K’s Best Team

[dukehokie]

The Chronicle did a pretty cool thing. They ran a simulation tournament of what they felt were some of K’s best teams. The article is worth reading and the simulations are by no means perfect, but I’ll spoil the ending so we can discuss.

1991-1992 plays 2000-2001 in the championship and ‘00-‘01 wins it. And I don’t think I disagree.

IMO, it’s the defense and the 3 ball that sets them apart. 91-92 could shoot it, but no team in college basketball history has shot the 3 the way that 00-01 team shot it. And no team in NCAA history had a defender like Shane Battier.

What do you all think?

http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/2019/11/duke-mens-basketball-best-team-ever

 

[DiehardDukeFan4Life]

IMO this is one of those things where if you agree with the simulation you’re not really wrong and on the flip side if you disagree with the simulation you’re really not wrong either. I’d favor the 91-92 team because they only had 2 losses and someone can correct me if I’m wrong but if I’m remembering correctly both of those losses that Bobby Hurley didn’t ply in because of injury. I’m not saying that they would’ve won those games if he had played because there’s no way to know that for sure but it makes you wonder.

 

[OldasdirtDevil]

The Chronicle did a pretty cool thing. They ran a simulation tournament of what they felt were some of K’s best teams. The article is worth reading and the simulations are by no means perfect, but I’ll spoil the ending so we can discuss.

1991-1992 plays 2000-2001 in the championship and ‘00-‘01 wins it. And I don’t think I disagree.

IMO, it’s the defense and the 3 ball that sets them apart. 91-92 could shoot it, but no team in college basketball history has shot the 3 the way that 00-01 team shot it. And no team in NCAA history had a defender like Shane Battier.

What do you all think?
http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/2019/11/duke-mens-basketball-best-team-ever
http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/2019/11/duke-mens-basketball-best-team-ever

Christian Laettner, the baddest mofo, swaggering clutch player of all time. That's all I'm going to say.

OFC

 

[meisperplexed]

IMO this is one of those where if you agree with the simulation you’re not really wrong and on the flip side if you disagree with the simulation you’re really not wrong either. I’d favor the 91-92 team because they only had 2 losses and someone can correct me if I’m wrong but if I’m remembering correctly both of those losses that Bobby Hurley didn’t ply in because of injury. I’m not saying that they would’ve won those games if he had played because there’s no way to know that for sure but it makes you wonder.

He played in the first loss at UNC, but he broke the bone in his foot in the first half and it was still only a 2 point loss if memory serves. I know Hurley was tough as nails, but I do think the injury affected his play in that game.

 

[DukeRulesBasketball]

I think it’s very hard to beat the 91-92 Duke team. They weren’t just one of the best Duke teams, but they were one of the best college basketball teams of all time. Also, If Kyrie never got injured, the 2010-11 Duke team would have been one of K’s best teams, because, I’m pretty sure that team would have repeated as National Champions with maybe 2 losses of the year.

 

[DiehardDukeFan4Life]

He played in the first loss at UNC, but he broke the bone in his foot in the first half and it was still only a 2 point loss if memory serves. I know Hurley was tough as nails, but I do think the injury affected his play in that game.

I thought I might’ve been at least close on him being out for our 2 losses but I wasn’t completely sure

I think it’s very hard to beat the 91-92 Duke team. They weren’t just one of the best Duke teams, but they were one of the best college basketball teams of all time. Also, If Kyrie never got injured, the 2010-11 Duke team would have been one of K’s best teams, because, I’m pretty sure that team would have repeated as National Champions with maybe 2 losses of the year.

I was just talking to a buddy of mine about this Friday night. He’s a UNC fan but he’s one of the UNC fans that you can discuss Duke/UNC with without him being obnoxious. I said that if Kyrie Irving hadn’t gotten injured we possibly would’ve repeated as champions and he disagreed but that’s not really any surprise. I actually had to buy him a beee and a shot to pay off bets we had on last season’s 2 Duke/UNC games that we lost because he hadn’t been to the bar since we made the bets because he has a toddler son.

 

[pisgah101]

I agree personally. I think having 99 and 01 play in the first round was a screw up.. could be the best two right there. Also would put 04 in over last years team

 

[smashmouth5]

Watching the 91-92 team was like watching art in motion. I love Shane's defense but he can't guard Laettner and Hill at the same time. They just created so many match up problems. 91-92 could of been called the Killers long before the band.

