Tag: ACC

Record: 34-4, 13-3 (1st place)
ACC Tournament: Lost in semifinal
NCAA Tournament: Won
Final AP Ranking: 2
All-ACC Players: Ty Lawson (ACC POY), Tyler Hansbrough (1st), Danny Green (3rd)
All-Americans: Tyler Hansbrough (1st), Ty Lawson (2nd)

North Carolina came into the 2009 season as the clear preseason #1. The 2008 team (#28 on my list) had finished 36-3 and reached the Final Four, and the only departures from that team were role players Alex Stepheson and Quentin Thomas. Their six top scorers – Tyler Hansbrough, Wayne Ellington, Ty Lawson, Danny Green, Deon Thompson, and Marcus Ginyard – were all back. Add to that three McDonald’s All-Americans – Larry Drew, Tyler Zeller, and Ed Davis – and the Tar Heels had a championship-caliber roster.

Ginyard unfortunately hurt his foot and missed the season. But if it slowed the Tar Heels down, you couldn’t tell. They took down Kentucky, Oregon, Notre Dame, and Michigan State in non-conference play as they raced to a 13-0 start. But their first two ACC games were clunkers – a home loss to Boston College and a road loss at Wake Forest.

After a get well game against a weak Virginia team, the Tar Heels got things rolling. They won 13 out of their last 14, including a sweep of Duke. The only blemish came in an overtime loss at Maryland in which Greivis Vasquez had 35 points, 11 rebounds, and 10 assists – one of the greatest triple-doubles in ACC history. Their regular season run culminated with a Senior Day win over Duke.

Going into the ACC Tournament, the main concern was the health of Ty Lawson who had injured his toe running into the basket stanchion. He played through it in the second Duke game, but he was hurting. Roy Williams, prioritizing the NCAA Tournament as he always did, made the decision to sit Lawson for the ACC Tournament in hopes that he would be ready for the NCAAs. Without Lawson, the Tar Heels struggled to beat Virginia Tech in the quarters and fell to Florida State in the semis. But Roy had bigger things in mind than a mere ACC championship.

It paid off. When Lawson returned for the second round game against LSU, he looked like his old self, and the Tar Heels were off and running. I’m trying to find some drama in the NCAA Tournament, but there just wasn’t any. Carolina controlled every single game. They covered the spread in every game. They led at half in every game. Their closest margin of victory was 12 points. The championship game against Michigan State was over at halftime. This team dominated the NCAA Tournament like few teams have.

Hansbrough was more or less his usual self, but Lawson and Ellington were the biggest stars. Ellington averaged 19.2 points on 55% from the field and 53% from three. Lawson averaged 20.8 points and had 34 assists against 7 turnovers in the tournament. In the final against Michigan State, Lawson had eight steals.

This group was just about perfect on offense. Everything you want – high FG%, didn’t turn it over, got to the line a lot, made free throws, great offensive rebounding team. They didn’t shoot a lot of threes, but when they did, they made them. On defense, their one vulnerability was defending the three-point line. They allowed ACC opponents to shoot 37.1% from three. One of the keys to their NCAA Tournament run was tightening that up. In their six tournament games, opponents shot 35-131 from three – a 26.7% clip.

It was one of those teams that if you wanted to have any chance to beat them, you had better score, because you knew they were gonna score. You weren’t going to beat this team 56-55. Once they shored up their perimeter defense, there were no weaknesses left. There was nothing to attack. They were a team on a mission to finish the job they left unfinished in 2008, and they did exactly that.

Record: 35-5, 13-3 (1st place tie)
ACC Tournament: Won
NCAA Tournament: Won
Final AP Ranking: 3
All-ACC Players: Kyle Singler (1st), Jon Scheyer (1st), Nolan Smith (2nd)
All-Americans: Jon Scheyer (2nd)

I love the composition of this team. In Singler, Scheyer, and Smith, you had one of the great trios in ACC history holding down the two guard spots and the wing. Those three guys basically never came out of the game.

Then, in the frontcourt, you had tremendous size in Brian Zoubek, Lance Thomas, and the Plumlee brothers. Their jobs were to play defense, get rebounds, set screens, and occasionally get a garbage basket off an offensive rebound or a dish from one of the big three.

It worked beautifully. The three S-boys each averaged over 17 points and two assists. They took about equal numbers of shots. Each was an excellent three-point shooter, each one could drive, each one could pass. It was impossible to defend. When they missed, one of the giants usually grabbed the rebound as the Blue Devils were one of the nation’s best offensive rebounding teams.

