Color me unimpressed with UK's D.

[Eakane]

They may go undefeated through the regular season, but I'd like our chances in a match-up with them. Kentucky's advantage comes in its size and its depth. We match them in depth, and we have the edge in quickness. L'ville's problem was that they couldn't shoot. Same with Carolina and UCLA. Seems to me the key to beating Kentucky is having 2 and preferably 3 players who can consistently hit from 14-23 feet. We have 5.

[Wahoo2000]

They may go undefeated through the regular season, but I'd like our chances in a match-up with them. Kentucky's advantage comes in its size and its depth. We match them in depth, and we have the edge in quickness. L'ville's problem was that they couldn't shoot. Same with Carolina and UCLA. Seems to me the key to beating Kentucky is having 2 and preferably 3 players who can consistently hit from 14-23 feet. We have 5.

Wow. I can understand you feeling you match up well with them given your shooting prowess, but how can you not be impressed? #smh

Their defense is great. GREAT. They do it in a different way (pure elite athleticism and size at every spot) than we do (packline, perfect principles & execution) or Louisville does (great pressure)..... but they are no doubt a GREAT defense.

Do I think Duke can beat Kentucky? Absolutely. But if both teams play the best game they're capable of playing, I'd probably have to give the edge to KY. But it'd be a slight edge.

I'd pay some REAL coin to watch that one in a FF or Championship game....

[CDu]

I second the comments wondering why they don't impress. Defensively, they look very very good. Offensively? They look a bit shakier. But defensively they appear quite legit.

I don't think they are unbeatable, but they are one of the best defensive teams we've seen in a while.

[Duke95]

They may go undefeated through the regular season, but I'd like our chances in a match-up with them. Kentucky's advantage comes in its size and its depth. We match them in depth, and we have the edge in quickness. L'ville's problem was that they couldn't shoot. Same with Carolina and UCLA. Seems to me the key to beating Kentucky is having 2 and preferably 3 players who can consistently hit from 14-23 feet. We have 5.

Yeah. Their weak strength of schedule so far has just made them look better than they are. ;)

Seriously, UK is the best defensive team I've ever seen in college basketball. 41-7 at half against UCLA and still you're not impressed. What do you want them to do, pitch a shutout?

[COYS]

I second the comments wondering why they don't impress. Defensively, they look very very good. Offensively? They look a bit shakier. But defensively they appear quite legit.

I don't think they are unbeatable, but they are one of the best defensive teams we've seen in a while.

I agree with all of this. It's impossible not to be impressed with their D. However, UVA is in second place (in terms of defense), and I think it's closer than many realize. Harvard doesn't have the cache that UCLA has, but UVA's demolition of the Crimson was just as impressive (if not more impressive) than UK's destruction of UCLA. Also, while UK has been truly incredible, they have yet to face a quality team that is strong shooting from outside. Both Louisville and Texas struggle from range and are, generally speaking, mediocre on offense as far as the elite teams go. I say all this no to minimize UK, but to put their current defensive performance in perspective. They have been excellent, but they are not light years beyond UVA. Nor have their toughest opponents been elite offensive teams (this is also true for UVA).

UK is absolutely deserving of their number one ranking. Speculation as to whether or not they can go undefeated is completely legitimate. However, I don't think their defense is untouchable . . . at least. they still have a ways to go before they can prove that.

[mgtr]

I agree with all of this. It's impossible not to be impressed with their D. However, UVA is in second place (in terms of defense), and I think it's closer than many realize. Harvard doesn't have the cache that UCLA has, but UVA's demolition of the Crimson was just as impressive (if not more impressive) than UK's destruction of UCLA. Also, while UK has been truly incredible, they have yet to face a quality team that is strong shooting from outside. Both Louisville and Texas struggle from range and are, generally speaking, mediocre on offense as far as the elite teams go. I say all this no to minimize UK, but to put their current defensive performance in perspective. They have been excellent, but they are not light years beyond UVA. Nor have their toughest opponents been elite offensive teams (this is also true for UVA).

UK is absolutely deserving of their number one ranking. Speculation as to whether or not they can go undefeated is completely legitimate. However, I don't think their defense is untouchable . . . at least. they still have a ways to go before they can prove that.

