Duke's Demise, Or Not

[SupaDave]

[QUOTE=dukie8;284221][QUOTE=SupaDave;284211]

Where did I compare St John's to Duke? Do tell.

You mention a program that has had LOSING records to somehow quantify the last few seasons at Duke when there's no comparison. Kansas was used to show that the lamenting of NCAA tourney appearances and wins is pointless b/c the next year could be YOUR year. Kansas' situation and success is much more similar to ours.

[dukie8]

Yes - please look at those 5 years and tell me what we've got. A few #1 rankings, some ACC championships, some Maui Championships, never lost in the Big Ten Challenge, and have made the tourney every year.

Let's see here...

Going back to 2003-2004 we have been in the final four once and the sweet sixteen three times. We have won FIVE ACC championships.

A larger look going back to 1999 shows that even with ONE National Championship we've been LARGELY a sweet sixteen team.

Looks to me that we are right about where we should be - still performing at a high level.

See this is where perspective and FACTS come in instead of some mysterious sharp decline.

WHAT standard based on the FACTS are we not meeting?

What's with the random all-caps? No need to be yelling.

What part of a total of 5 NCAAT wins in the past 4 years despite having 15 McD AAs and a HOF coach doesn't qualify as a fact? You are aware that Duke won 5 or more NCAAT games in each of 1986, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1994, 1999 and 2001? I don't think that there is anything "mysterious" about the decline over the past 5 years. It's about as black and white as you can get when you objectively compare them to '86-'04.

[DevilCastDownfromDurham]

Yes - please look at those 5 years and tell me what we've got. A few #1 rankings, some ACC championships, some Maui Championships, never lost in the Big Ten Challenge, and have made the tourney every year.

Let's see here...

Going back to 2003-2004 we have been in the final four once and the sweet sixteen three times. We have won FIVE ACC championships.

A larger look going back to 1999 shows that even with ONE National Championship we've been LARGELY a sweet sixteen team.

Looks to me that we are right about where we should be - still performing at a high level.

See this is where perspective and FACTS come in instead of some mysterious sharp decline.

WHAT standard based on the FACTS are we not meeting?

And that's a great counterargument based on recent results. I'm happy to engage that, and I will in a second, but I'm still confused by why you summarily dismissed evaluating the program based on recent results just a few posts ago.

Now, I agree with your post I'm quoting that we have historically been a program that is in the Sweet 16 on an average year. The difference I've noticed is that until 2005 our "blips" tended to be positive steps where we made a deep run to the Final Four every 3-4 years. Recently, our "blips" have gone the other ways, going out in the first and second round. We're still a top 10 program, but our "bad blips" in the tournament combined with losing ~3 more games per season suggests to me that in the last 5 years we're not quite where we were from 1999-2004. Maybe that was a unique situation that it's unrealistic to sustain and I'm hopeful that we're about to hit an upswing. But I don't think there's anything mysterious about the idea that this half-decade hasn't gone as well as the one preceding it.

[Reddevil]

How would you prefer to judge the current state of the program, if not by recent results? Obviously the Duke program is large enough that no 5-10 year period will define it. Bu if you want to have a sense of where we are right now and where we are trending, how we've done in the last several seasons seems as good a benchmark as any.

Obviously nothing we say or do will have any effect on the program itself since we're not players and coaches. In that light, I guess I can understand why some folks would be happier to just say "Duke is great, Trust in K" and leave it at that. I get that, but I think there's also a place for honest and critical (in the positive, academic sense of the term) discussion of the program. What have we done well? What could we do better? What are other programs doing that we might emulate or react to? Of course that won't change anything, but that's what makes discussion possible and valuable. Without that we'd just be an echo chamber/pep rally.

