Duke v. First Round Opponent in NCAA Pre-Game Thread

[Udaman]

Might as well start this early and the mods can update our opponent tomorrow.

Last night really hurt. Really. Now Duke will be fighting history. Since the tournament began allowing at large teams in the field, no team that lost in the quarterfinals of its own tournament has ever won the championship. Let that sink in. Never happened. Only two teams that did this made it to the Final Four and that was unique. It was UConn in 2009 and that was after a quadruple OT loss versus Syracuse (thus it could have gone either way) and Michigan State in 2010. They also lost in OT and got a 4 seed then got incredibly lucky as the 1, 2 and 3 seeds all lost before they played them. That was probably the luckiest walk to a Final Four ever.

Duke is part of this trend. For the years we lost in the ACC quarters we:

1987: lost in Sweet 16 as 5 seed.
1993: lost in 2nd round as 3 seed.
1996: lost in first round as an 8 seed.
1997: lost in 2nd round as 2 seed.
2007: lost in first round to VCU as 6 seed.*

In all of the tournaments since 1987 we haven't made it out of the first weekend and we lost to a lower seed.

This trend has been there for other good teams as well. In 2011 Pittsburgh lost in the quarters of the Big East tournament. They ended up with a #1 seed and lost in the 2nd round. That same year Purdue lost in its quarters. They were a 3 seed and lost in the 2nd round of the NCAA tournament. In 2010 Syracuse lost in its quarters. They got a #1 seed and lost in the Sweet 16.

I think it's tough for 2 reasons. First losing that late creates doubt. You are questioning yourself and riding an emotional letdown. A game gets tight and you feel the pressure. Second, your opponent has confidence. Their coach uses your loss to pump up his team. "These guys just choked in their tournament. They're playing scared and playing not to lose." Those are tough things to overcome.

Bottom line: we have a tough road to travel. I bet we play great in the first round, but I'll be nervous as heck the 2nd game. We will need to play like we did the first month of the season. It wouldn't hurt to have a few upsets and to avoid teams with 3 or more big, physical players.

But when you are filling out your brackets and you write Duke down to win it all......just remember you have over 30 years of history against you. Here's hoping we are the first to stop this trend!

[Bob Green]

I hope the purpose of this thread isn't to help fans move on from last night because your fact based ramblings are not going to help everyone gather up their optimism and move forward with renewed vigor.

[Udaman]

I'm a numbers guy. Actually I hope this might help the team. They need to realize its never been done so they need to want it more than anything and go all out every second.

[Tripping William]

But when you are filling out your brackets and you write Duke down to win it all......just remember you have over 30 years of history against you. Here's hoping we are the first to stop this trend!

So, you're saying we have a chance! :)

[OZZIE4DUKE]

I'm a numbers guy. Actually I hope this might help the team. They need to realize its never been done so they need to want it more than anything and go all out every second.


So, you're saying we have a chance! :)

Of course we have a chance! We have a great opportunity to have a six-game winning streak to end our season! Time to heal our wounded, time to reinvigorate our reincarnation with Ryan, time to regain our shot! LET'S GO DUKE! http://www.crazietalk.net/ourhouse/images/smilies/devil9f.gif

As for this weekend, Let's Go State! Let's go terps. Hard to say that last part. http://www.crazietalk.net/ourhouse/images/smilies/devil9f.gif http://www.crazietalk.net/ourhouse/images/smilies/devil9f.gif

[OldPhiKap]

Last night has absolutely nothing to do with next Thu/Fri.

Not sure this is the tournament starter we are looking for.

Just sayin'

[BlueDevilBrowns]

Might as well start this early and the mods can update our opponent tomorrow.

Last night really hurt. Really. Now Duke will be fighting history. Since the tournament began allowing at large teams in the field, no team that lost in the quarterfinals of its own tournament has ever won the championship. Let that sink in. Never happened. Only two teams that did this made it to the Final Four and that was unique. It was UConn in 2009 and that was after a quadruple OT loss versus Syracuse (thus it could have gone either way) and Michigan State in 2010. They also lost in OT and got a 4 seed then got incredibly lucky as the 1, 2 and 3 seeds all lost before they played them. That was probably the luckiest walk to a Final Four ever.

