PDA

View Full Version : Some perspective: recent history of ACC Tourney and NCCA Tourney success



scottdude8
03-10-2018, 09:58 AM
In 2017, Duke won the ACC Tourney and UNC was upset in the semis of the ACC Tourney (by us). UNC won the NCAA Tourney while we were upset in second round.

In 2015, Duke was upset in the quarters of the ACC Tourney. We won the NCAA title. UNC made it to the ACC Tourney final but lost in the Sweet 16.

In 2014, Virginia won the ACC Tourney but was upset in the Sweet 16. We lost to Virginia in the ACC Final but were upset in the first round of the NCAA Tourney.

In 2013, Duke was upset in the quarters of the ACC Tourney. We still made it to the Elite 8. North Carolina made it to the ACC Tourney final but lost in the second round of the NCAA Tourney. Miami won the ACC Tourney but lost in the Sweet 16.

None of the above is a scientific analysis, it's a quick look through of recent history of ACC Tourney and NCAA Tourney success using Google, Wikipedia, and some memory. The point: as much as losing to UNC last night sucks, nothing about that loss necessarily means our NCAA Tourney chances are dead while UNC is going to the Final Four. Some perspective is always useful. Despite playing with two injured starters and playing objectively bad basketball, we still had a very realistic chance to beat one of the best teams in the country last night. If it comes together like it has at times this year we have every opportunity to make a deep NCAA Tourney run.

Breathe.

HereBeforeCoachK
03-10-2018, 10:01 AM
When I tried to make some of those points ^^^^ last night before the game, I was lit up by a number of posters here. I would imagine now more people are open to this kind of analysis.

Duke_92
03-10-2018, 10:48 AM
What I tell myself is that the 91 team had 7 losses and lost to UNC in the ACC tournament.....not sure this passes as recent! I guess that’s relative.

duke4ever19
03-10-2018, 10:55 AM
When I tried to make some of those points ^^^^ last night before the game, I was lit up by a number of posters here. I would imagine now more people are open to this kind of analysis.

You were "lit up" last night because you called the ACC Tournament "meaningless" and put forward a post hoc ergo propter hoc argument. Saying there is "something to" losing early in the tournament to rest players.

I countered by saying you were wily-nilly selecting examples that help your point while ignoring the mountain of evidence suggesting playing an extra game or two in the ACC tournament doesn't necessarily lead to "tired legs" and early flame-outs in the tournament. I argued that for every example you put forward, there were several counter-examples which render your argument fallacious.

scottdude8
03-10-2018, 11:07 AM
To clarify, I by no means intend to devalue the ACC tourney. I wanted to win badly last night. I was itching for the chance to spend 100 bucks on ACC title swag. That said, the season isn’t over by any means, and recent history bears that out. That’s the point I thought needed emphasis.

HereBeforeCoachK
03-10-2018, 11:24 AM
You were "lit up" last night because you called the ACC Tournament "meaningless" and put forward a post hoc ergo propter hoc argument. Saying there is "something to" losing early in the tournament to rest players. .

Well thank you for clarfying. Your guidance and wisdom is much appreciated.

HereBeforeCoachK
03-10-2018, 11:31 AM
What I tell myself is that the 91 team had 7 losses and lost to UNC in the ACC tournament....not sure this passes as recent! I guess that’s relative.

Not recent, but significant in that it was Duke's first national title, and done 3 weeks after getting waxed by 22 points in the finals of the ACCT.

And the recent....after getting waxed by N Dame by 10, Duke won natty in 2015.

I'll add, before anyone else jumps in and points it out, that this is not statistically significant test.....but it is at least some evidence that there is no reason to fret over the loss last night with The Big Dance coming up.

jv001
03-10-2018, 11:38 AM
Not recent, but significant in that it was Duke's first national title, and done 3 weeks after getting waxed by 22 points in the finals of the ACCT.

And the recent...after getting waxed by N Dame by 10, Duke won natty in 2015.

I'll add, before anyone else jumps in and points it out, that this is not statistically significant test....but it is at least some evidence that there is no reason to fret over the loss last night with The Big Dance coming up.

