Are we THAT bad, or unlucky?

[DukeWarhead]

I can't figure it out. I just can't.
Why, oh why, with such talent are struggling? Please, no excuses about youth. Many, many teams are young, and the season is almost over.
My co-worker UNC fan losers are never going to let this rest tomorrow.
Here's hoping we win one game in the tourney. Seriously, I will be happy with one.
Share my pain, people. Misery loves company.

[Chard]

Well, with lower expectations just think of how much fun you will have cheering them on. I will gush if they get past the first weekend.

[Dukefan4Life]

We just look so lost out there at times! this team is the first duke team that ive ever seen that hasnt gelled! i know you didnt want to hear the youth factor but i think it does play a role. We just dont have it together in so many ways! i dont like the way we run our offense! we just make a few passes then someone takes it one-on-one. I would like to see more use of the post by josh, that would free up some of our shooters or to take it to the whole! we need ALOT Of help! i hope next year will be better

[SMO]

I thought a lot of guys looked tired, a step slow, or not aggressive. It seemed to hit them about 5 minutes into the second half. Let's hope the week off gets them reinvigorated.

[Bob Green]

This team has all the ingredients for success except consistency. We do many things very well but we don't do those same things on a consistent basis. One example, out of the weave, McRoberts rolls from the high post and Paulus hits him with a nice entry pass, which results in a two-handed backwards highlight reel dunk. Our two super sophomores combine for a really beautiful play. We executed that play exactly one time in the game. There are other examples, but I believe it is unnecessary to list them in order to make my point. We do not execute successfully on a consistent basis.

The consistency will come and this team will be successful. It may happen next weekend or we may have to wait until next year, but the consistency will come. I am patient.

Bob Green
Yokosuka, Japan

[A-Tex Devil]

We are passive. Period.

Maybe that's got to do with youth, but if you don't go and take it, you are often going to lose. McRoberts fast break pass into the bench was a good summary of this season. If he's aggressive and takes it to the hole, he gets a bucket and a foul shot or at worst, a foul. Instead he passes to a guy that had expected him not to.

The way Pocius played on O tonight should be a lesson to this team. If no one else is gonna do it I'll do it myself.

My personal opinion is that this team has the wrong alpha dog.

[jipops]

I can't figure it out. I just can't.
Why, oh why, with such talent are struggling? Please, no excuses about youth. Many, many teams are young, and the season is almost over.
My co-worker UNC fan losers are never going to let this rest tomorrow.
Here's hoping we win one game in the tourney. Seriously, I will be happy with one.
Share my pain, people. Misery loves company.

I really don't quite understand all this talk of "we have all this talent, why are we struggling?". Yes there is some talent but you forget the youth on this team. Secondly, if we are supposedly so talented, why do we have disadvantages in so many matchups? I would argue that NC State put more talent on the floor tonight.

Are people here actually surprised that we lost tonight? This was an easy pick actually, the real shocker was the MD game.

My only disappointment tonight was the incredibly weak defense we displayed. That could have been the worst defensive performance that Duke has played in more than a decade. Possibly exception could be a couple games in '02. With 6 minutes left all we needed was to get ONE stop and we just couldn't do it. It was at this point of the game where we lost. There was never any help coming over and the communication was simply awful. It was truly amazing and discouraging to see this team play so poorly on D. I expected us to lose today but I didn't expect us to perform a matador impression all night.

This will of course sound like an excuse but one has to wonder if such poor defense can be attributed to distraction. This past weeks media circus had to have taken a lot of focus away from preparation. Sure it's up to the guys on the team to focus but with a group this young it's very difficult to do this. On the other hand, Duke's defense has taken a down turn going back to the MD game. This was the 3rd game in a row where our opponent had a layup drill though the prior two opponents had far superior talent. One more game with that kind of D and all we'll have to look forward to is next year.

[rsvman]

The problem is not the offense, it's the defense.


For the first half of the season our defense was sterling. Since then, it has suffered some. Today, our offense wasn't that bad. But look at what our defense did (or didn't do). What did NC State shoot, 57% or something? They had lay-up after lay-up and lay-up. We allowed them to get great positioning on the blocks or in the paint possession after possession. In the OT we could not get a single stop. Throughout the game they ran a high pick and roll, which ended up with Paulus guarding a guy 6' 9" or taller, and they just kept exploiting it, over and over. Etc., etc., etc.


It was the DEFENSE, not the offense, that cost the game tonight. If we played D anywhere near as well as we did in the first half of the season, the L becomes a W.

[Troublemaker]

I can't figure it out. I just can't.
Please, no excuses about youth.

It has everything to do with youth. The teams that are young and doing well recruited better for the short-term, which is a kind way to say that they're just better players. But this is an old-school team that will take a couple of years to develop, and other than Josh, they'll stay together and improve and will become a top 15-ish team next year and a top 5 team the following two years. Duke is fine.

[evrdukie]

This is the same note I posted on another discussion. I'm really interested in an informed answer.

I've watched Duke basketball for a long time, but don't pretend to the expertise a lot of the posters obviously possess. What I'm having trouble understanding this year is this: Most of Duke's starters were very highly touted high school players, big time college prospects by pretty much any standard. And yet this team is utterly mediocre and has regularly lost to teams that, on paper at least, shouldn't even be competitive with Duke. It's disappointing and I'm wondering if anybody can furnish a plausible explanation.

[Troublemaker]

This is the same note I posted on another discussion. I'm really interested in an informed answer.

I've watched Duke basketball for a long time, but don't pretend to the expertise a lot of the posters obviously possess. What I'm having trouble understanding this year is this: Most of Duke's starters were very highly touted high school players, big time college prospects by pretty much any standard. And yet this team is utterly mediocre and has regularly lost to teams that, on paper at least, shouldn't even be competitive with Duke. It's disappointing and I'm wondering if anybody can furnish a plausible explanation.

