PDA

View Full Version : Unc Vs. Uk. Somebody had to lose. Fortunately, it was unc.



moonpie23
12-13-2014, 09:36 AM
i thought i'd start this thread to keep all this banter separate from the Alex Poythress issue....


I think Unc is going to win today.....maybe by double digits, but i'll go with...


74-66 unc


ps.....this is pretty much the ONLY day i root for Cal to win...

gurufrisbee
12-13-2014, 10:00 AM
Best thing - one of them will lose

Worst thing - one of them will win

Kentucky, wildly overrated, is still pretty deep and talented.

NC, also fairly overrated, is too reliant on Paige since no one else can shoot.

Kentucky 58, NC 51.

tfk53
12-13-2014, 10:11 AM
My thoughts are the heels will either make it very close and possibly get the upset OR it will be 30 point blow out. Feel cats have a hard time focusing on lower level teams, like Columbia game. They will be focused today I suspect.

Native
12-13-2014, 10:17 AM
If UK wins, it's going to have to win big. If they keep the score as close as they did against Columbia, Paige can probably go off and win it for the Cheats.

Personally, I'm hoping for a bench-clearing brawl — with no injuries, of course — that gets multiple players suspended on both teams and forces the NCAA's hand in addressing the situation on the Hill. But Christmas ain't for a few weeks, so let's pull for a UK win, shall we?

moonpie23
12-13-2014, 10:23 AM
If UK wins, it's going to have to win big. If they keep the score as close as they did against Columbia, Paige can probably go off and win it for the Cheats.

Personally, I'm hoping for a bench-clearing brawl — with no injuries, of course — that gets multiple players suspended on both teams and forces the NCAA's hand in addressing the situation on the Hill. But Christmas ain't for a few weeks, so let's pull for a UK win, shall we?

i like the way that sounds......

77devil
12-13-2014, 10:27 AM
If UK wins, it's going to have to win big. If they keep the score as close as they did against Columbia, Paige can probably go off and win it for the Cheats.

Personally, I'm hoping for a bench-clearing brawl — with no injuries, of course — that gets multiple players suspended on both teams and forces the NCAA's hand in addressing the situation on the Hill. But Christmas ain't for a few weeks, so let's pull for a UK win, shall we?

I prefer a brawl scenario in which the refs bolt for the exit and both teams have to forfeit.

jv001
12-13-2014, 10:27 AM
If UK wins, it's going to have to win big. If they keep the score as close as they did against Columbia, Paige can probably go off and win it for the Cheats.

Personally, I'm hoping for a bench-clearing brawl — with no injuries, of course — that gets multiple players suspended on both teams and forces the NCAA's hand in addressing the situation on the Hill. But Christmas ain't for a few weeks, so let's pull for a UK win, shall we?

Now this I like. No injuries but wounded pride for both teams. Then let the Cheats get what they deserve for 18 years of fraud and putting teams on the playing field/court that should have been ineligible in the first place. GoDuke!

mattman91
12-13-2014, 10:30 AM
Go Big Blue!

*throws up*

CameronBornAndBred
12-13-2014, 10:32 AM
I'm hoping for cosmic intervention.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/12/tech/innovation/geminid-meteor-shower-2014/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Henderson
12-13-2014, 10:36 AM
Now this I like. No injuries but wounded pride for both teams. Then let the Cheats get what they deserve for 18 years of fraud and putting teams on the playing field/court that should have been ineligible in the first place. GoDuke!

Maybe they could then decide the outcome of the game with an old-fashioned tag team match. Roy against Cal. In Roy's corner ready to tap in: John Chaney. In Cal's corner, the UK tattoo guy from last year. Chaney is 82, but I'll bet he'd be game for a shot at Cal.

hudlow
12-13-2014, 10:44 AM
The Heels will get behind by 20. In the second half they'll scratch and fight back to within 1 and as the final buzzer sounds - Paige's jumper clangs off the rim.

UK 75
UNC 74

Native
12-13-2014, 11:03 AM
I'm hoping for cosmic intervention.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/12/tech/innovation/geminid-meteor-shower-2014/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/aVOSkIC.gif

oldnavy
12-13-2014, 11:03 AM
However this turns out (I suspect UK will win), I expect the game to be ugly from an aesthetic point of view.

I predict a low scoring, slogging, brick-fest... UK wins 53-48, with around 30 personal fouls called in total and the game takes 3+ hours to play.

I actually hope that UNC wins... which is the ONLY time I will ever say this. Most years I pull for UK, but I am sick of hearing how dominate UK is, or is going to be.... yak, yak, yak!

moonpie23
12-13-2014, 11:07 AM
I actually hope that UNC wins... !

dood.......we gotta talk....


i actually hope it's 60-60 in the 3rd OT when they call a phantom LAST foul on WCS and the lights go off in the building....

Henderson
12-13-2014, 11:11 AM
I actually hope that UNC wins....

Just... can't ...

OldPhiKap
12-13-2014, 11:13 AM
9F!!!!!

I am not rooting for Kentucky. I am rooting HARD against the Heels.

oldnavy
12-13-2014, 11:20 AM
dood.......we gotta talk....


i actually hope it's 60-60 in the 3rd OT when they call a phantom LAST foul on WCS and the lights go off in the building....

I know, I know.... this is like that episode in Star Trek.... what was it called? Where the problem was unsolvable, (except Kirk solved it of course)...

I win either way, and I lose either way? Weird....

BUT... unlike most of you, my wife will be in a MUCH better mood if UNC wins, so that sort of tips the scales a little...

94duke
12-13-2014, 11:30 AM
I know, I know.... this is like that episode in Star Trek.... what was it called? Where the problem was unsolvable, (except Kirk solved it of course)...

I win either way, and I lose either way? Weird....

BUT... unlike most of you, my wife will be in a MUCH better mood if UNC wins, so that sort of tips the scales a little...

Kobayashi Maru. The no-win scenario.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kobayashi_Maru

cspan37421
12-13-2014, 11:31 AM
Better color blue
w/r/t cheating, only smoke, no fire, certainly no campus-wide conflagration
less of a gap between who they are and who they pretend to be

weezie
12-13-2014, 11:35 AM
Go Big Blue!

*throws up*

Well said....urp.

AncientPsychicT
12-13-2014, 12:02 PM
Are people really not sure about this? Obviously you root for Kentucky. I mean, come on. Why is this even a question?

Dr. Rosenrosen
12-13-2014, 12:05 PM
I'm hoping for cosmic intervention.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/12/tech/innovation/geminid-meteor-shower-2014/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
Let's go, Meteor, let's go, clap clap

camion
12-13-2014, 12:08 PM
Couldn't you just root for:

4581

Ggallagher
12-13-2014, 12:10 PM
Anyone else catch the first and last clips of great games that were shown at the beginning of the program?
The first clip was The SHOT - a wonderful Kentucky defeat at Duke's hands.
The last clip was Zoub standing in front of the rim as Butler's shot bounced off in 2010.

So nice to be there with our friends :)

Philadukie
12-13-2014, 12:10 PM
Hey y'all Dukie preppies. Ol' Daggum Roy here! I just hacked this user ID to send y'all a quick pre-game message. I know y'all hopin' and expectin' for an ol' Tar Heel beat-down today, but let me tell y'all -- don't count Ol' Roy out yet! After a good ol' fashion power breakfast at Country Buffet (and a massage from Roy's personal traveling masseuse) we're ready to play these ol' Wildcats, or should I say Kitty Cats, cause that's what they're gonna look like when good Ol' Roy and the boys are done with them!

But listen. Just in case we lose today, just want y'all to know that ol' Roy is still a class act. All this here stuff about Roy cheatin' and lyin' and fakin' classes ain't nothin' but a bunch of stinky hogwash. Ol' Roy is a still a good ol' country boy from Asheville. Roy is an upstandin' honest feller. I might syphon your gas when you're not lookin', or maybe kiss your sister, but I ain't no class-fakin' cheater!

Alright, that's it now. I got to get on that there court and coach these boys to a victory. But, again, in case we lose, just know that faster 'en you can say Haitian earthquake, Ol' Roy's gonna let everyone know that it's always someone else's fault.

See you at the Golden Corral, preppies!!

Ol' Roy

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
12-13-2014, 12:58 PM
Lord.

Glad we aren't playing UK today.

Wheat/"/"/"
12-13-2014, 01:08 PM
Obvious story of the first half is KY making 3's. Hard to beat a team that good on a good shooting day.

I like UNC's effort so far this game. Too many unforced TO's but overall playing hard.

I think you guys saw how valuable Britt is to this team that half, he played well. As did Johnson.

Paige continues to force things, and it's because he's not in rythem with the sf. UNC has to get more from Jackson or whoever at that spot to spread the floor for Paige, as well as open some space for Meeks to get involved. Jackson has to step it up.

I don't get the sense that UNC is out of this game just yet. They'll need KY to cool off from 3 land and start pressing more next half to create some KY TO's.

BD80
12-13-2014, 01:17 PM
Just saw the halftime commercials for each university, you know, the "we are ______" promos.

During the unc collage of scenes, I was expecting/hoping to see an empty classroom.

wk2109
12-13-2014, 01:27 PM
Right before halftime, with possession of the ball and 15-20 seconds left on the clock, why would Roy:

1) Not use his use-it-or-lose-it time out?
2) If he's not going to call a time out, at least call a play for Marcus Paige and not allow a JP Tokoto isolation?

It's decisions like this that make Roy's coaching ability so questionable.

OldPhiKap
12-13-2014, 01:30 PM
At least IC is taking this well.

(In case you're wonderiing -- the refs are screwing UNC)

Wander
12-13-2014, 01:35 PM
I think you guys saw how valuable Britt is to this team that half, he played well.

Britt looks like a mediocre and unremarkable backup point guard. Your obsession with him is strange.

Henderson
12-13-2014, 01:39 PM
At least IC is taking this well.

(In case you're wonderiing -- the refs are screwing UNC)

They'll have to line up.

Don't picture that.

OldPhiKap
12-13-2014, 01:42 PM
They'll have to line up.

Don't picture that.

Ah, so THAT'S what they mean by "The Carolina Way" -- that makes muy more sense.

UK is gonna be a problem this year. Especially if they are hitting from outside.

NashvilleDevil
12-13-2014, 01:55 PM
Bold prediction. Kentucky will not make the Elite Eight.

dukelifer
12-13-2014, 02:04 PM
Bold prediction. Kentucky will not make the Elite Eight.

UNC getting crushed out there. When they are motivated, KY is hard to beat. Not sure they willn go undefeated but the SEC is weak - so they have a shot.

Henderson
12-13-2014, 02:05 PM
Ah, so THAT'S what they mean by "The Carolina Way" -- that makes muy more sense.

The Carolina Way is a journey. Then a destination.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
12-13-2014, 02:08 PM
Bold prediction. Kentucky will not make the Elite Eight.