Duke is part of this trend. For the years we lost in the ACC quarters we:

1987: lost in Sweet 16 as 5 seed.
1993: lost in 2nd round as 3 seed.
1996: lost in first round as an 8 seed.
1997: lost in 2nd round as 2 seed.
2007: lost in first round to VCU as 6 seed.*

In all of the tournaments since 1987 we haven't made it out of the first weekend and we lost to a lower seed.

This trend has been there for other good teams as well. In 2011 Pittsburgh lost in the quarters of the Big East tournament. They ended up with a #1 seed and lost in the 2nd round. That same year Purdue lost in its quarters. They were a 3 seed and lost in the 2nd round of the NCAA tournament. In 2010 Syracuse lost in its quarters. They got a #1 seed and lost in the Sweet 16.

I think it's tough for 2 reasons. First losing that late creates doubt. You are questioning yourself and riding an emotional letdown. A game gets tight and you feel the pressure. Second, your opponent has confidence. Their coach uses your loss to pump up his team. "These guys just choked in their tournament. They're playing scared and playing not to lose." Those are tough things to overcome.

Bottom line: we have a tough road to travel. I bet we play great in the first round, but I'll be nervous as heck the 2nd game. We will need to play like we did the first month of the season. It wouldn't hurt to have a few upsets and to avoid teams with 3 or more big, physical players.

But when you are filling out your brackets and you write Duke down to win it all......just remember you have over 30 years of history against you. Here's hoping we are the first to stop this trend!


This is perhaps the single most depressing post I have ever read on this board.

Did getting blown out by UNC in the ACCT Final stop Duke from winning the Title in 1991?

NO

Did losing in the semifinals of the 1994 ACCT stop Duke from making the Championship Game 3 weeks later?

NO

Did blowing a 10 point lead with under 4 minutes left in the ACCT Final stop Duke from making the Final 4 in 2004?

NO


I understand the stat about losing in the 1st round of your conference tournament, but I believe it's more of a statistical anomaly than anything else. How is losing in the quarterfinals of a conference tourney any different than losing in the semifinals or finals of the same tournament? It doesn't logically make sense.

You mean to tell me a team will allow doubt to creep in if they lose in the 1st round of their tournament, but if they lose in the 2nd round, magically they will still have supreme confidence?

As far as Duke's history under K goes, the teams above were all flawed teams anyways, much more than this year's team.

Let's look at each of them:

1987 - A very young team devoid of the same senior leadership from the legendary 1986 team. However, being a 5 seed, still performed to their seeding.

1993 - A veteran team, but one that dealt with injuries and health issues all year and never developed proper chemistry. They lost to Cal in the 2nd round when some kid name Jason Kidd went "Arizona 2011" on them.

1996 - This is one of the Bridge Teams that also dealt with Chris Collins being injured most of the 2nd half of the season and wasn't playing well for weeks going into the tournament. Being a 8 seed and losing in the first round is expected.

1997 - The 2nd Bridge Team that was young and inexperienced, although they did finish 12-4 to win the ACC Regular season. By the end of the year, however, this team was clearly gassed, both mentally and physically. Losing in the second round wasn't a shock but you could call it disappointing, considering they lost to a 10 seed Providence team(although they did make a run to the Elite 8).

2007 - Again, an extremely young Bridge Team that lost a ton of leadership the year prior. This team finished 8-8 in the conference and was clearly overseeded as a 6 seed going into the tournament. They lost in the 1st round to a veteran VCU team lead by future NBA player Eric Maynor on a last second shot.


To me, this year's team has much more in common with 1991, 1994, and 2004 than the above mentioned teams. I think our future is still bright and I have no problem picking them to make it to Atlanta.

[Chris Randolph]

Who is the last team to have not won their regular-season conference championship or tournament conference championship and still win the national championship?