Trevon's and Wendell's injuries, and our offense, that's something to fret over. :cool: GoDuke!

sagegrouse
03-10-2018, 11:58 AM
When I tried to make some of those points ^^^^ last night before the game, I was lit up by a number of posters here. I would imagine now more people are open to this kind of analysis.

Naw! Fizzy soda pop is still weak -- although not as fizzy a day later.

Actually, there is a comparison of last night to our loss to Notre Dame in the ACC semis in 2015 (some have said quarter-finals, but it was the semis). We were flat and got behind and could never catch up. IIIRC (and there is always a first time) K used that game as an object lesson in congressional testimony in favor of a program for early-childhood development -- a fast start is important.

Lesson learned, I hope. I think our team can beat anyone in the country -- no matter how well the opponent plays -- with an intense, smart effort and reasonable success in hitting three-point shots. In other words, it's on us.

WRT last night, I give kudos to the Heels for playing with a great deal of focus and for reacting well to what Duke was intending to do. Those above who have rightfully criticized our play at the end of the game (Grayson's, in particular) should recognize that if the first-half score was 16-16 instead of 16-3, the end-game plays wouldn't have mattered.

jv001
03-10-2018, 12:07 PM
Naw! Fizzy soda pop is still weak -- although not as fizzy a day later.

Actually, there is a comparison of last night to our loss to Notre Dame in the ACC semis in 2015 (some have said quarter-finals, but it was the semis). We were flat and got behind and could never catch up. IIIRC (and there is always a first time) K used that game as an object lesson in congressional testimony in favor of a program for early-childhood development -- a fast start is important.

Lesson learned, I hope. I think our team can beat anyone in the country -- no matter how well the opponent plays -- with an intense, smart effort and reasonable success in hitting three-point shots. In other words, it's on us.

WRT last night, I give kudos to the Heels for playing with a great deal of focus and for reacting well to what Duke was intending to do. Those above who have rightfully criticized our play at the end of the game (Grayson's, in particular) should recognize that if the first-half score was 16-16 instead of 16-3, the end-game plays wouldn't have mattered.

Great post. Neals has just posted the +/- for last night's game and something interesting: The starting lineup was +15 and the top 3 lineups had Duval in the lineup. I truly believe if he does not get injured it's a different outcome. His speed and length is a great weapon on both defense and offense. We were only down 5 points at half time and played them even(38-38) in the 2nd half. Sometimes luck plays a part. Oh, and our bench was really bad last night. Javin is a better player than he's showed lately. GoDuke!

CDu
03-10-2018, 12:12 PM
Great post. Neals has just posted the +/- for last night's game and something interesting: The starting lineup was +15 and the top 3 lineups had Duval in the lineup. I truly believe if he does not get injured it's a different outcome. His speed and length is a great weapon on both defense and offense. We were only down 5 points at half time and played them even(38-38) in the 2nd half. Sometimes luck plays a part. Oh, and our bench was really bad last night. Javin is a better player than he's showed lately. GoDuke!

Yeah, for all the talk about how Duval cost us the game, he was in the game when we played well. Yes, he was atrocious offensively last night (in large part because he was hobbled, but also because he was trying to do too much while hobbled). But our defense suffered without him in the game.

jv001
03-10-2018, 12:17 PM
Yeah, for all the talk about how Duval cost us the game, he was in the game when we played well. Yes, he was atrocious offensively last night (in large part because he was hobbled, but also because he was trying to do too much while hobbled). But our defense suffered without him in the game.

One reason he was atrocious on offense was it seemed he ended up with the ball as the shot clock was running down. That and a few times Grayson and Gary got the ball to him when someone else was open. The poor guy just can't shoot and his teammates should know that by now. GoDuke!

MarkD83
03-10-2018, 12:17 PM
The real perspective on this Duke team, is while they have plenty of talent and play brilliantly at times they are still very inconsistent.

With a likely 2 seed (can't see a loss to another potential 2 seed dropping them to a 3) my expectations are

1) major disappointment if they lose in the first round
2) Second round loss is a possibility
3) Sweet 16 would be great
4) Everything beyond that is awesome

p.s. Just a first warning shot for next year. Next year's team will be even younger and rely on freshman even more than this year. 25 wins, a top 4 finish in the ACC and a sweet 16 would be major accomplishments for next year's team.