 

[RanDEVILman]

I would disagree with the notion that watching 92 was poetry. I was young at the time, but I go back and watch classic games at some point frequently. That team struggled at times in the NCAAT. Offensively they were good, but very rough for stretches. The 01 team just clicked about the entire tournament, minus the Maryland game. Now, not saying 01 would win. Battier is my all time favorite, but it’s really hard to think Laettner would ever lose, ugly or otherwise.

 

[dukehokie]

This is definitely a tough one. Laettner is obviously top 10 maybe 5 all-time in college, but Battier would have that matchup, and it wouldn’t be easy for Christian. Mainly because Battier is used to playing versatile bigs. The guys Christian played weren’t used to bigs who could step out. He was truly ahead of his time. I really think the stalemate of that matchup coupled with the way the 00-01 team shot the ball is what would put them over. That team isn’t talked about as an all-time team for some reason, but in defense and shooting, they set some national marks that were truly incredible.

 

[skysdad]

1991-92. OFC

 

[bullettoothtony]

Man this one is tough. '92 with the wealth of tournament experience, Hurley, Hill and Laettner. Everyone knows about them.

But '01 was an offensive juggernaut, virtually impossible to defend. With a defense anchored by one of the best on-ball and help defenders in the history of college basketball.

My head hurts trying to analyze it!

 

[lyonhawk]

1991-92. OFC

If Battier was on Laettner who would Boozer guard? I think Dunleavy is also a problem for 92. That said, I still think 99 was our best team.

 

[christophero]

Man this is tough. 92 would seem to be the best team, and they won back to back. 99 would have a shot because of Brand and Battier. 2001 would be close. How about 2010? Not flashy but very experienced and well balanced. Gotta go with 92.

 

[OldasdirtDevil]

Christian Laettner, the baddest mofo, swaggering clutch player of all time. That's all I'm going to say.

OFC

Haha, maybe I'll add a little more!

Laettner, Hill, & Hurley. All 3 are at the top of the heap at their positions in Duke basketball (yeah, I know many will pick Jwill over Bobby, but that's a whole nother argument in and of itself).

Laettner...top 5 player in all of college basketball imo, and perhaps the most clutch. Shot 55% from 3 his senior year (almost 50% for career).

Hill...perhaps the best all around player in Duke history, and alarmingly athletic.

Hurley...still the all-time assists leader in NCAA history, and although he could be whiney, he was one tough little sob, and damn nigh as clutch as Laettner.

The rest of the starting lineup wasn't chopped liver either.

The 91/92 team shot over 50% from the field, and 43% from 3. The 00/01 shot 38% from 3 but shot a $hit ton more of them. Now, is that an advantage? It certainly could be, but a team that relies on shooting that many 3's can get in trouble quickly if they don't fall. The 91/92 team shot far less 3's ('cause they didn't need to), but they were quite capable of knocking them down if the need arose.

Here is just one stat that I will throw out that to me is a killer to the 00/01 team...they shot less that 70% from the ft line (compared to 75% to the 91/92 team). And even worse for the 00/01 team is that their pg (Jwill) shot only 65%( compared to 79% for Hurley). That's a big advantage to give a team that already has Laettner, Hill & Hurley.

And it's really funny that in that simulated game that the 00/01 team shot 70% from the ft line while the great ft shooting team of 91/92 (with the 3 headed monster of Laettner 81%, Hurley 79% & Hill 73%) shot only 58% {17 of 29}!!!

Laettner, Hill & Hurley ain't walking off that court without the W.

OFC

 

[christophero]

Agreed. Hurley was great at getting the right shot to the right person. That team was such a well oiled machine. Hill and Laettner and the other guys played their roles perfectly. I remember Brian Davis being a beast.

 

[Mac9192]

Haha, maybe I'll add a little more!

Laettner, Hill, & Hurley. All 3 are at the top of the heap at their positions in Duke basketball (yeah, I know many will pick Jwill over Bobby, but that's a whole nother argument in and of itself).

Laettner...top 5 player in all of college basketball imo, and perhaps the most clutch. Shot 55% from 3 his senior year (almost 50% for career).

Hill...perhaps the best all around player in Duke history, and alarmingly athletic.

Hurley...still the all-time assists leader in NCAA history, and although he could be whiney, he was one tough little sob, and damn nigh as clutch as Laettner.