[Chris Randolph]

Looking ahead to the tournament I believe we will find out what our three seniors are really made of. This is a gut check time for them. How bad do they want to leave a lasting legacy. If we play well the first weekend and advance I believe we will get to the final four.

[Struggling golfer]

Might as well start this early and the mods can update our opponent tomorrow.

Last night really hurt. Really. Now Duke will be fighting history. Since the tournament began allowing at large teams in the field, no team that lost in the quarterfinals of its own tournament has ever won the championship. Let that sink in. Never happened. Only two teams that did this made it to the Final Four and that was unique. It was UConn in 2009 and that was after a quadruple OT loss versus Syracuse (thus it could have gone either way) and Michigan State in 2010. They also lost in OT and got a 4 seed then got incredibly lucky as the 1, 2 and 3 seeds all lost before they played them. That was probably the luckiest walk to a Final Four ever.

Duke is part of this trend. For the years we lost in the ACC quarters we:

1987: lost in Sweet 16 as 5 seed.
1993: lost in 2nd round as 3 seed.
1996: lost in first round as an 8 seed.
1997: lost in 2nd round as 2 seed.
2007: lost in first round to VCU as 6 seed.*

In all of the tournaments since 1987 we haven't made it out of the first weekend and we lost to a lower seed.

This trend has been there for other good teams as well. In 2011 Pittsburgh lost in the quarters of the Big East tournament. They ended up with a #1 seed and lost in the 2nd round. That same year Purdue lost in its quarters. They were a 3 seed and lost in the 2nd round of the NCAA tournament. In 2010 Syracuse lost in its quarters. They got a #1 seed and lost in the Sweet 16.

I think it's tough for 2 reasons. First losing that late creates doubt. You are questioning yourself and riding an emotional letdown. A game gets tight and you feel the pressure. Second, your opponent has confidence. Their coach uses your loss to pump up his team. "These guys just choked in their tournament. They're playing scared and playing not to lose." Those are tough things to overcome.

Bottom line: we have a tough road to travel. I bet we play great in the first round, but I'll be nervous as heck the 2nd game. We will need to play like we did the first month of the season. It wouldn't hurt to have a few upsets and to avoid teams with 3 or more big, physical players.

But when you are filling out your brackets and you write Duke down to win it all......just remember you have over 30 years of history against you. Here's hoping we are the first to stop this trend!

I thought the same last year that Duke would play great in the first game. It looks like Duke will be playing another 15 team again this year. I think that last night's game cost us a number 1 seed. If Miami wins the ACC Tourney they deserve the number 1 seed.

[Struggling golfer]

Looking ahead to the tournament I believe we will find out what our three seniors are really made of. This is a gut check time for them. How bad do they want to leave a lasting legacy. If we play well the first weekend and advance I believe we will get to the final four.

I agree that it is on the seniors to show what they are made of.....hopefully they will respond. As to being a Final 4 team...dunno..maybe. I think that in this week's ESPN magazine it showed that Duke could be vulnerable because of its lack of offensive rebounding.

[Kedsy]

I think that in this week's ESPN magazine it showed that Duke could be vulnerable because of its lack of offensive rebounding.

Well, if ESPN said it then it must be true.


But when you are filling out your brackets and you write Duke down to win it all......just remember you have over 30 years of history against you. Here's hoping we are the first to stop this trend!

I agree the trend you've pointed out is a negative. But it's only five datapoints (for Duke anyway). Other historic trends are positive. For example, this year's team will be the seventh Duke team under Coach K to go into the NCAA tournament with three or more seniors among its top seven minute-getters. Five of the first six made the Final Four (and four of those five made the championship game).