Based on what, exactly?

Their defense is great, and their offense is very... opportunistic.

Bluegrassdevil1
12-13-2014, 02:10 PM
Bold prediction. Kentucky will not make the Elite Eight.

UK has been to at least the Elite Eight each year with Calipari when they have made the tournament. That little movie about space battles that comes out one year from now has a better chance of finishing second at the box office than this UK squad does of not making at least the Elite Eight.

It will take a big time team to knock out the Cats, and a four seed will not nearly be big time enough.

However, if UK is the first #1 to lose to a #16, I will gladly enjoy being incorrect.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
12-13-2014, 02:11 PM
UK has been to at least the Elite Eight each year with Calipari when they have made the tournament. That little movie about space battles that comes out one year from now has a better chance of finishing second at the box office than this UK squad does of not making at least the Elite Eight.

It will take a big time team to knock out the Cats, and a four seed will not nearly be big time enough.

However, of UK is the first #1 to lose to a #16, I will gladly enough being incorrect.

Amen

bob blue devil
12-13-2014, 02:13 PM
Am I the only person who heard Anthony say that Roy was in Kansas when the scandal was going down at UNC? Why would he say that?

Dev11
12-13-2014, 02:16 PM
Am I the only person who heard Anthony say that Roy was in Kansas when the scandal was going down at UNC? Why would he say that?

You were not the only one and I can't offer a better explanation than Anthony got himself confused and meant to say that Roy was at Kansas when it started.

NashvilleDevil
12-13-2014, 02:17 PM
Based on what, exactly?

Their defense is great, and their offense is very... opportunistic.

What is everyone basing them making the title game on? Some good performances in November and December? Duke has had plenty of those and flamed out early. I just don't think they make the Elite Eight. There will be a four seed from a power conference that won't be intimidated. And like I said, bold prediction.

Duvall
12-13-2014, 02:20 PM
Am I the only person who heard Anthony say that Roy was in Kansas when the scandal was going down at UNC? Why would he say that?

The same reason Bilas and other announcers frequently speak nonsense about the scandal - the inventory must be protected.

Duvall
12-13-2014, 02:26 PM
UNC did far better on the glass than I expected, beating Kentucky on both ends. UK picked a good day to have its first good shooting day from distance...

Henderson
12-13-2014, 02:29 PM
I'd say Caolina is a reasonable top 20 team and that, despite any perceived weakneses, UK has to be regarded as at least a top 5 team.

So top 20 team loses to top 5 team on the road by 14. I'd say both came out OK.

Wander
12-13-2014, 02:33 PM
UK picked a good day to have its first good shooting day from distance...

OK, but UNC is also a bad three point shooting team that had an unusually good shooting day from distance, so it sort of cancels out, right? Kentucky's average is 28% and they shot 47%. UNC's average is 28% and shot 46%.

Wheat/"/"/"
12-13-2014, 02:34 PM
Britt looks like a mediocre and unremarkable backup point guard. Your obsession with him is strange.

No obsession, just pointing out that he played well for those who don't notice the glue guys like him that make teams better.

UNC is struggling to make the timely "basketball plays". They seem to turn it over with a lazy pass in key moments or, for example, like the play midway through second half down 9 and fighting to get back in it Tokoto fails to strongly squeeze the defensive rebound and let's it get slapped away and KY gets another shot and makes a 3 to stretch it back to 12.

We can't look past the fact that Ky played very well. They were the better team out there today.

Roy's got to find a way to get something more from the SF spot. Jackson and Pinson are still showing some inexperience and Tokoto is not being aggressive enough going to the rim when he's there.

UNC is a work in progress. Nobody will question their effort today, and that's a positive.

Bluegrassdevil1
12-13-2014, 02:38 PM
UNC did far better on the glass than I expected, beating Kentucky on both ends. UK picked a good day to have its first good shooting day from distance...

I completely agree. Relative to Carolina's recent struggles and UK's recent success, the Heels did not look that bad out there.

I suspect that next week's OSU game will be quite important to the fighting Huckleberry Hounds. Beating a good OSU team, coupled with positives against UK, could lead them to a strong ACC run; however, losing four times before ACC play, not having a great pre-conference win (Florida may get it together, but their current state is a mess), could harm them a great deal.

I still worry that UNC will pull it together in the ACC, especially with a less than brutal conference draw, but right now, Carolina does look like a group that can hang around against quality opposition, but in the end, be unable to get the win.

Their early Chapel Hill contest with U of L may prove to be their return to the forefront, or it could signal that the team may simply go through a season similar to Duke last year: on paper, and in theory, everything should be in place, but for a myriad of reasons, the puzzle just never fully goes together.

Henderson
12-13-2014, 02:38 PM
No obsession, just pointing out that he played well for those who don't notice the glue guys like him that make teams better.

UNC is struggling to make the timely "basketball plays". They seem to turn it over with a lazy pass in key moments or, for example, like the play midway through second half down 9 and fighting to get back in it Tokoto fails to strongly squeeze the defensive rebound and let's it get slapped away and KY gets another shot and makes a 3 to stretch it back to 12.

We can't look past the fact that Ky played very well. They were the better team out there today.

Roy's got to find a way to get something more from the SF spot. Jackson and Pinson are still showing some inexperience and Tokoto is not being aggressive enough going to the rim when he's there.

UNC is a work in progress. Nobody will question their effort today, and that's a positive.

Where is Justin Jackson? I was so high on him.

alteran
12-13-2014, 02:43 PM
You were not the only one and I can't offer a better explanation than Anthony got himself confused and meant to say that Roy was at Kansas when it started.

They're clearly having trouble keeping their apologia taking points straight.
We can take some solace in the fact that they're at least acknowledging it's a scandal now.

Wander
12-13-2014, 02:50 PM
No obsession, just pointing out that he played well for those who don't notice the glue guys like him that make teams better.


But he doesn't do that. At all. UNC is absolutely desperate for a guard who can play halfway decent alongside Paige. Any guard - point, shooting, combo, defensive-oriented guy, glue guy, whatever. Despite this glaring need, Britt's minutes have gone down from his freshman to sophomore season. It's not just his stats either, although those are pretty bad - his shooting percentage sucks even though nearly every shot he takes is wide open. He's a horrible defender and doesn't run the team well.

If he was anywhere near the glue guy that you think he is, Roy would be playing him a lot more minutes, because UNC really really really needs a guard to be the 5th player to go alongside Paige, Meeks, Johnson, and Tokoto. That could actually be a really good starting lineup if they did have such an all-around glue player type of guard to add in there - someone like Duke's Tyler Thornton would be huge for UNC.

77devil
12-13-2014, 02:55 PM
I'll give it to Ol' Roy today. He was excellent at preserving time outs. When asked at the post game presser why he did not call any to make adjustments when UNC was down 18 or down the stretch, Roy replied:


The team was perfectly prepared and the Roy Williams' game plan was flawless. There was no need for adjustments dadgumit. If only the kids would execute you wouldn't be asking that stupid question.

Duvall
12-13-2014, 02:56 PM
OK, but UNC is also a bad three point shooting team that had an unusually good shooting day from distance, so it sort of cancels out, right? Kentucky's average is 28% and they shot 47%. UNC's average is 28% and shot 46%.

True. It was a strange game in that the margin was roughly expected, but both teams shot better than they have against much weaker defenses.

tbyers11
12-13-2014, 03:37 PM
If he was anywhere near the glue guy that you think he is, Roy would be playing him a lot more minutes, because UNC really really really needs a guard to be the 5th player to go alongside Paige, Meeks, Johnson, and Tokoto. That could actually be a really good starting lineup if they did have such an all-around glue player type of guard to add in there - someone like Duke's Tyler Thornton would be huge for UNC.

Agree with you on Britt not appearing to be a very good player. I haven't watched a ton of UNC this year but he certainly, IMO, didn't have a good "glue guy" game today. Tangibles or intangibles he didn't show much

I think you've hit on the major flaw with this UNC team also. Lack of a strong 2nd guard. I think this is why Paige's scoring numbers are often so much better in the 2nd half of games. He is trying to play facilitator in the first half and get everybody involved at the expense of his own shot. He is OK in this role put I think he is much better at hunting his shot in the standard 2-guard role he plays in the 2nd half. If Roy thought Britt or Berry were ready wouldn't he have them out there more to maximize Paige's talents?

Wheat/"/"/"
12-13-2014, 04:10 PM
Where is Justin Jackson? I was so high on him.

Jackson is showing the typical freshman struggles with strength and adjusting to the speed of the game. He'll get much better, but he's not a one and done type player. Doesn't have the body for that.

When Britt was on the floor today, UNC was playing its best ball. It's that simple and not hard to see if you're paying attention.

COYS
12-13-2014, 05:01 PM
Is it just me, or does anyone else think UK is actually a better team with Tyler Ulis running the show? Andrew Harrison is big, which helps him on defense, but he doesn't seem to use his size effectively on the offensive end, and he just doesn't seem like a natural show-runner on offense. Meanwhile, the rest of their team is so big that going with the smaller but more offensively savvy Ulis seems like a trade for the better for that team.

Also, from a rebounding stats perspective, this one seems like a particularly odd game. UNC grabbed 58% (!!!!!!) of their own misses. That makes UK's defensive rebounding percentage a paltry 42%. If you gave me that stat and asked which team scored 84 points, I'd guess UNC, obviously. However, UK shot great from three and grabbed 46% of their own misses (and, relatively speaking there weren't that many of them), canceling out what will almost certainly be their worst showing on the defensive glass this season (i have neither the time nor the will to check, but I'd be surprised if this isn't UK's worst showing on the defensive glass in years).

At any rate, UNC has a lot of questions to answer and UK looks every bit the number one team, as much as I hate to admit that. Not unbeatable, perhaps, but they are formidable.

Ichabod Drain
12-13-2014, 05:06 PM
Jackson is showing the typical freshman struggles with strength and adjusting to the speed of the game. He'll get much better, but he's not a one and done type player. Doesn't have the body for that.

When Britt was on the floor today, UNC was playing its best ball. It's that simple and not hard to see if you're paying attention.

I've seen quite a few mock drafts with Jackson going in the first round. Including some very recent ones.

Duvall
12-13-2014, 05:14 PM
I've seen quite a few mock drafts with Jackson going in the first round. Including some very recent ones.

Pretty common for highly rated UNC freshmen to be at the top of the draft boards early in their freshman seasons. Less common for them to be there at the end of their freshman years.

BD80
12-13-2014, 05:26 PM
Is it just me, or does anyone else think UK is actually a better team with Tyler Ulis running the show? Andrew Harrison is big, which helps him on defense, but he doesn't seem to use his size effectively on the offensive end, and he just doesn't seem like a natural show-runner on offense. Meanwhile, the rest of their team is so big that going with the smaller but more offensively savvy Ulis seems like a trade for the better for that team.
...