Stray Gator
03-10-2018, 02:08 PM
Not recent, but significant in that it was Duke's first national title, and done 3 weeks after getting waxed by 22 points in the finals of the ACCT.

And the recent...after getting waxed by N Dame by 10, Duke won natty in 2015.

I'll add, before anyone else jumps in and points it out, that this is not statistically significant test...but it is at least some evidence that there is no reason to fret over the loss last night with The Big Dance coming up.

I agree that losing early in ACC Tournament is "no reason to fret" about our prospects in the NCAA Tournament. I still disagree with the premise that losing early in the ACC Tournament improves our prospects in the NCAA Tournament, which is the point you were urging so assiduously last night. The fact that there have been seasons in which the team that won the national championship was one that had lost early in its conference tourney cannot, in my judgment, be deemed "significant" when the record reflects that there have been seasons in which the team that won the national championship had also won its conference tourney. In Duke's case, three of our five national championship teams also won the ACC Tournament. Just to be clear, no one is contending that this proves winning the ACC Tournament improves Duke's chances of winning the NCAA Tournament; but I believe it certainly provides significant evidence that winning the ACC Tournament does not hurt Duke's chances of winning the NCAA Tournament.

HereBeforeCoachK
03-10-2018, 02:18 PM
I agree that losing early in ACC Tournament is "no reason to fret" about our prospects in the NCAA Tournament. I still disagree with the premise that losing early in the ACC Tournament improves our prospects in the NCAA Tournament, which is the point you were urging so assiduously last night. The fact that there have been seasons in which the team that won the national championship was one that had lost early in its conference tourney cannot, in my judgment, be deemed "significant" when the record reflects that there have been seasons in which the team that won the national championship had also won its conference tourney. In Duke's case, three of our five national championship teams also won the ACC Tournament. Just to be clear, no one is contending that this proves winning the ACC Tournament improves Duke's chances of winning the NCAA Tournament; but I believe it certainly provides significant evidence that winning the ACC Tournament does not hurt Duke's chances of winning the NCAA Tournament.

I was responding to a poster who said that "most of Duke's national championship teams" won the ACCT, and that post absolutely was in context of winning the ACCT did improve chances...so not only was someone saying that, they were using the math of 5 championships to make that point specifically. The math is 3-2, which I thought was very inconclusive. So I used the last 3 years to demonstrate that. Perhaps you did't understand that part. He was using 5 years over 26, I was using 3 years in a row.

That said, rest is exponentially more important for a team that is banged up, and/or uses a short rotation. Also, rest is mental as well as physical. Duke uses a longer rotation this year than they have in a while, but its still a relatively short rotation. Some teams go 9-10-11 deep. It's a different dynamic for those teams.

Now we also seem to have two starters hampered by injuries. Maybe 3. I'm thinking at this point, our only choice is to find the silver lining in not playing tonight. While I couldn't think that way during the game last night, while it was going on, I had contemplated that silver lining already.

wobatus
03-10-2018, 02:26 PM
ACC regular season success has been more of an indicator of NCAA tourney success than ACC tournament titles in recent years. In the last 15 years 6 ACC teams won NCAA titles. Five of them won the ACC regular season. Only1 won the ACC Tournament. Duke in 2010, which also won the regular season title. 2015 Duke won neither.

Ian
03-10-2018, 02:50 PM
In 2017, Duke won the ACC Tourney and UNC was upset in the semis of the ACC Tourney (by us). UNC won the NCAA Tourney while we were upset in second round.

In 2015, Duke was upset in the quarters of the ACC Tourney. We won the NCAA title. UNC made it to the ACC Tourney final but lost in the Sweet 16.

In 2014, Virginia won the ACC Tourney but was upset in the Sweet 16. We lost to Virginia in the ACC Final but were upset in the first round of the NCAA Tourney.

In 2013, Duke was upset in the quarters of the ACC Tourney. We still made it to the Elite 8. North Carolina made it to the ACC Tourney final but lost in the second round of the NCAA Tourney. Miami won the ACC Tourney but lost in the Sweet 16.