The rest of the starting lineup wasn't chopped liver either.

The 91/92 team shot over 50% from the field, and 43% from 3. The 00/01 shot 38% from 3 but shot a $hit ton more of them. Now, is that an advantage? It certainly could be, but a team that relies on shooting that many 3's can get in trouble quickly if they don't fall. The 91/92 team shot far less 3's ('cause they didn't need to), but they were quite capable of knocking them down if the need arose.

Here is just one stat that I will throw out that to me is a killer to the 00/01 team...they shot less that 70% from the ft line (compared to 75% to the 91/92 team). And even worse for the 00/01 team is that their pg (Jwill) shot only 65%( compared to 79% for Hurley). That's a big advantage to give a team that already has Laettner, Hill & Hurley.

And it's really funny that in that simulated game that the 00/01 team shot 70% from the ft line while the great ft shooting team of 91/92 (with the 3 headed monster of Laettner 81%, Hurley 79% & Hill 73%) shot only 58% {17 of 29}!!!

Laettner, Hill & Hurley ain't walking off that court without the W.

OFC

Great points Dirt. First off, Battier is probably the best leader K ever had. Unbelievable team. Talent everywhere. But the 92 team was just the sh%#! Laettner was a prick. But K let Laettner be Laettner. Because it worked. The whole bunch just put their egos all to the side when they put the jerseys on.
You guys also need to understand the pressure on that team. They had no peace the entire season. A freaking rock band on tour, and they had to be escorted in and out of every arena.
All they did was win. So, no disrespect to 01, or any of the other teams, 92 will always be the best.

 

[skysdad]

Haha, maybe I'll add a little more!

Laettner, Hill, & Hurley. All 3 are at the top of the heap at their positions in Duke basketball (yeah, I know many will pick Jwill over Bobby, but that's a whole nother argument in and of itself).

Laettner...top 5 player in all of college basketball imo, and perhaps the most clutch. Shot 55% from 3 his senior year (almost 50% for career).

Hill...perhaps the best all around player in Duke history, and alarmingly athletic.

Hurley...still the all-time assists leader in NCAA history, and although he could be whiney, he was one tough little sob, and damn nigh as clutch as Laettner.

The rest of the starting lineup wasn't chopped liver either.

The 91/92 team shot over 50% from the field, and 43% from 3. The 00/01 shot 38% from 3 but shot a $hit ton more of them. Now, is that an advantage? It certainly could be, but a team that relies on shooting that many 3's can get in trouble quickly if they don't fall. The 91/92 team shot far less 3's ('cause they didn't need to), but they were quite capable of knocking them down if the need arose.

Here is just one stat that I will throw out that to me is a killer to the 00/01 team...they shot less that 70% from the ft line (compared to 75% to the 91/92 team). And even worse for the 00/01 team is that their pg (Jwill) shot only 65%( compared to 79% for Hurley). That's a big advantage to give a team that already has Laettner, Hill & Hurley.

And it's really funny that in that simulated game that the 00/01 team shot 70% from the ft line while the great ft shooting team of 91/92 (with the 3 headed monster of Laettner 81%, Hurley 79% & Hill 73%) shot only 58% {17 of 29}!!!

Laettner, Hill & Hurley ain't walking off that court without the W.

OFC

Free throw percentage. Glad you noted it. It seems to me that a lot of us don't understand how important it is. If you think about it our poor free throw shooting especially during crunch time has cost us at least one natty and kept us from advancing in others. At least team wise 70 per cent is a must. 75 per cent or higher is where we need to be. Yes if we beat someone my 30 points it's not a big deal but when it comes down to one or two points there's the difference. In the game between the 91-92 and 00-01 simulated game the 91-92 team hits 16 out of 20 while the 00-01 team hits 4 more 3 pointers they go 11-19 and bricks their last 4 attempts and losing by 2 points. OFC

 

[skysdad]

Free throw percentage. Glad you noted it. It seems to me that a lot of us don't understand how important it is. If you think about it our poor free throw shooting especially during crunch time has cost us at least one natty and kept us from advancing in others. At least team wise 70 per cent is a must. 75 per cent or higher is where we need to be. Yes if we beat someone my 30 points it's not a big deal but when it comes down to one or two points there's the difference. In the game between the 91-92 and 00-01 simulated game the 91-92 team hits 16 out of 20 while the 00-01 team hits 4 more 3 pointers they go 11-19 and bricks their last 4 attempts and losing by 2 points. OFC

