Kyrie at duke

[CameronBlue]

Don't sweat it. The way Arizona played and shot - no one was beating them, period. It was a performance for the ages for them. They absolutely peaked that game and got blown out in the next round. Even with chemistry, Duke wasn't winning that game.

Disagree, or more accurately there's no simply no way to prove the point as the game is not a series of discrete events. Change the substitution pattern and it's a completely different game. Put the ball in Nolan's hands exclusively and the end result is...? Who knows? Again K's decision to play Kyrie extended minutes, while understandable, ultimately proved to be the wrong decision (and yes the way Arizona played there may not have been a correct decision). To steal from hockey vernacular, that's one I wish Duke had back.

[SouthernDukie]

If I didn't know any better I'd think there are multiple Duke fans here who almost wish Kyrie had never even come to Duke. Sheesh...

Yes, I concede that Monday morning quarterbacking can see the integration of Kyrie back into the lineup messing with Nolan's game and even some team chemistry. But I believe many here are overstating that fact and not remembering just how insane Williams and Arizona were that night. We lost because of the other team playing out of their minds, not because of Kyrie.

[CameronBlue]

2011 is just another example of if we had a better coach, we’d have about 12 or 13 titles. 86, 94, 98, 99, 02, 04, 11 - fire Coach K!!! He’s cost us so, so much.

If I didn't know any better I'd think there are multiple Duke fans here who almost wish Kyrie had never even come to Duke. Sheesh...

Please. Just stop. Sheesh...

[Edouble]

Completely agree with this. It wasn't just Nolan, it was the whole team. There was a little bit of standing around watching Kyrie zip around the court. He still got numbers but the whole flow and identify of the team was thrown out of whack.

What I would have preferred (knowing full well I am no Coach K) with the benefit of hindsight is to contain Kyrie's role ONLY to the second unit and playing bench minutes. So the starters play like they always do and our second unit would have a massive spark.

In my opinion, one of Coach K's rare missteps.

There isn't a second unit though. That's an NBA thing. Nolan and Kyle were out there 34 and 35 minutes, respectively. Including Kyrie, only seven players played double digit minutes.

[SouthernDukie]

Please. Just stop. Sheesh...

Right. Because Kyrie isn't being roasted by some in this thread. Excuse me for thinking this was a Duke fan board.

Look, I get that we pride ourselves on not being fans with blinders on. But sometimes that mindset can be taken too far in the other direction.

[Steven43]

Right. Because Kyrie isn't being roasted by some in this thread. Excuse me for thinking this was a Duke fan board.

Look, I get that we pride ourselves on not being fans with blinders on. But sometimes that mindset can be taken too far in the other direction.

This being a Duke fan board does not, and should not, in any way preclude DUKE FANS — I think the vast majority of us here are indeed major fans of Duke Basketball — from giving their personal opinion as to how Kyrie Irving played more than eight years ago in the NCAA Tournament game against Arizona.

Rah rah Duke cheerleading at all times from every poster on DBR is not what I thought I was signing on for. I think that would make for an incredibly boring board lacking interest, intrigue, and mental stimulation. Perhaps you see it differently.

[InSpades]

Disagree, or more accurately there's no simply no way to prove the point as the game is not a series of discrete events. Change the substitution pattern and it's a completely different game. Put the ball in Nolan's hands exclusively and the end result is...? Who knows? Again K's decision to play Kyrie extended minutes, while understandable, ultimately proved to be the wrong decision (and yes the way Arizona played there may not have been a correct decision). To steal from hockey vernacular, that's one I wish Duke had back.

You completely contradict yourself within like 4 sentences. At first you say "there's no way to prove" and then "ultimately proved to be the wrong decision".

You can't possibly say it was the wrong decision. If K never brings back Kyrie (or uses him only in limited minutes off the bench) then maybe Duke loses to Arizona by 30.

We only get to see 1 path... that path had us lose to a supremely hot Arizona team. Perhaps if K had sat Kyle Singler and played Josh Hairston instead then we would've won... anything is possible I guess. Does it mean playing Kyle was wrong because we lost?

Up until about a year ago I would've told you that Kyrie was the most impressive freshman I've ever seen wear a Duke uniform. The Arizona game was tough and Kyrie definitely tried to take over on offense... I'm never going to fault him for that. He was fabulous and playing him was our best chance to win a national championship. It didn't work out. Sometimes that happens. See last year.

[SouthernDukie]

This being a Duke fan board does not, and should not, in any way preclude DUKE FANS — I think the vast majority of us here are indeed major fans of Duke Basketball — from giving their personal opinion as to how Kyrie Irving played more than eight years ago in the NCAA Tournament game against Arizona.

