Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 21
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Northern VA

    2010-2011 Preseason Rankings

    It sounds like most pundits are picking Duke preseason #1 going into next season, with top competition from the likes of Purdue and MSU.

    Count Luke Winn as in the Duke #1 camp going into next season, mostly on the strength of watching Curry and Irving recently. He also has nice things to say about Austin Rivers.

    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...html?eref=sihp


    Dick Vitale has us #1, then 2. MSU, 3. Purdue, 4. OSU, 5. Villanova, 6. KY, 7. Syr., 8. FL, 9. KSU...

    http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/dickv...ory?id=5292918

    What are your early top-10 picks?

    I'm thinking 1. Duke, and then pick'em between Purdue, MSU, OSU. The next three-team grouping would include KSU, Syr, Baylor and maybe Nova. I'd round out the top-10 with TN, Pitt or FL. I don't think some historical powerhouses like KY and NC merit the preseason respect they're getting thusfar.


    P.S. When was the last time a National Champ lost three starting players to graduation and came back still as preseason #1 the next year?? Hmmmm.
    Last edited by -bdbd; 07-02-2010 at 02:00 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Inman, SC & Fort Myers, FL
    I wonder how often the National Preseason #1 ends up in the final four? Wild guess -- maybe 25% (or less!) of the time. I am betting that someone here will post the actual.

  3. #3
    from 2003-2010, out of total 8 times, the #1 ranked preseason team made to the final four 4 times (50%). Out of those four times it didn't make, two of them were Duke 2005 and 2006.

    Here is the preseason ranking going back to the year 2002-2003.
    http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/rankings

    Here is ncaa history
    http://www.cbssports.com/collegebask...mayhem/history

    So there is a 50% chance we will go to final 4 and 75% of chance winning it all if we make it to final four. Woah!

  4. #4

    1 to champion

    If you survey the entire 64/65 team NCAA era (since 1985), you'll find that 12 of the 26 preseason No. 1 teams reached the Final Four and just six of those 26 won the national championship.

    That's a 46 percent chance of getting to the Final Four ... a 23 chance of winning it all. Yeah, if Duke gets to the final four, its chance would seem to be 1-of-2 (which is better than the theoretical 1-in-4)

    The six to start No. 1 and finish as champs:

    1990 -- UNLV (oddly they were preseason No. 1, lost their first game and never returned to No. 1 ... the next year, they were No. 1 every week of the season, but lost in the semifinals to Duke).

    1992 -- Duke (wire to wire No. 1 --the only wire to wire No. 1 team to win the title since 1976 Indiana)

    1996 -- Kentucky (although they finished No. 2 in the final poll)

    2004 -- UConn (dropped out of the No. 1 slot early and never came close to regaining it, finishing No. 7)

    2007 -- Florida

    2009 -- North Carolina

    don't have a lot of time to spend researching this, but other preseason No. 1s to win it all -- UNC in 1982, Indiana in 1976, UCLA in 1973, 1972, 1971 (not in 1970! South Carolina was preseason No. 1), 1969, 1968, 1967.

    So I guess that since John Wooden stopped making it easy on the pollsters after 1973, the preseason No. 1 team has won eight of the last 37 -- that's 22 percent, not much different from the post-1985 data.

    One interesting note -- 13 preseason No. 1 teams in the last 37 years have finished No. 1 in the final AP poll. So the odds of Duke doing that are better than 35 percent -- significantly better than making the Final Four or winning the title.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Honestly, we probably have better odds coming into this year than we did previous years and better odds than if we were preseason #2 or 3, right? I am not in the mood to do research on the odds if you were #2,3,4,or 5.

    I simply look at it like Mr. Winn did. Kyrie Irving will be a game changer from the moment he steps onto the court. Seth Curry will be a game changer as soon as HE steps onto the court. We have 2 senior AA candidates in Nolan and Kyle and AT LEAST 2 aspiring big men with a lot of potential and room to get better. This is a very good team with an even better coach and we absolutely deserve to be preseason #1.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    This is not to be pessimsitic but just a friendly reminder to enjoy the process.

    Duke was great in 1999 but did not win the NCAAs.