I see this as a potential issue for ky. calipari was already straying from the platoon system, and without Poythros, it was going to get complicated. calipari is used to quick, ball-control point guards and it appears to me that Ullis is better for the team. Thus, I see Ullis' minutes increasing, particularly in critical situations. Which leaves Harrison on the short end of the minutes handling the ball. The Harrison twins are back to improve their draft stock, what happens when their stock starts slipping because it appears that Ullis is the better player? Aaron Harrison already shoots every time he gets the ball. There could be some chemistry problems on the horizon.

Kedsy
12-13-2014, 05:40 PM
I see this as a potential issue for ky. calipari was already straying from the platoon system, and without Poythros, it was going to get complicated. calipari is used to quick, ball-control point guards and it appears to me that Ullis is better for the team. Thus, I see Ullis' minutes increasing, particularly in critical situations. Which leaves Harrison on the short end of the minutes handling the ball. The Harrison twins are back to improve their draft stock, what happens when their stock starts slipping because it appears that Ullis is the better player? Aaron Harrison already shoots every time he gets the ball. There could be some chemistry problems on the horizon.

Seemed to me in today's game there was a fair amount of time where all three played (Ulis and both Harrisons), along with two of the big guys. That's one way to deal with the loss of Poythress, right? And I doubt Andrew Harrison's draft stock will drop so much if he appears to be spending part of the game playing PG alone and part of the game in a "two PG" offense.

Wheat/"/"/"
12-13-2014, 05:56 PM
I've seen quite a few mock drafts with Jackson going in the first round. Including some very recent ones.

I've seen that too. All those drafts are based on potential. Everybody loves potential. Potential, potential, potential.

I miss the days where these kids mature and are coached to the league, and not rushed and stolen from the college game based on their potential.

BD80
12-13-2014, 06:10 PM
Seemed to me in today's game there was a fair amount of time where all three played (Ulis and both Harrisons), along with two of the big guys. That's one way to deal with the loss of Poythress, right? And I doubt Andrew Harrison's draft stock will drop so much if he appears to be spending part of the game playing PG alone and part of the game in a "two PG" offense.

One, I'm postulating that Ullis' time will increase, particularly if there are close games. For example, come tournament time.

Two, I envision Ullis getting the ball even when Andrew is in the game. I think that will drop Andrew's stock if it is clear that he isn't even the best pg on his own team. I haven't seen any reason to believe that the NBA would be interested in him as a shooting guard. Although, the thought of both Harrisons competing to prove their shooting capability to scouts brings a smile to my face.

Wheat/"/"/"
12-13-2014, 06:15 PM
But he doesn't do that. At all. UNC is absolutely desperate for a guard who can play halfway decent alongside Paige. Any guard - point, shooting, combo, defensive-oriented guy, glue guy, whatever. Despite this glaring need, Britt's minutes have gone down from his freshman to sophomore season. It's not just his stats either, although those are pretty bad - his shooting percentage sucks even though nearly every shot he takes is wide open. He's a horrible defender and doesn't run the team well.

If he was anywhere near the glue guy that you think he is, Roy would be playing him a lot more minutes, because UNC really really really needs a guard to be the 5th player to go alongside Paige, Meeks, Johnson, and Tokoto. That could actually be a really good starting lineup if they did have such an all-around glue player type of guard to add in there - someone like Duke's Tyler Thornton would be huge for UNC.

Britt is a good defender, and runs the offense just fine. You are correct that he has struggled as a scorer.

I don't see the back up PG as the problem, I see lack of production from the SF and the 2g the biggest issue right now.

Paige is the PG. In the long run, playing him at 2g is not the best way to develope this team and Roy is trying to avoid it as much as possible.

Reality is that as of now though, UNC's best line up is Britt, Paige, Tokoto, Johnson, Meeks and that's what we've been seeing from Roy in crunch time. But Roy wants to develope that SF/2g position...has to...because come conference/tourney time he's got to have that.

The only way to get better is to keep Jackson/Pinson in there playing to gain the experience and hope one steps up.

jv001
12-13-2014, 06:15 PM
I've seen that too. All those drafts are based on potential. Everybody loves potential. Potential, potential, potential.

I miss the days where these kids mature and are coached to the league, and not rushed and stolen from the college game based on their potential.

I thought Berry would win the point guard job by ACC games, but I don't know if that will happen. I guess, I'm not as good an evaluator of high school talent as I thought I was. GoDuke!

sagegrouse
12-13-2014, 07:34 PM
Right before halftime, with possession of the ball and 15-20 seconds left on the clock, why would Roy:

1) Not use his use-it-or-lose-it time out?
2) If he's not going to call a time out, at least call a play for Marcus Paige and not allow a JP Tokoto isolation?

It's decisions like this that make Roy's coaching ability so questionable.

Roy's pact with the devil (small d) is that for every unused timeout, he gets another fortnight on earth. Dude is gonna be 145 YO.

mgtr
12-13-2014, 07:35 PM
I thought Berry would win the point guard job by ACC games, but I don't know if that will happen. I guess, I'm not as good an evaluator of high school talent as I thought I was. GoDuke!

I see that Berry is not a Rick Barry berry, but a Chuck Berry berry. Its all about the spelling. I am betting he is the starting point guard by tournament time, however it is spelled.

Wheat/"/"/"
12-13-2014, 07:41 PM
I thought Berry would win the point guard job by ACC games, but I don't know if that will happen. I guess, I'm not as good an evaluator of high school talent as I thought I was. GoDuke!

I think he'll be fine. He got some good minutes today.

He's just behind two, good, experienced PG's in Paige and Britt.

NSDukeFan
12-13-2014, 08:10 PM
One, I'm postulating that Ullis' time will increase, particularly if there are close games. For example, come tournament time.

Two, I envision Ullis getting the ball even when Andrew is in the game. I think that will drop Andrew's stock if it is clear that he isn't even the best pg on his own team. I haven't seen any reason to believe that the NBA would be interested in him as a shooting guard. Although, the thought of both Harrisons competing to prove their shooting capability to scouts brings a smile to my face.
Pretty sure this is incorrect as Andrew Harrison was the top ranked PG in his class and Cal turns those guys into lottery picks with his great coaching. There is no way the top PG in his class would ever be at UK a second year as he should be dominating in the NBA right now.

I thought Berry would win the point guard job by ACC games, but I don't know if that will happen. I guess, I'm not as good an evaluator of high school talent as I thought I was. GoDuke!
I feared Berry as well and actually very much fear this freshman class at UNC as they should all be quality multiple year guys.

CDu
12-13-2014, 08:42 PM
I think he'll be fine. He got some good minutes today.

He's just behind two, good, experienced PG's in Paige and Britt.

More accurately, he is behind one good, experienced PG and one inexperienced, not-very-good PG. Britt is at best a borderline ACC-caliber PG. Love your optimism, but your portrayal of Britt is far from accurate.

77devil
12-13-2014, 09:38 PM
I think he'll be fine. He got some good minutes today.

He's just behind two, good, experienced PG's in Paige and Britt.

A veritable embarrassment of riches at PG with all the rest of the talent and 3 losses already. Perhaps the coaching?

BD80
12-13-2014, 09:45 PM
Any word on ol' roy's swoon on the sidelines in the second half? Same ol, same ol?

Wheat/"/"/"
12-13-2014, 10:05 PM
More accurately, he is behind one good, experienced PG and one inexperienced, not-very-good PG. Britt is at best a borderline ACC-caliber PG. Love your optimism, but your portrayal of Britt is far from accurate.

He's a quality back up PG on this team, and he's a sophomore.

Sorry, but I'll trust my own eyes the kid can play at a high level, over your biased assessment that he's a "not very-good PG".

And I'll add that the confidence of a hall of fame coach playing him in crunch time against the best team in the country is also enough to prove my point he's a good player.

He's quick, takes care of the ball, plays harassing defense and drains his FT's. Despite not looking to score, he's shooting 35% from 3, which surprisingly, was leading the team going into today.

When it comes time for him to match up against Tyus, and he will, I'm confident he will do just fine.

Wheat/"/"/"
12-13-2014, 10:14 PM
A veritable embarrassment of riches at PG with all the rest of the talent and 3 losses already. Perhaps the coaching?

Maybe.

But early season losses to top 25 teams, including #1...while building a team...couldn't possibly meet level of coaching ineptitude of first round losses in the big dance, when the talent level was so superior....right? ;)

kshepinthehouse
12-13-2014, 10:16 PM
He's a quality back up PG on this team, and he's a sophomore.

Sorry, but I'll trust my own eyes the kid can play at a high level, over your biased assessment that he's a "not very-good PG".

And I'll add that the confidence of a hall of fame coach playing him in crunch time against the best team in the country is also enough to prove my point he's a good player.

He's quick, takes care of the ball, plays harassing defense and drains his FT's. Despite not looking to score, he's shooting 35% from 3, which surprisingly, was leading the team going into today.

When it comes time for him to match up against Tyus, and he will, I'm confident he will do just fine.

Dude doesn't even know which hand he wants to shoot with.

Wander
12-13-2014, 11:24 PM
And I'll add that the confidence of a hall of fame coach playing him in crunch time against the best team in the country is also enough to prove my point he's a good player.

What do you expect Roy Williams to do - only put 4 players on the floor?

That's part of the point you're missing - Roy DOESN'T agree with your assessment of Britt. If he did, Britt wouldn't have seen his minutes decrease from his freshman to his sophomore season. The fact that Britt can't crack 15 minutes per game on a team that's desperate for another guard says everything you need to know about his current ability to play at this level. Roy's distribution of minutes implies that he agrees the assessment of myself, CDU, and every other basketball fan on the planet, including UNC fans, who has watched UNC play this year.

CDu
12-14-2014, 03:18 AM
He's a quality back up PG on this team, and he's a sophomore.

Sorry, but I'll trust my own eyes the kid can play at a high level, over your biased assessment that he's a "not very-good PG".

And I'll add that the confidence of a hall of fame coach playing him in crunch time against the best team in the country is also enough to prove my point he's a good player.

He's quick, takes care of the ball, plays harassing defense and drains his FT's. Despite not looking to score, he's shooting 35% from 3, which surprisingly, was leading the team going into today.

When it comes time for him to match up against Tyus, and he will, I'm confident he will do just fine.

I am amused that you are calling me biased. If ever there was the proverbial pot... My "biased" opinion is consistent with 99% of folks who have seen him play, including UNC fans. You lr eyes are easily as biased (probably more) than my opinion.

What "crunch time" was there in the UK game? That was a double-digit game for the last 30 minutes or so. I mean, Joel James was playing at the same time late-ish in the game. That doesn't exactly sound like a ringing endorsement of Britt.

He is at best an okay backup PG, which is far different than a "good PG" as you called him.