Rah rah Duke cheerleading at all times from every poster on DBR is not what I thought I was signing on for. I think that would make for an incredibly boring board lacking interest, intrigue, and mental stimulation. Perhaps you see it differently.

Um, did I not cover that point with my second paragraph?

The reality is that Kylie has become the convenient whipping boy for many here. I say, without fear of contradiction, that no one can name another former Dyke player who is now a bonafide star in the NBA who has been talked down more here than Kylie Irving. Whether it’s calling him Bumslayer, or questioning his heart because he didn’t bring another title to Bean Town, or what have you, no Duke player has been talked down more. And I just think it’s way over the top. But feel free to keep running him down. It’s what all the cool kids are doing today.

[OldPhiKap]

I absolutely loved watching Kyrie play.

Giving a player crap after he fought back from a season-long injury to rejoin the team seems pretty low to me.

YMMV.

[Steven43]

Um, did I not cover that point with my second paragraph?

The reality is that Kylie has become the convenient whipping boy for many here. I say, without fear of contradiction, that no one can name another former Dyke player who is now a bonafide star in the NBA who has been talked down more here than Kylie Irving. Whether it’s calling him Bumslayer, or questioning his heart because he didn’t bring another title to Bean Town, or what have you, no Duke player has been talked down more. And I just think it’s way over the top. But feel free to keep running him down. It’s what all the cool kids are doing today.

You are quite misguided on this subject, I think. Simply giving one’s personal opinion about the way Kyrie played against Arizona does not constitute “running him down”. If a DBR poster cannot point out — quite correctly, in my opinion — that against Arizona he did not look to be in good shape, played poor defense, and did not do a good job of getting his teammates involved, then what kind of board is this? That is relatively mild criticism at worst.

Whether or not Kyrie is a bonafide NBA star has nothing to do with the subject at hand. And for the record, Kyrie was reviled by virtually the entire fandom and media surrounding the NBA last season for his poor leadership and defense. That was not a DBR thing.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.masslive.com/celtics/2019/09/kyrie-irving-says-he-failed-as-boston-celtics-leader-says-death-of-his-grandfather-impacted-change-of-heart.html%3foutputType=amp

[wsb3]

I have long ago moved on from this loss.
Just don't mention the 86 Championship.That one may take a little while.

[SouthernDukie]

As an aside, and for the record (before anyone else points it out), I do know his name is Kyrie, not Kylie. Just realized my silly iPad was autocorrecting his name. As is often the case, the autocorrection became an auto incorrection.

[Steven43]

I have long ago moved on from this loss.
Just don't mention the 86 Championship.That one may take a little while.

I think 2004 may have been worse. And 1999 was downright brutal as well. There have just been so many painful Duke losses since 1986. I guess it makes one appreciate the wins all the more.

[ncexnyc]

This topic is always good for a laugh or two. It provides almost as many laughs as when people on this board dump on Austin Rivers.

We've got a couple of people on this board who like to stir the pot and argue, just for the sake of arguing. You know who you. You're the person who responds multiple times in a thread without ever saying anything new.

Kyrie was a great player for Duke, but believe it or not prior to the injury there were actually people on this board who were crying Kyrie wasn't a pass first PG. I'm sure those of you who were here back then remember that, as well as how many pages the Kyrie Vigil thread went and everyone was extremely anxious for Kyrie to return.

The botton line is we ran into a team that was having a smoking hot evening and we also couldn't catch a break. Curry who had done a good job throughout the season providing us with some offensive spark off of the bench went out early in the 2nd half. Then we had Kyle's mysterious cut that took the staff forever to get patched up.

[cato]

Both preceding posts make my point: This was Nolan'steam, which was wrenched from him and handed to Kyrie, to no avail. I feel sorry for all involved.

How would Nolan and the team have reacted if a healthy Kyrie sat?

I’m trying to remember an example of a situation where the best player on a team was cleared to play but held out of an elimination game.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

Disagree, or more accurately there's no simply no way to prove the point as the game is not a series of discrete events. Change the substitution pattern and it's a completely different game. Put the ball in Nolan's hands exclusively and the end result is...? Who knows? Again K's decision to play Kyrie extended minutes, while understandable, ultimately proved to be the wrong decision (and yes the way Arizona played there may not have been a correct decision). To steal from hockey vernacular, that's one I wish Duke had back.

Kind of contradicted yourself there a tad. No, there's no way to prove EITHER point, and certainly no way to prove that playing Kyrie was the wrong decision. Fact is, we led at half, but the way big Derrick was playing, including that bomb he hit right before half - I knew we would lose the game...that Zona was just having one of those nights. Didn't even watch the second half. I don't think I"m prophetic. I think I just had the right instincts that game. My same instincts told me Zona would stink it up in the Elite 8, and that was on the money too.

