Some additional useful context/perspective to go along with the front page story

[scottdude8]

JD's post on the front page (https://www.dukebasketballreport.com/2019/2/27/18242608/people-need-some-perspective-about-duke-basketball) about the perspective we need to have on last night's loss is brilliantly written, and a must read. If you look outside of the context of our four losses, and into recent historical precedent and the state of the current college basketball landscape, there's even more context that goes towards the following point: this tough stretch, especially considering the extenuating circumstances, does by no means affect our season's overall goals. Consider:


Our best teams, including our national championship teams, have all gone through a tough stretch like this. Our 2010 National Title team lost 3 of 7 games in January, including a bad loss at NC State. Our 2011 team that earned a No. 1 seed two of the last three games of the regular season (ironically including one at Va. Tech). Our 2013 Elite Eight team lost 2 of 4 games in mid-February, both of which were on the road against unranked teams. The 2015 National Title team lost back to back games, and 3 of 6, in January. In short, all great teams go through a tough stretch. The fact that this team is going through one now, especially given the extenuating circumstances, does not mean the season is dead and buried.
History shows that we can still earn a No. 1 seed even if we loss another game (or two!). Last year, Xavier earned a No. 1 seed despite 5 regular season losses, and Kansas earned one despite 7 regular season losses. Neither played in a conference as tough as the ACC is this year, nor had the stellar non-conference resume we do. UNC earned a No. 1 seed in 2017 with 7 losses. In 2016 Oregon earned a No. 1 seed with 6 losses.
We're still well situated as one of the top four teams in the country, despite the loss. We are still at No. 3 in the NET rankings (https://www.ncaa.com/rankings/basketball-men/d1/ncaa-mens-basketball-net-rankings). Only two teams in the power conferences, Virginia and Tennessee, have less losses than our four. Duke has the same number of Q1 wins as Virginia and have beaten them twice. Duke has four more Q1 victories than Tennessee. Kentucky has four losses, and we annihilated them in a head to head meeting. All of the likely remaining two and three seeds (including Michigan, MSU, Marquette, and Texas Tech) have clear flaws in their resume that Duke does not. Meanwhile, we get a shot at revenge against UNC, another likely two seed.
All of the "analytic rankings" still love us. We are still in the top 3 of all six analytic rankings included on the team sheets even after last night's loss.


Let's all take a deep breath, watch how this team recuperates and improves over the (FINALLY!) light portion of our schedule, and see how everything else shakes out before we panic.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Let's all take a deep breath, watch how this team recuperates and improves over the (FINALLY!) light portion of our schedule, and see how everything else shakes out before we panic.

I agree with perspective, but the "light portion of our schedule" is just the next two games. It isn't necessarily an opportunity to "get right" as much as it is to hopefully get Zion a few reps and get him primed for the stretch run.

Important basketball starts very soon.

[scottdude8]

I agree with perspective, but the "light portion of our schedule" is just the next two games. It isn't necessarily an opportunity to "get right" as much as it is to hopefully get Zion a few reps and get him primed for the stretch run.

Important basketball starts very soon.

Very good point. I would say in the gauntlet of the ACC, two home games against two of the worst teams in the conference is as much of a "light portion" as we're going to get, haha.

[JayZee]

Very good point. I would say in the gauntlet of the ACC, two home games against two of the worst teams in the conference is as much of a "light portion" as we're going to get, haha.

I think of the next two games as an inhale.

Which makes the next UNC game a Steve Hale, I mean exhale...

[Nugget]

If you look outside of the context of our four losses, and into recent historical precedent and the state of the current college basketball landscape, there's even more context that goes towards the following point: this tough stretch, especially considering the extenuating circumstances, does by no means affect our season's overall goals.

Agree with most of your points (obviously, subject to great variance based on when/if Zion returns). But, I would say that the one disappointment of last night's loss is that it makes it much more likely that we will not catch Virginia for the ACC regular season title -- seems unlikely to me that they will drop a game, maybe at Syracuse?

And that will result in us having to beat UNC and Virginia on back-to-back days if we want to win the ACC Tournament.