And on defense, the size inside allowed them to take away the three, even if that meant giving up a few drives. Duke ranked second nationally in three-point FG% defense at 28.3%, and only ten teams in Division I allowed fewer three-point attempts as a percentage of total shot attempts. As a result, the Blue Devils averaged less than four made threes allowed per game for the season, which must be close to some kind of record in the modern era.

It was a masterfully constructed team. Pretty much any way you tried to attack them, they had you.

They did lose five games, all on the road: Wisconsin, Georgia Tech, NC State, Georgetown, and Maryland. In a couple of those games, Singler, Scheyer, and Smith all had poor shooting games. Rare but not impossible. In a couple of the others, teams were able to find soft spots on the interior. Duke’s guys were big, but none individually was an exceptional defender or great shot-blocker. A few skilled big men such as NC State’s Tracy Smith, Georgia Tech’s Gani Lawal, and Georgetown’s Greg Monroe were able to have their way inside.

But they finished the regular season at 26-5 and ranked fourth in the country. The ACC Tournament started slowly as Duke faced Virginia in Tony Bennett’s first season. The Cavaliers weren’t very good, but they showed that signature defense in holding Duke to 57 points, its lowest total of the season. Unfortunately for them, they only managed to score 46. The semifinals and finals were not as close as the scores indicated. Duke led both games wire to wire and neither had any real drama.

Duke was the top seed in the South region. In the regionals, the Blue Devils showed their versatility. They won their Sweet 16 game against Purdue with defense, holding the Boilermakers to 37% shooting and owning the glass to overcome a subpar offensive performance. In the regional final, Duke had to survive an 0-for-10 performance from Singler. They did, thanks to nine threes from Smith and Scheyer and 22 offensive rebounds. Baylor led 61-60 at the under 4:00 timeout, but a four-point play by Smith (made free throw, missed free throw, offensive rebound, three) ignited a 12-1 run that sealed the game.

The national semifinal against #6 West Virginia was a tour de force performance. The Mountaineers were one of the few teams in the nation who could match Duke in size and rebounding. But they couldn’t match them on the perimeter. Singler, Smith, and Scheyer combined for 63 points, 17 assists (mostly to each other), and 3 turnovers. Each player individually had at least 19 points and 5 assists. Duke’s big guys just tried to play defense and stay out of the way as the Blue Devils cruised to a 78-57 win.

The national championship pitted Duke against upstart Butler. The Bulldogs had made a memorable Cinderella run through the West region, beating top seed Syracuse and second seed Kansas State in the regionals and Michigan State in the semis. Butler hung their hat on an outstanding defense that hadn’t allowed any opponent in the tournament to score 60 points. As it turned out, that was the magic number in the final, too.

It was one of those tense games where nobody could get a comfortable lead. The first half was back and forth. Duke took a narrow lead early in the second half, and the rest of the game was Butler getting it to a one-possession game, and Duke pushing it back to two. With about a minute left, Butler closed it to 60-59 with the ball, and the game really came down to that possession. Gordon Hayward took a high-arcing, fall-away baseline jumper with Zoubek’s hand in his face, a difficult shot but one that Hayward looked comfortable taking. It was on line but hit the back of the rim. After Duke made one free throw to stretch the lead to two, Hayward had a great look at an open, on balance 40-footer that nearly banked in.

I have a theory around how this team was put together. I have no evidence, mind you, it just makes sense to me. Think about the 2005-2009 Duke teams. Every year they were highly ranked but couldn’t get out of the Sweet 16. These teams were guard-oriented teams that were a bit soft in the middle. The 2006 team in particular was a terrible inside team, which sounds strange for a team with Shelden Williams, but look at the stats.

Meanwhile down the road, Carolina won the 2005 national championship by absolutely dominating the paint. The dominated the paint in 2007 when they swept Duke and in 2009 when they swept Duke again and won another national championship.

Watching all this, Coach K realized that something had to change. He was tired of watching his teams get bullied by their archrivals and come up short in the NCAA Tournament. He decided to go out and get as many big, tough guys as he could find, so that for once his team would be the bully. But he did it in a really smart way that didn’t bog down their guard-oriented offense.

This is an important aspect of the genius of Coach K. He reinvented his approach and his team several times during his career. Most coaches would have looked at Duke’s records from 2005-2009 and told themselves, we were really good but things just didn’t bounce our way. Coach K was honest enough with himself to say, even though we are in the Top 10 every year, this isn’t good enough and we have to change. It takes vision and courage to change things that are really good to get them to great. He was never afraid to do that.

