No matter how good the team is, simply reaching a Final Four is a successful season. As others have said, there is too much luck involved to demand anything more.
Looking at Duke's recent history does it prove that the one and done mentality won't cut it anymore.
- Thread starter Creed Bratton
- Start date
It’s hard to get to the FF.
I’m not sold on Duke’s coach now.
But he has already made one.
Scheyer benefits from Duke's brand rather than he saves Duke
Even he is not Duke's coach, Cooper and Kon may still come to Duke...
Thankfully Scheyer is a bad in game coach... He singlehandedly sent Houston a victory
He is not on Golden, Oats' level to me...
Glad he is Duke's coach so Duke may never win a championship again under him...
Last edited:
You can look at Duke and one and done kids but look at our one and done record. It does not and will not work. You need older 2nd and 3rd year men to hang a championship banner.
I'm thinking we have to get a 1 seed then kick so much ass that even the NCAA agenda of sending guys like the Roofer or a couple others to get in the way will not be enough to keep UK from winning number 9. It's more clear now then ever that just leaning on freshmen can get you to second weekend but will not win it all. Mark atleast is out there putting in the work and hopefully he will be rewarded with a final four soon.
No I don’t think so. They’ve made the final 4, what 2 of the last 3 years? That proves that it can still work. When you make it that far, it’s anyone’s game. Everyone is great at that point. I mean think about it, they are now the only program who truly lives off 1 and dones. So of course you’re going to take the field 99% of the time over 1 team made up of talented freshmen. Even if they are generational talents.
Exactly. I’m confused by his post. I think they proved that it absolutely can still work. Of course the field is going to win 99% of the time over 1 incredibly talented freshman team. But at some point they’ll win again with freshman if they keep that same strategy
It’s just hard to win it all. Sure they were propped up, but I don’t see how anyone can look at the season Duke just had and say that proves you can’t win it all like that. I don’t think so. They were quite strong.
And on top of that their NCAAT exit was a referendum on Scheyer vs Sampson. Not a referendum on one and done vs anything.
And on top of that their NCAAT exit was a referendum on Scheyer vs Sampson. Not a referendum on one and done vs anything.
Easier to get to a FF if you are at a blue blood, because it’s easier to get talent at those schools.
Scheyer benefits from having the Duke name which recruits itself.
Same for UK, UNC, and KU.
I give younger, hungrier Cal a lot of credit for getting UMass and Memphis to a FF.
That’s more impressive to me than his 2012 title.
Cal could coach, when he first started.
He has gotten some of his fire back, going to a school where he can be the hero again.
We will see if he can find the magic again and get Arkansas back to the FF.
Scheyer benefits from having the Duke name which recruits itself.
Same for UK, UNC, and KU.
I give younger, hungrier Cal a lot of credit for getting UMass and Memphis to a FF.
That’s more impressive to me than his 2012 title.
Cal could coach, when he first started.
He has gotten some of his fire back, going to a school where he can be the hero again.
We will see if he can find the magic again and get Arkansas back to the FF.
You are correct. Wait until you are 80
Looking at it now getting UMass to the FF was miraculous.
They were absolutely nothing before he went there and nothing after he left. Even with Dr J playing there they were nothing.
That would be like taking Austin Peay to the FF.
Memphis did have some history. But UMass didn’t.
And it wasn’t a fluke year. They were coming for 2 seasons before that. They gave us a tough game in the ‘95 tournament.
A Cal technical for being out of the coaching box helped us win.
And with no players except Camby.
Yeah. That’s true. The only way to really assess tournament performance - and since college basketball really is only about the tournament, overall performance - is performance against seed. Cal was towards the top of that, if not at the very top. And in terms of luck, he didn’t have a lot, at least as far as brackets opening up - he played a lot more top 4 seeds than his peers. By contrast Self and K and Bennett were perilously close to the bottom of the ‘performance against seed’. But, Cal made a lot of enemies, especially in the media, and you’re not going to see any of them bring up stats that would make Calipari look good at the expense of K and Self. And Kentucky fans, understandably, are still quite put out with Cal, so there’s not going to be much praise of him around here.