Youth. (I would've made this a one-word answer but apparently you need to post at least 10 characters!)

[A-Tex Devil]

I would argue that NC State put more talent on the floor tonight.


If that is the case, we have more problems than I realize. We've had the pick of recruits the last several years (with a few exceptions), and I imagine we could have most if not all of NC State's recruits had we wanted them.

If NC State is truly more "talented," then we have a talent evaluation problem. We should have won tonight, period.

[rsvman]

It's not a talent issue.

Jipops got it right and apparently he was drafting his post at the same time I was drafting mine.


We got what victories we got this season by playing outstanding defense; likewise, we got the loss tonight by playing terrible, porous defense.

Some of it may be that opposing coaches have figured out strategies to break down Coach K's style of man defense. All defensive schemes have strengths and weaknesses, and this D is no exception. Driving by your guy, pulling the help D, passing to the guy he left, pulling another helper, and then passing to the guy THAT guy left usually results in a layup. Easier said that done, but that's pretty much what State did all night long. Also, this D is highly susceptible to the high pick-and-roll, and that play got us repeatedly, too.

[BlueDevilBaby]

Agreed. Defense did Duke in. I kept expecting the defensive stop with a fast break bucket, but it did not happen. Too many points in the paint.:(

[_Gary]

If that is the case, we have more problems than I realize. We've had the pick of recruits the last several years (with a few exceptions), and I imagine we could have most if not all of NC State's recruits had we wanted them.

But those "few exceptions" killed us this year, IMHO. I'm thinking specifically of Wright who, if he had come here like so many of us were expecting, could and would have made a big difference! That one loss of a recruit, when things were shaky to begin with (due to early defections from years gone by, and guys never getting here to begin with), really came back to hit us this year. And it's no one's fault, that's just the way it worked out. But we really needed that inside defensive presence this year and we didn't have it. Just looking at the game tonight I believe with all my heart that one recruited player, had he been wearing Duke blue this year, would have put us over the top. We got abused in the post again and again tonight. No defensive presence at all. Wright would have been the missing cog in this year's team, IMHO. I know some will say one player can't make that big of a difference, but in this one instance, I believe it could and would have.

Having said that, we desperately need to land PP next year or we are going to be in the same boat defensively. We'll be better all the way around regardless, but the defensive post will still be hurting if he doesn't come.

Gary

[jacone21]

I think we have talent on the floor. We just seem to lack that one guy who can say, "Get on my back boys, 'cause I'm getting ready to take this Samuel L. Jackson game to the house." Nobody makes those key, critical, big plays this year, like Atsur did on consecutive possessions tonight. I don't mean one-on-one plays, I mean critical, intelligent plays in the flow. Without that calming influence, that playmaker, talent is not enough. Basketball is a team game and at the most critical time, Duke's team game falls apart.

[BobbyFan]

What I'm having trouble understanding this year is this: Most of Duke's starters were very highly touted high school players, big time college prospects by pretty much any standard. And yet this team is utterly mediocre and has regularly lost to teams that, on paper at least, shouldn't even be competitive with Duke. It's disappointing and I'm wondering if anybody can furnish a plausible explanation.

In JJ and Shelden, we lost about 45 ppg which came at remarkable efficiency numbers. And we haven't come close to replacing that scoring. It's that simple.

Strong residual and incoming talent helped make the transition easier following similarly heavy losses to early departure/graduation in the 2000 and 2003 seasons and probably created a false illusion of the ease of "rebuilding" at Duke. This year has been a dose of reality.

[jipops]

It's not a talent issue.

Jipops got it right and apparently he was drafting his post at the same time I was drafting mine.


We got what victories we got this season by playing outstanding defense; likewise, we got the loss tonight by playing terrible, porous defense.

Some of it may be that opposing coaches have figured out strategies to break down Coach K's style of man defense. All defensive schemes have strengths and weaknesses, and this D is no exception. Driving by your guy, pulling the help D, passing to the guy he left, pulling another helper, and then passing to the guy THAT guy left usually results in a layup. Easier said that done, but that's pretty much what State did all night long. Also, this D is highly susceptible to the high pick-and-roll, and that play got us repeatedly, too.

You hit it there. It was much easier to defend the high picks with Grant running the point. Not so easy with Atsur as their main ball-handler. Still, allowing 60% from the field looks like a lack of preparation. Not throwing any blame the coaches' way, I just think a young group like ours was very much susceptible to distraction caused by this week's overblown media nasal circus. That's not so much an excuse but yet another weakness on this team, due to ofcourse... youth.

The quick early fouls on McRoberts hurt quite a bit as well. Notice McCauley went nuts when Josh came back in during the 1st half carrying 2.

[Bay Area Duke Fan]

This Duke team has more high school AAs than anyone, but it just doesn't win close games. I think this proves that being a McD AA doesn't mean stardom in college hoops. If it did, Duke would be a #1 seed again this year.

Let's face it....our guys just aren't as talented as teams like Ohio State, Texas and UNC, all of which are as young as Duke. Hopefully, next year's AA recruits will prove to be better college players, and our existing guys will have another year of experience.

Now, let's see about next week.

[bhd28]

It's not a talent issue.

Jipops got it right and apparently he was drafting his post at the same time I was drafting mine.


We got what victories we got this season by playing outstanding defense; likewise, we got the loss tonight by playing terrible, porous defense.

Some of it may be that opposing coaches have figured out strategies to break down Coach K's style of man defense. All defensive schemes have strengths and weaknesses, and this D is no exception. Driving by your guy, pulling the help D, passing to the guy he left, pulling another helper, and then passing to the guy THAT guy left usually results in a layup. Easier said that done, but that's pretty much what State did all night long. Also, this D is highly susceptible to the high pick-and-roll, and that play got us repeatedly, too.

