Duke is horrendous | Page 3 | The Boneyard

Duke is horrendous

tzznandrew said:
That's a different team, resume-wise, right? They'd have to have beaten Louisville-FSU and a third team. You'd probably look at their blind resume and it wouldn't be so bad.

But this team just got trounced by 20 by a mediocre UNC team.
Expand ...
Even still, that’s a 15-11 team... does any 15-11 team deserve to compete for a national championship?
 
Rocktheworld said:
Even still, that’s a 15-11 team... does any 15-11 team deserve to compete for a national championship?
Expand ...
The committee has sent worse teams to the tournament.

And you know that records don't tell the whole story. Look at some of the other trash teams on the bubble. There isn't some line every team has to cross to make the tournament, you just have to be better than those you're competing against.

They're not getting in because they aren't winning 4 straight, let alone 5. And even if they do I'm not convinced they'd get in.
 
tzznandrew said:
The committee has sent worse teams to the tournament.

And you know that records don't tell the whole story. Look at some of the other trash teams on the bubble. There isn't some line every team has to cross to make the tournament, you just have to be better than those you're competing against.

They're not getting in because they aren't winning 4 straight, let alone 5. And even if they do I'm not convinced they'd get in.
Expand ...
I was gonna say, it wouldn’t be as bad as Cuse in ‘16 but still extraordinarily bad. I’m not sure how many teams have gotten in on a .58 winning percentage.

Hmm. So when I see Boise State and Colorado State schedules compared to Dukes, I see your point about the bubble. We will see how Michigan State and Xavier do in conference tournaments too

I’m glad to agree that I think Duke isn’t winning 4 straight, unless there are some upsets earlier in the bracket.
 
Rocktheworld said:
I was gonna say, it wouldn’t be as bad as Cuse in ‘16 but still extraordinarily bad. I’m not sure how many teams have gotten in on a .58 winning percentage.

Hmm. So when I see Boise State and Colorado State schedules compared to Dukes, I see your point about the bubble. We will see how Michigan State and Xavier do in conference tournaments too

I’m glad to agree that I think Duke isn’t winning 4 straight, unless there are some upsets earlier in the bracket.
Expand ...
They have to beat Louisville and Florida State is there after that with a double bye. It would be the semis where maybe they run into an upset.
 
Rocktheworld said:
Even still, that’s a 15-11 team... does any 15-11 team deserve to compete for a national championship?
Expand ...
Puke could go 4-1 in the ACC tourney which would put them at 15-12, 0.556.

thumb.gif
 
tzznandrew said:
They have to beat Louisville and Florida State is there after that with a double bye. It would be the semis where maybe they run into an upset.
Expand ...
Yeah, I know, and I don’t think they are making a 4-win run unless that fourth win has to be Notre Dame or something. Maybe they can beat Louisville and eke one out over FSU; maybe not, I haven’t watched them all year
 
.-.
Rocktheworld said:
Yeah, I know, and I don’t think they are making a 4-win run unless that fourth win has to be Notre Dame or something. Maybe they can beat Louisville and eke one out over FSU; maybe not, I haven’t watched them all year
Expand ...
They're not good. But the ACC is down, so it's not implausible.

But those people saying 1-1 or 2-1 are getting them in are lazy.
 
If chalk holds they'd play BC, Louisville, Florida State, Va Tech, Virginia. How funny would it be to lose to BC in the Tuesday afternoon game.

Very Funny Reaction GIF
 
Kolumbo said:
If chalk holds they'd play BC, Louisville, Florida State, Va Tech, Virginia. How funny would it be to lose to BC in the Tuesday afternoon game.

Very Funny Reaction GIF
Expand ...
I'm certainly going to hold my nose and pull for BC.
 
tzznandrew said:
They're not good. But the ACC is down, so it's not implausible.

But those people saying 1-1 or 2-1 are getting them in are lazy.
Expand ...
Nahhh I saw today Lunardi still had them as a 24% chance of getting in and at first I thought it was crazy after that last loss, but he said if they make a “deep” run they can be in. What he means by that, in a 5-game tournament, I’m not sure. I think they have to beat FSU to even be on the bubble.
 
