I'd hope that a Duke-affiliated person would have the logical wherewithal to account for both the input and the output of a system. Going by sheer number of incoming five star/burger boy level guys, UK's teams have been over twice as talented as Duke's over the past 7 years. Do you really believe that is the case? Obviously not - they both average around 6 per roster (go look for yourself) but UK requires more input to keep up with the output.
The reductio ad absurdum: Coach A's roster is comprised of 8 freshman five stars and he replaces them all annually with 8 more. Coach B's roster is 2 fr, 2 so, 2 jr, 2 sr five stars, and he replaces the 2 SRs with 2 fr every year. Is coach A's roster better? After all, he gets four times as many five stars as coach B!
Silly argument, right?
As for the title crack, there's another important logical concept to grasp - probability and the single-elimination tournament format. Coach K lost in '99 with 5 lottery picks including #1. It happens. If you gave Cal the talent K has had at Duke for the past 3 decades, does he win 5 titles over 30 years? Probably not, but so what? That just means he's not as good as the GOAT. Boo f'n hoo. Nobody in here believes he wouldn't have at least 2 or 3 in those 30 years, which would put him in incredibly elite historical company. He took squads w/ only 2 high major kids on each at UMASS and reeled off 5 straight tourney appearances, averaging 30 wins a season, 3 16s with a F4 + E8 at a school that had 1 tourney appearance before him, in 1962. The only coaches who have matched his current F4 streak are Wooden and K. He didn't forget how to coach.
Your guys are gonna be great. And because you have more high level guys coming back than we do (output of the system), I expect Duke '16-'17 to be better than UK. But the tourney is a devilish mistress.