Zion

[n_huffhines]

I have to say I am kind of surprised at how important Zion at least appears to be at this point to their success. There are 4 McDonald's All-Americans on that team; Zion is just one of them. The rest of the team appears lost when he isn't in there, despite them being very capable players themselves. This honestly doesn't appear to be Coach K's greatest coaching job.

Their biggest/only glaring weakness is they can't shoot. 328th in the country in 3p% and 236th in ft%. That's on the players, not K. They don't turn the ball over. They play good D. They rebound very well. They get lots of assists. They don't foul. All the things you would hope for from a well-coached team are there.

 

[volfanbill]

I have to say I am kind of surprised at how important Zion at least appears to be at this point to their success. There are 4 McDonald's All-Americans on that team; Zion is just one of them. The rest of the team appears lost when he isn't in there, despite them being very capable players themselves. This honestly doesn't appear to be Coach K's greatest coaching job.

Again, basketball is a team sport. The team was built around Zion being the focal point. This isn’t like playing ball at the park.

 

[05_never_again]

Again, basketball is a team sport. The team was built around Zion being the focal point. This isn’t like playing ball at the park.

But that bolded part is the flaw, right? I mean they have 4 elite players on that team. Why exactly was the team built around one guy as the focal point?

 

[gisman]

Struggling to figure out what volfanbill is talking about. No one is saying that Duke should be or is as good without Zion. The frustration is that they are losing or playing poorly and the polls don't reflect their current performance. They are getting a pass, not sure how you can think this isn't happening.

 

[05_never_again]

Their biggest/only glaring weakness is they can't shoot. 328th in the country in 3p% and 236th in ft%. That's on the players, not K. They don't turn the ball over. They play good D. They rebound very well. They get lots of assists. They don't foul. All the things you would hope for from a well-coached team are there.

View attachment 196662

I'd be curious to see what their turnover, defensive stats, rebounding, assists, fouls, etc. stats are post-Zion though. In several of these games they've played without him (UNC, Virginia Tech, Wake) they have way too many possessions where they just don't look like they know what they're doing. Like in that game last night...how does Cam Reddish have just 6 pts and 2 rebounds? He and Barrett also combined for 10 turnovers.

 

[n_huffhines]

I'd be curious to see what their turnover, defensive stats, rebounding, assists, fouls, etc. stats are post-Zion though. In several of these games they've played without him (UNC, Virginia Tech, Wake) they have way too many possessions where they just don't look like they know what they're doing. Like in that game last night...how does Cam Reddish have just 6 pts and 2 rebounds? He and Barrett also combined for 10 turnovers.

Reddish sucks. He's a great prospect but he can't finish around the rim, he doesn't rebound, he gets tons of turnovers, and his long range shooting is just OK.

 

[n_huffhines]

Struggling to figure out what volfanbill is talking about. No one is saying that Duke should be or is as good without Zion. The frustration is that they are losing or playing poorly and the polls don't reflect their current performance. They are getting a pass, not sure how you can think this isn't happening.

Where do you think they should be? Excluding the UNC game which probably shouldn't factor, since Zion got hurt they are 3-1 with a road loss to the current #15 team. They beat Syracuse by double digits and throttled Miami. How far should a team fall for losing to good teams without the best player in the country (who will be back soon)? Wake doesn't factor because the new polls haven't come out. They dropped from #1 to #4, so I don't know why everybody is so upset. Gonzaga being #1 is what irks me. They beat one good team (caught the Duke freshmen early) all year and play in a **** conference.

 

[volfanbill]

But that bolded part is the flaw, right? I mean they have 4 elite players on that team. Why exactly was the team built around one guy as the focal point?

Because he sets the dynamic? Any team that loses its focal point will hit a snag. It’s not a flaw, it’s how teams are setup. It would be impossible to design schemes around every possible scenario. So instead, you design the best game plan for this team and perfect it.

 

[volfanbill]

He and Barrett also combined for 10 turnovers.

Weird way to put this. Barrett had 7 turnovers.

Reddish, Barrett and Zion have always been the guy. Now they’re trying to adjust to playing as a team. Coach K is the GOAT, but it’s never guaranteed championships trying mesh these 18 year olds together in nine months. If it were, Cal would have 7 titles by now.

