From: kenneth@ducvax.auburn.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.college
Subject: Re: Duke Tourney Observations
Date: 11 Apr 92 11:52:08 GMT

In article <2319@news.duke.edu>, trradrx@canctr.mc.duke.edu writes:
> 1) Read in McNews the other day that some pro scouts have projected Grant
> Hill as a #5 or #6 pick if he came out for the draft *this year*!  Some have
> compared him to Dr J. (not Burch! :-) )  They admire his moves to the basket,
> rebounding, ballhandling and defense, which I feel is the most underrated
> portion of his game.  If Grant develops some confidence in his outside shot,
> he might bring Duke four championships.  I feel that he'll probably stick
> around for four years; he's actually a real student (1400+ on the SAT's),
> and his father went to Yale.  His mother is a professor, I believe.  Of
> course, the Duke fan mantra is "It doesn't matter how well our players do in
> the NBA...." :-)

I've heard him being compared to Magic Johnson.  The man is a 6'8" Soph.,
plays back-up POINT GUARD to Hurley, and the man just ABUSED Michigan on
the baseline.  
 
> 2) It was interesting that Duke ended up playing two teams that had freshmen
> that Duke was heavily recruiting.  (Chris Webber and Alan Henderson)  After
> watching them this season, and particularly after the recent games, I would
> have to say that I wish Henderson had gone to Duke, but not Webber.  Frankly,
> I think Webber's hotdogging/whining/ballhogging/poor shot selection would
> just not have played with Coach K, and I don't think there would have been
> enough room on the court for his and Christian's ego.  Of course, there are
> those fans who might say that Webber's whining would have fit in perfectly
> on Duke! :-)  On the other hand, Henderson is a tough rebounder, scorer 
> and defender who seems to prefer doing his job than jawing.  When I saw
> him in an all-star game, he seemed a little too flashy, but this guy
> can work.  I look forward to seeing Webber and Henderson battle for the 
> next 3 years.

Well, I think Coach K. may have changed Webber's attitude.  He would've 
told him where the bear sits right away.  Coach K. doesn't take much from
anybody, including Christian.  In the Clemson game, he'd yanked the whole
starting 5 off the floor after they'd gotten behind by 19 points, put the
reserves on the floor, and THEY went on a 6-0 run to get the Devils back
into the game, which they won something like 99-98 or 98-97 or some such.

 
> 3) I like Indiana.  They're well coached, disciplined, and they make good
> decisions on the court.  I like most Indiana fans.  They seem very knowledg-
> able and devoted to their team.  However, some Indiana fans on this group
> need to purchase a very large clue.  Claiming that the refs won the game
                     ^^^^ ^^^^^ ^^^^   Yes, they do!

> is rather absurd, considering:
>   1) Indiana had a huge lead in fouls in the first half.  This is because
> they were attacking the basket, and Duke was tentative.  It was clear from
> the get-go that anyone wildly going to the basket would be called for 
> charging.  Duke adjusted to this.  IU did not.

GREAT point.  I saw the game, and they were calling the charge BOTH ways,
against BOTH teams.  The IU/Duke game was one of the most consistently
officiated games I've ever seen -- same call on both teams.

>   2) Duke had a huge lead in fouls in the second half because *they*
> attacked the basket, and IU was tentative.  Case closed.  Cheaney was called
> for charging late in the game because he was totally out of control going
> to the hoop.  The starters lost their composure.  Duke was solidly in control
> until those miracle 3's started raining in (admit it, when *Nover* starts
> hitting 3's, you know something weird is going on!).  The final margin was
> only 3, but Duke was in control in the second half.  Cheaney said that the
> technical did not decide the game; he said that IU frequently picks up 
> play when Knight gets a T.  He did complain some about the officiating; Tony
> Lang replied that IU should have spent less time complaining to the refs and
> should have paid more attention to trying to win the game.  The IU scrubs
> taught the starters a lesson.  This is an excellent team, that will get
> better when they stop making excuses and concentrating on finding a way to
> win.

Another good point.  I remember some WILD threes being put up, and THEY KEPT
GOING IN!  I was sitting here saying to myself, "DAMN!"  The man was just
hot.

>   3) Packer droning on and on about Laettner annoyed me too; there *were*
> four other players out there.  Duke is #1 because our all-american has
> a lot of support, and it would have been nice to here some more about them
> from Packer.   He was really focusing on Laettner's poor shooting, ignoring
> the fact that he caused a few turnovers, as well.  And neither Duke nor
> Michigan played good first halves; UM was out of control.  A little more
> composure and they could have had a big lead at the half.  UM looked very
> flat emotionally in the second half; towards the end they weren't even
> trying.  The job that Duke did defensively in the second halves of the IU
> and UM games rivals that job that G-Town did on Kentucky in 1984, where
> they kept them from scoring for like 15 minutes.  Nice to see the D come
> back to Duke.

Yup.  Duke's normal 5 starters all averaged double figures in scoring for a
reason -- they can PLAY!  If not for Hurley's bombs from outside, Duke may
very well have lost the IU game.  I like Parks.  He has the killer DUNK
instincts.  Laettner is a bit tentative about going for the "Thunder Dunk"
sometimes, but I really enjoyed seeing Cherokee go up and slam it and get the
foul.

>   4) Durham: City of Champions!  The div II NCCU Eagles won the National
> Championship in 1989, making 3 titles in 4 years for the City of Medicine!
> Obviously, LA has those 10 championships, but I'd be interested in knowing
> of other cities with small colleges and big colleges that have similar
> accomplishments.

Not my city, that's for sure! :)

Ken