Record: 26-5, 13-1 (1st place)
ACC Tournament: Won
NCAA Tournament: Lost in national final
Final AP Ranking: 3
All-ACC Players: Jeff Mullins (ACC POY), Buzz Harrison (2nd), Hack Tison (2nd), Jay Buckley (2nd)
All-Americans: Jeff Mullins (2nd)

OK, I just got done writing about 1963 Duke. What am I going to say different about 1964 Duke? Well, it was a different team. National Player of the Year Art Heyman was gone. Jeff Mullins was now the leader. Veterans Jay Buckley, Hack Tison, and Buzz Harrison were back. But what really put this team over the top were the additions of Jack Marin and Steve Vacendak from the freshman team.

The ACC in 1964 was pretty terrible. The distance between the first and second-place teams was never so great. Wake Forest, who finished second, probably wasn’t one of the 40 best teams in the country. The rest of the league was just plain bad. Duke had one close game in the ACC all year. They won their ACC Tournament games by 31, 16, and 21.

But Vic Bubas was smart. He knew his team needed to be tested against good competition, and he knew he wasn’t going to get it in the ACC. So he scheduled a really challenging non-conference slate:

• Beat #7 Ohio State 76-75 on a neutral court
• Beat West Virginia 86-81 on the road
• Lost to Vanderbilt 97-92 in overtime, on the road
• Lost to #3 Michigan, 83-67, on the road
• Lost to #1 Kentucky, 81-79, on a neutral court
• Beat Tennessee 67-65 in double OT, in Greensboro
• Beat #4 Davidson 82-75 at home

Every one of those opponents was probably better than the second-best team in the ACC. Notice that only one of the games was at Cameron. If you like analogies, Duke in 1964 was like a modern-day Gonzaga. They dominated a relatively weak league and played a brutal non-conference schedule to test themselves against the best. So when the NCAA Tournament came, they were ready.

Duke received a bye to the regionals, which were conveniently held at Reynolds Coliseum. They dominated #7 Villanova behind 43 points and 12 boards from Mullins. In the regional final, they annihilated UConn 101-54 in a game the Blue Devils led by 35 at halftime.

The Final Four brought a rematch with #2 Michigan, who had beaten Duke handily earlier in the season on their homecourt. The Wolverines featured two All-Americans in Cazzie Russell and Bill Buntin. This time, behind a balanced scoring effort led by Buckley’s 25, the Blue Devils triumphed to advance to the national championship game. Where they had the misfortune to meet undefeated UCLA. Starting this very year, the Bruins put a stranglehold on the national championship which they would not relinquish until John Wooden’s retirement after the 1975 season.

Teams to Place Four Players on First or Second Team All-ACC:

• 1964 Duke: Mullins (1), Harrison (2), Tison (2), Buckley (2)
• 1972 UNC: McAdoo (1), Wuycik (1), Chamberlain (2), Karl (2)
• 1975 Maryland: Lucas (1), Davis (2), Howard (2), Brown (2)
• 2012 UNC: Zeller (1), Henson (1), Barnes (1), Marshall (2)

A Rabbit Trail on Style of Play

I commented in an earlier post on late 1960s North Carolina about what we can infer about style of play for long-ago teams from the scant statistical record. This team is interesting in that regard as well.

We have field goal percentages both offensively and defensively, so we know that part. We can see from FG/FT attempts and opponents’ FG/FT attempts which teams took more shots than their opponents. What we lack is the detail behind why that is that case. If a team takes more shots than their opponents, either they are winning on the glass or they are winning on turnover margin. But for teams from the 1960s, we have no data at all on turnovers. We have total rebounds, but we don’t have offensive vs. defensive rebound breakdown. So how do we know what they were good at, exactly?

Raw rebound margin is not as useful as you might think as to whether a team is truly good at rebounding. To understand why, imagine a game between a very good shooting team (Team A) and a very poor shooting team (Team B). Team A goes 40-for-60, missing 20 shots. Team B goes 20-for-60, missing 40 shots. Team A gets 40 rebounds to Team B’s 20. Team A is the better rebounding team, right?

Not necessarily. Remember that the defense has an inherent advantage over the offense in getting rebounds. So when Team B misses, Team A should get the rebound, and vice versa. In this case, Team B missed many more shots, so Team A had many more defensive rebound opportunities. In actuality, Team A’s 40-20 advantage on the boards is exactly what we would expect if Team A and Team B are equally good at rebounding. Team A’s apparent advantage is only because Team B missed so many more shots.

I came up with the concept of Expected Rebounds to account for this. It’s based on the fact that the defense gets the rebound on a missed field goal about 2/3 of the time on average. Free throws are a different story; offensive rebounds on free throw attempts are very rare.

