PDA

View Full Version : MBB: Georgetown 89, Duke 77 Post-Game Thread



Pages : [1] 2

JBDuke
01-30-2010, 03:16 PM
Put your post-game thoughts here.

ice-9
01-30-2010, 03:16 PM
Oh well, at least the final margin of 12 was...not horrible. Misleadingly not horrible. :)

My unsubstantiated theory is that championship teams simply don't lose by more than 20 points...to anyone. This game was close to excluding Duke from that category.

I do think our players played hard and wanted to win; we simply weren't able to adapt on defense and that's what lost us the game. I mean giving up 72%...yikes. Why didn't we try more zone? Sure, it would lengthen possessions and make a comeback more difficult, but it's a heckuva lot better than allowing dribble penetration that lead to open lay-ups and dunks.

It's interesting to note how different our D is at home and on the road. At home, we look fantastic, reading plays, help side defense, generally doing what we want to do. On the road...we keep giving up easy shots. Wisconsin, NC State, and now GT.

I wonder what's up with this. Isn't defense supposed to be a constant?

BlueintheFace
01-30-2010, 03:17 PM
Georgetown shot 72%

gwwilburn
01-30-2010, 03:17 PM
And that 72% is what worries me more than anything else

uh_no
01-30-2010, 03:18 PM
Georgetown shot 72%

I hope you're not trying to use this as an excuse.....our defense was terrible....so many open looks for them....backdoor cuts, dunks...everything....they did shoot well, but they had so many open shots and looks you can't possibly pretend like this is an anomaly....especially since this is the second blowout in 2 weeks in the same fashion

moonpie23
01-30-2010, 03:19 PM
ugly, TOUGH game for the guys...


and the win was "only" 12, but that was a butt-whupping..


i still love this team and i still think obama is a jinx to dark blue in a basketball game somehow..


ugh...

on to the next game...

grossbus
01-30-2010, 03:19 PM
am a little surprised that we left our starters in (those that had not fouled out) to the end of the game.

uh_no
01-30-2010, 03:20 PM
am a little surprised that we left our starters in (those that had not fouled out) to the end of the game.

perhaps coach K wasn't too keen on seeing our bench players get posterized

BlueintheFace
01-30-2010, 03:21 PM
perhaps coach K wasn't too keen on seeing our bench players get posterized

I think it was more about making them fight to the last whistle and feeling the pain.

HDB
01-30-2010, 03:21 PM
Why is it that Duke seems to regress as the season progresses the last 5 years? That's what really bothers me. I can remember when Duke teams used to improve over the course of the year and hit their stride in March. We started the year with 3 good players and it was clear this team needed more than that. Now we sit at the end of January and I have little hope that we're going to get serious contributions from anyone else on the roster the rest of the way. Depressing.

proelitedota
01-30-2010, 03:21 PM
I am not worrying until we lose a neutral game.
Like I said, I am fine with winning all home and neutral games, losing all road games this year. :D

Genedoc
01-30-2010, 03:22 PM
We need some kind of big man coaching. Our interior play was pathetic.

Why single out the interior play? The perimeter effort was no better.

This is just flatly not a very good team right now. The defense is so bad we're capable of giving up 100 points to anyone we play, and it looks like there are 4-5 different agendas on the floor at any given time on offense.

strawbs
01-30-2010, 03:22 PM
i don't mind the loss, especially to a quality team like g'town. I mind how horribly the team played today. It is so frustrating to me, that this team has played great defense essentially all year, then they allow g'town to shoot 70% from the field. How does this happen??? I just can't believe the defense never adapted, you can't hedge like duke does on ball screens and overplay passing lanes against a team like g'town who can absolutely kill you back door.
I still love this team, i think they definitely have final four potential, but i was really disappointed with the effort today.

sandinmyshoes
01-30-2010, 03:23 PM
Ugh aack ugh


But I'm glad we played a tough OOC game on the road. I would have prefered it to be earlier in the schedule, where any possible negative influence might have longer to fix. Hopefully, like he so often does, Coach K can use this to motivate the guys.

Now I think I'll take a break from the various boards so I don't have to read the overreaction from people who overrated the team and now will go ballistic on them because of their own inability to apply any kind of non-emotional assessment. It seems like some people swing from overreaction to overreaction. :(

cruxer
01-30-2010, 03:23 PM
Our defense was obviously terrible and offensively we missed some shots we simply had to make to keep it close when we were still down single digits. We couldn't defend without fouling and even when fouling, we didn't foul enough to prevent a shot.

I think Clark called it, Georgetown looked fresher. having a game 2.5 days ago and having to travel obviously took a toll. I wouldn't read too much in how we played since the schedule had to play at least a part. Monroe obviously made up for some past performances against us. Now that we have the bad taste of an "L" in our mouths, here's to our taking it out on Tech, BC, and kerlina!

-c

Genedoc
01-30-2010, 03:23 PM
I think it was more about making them fight to the last whistle and feeling the pain.

You saw fight? I didn't. I saw a lot of indifference for the whole game.