He is averaging 1.7 turnovers per game in just 20.9 mpg with a 2.4:1.7 a:to ratio and a 23.4 turnover %. So no, he doesn't take care of the ball.

Tyus Jones will eat him alive. I think you and perhaps Britt's family are the only ones who believe otherwise.

CDu
12-14-2014, 03:40 AM
I am amused that you are calling me biased. If ever there was the proverbial pot... My "biased" opinion is consistent with 99% of folks who have seen him play, including UNC fans. You lr eyes are easily as biased (probably more) than my opinion.

What "crunch time" was there in the UK game? That was a double-digit game for the last 30 minutes or so. I mean, Joel James was playing at the same time late-ish in the game. That doesn't exactly sound like a ringing endorsement of Britt.

He is at best an okay backup PG, which is far different than a "good PG" as you called him.

He is averaging 1.7 turnovers per game in just 20.9 mpg with a 2.4:1.7 a:to ratio and a 23.4 turnover %. So no, he doesn't take care of the ball.

Tyus Jones will eat him alive. I think you and perhaps Britt's family are the only ones who believe otherwise.

Slight edit. The turnover stats were last year's numbers. This year he is playing substantially less, is being asked to do less when he is in the game (Paige and Tokoto are the primary ballhandlers/playmakers), and as a result both his assist % and turnover % are down. He takes care of the ball now, but that is all he does with it. He is not a "good" PG.

Wheat/"/"/"
12-14-2014, 06:53 AM
I am amused that you are calling me biased. If ever there was the proverbial pot... My "biased" opinion is consistent with 99% of folks who have seen him play, including UNC fans. You lr eyes are easily as biased (probably more) than my opinion.

What "crunch time" was there in the UK game? That was a double-digit game for the last 30 minutes or so. I mean, Joel James was playing at the same time late-ish in the game. That doesn't exactly sound like a ringing endorsement of Britt.

He is at best an okay backup PG, which is far different than a "good PG" as you called him.

He is averaging 1.7 turnovers per game in just 20.9 mpg with a 2.4:1.7 a:to ratio and a 23.4 turnover %. So no, he doesn't take care of the ball.

Tyus Jones will eat him alive. I think you and perhaps Britt's family are the only ones who believe otherwise.

Crunch time ...when UNC was fighting to get back in it second half and got the lead back within 9, Britt was on the floor for most of that.



Believe what you want to believe. But to say a kid, any kid, getting quality minutes late in contested games for a top 25 team is not a "good player" is ridiculous.

And Joel James is a good player too. You'll see him as well against Okafor and I'm confident he'll do fine too.

CDu
12-14-2014, 07:04 AM
Crunch time ...when UNC was fighting to get back in it second half and got the lead back within 9, Britt was on the floor for most of that.



Believe what you want to believe. But to say a kid, any kid, getting quality minutes late in contested games for a top 25 team is not a "good player" is ridiculous.

And Joel James is a good player too. You'll see him as well against Okafor and I'm confident he'll do fine too.

Hahahahahahahahahaha.

oldnavy
12-14-2014, 07:10 AM
Britt is OK.... he is serviceable... Today, he did add a small spark with some aggressive play when the heels needed it, but clearly he isn't going to put the team on his back and take over a game.

What is going on with Paige? I get that he wants to get others involved in the game, but that kid HAS to become more selfish if this UNC team is going to get better. His habit of differing to others until later in games would drive me mad if I wanted UNC to do well.

UNC will be out of the polls tomorrow, is this the fastest that they have dropped from a top 5ish to unrated?

I will say one thing, UK was more aggressive and got more FT attempts, but some of the calls were very suspect IMO... not saying UNC got robbed, just that UK seemed to benefit a bit from the refs.... no surprise.

UNC got outplayed and turned the ball over WAY to often to worry about the calls.... if they cut the TO's in half, this game may have ended differently.

The game was easier to watch than I predicted, but then again both teams shot the ball much better than they had against lesser competition... this is why I never wager on sports...

77devil
12-14-2014, 07:35 AM
And I'll add that the confidence of a hall of fame coach playing him in crunch time against the best team in the country is also enough to prove my point he's a good player.

Crunch time? What crunch time? You and I must have been watching a different game. Playing your best option does not mean he's a good option.


Maybe.

But early season losses to top 25 teams, including #1...while building a team...couldn't possibly meet level of coaching ineptitude of first round losses in the big dance, when the talent level was so superior....right? ;)

I've never heard or read anyone try to compare Ol' Roy to Coach K except UNC fans. As Deano said when USA basketball was looking to replace the train wrecks that were George Karl and Larry Brown, there's only one college coach for the job, and it wasn't Huck.

Obviously Coach K's not infaliable. But no objective observer considered last year's team with Thorton and Hariston in the rotation as being superior talent.

You think UNC's talent is much better than I do. Logically then, you must conclude their failure to perform is due to coaching.

OldPhiKap
12-14-2014, 08:47 AM
I think this is right for Britt:

2013: 37% fg, 2.4 apg 1.7 topg
2014: 37.5% fg, 1.1 apg, .7 topg.

Not much there that screams "improvement" so far as a pg. but the Britt argument for Carolina fans is akin to the TT argument Duke fans had -- good kid with hustle, but limits on productivity. (And to be clear, I would take TT over Britt any day of the week and twice on Sunday. Not making a strict comparison of the players -- just the issue). Britt is good, but limited.

As far as "crunch time" goes, I'll credit UNC that they did not just fold like they did a few years ago when getting hammered. But there was a double-digit lead six minutes into te game. It got close to a twenty point spread at one point. The Only crunching going on was by the Wildcats.

Henderson
12-14-2014, 08:52 AM
Britt is good, but limited.

That's just another way of saying, "mediocre," and I agree. Players at Britt's level are a dime a dozen in D1.

CDu
12-14-2014, 09:08 AM
That's just another way of saying, "mediocre," and I agree. Players at Britt's level are a dime a dozen in D1.

Exactly. He is mediocre. He is neither good nor terrible. You don't want to rely on him as a starting PG or a guy to get major minutes. You don't want him to run your offense. He is a caretaker and nothing more.

Maybe eventually he develops into something more. But to this point he has been thoroughly mediocre. I would venture that there are 25 better PG in the ACC. Maybe more. In a 16 team conference, that makes him a mediocre backup PG.

I don't even know what to say about Wheat's Joel James comment. There are probably 40 better big men in the ACC than him.

roywhite
12-14-2014, 09:19 AM
That's just another way of saying, "mediocre," and I agree. Players at Britt's level are a dime a dozen in D1.


Exactly. He is mediocre. He is neither good nor terrible. You don't want to rely on him as a starting PG or a guy to get major minutes. You don't want him to run your offense. He is a caretaker and nothing more.

Maybe eventually he develops into something more. But to this point he has been thoroughly mediocre. I would venture that there are 25 better PG in the ACC. Maybe more.

I don't even know what to say about Wheat's Joel James comment. There are probably 40 better big men in the ACC than him.

Really, that was my overall impression of watching UNC. They are no longer getting the very best players; more of them are going to Duke and Kentucky.

Can UNC still win or even make an NCAA run? Yes, but we're not seeing one-and-done types playing in Chapel Hill.

mpj96
12-14-2014, 09:25 AM
I thought UNC played pretty well yesterday. UK is just very strong and they got up for this game. UNC fans must be frustrated with Tokoto. The guy is an athletic freak but his head for the game is so far behind his physical skills.

Henderson
12-14-2014, 09:57 AM
They are no longer getting the very best players; more of them are going to Duke and Kentucky.

That's a pretty common complaint over on IC too. Due to the cyclical nature of such things, I wouldn't place too much stock in it, except that the well seems pretty dry without much reason to expect a turnaround soon.

And it's consistent with the perception that Roy's message isn't hitting buttons with top recruits any longer. Stephen Zimmerman dropped Carolina from his list a few weeks ago. There are reports on IC that Brandon Ingram referred to Roy as "old school" and "corny." But I haven't seen a primary report quoting him. Anyone got that?

Barring early departures, there isn't a strong need for Roy to kill it with his '15 class. He doesn't have any critical seniors. Of course that leaves him with this [decent but nothing special] talent, and he'll still be the [decent but nothing special] coach. So another mediocre season next year unless he picks up a surprise or two in the spring.

I'll be watching his '16 class for signs of either redemption as a recruiter or the coming of the end for Roy.

P.S. How in the world did Marcus Paige receive more AP Preseason AA votes than anyone else?

moonpie23
12-14-2014, 10:01 AM
seriously....what TOP TIER player would go there with the veritable Sword Of Damocles hanging over their heads?

Henderson
12-14-2014, 10:07 AM
seriously....what TOP TIER player would go there with the veritable Sword Of Damocles hanging over their heads?

Yes. But I think it's more than that.

CDu
12-14-2014, 10:12 AM
Really, that was my overall impression of watching UNC. They are no longer getting the very best players; more of them are going to Duke and Kentucky.

Can UNC still win or even make an NCAA run? Yes, but we're not seeing one-and-done types playing in Chapel Hill.

Agreed completely. I don't know if it is purely cause and effect, but since Calipari opened his one-and-done shop and Coach K fully embraced the one and done, the quality of talent coming to UNC has dropped substantially.

Henderson
12-14-2014, 10:20 AM
Agreed completely. I don't know if it is purely cause and effect, but since Calipari opened his one-and-done shop and Coach K fully embraced the one and done, quality of talent coming to UNC has dropped substantially.

I don't think it's a full embrace. More like recognition and acceptance. Like a bro' hug. Cal is swapping spit and getting naked with it.

CDu
12-14-2014, 10:48 AM
I don't think it's a full embrace. More like recognition and acceptance. Like a bro' hug. Cal is swapping spit and getting naked with it.

Disturbing analogy, but I agree.

Wander
12-14-2014, 11:37 AM
Hahahahahahahahahaha.

Joel James might legitimately be the worst rotation player on a top 25 team (are we still calling UNC that?). Wheat has to be trolling us.

Duvall
12-14-2014, 11:37 AM
Believe what you want to believe. But to say a kid, any kid, getting quality minutes late in contested games for a top 25 team is not a "good player" is ridiculous.

Are we really defining "good player" to include every rotation player for every top-25 team? That seems...generous.


And Joel James is a good player too. You'll see him as well against Okafor and I'm confident he'll do fine too.

What exactly is Joel James good at?

Duvall
12-14-2014, 11:39 AM
Joel James might legitimately be the worst rotation player on a top 25 team (are we still calling UNC that?). Wheat has to be trolling us.

It's uncanny. (http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/compare?add=brian-bersticker&brian-bersticker=2001-2002&i=1&p1=joel-james)

AncientPsychicT
12-14-2014, 11:46 AM
It's uncanny. (http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/compare?add=brian-bersticker&brian-bersticker=2001-2002&i=1&p1=joel-james)

It's not just uncanny. If anything, James' numbers are even worse than Bersticker's. Mein Gott, I didn't know that was even possible.