Wait a minute there... you think opposing ACC coaches have figured out how to beat Dukes defense after only 30 years? I honestly think there needs to be some 'tweaks' to the defense. It works great when we have more athletic guys than the opponents, but that isn't always the case. Seriously, if we have trouble guarding one-on-one and we have trouble guarding the pick-and-roll.... that's trouble, right? Playing the passing lanes won't help with that. Help defense can, but that has been worse in the past 5 games than it was in the first 5. That's not a good thing. What is worst, I think, is that I feel like I am seeing those guys fold in tough games at the end. That's what is scary to me. This team doesn't win close games. I love the players, and I love the coach, but I am dissapointed in the team's play right now. Not doom and gloom... not Duke has lost it... just dissapointed in their play this year. It is so frustrating to see the critical turnovers, forced shots, and defensive breakdowns at the ends of games that we have seen so often this year.

[bhd28]

Not throwing any blame the coaches' way, I just think a young group like ours was very much susceptible to distraction caused by this week's overblown media nasal circus.

Why not? I actually think Coach K deserves some blame in this one. The guys should know how to guard a pick-and-roll to at least some degree by now.

[_Gary]

Why not? I actually think Coach K deserves some blame in this one. The guys should know how to guard a pick-and-roll to at least some degree by now.

Everybody keeps harping on the pick & roll, and it was bad. But the thing that stood out to me was the complete lack of any one on one defensive prowess in the post. We got abused every time the ball was lobbed in. Both McBob and Nelson went for headfakes on more than one occasion that created some easy layups. I'm still convinced our perimeter defensive wasn't that bad tonight (not great, but it didn't cost us the game, IMHO). It's our post defensive that needs the most attending to over the summer. Again, just my opinion.

Gary

[A-Tex Devil]

I'm thinking specifically of Wright who, if he had come here like so many of us were expecting, could and would have made a big difference! Gary

I'll admit to not having seen a lot of Carolina this year except when we played them, but has Wright been that great on D? I mean, obviously, he would have helped a whole lot.

But we didn't need Wright to beat state tonight. If Atsur and Costner are better than Paulus and McRoberts, why didn't we (and everyone else that wanted McRoberts and Paulus and everyone else we have) recruit them? Disclaimer: I don't believe this is true, although tonight tested my faith.

But overall I agree with most people here. We turn the ball over too much and we have no interior presence on offense or defense. Just terribly disappointed. We either lost to an inferior team tonight or our program took a more serious downturn this year than I realize.

[jipops]

If that is the case, we have more problems than I realize. We've had the pick of recruits the last several years (with a few exceptions), and I imagine we could have most if not all of NC State's recruits had we wanted them.

If NC State is truly more "talented," then we have a talent evaluation problem. We should have won tonight, period.

The coaches do not have a talent evaluation problem. WE have a talent evaluation problem. Look, we have some very good players. It has been an unrealistic expectation that these guys were going to dominate the ACC the same way the teams of this past decade have. I rolled my eyes for days after seeing us picked to finish 2nd in the conference. Could anyone not see how ridiculous that expecation was. We were supposed to beat out other teams with extremely talented upperclassmen? Now that would have been an amazing feat, would have given K Coach of the century.

People around here are spoiled. They don't remember the 80's and early 90's where players took 2-3 years to become true impact and sometimes dominant players. We expect any player that once wore a fast food jersey to come in and be a star. This is a ludicrous and uneducated expectation. If a player's glaring weaknesses cannot be overshadowed by his strengths at the college level, then that player is going to have to undergo an adjustment period. If that player undergoes injuries and/or has surgeries (like FOUR of our guys) that adjustment could take longer. K is obviously trying to build a core team that is going to be together for a few years. Sure an athletic freak like a Brandon Wright or Lawson would be nice. But we can't expect to see many players like that. Keep in mind that K did recruit Hansblah as well, we simply missed out on that one.

So yes, I did see a more talented team in NC State tonight. Costner was able to play to his strengths by driving to his right all night. Atsur's experience toyed with our guys throughout the 2nd half. McCauley obviously has a more advanced post game than Josh. Also, not often that you go up against such big guards that all so effectively use the dribble.

But give our guys a year or so to gain experience, and we'll be able to create matchup problems for the opposition.

[mapei]

I think we are weak (compared to other top programs and compared to past Duke teams) at the 3, 4, and 5 positions. At the 3, DeMarcus would be a 6th man on Duke's final four teams, not our leading scorer. At the 4, McClure is steady and really easy to like with his clutch "glue" plays, but he doesn't offer much scoring and fouls too much. Thomas contributes little. At the 5, we're playing someone who really is a 4 or even 3.

This is also a slow team compared to what I'm used to from Duke. I saw the 2001 Duke/MD game on espnClassic earlier this week. That team would beat this one by about 20, and had four guys who are better than any of our current guys. And the starters were all underclassmen except for Shane, so that team was young, too.

As for Brandan Wright, he would make not only our team but *any* team much better. He's a great talent. We don't have anyone on our roster that good.

Will we be a top 5 team in two years, as someone said? Yes, if we get better players. I think Paulus, McClure, Nelson and McRoberts are playing now about as well as they are going to. They may have some upside, but not a lot. And I don't see it in Zoubek or Thomas either, though I'll love it if I'm wrong about that. Scheyer and Henderson, yes - those guys look like they have it to me, and so might Marty, though my opinion on Marty may not matter if K disagrees.

Bob G mentioned that we make great plays at times and only lack consistency. Yes, that's what keeps mediocre teams from being great ones. That observation would define about 50 other NCAA teams in addition to Duke.

[rsvman]

Brandan Wright would not have saved tonight, or the season.


In fact, many people think he is UNC's worst defensive player. He's a powerhouse on offense, yes, but his interior defense is no better than the guys we have; if anything, it's probably worse. He gets an occasional spectacular block, but aside from the highlight reel moments, there's a lot to dislike about Wright's defense.