If U.Va. wins the regular season and tournament, I'd think they would get #1 in the East over us, even if we were to beat Carolina twice in that stretch, and despite our having won the season series against U.Va.. Could we win the title as a #1 seed in the South instead? Sure. But, it would be slightly preferable to be in the East.

[Troublemaker]

Agree with most of your points (obviously, subject to great variance based on when/if Zion returns). But, I would say that the one disappointment of last night's loss is that it makes it much more likely that we will not catch Virginia for the ACC regular season title -- seems unlikely to me that they will drop a game, maybe at Syracuse?

And that will result in us having to beat UNC and Virginia on back-to-back days if we want to win the ACC Tournament.

If U.Va. wins the regular season and tournament, I'd think they would get #1 in the East over us, even if we were to beat Carolina twice in that stretch, and despite our having won the season series against U.Va.. Could we win the title as a #1 seed in the South instead? Sure. But, it would be slightly preferable to be in the East.

Statistically, it has to be < 50% that (a) UVA wins out AND (b) UVA and UNC both end up playing Duke in the ACCT. I mean, it's probably much less than 50% because we're talking about going 7-0 in outcomes here -- UVA winning 6 straight (4 regular season, 2 ACCT) and UNC winning once (in the ACCT quarterfinal). (That's without factoring in how Duke has to win our QF and then beat UNC in the SF, which would take it to going 9-0 in outcomes.)

For me, I'm keeping it simple for now. Let's win the two games at home where Duke is going to be huge favorites, and then let's beat UNC in Chapel Hill. And then, whatever happens elsewhere happens.

[cato]

For me, I'm keeping it simple for now. Let's win the two games at home where Duke is going to be huge favorites, and then let's beat UNC in Chapel Hill. And then, whatever happens elsewhere happens.

Sure would be nice for this to happen. That UNC loss was bad and the team has not recovered. If they can win two at home and then get revenge, that will be big.

[gep]

Very good point. I would say in the gauntlet of the ACC, two home games against two of the worst teams in the conference is as much of a "light portion" as we're going to get, haha.

I think the operative word here is "home games". Coach K alluded to as much in his VTech post-game.


Agree with most of your points (obviously, subject to great variance based on when/if Zion returns). But, I would say that the one disappointment of last night's loss is that it makes it much more likely that we will not catch Virginia for the ACC regular season title -- seems unlikely to me that they will drop a game, maybe at Syracuse?

And that will result in us having to beat UNC and Virginia on back-to-back days if we want to win the ACC Tournament.

If U.Va. wins the regular season and tournament, I'd think they would get #1 in the East over us, even if we were to beat Carolina twice in that stretch, and despite our having won the season series against U.Va.. Could we win the title as a #1 seed in the South instead? Sure. But, it would be slightly preferable to be in the East.

I'm always at a loss on this... sometimes, winning the ACC regular season is "not a great achievement", with the unbalanced schedule, and that the ACC Tournament is where it's at. So is "winning the ACC regular season" worth it or not???:confused:

And, why does "having to beat unc and UVA" necessary to win the ACC Tournament... either or both could lose before...:confused:

[HereBeforeCoachK]

I'm always at a loss on this... sometimes, winning the ACC regular season is "not a great achievement", with the unbalanced schedule, and that the ACC Tournament is where it's at. So is "winning the ACC regular season" worth it or not???:confused:

It's all about the NCAAT now for Duke. The ACC reg season / ACCT are merely positioning exercises....

[CDu]

Statistically, it has to be < 50% that (a) UVA wins out AND (b) UVA and UNC both end up playing Duke in the ACCT. I mean, it's probably much less than 50% because we're talking about going 7-0 in outcomes here -- UVA winning 6 straight (4 regular season, 2 ACCT) and UNC winning once (in the ACCT quarterfinal). (That's without factoring in how Duke has to win our QF and then beat UNC in the SF, which would take it to going 9-0 in outcomes.)

For me, I'm keeping it simple for now. Let's win the two games at home where Duke is going to be huge favorites, and then let's beat UNC in Chapel Hill. And then, whatever happens elsewhere happens.

