Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 49
  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    The counterargument to this is that it's basically the same thing that has happened each of the last two years since Grayson Allen graduated (and as Grayson was the only significant returning contributor, you could include heading into his senior year as well). Yet we've continued to be a top-5 team in o verall efficiency each year. It has looked different from year to year (first the zone defense, then the Zion/Barrett juggernaut approach, then the Carey/Jones and deep rotation approach). Next year's team will almost certainly look different as well (probably more interchangeable parts style and more guys able to create their own shots). But I'd expect it to be a really really good team again. Especially so if Stanley does decide to return.
    I'm inclined to agree. If I were forced to put money on it, I'd definitely bet on Duke being a Top-10 team next year, beating the Torvik projection. I just think it's worth considering what the other side of the distribution might be, and what it would take to push us to that side.

    This past season was actually one of Coach K's most impressive jobs in recent years, in my opinion. Getting Tre and Vern to the levels they achieved this year was awesome, and I certainly wouldn't want anyone else there to coach up the likes of Moore/Hurt/Johnson/Roach/Steward, etc.

  2. #22
    Seth Davis has Duke #6. Seems high but I'll take it.

    https://theathletic.com/1733488/2020...top-right-now/

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Natty_B View Post
    Seth Davis has Duke #6. Seems high but I'll take it.

    https://theathletic.com/1733488/2020...top-right-now/
    Seth Davis being high would explain many of his takes.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    New Orleans, Louisiana
    Quote Originally Posted by Natty_B View Post
    Seth Davis has Duke #6. Seems high but I'll take it.

    https://theathletic.com/1733488/2020...top-right-now/
    Quote Originally Posted by Hingeknocker View Post
    Seth Davis being high would explain many of his takes.
    Also high is the paywall for that article. I know that Gonzaga, Baylor, Villanova, and Creighton are four of the Top 5.

    Here are free ones that also came out this week.

    NCAA.com/Andy Katz Power 36

    1. Gonzaga
    2. Baylor
    3. Villanova
    4. Creighton
    5. Iowa
    6. Wisconsin
    7. Kansas
    8. Michigan
    9. Kentucky
    10. Virginia
    11. Duke
    14. Florida State
    15. North Carolina
    24. Louisville

    On the bubble: NC State

    Sports Illustrated/Jeremy Woo Top 25

    1. Villanova
    2. Gonzaga
    3. Baylor
    4. Virginia
    5. Creighton
    6. Kentucky
    7. Duke
    8. Iowa
    9. Kansas
    10. Texas Tech
    15. Florida State
    21. North Carolina

    MSN Sports/theScore/Mark Cooper Top 25

    1. Gonzaga
    2. Creighton
    3. Baylor
    4. San Diego State
    5. Villanova
    6. Virginia
    7. Kansas
    8. Kentucky
    9. Michigan State
    10. Houston
    12. Duke
    17. North Carolina
    24. Florida State

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    northern Virginia
    Quote Originally Posted by brevity View Post

    On the bubble: NC State
    Some things never change!

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    New Orleans, Louisiana
    Quote Originally Posted by brevity View Post
    ESPN/Jeff Borzello Top 25 (posted March 21)

    1. Villanova
    2. Creighton
    3. Gonzaga
    4. Baylor
    5. Kentucky
    6. Duke
    7. Iowa
    8. Virginia
    9. Michigan State
    10. Kansas
    11. North Carolina
    22. Florida State
    April 20 is a ridiculously early time for ESPN/Jeff Borzello's UPDATED ranking, but life in Bristol is boring, and here we are.

    1. Villanova
    2. Gonzaga
    3. Baylor
    4. Virginia
    5. Iowa
    6. Kansas
    7. Duke
    8. Michigan State
    9. Wisconsin
    10. Arizona State
    16. North Carolina
    22. Florida State

    Next in Line: Louisville

    Bobby Hurley and Arizona State rise from "next in line" to #10. Creighton and Kentucky each dropped 10 places. Regarding UNC's fall from #11 to #16: "I may have been a little aggressive with my ranking of the Tar Heels in March, slotting them just outside the top 10. Now, I do love this team's talent -- but I question how it's all going to come together."

