UNLV wins that game 9 out of 10 times. And that is not an insult to the Duke guys. Grant Hill was a Freshman. Hurley was a sophomore. That UNLV team was undefeated and coming off a national title and on a different level despite the loss.

 

I'm not trying to say Duke was better than UNLV. Simply that they weren't as overmatched as it was made out to be. Their talent level was there.

Any chance we can get some posts from the ones that voted UK? I would love to hear the reasons.

I'm not trying to say Duke was better than UNLV. Simply that they weren't as overmatched as it was made out to be. Their talent level was there.

 

Not at that time. Duke came into it's own in that game.

 

I would still take Anthony over Hurley (Anthony fouled out and that was the real problem for UNLV in that game).

 

I would still take Hunt over Hill.

 

I would still take Augmon (at that time) over Grant Hill (at that time)

 

Larry Johnson played awful but his game was awesome in college.

 

Laettner is the only clear cut Duke victory and the Dukie bench.

 

 

UNLV played about as bad as they could and still only lost in the closing seconds. I couldn't stand the Running Rebels but they were an awesome starting five in college.

Not at that time. Duke came into it's own in that game.

 

I would still take Anthony over Hurley (Anthony fouled out and that was the real problem for UNLV in that game).

 

I would still take Hunt over Hill.

 

I would still take Augmon (at that time) over Grant Hill (at that time)

 

Larry Johnson played awful but his game was awesome in college.

 

Laettner is the only clear cut Duke victory and the Dukie bench.

 

 

UNLV played about as bad as they could and still only lost in the closing seconds. I couldn't stand the Running Rebels but they were an awesome starting five in college.

 

And LJ is the only clear cut Vegas pick. That's my point.

 

Talent is talent and Duke had plenty on their roster. Regardless of who you choose, it's not as clear cut in the rest of the matchups.

 

I'm aware that the majority of people still feel like UNLV was 30 points better than Duke. That's fine. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I disagree. One year made a big difference. Duke's players matured, got better and they added a big time talent in Grant Hill. UNLV was the exact same team. Duke closed the gap to the point where they could compete and then got the job done when it counted.

 

I'm not big on defending the Dukies, so I'm content to know I'm in the minority.

And LJ is the only clear cut Vegas pick. That's my point.

 

Talent is talent and Duke had plenty on their roster. Regardless of who you choose, it's not as clear cut in the rest of the matchups.

 

I'm aware that the majority of people still feel like UNLV was 30 points better than Duke. That's fine. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I disagree. One year made a big difference. Duke's players matured, got better and they added a big time talent in Grant Hill. UNLV was the exact same team. Duke closed the gap to the point where they could compete and then got the job done when it counted.

I'm not big on defending the Dukies, so I'm content to know I'm in the minority.

 

I think you're right. (Does that put me in the minority too? :lol: ) I think a lot of people looked at what happened the year before, and thought...same players, should be the same result. So, when Duke was able to compete, it added to the "shock" value.

 

If I remember right, wasn't Hurley sick with the flu in the first matchup? So that no doubt had some impact on the score and perhaps made the marin 30 points instead of 20. Now you couple him just being healthy, let alone improving his game, along with some added talent (Hill)...and it's no so far-fetched to make up that deficit.

Any chance we can get some posts from the ones that voted UK? I would love to hear the reasons.

 

I'd say most voted before or without seeing the stats.

 

Looking at the stats, it's not even close. UK is a clear #4 behind Kansas, Duke, and North Carolina.

I think you're right. (Does that put me in the minority too? :lol: ) I think a lot of people looked at what happened the year before, and thought...same players, should be the same result. So, when Duke was able to compete, it added to the "shock" value.

 

If I remember right, wasn't Hurley sick with the flu in the first matchup? So that no doubt had some impact on the score and perhaps made the marin 30 points instead of 20. Now you couple him just being healthy, let alone improving his game, along with some added talent (Hill)...and it's no so far-fetched to make up that deficit.

 

I agree. And, yes, that puts you in the minority.

 

Both teams had three guys drafted in the top 12 of the NBA draft. The UNLV guys obviously went in the same draft.

 

Something else I found interesting was that Duke's average margin of victory in the tournament, 18.8, was one point higher than UNLV's heading into that game.