PDA

View Full Version : 2016-17 Season, Vegas Odds



BD80
07-06-2016, 08:08 PM
Duke the big-time favorite:

Duke 3/1
Kentucky 7/1
Kansas 10/1
Michigan State 12/1
Villanova 12/1
Louisville 15/1
North Carolina 15/1
...
Virginia 24/1
...
Syracuse 50/1
...
Miami (FL) 60/1
...

http://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/duke-kentucky-atop-the-latest-vegas-title-odds-for-college-basketball-in-2016-17/

flyingdutchdevil
07-06-2016, 08:10 PM
Duke the big-time favorite:

Duke 3/1
Kentucky 7/1
Kansas 10/1
Michigan State 12/1
Villanova 12/1
Louisville 15/1
North Carolina 15/1
...
Virginia 24/1
...
Syracuse 50/1
...
Miami (FL) 60/1
...

http://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/duke-kentucky-atop-the-latest-vegas-title-odds-for-college-basketball-in-2016-17/

WOW! Love it. Not surprising at all.

Sorry, but I'm gonna say it. Anything less than a championship will arguably be a disappointment.

Welcome to the most spoiled fanbase in America!

Troublemaker
07-06-2016, 08:12 PM
That's going to be some Champions Classic!

(although I do think MSU is probably overrated there)

NSDukeFan
07-06-2016, 08:21 PM
WOW! Love it. Not surprising at all.

Sorry, but I'm gonna say it. Anything less than a championship will arguably be a disappointment.

Welcome to the most spoiled fanbase in America!

You never know how a season with 18-22 year old young student athletes will turn out. I am certainly hoping for an ACC Championship and/or a regional championship and/or more, but I will be happy to see how things progress before I judge a season.

NashvilleDevil
07-06-2016, 08:41 PM
WOW! Love it. Not surprising at all.

Sorry, but I'm gonna say it. Anything less than a championship will arguably be a disappointment.

Welcome to the most spoiled fanbase in America!

I just want everyone on the team to stay healthy. Since the Final Four is not in Indy or Minny I think Duke's chances are slim to win it all. I'll be happy with a Final Four appearance.

unclsam1
07-06-2016, 08:56 PM
Can we please stay away fro 40-0 tee shirts!!!

77devil
07-06-2016, 09:22 PM
Duke the big-time favorite:

Duke 3/1
Kentucky 7/1
Kansas 10/1
Michigan State 12/1
Villanova 12/1
Louisville 15/1
North Carolina 15/1
...
Virginia 24/1
...
Syracuse 50/1
...
Miami (FL) 60/1
...

http://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/duke-kentucky-atop-the-latest-vegas-title-odds-for-college-basketball-in-2016-17/

Glad to see Duke is the money favorite but 3/1 seems thin for any favorite against the field in a six game single elimination tournament.

sagegrouse
07-06-2016, 09:27 PM
I think 3-1 odds is ridiculous, especially for a team counting on three or maybe four freshman to be big contributors. Who knows how that will turn out? Is there any evidence that HS kids are learning better and really good team defense?

I promise to celebrate every victory and not get too mad at losses, which are almost certain to occur.

And, by the way, in the ACC Carolina will be very good, as will be Louisville and Virginia. Are any of them relying so heavily on freshmen?

Anyway, someone above said anything but a national championship would be a disappointment. I would like to disassociate myself from those remarks.

CameronBornAndBred
07-06-2016, 09:28 PM
What are the odds on a mid-season foot vigil?

Troublemaker
07-06-2016, 10:16 PM
Glad to see Duke is the money favorite but 3/1 seems thin for any favorite against the field in a six game single elimination tournament.


I think 3-1 odds is ridiculous, especially for a team counting on three or maybe four freshman to be big contributors. Who knows how that will turn out? Is there any evidence that HS kids are learning better and really good team defense?

I promise to celebrate every victory and not get too mad at losses, which are almost certain to occur.

And, by the way, in the ACC Carolina will be very good, as will be Louisville and Virginia. Are any of them relying so heavily on freshmen?

As you guys know, the bookies don't make money by giving you fair odds.

They make money by having suckers eat up the 3/1 odds, given all the expected hoopla for a dominant Duke team this offseason.


Anyway, someone above said anything but a national championship would be a disappointment. I would like to disassociate myself from those remarks.

One thing about this, though. Disappointment is a feeling, and feelings don't have to be rational.

For example, I'll probably be disappointed if Duke doesn't win it all, even though I know the odds are much worse than 3/1, especially this far out.