Good points, all. I hope we can play them in national championship. With their size and athleticism, should be quite a match. Need to hit outside shots to open up inside. Even then, could be tough.

[Wander]

If they held basketball powerhouse Kansas to their lowest scoring total in 30 years instead of a mere 25 years, would you be impressed with their defense? Come on.

[jimsumner]

Good points, all. I hope we can play them in national championship. With their size and athleticism, should be quite a match. Need to hit outside shots to open up inside. Even then, could be tough.

I hope Duke can play somebody else in the national championship.

[gumbomoop]

Kentucky's advantage comes in its size and its depth. We match them in depth, and we have the edge in quickness.... Seems to me the key to beating Kentucky is having 2 and preferably 3 players who can consistently hit from 14-23 feet. We have 5.

Comparing Duke and UK, with a view toward a FF matchup:

Size -- For the 2 interior spots, UK has 5 players, Duke 3. I worry that Marshall will during tough ACC games slide toward 7-8 mpg rather than toward 11-12. [In K I do not trust.....] Even if Calipari fully abandons platoons, and Lee [woeful FT %] slides below 10 mpg, their interior size/depth tops ours considerably. We have Jahlil. Can he play 32 minutes v. those guys, avoiding foul problems and exhaustion? Will Krzyzewski actually trust Marshall to play 10-12 minutes in such a game? Will Amile rebound fiercely against these real tall fellows?

Depth -- Again, even if Calipari abandons platoons, he seems to play 8.5-9 guys, with 9th guy Lee probably logging more FF-game-minutes than our 7/8 guys [Matt and Marshall]. Is Devin Booker so much better than Grayson that he gets 19 mpg? [Answer might be, "Yes," I don't know.] So, while I agree that Duke could "match them in depth," given K's short-bench approach, the effect is that UK has a clear practical advantage in this category. Right now, trying to predict for a FF matchup, I'd guess K would use a 6-man rotation [averaging 31 min/player] with 6-7 minutes each for Matt and Marshall.

Shooting -- Agree that you gotta have shooters to beat UK. Not clear to me that UK would double so much on Jahlil that he'd have multiple opportunities to pass out to open perimeter. But yes, we do have some pretty good shooters.

Quickness -- I'm genuinely not sure here. UConn sure looked a lot quicker than Duke, but maybe some of that was wasted effort. Rasheed's quickness is there, but not always effective. Quinn doesn't depend so much on quickness as spacing and smarts and improved 3-bombing. Tyus is quick enough, cool, smart, smart. Harrisons appear lethargic sometimes, but Ulis is quick, heady, very, very valuable; and Booker very lively on both O and D. Justise more overpowers opponents than out-quicks them. Jahlil is quick in several ways, but those UK bigs are no slouches here. Maybe quickness is a wash?

[gumbomoop]

I hope Duke can play somebody else in the national championship.

Let's play West Virginia.

[CDu]

I hope Duke can play somebody else in the national championship.

I wholeheartedly agree. I'd be just fine playing a 5 seed in the title game, thankyouverymuch. I'm not overly concerned with style points in a championship run. Beating Kentucky in the title game would be obviously better than beating a 5 seed, but losing to Kentucky in the championship game would be far worse than beating a 5 seed.

[Eakane]

"Need to hit outside shots to open up inside. Even then, could be tough."

That's usually the case, but that won't work against UK. Against L'ville, they simply put three talls within 4 feet of the basket, against which Harrell could do nothing. But, if they do the same against us, then anytime the ball goes into Jah, it will end up with somebody (Winslow, Sulaimon, Cook, T or G Jones) looking at a wide open three. The Cats didn't really need to worry about this with the Cards (or anyone else they've faced).

We also deny them one of their top weapons -- with two elite point guards, they're not likely to get much out of their press. On the other hand, they are likely to kill s on the boards.

I'm not saying they are a bad defensive team. I'm not deluded. I just think that basketball is all about match ups, and we match up extremely well against them. I think Arizona and Wisconsin do as well, but for different reasons. I also think Gonzaga and U.Va could prove to be very pesky for them. Sadly, none of these teams are in the SEC. :-)

[CDu]

"Need to hit outside shots to open up inside. Even then, could be tough."

