PDA

View Full Version : Fate of the Tarheels - all return



CameronCrazy'11
06-15-2008, 04:15 PM
The deadline to withdraw from the draft is Monday, right? Anyone know if any of them have pulled their names out yet?

hondoheel
06-15-2008, 06:40 PM
No, they're all still in, although most expect at least Green to return. Deadline is 5 PM tomorrow.

Edouble
06-15-2008, 10:53 PM
tick, tick, tick...

mjones723
06-15-2008, 10:59 PM
Unfortunately, I am hearing all 3 will be back. Worst case scenario.

mo.st.dukie
06-16-2008, 01:11 AM
Yeah, I think all three are returning, that'll make for one tough team to beat.

DevilDan
06-16-2008, 02:47 AM
No problem ... that's what it's all about ... by January, our Boys should be ready to take 'em on. They'll no doubt be ranked ahead of US, so they will be ready to be knocked off in prime time. GO DUKE !

CDu
06-16-2008, 08:36 AM
No problem ... that's what it's all about ... by January, our Boys should be ready to take 'em on. They'll no doubt be ranked ahead of US, so they will be ready to be knocked off in prime time. GO DUKE !

I disagree. I don't care how good the Tarheels are, I just want to win. I'd be happier if they were fielding a team of JV players. If all three return to UNC, that's a very bad thing in my opinion.

sandinmyshoes
06-16-2008, 08:54 AM
That will be one very talented and deep team. So talented and deep that maybe the chemistry problems annually predicted by wishful thinking Duke fans will finally come true. It's certianly going to tax Williams' ability to keep everyone happy with minutes while maintaining a cohesive unit on the floor. He is better than average at that, but I have to wonder if even Old Roy is that good.

roywhite
06-16-2008, 09:13 AM
That will be one very talented and deep team. So talented and deep that maybe the chemistry problems annually predicted by wishful thinking Duke fans will finally come true. It's certianly going to tax Williams' ability to keep everyone happy with minutes while maintaining a cohesive unit on the floor. He is better than average at that, but I have to wonder if even Old Roy is that good.

I agree. Reminds me of the '93-94 season for the Heels: coming off a national championship, they added talented freshmen Wallace, Stackhouse, and McInnis, and were widely proclaimed #1 pre-season. The team never did fit together well and under-achieved.

We'll see if the early entrants do pull out of the draft (as some reports are indicating); in that case, the Heels will almost certainly be pre-season #1, but will have a difficult task fitting the pieces together.

Classof06
06-16-2008, 10:27 AM
I've also been hearing that all three will be back and despite all that I've heard, that's what I've believed until proven otherwise.

UNC is going to be very good next year but there's no doubt in my mind Duke is still going to give them a run for their money. One could reasonably argue that Duke should've swept UNC this year and I see no reason why we can't beat them next season. Regardless of who does or doesn't come back, these 2 teams are going to be damn good.

sandinmyshoes
06-16-2008, 10:55 AM
I agree that both teams are going to be good. But saying that Duke should've swept UNC last year is a stretch in my opinion. It could also be reasonably argued that UNC should have swept Duke last year. We caught them without Lawson one game, and with Lawson coming back off injury the other game. And without Frasor either game.

All that said, I think the games this year could be like the titantic struggles back when Coach K was coming into his own, and Smith was still at the helm down the road.

DukeBlood
06-16-2008, 11:29 AM
Im reading reports that all three will be back.

No shock here, Danny Green will be back for UNC next year.
http://www.850thebuzz.com/blog/?p=4613

I hope that Lawson goes pro. I know most reports are saying he will be back, but there's still some hope.

miramar
06-16-2008, 11:50 AM
The News and Observer says that UNC is about to put out a press release, and that there won't be a press conference:

http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/story/1109909.html

hondoheel
06-16-2008, 12:28 PM
http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/8251152/Sources:-Trio-of-UNC-stars-will-return-to-school

DukeBlood
06-16-2008, 12:37 PM
http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/8251152/Sources:-Trio-of-UNC-stars-will-return-to-school

Yup, Oh well. Im not too surprised after seeing so many reports that expected them to return.

CLT Devil
06-16-2008, 01:03 PM
Story on foxsports.com

To all my heels fans out there, congrats on your 2009 Nat Champ, anything less is unacceptable.;)

jlear
06-16-2008, 01:15 PM
I assume I am in the minority, when I say, I am glad they are all coming back. If an opponent needs to be weakened for us to beat them then I would rather lose. No excuses, for us or them, only 5 guys on the floor for each team at once. I hope they never lose another player early and continue to do well in recruiting. To want UNC to lose players to the draft is weak in my opinion.

Bring it, we will still come out on top!

Edouble
06-16-2008, 01:19 PM
Story on foxsports.com

To all my heels fans out there, congrats on your 2009 Nat Champ, anything less is unacceptable.;)

I can think of several more talented teams that never cut down the nets, so I for one, amd definitely not ready to annoint anyone.

I think anything less was unacceptable last year as well.

Duvall
06-16-2008, 01:21 PM
I eagerly await the angry cries of Tar Heel fans denouncing Roy for using his Svengali-like powers to force these players to come back to school.

CLT Devil
06-16-2008, 01:24 PM
Just trying to pull a little reverse mojo, maybe they will be so loaded like the 1998 heels that they can't all get along and lose in the Final Four...that had to be one of the most talented teams in CBB history, much like our '99 team.

The only one I really wanted to leave was Danny Green...his antics irritate me.

wilko
06-16-2008, 01:24 PM
I assume I am in the minority, when I say, I am glad they are all coming back. If an opponent needs to be weakened for us to beat them then I would rather lose. No excuses, for us or them, only 5 guys on the floor for each team at once. I hope they never lose another player early and continue to do well in recruiting. To want UNC to lose players to the draft is weak in my opinion.

Bring it, we will still come out on top!

You are a better human being than I am.
I feel no such compassion towards the heels.

I for one would fully and gladly accept a forfeit from them for whatever circumstances AND never let them forget it.

I cant possibly imagine showing any sympathy to them until we have the all time win record vs them in BB.

Classof06
06-16-2008, 01:30 PM
I agree that both teams are going to be good. But saying that Duke should've swept UNC last year is a stretch in my opinion. It could also be reasonably argued that UNC should have swept Duke last year. We caught them without Lawson one game, and with Lawson coming back off injury the other game. And without Frasor either game.

All that said, I think the games this year could be like the titantic struggles back when Coach K was coming into his own, and Smith was still at the helm down the road.

When I say you can argue Duke should've swept UNC, that's not me saying that we were the better team. I'm just saying, we went into Chapel Hill and beat them relatively handily (regardless of who was playing), and in the 2nd game we fought all the way back to finally grab the lead and then gave it right back. When Duke is winning in Cameron with less than 5 minutes left, they usually win the game.

Looking at it with no biases, one could say Duke was very close to sweeping UNC (again, regardless of who missed what games). Even when UNC was at full strength in Cameron, that's a game you can easily argue that Duke should've won. And that night was one of Duke's poorer performances of the season.

weezie
06-16-2008, 01:32 PM
Just trying to pull a little reverse mojo, maybe they will be so loaded like the 1998 heels that they can't all get along and lose in the Final Four...



Now that's what I'm talkin' about......

UrinalCake
06-16-2008, 01:43 PM
I would have felt pretty confident about our chances against them if just Lawson had left. He is the one most responsible for running their offense. Oh well. The best I can hope for now is that each of them plays really selfishly next year, now that the NBA scouts have told them what they need to work on. This will lead to poor chemistry, inexplicable losses to unranked teams, a team brawl, and a player strike, all of which cause Roy Williams to retire. Yeah, that's what'll happen...

Franzez
06-16-2008, 01:52 PM
Yup.:mad:

Bluedawg
06-16-2008, 01:54 PM
Yup.:mad:

fact or opinion. Link?

BlueintheFace
06-16-2008, 01:55 PM
Let's all just agree to this now as a Duke Fan Board...

1) Tyler Hansbrough SHOULD win the National Player of the Year again...

and

2) UNC ABSOLUTELY SHOULD win the National Championship!!

These are the expectations and anything short constitutes failure in Chapel Hill

Franzez
06-16-2008, 01:59 PM
fact or opinion. Link?

Just got word from two sources that the North Carolina trio of Ty Lawson, Wayne Ellington and Danny Green are all returning to Chapel Hill and withdrawing from the NBA Draft.

``They are all going back to school,” the source said. “None of them were sure they would be taken in the first round.”

That means that the only semi-significant losses for Roy Williams are that of Alex Stepheson and Quentin Thomas - and both are easily replaceable.

North Carolina has two freshman forwards in Tyler Zeller and Ed Davis who will come in and make up for the loss of Stepheson and Bobby Frasor will return from a knee injury and take the place, along with freshman point guard Larry Drew, of Thomas.
http://community.foxsports.com/blogs/goodmanonfox?All=1

It's official,all 3 are returning.

BlueintheFace
06-16-2008, 02:00 PM
I figure this should receive it's own thread...

http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/8251152/Sources:-Trio-of-UNC-stars-will-return-to-school

http://northcarolina.scout.com/

Let the speculation begin...

One thing is for sure... They ABSOLUTELY SHOULD win it all... with the returning and incoming talent to go with significant experience

sandinmyshoes
06-16-2008, 02:03 PM
When I say you can argue Duke should've swept UNC, that's not me saying that we were the better team. I'm just saying, we went into Chapel Hill and beat them relatively handily (regardless of who was playing), and in the 2nd game we fought all the way back to finally grab the lead and then gave it right back. When Duke is winning in Cameron with less than 5 minutes left, they usually win the game.

Looking at it with no biases, one could say Duke was very close to sweeping UNC (again, regardless of who missed what games). Even when UNC was at full strength in Cameron, that's a game you can easily argue that Duke should've won. And that night was one of Duke's poorer performances of the season.

I don't want to get into a long defense of UNC, but you're still overlooking the fact that they were reduced to their third string point guard when we beat them in Chapel Hill. And while we were in control most of the game, it was not a rout. In Cameron, we had to struggle to get back into the game and they were still without their second string point guard, and their starter had only recently returned after a three week absence.

You also fall into the trap that too many fans fall into. When our team loses, it's because we didn't play well, as you suggest in our loss in Cameron. But no doubt UNC fans would claim that they didn't play well in the Dead Dome.

In both cases, the other team deserves some credit.

BlueintheFace
06-16-2008, 02:17 PM
Try this lineup on for size... (last season's #'s)

Backcourt-
Ty Lawson- 12.7 pt/gm, 5.2 a/gm
Bobby Frasor- Looks like a 13 year old boy
Larry Drew- Scout.com #67
Wayne Ellington- 16.6 pt/gm, 4.5 r/gm
Danny Green- 11.5 pt/gm, 4.9 r/gm

Front Court-
Tyler Hansbrough- NPOY- 22.6 pt/gm, 10 r/gm
Deon Thompson- 8.4 pt/gm, 4.8 r/gm
Tyler Zeller- Scout.com #21
Ed Davis- Scout.com #10

...and a few others who will have court-side seats

CameronCrazy'11
06-16-2008, 02:19 PM
Let's all just agree to this now as a Duke Fan Board...

1) Tyler Hansbrough SHOULD win the National Player of the Year again...

and

2) UNC ABSOLUTELY SHOULD win the National Championship!!

These are the expectations and anything short constitutes failure in Chapel Hill

1. Tyler Hansbrough should be pre--season NPOY. He still has to earn it. There will doubtless be many others challenging him for the spot.

2. UNC is the favorite, but that doesn't mean they should win the championship. They are the team most likely to win it but it is still much more likely that someone else will. Last year it was a failure for UNC to not win the championship. And it was a failure for Memphis, UCLA, Tennessee, etc. Their are many teams who have a legitimate shot at the championship next year, Duke among them. UNC's odds may be marginally better than anyone else's, but I'm not ready to concede them the banner just yet.

UNC has a damn good team, no doubt, but they still have their work cut out for them. Duke, for one, isn't just going to roll over and hand them the crown. This season will be a big disappointment for UNC, especially for Hansbrough, if they don't do as well as last year - if Duke wins the ACC or they don' t get to the Final Four.

BlueintheFace
06-16-2008, 02:23 PM
1. Tyler Hansbrough should be pre--season NPOY. He still has to earn it. There will doubtless be many others challenging him for the spot.

2. UNC is the favorite, but that doesn't mean they should win the championship. They are the team most likely to win it but it is still much more likely that someone else will. Last year it was a failure for UNC to not win the championship. And it was a failure for Memphis, UCLA, Tennessee, etc. Their are many teams who have a legitimate shot at the championship next year, Duke among them. UNC's odds may be marginally better than anyone else's, but I'm not ready to concede them the banner just yet.

UNC has a damn good team, no doubt, but they still have their work cut out for them. Duke, for one, isn't just going to roll over and hand them the crown. This season will be a big disappointment for UNC, especially for Hansbrough, if they don't do as well as last year - if Duke wins the ACC or they don' t get to the Final Four.

All true.. I'm just raising expectations so I can more easily call them failures when they don't meet them... something tells me the national media will follow suit

BlueintheFace
06-16-2008, 02:31 PM
Don't know if it matters much but Andy Katz says Ty Lawson's fate is still unclear...

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2008/news/story?id=3446325

quickgtp
06-16-2008, 02:41 PM
Thank you for the update. Insider is stating that Lawson is probably still in at this point although there has not been any clarification.

Dukebacker
06-16-2008, 02:48 PM
If Ty does return, would he face some kind of punishment for his recent arrest?


I for one hope we don't have to see him in Carolina blue anymore. To each his own though.

CDu
06-16-2008, 02:50 PM
If Ty does return, would he face some kind of punishment for his recent arrest?


I for one hope we don't have to see him in Carolina blue anymore. To each his own though.

I can't imagine it would be a punishment of any substance. It certainly wouldn't have any effect on his playing time in any meaningful games, or have any effect on his decision I imagine.

I also hope not to see him on UNC's team next year.

CDu
06-16-2008, 03:51 PM
According to UNC, it is official now that all three will opt out of the draft. They're the clear favorites to win it all. Obviously that's no guarantee of anything, but the picture looks a lot less bright for us for this coming season. Hopefully we can win one and they find a way to choke in the tournament.

http://northcarolina.scout.com/2/762652.html

grit74
06-16-2008, 03:53 PM
Book reports.

Doesn't start the first exhibition game.

Has to listen to Roy talk about his mother and cokes.

dukeimac
06-16-2008, 03:55 PM
Several sources are saying that Lawson is still up in the air as I post.

Without Lawson Hans has a tougher time winning the NPOY again.

Not sure about everyone else but I am / would be glad to see Ellington come back for one more year.

I would just love to see Henderson and him go out next year and Henderson get picked before him. Henderson is made more for the NBA then Ellington. Henderson can create while Ellington waits for Ty to get him the ball.

I would just love to see Henderson get picked before Ellington.

ROF LMAO That would make my summer!

Faison1
06-16-2008, 03:57 PM
According to UNC, it is official now that all three will opt out of the draft. They're the clear favorites to win it all. Obviously that's no guarantee of anything, but the picture looks a lot less bright for us for this coming season. Hopefully we can win one and they find a way to choke in the tournament.

http://northcarolina.scout.com/2/762652.html

Man....That's pretty pessimistic if you ask me.....Yes, those guys entered their names in the draft, but they are not THAT great. I would be concerned if it was McCants, Felton, Williams, and Mays coming back for another year, but I don't see Lawson and crew as comparable. So, let's see how things go. I like the individual matchups outside of the center matchup. But beyond that, I like our chances.

miramar
06-16-2008, 03:57 PM
According to UNC, it is official now that all three will opt out of the draft. They're the clear favorites to win it all. Obviously that's no guarantee of anything, but the picture looks a lot less bright for us for this coming season. Hopefully we can win one and they find a way to choke in the tournament.

http://northcarolina.scout.com/2/762652.html

I am still extremely optimistic about Duke's chances for next year. Carolina will be tough, certainly the pre-season #1, but we should remember that the reason they all came back is because of their projected position in the draft.

CDu
06-16-2008, 04:17 PM
Man....That's pretty pessimistic if you ask me.....Yes, those guys entered their names in the draft, but they are not THAT great. I would be concerned if it was McCants, Felton, Williams, and Mays coming back for another year, but I don't see Lawson and crew as comparable. So, let's see how things go. I like the individual matchups outside of the center matchup. But beyond that, I like our chances.

Obviously they're not as good as the McCants/Felton/Mays/Williams group. That doesn't mean it's not a big hit. UNC was one of the four best teams in the country last year, and they got effectively deeper and more talented, adding two better PG to replace Thomas and adding two talented bigs to replace their third big guy. And on top of that, the other three teams took a substantial step backward.

Honestly, I can't see how you like our chances to beat UNC. They are less than 50%. They certainly aren't close to 0%, but UNC is clearly the favorite. Is it the end of the world? No. But it isn't a good thing that they are coming back. Don't get me wrong - I'm still very hopeful, and I certainly am not handing them the championship. I'm just not overly optimistic, and I'd be a lot more optimistic if they hadn't gotten Lawson back.

Faison1
06-16-2008, 04:41 PM
Obviously they're not as good as the McCants/Felton/Mays/Williams group. That doesn't mean it's not a big hit. UNC was one of the four best teams in the country last year, and they got effectively deeper and more talented, adding two better PG to replace Thomas and adding two talented bigs to replace their third big guy. And on top of that, the other three teams took a substantial step backward.

Honestly, I can't see how you like our chances to beat UNC. They are less than 50%. They certainly aren't close to 0%, but UNC is clearly the favorite. Is it the end of the world? No. But it isn't a good thing that they are coming back. Don't get me wrong - I'm still very hopeful, and I certainly am not handing them the championship. I'm just not overly optimistic, and I'd be a lot more optimistic if they hadn't gotten Lawson back.

I like our chances any time we step on the floor....you think our guys ever go on to the court thinking, "man, we have less than a 50% chance of winning here." Of course not!! They think they can win every time out. And I think they can too.

Faison1
06-16-2008, 04:44 PM
I like our chances any time we step on the floor....you think our guys ever go on to the court thinking, "man, we have less than a 50% chance of winning here." Of course not!! They think they can win every time out. And I think they can too.

The more I think about it, the better I feel about next year. In fact, the only reason I didn't want Lawson to return is so I could watch my Carolina friends (and wife) worry about next year. Beyond that, I like the possibility of someone stepping up and putting Danny Green where he belongs....on the bench or in tears.

CDu
06-16-2008, 04:51 PM
I like our chances any time we step on the floor....you think our guys ever go on to the court thinking, "man, we have less than a 50% chance of winning here." Of course not!! They think they can win every time out. And I think they can too.

You are talking about two different things. CAN they win every game? Absolutely. There is no team that we can't beat. There is, however, a difference between being capable of winning and being favored to win.

Moreover, the players SHOULD think they can win. But what the players believe and what is reality don't necessarily have to be the same thing. So it's kind of pointless to bring up what the players thing in terms of a discussion of which team is better.

As I said before, Duke CAN still win. That doesn't mean they are likely to win, or that the odds are good. And the odds just got worse today. I can't understand why that doesn't make sense to you. I can't see any logical reason why you'd rather UNC have Lawson back.

CameronCrazy'11
06-16-2008, 04:55 PM
You are talking about two different things. CAN they win every game? Absolutely. There is no team that we can't beat. There is, however, a difference between being capable of winning and being favored to win.