None of the above is a scientific analysis, it's a quick look through of recent history of ACC Tourney and NCAA Tourney success using Google, Wikipedia, and some memory. The point: as much as losing to UNC last night sucks, nothing about that loss necessarily means our NCAA Tourney chances are dead while UNC is going to the Final Four. Some perspective is always useful. Despite playing with two injured starters and playing objectively bad basketball, we still had a very realistic chance to beat one of the best teams in the country last night. If it comes together like it has at times this year we have every opportunity to make a deep NCAA Tourney run.

Breathe.

I don't think Duke's chances in the tourney are depedant upon success in the ACCT. However, the manner in which Duke lost is consistent with certain characteristics (such as poor backcourt play in general and decision making in key possessions late in games) which they've displayed throughout the season and does not appear to have improved at all. And those characterics make me doubious of future success.

In other words, this was not a "they had a uncharacteristic bad game" situation which you can write off an move on. This was a "we keeping doing the same thing yet somehow think it will end up differently" situation.

I'm not down on our chances to win the tournment because of last night's loss. I'm down on our chances because I have no confidence that in a game with a quality opponent that is close with 2 minutes left, that we would make the smart, savvy plays neccessary to pull it out. We are 0-6 in our last 6 games decided by 5 points or less, and the last 2-3 minutes of all those games have looked the same to me. We either fail to get a good shot, turn the ball over, fail to box out, or miss FTs, some time all of the above.

Duke07
03-10-2018, 03:11 PM
I think specifically for this year's Duke team with the current injury issues, the silver lining may be avoiding Duval/Carter playing hurt tonight and potentially prolonging their recovery time. In any other year, I agree winning always trumps losing. Anticipating a Friday 1st round game (Charlotte or Nashville), a week off for them might be of greater benefit than a slightly higher seed in regards to our overall NCAA tourney prospects (and we would've probably gotten a 1 seed only if we beat UVA which obviously would be a major task)..

Stray Gator
03-10-2018, 03:17 PM
I was responding to a poster who said that "most of Duke's national championship teams" won the ACCT, and that post absolutely was in context of winning the ACCT did improve chances...so not only was someone saying that, they were using the math of 5 championships to make that point specifically. . . .

I'm sure everyone has grown weary of this discussion, and I regret that you force me to belabor it further. I was the poster who responded to your suggestion that this team would "benefit" from "a little rest" by pointing out that the majority of Duke's national championship teams also won the ACC Tournament. To be specific, here was your post:


Interesting how people who love the Devils look at things so differently. I enjoyed the run last year, and did not expect it. But at the same time, I was thinking "a little rest might be more beneficial in the long run." Once we lost in Greenville, I had zero joy whatsoever at the ACCT. Once the Heels cut down the nets for the big title, I went from zero joy to below zero.

And here's what I said in response:


You continue to suggest that Duke basketball teams would have a better chance of winning the national championship if they would bow out of the ACC Tournament early so that they could get "a little rest" for the NCAA Tournament. The fact remains, however, that the majority of Duke's national championship teams also won the ACC Tournament.

You're certainly entitled to believe whatever you wish, but I don't think that "a little rest" would have made any difference whatsoever in the outcome of Duke's game against South Carolina last March; and I'll venture a guess that Duke's coaches and players would confirm that playing the four games it took to win the ACC Tournament last year did not materially affect their performance in the NCAA Tournament. Indeed, given the remote prospects of winning the NCAA Tournament in any season, I'd guess that those coaches and players are proud enough of the ACC Championship that they wouldn't trade it for the chance to have a do-over of the 2017 NCAA tournament.

In any event, count me as one Duke alumnus and fan who still values the ACC Championship -- and did even through the unpleasantness of seeing UNC cut down the nets for the NCAA title.

You then retorted that


"[O]ur ACCT title was meaningless last year as the Holes cut down the real nets. So recent history indicates the rest is key."

Despite your repeated mischaracterizations, I have never said or suggested that winning the ACC Tournament would improve Duke's chances of winning the NCAA Tournament. Just because I don't agree with your opinion that losing early in the ACC Tournament improves Duke's chances of winning the NCAA Tournament, and offered facts to show that the record doesn't support that opinion, does not justify your repeated attempts to falsely portray my response as having claimed that winning the ACC Tournament improves Duke's chances of winning the national championship.

