid-2000s:

2011: #2 in the country
2010: #9
2009: #8 (didn't include Andre when they ranked it, so it's really higher)
2008: #11
2007: #3
2006: #3
2005: #2

It just so happens that the 2008 recruiting class is this year's senior class. But putting that aside, where's the lull? Do you really expect us to be the top recruiting class every single year?

FWIW, our recruiting was unranked in 2000, 2001, and 2003, so you don't need to bring in the top class every year to succeed.



Do you believe that the more talented team wins every game they play? If not, then you have to accept that the more talented team is going to lose sometimes.



On the 2011-2012 team, out of our ten active scholarship players, we have eight (8) players who were ranked in the top 32 of their class, according to RSCI (I'm including Andre who was around #15 before he re-classified), plus a player who made 3rd team All-ACC this year.

We're recruiting at the highest level. Do you really expect every player we recruit to be top ten? If so, do you really expect we'll get them all?

Yes, with Coach K's record of success, I do think he should try to have a Top-5 recruiting class every year-- even more so, now that he has conceded that he is bringing in players who may stay only one year-- he cannot afford to go even a year without bringing in a player who turns out to be a Top 5-10 overall player, if he wants to compete on an even basis with UNC's talent (and now Kentucky's) because he is likely to lose that very player, the very next year. Although Rivers was not a like for like replacement for Irving, at least there was some comparability in those two players' overall rankings, which gave Duke some hope of matching UNC's talent base this year... unless Duke gets Zeigler Muhammad (and he turns out to be all that and a bag of chips), Duke is going to have a very difficult time reaching the level to which they once were accustomed, next year.

As for the most talented team winning, yes I expect that to happen most of the time-- that's what usually does happen. In the NCAA tournament, it is so rare for a #2 to lose to a #15 seed (reflective of talent disparity), that it had only happened about 6 times previously to this year, and not for about 6 years until Duke and Missouri this year. Moreover, when the more talented team does lose, it is because they usually played with a cocky or entitled attitude, and failed to give maximum effort-- when Duke was on its best string of tournament successes, it rarely ever got beat on effort-- they played SO hard, that they willed themselves to wins, even over teams with more talent (let alone teams with lesser talent). But clearly, even the players on this Duke team did not feel that they played as hard as they are capable of, as was clearly described after the Lehigh game, by Austin Rivers and Miles Plumlee-- pretty shocking that the Duke hallmark, of supreme effort wasn't even there, to go along with the superior talent that Duke fielded in that game-- I didn't expect Duke to start being one of these early round mortality statistics as a direct result of not putting forth the maximum effort-- that had always been the one thing Duke could be counted on for, through thick and thin, high talent or low talent.

In my opinion, there has been a lull recently; I do not think that a team that plays Hairston or Thornton for significant minutes can realistically expect to compete on an even footing with the best teams regularly, any more than UNC can compete at that level with Stillman White at PG-- and in fact, that is the most crucial position-- if Duke does not have a top-flight PG, who can both stop the other teams' top PGs, when on defense, and beat the other teams' top PGs off the dribble on offense, it is going to be very hard for Duke to compete at the level that Coach K hopes for-- all the best K/Duke teams had this, Amaker/Dawkins, Hurley, Wojo/Avery, Williams/Duhon, Scheyer/Smith-- and this team doesn't even begin to have a comparable player/pair. I saw Boeheim say recently that he's really never seen a really good team that didn't have a good PG-- and I find it hard to argue with him.

I've said before that there WAS a Golden Era in Duke Basketball recruiting-- it was at the end of the last century, when Duke was fielding Brand, Battier, Langdon, Avery, Maggette, Carrawell, James, etc., and bringing in Boozer, Dunleavy, Williams, Duhon (and as yet, had no expectation of losing any of those players, so hence was expecting to field all or most of those players simultaneously), and then after losing a number of early departures, was fielding Boozer, Dunleavy, Williams, Duhon, plus Jones, Ewing, etc., and had Redick, Williams, Randolph in the offing... but after that period, Duke has started to spread their recruiting gems ever farther apart, and has not had the kind of talent surplus, to compete on even terms regularly (talent-wise) with UNC for some time now-- particularly when it comes to big men. Shelden is the last one who really panned out, and developed into a big-time low-block scorer (and defender, obviously)... K/Duke are trying to do it with smoke and mirrors, if they think they are going to win championships and go to Final Fours with Hairston, Thornton, (and for different reasons, Dawkins, Plumlee, and probably Gbinje, and Cook) playing major minutes... K is good enough at motivating his troops that sometimes it will still work out (as it did once this year, and once in Hansborough's last year), but Duke will always be fighting an uphill battle, unless the current trend in recruiting is reversed to recapture the trend of the late-90's/early 2000's.

[Mudge]

If you're going to be this condescending, you really ought to have at least some idea what you're talking about. Lance Thomas has played double-figure minutes for the Hornets for 12 consecutive games, averaging 18 minutes a game over that time and averaging almost 7 ppg and almost 3 rpg.

I stand corrected on this relatively small matter-- it doesn't really change the overall argument a wit. I note that the Hornets are having a fine season, and I am sure that Lance is making a big difference in their league success.

[Kedsy]

I stand corrected on this relatively small matter-- it doesn't really change the overall argument a wit. I note that the Hornets are having a fine season, and I am sure that Lance is making a big difference in their league success.

Wow, more condescension. You said you couldn't imagine Lance as an NBA player. Now it matters whether he plays on a winner or not? And you expect people to take your arguments seriously?


Yes, with Coach K's record of success, I do think he should try to have a Top-5 recruiting class every year...

Of course he tries. Everyone tries. But just because he's missed two years out of seven doesn't mean we're in a recruiting "lull."


... but after that period, Duke has started to spread their recruiting gems ever farther apart, and has not had the kind of talent surplus, to compete on even terms regularly (talent-wise) with UNC for some time now--

We haven't been able to compete on even terms with UNC for some time now? Head-to-head we've won 5 of the last 7 games with them, and we've had significantly better teams than UNC two of the last three years.

[Sir Stealth]

I wish this board would just have one single "wailing and gnashing of teeth because we had a bad loss" thread. Saying that Duke has been on a downward trend is completely absurd. We won the national championship in 2010. It is 2012. Our 2011 team was a loaded team that, had it's best player stayed healthy, could have easily been a once-in-a-generation type dominant squad. Even without it's best player, it was an ACC Championship team. It faced a difficult situation with reintegrating a key injured player right as the NCAA tournament started, but absolutely nothing about that team suggested that the program was on a downward trend.

It can make a person dizzy reading criticisms that say that we aren't recruiting well on the one hand and then say that we underperformed the most given our talent on the other. I would say that the latter is much more fair for this season given the Lehigh loss, but ONLY for that one loss, because the team had a largely successful season with wins over many of the good teams that we supposedly don't have the talent to compete with now. It is absurd to say that Duke has an institutional talent gap. The year after losing the number 1 overall pick, another first rounder who was 1st team All-American, and an all-time great within the program who was a top 10 recruit coming out of high school, we still were absolutely loaded with McDonalds All-Americans relative to other teams. We will lose two more first round picks after this year and still have 4 McDonald's AAs on the roster next year, with an additional 3 players (Dawkins, Gbinije, and Murphy) who probably would have been had they progressed through high school in the standard time, and that doesn't even count Seth Curry and his pedigree.

Top level talent is going to ebb and flow year to year, but Duke's has ebbed and flowed much less than any other program in the entire country. The loss to Lehigh was very disappointing, but one loss at the end of a year that was largely successful does not come close to an institutional decline in the program. I personally don't think Shane Ryan ever sounds like he knows what he's talking about, and my opinion didn't change with the Grantland article saying that our program was in decline because our recent NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP somehow didn't fully count, or something. I think that he is a poor representative of our fanbase. I wish people would have a little more perspective before they declare our program to be broken.

[Sir Stealth]

We haven't been able to compete on even terms with UNC for some time now? Head-to-head we've won 5 of the last 7 games with them, and we've had significantly better teams than UNC two of the last three years.

The selective amnesia that seems to be going around is hard to understand. Some people seem to have much more vivid memories of 2007 and 2008 than they do 2010 and 2011.

[ncexnyc]

I guess this must be the counter thread to the optimism one.

Mudge, I'm curious what you felt the ceiling was for this team? I know the vast majority of board members, even those with the thickest, deepest shade of blue lens possible, knew this team had way too many question marks entering the season.

I think you'll also find a number of people starting to acknowledge that the World Tour enabled us to get a jump on a number of the other programs and that contributed to our early season wins and why we got as high as we did in the rankings. Now you might ask, "How did we manage to stay ranked so high?" Well the answer is simple. The team never collapsed and the losses didn't look bad to the casual viewer. The OSU loss was on the road to a highly touted team. The Temple loss was another road game and the score was close. FSU was a buzzer beater after they had smoked UNC. Miami was an OT game. Throw in key wins against UNC and FSU, both away games and it's easy to see why we could still be in the top 10.

Was this a balanced team? No, it wasn't lots of similar parts. Can you blame the Coach for this? Yes, you may if that's how you want to play it. Do I? No I don't. Player develpment isn't an exact science and you can never tell what happens due to players transfering, which has hit us recently.

So considering what we had coming into the season and what our final record was, I'm happy with the year. Does the way it ended sit well with me? No it doesn't, but that's the way the cards were dealt to us.

[Matches]

Top level talent is going to ebb and flow year to year, but Duke's has ebbed and flowed much less than any other program in the entire country. The loss to Lehigh was very disappointing, but one loss at the end of a year that was largely successful does not come close to an institutional decline in the program. I personally don't think Shane Ryan ever sounds like he knows what he's talking about, and my opinion didn't change with the Grantland article saying that our program was in decline because our recent NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP somehow didn't fully count, or something. I think that he is a poor representative of our fanbase. I wish people would have a little more perspective before they declare our program to be broken.