Moreover, the players SHOULD think they can win. But what the players believe and what is reality don't necessarily have to be the same thing. So it's kind of pointless to bring up what the players thing in terms of a discussion of which team is better.

As I said before, Duke CAN still win. That doesn't mean they are likely to win, or that the odds are good. And the odds just got worse today. I can't understand why that doesn't make sense to you. I can't see any logical reason why you'd rather UNC have Lawson back.

Because beating with UNC with Lawson and all their stars is a much more impressive feat and would be a huge boost for the fans and psychologically for the players. It's a lot more fun to slay the giant than the underdog.

mgtr
06-16-2008, 04:55 PM
Basketball is still a team game. I would rather have a team than just a collection of players. In a way, that is the problem that Coach K has addressed with the Olympic team. A collection of players, even with a great coach, couldn't get the job done last time.
I see Duke as more of a team than UNC. They have some great players, but we may have abetter team. Time will tell.

CameronCrazy'11
06-16-2008, 04:59 PM
Basketball is still a team game. I would rather have a team than just a collection of players. In a way, that is the problem that Coach K has addressed with the Olympic team. A collection of players, even with a great coach, couldn't get the job done last time.
I see Duke as more of a team than UNC. They have some great players, but we may have abetter team. Time will tell.

Our performance is also a little more of a variable than theirs. No one expects Hansbrough, Lawson, or Ellington to be much better next year than they were this year. But virtually every Duke player has room to improve and be a total stud. Henderson, Scheyer, and Singler were great but will probably be consistently great this year. And of course, the huge question mark is how are post players will be. At the end of the year, nothing would make me happier than beating UNC in Cameron and stealing the ACC championship from them.

RepoMan
06-16-2008, 05:02 PM
No one expects Hansbrough, Lawson, or Ellington to be much better next year than they were this year.

You don't really believe that, right? I mean, that is exactly why Marty Blake suggested that Lawson, Ellington, and Green return -- to get better and improve their draft stock after that season. Of course they will improve, and I reckon just about everyone thinks that they will do so.

CDu
06-16-2008, 05:02 PM
Because beating with UNC with Lawson and all their stars is a much more impressive feat and would be a huge boost for the fans and psychologically for the players. It's a lot more fun to slay the giant than the underdog.

I realize that a lot of people have this feeling. I'm okay with people believing that (everyone has their own opinion of course), but I don't think it's a logical stance. Sure, it's more fun to slay the giant. But the giant wins a LOT more than the underdog. I find winning more fun than losing, regardless of the opponent. Anything that gives my team a better chance to win is a good thing. And Lawson returning most certainly does not give my team a better chance of winning.

CDu
06-16-2008, 05:07 PM
Our performance is also a little more of a variable than theirs. No one expects Hansbrough, Lawson, or Ellington to be much better next year than they were this year. But virtually every Duke player has room to improve and be a total stud. Henderson, Scheyer, and Singler were great but will probably be consistently great this year. And of course, the huge question mark is how are post players will be. At the end of the year, nothing would make me happier than beating UNC in Cameron and stealing the ACC championship from them.

I can't see how you can say that Lawson, Ellington, and Green don't have room for improvement. If you say that Lawson, Ellington, and Green can't get better, then you'd have to say that Henderson, Scheyer, Thomas, Zoubek, and Paulus can't get better either. Both teams have substantial room for growth. UNC is just starting from a better position.

I completely agree with your last sentence (we all are hoping for a Duke title), but don't let that blur reality.

hudlow
06-16-2008, 05:37 PM
They'll choke again.

They're Carolina.

What else is new?

yancem
06-16-2008, 06:02 PM
While I will concede the at least on paper UNC looks to be the best team in the nation next year and that they should be the pre-season pick to win the NC, I'm a little surprised by the fear that some of you guys are displaying. Should we really be that scared of a team because 3 guys that the NBA doesn't seem to deem worthy of a first round pick decided to return for another year of college ball?

Yes they will be good, Hansolo is the reigning NPOY and has a good shot of earning the same honors next year and they have a good recruiting class coming in. But Duke also returns some very solid players. Henderson probably has more pro potential than anyone on UNC's squad, Singler is a big matchup problem for just about anyone in the country and Scheyer is as tough and talented as just about anyone. The way I see it, the only big advantage that UNC has over Duke is Hansolo. For all the hype about Lawson, he doesn't play defense, has a mediocre outside shot and has a tendency to get bored in the bored in the half court offense. Paulus may not be the world's best defender but he's scrappy, a great shooter and makes a lot of clutch shots. Plus, I'll take Smith over either Frasor or Drew.

UNC has incredible size and depth in the front court but I doubt that more than 2 will be on the court at the same time and for the first time in a couple of years, Duke has some big bodies to put out there as well. We still don't have an answer for Hansolo but at least this year we will have options.

Like I said, UNC was the better team last year and have earned the right to be the favorites this year but if they really are considered to be as scary as some of you are saying then it demonstrates a sad state for college basketball. I think that the '05 version of the powder blue would have little trouble dispensing of the '09 team.

Lord Ash
06-16-2008, 06:12 PM
Hm, just because a player isn't ready for the NBA doesn't mean he isn't a game changer in college. And these are THREE of those guys. And a superstar All-American. And a bunch of real talented freshmen. And a bunch of talented backups.

Carolina will be a bear next year, and will likely win that title that "makes them better than Duke." Dammit.:mad:

CameronCrazy'11
06-16-2008, 06:21 PM
I think some people may have been drinking too much of the light blue kool-aid. For all their hype, UNC was not that good last year. They breezed through a weak out of conference schedule and started off ACC play with an overtime win against Clemson, a buzzer-beater to top Georgia Tech and then a last-second loss to Maryland. They were very very good, but they were not the amazing super-team that the media was making them out to be. Where they held it together was in summoning up the mental toughness to win the close contests, an area where Duke all too often lacked. We all saw how in games Miami Duke just completely fell apart. It was almost like they forgot that they knew how to play basketball until the last few minutes, when they got their groove back and were amazing. If Duke has toughness next year to pull out a win in those close games, the rest of the country had better beware.

RelativeWays
06-16-2008, 06:27 PM
Queue Price is Right defeat music.

EarlJam
06-16-2008, 06:37 PM
I assume I am in the minority, when I say, I am glad they are all coming back. If an opponent needs to be weakened for us to beat them then I would rather lose. No excuses, for us or them, only 5 guys on the floor for each team at once. I hope they never lose another player early and continue to do well in recruiting. To want UNC to lose players to the draft is weak in my opinion.

Bring it, we will still come out on top!

I'm with you.

We're gonna be stronger next year too, and dang nabbit, we BEAT UNC last year. And any team that puts on a performance like UNC did in the first half against Kansas, well, something ain't all right. There was no excuse for that.

Yeah, Carolina will be favored, as they should be (overwhemingly); but a lock for the championship? No way, and I like our chances against him.

Now.................deepen our bench for end of season strength! (don't hit me). :o

-EarlJam

P.S. If we had Kurt Rambis on our team we'd be the pre-season #1.

The1Bluedevil
06-16-2008, 06:54 PM
The thought of UNC and UConn having the two best teams makes me want to vomit.

CDu
06-16-2008, 07:04 PM
While I will concede the at least on paper UNC looks to be the best team in the nation next year and that they should be the pre-season pick to win the NC, I'm a little surprised by the fear that some of you guys are displaying. Should we really be that scared of a team because 3 guys that the NBA doesn't seem to deem worthy of a first round pick decided to return for another year of college ball?

I don't think anyone has said UNC will be scary. I said that it is bad news that Lawson returned. I also said that it makes UNC the favorites. I don't think any of that is unrealistic. But as soon as I said that, people jumped to the other extreme implying that I was saying UNC was unbeatable.


Like I said, UNC was the better team last year and have earned the right to be the favorites this year but if they really are considered to be as scary as some of you are saying then it demonstrates a sad state for college basketball. I think that the '05 version of the powder blue would have little trouble dispensing of the '09 team.

People keep talking about a comparison to the '05 team. That's irrelevant. Yes, the '05 team would beat this team. You know what? The '05 team won a national championship. And they did so against tougher teams than the '09 team will face.

Again, all I said was that UNC is better off with Lawson, and that him returning is bad news, and that UNC will be the favorites against us. I don't know why people are getting so bent out of shape about that.

heath_harshman4
06-16-2008, 07:12 PM
They'll choke again.

They're Carolina.

What else is new?

I hate carolina as much as the next guy but come on...

Final 4 and running the ACC double is a choke now a days?
What the hell would you call what we did?

CameronCrazy'11
06-16-2008, 07:15 PM
I hate carolina as much as the next guy but come on...

Final 4 and running the ACC double is a choke now a days?
What the hell would you call what we did?

I see your point, but 40-12 is by any definition, a choke.

Faison1
06-16-2008, 07:27 PM
"As I said before, Duke CAN still win. That doesn't mean they are likely to win, or that the odds are good. And the odds just got worse today. I can't understand why that doesn't make sense to you. I can't see any logical reason why you'd rather UNC have Lawson back.[/quote]"

Who cares if the odds are worse? Yes, it sucks we missed on some recruits...yes it sucks we will be seeing Danny Green again....yes, it sucks Ty Lawson is a pretty good player....therefore, I decide to put my faith in what K can do, as well as a very solid crew of admirable characters.

I guess there is a misunderstanding here, and I feel you are hanging onto a rather defeatist attitude heading into an uncontrollable situation. We've been handed a set of cards that we have to play. So, I choose to believe that our team will be much better next year, just like they were from last year to this year.

dukemsu
06-16-2008, 07:32 PM
All three plus Hans make the Heels the overwhelming favorite to win it all. There will be some who say the Heels will go unbeaten. I don't buy that, but they will certainly be the de facto #1 team.

Thing is, they've now set themselves up as a championship being the expected (and demanded) result. Nothing short of a championship will meet expectations. Should they lose in the tournament, oh, the teeth-gnashing that will happen.

Being the overwhelming favorite and being placed in this position is not necessarily a good thing (we as Duke fans know this). UNC has the pieces and the coach to win.

But make no mistake, this will be the biggest challenge Ol'Roy has. Three guys trying to better their draft positions. A returning star who dominates the ball. Freshmen wanting to make their mark. An undeniable bullseye attached to their back.

Not saying they can't pull it off. But it won't be easy.

dukemsu

heath_harshman4
06-16-2008, 07:36 PM
I see your point, but 40-12 is by any definition, a choke.

true, but i would rather have seen us down 40-12 to the eventual national champion in the final 4 than what happened to us.

Wander
06-16-2008, 07:41 PM
Who cares if the odds are worse?

Well, everyone on these boards, for starters, including yourself.

Son of Mojo
06-16-2008, 07:49 PM
Several sources are saying that Lawson is still up in the air as I post.

Without Lawson Hans has a tougher time winning the NPOY again.

Not sure about everyone else but I am / would be glad to see Ellington come back for one more year.

I would just love to see Henderson and him go out next year and Henderson get picked before him. Henderson is made more for the NBA then Ellington. Henderson can create while Ellington waits for Ty to get him the ball.

I would just love to see Henderson get picked before Ellington.

ROF LMAO That would make my summer!

Whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa......huh?? You actually HOPE Henderson leaves just so he'd be picked ahead of Ellington??? How could this be something you desire? It would weaken us to lose Henderson, particularly since he looks to be a star on the rise. Geez.........anyway, I want all of the holes to leave but we're not so fortunate. And yes, on paper and on the court they do have a really good team but like it was mentioned by a few on this string, they were VERY fortunate to win a number of games last year. It wouldn't have been out of the realm of possiblity for them to have had double digit losses if not for some good fortune that they had (BY, Tech, Clemson too many times, and there were some other close calls that right now, after being awake since 3:30 am, I can't remember off-hand). Like the old adage states.....sometimes it's better to be lucky than good.

DevilDan
06-16-2008, 07:58 PM
Again, no problem ... Let 'em be #1 -- it will make it that much sweeter when we knock them off at Cameron. I think we have the players to challenge them, come early 2009.

I just want to see our frontcourt start to take shape in Nov-Dec. If Brian is physically ready, play him early to build up his confidence. If Thomas comes back stronger, it's another plus. If Czyz can bring it at this level, and Plumlee can give some good minutes, it will further take the defensive burden off Kyle's shoulders.

Henderson/Scheyer/Paulus/Singler is a very solid nucleus -- that 5th starter (or "5", or the "frontcourt by committee") will tell the story in the long run. Can't wait ... GO DUKE !

CDu
06-16-2008, 08:18 PM
"As I said before, Duke CAN still win. That doesn't mean they are likely to win, or that the odds are good. And the odds just got worse today. I can't understand why that doesn't make sense to you. I can't see any logical reason why you'd rather UNC have Lawson back.[/quote]"

Who cares if the odds are worse? Yes, it sucks we missed on some recruits...yes it sucks we will be seeing Danny Green again....yes, it sucks Ty Lawson is a pretty good player....therefore, I decide to put my faith in what K can do, as well as a very solid crew of admirable characters.

I guess there is a misunderstanding here, and I feel you are hanging onto a rather defeatist attitude heading into an uncontrollable situation. We've been handed a set of cards that we have to play. So, I choose to believe that our team will be much better next year, just like they were from last year to this year.

Yes, I think you've misunderstood me. I simply stated that it was bad news. I didn't say it was the end of the world. I just said I'd have preferred that Lawson left, and that it makes UNC stronger. Obviously, it's uncontrollable. That doesn't mean I have to be happy about it. I don't think I've had a defeatist attitude in the least. Suggesting such a thing is, in my opinion, the overreaction to which I was referring.

Just because I state these facts and just because I'm disappointed Lawson is returning doesn't mean I'm not still hopeful. It just would have been nice had Lawson left. Hopefully the team makes more improvement than UNC does, and hopefully Coach K figures out the right buttons to push when it matters most. And hopefully (if we aren't fortunate enough to make the Final Four) UNC will slip up and not win it all.

rsvman
06-16-2008, 08:49 PM
Nobody is invincible. Even the '05 Heels were one questionable call away from losing to a Villanova team that was missing its best player to injury! Sure, they won the title, but they could have just as easily lost that game, and then they wouldn't have that title, despite having the exact same talent.

The tournament is a crap shoot, even if you do have a ton of talent. And the Duke-UNC games will likely be tight no matter how much talent they have; I like Duke's chances of at least a split during the regular season.

bbar7502
06-16-2008, 08:57 PM
totally agree with rsv, this unc team could end up like the 94 unc team with a lot of hype but never able to get it together, kind of success. I am just going to put it out there and say Duke will win the acc and have more success then unc next year, whos with me?! anyone?:D

CameronCrazy'11
06-16-2008, 09:16 PM
totally agree with rsv, this unc team could end up like the 94 unc team with a lot of hype but never able to get it together, kind of success. I am just going to put it out there and say Duke will win the acc and have more success then unc next year, whos with me?! anyone?:D

I like our matchup vs. UNC and our chances to take the ACC a lot better this year than last year, and we were damn close to being regular season ACC champs last year.

Scorp4me
06-16-2008, 09:17 PM
According to Heels fans from the past the real crime here is that Roy did not force Hansblahblah to enter the draft. They said that anything less than that was being selfish and putting himself and the program above the best interest of the kids. Now I personally never believed that myself and think it's great to see a kid want to stick around. But while the other 3 were not guaranteed 1st rounders, Hanblahblah has no where to go but down. And I'm very disappointed in Roy.

Not really, but I think the best situation for Carolina was if 1 or 2 of them had left. Plenty of talent left with no chemistry problems. It's not just the numbers, it's what's sticking around. Maybe all will be forgotten, but I won't be surprised if it isn't.

moonpie23
06-16-2008, 09:25 PM
calm down folks.....

"those three guys are GREAT"

not great enough to get on an NBA Team.....and you KNOW they would have gone if they could have..


"but they will be LOADED"..

uhh...they were "LOADED" this year...AND they were "LOADED" in 07...don't forget....roy can't win the big one with his own players...

unc fan: "hey man, did you hear the big news? all three of them are coming back!"

ABC fan:..." uh, that's not really news dude, we all knew that with 6 minutes left in the first half of the kansas game!

Boo-ya!!!

DUAA_shirt
06-16-2008, 09:28 PM
That was fast! Now that we've decided the outcome of the 2009 season already, we can start talking about the 2010 season!

CameronCrazy'11
06-16-2008, 09:29 PM
I think it's obvious that Hansbrough's decision to stay wasn't a tactical one. He wants to stay for the glory, the championship, the pride, the women, whatever. Considering how good his numbers were last year, it's hard to imagine him raising his stock anymore. His decision to stay was admirable, even if annoying for Duke fans. You're right though that his stock is only going to go down if he underperforms, but I don't think he's overly worried.

The chemistry angle is an interesting one. There have been reports sort of implying that there was jealousy / tension between UNC's star guards and Hansbrough and that Lawson, Ellington, and Green thought they were having to take too much of a back seat to Hansbrough. However, I don't know that the chemistry will actually cause them to lose any games this year.

Bluedog
06-16-2008, 09:58 PM
Does UNC have a protocol for punishments they dole out for arrests? I would think drinking after driving is pretty harsh, but maybe not. I'd think that Lawson would at least be suspended for a game or so....but who knows. Maybe they have to wait for him to be convicted. UNC's depth will be pretty ridiculous, but only 5 players can be on the court at one time and anything can happen in a 40 min game. It's definitely not a foregone conclusion that they'll make the Final Four, let alone win the National Championship. Anything can happen with one and done format.

Heelo
06-16-2008, 10:12 PM
Several sources are saying that Lawson is still up in the air as I post.

Without Lawson Hans has a tougher time winning the NPOY again.

Not sure about everyone else but I am / would be glad to see Ellington come back for one more year.

I would just love to see Henderson and him go out next year and Henderson get picked before him. Henderson is made more for the NBA then Ellington. Henderson can create while Ellington waits for Ty to get him the ball.

I would just love to see Henderson get picked before Ellington.

ROF LMAO That would make my summer!

I don't get it. There hasn't been a single point in time since their junior seasons in high school that Henderson wasn't considered a better pro prospect than Ellington.

Kishiznit
06-16-2008, 10:48 PM
Fellow Duke Fans - get your heads out of your arse and understand that this is a great day for Duke basketball. You will see that the pressure this year is on the tarholes. I love the fact that all 3 returning = reduced minutes for newcomers. 'Ol roy will feel like he owes Green more minutes this year so he doesn't upset his dad anymore than he already has. The 6-8" kid (Davis) will be the only rookie with significant minutes and after next year, they will struggle. Even though top recruits are coming in they will rely primarily on them for scoring in 2009-2010. I really like our chances in 2008-2009 to take care of business.....make sure our guys stay in the gym..........

Uncle Drew
06-16-2008, 11:12 PM
My life it seems has been in chaos the last few months and today my mom was admitted to the hospital. Hopefully everything will be okay, but the last thing my brother and I needed to hear was not one, not two but all three UNC players will be returning. Sports in general are a distraction for most of us, especially when our teams are good and contenders. This is exactly why I am a pessimist about life most of the time, when you expect the worst you're always never shocked when it happens and happy when it doesn't happen. I guess I let myself believe all three could stay in the draft and had high hopes at least one in particular would keep his name in. Hearing all three would return was like taking a battering ram to the gut.