I don't appreciate you deliberately and repeatedly misrepresenting my position. I try to discuss issues here reasonably, with appropriate respect for the opinions of others; but I expect that those who disagree with me will debate honestly and honorably. If you find it necessary to materially miscast another person's position to defend your own, I believe that not only shows disrespect for the person you're debating, but signifies that you recognize a weakness in your position that leaves you unwilling or unable to defend it on its own merits. I maintain, as I have from the outset, that whether Duke wins the ACC Tournament or exits early and gets "a little rest" does not significantly affect Duke's chances of winning the NCAA Tournament. You're welcome to disagree, and encouraged to offer evidence that supports your position; but you're not entitled to misstate my position.

subzero02
03-10-2018, 03:24 PM
Naw! Fizzy soda pop is still weak -- although not as fizzy a day later.

Actually, there is a comparison of last night to our loss to Notre Dame in the ACC semis in 2015 (some have said quarter-finals, but it was the semis). We were flat and got behind and could never catch up. IIIRC (and there is always a first time) K used that game as an object lesson in congressional testimony in favor of a program for early-childhood development -- a fast start is important.

Lesson learned, I hope. I think our team can beat anyone in the country -- no matter how well the opponent plays -- with an intense, smart effort and reasonable success in hitting three-point shots. In other words, it's on us.

WRT last night, I give kudos to the Heels for playing with a great deal of focus and for reacting well to what Duke was intending to do. Those above who have rightfully criticized our play at the end of the game (Grayson's, in particular) should recognize that if the first-half score was 16-16 instead of 16-3, the end-game plays wouldn't have mattered.

Early in that loss to Notre Dame, the camera caught coach K mouthing the words, "no one wants to play". I felt the same way during most of the first half last night. This team needs to get closer to playing complete games or we will flame out earlier than we should in the NCAAT.

jv001
03-10-2018, 03:36 PM
Early in that loss to Notre Dame, the camera caught coach K mouthing the words, "no one wants to play". I felt the same way during most of the first half last night. This team needs to get closer to playing complete games or we will flame out earlier than we should in the NCAAT.

I remember Coach K saying freshmen let their mistakes on offense carry over to their defense. It looks like this team has been playing good defense but let's the offense/misses carry over to their "wanting to play" attitude. You might even say that Grayson let that happen last night. GoDuke!

Ian
03-10-2018, 03:38 PM
Naw! Fizzy soda pop is still weak -- although not as fizzy a day later.

Actually, there is a comparison of last night to our loss to Notre Dame in the ACC semis in 2015 (some have said quarter-finals, but it was the semis). We were flat and got behind and could never catch up. IIIRC (and there is always a first time) K used that game as an object lesson in congressional testimony in favor of a program for early-childhood development -- a fast start is important.

Lesson learned, I hope. I think our team can beat anyone in the country -- no matter how well the opponent plays -- with an intense, smart effort and reasonable success in hitting three-point shots. In other words, it's on us.

WRT last night, I give kudos to the Heels for playing with a great deal of focus and for reacting well to what Duke was intending to do. Those above who have rightfully criticized our play at the end of the game (Grayson's, in particular) should recognize that if the first-half score was 16-16 instead of 16-3, the end-game plays wouldn't have mattered.

But our problem of inability to execute well in key possessions late is still with us. Unless you somehow think we can play so well in the first 38 and be ahead by enough to make the last 2 minutes meaningless and do it for all 6 games, which I find unlikely, eventually we will be in a close game with 2 minutes left, and then what? More of what we saw last night?

arnie
03-10-2018, 03:41 PM
I think specifically for this year's Duke team with the current injury issues, the silver lining may be avoiding Duval/Carter playing hurt tonight and potentially prolonging their recovery time. In any other year, I agree winning always trumps losing. Anticipating a Friday 1st round game (Charlotte or Nashville), a week off for them might be of greater benefit than a slightly higher seed in regards to our overall NCAA tourney prospects (and we would've probably gotten a 1 seed only if we beat UVA which obviously would be a major task)..
I agree, Duval needs to rest his ankle sprain and be able to play 30+ healthy minutes. With Duval we may not even make it to the sweet sixrpteen (who knows), but without him I’m convinced our ceiling is low with little chance to make final 4.

kako
03-10-2018, 03:41 PM
Like investing, in sports past performance does not always guarantee future returns.