    Enjoy the fact that the 2010-11 Devils CAN be great and that the journey to greatness is fun to watch.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Vitale had us #5 in his 2009-10 preseason Top 40:

    http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/dickv...ory?id=4361336

    while NBADraftNet has us at #18:

    http://www.nbadraft.net/node/9879

    and ESPN/USA Today Coaches Poll had us at #8 and the AP had us at #9:

    http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bask...1/seasontype/2

    My point is the preseason rankings are all over the place and while we definitely deserve to be the preseason #1 for the 2010-11 season, in the end, preseason rankings are meaningless.
    Bob Green
    DBR Survivor Football Champion
    2010 & 2016

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Wilmington, NC
    It's still July, isn't it?

    Stupid July, talking so long to turn into November...

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Regardless of the inherent talent Duke will have next season, there are truly critical "intangibles" that must unite for our team to reach its full, Final Four, potential. Certainly, Coach K and his superb staff excel in this arena. However:
    - What will the team's chemistry be initially, and how will it evolve?
    - How selfless will legitimate superstars be to optimize TEAM on-court performance and to become deep friends with their teammates?
    - How will these players integrate and grow as a unit?
    - How tough will they be -- individually and collectively -- especially in adversity?
    - What will their work ethic be?
    - How effective will Captain/senior leadership be?
    - How well will they -- individually and collectively -- learn from their inevitable mistakes?
    - Will they make this season fun or drudgery?
    - And so forth?

    The fundamental reason we are the current National Champions is our 2009 - 2010 team did extremely well with these "intangibles" throughout the entire season. Duke's club that narrowly defeated Butler last April was massively improved in comparison to the squad that played in November. Having personally witnessed Georgetown's drubbing of Duke in DC, I am convinced our TEAM learned, grew and developed crucial tenacity as a result of that bitter defeat.

    My experience suggests these "intangibles" are actually more important than demonstrated player potential and athleticism. Please consider UNC's NIT-bound 2009 - 2010 team as a perfect example of a talent-rich club that badly failed to achieve its potential due to such "intangibles."

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by 4decadedukie View Post
    Regardless of the inherent talent Duke will have next season, there are truly critical "intangibles" that must unite for our team to reach its full, Final Four, potential. Certainly, Coach K and his superb staff excel in this arena. However:
    - What will the team's chemistry be initially, and how will it evolve?
    - How selfless will legitimate superstars be to optimize TEAM on-court performance and to become deep friends with their teammates?
    - How will these players integrate and grow as a unit?
    - How tough will they be -- individually and collectively -- especially in adversity?
    - What will their work ethic be?
    - How effective will Captain/senior leadership be?
    - How well will they -- individually and collectively -- learn from their inevitable mistakes?
    - Will they make this season fun or drudgery?
    - And so forth?

    The fundamental reason we are the current National Champions is our 2009 - 2010 team did extremely well with these "intangibles" throughout the entire season. Duke's club that narrowly defeated Butler last April was massively improved in comparison to the squad that played in November. Having personally witnessed Georgetown's drubbing of Duke in DC, I am convinced our TEAM learned, grew and developed crucial tenacity as a result of that bitter defeat.

    My experience suggests these "intangibles" are actually more important than demonstrated player potential and athleticism. Please consider UNC's NIT-bound 2009 - 2010 team as a perfect example of a talent-rich club that badly failed to achieve its potential due to such "intangibles."
    Although I don't disagree at all with this list of intangibles, I think I may disagree with the implication that we should be overmuch concerned about them. The bolded words in the tag quote will perhaps suffice to highlight what I see as a possible contradiction. For, if K and staff excel in thinking about and focusing on intangibles, what's up with the "However"? Why not with more logic say, precisely because K knows how crucial are these intangibles, we're in the very best possible shape heading into '10-'11, with talent out the wazoo [contrast the Wahoos, who lack this wazoo], and a coach who's demonstrated pretty regularly that his teams develop first-rate chemistry, leadership, etc.