One school that has lost a lot of talent to early entry got a gift from the God's today to make up for all the Stackhouses, Carters and Jordans they lost. Not that any of the three potential 2008 draft players is as talented as those guys. But like pieces to a puzzle they are key to what should be a dominant and successful season for the hated heels. Those of you who think both schools need to be good for the rivalry to matter just got your wish. And while you can argue playing time will be difficult to squeeze everyone in it's only going to make them deeper and their practices that much more intense teaching the freshmen that much more. Back in 1999 when Duke was loaded top to bottom it was noted Duke practices were more strenuous than 99% of the games they played, and it made them that much better once game time hit. UNC should be able to run teams off the court or pound them to death in a half court setting next season. Outside shooting should improve a little and with more athletic post players it should leave the outside wide open.

Nobody is gift wrapping the ACC or NCAA championships for them, but anyone who thinks they aren't the favorite is insane. We can say Roy never won it all with his own recruits for now, and there is the possibility of injury, sickness or choking. But things just took a bleak turn and even though Duke will be improved from last season IMO UNC will be even better. Last season with injuries to key players they made the Final Four. So what do you think a healthy Final Four team with added height and tallent should do?

Devilsfan
06-16-2008, 11:28 PM
Maybe Hanstravel and Frazier will teach the misguided three how to really take a dive.

ncexnyc
06-16-2008, 11:51 PM
I assume I am in the minority, when I say, I am glad they are all coming back. If an opponent needs to be weakened for us to beat them then I would rather lose. No excuses, for us or them, only 5 guys on the floor for each team at once. I hope they never lose another player early and continue to do well in recruiting. To want UNC to lose players to the draft is weak in my opinion.

Bring it, we will still come out on top!

I believe Ric Flair said it best, "To be the man, you've got to beat the man."

If we as Duke fans want to brag that we are the class of not only the ACC, but of college basketball in general, then I for one want to be able to say that we beat all comers with their best and not some watered down has beens.

Edouble
06-17-2008, 12:01 AM
I'm glad they're back. Our goal is to be the best. We should welcome all competition. We've got the most talented player in the conference, and when we build the team around him, we should be competative with anyone and have the goal of becoming a championship ballclub. UNC, with these five non-first rounders, has been a solid Elite Eight club for the past two years and I wouldn't expect more from them in 2008-09. Let's beat 'em at their place again this year.

Uncle Drew
06-17-2008, 04:03 AM
I'm glad they're back. Our goal is to be the best. We should welcome all competition. We've got the most talented player in the conference, and when we build the team around him, we should be competative with anyone and have the goal of becoming a championship ballclub. UNC, with these five non-first rounders, has been a solid Elite Eight club for the past two years and I wouldn't expect more from them in 2008-09. Let's beat 'em at their place again this year.

Edouble this isn't directed at you per say because you are echoing the sentiment of several posters on here. In 1999 when UNC lost Carter and Jamison Duke went through the entire ACC undefeated. When people look back in the record books hardly anyone but Ed Cota ("If Twan and Vince had been here it wouldn'y have been no contest") remembers they lost players early. The point is to win, no matter if they suit up Lawson, Green and Ellington or if they have to put a few cheerleaders in basketball shorts.

And to those who say to be the best you have to beat the best, what if that best beats you by 25 points in both games and 30 in the ACC tournament? I'm not saying that is going to happen but I certainly liked Dukes chances of winning against them in any game before news the three were returning. I do think Duke in general will be a better team with certain players hopefully getting stronger and better. But common logic says if Duke players are probably going to get better and stronger then so are several Tarheels as well. Then throw in the fact they have the reigning NATIONAL player of the year returning (someone we haven't been able to defend the last two years) a highly ranked and tallented incomming freshman class and lost one player who played any significant minutes. (We lost more to graduation than they did!) Am I the only one who sees this as a very, very bad thing for Duke and a very, very, very good thing for UNC?

Some are using the logic that we beat UNC in Chapel Hill and could have beaten them in Durham. Are people forgetting the Chapel Hill game was the first full game they played without Lawson. (Or the winning streak they went on even without him?) Throw in the fact his back up is healed and he won't have to play 40 minutes a game. (And look for UNC to rest their starters a LOT due to blow outs.) Then probably their two most athletic players are coming back by many accounts even better than they were last year and this is a good thing? I'm sorry but this all seems like being in a nest of vipers and being happy there are three extra snakes in the pit because when you shoot the percentage of hitting a serpent are higher.

roywhite
06-17-2008, 06:42 AM
Caulton Tudor predictably captures the arrogance and expectations of the pro-Carolina media crowd in one of the articles linked in the DBR feature.

http://www.charlotte.com/sports/story/673382.html

My favorite quotes:

"Other than Connecticut, and perhaps Purdue, it's difficult to pinpoint strong challengers to North Carolina's likely supremacy" Oh, really?

"There might not be even one evolving NBA standout, but no team in the nation will begin with anywhere near the same collegiate punch.

They might not win it all. But they should."

Pretty high expectations, wouldn't you say? Should we even play the season?

Buckeye Devil
06-17-2008, 07:07 AM
Edouble this isn't directed at you per say because you are echoing the sentiment of several posters on here. In 1999 when UNC lost Carter and Jamison Duke went through the entire ACC undefeated. When people look back in the record books hardly anyone but Ed Cota ("If Twan and Vince had been here it wouldn'y have been no contest") remembers they lost players early. The point is to win, no matter if they suit up Lawson, Green and Ellington or if they have to put a few cheerleaders in basketball shorts.

And to those who say to be the best you have to beat the best, what if that best beats you by 25 points in both games and 30 in the ACC tournament? I'm not saying that is going to happen but I certainly liked Dukes chances of winning against them in any game before news the three were returning. I do think Duke in general will be a better team with certain players hopefully getting stronger and better. But common logic says if Duke players are probably going to get better and stronger then so are several Tarheels as well. Then throw in the fact they have the reigning NATIONAL player of the year returning (someone we haven't been able to defend the last two years) a highly ranked and tallented incomming freshman class and lost one player who played any significant minutes. (We lost more to graduation than they did!) Am I the only one who sees this as a very, very bad thing for Duke and a very, very, very good thing for UNC?

Some are using the logic that we beat UNC in Chapel Hill and could have beaten them in Durham. Are people forgetting the Chapel Hill game was the first full game they played without Lawson. (Or the winning streak they went on even without him?) Throw in the fact his back up is healed and he won't have to play 40 minutes a game. (And look for UNC to rest their starters a LOT due to blow outs.) Then probably their two most athletic players are coming back by many accounts even better than they were last year and this is a good thing? I'm sorry but this all seems like being in a nest of vipers and being happy there are three extra snakes in the pit because when you shoot the percentage of hitting a serpent are higher.

with your sentiments here, especially about the three extra vipers. It's not like UNC would have been so down that people would have felt sorry for them or anything like that. When Dunleavy, Williams, and Boozer left after the 2002 season, did it take any of the luster off of beating Duke? I don't think so.

I understand about wanting to beat the best, but it will be quite a bit harder than anticipated with everyone back and probably better as Latta points out.

sandinmyshoes
06-17-2008, 07:45 AM
I just hope that some of these fans who are predicting us to beat UNC or even win the ACC championship don't turn on our own players and coach if that fails to happen.

Do not misunderstand. We are capable of winning the regular season, the ACC and the NCAA. That is a reasonable goal. But it is an unreasonable expectation.

Meanwhile, with UNC I think the NCAA championship might come down to Lawson developing some mental toughness. I remember Felton going through some mental lapses and poor judgement under pressure, but he learned from those and his composure and grit (which I came to reluctantly admire) were as key as anything Sean May did in gaining UNC the 2005 title.

But even if Lawson does so, all it takes is one off game. One poor shooting night, and we escape the grim prospect of them hanging yet another banner in the Dead Dome.

whereinthehellami
06-17-2008, 07:48 AM
I'm not convinced they had good chemistry last year and that they will have it this year. Especially with the way the NBA tryouts were handled. Keep in mind that Green, Ellington, and Lawson are only returning because they weren't good enough to go pro.

I think they will put up gaudy numbers again and will have a near perfect record but will not get it done in the end again. Too mnay head cases on that team.

sagegrouse
06-17-2008, 08:08 AM
This thread refers to the recent actions of Messrs. Green, Lawson, and Ellington as "will be back," "coming back," or "returning."

Humh! Aren't they really "slinking back to Chapel Hill," not having found anyone in the NBA willing to take them?

This is a leadership problem for Roy, coaching a team where three of the key players have shown through actions and a lot of words that they don't want to be there.

I look forward to beating them next season.

sagegrouse

roywhite
06-17-2008, 08:25 AM
So what lessons do Lawson, Ellington, and Green draw from this "testing the waters" experience?

That they're not quite good enough to be drafted high

That they need to step up their performance next year to advance their draft status; surely they'll want to score more and show more offense

How does this work if the team revolves around Hansbrough? He's already somewhat of a "black hole"; he looks to shoot when he gets the ball, and is not adept at passing out of double-teams.

Meanwhile, Bobby Frasor and also a talented incoming freshman class will want playing time. Where does that come from?

Does this all add up to a dominant team? Well, perhaps, but they could also be vulnerable to bad team chemistry, lapses in concentration, and selfish play from time to time. No reason for Duke, with a potent, deep roster of its own, to fear these guys.

Udaman
06-17-2008, 09:25 AM
The Duke blue tinted glasses are on here big time, at least with some of you.

Let me start by saying that yes, in college basketball it is not always the best team that wins. Come tourney time, with the one and done format anything can happen, and great teams sometimes lose when they shouldn't (see Georgetown v. Villanova, Houston v. NC State, UNLV v. Duke, Boston College v UNC, etc, etc).

But with the all three UNC players coming back, this UNC team will be (on paper) on of the greatest college basketball teams...ever. They are returning the Player of the Year, something which hasn't happened in over 20 years. They have one of the best point guards. They have unbelievable depth. They have a hall of fame coach. They will be quick at the guard position, and have great size in the paint. They have a go-to clutch scorer

You stack this team up against any great team over the past 20 years, and they are as good if not better. The only team I would even consider close to them would be the 92 Blue Devils. Only they will be stacked like this at a time when everyone good tends to go pro (see the drafts of the past 7 years). Any team you mention right now for a challenger to them next year seems to pale by comparison.

The simply fact is that UNC should be the unanimous pre-season #1, and they should be favored to win every game they play. This team has a chance to go undefeated, and anything less than a national championship will be a huge, huge disappointment for them.

Again, anything can happen. But the 08-09 Tar Heels will be a monster of a team, capable of beating every team they play by 20 points, regardless of where they play them. If you think otherwise...you are fooling yourself.

roywhite
06-17-2008, 09:37 AM
Will this 2008-09 Tarheel team be any better on paper than their 1993-94 team? That team was coming off a national championship, and returned Eric Montross, Brian Reese, Derrick Phelps, and others. They added 3 outstanding freshman in Jerry Stackhouse, Rasheed Wallace, and Jeff McInnis (all of whom have had long pro careers). They were overwhelming favorites to repeat as national champs.

The results? Carolina lost in the second round of the NCAA tournament to Boston College (way to go, Bill Curley). Duke, meanwhile, led by Grant Hill, reached the NCAA championship and lost by a fingernail.

I'm not buying the Carolina-related hype. The proof needs to come on the court.

sagegrouse
06-17-2008, 10:02 AM
The Duke blue tinted glasses are on here big time, at least with some of you.

Let me start by saying that yes, in college basketball it is not always the best team that wins. Come tourney time, with the one and done format anything can happen, and great teams sometimes lose when they shouldn't (see Georgetown v. Villanova, Houston v. NC State, UNLV v. Duke, Boston College v UNC, etc, etc).

But with the all three UNC players coming back, this UNC team will be (on paper) on of the greatest college basketball teams...ever. They are returning the Player of the Year, something which hasn't happened in over 20 years. They have one of the best point guards. They have unbelievable depth. They have a hall of fame coach. They will be quick at the guard position, and have great size in the paint. They have a go-to clutch scorer

You stack this team up against any great team over the past 20 years, and they are as good if not better. The only team I would even consider close to them would be the 92 Blue Devils. Only they will be stacked like this at a time when everyone good tends to go pro (see the drafts of the past 7 years). Any team you mention right now for a challenger to them next year seems to pale by comparison.

The simply fact is that UNC should be the unanimous pre-season #1, and they should be favored to win every game they play. This team has a chance to go undefeated, and anything less than a national championship will be a huge, huge disappointment for them.

Again, anything can happen. But the 08-09 Tar Heels will be a monster of a team, capable of beating every team they play by 20 points, regardless of where they play them. If you think otherwise...you are fooling yourself.

As one of the members of the peanut gallery (Re: "Some of you are just plain nuts"), I disagree that UNC is prospectively one of the great teams of all time.

Ellington and Green have just proven that they will have trouble ever playing in the NBA. IMHO, Lawson is also a question mark (size, defense, attitude). Is Hansbrough the only NBA player on the returning roster? And Hansbrough may be the second coming of Dave Cowens, but most observers think he will more likely be a role player.

Not only does this team not seem as strong as Laettner, Hill, Parks, Lang and Hurley, but is also not as good in prospect as the Duke '99 team (Brand, Maggette, Battier, Langdon) or the '01 team (Battier, JWill, Boozer, Dunleavy) or even the Tarheel '05 champs (May, Felton, McCants, et al.) or the underperforming team with Vince Carter and Jamison (1998, IIRC).


sagegrouse
'Hey, a little emotion is OK, but why the derision in the title?'

sandinmyshoes
06-17-2008, 10:14 AM
I think any discussion of this UNC team being one of the greatest has to carry the caveat of "relative to their era." Teams now are physically more mature than those of even ten years ago because weight training and conditioning has become so much more advance. But in terms of pure talent, they are not. Guys like like Thompson, Worthy, Sampson and Ewing would never have seen a sophmore year in this day and age.

There is still the matter of perimeter shooting for this club as well. They have been prone to cold shooting nights, which allows the defenses to collapse on Hansbrough.

The chemistry issue is still there. Losing Stepheson opens things a bit in the paint. From what I recall of their freshmen when they were still recruits, Zeller and Drew seem like the sort who will bide their time. Davis less so. That's why I'm not sure the 94 comparison is a valid one. There is a significant mindset difference between Zeller/Drew and Stackhouse/McInnis/Wallace. There is also the fact that these new guys are not clearly better athletes or skilled players than the upperclassmen, as was the case in 94.

I still think it comes down to this edition of UNC avoiding cold shooting nights, and Lawson showing some mental toughness.

Jaymf7
06-17-2008, 10:14 AM
But with the all three UNC players coming back, this UNC team will be (on paper) on of the greatest college basketball teams...ever...

You stack this team up against any great team over the past 20 years, and they are as good if not better.


I am all for building unreasonable expectations for the Holes, but are you serious?

If we want to compare next year's UNC team to past great teams, why not start with this year's champs, who thoroughly embarassed them. Sure, UNC fought back when Kansas let up (as we have done in the past), but KU quickly regained control and finished the game in convincing fashion. UNC really had no answers. Sure, UNC will be a year older next year and have a solid freshman class, but as we have said there can only be 5 players on the court at a time. They will have great depth, but that only goes so far.

Even with all 4 heels back, I still like our individual matchups (except Hansblah, of course). They are a better team but we certainly have a shot. They will not go undefeated.

Comparing them to JUST OUR TEAMS after the 1992 team you reference, I like several of ours better. Our 1999 team would destroy next year's UNC in a 5 game series (have to add the series part in light of the last game that team played). 4 lottery picks for us THAT YEAR, plus role players like Battier. Brand over Hansblah, Maggette over Green, Langdon plays with Ellington, Avery plays with Lawson, etc. Same with 2001. No contest.

Other schools have had good teams recently, too.

UNC will be the favorites next year, but they will be far from unbeatable.

Edouble
06-17-2008, 10:25 AM
One poor shooting night, and we escape the grim prospect of them hanging yet another banner in the Dead Dome.

I think it's pretty obvious that they will be hanging another banner in the Dean Dome this year. They hang some damn thing up every year.

BlueintheFace
06-17-2008, 10:26 AM
Here is one thing that many of you have touched upon so far, but I think is of amazing importance...

Duke will not have much pressure at all from the national media. Remember what it was like with JJ and Shelden (most recently)? Remember how the individual records for JJ and the team success brought so much pressure and attention to the program that it weighed on the players. I must have read at least 100 stories about how K thought the team was suffering from all the media attention.

This year, Duke can shape up to be a legitimate Final Four team and still go under the radar thanks to the boys at Chapel Hill.

FOR ONCE we can have an amazing season and not face the overwhelming pressure that normally comes with being a great Duke team.

The guys will have to constantly hear about how they can't match up with the great Tarheels and will be able to use it as motivation.

Meanwhile the Tarheels WILL have chemistry issues (and possibly coaching issues) with so much talent(ego) and so many lineups to consider. They ABSOLUTELY WILL suffer from unending media pressure, and Tyler WILL be forced to turn his mind to ACC and National records as the season progresses (mental and physical strain will be inevitable).

Carolina has the pieces, but these problems are very real and definitely nothing to scoff at. After all, who would know better than us?

BlueintheFace
06-17-2008, 10:28 AM
I think it's pretty obvious that they will be hanging another banner in the Dean Dome this year. They hang some damn thing up every year.

HAHA!!

Udaman
06-17-2008, 10:33 AM
Carolina returns their top 6 players. Top 6. Of those 6, they will have 3 Seniors and 3 Juniors, making them one of the oldest teams in the country as well. They bring in one of the top recruiting classes in the country. The return the Player of the Year for the first time in over 20 years...a guy who in college is pretty much unstopable. Add in a hall of fame coach and a team that will be hungry to win it all....and you have just a tremendous team.

Again, I'm not ready to annoit them the champs. Anything can happen in college. But anyone not ready to admit that what they have should be awesome is kidding themselves.

As for the comparison to the 1999 Blue Devil team - assuming that everyone is healthy on both side - the nod goes to Carolina, if you ask me.

Hansblahblah and Brand would be a push (boy what a great matchup that would be). Lawson would abuse Avery. Ellington is slightly better than Langdon. Green is better than Maggette (it is easy to forget that down the stretch for us Maggette was basically a non-factor). Their bench would be better than ours. To make the argument that we would "destroy" them in a 5 game series proves what I'm trying to say. Take off the Duke glasses for a second. A 5 game series between those two teams would be classic, and whoever won would likely do so 3-2.

Personally, I like the fact that Caroline will be the undisputed #1 team. It puts all the pressure on them. It makes it so that a loss in the championship game would mark their season a failure. But I'm honest enough to admit that they could and should win it all, and they will be capable of beating us by 20 or more points every time we play them.

sandinmyshoes
06-17-2008, 10:33 AM
I think it's pretty obvious that they will be hanging another banner in the Dean Dome this year. They hang some damn thing up every year.


:D Good point. Of course this year they'll be doing last year's ACC and FF banners. But the one I want to escape is the NCAA Championship.

Edouble
06-17-2008, 10:34 AM
4 lottery picks for us THAT YEAR, plus role players like Battier. Brand over Hansblah, Maggette over Green, Langdon plays with Ellington, Avery plays with Lawson, etc. Same with 2001. No contest.


Well, actually THREE, b/c Avery went 14th. But seriously, the 1999 team would destroy UNC. Carawell shut down Steve Francis twice and he was a top 3 draft pick. UNC doesn't even have a player like that right now.

Devilsfan
06-17-2008, 10:39 AM
It's like playing basketball in a YMCA youth league. Little Johhny didn't win but let's give him a trophy so as not to damage his self image. Let's hang another participation banner in the smith center.