So a crude, quick-and-dirty formula for calculating Expected Rebounds is:

(2/3 * opponents’ field goal misses) + (1/3 * own field goal misses) + opponents’ free throw misses

This isn’t perfect, of course; offensive rebounds on free throws are rare but not zero, and not every missed free throw even results in a rebound, unless you’re counting deadball rebounds, etc. But as a rough indicative measure, it will do. The idea is that if a team has more rebounds than its expected rebounds, it must be a good rebounding team.

Let’s look at an example. 1963 Duke had the following stat lines:

Team	FG	FGA	FT	FTA	Reb
Duke	984	1926	528	784	1468
Opponents	819	2037	431	611	1127

Using my formula from above, Duke’s Expected Rebounds would be:

2/3 * (2037 – 819) + 1/3 * (1926 – 984) + (611 – 431) = 1,306

Doing the same calculation for Duke’s opponents:

2/3 * (1926 – 984) + 1/3 * (2037 – 819) + (784-528) = 1,290

Since Duke got 1,468 rebounds, well above their expected 1,306 rebounds, this supports that they were, in fact, an outstanding rebounding team. We’ll call the difference between actual rebounds and expected rebounds (1,468 – 1,306 = +162) the True Rebounding Margin.

When you compare the 1964 team to the 1963 team, something interesting jumps out at you. The 1963 team shot 51.1% from the field compared to 40.2% for its opponents – a huge 10.9% advantage in FG%. The 1964 team, however, had only a 4.1% advantage in FG%, and yet their average scoring margin was actually greater than the 1963 team (+15.0 vs. +14.2). What does that tell you? It tells you that the ’64 team made up for the relative decline in FG% margin by getting more shots than their opponents, which means they were either a great rebounding team or great at turnover margin or both.

What does Expected Rebounds tell us for 1964?

Team	FG	FGA	FT	FGA	Reb
Duke	1028	2163	551	771	1426
Opponents	872	2009	399	612	1279

Duke Expected Rebounds: 2/3 * (2009 – 872) + 1/3 * (2163 – 1028) + (612 – 399) = 1,349

Opponents’ Expected Rebounds: 2/3 * (2163 – 1028) + 1/3 * (2009 – 872) + (771 – 551) = 1,356

Duke’s True Rebounding Margin = Actual Rebounds – Expected Rebounds = 1,426 – 1,349 = +77. Good, but not nearly as good as 1963 Duke’s +162.

Let’s summarize what we’ve learned. 1964 Duke had a slightly larger scoring margin than 1963 Duke. And yet 1963 Duke had a higher FG%, a lower FG% allowed, and was a better rebounding team. How is this possible? There is only one way: 1964 Duke must have had an exceptional turnover margin, much better than 1963 Duke. That is literally the only way that all those things can be true. (I’m fudging a little bit by ignoring the impact of free throws, which is the other factor we haven’t considered. 1964 Duke was a little better than 1963 Duke in that regard, but not nearly enough to explain the scoring margin.)

It still doesn’t tell us everything we’d like to know. There are two sides to turnover margin: forcing turnovers, and avoiding turnovers of your own. Was 1964 Duke exceptional at forcing turnovers, or exceptional at taking care of the ball, or both? There is no data to tell us that. We could perhaps conjecture that the addition of Vacendak, an outstanding point guard, helped the turnover margin, and that perhaps the subtraction of Heyman may have hurt their rebounding, but helped their turnover margin. But we’re just guessing.

Record: 37-3, 12-2 (1st place tie)
ACC Tournament: Won
NCAA Tournament: Lost in national final
Final AP Ranking: 1
All-ACC Players: Johnny Dawkins (1st), Mark Alarie (1st)
All-Americans: Johnny Dawkins (1st)

At some point, I have to do a post or series of posts on the best years ever for the ACC. It seems like every year I look at from the mid-1970s through the early 2000s, I can’t believe how good the league was. 1986 is like that.

At the top of the league, Duke, Carolina, and Georgia Tech were in the Top 10 all year long, every single poll. Those three teams collectively also held down the #1 ranking all year. Georgia Tech was #1 preseason; they quickly ceded it to Carolina, who held it until mid-February, handing it off to Duke, who held it the rest of the way.

After the big three, you had NC State, Virginia, and Maryland. NC State finished 7-7 in the ACC, but they were ranked much of the year, had non-conference wins over #12 UNLV and #16 Louisville, and reached the Elite Eight. Maryland had Len Bias, and the best they could do was 6-8 and a 6th place (out of eight) ACC finish.