    If intangibles are more important than talent, there should be no particular concern about this in '10-'11. It's always a concern, true, as last year's Heels proved with dismaying [or delightful, depending on one's colors] pointedness. True, as well, those crucial intangibles could all go pear-shaped for the Devils next season. But it's not exactly likely. Rather, it's likely - not certain, but likely - that our guys will flourish under senior leadership, will play every play, will have fun playing with a joyous [not to mention mischievous] KI, and will pay careful attention to their coach. Who will perhaps alert them to how angrily KS plays defense, pretty much every play....

    If Duke loses late March-early April '11, it's unlikely it will be because of intangibles. It will be because they played poorly, or ran into an inspired opponent who could do no wrong, for one night.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia

    gumbomoop . . . I believe you may be overly optimistic.

    Josh McRoberts and Greg Newton (to cite two examples) were extremely corrosive (IMHO) to their TEAMS at Duke, despite both their INDIVIDUAL potential and the documented, repeated excellence of our coaching staff. Sometimes, even at Duke, player's egos and personalities impede (or even preclude) optimized team performance. Frequently, the greater the athletic potential, the larger the issues associated with teamwork, selflessness, synergy, integration, hard preparation, tenacity, and leadership. No coach -- and his staff -- does team- and character-development better than Coach K; however, that does not guarantee 100 percent success in the vital area of "the intangibles."

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    nyc
    Quote Originally Posted by 4decadedukie View Post
    Josh McRoberts and Greg Newton (to cite two examples) were extremely corrosive (IMHO) to their TEAMS at Duke, despite both their INDIVIDUAL potential and the documented, repeated excellence of our coaching staff. Sometimes, even at Duke, player's egos and personalities impede (or even preclude) optimized team performance. Frequently, the greater the athletic potential, the larger the issues associated with teamwork, selflessness, synergy, integration, hard preparation, tenacity, and leadership. No coach -- and his staff -- does team- and character-development better than Coach K; however, that does not guarantee 100 percent success in the vital area of "the intangibles."
    I disagree. Everything we know about this team suggests we will have great chemistry. Nolan and Singler are demonstrated leaders who scored a lot but were always team first. Dawkins struggled last year a bit with this but, I think, learned what it takes to excel in the team first environment and witnessed the rewards and stepped up to contribute in many huge games. Kyrie Irving is a well documented leader who, even in high school All-Star games, makes his teammates better. Seth Curry spent a year witnessing what excellent chemistry looks like. The Plumlees played their roles well last year while, no doubt, salivating at the thought of being THE big men this year. I don't think it will take much psychological manipulation by the coaching staff to get these kids excited about the opportunity and to understand that one of the only things that could derail the train to glory is division among the ranks. There are simply too many blatantly obvious positives.

    The biggest factor, I think, is Irving. K is already placing great importance on him...because K recognizes that he is an uncommonly mature, humorous, empathetic kid. We've seen the videos of him joking with his teammates. We've seen a lot of post game interviews. We've read the stories about his work ethic. He's likable, he works hard, he cares about his teammates. He will understand that Nolan and Kyle are the true leaders and will take his middle-management role and run with it. I honestly have very few doubts about him after such a long proving process...he's a Duke point guard through and through. And he's not a nerd, like HB. HB, in those recruiting videos, seems like a big herb to me. Kyrie just seems like a quick wit and a kid with positive energy. HB seems more wrapped up in himself. Not that that's the most important comparison...just saying I think we got the right kid when it comes to chemistry.

  13. #13

    predictions

    The only point I'd make about predictions is that it is easier to predict the whole body of work during the season than to predict the outcome of any one game ...

    In one game, there are too many variables -- one team may be hot ... one team may be cold ... a key player may be in foul trouble, etc. Over the course of the season, such things even out and the teams with the best coaching. the best talent, the best work ethic usually do well.

    My point is that when we look ahead to the coming season and make predictions, we should feel much more confident about our predictions for the whole season than for any one game -- and that means that predictiong the outcome of a one-and-done tournament that requires six straight wins -- probably five of them against competitive opponents -- is chancy stuff.

    In other words, I feel VERY confident in predicting that Duke will be a VERY good team next year. As I cited, the odds of a preseason No. 1 finishing the regular season at No. 1 are 35 percent. The odds of a preseason No. 1 finishing in the top 5 (based on the 64-team era) are 17 of 26 (65 percent) ... the odds of finishing in the top 10 are 24 of 26 (92.3 percent).