Also the 91-92 had a couple of pretty good defensive players also who won some pretty important defensive awards and Laettner ,Davis, Thomas Hill and Lang weren't defensively challenged. OFC

 

[skysdad]

I've got to go somewhere or I would do it but could someone do a starting five match up with the top 2 or 3 first off the bench for both teams and see what we come up with and compare. OFC

 

[timo0402]

The Chronicle did a pretty cool thing. They ran a simulation tournament of what they felt were some of K’s best teams. The article is worth reading and the simulations are by no means perfect, but I’ll spoil the ending so we can discuss.

1991-1992 plays 2000-2001 in the championship and ‘00-‘01 wins it. And I don’t think I disagree.

IMO, it’s the defense and the 3 ball that sets them apart. 91-92 could shoot it, but no team in college basketball history has shot the 3 the way that 00-01 team shot it. And no team in NCAA history had a defender like Shane Battier.

What do you all think?
http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/2019/11/duke-mens-basketball-best-team-ever
http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/2019/11/duke-mens-basketball-best-team-ever

I think the 5pt play guys should debate this...

@dbav what do you think?

 

[dbav]

I think the 5pt play guys should debate this...

@dbav what do you think?

The 2001 Championship was my junior year there. That team was insane. It wasn't just that they beat the teams they were supposed to beat, it's that they beat those teams by 30+ points.

I also remember that year being unique in that Duke and Arizona were the top 2 in every preseason poll and actually met in the Championship game. I don't recall ever seeing that outside of that year.

As to the podcast...shameless, but I do think Battier defending Laettner would be a sight to see.

 

[timo0402]

The 2001 Championship was my junior year there. That team was insane. It wasn't just that they beat the teams they were supposed to beat, it's that they beat those teams by 30+ points.

I also remember that year being unique in that Duke and Arizona were the top 2 in every preseason poll and actually met in the Championship game. I don't recall ever seeing that outside of that year.

As to the podcast...shameless, but I do think Battier defending Laettner would be a sight to see.

I actually believe in 99 that duke and UConn were 1-2 in some order the entire season as well.
Would love to see a Shane bs Christian battle. Who do you pull for?

 

[dbav]

I actually believe in 99 that duke and UConn were 1-2 in some order the entire season as well.
Would love to see a Shane bs Christian battle. Who do you pull for?

Honestly, Battier because he was more my time. The 91 and 92 teams played when I was 10 and 11. I was never a huge fan of Laettner because I tend to like quiet confidence rather than the brashness that Laettner displayed. That view has changed slightly, but Battier was just as crafty as Laettner. Both were arguably the best player in the game for 2 years.

I think it would be fairly even with a slight edge to Laettner due to size. I would pull for Battier because he's just a classy dude. I even have a fun story of when I stopped a fraternity brother from picking a fight with Battier during alumni weekend, haha.

 

[OldasdirtDevil]

Oh man, you guys wanting a Battier/Laettner matchup. Christian would eat that 'midget' alive!
Laettner had every kind of post move known to man, besides an incredible outside shot.

Shane was 6' 8", and I'm pretty sure Laettner was a genuine 7 footer. It's been a long time since I heard the interview, but after he left Duke for the pros he was telling someone (I believe it was David Letterman on the Last Show) that he was measured at 7 foot, but he didn't want to be listed at that height because everyone thought a 7 footer had to be glued down into the paint, and he wanted to utilize his perimeter game also.

Anyway, I thought Shane was incredible, but as you can see, my man crush is for Laettner!

OFC

 

[OldasdirtDevil]

You know, we're just so damn lucky that we can have such discussions about what team or player is the best, etc. So many great memories. After reading through this thread, I thought about our great Duke teams and memories and so I watched this video again. Thought maybe some of you might want to see it again too.
Turn up the volume, if you watch it.



OFC

 

[dukehokie]

I understand the man-crush @OldasdirtDevil, but he’d crush Battier? I don’t know man.

 

[OldasdirtDevil]

I understand the man-crush @OldasdirtDevil, but he’d crush Battier? I don’t know man.

Haha, maybe that didn't come through like I intended, 'hokie! I was just having a little fun with that. I think Christian would win the matchup, but Shane is a formidable challenger. Two great Duke legends, nothing would come easy for either. I'm actually kind of glad we don't have to see what would happen.