[jipops]

Why not? I actually think Coach K deserves some blame in this one. The guys should know how to guard a pick-and-roll to at least some degree by now.

Actually K did take some blame in the post-game presser. This simply looked like an unfocused team tonight. Keep in mind we're posting on this board about a team that is still largely made up of teenagers, there may be one or two on the entire squad above legal drinking age. Would be hard to see how a teenager could stay focused through all the idiotic hatred that has been thrown their way this past week.

[_Gary]

Brandan Wright would not have saved tonight, or the season.


We will have to agree to disagree on that comment, my friend. I realize that Wright is not considered UNC's best post defender, and that many aren't in love with his defense in Chapel Hill, but that doesn't mean he wouldn't have greatly helped this team in the post - on both offense and defense. He would have!

Gary

[dukelifer]

I think we are weak (compared to other top programs and compared to past Duke teams) at the 3, 4, and 5 positions. At the 3, DeMarcus would be a 6th man on Duke's final four teams, not our leading scorer. At the 4, McClure is steady and really easy to like with his clutch "glue" plays, but he doesn't offer much scoring and fouls too much. Thomas contributes little. At the 5, we're playing someone who really is a 4 or even 3.

This is also a slow team compared to what I'm used to from Duke. I saw the 2001 Duke/MD game on espnClassic earlier this week. That team would beat this one by about 20, and had four guys who are better than any of our current guys. And the starters were all underclassmen except for Shane, so that team was young, too.

As for Brandan Wright, he would make not only our team but *any* team much better. He's a great talent. We don't have anyone on our roster that good.

Will we be a top 5 team in two years, as someone said? Yes, if we get better players. I think Paulus, McClure, Nelson and McRoberts are playing now about as well as they are going to. They may have some upside, but not a lot. And I don't see it in Zoubek or Thomas either, though I'll love it if I'm wrong about that. Scheyer and Henderson, yes - those guys look like they have it to me, and so might Marty, though my opinion on Marty may not matter if K disagrees.

Bob G mentioned that we make great plays at times and only lack consistency. Yes, that's what keeps mediocre teams from being great ones. That observation would define about 50 other NCAA teams in addition to Duke.

The 2001 team had two seniors- and their leadership AND play was invaluable to their winning. Duke would not have won it all without them. Their leadershio on that team cannot be underestimated. This current Duke team has no one even close. DN is a junior who has barely played two complete seasons. Experience helps to win games- you saw that from Atsur tonight. If he does not pick that team up with his second half play- State would have folded. Experience is VERY important to winning- particularly tight games. Duke has mostly lost tight games all year because they failed to make the right play at the right time. Somehow, Shane and other seniors over the year have had a knack for making the right play and bringing along their talented underclassman.

[DukeDevilDeb]

Jacone21: Your post is exactly right... all the things that our great teams did are not being done by this team. I remember when Christian Laettner was a freshman and missed a couple of free throws at the end of a game because the opposing fans got under his skin. When the whistle blew, all the upperclassmen (and there were some then) ran over to tell him that the loss wasn't his fault.

But when Christian returned to Durham, he roped in a bunch of loud brassy guys to sit in Cameron and call him EVERY NAME in the book while he shot free throws... over and over and over. So in the UNLV game in 1991, when he stepped up to the free throw line with 12 seconds left and two shots, he hit both of them perfectly (regardless of the crowd comments). Is there a single player on this team who has stepped up like that? Tried to learn something (like free throw shooting) that could help the team?

[Chicago 1995]

Youth. (I would've made this a one-word answer but apparently you need to post at least 10 characters!)
Youth's only part of it. There are young teams who have developed in ways we haven't, including a Texas team that's nearly as inexperienced.

We've got some talent issues too, and talent issues that aren't going away.

[A-Tex Devil]

[QUOTE=jipops;4268]The coaches do not have a talent evaluation problem. WE have a talent evaluation problem. QUOTE]

I'll buy that to some extent. But I will take a bit of a "snob" attitude and say if we're Duke and we get the best recruits, how come the "best recruits" that we get aren't playing as well as others in their same class across the country? (I'll compare Hansborough to Josh as one example (or hell, how about Costner), Greg Paulus to Dominique James as another).

My first two years rooting for Duke were '94'-95 and '95-'96 so I feel I have a bit of perspective. The biggest problem with team this year, and it's youth related, is just a lack of leadership. And I'm not sure that's something the Sophomores or Juniors, except perhaps Greg, are strong in, or ever wiil be/would have been. I saw it in Wojo and Chris Carrawell from Day 1 as freshmen. I just hope we get an ***-kicker on this team soon because it needs it.

[mapei]

>The 2001 team had two seniors- and their leadership AND play was invaluable to their winning. Duke would not have won it all without them.

Well, Shane was incredible - I'll certainly give you that. He's my all-time favorite player. And Nate was a terrific sixth man, who hit two game-winning shots that year, including one in the game I just re-watched. But we also had JWill (soph), Boozer (soph), Dunleavy (soph, I think?), and Duhon (freshman) - four out of five starters were young. My real point isn't just that they were young, but that they were better players at each position than the ones we have now, *even though they were young*. Experience matters, but so does talent.

[dukelifer]

This Duke team has more high school AAs than anyone, but it just doesn't win close games. I think this proves that being a McD AA doesn't mean stardom in college hoops. If it did, Duke would be a #1 seed again this year.

Let's face it....our guys just aren't as talented as teams like Ohio State, Texas and UNC, all of which are as young as Duke. Hopefully, next year's AA recruits will prove to be better college players, and our existing guys will have another year of experience.

Now, let's see about next week.

Duke had fewer McD AA last year than this - and they were a number 1 seed. I think this proves Duke should recruit fewer McD AA. Ohio State, Texas and UNC all have several players with NBA level talent. Duke may have 2 players that will be in the NBA. Just having NBA level talent does not mean you will win it all- but it does help in certain situations. Not all McD AA are equivalent.