Statistically, it was probably a slightly better than 50/50 that UVa would go 7-0. And then probably slightly less than 50/50 for them to go 7-0 and UNC to win their first ACCT game in a glorified home game against the 6 or 7 seed. And that is ignoring the fact that UVa doesn’t have to win out for us to have a tourney path of UNC and UVa back-to-back in some order. With a ~30% chance of a UVa regular-season loss and a ~60% chance of another Duke regular season loss, the chances of Duke winding up the 2 or 3 seed with a UVa loss are probably ~20%.

So, to that poster’s point, it is probably well over a 50/50 (probably more like 2/3 probability) that we would have to beat UVa and UNC back to back to win the ACC (us winning our first ACCT game is irrelevant to the hypothetical path we would have to take).

That said, I agree with you that there is plenty to focus on before the ACC tourney.

[Troublemaker]

Sure would be nice for this to happen. That UNC loss was bad and the team has not recovered. If they can win two at home and then get revenge, that will be big.

I think the team recovered -- otherwise, we wouldn't have won @Cuse. It's just difficult to win both @Cuse and @VaTech. As I wrote in the postgame thread, the most likely outcome for a back half of the top 10 team is to split the two games. I think perhaps only the elite teams -- UVA, Gonzaga, Duke at full strength -- would be favored to go 2-0 in those games.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

I think the team recovered -- otherwise, we wouldn't have won @Cuse. It's just difficult to win both @Cuse and @VaTech. As I wrote in the postgame thread, the most likely outcome for a back half of the top 10 team is to split the two games. I think perhaps only the elite teams -- UVA, Gonzaga, Duke at full strength -- would be favored to go 2-0 in those games.

Especially given that these were the two biggest home games of the season for both Cuse and VT. VT was all lathered up for the Duke game...Duke still in rehab following the 33 second shocker and the gutsy win at Cuse.

[Troublemaker]

Statistically, it was probably a slightly better than 50/50 that UVa would go 7-0. And then probably slightly less than 50/50 for them to go 7-0 and UNC to win their first ACCT game in a glorified home game against the 6 or 7 seed. And that is ignoring the fact that UVa doesn’t have to win out for us to have a tourney path of UNC and UVa back-to-back in some order. With a ~30% chance of a UVa regular-season loss and a ~60% chance of another Duke regular season loss, the chances of Duke winding up the 2 or 3 seed with a UVa loss are probably ~20%.

So, to that poster’s point, it is probably well over a 50/50 (probably more like 2/3 probability) that we would have to beat UVa and UNC back to back to win the ACC (us winning our first ACCT game is irrelevant to the hypothetical path we would have to take).

That said, I agree with you that there is plenty to focus on before the ACC tourney.

Nugget talked about UVA winning out, though. My odds were for the combination of (a) that, and (b) the UNC-UVA path in the ACCT. Which are clearly <50%.

If you re-read Nugget's post, his disappointment stems from the fact that UVA will probably win out (no regular season title for Duke) and the UNC-UVA path in the ACCT (likely no ACC tournament title for Duke).

If UVA loses, say, @Cuse (something Nugget mentioned in his post as a possibility), then I don't believe Nugget would be all that disappointed anymore . (Of course, Duke would have to take care of our business as well).

I think the idea is that we want to win one of the two ACC titles.

[Troublemaker]

Especially given that these were the two biggest home games of the season for both Cuse and VT. VT was all lathered up for the Duke game...Duke still in rehab following the 33 second shocker and the gutsy win at Cuse.

Coach K, who is not shy about calling out bad play or bad effort by Duke, actually praised Duke's play against VaTech. To paraphrase, he said that Duke didn't lose the game -- VaTech won it with a great performance.

That's good enough for me.

Duke is of sound mind and body (since Zion is getting better).

[HereBeforeCoachK]

Coach K, who is not shy about calling out bad play or bad effort by Duke, actually praised Duke's play against VaTech. To paraphrase, he said that Duke didn't lose the game -- VaTech won it with a great performance.

That's good enough for me.

Duke is of sound mind and body (since Zion is getting better).

He also said that his team was exhausted - needed to refresh, and that they "played hard." And VT's good performance was part of it being their most important home game of the year. Their body language won't even be the same the next game out.