OFC

 

[christophero]

That 99 team was crazy good. Had we beaten U Conn (a big if) i would tie them with the 92 team. That game would be 4 overtimes.

 

[dukehokie]

That 99 team was crazy good. Had we beaten U Conn (a big if) i would tie them with the 92 team. That game would be 4 overtimes.

Beating UConn isn’t a qualifier for me. That team was incredible regardless. In a 7 game series, they’d beat just about any team in NCAA history. I don’t even question it. That ‘99 UConn game is a mystery beyond mysteries.

 

[timo0402]

Beating UConn isn’t a qualifier for me. That team was incredible regardless. In a 7 game series, they’d beat just about any team in NCAA history. I don’t even question it. That ‘99 UConn game is a mystery beyond mysteries.

Don’t even want to think about it. It’s been 20 years and i still can’t watch that game again.

 

[smashmouth5]

Really enjoying this...

91-92
Laettner 22 ppg 8 rpg 2 apg
T. Hill 15 ppg 3 rpg 2 apg
G. Gill 14 ppg 6 rpg 4 apg
Hurley 13 ppg 2 rpg 8 apg
Davis 11 ppg 5 rpg 2 apg
Lang 6 ppg 4 rpg 1 apg
Parks 5 ppg 2 rpg
Clark and Meek saw playing time.

00-01
Williams 22 ppg 3 rpg 6 apg
Battier 20 ppg 7 rpg 2 apg
Dunleavy 13 ppg 6 rpg 3 apg
James 12 ppg 5 rpg 1 apg
Boozer 13 ppg 7 rpg 1 apg
Duhon 7 ppg 3 rpg 5 apg
Sanders 3 ppg 2 rpg

 

[dbav]

Watching William's go at Hurley on the offensive end and Duhon going at him on the defensive end would have been fun too. Not to mention Dunleavy/James vs. the Hills.

 

[christophero]

imagine senior Battier on Grant Hill.

 

[OldasdirtDevil]

Really enjoying this...

91-92
Laettner 22 ppg 8 rpg 2 apg
T. Hill 15 ppg 3 rpg 2 apg
G. Gill 14 ppg 6 rpg 4 apg
Hurley 13 ppg 2 rpg 8 apg
Davis 11 ppg 5 rpg 2 apg
Lang 6 ppg 4 rpg 1 apg
Parks 5 ppg 2 rpg
Clark and Meek saw playing time.

00-01
Williams 22 ppg 3 rpg 6 apg
Battier 20 ppg 7 rpg 2 apg
Dunleavy 13 ppg 6 rpg 3 apg
James 12 ppg 5 rpg 1 apg
Boozer 13 ppg 7 rpg 1 apg
Duhon 7 ppg 3 rpg 5 apg
Sanders 3 ppg 2 rpg

Thanks for posting that, Smash! Sky was wanting something to compare, and I hadn't got around to it.

OFC

 

[OldasdirtDevil]

imagine senior Battier on Grant Hill.

Imagine a senior Grant Hill on Battier!

OFC

 

[jwill133]

Personally, I think the 1999 teams A game would beat any other teams A game. They just happened to play a sub-par game at the worst possible time.

As far as 01 versus 92. Depends on how 01 shoots from three. If they can hit 40% of them for that ONE game, than they would win, that’s a tall task though. 92 the safer bet.

 

[dukesince91]

If this game is for a National Championship, I got my money on '92.
Laettner would will them to the title.

 

[christophero]

Avery and Brand did not look like themselves in the title game. That did not help. Brand played okay but I remember him having trouble with Voskill's height. Still makes me mad.

 

[skysdad]

Thanks for posting that, Smash! Sky was wanting something to compare, and I hadn't got around to it.

OFC

There would be some heck of match ups for sure. I don't think Battier would be on Laettner at all. Boozer would have to handle him. Shane would be have his hands full on G. Hill. Dunleavy Davis or Lange depending on whose in the game. While I think Williams would get the best of T. Hill there is no way Duhon could get the best of Hurley with all due respect to Chris. I think that Parks coming off the bench would give the advantage to the 92 team also. If the 2001 team countered with Sanders to give Boozer a breather Parks would eat him up. Nate would help off the bench though. Like I mentioned above free throw shooting would do in the 2001 team. OFC