College basketball 2009-10 running thread No. 1

You have no idea how tempting it is to steal that for my Facebook status.

 

Go ahead. Besides, it's not I ever say anything status- or sig-worthy or anything else.

 

Disagree. James and Pittman are too strong on the inside for everyone but Thompson. Davis and Henson have talent to burn, but they are thin and can be pushed around by strong bigs which Texas has. And Texas has better ability to score in the backcourt. UNC really doesn't have a go-to backcourt scorer at this point.

And Sam, I'll need to see it for a whole season to believe it. Duke dominated teams in similar fashion for a game or two in past years, but they're still too reliant on shooters. Their top four scorers have taken 180 out of 198 of their 3-pointers to this point in the season.

 

Can't buy that argument. Name a team that doesn't rely on shooters. Think Chapel Hill wins titles if their shooters completely check out?

This team has beaten two or three quality opponents with rebounding, stellar inside play and hard-nosed defense. Could that go away later in the year? Sure it could. But this Duke team is nowhere near as likely to live or die beyond the arc. Completely different sort of team.

 

Well struck Mr. Mills.

 

I'm not saying that top teams don't rely on shooters. But at the same time there needs to be a consistent low post thread. Just from 2004 onward: Okafor, May, Noah/Horford, Arthur/Jackson, Hansbrough. I'm not arguing that Duke's not a Sweet 16 or even Elite Eight team. I just think that I've heard these pronunciations in recent years about this Duke team and I'm going to remain skeptical for a while. I mean, the conference seasons haven't even really begun.

 

you just hate duke.

 

Well that's a childish, pointless argument. Anyone who knows me well knows that I don't get too heated about sports, even over my favorite teams. I can be pretty rational. My arguments aren't based on hatred of Duke. They're based on the string of early round exits for most of this decade. If you would like to argue any of the facts I presented and make a real point, please go ahead.

 

touch a nerve? it's a joke.

(but your arguments aren't all that sterling, either. duke wasn't so dominant the last 6-8 years. you could point to any number of reasons, but the bottom line is, far as i could tell, they were soft when it mattered. same thing might happen this march. lot of issues between here and there. right now, they look good, different from other duke teams this decade.)

 

xan and dre, stop please. Both of you are better than this.

Dre, this Duke team is constructed much differently and the best thing is that the coaching staff is selling that they love the challenge and love having to make adjustments and do something besides the same old crap. This team has a bunch of options in the low post. Not convinced Zoubek has turned into a stud, but he's more than merely serviceable. Lance Thomas will gladly do the dirty work and the Plumlee brothers are as much a work in progress as much of Roy Williams' roster.

Xan, I don't buy dre's argument. But that shouldn't be confused with any sort of nastiness toward Duke. I've seen enough of it to know and it's not apparent here. To boot, I've seen enough irrational crap concerning these programs to last a lifetime. No, I'm not suddenly a Chapel Hill apologist - anything but - but a little rational thinking here would help.

 

i was having fun with him, knowing how important unc hoops is to him (that doesn't mean i think he's fanatical. it's fun to needle a duke fan by saying something unc-centric, and vice-versa, just to get a reaction. it's all in fun.)

as a fan of college hoops, i like both programs. growing up out west i wanted usc and long beach state to play like duke and carolina -- it's the ultimate respect.

as for duke's woes this decade, i also think shashevski hasn't recruited all that well.

 

UK. 2,000.

Great day for college hoops.