One can believe our program has shortcomings or flaws without declaring it to be "broken". Pointing out and/or discussing those flaws doesn't qualify one as an alarmist. In recent years we have struggled to recruit space-eating big men and playmaking PGs. (Kyrie of course was the exception - but the exception doesn't disprove the rule.) K is of course still recruiting at a high level, and our program is performing at a high level. But over the last few years, K has not had as much success putting together complete teams as he has had at times in the past. To some extent that's an unfair comparison, because some past teams were insanely loaded, far beyond what is reasonable to expect - but it does represent a change. It's not unreasonable to point out that change and discuss its causes and/or implications.

[60's Devil]

I have to say thanks to Mudge for taking off the rose colored glasses that a lot of us are wearing and pointing out the honest truth. We are ,unfortunately, in a recruiting lull. Hopefully we will get at least one of the three offers still out . If we continue like we are, losses next year to FSU and N.C. State will bring the situation to a head and we may be referring to this period as the lull before the storm. Thanks to the mods for letting this thread live.

[dcdevil2009]

I've said before that there WAS a Golden Era in Duke Basketball recruiting-- it was at the end of the last century, when Duke was fielding Brand, Battier, Langdon, Avery, Maggette, Carrawell, James, etc., and bringing in Boozer, Dunleavy, Williams, Duhon (and as yet, had no expectation of losing any of those players, so hence was expecting to field all or most of those players simultaneously), and then after losing a number of early departures, was fielding Boozer, Dunleavy, Williams, Duhon, plus Jones, Ewing, etc., and had Redick, Williams, Randolph in the offing... but after that period, Duke has started to spread their recruiting gems ever farther apart, and has not had the kind of talent surplus, to compete on even terms regularly (talent-wise) with UNC for some time now-- particularly when it comes to big men. Shelden is the last one who really panned out, and developed into a big-time low-block scorer (and defender, obviously)... K/Duke are trying to do it with smoke and mirrors, if they think they are going to win championships and go to Final Fours with Hairston, Thornton, (and for different reasons, Dawkins, Plumlee, and probably Gbinje, and Cook) playing major minutes... K is good enough at motivating his troops that sometimes it will still work out (as it did once this year, and once in Hansborough's last year), but Duke will always be fighting an uphill battle, unless the current trend in recruiting is reversed to recapture the trend of the late-90's/early 2000's.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like your problem might not be with our recruiting, but with our evaluation of incoming recruits. In what you describe as the Golden Era of Duke Basketball recruiting, our incoming classes were ranked similarly to our recent incoming classes. Likewise, we're still getting top 5 level recruits on a very consistent basis (Deng, McRoberts, Singler, Austin, and Kyrie) and surrounding them with top 25 level guys (Kelly, Plumlee, Smith, Zoubek, Elliot Williams, Thomas, Zoubek, Paulus and others). The biggest difference isn't that we're failing to sign guys, it's that in the past the guys who stayed developed to meet or exceed their high school rankings, while for whatever reason, some of our recent recruits haven't done so or have transferred. It might have been that we got really lucky in the late '90s/early '00s or really unlucky recently, but in either case, I don't see it as a problem with Coach K ability to sign recruits (but it could hint at an issue identifying who to recruit).

Another possibility is that our perceptions are skewed by what's happened in Chapel Hill recently. While we've been consistent year-to-year with our recruiting, team success, and early departures, Roy's only been consistent in his recruiting. As a result, he's underperformed with more talented teams, and in turn (as well as a Ty Lawson DUI) he's managed to get multiple years from guys who would have been lottery picks - probably not a strategy he's done intentionally. One the other hand we've been getting similarly ranked recruits each year with potential one and domes who have succeeded individually as a part of the team, but we're only getting a year from them. Maybe if they hadn't played as well as freshmen, we'd get them as sophomores, but I'd rather get the most out of what we have every year. I mean would you trade an incredibly disappointing NIT year with last year's team to possibly add Kyrie to this year's team? Personally, I wouldn't.

[Mudge]

Wow, more condescension. You said you couldn't imagine Lance as an NBA player. Now it matters whether he plays on a winner or not? And you expect people to take your arguments seriously?



Of course he tries. Everyone tries. But just because he's missed two years out of seven doesn't mean we're in a recruiting "lull."



We haven't been able to compete on even terms with UNC for some time now? Head-to-head we've won 5 of the last 7 games with them, and we've had significantly better teams than UNC two of the last three years.

If I'm an NBA GM, and I watched Lance Thomas in college, I don't think I want him playing regular minutes for my NBA squad-- not if I expect to be a good team-- just as I don't think Duke can expect to compete for a Final Four or National Championship with our current starting point guard (unless maybe he is surrounded by 4 reputed NBA lottery picks, as Stillman White is alleged to have nearly been)... so yes, I anticipate this argument, that has virtually nothing to do with whether Lance Thomas enjoys a short stint in the NBA, to be taken seriously-- obviously, it has been, given the number of other posters on this thread who have taken it seriously by posting variations of their agreement with some or all of the points I raised here, despite the reflexive gainsaying posture that you can be counted on for.

You are entitled to your opinion, and I to mine-- I don't think a team that features certain current players playing anything more than spot duty can realistically contend for the national championship-- any more than I thought a team that started Greg Paulus at PG could do so. If you don't think Duke is in a recruiting lull, rest content in your conviction; meanwhile, I will not relish the thought of playing teams like this year's Final Four teams (next year) with several of this year's players playing big minutes... one of those players had his moment of glory vs. Kansas this year-- don't expect lightning to strike twice in the same place. I don't care what the numerical rankings of the recruiting classes say beforehand-- I know what my eyes are showing me, and Duke has had more than its share of highly-ranked recruits recently who apparently are not living up to their advance billing.

As for UNC, most people felt that they had significantly more talent than Duke in 2007, 2008, 2009, and was at least equal in 2011; 2010 favored Duke, as Duke benefitted from UNC's early departures, more than UNC did from Duke's. Duke has won 5 of 7-- which is a credit to K's coaching, but does not mean that Duke was competing with equal talent in all those games, which is what I actually claimed earlier. This year, UNC had more talent, but Duke managed a split, against the odds, by stealing one at UNC, when UNC got complacent at the end-- otherwise, UNC would have swept, and probably (if Kelly doesn't get hurt) would have met and beaten Duke a third time in the ACC tournament. In 2011, the talent was roughly equal, but Duke got 2 of 3-- again, credit to K getting more out of his talent than Williams. In 2010, Duke had a big talent advantage (the one big aberration in the recent trend), and made it stand up for a sweep. To me, it was clear that UNC had more talent in 2008 and 2009, and probably in 2007-- and for Duke to steal a win off UNC in those years was another coaching coup for K-- not a sign that the talent was equal. At no time, in the last 6 years (since Shelden graduated) have I felt that Duke had anywhere near the big-man talent that UNC has had, which is in fact a key point in the Grantland article referenced in this thread. If you are keeping score on talent, that's four out of the last six years that UNC was playing with a talent advantage, one year that was about even, and one that favored Duke-- I call that a talent lull, compared to Duke's Golden Era of the turn of the Millenium.

[CDu]

I have to say thanks to Mudge for taking off the rose colored glasses that a lot of us are wearing and pointing out the honest truth. We are ,unfortunately, in a recruiting lull. Hopefully we will get at least one of the three offers still out . If we continue like we are, losses next year to FSU and N.C. State will bring the situation to a head and we may be referring to this period as the lull before the storm. Thanks to the mods for letting this thread live.

I'm not sure I agree that we're in a lull. We're still landing top-20 players every year (usually multiple of them) and getting top 5-10 players almost every year. We're not getting the tall, athletic wings as often as we used to, but we're not in a recruiting lull.

And with regard to the predictions for next year, I don't think you've paid much attention to whom FSU is losing. They'll lose all of their bigs and two of their guards. Basically, they'll have Snaer, White, Miller, Shannon, and a bunch of freshmen/transfers. They won't be nearly as intimidating inside as they were this year, and they won't be nearly as experienced on the perimeter.

[_Gary]

One can believe our program has shortcomings or flaws without declaring it to be "broken". Pointing out and/or discussing those flaws doesn't qualify one as an alarmist. In recent years we have struggled to recruit space-eating big men and playmaking PGs. (Kyrie of course was the exception - but the exception doesn't disprove the rule.) K is of course still recruiting at a high level, and our program is performing at a high level. But over the last few years, K has not had as much success putting together complete teams as he has had at times in the past. To some extent that's an unfair comparison, because some past teams were insanely loaded, far beyond what is reasonable to expect - but it does represent a change. It's not unreasonable to point out that change and discuss its causes and/or implications.

Very well stated. I concur with this.

[Mudge]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like your problem might not be with our recruiting, but with our evaluation of incoming recruits. In what you describe as the Golden Era of Duke Basketball recruiting, our incoming classes were ranked similarly to our recent incoming classes. Likewise, we're still getting top 5 level recruits on a very consistent basis (Deng, McRoberts, Singler, Austin, and Kyrie) and surrounding them with top 25 level guys (Kelly, Plumlee, Smith, Zoubek, Elliot Williams, Thomas, Zoubek, Paulus and others). The biggest difference isn't that we're failing to sign guys, it's that in the past the guys who stayed developed to meet or exceed their high school rankings, while for whatever reason, some of our recent recruits haven't done so or have transferred. It might have been that we got really lucky in the late '90s/early '00s or really unlucky recently, but in either case, I don't see it as a problem with Coach K ability to sign recruits (but it could hint at an issue identifying who to recruit).

