Derrick Williams played a nearly perfect first half, and then his supporting cast played a nearly perfect second half.

It’s really that simple.

If not for Williams, Duke might have blown Arizona out in the first 20 minutes. The sophomore forward went 8-for-11 from the field (5-of-6 from 3PT) for 25 points to go along with six rebounds, three steals and a block. That’s all in a half, people. Not a game. A half. His deep three as time expired cut the Duke lead from nine to six, and gave Arizona some momentum heading into intermission.

One category that coaches and statheads both look at is offensive efficiency, which is the number of points per possession that an offense scores in any given game. Since each offensive rebound starts a new possession, one stat I like to look at is the number of points per trip. In the second half, the Wildcats scored 55 points on 35 trips, or 1.57 points per trip. The sign of a good offense is generally 1.0 point per trip, so Arizona’s work in the half was nothing short of outstanding.

Arizona missed just 16 shots in the second half (making 21), but gathered 12 (twelve!) offensive rebounds, so along with three turnovers, the Wildcats only had eight scoreless trips in the second half. That means that they scored on 27 of their 35 (77%) trips in the final 20 minutes. That’s a truly an amazing half of basketball.

Arizona made nearly all its open shots and hit several tough leaners and fadeaways that aren’t typically high percentage shots. They took care of the ball — remember the aforementioned three turnovers — and made every correct decision when Duke’s defense came over to help or trap.

That said, Duke still had a chance to make a run with about six minutes to play. The Blue Devils cut the lead from 14 to 11 and forced an Arizona miss, but Nolan Smith couldn’t convert a semi-tough layup to get the lead under 10. Had that shot gone in, the pressure would have been back on the Wildcats, and the game might have been tighter at the end. But it didn’t fall and Arizona went on a 5-0 run to push the lead back to 16. Wheels off. Game over.

My teammates at Duke — all of them, black and white — were a band of brothers who came together to play at the highest level for the best coach in basketball. I know most of the black players who preceded and followed me at Duke. They all contribute to our tradition of excellence on the court.

It is insulting and ignorant to suggest that men like Johnny Dawkins (coach at Stanford), Tommy Amaker (coach at Harvard), Billy King (general manager of the Nets), Tony Lang (coach of the Mitsubishi Diamond Dolphins in Japan), Thomas Hill (small-business owner in Texas), Jeff Capel (former coach at Oklahoma and Virginia Commonwealth), Kenny Blakeney (assistant coach at Harvard), Jay Williams (ESPN analyst), Shane Battier (Memphis Grizzlies) and Chris Duhon (Orlando Magic) ever sold out their race.

To hint that those who grew up in a household with a mother and father are somehow less black than those who did not is beyond ridiculous. All of us are extremely proud of the current Duke team, especially Nolan Smith. He was raised by his mother, plays in memory of his late father and carries himself with the pride and confidence that they instilled in him.

Well said, Grant.

In a recent column, FoxSports columnist Jason Whitlock took the Fab Five to task for saying such things:

The Fab Five clearly believe Coach K and Duke didn’t and don’t recruit inner-city black kids, and they believe race/racism/elitism are the driving forces behind the philosophy.

Let’s go back to the Fab Five era and Duke’s philosophy then. Coach K recruited kids who had every intention of staying in school for four years. He recruited kids who had a good chance of competing academically at Duke and could meet the standardized test score qualifications for entrance.

The Fab Five stated it was their intention to win a national championship and turn pro as a group after their sophomore season. Webber, who was recruited by Duke, left Michigan after two years. Rose and Howard left as juniors. Impoverished inner-city kids have good reason to turn pro early. I’m not knocking Webber, Howard and Rose for their decisions. They didn’t fit the Duke profile at the time.

During the three-year run of the Fab Five (one season without Webber), Duke beat Michigan all four times the schools met while winning two ACC titles and one NCAA title. During the same span, Michigan won zero conference or national titles. In addition, Webber’s interactions with booster Ed Martin put the program on probation and caused Michigan to forfeit all its games.

I think Coach K recruited and recruits the right kids for Duke.

It turns out that Jalen Rose was the executive producer of the documentary, so it would be tough to argue that his words were taken out of context.

ESPN is currently running a two-hour documentary about Michigan’s Fab Five (Chris Webber, Jalen Rose, Juwan Howard, Jimmy King and Ray Jackson, and if you haven’t seen it, I’d definitely recommend it. Webber didn’t agree to participate, but the interviews with the other four members along with members of the coaching staff were quite compelling.