[SharkD]

Youth's only part of it. There are young teams who have developed in ways we haven't, including a Texas team that's nearly as inexperienced.

Texas doesn't exactly live under the same microscope and heightened expectations that Duke does. Nor did Texas have the second-hardest schedule in the nation.


Jacone21: Your post is exactly right... all the things that our great teams did are not being done by this team. I remember when Christian Laettner was a freshman and missed a couple of free throws at the end of a game because the opposing fans got under his skin. When the whistle blew, all the upperclassmen (and there were some then) ran over to tell him that the loss wasn't his fault.

But when Christian returned to Durham, he roped in a bunch of loud brassy guys to sit in Cameron and call him EVERY NAME in the book while he shot free throws... over and over and over. So in the UNLV game in 1991, when he stepped up to the free throw line with 12 seconds left and two shots, he hit both of them perfectly (regardless of the crowd comments). Is there a single player on this team who has stepped up like that? Tried to learn something (like free throw shooting) that could help the team?

DeMarcus Nelson. Who spent quite a bit of time with Assoc. Coach Dawkins at the charity stripe. The fact of the matter is that most of these "character building" stories don't come out until Tourney Time or 2-3 years after the event. Coach K made it pretty clear after the Greg Newton fiasco that if a player isn't making an effort, he won't get playing time.


The 2001 team had two seniors- and their leadership AND play was invaluable to their winning. Duke would not have won it all without them. Their leadershio on that team cannot be underestimated. This current Duke team has no one even close. DN is a junior who has barely played two complete seasons. Experience helps to win games- you saw that from Atsur tonight. If he does not pick that team up with his second half play- State would have folded. Experience is VERY important to winning- particularly tight games. Duke has mostly lost tight games all year because they failed to make the right play at the right time. Somehow, Shane and other seniors over the year have had a knack for making the right play and bringing along their talented underclassman.

Exactly. You plucked the words right out of my brain... before I even thought them.


...My real point isn't just that they were young, but that they were better players at each position than the ones we have now, *even though they were young*. Experience matters, but so does talent.

I'll grant you that that 2001 National Championship team had more talent than this squad -- even Coach K says so. They also had the advantage of having more polish, as a result of their personal experiences and the leg-up you get from having talented Upperclassmen who know the ropes and give the young guys a leg up.

--

I've been a Duke fan since I was 5 (1984/85 season) -- I've seen strong teams, talented teams, driven teams, weak teams... etc. I'll agree with Coach K (he is probably a much better judge than I) when he says that this is the most perplexing team that he's coached. The raw talent is there, it's just not put to use effectively or consistently.

It may not live up to some people's expectations, but 20+ wins, a 14-1 non-conf record, not folding under the 4L "streak" spotlight and some moments of brilliance at the end of the season, despite the MD/UNC losses is a very solid foundation for what I believe will be a spectacular year next year (assuming McRoberts sticks around).

Not to cast aspersions, but I wonder if the people now predicting doom and gloom would have joined in the chorus calling for Krzyzewski's head after the 1982/83 season. I'm glad that Tom Butters had more faith than some current Duke "fans" do.

[Troublemaker]

Youth's only part of it. There are young teams who have developed in ways we haven't, including a Texas team that's nearly as inexperienced.

We've got some talent issues too, and talent issues that aren't going away.

Right. That's what I meant earlier in this thread when I said that the young teams that are performing better have better players. Durant and Augustine? Obviously, those guys can ball. They're able to reap the benefits of their talents sooner. BUT... those teams like Texas, UNC(Wright,Lawson), Kansas(Wright,Rush) will also have to play the "will he stay" game every season. Duke, on the other hand, well, we can say with better confidence that besides Josh, the players on this roster will see a 3rd and/or 4th year at Duke. I don't see any reason why we wouldn't be a great team in 2009 and 2010 and a very good team in 2008.

[A-Tex Devil]

Right. That's what I meant earlier in this thread when I said that the young teams that are performing better have better players. Durant and Augustine? Obviously, those guys can ball. They're able to reap the benefits of their talents sooner. BUT... those teams like Texas, UNC(Wright,Lawson), Kansas(Wright,Rush) will also have to play the "will he stay" game every season. Duke, on the other hand, well, we can say with better confidence that besides Josh, the players on this roster will see a 3rd and/or 4th year at Duke. I don't see any reason why we wouldn't be a great team in 2009 and 2010 and a very good team in 2008.

We'll have to see. I'm willing to bet that there are going to be a lot more Syracuse '03 teams winning it all with the new rules. Teams with NBA ready Freshman and Sophs.

Sure the occasional Michigan St. '00 and George Mason from last year will make it. But Flordia won a championship with abunch of Sophmores last year. I'm not sure seniority is the key like it used to be.

I really think we should have highlighted out Freshmen earlier. I don't htink anyone in the ACC can stop GH going to the hole one on one. Next year we need to really THINK about who the leader of this team will be. Which player (not coach) are the others' gonna be afraid to screw up in front of. That's why Wojo and Carawell and Battier (ina subtler way) were so awesome. Next year it's Demarcus, Greg or GH. We need some fire!

[Troublemaker]

We'll have to see. I'm willing to bet that there are going to be a lot more Syracuse '03 teams winning it all with the new rules. Teams with NBA ready Freshman and Sophs.

Sure the occasional Michigan St. '00 and George Mason from last year will make it. But Flordia won a championship with abunch of Sophmores last year. I'm not sure seniority is the key like it used to be.

I really think we should have highlighted out Freshmen earlier. I don't htink anyone in the ACC can stop GH going to the hole one on one. Next year we need to really THINK about who the leader of this team will be. Which player (not coach) are the others' gonna be afraid to screw up in front of. That's why Wojo and Carawell and Battier (ina subtler way) were so awesome. Next year it's Demarcus, Greg or GH. We need some fire!