Kedsy
07-06-2016, 10:32 PM
And, by the way, in the ACC Carolina will be very good, as will be Louisville and Virginia. Are any of them relying so heavily on freshmen?

I'll say this much, if UNC doesn't get some outstanding production from its freshmen, then the team probably won't be "very good."

Meeks, Berry, Jackson, Hicks, Pinson is a decent core, good but not quite "very good," IMO. Absent some really good frosh, there's no depth there at all.

JPtheGame
07-06-2016, 11:37 PM
Can we please stay away fro 40-0 tee shirts!!!

We can start 40-1 shirts because those are the current odds on Duke running the table.
25-1 if you only think they will enter the tourney undefeated.

BD80
07-07-2016, 07:23 AM
Can we please stay away fro 40-0 tee shirts!!!

Tee-shirt? Why bother? I got me a tattoo!

gumbomoop
07-07-2016, 09:12 AM
I'll say this much, if UNC doesn't get some outstanding production from its freshmen, then the team probably won't be "very good."

Meeks, Berry, Jackson, Hicks, Pinson is a decent core, good but not quite "very good," IMO. Absent some really good frosh, there's no depth there at all.

Assuming the 5 Kedsy lists as the starters, Roy needs dependable play off the bench from 3 players: Maye for ~ 10 mpg to back up Hicks at the 4, frosh C Bradley to back up Meeks for 12-15, and Britt to spell Berry at PG and maybe Pinson at SG. Although I have disagreed with Wheat's puffing up of Joel James, I think Britt is dependable for 20+ mpg.

Roy then needs one of soph Williams and frosh Woods and Robinson to provide some shooting from the wing/2. I suppose soph Williams has the edge at the beginning, but Woods looks more likely to me to get PT. Though knowing Roy, maybe he'll play 11 guys rather than 9 all season long.

For the Heels to be good-to-excellent by ACC schedule and way beyond, Meeks has to be in shape enough to play 25 mpg, Hicks has to become a go-to guy a lot, Jackson has to be a consistently excellent all-round player, Berry has to be both playmaker and 3-bomber, Pinson has to be a first-rate defender. Maye has to be able to be a real rotation player. And probably 2 of the untested young players have to join Britt in being dependable off the bench, Bradley most especially.

JasonEvans
07-07-2016, 10:22 AM
Tee-shirt? Why bother? I got me a tattoo!

I was just going to post this!
http://8328-presscdn-0-65.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/kentucky-wildcats-national-champions-2015-tattoo-40-0.jpg

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
07-07-2016, 10:24 AM
What kind of odds can I get from Vegas on three straight undefeated seasons?

Asking for a friend...

Kedsy
07-07-2016, 11:31 AM
For the Heels to be good-to-excellent by ACC schedule and way beyond, Meeks has to be in shape enough to play 25 mpg, Hicks has to become a go-to guy a lot, Jackson has to be a consistently excellent all-round player, Berry has to be both playmaker and 3-bomber, Pinson has to be a first-rate defender. Maye has to be able to be a real rotation player. And probably 2 of the untested young players have to join Britt in being dependable off the bench, Bradley most especially.

Lotta ifs. And I still think they'd only be good and not excellent. I'd add to your litany that Pinson has to show some offense as well as defense and Bradley has to be a lot better than "dependable." Neither Maye nor Williams showed any evidence that they'll be significantly better than terrible; even with a great deal of improvement, neither appears to be poised to be a "real rotation player," meaning all three freshman will have to be ready to play meaningful minutes off the bench, which given the recruiting rankings of Woods and Robinson, seems a stretch.

If this UNC roster was being Coached by K, it would be a short 7-man rotation with Britt and Bradley coming off the bench and that would be it, other than in garbage time. And in that group, who other than Berry is going to shoot the ball? Lot of scoring burden on Hicks, Jackson, and Berry, and with the past fouling proclivities of Hicks and Meeks, a lot of burden on Bradley and Pinson (as an undersized PF).

UNC looks like a pretty good, upper-middle-of-the-pack ACC team. A whole lot of things have to go right before that team ventures anywhere close to excellent.

dukelifer
07-07-2016, 11:53 AM
Lotta ifs. And I still think they'd only be good and not excellent. I'd add to your litany that Pinson has to show some offense as well as defense and Bradley has to be a lot better than "dependable." Neither Maye nor Williams showed any evidence that they'll be significantly better than terrible; even with a great deal of improvement, neither appears to be poised to be a "real rotation player," meaning all three freshman will have to be ready to play meaningful minutes off the bench, which given the recruiting rankings of Woods and Robinson, seems a stretch.