Well, this is a good point. I guess having the word "Demise" in the thread title has some of us (guilty) a bit defensive. There are only a few qualified, elite C's, PF's and PG's to go around. Recruiting is tricky. Getting the right combination of guys on a 13 man roster at the right time is tough. Early entry, makes it even harder. How many elite, athletic, wide-body big men with great feet and hands are there in any given class? One or two tops right? Where do they live? Who do they like? Are they likely to go pro after a year or two? (probably) Sustaining a FF level of success is harder than ever. What Duke did for nearly 2 decades is amazing. Florida's back to back, and unc's 2 in 5 years is tough to duplicate. Lulls will happen, but demise - please.

[DevilCastDownfromDurham]

Well, this is a good point. I guess having the word "Demise" in the thread title has some of us (guilty) a bit defensive. There are only a few qualified, elite C's, PF's and PG's to go around. Recruiting is tricky. Getting the right combination of guys on a 13 man roster at the right time is tough. Early entry, makes it even harder. How many elite, athletic, wide-body big men with great feet and hands are there in any given class? One or two tops right? Where do they live? Who do they like? Are they likely to go pro after a year or two? (probably) Sustaining a FF level of success is harder than ever. What Duke did for nearly 2 decades is amazing. Florida's back to back, and unc's 2 in 5 years is tough to duplicate. Lulls will happen, but demise - please.

I agree with most of this and mainly wanted to point out that "demise" was a deliberately incendiary term used to set up a straw man by the OP, who was arguing that things aren't as bad as many think they are. Anyone who thinks we're facing the program's demise is seriously overstating things and/or out of touch with reality.

I also agree that it's really, really tough to remain on top of the mountain. UNC has done it better than most and we're trying to catch up with them right now. It's inaccurate to say we're facing a "demise" but it's also inaccurate to say that everything's great and we have nothing to improve on.

[RepoMan]

What's with the random all-caps? No need to be yelling.

What part of a total of 5 NCAAT wins in the past 4 years despite having 15 McD AAs and a HOF coach doesn't qualify as a fact? You are aware that Duke won 5 or more NCAAT games in each of 1986, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1994, 1999 and 2001? I don't think that there is anything "mysterious" about the decline over the past 5 years. It's about as black and white as you can get when you objectively compare them to '86-'04.

Feel free to be unhappy. It certainly is a legitimate response. I'm unhappy too. But, 5 years basically spans the length of a recruiting class. A recruit that doesn't meet expectations is felt for that lentgh of time, and vice versa for one who exceeds expectations (with the caveat being that, nowadays, the ones that exceed expectations are less likely to stay).

You compare the present to 1990 - 1992, but the same core guys were on each of those teams. Laettner, Hurley, Hill -- you just don't get guys like that playing on the same team for a protracted period all that often.

I agree that Duke would benefit if it had a superior talent at PG (especially) or in the post. Heck, based on his televised interview, K agrees. But between wish and reality there is a huge gap. Not everyone is going to come to Duke. Not everyone who comes is going to meet or exceed expectations.

I hope we snag Wall or some of the other premier recruits we are seeking. We've certainly had our share over the years, and there is no reason to think that we won't get some more in the future. But Duke doesn't hame some sort of "right" to get them. We have to "recruit" them, and not everyone says yes.

PS: I just don't get the repeated "15 McD AA" references. I mean, obviously, we have had talented teams. That is why we have won alot of games. Just as obviously we have had some holes, some of which have been caused by some of those McD AAs not meeting expectations, which is why we haven't gone as far in the NCAA as we would have liked. The presence of "15 McD AAs" doesn't compensate for what we have been missing. While I agree that some recruits have not met expectations, given the reality of the talent we have had over the past 4 years, I don't think we have really underperformed much in the tournament.

[SupaDave]

Feel free to be unhappy. It certainly is a legitimate response. I'm unhappy too. But, 5 years basically spans the length of a recruiting class. A recruit that doesn't meet expectations is felt for that lentgh of time, and vice versa for one who exceeds expectations (with the caveat being that, nowadays, the ones that exceed expectations are less likely to stay).

You compare the present to 1990 - 1992, but the same core guys were on each of those teams. Laettner, Hurley, Hill -- you just don't get guys like that playing on the same team for a protracted period all that often.