I'll definitely take my chances in 2009 and 2010 with the roster we're expected to have. Let's take a look at what we should have in 09:

Sr Paulus...........So Smith
Jr Scheyer.........Sr Pocius
Jr Henderson......Sr McClure
So Singler.......So King
Jr Zoubek(So Patterson?).......Jr Thomas

Add in a freshman Greg Monroe and I'd have to think that roster is top 3 if not top 1 in 2009. It's going to take some seasoning to reach that point, but hey, we have all the time in the world. We're fans of a great college basketball program so let's enjoy the ride.

[bhd28]

Jacone21: Your post is exactly right... all the things that our great teams did are not being done by this team. I remember when Christian Laettner was a freshman and missed a couple of free throws at the end of a game because the opposing fans got under his skin. When the whistle blew, all the upperclassmen (and there were some then) ran over to tell him that the loss wasn't his fault.

But when Christian returned to Durham, he roped in a bunch of loud brassy guys to sit in Cameron and call him EVERY NAME in the book while he shot free throws... over and over and over. So in the UNLV game in 1991, when he stepped up to the free throw line with 12 seconds left and two shots, he hit both of them perfectly (regardless of the crowd comments). Is there a single player on this team who has stepped up like that? Tried to learn something (like free throw shooting) that could help the team?
So Christian Laettner missed FTs as a Frosh... practiced... and hit big shots as a Junior. You are asking if any player has worked and learned this year? I guess we will find out in 2 years if they learned things like CL. If you are asking if the guys have worked hard this year... then I think the answer is yes. "Our youngsters are working hard and trying to get better every day. They are a terrific group and I have loved coaching them." Maybe Coach is being PC... but as many people say, he sees them behind the scenes... we don't. Real improvement in sports takes more than a couple of months... particularly during the season where you spend the majority of your time preparing for the next opponent (and not a small amount of time studying). We won't know how they will really work to improve until next season.

[SoCalDukeFan]

First of all as fans we are probably spoiled or expect too much. The UConnvicts are hoping for an NIT Bid and their fans accept this as a rebuilding year. (At least one fan I know does).

Secondly, we lack experience and leadership. We underrecruited and/or lost players for two years, hence we have one junior and no seniors. And Nelson missed a lot his first two years and he may not be a natural leader, so the leadership mantle falls to sophmores. I can remember hearing how Ferry taught Laettner and Laettner taught Parks etc. Is that going on now?

We lost a lot when we lost Redick and Williams. I forget the numbers but they were a big percentage of our points and rebounds. There is no one who could come in and assume the roles that Redick and Williams had. So there were an abnormal amount of changes that had to be made.

While we may have a lot of McD's AA, I think that the talent level is down. Is there anyone on this team that you think the NBA is ga ga over?

So we had essentially a new team with very little experience and leadership and one lacking a true star player. Our expectations were probably too high.

We lost in overtime. Many of our losses were close.

Lastly no one is dominating. UCLA lost to Cal today. Every ACC tournament game today was essentially an upset. How many #1 seeds last year made it to the Final Four? How many teams do you see as obvious #1 seeds this year?

[Constantstrain 81]

Painful to watch. The terribly officiated game (on both sides) had phantom offensive fouls and moving picks early - then no calls later in the game. After the first couple of minutes, I had the feeling that Duke was playing not to lose. I never shook that feeling and I think the team did not, either.

What was wrong on defense? Lack of aggressive, in my opinion. In the second half, we seemed to sit back and let them do what they wanted to. Costnor is a fine player. I don't see NBA teams flocking to him over McRoberts, though. When he got the ball, we did not attack. We seemed to be worried about ... well, I don't know what we were worried about. Maybe we were "cutting" off something on defense - but they sure had no trouble scoring at will with what we were not cutting off.

I guess it is just one of those lessons that teams (and fans) learn from time to time. You work harder. You prepare harder. You adapt to game circumstances. We did not. Oh well, a week to prepare for someone who isn't going to want to play us.

[CMS2478]

I don't see the whole youth argument either........there are plenty of teams that are young and play well......it's talent. We need to take our heads out of the sand and just acknowledge that we aren't as good as we normally are. With guys bolting to the NBA left and right you are always going to have "young" teams bc there won't be many guys that stay 4 years. And I'm not sure if really helps to have senior leadership if the seniors aren't really good. We have been lucky to have that in the past with Battier, etc. but that is not going to happen often. So we need to get over the whole youth thing and learn to win, no matter what their age is.

[devildownunder]

I'll definitely take my chances in 2009 and 2010 with the roster we're expected to have. Let's take a look at what we should have in 09:

Sr Paulus...........So Smith
Jr Scheyer.........Sr Pocius
Jr Henderson......Sr McClure
So Singler.......So King
Jr Zoubek(So Patterson?).......Jr Thomas

Add in a freshman Greg Monroe and I'd have to think that roster is top 3 if not top 1 in 2009. It's going to take some seasoning to reach that point, but hey, we have all the time in the world. We're fans of a great college basketball program so let's enjoy the ride.


A few thoughts:

I just don't think it's quite that simple. Suppose any of this year's freshman has a real breakout season next year, Henderson perhaps. Let's say he averages 18pts and 7 boards. And then let's also suppose that Singler lives up to his billing and averages 14 and 7 and 5 as a freshman and shoots 45 percent from long range. And let's say because of that we win the ACC and the tournament and then reach the elite 8 -- a 28-win season, something like that.

Well, then they both become sure-fire 1st-round NBA draft choices and they're outta here. And we're left trying to replace 2 huge holes in the lineup again.

My point here is not that we should hope for guys not to be good. What I'm saying is that you really do have to be extremely lucky these days to land a player who will give you one great year and then return to give you another. There is just too much money in it for them if they leave.