Shoot, seventh-place Clemson was a good team, and they went 3-11 in the conference. They beat 32-3 Bradley on a neutral court and made the third round of the NIT.

(I will concede that last-place Wake Forest was terrible.)

Duke’s only two regular season losses were back-to-back in mid-January. After a 16-0 start, they went to Chapel Hill to play also-undefeated Carolina. It was, not coincidentally, the first game in the Dean Dome. The Tar Heels pulled it out 95-92. Then the Blue Devils had to go to Atlanta to face #4 Georgia Tech, and they dropped that one as well.

They wouldn’t lose again until the national championship game. On the back nine of the schedule, they picked off Georgia Tech easily in the rematch, won a squeaker at NC State, notched nonconference wins against ranked opponents in Notre Dame and Oklahoma, and closed the regular season with an 82-74 Senior Day win over the Tar Heels.

The ACC Tournament final was a rubber match with defending champion Georgia Tech. If you’re like me – an old guy who grew up with the 1980s and 1990s ACC – go back and watch this game. It will remind you of everything you loved about ACC basketball. What stood out to me was how good Georgia Tech was. Mark Price, John Salley, Duane Ferrell, Tom Hammonds, and Bruce Dalrymple? That’s a heckuva team. It was a one possession game for most of the second half. In the last four minutes or so, the teams kept trading the lead. It came down to one possession. After a slick turnaround by Alarie gave Duke a one-point lead, Cremins called timeout with 37 seconds left to set up a play. He wanted to get a shot for Price, but Dawkins denied it. Price dished to Craig Neal, who was on the floor only because Dalrymple had fouled out. Neal’s contested 17-footer was well short, Duke grabbed the rebound, Georgia Tech had to foul, Dawkins made the free throws (of course), and that was the ballgame. No three-pointer, so if you were down three with less than ten seconds left, the game was basically over.

In the NCAAs, after a first round scare against Mississippi Valley State in which Duke didn’t take the lead until midway through the second half, the Blue Devils mostly coasted through the rest of the region, taking advantage of some upsets elsewhere in the bracket and playing a relatively easy schedule (including a regional final win over David Robinson and Navy) to reach the Final Four.

That set up a titanic Final Four showdown with second-ranked Kansas. Duke had beaten the Jayhawks all the way back on December 1. Since then, Kansas had lost only two more games and were riding a 16-game winning streak. It came down to a few possessions at the end of the game. Freshman Danny Ferry made a couple of big plays, Kansas wasn’t able to convert a few opportunities, and the Blue Devils advanced to the national championship game.

Duke led for most of the game, but it was never a comfortable lead, and Louisville just executed a little bit better in the last few minutes of the game. Duke had good looks down 66-65 and 68-65, but they wouldn’t go down, and that was the game. In the final analysis, Duke’s interior defense didn’t get it done. Louisville’s frontcourt of Pervis Ellison, Herbert Crook, and Billy Thompson had 48 points on 21-for-31 from the field. There were too many point-blank looks. Part of it is that Jay Bilas and Mark Alarie were in foul trouble for much of the game which may have forced them to play softer than they normally would. Regardless, Duke still could’ve won the game by knocking down a couple of open shots late, but it didn’t happen. They were a better team than Louisville, but they weren’t better on that particular night.

For more context on this team, check out my post on Johnny Dawkins where I wrote in depth about the Duke Class of ’86. That group of Dawkins, Alarie, Bilas, and David Henderson was exceptional. But they needed Tommy Amaker to get them over the top. Speaking of Amaker, remember the pass-first point guard? The floor general and defensive stalwart who had as many assists as points? The ACC had a lot of those guys over the years – Amaker, Steve Blake, Jimmy Black, Craig Neal, Derrick Phelps, Steve Wojciechowski… is it just me, or is that type of player gone now, or at least rarer?

Record: 35-3, 16-2 (1st place tie)
ACC Tournament: Lost in semifinal
NCAA Tournament: Won
Final AP Ranking: 2
All-ACC Players: Kyle Guy (1st), De’Andre Hunter (1st), Ty Jerome (2nd)
All-Americans: None

The 2018 loss to UMBC must have shaken the Virginia program to its core. But Tony Bennett is a high character guy and a great coach, and I’m guessing that once he was able to gain some perspective and look dispassionately at the situation, he realized that loss happened because his team needed to get better.

In particular, the 2018 team was not great on offense. Their Effective FG% was only 98th in D-1. They were not a good offensive rebounding team. Their defense was so good that it bailed them out of some pedestrian offensive performances. When their defense inexplicably broke down against UMBC, they had no answers on offense.