Rocktheworld said:
Nahhh I saw today Lunardi still had them as a 24% chance of getting in and at first I thought it was crazy after that last loss, but he said if they make a “deep” run they can be in. What he means by that, in a 5-game tournament, I’m not sure. I think they have to beat FSU to even be on the bubble.
Expand ...
He tweeted yesterday they'd have to win all 5 games to be back on the bubble
 
navery12 said:
He tweeted yesterday they'd have to win all 5 games to be back on the bubble
Expand ...
Dang okay then

Could’ve sworn I heard something different this morning but hey maybe it was a more optimistic take
 
.-.
I just looked at player rankings they landed over the last 3 years, 1,2, 6, 12, many in the 20’s and 30’s. Imagine if Hurley or anyone else had that level of talent to draw on and develop.
 
Not trying to derail the thread, but I would like some clarification about a post of mine that got removed/deleted from 2:30 yesterday. If a Mod or possibly someone in the know could let me in on what is off limits as far as my opinions go, it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you and back to Duke being horrendous.
 
Rank the blind resumes:

TEAM A - Best wins: Team 21, 37, 39, 51
Worst losses: Team 89, 90 163

TEAM B – Best wins: Team 10, 26, 32, 52
Worst losses: Team 91, 92, 115

Team C - Best wins: Team 38, 53, 57, 59
Worst losses: Team 36, 39, 163

Team D - Best wins: 22, 38, 49, 51
Worst losses: 38, 49, 66, 87
 
Last edited:
B had the best resume. A has better wins bit worse losses than C. I'd call them a tossup and wouldn't waste any energy saying one belongs in and the other doesn't.

Team B
Team A/C
Team C/A
 
.-.
Friarsnoop said:
Rank the blind resumes:

TEAM A - Best wins: Team 21, 37, 39, 51
Worst losses: Team 89, 90 163

TEAM B – Best wins: Team 10, 26, 32, 52
Worst losses: Team 91, 92, 115

Team C - Best wins: Team 38, 53, 57, 59
Worst losses: Team 36, 39, 163

Team D - Best wins: 22, 38, 49, 51
Worst losses: 38, 49, 66, 87
Expand ...
Feels like a trick
 
I only want Duke to make the tourney if they would play us in the first round. Uconn would win by 25+.
 
Friarsnoop said:
Rank the blind resumes:

TEAM A - Best wins: Team 21, 37, 39, 51
Worst losses: Team 89, 90 163

TEAM B – Best wins: Team 10, 26, 32, 52
Worst losses: Team 91, 92, 115

Team C - Best wins: Team 38, 53, 57, 59
Worst losses: Team 36, 39, 163

Team D - Best wins: 22, 38, 49, 51
Worst losses: 38, 49, 66, 87
Expand ...
These are not resumes, these are 8 random games.
 
B,A,C

Add up the totals in win and loss columns for each team. Subtract the win total from the loss total for each team. Team with biggest delta gets 3 points, next gets 2, lowest gets 1. Team with lowest total in win column gets 3 points, next team 2. etc. Team with the lowest in loss column gets 3 points next 2 etc.

Final score B - 7points, A - 6 points, C - 5 points

Edit: Corrected initial order to match point total and it looks like team D was added in edit

New order using same methodology and 4 point system rather than 3 is B,A,D,C
 
Last edited:
.-.
Friarsnoop said:
Rank the blind resumes:

TEAM A - Best wins: Team 21, 37, 39, 51
Worst losses: Team 89, 90 163

TEAM B – Best wins: Team 10, 26, 32, 52
Worst losses: Team 91, 92, 115

Team C - Best wins: Team 38, 53, 57, 59
Worst losses: Team 36, 39, 163

Team D - Best wins: 22, 38, 49, 51
Worst losses: 38, 49, 66, 87
Expand ...
It's a tough call. I'll go with the follow. Order is best to worst.

D
B
C
A
 
auror said:
These are not resumes, these are 8 random games.
Expand ...
It's not perfect. Not even close. But you could rank teams by just looking at a subset of games. For example, their best four wins and worst four losses. Sort of a thumb in the air measurement.

I'd be curious how such a measurement stacks up against the teams entire body of work.
 
Friarsnoop said:
Rank the blind resumes:

TEAM A - Best wins: Team 21, 37, 39, 51
Worst losses: Team 89, 90 163

TEAM B – Best wins: Team 10, 26, 32, 52
Worst losses: Team 91, 92, 115

Team C - Best wins: Team 38, 53, 57, 59
Worst losses: Team 36, 39, 163

Team D - Best wins: 22, 38, 49, 51
Worst losses: 38, 49, 66, 87
Expand ...
Just based on these blind resumes I would say A, C and D are pure horseshit. B is about average.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,195
Messages
4,556,370
Members
10,442
Latest member
Virginiafan


Top Bottom