2010: (3) Jon Scheyer, Lance Thomas, Brian Zoubek
2006: (4) JJ Redick, Shelden Williams, Sean Dockery, Lee Melchionni
1994: (3) Grant Hill, Antonio Lang, Marty Clark
1990: (3) Alaa Abdelnaby, Phil Henderson, Robert Brickey
1989: (3) Danny Ferry, John Smith, Quin Snyder
1986: (4) Johnny Dawkins, Mark Alarie, David Henderson, Jay Bilas

Here's another. In Coach K's days at Duke, only six Duke squads have had five double-digit scorers. A seventh Duke squad had four double-digit scorers and a fifth guy with 9.9 ppg, so we'll throw that team in too. The seven seasons: 1991, 1992, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2004, 2008. That's five Final Fours out of seven, including four championship game appearances and three NCAA championships.

Here's a third. In Coach K's time here, only four times has Duke had five guys each get 24 or more points in individual games: 1992, 1999, 2001, and 2011. That's three championship game appearances and two national titles out of four.

This year's team meets all of the above criteria, so which small-sample trend should we go with here? One that says we'll go out in the first weekend or three that suggest we should make the Final Four. Or some other trend that I'm sure we can uncover that may or may not say something else?

My take is that all these trends have some validity. Despite the lack of an adequate sample size, we can see why each of them could be true. But none of them really are true, at least not in a predictive sense. So none of them govern this Duke team's race. The NCAA games start in less than a week and are done in less than a month. That's when we'll know.

[Indoor66]

Well, if ESPN said it then it must be true.



I agree the trend you've pointed out is a negative. But it's only five datapoints (for Duke anyway). Other historic trends are positive. For example, this year's team will be the seventh Duke team under Coach K to go into the NCAA tournament with three or more seniors among its top seven minute-getters. Five of the first six made the Final Four (and four of those five made the championship game).

2010: (3) Jon Scheyer, Lance Thomas, Brian Zoubek
2006: (4) JJ Redick, Shelden Williams, Sean Dockery, Lee Melchionni
1994: (3) Grant Hill, Antonio Lang, Marty Clark
1990: (3) Alaa Abdelnaby, Phil Henderson, Robert Brickey
1989: (3) Danny Ferry, John Smith, Quin Snyder
1986: (4) Johnny Dawkins, Mark Alarie, David Henderson, Jay Bilas

Here's another. In Coach K's days at Duke, only six Duke squads have had five double-digit scorers. A seventh Duke squad had four double-digit scorers and a fifth guy with 9.9 ppg, so we'll throw that team in too. The seven seasons: 1991, 1992, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2004, 2008. That's five Final Fours out of seven, including four championship game appearances and three NCAA championships.

Here's a third. In Coach K's time here, only four times has Duke had five guys each get 24 or more points in individual games: 1992, 1999, 2001, and 2011. That's three championship game appearances and two national titles out of four.

This year's team meets all of the above criteria, so which small-sample trend should we go with here? One that says we'll go out in the first weekend or three that suggest we should make the Final Four. Or some other trend that I'm sure we can uncover that may or may not say something else?

My take is that all these trends have some validity. Despite the lack of an adequate sample size, we can see why each of them could be true. But none of them really are true, at least not in a predictive sense. So none of them govern this Duke team's race. The NCAA games start in less than a week and are done in less than a month. That's when we'll know.

Those stats have as much validity for this season as does your likelihood of winning the next had of blackjack at the casino.

[Kedsy]

Those stats have as much validity for this season as does your likelihood of winning the next had of blackjack at the casino.

Maybe, maybe not. It's easy to see the value of experience and of having five potent scoring threats. Just as it's easy to see how losing early in the ACC tournament is a negative.

Besides, winning a blackjack hand is not entirely a random event. Blackjack involves skill as well as luck. Just like playing in the NCAAT.

[BlueDevilBrowns]

Those stats have as much validity for this season as does your likelihood of winning the next had of blackjack at the casino.

I think what he was trying to illustrate is each year is different. You can pull random stats from any previous year(s) to make your point, negative or positive.

In this case, the feeling of impending doom some feel now has no merit if it's only based off some random stat(s) from previous years and unrelated rosters.

[Kedsy]

I think what he was trying to illustrate is each year is different. You can pull random stats from any previous year(s) to make your point, negative or positive.