Uncle Drew
06-17-2008, 10:43 AM
People are naming off teams that on paper and probably on the court would be better than next years UNC team. The thing is as mentioned by another poster all the would be contenders next year except UNC lost significant talent and playing time even Duke. (Nelson) That isn't to say schools don't have talent coming in to help replace that but they are freshmen, and to counteract that UNC has a loaded freshman class of it's own joining a team that made the Final Four last year.

It's not like anyone posting here controls what UNC players decide to do any more than how Duke recruits or who they have coming in. This is a sounding board for people who are frustrated or optimistic. Lawson would have been drated in the first round but chose to wait until next season when guards would be at a higher premium. Green may very well have been able to get drafted in the first round if not for a injury or two. Ellington was borderline late first round or early second round from what I'd heard. You can mock that two weren't ready, but all three will play in the NBA some day along with the POY. THAT IS NOT A GOOD THING FOR DUKE! Sure Duke will improve over the summer and improve (let's hope) as the season progresses. But do you people not understand UNC already has (by returning ALL THREE) improved, will improve in depth and talent (via a kiler freshman class) and will improve even more as the season goes along? The potential was there for UNC to stay about as good as they were or maybe even take a step back. They just took a giant stride and losing Nelson and adding what we have coming in IMO is either standing still or a step forward.

Tallent wise I wouldn't agree with next years UNC teams being one of the best in the last 25 years. But compared to what everyone else has they probably will be one of the most dominant in the last 25 years. Duke will have a good team next year, but they may finish third to Wake in the ACC. Let's not forget the spread offense got figured out last season and IMO peaked before the Wake game in Winston. I am looking forward to a stronger, wiser, better conditioned Henderson, Singler, Zoubek etc. But if you think all the UNC players have spend their time high diving into kiddie pools I have some beach front property to sell you in down town Durham.

dukie8
06-17-2008, 11:09 AM
Will this 2008-09 Tarheel team be any better on paper than their 1993-94 team? That team was coming off a national championship, and returned Eric Montross, Brian Reese, Derrick Phelps, and others. They added 3 outstanding freshman in Jerry Stackhouse, Rasheed Wallace, and Jeff McInnis (all of whom have had long pro careers). They were overwhelming favorites to repeat as national champs.

The results? Carolina lost in the second round of the NCAA tournament to Boston College (way to go, Bill Curley). Duke, meanwhile, led by Grant Hill, reached the NCAA championship and lost by a fingernail.

I'm not buying the Carolina-related hype. The proof needs to come on the court.

your recollection of unc being the "overwhelming favorites to repeat" in '94 defies reality. yes, they ended the season #1 at 27-6 but arkansas was #2 at 25-3, purdue was #3 at 27-4 and uconn was #4 at 26-4. i can't find historical vegas odds, but i am fairly certain that a 6-loss team never has been the "overwhelming" favorite to win it all -- ever. moreover, they didn't even have a 1st team all american that season (nevermind the reigning NPOY). to compare the return of montross from '93, a good but nothing spectacular player (he was 2nd team AA in '93 and '94), to the return of the NPOY is laughable. unless hans gets hurt, he's a lock for 1st team AA and lawson very well could join him.

i certainly hope that unc doesn't win it all but, on paper, it doesn't get much better than what they are starting with. people are grasping at straws if they are trying to poke holes in their current stable of horses.

it also should be noted how watered down college is at this point with nearly every top player gone after his freshman or sophmore season. college basketball is the only major sport that has gotten considerably WORSE over the past 20 years because of this. whether the '94 unc, '99 duke or '91 unlv teams would beat the '09 team on paper is completely irrelevant. what is relevant is the quality of the 300+ other teams next year and none of them can hold a candle to the top 10 teams in '91, '94 or '99.

roywhite
06-17-2008, 11:29 AM
your recollection of unc being the "overwhelming favorites to repeat" in '94 defies reality. yes, they ended the season #1 at 27-6 but arkansas was #2 at 25-3, purdue was #3 at 27-4 and uconn was #4 at 26-4. i can't find historical vegas odds, but i am fairly certain that a 6-loss team never has been the "overwhelming" favorite to win it all -- ever. moreover, they didn't even have a 1st team all american that season (nevermind the reigning NPOY). to compare the return of montross from '93, a good but nothing spectacular player (he was 2nd team AA in '93 and '94), to the return of the NPOY is laughable. unless hans gets hurt, he's a lock for 1st team AA and lawson very well could join him.



I was speaking, as we are now, of pre-season expectations. The 1993-94 UNC team entered the season as very strong favorites to win the title. As you note above, they managed to lose 6 games, and didn't get past the 2nd round in the NCAA tournament.

This will all sort itself out in actual competition, but I'm just not buying that UNC in 2008-09 is going to be a super team.

CDu
06-17-2008, 11:43 AM
I was speaking, as we are now, of pre-season expectations. The 1993-94 UNC team entered the season as very strong favorites to win the title. As you note above, they managed to lose 6 games, and didn't get past the 2nd round in the NCAA tournament.

This will all sort itself out in actual competition, but I'm just not buying that UNC in 2008-09 is going to be a super team.

How are you not buying that they will be a super team? They were one of the top four teams in the country last year. They were legitimately expected to win the ACC regular season (which they did), tournament (which they did) and make the Final Four (which they did, rather easily). They lost only a handful of games last year. They did so with their PG being injured for part of the season and arguably not being a full speed, and they did so without their backup PG.

This year, they have their top six players back and they improve their talent and depth at PG and in the post. And they do so while each of the other top teams last significant talent. They wouldn't be able to beat the great teams of the past, but relative to their current competition, I think it's fair to say that they should be similarly favored.

Obviously that doesn't guarantee anything. The 1994 Tarheels and 1999 Devils prove that, in a single-elimination tournament, anything can happen. The best team frequently doesn't win it all. And you are correct that it will sort itself out in actual competition. But on what basis would you say they shouldn't be the favorites to easily win the ACC and that they shouldn't be the favorites to win the national championship?

miramar
06-17-2008, 11:48 AM
The only returnees I'm concerned about are Thomas and Zoubek at center; Singler at forward; Henderson, Scheyer, and Paulus at the guards; and Smith, McClure, and Pocius off the bench. No matter who Carolina has, I think Duke will have its most complete and experienced team in years, and I'm looking forward to seeing it.

I also think that these players have the ability to finish the season strong, something that we haven't seen in a while. It is really a shame that players such as JJ, Randolph, Melchioni, Dockery, and Nelson didn't go out on a high note, but I think that will change this year.

roywhite
06-17-2008, 11:53 AM
How are you not buying that they will be a super team? They were one of the top four teams in the country last year. They were legitimately expected to win the ACC regular season (which they did), tournament (which they did) and make the Final Four (which they did, rather easily). They did so with their PG being injured for part of the season and arguably not being a full speed, and they did so without their backup PG.

This year, they have their top six players back and they improve their talent and depth at PG and in the post. And they do so while each of the other top teams last significant talent.

Obviously that doesn't guarantee anything, and you are correct that it will sort itself out in actual competition. But on what basis would you say they shouldn't be the favorites to easily win the ACC and that they shouldn't be the favorites to win the national championship?

They will be the favorites to win the conference and the National Championship. But so what? It's fun to talk about, but it doesn't mean much, and it certainly doesn't guarantee any final result.

I see possible vulnerabilities in a number of areas:

None of the 3 guys who tested the draft were super players, or they would have left. I wouldn't be surprised to see Singler and/or Gerald Henderson get drafted higher than Ellington/Lawson/Green, or even Hansbrough.

Hansbrough is a terrific college player, but if he doesn't go to the foul line repeatedly (for example, in NCAA tournament games), he does not dominate.

Possible chemistry issues; too many guys looking to the pros, not enough touches to go around (it doesn't sound like everybody was happy with Hansbrough getting the ball so much), and a "we can turn it on when we need to, or feel like it" mindset being possible, which usually doesn't work.

Matches
06-17-2008, 12:04 PM
This year, they have their top six players back and they improve their talent and depth at PG and in the post. And they do so while each of the other top teams last significant talent. They wouldn't be able to beat the great teams of the past, but relative to their current competition, I think it's fair to say that they should be similarly favored.

Obviously that doesn't guarantee anything. The 1994 Tarheels and 1999 Devils prove that, in a single-elimination tournament, anything can happen. The best team frequently doesn't win it all. And you are correct that it will sort itself out in actual competition. But on what basis would you say they shouldn't be the favorites to easily win the ACC and that they shouldn't be the favorites to win the national championship?

Co-sign. I think we all know games aren't played on paper, anything can happen in one game etc. - but it's clear that on paper, for whatever that's worth, '08-'09 UNC is more loaded than anyone has been for a long time, at least since '99 Duke. They will be prohibitive favorites in every single game they play next year. Discussion about who's going to get drafted where is really neither here nor there. Hansblah may not get drafted all that high but there's no denying he is a tremendous college player.

At this point they're so deep they're not even all that susceptible to injury, either. There'd be a dropoff if Hans or Lawson got hurt but even then they have guys capable of stepping in.

I hope they lose every game they play, but I'd be surprised if they lost more than 3-4 games all year.

CDu
06-17-2008, 12:07 PM
They will be the favorites to win the conference and the National Championship. But so what? It's fun to talk about, but it doesn't mean much, and it certainly doesn't guarantee any final result.

I see possible vulnerabilities in a number of areas:

None of the 3 guys who tested the draft were super players, or they would have left. I wouldn't be surprised to see Singler and/or Gerald Henderson get drafted higher than Ellington/Lawson/Green, or even Hansbrough.

Hansbrough is a terrific college player, but if he doesn't go to the foul line repeatedly (for example, in NCAA tournament games), he does not dominate.

Possible chemistry issues; too many guys looking to the pros, not enough touches to go around (it doesn't sound like everybody was happy with Hansbrough getting the ball so much), and a "we can turn it on when we need to, or feel like it" mindset being possible, which usually doesn't work.

As long as you are accepting of the idea that they will be the favorites to win it all, I don't really have any disagreements. Yes, there are possible areas of vulnerability. I'd say they have fewer areas of vulnerability than any other team in the country, but they do have vulnerability.

My only beef in this thread has been with those who suggest that those guys returning isn't a bad thing for Duke's chances. We can poke holes in any of the team's (certainly including our own), but to suggest that returning three of UNC's four best players is anything but a bad result for Duke suggests a lack of touch with reality. If I were a UNC fan, I'd certainly prefer to have the talent return and hope that chemistry doesn't become a problem than to have no chemistry but lack the talent.

dukie8
06-17-2008, 12:07 PM
I see possible vulnerabilities in a number of areas:

None of the 3 guys who tested the draft were super players, or they would have left.

that is pure poppycock. was redick not a super college player his junior year? how would you rate alford's collegiate career? just because someone doesn't have a game that is suited to the nba doesn't mean that he isn't a super college player. the games are very different. moreover, just because someone cannot get a verbal that he will be taken in the first round of a very deep draft, doesn't mean that he isn't a super college player.

how many college pgs will be better than lawson next year? did you even watch unc's games to see the difference with him in and out of the lineup? it was like night and day.

roywhite
06-17-2008, 12:22 PM
that is pure poppycock. was redick not a super college player his junior year? how would you rate alford's collegiate career? just because someone doesn't have a game that is suited to the nba doesn't mean that he isn't a super college player. the games are very different. moreover, just because someone cannot get a verbal that he will be taken in the first round of a very deep draft, doesn't mean that he isn't a super college player.

how many college pgs will be better than lawson next year? did you even watch unc's games to see the difference with him in and out of the lineup? it was like night and day.

Easy now. Sure, I watched plenty of UNC games, and I saw how dangerous Lawson was. But each of the three guys who tested the draft have some flaws; they are simply not Worthy/Perkins/Jordan or Laettner/Hurley/G.Hll. Okay, so that type of talent is not around the college game any more? They are not better than the talent on our 2001 team or even UNC's own 2005 team. They are not better than what Kansas or UCLA had last year.

Duke will be excellent this coming year and can certainly beat UNC on a given night. The season has yet to be played. Why give this Tarheel group more credit than they deserve?

Jaymf7
06-17-2008, 12:47 PM
My only beef in this thread has been with those who suggest that those guys returning isn't a bad thing for Duke's chances.

I guess that depends on what you mean by "chances." If you mean our chances to go undefeated or win the ACC, yes the return of these players is a bad thing. I would prefer to see epic battles and hopefully a long run in March.

In that case, it is great that UNC is loaded. We will have some tough games with them (which I personally believe will be competitive), we will have a shot or two at beating them as a #1 in the country, and we will very likely not meet them in the NCAAs until the Final Four. A loss to them will not hurt us much and a win will give us great respect. Under such circumstances, a loaded UNC really does not hurt our chances (apart from perhaps presenting a slightly tougher Final Four opponent if we get that far -- and I would much rather see that than us rolling over a diluted UNC and playing someone else in the FF).

Let them be loaded... and fall.

hondoheel
06-17-2008, 12:49 PM
I'd say this year's team has more talent than last year's. They lost Alex Stepeson and Quentin Thomas, but gain Zeller, Drew, Davis (all Mc Donalds AAs) and Justin Watts, and maybe more importantly Bobby Frasor. Think maybe they wouldn't have fallen so far behind Kansas if Frasor had been available? Not to mention the improvement of the other returning players.

I honestly think the Louisville squad that UNC beat in the quarterfinals was a better team than Kansas. For whatever reason though they stunk it up against KU.

CDu
06-17-2008, 12:57 PM
I guess that depends on what you mean by "chances." If you mean our chances to go undefeated or win the ACC, yes the return of these players is a bad thing. I would prefer to see epic battles and hopefully a long run in March.

In that case, it is great that UNC is loaded. We will have some tough games with them (which I personally believe will be competitive), we will have a shot or two at beating them as a #1 in the country, and we will very likely not meet them in the NCAAs until the Final Four. A loss to them will not hurt us much and a win will give us great respect. Under such circumstances, a loaded UNC really does not hurt our chances (apart from perhaps presenting a slightly tougher Final Four opponent if we get that far -- and I would much rather see that than us rolling over a diluted UNC and playing someone else in the FF).

Let them be loaded... and fall.

I just want Duke to win. I don't care if it's against the best competition or the worst. I want wins. UNC being better reduces our chances at winning the ACC regular season title and it reduces our chances at winning the ACC tourney title. In turn, that reduces our chances at winning the National Championship as well.

I've gotten past the point where I get excited about Duke playing against great teams. I just want to see Duke win, and having UNC be weaker would make that possibility greater.

CDu
06-17-2008, 12:59 PM
I'd say this year's team has more talent than last year's. They lost Alex Stepeson and Quentin Thomas, but gain Zeller, Drew, Davis (all Mc Donalds AAs) and Justin Watts, and maybe more importantly Bobby Frasor. Think maybe they wouldn't have fallen so far behind Kansas if Frasor had been available? Not to mention the improvement of the other returning players.

I honestly think the Louisville squad that UNC beat in the quarterfinals was a better team than Kansas. For whatever reason though they stunk it up against KU.

That Louisville team wasn't close. They had good size but lacked ANY guard play whatsoever. And their defense wasn't as good. Kansas had great depth inside and MUCH better guard play.

Jaymf7
06-17-2008, 01:06 PM
I just want Duke to win. I don't care if it's against the best competition or the worst. I want wins.

I can respect that. Maybe we should move to C-USA? ;)

ncexnyc
06-17-2008, 01:09 PM
Frankly I am shocked by some of the responses on this thread.

Duke University isn't about shortcuts, the academic standards are some of the highest in the country.

The Duke basketball program that we have come to know and love, which was built by Coach K is the same. Only the highest quality kids come to Duke.
Coach K doesn't take the easy way out like so many other programs do. I seriously doubt that Coach K wants anything handed to his team and I am sure being the master motivator that he is, he will use the return of the UNC 3 as a motivational ploy to inspire our team.

Yes, UNC is loaded and will definitely be the pre-season #1, but that doesn't say they can't be had. I'm already hearing undefeated talk from my co-workers and can't wait for their first loss, hopefully at our hands.

dukie8
06-17-2008, 01:35 PM
Easy now. Sure, I watched plenty of UNC games, and I saw how dangerous Lawson was. But each of the three guys who tested the draft have some flaws; they are simply not Worthy/Perkins/Jordan or Laettner/Hurley/G.Hll. Okay, so that type of talent is not around the college game any more? They are not better than the talent on our 2001 team or even UNC's own 2005 team. They are not better than what Kansas or UCLA had last year.

Duke will be excellent this coming year and can certainly beat UNC on a given night. The season has yet to be played. Why give this Tarheel group more credit than they deserve?

you still are missing the point. the fact that they are or are not as talented as other teams from other eras is completely irrelevant. what matters is how they stack up against the other teams in '09 and they are light years ahead of everyone on paper. i can't recall a team, on paper, so much better than everyone else.

how can you say that ucla, a team that look horrible in several of its NCAAT games and had to rally, essentially at home, just to get to the FF (where it then got hammered by memphis) wa BETTER than unc will be next year with its top 6 back plus 2 AAs? you are aware that unc slaughtered its 4 opponents leading up to the FF? unc was a much better team than ucla LAST year. next year, it won't be close.

i'm not giving unc more credit than it deserves. i'm just being realistic. what team in the past 25 years has started the season this far ahead of everyone else? don't tell me duke '99. duke '98 didn't even get to the FF and wasn't a 1 seed. it added maggette but he was a bench player and hardly a key to the '99 team. nobody preseason was predicting that the '99 team would shred everyone by 30. i don't think anyone wants to see unc run the table in the ACC and win a NC but it is very possible. the best thing going against them is that roy has been less than spectacular in the ncaat (that's going back to kansas). hopefully his inability to prepare teams for big games will continue this year.

quickgtp
06-17-2008, 01:36 PM
I'd say this year's team has more talent than last year's. They lost Alex Stepeson and Quentin Thomas, but gain Zeller, Drew, Davis (all Mc Donalds AAs) and Justin Watts, and maybe more importantly Bobby Frasor. Think maybe they wouldn't have fallen so far behind Kansas if Frasor had been available? Not to mention the improvement of the other returning players.

I honestly think the Louisville squad that UNC beat in the quarterfinals was a better team than Kansas. For whatever reason though they stunk it up against KU.

UNC did not "stink it up" against KU in the Final Four. They were simply beaten badly by a team that was better than them.

There us talk around me as well that UNC will go undefeated next year. That's just moronic to think. They have the same team returning with a 4 year back-up pg in Drew, a soft, lanky big man in Zeller, and a decent big man in Davis coming in. They also lost a good reserve in Stepheson. Remember, only 5 guys can play at a time. We have the depth next year to give them a fit.

hondoheel
06-17-2008, 01:44 PM
Do you think West Virginia was a better team than Duke last year? Serious question.

(I see this post made the start of a new page, but it was in response to the previous post.)

dukie8
06-17-2008, 01:52 PM
Do you think West Virginia was a better team than Duke last year? Serious question.

absolutely. just in the month of march, they beat uconn and pitt. to get 2 equivalent wins for duke, you would have to go back to feb 6 (unc) and jan 19 (clemson). west virginia and duke were 2 teams going in opposite directions as of the beginning of february. we even made their back-up pg, mazzulla, look like magic or kidd.

quickgtp
06-17-2008, 02:42 PM
I am not sure if WVU was better overall or not. Duke did hold the lead for 3/4 of the game until WVU wore them down. UNC was never in it with Kansas, even when Kansas let up and let UNC creep to within a few points. I am not here to knock UNC but they simply were not as good as the Jayhawks.

