CamrnCrz1974
Good Guy for a Dookie
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2011
- Messages
- 2,040
- Reaction Score
- 11,898
What I posted on The Devil's Den:
As for yesterday's game and my assessment as to the state of the program...
First, congratulations to the seniors on their accomplishments and accolades (both on and off the court) in their four years. They were the highest rated recruiting class ever signed by Duke, in terms of overall ranking and depth. We will miss all five seniors.
Second, losing two starting guards is awful. Just awful. No doubt about it.
But what bothers me is when McCallie makes statements like this (after the brackets were announced):
If No. 2 Duke and the top-seeded Huskies both win their first three NCAA tournament games they'll meet in regional finals with a trip to the Final Four on the line.
That doesn't seem fair to McCallie.
"To me that is kind of fascinating," she said. "What, are we trying to do, keep Duke out of the Final Four?"
"We should have been the number one two seed," McCallie said. "Look at the numbers."
It's "like, c'mon people, wake up," McCallie said. "Look at these things scientifically. Have an objective reality. What's going on with this? Does RPI matter at all? Does strength of schedule matter at all? ... I have to stand up for this team."
It was if she was setting up a reason for Duke not to make the Final Four and to temper expectations, under the guise of standing up for her team. To get the Final Four, you have to beat good teams. During her tenure at Duke, McCallie has been unable to do that in the Elite Eight, with two games were her team scored in the 40s, three double digit losses, and being blown out in the second halves.
Getting to the Final Four is a privilege, not a right. And based on the team's performances in the Elite Eight, there is no conspiracy to keep Duke out of the Final Four; the team is simply not showing up in the way that it needs to in order to defeat a really good opponent. Remember, in every year that Duke lost in the Elite Eight, the winning opponent went on to lose the next game in the Final Four; Duke did not lose to the national champion or even the runner-up in any of those years.
Putting aside the previous issues with her Twitter posts and her post-game press conference idiosyncrasies, her statements about the Final Four look silly when 2nd seeded Duke loses a home game to 7th seeded DePaul.
Yes, there were injuries. Yes, the injuries depleted the backcourt. But McCallie acts as if the players needed to develop ballhandling skills now - in an interview, she stated that Richa Jackson, Tricia Liston and even Haley Peters would need to know how to handle at the next level so it was important for them to step up and handle now. If that is the case, why were they not more developed in practice and in games before last quarter of their senior seasons? Ka'lia Johnson was brought in as a point guard; why weren't her skillls developed in practice (if not in games), especially when she had to face Jones and Gray in practice?
DePaul had an incredible game plan. But DePaul has a very similar style from year to year. Doug Bruno likes pressing teams who can shoot, employing a 4-out, 1-in offense or using four guards and one post player to spread the floor. The team should have been prepared for this.
In addition, while Doug Bruno had a great year, the Blue Demons were not an elite team. DePaul did not defeat a single ranked team all year, until Duke. DePaul had only played two ranked teams (losing on the road to Notre Dame by 16 and losing at home to Kentucky by 11). The team gave up 100 points to Oklahoma in the first round. And this was a game on Duke's home floor.
Better yet, why did McCallie not make the necessary in-game adjustments? As RobC noted, why did she not to the triple post offense much earlier than she did and why did she then abandon it? Why was McCallie so unwilling to accept that the post-oriented nature of her current roster of available players, go big, stay with shooters, and force DePaul to try and go inside, where the team was ineffective?
In other words, her public statements created an excuse, just in case something like this happened. Losing two guards was awful. But even with the losses of Gray and Jones, Duke should have won yesterday's game. Duke did not lose because Gray and Jones did not play; Duke lost because of McCallie's coaching, her questionable decisions, and her failure to make the necessary adjustments.
There have been injuries the past two years to Chelsea Gray. This year, there was Alexis Jones as well. And there have been other injuries to other players. If the players keep getting injured and the injuries are excessive (which they have been in recent years), the problem might be with the strength and conditioning program that McCallie has implemented. Building a team for strength and not preparing the players to be in "basketball shape" and conditioning for an up-tempo, stop-start game will lead to injuries. There needs to be a balance, and the current training program is not only not working, it is a contributing factor to the barrage of injuries.
In her seventh season, McCallie's predecessor took a program from the bottom of the ACC to the Final Four. The program then made the Elite Eight seven times, with four Final Four appearances and two national championship games in her predecessor's last ten years.
McCallie inherited a roster of eight McDonald's All-Americans over four classes. Think about that - with 24 McDonald's All-Americans each year and 96 for the four years, McCallie came to Duke with 12 percent of the entire country's top players at her disposal. And McCallie has had her assistants constantly recruiting and even McCallie herself was very active in the recruitment of certain players (e.g., Elizabeth Williams). The recruiting under McCallie is at the highest levels in program history. Yet McCallie's seven seasons, there are not just zero Final Four appearances (and constant regular season blowouts against elite opponents); there are also two losses in the second round of the NCAA Tournament (and the two losses occurred as a top-two seed).
There are always reasons/explanations/excuses for a certain performance on an annual basis. But in the aggregate, there is only one common theme. McCallie has amassed a great winning percentage at Duke and has won four ACC titles. But Duke is not a truly elite program and has not been a truly elite program under her watch.
