Does this year remind u of 1990

[topps coach]

Maybe I am wrong but this year is starting to remind me of 1990 . If u remember we had a very young team that went thru a very rough two week stretch in late Febuary lost acouple of games in a row. A;; of the haters came out in full forcem then Phil Henderson challenged the team to stop acting like babies. Iam hoping that Demarus latest statement will serve the same purpose.

[CameronBornAndBred]

I had to refresh my memory, we had lost 4 ACC games by the 28th of February that year, would lose the next to UNC for a total of 5. Just looking at that record, it's surprising we went to championship game at all.
This team reminds me a lot more of the '93-'94 team, one that wasn't expected to do much at all, yet acomplished alot on the back of senior Grant Hill. Very similar to how Demarcus is carrying the team this year. I don't know if we'll make it to the championship game like those guys did in '94, but they have the potential.

[MIKESJ73]

The team reminds me more of 2004.
The senior leader Duhon-Nelson
The freshman phenom Deng-Singler
Starting junior guard Ewing-Paulus
Good Sophs Redick,Landlord,Dock-Sheyer,Thomas,Henderson

2004 started 21-1, only to lose back to back away games, Final Four, one foul away from NCaa title.

2008 started 22-1, only to lose back to back away games,??????

Very similar.

[Ignatius07]

The 04 team would have blown this team out of the water. And you can't say enough having your leader be your point guard, either. Plus the interior defense of Shelden...

[Cameron]

Chris Duhon...Oh how I miss him. My all-time favorite Devil.

[jimsumner]

I've made the comparison to '04 also. Another similarity is scoring balance. Redick led the '04 team with 15.9 ppg, with Deng at 15.1, Shel and Ewing at 12.6, and Duhon at 10.0. Not far from the top five this season. The '04 team had Randolph and Dockery off the bench, with sporadic contributions from Horvath and Melchionni.

The big difference is that '08 doesn't have a low-post presence equal to that of Williams in '08.

[CameronBornAndBred]

The big difference is that '08 doesn't have a low-post presence equal to that of Williams in '08.

That is a HUGE difference, and the one that disqualifies the comparisons between the two teams.

[jimsumner]

The 1988 team went deepest into March without a lot of size. 6'10" Ferry, 6'5" Brickey, 6'6" King starting inside, with 6'8" Smith as the top interior sub and Abdelnaby as the late-developing sophomore big man.

A more sobering comparison might be 1997. After K soured on Newton, Duke started 6'8" McLeod and 6'6" Carrawell inside, with 6'6" James, 6'6" Wallace,
6'8" Chappell and 6'5" Price getting minutes inside. Great perimeter game, with Langdon, Capel, and Wojo. Won ACC regular season but crashed and burned in March. I think the '08 team has more quality size than '97 but the '97 team looked pretty good in late February.

[dukie8]

Maybe I am wrong but this year is starting to remind me of 1990 . If u remember we had a very young team that went thru a very rough two week stretch in late Febuary lost acouple of games in a row. A;; of the haters came out in full forcem then Phil Henderson challenged the team to stop acting like babies. Iam hoping that Demarus latest statement will serve the same purpose.

no. the '90 team started 3 seniors -- henderson, brickey and alaa. i don't know how you could possible characterize that team as young. moreover, we have gone over this ad infinitum, this year's team is NOT young by 2008 standards. paulus and nelson have played on national tv more than anyone in college basketball and are 3 and 4 year starters. we aren't in the 1980s anymore when everyone stays for 4 years.

[TwoDukeTattoos]

[QUOTE=jimsumner;108321]I've made the comparison to '04 also. Another similarity is scoring balance. Redick led the '04 team with 15.9 ppg, with Deng at 15.1, Shel and Ewing at 12.6, and Duhon at 10.0. Not far from the top five this season. The '04 team had Randolph and Dockery off the bench, with sporadic contributions from Horvath and Melchionni.

