Coming into the 2009-2010 season, the banners were in the rafters, but the writing was on the wall. Most of us Tar Heel fans, still drunk on the fumes of last season’s spectacular national championship journey, saw just the banners, the glory, the lofty preseason rankings. We may not have expected another championship team, but we certainly imagined that this year’s younger squad would play their way into the top 10. After all, how could they not?
Junior Olympian Deon Thompson and projected top 5 pick Ed Davis would dominate the post. Senior Marcus Ginyard would bring defense and leadership to the table. Larry Drew II would escape the shadow of Ty Lawson and calmly direct a swath of high flying McDonald’s All-Americans in John Henson, Dexter Strickland, and Leslie McDonald. Another year, another fast break through ACC play. Bring on another tournament run…Or so we thought.
Hindsight is more than 20-20. Like Ray Felton on a fast break or Ed Cota in traffic, it has a way of slowing down its surroundings and revealing the little things we may not notice the first time around. At this point, I’d like to take a hindsight glance at a few unseen hints that this team would struggle in 2010.
1) No one on this team had ever been a primary scoring option at the college level. Deon Thompson was the team’s 5th scoring option last year, and Ed Davis was probably the 6th. Being the go-to-guy is not just a responsibility; it’s a mentality. Hansbrough had it. Thompson and Davis don’t (yet?). Case in point—late in the 2nd half against Georgia Tech, the ball was on the right wing, and the entire lane was open. Ed Davis hadn’t touched the ball in a while, but the Tar Heels were creeping back into contention. With any level of effort, Davis could have seized post position and earned himself a high percentage look. Instead, he floated around the top of the key, as if waiting for Hansbrough to work his way into the open spot and take the team on his back. At that point in the game, a go-to scorer wants the ball. From my vantage point, it just doesn’t look like Ed really does sometimes.
2) Playing with new players means learning your teammates’ tendencies, preferences, dislikes, and quirks. For example, a point guard who’s played with a teammate for a few years would know exactly where that teammate likes to catch the ball in order to get up a quick shot. This year’s squad, while it certainly doesn’t lack talent, lacks experience playing together, and that’s a huge factor in the Tar Heels’ turnover terrors. Think this doesn’t matter? In 2004, the US Olympic Men’s Basketball Team, cobbled together at the last second, lost to squads of unheralded Argentinian players who played beautifully together thanks to ample experience. Sure, some of this year’s Tar Heel passes into the bleachers come from a lack of composure, but a lot of them come from not having played together much. (More proof of this theory comes from the Kentucky Wildcats, whose unmatched talent has struggled with teamwork turnovers all year long as well.)
3) Injuries can bring any team to its knees. This year, they haven’t been terribly detrimental to the team, but they certainly haven’t helped either. Coming into the season, we knew that Ginyard might struggle with injuries, given his gimpy, gauze ridden 2009. Zeller, while his injury last year was a bit of a fluke accident, also has had injury issues in the past. Additionally, it’s easy to see how the freshman class could struggle adjusting physically from the lolly-gagging pace of high school basketball to the uptempo, Roy Williams brand of basketball in Chapel Hill. All of these factors were major warning signs: injuries could play a big role in this team’s success in 2009-2010.
In retrospect, it’s easy to see how the current edition of the Tar Heels would struggle quite a bit this season.
All we can do now is take it in stride, enjoy the ride, and hope Roy’s Boys can break on through to the other side.