BlueintheFace
01-30-2010, 03:23 PM
Yah, quite frankly, anybody who feels the need to single out a particular player or set of players as playing poorly either didn't watch the game or is just repeating a popular refrain after a loss. Pretty much the whole team struggled.

JBDuke
01-30-2010, 03:24 PM
Oh well, at least the final margin of 12 was...not horrible. Misleadingly not horrible. :)

My unsubstantiated theory is that championship teams simply don't lose by more than 20 points...to anyone. This game was close to excluding Duke from that category.

...

You mean like the 1991 Duke championship team that lost to UNC by 22 in the ACC Tourney final?

BlueintheFace
01-30-2010, 03:24 PM
You saw fight? I didn't. I saw a lot of indifference for the whole game.

hahaha. good for you.

loldevilz
01-30-2010, 03:25 PM
My thoughts: we need a real point guard... we need a big man...most of all we need some toughness

proelitedota
01-30-2010, 03:26 PM
My thoughts: we need a real point guard... we need a big man...most of all we need some toughness

We have one of the top pg in the nation. We just need the post presence.

Sixthman
01-30-2010, 03:26 PM
This had the look and feel of our most recent post season exits. I've always wondered what would happen if we had the chance to take the court after a game like that. Now we'll get the chance to see. The biggest potential impact is that this experience frees the team to understand and believe that for the team to win, they cannot defer to the big three and count on success.

CrazieDUMB
01-30-2010, 03:26 PM
Terrible collapse on defense. 16 TO and god knows how many fast break points for georgetown. I might be inclined to say that GT shot the lights out (72%) but that wouldn't do justice to the number of open looks inside and points off fast breaks.

Seems like we really have trouble when teams are creative in moving the ball and cutting from odd angles. Because we tend to play the passing lanes, that opens up so much to the basket. When the passes aren't getting denied, like today, it makes for a whole lot of easy buckets. Same sort of thing happend against GTech.

Is this a really bad loss? Hard to say. Obviously doesn't help the idea that we can't do anything on the road. Both teams were ranked highly, it sure doesn't seem like we belong with those top 10 teams right now.

Big 3 shot 15/42 (36%) and took 70% of our shots and had 8/16 of our turnovers. No one really seemed to be able to take over and open things up for everyone else. It seems that these guys really only do well collectively when at least one guy is really driving the game. I really wonder how we would have done offensively if we didn't have so many turnovers and fall so behind so early.

Sigh... Bring on Georgia Tech, I guess.

Genedoc
01-30-2010, 03:26 PM
i don't mind the loss, especially to a quality team like g'town. I mind how horribly the team played today. It is so frustrating to me, that this team has played great defense essentially all year, then they allow g'town to shoot 70% from the field. How does this happen??? I just can't believe the defense never adapted, you can't hedge like duke does on ball screens and overplay passing lanes against a team like g'town who can absolutely kill you back door.
I still love this team, i think they definitely have final four potential, but i was really disappointed with the effort today.

Agreed. Losing a tough, hard fought game is one thing. Rolling over and playing dead for the 2nd game in two weeks is disconcerting at best.

BlueintheFace
01-30-2010, 03:26 PM
I didn't see much indifference or laziness on defense so much as bewilderment. I think Duke was unprepared for Georgetown's offense. You can blame that on having 1.5 days or bad coaching, but this wasn't like NC State.

ice-9
01-30-2010, 03:26 PM
You mean like the 1991 Duke championship team that lost to UNC by 22 in the ACC Tourney final?

I did say unsubstantiated...

dukeblue225
01-30-2010, 03:26 PM
Why is it that Duke seems to regress as the season progresses the last 5 years? That's what really bothers me. I can remember when Duke teams used to improve over the course of the year and hit their stride in March. We started the year with 3 good players and it was clear this team needed more than that. Now we sit at the end of January and I have little hope that we're going to get serious contributions from anyone else on the roster the rest of the way. Depressing.

Last year Williams wasn't a factor until February. Hopefully Andre Dawkins can get over everything and begin to contribute.

ChicagoCrazy84
01-30-2010, 03:27 PM
Why is it that Duke seems to regress as the season progresses the last 5 years? That's what really bothers me. I can remember when Duke teams used to improve over the course of the year and hit their stride in March. We started the year with 3 good players and it was clear this team needed more than that. Now we sit at the end of January and I have little hope that we're going to get serious contributions from anyone else on the roster the rest of the way. Depressing.


I agree and it is very bothersome and just too consistent of a trend. You look for signs of guys stepping up and improving their games game in and game out and I see none of that with Mason, Miles, Andre, or LT. Very frustrating trend. Coach K has to have a serious man to man talk with a few of these guys and get them going.

CDu
01-30-2010, 03:27 PM
Not much positive to say about this one. They kicked our tails pretty badly. Our defense was pretty poor in the first half, and we committed too many turnovers in the second half. They got way too many layups and dunks. For a team that prides itself on great defense, that's a problem.

Georgetown also shot well, but even if you take away a couple of threes (to make them 4-13 from deep), they'd still have won comfortably. Their big three were just much better than our big three today, and their supporting cast did its job. But we just had no answer for Monroe, Freeman, and Wright today.