Another possibility is that our perceptions are skewed by what's happened in Chapel Hill recently. While we've been consistent year-to-year with our recruiting, team success, and early departures, Roy's only been consistent in his recruiting. As a result, he's underperformed with more talented teams, and in turn (as well as a Ty Lawson DUI) he's managed to get multiple years from guys who would have been lottery picks - probably not a strategy he's done intentionally. One the other hand we've been getting similarly ranked recruits each year with potential one and domes who have succeeded individually as a part of the team, but we're only getting a year from them. Maybe if they hadn't played as well as freshmen, we'd get them as sophomores, but I'd rather get the most out of what we have every year. I mean would you trade an incredibly disappointing NIT year with last year's team to possibly add Kyrie to this year's team? Personally, I wouldn't.

This could be a valid point-- maybe it is more about how recruits turned out, than how highly they were acclaimed coming in (the Paulus phenomenon)-- we had a lull in the mid-2000's where players did not live up to the reputations that preceded them, and perhaps that is all that is happening now...

But I guess I would ask: Why was Duke able to stockpile so much more talent in that 1998-2006 era, so that when a player like Burgess or Randolph didn't pan out, it didn't matter very much? Or possibly, more to the point: Why was Duke having a much higher success rate in converting highly-rated recruits into high performing players in that era-- the miscalculations or the failed-to-develop/progress rate seemed to be much lower than now, if we are to believe that the current crop is/was every bit as highly recruited (coming in) as the players of that era.

[MaxAMillion]

This could be a valid point-- maybe it is more about how recruits turned out, than how highly they were acclaimed coming in (the Paulus phenomenon)-- we had a lull in the mid-2000's where players did not live up to the reputations that preceded them, and perhaps that is all that is happening now...

But I guess I would ask: Why was Duke able to stockpile so much more talent in that 1998-2006 era, so that when a player like Burgess or Randolph didn't pan out, it didn't matter very much? Or possibly, more to the point: Why was Duke having a much higher success rate in converting highly-rated recruits into high performing players in that era-- the miscalculations or the failed-to-develop/progress rate seemed to be much lower than now, if we are to believe that the current crop is/was every bit as highly recruited (coming in) as the players of that era.

UNC was down. UNC has historically recruited better than Duke when they are winning. Carolina was the team getting high school all-americans left and right when Coach K took over from Coach Foster. Certainly Duke got highly touted players as well but not to the degree that UNC did when Coach Smith was there.

[Matches]

But I guess I would ask: Why was Duke able to stockpile so much more talent in that 1998-2006 era, so that when a player like Burgess or Randolph didn't pan out, it didn't matter very much? Or possibly, more to the point: Why was Duke having a much higher success rate in converting highly-rated recruits into high performing players in that era-- the miscalculations or the failed-to-develop/progress rate seemed to be much lower than now, if we are to believe that the current crop is/was every bit as highly recruited (coming in) as the players of that era.

Part of it is that K managed to bring in two absolutely loaded classes in a three-year period. We got three legit stars the classes of '97 (Brand, Battier, Avery) and '99 (J-Will, Dunleavy, Boozer). We haven't had a class since then that gave us three legit stars (and other than the Dawkins class I don't recall us having one prior to that). K was able to supplement those star-laden classes with smaller ones (Maggette in '98, Duhon in '00, Ewing in '01) without necessarily needing to bring in multiple impact players each year.

UNC's best years have included those types of classes as well (Felton, May, McCants in '02; Lawson, Ellington, Wright in '06). Roy also landed several two-star classes (Hanstravel/ Green in '05, Marshall/ Barnes in '10, Davis/ Zeller in '08).

It really doesn't take all that much talent for a college bball team to be "loaded" - our '01 and '04 teams both had elite talent but not 9-10 guy "abundance of riches" rotations. One or two home runs really go a long way.

[Kedsy]

As for UNC, most people felt that they had significantly more talent than Duke in 2007, 2008, 2009, and was at least equal in 2011; 2010 favored Duke, as Duke benefitted from UNC's early departures, more than UNC did from Duke's.

You and a handful of people in Chapel Hill were the only people who thought UNC was "at least equal" to Duke in 2011. Your suggestion that even if we beat them we're not "compet[ing] on an even basis with UNC's talent" makes no sense.

[Matches]

You and a handful of people in Chapel Hill were the only people who thought UNC was "at least equal" to Duke in 2011.

I think it was pretty close after Irving's injury. Pre-injury Duke was clearly superior.

[Sir Stealth]

One can believe our program has shortcomings or flaws without declaring it to be "broken". Pointing out and/or discussing those flaws doesn't qualify one as an alarmist. In recent years we have struggled to recruit space-eating big men and playmaking PGs. (Kyrie of course was the exception - but the exception doesn't disprove the rule.) K is of course still recruiting at a high level, and our program is performing at a high level. But over the last few years, K has not had as much success putting together complete teams as he has had at times in the past. To some extent that's an unfair comparison, because some past teams were insanely loaded, far beyond what is reasonable to expect - but it does represent a change. It's not unreasonable to point out that change and discuss its causes and/or implications.

I'd say it's splitting hairs to make a distinction between shortcomings, flaws, or being "broken." A lot of people making comments seem to feel that there has been a meaningful decline that must be corrected. My opinion would be that Kyrie absolutely does disprove your rule, considering that we are presumably talking about a relatively short period of time and he is looking, as the overwhelming favorite for ROY at age 19, like he could be the best example of a playmaking pg in the last decade or so. You can't ignore that or discount the fact that these conversations would likely all seem even more ludicrous, despite no changes in our recruiting whatsoever, had Kyrie not suffered a freak toe injury. I also would like to see us land more physical big men, I do personally believe that it is unreasonable to say that K has not had success putting together complete teams in the past few years when we won the national championship in 2010.

[BleedsP287]

I don't buy the argument that we lost because Ryan was a key player. Our players didn't play well, I don't think the coaches did a great job of getting our guys to play well. We'd been having that problem a lot lately, it isn't the lack of Ryan that did it. And I think if we played Lehigh 10 times we'd win 8 even spotting them this win. We did underperform in our last game. But we had some high points this season too. Every team has it's ups and downs, sucks, but we'll be back.

[Des Esseintes]

I think it was pretty close after Irving's injury. Pre-injury Duke was clearly superior.

I don't know why Duke would get points off for an in-season injury, but even without Irving Duke was clearly the better team. They beat Carolina two out of three head-to-head, and while Carolina took the regular season ACC crown, Duke's margin of victory over the course of conference play was significantly better than UNC's. At no point that season was UNC ranked higher than Duke, either in the polls or kenpom numbers. And, again, Duke was minus the #1 pick in the draft for all of that.

[Matches]

I don't know why Duke would get points off for an in-season injury, but even without Irving Duke was clearly the better team. They beat Carolina two out of three head-to-head, and while Carolina took the regular season ACC crown, Duke's margin of victory over the course of conference play was significantly better than UNC's. At no point that season was UNC ranked higher than Duke, either in the polls or kenpom numbers. And, again, Duke was minus the #1 pick in the draft for all of that.

UNC did win the regular season, and blew us out pretty convincingly in the game in CH. We of course blew them out the next week in the ACCT but the game in Durham came down to the last few seconds. Both teams were really good by the end of the year - I tend to agree we were better but the margin was thin.

It's not really about taking points-off - the Kyrie-less team was the one we fielded for most of the season.

[Des Esseintes]

UNC did win the regular season, and blew us out pretty convincingly in the game in CH. We of course blew them out the next week in the ACCT but the game in Durham came down to the last few seconds. Both teams were really good by the end of the year - I tend to agree we were better but the margin was thin.

It's not really about taking points-off - the Kyrie-less team was the one we fielded for most of the season.

Sure, but in state-of-the-program terms, Irving's injury should be a non-issue. It was a freak accident. It speaks to Duke's superiority over UNC that year that the team K assembled was still better than Carolina even after losing him. The margin was narrower, obviously, but we remained better. It's an absurdity--of Mudge's, not yours--to say that Carolina was "at least the equal" of Duke that season.

[Sir Stealth]

It's not really about taking points-off - the Kyrie-less team was the one we fielded for most of the season.

Except that this whole discussion was generated based on the idea that we haven't been bringing in the talent to match UNC in recent years, based on our recruiting, not on our ability to keep recruited players healthy. So the fact that we didn't have the number 1 player in the draft when facing UNC matters a great deal, as does the fact that we still beat them 2 out of 3 even without him, and decisively in the final rubber match on a neutral court.

[dcdevil2009]

This could be a valid point-- maybe it is more about how recruits turned out, than how highly they were acclaimed coming in (the Paulus phenomenon)-- we had a lull in the mid-2000's where players did not live up to the reputations that preceded them, and perhaps that is all that is happening now...

But I guess I would ask: Why was Duke able to stockpile so much more talent in that 1998-2006 era, so that when a player like Burgess or Randolph didn't pan out, it didn't matter very much? Or possibly, more to the point: Why was Duke having a much higher success rate in converting highly-rated recruits into high performing players in that era-- the miscalculations or the failed-to-develop/progress rate seemed to be much lower than now, if we are to believe that the current crop is/was every bit as highly recruited (coming in) as the players of that era.

I think there are a couple reasons for it, starting with the one and done rule. The players who were NBA ready (and some of the ones who weren't) could go straight of high school could go if they wanted. When a projected lottery pick went to school instead of the NBA, it showed how much he really wanted to be in school, even if only for a short time (Melo, for example). The guys who passed on the NBA out of high school seemed to be more likely to make that decision again. Jason Williams, for example chose college over the NBA once, and Duke over the NBA three times. Shaun Livingston chose Duke over any other college, but the NBA over Duke. I think this has hurt Duke on two fronts. First we're not getting as many of the players who would have gone straight out of high school because many of them view college as something of an obligation before they can get where they want. I don't mean to disparage Kentucky as an institution, but if I had little to no interest in college and was trying to go pro as soon as possible, it's more appealing than a school like Duke or Syracuse or even Georgetown. If you think you're a top-5 pick regardless of where you go to school, then you're probably less interested in the stuff Duke has to offer (academics, great coaching, etc.). Second, and this applies to everyone, when a player doesn't have a choice about going to college, I think it can cause problems in the way that players buy into the team concept. For a school like Duke, where the idea of "team" is so important, (and this might be a stretch) I can see it hurting the confidence and development of other players (Andre comes to mind) because the you're never going to be "the man" as an upperclassman if these one and done guys are always going to play ahead of you (the idea of "just be you" might lose some luster if "you" means backing up superstar recruit X).