That's usually the case, but that won't work against UK. Against L'ville, they simply put three talls within 4 feet of the basket, against which Harrell could do nothing. But, if they do the same against us, then anytime the ball goes into Jah, it will end up with somebody (Winslow, Sulaimon, Cook, T or G Jones) looking at a wide open three. The Cats didn't really need to worry about this with the Cards (or anyone else they've faced).

We also deny them one of their top weapons -- with two elite point guards, they're not likely to get much out of their press. On the other hand, they are likely to kill s on the boards.

I'm not saying they are a bad defensive team. I'm not deluded. I just think that basketball is all about match ups, and we match up extremely well against them. I think Arizona and Wisconsin do as well, but for different reasons. I also think Gonzaga and U.Va could prove to be very pesky for them. Sadly, none of these teams are in the SEC. :-)

Well, I don't think anyone matches up "extremely well" against UK, as defensively they are strong everywhere except maybe Ulis. But I do agree that we have some ways in which we can threaten them (as you noted, our two PG certainly help). They would have a big advantage inside (especially if Okafor gets in any sort of foul trouble), and defensively they are quite strong on the perimeter too.

We could certainly shoot our way past them. Of course, if we aren't shooting well from the outside, they could destroy us on the glass and win comfortably.

[mgtr]

Of course, it depends on how many outside shots we hit. Need to hit enough to get them to change their gameplan (or, maybe they don't change and we run away with it).

[Wander]

I just think that basketball is all about match ups, and we match up extremely well against them. I think Arizona and Wisconsin do as well, but for different reasons. I also think Gonzaga and U.Va could prove to be very pesky for them. Sadly, none of these teams are in the SEC. :-)

But you're just naming the other best teams! Duke, Arizona, Wisconsin, Gonzaga, and UVA may be 5 of the top 6 teams in the country. So yes, I agree it is harder to win a game against a better opponent than it is a worse one.

[jimsumner]

It's funny how Kentucky keeps playing teams that can't shoot. Or dribble. Or pass.

Just lucky, I suppose.

[kAzE]

It's funny how Kentucky keeps playing teams that can't shoot. Or dribble. Or pass.

Just lucky, I suppose.

I can't tell is that comment is facetious or not, but the reason teams facing UK look like they can't shoot, pass, or dribble is because UK is so good defensively . . .

I pray every night that we never have to play UK . . . IMO we do NOT match up well. Quickness is fine and all, but size usually wins, especially when their big guys are also quick and skilled like Towns and Lyles. UK dominates the boards against everyone they face, even an elite rebounding team like Louisville, and that's usually a good recipe for destroying the opponent.

Okafor is our only advantage in terms of size, but A. they have 5 guys to throw at Okafor on defense, he'd get fouled out in 20 minutes, and B. Okafor isn't the type of guy who does well offensively against superior length, which they have. He'd likely get his shot blocked much more often than against other opponents.

I'm not sure I'd trust our shooting to win the day. Again, they have superior size at every position other than at center. I suspect we'd have just as much trouble finding open looks from deep as any other team that has faced them.

Bottom line is, I think this UK team might just be the best defensive team assembled in the 1 and done era. There's probably 10-15 teams who are capable of beating them if they play really well, and we are one of those teams for sure, but I'd rather not face them.

[kAzE]

Well, I don't think anyone matches up "extremely well" against UK, as defensively they are strong everywhere except maybe Ulis. But I do agree that we have some ways in which we can threaten them (as you noted, our two PG certainly help). They would have a big advantage inside (especially if Okafor gets in any sort of foul trouble), and defensively they are quite strong on the perimeter too.

We could certainly shoot our way past them. Of course, if we aren't shooting well from the outside, they could destroy us on the glass and win comfortably.

I disagree on Ulis, he's their best perimeter defender and it's not close. The Harrisons are actually the weakest link defensively on that team. They aren't quick enough to stay with smaller guys. Ulis is a superb ballhawk, he's really quick and very feisty. He's definitely one of those guys who isn't afraid to get in your face and mix it up either. I kind wish he was on our team, actually.