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by brevity View Post
    April 20 is a ridiculously early time for ESPN/Jeff Borzello's UPDATED ranking, but life in Bristol is boring, and here we are.

    1. Villanova
    2. Gonzaga
    3. Baylor
    4. Virginia
    5. Iowa
    6. Kansas
    7. Duke
    8. Michigan State
    9. Wisconsin
    10. Arizona State
    16. North Carolina
    22. Florida State

    Next in Line: Louisville

    Bobby Hurley and Arizona State rise from "next in line" to #10. Creighton and Kentucky each dropped 10 places. Regarding UNC's fall from #11 to #16: "I may have been a little aggressive with my ranking of the Tar Heels in March, slotting them just outside the top 10. Now, I do love this team's talent -- but I question how it's all going to come together."
    UNC has a CRAPLOAD of frontcourt guys. A TON. absurd really. Bacot, Brooks (really good) and the two 5* guys. No way they foul out... the issue is obviously you can only play two at a time. Brooks and ? (one of Bacot or the two freshman). Supposedly a superstar PG too. But the weakness is they don't have a proven wing or shooter. Better they have the 4 studs inside than 3 studs inside and a super shooter too. Now they may have the shooter .. just not proven yet.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh
    Quote Originally Posted by gofurman View Post
    UNC has a CRAPLOAD of frontcourt guys. A TON. absurd really. Bacot, Brooks (really good) and the two 5* guys. No way they foul out... the issue is obviously you can only play two at a time. Brooks and ? (one of Bacot or the two freshman). Supposedly a superstar PG too. But the weakness is they don't have a proven wing or shooter. Better they have the 4 studs inside than 3 studs inside and a super shooter too. Now they may have the shooter .. just not proven yet.
    Wait, PJ has eligibility remaining?

    [redacted] them and the horses they rode in on.

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by gofurman View Post
    UNC has a CRAPLOAD of frontcourt guys. A TON. absurd really. Bacot, Brooks (really good) and the two 5* guys. No way they foul out... the issue is obviously you can only play two at a time. Brooks and ? (one of Bacot or the two freshman). Supposedly a superstar PG too. But the weakness is they don't have a proven wing or shooter. Better they have the 4 studs inside than 3 studs inside and a super shooter too. Now they may have the shooter .. just not proven yet.
    I didn't realize Brooks had a year left. One of those guys that feels like he's been in the ACC for like 6 seasons. Too bad for the heels trades aren't a thing in cbb- they could totally offer up a couple of those bigs for an elite shooter and slasher.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Wahoo2000 View Post
    I didn't realize Brooks had a year left. One of those guys that feels like he's been in the ACC for like 6 seasons. Too bad for the heels trades aren't a thing in cbb- they could totally offer up a couple of those bigs for an elite shooter and slasher.
    Fortunately for them they don't rely on slashers at all. It's all about the PG and the bigs. Wings at UNC are de-emphasized.

    The key will be how well their freshman PG can carry the load, and how well Harris comes back from injury on the wing. If those two guys are fine, UNC should be really good next year. But not all freshmen hit the ground running at UNC.

  11. #31
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Chesapeake, VA.
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    ... But not all freshmen hit the ground running at UNC.
    Understatement of the year!

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by brevity View Post
    April 20 is a ridiculously early time for ESPN/Jeff Borzello's UPDATED ranking, but life in Bristol is boring, and here we are.

