Why "insert team here" won't win the title

• centralbucksfan

  Azubuike24 wrote:

  centralbucksfan wrote:

  Azubuike24 wrote: Just to play a little devil's advocate.
  
  Kentucky won't win a title because they can't win 6 straight games under the microscope with a young team and against opposition who will do anything to take them out of their game. This includes slowing the game down, committing hard fouls and trying to exploit tempers of a few players. I don't think they can pull out 4 straight games like the Vanderbilt game on Saturday, even if they are the most talented squad on the floor.

  I actually believe, what could do in UK, is the lack of consistant competition throughout the season. Their toughest games in conference, is Vandy, rated and Tenn both near end of top 20 ratings, both good, still not great. They have yet to really play a legit top 10 team, one that matches up with them in certain area's. Their OCC schedule was not good...especially now that UNC and UConn are both where they are. It'll be interesting to see how these young frosh repond when put to a real test, and if they happen to get by one team, there will be yet another waiting.
  Reminds me of Cal teams at Memphis. So so conference, OCC was just ok and that may have cost his teams in the tourney.

  I'd buy this if they didn't have a coach who has gone far in the tournament year after year from Conference USA. UK has played tough opponents and in tough environments. There won't be a team who comes out and shocks them by being able to match up man to man. I think only 1 team can do that anyway, and it's Kansas.
  
  One thing I'll also add is foul shooting. DeMarcus Cousins has become the guy I most want on the foul line outside of John Wall, and that's scary. It always plagued Calipari at Memphis, and it's going to be a slight achilles heel heading into the NCAA's this year.

  Isn't the title of the thread about why a team wont' win a title? Last I checked, Cals team at Memphis didn't win the title. They had unbelievable talent during this time, as much as anyone in the country, comparable to what he currently has at UK...yet no title.
  Again, I said I couild see them getting by one top team...but to go up against another and win.....
  Sorry, but in the SEC....besides the two I mentioned, there hasn't been a stretch of back to back to back real difficult games.
• Azubuike24

  

  I am aware of what the title of the thread is. I just didn't necessarily agree with your reasoning. I would point to Purdue as a similar team. Who have they played? Which tough environments? At MSU, at Wisconsin and at Illinois. That's about it. Nothing in the non-conference in-terms of road tests.
  
  Hell, I'd say Kentucky's game at a sold out Madison Square Garden against Connecticut might be one of the single best NCAA Tournament-like preparation games that anyone has played this year.
  
  We can obviously disagree, but I don't buy the schedule thing at all. Maybe if it was Memphis and they had a soft OOC schedule...but not UK, and even in the SEC.
• swamisez

  

  Laley23 wrote:

  swamisez wrote:
  
  Lack of a notable big man
  Michigan State 2000
  Syracuse 2003
  Kansas 2008
  
  I think it can be done, I would put Zoubek as a senior in the same class as Aldrich as a Frosh. Both were used primarily for defense and didn't show flashes of offensive promise until much later in the season.

  Sorry, bad examples
  
  Syracuse had a guy. You may know him. He is Carmelo Anthony. Not to mention future lottery pick Hakim Warrick.
  
  Kansas had 2 very good post options in Darnell Jackson and Darrel Arthur. Both of whom trump what Duke has this year or in past year.
  
  MSU is pretty good. I think Dukes bigs compare to Granger and Hutson. The other two arent even debatable though. At least, imo.

  The point said "valuable big man". I guess I think when I hear that phrasing I refer to a prototypical center. Darrel Arthur, Hakim Warrick, Carmelo Anthony were not prototypical big men. Sasha Kahn yes, he would fit that mold.
• Laley23

  

  swamisez wrote:

  Laley23 wrote:

  swamisez wrote:
  
  Lack of a notable big man
  Michigan State 2000
  Syracuse 2003
  Kansas 2008
  
  I think it can be done, I would put Zoubek as a senior in the same class as Aldrich as a Frosh. Both were used primarily for defense and didn't show flashes of offensive promise until much later in the season.

  Sorry, bad examples
  
  Syracuse had a guy. You may know him. He is Carmelo Anthony. Not to mention future lottery pick Hakim Warrick.
  
  Kansas had 2 very good post options in Darnell Jackson and Darrel Arthur. Both of whom trump what Duke has this year or in past year.
  