[CDu]

I pray every night that we never have to play UK . . . IMO we do NOT match up well. Quickness is fine and all, but size usually wins, especially when their big guys are also quick and skilled like Towns and Lyles. UK dominates the boards against everyone they face, even an elite rebounding team like Louisville, and that's usually a good recipe for destroying the opponent.

Okafor is our only advantage in terms of size, but A. they have 5 guys to throw at Okafor on defense, he'd get fouled out in 20 minutes, and B. Okafor isn't the type of guy who does well offensively against superior length, which they have. He'd likely get his shot blocked much more often than against other opponents.

I'm not sure I'd trust our shooting to win the day. Again, they have superior size at every position other than at center. I suspect we'd have just as much trouble finding open looks from deep as any other team that has faced them.

Bottom line is, I think this UK team might just be the best defensive team assembled in the 1 and done era. There's probably 10-15 teams who are capable of beating them if they play really well, and we are one of those teams for sure, but I'd rather not face them.

And you didn't even mention the quickest and possibly best of their bigs (Cauley-Stein). Towns is a better shooter, but I'd take Cauley-Stein's total game over Towns any day. It's just an embarrassment of riches they have in their frontcourt. And their backcourt isn't too shabby either.

I agree with you. It is a terrible matchup for Okafor. We'd probably need to be lights-out from 3-pt range to beat them.

Kentucky is certainly not unbeatable, as you said. But (as you also said), I'd really rather not face them. While we certainly could beat them, I'm not sure that we would win a best of seven. Heck, I might take them 5 of 7 against us.

[Tripping William]

I hope Duke can play somebody else in the national championship.

I'm also with Jim here. Can we limit our Duke vs. Kentucky non-obsession to BBQ, please? I thought we had a game tonight against someone not named UKLV. :D

[bbosbbos]

Fried chicken's D is very very good. I will not deny it.

Only hot 3 pt teams have chance to beat them, for example Indiana. We certainly have chance too, but we need some hot 3s.

[gurufrisbee]

Kentucky's defense can be excellent. But that entire team is also very prone to inconsistency on both ends of the floor (but much more so on offense than defense). Buffalo, Providence, Columbia - these are not teams that with ten minutes to go should ever be tied in Lexington - and yet they all were. I'd take Toledo over any of those three. If Kentucky finds some consistency, then I'll get worried about them. At this rate, they'll run in to a good team the second weekend of the tournament and get knocked out before Duke ever has to worry about them.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Thankfully, we won't be playing many teams as bad as they are on D.
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/96/kentucky-wildcats


2014-15 OVERALL RANKINGS


Offense | Defense
POINTS ALLOWED


47.8 2ndOVERALL

REBOUNDS PER GAME


26.8 53rdOVERALL

BLOCKS PER GAME


8.2 1stOVERALL

STEALS PER GAME


8.3 48thOVERALL

[Duke95]

Fried chicken's D is very very good. I will not deny it.

Only hot 3 pt teams have chance to beat them, for example Indiana. We certainly have chance too, but we need some hot 3s.

Unfortunately, you may be right. I think Okafor is better than any of their bigs, but the problem is that they have so many. I don't think driving against them would be very effective, unless we are very disciplined about kicking the ball out to open shooters.

[CDu]

Unfortunately, you may be right. I think Okafor is better than any of their bigs, but the problem is that they have so many. I don't think driving against them would be very effective, unless we are very disciplined about kicking the ball out to open shooters.

It is sort of like when OSU played Florida for the title. Oden was the best big man on the floor that night, but UF had three guys (Noah, Horford, and Richard) to withstand Oden's force. Only in this case, UK goes even deeper than that (Cauley-Stein, Towns, Johnson, Lyles, Lee). It is crazy to me that a top-20 recruit would stick around to be the FIFTH big man, even as a sophomore.

[-jk]

I hope Duke can play somebody else in the national championship.

Amen!, brother...