But to answer the OP’s question…….either you think it’s foolish to try to win with one and done kids, or you think talent is the most important thing. Either way, if you are critical of Calipari you should apply the same standard to Duke.
Last edited:
OAD is done. With money now in the mix you're gonna have great college players that aren't NBA level stick around as long as possible. Grown men vs beanpoles Grown men win.
That doesn't seem to be the consensus with the 2015 team. I never see anyone on this board defending them and and most use it as the measuring stick to show how Cal couldn't get it done even with elite talent. So I don't get why our team gets hammered for not winning it all with that talent but some of you are saying just making a final four is all you can ask of a team that had 5 draft picks and 3 of them probable lottery picks.
Actually this is the only year they have made the final four under Scheyer. They were in the Elite 8 last year.
I gave 3 options in the original post, so if you rule out the one and done are you saying Scheyer, with all that talent, failed as a coach like most say Cal has or are you saying the tournament is just random?
Duke in particular this one season had a strong team that often looked and played like they could have won it all and they didn’t win it all. Why is a blanket statement appropriate as opposed to reactionary?
Your random option would work if you qualified it to the point it’s only talking about random elements. But then it boils down to everything we’ve ever known about the tournament.
Scheyer sure failed as a coach in those last few minutes, didn’t he? But again everybody already knows that. He’s 37. If you want to say he’s a Cal-level failure as a coach he’ll have to do that another thirty straight years. And I hope he does.
Duke’s history?!
How about ours?
Like a poster said above…”It’s hard to get to the FF”
I would expand that to the game and grind of the season is tough in totality.
Both are even tougher for freshman.
That difficulty compounds with the turnover, being surrounded by other freshman. Even transfers who may be older but are new to SEC and top end P5. Guys from Cornell with masters degrees who’ve played 3-4 years with other adults with professional degrees then get thrown into a system where they are surrounded by teenagers.
You need talent. You also need role players, a bench, experience.
How about ours?
Like a poster said above…”It’s hard to get to the FF”
I would expand that to the game and grind of the season is tough in totality.
Both are even tougher for freshman.
That difficulty compounds with the turnover, being surrounded by other freshman. Even transfers who may be older but are new to SEC and top end P5. Guys from Cornell with masters degrees who’ve played 3-4 years with other adults with professional degrees then get thrown into a system where they are surrounded by teenagers.
You need talent. You also need role players, a bench, experience.
I won't say it's impossible to win with a freshman heavy team. But it's hard. It will be rare.
Especially with NIL. Guys that would have gone pro are coming back. We're seeing 26 year old Chad Baker Mazara come back. There's just a physical difference in an 18 year old vs a 26 year old.
Especially with NIL. Guys that would have gone pro are coming back. We're seeing 26 year old Chad Baker Mazara come back. There's just a physical difference in an 18 year old vs a 26 year old.
I don't think it's impossible for a freshman led team to win the NCAAT. You just need the right crop of players. If you put our 2012 team up against the field from the last few years I still think they'd have a good shot to win.
That said, you'll need a dude like AD, #1 pick talent, transcendent in at least a few areas, and some guys in a tier just below that.
But aside from Cal, I don't see anyone even trying that type of roster construction anymore, and even Cal had pivoted at least a little bit.
Duke was a single meh game away from doing it this year and needed and utter collapse in the last minute and a half to not have a chance to do it. It may be done again.
That said, you'll need a dude like AD, #1 pick talent, transcendent in at least a few areas, and some guys in a tier just below that.
But aside from Cal, I don't see anyone even trying that type of roster construction anymore, and even Cal had pivoted at least a little bit.
Duke was a single meh game away from doing it this year and needed and utter collapse in the last minute and a half to not have a chance to do it. It may be done again.