That's the key: balance. I think that's why this team may have a good chance to do well in March is because our scoring is so balanced.

[TwoDukeTattoos]

The 1988 team went deepest into March without a lot of size. 6'10" Ferry, 6'5" Brickey, 6'6" King starting inside, with 6'8" Smith as the top interior sub and Abdelnaby as the late-developing sophomore big man.

A more sobering comparison might be 1997. After K soured on Newton, Duke started 6'8" McLeod and 6'6" Carrawell inside, with 6'6" James, 6'6" Wallace,
6'8" Chappell and 6'5" Price getting minutes inside. Great perimeter game, with Langdon, Capel, and Wojo. Won ACC regular season but crashed and burned in March. I think the '08 team has more quality size than '97 but the '97 team looked pretty good in late February.

I remember a crazy emotional win over UNC that year at Cameron.

[MIKESJ73]

The 04 team would have blown this team out of the water. And you can't say enough having your leader be your point guard, either. Plus the interior defense of Shelden...

I have to disagree that 04 would blow 08 out.
Deng and Singler are pretty close.
Soph Williams wasn't that good offensively and very foul prone, but better than LT.
I believe Henderson could contain Soph Redick.
Demarcus is better than the junior version of Ewing.
08 has a better bench
Duhon over Paulus may be the deciding factor, but not a blowout.

Just my opinion..

[yancem]

The 04 team would have blown this team out of the water. And you can't say enough having your leader be your point guard, either. Plus the interior defense of Shelden...


I have to disagree that 04 would blow 08 out.
Deng and Singler are pretty close.
Soph Williams wasn't that good offensively and very foul prone, but better than LT.
I believe Henderson could contain Soph Redick.
Demarcus is better than the junior version of Ewing.
08 has a better bench
Duhon over Paulus may be the deciding factor, but not a blowout.

Just my opinion..

I think that I'm inclined to agree with MIKESJ73 (but am not quite sure) but for arguments sake lets say that Ignatius is right. The think to remember is that none of the top teams were at the level of a couple of years ago. I think that the best example would be to compare 05 UNC to this year's UNC team. Both entered the season as favorites or at least strong contenders to win the NC. For all of the hype that the '08 Heels get, I would take Felton over Lawson, McCants (attitude issues aside) over Ellington, Manuel over Ginyard Jawad Williams over Thompson, Marvin Williams over Green, Melvin Scott over Thomas, well you get the picture. The only '08 player I would say might be better than his '05 counterpart is Hansolo vs May and to be honest that is not a huge difference.

I'm not sure that any of this year's teams could hang with UNC '05 or UConn '04 (at least once they decided to play for real). So what does this mean for Duke this year? Well, I think that if they re-find their defensive focus and get back to valuing the ball on offense, they are a dangerous team. The other keys will be getting Henderson healthy and contributing in the scoring department and can Thomas and Zoubs continue to improve. If all of that happens, I wouldn't want to play us come tourney time.

[mpj96]

no. the '90 team started 3 seniors -- henderson, brickey and alaa. i don't know how you could possible characterize that team as young. moreover, we have gone over this ad infinitum, this year's team is NOT young by 2008 standards. paulus and nelson have played on national tv more than anyone in college basketball and are 3 and 4 year starters. we aren't in the 1980s anymore when everyone stays for 4 years.

Respectfully disagree. This team is young. Last year a high scoring game seemed like it was in the low 70s. We lost our best player from last year and yet this year it is not unusual to be scoring in the 90s. That is b/c our 3 freshmen play a very important role on this team. Our sophomores are also a very vital piece.

You are right that teams in general get younger and younger on average every year. However, the susceptibilities of freshmen and sophomore players (and our team relies heavily on freshmen and sophomores) inhere.

Switching gears a bit, this team is very different from '94. I love Markie, but no way he could have taken that team to the FF, much less the finals. IMHO you can count on one hand the players that could have accomplished that feat and we are lucky to have had one of them at the helm of our '94 team.