-jk

[Wheat/"/"/"]

.......UK dominates the boards against everyone they face, even an elite rebounding team like Louisville, and that's usually a good recipe for destroying the opponent.


That statement is inaccurate.

UNC beat them handily on the boards.

http://espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=400587839

[kAzE]

That statement is inaccurate.

UNC beat them handily on the boards.

http://espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=400587839

I stand corrected, but it was a tie on the defensive boards. UNC just grabbed way more offensive boards, because A. they didn't shoot it as well, so they had more opportunities, and B. they fouled the bejeezus out of UK, limiting their field goal attempts. Although I will say this: shooting 45% is starting to look pretty good compared to some of these other teams facing UK . . .

UNC is definitely an elite rebounding team though, I'll give them credit there. Especially on the offensive glass.

[Wander]

UNC is definitely an elite rebounding team though, I'll give them credit there. Especially on the offensive glass.

This is a good example of what makes Kentucky so good. Offensive rebounding is probably the single thing that UNC is best at - but Kentucky played UNC almost exactly even on the offensive glass.

I think Duke and especially Wisconsin would have a great chance against Kentucky, but those guys are good at so many things.

[Duvall]

I can't tell is that comment is facetious or not, but the reason teams facing UK look like they can't shoot, pass, or dribble is because UK is so good defensively . . .

I pray every night that we never have to play UK . . . IMO we do NOT match up well. Quickness is fine and all, but size usually wins, especially when their big guys are also quick and skilled like Towns and Lyles. UK dominates the boards against everyone they face, even an elite rebounding team like Louisville, and that's usually a good recipe for destroying the opponent.

Okafor is our only advantage in terms of size, but A. they have 5 guys to throw at Okafor on defense, he'd get fouled out in 20 minutes, and B. Okafor isn't the type of guy who does well offensively against superior length, which they have. He'd likely get his shot blocked much more often than against other opponents.

I'm not sure I'd trust our shooting to win the day. Again, they have superior size at every position other than at center. I suspect we'd have just as much trouble finding open looks from deep as any other team that has faced them.

Bottom line is, I think this UK team might just be the best defensive team assembled in the 1 and done era. There's probably 10-15 teams who are capable of beating them if they play really well, and we are one of those teams for sure, but I'd rather not face them.

Agreed. Kentucky isn't unbeatable, but Duke really isn't the team to exploit their weaknesses.

[Duke95]

Agreed. Kentucky isn't unbeatable, but Duke really isn't the team to exploit their weaknesses.

Unfortunately, I agree with this. I think Wisconsin can do so. They have a big man who can shoot 3s.

[_Gary]

Not that every UK team isn't frustrating and worthy of my absolute hatred, but this one in particular has me disgusted because I feel the vast majority of their defensive superiority isn't about great coaching techniques, great mental acumen, fantastic quickness at the guard spot, or just out and out pure hustle. They are great because of pure length and athleticism (things you are born with, not things you learn). If they end up winning it all, it won't be because they were the best coached team. Or the best prepared. Or the smartest. Or... You get my point. It will be, above all else, because of their superior height at basically every position and their truly elite athleticism, especially in the post. I'd rather lose to Butler in the Finals that a team like this one. Oh, I know the pundits wouldn't give us nearly as hard a time if we lost to a team like this year's Wildcats, but it just galls me for any team to win when it seems like it's literally all about natural birth advantages and there's nothing else to it. That's what this year's UK team is to me.

Okay, now you can accuse me of sour grapes or whatever. :cool:

[Indoor66]

It's funny how Kentucky keeps playing teams that can't shoot. Or dribble. Or pass.

Just lucky, I suppose.

Kinda reminds me of the Gary Player explanation of his "luck" after sinking a sand shot.

[Billy Dat]

With Kentucky setting the standard right now, I keep thinking about how we measure up. Would we be able to feed Okafor over their pressure and length, and would he be able to operate once he caught the ball? I bet they'd play him straight up and run help defenders at him once he started to make his move. He is so adept at passing out of those scenarios, that I'd assume they be looking for that action and trying to jump those passing lanes. Much would depend on whether we could square and shoot before they recovered. Would we hit our 3s? Could we keep them off the glass?