Ultrarunner
12-14-2014, 12:18 PM
Really, that was my overall impression of watching UNC. They are no longer getting the very best players; more of them are going to Duke and Kentucky.

Can UNC still win or even make an NCAA run? Yes, but we're not seeing one-and-done types playing in Chapel Hill.

A minor quibble - we have seen one-and-done talent on the Hill as recently as last year. The problem is that they don't leave after their first year but stick around two, three, four years. And in JMM's case, left undrafted. Barnes was there two years. Henson played out of position for a goodly part of his first year, setting back his draft prospects.

That's within the last five years. If all we're talking about is this year or last, then feel free to disregard. The failure of kids to get to the pros as quickly may be hurting Roy's recruiting, or the ongoing 'academic' scandal, or he just might be in a slump. Take a smarter man than me to figure that out. My personal guess is 'yes' - all of those are factors.

OldPhiKap
12-14-2014, 12:24 PM
Roy has gotten good-to-great athletes over that period of time. He has gotten few scorers. Which is problematic, since that is kind of the object of the game.

ncexnyc
12-14-2014, 01:17 PM
Joel James might legitimately be the worst rotation player on a top 25 team (are we still calling UNC that?). Wheat has to be trolling us.
Nope he's not trolling us, just feeding us his standard UNC is a producer of quality big men rhetoric.

Wheat's cool. Despite his love for UNC, anyone who loves to fish can't be all bad.

wilko
12-14-2014, 01:33 PM
Can UNC still win or even make an NCAA run? Yes, but we're not seeing one-and-done types playing in Chapel Hill.

Perfectly thrilled with this outcome...

Billy Dat
12-14-2014, 03:54 PM
What is going on with Paige? I get that he wants to get others involved in the game, but that kid HAS to become more selfish if this UNC team is going to get better. His habit of differing to others until later in games would drive me mad if I wanted UNC to do well.

You have hit upon a feeling I share, that when I watch UNC, I think Paige needs to be in attack mode from the tip. The Heels have a lot of length and athleticism and are real good on the glass. I think Paige needs to get into the defense for soft floaters, drive and kicks, etc. to allow them to take advantage of the defense when it is in help and recover mode.

Wheat, after your pre-game comments about Tokoto I paid close attention to him and while I think he's a different kind of player than Winslow, I do see a lot of improvement in his game. He looks a lot more confident on offense. Both he and Winslow have distinctive hair.

Kentucky is just really really tough. They are a deserving #1. Watching Texas and UNC, it was easy to get lulled into the idea of, "Hey, this team is hanging with them athletically", and then their defense and transition game would push a close-ish game out to 10, then 15. The Poythress injury not only opens up playing time (which ever one in the platoons wants more of), but also gives them something to rally around. Cauley-Stein has really evolved into a huge presence on both ends of the court. Game to game, the debate shifts around to who are the best 5, but it kind of doesn't matter. The Louisville game will be really fun to watch as I don't see UCLA giving them a good game.

Wheat/"/"/"
12-14-2014, 03:55 PM
The hubris on display here is why teams/fans love to beat Duke.

Just because a player may have limitations, does not mean he can't be a good player. Basketball is a team sport that can hide a players weaknesses, and accent his positives.

Lots of teams with less talented players beat teams with more talented players. Happens all the time. There are a lot of good players all around the country, and some that are just more talented than others.

I thought Tyler Thornton was a good player. I didn't think Austin Rivers was a particularly good player. Rivers was way more talented, but who understood the game better and got the most out of their talents? I'd say Thornton did and it would be a disservice to not recognize him as a good player just because his physical talent level was average.

For some of you on this thread, every player on Lehigh and Mercer would be considered a weak player, not worthy of the bench at Duke, using the metrics you guys are trying to apply to players like James and Britt. We know how that turned out.

I'm not trying to make anyone mad, but those were good,(not great),basketball players too, deserving respect, who were made better by playing strong together as a team.

The disrespect I see for good players is what gets to me, and why I step up to defend them.

James has his place as a good player. His size bothered the KY guys during his minutes. He's big, real big...moves good for his size and has a nice touch around the basket when he cleanly catches it down low. He plays strong defensively. He's a good rebounder. His weakness really lies in his hands. His teammates have to adjust for that and make betters passes than they would have to for somebody like Meeks, who has excellent hands. They are working on it. And he can be a quality asset for UNC this year.

CDu
12-14-2014, 04:06 PM
The hubris on display here is why teams/fans love to beat Duke.

Just because a player may have limitations, does not mean he can't be a good player. Basketball is a team sport that can hide a players weaknesses, and accent his positives.

Lots of teams with less talented players beat teams with more talented players. Happens all the time. There are a lot of good players all around the country, and some that are just more talented than others.

I thought Tyler Thornton was a good player. I didn't think Austin Rivers was a particularly good player. Rivers was way more talented, but who understood the game better and got the most out of their talents? I'd say Thornton did and it would be a disservice to not recognize him as a good player just because his physical talent level was average.

For some of you on this thread, every player on Lehigh and Mercer would be considered a weak player, not worthy of the bench at Duke, using the metrics you guys are trying to apply to players like James and Britt. We know how that turned out.

I'm not trying to make anyone mad, but those were good,(not great),basketball players too, deserving respect, who were made better by playing strong together as a team.

The disrespect I see for good players is what gets to me, and why I step up to defend them.

James has his place as a good player. His size bothered the KY guys during his minutes. He's big, real big...moves good for his size and has a nice touch around the basket when he cleanly catches it down low. He plays strong defensively. He's a good rebounder. His weakness really lies in his hands. His teammates have to adjust for that and make betters passes than they would have to for somebody like Meeks, who has excellent hands. They are working on it. And he can be a quality asset for UNC this year.

Mercer was a bad loss. Duke played poorly and lost. Lehigh was also a bad loss, though not as bad as they had arguably the best player (which was known pregame). Duke losing a game or two doesn't make Britt and (especially) James good players.

It isn't hubris to say that those guys aren't among the 25 (or 40) best players in conference at their positions. It is just reality. UNC has a number of good-to-very-good players. Those two aren't among them.

BD80
12-14-2014, 04:07 PM
The hubris on display here is why teams/fans love to beat Duke.

Just because a player may have limitations, does not mean he can't be a good player. Basketball is a team sport that can hide a players weaknesses, and accent his positives.

Lots of teams with less talented players beat teams with more talented players. Happens all the time. There are a lot of good players all around the country, and some that are just more talented than others.

I thought Tyler Thornton was a good player. I didn't think Austin Rivers was a particularly good player. Rivers was way more talented, but who understood the game better and got the most out of their talents? I'd say Thornton did and it would be a disservice to not recognize him as a good player just because his physical talent level was average.

For some of you on this thread, every player on Lehigh and Mercer would be considered a weak player, not worthy of the bench at Duke, using the metrics you guys are trying to apply to players like James and Britt. We know how that turned out.

I'm not trying to make anyone mad, but those were good,(not great),basketball players too, deserving respect, who were made better by playing strong together as a team.

The disrespect I see for good players is what gets to me, and why I step up to defend them.

James has his place as a good player. His size bothered the KY guys during his minutes. He's big, real big...moves good for his size and has a nice touch around the basket when he cleanly catches it down low. He plays strong defensively. He's a good rebounder. His weakness really lies in his hands. His teammates have to adjust for that and make betters passes than they would have to for somebody like Meeks, who has excellent hands. They are working on it. And he can be a quality asset for UNC this year.

Whew. I've done more reading about a mediocre unc basketball team in this thread alone than the entire 2005 unc starting line-up read for all of their classes combined

On a serious note, was there any concern about ol' roy's sideline swoon in the ky game?

Wheat/"/"/"
12-14-2014, 04:18 PM
On a serious note, was there any concern about ol' roy's sideline swoon in the ky game?

Another bout with his vertigo issues it seems.

Kedsy
12-14-2014, 04:28 PM
Obviously Coach K's not infaliable. But no objective observer considered last year's team with Thorton and Hariston in the rotation as being superior talent.

Well, first of all, I don't remember a Duke team with a player named either "Thorton" or "Hariston." Really, is it so hard to get the names right?

Second, Wheat meant last year's Duke team's talent was superior to Mercer's, and to my knowledge every objective observer in the cosmos would have agreed with that statement.

Finally, even if you didn't get what Wheat was saying, lots of objective observers thought the 2013-14 Duke team had superior talent to most schools in the country.

Wander
12-14-2014, 04:54 PM
James has his place as a good player. His size bothered the KY guys during his minutes. He's big, real big...moves good for his size and has a nice touch around the basket when he cleanly catches it down low. He plays strong defensively. He's a good rebounder. His weakness really lies in his hands. His teammates have to adjust for that and make betters passes than they would have to for somebody like Meeks, who has excellent hands. They are working on it. And he can be a quality asset for UNC this year.

Let me just quote CDu here: hahahahahahahahahahah.

Seriously: Joel James, who is 6-10, 280 pounds, is picking up defensive rebounds at the same rate as Duke's point guard.



The hubris on display here is why teams/fans love to beat Duke.


Except this has nothing to do with Duke fans. 90% of UNC fans think Britt is a serviceable, fine, nothing special, backup point guard, and 99.999999% of UNC fans think that Joel James sucks.

slower
12-14-2014, 05:23 PM
The hubris on display here is why teams/fans love to beat Duke.

Just because a player may have limitations, does not mean he can't be a good player. Basketball is a team sport that can hide a players weaknesses, and accent his positives.

Lots of teams with less talented players beat teams with more talented players. Happens all the time. There are a lot of good players all around the country, and some that are just more talented than others.

I thought Tyler Thornton was a good player. I didn't think Austin Rivers was a particularly good player. Rivers was way more talented, but who understood the game better and got the most out of their talents? I'd say Thornton did and it would be a disservice to not recognize him as a good player just because his physical talent level was average.

For some of you on this thread, every player on Lehigh and Mercer would be considered a weak player, not worthy of the bench at Duke, using the metrics you guys are trying to apply to players like James and Britt. We know how that turned out.

I'm not trying to make anyone mad, but those were good,(not great),basketball players too, deserving respect, who were made better by playing strong together as a team.

The disrespect I see for good players is what gets to me, and why I step up to defend them.

James has his place as a good player. His size bothered the KY guys during his minutes. He's big, real big...moves good for his size and has a nice touch around the basket when he cleanly catches it down low. He plays strong defensively. He's a good rebounder. His weakness really lies in his hands. His teammates have to adjust for that and make betters passes than they would have to for somebody like Meeks, who has excellent hands. They are working on it. And he can be a quality asset for UNC this year.

Ah, the smell of burned Wheat. You seem a little edgy these past few days.

77devil
12-14-2014, 05:54 PM
Well, first of all, I don't remember a Duke team with a player named either "Thorton" or "Hariston." Really, is it so hard to get the names right?