It’s what makes Jones so important. He’s the distributor. The offense is built around Zion with Jones running it. Barrett has never been a true point and it’s been obvious to anyone that was watched Duke in depth all year. He can dish it to the corners or whatever and pick up assists, but once he picks up his dribble, he only knows how to score. This has been magnified when Jones isn’t playing and now that so much more is being asked of him without Zion. Duke is the sum of its parts. K took four 18 year olds and designed the best offense he could. No coach can prepare for injuries, there just aren’t enough practices to cover all those bases.

As someone said, Duke took a bad loss to UNC when Zion went down and lost on the road to a top 15 team. They have the 10th toughest schedule in the country and have all of four losses. All to highly ranked, guaranteed tourney teams.

 

[gisman]

How far should a team fall for losing to good teams without the best player in the country (who will be back soon)?

I guess I thought they should fall regardless of their injury situation. Why does an injury factor into a team's ranking? It reflects their current condition. Their record is their record. I think they should certainly be below Tennessee. To be honest it seems much of the double standard is between Tennessee and Duke. We lose to Kentucky and drop 6 spots and most pundits say we were overrated. They lose in about the same way to North Carolina and drop 2 or 3 and the same pundits say it's okay they just lost their best player and we will hold their spot while he recovers.

 

[volfanbill]

I guess I thought they should fall regardless of their injury situation. Why does an injury factor into a team's ranking? It reflects their current condition. Their record is their record. I think they should certainly be below Tennessee. To be honest it seems much of the double standard is between Tennessee and Duke. We lose to Kentucky and drop 6 spots and most pundits say we were overrated. They lose in about the same way to North Carolina and drop 2 or 3 and the same pundits say it's okay they just lost their best player and we will hold their spot while he recovers.

Look at Duke’s wins. Look at Tennessee’s. Look at strength of schedule. This isn’t rocket science, it’s just your bias.

 

[gisman]

Look at Duke’s wins. Look at Tennessee’s. Look at strength of schedule. This isn’t rocket science, it’s just your bias.

Sure they have more quality wins but look at Duke's losses as well. I am certainly biased, but that doesn't explain everything so neatly. And by the way please stop insulting everyone who disagrees with you.

 

[volfanbill]

Sure they have more quality wins but look at Duke's losses as well. I am certainly biased, but that doesn't explain everything so neatly. And by the way please stop insulting everyone who disagrees with you.

Lol if that’s an insult, the internet isn’t for you. What about Duke’s losses? To the number one team in the country? The number 3 team? Syracuse without their PG and another starter? The number 15 team on the road?

 

[gisman]

Lol if that’s an insult, the internet isn’t for you. What about Duke’s losses? To the number one team in the country? The number 3 team? Syracuse without their PG and another starter? The number 15 team on the road?

It isn't just me, it is every person that has disagreed with you, and you can't make an argument without leading with an insult. Flame away, it's the internet after all.

 

[n_huffhines]

I guess I thought they should fall regardless of their injury situation. Why does an injury factor into a team's ranking? It reflects their current condition. Their record is their record. I think they should certainly be below Tennessee. To be honest it seems much of the double standard is between Tennessee and Duke. We lose to Kentucky and drop 6 spots and most pundits say we were overrated. They lose in about the same way to North Carolina and drop 2 or 3 and the same pundits say it's okay they just lost their best player and we will hold their spot while he recovers.

Kentucky smashed us and we were at full strength and we had 1 win over a ranked opponent all year. Duke got smashed, but without the best player in the country. It wasn't "about the same way", IMO. Maybe there is a double standard, but if there is, I think the problem is in how Tennessee was treated and not in how Duke is being treated.

What are the rankings supposed to be about? That's one major problem is there is no set criteria. Is it a reward for the best season so far? Are Monday's rankings supposed to be about who will be the best team the upcoming week?

 

[gisman]

Kentucky smashed us and we were at full strength and we had 1 win over a ranked opponent all year. Duke got smashed, but without the best player in the country. It wasn't "about the same way", IMO. Maybe there is a double standard, but if there is, I think the problem is in how Tennessee was treated and not in how Duke is being treated.