The Louisville game was an all out war, a real fun game to watch despite its defensive focus. Louisville did an excellent job with shot fakes to counter Kentucky's hyper aggressive close-outs.

After tonight's game, K said he's going to take more looks at Jahlil and Marshall on the court together. All I could think about when he said that was that he's thinking about UK down the road and their size. I know he doesn't claim to think that way, but he obviously wants to try and develop some bigger line-ups.

Their offense is limited, but the emergence of Ulis is really helping on that end, and in the Harrisons and Booker they may have just enough outside shooting to keep teams somewhat honest. Still, though, I think to beat them you need to really slow the game down, make them take outside shots, keep them out of transition, and limit their second shots. If we played them and allowed too many second shots, Jahlil might foul out in one half. On the other end, they'd pound Jah with Cauley-Stein, Townes, Lee, Johnson and even Lyles. That's 25 fouls.

Listen, I can't stand Kentucky but this year's team has really fascinated me. I don't care how many long athletic players they have, to suggest that Cal isn't doing a good job coaching them is crazy. The players have bought into their limited minutes, play as hard as you ever see kids play when they hit the court, go after shots and rebounds like a pack of hungry dogs, and seem to do it all without a ton of ridiculous swagger...and he rides them hard. I don't know if I want to play them in the NCAAs, but I'd give anything to play them before the tournament just to see what would happen.

[Duke95]

Not that every UK team isn't frustrating and worthy of my absolute hatred, but this one in particular has me disgusted because I feel the vast majority of their defensive superiority isn't about great coaching techniques, great mental acumen, fantastic quickness at the guard spot, or just out and out pure hustle. They are great because of pure length and athleticism (things you are born with, not things you learn). If they end up winning it all, it won't be because they were the best coached team. Or the best prepared. Or the smartest. Or... You get my point. It will be, above all else, because of their superior height at basically every position and their truly elite athleticism, especially in the post. I'd rather lose to Butler in the Finals that a team like this one. Oh, I know the pundits wouldn't give us nearly as hard a time if we lost to a team like this year's Wildcats, but it just galls me for any team to win when it seems like it's literally all about natural birth advantages and there's nothing else to it. That's what this year's UK team is to me.

Okay, now you can accuse me of sour grapes or whatever. :cool:

This. What Gary said.

But I've discovered something from being an amateur bike racer. There are just some people who are born with better genetics for the sport: better VO2 max, higher pain threshold, whatever. That is hard to overcome. But frankly, we have a superb coach, a superb team, and as good a shot as anyone at the NCAAs. Can we beat Kentucky? Who knows. I'd be happy if we're asking this question when it's Duke-Kentucky in the finals.

[_Gary]

I don't care how many long athletic players they have, to suggest that Cal isn't doing a good job coaching them is crazy.

Then I'm crazy. Look, there's a difference between being able to recruit and then satisfy the desire of McDonald's All-Americans to get playing time and being a "good coach" in terms of X's and O's. And I still maintain that on defense (where UK is being hailed as one of the greatest teams of all time) it isn't about Cal's coaching nearly as much as it is about the physical makeup of the team. I agree he's doing a good job at keeping all his guys happy and active, but I don't think that's nearly the same thing as being a team that wins a lot because of the system or scheme of a head coach. Two different things entirely, imho.

[Wander]

With Kentucky setting the standard right now, I keep thinking about how we measure up. Would we be able to feed Okafor over their pressure and length, and would he be able to operate once he caught the ball? I bet they'd play him straight up and run help defenders at him once he started to make his move. He is so adept at passing out of those scenarios, that I'd assume they be looking for that action and trying to jump those passing lanes.

Okafor is the best player in the country and I have little doubt that he'd play very well against Kentucky... while he was on the court. My biggest fear would be UK throwing their nineteen NBA big guys at Okafor in an all-out effort to put him in foul trouble all game, and then dominating us inside after that.

That said, a Duke-Kentucky final would be awesome.

[_Gary]

My biggest fear would be UK throwing their nineteen NBA big guys at Okafor...