    1. Villanova
    2. Gonzaga
    3. Baylor
    4. Virginia
    5. Iowa
    6. Kansas
    7. Duke
    8. Michigan State
    9. Wisconsin
    10. Arizona State
    16. North Carolina
    22. Florida State

    Next in Line: Louisville

    Bobby Hurley and Arizona State rise from "next in line" to #10. Creighton and Kentucky each dropped 10 places. Regarding UNC's fall from #11 to #16: "I may have been a little aggressive with my ranking of the Tar Heels in March, slotting them just outside the top 10. Now, I do love this team's talent -- but I question how it's all going to come together."
    I usually laugh at Duke's high preseason ranking, because I feel that the voters put talent above experience and experience is undervalued (just my two cents).

    This time around, I think 6-7 is too low! Lots of teams are getting gutted, including KU, UNC, UK (especially UK), Creighton, and even Gonzaga. Virginia is awesome defensively but still so many questions about that offense.

    I think top 3 is legit for this Duke team. We return the #12 and #25 best players in the 2023 class. The only player ranked ahead of Hurt who is returning is Scottie Lewis. We have one of the best defensive guards in the nation in Goldwire. And even if he doesn't start, Goldwire will play a lot and lead a lot. And then we have Baker, who to me is a massive wildcard due to his shooting ability (I'm not expecting him to have a Kennard-esque jump, but I would easily see him be a high volume 40%+ 3pt shooter).

    And then the frosh. We have a surefire stud in Johnson. DJ and Jeremy are starter-level talent and could even be high impact like Johnson. And then we have 4 wildcards (including Tape) who are all big men.
    Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things. - Winston Churchill

    President of the "Nolan Smith Should Have His Jersey in The Rafters" Club

  13. #33
    ^ I tend to agree, I think we may be underrated.

    I'm fascinated to see how our offense will function with essentially two point guards. Would love to see us routinely have 14+ assists per game. Is that too ambitious?

  14. #34
    scottdude8's Avatar
    scottdude8 is offline Contributor, Zoubek disciple, and resident Wolverine
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Toronto
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingdutchdevil View Post
    I usually laugh at Duke's high preseason ranking, because I feel that the voters put talent above experience and experience is undervalued (just my two cents).

    This time around, I think 6-7 is too low! Lots of teams are getting gutted, including KU, UNC, UK (especially UK), Creighton, and even Gonzaga. Virginia is awesome defensively but still so many questions about that offense.

    I think top 3 is legit for this Duke team. We return the #12 and #25 best players in the 2023 class. The only player ranked ahead of Hurt who is returning is Scottie Lewis. We have one of the best defensive guards in the nation in Goldwire. And even if he doesn't start, Goldwire will play a lot and lead a lot. And then we have Baker, who to me is a massive wildcard due to his shooting ability (I'm not expecting him to have a Kennard-esque jump, but I would easily see him be a high volume 40%+ 3pt shooter).

    And then the frosh. We have a surefire stud in Johnson. DJ and Jeremy are starter-level talent and could even be high impact like Johnson. And then we have 4 wildcards (including Tape) who are all big men.
    Seconded. While there are some teams that are returning more than Duke (Virginia, Villanova, Gonzaga, Iowa and Creighton primarily), all of those teams aren't getting off scot-free (Creighton is officially losing Alexander to the draft, Nova may lose Bey, Virginia loses key seniors like Diakite... and even Gonzaga has a few players testing the waters), and many of them were good, but most certainly not great, teams last year. Virginia had a hard ceiling because of their offense, and there doesn't seem to be a clear solution there. Nova and Creighton were both very good Big East teams, but they also were both 7 loss teams that had some very bad stretches. I wouldn't expect Luka Garza to be quite as dominant this year as opposed to last for Iowa now that teams will be gameplaning the heck out of him. Gonzaga will be a number one seed because they're Gonzaga, so no harm no foul there.

    Certainly Duke's floor in 2020-21 is lower than those teams. But I think our ceiling is much higher. I'd argue that Hurt and Moore are likely to improve more between their freshman and sophomore years than most other returnees given their recruiting bona-fides and the new roles they'll have as the clear alphas on this year's team. Goldwire is an X-factor any team would love to have. I'm similarly bullish on Joey Buckets, too... and that doesn't even get into the freshmen.