If this UNC roster was being Coached by K, it would be a short 7-man rotation with Britt and Bradley coming off the bench and that would be it, other than in garbage time. And in that group, who other than Berry is going to shoot the ball? Lot of scoring burden on Hicks, Jackson, and Berry, and with the past fouling proclivities of Hicks and Meeks, a lot of burden on Bradley and Pinson (as an undersized PF).

UNC looks like a pretty good, upper-middle-of-the-pack ACC team. A whole lot of things have to go right before that team ventures anywhere close to excellent.
They will be very good and could surprise. Lots of very good players and if they gel- they can make noise. I expect Jackson to have a break out year and we already saw what Berry can do. Don't sleep on UNC. This is veteran team of former high school all Americans that will play well from the get go.

CDu
07-07-2016, 11:55 AM
Lotta ifs. And I still think they'd only be good and not excellent. I'd add to your litany that Pinson has to show some offense as well as defense and Bradley has to be a lot better than "dependable." Neither Maye nor Williams showed any evidence that they'll be significantly better than terrible; even with a great deal of improvement, neither appears to be poised to be a "real rotation player," meaning all three freshman will have to be ready to play meaningful minutes off the bench, which given the recruiting rankings of Woods and Robinson, seems a stretch.

If this UNC roster was being Coached by K, it would be a short 7-man rotation with Britt and Bradley coming off the bench and that would be it, other than in garbage time. And in that group, who other than Berry is going to shoot the ball? Lot of scoring burden on Hicks, Jackson, and Berry, and with the past fouling proclivities of Hicks and Meeks, a lot of burden on Bradley and Pinson (as an undersized PF).

UNC looks like a pretty good, upper-middle-of-the-pack ACC team. A whole lot of things have to go right before that team ventures anywhere close to excellent.

I disagree, either only slightly or by a fair amount depending on what a "pretty good, upper-middle-of-the-pack ACC team" means to you. I think they are going to be safely a top-25 team nationally. If all goes well, maybe they threaten the top-10 nationally. Remember: they haven't been a good shooting team for years, yet have remained quite good. Last year, they had two guys who could shoot from the perimeter and were a #1 seed and top-5 team that made it to the championship game. This year's team surely won't be as good as last year's team was, but I think they'll still be pretty darn good.

They will need Bradley to be a solid backup. That shouldn't be unexpected given the typical production of top-30 recruits as frosh for Williams. It will be good if one of Williams (unlikely), Robinson (possible), or Woods (more likely) is a solid reserve. Pinson gives them a terrific defender and slasher and a surprisingly good passer. Berry will be a 2nd team All-ACC guy with the ability to shot from 3, drive to the rim, and distribute a little. Meeks lost minutes last year due to the emergences of Brice Johnson and Isiah Hicks, but should see an uptick in his minutes and again threaten the 11 and 7 range. Hicks put up comparable per-40 numbers as Brice Johnson did last year, but will have to rein in the fouls to make the jump to a 25-30 mpg guy. He's the key. Jackson was a solid scorer for UNC last year and is a solid defender with the versatility to play a smallball PF, a SF, or a SG.

Comparing what the team would look like with Coach K coaching is kind of pointless, because Coach K and Williams coach very differently. Coach K relies heavily on 3pt shooting and a motion offense. Williams relies much more on post play, transition, rebounding, and a de-emphasis on the 3pt shot. The UNC team is not designed at all well to play the way Coach K likes to play, and as such would be a middle-of-the-pack ACC team if they tried to do it that way. But they're still designed to do what Williams likes to do, and as such I think they'll remain a top-4 ACC team. They will be a veteran group, and have the rare combination of veteran players with top-tier pedigree (Jackson, Pinson, and Hicks were top-20 recruits who are now juniors/seniors). They will run and they will pound the glass and they will win the vast majority of their games that way.

English
07-07-2016, 01:16 PM
...UNC will be great...

Oh good, another thread we can turn into a conversation about how strong UNC will be this season. I think the last one we had going fell to the second page.

DukieTiger
07-07-2016, 02:05 PM
Regarding Duke's dependence on freshmen- I feel like it will be less dependence than it seems. Duke is returning 4 starter-level players and all 4 are essentially double-figure scorers. That's still a very good team if the freshmen aren't super-elite.

I feel like this group has less pressure to perform than the Okafor group did. I'd describe it more as opportunity. For example, Jackson and Tatum have the opportunity to be backcourt stars, but if they don't, Duke will probably still start 2 all conference guards in Allen and Kennard.