What changed in 2019? Actually, not that much from a personnel perspective. Devon Hall and Isaiah Wilkins graduated and were replaced by freshman Kihei Clark and transfer Braxton Key, respectively. But the biggest change was that the core three – Kyle Guy, Ty Jerome, and De’Andre Hunter – got a year older and a year better. Hunter, in particular, took a major step forward from a key reserve in 2018 to a star in 2019.

Don’t be fooled by their points per game stats. Guy, Jerome, and Hunter averaged “only” 44 points collectively, but that’s because of Virginia’s slow tempo. They were actually incredibly efficient offensive players – arguably the best trio of offensive players of any team in the country.

Virginia’s only two losses in the regular season were to #43 Duke, whom they battled all year for the top spot in the polls. After a disappointing loss in the ACC Tournament semis to Florida State, the Cavaliers headed to the South region as the top seed.

I had forgotten that they were down fourteen to Gardner-Webb in the first round. After what had happened with UMBC the year before, there must have been thoughts of “here we go again”, but to their credit, the Cavaliers steadied themselves and dominated to second half to win going away. Breathing a little easier, they dismantled Oklahoma in the second round with little trouble.

It was tight the rest of the way. In the regionals, they survived an ugly game against Oregon where neither team could make shots. That set up the unforgettable regional final with Purdue. Purdue’s Carsen Edwards was absolutely on fire, hitting 10 threes and putting the Boilermakers in position to win with five seconds left when Jerome was fouled and went to the line for a one-and-one. He left it way short (gotta say, it looked like a choke), but Virginia’s Mamadi Diakite did a great job getting a hand on the rebound and tapping it back. He tapped it so hard that Kihei Clark had to run back to three-quarter court to retrieve the ball. Clark had the presence of mind not to panic but to pass it back to Diakite, who hit a 10-footer at the buzzer to send the game to overtime where Virginia pulled out a five-point victory.

The national semifinal against Auburn was, if possible, even more dramatic. The Tigers mounted a furious second-half comeback and had opened up a four-point lead when Guy hit a tough three to cut it to one. A Virginia foul sent Auburn to the line where they made the first but missed the second. Auburn had fouls to give and used them effectively, forcing Virginia to inbound with just 1.5 seconds left. Guy got a decent look at a three and missed, which would have ended the game, but the officials called a controversial (but correct, in my opinion) foul. Guy, to his eternal credit, made all three free throws, and after Auburn’s desperation attempt failed, the Cavaliers were headed for the final versus Texas Tech.

How about one more nail-biter for good measure? This was a well-played, back-and-forth affair. Hunter hit the biggest shot, a three to tie the game at the end of regulation and send it to overtime. By this point, Virginia had played and won so many close games that they were ready for the moment. Five minutes later, the Cavaliers were national champions.

1983 NC State may have been the Cardiac Pack, but this Virginia team takes a back seat to no one when it comes to I-can’t-bear-to-watch moments. Their last three tournament games were as close as close could be – two decided in overtime, the other a one-point game that was snatched from the jaws of defeat in the final seconds.

Interesting fact: since 2007, five teams have finished in the kenpom top 5 in both offensive and defensive efficiency: 2008 Kansas, 2010 Duke, 2016 Villanova, 2019 Virginia, and 2024 UConn. All five won the national championship.

Record: 27-3, 14-0 (1st place)
ACC Tournament: Won
NCAA Tournament: Lost in national semifinal
Final AP Ranking: 2
All-ACC Players: Art Heyman (ACC POY), Jeff Mullins (1st)
All-Americans: Art Heyman (National POY)

1963 marked the arrival of Vic Bubas and Duke on the national scene. Bubas had been steadily building up the program since his arrival in 1959:

• 1959-60: 17-11, 7-7, ranked 18th
• 1960-61: 22-6, 10-4, Art Heyman‘s debut, ranked 10th
• 1961-62: 20-5, 11-3, Jeff Mullins‘ debut, ranked 10th

Going into 1962-63, Heyman and Mullins were both back from the prior year’s team. The Blue Devils were ranked second in the preseason poll. It seemed like their year to do something special.

Duke dropped to number eight in the polls after late December losses to Lefty Driesell-coached Davidson and Rick Barry-led Miami. They didn’t lose again until the Final Four. Following a win over Bill Bradley and Princeton, the Blue Devils proceeded to rip through the ACC regular season, becoming only the second team (North Carolina 1957) to be undefeated in ACC play. To give you an idea of the distance between Duke and the rest of the league, the second place team was Wake Forest. Duke beat the Deacs four times by an average of 20 points.