In this case, the feeling of impending doom some feel now has no merit if it's only based off some random stat(s) from previous years and unrelated rosters.

Yes, the idea that losing in the ACC quarterfinals is the kiss of doom has no more validity than the idea that having three seniors or five double-digit scorers will lead to the promised land. They're all interesting and all make sense on some level but none of them have much in the way of predictive value.

[NashvilleDevil]

Yes, the idea that losing in the ACC quarterfinals is the kiss of doom has no more validity than the idea that having three seniors or five double-digit scorers will lead to the promised land. They're all interesting and all make sense on some level but none of them have much in the way of predictive value.

You were using Duke's sample size of being eliminated early in the ACC tourney but what about being eliminated early in other conference tournaments? What is the track record of those teams?

[brevity]

Might as well start this early and the mods can update our opponent tomorrow.

I don't like this. At all. How is Duke's coaching staff expected to scout First Round Opponent? We already know that every other team in the land is gunning for Duke, so at least they're prepared. It's totally unfair. Not knowing the opponent creates all kinds of matchup problems.

Just forget it. Waste of time to prepare for a First Round Opponent anyway; after all, the First Round takes place in Dayton, and Duke does not play until the Second Round.

[Kedsy]

You were using Duke's sample size of being eliminated early in the ACC tourney but what about being eliminated early in other conference tournaments? What is the track record of those teams?

Well, I don't know. Udaman says only two teams have lost in their tourney quarterfinals and made the Final Four, but interestingly enough both did it within the past four years. My question would be how many teams have lost in their tourney quarterfinals and still got a #1 or #2 seed (like 2nd round loser Duke in 1997 and Final Four team UConn in 2009). My guess is not that many but I'm too lazy to do the legwork on that one.

[DBFAN]

Who is the last team to have not won their regular-season conference championship or tournament conference championship and still win the national championship?

While I know that is rare, it's a little misguided. The unbalanced conference schedule is a relatively new thing. Can't judge teams today like we did in the 80's and 90's

[davekay1971]

I've spent some time scouting the First Round Opponent University Fighting Hedgehogs and here's what I've discovered.

They start no one over 6'6" except one guy from Romania who started playing basketball in November and who is 7'1" and 290 pounds. He started the season slowly, but the last 3 games he seems to be putting it together and has averaged a double double.

They have a point guard and shooting guard who have been playing together since 3rd grade. They are both streaky shooters from long range, both quick with the basketball, and both love to drive into the paint. They can have off nights, but when they're on, they're on. And, because they've been playing together for so long, they tend to have off, or on, nights at the same time.

They have a fifth year senior small forward who missed most of the season with a wrist sprain, but three weeks ago he rejoined the starting lineup and really helped power FROU to their conference championship game. By the way, he's from Carrboro and grew up wanting to be a Blue Devil, so he's really looking forward to the chance to play Duke and prove we missed out on him.

Their starting power forward is a freshman who wasn't recruited heavily mainly because he was with his father who's in the Army and was stationed in Seoul, Korea. The kid sprouted up late, is 6'6", still growing, and freakishly athletic. He, also, has come along well late this season and seems to be peaking right now.

They are 21-11 on the season, but 10-0 in their last 10 given the way their players have come together...

Having nightmares yet?

[tommy]

While I agree with some that losing in the quarterfinals of the ACC tournament may have been a blessing in disguise of sorts, meaning that Seth gets a lot of rest, and Ryan gets more time to re-integrate, I am a little concerned that we will have TOO much time off. Since beating Carolina last Saturday, the only game we have had has been Maryland, so depending on whether our first NCAA game is Thursday or Friday, we will have had a grand total of one game in either 12 or 13 days. That is not the type of schedule that usually leads to sharpness coming out of the locker room.

[hurleyfor3]

We're locking this because, as some have eloquently pointed out, it's completely speculative. We truly have no idea what we're talking about.

Also, be informed the other speculative threads (what is our seed/ who don't you want as a 2) will be closed when the selection show starts. Then we'll have the usual threads up once the brackets are announced.