I agree that Duke would benefit if it had a superior talent at PG (especially) or in the post. Heck, based on his televised interview, K agrees. But between wish and reality there is a huge gap. Not everyone is going to come to Duke. Not everyone who comes is going to meet or exceed expectations.

I hope we snag Wall or some of the other premier recruits we are seeking. We've certainly had our share over the years, and there is no reason to think that we won't get some more in the future. But Duke doesn't hame some sort of "right" to get them. We have to "recruit" them, and not everyone says yes.

PS: I just don't get the repeated "15 McD AA" references. I mean, obviously, we have had talented teams. That is why we have won alot of games. Just as obviously we have had some holes, some of which have been caused by some of those McD AAs not meeting expectations, which is why we haven't gone as far in the NCAA as we would have liked. The presence of "15 McD AAs" doesn't compensate for what we have been missing. While I agree that some recruits have not met expectations, given the reality of the talent we have had over the past 4 years, I don't think we have really underperformed much in the tournament.

What?! Sanity. Don't you dare bring that in the mix!

Lots of these guys have never heard of Bucky Waters or Neill McGeachy. Some of you TRULY (yep random caps so you'll know what I want to be stressed) can't seem to process that we haven't always been on the winning side of things.

[dukie8]

Feel free to be unhappy. It certainly is a legitimate response. I'm unhappy too. But, 5 years basically spans the length of a recruiting class. A recruit that doesn't meet expectations is felt for that lentgh of time, and vice versa for one who exceeds expectations (with the caveat being that, nowadays, the ones that exceed expectations are less likely to stay).

You compare the present to 1990 - 1992, but the same core guys were on each of those teams. Laettner, Hurley, Hill -- you just don't get guys like that playing on the same team for a protracted period all that often.

I agree that Duke would benefit if it had a superior talent at PG (especially) or in the post. Heck, based on his televised interview, K agrees. But between wish and reality there is a huge gap. Not everyone is going to come to Duke. Not everyone who comes is going to meet or exceed expectations.

I hope we snag Wall or some of the other premier recruits we are seeking. We've certainly had our share over the years, and there is no reason to think that we won't get some more in the future. But Duke doesn't hame some sort of "right" to get them. We have to "recruit" them, and not everyone says yes.

PS: I just don't get the repeated "15 McD AA" references. I mean, obviously, we have had talented teams. That is why we have won alot of games. Just as obviously we have had some holes, some of which have been caused by some of those McD AAs not meeting expectations, which is why we haven't gone as far in the NCAA as we would have liked. The presence of "15 McD AAs" doesn't compensate for what we have been missing. While I agree that some recruits have not met expectations, given the reality of the talent we have had over the past 4 years, I don't think we have really underperformed much in the tournament.

The 15 McD AA references is to address the issue of whether it is reasonable to even expect Duke to be winning NCAAT games from a talent standpoint. I think if that number were 0 or 1, it would be unreasonable to expect sustained NCAAT excellence. For example, Rutgers or Northwestern fans wouldn't be upset with just 5 NCAAT wins in 4 years given the level of their personnel. Now whether those 15 were the right positions or even worthy of AA status is a discussion for another thread.

Unlike you and other people, I hope we don't get Wall. There is a lot to be said about how K runs the program and, other than the Maggette mess, there isn't a whiff of improprieties. I'd rather have Duke never go back to another FF than to stoop to the level of UConn, Memphis, USC or Indiana to try and get back there. Maybe Wall is different than what I have read but he seems like just the kind of player K used to avoid like the plague.

[SupaDave]

What's with the random all-caps? No need to be yelling.

What part of a total of 5 NCAAT wins in the past 4 years despite having 15 McD AAs and a HOF coach doesn't qualify as a fact? You are aware that Duke won 5 or more NCAAT games in each of 1986, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1994, 1999 and 2001? I don't think that there is anything "mysterious" about the decline over the past 5 years. It's about as black and white as you can get when you objectively compare them to '86-'04.