IMO, the foundation is stronger with upperclassmen than it has been in years, and that significantly raises the floor of this team. That's why I think this is the year Duke ends its ACC Regular Season drought. I don't think you can find a better returning core in the ACC- so other teams will in fact be more dependent on freshmen, even if Duke's are the most prominent.

BD80
07-07-2016, 02:26 PM
Regarding Duke's dependence on freshmen- I feel like it will be less dependence than it seems. ...

Ah, if only the Final Four were back at Lucas Oil Stadium this season, it could be Indiapendence!

Kedsy
07-07-2016, 02:53 PM
They will run and they will pound the glass and they will win the vast majority of their games that way.

Maybe. Will they really pound the glass? Unless I'm missing someone, their whole roster will only have two players taller than 6'8". Meeks and Hicks, for their size are average or below average overall rebounders (although both are pretty good offensive rebounders, if that's what you mean by pound the glass). Jackson and Pinson are wings who rebound like guards, Pinson is a similar rebounder to Luke Kennard, but Jackson and Berry are only so-so rebounders for guards, despite Jackson's height. Unless Bradley is a beast on the boards, UNC should have its worst rebounding team in years.

Wander
07-07-2016, 03:02 PM
I disagree, either only slightly or by a fair amount depending on what a "pretty good, upper-middle-of-the-pack ACC team" means to you. I think they are going to be safely a top-25 team nationally. If all goes well, maybe they threaten the top-10 nationally.

Yeah, we should probably define what "good" vs "very good" means before we just end up talking past each other. I'd put UNC at around #15 or so right now. I would consider that "very good" but others may feel differently. Brice Johnson was great, but power forward is probably the position UNC was best equipped to lose a star player from. Marcus Paige had a good tournament but for the most part Joel Berry was better last year. Losing Joel James is meaningless and maybe even a very slight benefit given Roy's insistence on playing a deep bench. The freshmen class just needs to be decent enough to provide 2 competent bench players in addition to Nate Britt. So I think UNC will not be in serious national title contention, but will handle their losses from last year decently.

Troublemaker
07-07-2016, 03:04 PM
Kedsy, would it be fair to say that last offseason, you underestimated the eventual ACC champion, national-title game participant Heels?

That, of course, doesn't mean you won't get it right about them this upcoming season.

Kedsy
07-07-2016, 03:14 PM
Kedsy, would it be fair to say that last offseason, you underestimated the eventual ACC champion, national-title game participant Heels?

That, of course, doesn't mean you won't get it right about them this upcoming season.

I definitely underestimated how much that team would achieve, no question about it. I'm not sure if I underestimated UNC or if I overestimated the rest of college basketball. Frankly, I didn't expect Villanova to make the Final Four, either.

But the comment that drew me in to this debate is that UNC will have a very good team without relying on its freshmen. Despite being wrong about last year's UNC ceiling, I'm fairly confident that if this year's UNC team doesn't get surprisingly good contributions from its freshmen, then it's a 4th/5th place ACC team. Maybe better if they rely on a couple freshmen to play big roles and those frosh deliver.

gumbomoop
07-07-2016, 04:10 PM
Maybe. Will they really pound the glass? Unless I'm missing someone, their whole roster will only have two players taller than 6'8"... Unless Bradley is a beast on the boards, UNC should have its worst rebounding team in years.

You missed Bradley, usually listed at 6'10". I don't expect him to be a beast his frosh year, but he's ranked #17 in ESPN's final 2016 list, and I think he moved up during his senior year. Looked pretty good to me in AS games.

ETA: My apologies. I misread Kedsy's comment, so he did not miss Bradley.

CDu
07-07-2016, 04:17 PM
Maybe. Will they really pound the glass? Unless I'm missing someone, their whole roster will only have two players taller than 6'8". Meeks and Hicks, for their size are average or below average overall rebounders (although both are pretty good offensive rebounders, if that's what you mean by pound the glass). Jackson and Pinson are wings who rebound like guards, Pinson is a similar rebounder to Luke Kennard, but Jackson and Berry are only so-so rebounders for guards, despite Jackson's height. Unless Bradley is a beast on the boards, UNC should have its worst rebounding team in years.

I was referring to "pounding the glass" offensively, as you brought up the question of who would shoot. UNC was not a dominant defensive rebounding team last year either, and I expect that to continue. But they are regularly a strong offensive rebounding team, and I think that will also continue. I think the trio of Meeks, Hicks, and Bradley will be very effective on the offensive glass. I'd put them at most likely no worse than 4th or 5th in the conference, with the chance to be 2nd or 3rd. In this era of heavy turnover, it's dangerous to underestimate a team with tons of experience, and it's dangerous to estimate a team with tons of experience and raw talent.