As for yesterday's game and my assessment as to the state of the program...
First, congratulations to the seniors on their accomplishments and accolades (both on and off the court) in their four years. They were the highest rated recruiting class ever signed by Duke, in terms of overall ranking and depth. We will miss all five seniors.
Second, losing two starting guards is awful. Just awful. No doubt about it.
But what bothers me is when McCallie makes statements like this (after the brackets were announced):
If No. 2 Duke and the top-seeded Huskies both win their first three NCAA tournament games they'll meet in regional finals with a trip to the Final Four on the line.
That doesn't seem fair to McCallie.
"To me that is kind of fascinating," she said. "What, are we trying to do, keep Duke out of the Final Four?"
"We should have been the number one two seed," McCallie said. "Look at the numbers."
It's "like, c'mon people, wake up," McCallie said. "Look at these things scientifically. Have an objective reality. What's going on with this? Does RPI matter at all? Does strength of schedule matter at all? ... I have to stand up for this team."
It was if she was setting up a reason for Duke not to make the Final Four and to temper expectations, under the guise of standing up for her team. To get the Final Four, you have to beat good teams. During her tenure at Duke, McCallie has been unable to do that in the Elite Eight, with two games were her team scored in the 40s, three double digit losses, and being blown out in the second halves.
Getting to the Final Four is a privilege, not a right. And based on the team's performances in the Elite Eight, there is no conspiracy to keep Duke out of the Final Four; the team is simply not showing up in the way that it needs to in order to defeat a really good opponent. Remember, in every year that Duke lost in the Elite Eight, the winning opponent went on to lose the next game in the Final Four; Duke did not lose to the national champion or even the runner-up in any of those years.
Putting aside the previous issues with her Twitter posts and her post-game press conference idiosyncrasies, her statements about the Final Four look silly when 2nd seeded Duke loses a home game to 7th seeded DePaul.
Yes, there were injuries. Yes, the injuries depleted the backcourt. But McCallie acts as if the players needed to develop ballhandling skills now - in an interview, she stated that Richa Jackson, Tricia Liston and even Haley Peters would need to know how to handle at the next level so it was important for them to step up and handle now. If that is the case, why were they not more developed in practice and in games before last quarter of their senior seasons? Ka'lia Johnson was brought in as a point guard; why weren't her skillls developed in practice (if not in games), especially when she had to face Jones and Gray in practice?
DePaul had an incredible game plan. But DePaul has a very similar style from year to year. Doug Bruno likes pressing teams who can shoot, employing a 4-out, 1-in offense or using four guards and one post player to spread the floor. The team should have been prepared for this.
In addition, while Doug Bruno had a great year, the Blue Demons were not an elite team. DePaul did not defeat a single ranked team all year, until Duke. DePaul had only played two ranked teams (losing on the road to Notre Dame by 16 and losing at home to Kentucky by 11). The team gave up 100 points to Oklahoma in the first round. And this was a game on Duke's home floor.
Better yet, why did McCallie not make the necessary in-game adjustments? As RobC noted, why did she not to the triple post offense much earlier than she did and why did she then abandon it? Why was McCallie so unwilling to accept that the post-oriented nature of her current roster of available players, go big, stay with shooters, and force DePaul to try and go inside, where the team was ineffective?
In other words, her public statements created an excuse, just in case something like this happened. Losing two guards was awful. But even with the losses of Gray and Jones, Duke should have won yesterday's game. Duke did not lose because Gray and Jones did not play; Duke lost because of McCallie's coaching, her questionable decisions, and her failure to make the necessary adjustments.
There have been injuries the past two years to Chelsea Gray. This year, there was Alexis Jones as well. And there have been other injuries to other players. If the players keep getting injured and the injuries are excessive (which they have been in recent years), the problem might be with the strength and conditioning program that McCallie has implemented. Building a team for strength and not preparing the players to be in "basketball shape" and conditioning for an up-tempo, stop-start game will lead to injuries. There needs to be a balance, and the current training program is not only not working, it is a contributing factor to the barrage of injuries.
In her seventh season, McCallie's predecessor took a program from the bottom of the ACC to the Final Four. The program then made the Elite Eight seven times, with four Final Four appearances and two national championship games in her predecessor's last ten years.
McCallie inherited a roster of eight McDonald's All-Americans over four classes. Think about that - with 24 McDonald's All-Americans each year and 96 for the four years, McCallie came to Duke with 12 percent of the entire country's top players at her disposal. And McCallie has had her assistants constantly recruiting and even McCallie herself was very active in the recruitment of certain players (e.g., Elizabeth Williams). The recruiting under McCallie is at the highest levels in program history. Yet McCallie's seven seasons, there are not just zero Final Four appearances (and constant regular season blowouts against elite opponents); there are also two losses in the second round of the NCAA Tournament (and the two losses occurred as a top-two seed).
There are always reasons/explanations/excuses for a certain performance on an annual basis. But in the aggregate, there is only one common theme. McCallie has amassed a great winning percentage at Duke and has won four ACC titles. But Duke is not a truly elite program and has not been a truly elite program under her watch.
, but they should be able to be one of the elite teams in the B10. New Jersey produces enough talent to enable this to happen. In recent years, B10 schools are starting to hire Dynamic Coaches, its time for Rutgers to do the same. 