Just some examples:
State was not the best team in '83. They won.
Nova was not the best team in '85. They won.
UNLV was by far the best team in '91. They lost (thanks, Bobby).
Duke was the best team in '99. They lost (still hurts)
Florida was the best team in '07. They won.
UConn was definitely not the best team in '14. They lost.

None of those years worked out as the soothsayers said it would.

There's no law that not-so-great teams can't get hot for 6 games (or even 7). Or that the best teams may have an off night any night.

Duke lost the ACCT in '91 and '15. Those years worked out. Duke won the ACCT in '99, '00, '02, '03, '09, '11 and '17. Obviously, no NCAAT titles those years. So don't start predicting one way or another based on last night's game. I would have LOVED to win it, but it didn't happen. Move on, next play. Duke will be dancing.

Duke has as good a chance as any to win it all. Will they definitely? Nobody can say yes, Will they definitely lose? If anyone is so confident about that, give me 1000-1 odds and I'll gladly bet you a dollar. Tournament play is a crap shoot, but K has proven over the years he is one of the very best at it. The team just needs to start doing what it's capable of doing for the next 6 games.

Rich
03-10-2018, 03:47 PM
But our problem of inability to execute well in key possessions late is still with us. Unless you somehow think we can play so well in the first 38 and be ahead by enough to make the last 2 minutes meaningless and do it for all 6 games, which I find unlikely, eventually we will be in a close game with 2 minutes left, and then what? More of what we saw last night?

Ian, you are one of the most negative posters I've ever seen on these Boards. You keep repeating over and over about why this team is not good and will lose, from the freshmen one-and-done model to the defense to the poor execution of late game possessions. You never really offer much in the way of constructive analysis, positivity, or even constructive criticism. It's all destructive criticism. I really don't know what you're looking for here. People to argue with you? People to agree with you? I try to skip your posts but I'm usually reading straight through without looking at the poster's name, but I can always pick out yours. For your sake, I really hope you're more upbeat, happy, and find ways for joy away from these boards.

jv001
03-10-2018, 03:48 PM
Like investing, in sports past performance does not always guarantee future returns.

Just some examples:
State was not the best team in '83. They won.
Nova was not the best team in '85. They won.
UNLV was by far the best team in '91. They lost (thanks, Bobby).
Duke was the best team in '99. They lost (still hurts)
Florida was the best team in '07. They won.
UConn was definitely not the best team in '14. They lost.

None of those years worked out as the soothsayers said it would.

There's no law that not-so-great teams can't get hot for 6 games (or even 7). Or that the best teams may have an off night any night.

Duke lost the ACCT in '91 and '15. Those years worked out. Duke won the ACCT in '99, '00, '02, '03, '09, '11 and '17. Obviously, no NCAAT titles those years. So don't start predicting one way or another based on last night's game. I would have LOVED to win it, but it didn't happen. Move on, next play. Duke will be dancing.

Duke has as good a chance as any to win it all. Will they definitely? Nobody can say yes, Will they definitely lose? If anyone is so confident about that, give me 1000-1 odds and I'll gladly bet you a dollar. Tournament play is a crap shoot, but K has proven over the years he is one of the very best at it. The team just needs to start doing what it's capable of doing for the next 6 games.

I think most of us are discussing your last sentence. No one doubts our coach or our talent, but we are wanting to see the team come together for the last six games. GoDuke!

weezie
03-10-2018, 05:04 PM
I remember Coach K saying freshmen let their mistakes on offense carry over to their defense. It looks like this team has been playing good defense but let's the offense/misses carry over to their "wanting to play" attitude...

Yes, I remember him saying that. Also, his belief that each team travels it's own road and forges it's own identity. Each team is new each year and they deserve their own Duke, just like those of us who also went to Duke all have our memories, friends, experiences.,

God bless those kids. Likely pretty banged up, bummed and disappointed in themselves today. I wish I could give each of them a big old weezie hug and a chin chuck.