    TL;DR: I really hope we see college basketball sooner rather than later, because I love the potential of this year's squad.
    Scott Rich on the front page

    Trinity BS 2012; University of Michigan PhD 2018
    Duke Chronicle, Sports Online Editor: 2010-2012
    K-Ville Blue Tenting 2009-2012

    Unofficial Brian Zoubek Biographer
    If you have questions about Michigan Basketball/Football, I'm your man!

  15. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by scottdude8 View Post
    Seconded. While there are some teams that are returning more than Duke (Virginia, Villanova, Gonzaga, Iowa and Creighton primarily), all of those teams aren't getting off scot-free (Creighton is officially losing Alexander to the draft, Nova may lose Bey, Virginia loses key seniors like Diakite... and even Gonzaga has a few players testing the waters), and many of them were good, but most certainly not great, teams last year. Virginia had a hard ceiling because of their offense, and there doesn't seem to be a clear solution there. Nova and Creighton were both very good Big East teams, but they also were both 7 loss teams that had some very bad stretches. I wouldn't expect Luka Garza to be quite as dominant this year as opposed to last for Iowa now that teams will be gameplaning the heck out of him. Gonzaga will be a number one seed because they're Gonzaga, so no harm no foul there.

    Certainly Duke's floor in 2020-21 is lower than those teams. But I think our ceiling is much higher. I'd argue that Hurt and Moore are likely to improve more between their freshman and sophomore years than most other returnees given their recruiting bona-fides and the new roles they'll have as the clear alphas on this year's team. Goldwire is an X-factor any team would love to have. I'm similarly bullish on Joey Buckets, too... and that doesn't even get into the freshmen.

    TL;DR: I really hope we see college basketball sooner rather than later, because I love the potential of this year's squad.
    I do believe Nova is the #1 team in the country, and it isn't close. Their returning talent is insane, especially if Antoine confirms it (and I don't think he's going pro).

    But Duke? I could easily see us as #2. The Zags are the Zags, and they can have the West Coast. If we play them, we aren't likely to see them until the FF. And I think we'll beat them on a neutral floor.
    Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things. - Winston Churchill

    President of the "Nolan Smith Should Have His Jersey in The Rafters" Club

  16. #36
    To be a 1-seed type team, we'll probably need several players to surprise. (I'll define "surprise" as exceeding your recruiting ranking if you're a freshman and exceeding your projected improvement if you're a vet.)

    So, for example, if UNC were going to start the following, I doubt we'd see them as a top-3 team:

    PG - A freshman ranked #21 (by 247's composite ranking)
    SG - A freshman ranked #24
    SF - A sophomore who's a very good defender but posted a 93 offensive rating as a freshman
    PF - A freshman ranked #11
    C - (A sophomore who can shoot but didn't defend as a freshman) OR (Columbia's starting center) OR (a freshman ranked #29)

    Now, I do anticipate we'll see a surprise or two. If I had to guess, I think Steward is underrated. I think either Moore or Hurt will far exceed his freshman performance.

    But I think a preseason ranking in the back half of the top 10 is fair (and potentially optimistic if there ends up being no surprises).

  17. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by Troublemaker View Post
    To be a 1-seed type team, we'll probably need several players to surprise. (I'll define "surprise" as exceeding your recruiting ranking if you're a freshman and exceeding your projected improvement if you're a vet.)

    So, for example, if UNC were going to start the following, I doubt we'd see them as a top-3 team:

    PG - A freshman ranked #21 (by 247's composite ranking)
    SG - A freshman ranked #24
    SF - A sophomore who's a very good defender but posted a 93 offensive rating as a freshman
    PF - A freshman ranked #11
    C - (A sophomore who can shoot but didn't defend as a freshman) OR (Columbia's starting center) OR (a freshman ranked #29)

    Now, I do anticipate we'll see a surprise or two. If I had to guess, I think Steward is underrated. I think either Moore or Hurt will far exceed his freshman performance.