    So, obviously, the odds are pretty good that Duke will be one of the nation's top teams next season.

    Unfortunately, that doesn't translate to NCAA Tournament success. But as Chicago Crazy suggested, the odds of a preseason No. 1 team winning it all are better -- even at 23 percent -- than for any other preseason ranking.

    In fact (again using the 64-team era), the odds of the preseason:

    No. 2 -- 11.5 (3 of 26)
    No. 3 -- 15.4 (4 of 26)
    No. 4 -- 7.7 (2 of 26)
    No. 5 -- 0.0
    No. 6 -- 7.7 (2 of 26)
    No. 7 -- 7.7 (2 of 26)
    No. 8 -- 3.8 (1 of 26)
    No. 9 -- 7.7 (2 of 26
    No. 10 -- 0.0

    Interesting that the second 10 has produced just one national champion in the modern era -- Arizona, No. 19 in the 1997 preseason poll.

    Three teams that were unranked in preseason have won it all -- Villanova in 1985; Syracuse in 2003 and Florida in 2006.

    So the odds are significantly better for the preseason No. 1 team than for anybody else ... big drop to 2-3 ... then another drop to 4-9, which I would say are all about equal (excepting the oddity that no. No. 5 team has won it. From 10 on down, the odds are very long ... but not impossible.

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by 4decadedukie View Post
    Josh McRoberts and Greg Newton (to cite two examples) were extremely corrosive (IMHO) to their TEAMS at Duke, despite both their INDIVIDUAL potential and the documented, repeated excellence of our coaching staff. Sometimes, even at Duke, player's egos and personalities impede (or even preclude) optimized team performance. Frequently, the greater the athletic potential, the larger the issues associated with teamwork, selflessness, synergy, integration, hard preparation, tenacity, and leadership. No coach -- and his staff -- does team- and character-development better than Coach K; however, that does not guarantee 100 percent success in the vital area of "the intangibles."
    I freely admit to being overly, foolishly optimistic every season. Sometimes, of course, this pans out really swell, as in '09-'10. Anyhow, I am always surprised when Duke loses any particular game. [Of course I know we'll not go undefeated, but any particular game....] I have elected myself President-for-Life of the Loony Optimists League [LOL].

    Having said - well, admitted - all that, I still partly disagree with you, and I'm guessing other posters. And, just thinking through this - I am trying to do so, and welcome your sensible response, too, seriously - maybe the difference in our perspectives revolves around the tag-quote bold words. Although wildly optimistic, I also realize things don't always pan out. To expect a 100% guaranteed success - now, that really does strike me as unreasonable, loony even. So - think this through with me, now - who's being overly optimistic in a sort of all-encompassing, generic sort of way?

    Trying to be clear here: I agree totally with your analysis re importance of personality, ego, selflessness, synergy, integration. Excellent points. I mean it. But some posters here do seem to want something akin to a 100% guarantee of success, and so agonize about what could go wrong. This seems likely be be especially true as we approach '10-'11, when expectations are obviously - and reasonably - quite high, sky high, in fact. The '09-'10 season was wondrous and wonderful, what with below-radar expectations, sneaky emergence of perfect good-storm of 3S, LT, and Z. But now [we just have to see how hilarious this is], we're nervous, because (a) we're loaded, yet (b) there's no 100% guarantee re the intangibles you've laid out.

    I have long ago concluded that We the Duke Entitled will never be satisfied with anything less than a 100% guarantee. Trying mightily to overcome this burden, as a Loony Optimist, I'm also [claiming to be] a Reasonable Realist, happy to expect to win [a lot, especially next season], willing, reluctantly, to be occasionally surprised by a loss, and determined to forego any truly loony thoughts of a 100% guarantee.

    We have many, many reasons to be confidently optimistic for '10-'11, so long as we don't expect a 100% guarantee. I personally like our chances for a 5th NC, but I don't expect a guarantee.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Inman, SC & Fort Myers, FL
    I am impressed that roughly half of the number 1 preseason ranked teams ended up in the final four. My guess was 25%, way, way off.