If it makes you feel any better I think Kansas was better than Duke as well!

Bluedog
06-17-2008, 03:30 PM
absolutely. just in the month of march, they beat uconn and pitt. to get 2 equivalent wins for duke, you would have to go back to feb 6 (unc) and jan 19 (clemson). west virginia and duke were 2 teams going in opposite directions as of the beginning of february. we even made their back-up pg, mazzulla, look like magic or kidd.

If we make just 3 of 14 three pointers (21%) in that huge 14-shot drought (I believe it was 14 in a row....), then we probably win the game. I don't think West Virginia was clearly the better team, but it could certainly be argued that they were. We just had an absolutely pathetic shooting day.

Uncle Drew
06-17-2008, 04:09 PM
UNC did not "stink it up" against KU in the Final Four. They were simply beaten badly by a team that was better than them.

There us talk around me as well that UNC will go undefeated next year. That's just moronic to think. They have the same team returning with a 4 year back-up pg in Drew, a soft, lanky big man in Zeller, and a decent big man in Davis coming in. They also lost a good reserve in Stepheson. Remember, only 5 guys can play at a time. We have the depth next year to give them a fit.

No disrespect but I've been hearing that "they can only play five guys at a time" line for years about teams. Let's think logically here while you can only put five guys on the floor aside from a loss to Duke they didn't sink like a rock when Lawson went down. (And that was with their other PG down for the season.) They had enough depth to weather the storm and are only adding depth this season. If UNC plays smart and jumps on teams early there will be plenty of mop up minutes for fresmen and bench players. Those minutes, durring actual games only makes those players even better and the team as a whole better as the season progresses.

As for adjectives like "lanky", "back up" and "soft", please repost those after seeing them play, especially against Duke. The thing I think is funny is people are picking out UNC's quote un quote flaws like outside shooting per say. Or "possible" chemestry issues maybe bad attitudes over playing time will bite them in the butt. It's ironic how optimistic some people are about Duke this upcoming season (and I too think they will be improved) but they can look at UNC and try to type flaws into existance. Just like Duke should improve they should too. And while I agree the three returing players aren't Perkins, Jordan and Worthy they aren't King Rice, Brian Reese and Serge Zwicker either. Duke has enough guards to perhaps fill in gaps left by Nelson and King plus they added a little height. But there is not a single game where UNC won't be favored this season unless 12 cases of mono hit the team and the coach gets vertigo.

I honestly hope the games against the hated heels are competitive, I hope Duke wins but if they turn out ugly it won't surprise me. Regardless of whether this team is better than teams A, B & C from past years everyone in the country lost key players but them. If Duke's 1995 team had gotten to play high school teams instead of ACC foes all season they wouldn't have had their down year. It's not so much how good this UNC team should be but the competition they will be playing against.

Bluedog
06-17-2008, 04:19 PM
There us talk around me as well that UNC will go undefeated next year. That's just moronic to think.

While I don't think it's likely at all that UNC will go undefeated next year, they pretty nearly went undefeated LAST year (36-3 isn't shabby). I don't think it's moronic to think that it's within the realm of possibility that UNC will go undefeated. However, I agree with you that it is moronic to expect UNC to go undefeated.

quickgtp
06-17-2008, 06:39 PM
While I don't think it's likely at all that UNC will go undefeated next year, they pretty nearly went undefeated LAST year (36-3 isn't shabby). I don't think it's moronic to think that it's within the realm of possibility that UNC will go undefeated. However, I agree with you that it is moronic to expect UNC to go undefeated.

Good call Bluedog.....one should not EXPECT unc to go undefeated. Remember they had a few wins (both against Clemson, and one against UVA which I was at) that were pretty much handed to them (especially the UVA game.)

As for the other comment about labeling unc's incoming players; I have seen all 3 play in person and I can tell you that Drew and Zeller are overrated. The only one that will come close to living up to his scouting report will be Ed Davis. This kid can play ball. The other two are pretty soft. Drew is too small and Zeller is too soft. Remember he RARELY checked/was checked by anyone that was taller than 6'6 all through high school. He did check the incoming stud from Ohio State in the Mcd's game and looked average at best.

Lastly, why do people keep referring to King as a guard? I don't recall him playing the guard position in a game. He sure shot like a guard, but he played the 3 and 4 positions (if you can call it that in the Duke system.) The only player we are replacing of importance is Nelson. King was a deep threat but was too slow to play good defense and his shot was pretty streaky. I will take Czyz, Plumlee or Williams all day long over King.

CDu
06-17-2008, 07:29 PM
Good call Bluedog.....one should not EXPECT unc to go undefeated. Remember they had a few wins (both against Clemson, and one against UVA which I was at) that were pretty much handed to them (especially the UVA game.)

As for the other comment about labeling unc's incoming players; I have seen all 3 play in person and I can tell you that Drew and Zeller are overrated. The only one that will come close to living up to his scouting report will be Ed Davis. This kid can play ball. The other two are pretty soft. Drew is too small and Zeller is too soft. Remember he RARELY checked/was checked by anyone that was taller than 6'6 all through high school. He did check the incoming stud from Ohio State in the Mcd's game and looked average at best.

Lastly, why do people keep referring to King as a guard? I don't recall him playing the guard position in a game. He sure shot like a guard, but he played the 3 and 4 positions (if you can call it that in the Duke system.) The only player we are replacing of importance is Nelson. King was a deep threat but was too slow to play good defense and his shot was pretty streaky. I will take Czyz, Plumlee or Williams all day long over King.

UNC lost all of three games last year. Of those three losses, one was to Kansas (who lost their entire team this summer), one was to Maryland (who lost their entire post presence this summer), and one was to Duke without their starting PG. Sure, they almost lost to Clemson twice. Well, Clemson lost two key players from last year's team and isn't likely to be as good next year. And the UVa game and one of the Clemson games that you mentioned were without Lawson.

Drew and Zeller may be overrated, but Frasor is certainly an upgrade over Thomas and Davis is an upgrade over Stepheson. So while all of their elite competition from this past year has been completely depleted or at least has key losses to address, UNC's team got deeper and more talented.

I agree with Bluedog - while it's probably unreasonable to EXPECT UNC to go undefeated, it's equally unreasonable to write off that possibility.

dukemsu
06-17-2008, 07:33 PM
The Duke blue tinted glasses are on here big time, at least with some of you.

Let me start by saying that yes, in college basketball it is not always the best team that wins. Come tourney time, with the one and done format anything can happen, and great teams sometimes lose when they shouldn't (see Georgetown v. Villanova, Houston v. NC State, UNLV v. Duke, Boston College v UNC, etc, etc).

But with the all three UNC players coming back, this UNC team will be (on paper) on of the greatest college basketball teams...ever. They are returning the Player of the Year, something which hasn't happened in over 20 years. They have one of the best point guards. They have unbelievable depth. They have a hall of fame coach. They will be quick at the guard position, and have great size in the paint. They have a go-to clutch scorer

You stack this team up against any great team over the past 20 years, and they are as good if not better. The only team I would even consider close to them would be the 92 Blue Devils. Only they will be stacked like this at a time when everyone good tends to go pro (see the drafts of the past 7 years). Any team you mention right now for a challenger to them next year seems to pale by comparison.

The simply fact is that UNC should be the unanimous pre-season #1, and they should be favored to win every game they play. This team has a chance to go undefeated, and anything less than a national championship will be a huge, huge disappointment for them.

Again, anything can happen. But the 08-09 Tar Heels will be a monster of a team, capable of beating every team they play by 20 points, regardless of where they play them. If you think otherwise...you are fooling yourself.


Um...I'm going to have to take exception here. No way are these guys one of the best teams ever. This is the same group who gagged horribly at the Final Four. The same group who couldn't guard people with any kind of consistency.

They will be outstanding, on some nights unbeatable. But to be one of the greatest teams ever, it's necessary to be great on both ends and in transistion. These guys aren't. These teams were: Duke 92 and 01. UNLV 90 and 91. Kentucky 1996. Florida 2007.

The Heels have a ways to go to get to be one of the best teams ever. Sorry.

dukemsu

quickgtp
06-17-2008, 07:40 PM
IMO it is unreasonable to think that UNC will go undefeated. Why? Simply because it's college basketball. The sport is to competitive to have that happen in this day.

What makes you think that Stepheson is not as good as Davis? High school ranking? I can tell you that they are pretty close if not equivalent coming out of HS.

And I agree, this is not one of the best teams of all time. Great yes. Unbeatable and in the list of all time greats? Nope.

I guess that's why we have opinions, right?

CDu
06-17-2008, 08:00 PM
IMO it is unreasonable to think that UNC will go undefeated. Why? Simply because it's college basketball. The sport is to competitive to have that happen in this day.

I didn't say it was reasonable to think that UNC will go undefeated. I said it is unreasonable to expect that UNC will go undefeated. I said it's ALSO unreasonable to say that they can't go undefeated.


What makes you think that Stepheson is not as good as Davis? High school ranking? I can tell you that they are pretty close if not equivalent coming out of HS.

Stepheson was merely an okay player. He was solid defensively but useless offensively. I think it's fair to suggest that the combination of Davis and Zeller will be an upgrade over Stepheson. And as far as rankings are concerned (which was not the basis of my argument), Davis is a five-star recruit and the #3 PF in his class. Stepheson was a four-star recruit and the #11 C in his class. Their rankings are not equivalent. I feel pretty comfortable saying that Davis will be a better player than Stepheson. Also, Zeller is a five-star recruit as well, though not as highly rated as Davis. I definitely feel comfortable saying the combination of Zeller and Davis is an upgrade over Stepheson.

But even if we assume it's only a wash in the post (and I think it's more than reasonable to suggest Davis and Zeller will at least be a wash with Stepheson), then UNC will still be a better team next year with Fraser replacing Thomas.

Newton_14
06-17-2008, 08:49 PM
With all 3 coming back the holes will be, just like this year, very deep, and very good. That being said, I am certainly not ready to concede anything to them. They will still have flaws like any other college team these days. They will not have a single player that's projected to be a top 5 NBA pick. It is a collection of one "great" college player in Hanswalkskydiveintolittlepoolandwalksalot, and a really good PG in Lawless, and after that a lot of good college players. Certainly not "One of the Greatest Teams Ever". They will likely win 30+ games again and be a serious threat to win the ACC Regular Season, ACC Tourney, and make the FF.

And likewise Duke will be a very good team as well and in Coach K's words, the most talented Duke team in the last 4 years. To beat Duke, the holes will have to bring their A game. It should make for some really great battles on tobacco road.... I am a little surprised at those who feel they might run Duke out of the gym or something. In no way do I see that happening..

Jaymf7
06-17-2008, 09:13 PM
Hanswalkskydiveintolittlepoolandwalksalot, and a really good PG in Lawless


Funny.

CDu
06-17-2008, 09:15 PM
With all 3 coming back the holes will be, just like this year, very deep, and very good. That being said, I am certainly not ready to concede anything to them.

They'll be like last year's team, but deeper, more experienced, and more talented. Other than that, I agree - nobody is conceding anything to them.


They will still have flaws like any other college team these days. They will not have a single player that's projected to be a top 5 NBA pick. It is a collection of one "great" college player in Hanswalkskydiveintolittlepoolandwalksalot, and a really good PG in Lawless, and after that a lot of good college players. Certainly not "One of the Greatest Teams Ever". They will likely win 30+ games again and be a serious threat to win the ACC Regular Season, ACC Tourney, and make the FF.

I don't understand the quotation marks around "great" with regard to Hansbrough. As much as I can't stand saying it, he's earned the title of great college player. He's a national player of the year (with a real chance to be a two-time player of the year) and he's very likely to set the all-time ACC scoring record. That's pretty great.

I also think calling them a serious threat to win the ACC regular season and tournament and to make the final four is an understatement. They will be clear favorites to do so. That's probably just semantics, though.

Also, I'm not sure I see the point about not having a top-five pick on their team. Kansas didn't have a top-five pick on their team, and they won the whole thing.


And likewise Duke will be a very good team as well and in Coach K's words, the most talented Duke team in the last 4 years. To beat Duke, the holes will have to bring their A game. It should make for some really great battles on tobacco road.... I am a little surprised at those who feel they might run Duke out of the gym or something. In no way do I see that happening..

I also don't see UNC running us out of the gym. I think they'll be better than us, and I could easily see a UNC sweep. But I think the games will be competitive. If UNC doesn't play hard, we'll beat them. And we can beat them if we're hitting our shots, avoiding turnovers, and not getting completely destroyed on the glass and inside. They'll probably be the favorite in both games, but the games should be fairly close either way.

CameronCrazy'11
06-17-2008, 10:40 PM
There's a lot more argument here than actual disagreement. We all agree that Carolina will be the top team on paper and should be the pre-season #1. We all also agree that Duke can mount a serious challenge to the Holes in head to head matches and for A.C.C. dominance. These two ideas don't contradict each other.

hondoheel
06-18-2008, 12:29 AM
And likewise Duke will be a very good team as well and in Coach K's words, the most talented Duke team in the last 4 years.


I don't agree that Duke will be more talented than last year. I don't think a frosh Eliot Williams will adequately replace Nelson, and I don't think Czyz or Plumlee will get many minutes (of course, neither did Taylor King down the stretch.) Duke will be a little deeper, especially with Pocius returning, but since when did K play more than 7 guys anyway?

CameronCrazy'11
06-18-2008, 12:51 AM
I don't agree that Duke will be more talented than last year. I don't think a frosh Eliot Williams will adequately replace Nelson, and I don't think Czyz or Plumlee will get many minutes (of course, neither did Taylor King down the stretch.) Duke will be a little deeper, especially with Pocius returning, but since when did K play more than 7 guys anyway?

Duke will be better because it is older and tougher physically but especially mentally. The times we really struggled were when our guys were struggling with the kind of confidence issues that come from being a little young. In 06-07 we had a very young team and now we'll have a very old team. As for Nelson, he was great and amazing to watch, but with the way our offense ran through him, when he struggled, we really struggled. Scheyer isn't the flashiest, but he more than gets the job done. Williams and Smith both have real star potential. With Zoubek, Thomas, and McClure older and the addition of Plumlee and Czyz, our post-play will be better (how much better is another debate, one we've had many times). Our guards will probably be about the same as last year, maybe a little better, and our post play will be improved, so I think it's safe to say that we should have, at least on paper, a better team than last year.

DevilDan
06-18-2008, 01:05 AM
Boozer & Hondoheel both have a shot at being right. For the Boozer prediction ("most talented Duke team in the last 4 years") to pan out, our guys have got to develop a frontcourt presence. We return with Zoubek in rehab (again), and Thomas, who (so far) shows no power near the rim, on either end.

The hope is that Czyz could add a new inside dynamic, and Plumlee could give some solid minutes at the "5"--though that may be a new position for him. The key? Playing the new two in Nov-Dec, so they can carve out a role in the scheme. If they don't figure somehow in the first 12-14 games, they'll be on the sideline, watching the games with the rest of us in Jan-Mar.

If that's the case, we'll see the spread & spacing offense, opening up the frontcourt for the drive and (a) finish, or (b) the kickout to the perimeter shooter. That offense will look good on some nights, not so good others. In Feb-Mar of this past season, the energy and timing just wasn't there (or on defense). If we come back with that as our only plan, I give the nod to Hondoheel's point of view. We may be a little more talented (due to experience, and the addition of Williams), but it'll again result in a "good year", with 26-28 wins, and a fairly similar finish as last time.

I hope CameronCrazy'11 (just posted) has a handle on it ...

Either way, I love the guys and the program. GO DUKE !

DukeBlood
06-18-2008, 02:35 AM
I don't agree that Duke will be more talented than last year. I don't think a frosh Eliot Williams will adequately replace Nelson, and I don't think Czyz or Plumlee will get many minutes (of course, neither did Taylor King down the stretch.) Duke will be a little deeper, especially with Pocius returning, but since when did K play more than 7 guys anyway?

How not?
PG's:
Paulus- Will get a little better. Dont see him being way better though.

Smith- SHOULD see huge improvement. Has a chance to take over the strartin PG spot. Will make the big Freshman to Sophomre jump

SG/SF's:
Jon Scheyer- Will get better as well. Stronger, better shooter etc,. He works as hard as anyone, and just continues to find ways to get it done.

Marty Pocius- Its hard to say here. I wouldn't be shocked if he averaged 20 mpg or 5.

Elliot Williams- A freshman, too many unknowns to think if he will make this team better.

Gerald Henderson- Has a chance to be of the Top-5 players in the ACC. He will be better with a offseason to improve and become HEALTHY.

PF/C's:
Lance Thomas- Has to become better. If not, he will lose his spot to one of hte two Freshman and/or Brian Zoubek. I do believe he will be better though.

Brian Zoubek- Should recover nicely from surgery(How's that going anyway?). Alot of people are believing he will take Lance's spot.

Kyle Singler- Special. I wouldn't trade him for anyone. Will only get stronger/better during the off-season. COULD be a Top-5 ACC player(Dont think thats as likely as Henderson though)

David McClure- Dont expect him to get too much better. Plays good-great defense. Could be a threat if he developes a 10-15 ft. shot.

Miles Plumlee/Olek Czyz- Freshman. Cant comment

You are right though. I dont think Elliot Williams will replace Nelson. Although I believe Smith will be getting more time(A good thing), and Williams could be a better offensive player. I dont think anyone can match Nelson's defense though.

Udaman
06-18-2008, 08:41 AM
Quickgtp - you win the award for "First Poster to Talk About Our Depth Next Year, Even Though Everyone Knows By The End of the Year We'll Be Gassed and Only Playing 7 Guys, At Most."

News flash - the absolute one thing I can guarantee about next year is this - Duke will not have the depth to hang with UNC next year. Not a chance. Not even close.

This is not to say that we can't beat them - but it won't be because we have the depth to match theirs. In fact, if the games become a track meet, we will lose and lose badly. The way we will win is to shut them down on the perimeter, control the tempo, and hope that Hansblah doesn't score 50.

But seriously, of all the teams we will play, UNC might be the worst matchup for us. They have Hansblahblah, who we have nobody to guard. They have Lawson, who we have nobody to guard. They can penetrate past our perimeter. They have depth, and they have the bodies to keep pouring people off the bench, challenging us to try and run with them, and then watching as we tire out. It's been the same way for the past three years (when they have basically owned us), and next year they'll be better.

I see this UNC team like Duke would have been in 2000 if Brand, Avery and Maggette had come back. They will dominate pretty much everyone they play. They have a true chance to go undefeated (and if I were them, I would make that my goal - why not?). They will be the clear favorite to win the tournament, and anything less will be seen as a massive failure.

quickgtp
06-18-2008, 09:23 AM
udaman you win the "I can't seem to stop riding UNC's jock" award then my friend. I am starting to question your knowledge of the game and whether you are a closet Heel fan with some of your comments. One of the greatest teams EVER? Are you serious? We are only going to go 7 players deep? What, are you going to Beijing with K? I would assume so since you know the plans he has for Duke next year.

