By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.
SignUp Now!SeanMayTriedToEatMe said:The luck has evened out over K's 30+ years, as would be expected over such a long time period.
He failed to win a 70% game for the title in 1999 and failed in 2002 with the only team in kenpom history at #1 offense and #1 defense, with the 2nd biggest efficiency gap ever to the #2 team (Ohio State 2011 had the biggest efficiency gap). He won a title in 2010 when any number of little things could have easily ended the season differently and he won a title in 2015 when he would have been a 5-7 point underdog against Kentucky in the title game.
If you sort the luck out differently, with K winning it all in 1999 and 2002, but losing in the Sweet Sixteen in 2010 and in the title game in 2015, which is all heavily luck-based, then there's quite a different narrative right now. 5 titles in 12 seasons from 1991 to 2002 puts him in the GOAT conversation already, with any intelligent person understanding that it's more impressive than Wooden's run from a probability standpoint.
However, zero titles in the ensuing 15 seasons, and only two Final Fours (2004 and 2015 in this adjusted luck hypothetical), along with an objectively declining ability to coach defense, puts him in Bowden/Knight/Paterno territory: a once-great coach who can muster up a Final Four run once every 5-10 years and win a ton of games each season with the best talent, but is on the decline in major aspects of the job and should step down sooner rather than later for the good of the program in the long run.
The real difference between that awful narrative and the "we just won a national title two years ago, so let's just count our lucky stars we still have K" narrative is at least largely, if not mostly, due to luck. The optimistic narrative in the parallel luck universe would be "the man gave us 5 titles in 12 seasons - he can stay at Duke as long as he wants." I'm fine with that as well. But the reality of decline in certain major areas isn't even argued against with that narrative.
We'll have the best talent or close to it almost every season until K retires. I'm pretty sure of that. But the most miserable sports fans, aside from the fans who simply never have a good team to root for, are the fans who have great players to root for but lack the coach to pilot them to the expectations that come with having great players.
SeanMayTriedToEatMe said:Sure, there has been more bad luck than just the examples I cited, but again, the luck sorted itself out over 30+ years. There was tremendous good luck in Laettner's shot and 10/10, 10/10 in 1992. There was good luck in pulling off one of the most monumental upsets in basketball history in 1991. There was good luck in the Miracle Minute, which - who knows? - may have been necessary to give the 2001 team the confidence to come back from a huge hole against Maryland later, which in itself could be considered good luck.
I would not consider failing to beat Louisville's 2013 team to be bad luck, regardless of who was healthy on that Duke roster.
2017... come on. 2017 is kind of the whole point.
DurhamSon said:I would say he kept us in contending title position pretty consistently through 2011. Only twice from 2002-2011 were we not in the top 6 or 7 of Pomeroy, which i'd say is a "title contending" range. Even if we didn't make the FF because of variance -- unless of course you think the Pomeroy rating don't tell the entire story and there was a systematic limiting roadblock in the coaching not reflected in the ratings -- we were at least in position to contend.
2012-2017 we were in contending position just twice (and really, fringe in 2013). Otherwise, not even close. We were fortunate to cash in during that 2015 contending year, but then again like you mentioned, it's balanced out from being unfortunate during those 8 seasons from 2002-2011 only going to two FFs.
It's the only contending essentially 1.5 times in the last six seasons which bothers me.