Second, Wheat meant last year's Duke team's talent was superior to Mercer's, and to my knowledge every objective observer in the cosmos would have agreed with that statement.

Finally, even if you didn't get what Wheat was saying, lots of objective observers thought the 2013-14 Duke team had superior talent to most schools in the country.

Thanks for the spelling reminder. So much for not proof reading. The rest is out of context and not worth replying to.

Wheat/"/"/"
12-14-2014, 07:06 PM
Second, Wheat meant last year's Duke team's talent was superior to Mercer's, and to my knowledge every objective observer in the cosmos would have agreed with that statement.

Finally, even if you didn't get what Wheat was saying, lots of objective observers thought the 2013-14 Duke team had superior talent to most schools in the country.


My point for those guys was.....keep disrespecting good, hardworking players and get all puffed up about over hyped recruiting rankings and mock drafts at your own peril...fans should pay more attention to the actual play on the court....you'd think they'd learn.

(UNC fans are guilty of this as well).

kshepinthehouse
12-14-2014, 07:10 PM
My point for those guys was.....keep disrespecting good, hardworking players and get all puffed up about over hyped recruiting rankings and mock drafts at your own peril...fans should pay more attention to the actual play on the court....you'd think they'd learn.

(UNC fans are guilty of this as well).

But when we watch James and Britt play on the court we don't see them as good players. I've never been impressed with James at all and Britt has had a few impressive moments to me but I think the word serviceable applies best with him.

jipops
12-14-2014, 07:21 PM
(UNC fans are guilty of this as well).

Yup...and yes.

CDu
12-14-2014, 07:29 PM
My point for those guys was.....keep disrespecting good, hardworking players and get all puffed up about over hyped recruiting rankings and mock drafts at your own peril...fans should pay more attention to the actual play on the court....you'd think they'd learn.

(UNC fans are guilty of this as well).

I am not disrespecting good players, of which UNC has several. I am saying that Britt is mediocre and James is not good. And trust me, I am basing this on having paid plenty of attention to the actual play on the court.

Wheat/"/"/"
12-14-2014, 07:29 PM
But when we watch James and Britt play on the court we don't see them as good players. I've never been impressed with James at all and Britt has had a few impressive moments to me but I think the word serviceable applies best with him.


I challenge you guys to watch them both carefully against OSU this weekend.

Particularly Britt in the late game. Watch him pressure the ball on D, fight through screens, push the tempo up the floor and run the plays for Paige and then tell me he's not a good/quality player running the system Roy wants.

James is 4th on the depth chart, but that doesn't mean he's not a good player, only that there are better ones ahead of him. Watch his low post positioning and his turnaround shot.
Watch his hedges and recovery on D, boxing out, and remember he's 6'10-"11 280lbs.

They are good players, not alpha dogs, but good players and getting better game by game.

OldPhiKap
12-14-2014, 07:32 PM
I challenge you guys to watch them both carefully against OSU this weekend.

Particularly Britt in the late game. Watch him pressure the ball on D, fight through screens, push the tempo up the floor and run the plays for Paige and then tell me he's not a good/quality player running the system Roy wants.

James is 4th on the depth chart, but that doesn't mean he's not a good player, only that there are better ones ahead of him. Watch his low post positioning and his turnaround shot.
Watch his hedges and recovery on D, boxing out, and remember he's 6'10-"11 280lbs.

They are good players, not alpha dogs, but good players and getting better game by game.

fair enough.

CDu
12-14-2014, 07:42 PM
I challenge you guys to watch them both carefully against OSU this weekend.

Particularly Britt in the late game. Watch him pressure the ball on D, fight through screens, push the tempo up the floor and run the plays for Paige and then tell me he's not a good/quality player running the system Roy wants.

James is 4th on the depth chart, but that doesn't mean he's not a good player, only that there are better ones ahead of him. Watch his low post positioning and his turnaround shot.
Watch his hedges and recovery on D, boxing out, and remember he's 6'10-"11 280lbs.

They are good players, not alpha dogs, but good players and getting better game by game.

I have watched them every game, and I have been unimpressed every game. I will watch the OSU game too, and expect to again be unimpressed. They are not good players right now. They do try hard, but they aren't good.

Duvall
12-14-2014, 08:07 PM
There's certainly something remarkable about not only insisting that you are right and everyone else is wrong (not just wrong, but biased), but also accusing everyone of hubris in daring to disagree with you. Especially since the view of the overwhelming majority is the one that happens to be supported by all the available statistics - the shots missed, the rebounds ungrabbed, the assists not made.

Duke95
12-14-2014, 08:52 PM
I have watched them every game, and I have been unimpressed every game. I will watch the OSU game too, and expect to again be unimpressed. They are not good players right now. They do try hard, but they aren't good.

I have to disagree. After watching UNC against Kentucky, I thought they (UNC) have a lot of promise. Paige is a solid player. He has an extraordinarily smooth shot, yet seems to struggle sometimes in their offense.

I wish Duke fans would heed the advice they give to UNC fans and take off their blue-colored glasses. UNC is a strong team. They have a tendency to play to the level of their opponent, but they're a strong team nonetheless.

lotusland
12-14-2014, 09:15 PM
The hubris on display here is why teams/fans love to beat Duke.

Just because a player may have limitations, does not mean he can't be a good player. Basketball is a team sport that can hide a players weaknesses, and accent his positives.

Lots of teams with less talented players beat teams with more talented players. Happens all the time. There are a lot of good players all around the country, and some that are just more talented than others.

I thought Tyler Thornton was a good player. I didn't think Austin Rivers was a particularly good player. Rivers was way more talented, but who understood the game better and got the most out of their talents? I'd say Thornton did and it would be a disservice to not recognize him as a good player just because his physical talent level was average.

For some of you on this thread, every player on Lehigh and Mercer would be considered a weak player, not worthy of the bench at Duke, using the metrics you guys are trying to apply to players like James and Britt. We know how that turned out.

I'm not trying to make anyone mad, but those were good,(not great),basketball players too, deserving respect, who were made better by playing strong together as a team.

The disrespect I see for good players is what gets to me, and why I step up to defend them.

James has his place as a good player. His size bothered the KY guys during his minutes. He's big, real big...moves good for his size and has a nice touch around the basket when he cleanly catches it down low. He plays strong defensively. He's a good rebounder. His weakness really lies in his hands. His teammates have to adjust for that and make betters passes than they would have to for somebody like Meeks, who has excellent hands. They are working on it. And he can be a quality asset for UNC this year.

The hubris on IC is exponentially greater than here ( although the spelling police are much worse here). I think teams/fans like to beat duke mostly because they win. Same for UK and usually unc. I enjoy your perspective on here and appreciate how well you take some jabs but you must realize you are pampered here compared to how duke fans are treated on IC. Britt and Williams seem average at best to me but you've watched them more closely than I so maybe I've missed the subtleties of their games. Austin Rivers was not quite jabari parker or kyrie Irving but he was way better than Tyler Thornton, Nate Britt or joel James as a freshman.

CDu
12-14-2014, 09:28 PM
I have to disagree. After watching UNC against Kentucky, I thought they (UNC) have a lot of promise. Paige is a solid player. He has an extraordinarily smooth shot, yet seems to struggle sometimes in their offense.

I wish Duke fans would heed the advice they give to UNC fans and take off their blue-colored glasses. UNC is a strong team. They have a tendency to play to the level of their opponent, but they're a strong team nonetheless.

I was talking about Britt and James, not UNC as a team.

gumbomoop
12-14-2014, 10:23 PM
James is 4th on the depth chart, but that doesn't mean he's not a good player, only that there are better ones ahead of him. Watch his low post positioning and his turnaround shot.

I'm not clear on the "4th on depth chart" ref. I'd have said James is either 2d on depth chart at the 5, or at least tied with Hubert for 2d. As Meeks so far has averaged 23 mpg, that James, so far, averages but 7.3 mpg does not appear to support your fulsome praise of his multi-talents. That is, Meeks can't yet play 27-30 mpg, so Heels really do need a solid backup at 5. Hubert came to UNC as something of a project, and hasn't much panned out. I assume the same - a project - about James, who's still early in his third season, and so might, probably will, contribute more than Hubert, left-handed compliment notwithstanding.

As to his turnaround shot, do you mean that most, or several, of his total of 13 FGAs this season are turnarounds? Do you mean that most, or several, of his total of 6 FGMs this season are turnarounds?

I will say that James looked smooth on his 2 FTs v. UK. I'm skeptical that he'll soon contribute much O, period, so I'm obviously skeptical about how dependable is his turnaround. His O-contributions seem more likely to come from lay ups after a nifty pass, or FTs. I'd guess he really is sort of the backup 5, and that he "deserves" to play pretty much of all the meaningful backup minutes to Meeks, leaving just a few mop-up minutes for the senior Hubert.

If he gradually gets up to 10-12 backup minutes, I could see him becoming a very useful player. But that's not guaranteed, and, really, in part depends on whether Roy will finally decide, firmly, that the Hubert-project is at its dismaying end, allowing the James-project at least a chance to develop.

Duvall
12-14-2014, 10:30 PM
Second, Wheat meant last year's Duke team's talent was superior to Mercer's, and to my knowledge every objective observer in the cosmos would have agreed with that statement.

Finally, even if you didn't get what Wheat was saying, lots of objective observers thought the 2013-14 Duke team had superior talent to most schools in the country.

I think what Wheat was saying was pretty clear. It also had little to do with the point we were arguing...

Wheat/"/"/"
12-15-2014, 07:52 AM
I'm not clear on the "4th on depth chart" ref. I'd have said James is either 2d on depth chart at the 5, or at least tied with Hubert for 2d. As Meeks so far has averaged 23 mpg, that James, so far, averages but 7.3 mpg does not appear to support your fulsome praise of his multi-talents. That is, Meeks can't yet play 27-30 mpg, so Heels really do need a solid backup at 5. Hubert came to UNC as something of a project, and hasn't much panned out. I assume the same - a project - about James, who's still early in his third season, and so might, probably will, contribute more than Hubert, left-handed compliment notwithstanding.

As to his turnaround shot, do you mean that most, or several, of his total of 13 FGAs this season are turnarounds? Do you mean that most, or several, of his total of 6 FGMs this season are turnarounds?

I will say that James looked smooth on his 2 FTs v. UK. I'm skeptical that he'll soon contribute much O, period, so I'm obviously skeptical about how dependable is his turnaround. His O-contributions seem more likely to come from lay ups after a nifty pass, or FTs. I'd guess he really is sort of the backup 5, and that he "deserves" to play pretty much of all the meaningful backup minutes to Meeks, leaving just a few mop-up minutes for the senior Hubert.

