Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 61 to 78 of 78
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    Yup, Banchero seems fairly thin for his 6'9" or 6'10" listed height. He definitely looks thinner than Griffin to me.
    https://playersbio.com/paolo-banchero/

    a bunch of more recent articles list him at 235 lbs, for what that may be worth...this one is from a week ago, for example.

    please don't ask me about the writing style in that article, I have no particular explanation.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Natty_B View Post
    Andy Katz has Duke at #20 (below UNC) not sure I'm buying that one.
    I'd not have any issue with him saying he thinks we're #20, as it largely comes down to how highly you rate the freshmen coming in. But I have trouble seeing UNC better, considering that as of the moment they have nothing of note coming in, they are losing at least 2 and probably 3 (Brooks) of their 4 bigs, and they have a new coach. Katz suggests that Caleb Love's return is a good thing, but he was notably worse than Jeremy Roach was this year.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Greensboro

    Duke at 20?

    Quote Originally Posted by Natty_B View Post
    Andy Katz has Duke at #20 (below UNC) not sure I'm buying that one.
    I don't see us being as low as 20 regardless of whether Hurt comes back or not. 5 to 10 seems appropriate, with a lot of room for improvement over the season, especially if we have a larger number of pre-ACC games.

  4. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by Wander View Post
    LOL. If Duke was a top 40 team this year, then Gonzaga is the best team in the country by the same argument. I'm sure they'll be happy to hear it.

    Yes, Duke was ranked 36 in kenpom – above Georgia Tech, Oregon State, Virginia Tech, Florida, Michigan State, and several other teams that exactly zero non-Duke fans would agree were worse than Duke this year.
    Oh, hardly. VT benefitted enormously from lucky cancellations (easiest schedule in ACC by a large margin), Oregon State sucked all year then magically got it together for several games at the end of the year (which doesn’t mean they didn’t suck for most of the year), and Michigan State was a train wreck.

    I’d say I did think GT was better than Duke on balance over the year (lower ceiling perhaps, but far more consistent) and Florida... I’m not sure about. I’d have to think about it. But the rest were clearly inferior to Duke over the totality of the season. I’m in the “Duke was probably the best team to not make the NCAAs” camp.

    Edit - I’d peg you guys at like 8th or 9th atm for next year. 5th seems optimistic until we see how all the new pieces mesh AND we see how everyone else’s rosters end up (like, right now Virginia deserves an “incomplete” grade for next season). 13th feels pessimistic given the talent you’d got.
    Last edited by ElliottHoo; 04-06-2021 at 05:45 PM.

  5. #65
    Quote Originally Posted by mo.st.dukie View Post
    We all know what happened the last game. The 2nd half against VA Tech was pretty much entirely played within a 1-7 point margin and same against Miami. I don't care who they were missing, road games in the ACC are brutal and we've had some great teams get beat badly at both Miami and Virginia Tech. The fact is, that we were in every game once ACC play got going, that is true other than the very last game.

    It's amazing how people's perspective of the team and the potential of the players if we had won a few more games by 2 or 3 points instead of losing those games by 2 or 3 points.
    I was responding to post #20 that said once the ACC got going we were in every game. That’s obviously not the case against the Cheats. The 2nd half against VaT started with us at a 12-point deficit, and did get as close as 1 at 12:34. The rest of the half was a roughly 6-10 deficit, but we got it to 4 at 2:34 and then VaT put us away. So I disagree with your take that that game was pretty much played within a 1-7 pt margin. We can simply disagree that we were “in that game”. The ACC was weak this year and losing anywhere to Miami is a really bad loss.

    You imply that if we won a few more games by 2 or 3 points our perspective changes. As noted upstream we won several very close games that could have easily gone the other way. So, maybe another win or two gets us to 14-10 or 15-9 overall, that doesn’t make for an average Duke season under K.

    IMHO, The returning players (once we know who they are) will have to show dramatic improvement and the freshmen turn into world beaters for us to be top 10 or better. I think Andy Katz has it about right at 20.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by arnie View Post
    I was responding to post #20 that said once the ACC got going we were in every game. That’s obviously not the case against the Cheats. The 2nd half against VaT started with us at a 12-point deficit, and did get as close as 1 at 12:34. The rest of the half was a roughly 6-10 deficit, but we got it to 4 at 2:34 and then VaT put us away. So I disagree with your take that that game was pretty much played within a 1-7 pt margin. We can simply disagree that we were “in that game”. The ACC was weak this year and losing anywhere to Miami is a really bad loss.

    You imply that if we won a few more games by 2 or 3 points our perspective changes. As noted upstream we won several very close games that could have easily gone the other way. So, maybe another win or two gets us to 14-10 or 15-9 overall, that doesn’t make for an average Duke season under K.

    IMHO, The returning players (once we know who they are) will have to show dramatic improvement and the freshmen turn into world beaters for us to be top 10 or better. I think Andy Katz has it about right at 20.
    We didn’t win several close games. We were 2-6 in games decided by 5 or less or OT. We won TWO close games, not several. And now, 15-9 isn’t as good as our typical season. Nobody has said otherwise.

    And no, we don’t need both massive improvement from our returnees AND for the freshmen to be worldbeaters for us to be a top-10 team. If the freshmen are top-tier and the returnees improve a normal amount, that would probably do it. Or if we have massive improvement from our returnees and the freshmen are simply pretty good that could do it. Massive improvement AND worldbeating freshmen and we are in line for a 1 seed, not merely top-10.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    North Venice, FL
    Quote Originally Posted by mo.st.dukie View Post
    USA Today has us at #2 but with the assumption Hurt returns.

