Comments on: That’s Debatable: Impact of Kyrie Irving’s Injury on Duke

By: Tom W

Tom W — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 19:42:49 +0000

TG: the first statement is my claim, whereas the second is referring to the general consensus in terms of Duke’s odds. My fault – shoulda been clearer.

By: tallguy

tallguy — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 13:16:32 +0000

This:

“if Irving is out for the remainder of the season or if he comes back at half-speed, Duke will not win the national championship”

Followed by this:

” without him, they’re simply another of a group of 8-12 who have a reasonable shot at cutting down the nets. ”

make up your mind (the correct response is the latter, by the way).

By: Matt B.

Matt B. — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 02:26:49 +0000

I don’t think that Purdue is a good comparison. First, Hummel was also Purdue’s emotional leader, which Irving is not. Second, Injuries or not, the polls are much more fluid in the preseason than they are in January (likely time of Dukes first loss). With Hummel, there was already president with just how bad they were without him, as they struggled with bad teams at first. If Duke’s first loss isn’t to a terrible team, they will stay in the top five.

By: greg

greg — Thu, 09 Dec 2010 21:14:25 +0000

so when they lose they’ll drop 10 spots in the polls. Precedent already set with Purdue.

By: Ben

Ben — Thu, 09 Dec 2010 21:12:49 +0000

Question: Suppose Irving’s out for the year, who’s the FOY in the ACC?

How about Joe Harris? How is no one talking about this kid?

I mean, he’ll probably come to earth during the ACC slate, but he was pretty sick in the wins over Minn and VT. Seriously. No one has said word one about him.