Maybe this will be the year that the wheels fall off, but I don't think it will be. I think they'll be comfortably a top-25 team and will have an outside shot at top-10. I'd love to be wrong though.

johnb
07-07-2016, 04:27 PM
I disagree, either only slightly or by a fair amount depending on what a "pretty good, upper-middle-of-the-pack ACC team" means to you. ....

I'd say upper middle of the pack is about 4th/5th (but below the top 3), and that would probably be national top 25. I have no idea how good Carolina will be, but I can always hope for the best/worst.

CDu
07-07-2016, 04:30 PM
I'd say upper middle of the pack is about 4th/5th (but below the top 3), and that would probably be national top 25. I have no idea how good Carolina will be, but I can always hope for the best/worst.

Yeah, like I said, it all depends on what one means by "upper middle of the pack." In a 15 team conference, I'd put that at 6th or 7th (the top two spots of the middle third), with 4th or 5th being the bottom of the top tier. But again, mileage may vary from person to person.

Kedsy
07-07-2016, 05:57 PM
Yeah, like I said, it all depends on what one means by "upper middle of the pack." In a 15 team conference, I'd put that at 6th or 7th (the top two spots of the middle third), with 4th or 5th being the bottom of the top tier. But again, mileage may vary from person to person.

As I said in a different post, when I said "upper middle of the pack," I meant 4th or 5th. I suppose it's possible they sneak into 3rd, but it's also possible they'll drop to 6th.

sagegrouse
07-07-2016, 08:14 PM
Maybe. Will they really pound the glass? Unless I'm missing someone, their whole roster will only have two players taller than 6'8". Meeks and Hicks, for their size are average or below average overall rebounders (although both are pretty good offensive rebounders, if that's what you mean by pound the glass). Jackson and Pinson are wings who rebound like guards, Pinson is a similar rebounder to Luke Kennard, but Jackson and Berry are only so-so rebounders for guards, despite Jackson's height. Unless Bradley is a beast on the boards, UNC should have its worst rebounding team in years.

Well, it's OK with me if UNC's rebounding tails off this year. Didn't the Heels outrebound us 2:1 in both games last year?

Kedsy
07-07-2016, 08:48 PM
Well, it's OK with me if UNC's rebounding tails off this year. Didn't the Heels outrebound us 2:1 in both games last year?

Just the second game. The first game was 1.35:1. Still, your point is valid.

yancem
07-07-2016, 08:56 PM
Well, it's OK with me if UNC's rebounding tails off this year. Didn't the Heels outrebound us 2:1 in both games last year?

I don't see that happening this year. Not with them loosing Johnson and us adding Giles and Bolden.

moonpie23
07-07-2016, 09:15 PM
Unc is gonna have a difficult time with the snack machine deficit...

CDu
07-07-2016, 09:16 PM
I don't see that happening this year. Not with them loosing Johnson and us adding Giles and Bolden.

And Jefferson. Though losing Plumlee, but that is a net positive in rebounding.

subzero02
07-07-2016, 10:04 PM
And Jefferson. Though losing Plumlee, but that is a net positive in rebounding.

With our shot blocking and defensive rebounding potential, we could really put up some great defensive efficiency numbers. I know what to expect from Jefferson on the defensive boards but what do people expect from Bolden and Giles? I know we'd have to have a better idea of minutes and rotation to make accurate statistical predictions but I'd be interested in seeing posters' viewpoints.

-jk
07-07-2016, 10:08 PM
With our shot blocking and defensive rebounding potential, we could really put up some great defensive efficiency numbers.

Alas, defense is more a team thing. Coordinated.

I hope our guys learn to play together this year...

-jk

Troublemaker
07-07-2016, 10:16 PM
With our shot blocking and defensive rebounding potential, we could really put up some great defensive efficiency numbers. I know what to expect from Jefferson on the defensive boards but what do people expect from Bolden and Giles? I know we'd have to have a better idea of minutes and rotation to make accurate statistical predictions but I'd be interested in seeing posters' viewpoints.

Bolden -- advanced defensively for a freshman. Coach K praises his high school coach for being a great defensive teacher. Comes from same high school as Matt.

Giles -- when healthy, an incredible athlete. very switchable on defense and a great rebounder.

Neals384
07-08-2016, 12:53 AM
According to the Way Too Early thread, Duke was listed as 5-1 in early May, with Ky at 8-1. So, did the Bolden announcement move the needle that much? And how come Ky is now 7-1 when they didn't get Bolden?