[Troublemaker]

He also said that his team was exhausted - needed to refresh, and that they "played hard." And VT's good performance was part of it being their most important home game of the year. Their body language won't even be the same the next game out.

Ah, yes. I'll amend to say Duke is of sound mind and soon to be of sound body -- we'll get "rejuvenated" by these home games, and Zion will return.

[Duke79UNLV77]

It's all about college-LeBron Zion since he is such a singular talent and overcomes some clear weaknesses in our team. In my opinion, he was having the best season of any Duke player in the K era, not just any freshman. If he can return at full strength and fully reincorporated, we'd still be favored against anybody anywhere. If not, we could still potentially beat anyone, but a Final Four run would be unlikely. In that respect, our season is day-to-day with no timetable for return, but we're optimistic.

[CDu]

Nugget talked about UVA winning out, though. My odds were for the combination of (a) that, and (b) the UNC-UVA path in the ACCT. Which are clearly <50%.

Eh, again, I'm not sure that it's "clearly" <50%. I'd guess it is somewhere around 45%. And (see below) I think narrowing it down to that particular scenario seems pointless, as I think the frustration lies in the highly-likely loss of the 1 seed.


If you re-read Nugget's post, his disappointment stems from the fact that UVA will probably win out (no regular season title for Duke) and the UNC-UVA path in the ACCT (likely no ACC tournament title for Duke).

If UVA loses, say, @Cuse (something Nugget mentioned in his post as a possibility), then I don't believe Nugget would be all that disappointed anymore . (Of course, Duke would have to take care of our business as well).

I mean, maybe? Seems like a "forest for the trees" argument. My suspicion is that the frustration will be the same regardless of exactly how it plays out so long as we aren't the 1 seed. In other words, the frustration is that we'll likely face a tourney path of UNC/UVa in some order. And that's very much true. There is about an 85-90% chance that the draw will have us as a 2 or 3 seed, which means our ACC path would very likely involve UNC and UVa. It is, by a wide margin, the most likely scenario, and probably a 55-60% chance of being the path we'd have to travel (85-90% chance of that seeding and then factoring in the probability of UNC and UVa winning their tourney games).


I think the idea is that we want to win one of the two ACC titles.

I think the idea is that we want to win both (perhaps the "duh" statement of the year by me). But I think the reality is that we'll likely have to settle for trying to win one. We've probably got about a 10-15% chance of winning the regular season title, and probably about a 30% chance of winning the ACC tourney.

[Troublemaker]

Eh, again, I'm not sure that it's "clearly" <50%. I'd guess it is somewhere around 45%. And (see below) I think narrowing it down to that particular scenario seems pointless, as I think the frustration lies in the highly-likely loss of the 1 seed.

I mean, maybe? Seems like a "forest for the trees" argument. My suspicion is that the frustration will be the same regardless of exactly how it plays out so long as we aren't the 1 seed. In other words, the frustration is that we'll likely face a tourney path of UNC/UVa in some order. And that's very much true. There is about an 85-90% chance that the draw will have us as a 2 or 3 seed, which means our ACC path would very likely involve UNC and UVa. It is, by a wide margin, the most likely scenario, and probably a 55-60% chance of being the path we'd have to travel (85-90% chance of that seeding and then factoring in the probability of UNC and UVa winning their tourney games).

I think the idea is that we want to win both (perhaps the "duh" statement of the year by me). But I think the reality is that we'll likely have to settle for trying to win one. We've probably got about a 10-15% chance of winning the regular season title, and probably about a 30% chance of winning the ACC tourney.

Um, the reason I calculated for UVA winning out and Duke facing both UNC and UVA in the ACCT is because that's the scenario that Nugget talked about. And if you agree that it's < 50% (especially once you throw in that Duke has to win our QF and then beat UNC in the SF), what are we arguing about again?

Lol, I can't get into the weeds with you on this one, CDu. Ironic that you would ever accuse anyone of not seeing the forest for the trees.

[CDu]

Um, the reason I calculated for UVA winning out and Duke facing both UNC and UVA in the ACCT is because that's the scenario that Nugget talked about. And if you agree that it's < 50% (especially once you throw in that Duke has to win our QF and then beat UNC in the SF), what are we arguing about again?