Okay, I know UK and Cal seemingly do any number of sneaky things every so often, but I don't think even they could field 19 NBA players against us in game and get away with it. :p

[Nugget]

I think the suggestion that Kentucky's D isn't great is nuts. Here's just a few data points to consider:

In 9 of the 26 halves they have played, they have given up 17 points or fewer.

KenPom's public site shows adjusted defense rankings back to 2002. Generally the top defensive team gives up between 86-88 points per 100 possessions. Twice the top defensive team got down to 85.6.,and the very best, 2009 Memphis, was 85.1 points per 100 possessions. So far, Kentucky is at 82!

Teams are shooting 29.7% from the field against them, including a ridiculous 31.8% on two pointers.

Kentucky's size simply swallows teams up. I didn't quite appreciate this until seeing them in person against UCLA. One play in particular stood out to me - Tony Parker (a pretty big dude) tried to take it up inside, only to be swatted collectively by 6-10 Lyles and 7 ft. Towns, leading to a breakaway by 7 ft. Cauley-Stein. Kentucky just suffocates you.

[AIRFORCEDUKIE]

1. I would love to see Duke play Kentucky, I watch basketball for the match ups and the challenge. What better challenge then seeing our boys go against an Undefeated Kentucky team in the Title game. That would be epic, and story book material and imagine the feeling if we were to win it.

2. Do we really need 2 threads about Kentucky on this board? Honestly, it doesn't really matter at this point how good they are, they play in the SEC and will be favored by a considerable margin in the rest of their games so they just might go undefeated. We have bigger fish to fry, as in Louisville, Virginia, UNC, Syracuse, Miami, Clemson. ITS ACC SEASON BABY, lets go!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

P.S. By bigger fish I actually mean the ACC season as a whole. I understand Kentucky is the biggest fish to fry this season, but in the grand scheme of things for DUKE, the ACC as a whole is a much bigger fish...right? right......

Now lets merge some threadage

[jimsumner]

I can't tell is that comment is facetious or not, but the reason teams facing UK look like they can't shoot, pass, or dribble is because UK is so good defensively . . .



New Year's resolution No. 1 for kAzE.

Fine-tune sarcasm meter. :)

[Eakane]

We beat Wisconsin by swithcing which left unexploited mismatches (it helped that we shot the lights out); we beat UNLV by fronting LJ (it helped that we had the three best players on the floor in Hurley, Laettner and G.Hill).
My contention is that as good a team as UK is, and as good a team they are defensively, an unconventional approach that I leave to K's good graces, combined with some good shooting from 14-23 feet, may yield a very happy day for us. That, and a seriously brutal ACC season to prepare us better for March than UK, may give us an edge.
Anyway, I resolve to stop obsessing about the Cats, and start getting ready for Louisville, U.Va, the remedial school down the road and the like. One last parting shot. Personally, I would prefer to see a final game match up with the Cats. Back in '91, I was talking to a Duke law professor friend of mine, who was relived that we would be playing (and presumably losing) to UNLV in the semis, so that we would not suffer the ignominy of losing to the Heels in the Finals. The day of the semis, when UNC lost and Duke won was the happiest of my basketball viewing life, but a part of me was just a tiny bit disappointed that Carolina wasn't our opponent in the finals; just for the shot at ever-lasting glory. Don't worry; I got over it. And I suppose if we end up playing someone other than UK, I'll be ok too. Sure would be nice to see though...

[AIRFORCEDUKIE]

We beat Wisconsin by swithcing which left unexploited mismatches (it helped that we shot the lights out); we beat UNLV by fronting LJ (it helped that we had the three best players on the floor in Hurley, Laettner and G.Hill).
My contention is that as good a team as UK is, and as good a team they are defensively, an unconventional approach that I leave to K's good graces, combined with some good shooting from 14-23 feet, may yield a very happy day for us. That, and a seriously brutal ACC season to prepare us better for March than UK, may give us an edge.
Anyway, I resolve to stop obsessing about the Cats, and start getting ready for Louisville, U.Va, the remedial school down the road and the like. One last parting shot. Personally, I would prefer to see a final game match up with the Cats. Back in '91, I was talking to a Duke law professor friend of mine, who was relived that we would be playing (and presumably losing) to UNLV in the semis, so that we would not suffer the ignominy of losing to the Heels in the Finals. The day of the semis, when UNC lost and Duke won was the happiest of my basketball viewing life, but a part of me was just a tiny bit disappointed that Carolina wasn't our opponent in the finals; just for the shot at ever-lasting glory. Don't worry; I got over it. And I suppose if we end up playing someone other than UK, I'll be ok too. Sure would be nice to see though...

