I was there in Atlanta when Duke lost to LSU last year in the Sweet 16.
As the team filed off the court, I made my prediction for this season. But I'm not going to put it in print-I learned my lesson last year. There won't be a 2006-07 version of The Train. I think we all know how that ended, and I don't think we want a repeat performance.
Instead I'll say this: I'm very optimistic about this team. To quote Coach K (from last year, but he probably said something like it this year), "I think this team has a chance to be very good."
ESPN.com columnist Bill Simmons often writes about the Ewing Theory, based on his observations that Patrick Ewing's teams always played better when he was injured or on the bench with foul trouble.
A team is prime Ewing Theory material when:
It has a player that received an inordinate amount of media attention and fan interest despite never winning anything substantial (like, say, a national championship).
Once that player leaves, everyone writes the team off for the next year.
Looking for prime examples of the Ewing Theory? Take the Knicks in 1999-they reached the NBA Finals even though Ewing himself ruptured an Achilles tendon and missed the playoffs. Or Tennessee Football in 1998-Peyton Manning left in 1997, and they won the National Championship the next year. Or, if you need a college basketball example, the Virginia Cavaliers in 1984-Ralph Sampson graduated without ever winning a title, and they made the Final Four the next year.
Not to throw J.J. Redick under the bus or anything, but he's a prime Ewing Theory candidate. Inordinate amount of media attention? Check. Fan interest? Check. Never really won anything? Check (one Final Four in four years just doesn't cut it). Everyone writes off his team after he leaves? Check.
The effectiveness of the Ewing Theory is spooky enough on its own, but I'll add some bonus actual basketball analysis so you get your money's worth and everything.
Not everyone knows this, but Duke was the third highest scoring team in college basketball last season, averaging 82.5 points per game. But a big part of that offense was Redick, who averaged 26.8, more than 30 percent of the Blue Devils' total offense. None of the last five national champions-Florida, North Carolina, Syracuse, Maryland or Duke-had a player that accounted for that much of their scoring punch.
Even Lloyd Christmas (yep, that's a Dumb & Dumber reference) could've predicted that if Redick had a bad game, the Blue Devils weren't going to win. Predictably, when Redick struggled against Louisiana State, Duke lost.
(Not that I'm blaming J.J. for the whole thing. Every time he cut through the lane, the Tigers' defenders were practically mugging him, stealing his wallet, punching him in the face and urinating on his body while he lay lifeless on the ground. But, hey, they called it both ways and fair is fair-it's not like the less skilled team benefited much, much more from the fact that the referees ignored some contact that would've warranted a yellow flag in a football game.)
(Sorry, just had to get that out.)
Anyway, the problem wasn't so much that Redick scored so many of Duke's points but that they were basically helpless without him. Redick played so many minutes (because he was in such good shape and rarely got into foul trouble) that Duke never had to learn to run its offense without him. There was no second option on the perimeter when teams collapsed on Shelden Williams inside. That wasn't because Greg Paulus and Josh McRoberts were incapable of running some pick-and-roll action but because they never had to.
Coach K called the phenomenon J.J.-watching. Duke ran its offense exclusively through Redick, knowing that he'd be able to make the tough shot, or get to the line, or find an open teammate. The effect was that each player lost something in his offensive game. And don't forget, Duke had four McDonald's All-Americans on its roster last year not named J.J. Redick (and that's not even counting Williams, who wasn't a McDonald's guy)- more than LSU, more than every team that made the Final Four.
So this year, without Redick, each of Duke's talented players might be able to maximize his individual potential by looking for his own shot more. And maybe that'll mean more easy baskets for a team that found them very hard to come by at the end of last season.
And that's why I think Duke has a chance to be very good this year.
Okay, fine, twist my arm. I'll give a clue to what I predicted at the end of last season.
It starts with an "F," and ends with an "inal Four." But that's the only hint you're getting.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.