For the top 25 level recruits and not living up to expectations, a possible reason for the perceived lack of development might be that our expectations now are different than our expectations pre-2006. For the top 5-10 level guys, they might have been not been developing in the NBA pre-2005 instead of not developing in college today. When a recruit isn't working out in college, he doesn't work out for four years and it's tough to get past it. Renardo Sidney comes to mind at Mississippi St. To a lesser extent, I think Josh McRoberts might have been that way for us. But back to the top 25 level guys, I think we're quicker to label players as busts today than we were pre-2006. With more impact players having to spend a year in college, the talent distribution has shifted from upperclassmen to freshmen and sophomores, meaning that there's more pressure on players to develop immediately. As a team that has relied so heavily on having a vocal leader and an extension of Coach K on the floor, we've sometimes sacrificed a more skilled point guard's minutes to get that leader out there. The downside is that without a good point guard to make everyone else better, it looks like no one has developed around him. In the Paulus years, I feel like Greg's leadership more than his basketball ability kept him on the floor, at least until someone was able to step up and fill that role. This year, I feel like the plan going in was to have Seth be that guy, but he was too quiet, and while Quinn was a better point guard than Tyler at the end of the year, Tyler's leadership earned him the job.

And finally, I think there's also a certain degree of luck associated with which recruits pan out. When you're trying to project what will happen with a bunch of high school kids, albeit very talented ones, it's amazing that Burgess and Randolph were the only major and semi-major miscalculations from that '98 to '05 timespan.

[BlueandWhite]

I wish this board would just have one single "wailing and gnashing of teeth because we had a bad loss" thread. Saying that Duke has been on a downward trend is completely absurd. We won the national championship in 2010. It is 2012. Our 2011 team was a loaded team that, had it's best player stayed healthy, could have easily been a once-in-a-generation type dominant squad. Even without it's best player, it was an ACC Championship team. It faced a difficult situation with reintegrating a key injured player right as the NCAA tournament started, but absolutely nothing about that team suggested that the program was on a downward trend.

It can make a person dizzy reading criticisms that say that we aren't recruiting well on the one hand and then say that we underperformed the most given our talent on the other. I would say that the latter is much more fair for this season given the Lehigh loss, but ONLY for that one loss, because the team had a largely successful season with wins over many of the good teams that we supposedly don't have the talent to compete with now. It is absurd to say that Duke has an institutional talent gap. The year after losing the number 1 overall pick, another first rounder who was 1st team All-American, and an all-time great within the program who was a top 10 recruit coming out of high school, we still were absolutely loaded with McDonalds All-Americans relative to other teams. We will lose two more first round picks after this year and still have 4 McDonald's AAs on the roster next year, with an additional 3 players (Dawkins, Gbinije, and Murphy) who probably would have been had they progressed through high school in the standard time, and that doesn't even count Seth Curry and his pedigree.

Top level talent is going to ebb and flow year to year, but Duke's has ebbed and flowed much less than any other program in the entire country. The loss to Lehigh was very disappointing, but one loss at the end of a year that was largely successful does not come close to an institutional decline in the program. I personally don't think Shane Ryan ever sounds like he knows what he's talking about, and my opinion didn't change with the Grantland article saying that our program was in decline because our recent NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP somehow didn't fully count, or something. I think that he is a poor representative of our fanbase. I wish people would have a little more perspective before they declare our program to be broken.

Not sure what to add to your solid post, and agree that people need to take a step back and have perspective on the entire picture.

This year's ending was a disappointment, but the entire season was by no means disappointing and honestly, Duke did better than I'd expected given the players we'd lost and question marks as you correctly point out. Regarding 2011, we should only be disappointed because we didn't get to see what COULD HAVE BEEN had Kyrie played all year -- and, even then, what guarantee is there that Duke would've again made the Final Four, let alone won the title (the two most disappointing losses in Duke basketball history:1986-Louisville, NCAA title game, and 1999-UConn, NCAA title game), because you just never know what can happen in the tournament, and the best team doesn't always win even when it gets to the final game (see also, 1983, NCSU v. Houston, 1985-Georgetown v. Villanova, and many other more recent examples).

Duke is one of the most recent winners of the NCAA tournament -- rare air that we breathe, we Duke fans. Look at a school with a great tradition like Indiana that had to go through their recent coaching debacle and sink to the bottom of their league -- Duke hasn't had anything close to this happen during Coach K's tenure. It may be another 3, 4 or 5 years before Duke even gets to the Final Four again -- but, there is probably a close to 100% chance that during the decade of the 2010's Duke will continue to have consecutive 20+ game winning teams and top 3 ACC finishes...and certainly several ACC regular season and tournament champions. There is no reason why can't and won't Duke have another team like 92, 99 or 01, or what would probably have been in 2011...it might not be next year, but it probably won't be too long before Duke is again an odds-on favorite to win it all again.

[loldevilz]

Lance Thomas is an NBA player? I must have missed his promotion, as last I heard he was roaming the D-League somewhere... I can't imagine that he is playing any meaningful minutes for even the lower echelon teams in the NBA.

You don't see my point? OK, explicitly, many close observers of college basketball (including analysts of far more insight than the dunces cited above, people like Bilas and Hubert Davis) were not that impressed with Duke this year-- Duke was not awe-inspiring or fear-inducing as a team this year-- to Florida State, NC State, Virginia Tech, Temple, or even Lehigh-- those teams all looked forward to playing Duke this year, because they knew that Duke was vulnerable, and they wanted to get a famous scalp, when the getting was good-- nobody was afraid of playing Duke; they relished the opportunity-- is that clear enough?

Lance Thomas is an NBA and he will be the best NBA player from the 2010 team. He started the last game for the Hornets and he has been giving them great minutes as an athletic defender.

[heyman25]

I look at our team compared to UK, and I see the disparity pretty clearly. Kentucky has incredibly versatile players at the 2-4 spots on the floor. Jones can play either forward spot. Kidd-Gilchrest can play SG, SF, or PF. Miller can play SG or SF. Lamb off the bench can play PG, SG, SF. All five starters and their sixth man are capable of initiating transition offense once they get the ball (even Davis - the C).

It's that type of length, athleticism, and versatility that have been missing. This year, we had probably 3 players on the roster who had that type of length, athleticism, and versatility. One was Rivers. The other two were Murphy and Gbinije, but neither were apparently ready to contribute this year enough to oust the veteran wing players on the team. And while Rivers was versatile, he had his limitations too (couldn't play off the ball, couldn't distribute).

The rest of the team was pretty limited. The Plumlees were capable against bigs but lacked quickness and offensive polish. Kelly could shoot but struggled a lot against quicker players and didn't show much post game. Curry could shoot and occasionally drive but struggled against taller physical guards. Dawkins could shoot. Thornton could see the floor and was a great off-ball defender but struggled offensively. Cook showed offensive promise but was limited by height and perhaps lingering knee issues. And nobody outside of (occasionally) Rivers could consistently defend against dribble penetration.

The 2010 team was an anomaly, but only in that those senior bigs finally figured things out. We had defensive versatility at 4 spots with that team. We had offensive versatility from 3 players. We had no perimeter depth and thus were fortunate not to face adversity there, but the starters fit the ideals perfectly (tall, long, and defensively versatile). Had those guys figured it out a year or two earlier (and had we switched PG earlier as well), we might have made some tournament noise sooner.

I hope that some of the following things happen the next several months (in no particular order):
1. Gbinije and Murphy make big strides and emerge as key players
2a. We get Oriakhi (and he's eligible right away) to add athleticism and toughness in the absence of Miles and (presumably) Mason
2b. We get Mason back for his senior year
3. We get Zeigler (and he's eligible right away) or Muhammad
4. Sulaimon is an impact player on the wing both offensively and defensively
5. Dawkins gets MUCH stronger with the ball and improves his focus and defense
6. Curry gets stronger with the ball and can become a scoring PG
7. Cook gets healthy and can be an ACC-caliber starting PG

It would be REALLY nice if several of those things could happen so that we can improve our versatility and not be so much of a one-trick pony as we were this year (even though that trick was fairly effective for a while).

Dawkins improving? 3 years he is basically the same player he was on the 2010 team. I would not hold my breath for that development.Cook was healthy in February and March. He may be the most important player that needs to improve in the off season.

[Troublemaker]

Re: Mason's eliteness.... he only averaged 15 points a game his senior year in high school. Tyler Zeller averaged 33 points a game his senior year. Everyone knows this right?

Mason was always destined to be inconsistent on offense because he doesn't have natural touch. His high recruiting ranking was mostly due to his height and leaping ability, not things that necessarily translate into becoming an offensive force.

If you took Mason and added more natural touch, more flexibility in his torso (has anyone watched Mason run? who runs like that?), and a wider base, he could become a great scorer. But there are some natural gifts missing with him.

Still, I am happy with his development for what he is. If he were to actually be around for his senior year, I think he'd become a good scorer, perhaps mid-teens in scoring average.

[heyman25]

Oh I certainly believe he has the ability to be elite. And there have definitely been times when he looked the part of elite. But even in that 9-9 game, Mason showed the limitations, committing four bad turnovers and looking a bit lost when the defense finally started doubling him.

I think Coach K wanted nothing more than to utilize Mason as an elite big man this year. But I think it was a combination of things that prevented it from happening, some of them on Mason (still not fully comfortable in the post and very few moves) and some not (inability/unwillingness of guards to properly feed him in the post).
Mason has no jump shot period!. He puts the ball on the floor too much. Most of the time it results in a turnover. He was 9 for 9 on dunks. Sometimes he misses those. Take your Duke blue glasses off.He blocks shots,but does not keep them in play. He has a million miles to go before he could be considered elite. Maybe he should go to the NBA to get better instruction on how to improve his game.