UNC will have a great team next year. Again, one of the greatest ever? Nope. They will have depth for sure but that doesn't win you every game. Just ask our 2001 team how they kept beating UMD (3 outta 4) with their depth. If you actually think next year's UNC team is better than our 99 squad then you need to take a step back and re analyze the game. Heck, I would take that UMD team from 2001 and 2002 over next years UNC team.

quickgtp
06-18-2008, 09:35 AM
I didn't say it was reasonable to think that UNC will go undefeated. I said it is unreasonable to expect that UNC will go undefeated. I said it's ALSO unreasonable to say that they can't go undefeated.



Stepheson was merely an okay player. He was solid defensively but useless offensively. I think it's fair to suggest that the combination of Davis and Zeller will be an upgrade over Stepheson. And as far as rankings are concerned (which was not the basis of my argument), Davis is a five-star recruit and the #3 PF in his class. Stepheson was a four-star recruit and the #11 C in his class. Their rankings are not equivalent. I feel pretty comfortable saying that Davis will be a better player than Stepheson. Also, Zeller is a five-star recruit as well, though not as highly rated as Davis. I definitely feel comfortable saying the combination of Zeller and Davis is an upgrade over Stepheson.

But even if we assume it's only a wash in the post (and I think it's more than reasonable to suggest Davis and Zeller will at least be a wash with Stepheson), then UNC will still be a better team next year with Fraser replacing Thomas.


This whole argument went bye bye the moment you brought rankings into it. Stepheson and Davis are equal in talent when both came out of HS. You are putting too much faith into rankings. Zeller and Davis are a wash with Stepheson at best IMO. Even then I feel that's generous!

Frasor is not a big step over Thomas. Look at their stats last year. They are pretty close overall.

Bottom line is that UNC should be predicted to win the ACC and nat'l title as of now and throughout the season. Let's let March Madness start and see how it all plays out. For the last 3 seasons I have said that UNC would not win the title. I am already stating that Travel Hansbrough will leave UNC without a national title ring.

dukie8
06-18-2008, 09:58 AM
Frasor is not a big step over Thomas. Look at their stats last year. They are pretty close overall.

how are you comparing the 2 based on last year's stats? thomas played in 37 games and started 9. frasor played in 12 and started 1. how do you account for the fact that thomas started 9 games with no back-up in any of them while frasor was lawson's back-up in all of his games (with thomas on the bench as well)? don't you think that that would skew the stats a tad?

CDu
06-18-2008, 10:11 AM
This whole argument went bye bye the moment you brought rankings into it. Stepheson and Davis are equal in talent when both came out of HS. You are putting too much faith into rankings. Zeller and Davis are a wash with Stepheson at best IMO. Even then I feel that's generous!

Firstly, I didn't bring rankings into it. You did. In my response to you, in fact, I specifically said that rankings were not the basis of my argument. And since you almost certainly didn't see either player play in high school, I'd take the rankings over your judgment.


Frasor is not a big step over Thomas. Look at their stats last year. They are pretty close overall.

This sums it up right here. Frasor IS a big step up over Thomas. Frasor was a McDonald's All-American and was second in the ACC in assists as a freshman. Thomas was an end-of-the-bench player who was the third string PG until Frasor tore his ACL.

Frasor has played ahead of Thomas on the depth chart in every year of his career. The fact that you would suggest that the guy who was Frasor's backup is not a step down from Frasor indicates that you really have no idea what you're talking about. Thomas is a big step down from Frasor.


Bottom line is that UNC should be predicted to win the ACC and nat'l title as of now and throughout the season. Let's let March Madness start and see how it all plays out. For the last 3 seasons I have said that UNC would not win the title. I am already stating that Travel Hansbrough will leave UNC without a national title ring.

Nobody has written UNC in for the title. I'm not sure why you're bragging about predicting that UNC won't win the title. Even the best team would not be favored against the entire field in a six-game single-elimination tournament. Don't hurt yourself patting your back on that one. I'd agree that UNC is less than a 50% chance of winning the national championship.

sandinmyshoes
06-18-2008, 10:17 AM
This whole argument went bye bye the moment you brought rankings into it. Stepheson and Davis are equal in talent when both came out of HS. You are putting too much faith into rankings. Zeller and Davis are a wash with Stepheson at best IMO. Even then I feel that's generous!

Frasor is not a big step over Thomas. Look at their stats last year. They are pretty close overall.

Bottom line is that UNC should be predicted to win the ACC and nat'l title as of now and throughout the season. Let's let March Madness start and see how it all plays out. For the last 3 seasons I have said that UNC would not win the title. I am already stating that Travel Hansbrough will leave UNC without a national title ring.


What are you basing your opinion on? I can tell you from having seen both as recruits that Davis is a better basketball player than Stepheson at the same points in their pre-college careers. Davis is more of a PF/SF than Stepheson. Stepheson is more of a C/PF than Davis. It might be a wash because Stepheson was going to be an upper-classman, while Davis will be a frosh. But if Davis clicks early, he could contribute more than Stepheson or Deon Thompson.

The Frasor/Thomas comparison has already had its absurdity revealed, but I would also point out how derisive fans of Duke and UNC were of Thomas, but after he got some time as the starter under his belt he was a capable ACC player. The big issue for Frasor will be how he comes off the injury.

The part where you crow about having predicted UNC to not win a championship for three years in a row or whatever was just childish. Picking who WILL win a championship and getting it right has some merit. But in the NCAA system, it's real easy to say a team will not win the title and be correct.

The discussion on this thread has sadly slipped to the TDD/IC level.:rolleyes:

quickgtp
06-18-2008, 10:29 AM
Wow, I did not know that making a prediction here was such a bad thing. If that is all you can harp on me for, then so be it. But I ask, I am the one being "childish?"

CDu, I really think you need to slow down and read my posts before you respond. I have seen all 3 UNC recruits in person in HS. How did you miss out on that from before? Yes, Stepheson is a bit bigger than Davis and could fill a void of PF/C, while Davis is more of an athletic, lengthy big. How does that answer your theory of Davis and Zeller being more solid than Stepheson?

It's easy to take the route of "well you can't compare the two because Frasor was injured......." My point is that Thomas was more than capable of filling the role of Frasor while he was out. Frasor is not leaps and bounds ahead of Thomas. And please, for the love of God, stop mentioning Mcd's All American status. That means nothing at this point!

I guess coming here to speak my opinion was a bad thing in your eyes?

-jk
06-18-2008, 10:37 AM
Everyone please take a step back, count to 10, deep breath, whatever works for you. Relax. We're here for fun!

-jk

quickgtp
06-18-2008, 10:38 AM
BTW Cdu, I did in fact question you on ranking first, but I was only pointing out that it seemed as if you were going solely off of rankings. You proved in the following post that you were heavily leaning on rankings. That to me goes out the window, again IMO, because I have seen them play in person on more than a few occasions......

I thought this was a friendly, laid back board to discuss Duke bball!:rolleyes:

CDu
06-18-2008, 10:40 AM
CDu, I really think you need to slow down and read my posts before you respond. I have seen all 3 UNC recruits in person in HS. How did you miss out on that from before? Yes, Stepheson is a bit bigger than Davis and could fill a void of PF/C, while Davis is more of an athletic, lengthy big. How does that answer your theory of Davis and Zeller being more solid than Stepheson?

My theory that the combination of Davis/Zeller is more solid than Stepheson is based on the fact that Stepheson wasn't terribly good (a solid role player) and that two talented big men are better than one. You've been talking about how Davis and Stepheson are equals, but you've continued to ignore the fact that having both Davis and Zeller provides even more depth and versatility to a talented team. And that's ignoring the fact that most people think Davis is better than Stepheson. Sorry to have missed the post where you said you saw both play, but I'll take the word of the experts over your opinion. And even if they're a wash, the combination of Zeller/Davis is definitely at least a wash with Stepheson.


It's easy to take the route of "well you can't compare the two because Frasor was injured......." My point is that Thomas was more than capable of filling the role of Frasor while he was out. Frasor is not leaps and bounds ahead of Thomas. And please, for the love of God, stop mentioning Mcd's All American status. That means nothing at this point!

My comparison went well beyond "he's a McD's All American" and "he was hurt last year." I specifically stated the fact that Frasor was ahead of Thomas on the depth chart for each of the past three years. The fact that Thomas was adequate as a fill-in is irrelevant to the comparison. Frasor is a better player than Thomas. He'd have been more than just adequate as a fill-in. He's a better player. He's a better PG, and he's more capable of being productive as a SG to give Ellington a break. Replacing Thomas with Frasor is unequivocally a step forward.


I guess coming here to speak my opinion was a bad thing in your eyes?

I don't have a problem with you posting your opinion. I welcome everyone's opinion. But misstating what I'm saying doesn't make me want to play nice. And when you say things like Thomas isn't a step down from Frasor you lose credibility.

dukie8
06-18-2008, 10:42 AM
UNC was never in it with Kansas, even when Kansas let up and let UNC creep to within a few points. I am not here to knock UNC but they simply were not as good as the Jayhawks.

If it makes you feel any better I think Kansas was better than Duke as well!

how were they "never in it?" unc cut it to 54-50 with 11:16 to go and it still was 58-53 with 7:53 left. did you watch the game?

thanks for going out on a limb and proclaiming that the national champion was better than a team that got knocked out in the 2nd round (and barely squeaked by a 15 seed in the first round).

quickgtp
06-18-2008, 10:48 AM
how were they "never in it?" unc cut it to 54-50 with 11:16 to go and it still was 58-53 with 7:53 left. did you watch the game?

thanks for going out on a limb and proclaiming that the national champion was better than a team that got knocked out in the 2nd round (and barely squeaked by a 15 seed in the first round).

Man was that last statement really called for? Besides, in this game it's all about matchups.

And you actually think that never leading a game ONCE throughout means you are actually "in" the game? KU let up and UNC hit the gas. Once KU saw UNC was playing harder they turned it back on and pulled away. Check the post game interviews, don't take my word for it.

quickgtp
06-18-2008, 10:54 AM
CDu it's obvious that we will not see eye to eye on this one, but I do respect your opinions. As for the credibility statement; in whose eyes? I am not concerned with that at all. Thomas did more of a capable job and Frasor is not that much of a better player. They key difference is that Frasor is more patient while Thomas created his own plays and problems at the same time.....

Take the "experts" opinions with a grain of salt. For every Kobe there is a Shavlik......IMO, there are a TON of experts out there but only a handful that actually know what they are doing......and before you get any thoughts I don't think I am an expert by any means. I'm just a die hard fan.

CDu
06-18-2008, 11:00 AM
CDu it's obvious that we will not see eye to eye on this one, but I do respect your opinions. As for the credibility statement; in whose eyes? I am not concerned with that at all. Thomas did more of a capable job and Frasor is not that much of a better player. They key difference is that Frasor is more patient while Thomas created his own plays and problems at the same time.....

Take the "experts" opinions with a grain of salt. For every Kobe there is a Shavlik......IMO, there are a TON of experts out there but only a handful that actually know what they are doing......and before you get any thoughts I don't think I am an expert by any means. I'm just a die hard fan.

Yeah, I don't see any point in discussing this further. I don't see why I should believe your opinion over the consensus regarding Davis/Stepheson, and I definitely disagree with you on Frasor/Thomas because I think Frasor is a superior player in pretty much every facet. It's a waste of both of our time to discuss this any further.

quickgtp
06-18-2008, 11:06 AM
Good stuff.....I think you will be very surprised though when you see Zeller play for the first time (if you haven't seen him already.)

Udaman
06-18-2008, 11:07 AM
I agree that we all need to tone it down....One thing we can certainly agree upon is 9F, so at least we have that in common.

Quickgtp - I based my "we won't have depth" argument on the fact that for the last 5 years everyone has said we would be deep before the season began, and by the end we basically go 6-7 deep (the worst for me, by far, was JJ's Senior year when before the season even he was saying it, and by the end he was playing 38 minutes a game and was completely swamped).

If you look at our team next year, you have Paulus, Scheyer, Henderson, Thomas and Singler - and that's a solid starting 5 no doubt (though not much defensive strength on the perimeter). But our Bench is King, Zoubek, McClure, Pocious and the freshmen. There is some talent there, but no sure things, and Coach K has historically had better talent than that and barely used them. It would not surprise me at all to be down to a 7 man rotation come February.

And yes, I think the Tar Heels could be one of the best college teams ever next year. To return your starting 6 players, and the National Player of the Year - especially in this day and age - is remarkable. We'll have to wait and serve judgement when the season is over, but I think they would match up very well with our 99 team. Incidentally, the best teams I can remember over the past 22 years (I was a First Year at Duke in 1986) would be:

5. Syracuse - 1989-90 (maybe one of the biggest choke jobs ever by Boheim. How Coleman, Douglass, Thompson, Owens and Seikely could lose in the Sweet 16 is beyond me.
4. Duke 2000-2001
3. UNLV - 1989 - 91
2. Duke 1998-1999
1. Duke 1991- 1992

Oklahoma from 1988 would be the 6th team on this list, with perhaps the most dominant offense ever in the college - Blaylock, King, Grace, Grant and Sieger were just amazing. Also, this only goes back to my freshman year. In 1986, there are three teams I would put on this list, that were better than just about all of these teams, Duke, UNC and Georgia Tech.

Edouble
06-18-2008, 12:34 PM
If you look at our team next year, you have Paulus, Scheyer, Henderson, Thomas and Singler - and that's a solid starting 5 no doubt (though not much defensive strength on the perimeter). But our Bench is King, Zoubek, McClure, Pocious and the freshmen. There is some talent there, but no sure things, and Coach K has historically had better talent than that and barely used them. It would not surprise me at all to be down to a 7 man rotation come February.

No King on the bench, my man. You're also leaving off Nolan Smith, who looks to play big minutes this year. His defense will get him in the game, no doubt.

quickgtp
06-18-2008, 12:50 PM
uda we actually went 8-9 deep towards the end of last year (see the ACC tourney.) I really think we will stick with an 8-10 man rotation this upcoming year.

JStuart
06-18-2008, 12:52 PM
I think what we're all thinking is that UNC may not be the 'best team ever in the ACC', but we're all fearful of the fact that they don't have to be. The level of competition in the ACC and the NCAA may be low enough that there may not be anyone who could -on a given night in, say, March '09- knock them out.
We all agree that the teams they had trouble with last year -Clemson, Kansas, Maryland, Davidson, (had to include them!), Memphis, and UCLA- will not be as good this year. I was worried this past season that there might not be anyone short of UCLA that could take the T'Holes out, and when Memphis kicked the Bruins to the curb, I had a bad gut feeling about UNC's chances...fortunately Kansas came through in the clutch.
But aside from Duke, who in the NCAA is projected to be as good as UNC...UConn? Georgetown? Could it be the weakest NCAA field in history? All Roy has to do is beat 6 teams in the NCAA, and I fear that there just aren't enough deep, experienced, or talented teams out there this year to challenge them, aside from us.

MChambers
06-18-2008, 01:26 PM
I think what we're all thinking is that UNC may not be the 'best team ever in the ACC', but we're all fearful of the fact that they don't have to be. The level of competition in the ACC and the NCAA may be low enough that there may not be anyone who could -on a given night in, say, March '09- knock them out.
We all agree that the teams they had trouble with last year -Clemson, Kansas, Maryland, Davidson, (had to include them!), Memphis, and UCLA- will not be as good this year. I was worried this past season that there might not be anyone short of UCLA that could take the T'Holes out, and when Memphis kicked the Bruins to the curb, I had a bad gut feeling about UNC's chances...fortunately Kansas came through in the clutch.
But aside from Duke, who in the NCAA is projected to be as good as UNC...UConn? Georgetown? Could it be the weakest NCAA field in history? All Roy has to do is beat 6 teams in the NCAA, and I fear that there just aren't enough deep, experienced, or talented teams out there this year to challenge them, aside from us.

We'll just have to do it by ourselves, then. All the sweeter!

jv001
06-18-2008, 01:55 PM
I thought this was a Duke University board and not a unc board.

oli-p
06-18-2008, 05:58 PM
Um...I'm going to have to take exception here. No way are these guys one of the best teams ever. This is the same group who gagged horribly at the Final Four. The same group who couldn't guard people with any kind of consistency.

They will be outstanding, on some nights unbeatable. But to be one of the greatest teams ever, it's necessary to be great on both ends and in transistion. These guys aren't. These teams were: Duke 92 and 01. UNLV 90 and 91. Kentucky 1996. Florida 2007.

The Heels have a ways to go to get to be one of the best teams ever. Sorry.

Gagged in the final four, the same way Duke got crushed by UNLV and then won it all the next year? If they learned and they get tougher over the summer and win it all next year, it is a very similar story. They are not going to have trouble with Duke next year. Did Duke suddenly get tremendously bigger to improve rebounding? The lack of size and talent in the middle will contiue to hurt Duke.

CameronCrazy'11
06-18-2008, 06:11 PM
I thought this was a Duke University board and not a unc board.

It's a board for Duke fans who think the end times are here.

Uncle Drew
06-18-2008, 06:43 PM
It's a board for Duke fans who think the end times are here.

The end of times are here and UNC basketball is one of the four horsemen.

1. UNC- Pestilence: They are like a swarm of locust, you get rid of one of them and 20 take their place. (The fact we couln't get rid of three is a really bad sign.)

2. Rosie O'Donnel- Famine: If she keeps eatting, and eatting we're all going to be starving in a month or two.

3. Coach Cutcliff- War: Came to Durham to hopefully bring some fighting mentality to the Duke football team.

4. Boston Celtics- Death: The KILLED the Lakers last night!

Tongue in cheek people, put your bibles down and step away from the keyboard.

miramar
06-18-2008, 07:12 PM
People are all worked up about Carolina, but all this reminds me of the situation shortly after Johnny Dawkins graduated, when all everybody could talk about was how great UNC was with J.R. Reid, who was the next Lou Alcindor (at least according to Dicky V). It turns out that Duke did very well, thank you, and I think that will continue.

While it may seem that Carolina is the reincarnation of Johnny Wooden's UCLA teams, their overall record last year is interesting.

Even though they lost only three games, they also won six very close games: Davidson 72-68, Clemson 90-88 (OT), Clemson 103-93 (2OT), Virginia 75-74, VTU 68-66, and Clemson 86-81. Give them credit for winning close games, but this is also a sign that they are not as strong as they appear to be.

People are also making a big deal out of their NCAA Final Four appearance, if you can call it that, but in essence they played four home games in Raleigh and Charlotte, while facing only one tough team:

1) Mount St. Mary's, meaningless.
2) Arkansas lost 12 games last season including 7 out of their last 13, so in essence they beat a team playing .500 basketball practically at home.
3) Washington State started out great (15-0!), until UCLA brought them back to earth. They lost 9 out of their last 21 games, so Carolina again beat a team that was basically playing .500 basketball, so the only difference is that Washington State had a great first weekend where they blew out Winthrop and Notre Dame, and then crashed to earth when the carriage turned back into a pumpkin.
4) They beat a pretty good Louisville team in Charlotte, so you have to give them credit for that, but you can't go crazy over getting to the Final Four with only one significant victory.

When they finally faced a really tough team in the semifinals, UNC fell apart.

Finally, give Hansbrough credit for his scoring and rebounding, but he doesn't play a whole lot of defense against big guys, and only managed to block 13 shots all year.

The key for Duke could very well be Zoubek, at least if he's healthy. In limited minutes, Hansbrough had trouble scoring and rebounding against him last year, and that is a real opportunity for Duke.

CameronCrazy'11
06-18-2008, 07:22 PM
The key for Duke could very well be Zoubek, at least if he's healthy. In limited minutes, Hansbrough had trouble scoring and rebounding against him last year, and that is a real opportunity for Duke.