    But I think a preseason ranking in the back half of the top 10 is fair (and potentially optimistic if there ends up being no surprises).
    This will be a rebuilding year. Just not enough experience. There are good players and they will have their moments but unless someone is Parker good, or Tatum good, or Ingram good- this is going to be a struggle. There are returning experienced players in the league. UVa is prime example of a team that will give this young Duke team fits. UNC will be markedly better. I will wait and see but I think expectations will be very low.

  18. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by dukelifer View Post
    This will be a rebuilding year. Just not enough experience. There are good players and they will have their moments but unless someone is Parker good, or Tatum good, or Ingram good- this is going to be a struggle. There are returning experienced players in the league. UVa is prime example of a team that will give this young Duke team fits. UNC will be markedly better. I will wait and see but I think expectations will be very low.
    That's too far in the other direction, assuming "rebuilding" means outside the top 20. According to kenpom ($$$), we haven't been outside the top 20 in a quarter century. Also, "just not enough experience" is slightly imprecise to me since we've had really good, really young teams before. It's more that, like last year's freshmen class, they're not quite the high-end freshmen we'd been landing before and on paper don't project to be as immediately impactful. If this roster is largely still around for the 2021-22 season, we could really be something then if we can combine them with a stud or two from the high school class of 2021.

  19. #39
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Troublemaker View Post
    To be a 1-seed type team, we'll probably need several players to surprise. (I'll define "surprise" as exceeding your recruiting ranking if you're a freshman and exceeding your projected improvement if you're a vet.)

    So, for example, if UNC were going to start the following, I doubt we'd see them as a top-3 team:

    PG - A freshman ranked #21 (by 247's composite ranking)
    SG - A freshman ranked #24
    SF - A sophomore who's a very good defender but posted a 93 offensive rating as a freshman
    PF - A freshman ranked #11
    C - (A sophomore who can shoot but didn't defend as a freshman) OR (Columbia's starting center) OR (a freshman ranked #29)

    Now, I do anticipate we'll see a surprise or two. If I had to guess, I think Steward is underrated. I think either Moore or Hurt will far exceed his freshman performance.

    But I think a preseason ranking in the back half of the top 10 is fair (and potentially optimistic if there ends up being no surprises).
    I would point out that this is relying heavily on 247's vague "composite" ranking. Especially since it disagrees with the composite ratings from RSCI's summer site in terms of Johnson. If Johnson is more like the top-5 guy that RSCI had him, that would notably change the dynamic.

    Worth noting that Hurt was performing above where Jones was last year based on the advanced metrics. And the biggest thing that was limiting him was something that should inherently improve with age (his strength). I don't think he will have to surprise next year to become a star player.

    My suspicion is that Johnson and Hurt are studs, Roach and Steward are "better than you might expect from a Duke top-20/30", and Moore is better but not "surprisingly" better.

  20. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by bullettoothtony View Post
    I'm fascinated to see how our offense will function with essentially two point guards. Would love to see us routinely have 14+ assists per game. Is that too ambitious?
    Probably not overly ambitious, considering that Duke has had 14+ assists per game in 7 of the past 10 seasons (and 13+ in two of the three others). Best performance over the 10 year period was 17.5 apg in 2018.

Similar Threads

  1. Preseason basketball rankings
    By wilson in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 10-16-2015, 08:13 AM
  2. Preseason football rankings
    By wilson in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 08-25-2015, 12:08 PM
  3. Preseason Rankings
    By El_Diablo in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 11-03-2011, 03:43 PM
  4. Stupidly Early Preseason Rankings
    By DavidBenAkiva in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 04-07-2010, 08:42 AM
  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
  •