[loldevilz]

You and a handful of people in Chapel Hill were the only people who thought UNC was "at least equal" to Duke in 2011. Your suggestion that even if we beat them we're not "compet[ing] on an even basis with UNC's talent" makes no sense.

You have to be kidding me. In the final polls they finished 8 and we finished 7.

[Duvall]

You have to be kidding me. In the final polls they finished 8 and we finished 7.

The postseason coaches' poll? Well, that changes everything.

[CameronCrazy06]

I don't get where the complaints about Coach K's recruiting are coming from. We brought in the #2 class in America this season featuring three McDonalds All-Americans, and Alex Murphy probably would have been a fourth if he had remained in the 2012 class. Even if you take Austin Rivers out of the equation, this was still a great recruiting class. The year before that, we had the #6 class, featuring the #1 overall pick in the NBA Draft, Kyrie Irving. If you would rather us not go after big name recruits who have the chance of going one-and-done, that's fine; it seems to be the strategy Coach K took until he signed Irving, when he realized the college basketball recruiting game had changed and he needed to adapt. I know our recruiting class this year only has one player (a very good one might I add), but we still are in the running for three McDonald's All-Americans, and we also have two hold-overs from the 2011 class who red-shirted and will bolster our freshman class (we're basically bringing in one 5-star recruit and two 4-star recruits).

Also, transfers hurt our 2008 class badly, as I'm sure you all know. As we saw with both of their new schools, Elliot Williams and Olek Czyz were both very good basketball players that certainly could have contributed on this year's Duke team, but for one reason or another it didn't work out in Durham. With the lack of a full senior class, it was a good opportunity for our underclassmen to emerge as leaders, and we got a good idea of who had that in them and who didn't. I think this will pay dividends for the team next season, and I definitely don't think we will be "down" like many critics have hinted at; I think we will be in contention for an ACC championship just like we have the past five seasons. Whether this translates into tournament success is another story, and it's a long ways away.

[fgb]

If we had lengthy and atheltic wings, loss of Ryan Kelly would have hurt less.

gbinije is a lengthy and athletic wing.

[dcar1985]

I don't get where the complaints about Coach K's recruiting are coming from. We brought in the #2 class in America this season featuring three McDonalds All-Americans, and Alex Murphy probably would have been a fourth if he had remained in the 2012 class. Even if you take Austin Rivers out of the equation, this was still a great recruiting class. The year before that, we had the #6 class, featuring the #1 overall pick in the NBA Draft, Kyrie Irving. If you would rather us not go after big name recruits who have the chance of going one-and-done, that's fine; it seems to be the strategy Coach K took until he signed Irving, when he realized the college basketball recruiting game had changed and he needed to adapt. I know our recruiting class this year only has one player (a very good one might I add), but we still are in the running for three McDonald's All-Americans, and we also have two hold-overs from the 2011 class who red-shirted and will bolster our freshman class (we're basically bringing in one 5-star recruit and two 4-star recruits).

Also, transfers hurt our 2008 class badly, as I'm sure you all know. As we saw with both of their new schools, Elliot Williams and Olek Czyz were both very good basketball players that certainly could have contributed on this year's Duke team, but for one reason or another it didn't work out in Durham. With the lack of a full senior class, it was a good opportunity for our underclassmen to emerge as leaders, and we got a good idea of who had that in them and who didn't. I think this will pay dividends for the team next season, and I definitely don't think we will be "down" like many critics have hinted at; I think we will be in contention for an ACC championship just like we have the past five seasons. Whether this translates into tournament success is another story, and it's a long ways away.

If you think about it that way probably would have been a recruiting class of 5 McDonald's AA....only reason Mike G wasn't and the same reason Alex wouldn't have been one had he not reclassified is that they were 5th year seniors and didn't qualify...Im sure Alex would've been a Jordan Brand AA.....You'd have to be near crazy to think that's a lull in recruiting

[dcar1985]

gbinije is a lengthy and athletic wing.

You're seriously the first person besides myself to say that.....we had the athletic long wing everyone swears we need, for whatever reason he sat the bench most of the year though....I think K is the greatest coach ever but Mike and Quinn for that matter should've got more burn.

[OldPhiKap]

How did we get to this point?

I agree. How did we as a fanbase get so self-entitled and spoiled that we angst about recruiting classes outside the top five, and an early loss with a key player injured?

Good gravy.

[loldevilz]

How did we get to this point?

I agree. How did we as a fanbase get so self-entitled and spoiled that we angst about recruiting classes outside the top five, and an early loss with a key player injured?

Good gravy.

I agree that people are complaining way too much about recruiting, but Duke and other top bball schools are never accurately ranked. Just like many of our players were McD All-Americans because they chose Duke. To say that Thornton, Hairston, Irving class was top 5 is absurd, especially when you consider that Irving was a guaranteed 1-and-done.

[azzefkram]

You're seriously the first person besides myself to say that.....we had the athletic long wing everyone swears we need, for whatever reason he sat the bench most of the year though....I think K is the greatest coach ever but Mike and Quinn for that matter should've got more burn.

I couldn't agree more. Mike played about 100 minutes for the season.

[Wildcat]

If Mike was the athletic wing we need so bad; why did he log so few minutes? Mike must not have been ready; or his defense needed some fine tunning. Beats me

[gumbomoop]

... this whole discussion was generated based on the idea that we haven't been bringing in the talent to match UNC in recent years, based on our recruiting....

Many, many threads, in the end, reduce to Jderf's Law. To wit:


As a DBR discussion grows longer, the probability of a debate between UNC and Duke's current teams/rosters approaches 1.

[Devilsfan]

Mike G has to be as good at his position as Josh was at his and he's not undersized.

[dcar1985]

If Mike was the athletic wing we need so bad; why did he log so few minutes? Mike must not have been ready; or his defense needed some fine tunning. Beats me

I don't think he fully grasped the offense and at times looked like he didn't know exactly where to be....now the reason for that is beyond me, im not in the practices. Maybe he gets a better feel for things doing it in game versus practice.....my real point is that Mike has all those qualities we keep saying we need to get. I expect him to be big for us the next few years....

Not that it's everything but how many dunks did we get from our non bigs...I can think of 5 the whole season and two of them came from Mike in his limited minutes...I think he's going to bring that athleticism and defense to the 3 spot next year.

[GoingFor#5]

I think there are a couple issues at play here. First thing is that while we recruit great players, most of them specialize in long range shooting and don't give us any extra dimension. We need to recruit more slashers, skilled big man, etc. Just need a more well-balanced attack. I also think the NCAA tournament is poorly officiated which works against finesse teams such as Duke. In the spirit of "letting them play", less talented teams can get away with little bumps that should be fouls. It amazes me how NCAA tournament games always tend to be choppy with no flow because of this. This won't change, though, so the gameplan should be to recruit more athletic slashers and bangers down low to complement the outside shooting.

[Wildcat]

He will still be playing behind Kelly and maybe Dawk, Murphy and Plums3. Mike is going to have to work hard over the summer if he wants to get major burn next year. He may be 8th or 9th on depth chart.

[pfrduke]

I think there are a couple issues at play here. First thing is that while we recruit great players, most of them specialize in long range shooting and don't give us any extra dimension. We need to recruit more slashers, skilled big man, etc. Just need a more well-balanced attack. I also think the NCAA tournament is poorly officiated which works against finesse teams such as Duke. In the spirit of "letting them play", less talented teams can get away with little bumps that should be fouls. It amazes me how NCAA tournament games always tend to be choppy with no flow because of this. This won't change, though, so the gameplan should be to recruit more athletic slashers and bangers down low to complement the outside shooting.

Is there anyone other than potentially Andre Dawkins (and I would disagree that the description is applicable to him, but recognize grounds for reasonable disagreement) to whom this description is applicable? Not just on our current roster, but at any time in the past 6 years?

[GoingFor#5]

Is there anyone other than potentially Andre Dawkins (and I would disagree that the description is applicable to him, but recognize grounds for reasonable disagreement) to whom this description is applicable? Not just on our current roster, but at any time in the past 6 years?

Seth Curry. Perhaps he wasn't a specialist at one point so maybe my criticism should have been directed more towards the offense we run rather than the player's abilities coming to Duke.

[pfrduke]

Seth Curry. Perhaps he wasn't a specialist at one point so maybe my criticism should have been directed more towards the offense we run rather than the player's abilities coming to Duke.

Seth is an effective penetrator who scored a ton going to the rim (although he's not the best distributor in those situations). He also has a really nice mid-range game, and can get a shot for himself going one-on-one. He was also an extremely effective perimeter defender two seasons ago. He was less so this past season - not sure whether it was a drop in performance or the impact of no longer having Nolan with him in the backcourt.

I don't really think it's colorable to say that Seth brings no "extra dimension" beyond long-range shooting.

[Steven43]

Seth is an effective penetrator who scored a ton going to the rim (although he's not the best distributor in those situations). He also has a really nice mid-range game, and can get a shot for himself going one-on-one. He was also an extremely effective perimeter defender two seasons ago. He was less so this past season - not sure whether it was a drop in performance or the impact of no longer having Nolan with him in the backcourt.

I don't really think it's colorable to say that Seth brings no "extra dimension" beyond long-range shooting.

At one time this season I was basically in alignment with your current opinion of Seth. No longer. His play in the last few games did not in any way resemble what you describe it to be. And that was when we needed him the most.

[DukeDevilDeb]

Lance Thomas is an NBA player? I must have missed his promotion, as last I heard he was roaming the D-League somewhere... I can't imagine that he is playing any meaningful minutes for even the lower echelon teams in the NBA.