[dukie8]

Respectfully disagree. This team is young. Last year a high scoring game seemed like it was in the low 70s. We lost our best player from last year and yet this year it is not unusual to be scoring in the 90s. That is b/c our 3 freshmen play a very important role on this team. Our sophomores are also a very vital piece.

You are right that teams in general get younger and younger on average every year. However, the susceptibilities of freshmen and sophomore players (and our team relies heavily on freshmen and sophomores) inhere.

Switching gears a bit, this team is very different from '94. I love Markie, but no way he could have taken that team to the FF, much less the finals. IMHO you can count on one hand the players that could have accomplished that feat and we are lucky to have had one of them at the helm of our '94 team.

singler is critical but king is purely a backup who often barely plays in games and smith is up and down -- some games, like last game, he is great and other games, like wfu, he has been very ineffective and relegated to the bench.

the fact still remains that this team starts 2 extremely experienced players -- paulus and nelson. there aren't too many bcs schools who have that luxury. "young" is relative. yes, this team is young compared to the teams of the 80s and early 90s but it is NOT young compared to most other top tier teams. which elite school doesn't start a slew of frosh and sophs or upper classmen who were backups earlier in their careers?

unc: starts 3 sophs and no seniors.
ucla: starts a frosh, a soph and no seniors.
memphis: starts a frosh and 1 senior.
tennessee: starts 3 sophs and 2 seniors.

i could continue listing elite teams and their lineups but you should get the picture by now that our team looks pretty similar, in terms of experience, to most other elite schools. calling our team "young" completely ignores the fact that nearly every other elite team is just as young (or younger) so as to make it a non issue.

[YmoBeThere]

smith is up and down -- some games, like last game, he is great and other games, like wfu, he has been very ineffective and relegated to the bench.

You apparently watched a different version of the Wake game than I did. Smith had 21 points in 18 minutes of playing time...

[dukie8]

You apparently watched a different version of the Wake game than I did. Smith had 21 points in 18 minutes of playing time...

my bad. i flip-flopped the wfu and miami games. you are correct -- 21 points against wfu but 0 points against miami. talk about hot and cold.

[YmoBeThere]

my bad. i flip-flopped the wfu and miami games. you are correct -- 21 points against wfu but 0 points against miami. talk about hot and cold.
Agreed about the hot and cold, but that is the nature of a freshman isn't it? At least those that are not All-World freshmen like Beasley.

[DukeDevilDeb]

I had to refresh my memory, we had lost 4 ACC games by the 28th of February that year, would lose the next to UNC for a total of 5. Just looking at that record, it's surprising we went to championship game at all.
This team reminds me a lot more of the '93-'94 team, one that wasn't expected to do much at all, yet acomplished alot on the back of senior Grant Hill. Very similar to how Demarcus is carrying the team this year. I don't know if we'll make it to the championship game like those guys did in '94, but they have the potential.

You know, I'm not convinced that Markie is carrying the team this year. He has been a good captain and a solid force, but after watching his play in the Wake, Miami, and now St. John's games, I'm not that impressed. After his very passionate statement about not letting the downward slide continue, he had 9 points on 4-5 field goal shooting and 1-2 from 3 point range. At the line, Markie was 0-2 (and I view this as a major problem down the road). In terms of rebounds--usually one of his strengths--he had no offensive rebounds and 4 defensive ones. Think about that. Zoubek had 9 more rebounds than DeMarcus did!

Nelson had 2 assists, 3 turnovers, 1 block, and 1 steal in 23 minutes. As noted above, Zoubek had 9 more rebounds than DeMarcus AND 2 more points. In addition, Markie had 3 fouls, Brian only 1.

Now, DeMarcus is clearly a better athlete, and I don't think either his or Brian's line is a usual one. But DeMarcus just has not been strong the last several games. And I certainly don't see him carrying us. If he is, we're in trouble. Jon is carrying us far more than Markie.