  MSU is pretty good. I think Dukes bigs compare to Granger and Hutson. The other two arent even debatable though. At least, imo.

  The point said "valuable big man". I guess I think when I hear that phrasing I refer to a prototypical center. Darrel Arthur, Hakim Warrick, Carmelo Anthony were not prototypical big men. Sasha Kahn yes, he would fit that mold.

  Gotcha. Although I would say Dukes overall lack of big men is an issue. Which it wasnt for those teams. I would agree they arent prototypical bigs though. But they are much more skilled than what Duke has on the roster.
• swamisez

  

  That last fact cannot be debated when someone like Brian Zoubek is in discussion.
• Laley23

  

  swamisez wrote: That last fact cannot be debated when someone like Brian Zoubek is in discussion.

  lol. I do love the Plumlee brothers. But they are both young and untested, particularly in big tourney games. They could be the bigs needed (along with some depth in the post) that gets Duke back to the FF in the coming years.
• Laley23

  

  I dont like the SEC for UK this year in preparation, but I wouldnt consider it an issue for them winning it all. As Az said, Cal took Memphis would played a great OOC schedule and crap conference schedule to the final seconds of the championship. He has that much talent this year and played a decent OOC schedule, but the SEC is MUCH better than C-USA. So if that little amount is what we are basing on it would be enough to put two more pts up in the final.
  
  Obviously that is hypothetical, and cant be judged or anything. But Cal has played a tougher overall schedule this year than any year at Memphis.
• swamisez

  

  Until the rules about college bb change or K starts going after one and done players, I don't see them being a viable title contender. The landscape is so different, and their type of talent isn't what is necessary to win at that level. The talent on the 2001 team was obvious they had three/four players who were NBA ready. This year Singler? Scheyer? Smith? I don't see any of those being a major contributor at the NBA level. Even Chris Duhon has found a niche in the NBA. Boozer Williams Battier were all NBA calibre. This year's devils don't have a single player most would agree could be a legitimate threat at the next level.
• cats gone wild

  centralbucksfan wrote:
  Their OCC schedule was not good...especially now that UNC and UConn are both where they are. It'll be interesting to see how these young frosh repond when put to a real test, and if they happen to get by one team, there will be yet another waiting.
  Reminds me of Cal teams at Memphis. So so conference, OCC was just ok and that may have cost his teams in the tourney.

  I would say UConn is turning it around. They have beat 3 teams that were ranked in the top 10 (WVU, Vill, Tex). But, this was a bad year to play UNC, Louis, and Indiana who are usually good, but this year bad. Beating Vandy twice and Tenn once so far is pretty good. As others said, at Memphis he didnt have a tough schedule but still managed to do pretty good in tourney.
• georgemc80

  I agree with swami...the current NBA draft rule is bastardizing the college game.
• Prescott

  Until the rules about college bb change or K starts going after one and done players,

  I thought he went after John Wall.
• centralbucksfan

  Azubuike24 wrote: I am aware of what the title of the thread is. I just didn't necessarily agree with your reasoning. I would point to Purdue as a similar team. Who have they played? Which tough environments? At MSU, at Wisconsin and at Illinois. That's about it. Nothing in the non-conference in-terms of road tests.
  
  Hell, I'd say Kentucky's game at a sold out Madison Square Garden against Connecticut might be one of the single best NCAA Tournament-like preparation games that anyone has played this year.
  
  We can obviously disagree, but I don't buy the schedule thing at all. Maybe if it was Memphis and they had a soft OOC schedule...but not UK, and even in the SEC.

  
  First of all, comparing the SEC to the Big Ten in bball is like me comparing the Big Ten to SEC in football.
  Secondly, Purdue is a SEASONED experienced team that made the sweet 16 last year. Been there done that already. Doesn't gaurantee anything...but that experience cannot be substituted. Bad comparison.
  UConn? Come on..if thats the best you can come up with, thats not very good to be honest. Even with win last nite, They are still VERY iffy to get into the NCAA. They are sub .500 in Big East right now.
  And again..with has much talent as Cal had at Memphis...he still never won a title.
  And lets not forget...Cal ONLY made 1 final four while at Memphis in 9yrs. His teams were also in the NIT 3 of those years. Lost in 1,2 round 2 times.
  His last 4yrs were obviously good...but if you look closely...when his teams FINALLY ran into quality teams/coaches in 3 of those 4yrs in 2005(UCLA), 2006(OSU), they lost. Last year,a top seed, lost to Mizzou in sweet16.
  So its not like his record in NCAA is as sparkling as many make it out to be.
  