You don't see my point? OK, explicitly, many close observers of college basketball (including analysts of far more insight than the dunces cited above, people like Bilas and Hubert Davis) were not that impressed with Duke this year-- Duke was not awe-inspiring or fear-inducing as a team this year-- to Florida State, NC State, Virginia Tech, Temple, or even Lehigh-- those teams all looked forward to playing Duke this year, because they knew that Duke was vulnerable, and they wanted to get a famous scalp, when the getting was good-- nobody was afraid of playing Duke; they relished the opportunity-- is that clear enough?

Lance signed a contract for the rest of the year with the Hornets! Straight from their website:

42 Lance Thomas F 6-8 225 04/24/1988 Duke / USA R

Now please apologize to one of my very favorite Duke players of all time... never the elite best but someone who worked his behind off trying to be as good as he could.

[Kedsy]

To say that Thornton, Hairston, Irving class was top 5 is absurd, especially when you consider that Irving was a guaranteed 1-and-done.

Well, I don't think anybody said that. According to RSCI that class was ranked 9th.

[Steven43]

I agree that people are complaining way too much about recruiting, but Duke and other top bball schools are never accurately ranked. Just like many of our players were McD All-Americans because they chose Duke. To say that Thornton, Hairston, Irving class was top 5 is absurd, especially when you consider that Irving was a guaranteed 1-and-done.

I concur with your assessment of that ranking. Of course, Kyrie turned out to be the best recruit in the nation and though Josh and Tyler try very hard to compete, they don't seem to have the potential to put a class in the top 10, even with Kyrie's stellar talent. Tyler appears to resemble his ranking (outside the top 100), but Josh does not seem as athletic as you would expect someone with his ranking (19-36 range) to be.

[pfrduke]

At one time this season I was basically in alignment with your current opinion of Seth. No longer. His play in the last few games did not in any way resemble what you describe it to be. And that was when we needed him the most.

So the most recent 4-5 games tells you more about Seth Curry as a player than his previous 60 (at Duke, not to mention the 25-30 at Liberty)? Got it.

[Newton_14]

Kansas lost to Northern Iowa 2 years ago in the NCAA at full strength. Lost to VCU last year (a play in team) at full strength. Missouri lost to a 15 seed this year at full strength. UNC lost to Weber St a few years back at full strength, and to George Mason in 2006 at full strength.

Upsets happen in that tournament, and that high seed upset "bug" has bitten other big name schools far more often than it has bitten Duke. Heck, in 1986, Duke darn near lost to Mississippi Valley State in the very first game.

Duke had a bad tourney, without Kelly. The team they lost to had talent. They were not stiffs. UNC should have lost to Ohio. The days of taking that first game in the tourney for granted are long gone. Heck, UNC came within an eyelash of having a chance to make the Final Four this year, having never played a single digit seed. If State had pulled the upset against Kansas (and that game went to the wire), that scenario would have happened.


By game time of Duke/Lehigh, the line had dropped to 10. The basketball "experts" equated the matchup to Duke having to play a Virginia Tech or Clemson from the ACC. Duke still had to be off to lose the game, but they were indeed off. The longer the game stayed close, the tighter Duke became, and the looser Lehigh became.

If people thought that game was going to be an automatic blowout with Lehigh having no chance at all of winning, I find that more shocking than the fact that Lehigh pulled the upset.

[Steven43]

So the most recent 4-5 games tells you more about Seth Curry as a player than his previous 60 (at Duke, not to mention the 25-30 at Liberty)? Got it.

While Seth has played well at times in those previous 60 games, particularly in regard to his outside shooting, even that apparent strength has always been streaky. And as far as penetrating to the basket goes, he only showed that in a few games, particularly against NC State this year. On defense he does not have the quickness to stay in front of his man. So, while I do think he is a better player than he showed the last 4 games or so, I don't think he had consistently shown Duke-level greatness prior to those recent games. Really good free throw shooter, though. No doubt. As to your last comment, I'm not sure what Liberty has to do with this conversation. Perhaps you think Seth is the answer we are looking for at guard, and that's fine. I do think he could be a very good instant offense player to bring off the bench, but I don't think he should be starting at Duke.

[Kedsy]

Here's the thing -- take any timeframe you wish (e.g., for the past "n" seasons), more than two season and fewer than 28, and I'm pretty sure the following will be true: If you look at win/loss record in the regular season, Duke will be #1 (maybe #2 but I doubt it) in the country; if you look at post-season success, Duke will be in the top five in the nation; and if you look at recruiting success, Duke will be in the top three in the nation. Any timeframe. And that's not good enough for some people? How did we get to this point, indeed?

But what bothers me more about the attitude underlying this thread is, even if the above is not good enough for you, can you name even one thing that anybody could do that they aren't already doing to fix it? If you don't think our recruiting is good enough -- do you think Coach K isn't already trying his hardest to recruit the best he can? Do you think another coach could do it better than K at Duke? If you don't think our recruits are panning out -- do you think the players are intentionally trying to screw up? Do you think the coaching staff isn't doing their best to make all our players reach their potential? Do you think another coach could do better?

Assuming you don't think any of those things, then the question "how did we get to this point?" is nothing short of whining. And I don't see the point in whining in light of the amazing achievements outlined in the first paragraph, above. Just my opinion, of course.

[davekay1971]

How we got to this point:

NC State hired a guy named Everett Case who elevated NC State basketball, and the interest in basketball in North Carolina to an all-time high. UNC responded by hiring Frank McGuire, who brought a national championship to Chapel Hill. Duke, in an effort to keep pace, hired a Case assistant named Vic Bubas. Bubas, in turn, made Duke the best of the three Triangle teams.

After Bubas retired, Duke struggled to keep pace. While a previously unknown Jayhawk named Dean Smith returned UNC to national prominence and NC State enjoyed the talents of David Thompson and ended UCLA's dominance, Duke fell into a distant third. Bill Foster briefly elevated Duke back to the peak in 1978, but then he left, leaving little talent behind.

Duke hired a little-known coach from Army with no particular track record. There was much wailing, teeth-gnashing, and consternation in Durham, for the next 3 years. Then Mike Krzyzewski showed that he could recruit. And then that he could coach. In 1986, Duke announced that it was back, competing on even terms with UNC and NC State. For about a decade, Duke and UNC remained evenly matched as two of the top programs in America, while State failed to keep pace. Then Dean Smith retired, and Duke was left as the sole superpower in the ACC, until the prodigal son, Roy Williams, came home, and in 2005 he put UNC back on even standing with Duke. For 2 years (2008-2009), it looked as if he might surpass Duke, but in 2010 and 2011 Duke had the upper hand.

In 2012, UNC returned a stellar core of talent, while Duke graduated 2 all-time great seniors and the best freshman, possibly, to ever play in Durham (so good that he was the number 1 pick in the NBA and probable NBA ROY). Duke struggled to find a point guard or a on-court leader, but still managed a very good regular season, finishing number 2 in the ACC and top 10 in the nation. Duke played it's worst game of the season in the NCAA tournament, partially because of an injury to a critical starter, partially because they just played a lousy game against an inspired opponent.

And there was much wailing, teeth-gnashing, and consternation in Durham (and on the DBR, which, fortunately, wasn't around in 1981)

That's how Duke got to this point.

Addendum: Kedsy, you beat me to it, illustrating the point of my post much more succinctly. I'm not sure what "this point" is, but I'm sure it's an incredibly subjective "point" that I'm pretty happy with while others think is bordering on, to borrow Ol' Roy's term, a catastrophe.

[throatybeard]

How did we get to this point?

Indeed. How did we get to the point where, despite losing the top pick in the NBA draft and two guys who were in the discussion for jersey retirement, Coach K pilots a team to a Maui championship, to wins over Michigan, Michigan State and Kansas (a FF team), to miracle comebacks against North Carolina and a S16 NC State team, to a second place ACC finish...how did we come to the point where our fans are so whiny and spoiled that such a season is unacceptable? 27-7. A supposed grease fire.

Look, Lehigh was a mess. It was, but dang. This expectations game has gotten to be ridiculous.

[greybeard]

Re:Mason was always destined to be inconsistent on offense because he doesn't have natural touch.

If you took Mason and added more natural touch, more flexibility in his torso (has anyone watched Mason run? who runs like that?), and a wider base, he could become a great scorer. But there are some natural gifts missing with him.

None of these things were /are natural. When you are born, you have no innate, "naturable ability to do anything. Babies begin learning and continue the process of exploring movement with no prticular object in mind. They learn some pretty complicated things by the time they are less than one yea'rs old (absent some mental or physical developmental issues). When they begin to stand, it becomes an entirely different matter. People start teaching them. As kids grow older, in the last 20 years, "coaches" more and more o an ever more sophiscated level take away the ability of these kids to explore and learn at their own pass, chosing what works best for them. These coaches demand that they learn ever increasinuingly difficult tasks telling them what to do and when, and more importantly how. Those kids who have the time for free retain some of the freedom to explore and learn at their own speed. The ones who bring some self-learned gifts and catch a coach's eye receive more and more instruction, more telling them not only what to do, but how to do it. Learning is stultified.

Why is baseball so dominated by Dominicans, might it be that they have much more time to learn on the streets in their own time. The same for other cultures in which players don't get grabbed up for organized play until their teens. They contimue to develop the self learning skills that they had when they were kids.

Mason can learn to solften his ribs and spine, to move his pelvis more freely, to free his cervical spine and thus his head that will change how he uses his lower expremities, will learn how to corordinate himself better and acquire better and more refined concepts of what tasks are involved in say, shooting a basketball, if you reacquires the learning skills he began devveloping after birth while being presented with mental/challenges at low amplitute by a trained professional.