For that reason, I think that recruiting is more inexact than it has ever been and I believe that K is playing a very dangerous game if he starts regularly limiting the number of top-flight talents he pursues. Why? Because he is sacrificing superstar talent in the hopes that those next-tier players will all stay and progress at a nice steady pace, giving him depth and experience. That is, IMO, as much of a gamble as bringing in the future NBA superstar for one season.

Now, there is no proof that K has gone down this path just yet. It seems that he is still going after some blue-chippers. He is, however, largely avoiding the guys who are likely to bolt right away, maybe going after one each year. Again, that's tough, because if you miss on that one you are stuck.

Recruiting is harder than ever and I don't have the answers. All I know is we can't count on our freshmen being here as juniors if they have great soph years any more than Texas can count on having Durant next year (ok, that may be a slight exaggeration. ;)

[devildownunder]

>The 2001 team had two seniors- and their leadership AND play was invaluable to their winning. Duke would not have won it all without them.

Well, Shane was incredible - I'll certainly give you that. He's my all-time favorite player. And Nate was a terrific sixth man, who hit two game-winning shots that year, including one in the game I just re-watched. But we also had JWill (soph), Boozer (soph), Dunleavy (soph, I think?), and Duhon (freshman) - four out of five starters were young. My real point isn't just that they were young, but that they were better players at each position than the ones we have now, *even though they were young*. Experience matters, but so does talent.


That one year of experience for jwill, boozer and dunleavy (yes, he was in that awesome class, too) makes a HUGE difference. And after watching the difference between that team and next year's group, without nate and especially shane, I will never again question the critical importance of senior leadership. This team has a ton of deficiencies but if there is one thing i would grant them, forsaking anything else, it would be a senior starter who came by his playing time honestly.

[Troublemaker]

With guys bolting to the NBA left and right you are always going to have "young" teams bc there won't be many guys that stay 4 years.

Duke will be a very veteran team in '09 and '10 and we'll be great both years. And we'll be pretty darn good next year as well.

[devildownunder]

It may not live up to some people's expectations, but 20+ wins, a 14-1 non-conf record, not folding under the 4L "streak" spotlight and some moments of brilliance at the end of the season, despite the MD/UNC losses is a very solid foundation for what I believe will be a spectacular year next year (assuming McRoberts sticks around).

Not to cast aspersions, but I wonder if the people now predicting doom and gloom would have joined in the chorus calling for Krzyzewski's head after the 1982/83 season. I'm glad that Tom Butters had more faith than some current Duke "fans" do.

What kind of season constitutes "doom and gloom" and who do you see predicting it? I see a bunch of people saying things like "we're not as good as we usually are," which is, unquestionably, true.

[Troublemaker]

DDU, K isn't avoiding the 1-and-dones since he recruited Brandan Wright and is recruiting Greg Monroe, so you don't have to worry about that. I'm not even sure he's really changed recruiting philosophy much at all, and it may just be coincidence that the roster is where it's at in terms of number of 3 to 4 year types. So what I'm doing is pointing out he benefits of that.

[devildownunder]

DDU, K isn't avoiding the 1-and-dones since he recruited Brandan Wright and is recruiting Greg Monroe, so you don't have to worry about that. I'm not even sure he's really changed recruiting philosophy much at all, and it may just be coincidence that the roster is where it's at in terms of number of 3 to 4 year types. So what I'm doing is pointing out he benefits of that.


Right TM, I know he's all over Monroe and that we just lost to the evil smurfs on Wright. I was just sort of thinking about the pitfalls of recruiting these days and realizing how hard it is to have one sure-fire method. Just speculating a bit on what might be happening, that's all.

Your plan is best-case for the players we have. I've dreamed about it working out that way, too. I just wish I were optimistic enough to think it would actually happen. Seriously.

[CMS2478]

Hey, I'm not going to argue with you on that TroubleMaker I hope we are a verteran team and I hope we are good. I'm just saying that in many of the cases there are very talented players that are young. (Ohio State) So just bc they are young doesn't mean they can't be good. But I agree with you that if all our guys stay around and don't go NBA or transfer we could be really special. And senior leadership definetly woudln't hurt. :D

[rsvman]

I wish everybody would stop talking as though this season were already over.

We still have the NCAA tournament coming up, remember?

And while we have seen some pretty poor play over the last few games, I, for one, can remember the team that beat Boston College twice. I can remember the team that played the first half against Clemson at their place, and the team that held St. John's to 10 points in the first half. Granted that that team has seemed to show up only one half at a time, I think that team can compete with anybody in the country. I don't know when (or if) they'll reappear, but it COULD happen.

And if ever a Duke team could get overlooked, this is the one. I can see how an opposing coach would talk us down, "This is not the Duke team of past years. These guys can't even beat NC State in the ACC tournament. We can TAKE these guys," etc., etc.

Honestly it wouldn't surprise me at all to see this team make the Elite Eight and surprise the heck out everybody in the nation but me.

So, can we please can the "this season's over" talk? Thanks.

[Billy Dat]

Sidney Lowe didn't watch tape of any ACC game, he watched tape of USA vs Greece from last summer's World Championships.

[DU Band Prez 88]

The last time Duke was in anything close to this kind of situation entering the NCAAs was 1996. This was the year after the dreadful '95 season. We entered the NCAAs in '96 as a #8 seed and were defeated in the first round by Eastern Michigan. I cannot recall how we did that year in the ACCs but if I'm not mistaken, we also lost that year in the first round and I believe it was also to NC State.

I'm not suggesting that this portends a similar end to our season. In fact, I'd argue that even entering as a #8 seed (the seed I think we'll end up with), and even if sent to the West or Midwest (which I expect), we would stand a very, very good chance of both winning that initial 8-9 game and upsetting a #1 seed in the second game. How much can this team learn from the past couple of losses and in what I'm sure will be intense practices this week get back to playing great defense for a full 40 minutes of a game -- which Duke has NOT been doing these last couple of weeks.