If he gradually gets up to 10-12 backup minutes, I could see him becoming a very useful player. But that's not guaranteed, and, really, in part depends on whether Roy will finally decide, firmly, that the Hubert-project is at its dismaying end, allowing the James-project at least a chance to develop.

He's behind Meeks, Johnson and Hicks. When Meeks sits, Johnson slides to the 5 and Hicks plays PF. He's probably fairly even on the depth chart with Hubert, up and down game Roy will go with Hubert, 1/2 court game he'll go with James. His size causes issues in the paint.

He has surprisingly good shooting touch for a guy who sometimes struggles to catch the tough pass. He plays more physical, unlike the other 3...Roy also likes his energy level, he always plays hard.

Wheat/"/"/"
12-15-2014, 08:04 AM
I think what Wheat was saying was pretty clear.

There are good players that aren't "star" players, and they should be respected.

alteran
12-15-2014, 09:52 AM
The hubris on display here is why teams/fans love to beat Duke.

Wheat, Wheat, Wheat... no university has more hubris than The University of The People, formerly known as the home of The Carolina Way.

If hubris was what caused people to pile on an institution, Chapel Hill would collapse under the weight, and the hole would be visible from space.

Just a pet peeve, my friend. I'm tired of people being haters* on Duke and justifying it on some supposedly "unique" element of Duke fans which is in fact present in every fanbase in the country, often in far greater degrees. (Seriously-- University of The People?) . If people want to hate Duke, fine. But they should own it-- not rationalize it by pretending it's based on something that in fact exists everywhere. That's just lame.

--alteran

* Just to be clear, I don't consider you a hater at all, I just don't care to hear that mentality defended-- particularly not here. Not when I have to deal with UNC fans getting in my face every couple of weeks out of a sense of entitlement just because I wear Duke gear in Durham.

johnb
12-15-2014, 10:21 AM
One reason I hate Carolina is that they lose to Kentucky, thereby preventing us from getting to be #1 (which I realize doesn't count for anything, but I still prefer that we get there at some point during the season),

AND they'll soon go on an ACC winning streak and be in the chase to be conference champion. It's really annoying.

As for Wheat's point, I have to say I agree with him. Anyone in the rotation on a top 50 NCAA team is really good--certainly good enough that if they got lost and wound up in one of my pick up games, we'd notice that an alien had arrived on court.

Just like when we talk about Semi as being a 2nd or 3rd tier recruit, it's kinda snotty--he was an awesome recruit and is an excellent (if comparatively less experienced) basketball player on a team stuffed with really excellent players who have all been playing the game against top notch competition their whole lives.

As for the proposed brawl, I'd have preferred for ol' Roy to have slugged Cal, leading to coaching combat that the players were unable to slow, leading to wholesale suspensions of adults. I generally respect the players; it's the administration and coaches who deserve scorn.

oldnavy
12-15-2014, 10:38 AM
Semantics...

Both Britt and James are good/very good basketball players when compared to everyone that plays basketball.

I think the issue is in comparison to other ACC level players. They are not "good" when measured against ACC or other major DI competition... they would slip to average or perhaps slightly below average on that scale IMO, with Britt scoring much higher than James.

I have an issue with folks that want to claim that Duke doesn't develop bigs, and then claim that James is something other than a space filler himself....

James is exactly the type of player that UNC fans would hold up as an example of Duke not developing if he were in fact at Duke..

flyingdutchdevil
12-15-2014, 10:54 AM
Semantics...

Both Britt and James are good/very good basketball players when compared to everyone that plays basketball.

I think the issue is in comparison to other ACC level players. They are not "good" when measured against ACC or other major DI competition... they would slip to average or perhaps slightly below average on that scale IMO, with Britt scoring much higher than James.

I have an issue with folks that want to claim that Duke doesn't develop bigs, and then claim that James is something other than a space filler himself....

James is exactly the type of player that UNC fans would hold up as an example of Duke not developing if he were in fact at Duke..

I haven't really seen James play much ball (due to the amazing depth that UNC has at the 4-5). But I have seen Britt play plenty...and he is not ACC-caliber. There aren't many UNC players who get this many minutes and aren't considered ACC-caliber, but Britt fits that bill.

Firstly, his stats are pretty terrible: 36% FG, 32% 3FG, 1.6 A:T ratio, 5.6 fouls per 40 min... his only statistical measurement that is better than "okay" is his FT shooting, where he is shooting an incredible 93%. Secondly, the guy is tiny at 5'11" and doesn't offer much upside from an athletic point of view. Thirdly, hustle is great...but talent coupled with hustle is soooo much better.

Britt isn't ACC-caliber, and know what? There have been quite a few Duke players who I wouldn't consider to be ACC-caliber either. The difference between Britt and the non-ACC Duke players? Minutes played. Britt is averaging 15 min a game, which is fairly high for what seems to be an ineffective player.

Wheat/"/"/"
12-15-2014, 10:55 AM
Wheat, Wheat, Wheat... no university has more hubris than The University of The People, formerly known as the home of The Carolina Way.


There is plenty of hubris to go around, from all sides...that's for sure.

Personally, I don't get it. I just like to watch kids play a game and hope the team I enjoy following plays it better than the other guys. I enjoy breaking down how they play, and seeing how others break down their play.

I just don't see the need some people have to be so condescending towards a player. Any player.

Especially one who was good enough to get a ride to a major college basketball school and get quality playing time against the number one team in the country and then see the great analysis he's "not-very-good" or "medicore".

Henderson
12-15-2014, 11:05 AM
There is plenty of hubris to go around, from all sides...that's for sure.

Personally, I don't get it. I just like to watch kids play a game and hope the team I enjoy following plays it better than the other guys. I enjoy breaking down how they play, and seeing how others break down their play.

I just don't see the need some people have to be so condescending towards a player. Any player.

Especially one who was good enough to get a ride to a major college basketball school and get quality playing time against the number one team in the country and then see the great analysis he's "not-very-good" or "medicore".

I don't get this air of self-pitying woe. People are just disagreeing about the adjectives best used to describe players and the evidence that charges the debate. It's what sports fans do in discussions. "Good" vs. "Mediocre" has you wallowing in a sense of unfairness? If you want to make the case that, say Matt Jones, is mediocre as opposed to good, I'll disagree, but I won't whine about your making your point.

If anything, I see consensus here that Britt and James are neither exceptional nor horrible. So what's with the meta stuff?

Duvall
12-15-2014, 11:14 AM
One reason I hate Carolina is that they lose to Kentucky, thereby preventing us from getting to be #1 (which I realize doesn't count for anything, but I still prefer that we get there at some point during the season),

AND they'll soon go on an ACC winning streak and be in the chase to be conference champion. It's really annoying.

As for Wheat's point, I have to say I agree with him. Anyone in the rotation on a top 50 NCAA team is really good--certainly good enough that if they got lost and wound up in one of my pick up games, we'd notice that an alien had arrived on court.

Just like when we talk about Semi as being a 2nd or 3rd tier recruit, it's kinda snotty--he was an awesome recruit and is an excellent (if comparatively less experienced) basketball player on a team stuffed with really excellent players who have all been playing the game against top notch competition their whole lives.

This is true, and something fans need to keep in mind - all of these kids are tremendously accomplished in their chosen field, and should be discussed with respect. That said, when comparing them to the field of college basketball players, some are much better, and some are worse, and I think we can find respectful ways to discuss that.

77devil
12-15-2014, 11:50 AM
I don't get this air of self-pitying woe.

Roy exhibits this demeanor a lot in the post game presser after a loss. It's one of his characteristics that I find distasteful that is so distinct from Coach K.


People are just disagreeing about the adjectives best used to describe players and the evidence that charges the debate. It's what sports fans do in discussions. "Good" vs. "Mediocre" has you wallowing in a sense of unfairness? If you want to make the case that, say Matt Jones, is mediocre as opposed to good, I'll disagree, but I won't whine about your making your point.

If anything, I see consensus here that Britt and James are neither exceptional nor horrible. So what's with the meta stuff?

Another way to put it is they are not good enough for most UNC fan's expectation of Roy's recruiting if IC is indicative.

flyingdutchdevil
12-15-2014, 12:13 PM
I just don't see the need some people have to be so condescending towards a player. Any player.

Especially one who was good enough to get a ride to a major college basketball school and get quality playing time against the number one team in the country and then see the great analysis he's "not-very-good" or "medicore".

Because we're calling a player non-ACC caliber means we're being condescending towards a player? 95% of players on a rotation on an NBA team are better than 95% of current ACC players, but that doesn't stop everyone from criticizing NBA players.

Hell, we do that to our own players here on DBR! An ACC player should be compared with other ACC players and not with high school players, NBA player, or the dudes I play pick up with.

Also, what we do is not condescension, it's solid analysis with the quantitative reasoning to back it up.

CDu
12-15-2014, 01:27 PM
Personally, I don't get it. I just like to watch kids play a game and hope the team I enjoy following plays it better than the other guys. I enjoy breaking down how they play, and seeing how others break down their play.

Me too. And that's what we are doing in saying that Britt and James aren't really ACC caliber players. Well, more specifically, Britt is a mediocre option for a backup PG in the ACC, and James is not ACC caliber.


I just don't see the need some people have to be so condescending towards a player. Any player.

Especially one who was good enough to get a ride to a major college basketball school and get quality playing time against the number one team in the country and then see the great analysis he's "not-very-good" or "medicore".[/QUOTE]

It's not condescension. And this entire discussion is about the quality of players relative to their peers. Obviously Britt is better than probably 99% of basketball players in the US. He'd make me look silly for sure. But he isn't playing against me, nor is he playing against those 99%. He's playing in the ACC. And in the ACC, he's a mediocre option as a backup PG and a very bad option as a starting PG. Maybe he gets better someday, but right now he's just another guy on the floor out there. That he gets playing time on this team (and last year's team) says more about the lack of options at UNC's disposal right now than it does about his skill level.

And James is a less optimistic case. He is a big body with very little basketball skill. His turnover percentage is terrible, his rebound percentages are terrible on both ends of the floor, and he has had a negative +/- each of the last two years (which is impressive this year given that the team has played the easiest part of their schedule). If he were a freshman, I'd say there is reason for optimism that he could become an effective player for UNC. But he's a junior and he's playing worse now as he did as a freshman (which wasn't good to begin with). Again - he'd destroy the average pickup game, and I'm sure he'd put up solid numbers if he played for Elon or Furman. But he's playing in the ACC, and in the ACC he is not good.

Bluegrassdevil1
12-15-2014, 01:36 PM
In an attempt to shift away from the current UNC quality back and forth, I wanted to express why games like these make me extremely happy about UK's chances of not winning the big gold trophy: Teams with win streaks rarely ever win the National Championship.

I simply want UK to remain unbeaten for the simple precedent that teams with long stretches of winning do not often stand triumphant in April.

2014: Wichita State. Unbeaten. Lost in the second round.