As it is, probably with lots of "how to coaching," he developed a killer lefty power move off the left block that he finished very effectively, if not very esthetically in front of the basket. He did it against some much taller players because of his strength, girth, quickness, leaping ability, leaning in, and power. He later showed a way to slowly work his was to the middle of the basket from the other side with a step slide and developed a pretty effective and much more conventional, arching hook shot that was also quite effective. Mason had a killer drop step when moving to his right either from the right block and from the foul line. He intercepted quite a few passes and got down the court on breaks to finish more than anyother player on the team.
He was a force on the boards, especially the defensive boards and was a more than decent help defender until he hit the wall into the second half f the year. The same thing happened to Singler, I think it was his freshman year.

For what it's worth, I think that Rivers' declaring makes it more likely he'll stay, unless he is assured of a decent first round slot. It is a long life, he'll make more than enough money through the game even if it means playing overseas, and won't be subject to the grind of the pros until he finishes his college experience.

Nothing stops K from inviting Mason to join the US team this summer and getting lots of opportinity, presumally, to one on one play with some of the pros (the type of activity to leads to self learning) and being exposed to greater offensive arranges that have him getting it on the move, etc. If K gives Mason the same type assurance he gave to Singler, that is, to feature Mason in a diffent type inside game after a summer of work, I think he stays. If that work includes regular, daily 45 minute sessions working on the type of things mentioned above in lieu of stretching, which is a static experience and as near as I can tell, and I did a whole, whole lot of Yoga in my time, teaches one very little about movement and nothing about how to develop a means of learning nes (old) ways of self-use.

As I've said, there is a PT on the staff of Duke University Hospital who is a pratitioner and has been involved in a peer tud in the Triangle to demonstrate how using this process can help older folks with balance, ambulation, getting in and out of sitting, turning, etc.

Since you think that Mason's ways of using himself are "natural" which says to me that you don't think that there is much room for improvement, what do they say about someone who has tried something multiple time without results, trying it again and expecting something different?

[Newton_14]

Mike G has to be as good at his position as Josh was at his and he's not undersized.

Yeah, darn that Coach K, sitting all the good players on the bench and playing the bad players just to keep us fans from winning another National Championship! How dare he deprive us of that God given right we so justly deserve!:cool:

on a serious note..
Look, I love Mike Gbinije, and I think he as good potential. I saw him play at the Summer League last year and was impressed with his physical tools. Dude can jump, has good length, and quickness. Watching him in the early season games though, you could tell he was trying to figure it out, but just wasn't there yet. Same for Murphy. Duke's defensive scheme's are incredibly hard to learn as a freshman. Many freshman before Mike with similar skills have struggled early in their career and blossomed year over year. Lance Thomas was like that, as was a host of others.

Mike got minutes this year and struggled when he was out there. He played in just about every game until, I believe, the Ga Tech game. At that point K cut the rotation and Mike starting getting DNP's. (On the Mark Gottfried show tonight, Gottfried mentioned the exact same thing happening to one of his players this season, and stated emphatically the guy "is going to help us next year, but just was not ready yet this year", and "I cut the rotation because I felt going with 7 guys gave my team the best chance to win") So it isn't just Duke where freshman are brought along at a different pace depending on where they are with their games.

After a few DNP's, K started using Mike situationally, as a defender, and Capel commented after one of those games that Gbinije had put in a lot of extra work, and was showing some improvement. Sure, K could have thrown him into the middle of the fire and force fed him 15-20 minutes a game, but why do that when you spend most of the year in first place in your league and in the Top 10 in the country, on a team that would finish 26-5 in the regular season?

Had Duke been 16-15 mired in the bottom of the conference, K may have very well thrown Mike in there to sink or swim. I suspect he did not play much because he wasn't ready yet. I also suspect next year will be a different deal.

What I don't suspect is that K sat Gbinije even though he was primed and ready to go out, play great defense, and avg 12 points a game. Given the glaring need for a forward that could help, I have a hard time believing K sat him, if he was in fact ready and able to make a big contribution. That does not make any sense at all.

[dcar1985]

Yeah, darn that Coach K, sitting all the good players on the bench and playing the bad players just to keep us fans from winning another National Championship! How dare he deprive us of that God given right we so justly deserve!:cool:

on a serious note..
Look, I love Mike Gbinije, and I think he as good potential. I saw him play at the Summer League last year and was impressed with his physical tools. Dude can jump, has good length, and quickness. Watching him in the early season games though, you could tell he was trying to figure it out, but just wasn't there yet. Same for Murphy. Duke's defensive scheme's are incredibly hard to learn as a freshman. Many freshman before Mike with similar skills have struggled early in their career and blossomed year over year. Lance Thomas was like that, as was a host of others.

Mike got minutes this year and struggled when he was out there. He played in just about every game until, I believe, the Ga Tech game. At that point K cut the rotation and Mike starting getting DNP's. (On the Mark Gottfried show tonight, Gottfried mentioned the exact same thing happening to one of his players this season, and stated emphatically the guy "is going to help us next year, but just was not ready yet this year", and "I cut the rotation because I felt going with 7 guys gave my team the best chance to win") So it isn't just Duke where freshman are brought along at a different pace depending on where they are with their games.

After a few DNP's, K started using Mike situationally, as a defender, and Capel commented after one of those games that Gbinije had put in a lot of extra work, and was showing some improvement. Sure, K could have thrown him into the middle of the fire and force fed him 15-20 minutes a game, but why do that when you spend most of the year in first place in your league and in the Top 10 in the country, on a team that would finish 26-5 in the regular season?

Had Duke been 16-15 mired in the bottom of the conference, K may have very well thrown Mike in there to sink or swim. I suspect he did not play much because he wasn't ready yet. I also suspect next year will be a different deal.

What I don't suspect is that K sat Gbinije even though he was primed and ready to go out, play great defense, and avg 12 points a game. Given the glaring need for a forward that could help, I have a hard time believing K sat him, if he was in fact ready and able to make a big contribution. That does not make any sense at all.

Totally agree with everything you said but you gotta think...as bad as Dawkins was towards the end of the year he could have seen some of those minutes and been at least equally as bad (I think he would've played better) and earned some experience and confidence at the same time.

[ncexnyc]

Totally agree with everything you said but you gotta think...as bad as Dawkins was towards the end of the year he could have seen some of those minutes and been at least equally as bad (I think he would've played better) and earned some experience and confidence at the same time.


Seems as if you never got the memo. Dre just had to stand in the corner and the opposition would put a couple of defenders on him to honor has shot.:D

[Des Esseintes]

Seems as if you never got the memo. Dre just had to stand in the corner and the opposition would put a couple of defenders on him to honor has shot.:D

Um, not sure why you think that's hilarious, because it is true. Nobody was double-teaming Dre, but if you saw teams disrespecting his shot, leaving him by his lonesome late in the season, you were watching different games than I was. People absolutely had to stay home on him. I'm not going to defend his play down the stretch--it wasn't great--but one thing he always helps with is spacing. There are limits to that usefulness, I fully admit.

[Kfanarmy]

Very true, and a point that many have missed when dissecting our season. Often I think it's assumed that a perimeter-oriented team (as we were) will be a good passing team. Wasn't true of us. Our best passer was Cook who wasn't on the floor much. After that, it was probably... Kelly? Actually Mason is a pretty good passer, but it's not like he can feed himself in the post.

The rest of our guards are not very good passers. Hopefully that's an area where they can improve over the summer, although to some extent passing is an instinctual skill that's hard to teach. I don't know if they are or not "good passers." I didn't see them try very much. Whether that is because of height issues trying to pass over and around players 1-3 inches taller or if it is because each wanted to be the focus the play...AR fought hard but tended to go find his own shot, AD wanted, perhaps needed, two or three consecutive screens to get open if the defense didn't simply fall asleep on him. In the last month he could be guarded by a broom. Hard to evaluate their passing ability when their willingness seemed so lacking.

[Kfanarmy]

How did we get to this point?

I agree. How did we as a fanbase get so self-entitled and spoiled that we angst about recruiting classes outside the top five, and an early loss with a key player injured?

Good gravy. that's not really a fair comment, and it ignores the fact that teams in Duke's basketball strata this year were able to move past their first game and win their way into the sweet sixteen with a key player out. I personally don't think it was/is a talent issue so much as an inability to get this year's group of guys to work together at the end of the season....now how Duke got there I think is an interesting question.

[gep]

Lance Thomas is an NBA and he will be the best NBA player from the 2010 team. He started the last game for the Hornets and he has been giving them great minutes as an athletic defender.


Lance signed a contract for the rest of the year with the Hornets! Straight from their website:

42 Lance Thomas F 6-8 225 04/24/1988 Duke / USA R

Now please apologize to one of my very favorite Duke players of all time... never the elite best but someone who worked his behind off trying to be as good as he could.

And, if I recall correctly, before his senior season, Coach K said that Lance will be in the NBA...



Um, not sure why you think that's hilarious, because it is true. Nobody was double-teaming Dre, but if you saw teams disrespecting his shot, leaving him by his lonesome late in the season, you were watching different games than I was. People absolutely had to stay home on him. I'm not going to defend his play down the stretch--it wasn't great--but one thing he always helps with is spacing. There are limits to that usefulness, I fully admit.

This is what I always thought. While JJ was always moving, looking for his shot, that was Duke's "offense" on that team. On this team, Andre wasn't on that JJ "team"... and Andre's value to the offense might just have been to stay outside the 3-point line, forcing the defense to stay on him, opening up the rest of the court. And if his defender did leave him, the others should have noticed and passed to Andre... but unfortunately, not so much passes to Andre towards the end of the season... even if he was open. Maybe there's limits to such a scheme... maybe that's one of the reasons Andre wasn't in the games near the end of the season when Duke struggled mightily on offense as it was.

[Kfanarmy]

If people thought that game was going to be an automatic blowout with Lehigh having no chance at all of winning, I find that more shocking than the fact that Lehigh pulled the upset.Perhaps this says more about where Duke was at the end of the season than about your fellow fans. the team Duke put on the floor, talent-wise should have blown LeHigh out of the gym. It wasn't a talent issue, it wasn't an athletic issue. It was mostly due to a complete lack of team work; and a complete lack of dedication on a couple of guards part to learn and play perimeter defense.