Ahhhh, the thought of K retiring is beginning to weigh heavy on this fan's heart.

Ian
03-10-2018, 05:44 PM
Ian, you are one of the most negative posters I've ever seen on these Boards. You keep repeating over and over about why this team is not good and will lose, from the freshmen one-and-done model to the defense to the poor execution of late game possessions. You never really offer much in the way of constructive analysis, positivity, or even constructive criticism. It's all destructive criticism. I really don't know what you're looking for here. People to argue with you? People to agree with you? I try to skip your posts but I'm usually reading straight through without looking at the poster's name, but I can always pick out yours. For your sake, I really hope you're more upbeat, happy, and find ways for joy away from these boards.

While I don't agree with your characterization of my posts, I want to point out that there is an ignore function on the boards that I use on certain posters and you are welcome to use it.

throatybeard
03-10-2018, 07:58 PM
Ahhh, the thought of K retiring is beginning to weigh heavy on this fan's heart.

One doesn't have to let it, though. I honestly wasn't sure Duke would have the pleasure of his services after the mid 1990s, or the multiple hip replacements in the 1999-2002 period, or every NBA courtship up through the Lakers in 2004. Even as recently as the late 2000s, I just hoped he'd get to the wins record, and considered a horizon of about 2015 roughly the outside for which we could even reasonably speculate.

No matter how you weigh various events, we're already well well into the "it's all gravy" period with Coach Krzyzewski. I'm OK proceeding on a year by year basis whereby we celebrate raucously for each single year he doesn't retire.

Reilly
03-10-2018, 08:36 PM
Possible records:

26-8 ... lose round of 64
27-8 ... lose round of 32
28-8 ... lose sweet 16
29-8 ... lose elite 8
30-8 ... Final Four, lose in FF (1 trophy)
31-8 ... Final Four, lose in national champ game (1 trophy)
32-7 ... Final Four, National champs (2 trophies)

Duke is currently #2 in the SRS (https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/seasons/2018-ratings.html)

Other K teams finishing #2 in SRS all won a trophy of some sort.

2018: #2 in SRS ... #2 ACCR ... FF ACCT ... ????
2015: #2 in SRS ... #2 ACCR ... FF ACCT ... national champs (2 trophies: FF, NC)
2011: #2 in SRS ... #2 ACCR ... ACCTC ... sweet 16 (1 trophy: ACCT)
2006: #2 in SRS ... ACCRC ... ACCTC ... sweet 16 (2 trophies: ACCR; ACCT)
2000: #2 in SRS ... ACCRC ... ACCTC ... sweet 16 (2 tropies: ACCR; ACCT)

K teams finishing #1 in SRS (2010; 2004; 2002; 2001; 1999; 1998) all won some sort of trophy.

K teams finishing #3 in SRS (2005; 1993; 1992; 1989; 1988; 1986) -- 1993 did not win a trophy, but all others did.

Troublemaker
03-10-2018, 09:10 PM
p.s. Just a first warning shot for next year. Next year's team will be even younger and rely on freshman even more than this year. 25 wins, a top 4 finish in the ACC and a sweet 16 would be major accomplishments for next year's team.

Haha, let's see how this season plays out from here first.

I hate that any time the team struggles, it's back to blaming all the problems on youth. Frankly, the coaching on offense could be better, and focusing the offense around two scoring bigs isn't Coach K's specialty. Next year's team, though? More ball-handling in general and a team built around versatile high-scoring wings. That's more up Coach K's alley.

But, like I said, let's see how this season plays out.

freshmanjs
03-10-2018, 09:16 PM
Of Coach K's 12 final four seasons, Duke lost in the semis or earlier in the ACC tournament only 3 times. Let's not pretend this is in any way a good or neutral sign. Villanova, UNC, Virginia, Kansas are peaking at exactly the right time.

CameronCrazy'11
03-10-2018, 10:00 PM
If I have the math right, only 1 out of the last 6 national champions from the ACC even played in the ACC tournament finals. 2017 UNC, 2015 Duke, 2009 UNC, 2005 UNC, and 2002 Maryland all lost before the finals. 2010 Duke, of course, won the ACC tournament en route to the national championship.

weezie
03-10-2018, 10:01 PM
Of Coach K's 12 final four seasons, Duke lost in the semis or earlier in the ACC tournament only 3 times. Let's not pretend this is in any way a good or neutral sign. Villanova, UNC, Virginia, Kansas are peaking at exactly the right time.