  I think Cal is a quality coach. But I also think he is one of the most overhyped coaches, EVER.
• Azubuike24

  

  The comparison was more about the atmosphere of the game, not the quality of the opponent. A neutral game at MSG against a high profile opponent is a great comparison to an NCAA game. I don't buy the argument about a team being "tested" during the season necessarily. I don't think if this UK team loses it will be because they weren't tested. That's all.
• reclegend22

  

  I think Duke has as viable a shot at cutting down the nets as anyone else. Sure the Blue Devils have suspect perimeter depth, but when your starters one through three are Jon Scheyer, Nolan Smith and Kyle Singler, this doesn't matter as much. We've already seen the type of talent Andre Dawkins possesses (he single handily kept Duke in its game at Wisconsin in December late in the second half, hitting four consecutive triples under Kohl's harsh lights to bring the Devils back from down doubles). It's just a matter of him finally breaking out of the slump he went into mid-season, around the time his sister was killed in a car crash traveling to one of his games in Durham. And Ryan Kelly, who often floats between the three and four, provides Duke with another capable outside shot and proven inside rebounding.
  
  That's been the key to Duke's season, and what will keep the Blue Devils in the title hunt: rebounding. Duke has transformed into one of the most efficient offensive rebounding teams in the nation, and for a team with as many deadly outside weapons as Duke, second chance opportunities on the offensive end can be a killer for a tournament opponent. As has been mentioned, possessions often come at a premium in the NCAAs, which means less overall opportunities to score. This gives a team like Duke, who has bigs inside who are adept at regaining possession of missed shots and kicking back out to their open teammates on the perimeter, an advantage. It's all about creating more opportunities for your team to score, and Duke has enough proficient scoring weapons to kill teams that allow the Devils to earn second and third shot opportunities. It will also get your team more trips to the free throw stripe. This absolutely killed Virginia Tech the other night. Frankly, it was the difference in the game.
  
  Conversely, this was the same difference in Duke's losses to VCU, West Virginia and Villanova the past three seasons. The Blue Devils were unable in every one of those games to stop the opposition from scoring on second chance points and could deliver none of their own. The blame for Duke's recent March losses often resorts back to the "live by the three, die by the three" mantra. But Duke didn't shoot any more threes those seasons than it did in '01 or '04. The Blue Devils just had teams that were capable of rebounding back then. When you shoot that many threes and are having a cold night, without the ability to rebound, it's going to be one-and-out every time and you're getting your ass kicked. That won't be happening this season. This will make up for any athletic misgivings many think Duke still has. (Just remember, however, this same Duke backcourt took it to UConn’s Kemba Walker and Jerome Dyson earlier this year in a crushing of the Huskies. This is the same athletic backcourt that has been tearing the Big East up of late.)
  
  Brian Zoubek and Lance Thomas may not be Darnell Jackson and Darryl Arthur, but they are solid interior presences that provide rebounding and defensive pressure. Zoubek has been utilized as a strong disruptor inside all season -- doing the little things such as altering and blocking shots, grabbing boards and not allowing teams those valuable second chance points and starting Duke's break early with excellent outlet passing -- and Thomas is one of the best defenders in the country, a versatile mix that can shadow an opposing team's best guard on the perimeter or bang down low and pressure a power forward. Miles and Mason Plumlee are both unrefined at this point, but are extraordinary finishers when playing smart and not in foul trouble. Mason has as much athletic ability and NBA potential as any frontcourt player in the ACC. He's on the verge of that true breakout game. It just hasn't happened yet. He's shown flashes of brilliance, but not the whole picture. If that happens in the ACC Tournament or in the Big Dance, watch out.
  