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...25/7076060002/
    Anyone who refers to Hurt as a "Christian Laettner impersonator" either never saw Christian Laettner, or never watched Mathew Hurt, or both. That reference gives the prediction zero credibility.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    San Francisco
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    I'd not have any issue with him saying he thinks we're #20, as it largely comes down to how highly you rate the freshmen coming in. But I have trouble seeing UNC better, considering that as of the moment they have nothing of note coming in, they are losing at least 2 and probably 3 (Brooks) of their 4 bigs, and they have a new coach. Katz suggests that Caleb Love's return is a good thing, but he was notably worse than Jeremy Roach was this year.
    But not in the two Duke-UNC games.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by szstark View Post
    Anyone who refers to Hurt as a "Christian Laettner impersonator" either never saw Christian Laettner, or never watched Mathew Hurt, or both. That reference gives the prediction zero credibility.
    Duke's been looking for the next Christian Laettner almost as long as Carolina has been looking for the next Michael Jordan but nowhere near as long as NC State has been looking for the next David Thompson.

  10. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by Bay Area Duke Fan View Post
    But not in the two Duke-UNC games.
    Those must have been the only two games involving Duke and UNC he watched.

    I get that writing up a top 36 is not an easy task, but a lot of the blurbs were phoned in. For Virginia, he simply noted that he trusts Tony Bennett to figure things out and get whatever roster to meld into a competitive team. For Duke, he has all sorts of questions about the roster. Ask yourself, which coach has more consistently had his team ready to compete in the postseason the past decade?

  11. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    We didn’t win several close games. We were 2-6 in games decided by 5 or less or OT. We won TWO close games, not several. And now, 15-9 isn’t as good as our typical season. Nobody has said otherwise.

    And no, we don’t need both massive improvement from our returnees AND for the freshmen to be worldbeaters for us to be a top-10 team. If the freshmen are top-tier and the returnees improve a normal amount, that would probably do it. Or if we have massive improvement from our returnees and the freshmen are simply pretty good that could do it. Massive improvement AND worldbeating freshmen and we are in line for a 1 seed, not merely top-10.
    NOT True. We beat BC and UVA by 1. Hope you agree those games were close. We were tied with GaT with 1:19 left and 2 ahead with 46 seconds left. I call that 3 close games which should qualify as several.

    Getting past all that, I’m just not as optimistic as most posters. I’ll gladly eat crow if we are a Top 10 ten.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by arnie View Post
    NOT True. We beat BC and UVA by 1. Hope you agree those games were close. We were tied with GaT with 1:19 left and 2 ahead with 46 seconds left. I call that 3 close games which should qualify as several.

    Getting past all that, I’m just not as optimistic as most posters. I’ll gladly eat crow if we are a Top 10 ten.
    I would not call 3 several; I would call that a few. Regardless, if we want to include the Ga Tech win as close (totally reasonable) then we should add the Pitt loss as close (we were within 2 with under 1:30 to play at Pitt), making us 3-7 in close games. No matter how you cut it, we were a bit more unlucky in fortune in close games than we were lucky, by about 2 games’ worth.

  13. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    I would not call 3 several; I would call that a few. Regardless, if we want to include the Ga Tech win as close (totally reasonable) then we should add the Pitt loss as close (we were within 2 with under 1:30 to play at Pitt), making us 3-7 in close games. No matter how you cut it, we were a bit more unlucky in fortune in close games than we were lucky, by about 2 games’ worth.
    I would say 3 is more like a handful than a few or several. But I’m considering average sized hands holding apples or oranges but not cantaloupes. 3 apples is just right but 4 is a challenge. I also considered a “smattering” or a “plethora” but neither seemed well suited for triples.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Durham
    Quote Originally Posted by lotusland View Post
    I would say 3 is more like a handful than a few or several. But I’m considering average sized hands holding apples or oranges but not cantaloupes. 3 apples is just right but 4 is a challenge. I also considered a “smattering” or a “plethora” but neither seemed well suited for triples.
    a sprinkling?
    basketball is back, baby!

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Winston Salem, NC
    If I remember correctly, Duke's defense in the first few games were pretty good and our offense was not. Then our defense really got bad and it looked like teams started isolating Hurt on switches. Toward the end of the season, Mark Williams appeared and our defense improved quite a bit. My opinion if Hurt returns our defense will be worse and our offense will be better. One thing I took away from what little I saw in the NCAAT was Baylor was a terrific defensive team that could get 2nd shots. As much as I love Matthew Hurt, his defense is not good and he's not a good rebounder. That's one reason I feel Williams returning is the most important factor in Duke being very good. I rate that over getting a transfer guard and/or getting Baldwin. At this point I think Duke could be rated anywhere from #5 to #20. A lot depends on 1) Williams returning, 2) an incoming transfer and 3) No one else leaves.

    GoDuke!

  16. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by jv001 View Post
    If I remember correctly, Duke's defense in the first few games were pretty good and our offense was not.
    That's why the 20-21 Blue Devils remind me of the 20-21 Seahawks!

  17. #77
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Winston Salem, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15 View Post
    That's why the 20-21 Blue Devils remind me of the 20-21 Seahawks!
    Or maybe the WFT.

    GoDuke!

  18. #78
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    Quote Originally Posted by uh_no View Post
    a sprinkling?
    more than a sprinkling but less than a smattering if I can fine tune it a wee bit...

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 48
    Last Post: 06-10-2020, 10:52 AM
  2. MLax: Way-Too-Early 2018 Rankings
    By burnspbesq in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-12-2017, 02:00 PM
  3. Way too early ACC rankings for next year
    By gofurman in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-16-2012, 09:38 AM
  4. Stupidly Early Preseason Rankings
    By DavidBenAkiva in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 04-07-2010, 09:42 AM

Posting Permissions

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