Remember when Zoubek stole from Hansbrough in Cameron last year. That had to be my favorite Zoubek moment. Seriously though, Hansbrough did show trouble matching up with really big players last year. UNC wasn't unbeatable last year. Especially in the ACC, they had a bunch of close contests, as others have pointed out. I wouldn't be too surprised to see UNC drop a few games against Duke/Wake/Miami/Clemson or somebody else.

AnimalFriendly
06-18-2008, 10:29 PM
"Give them credit for winning close games, but this is also a sign that they are not as strong as they appear to be."

And how exactly is that? Winning close games is the sign of a strong team, one that's mentally strong & knows how to win when not playing at its best. I dare say most people on this board would say so had Duke won those same six games last year. I also find it amusing how so many people dismiss UNC's making the Final 4 as though it never would have happened had they been placed in another one of the regionals. Never mind that the East Regional was pretty unanimously labeled the toughest of the 4 which more than made up for any supposed "home court" advantage. I could understand this rationale better had UNC not obviously earned this so-called advantage. Who should have been placed #1 in the East instead of them? Funny too, how people never seem to give Carolina credit for winning the '05 tournament on a court at which, at bare minimum, 70% of those in attendance were Illinois fans.

RelativeWays
06-18-2008, 11:04 PM
UNC's issue this coming season will be the same at the 06-07 season: Chemistry. The 06-07 team was loaded with talent, but some of the players just didn't quite mesh and you saw it in the losses they had to GT, VT, Maryland and then Georgetown. Last years team was not as deep, but it was very versatile and everyone knew their roles. Outside of the Kansas beatdown, they were probably as good as any team in the country. So Duke doesn't need 12+ players dressed and ready. Give me 8-9 who can play regularly and mesh well and thats all you need.

moonpie23
06-18-2008, 11:14 PM
again...i say.....it's not the team....those guys are tremendous college bb players....it's the coach.....he IS gonna be loaded next year....but he was loaded THIS year...AND last year.....he was loaded at KANSAS....the only time roy has won was when he inherited a team that was already bred to win...

matt doh did more to prepare felton and may than roy did..

look at the results of "old roy"'s efforts when he has to prepare his team for the big stage....

failure after failure......some of you folks are comparing him with K? get real.....he CO-owns one stinking title........let's see him get two more.....oh...and they gotta be back to back...please..

COULD they win the NC? of course....WILL they win? if you think that strongly, bet the house on it....and the beach house...

Uncle Drew
06-19-2008, 07:23 AM
again...i say.....it's not the team....those guys are tremendous college bb players....it's the coach.....he IS gonna be loaded next year....but he was loaded THIS year...AND last year.....he was loaded at KANSAS....the only time roy has won was when he inherited a team that was already bred to win...

matt doh did more to prepare felton and may than roy did..

look at the results of "old roy"'s efforts when he has to prepare his team for the big stage....

failure after failure......some of you folks are comparing him with K? get real.....he CO-owns one stinking title........let's see him get two more.....oh...and they gotta be back to back...please..

COULD they win the NC? of course....WILL they win? if you think that strongly, bet the house on it....and the beach house...


By God I hope you're right. But those same arguments were made about Coach K from 1986 to 1990, people said he couldn't win the big one either. Okay nobody ever said Coach K won a championship with someone else players. But you could make the case for a lot of coaches out there who never quite got over the hump and finally did. Take Calhoun at UCONN for example he couldn't win the big one and now has beaten Duke in two Final Fours on the way to national championships.

Betting they will win the national championship is like picking a certain number in roulette, the odds are pretty much in favor of the house because all the numbers have an even chance. However in this casino all the other numbers have pieces of wood hammered into them (like the Bugs Bunny cartoon where he is playing roulette against Blaque Jaque Shalaque) greatly increasing the odds of UNC's number being picked. Odds in basketball are not even for every team, it's based on talent and coaching. If you don't think next seasons UNC team will have plenty of it take off the dark blue colored lenses for a while.

Look nobody is etching their name on any trophy yet. I doubt they are all on some team trust seminar taking turns falling into one anothers arms to build chemestry. But like it or not even though Duke SHOULD be improved, more athletic and deeper this season UNC SHOULD be all of those things but more so. In a matter of a month things seemed like they would be missing three key players and Duke would be improving even with the loss of Nelson. Now the reality is we have to make up for the loss of Nelson and they lose their 3rd string point guard and add a stellar freshman class. Things went from looking like we'd be playing UNC on a level basketball court or perhaps tilted slightly in Dukes favor to a court slanted in their favor.

No Hansbrough doesn't play D. Their outside shooting was suspect at times last year. They MIGHT have chemestry issues with the incomming players. But you can't blame some fans for having their hopes up only to get &#%# slapped with the news UNC isn't losing anyone relevant. All the people citing possible kinks in the UNC armor need to look at all the possible kinks in Duke's armor as well. What makes you think Duke's holes from last year are suddenly going to be fixed, while the few holes UNC had will still be there or even magnified? What happens if Duke's holes get larger and Carolina fills all their holes? Call me negative, call me alarmist; I don't care. We dodged a bullet last season they didn't win it all and I for one hate another season where they will be a favorite, THE favorite to win it all. Even a blind dog finds the hydrant sooner or later and this dog has a seeing eye person named Roy.

ClosetHurleyFan
06-19-2008, 08:06 AM
again...i say.....it's not the team....those guys are tremendous college bb players....it's the coach.....he IS gonna be loaded next year....but he was loaded THIS year...AND last year.....he was loaded at KANSAS....the only time roy has won was when he inherited a team that was already bred to win...

matt doh did more to prepare felton and may than roy did..

Oh God, please dont tell me someone is actually supporting Matt Doh on this board...how utterly and absurdly convenient. Last i checked, Roy got like 10 to 15 more wins out of those guys that season than year before and actually taught them how to play great defense, and yes, that was probably one of the most underrated aspects of that 2005 team, how well they played defense down the stretch.

look at the results of "old roy"'s efforts when he has to prepare his team for the big stage....

Funny, I guess it wasnt old Roy preparing felton and crew for the absolute pottymouth!pottymouth!pottymouth! kicking they gave Illinois in 2005 huh? Oh no, he gets no credit, that would be the ghost of Matt Doh past huh? Oh yeah, it was the 20/20 games that May was giving, guess the coaching had nothing to with that in 2005 huh?

Lets see, 6 final fours, one national championship, another national championship had his Kansas team not had an freakishly absurb night at the foul line (had they shot like 65 percent, they easily, I mean easily beat Syracuse, look at the numbers regarding the foul shooting, unbelievably bad), and consistent high win seasons, yeah sounds like a choker alright.

failure after failure......some of you folks are comparing him with K? get real.....he CO-owns one stinking title........let's see him get two more.....oh...and they gotta be back to back...please.....

Failure after failure? If this is failure, then every team in the country is a failure., including Duke who has choked early and often in NCAAs lately...get some perspective for crying out loud.

COULD they win the NC? of course....WILL they win? if you think that strongly, bet the house on it....and the beach house...

Truth is, your realistic arguments about Carolina's chances would be a lot more effective if not obscured by the sensationalism......saying Old Roy did less to prepare Felton and Crew than Matt Doh is akin to me saying Coach K faked a back injury in 1995. Give it a rest.

dukie8
06-19-2008, 09:02 AM
By God I hope you're right. But those same arguments were made about Coach K from 1986 to 1990, people said he couldn't win the big one either. Okay nobody ever said Coach K won a championship with someone else players. But you could make the case for a lot of coaches out there who never quite got over the hump and finally did. Take Calhoun at UCONN for example he couldn't win the big one and now has beaten Duke in two Final Fours on the way to national championships.


yes and no. there's a difference between having one of the top teams (or top team) and getting upset and knocked out and having one of the top teams, getting to the ff and either then getting to the finals or losing to a better team. roy has been upset 3 straight years with ZERO ff wins. k went to the finals in '86 and '90 and the ff in '88 and '89. the only iffy loses in there were in '86 (he still got to the finals) and '87. kansas, michigan (the winner) and unlv each was a significantly better team than duke so it's not a travesty in losing to them. unc was a BETTER team than gmu and georgetown and at least even (they were favored) with kansas. that's 3 straight years of losing to teams that were not better than your team. k never did that (at least not until his current stretch).

moonpie23
06-19-2008, 09:03 AM
Truth is, your realistic arguments about Carolina's chances would be a lot more effective if not obscured by the sensationalism......saying Old Roy did less to prepare Felton and Crew than Matt Doh is akin to me saying Coach K faked a back injury in 1995. Give it a rest.

facts dood....not sensationlism....he was loaded twice in a row and got out-coached while choking.....

this has nothing to do with K, it has everything to do with 40-12 and roy looking like a deer in the headlights......twice in a row.....

miramar
06-19-2008, 09:12 AM
"Give them credit for winning close games, but this is also a sign that they are not as strong as they appear to be."

And how exactly is that? Winning close games is the sign of a strong team, one that's mentally strong & knows how to win when not playing at its best. I dare say most people on this board would say so had Duke won those same six games last year. I also find it amusing how so many people dismiss UNC's making the Final 4 as though it never would have happened had they been placed in another one of the regionals. Never mind that the East Regional was pretty unanimously labeled the toughest of the 4 which more than made up for any supposed "home court" advantage. I could understand this rationale better had UNC not obviously earned this so-called advantage. Who should have been placed #1 in the East instead of them? Funny too, how people never seem to give Carolina credit for winning the '05 tournament on a court at which, at bare minimum, 70% of those in attendance were Illinois fans.

I should have made it clear that I wasn't trying to demean Carolina's accomplishments in any way. I certainly believe that they should be the preseason #1, but I also think that we need to keep some perspective here. While some people think the sky is falling, I think Duke will be very competitive next year and that the national championship has yet to be decided.

CDu
06-19-2008, 09:26 AM
yes and no. there's a difference between having one of the top teams (or top team) and getting upset and knocked out and having one of the top teams, getting to the ff and either then getting to the finals or losing to a better team. roy has been upset 3 straight years with ZERO ff wins. k went to the finals in '86 and '90 and the ff in '88 and '89. the only iffy loses in there were in '86 (he still got to the finals) and '87. kansas, michigan (the winner) and unlv each was a significantly better team than duke so it's not a travesty in losing to them. unc was a BETTER team than gmu and georgetown and at least even (they were favored) with kansas. that's 3 straight years of losing to teams that were not better than your team. k never did that (at least not until his current stretch).

That's quite a bit misleading. In 2006, UNC had a VERY young team that played surprisingly well. They lost to a senior-laden GMU team that went on to beat the supposed best team in the country and then lost to the eventual champion in the Final Four. The UNC loss was only an upset because the committee underrated GMU.

In 2007, UNC had a really good team that lost to the #2 seed in the elite-8. That #2 seed was arguably a fifth #1 seed. They were very experienced and had the size to counter UNC's size. It wasn't much of an upset. And this past year should certainly not be considered an upset. Kansas was a #1 seed just like UNC. They were one of the four best teams in the country, and they won the championship. Kansas had every reason to expect to win that game.

Also, we lost to Seton Hall in 1989, not Michigan. Seton Hall was not siginficantly better than us that year (they were a #3 seed, we were a #2). Nor was Michigan (also a #3 seed). And in 1988, the Kansas loss WAS an upset. They were a sixth seed in the tournament. To say that Kansas was significantly better than Duke (a #2 seed) is completely wrong.

AnimalFriendly
06-19-2008, 09:46 AM
yes and no. there's a difference between having one of the top teams (or top team) and getting upset and knocked out and having one of the top teams, getting to the ff and either then getting to the finals or losing to a better team. roy has been upset 3 straight years with ZERO ff wins. k went to the finals in '86 and '90 and the ff in '88 and '89. the only iffy loses in there were in '86 (he still got to the finals) and '87. kansas, michigan (the winner) and unlv each was a significantly better team than duke so it's not a travesty in losing to them. unc was a BETTER team than gmu and georgetown and at least even (they were favored) with kansas. that's 3 straight years of losing to teams that were not better than your team. k never did that (at least not until his current stretch).

Duke didn't lose to Michigan in '89, they lost to Seton Hall. By, I believe, over 15 points in a game they had once led by at least 17. This Seton Hall team was NOT significantly better than Duke, or even as good IMO, & yet they won. Nor was the Kansas team that defeated Duke in '88. Compare the rosters of those 2 teams for heaven's sake. Other than Manning, just who on Kansas' '88 team was so all-fired better than his Duke counterpart-starter? One could reasonably argue that UNC & Georgetown, at least, were closer to even than Duke was to Seton Hall OR Kansas in the applicable years.

dukie8
06-19-2008, 10:02 AM
That's quite a bit misleading. In 2006, UNC had a VERY young team that played surprisingly well. They lost to a senior-laden GMU team that went on to beat the supposed best team in the country and then lost to the eventual champion in the Final Four. The UNC loss was only an upset because the committee underrated GMU.

GMU was an 11 seed. i don't care how young 2-seeded unc was and how much the committee underrated GMU, that was a monumental upset. if you saw that coming, then tell me that you had the money line on GMU for that game. i don't have historical point spread data but my guess is that GMU was a double digit underdog in that one. to try and spin that as anything other than a colossal gaffe is completely revisionist.


In 2007, UNC had a really good team that lost to the #2 seed in the elite-8. That #2 seed was arguably a fifth #1 seed. They were very experienced and had the size to counter UNC's size. It wasn't much of an upset. And this past year should certainly not be considered an upset. Kansas was a #1 seed just like UNC. They were one of the four best teams in the country, and they won the championship. Kansas had every reason to expect to win that game.

gtown started 1 frosh, 1 soph and 3 juniors. that hardly is a "very experienced team." yes, they were a little more experienced than unc, which was mostly frosh and sophs, but it's not like they were a bunch of seasoned seniors who had been to the ncaat multiple times. moreover, it WAS a big upset. yes, gtown was good and they were the #2 seed, but unc was better and favored. it wasn't as big as the GMU upset, but it nonetheless, was an upset.

how is the #1 #1 seed losing to the #4 #1 seed not an upset? moreover, even if you think that the committee got the seedings wrong, the market still had unc as 2.5 pt favorites. it wasn't a big upset, but it nonetheless was an upset. i think that how it went down was more shocking than the actual result (ie, unc being a complete no-show for most of the first half). if unc lost a close game at the very end, it wouldn't be that big of a deal.


Also, we lost to Seton Hall in 1989, not Michigan. Seton Hall was not siginficantly better than us that year (they were a #3 seed, we were a #2). Nor was Michigan (also a #3 seed). And in 1988, the Kansas loss WAS an upset. They were a sixth seed in the tournament. To say that Kansas was significantly better than Duke (a #2 seed) is completely wrong.

i know that we lost to seton hall. that's why i put michigan in parens. the seton hall loss is the weakest of K's losses in that stretch. i agree that they weren't better than duke and didn't go on to win the NC. however, just to get to seton hall, duke had to upset the #1 #1 seed, georgetown. you can't penalize K for advancing further than the seedings would expect and then losing to a team at best duke's equivalent. it didn't really matter because michigan was better than duke that year. they were loaded and i believe that rice still has the all-time scoring record for 1 year.

i agree that kansas was an upset but it was in the FF and kansas went on to win the NC. losing to the eventual NC isn't the worst thing in the world because everyone else either did directly or indirectly. moreover, temple was the #1 seed that duke upset to get to the FF. once again, you can't penalize K for advancing further than the seedings would expect and then losing to a team in the FF that is at best duke's equivalent.

all of this gets a little off track with countering the idea that roy's track record in the NCAAT somehow mirrored K's from '86-'90. even ignoring roy's multiple upsets at kansas, K's record from '86-'90 is vastly superior to roy's recent run in the NCAAT.

dukie8
06-19-2008, 10:10 AM
Duke didn't lose to Michigan in '89, they lost to Seton Hall. By, I believe, over 15 points in a game they had once led by at least 17. This Seton Hall team was NOT significantly better than Duke, or even as good IMO, & yet they won. Nor was the Kansas team that defeated Duke in '88. Compare the rosters of those 2 teams for heaven's sake. Other than Manning, just who on Kansas' '88 team was so all-fired better than his Duke counterpart-starter? One could reasonably argue that UNC & Georgetown, at least, were closer to even than Duke was to Seton Hall OR Kansas in the applicable years.

i addressed this in my other post. just to get to play kansas and seton hall, duke had to upset better teams (temple and georgetown). you can't penalize duke for upsetting #1 seeds and then losing to teams roughly equivalent in the FF. that's a lot different than losing to teams that you were favored to beat (unc the last 3 years).

the kansas team that won was pretty damn good and had one of the best college players of all-time. if they weren't that good, then how did they win the NC? beating duke wasn't a fluke as they then won 2 days later. regardless, duke wasn't even supposed to be in that game if the seeds played out.

if the georgetown loss were in the FF, i would agree with you, but it wasn't. unc was favored to win that game and it didn't and it didn't have to upset anyone even to get there. add that onto the GMU and KU losses and you have a pattern developing down the road that never occurred with K '86-'90.

CDu
06-19-2008, 10:16 AM
GMU was an 11 seed. i don't care how young 2-seeded unc was and how much the committee underrated GMU, that was a monumental upset. if you saw that coming, then tell me that you had the money line on GMU for that game. i don't have historical point spread data but my guess is that GMU was a double digit underdog in that one. to try and spin that as anything other than a colossal gaffe is completely revisionist.

gtown started 1 frosh, 1 soph and 3 juniors. that hardly is a "very experienced team." yes, they were a little more experienced than unc, which was mostly frosh and sophs, but it's not like they were a bunch of seasoned seniors who had been to the ncaat multiple times. moreover, it WAS a big upset. yes, gtown was good and they were the #2 seed, but unc was better and favored. it wasn't as big as the GMU upset, but it nonetheless, was an upset.

how is the #1 #1 seed losing to the #4 #1 seed not an upset? moreover, even if you think that the committee got the seedings wrong, the market still had unc as 2.5 pt favorites. it wasn't a big upset, but it nonetheless was an upset. i think that how it went down was more shocking than the actual result (ie, unc being a complete no-show for most of the first half). if unc lost a close game at the very end, it wouldn't be that big of a deal.

all of this gets a little off track with countering the idea that roy's track record in the NCAAT somehow mirrored K's from '86-'90. even ignoring roy's multiple upsets at kansas, K's record from '86-'90 is vastly superior to roy's recent run in the NCAAT.

My point was that none of those were big upsets. GMU proved that by beating the #1 seed. FYI - UNC was a 3 seed, not a 2 seed, in 2006. Georgetown was considered by many in 2007 to be deserving of a #1 seed, and I bet the spread was pretty close. And Kansas was one of the best four teams in the country. The margin of defeat against Kansas was a surprise, but a 2.5 point spread is essentially nothing.

I'd agree that Williams's stretch isn't the same as the '86-'90 stretch for Coach K. But you were very much misstating the facts both ways, overstating UNC's failures the last three years and understating Duke's.

dukie8
06-19-2008, 10:22 AM
My point was that none of those were big upsets. GMU proved that by beating the #1 seed. FYI - UNC was a 3 seed, not a 2 seed, in 2006. Georgetown was considered by many in 2007 to be deserving of a #1 seed, and I bet the spread was pretty close. And Kansas was one of the best four teams in the country. The margin of defeat against Kansas was a surprise, but a 2.5 point spread is essentially nothing.