BTW, I did worry about chemistry with Kyrie coming back, and I think it's a valid concern and I always want my team to stick with the hot hand (second string QB, second string goalie) if they're on a roll. I would say that Kyrie coming back did disrupt the chemistry, but that in this particular game, it didn't make a difference. Also of note, Kyrie was personally outstanding.

[OldPhiKap]

I have long ago moved on from this loss.
Just don't mention the 86 Championship.That one may take a little while.

I think 2004 may have been worse. And 1999 was downright brutal as well. There have just been so many painful Duke losses since 1986. I guess it makes one appreciate the wins all the more.

For me, the 1986 game is the absolute low point of my sports-watching life. I was on the quad watching the game. . . .

But as Steven43 says, you gotta embrace the wins. We’ve got plenty.

[sagegrouse]

I was in Indy in 2015 with my 9 YO granddaughter. That was the best.

[mgtr]

How would Nolan and the team have reacted if a healthy Kyrie sat?

I’m trying to remember an example of a situation where the best player on a team was cleared to play but held out of an elimination game.

OK, fair enough. This is a good point. Its the winning or losing that counts in the end. I am certain that there would have been a lot of rants if Kyrie had been held out the whole game, and we lost. The coin of life has both a heads and a tails.

[CameronBlue]

You completely contradict yourself within like 4 sentences. At first you say "there's no way to prove" and then "ultimately proved to be the wrong decision".

No I don't, but I will clarify. To state for the record, while directing this comment to no one in particular, I've criticized neither Kyrie nor Nolan in this thread. My comments strictly concern the manner in which K worked Kyrie back into the lineup. From comments upthread it appears that point may be getting lost. Speaking only for myself no crap was directed toward either player, that should be clear from the record. (Observation on a point of discussion I assume is unrelated to this subtopic: The Kyrie as "whipping boy" and NBA piker tangent must be spillover from debate on another thread. If not then that's some alternate reality/straw man weirdness I just don't understand.)

“It was the wrong decision because Duke lost” is inferential under the circumstances; no conclusion is beyond dispute. It is also an opinion, obvious, no? (That the level of “snark” is proportional to rational conjecture here is just a happy coincidence and I’m sure why we all love DBR just so damn much). Is it valid? In post-mortem, IMO, a few things stand out:

1. Nolan had an uncharacteristically bad game. Against 'Zona, Nolan had his third lowest point output (and shooting %) of the season, and tied for 2nd lowest number of assists. Overall the Arizona game was Nolan's 2nd worst statistically and his worst game Duke won handily against an over-matched opponent (Maryland ACCT 1st round).

2. The team attempted its 3rd lowest number of 3 pointers, 14. The season average was 21, (s=5.5 for those scoring at home). The two games which were lower were pre-ACC season walkovers.

3. Seth Curry, co-hero of UNC I and vital contributor in UNC III, who averaged 25 min/game over the season, played 9 minutes against ‘Zona.

4. That Nolan’s role was the one most impacted by Kyrie’s return is prima facie. I get the line of thinking that you don't put Kyrie on the floor for extended minutes and ask him to play off the ball. But Nolan had clearly established himself as Duke's point guard in Kyrie's absence, and proved to be extremely effective in the role. There are just too many performances to point to, to suggest otherwise: UNC I, UNC III etc. I dare to think that there is a DBR consensus on this point. With Kyrie's return, potentially, then, there was a conflict.

Kyrie is a spectacular finisher and tailor-made for Duke’s motion offense (whether the 3 out 2 in variant or otherwise). He scored 28 points but dished out only 3 assists. Nolan can finish but he had spent a full season refining his understanding of his role, recognizing what’s available, who is open, when to drive, when to pass back out to the perimeter. With Kyrie in the lineup, it’s logical to presume (haven’t gone back to watch the tape) that Nolan’s role would have changed from being more involved with ball distribution to being more of the spot-up shooter and forcing Seth to the bench. Potentially a disruption of significance to team chemistry.

Nothing I’ve said takes into consideration Arizona’s performance, in the end they may have been destined to win. While playing Kyrie in the manner he did is justifiable it would have been ballsy of K to ask the same thing Kyrie he did of another supremely talented player, Grant Hill back during Duke’s run to the 92 title, to take a more subordinate role given the circumstances. It’s a cliché that is nauseatingly facile and I cringe when saying it, but Duke was doing quite nicely through the ACC tournament: if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.