  As for Duke not having any "big men" that are as skilled as recent national championship teams, I completely disagree. Kyle Singler, who fits into the same mold as those who were being mentioned above, is as skilled as any player in the country. He's a 6'8" guard in a forward's body, but can also go inside and finish with the skills of a back-to-the-basket center. He has unlimited range on his outside shot, a Larry Bird-esque touch on his mid-range pull-up and turnaround, superb handle, deft passing ability and plays great post-up and chaser defense. After a rough start to the season in which he was playing out of his true position, Singler is hitting his stride. Over his past six games he's averaging 20 points and shooting 23-of-42 from three. There are very few big men with that type of skill on the perimeter. And when you play under him, he can take you inside with dribble penetration to finish with a dunk or floater, get to the free throw line or dish off to a teammate for two.
  
  The star talent is obviously there in Scheyer, Smith and Singler. These are all All-American caliber players. And with an ever-improving inside game, Duke has a shot to win it all. It might not happen, but for the first time in four seasons, Duke will be a real player in March.
• centralbucksfan

  Azubuike24 wrote: The comparison was more about the atmosphere of the game, not the quality of the opponent. A neutral game at MSG against a high profile opponent is a great comparison to an NCAA game. I don't buy the argument about a team being "tested" during the season necessarily. I don't think if this UK team loses it will be because they weren't tested. That's all.

  Can agree to disagree. The best teams, championship teams, are always tested, they development a toughness and an attitude. They learn and know what it takes to win, not just one game, but having to turn around play another quality team. Great teams don't just happen because of talent. Especially when most of the team are freshman. That is why its VERY rare for a freshman dominated team to win it all. They just aren't mature enough to understand, and havent' been through it before.
  And as much as I hear about how tough the SEC is in football...thats a prime example of being tested weekly, and being prepared for playing in a championship game.
• cbus4life

  Prescott wrote:

  Until the rules about college bb change or K starts going after one and done players,

  I thought he went after John Wall.

  Yea, i was pretty sure K recruited Wall rather heavily.
• Prescott

  Based on Rec's assessment the dukies have to be the odds on favorite. No other team has (3) All-American players, a Kevin Love type player in Brian Zoubek, a lockdown defender in Lance Thomas, and two freshman who are on the brink of instant stardom.
  
  How can you not think duke is the odds on favorite to win it all?
• reclegend22

  

  I never said Duke was the odds on favorite. Can you read?
  
  I said Duke will be a player in March, something they haven't been in three or so years. There's a difference between saying that and saying they are the favorite.
• reclegend22

  

  prescott wrote:No other team has (3) All-American players

  I said Duke has three All-American "caliber" players on its roster. Kyle Singler, Jon Scheyer and Nolan Smith. Will they all be named All-Americans? Of course not. Will any of them? Maybe not. But Scheyer and Singler certainly are in that league, and Nolan Smith is the second best guard in the ACC behind Va Tech's Delaney, so he's certainly on the cusp of that discussion as well. I think most would agree that Scheyer deserves a first or second team All-American selection and that Singler and Smith, if they don't warrant that acclaim this season, will be right there at the top next fall.
  

  prescott wrote:a Kevin Love type player in Brian Zoubek

  Please tell me where I referred to Brian Zoubek as Kevin Love? Typical for you to make wild assertions, however.
  

  prescott wrote:a lockdown defender in Lance Thomas

  Lance Thomas is Duke's, and perhaps the ACC's, most versatile and strongest defender. Yes, he is a lockdown defensive presence.
  

  prescott wrote:and two freshman who are on the brink of instant stardom.

  Again, another wild interpretation. I said both Dawkins and Mason, especially Mason, have shown flashes of brilliance and are due for their true breakout soon enough. If you disagree with this that's fine. But don't twist it around as if I were anointing them Baby Jordans.
• Prescott

  You are off the charts.
  
  Zoubek dominates VT on the boards when they are undersized and without their leading rebounder for 21 minutes due to foul trouble. Do you think a light bulb went off in Zoubek's head or is his 3 rebound performances against Florida State and UNC or his average of 2 rebounds per game versus Clemson a better indicator of his contributions.
  
  Singler is now the good Singler because he is shooting the ball above his norm. Will he continue his Larry Bird-esqe shooting?
  
  The Plumlees are such great assets that they played a combined 14 minutes against VT.
  
  You reference the ONE game in which Dawkins shot the ball well without mentioning that he has made 3 (3) point shots in ACC play.
  
  
  I agree that duke is in the discussion, but that discussion includes about 25 other teams because this season has shown how weak the field is.