Yesterday, the internet was abuzz with comments made by the former Michigan players about Duke and especially Christian Laettner, whom Rose thought was an “overrated pu**y,” until he actually played against him and saw that he had some serious game. I’ll leave those comments alone since Rose eventually gave Laettner credit, but there are a few other moments in the documentary that jumped out at me:

1. Rose hated Duke because they wouldn’t recruit someone like him; they only recruited “Uncle Tom”-type black players. He also admitted he hated Grant Hill because Hill grew up in a great home while Rose grew up poor with an absentee father. Rose probably hit the nail on the head with regard to why many inner city blacks resent/criticize suburban blacks; it’s out of envy. They see lives that are more comfortable than theirs, and they lash out in anger. The Fab Five translated this to a hatred of the Duke players, including guys like Grant Hill and Thomas Hill.

I suspect if Mike Krzyzewski were asked about his recruiting habits and answered honestly, he’d say that he had the luxury of recruiting players (of whatever race) that he thought would fit into his team-first concept. He already had a successful college program, so why recruit a ‘risky’ player like Rose who may or may not fit into what he’s trying to build? The last thing he wants is to have a to battle a player on a daily basis.

In the end, Duke was 3-0 against the Fab Five, so I’d say the Blue Devils got the last laugh.

2. Forget the shorts, shoes, socks or even the style of play. The thing that bothered me about the Fab Five was the in-your-face taunting. The film was great because it reminded me of what I didn’t like about the Fab Five. Their play was outstanding. Nobody hogged the ball and winning was paramount, so from a pure basketball respect, they were wonderful. It was all the antics that drove me nuts. There were several highlights that showed the players getting into the face of the opponent after the guy was just dunked on. It’s one thing to over-celebrate with your teammates, but to show up an opponent like that is just bad sportsmanship. This was explained away as being part of the inner city playground culture, but my guess is that if they would have gotten into someone’s face on the playground, they would have been punched in the nose (or worse). At the time, officials didn’t really call taunting technicals, so there were no consequences to those actions. Oh, and Juwan Howard was the worst. Webber or Rose would dunk and there comes Howard, getting into the grill of the guy who just got dunked on. It was no surprise that against Ohio St. in their first Final Four, Howard got headbutt to the nose at one point in the game.

3. The Fab Five felt entitled to the money they were generating. This is understandable given their relative upbringings, but the Fab Five obviously didn’t value education very much if they didn’t think they were getting anything in return for their basketball prowess. They were also receiving free coaching, which improved their games and helped Webber, Rose and Howard have long and very profitable careers. What’s funny is that Rose came to this conclusion during a 16-day tour of Europe where the Wolverines traveled around and played a few professional teams in exhibition games. He looked around to the packed gym and said, “Somebody’s getting paid, and it isn’t us.” Keep in mind that the team got a FREE TRIP TO EUROPE, complete with food and board. This mentality is a little strange to me.

4. Rose brags about his trash talking, but then is surprised with Illinois fans return the favor. Rose freely admits do doing research about a player and then using that research against him. He might bring up the player’s mom or something that happened in the player’s family in an attempt to get into the player’s head. But when Rose got in trouble for being at a “crack house” (even though it wasn’t really a crack house), and the Illinois fans started chanting “Craaaaaack House” and “Just Say No,” Rose was surprised. He went on to have a great game, but shouldn’t he have respected what the Orange Crush was doing?

5. UNC/Michigan was a really weird game for me. As a long-time Duke fan, the 1992 title win over Michigan was obviously a great night. The documentary was cut in a way to make the game seem closer than it was, but the Blue Devils beat the Wolverines by 20 points even though Michigan held a one-point lead at halftime. The 1993 title game was a different story, because it was probably the only time I’ve ever rooted for North Carolina to win a basketball game. The documentary did a great job breaking down everything that led to Webber’s notorious timeout, including what was said in the huddle before the play and what might have happened along the Michigan bench to prompt Webber to ask for a timeout. There was a great, long shot of Webber walking off the court and the filmmakers also included the pretty painful post game press conference.

6. Webber was indicted for lying under oath about taking money from a Michigan booster. Rose didn’t get in trouble because he admitted to taking cash while in school. It’s estimated (alleged) that Webber took $280 K from a Michigan booster who was also an admitted bookmaker. Mitch Albom says that he got to know the Fab Five as well as or better than any writer during that time, and he doesn’t see how Webber could possibly have that much money stashed away without flaunting it in one way or another. He argues that Webber may have taken it after he declared for the draft, but that doesn’t jive with Rose’s accounts that he took money throughout college. Something’s not adding up. Regardless, the university made the decision to vacate the two Final Four appearances and those banners are sitting in storage somewhere.

7. “Our legacy is that we were bigger than the final score.” — Jalen Rose
This is exactly why so many people were turned off by the Fab Five. It’s a style versus substance argument, and what kills me is that this group had plenty of both. The only reason Rose says this about their legacy is because they never won a national championship. They were blown out by a better team in 1992 and Webber’s timeout (along with countless other plays throughout the game) cost them a chance to win it all in 1993. While it’s true that the Fab Five will always be remembered, it’s not always for good reasons. Many people associate the Fab Five with taunting or the rise of the hip-hop culture, when they should be remembered for playing really good basketball.