That brings up an interesting question, "In a year when Duke and UNC are evenly matched and clearly the best 2 teams in the country, would you want to see them in the Championship game?"

The thought scares me a bit, because imagine if we lost!! But, then again Imagine if we won!!! It is quite the brain pretzel..

Forever the team that lost would be the ones who could say, "well we beat you in the championship game" that's epic bragging rights.

[jv001]

That brings up an interesting question, "In a year when Duke and UNC are evenly matched and clearly the best 2 teams in the country, would you want to see them in the Championship game?"

The thought scares me a bit, because imagine if we lost!! But, then again Imagine if we won!!! It is quite the brain pretzel..

Forever the team that lost would be the ones who could say, "well we beat you in the championship game" that's epic bragging rights.

I would just counter with: You(unc) had to cheat to do it. You should have been on life long probation for your 18 years of academic fraud. GoDuke!

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

That brings up an interesting question, "In a year when Duke and UNC are evenly matched and clearly the best 2 teams in the country, would you want to see them in the Championship game?"

The thought scares me a bit, because imagine if we lost!! But, then again Imagine if we won!!! It is quite the brain pretzel..

Forever the team that lost would be the ones who could say, "well we beat you in the championship game" that's epic bragging rights.

I have frequently been in position to consider this question, and really, it's rather amazing that it hasn't happened yet. How is it possible, given the million monkeys with the million typewriters (kids, ask your parents - they can explain) that we have yet to meet in the Big Dance?

I say absolutely, let's do it. It's just another vindication of the rivalry and a great stage to let it play out. I always like our chances against UNC and would relish the opportunity to grab the biggest bragging stick in the history of the best rivarly in sport.

[kAzE]

New Year's resolution No. 1 for kAzE.

Fine-tune sarcasm meter. :)

Aw come on . . . you gotta at least throw a smiley in there or something.

[Black Mambo]

That brings up an interesting question, "In a year when Duke and UNC are evenly matched and clearly the best 2 teams in the country, would you want to see them in the Championship game?"

The thought scares me a bit, because imagine if we lost!! But, then again Imagine if we won!!! It is quite the brain pretzel..

Forever the team that lost would be the ones who could say, "well we beat you in the championship game" that's epic bragging rights.

When Austin Powers was captured by Dr. Evil, and about to be shark food, Powers asks Dr. Evil, "What, do you expect to beg?", to which Dr. Evil responds, "No, I expect you to die".








OK, so maybe not a great analogy, but I think you get the point. I expect (want) UNC to die, always (to a 16-seed in your scenario). This is the only acceptable answer.

[jipops]

They may go undefeated through the regular season, but I'd like our chances in a match-up with them. Kentucky's advantage comes in its size and its depth. We match them in depth, and we have the edge in quickness. L'ville's problem was that they couldn't shoot. Same with Carolina and UCLA. Seems to me the key to beating Kentucky is having 2 and preferably 3 players who can consistently hit from 14-23 feet. We have 5.

I'm not all that impressed with the Golden State Warriors' offense either...nor the height of the Freedom Tower...nor the existence of pyramids

[Duke95]

http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/specials/best-sports-moments-of-2012/images/960x608/mckayla-notimpressed.jpg

[Kfanarmy]

I'm not all that impressed with the Golden State Warriors' offense either...nor the height of the Freedom Tower...nor the existence of pyramids

but what say you...the pyramids of Africa, South and Central America, mounds in North America, Machu Picchu, Easter Island statues, UK's defense and Jahlil Okafor...aliens right? How can you not be impressed by aliens?

[mattman91]

This thread is almost as ridiculous as the players diet thread last season.