Don't give up on these guys yet...we could be in for a few surprises next week!

[Billy Dat]

A disturbing recent trend is that our recent teams do not get better in comparison to the elite across the country as the season goes on. It's not as obvious with this year's team because we never were really good in the first place, but it was striking with the JJ era squads, and even the late Williams/Dunleavy/Boozer squads. Those teams would jump out to gaudy November/December/January starts and then lose steam in February/March just as other teams, who stumbled early, started to hit their stride. Without analyzing the "whys" too much, I can only think that it is a factor of K getting his players to play consistently harder earlier in the season. Our effort is always there from Day 1, and maybe it takes other teams a few months to gell. But, by the time February/March comes along and everyone's got 20+ games under their belts, other squads seem to surge and we seem to go flat. The ACC Tourny aside, our habit of ending our ACC regular seasons with several losses is becoming a habit, as is our early exits from the NCAAs. Does anyone else see this as a trend, or am I seeing something that's not there? Is it because K is great at coaching effort but not great at growing a team over the course of the season? I think he did a much better job of the latter in the late 80s and ealy 90s. Those teams would often have 6-7 regular season losses, lose the ACC tourny, but would crest for the NCAAs. I'd rather reach Final Fours then compile 32-4 seasons that end in the Sweet 16. Again, we've all been spoiled by the greastest run since UCLA so maybe I'm just another entitled Duke fan.

[Matches]

The last time Duke was in anything close to this kind of situation entering the NCAAs was 1996. This was the year after the dreadful '95 season. We entered the NCAAs in '96 as a #8 seed and were defeated in the first round by Eastern Michigan. I cannot recall how we did that year in the ACCs but if I'm not mistaken, we also lost that year in the first round and I believe it was also to NC State.



Maryland, actually. Different situation, though - the 1996 team was playing extremely well at season's end before being crippled by injuries to Collins and Wojo in March.

The good news is that this year's team appears relatively healthy, and still has one more shot to turn things around.

[devildownunder]

Sidney Lowe didn't watch tape of any ACC game, he watched tape of USA vs Greece from last summer's World Championships.

Very true. Well, at least I'm a bit relieved to hear I'm not the only one who had that thought. :(

[devildownunder]

A disturbing recent trend is that our recent teams do not get better in comparison to the elite across the country as the season goes on. It's not as obvious with this year's team because we never were really good in the first place, but it was striking with the JJ era squads, and even the late Williams/Dunleavy/Boozer squads. Those teams would jump out to gaudy November/December/January starts and then lose steam in February/March just as other teams, who stumbled early, started to hit their stride. Without analyzing the "whys" too much, I can only think that it is a factor of K getting his players to play consistently harder earlier in the season. Our effort is always there from Day 1, and maybe it takes other teams a few months to gell. But, by the time February/March comes along and everyone's got 20+ games under their belts, other squads seem to surge and we seem to go flat. The ACC Tourny aside, our habit of ending our ACC regular seasons with several losses is becoming a habit, as is our early exits from the NCAAs. Does anyone else see this as a trend, or am I seeing something that's not there? Is it because K is great at coaching effort but not great at growing a team over the course of the season? I think he did a much better job of the latter in the late 80s and ealy 90s. Those teams would often have 6-7 regular season losses, lose the ACC tourny, but would crest for the NCAAs. I'd rather reach Final Fours then compile 32-4 seasons that end in the Sweet 16. Again, we've all been spoiled by the greastest run since UCLA so maybe I'm just another entitled Duke fan.


Not so sure about your premise.

The 2000 team lost its first two games of the year.

The 2001 NC team finished the season on a 10-game winning streak.

The 2002 squad beat UNC at the end of the year, won the ACC tourney and was rolling through the NCAAs until everything fell apart in the last 5 minutes against the Hoosiers.

The 2003 team was very young and didn't come around to being consistent until late in the season (when casey sanders improved, for one thing). I remember that group getting blown out by maryland on the road early in the season (uh-oh, i feel another schedulilng rant coming on) and then beating the terps at cameron later in the year. And, of course, they won the ACC.

The 2004 does follow your pattern somewhat, though I would argue that in their case the timing of the losses was coincidental. I think the key factor was the quality of the opposition. The team actually stumbled just a bit out of the blocks, losing to Purdue in the finals of the Great Alaska Shootout. But then they went to the Breslin Center and absolutely stuffed the Spartans right in front of the IZZOne. After that they ran off 18 straight wins before suffering back-to-back ACC losses and falling to GT down the stretch at home (awesome game) and maryland in the acc finals (infuriating game). But that squad also "recovered" to make the Final Four and almost defeat the best team in the country.

In 2005 and 2006 I think we have, in fact, followed your pattern and for the reasons you suggest. But I would argue that it's not about effort so much as it is K's ability to compensate for weaknesses and get the most out of what he has. The 2005 and 2006 teams featured some very good players but there was also a heavy reliance on the superstars. I think that in both of those seasons, especially 2006, Duke made hay early in the year because it took a while for opposing coaches to figure out which deficiencies K was masking and then adjust to attack them. And once that happened, our effectiveness just went down because there was no counter left to be made. The ideal example was the increasing focus on JJ's offense last year. Teams were reluctant to commit so much to stopping him early in the season, once they adjusted and started hounding JJ with hedging worthy of "the jordan rules" Duke's effectiveness went way down.

Finally, this year's group really doesn't fit into this pattern at all, unless you choose to view the OOC success as proof of how strong we were at the beginning of the season. Sorry, but I just can't do that. There are only so many points I am willing to give us for welcoming every mid-major with a name into our building and out-athleting them without ever playing any true road games.

Now, if next year we are 25-1 and then flame out in the last few conference games, the ACC tourney and the NCAAs then maybe we should consider it a concern. Not yet though.