  16. #16

    DevilDan

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Green View Post
    Vitale had us #5 in his 2009-10 preseason Top 40:

    http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/dickv...ory?id=4361336

    while NBADraftNet has us at #18:

    http://www.nbadraft.net/node/9879

    and ESPN/USA Today Coaches Poll had us at #8 and the AP had us at #9:

    http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bask...1/seasontype/2

    My point is the preseason rankings are all over the place and while we definitely deserve to be the preseason #1 for the 2010-11 season, in the end, preseason rankings are meaningless.

    Mr. Bob Green, appears that you are now stateside ... welcome back !

    Concur... while it's an honor to be picked #1 before the first game is played, it is just a list. At this time a year ago, I was pretty pleased that we were #8/#9 by ESPN/USA Today and the AP. I thought we might sneak up on some teams and work our way higher, but I have to admit, I had NO thoughts of winning it all. But this year I am really excited about this crew.

    Kyle & Nolan are easily in the nation's best dozen players, the Plumlees are back, and we look to have some more consistent production from the Plumlees, and a new-look Ryan Kelly. And the outstanding first year players Kyrie, Seth, Tyler & Josh will help us throughout the year. In just a few more weeks, we will SEE !

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by DevilDan View Post
    In just a few more weeks, we will SEE !
    If by "a few" you mean 15 (which is approximately when we play our first game) then I think you're still a bit premature. We'll see just how good this team is sometime in 2011. Possibly by December 2010, but I don't think we'll know yet at that point.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    If by "a few" you mean 15 (which is approximately when we play our first game) then I think you're still a bit premature. We'll see just how good this team is sometime in 2011. Possibly by December 2010, but I don't think we'll know yet at that point.
    I dunno. By December 4 Duke will have played Michigan State, Butler, Oregon and two of Marquette, Gonzaga and Kansas State, with only one of those games in Cameron. This team will get a chance to show pretty early on if it's as good as we hope it will be.

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Duvall View Post
    I dunno. By December 4 Duke will have played Michigan State, Butler, Oregon and two of Marquette, Gonzaga and Kansas State, with only one of those games in Cameron. This team will get a chance to show pretty early on if it's as good as we hope it will be.
    I said possibly by December, and I agree that's a pretty strong slate, but really Michigan State is the only elite team on that list. It's not as strong a schedule as, say, UNC's Fall of 2009 schedule and, while the Heels acquitted themselves decently last Fall, it didn't really show who and what they were. I'm not suggesting for a nanosecond that Duke's 2010-11 team will have anything in common with the 2009-10 UNC team. I actually believe that ultimately we're going to prove we deserve the pre-season #1 ranking. But you just never know how a team's going to react until you hit league play.

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    I said possibly by December, and I agree that's a pretty strong slate, but really Michigan State is the only elite team on that list. It's not as strong a schedule as, say, UNC's Fall of 2009 schedule and, while the Heels acquitted themselves decently last Fall, it didn't really show who and what they were. I'm not suggesting for a nanosecond that Duke's 2010-11 team will have anything in common with the 2009-10 UNC team. I actually believe that ultimately we're going to prove we deserve the pre-season #1 ranking. But you just never know how a team's going to react until you hit league play.
    K- St may not be elite depending on how you are using that term, but they should be a pre-season top 10 and co favorite to win the Big 12. Butler, Gonzaga and Marquette will all be decent, Oregon, not.

    Good point though that the wheels did not fall off the UNC train last year until loss to Charleston that was after the ACC-B10 challenge win and split in the other tournament.

Similar Threads

  1. Acc 2010-2011
    By houstondukie in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 130
    Last Post: 09-28-2010, 10:18 AM
  2. 2010-2011 Preseason Ranking
    By CrazieDUMB in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-08-2010, 01:55 PM
  3. Stupidly Early Preseason Rankings
    By DavidBenAkiva in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 04-07-2010, 08:42 AM
  4. Rankings:Preseason-midseason-tourney
    By Saratoga2 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-31-2008, 01:09 PM
  5. MSoc No.2 in Preseason Rankings
    By burnspbesq in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-01-2007, 05:15 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •