Grantland.com College Hoops Preview

[CDu]

Here are the closing sentences...everyone can make up their own minds:

"So, my Carolina brethren, please join me in the following prayer for Kendall Marshall. Please, please, please let him be healthy. If he plays 35 games, the Heels will be cutting down the nets in March. If he plays 15, expect two losses to Duke, a quick out in the ACC tournament, and nothing past the second round of the NCAA.

There is very little middle ground here. But isn't that why we love Ol' Roy?"

It's semantics. He's a New England guy, and has been a fan of UConn. He is really really on board with this UNC team, but he's not a UNC "homer."

[slower]

I don't know if "homer" is the right term. As far as college sports goes, he's a UConn fan (though like most New Englanders he's not as much a college sports fan as he is a pro sports fan). Maybe overly zealous in praise of UNC's team, but I'd not call him a Heel homer.

Simmons, himself, is not necessarily a UNC homer as much as a Duke hater. Jay Caspian Kang, however, IS a self-avowed UNC homer.

Love the site (Grantland), though - great writing.

[CDu]

Simmons, himself, is not necessarily a UNC homer as much as a Duke hater. Jay Caspian Kang, however, IS a self-avowed UNC homer.

Ah, my bad. Nevermind the "homer" discussion, as I was talking about Simmons. Carry on.

[CDu]

Knowing that Simmons doesn't care for Duke (he's made that clear in past articles), I think there was somewhat of a shot at Rivers in the article. Rivers's on-court attitude makes it easy to take that angle, because he does have a surly on-court demeanor at all times. However, I think it was a case of seeking out more of a controversy/issue than was really there. Coach K coaches every game as though it matters, and he recruits competitive players who understand that philosophy. So of course Rivers and Curry and all took the exhibition seriously. That's the Duke way - if you're playing and they're keeping score, play hard and play to win.

The guys seemed to get along fine during the road trip to China/UAE, and they didn't seem to have any disdain for each other during the slam dunk contest following the exhibition. Simmons' question about Rivers's attitude and adjustment to college are legitimate. His concerns about its impact on team chemistry aren't.

To answer your question, I'm not worried about chemistry issues between Curry, Rivers, Dawkins, or anyone else. There'll be enough shots to go around. Curry and Dawkins are used to sharing the ball with two other prolific scorers (Singler, Smith, and briefly Irving). The Plumlees are used to not being the primary scoring options, as they don't have very developed offensive games to begin with. Having said that, I suspect they'll get their opportunities as well. They won't be the focal point of the offense (why would they be when we have such good perimeter players?).

I just re-read and checked the author, and it's Shane Ryan and not Simmons. So change "Simmons" to "Ryan" throughout, and ignore the first part of the first sentence. The rest I still think holds true. I think it was a bit of a shot at Rivers, and I think it was reading to much into the game with regard to concerns about chemistry.

[slower]

This could be a remarkable year for Austin Rivers. I'm dead serious when I say that his freshman year seems tailor-made for a John Feinstein book.

Austin is used to the bright lights, but I don't think he realizes the FULL magnitude of what it means to be the most hated player on the most hated team in the country. He will be absolutely crucified for any weakness or errors this year. That's just the reality of what awaits him.

I love the kid. I hope he shoves it down the throats of the haters. I hope he stands over them and shouts at them while they choke. Whatever happens, I expect this to be a unique kind of spectacle, perhaps even more ridiculous than anything JJ or Greg Paulus had to endure. It could be Laettner-esque, yet turbocharged beyond even that by the advances in media over the past 20 years.

The haters are waiting, folks. They are sharpening their knives even now. You can see how this Grantland piece will be the template for the media monkeys to emulate ("Even his own teammates hate Austin Rivers..."). I hope I'm wrong. But I fear that I'm not.

[Billy Dat]

Some housekeeping on on who wrote what...

Jay Caspian Kang wrote the Carolina preview for Grantland.com, and he is a Heel fan. It was his statement I quoted, about cutting the nets down in March.

Shane Ryan wrote the Blue/White scrimmage piece, and he blogs Tobacco Road hoops on TobaccoRoadBlues.com

Both write for Grantland.com, whose founder/EIC is Duke baiter Bill Simmons, who, despite being a Boston-homer, actually dislikes UConn hoops and Calhoun, and did a nice job skewering him on a podcast with his friend JackO this past March in the wake of the news of UConn recruiting improprieties
http://espn.go.com/espnradio/play?id=6267250

[Lord Ash]

Aside from the self-indulgent psychobabble and obsession with image over substance, nothing really.

That might not be entirely fair. Attitude is key to performing as an athlete. Without the proper attitude, all the skill in the world cannot save you... See R. McCants for the perfect example. Balancing that killer, overbearing attitude enough to make it a benefit (ie Jordan) is a difficult thing to do... And often that attitude, and th required balance, are glaring evident in body language. Body language and the approach to the game is a HUGE part of sport and performance, and right now Austin's body language speaks of a player who has not yet found that proper balance to enhance his game. However, there are few men I trust more to help a player work on his sports attitude than K.

[Atlanta Duke]

Simmons, himself, is not necessarily a UNC homer as much as a Duke hater.

Simmons may not like Duke but he does not deny K's greatness

This from before the Butler game

Also tonight: Coach K rightly takes his place as 2nd best college hoops coach ever behind Wooden. The man is money in big games. Book it.

http://poptweets.net/user/sportsguy3...us/11669612578

And this on Kevin Durant's game improving after his 2010 Team USA experience

You can't overstate how much the Team USA experience helped Durant: not just succeeding as The Guy and carrying the Americans those last few games but also just getting coached. Durant's rebounding and defense look to be miles ahead of where they were the previous couple of years; he's a legitimate 4 now in today's NBA. You could say he graduated from Coach K Camp

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...5&sportCat=nba

[slower]

Simmons may not like Duke but he does not deny K's greatness

The two are not mutually exclusive.

[Atlanta Duke]

The two are not mutually exclusive.

Did not say they were - by way of example I despise one of the Sports Guy's favorite teams, the New England Patriots, but give Belchick and Brady credit for what they have accomplished

If Simmons does not want to cheer for Duke so be it - he has a lot of company but unlike many others does not denigrate what Duke has accomplished

[slower]

Did not say they were - by way of example I despise one of the Sports Guy's favorite teams, the New England Patriots, but give Belchick and Brady credit for what they have accomplished

If Simmons does not want to cheer for Duke so be it - he has a lot of company but unlike many others does not denigrate what Duke has accomplished

If you read Simmons regularly, you know that he takes his shots at Duke as often as he can.

[Orange&BlackSheep]

I just re-read and checked the author, and it's Shane Ryan and not Simmons. So change "Simmons" to "Ryan" throughout, and ignore the first part of the first sentence. The rest I still think holds true. I think it was a bit of a shot at Rivers, and I think it was reading to much into the game with regard to concerns about chemistry.

I personally thought the Ryan piece was really, really well-written and interesting and a legitimate take of what he saw as an outsider looking in. I am sure it is a big overblown, but I have to say that his basic impression of where AR is at the moment matches with mine.

But the forest for the trees of this all is: how many teams could split up their rosters and create such a high-quality, intense game?? I don't know what others felt, but I am still amazed at how compelling the game was.

[MChambers]

But the forest for the trees of this all is: how many teams could split up their rosters and create such a high-quality, intense game?? I don't know what others felt, but I am still amazed at how compelling the game was.

And how many other programs have the game be the actual focus, rather than a clown show?

[Jaymf7]

I liked the article and felt it accurately identified an issue I will be interested to see unfold over the year. Rivers certainly has come in with an attitude commensurate with his hype. Not a bad thing in and of itself. He also is clearly not as "ready" to play in our system, at this level, as say Kyrie was. Curry did in fact teach him a lesson on Friday (or at least the lesson was there to be learned if he wanted it). Rivers can grow a lot in our system, and if he is as mature on certain levels as he appears, I suspect he came to Duke because he would be challenged and grow.

That said, I found Rivers' answer to a simple question during a BW game interview particularly interesting. He was asked what was the biggest thing Coach K had taught him so far. Not an easy question to answer, but I can think of some cliches that I have heard. Rivers' response (paraphrasing) was that Coach K told him to always be aggressive and play his game. Seems like the last thing he'd need to be told. By contrast, I think Rivers said his dad told him to just make the simple plays and worry about winning, then the accolades, etc. would follow. Is that really the message the Duke staff is emphasizing?

I can certainly see K encouraging Rivers as he has struggled to adjust. He does need to continue to be aggressive and confident. But I suspect he will learn that the theatrics are a waste of energy. Maybe reading this Grantland piece (and perhaps watching some McBob clips) might speed the process.

[Kedsy]

That said, I found Rivers' answer to a simple question during a BW game interview particularly interesting. He was asked what was the biggest thing Coach K had taught him so far. Not an easy question to answer, but I can think of some cliches that I have heard. Rivers' response (paraphrasing) was that Coach K told him to always be aggressive and play his game. Seems like the last thing he'd need to be told. By contrast, I think Rivers said his dad told him to just make the simple plays and worry about winning, then the accolades, etc. would follow. Is that really the message the Duke staff is emphasizing?

I can certainly see K encouraging Rivers as he has struggled to adjust. He does need to continue to be aggressive and confident. But I suspect he will learn that the theatrics are a waste of energy.

In my mind, staying aggressive and playing his game are not related to the theatrics. He does need to stay aggressive and hunt his shot. He also needs to make the simple plays instead of the crazy ones. Of course he also needs to distribute the ball and play great defense. At his level you can't do just one thing.

I'm sure Coach K has told him many important things. The interviewer just asked Austin for one of them, and I guess that's the one that resonated most with Austin. Doesn't necessarily mean it's K's biggest priority, however (although maybe it is, for all I know). K is a master psychologist. Whatever he's telling Austin you can bet there's a good reason for it.

[Sir Stealth]

The Duke preview by Shane Ryan is up:

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/...l-championship

It was hard to enjoy the article with Ryan throwing out so much red meat to Duke haters and bringing Duke students into it so unnecessarily. This kind of stuff is something that we all have to be used to shrugging off by now, but he did his fellow alumni no favors.

A lot of people won't like the way that he talks about our players. I don't have as much of a problem with this, college basketball players are going to be critiqued and even mocked as big time athletes will. I think the criticism and of Rivers is fair, though the angle he takes on it may be somewhat overblown for dramatic effect. Much of what he says is insightful.

Other than the Duke stereotype stuff, I feel like the guy has an interesting take. It's a large forum to give a Duke fan who certainly does not embody the section of Duke's fanbase that is represented here, so the negative stuff is frustrating when it's allowed that the article is from a "homer" perspective, as the UNC article was. I also get the sense that, from a basketball analysis standpoint, Coach K would probably say that this guy has no idea what he's talking about. One thing I agree on, it will be very interesting to see how everything plays out with this team this season, probably even more intriguing than most years.

[Kedsy]

The Duke preview by Shane Ryan is up:

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/...l-championship

It was hard to enjoy the article with Ryan throwing out so much red meat to Duke haters and bringing Duke students into it so unnecessarily. This kind of stuff is something that we all have to be used to shrugging off by now, but he did his fellow alumni no favors.

A lot of people won't like the way that he talks about our players. I don't have as much of a problem with this, college basketball players are going to be critiqued and even mocked as big time athletes will. I think the criticism and of Rivers is fair, though the angle he takes on it may be somewhat overblown for dramatic effect. Much of what he says is insightful.

Other than the Duke stereotype stuff, I feel like the guy has an interesting take. It's a large forum to give a Duke fan who certainly does not embody the section of Duke's fanbase that is represented here, so the negative stuff is frustrating when it's allowed that the article is from a "homer" perspective, as the UNC article was. I also get the sense that, from a basketball analysis standpoint, Coach K would probably say that this guy has no idea what he's talking about. One thing I agree on, it will be very interesting to see how everything plays out with this team this season, probably even more intriguing than most years.

Wow, what an awful article. I thought the CTC Curry/Rivers one was really good, but I can't stand this one. The stuff on Duke fans is stupid, the bit about last year not being fair is petty, and his basketball analysis is pretty close to useless. His "probable" starting lineup (Curry-Rivers-Kelly-Plumlee-Plumlee) is a long shot to start even one game.

[Billy Dat]

Wow, what an awful article. I thought the CTC Curry/Rivers one was really good, but I can't stand this one. The stuff on Duke fans is stupid, the bit about last year not being fair is petty, and his basketball analysis is pretty close to useless. His "probable" starting lineup (Curry-Rivers-Kelly-Plumlee-Plumlee) is a long shot to start even one game.

I don't know...a lot of his criticisms seemed like a summary of the talk that gets thrown around on this board all the time. I kind of felt like I was reading the thoughts of a critical DBR poster...I thought it was pretty good. Is the Curry-Rivers-Kelly-Plumlee-Plumlee line-up so outrageous? Seems like the emergence of Miles makes it more likely than it was at the end of last season.

[airowe]

I can certainly see K encouraging Rivers as he has struggled to adjust.

Can you expand on this thought some more? I have seen nor heard anything to suggest that Rivers has struggled to adjust to college basketball. Maybe to college life as he spends nearly every minute of his free time in the gym, but point me to some semblance of information that would back up this point please.

[Kedsy]

Is the Curry-Rivers-Kelly-Plumlee-Plumlee line-up so outrageous? Seems like the emergence of Miles makes it more likely than it was at the end of last season.

Do we really want Ryan Kelly guarding small forwards? Do we think Ryan/Mason/Miles will combine for more than 80 minutes a game (the available minutes at PF and C without any of them venturing over to SF)? With all the perimeter depth we have, does it make any sense to start all three of our bigs?

If I had to set the over/under for this lineup starting during the season, I'd put it at 1. And I'd take the under. Even if I'm wrong, no way it's the "probable starting lineup" like the article says.