What are the rankings supposed to be about? That's one major problem is there is no set criteria. Is it a reward for the best season so far? Are Monday's rankings supposed to be about who will be the best team the upcoming week?

Solid post. This gets at my question. But should rankings care if you are at full strength or not when you play? It seems that it is a factor in how teams are ranked. Should you move even higher if you beat a good team when you are down a player or two because you can absorb an injury?

 

[n_huffhines]

Solid post. This gets at my question. But should rankings care if you are at full strength or not when you play? It seems that it is a factor in how teams are ranked. Should you move even higher if you beat a good team when you are down a player or two because you can absorb an injury?

If he's out for the year, then I think voters need to rank accordingly (negative qualifier), but he's day to day, so Zion missing should be a positive qualifier when considering where they belong.

 

[05_never_again]

Sure they have more quality wins but look at Duke's losses as well. I am certainly biased, but that doesn't explain everything so neatly. And by the way please stop insulting everyone who disagrees with you.

They have more losses, but they've also played a tougher schedule. You know how in football SEC fans will trot out "ain't played nobody"? The ACC does that in basketball. Their tougher schedule is also why they have more quality wins, but then again, they've won those games.

Tennessee only has what I'd call 2 really good wins - Gonzaga and Kentucky. Rightly or wrongly, the Gonzaga win can lose value over time because of recency bias. Duke has beaten Kentucky (season opener), Texas Tech (late December), FSU, and Virginia twice. They do have more losses than Tennessee, but I'd only say one of those wasn't a good loss (Syracuse).

 

[gisman]

If he's out for the year, then I think voters need to rank accordingly (negative qualifier), but he's day to day, so Zion missing should be a positive qualifier when considering where they belong.

Interesting. You seem to be thinking along the same lines as the voters. Not sure I agree, but it seems to be the consensus.

 

[n_huffhines]

Interesting. You seem to be thinking along the same lines as the voters. Not sure I agree, but it seems to be the consensus.

I do kinda like Duke, so TIFWIW, but I think I'm pretty consistent with this rationale.

 

[05_never_again]

What are the rankings supposed to be about? That's one major problem is there is no set criteria. Is it a reward for the best season so far? Are Monday's rankings supposed to be about who will be the best team the upcoming week?

What do you think most people who do the rankings are considering? I agree, no set criteria or framework about what exactly you need to consider is a problem.

Is it body of work? Number of "good wins?" Number of "good losses?" Number of "bad losses" (fewer the better)? Team that has the best chance of making a tournament run? "Best team" (however you define it)?

It seems like the most obvious and straightforward criteria would be body of work, but even that can be subjective.

 

[n_huffhines]

What do you think most people who do the rankings are considering? I agree, no set criteria or framework about what exactly you need to consider is a problem.

Is it body of work? Number of "good wins?" Number of "good losses?" Number of "bad losses" (fewer the better)? Team that has the best chance of making a tournament run? "Best team" (however you define it)?

It seems like the most obvious and straightforward criteria would be body of work, but even that can be subjective.

No idea

 

[volfanbill]

I'd assume they all look at them differently. Some count body of work more, some count current status more, some count potential more, some good wins, some more weight on losses. BPI is a standard measure that has Duke 3rd, Tennessee 6th. SOS plays a major role in that though.

 

[05_never_again]

I'd assume they all look at them differently. Some count body of work more, some count current status more, some count potential more, some good wins, some more weight on losses. BPI is a standard measure that has Duke 3rd, Tennessee 6th. SOS plays a major role in that though.

What does the NCAAT selection committee consider? Have they ever said specifically?

 

[Weezer]

Look at Duke’s wins. Look at Tennessee’s. Look at strength of schedule. This isn’t rocket science, it’s just your bias.

To be fair, I think your defense of Duke is showing your bias. They shouldn't get a pass on losing just because Zion is hurt. Good teams find ways to overcome injury. When the tournament comes around, if by some chance Zion is still hurt, do we just crown them National Champs, because, boo hoo, their star player is hurt? The idea of excusing losses because a star player is injured is just ridiculous. Injuries are part of the game. All teams play through them. Duke shouldn't get a pass.