[tele]

I would say the OP original question was just a recruit or two in the next couple of weeks away from bbeing a moot point.

[ncexnyc]

Um, not sure why you think that's hilarious, because it is true. Nobody was double-teaming Dre, but if you saw teams disrespecting his shot, leaving him by his lonesome late in the season, you were watching different games than I was. People absolutely had to stay home on him. I'm not going to defend his play down the stretch--it wasn't great--but one thing he always helps with is spacing. There are limits to that usefulness, I fully admit.

I guess the next thing you'll be trying to tell people is that the Boston Red Sox choked in 1978.

If I was to game plan against Duke I'd definitely pay attention to the 3 pt shooters in general. I then would have made it a priority to shutdown Mr. Rivers. As for having Dre stand in the corner, well if he chose to do that so be it. I wouldn't be to concerned about him until he showed me he was on.

You do realize that Dre had six games this past season where he scored ZERO points. His last six games were 0, 3, 0, 0, 0, and 5.

His scoring numbers for this season is nearly identical to his numbers from last season. Where was the improvement?

I hope that's serious enough for you.;)

[loldevilz]

Well, I don't think anybody said that. According to RSCI that class was ranked 9th.

ESPN had us at 6. I apologize profusely for my mistake.

[Bay Area Duke Fan]

Perhaps this says more about where Duke was at the end of the season than about your fellow fans. the team Duke put on the floor, talent-wise should have blown LeHigh out of the gym. It wasn't a talent issue, it wasn't an athletic issue. It was mostly due to a complete lack of team work; and a complete lack of dedication on a couple of guards part to learn and play perimeter defense.

To what extent was this the fault of the coaching staff for it's inability to prepare and motivate the players, to develop an appropriate game plan and to make effective adjustments during the game?

[COYS]

Laying aside the actual outcome of the game for a moment, Duke's almost loss to Belmont in 2008 is far more shocking in terms of the final score than Duke's loss to Lehigh this year. Belmont was ranked 148 in Kenpom (after the game ended . . . I presume they moved up a couple of spots) while Duke was top 10. They were separated by 140 spots. Belmont was, at best, a perfectly average NCAA team. Lehigh, on the other hand, was one of the best 15 seeds ever, ranked at 81 (as was mentioned before, they were actually ranked above VaTech). This year's Duke team, of course, was ranked lower than the 2008 squad, hovering around 17 before the game and currently ranked 20th with a very inconsistent defense and a suddenly inconsistent offense. Now, I preface this by saying that no one involved with Duke basketball should be happy with the result in the game against Lehigh. It is absolutely fine for everyone involved with the program to be upset that Duke lost to a 15 seed. However, take seeding out of the calculation, take the names off the jerseys, and look how the teams matched up on paper. Team A is better than Team B, but the margin is nowhere near insurmountable especially given that Team A is missing a key player.

So, Duke shouldn't be satisfied with this result. No way. We all know how much Coach K hates losing and this loss has got to sting more than most. That being said, from a more detached standpoint, the loss isn't a watershed that illuminates anything we didn't already know about the 2012 squad nor does it say anything about the overall program's long-term health. The team will be very different next season. With guys who bring different physical skills to the table like Alex, Mike, and Rasheed entering the conversation (or taking a more prominent spot in the conversation as is the case with Mike), our defensive issues might be completely different than this past season. With Austin moving on, our offense will look very different (and as good as Austin was, he was not a notably efficient player). The 2007 and 2008 teams looked radically different even though the personnel looked almost exactly the same (sub Kyle for Josh). The 2013 team will have more new faces with very different abilities. I predict we'll see a completely different team.

[Matches]

Laying aside the actual outcome of the game for a moment, Duke's almost loss to Belmont in 2008 is far more shocking in terms of the final score than Duke's loss to Lehigh this year. Belmont was ranked 148 in Kenpom (after the game ended . . . I presume they moved up a couple of spots) while Duke was top 10. They were separated by 140 spots. Belmont was, at best, a perfectly average NCAA team. Lehigh, on the other hand, was one of the best 15 seeds ever, ranked at 81 (as was mentioned before, they were actually ranked above VaTech). This year's Duke team, of course, was ranked lower than the 2008 squad, hovering around 17 before the game and currently ranked 20th with a very inconsistent defense and a suddenly inconsistent offense. Now, I preface this by saying that no one involved with Duke basketball should be happy with the result in the game against Lehigh. It is absolutely fine for everyone involved with the program to be upset that Duke lost to a 15 seed. However, take seeding out of the calculation, take the names off the jerseys, and look how the teams matched up on paper. Team A is better than Team B, but the margin is nowhere near insurmountable especially given that Team A is missing a key player.



That 2008 team was pretty clearly running on fumes, though. I wasn't terribly surprised that we struggled with Belmont.

I guess in retrospect it seems clear that the 2012 was running on fumes too.

[Des Esseintes]

I guess the next thing you'll be trying to tell people is that the Boston Red Sox choked in 1978.

If I was to game plan against Duke I'd definitely pay attention to the 3 pt shooters in general. I then would have made it a priority to shutdown Mr. Rivers. As for having Dre stand in the corner, well if he chose to do that so be it. I wouldn't be to concerned about him until he showed me he was on.

You do realize that Dre had six games this past season where he scored ZERO points. His last six games were 0, 3, 0, 0, 0, and 5.

His scoring numbers for this season is nearly identical to his numbers from last season. Where was the improvement?

I hope that's serious enough for you.;)

I didn't say anything about improvement. I think I was pretty clear in admitting Andre played poorly down the stretch. As you note, he barely scored those last six games. But that doesn't mean defenses sagged off him and ignored him, because they didn't. I guarantee you opposing coaches gave their charges explicit instructions not to leave Andre open. They've seen tape of his explosions, and they know as well as we do those explosions are impossible to predict.

Look, Andre remains much the same guy he was last year, but the guy he was last year can have a monster game from deep at any time. Because he has that ability, defenses will always respect his shot and hang near him. If you can point to a game where he was ignored BY THE DEFENSE (and not our offense) while he was on the court, I would love to hear about it. Having a great three point shooter on the court helps spacing, even when he's not hitting. There are limits to that usefulness, but it's folly to pretend it doesn't exist.

[COYS]

That 2008 team was pretty clearly running on fumes, though. I wasn't terribly surprised that we struggled with Belmont.

I guess in retrospect it seems clear that the 2012 was running on fumes too.

Running on fumes or suffering from an identity/confidence crisis. I'm not sure which.

[greybeard]

It's not how many over the course of a season, but when. Dawkins got off during a number of games and at times that Duke desperately needed it. Those moments incloude when Duke had a lead that had all but slipped away or did, towards the end of games when they needed his shot, or towards the end of a half. I think one could say that Dawkins got it done in a number of games that might well have gone the other way if he had not.

If Duke was not loaded with guards and another three shooter, Dawkins probably would have gotten more playing time, say if Duke had not landed Rivers. In fact, there might have been plays like the ones set for JJ, if necessary several times on a single possession and often sometimes with all sorts of multiple screens having been set. JJ wasn't putting the ball on the ground very often in those games, if I recall correctly. Fsekind likrwise didn't put it on the ground very often either, but, if I recall, he did pretty well when he did. Maybe Dawkins also would have been greater leeway to find his shot than he was allowed this year. If Dawkins missed two off the bat, he almost always was taken out immediately.

As for the last six games, no one can dispute that Rivers occupied the ball more and more, for longer times. Some have speculated that that threw the offense even more out of whack than it had been all season. Maybe Dawkins had difficulty dealing with it, had difficulty finding his rhythm. Usually, when you sit watching, you get a feel for how and when you can fit in with the flow of the offense to be effective. Other things might have happened to throw him off that it would be inappropriate to even suggest as a possibility without some evidence in support.

Who knows, maybe nothing or no one but Dawkins had anything to do with his inability to score the ball in the shortened minutes he got, even after Kelly went down. Maybe he just was in a shooting slump.

If K decides next season to go with an offense that features Curry running off screens aka JJ, I should think that Duke would not need to change a thing if Dawkins came in as Curry's backup.

[IBleedBlue]

If you think that Gbinje showed anything like what Henderson did as a freshman or that he is likely to end up as capable as Henderson, then you have a much better crystal ball than I... likewise, if you think that Gbinje shows the potential that Smith or even Kelly or Mason did as frosh, then again, you are a better seer than I... also, I am not one that was impressed with the contributions of Zoubek or Thomas as seniors, so those are not comparisons that give me much comfort-- those players depended heavily on much more skilled players around them, to make up for their shortcomings-- and I don't know yet whether Gbinje or Murphy or Marshall or Thornton or Hairston will have similarly skilled peers to rely on.

I actually heard Hubert Davis and Jay Williams while they were analyzing one of Duke's games that they think two most athletic guys who are underused on this team are Andre Dawkins and Michael Gbnije. And that both need to develop slashing skills which would highly complement their athletic ability. And which is why some of us are high on MG.

[OldPhiKap]

I actually heard Hubert Davis and Jay Williams while they were analyzing one of Duke's games that they think two most athletic guys who are underused on this team are Andre Dawkins and Michael Gbnije. And that both need to develop slashing skills which would highly complement their athletic ability. And which is why some of us are high on MG.

I think the highlighted part of your post shows why everyone should be excited about MG and another year of Dre, while at the same time explains why they did not get as much burn as some would like.

It's a process.

[Wildcat]

I certainly respect the opinions of a future Duke Hall of Famer, Jay Williams. I wonder what he saw in Mike that would cause him to posit that he was underused. If K knows they are short on athleticism; why doesn't he develop/play/cultivate and give some OJT to a kid who actually has it? It's a mystery to me; but one that has many baffled. I have never really seen Mike play; just clips from his highscool days. Sad, considering our weaknesses this year. I'm getting used to this. it is what it is.