Troublemaker
07-08-2016, 08:31 AM
According to the Way Too Early thread, Duke was listed as 5-1 in early May, with Ky at 8-1. So, did the Bolden announcement move the needle that much? And how come Ky is now 7-1 when they didn't get Bolden?

Doubtful. The 5-1 and 3-1 might've been at two different books, as 3-1 is hardly the consensus. For example, you can bet Duke at 13-2 (or 6.5-to-1) at some places right now (http://www.oddschecker.com/basketball/ncaab/ncaa-championship/winner). (That obviously would be the first clue that 3-1 aren't good/fair odds.)

DukieInBrasil
07-11-2016, 02:26 PM
While i have no insights on how to set betting lines or other such prognostications, i see some reasons for optimism for this squad to win Natty 6.
1) Experience. It is possible that Duke might field a starting lineup without a Fr. for the first time in a while. We will almost assuredly be starting a 5th yr Sr., at C/PF another Sr at SF/SG, a Jr SG, a So. G and possibly another So. at PF/C (Jeter). I was not impressed with Jeter's play in his Fr. year, but one never knows how he will progress from his 1st year, nor do we know how ready our Fr will be. It is more likely than not that Jeter won't start much if at all.
2) Skill. Each of the above cited players has at least one very valuable skill. Amile is a very skilled rebounder and has a lot of skill scoring around the basket, but he's not a freakish physical talent nor has he shown much shooting skill thus far. Matt Jones has a skill for 3pt shooting and defense, but he's not very skilled at driving to the rim or scoring inside nor is he a freakish physical talent. Grayson is an almost freakishly talented athlete, with excellent skill at 3pt and scoring in the paint. He showed a surprising amount of skill as a PG last year, but not one of his biggest strengths. Luke has a reputation as a skilled 3pt shooting talent, and we saw that occassionally last year, as well as a skill for scoring from pretty much anywhere on the floor. He may have to develop more skill for the PG position this year, but we saw some of that last year too. 4 of the incoming Fr. have reputations for being skilled as well, so we'll see how that goes.
3) Skilled experience. Points 1) + 2). Just to point out that our experienced players are not stiffs.
4) NCAA Tournament experience. 3 guys played on, and played big roles in Duke's most recent Natty. 5 guys played pretty important roles in last year's Sweet 16 team, while 2 additional guys were also on that team. Tournament experience is a big plus.
5) Depth. I'm not about to argue minutes played or rotation depth. But even if Duke only goes 7 or 8 rotation, there will undoubtedly be times when someone is unavailable for a game(s), or gets hurt during a game, or big time foul trouble, and having bodies, including bodies with some real skill/talent, will be handy.
6) Talent. None of Duke's players lack talent. Some are more talented than others. Grayson has immense talent. Our other returning (2016/17)starters all have a lot of talent in at least one area. Tatum, Giles, Jackson and Bolden have reputations for being very talented as well. So that bodes well.
7) Coaching talent. We've got the best in the business pulling the strings and he's got lots of very competent assistance/ts.

I'm pretty excited for this year's iteration of Duke basketball, i feel like they're going to be a fun team to watch!

Kedsy
07-11-2016, 02:51 PM
It is possible that Duke might field a starting lineup without a Fr. for the first time in a while.

I'm pretty excited too, but (absent injury) it is not reasonably possible that Duke has fewer than two freshmen in the starting lineup in 2016-17.

ChillinDuke
07-11-2016, 05:09 PM
Yeah, like I said, it all depends on what one means by "upper middle of the pack." In a 15 team conference, I'd put that at 6th or 7th (the top two spots of the middle third), with 4th or 5th being the bottom of the top tier. But again, mileage may vary from person to person.

Regarding UNC's chances next year, I agree with those who think they'll be "good." Their 1-5 range from solid to good (a couple with the potential to be great), and Nate Britt is good enough as a backup.

The question to me is - everybody's favorite - Roy Williams. If K is so clearly a 7.5-man rotation guy in major games, then isn't Roy so clearly a 9-man rotation guy? YMMV on the #-man that both K and Roy are, respectively. But my point is that if UNC has a solid front 5 (they do) and a good first backup (they do), and if Roy Williams is a [9]-man rotation kind of coach (he is), then who the heck is going to be UNC's player #7, #8, and #9? Is Luke Maye one of them?

They'll be good enough in their starting lineup to play top-of-the-acc ball. Maybe even Top-10 nationally ball. But the starting lineup doesn't play the whole game - and it especially doesn't play the whole game at UNC. And I can't envision a reasonable scenario where player #6 - #9 (headlined by Nate Britt) can play top-of-the-ACC / Top-10 nationally ball. At all. And that is why I agree with Kedsy that UNC is an ACC #4/#5 or Top-25 kind of team next year.

And, of course, it's possible I'm wrong. I won't apologize for that possibility. I'll be the first one to admit that I dramatically underestimated UNC last year.

But in mid-July - there aren't many things as enjoyable as envisioning how Roy Williams is going to muck up UNC's upcoming season.

- Chillin

Skitzle
07-11-2016, 05:50 PM
Regarding UNC's chances next year, I agree with those who think they'll be "good." Their 1-5 range from solid to good (a couple with the potential to be great), and Nate Britt is good enough as a backup.

The question to me is - everybody's favorite - Roy Williams. If K is so clearly a 7.5-man rotation guy in major games, then isn't Roy so clearly a 9-man rotation guy? YMMV on the #-man that both K and Roy are, respectively. But my point is that if UNC has a solid front 5 (they do) and a good first backup (they do), and if Roy Williams is a [9]-man rotation kind of coach (he is), then who the heck is going to be UNC's player #7, #8, and #9? Is Luke Maye one of them?

They'll be good enough in their starting lineup to play top-of-the-acc ball. Maybe even Top-10 nationally ball. But the starting lineup doesn't play the whole game - and it especially doesn't play the whole game at UNC. And I can't envision a reasonable scenario where player #6 - #9 (headlined by Nate Britt) can play top-of-the-ACC / Top-10 nationally ball. At all. And that is why I agree with Kedsy that UNC is an ACC #4/#5 or Top-25 kind of team next year.

And, of course, it's possible I'm wrong. I won't apologize for that possibility. I'll be the first one to admit that I dramatically underestimated UNC last year.

But in mid-July - there aren't many things as enjoyable as envisioning how Roy Williams is going to muck up UNC's upcoming season.

- Chillin

"Just a Good Backup? Ludicrous! Nate Britt is the Second Coming (Third Coming) of Isaiah Thomas. UNC will be a Top 1 Team" - IC

Troublemaker
07-12-2016, 01:44 AM
Regarding UNC's chances next year, I agree with those who think they'll be "good." Their 1-5 range from solid to good (a couple with the potential to be great), and Nate Britt is good enough as a backup.

The question to me is - everybody's favorite - Roy Williams. If K is so clearly a 7.5-man rotation guy in major games, then isn't Roy so clearly a 9-man rotation guy? YMMV on the #-man that both K and Roy are, respectively. But my point is that if UNC has a solid front 5 (they do) and a good first backup (they do), and if Roy Williams is a [9]-man rotation kind of coach (he is), then who the heck is going to be UNC's player #7, #8, and #9? Is Luke Maye one of them?

They'll be good enough in their starting lineup to play top-of-the-acc ball. Maybe even Top-10 nationally ball. But the starting lineup doesn't play the whole game - and it especially doesn't play the whole game at UNC. And I can't envision a reasonable scenario where player #6 - #9 (headlined by Nate Britt) can play top-of-the-ACC / Top-10 nationally ball. At all. And that is why I agree with Kedsy that UNC is an ACC #4/#5 or Top-25 kind of team next year.

And, of course, it's possible I'm wrong. I won't apologize for that possibility. I'll be the first one to admit that I dramatically underestimated UNC last year.

But in mid-July - there aren't many things as enjoyable as envisioning how Roy Williams is going to muck up UNC's upcoming season.

- Chillin

I think you're right about UNC being more of a top-25 team than top-10 (which is where the way-too-early preseason polls have them). Usually teams that advance far in the tournament are overrated the following season; Villanova probably won't end up playing like a top-4 team, either.

Wheat/"/"/"
07-12-2016, 09:42 PM
I'm expecting UNC to be a top ten team by the end of the conference season.

Roy is gonna play deep into the bench and drop a game or two that he probably could have won if he didn't go so deep, then tighten up the rotation mid way through conference play. That's just how he does things.

So they'll bounce around between top 5 and 15.

FYI, Meeks has worked hard on his body and is in good shape.

I expect Jackson to play a lot of minutes and be the leading scorer. He's a classic late bloomer.

Roy has some interesting options with his lineups...

I won't be surprised if he goes small more this year more than many think with a Hicks,Pinson,Jackson,Britt, Berry lineup.

But I'd think the majority of the time we'll see a more traditional UNC lineup of Meeks, Hicks, Jackson, Pinson, Berry as starters. First off the bench will be Britt, (and he'll get some starts over Pinson along with Berry).

Bradley, the freshman center, supposedly has the ready body and is said to be ready to contribute right away and spell Meeks, we'll see.

Maye will see some good minutes spelling Hicks at the PF spot. Word from pick up is he's been working hard on mid range shooting and knocking them down. He won't wow you but he can play and hold his own. He'll play more like a stretch 4 than Hick's power game and give the team a different look when he's in.

I think Kenny Williams showed promise and a heady game and will also contribute a lot this year at the 2g.

This is not a deep team but it has good balance and talent. I think they'll have good chemistry.

Kedsy
07-12-2016, 10:43 PM
Maye will see some good minutes spelling Hicks at the PF spot. Word from pick up is he's been working hard on mid range shooting and knocking them down. He won't wow you but he can play and hold his own. He'll play more like a stretch 4 than Hick's power game and give the team a different look when he's in.

I think Kenny Williams showed promise and a heady game and will also contribute a lot this year at the 2g.


I was with you until the above two pipe dreams.

timmy c
07-12-2016, 11:05 PM
Roy has some interesting options with his lineups...

Bradley, the freshman center, supposedly has the ready body and is said to be ready to contribute right away and spell Meeks, we'll see.

Maye will see some good minutes spelling Hicks at the PF spot. Word from pick up is he's been working hard on mid range shooting and knocking them down. He won't wow you but he can play and hold his own. He'll play more like a stretch 4 than Hick's power game and give the team a different look when he's in.

I think Kenny Williams showed promise and a heady game and will also contribute a lot this year at the 2g.

This is not a deep team but it has good balance and talent. I think they'll have good chemistry.


I was with you until the above two pipe dreams.
Wheat, thanks for your UNC perspective.

Meeks has shown that he can get his body ready, but he hasn't shown me enough determination. If Bradley is really ready, I expect he might get a few starts this season to go along with plenty of backup minutes.

Kenny Williams as a major contributor is a pipe dream. I expect seventh woods will pass him on the depth chart before February.

Wheat/"/"/"
07-12-2016, 11:46 PM
Wheat, thanks for your UNC perspective.

Meeks has shown that he can get his body ready, but he hasn't shown me enough determination. If Bradley is really ready, I expect he might get a few starts this season to go along with plenty of backup minutes.

Kenny Williams as a major contributor is a pipe dream. I expect seventh woods will pass him on the depth chart before February.

Meeks has had nagging injuries the last two years that have affected his play at times, so there's that, but I don't disagree that he needs to show more determination.

I have not seen Seventh Woods play, so I have no evaluation on him at this point.

I did watch Kenny Williams last year closely. He struggled early as a freshman but showed me some composure to his game. By the late season, Roy was using him in some key moments, in some big games, especially defensively, and he delivered some solid minutes.

I like his overall game. His shot looks good, even tho he didn't take or make many last year, nice handle, and he seems to have good feel for the court. If he comes in this year with the confidence I saw him gain last year late season, he's going to get some solid playing time.

Luke Maye is a good player. He's just not physically gifted. That said, he's not a bad athlete either.
Pick your cliche'...gym rat, heady, scrappy, whatever...he just has good instincts and rebounds well for his size. He's strong enough to hold his screening position and he can shoot it with a little space. He's going to get exposed defensively against many starting ACC power forwards, but as an off the bench player he can hold his own against opponents bench rotations. I see 10-12 minutes a game from him.

Wheat/"/"/"
07-12-2016, 11:52 PM
"Just a Good Backup? Ludicrous! Nate Britt is the Second Coming (Third Coming) of Isaiah Thomas. UNC will be a Top 1 Team" - IC

Nate Britt would start on most ACC teams this season. He's not a alpha dawg, but he's a good player.

I'll bet you now that he's going to be the key player for at least two UNC wins next season.

77devil
07-13-2016, 08:53 AM
Nate Britt would start on most ACC teams this season. He's not a alpha dawg, but he's a good player.

I'll bet you now that he's going to be the key player for at least two UNC wins next season.

Now that's high praise.

Indoor66
07-13-2016, 12:15 PM
Nate Britt would start on most ACC teams this season. He's not a alpha dawg, but he's a good player.

I'll bet you now that he's going to be the key player for at least two UNC wins next season.

Is that all they are going to win next year? :confused:

MChambers
07-13-2016, 02:35 PM
Is that all they are going to win next year? :confused:

That's two more than I'd like.

BD80
07-14-2016, 09:46 AM
That's two more than I'd like.

It's three more than I'd choose for them.