Are you actually really trying to use those years? Our BEST seasons? Come on. That's like 6 times in FORTY years. Really?

1994 - lost in championship game - didn't make the tourney the next year. Is that what you want?

Also, why is 1986 the cutoff date? It probably hurts for you to realize that we only went to the NIT in 1981 and in 1982 and 1983 - we went NOWHERE.

And lastly - I want you guys to take a look at the tourney records from 1995 - 2001. It is largely indicative of our situation now - both of which show gradual improvement after a "down" season. Then maybe you'll understand what BUILDING a program is about.

[SupaDave]

The 15 McD AA references is to address the issue of whether it is reasonable to even expect Duke to be winning NCAAT games from a talent standpoint. I think if that number were 0 or 1, it would be unreasonable to expect sustained NCAAT excellence. For example, Rutgers or Northwestern fans wouldn't be upset with just 5 NCAAT wins in 4 years given the level of their personnel. Now whether those 15 were the right positions or even worthy of AA status is a discussion for another thread.

Unlike you and other people, I hope we don't get Wall. There is a lot to be said about how K runs the program and, other than the Maggette mess, there isn't a whiff of improprieties. I'd rather have Duke never go back to another FF than to stoop to the level of UConn, Memphis, USC or Indiana to try and get back there. Maybe Wall is different than what I have read but he seems like just the kind of player K used to avoid like the plague.

Sounds to me like you're giving Mickey D's way too much credit.

[gumbomoop]

personally, i'd say success at duke is 1 Final Four every 4 seasons and consistently playing on the 2nd weekend of the tournament (4 out of 5 years perhaps)

I'll sign on to this criterion, as long as it's confined to on-court success, i.e., discounting [which we should not] campus presence, classroom achievement, etc.

But yes, in my semi-halucinatory "entitled" state of being, I think we should make a F4 every 4-5 years [and win one every 8-10], and definitely make Sweet 16/Elite 8 most of the time.

As for demise, well, we're in a bit of a slump, but I'm really impressed with MP2, Kelly, as well, have heard fine things about '10 and after [getting Barnes or Knight would delight], and believe that K will entice strong improvement from Nolan and EWill, which is key to 09-10. Singler is 09-10 conf POY, Scheyer is 2d team all-ACC, and K should certainly be able to get substantially improved productivity down low from MP1, MP2, and Z [I'm on record as thinking Z should redshirt].

Even without G/Wall/Bledsoe, your basic "worst case scenario" for 09-10, we're preseason top 6-7. In this scenario, to repeat: relentless fierceness, not to mention improved confidence from improved ballhandling, make Nolan and EWill key to deep run.

[dukie8]

Are you actually really trying to use those years? Our BEST seasons? Come on. That's like 6 times in FORTY years. Really?

1994 - lost in championship game - didn't make the tourney the next year. Is that what you want?

Also, why is 1986 the cutoff date? It probably hurts for you to realize that we only went to the NIT in 1981 and in 1982 and 1983 - we went NOWHERE.

And lastly - I want you guys to take a look at the tourney records from 1995 - 2001. It is largely indicative of our situation now - both of which show gradual improvement after a "down" season. Then maybe you'll understand what BUILDING a program is about.

I don't understand what you are trying to accomplish here? Do you actually think that the past 5 years at Duke have been great despite the fact that the best basketball was played in December in each of them and the team was upset in the NCAAT by a lower seeded team in each of them? What am I missing if you actually think that that the past 5 years in any way resemble any 5-year stretch from '86-'04? The '95-'01 stretch you referenced included 1 trip to the Elite 8, 1 trip to the Finals and a NC. I'm not exactly sure how that stretch compares to the past 5 years, which doesn't even include a trip to the Elite 8.

Lastly, you reference the early 80s and how bad Duke was then. Ya think? Do you really think that people today think that Duke was good then? They don't. Duke stunk then but how does that have anything to do with the fact that Duke has slipped over the past 5 years vis-a-vis the previous 20?

[SupaDave]

I don't understand what you are trying to accomplish here? Do you actually think that the past 5 years at Duke have been great despite the fact that the best basketball was played in December in each of them and the team was upset in the NCAAT by a lower seeded team in each of them? What am I missing if you actually think that that the past 5 years in any way resemble any 5-year stretch from '86-'04? The '95-'01 stretch you referenced included 1 trip to the Elite 8, 1 trip to the Finals and a NC. I'm not exactly sure how that stretch compares to the past 5 years, which doesn't even include a trip to the Elite 8.

Lastly, you reference the early 80s and how bad Duke was then. Ya think? Do you really think that people today think that Duke was good then? They don't. Duke stunk then but how does that have anything to do with the fact that Duke has slipped over the past 5 years vis-a-vis the previous 20?

This should say "I only picked Duke b/c they won a lot of games when I was a kid!"

Please go do some research on Vic Bubbas AND then go notice that the team built after 1995, something that it appears we are doing now.

[dukie8]

This should say "I only picked Duke b/c they won a lot of games when I was a kid!"

Please go do some research on Vic Bubbas AND then go notice that the team built after 1995, something that it appears we are doing now.

Huh? I didn't exactly "pick" Duke. I think getting 2 degrees there somehow qualifies me as someone who might have a legitimate reason to root for Duke. Had I gone to UNC, UVA or any other ACC school, I highly doubt that I would follow Duke basketball. Do you really think that most people just "pick" Duke when they are young and don't have any other deeper ties to the school?

What does doing research on Vic Bubbas have anything to do with your failure to recognize that the past 5 years are demonstrably worse than any other 5 year stretch over the past 25 years?

[SupaDave]

Huh? I didn't exactly "pick" Duke. I think getting 2 degrees there somehow qualifies me as someone who might have a legitimate reason to root for Duke. Had I gone to UNC, UVA or any other ACC school, I highly doubt that I would follow Duke basketball. Do you really think that most people just "pick" Duke when they are young and don't have any other deeper ties to the school?

What does doing research on Vic Bubbas have anything to do with your failure to recognize that the past 5 years are demonstrably worse than any other 5 year stretch over the past 25 years?

Sigh. B/c that's what you sound like. 1995-1999 are easily worse than the last 5 years. Especially as expectations go considering those teams all finished first in the ACC but the 1995/1996 teams. Nuff said.

[dukie8]

Sigh. B/c that's what you sound like. 1995-1999 are easily worse than the last 5 years. Especially as expectations go considering those teams all finished first in the ACC but the 1995/1995 teams. Nuff said.

You are entitled to your opinion but I would take any 5-year stretch that includes (1) a team on the short list of greatest teams ever, which played in the NC game and (2) a team that played in the Regional Finals over a 5-year stretch whose best team couldn't get past the Sweet 16.

[SupaDave]

You are entitled to your opinion but I would take any 5-year stretch that includes (1) a team on the short list of greatest teams ever, which played in the NC game and (2) a team that played in the Regional Finals over a 5-year stretch whose best team couldn't get past the Sweet 16.

So you'll also take the year of no tourney and the two years building up to that success as well then right?

[dukie8]

So you'll also take the year of no tourney and the two years building up to that success as well then right?

Definitely, although I think that '96-'97 and '07-'08 basically are a wash. I would without question rather have a super team followed by mass defections and a rebuilding year or 2 (think Florida or Ohio St in '07) that leads to another FF run versus sustained plodding of 0, 1 or 2 NCAAT wins for many consecutive years.

[SupaDave]

Definitely, although I think that '96-'97 and '07-'08 basically are a wash. I would without question rather have a super team followed by mass defections and a rebuilding year or 2 (think Florida or Ohio St in '07) that leads to another FF run versus sustained plodding of 0, 1 or 2 NCAAT wins for many consecutive years.

All it really sounds like you need is just a little patience.

[Wander]

never lost in the Big Ten Challenge

Am I the only one that laughed out loud when I read this part?