Well, while your observations are absolutely correct, everybody is peaking until they lose their last game.

As me dear old mother used to say, "Every kid is a genius, until they have to take the SATs."

throatybeard
03-10-2018, 10:16 PM
Well, while your observations are absolutely correct, everybody is peaking until they lose their last game.

As me dear old mother used to say, "Every kid is a genius, until they have to take the SATs."


Wait, does this mean the kids in the ACT states stay geniuses?

weezie
03-10-2018, 10:19 PM
Wait, does this mean the kids in the ACT states stay geniuses?

By jove, you must be right! I'll bet you aced that section ham sandwich::button hook, squash racket::_____________

subzero02
03-10-2018, 10:35 PM
Congrats to the Wahoos...

brevity
03-10-2018, 11:08 PM
Like investing, in sports past performance does not always guarantee future returns.

Just some examples:
State was not the best team in '83. They won.
Nova was not the best team in '85. They won.
UNLV was by far the best team in '91. They lost (thanks, Bobby).
Duke was the best team in '99. They lost (still hurts)
Florida was the best team in '07. They won.
UConn was definitely not the best team in '14. They lost.

They lost?!?

Wow. Kevin Ollie gets fired today, and history is already being rewritten.

freshmanjs
03-11-2018, 06:04 AM
everybody is peaking until they lose their last game.



I don't think that's true at all. I would not say that everyone is peaking. I don't think Oklahoma is peaking. Do you?

rsvman
03-11-2018, 07:45 AM
I don't think that's true at all. I would not say that everyone is peaking. I don't think Oklahoma is peaking. Do you?

Concrete much?

freshmanjs
03-11-2018, 03:10 PM
Concrete much?

Add Kentucky to the list of teams that is peaking right now, while Duke limps into the tournament

HereBeforeCoachK
03-11-2018, 03:20 PM
I don't think that's true at all. I would not say that everyone is peaking. I don't think Oklahoma is peaking. Do you?

Interesting concept, this peaking thing. Off top of my head: Duke champions:
1991, peaking at right time for sure, the pinnacle in the Semis versus Vegas.

1992: peaked v St Johns in December frankly, then the last 6-7 minutes versus Michigan in title game, but hardly peaking throughout the NCAAs. Just a dominant team over all.

2001: Really super team, not a great year in college hoops over all, so I think it's open question on when they peaked. Certainly did not shoot 3s well in NCAAs.

2010: To my eye, peaked in second half vs Baylor in Elite 8 and entire game against Press Virginia in semis. I didn't think they played well in finals, but still won. Overall though, peaked late season at right time.

2015: Definitely peaking at right time. Won 12 of 13 or something like that, then 6 straight in NCAAs.

I would add that the FF teams of 88, 89 and 90 did peak late, but did not win NCAAT's. The 86 team was great all year.

Another note, one year ago today we'd have all thought Duke was peaking at the right time. Not so much......

Ian
03-11-2018, 04:06 PM
The "peaking" thing always rung false to me. More like a post-hoc thing to explain what already happened. The truth to peak in the tournament doesn't require one to peak coming into the tournament. With 6 games it's entirely possible to come into the tournament down and play your way to peaking within the tournament. That's why it's irrevelant who's peaking right now on selection Sunday. Plenty of teams have won their conference tournament and appears to be "peaking" only to get knocked out very early, and plenty of teams have appeared to be struggling coming into the tournament, win an early close game, and then something clicks and they go on a run.

duke2x
03-11-2018, 05:56 PM
Outlier weekends are common.

2010 was a peak. UConn's title as the 3 seed out west after the 6 OT Syracuse game was a peak.

The 2001 Maui Invitational where Ball State wrecked havoc only to lose to Duke in the final was an outlier. I don't recall that Ball State seriously contended for the NCAA tournament. Florida in the PK80 played more like an outlier. I think Providence's run this weekend was more of an outlier.