I'd agree that Williams's stretch isn't the same as the '86-'90 stretch for Coach K. But you were very much misstating the facts both ways, overstating UNC's failures the last three years and understating Duke's.

we'll have to agree to disagree that a 3 seed losing to an 11 seed isn't a major upset. unc losing to gtown (actually collapsing) and unc losing to ku (actually collapsing) each in isolation isn't that big of a deal, but, when each is added to the GMU upset, you see a disturbing (actually a nice) pattern developing down the road.

CDu
06-19-2008, 10:26 AM
we'll have to agree to disagree that a 3 seed losing to an 11 seed isn't a major upset. unc losing to gtown (actually collapsing) and unc losing to ku (actually collapsing) each in isolation isn't that big of a deal, but, when each is added to the GMU upset, you see a disturbing (actually a nice) pattern developing down the road.

In general, I'd agree that a #3 losing to a #11 is a major upset. But that's ignoring the context. If you're going to ignore the context, then yes, we'll have to agree to disagree on that one.

sandinmyshoes
06-19-2008, 10:30 AM
facts dood....not sensationlism....he was loaded twice in a row and got out-coached while choking.....

this has nothing to do with K, it has everything to do with 40-12 and roy looking like a deer in the headlights......twice in a row.....

Your response did not even address CHF's assertion. The mantra about Williams not winning with his own players is fan fodder and not serious basketball talk. Williams had to fix a team that Doherty had broken.

I don't buy the "choking" tag on Williams. I do think his teams can be ragged at times due to all the subbing he does, however. But to say he chokes is as wrong as that label being thrown out at Coach K. I remember some seasons not too long ago where our own fanbase was talking about the possibility of going undefeated. And I remember seasons where we dominated the ACC. And in those seasons we fell sort of the NCAA championships and sometimes short of the Final Four. But I do NOT consider that to be "choking." It's just the nature of the one and done structure of the NCAAs.

Some of this talk is fun when we're trading barbs with rivals. But this board used to be a place for intelligent and realistic discussion of basketball. Unfortunately it has been trending more and more toward scout.com style hyperbole, homerism and boosterism.

moonpie23
06-19-2008, 11:17 AM
you don't have to "buy" the choking tag.......the entire nation (world) watched the obvious. twice in a row....i won't even start on his kansas choking...

he has to win some more titles before he can be in coach K's club...

sagegrouse
06-19-2008, 11:42 AM
you don't have to "buy" the choking tag.......the entire nation (world) watched the obvious. twice in a row....i won't even start on his kansas choking...

he has to win some more titles before he can be in coach K's club...

You left out the Kansas-Syracuse championship game, where KU missed a huge number of FTs. Isn't that coaching?

Seriously, Roy Williams is a very good college coach. And, inasmuch as his record at UNC in the NCAAT since 2005 is better than Duke's, I'll observe the adage that "people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones."

The head-to-head battles the next couple of years between Duke and UNC should be highlights of the sports year. I can't wait. Although at my age, since I can't afford to give away any extra months -- I'll be patient.

sagegrouse
'I am still not sold on the strength of UNC next year because basically the three players were rejected by the NBA -- but UNC will be undeniably deep'

Uncle Drew
06-19-2008, 01:09 PM
you don't have to "buy" the choking tag.......the entire nation (world) watched the obvious. twice in a row....i won't even start on his kansas choking...

he has to win some more titles before he can be in coach K's club...

I think we're all biased towards Coach K on here to one extent or another even though we feel free to second guess things about the program. And I will be the first to say several years at Kansas he had the most talented teams in the nation and couldn't win it all. (Often getting upset before the Final Four was in sight.) We can go back and forth on how good a coach Doh was and how good Roy is. I can't stand Roy, don't get me wrong and if a player suits up in light blue they instantly become the enemy.

But I think that's what a lot of people on here are concerned about is him winning another title, or two, or three. I mean let's just face facts, the man can recruit.....anyone who wants to argue that is an idiot. He did it at Kansas and so far at UNC he has brought in higher ranked classes that Coach K. (With the exception of the McRoberts class, but even there you could say he did a better judge of tallent with that class......at least one player in particular.) Roy is already reeling guys in left and right, and I really don't think potential recuits care if he won his title with Doh's players, and if he wins another one all it does is throw that argument out the window. I think what a lot of us are trying to say is the program is strong (hence the UNC isn't going anywhere thread), would have been formidable if all three players stayed in the draft and are that much better since those players are returning.

We can sit here and quote rankings of incoming players and it doesn't mean squat until they suit up and play. McRoberts was rated ahead of Hansbrough and I think we all saw how little that mattered come game time. But having a team with talent and bringing in more talent is NOT a good thing for anyone playing UNC next year. Anyone who says it is would say two grenades makes less of an explosion than one. I am excited to see Singler, Henderson, Zoubek etc. improve from last year to next year. But call me crazy I think UNC might have one or two players improve a little two. They might have a freshman or two that's as good as advertised or better. They might have some players wanting more minutes, but one thing is for sure winning is the best medicine for chemestry and if you don't think UNC is going to win a vast, vast majority of their games then I have a Greg Newton national championship ring to sell ya.

hq2
06-19-2008, 02:13 PM
Before everybody hands Carolina the title, let's look at history. In 93-94, they were the defending national champs, had Rasheed Wallace and Jerry Stackhouse coming in, and what happened? They lost in the second round to Boston College. Why? Horrible chemistry! The returning players and freshmen fought each other constantly, and they never got it together.

Duke, on the other hand, looks nicely positioned, about like they were in 85-86. This team reminds me a lot of that one; couple of 6-8 front line players with a big questionable 7 footer on the bench, wing player about 6-5 named Henderson. The backcourt that year was quicker, but this year's can shoot better. That team came in ranked # 3, while Carolina was ranked #1 or #2. Duke overtook them that year, won the conference, and went on to play for the national championship (Pervis Ellison *(&$*&# airball!!!!). Anyway, I think we can do it this year too.
Carolina may have better talent, but coaching and teamwork, which that team had in abundance being mostly seniors, made the difference.

CDu
06-19-2008, 02:54 PM
Before everybody hands Carolina the title, let's look at history. In 93-94, they were the defending national champs, had Rasheed Wallace and Jerry Stackhouse coming in, and what happened? They lost in the second round to Boston College. Why? Horrible chemistry! The returning players and freshmen fought each other constantly, and they never got it together.

Duke, on the other hand, looks nicely positioned, about like they were in 85-86. This team reminds me a lot of that one; couple of 6-8 front line players with a big questionable 7 footer on the bench, wing player about 6-5 named Henderson. The backcourt that year was quicker, but this year's can shoot better. That team came in ranked # 3, while Carolina was ranked #1 or #2. Duke overtook them that year, won the conference, and went on to play for the national championship (Pervis Ellison *(&$*&# airball!!!!). Anyway, I think we can do it this year too.
Carolina may have better talent, but coaching and teamwork, which that team had in abundance being mostly seniors, made the difference.

I'm not aware of anyone handing UNC the title. I'm pretty sure that everyone realizes the most talented team doesn't always win the national championship.

Scoring Point
06-19-2008, 03:57 PM
I'm not sure the 93-94 analogy for the Heels is very applicable. The frosh trio of Wallace, Stackhouse and McInnis was a lot more, um, challenging personality-wise, not to mention more talented/highly rated, than this year's incoming crew. And you can't overlook the loss of George Lynch, the '93 champs' emotional leader and arguably best player, as well as the guy best suited to deal with the the Wallace/Stackhouse/McInnis trio.

While not perfect either, I subscribe more to the Duke '99 analogy. Our '98 squad did not make the Final Four, but did go 15-1, 32-4 and lost to eventual national champ Kentucky in a barnburner in the Elite 8. I don't think anyone on the '09 Heels is as talented as Brand or Maggette, and I don't think they have any role players quite comparable to Battier or C-well. But they will be extremely deep with ACC-caliber players, have no obvious weaknesses and return a guy who has been the conference's best player for the past 2 years. Let's hope some chemistry issues - the threat of which seems very real - do emerge.

AnimalFriendly
06-19-2008, 03:58 PM
[QUOTE=dukie8;160325]GMU was an 11 seed. i don't care how young 2-seeded unc was and how much the committee underrated GMU, that was a monumental upset. if you saw that coming, then tell me that you had the money line on GMU for that game. i don't have historical point spread data but my guess is that GMU was a double digit underdog in that one. to try and spin that as anything other than a colossal gaffe is completely revisionist.

If this was a monumental upset, then how would you describe GMU beating Connecticut?

gtown started 1 frosh, 1 soph and 3 juniors. that hardly is a "very experienced team." yes, they were a little more experienced than unc, which was mostly frosh and sophs, but it's not like they were a bunch of seasoned seniors who had been to the ncaat multiple times. moreover, it WAS a big upset. yes, gtown was good and they were the #2 seed, but unc was better and favored. it wasn't as big as the GMU upset, but it nonetheless, was an upset.

Any team, especially nowadays, starting THREE juniors can reasonably be described as "very" experienced. And GT had been to the NCAAT the previous year, at least, and gave the eventual national champion its toughest game by far. I guess you just forgot about that.

how is the #1 #1 seed losing to the #4 #1 seed not an upset? moreover, even if you think that the committee got the seedings wrong, the market still had unc as 2.5 pt favorites. it wasn't a big upset, but it nonetheless was an upset. i think that how it went down was more shocking than the actual result (ie, unc being a complete no-show for most of the first half). if unc lost a close game at the very end, it wouldn't be that big of a deal.

One #1 seed beating another, no matter the spread, no matter the final score, isn't an upset - using that word is just silly.

i know that we lost to seton hall. that's why i put michigan in parens.

I find this claim amazing - here's your original sentence - words in caps are for my emphasis:

kansas, michigan (the winner) and unlv each was a significantly better team than duke so it's not a travesty IN LOSING TO THEM.

enough said.

the seton hall loss is the weakest of K's losses in that stretch. i agree that they weren't better than duke and didn't go on to win the NC. however, just to get to seton hall, duke had to upset the #1 #1 seed, georgetown. you can't penalize K for advancing further than the seedings would expect and then losing to a team at best duke's equivalent. it didn't really matter because michigan was better than duke that year. they were loaded and i believe that rice still has the all-time scoring record for 1 year.

Duke beating G'town was hardly an upset, I really couldn't care less about the seedings. And Seton Hall was hardly Duke's equivalent - Duke had far more talent. It wasn't even that close. BTW, the "loaded" Michigan team, you may recall, had a head coach who had been on the job for, what, a matter of a few weeks? Or was it days?

dukie8
06-19-2008, 05:05 PM
If this was a monumental upset, then how would you describe GMU beating Connecticut?

that was an even bigger upset (uconn was the #1 seed). in your world, is a team only capable of 1 upset per tournament? in my world, you can keep on generating larger upsets as you beat higher and higher seeded teams. this isn't rocket science and i cannot believe that the GMU loss even is up for debate as to its "upset" nature. if people are going to take the position that an 11 beating a 3 is not an upset, then there really isn't anything else to say.


Any team, especially nowadays, starting THREE juniors can reasonably be described as "very" experienced. And GT had been to the NCAAT the previous year, at least, and gave the eventual national champion its toughest game by far. I guess you just forgot about that.?

you can call a team with no seniors, a frosh and a soph starting and collectively 1 prior ncaat a "very" experienced team but i would not. it sounds pretty average or normal to me. reading how many people repeatedly characterized duke as young last year, with a senior, a junior, 2 sophs and a frosh starting (and multiple NCAATs under their collective belts), i would guess that others on here would agree.


One #1 seed beating another, no matter the spread, no matter the final score, isn't an upset - using that word is just silly.

you clearly are green when it comes to gambling, point spreads and upsets. i suppose uconn beating duke in '99 wasn't an upset either. just 2 even teams with a pick 'em spread going at it.


Duke beating G'town was hardly an upset, I really couldn't care less about the seedings. And Seton Hall was hardly Duke's equivalent - Duke had far more talent. It wasn't even that close. BTW, the "loaded" Michigan team, you may recall, had a head coach who had been on the job for, what, a matter of a few weeks? Or was it days?

you may not have thought of the gtown win as an upset but the rest of the planet, including vegas, did. i really don't know what to tell you about your bizarre definition of upsets. when presumably the #1 #1 seed (they didn't state that distinction then) loses in the elite 8 and is favored in vegas to win that game, then it's an upset. i'm not sure why i am even bothering to state this because it is so obvious.

whether seton hall was better or worse than duke really doesn't matter. they beat duke fair and square (well, sort of if you ignore the whole gaze affair and brickey going down) on the court. you can argue all you want about how seton hall was worse but, on the only court that mattered, they won. as i stated earlier, just to get to the FF, duke had to engineer an enormous upset over gtown. you can't ding K for losing to seton hall (even if you think that seton hall was a worse team than duke) because he never should have been there in the first place according to the seedings. that is VERY different than roy winning 3 games as a favorite and then losing to a fairly evenly matched (but underdog) gtown team or winning 4 games as a favorite and then losing to a fairly evenly matched (but underdog) ku team. this whole discussion arose out of the fact that someone claimed that what roy has done in the NCAAT is similar to what k did '86-'90. it's not and it's not even close.

also, since when does talent decide the outcome of games? you seem to think that because duke had more talent on paper than seton hall, then it automatically was a better TEAM and should have won. how do you reconcile all of the talent-laden teams that have lost to teams with inferior talent but were superior teams over the years?

Heelo
06-19-2008, 05:41 PM
On the 2008/09 UNC team's similarity to the 1993/94 UNC team...
This situation is the opposite of that one. In '94 you had a team of good-but-not-great players who relied on outstanding teamwork to succeed invaded by a recruiting class consisting of two NBA All-Stars and multi-year NBA starter. That talent disparity threw a wrench into the traditional hierarchy based on seniority. This year's incoming class is joining a team consisting of similarly- and more-talented players, and there is no obvious reason that the incoming players would be in a position to disrupt the team chemistry (with the possible exception of Ed Davis potentially displacing Deon Thompson).

On Roy being a "choker"...
If the Lakers and Celtics are giving up 20+ point leads in the second halves of NBA Finals games, then you'll excuse me if I don't accept blowing a 10-point lead with eight minutes to go against a Final Four team as "proof" of Roy's inability to win big games. Same goes for "upset" losses to Final Four teams and NCAA champions. I don't know about Roy's "chokes" in the late 90's, but I can't imagine that they were much worse than Duke's two most recent tourney showings led by their undisputed HOF coach. **** happens in the tourney. 'Nuff said.

On the return of the UNC Trio being "trouble" for Duke...
Well it doesn't help Duke, that's for sure. That said, any issues that Duke may have have nothing to do with UNC. I remember the summer after Roy's first season when you guys were signing up your big McRoberts class and feelings of jealousy abounded on the UNC boards, a moderator stepped in and said "Hey, you guys don't get it. We have Roy now, and no matter what those guys are doing over in Durham Roy's going to field and develop a competitive team." I believe that insight is appropriate here as well. Whether or not UNC holds a marginal advantage talent-wise is not the point. The point is that Duke has a team that will be competitive in every game they play against any team in the country. Additionally, postseason performance is the real measure of success for teams like UNC and Duke. Therefore, since it is unlikely that UNC and Duke face each other in the tourney (fingers crossed!), it is more important to figure out how you match up with the other sixty-two teams that will be in the field of sixty-four.

yancem
06-20-2008, 08:26 AM
On the 2008/09 UNC team's similarity to the 1993/94 UNC team...
This situation is the opposite of that one. In '94 you had a team of good-but-not-great players who relied on outstanding teamwork to succeed invaded by a recruiting class consisting of two NBA All-Stars and multi-year NBA starter. That talent disparity threw a wrench into the traditional hierarchy based on seniority. This year's incoming class is joining a team consisting of similarly- and more-talented players, and there is no obvious reason that the incoming players would be in a position to disrupt the team chemistry (with the possible exception of Ed Davis potentially displacing Deon Thompson).

On Roy being a "choker"...
If the Lakers and Celtics are giving up 20+ point leads in the second halves of NBA Finals games, then you'll excuse me if I don't accept blowing a 10-point lead with eight minutes to go against a Final Four team as "proof" of Roy's inability to win big games. Same goes for "upset" losses to Final Four teams and NCAA champions. I don't know about Roy's "chokes" in the late 90's, but I can't imagine that they were much worse than Duke's two most recent tourney showings led by their undisputed HOF coach. **** happens in the tourney. 'Nuff said.

On the return of the UNC Trio being "trouble" for Duke...
Well it doesn't help Duke, that's for sure. That said, any issues that Duke may have have nothing to do with UNC. I remember the summer after Roy's first season when you guys were signing up your big McRoberts class and feelings of jealousy abounded on the UNC boards, a moderator stepped in and said "Hey, you guys don't get it. We have Roy now, and no matter what those guys are doing over in Durham Roy's going to field and develop a competitive team." I believe that insight is appropriate here as well. Whether or not UNC holds a marginal advantage talent-wise is not the point. The point is that Duke has a team that will be competitive in every game they play against any team in the country. Additionally, postseason performance is the real measure of success for teams like UNC and Duke. Therefore, since it is unlikely that UNC and Duke face each other in the tourney (fingers crossed!), it is more important to figure out how you match up with the other sixty-two teams that will be in the field of sixty-four.

Wow, 10 pages into this thread and it takes a UNC guy to logically put things into perspective.

phillyheel
06-20-2008, 11:40 AM
As far as choking, K and Roy have come to the point in their careers where if they don't win the National Championship they've choked by some portion of the opposing fans.

DeepBlue70
06-20-2008, 01:43 PM
I'm not aware of anyone handing UNC the title. I'm pretty sure that everyone realizes the most talented team doesn't always win the national championship.

Anyone else out there happen to be a subscriber to the Richmond Times-Dispatch and have to put up with that shill Bob Lipper? Today (6/20) he practically salivates while delivering next year's championship to the Heels. You would think today's column would focus on either the draft or the upcoming Olympic lineup but no, not for Baby Blue Lipper. Lipper is a UNC grad who hardly tries to hide his allegiance. He'll even go out of his way to take potshots at K in articles that have nothing to do with Duke. I would love to respond to him but I don't want to give him the joy of taking the bait.

CDu
06-20-2008, 04:41 PM
Anyone else out there happen to be a subscriber to the Richmond Times-Dispatch and have to put up with that shill Bob Lipper? Today (6/20) he practically salivates while delivering next year's championship to the Heels. You would think today's column would focus on either the draft or the upcoming Olympic lineup but no, not for Baby Blue Lipper. Lipper is a UNC grad who hardly tries to hide his allegiance. He'll even go out of his way to take potshots at K in articles that have nothing to do with Duke. I would love to respond to him but I don't want to give him the joy of taking the bait.

I was talking about everyone on this board. The media makes their money by stirring the pot, so I'd take any column with a grain of salt.

Edouble
06-21-2008, 01:08 PM
Anyone else out there happen to be a subscriber to the Richmond Times-Dispatch and have to put up with that shill Bob Lipper? Today (6/20) he practically salivates while delivering next year's championship to the Heels. You would think today's column would focus on either the draft or the upcoming Olympic lineup but no, not for Baby Blue Lipper. Lipper is a UNC grad who hardly tries to hide his allegiance. He'll even go out of his way to take potshots at K in articles that have nothing to do with Duke. I would love to respond to him but I don't want to give him the joy of taking the bait.

I live in Richmond too, and you have successfully pointed out one of the top reasons not to subscribe to the Times-Fishwrap.