We are talking about that I think you are focusing on a literal interpretation that misses the point. While I'm quite sure that poster could have worded it better, I'm also quite sure he or she was upset because (a) we are very unlikely to win the ACC regular season and (b) very likely to have a tournament path that would require going through UVa and UNC instead of just one.

They didn't say it eloquently. But there's roughly an 85-90% chance that we won't win the ACC regular season. And there's roughly a 55-60% chance that we will have to go through UNC and UVa in the ACC tournament to win the ACC title.

So, my point is that I think it's kind of a hollow argument to downplay their concerns simply because one scenario has a slightly below 50% chance of happening when (a) that particular scenario (UVa winning out and us having a draw that will see UNC in the semis and UVa in the finals) is by far the single most likely individual outcome and (b) it is more than a 50% chance that our ACC draw will include UNC and UVa period.


Lol, I can't get into the weeds with you on this one, CDu. Ironic that you would ever accuse anyone of not seeing the forest for the trees.

Easy, tiger. First, this isn't that "weedy" at all. Second, lay off the personal attacks. That was out of line.

[Nugget]

We are talking about that I think you are focusing on a literal interpretation that misses the point. While I'm quite sure that poster could have worded it better, I'm also quite sure he or she was upset because (a) we are very unlikely to win the ACC regular season and (b) very likely to have a tournament path that would require going through UVa and UNC instead of just one.

They didn't say it eloquently. But there's roughly an 85-90% chance that we won't win the ACC regular season. And there's roughly a 55-60% chance that we will have to go through UNC and UVa in the ACC tournament to win the ACC title.

So, my point is that I think it's kind of a hollow argument to downplay their concerns simply because one scenario has a slightly below 50% chance of happening when (a) that particular scenario (UVa winning out and us having a draw that will see UNC in the semis and UVa in the finals) is by far the single most likely individual outcome and (b) it is more than a 50% chance that our ACC draw will include UNC and UVa period.

Easy, tiger. First, this isn't that "weedy" at all. Second, lay off the personal attacks. That was out of line.

Heh.

(1) He.

(2) I wasn't "upset" about it -- just noting the one slight caveat to the original point made that, despite the loss at Va Tech, everything this team would hope to achieve was still achievable for it; basically, consistent with your interpretation above: it's now somewhat appreciably more likely we won't finish first in the regular season. I think their is some value in its own right in finishing first and it does have some slight impact on seeding for the all-important NCAAs (both because it would tend to be the case that as 2/3 seed in the ACCT we'd be more likely to have to go through UNC and U.Va. on consecutive days, and because the NCAA selection Committee has historically used winning conference regular seasons as kind of a tie-breaker in its close-call seeding decisions).

(3) I definitely could have said it more eloquently!

[CDu]

Heh.

(1) He.

Thanks. I usually try to be good about not assuming gender/sex of posters at the risk of offending our female friends. I suspect the majority are male, but better safe than sorry. :)


(2) I wasn't "upset" about it -- just noting the one slight caveat to the original point made that, despite the loss at Va Tech, everything this team would hope to achieve was still achievable for it; basically, consistent with your interpretation above: it's now somewhat appreciably more likely we won't finish first in the regular season. I think their is some value in its own right in finishing first and it does have some slight impact on seeding for the all-important NCAAs (both because it would tend to be the case that as 2/3 seed in the ACCT we'd be more likely to have to go through UNC and U.Va. on consecutive days, and because the NCAA selection Committee has historically used winning conference regular seasons as kind of a tie-breaker in its close-call seeding decisions).

Sorry for overstating your emotional attachment to the matter. But thanks for confirming I had your intent correct and was on the same page as what you were trying to say.

[msdukie]

I think the operative word here is "home games". Coach K alluded to as much in his VTech post-game.



I'm always at a loss on this... sometimes, winning the ACC regular season is "not a great achievement", with the unbalanced schedule, and that the ACC Tournament is where it's at. So is "winning the ACC regular season" worth it or not???:confused:

And, why does "having to beat unc and UVA" necessary to win the ACC Tournament... either or both could lose before...:confused:

Winning any championship is always a great achievement.