As I said earlier, IMO the only real way to measure coaching performance is how a coach does against his seed expectation. Folks have a tendency to forget over time specific teams and just think of a coach in a certain way. example: Self and Cal are both Hall of Fame coaches. Self has had 10 one seeded teams, Cal only 3 - so Self should have won several more games than Cal, but Cal has won more tournament games. Bart Torvik has a great tool ranking coaches that way:
PASE
You can only rank coaches since 2000, that's as far back as the data goes. For 2000-2025, here are the top 5:
1. Izzo
2. Roy
3. Boeheim
4. Calipari
5. Beilein
Other names of note:
11. Jay Wright
18. Mark Few
25. Bill Self
31. Rick Pitino
69. Jon Scheyer
246. Mike Krzyzewski
435. (dead last) Tony Bennett
PASE
You can only rank coaches since 2000, that's as far back as the data goes. For 2000-2025, here are the top 5:
1. Izzo
2. Roy
3. Boeheim
4. Calipari
5. Beilein
Other names of note:
11. Jay Wright
18. Mark Few
25. Bill Self
31. Rick Pitino
69. Jon Scheyer
246. Mike Krzyzewski
435. (dead last) Tony Bennett
Scheyer seemed to be a better coach this year than before. He may be growing or he may be accumulating more talent. Or, both. He still seems green at times.
I think your question is a good one. I think the ACC helped and hurt Duke this year. It secured Duke a one seed, but I think the lack of competition made winning the Natty more difficult. Getting through a six-game stretch is hard enough. A young team needs more challenges than Duke received in the ACC to prepare for that. Had Duke played in the SEC and emerged without significant injury, I think it may very well have won the NC, even if it failed to land a 1 seed.
Noticed where Duke missed out on Sarr. Talked like he is a Kansas lean. Also, looks like Duke could miss on Coward. He is performing exceptionally well for the scouts and has probably moved up to a first round draft pick.
Am i crazy to think Syracuse won a title with Carnello Anthony as a freshman?
I think that was "his team" either way
Time flies, yall - crazy to think how some of those games seem like yesterday
I think that was "his team" either way
Time flies, yall - crazy to think how some of those games seem like yesterday
Omaha is a natural contrarian that openly said how he could not wait to see our players leave this year. Guaranteed DOOK would win it all and also giving Scheyer another Final 4 on his resume. It amazes me how people troll with such conviction and can't even get their facts straight.
No one is saying that you cannot win a title with a 5***** special Couper Flagg Freshman. The point is that you cannot win with a team dominated in its top 5 players all being frosh. If you rely on 3 or 4....then the team with experienced MEN will beat the boys.
It did take Jesus 22 years to be able to walk on water so....
Soooo, you are saying the odds are better at winning a NC with older experienced players over OAD freshmen??
Got it. We agree.
I am. The odds are way in the favor of the larger number of teams
Yep even our 2012 “one-and-done” championship team needed players like Miller to win
Final Four in 2021-22 and this year 2024-25? A couple of elite 8s 2018-19 and 2023-24?
Listen, Sheyer absolutely has to take a great deal of responsibility for the loss to Houston and to be frank, Duke was bad in all of it's close losses and that is a reflection on the coach. But Sheyer is young and still learning and clearly learning how to put together better teams (young talent and experience).
I would be a massive idiot to turn down the current status and or success of this program the last 7 years or so. Of course I would rather win it all but I am not sure if anyone has noticed but championships are very difficult to win. You have to be in it to win it and so yeah I will take trips to the final four every single time. And won't apologize if we get one or two by sheer luck.
Listen, Sheyer absolutely has to take a great deal of responsibility for the loss to Houston and to be frank, Duke was bad in all of it's close losses and that is a reflection on the coach. But Sheyer is young and still learning and clearly learning how to put together better teams (young talent and experience).
I would be a massive idiot to turn down the current status and or success of this program the last 7 years or so. Of course I would rather win it all but I am not sure if anyone has noticed but championships are very difficult to win. You have to be in it to win it and so yeah I will take trips to the final four every single time. And won't apologize if we get one or two by sheer luck.