2014: Florida. Lost to UConn in December. Did not lose again until playing UConn in the Final Four.

2013: Gonzaga. From 12/15 to the second round (3/23, oddly enough to WSU), the Zags only lost by one to Butler.

2012: UK had a large winning streak after a December loss to IU, BUT they lost to Vanderbilt in the SEC title game. (conference tournament losses are key)

2011: Ohio State. Unbeaten from 11/7/10 until 2/11/12. Lost in the Final Four.

2011: Kansas. Unbeaten from 11/2/10 until 1/22/11. Lost in the Elite Eight.

2010: UK. Unbeaten from 11/2/09 until 1/26/11. Lost in the Elite Eight.

2008: Memphis. Only loss until the National Championship game was against Tennessee.

2005: Illinois. Unbeaten until 3/6 loss at OSU. Lost in the National Championship game.

2004: St. Joseph's. Unbeaten until losing in conference tournament on 3/11 to Xavier. Lost in the Elite Eight.

1999: Duke. Unbeaten after Cincinnati loss. Lost in the National Championship game.

1997: Kansas. Only lost at Missouri by two. Lost in the Sweet Sixteen to Arizona.

1996: UK. Unbeaten after 11/28 loss to UMass. Lost conference tournament championship game to Miss. St. Won National Championship.

1995: UCLA. Unbeaten after 1/28 loss to Cal Berkley. Won National Championship. Rare exception to a long streak not resulting in tournament loss.

1991: UNLV. Unbeaten until losing in the Final Four to Duke.

1986: Duke. Only losses were back to back on 1/18 and 1/21. Lost in the National Championship game.

It is my hope that UK makes it all the way until mid-March without a loss, because I like the odds of history overcoming the prestige of their talent.

Henderson
12-15-2014, 01:50 PM
Me too. And that's what we are doing in saying that Britt and James aren't really ACC caliber players.

Not sure who "we" is but I don't subscribe to a view that Britt and James are not ACC caliber players. I think they are decent backups. ACC quality backups. See, e.g., FSU. But if that's the metric for UNC recruits worthy of discussion, things have slipped.

MChambers
12-15-2014, 01:53 PM
I don't think the length of a winning streak has anything to do with winning the national championship.

First, even the best team every year isn't an odds-on favorite to win. It's just not the nature of a long season followed by a 66 team tournament.

Second, a lot of the teams on your list just didn't play a difficult schedule. Take St. Joe's, for example. Not many thought that was the best team in the land. I think that has more to do with them not winning.

Also, you left the 1992 Blue Devils off your list, and they had a pretty good winning streak until Hurley broke his foot, lost two games, and then won the rest of their games.

Wander
12-15-2014, 02:26 PM
Not sure who "we" is but I don't subscribe to a view that Britt and James are not ACC caliber players. I think they are decent backups. ACC quality backups. See, e.g., FSU. But if that's the metric for UNC recruits worthy of discussion, things have slipped.

Britt is a fine backup for an average ACC team, though below average for a ranked team. James really just isn't an ACC caliber player at all. Even for FSU. For evidence, UNC has had five games against BCS level competition: UCLA, Florida, Butler, Iowa, Kentucky. James has a total of 2 points, 2 rebounds, 0 baskets, 0 assists, 0 steals, 1 block, and 3 turnovers. The "eye test" for little things that don't appear on the stat sheet is also consistent with bad play, and nearly every UNC fan agrees with this. It's not condescending to say that he is very simply a bad player at an ACC level.

CDu
12-15-2014, 02:31 PM
Not sure who "we" is but I don't subscribe to a view that Britt and James are not ACC caliber players. I think they are decent backups. ACC quality backups. See, e.g., FSU. But if that's the metric for UNC recruits worthy of discussion, things have slipped.

I think Britt is a middle-of-the-pack backup PG in the ACC. He is not an ACC caliber starter or primary contributor. In a 10-15 mpg role, he's tolerable, but not much more.

James is not among the top 40 big men in the ACC.

Also, I wouldn't reference FSU. Teams that happen to be in the ACC but are (this year) no better than mid-majors shouldn't be an argument that those UNC guys are ACC caliber. FSU as a team isn't ACC caliber this year (and they aren't alone).

Henderson
12-15-2014, 02:44 PM
Also, I wouldn't reference FSU. Teams that happen to be in the ACC but are (this year) no better than mid-majors shouldn't be an argument that those UNC guys are ACC caliber. FSU as a team isn't ACC caliber this year (and they aren't alone).

Ok. I'll leave it to linguistic philosphers to say what an ACC caliber player is except by reference to current ACC teams.

Kedsy
12-15-2014, 03:08 PM
In an attempt to shift away from the current UNC quality back and forth, I wanted to express why games like these make me extremely happy about UK's chances of not winning the big gold trophy: Teams with win streaks rarely ever win the National Championship.

I think you're trying to prove too much. Here are the only two teams on your list that were undefeated going into the NCAAT:



2014: Wichita State. Unbeaten. Lost in the second round.
1991: UNLV. Unbeaten until losing in the Final Four to Duke.


For the rest of your examples, some are contradictory (e.g., what's the difference between the accomplishments of the two UK champions and St. Joseph's below?):



2012: UK had a large winning streak after a December loss to IU, BUT they lost to Vanderbilt in the SEC title game. (conference tournament losses are key)

1996: UK. Unbeaten after 11/28 loss to UMass. Lost conference tournament championship game to Miss. St. Won National Championship.

2004: St. Joseph's. Unbeaten until losing in conference tournament on 3/11 to Xavier. Lost in the Elite Eight.


...and pretty much all have analogs who also won the national championship:



2013: Gonzaga. From 12/15 to the second round (3/23, oddly enough to WSU), the Zags only lost by one to Butler.


2012: Kentucky. From 12/11 on, the Wildcats only lost to Vanderbilt -- won championship.



2011: Ohio State. Unbeaten from 11/7/10 until 2/11/12. Lost in the Final Four.
2011: Kansas. Unbeaten from 11/2/10 until 1/22/11. Lost in the Elite Eight.
2010: UK. Unbeaten from 11/2/09 until 1/26/11. Lost in the Elite Eight.
2005: Illinois. Unbeaten until 3/6 loss at OSU. Lost in the National Championship game.
2008: Memphis. Only loss until the National Championship game was against Tennessee.
1997: Kansas. Only lost at Missouri by two. Lost in the Sweet Sixteen to Arizona.


The last two belong in this group because they both lost in February. Their seasons were noteworthy because of their long undefeated streak to start the season (not to end the season).

2009: UNC. Unbeaten until 1/4/09. Won championship.
2008: Kansas. Unbeaten until 1/30/08. Won championship.
2006: Florida. Unbeaten until 1/21/06. Won championship.
2005: UNC. Unbeaten from 11/20/04 until 1/14/05. Won championship.
1999: UConn. Unbeaten until 2/1/99. Won championship.
1996: UK. Unbeaten from 11/29/95 to 3/1/96. Won championship.
1994: Arkansas. Unbeaten until 1/8/94. Won championship.
1992: Duke. Unbeaten until 2/5/92. Won championship.
1989. Michigan. Unbeaten until 1/14/89. Won championship.



2014: Florida. Lost to UConn in December. Did not lose again until playing UConn in the Final Four.
1999: Duke. Unbeaten after Cincinnati loss. Lost in the National Championship game.
1986: Duke. Only losses were back to back on 1/18 and 1/21. Lost in the National Championship game.


You already mentioned 1995 UCLA as an exception to this.



1995: UCLA. Unbeaten after 1/28 loss to Cal Berkley. Won National Championship. Rare exception to a long streak not resulting in tournament loss.


I would add:

2013: Louisville. Unbeaten after 2/9 loss at Notre Dame. Won championship.
1986: Louisville. Unbeaten after 2/8 loss at NC State. Won championship.

I'd also point out the following hot streaks to end seasons:

2012: UK. won 30 of last 31 games. Won championship.
2010: Duke. won 18 of last 19 games. Won championship.
2002: Maryland. won 19 of last 20 games. Won championship.
1994: Arkansas. won 18 of last 19 games. Won championship.
1993: UNC. won 17 of last 18 games. Won championship.
1992: Duke. won 17 of last 18 games. Won championship.
1990: UNLV. won 21 of last 22 games. Won championship.


I think, ultimately, that not too many teams go on super-long winning streaks, that nobody has gone undefeated since 1976, and that only one team wins the championship each year. Beyond that, there's not nearly enough evidence to suggest a long winning streak is detrimental to winning championships.

CDu
12-15-2014, 03:13 PM
Ok. I'll leave it to linguistic philosphers to say what an ACC caliber player is except by reference to current ACC teams.

How about this simplification: not of top-100 caliber.

Henderson
12-15-2014, 03:41 PM
How about this simplification: not of top-100 caliber.

I'll subscibe to that in both cases.

Duvall
12-15-2014, 03:52 PM
I will say this - looking through ACC rosters, the list of league schools with two point guards of above-average quality or better might only have one name on it. Several schools are doing well with combo guards filling it at the point, others play below average guards to keep their point guard from playing 40 minutes. Those below average guards don't play nearly as many minutes as Britt, though.

OldPhiKap
12-15-2014, 06:42 PM
I like my hubris with warm pita bread, and a really high-quality olive oil.

Beyond that -- glad we play tonight, the exam period makes this board a bit loopy.

Wheat/"/"/"
12-16-2014, 09:31 AM
Here's a replay of the game if anybody missed it or wants to watch it again.

http://ukbasketballlive.com/kentucky-basketball-2014-2015-full-game-replays/

TruBlu
12-16-2014, 05:52 PM
If two cheating teams play each other, and both have to vacate their wins later, does the losing teams record end up not showing that loss?

Furious minds want to know!

Duvall
12-16-2014, 05:56 PM
If two cheating teams play each other, and both have to vacate their wins later, does the losing teams record end up not showing that loss?

Furious minds want to know!

You don't vacate losses. So if UNC is required to vacate games for its 2002 season, their record will be 0-20 instead of 8-20.

TruBlu
12-16-2014, 06:09 PM
If two cheating teams play each other, and both have to vacate their wins later, does the losing teams record end up not showing that loss?

Furious minds want to know!


You don't vacate losses. So if UNC is required to vacate games for its 2002 season, their record will be 0-20 instead of 8-20.

But if unc finishes this year 6-22 (we can hope), it would vacate its 6 wins to have a record of 0-22. But one of those 22 losses is to Kentucky who also vacates its wins, would unc's record then become 0-21?

(Not that it matters, unc would hang another banner anyway for having a "Perfect Season")

Henderson
12-16-2014, 06:29 PM
But if unc finishes this year 6-22 (we can hope), it would vacate its 6 wins to have a record of 0-22. But one of those 22 losses is to Kentucky who also vacates its wins, would unc's record then become 0-21?

Sounds like a Mobius strip or an M.C. Esher drawing.