The Devils breezed through the ACC Tournament without a close game. With only 25 teams in the NCAA Tournament at the time, Duke received a first-round bye and advanced to the regional semifinal against #9 NYU. After a hard-fought win over the Violets, Duke faced St. Joseph’s in the regional final. Behind 24 from Mullins and 20 from Fred Schmidt, the Blue Devils survived an off night from Heyman and pulled away in the second half for a 73-59 win and their first Final Four.

That was the end of their run. In the Final Four, Duke ran into a buzzsaw in the form of Loyola (Ill.). The Ramblers took it to the Blue Devils, pulling away late for a 94-75 victory. Loyola went on to dethrone the two-time defending national champion Cincinnati Bearcats to win the title. Duke won the third place game against Oregon State handily, Heyman setting the pace with 22 in his last college game.

Duke shot 51.1% from the field for the year, shattering the previous ACC record of 47.3% by Duke 1961. It would remain the high until the 1966 North Carolina Tar Heels became the second ACC team to shoot better than 50% for a season at 51.7%. These were the only two teams to shoot 50% or better until the 1970s, when it became commonplace.

Record: 31-4, 13-3 (2nd place)
ACC Tournament: Won
NCAA Tournament: Lost in Sweet 16
Final AP Ranking: 1
All-ACC Players: Carlos Boozer (1st), Jason Williams (1st), Mike Dunleavy (1st)
All-Americans: Jason Williams (1st), Mike Dunleavy (2nd)

This was the last year of Duke’s five-year run of greatness from 1998-2002. They were definitely the best team in the country in 1999 and 2001 and arguably the best team in the country in 1998, 2000, and 2002.

Coming into the 2001-2002 season, the Blue Devils were the defending national champions. Shane Battier and Nate James had departed, but Duke had plenty, and I do mean plenty, of talent. How about Jason Williams, Carlos Boozer, Mike Dunleavy, Dahntay Jones, Chris Duhon, and Daniel Ewing?

On paper, this team was just as good as the 2001 team. They are the only team in the history of the kenpom ratings going back to 1999 to finish the season as both the best offense and defense in the country. Like many of the Duke teams of this era, they were great at pretty much everything except rebounding. And free-throw shooting, I guess. What they were exceptional at was putting the ball in the basket. Williams, Dunleavy, and Boozer averaged 57 points among them, and it wasn’t volume scoring, it was highly efficient. Boozer in particular made two out of every three field goal attempts, good for the third-best single season FG% in league history (behind Brendan Haywood 2000 and Zion Williamson 2019).

On defense, they were extremely disruptive on the perimeter. Williams, Dunleavy, and Duhon were deflection machines and Duke led the ACC in steals by a wide margin. Their three-point defense was exceptional. They were a little bit vulnerable on the interior; Boozer wasn’t a shot-blocker, and Nick Horvath and Casey Sanders didn’t play enough to make a big impact.

They rolled through the regular season and ACC Tournament with a 29-3 record. Their average margin of victory of 19.7 is the fourth-best in league history behind 1999 Duke, 1973 NC State, and 2001 Duke. The fascinating storyline was that Maryland was having just as good a year. The Terps, not Duke, won the ACC regular season. The two giants battled to a draw in their two regular season matchups, with each team winning handily on its home court. We were denied a rubber match in the ACC Tournament when NC State upset Maryland in the semifinals, only to get hammered by Duke in the final.

Everything went according to plan until their Sweet 16 game with Indiana. Several things conspired to lose this game for Duke. One, they got killed on the glass as Indiana had 20 offensive rebounds. Two, they went 10-for-19 from the line. Three, they committed 26 fouls and sent Indiana to the line for 31 free throw attempts. Four, Dunleavy and Williams did not shoot well, combining to go 11-for-35. And five, Indiana was really good for a five seed. You’ll recall they advanced all the way to the championship game before losing to Maryland. And with all that, it was a one-point game.

Rebounding and free throw shooting were known vulnerabilities for this team, and Indiana was able to exploit them. In most of their games, Duke was able to make so many shots that it didn’t matter, but with the poor shooting night from Dunleavy and Williams, it was too much to overcome. What most people remember about this game is the very end. Duke was down 74-70 when Williams drained a three-pointer with four seconds left and was fouled… and missed the free throw.

I’m not all that big on intangibles, but I can’t help but think that the difference between this team and the 2001 team is the leadership and toughness of Shane Battier. This team may have been as good as the 2001 team on paper, but Battier wouldn’t have let them lose that Indiana game.