ESPN is replaying “The Fab Five” throughout next week. I’d definitely recommend checking it out.

Check out this lineup of college hoops today (all times ET):

12 PM: #2 Kansas @ #24 Missouri (CBS)
The Jayhawks need a victory in Columbia to win the Big 12 outright. They have a one-game lead over Texas with one game to play and are hoping to secure a #1 seed in the Big 12 Tournament as well. Meanwhile, Missouri is hoping to complete an unbeaten season at home.

2 PM: #7 Notre Dame @ #16 UConn (ESPN)
It’s senior night for the Huskies, who have beaten the Irish seven straight times at Gampel Pavilion. Notre Dame can earn the #1 seed in the Big East tournament with a win today and a Pittsburgh loss to Villanova.

4 PM: #19 Villanova @ #5 Pittsburgh (CBS)
Villanova has faded after a strong start to the season, but could still spoil the Panthers’ bid to be the top seed in the Big East Championship if they’re able to upset Pitt on their home floor. The Panthers need a win to solidify their bid to be a #1 seed in the NCAA Tournament.

6 PM: #14 Florida @ #20 Vanderbilt (ESPN)
These two teams went into overtime the first time they met this season and the Gators can clinch the outright SEC title with a win against the Commodores in Nashville.

8 PM: #4 Duke @ #13 North Carolina (CBS)
The ACC regular season championship is on the line as the Blue Devils face the Tar Heels in Chapel Hill. In the first meeting at Cameron, UNC had a 16-point lead before Duke came back to win 79-73. Duke is hoping to be a #1 seed in the NCAA Tournament and needs a win tonight to round out its resume.

It’s not often that there are five Top 25 matchups lined up every two hours like there are today. And don’t forget, #10 Wisconsin plays #1 Ohio State at 4 PM (on CBS) on Sunday.

Let me throw out a few names: Danny Ferry, Christian Laettner, Cherokee Parks, Elton Brand, Carlos Boozer and Shelden Williams — what do they have in common? Yes, they all played for Duke, and they all averaged at least 17.7 points and 7.4 rebounds in their final years in Durham. On average, this group posted 19.6 points and 9.0 boards in those years. Ferry, Laettner, Brand and Williams were named First Team All-Americans, while Boozer made the Third Team. Parks could have been an All-American as well had Mike Krzyzewski not missed most of of his senior season due to back surgery and exhaustion. Williams was the last “dominant” Duke big man, and he graduated in 2005-06.

Since then, Duke has seen a string of highly-touted big men come through Cameron, including Shavlik Randolph (who played with Williams), Josh McRoberts, Brian Zoubek, Miles Plumlee, Mason Plumlee and Ryan Kelly. Randolph, McRoberts, Mason Plumlee and Kelly were all McDonald’s All-Americans coming out of high school. Other than maybe McRoberts (13.0 points and 7.9 rebounds), none of these guys have even approached the numbers and success of the aforementioned group.

What has happened to big man development in Durham?

One theory is that the Duke assistant coaches — Steve Wojciechowski, Chris Collins and Nate James — were all perimeter players in their heyday. You don’t need to be a former post player to coach big men but it certainly doesn’t hurt. Do they have the expertise to teach Miles Plumlee how to shoot a jump hook or master the up-and-under?

Another theory is that Coach K’s offense has become increasingly perimeter-oriented over the past few years. Rarely does Duke probe the middle with post feeds and ask their bigs to score with their back to the basket. Mason Plumlee did have a couple of jump hook opportunities against Virginia Tech on Saturday, but the post is not the focus of the Duke offense. For the last few years, the Blue Devils have become increasingly dependent on the three-point shot. All the action is out on the perimeter where Nolan Smith and Kyle Singler break down their defenders and either shoot the open jumper or take it to the rim.

Or it could be the prospects themselves. Right now, Kelly is a 6-11 three-point specialist and looks uncomfortable with his back to the basket. Both Plumlees are capable of banging down low, but neither guy is polished with his back to the basket. The same goes for Randolph, Zoubek and McRoberts before them. Maybe guys like Laettner and Brand were just better offensive players coming out of high school. Laettner was a face up shooter — he hit 56% from three-point range his senior year — but he was also murder in the mid-post and got to the line regularly.

The Blue Devils managed to win a National Championship last year with no viable post threat, but Zoubek brought enough defense and rebounding that Duke was able to get by. The team is certainly bigger up front than they have been in years, but they still don’t have a guy that they want to feed in the post. This deficiency is masked when they are hitting their threes, but when they’re laying bricks like they did on Saturday (4-for-20 from 3PT against the Hokies), they’re going to lose. In fact, in the three Duke losses, the Blue Devils have shot a combined 20-of-81 (25%) from long range. It sure helps to have a dependable option down low when those threes aren’t falling.