Record: 34-4, 13-3 (2nd place)
ACC Tournament: Won
NCAA Tournament: Lost in national semifinal
Final AP Ranking: 1
All-ACC Players: Antawn Jamison (ACC POY), Vince Carter (1st), Ed Cota (2nd), Shammond Williams (2nd)
All-Americans: Antawn Jamison (National POY), Vince Carter (2nd)

Rarely in the history of college basketball has a new coach inherited such an embarrassment of riches as Bill Guthridge did in his first season as the head man.  The Tar Heels returned everyone save Serge Zwikker from the 1997 Final Four team, including second team All-American Antawn Jamison and superhuman athletic freak Vince Carter, who had grown by leaps and bounds as a sophomore and had Tar Heel fans practically drooling at what he might do as a junior.  Add in a couple of solid veterans in Shammond Williams and Ademola Okulaja, another year of experience for talented point guard Ed Cota, transfer Makhtar N’Diaye to provide interior size, and a strong (on paper) recruiting class led by seven-footer Brendan Haywood, and it’s a mystery the Tar Heels were only ranked fourth in the preseason poll.  Who did they think was going to be better?

Wait, I can answer that: Arizona, Kansas, and Duke.  Arizona was the defending national champion, so that one is understandable.  Kansas was returning Paul Pierce and Raef LaFrentz from a 34-2 team, so that explains that one.  And Duke had Avery, Brand, and Battier coming in.

In any case, the Tar Heels were loaded.  I hate to say that all Coach Gut had to do was roll the balls out, because there’s always more to it than that, but mostly he just had to not screw things up.

They came out on fire, demolishing seventh-ranked UCLA by 41 in the fourth game of the season and winning their first 17 games before an overtime loss at Maryland, which was really starting to find its legs as a program under Gary Williams.  In the first Duke showdown, Carolina dominated the top-ranked Blue Devils 97-73 and grabbed that ranking for themselves.

There was one head-scratcher, a 14-point home loss to NC State in late February.  That was the only other blemish as the Tar Heels took a 27-2 record into the regular season finale at Cameron.  This time, UNC blew a 17-point second half lead as Duke rode the energy of the home crowd to a 77-75 win.

The rubber match came eight days later in the ACC Tournament final.  Carolina had survived an overtime thriller against Maryland in the semifinal.  This one was tight for a while, but a 13-0 run midway through the second half sealed it for the Tar Heels.

In the NCAA Tournament, they survived a surprisingly tough second round matchup with UNC-Charlotte, then defeated Michigan State and UConn to earn a trip to the Final Four.  That’s where it all went wrong.  The Tar Heels played a terrible semifinal game, shooting 39% from the field and going 3-for-23 from three and 2-for-7 from the line in a 65-59 loss to a good but inferior Utah team.  Carolina was the best team in the country that year, but the best team doesn’t always win.

One oddity of the way Bill Guthridge coached this team was the six-man starting rotation.  He distributed starts evenly among six players, leaving one of them out each game seemingly at random.  Here are the number of starts by player:

• Jamison, 32 (out of 38 total games)
• Williams, 32
• Carter, 32
• Cota, 31
• Okulaja, 32
• N’Diaye, 30
• Haywood, 1

Isn’t that odd?  N’Diaye, in particular, always seemed like an strange fit for the Carolina program as a transfer.  Even as a freshman, Brendan Haywood was probably a better player.  In the Utah game, N’Diaye fouled out in 14 minutes with zero points.  I wonder if that Utah game would have turned out differently had Haywood received those 14 minutes instead.  With N’Diaye’s foul trouble, the Tar Heels went small for a lot of the game, and they had trouble containing Utah’s big men Michael Doleac and Britton Johnsen.

This team was really good at a lot of things.  They shot 13.4% better than their opponents from the field, 51.8% to 38.4%, and while I have no easy way of checking, that difference must be close to a record.  They made 124 more free throws than their opponents attempted.  They were an exceptional offensive rebounding team.  They had rim protectors.  They took care of the ball.  They didn’t foul (except for N’Diaye).  They weren’t a prolific 3-point shooting team, but they were efficient with the ones they took.

But they were caught with a shaky big man situation. Haywood wasn’t quite ready, and N’Diaye just wasn’t that good. Tar Heel fans might remember that they were supposed to have Vasco Evtimov, but he was forced to sit out the 1997-98 season and part of the next because he had played for a kind of semi-pro team in France. He wasn’t paid, but some other players were, and the NCAA decided that gave him an unfair advantage. But was he good enough to make a difference? Maybe not.