Tough game for our big three. Scheyer had a bunch of turnovers, Singler had a few really bad second half turnovers, and Smith just didn't get it going until too late. Not one of our big three shot better than 40%, and combined they had

And the freshman and our bigs just didn't have it today to pick up the slack. Thomas wasn't terrible, but he wasn't able to stop Monroe either. And the rest of the bigs just were overwhelmed. 22 fouls between Singler, the Plumlees, Thomas, Zoubek, and Kelly. Ouch.

BlueintheFace
01-30-2010, 03:27 PM
The turnovers were the biggest reason why Georgetown won the game in my opinion. They were almost all on the perimeter and led to easy hoops.

chrisheery
01-30-2010, 03:28 PM
I am incredibly bummed out. I hate feeling like this at the end of every January.

Few points I have made a few times this (and a few previous) season(s):

1. Get the ball inside, even if we miss a shot or two. Keep the big guys involved.

2. Let the younger guys play more and learn. A loss 2 months ago wouldn't have bothered me as much as this does. There are some games, really important games, where you need to have your best players in all the time, but we have had plenty of games to get guys ready, didn't do it, and now we are stuck with bench players who can't contribute much.

But, today's loss was really more about two (connected) problems. Defense and rebounding. There was no point in this game where Georgetown felt they couldn't score. That's too bad. I know we can play better on D and today was an anomaly for whatever reason, but it still makes me scared for what might happen down the road. Defense should be consistent and our best players were burned on backdoor cuts as much as our inexperienced players today. Singler and Nolan were burned at key times when we had a chance at a come back. Rebounding was terrible. Did we get more than 4 or 5 offensive rebounds? I didn't look it up, but I would be shocked if we did. We had size on them, but we didn't use it at all.

I'm sure we will play better next game, but this was a really poor effort and brings to bear all the concerns so many of us have had as the season has gone on.

arnie is still king
01-30-2010, 03:28 PM
Why single out the interior play? The perimeter effort was no better.

This is just flatly not a very good team right now. The defense is so bad we're capable of giving up 100 points to anyone we play, and it looks like there are 4-5 different agendas on the floor at any given time on offense.


I think our defense only looks poor when we play teams with quick guards and capable big men that can both execute. A lot of ACC teams don't have that combination. Of course, once we reach March, I'm afraid that's who we'll be playing. A sweet 16 appearance will be a success for this team.

gwwilburn
01-30-2010, 03:28 PM
We have four days to rest before Tech comes to town. On our plate we have four tough but winnable games. I would be elated to win all of them, but we need to see some State game to Clemson game-esque improvement for that to happen. This was probably our toughest game of the year. Lose to Tech again and I will really be worried.

BlueintheFace
01-30-2010, 03:28 PM
On DBR, Bad Loss= No Effort

...never fails

uh_no
01-30-2010, 03:29 PM
I agree and it is very bothersome and just too consistent of a trend. You look for signs of guys stepping up and improving their games game in and game out and I see none of that with Mason, Miles, Andre, or LT. Very frustrating trend. Coach K has to have a serious man to man talk with a few of these guys and get them going.

If you think a talk is all they need....you're mistaken.

CDu
01-30-2010, 03:30 PM
The turnovers were the biggest reason why Georgetown won the game in my opinion. They were almost all on the perimeter and led to easy hoops.

The turnovers and poor defense against cutters were the biggest problems. They got a lot of easy buckets out of both.

Genedoc
01-30-2010, 03:31 PM
On DBR, Bad Loss= No Effort

...never fails

Do you think we matched their intensity from tip to final whistle?

uh_no
01-30-2010, 03:32 PM
Do you think we matched their intensity from tip to final whistle?

I don't think we did, and I don't think we're capable of such intensity....

ice-9
01-30-2010, 03:33 PM
Do you think we matched their intensity from tip to final whistle?

While I don't think Duke was particularly intense, I don't think lack of effort was the problem. Those guys fought today, and you could see it on the offensive side where we played to get contact and drew a lot of fouls.

The problem is defense, and I'm not sure it's lack of effort as much as simply being confounded. We just couldn't do anything about their dribble penetration, cuts and plays.

I'm sounding like a broken record now but we should have played zone. It would've simplified our defense and forced GT into a more plain vanilla offense. This is one of those rare times where I wonder what Coach K was thinking about sticking to man-to-man...perhaps he viewed it as a teaching moment.

Spam Filter
01-30-2010, 03:33 PM
The effort was there, but we just didn't play very smart.

This team is what it is. It's essentially no different from the team of the last couple of years, and will probably end the season is very similar manner in March.

This is a very flawed team.

jjasper0729
01-30-2010, 03:34 PM
If you think a talk is all they need....you're mistaken.

as long as it's a talk like K gave to the 86 team that alarie always talks about.

one of the previous posters is right. we need to feed the post and get them some confidence that the big 3 have confidence in them. they don't get the ball and with the exception of LT lately, aren't confident in what to do with it. it doesn't help that we RARELY get a good post pass in (it would help if they were getting good position more consistently). that should be the focus of an entire practice before GT.. getting in position and feeding the post

BlueintheFace
01-30-2010, 03:34 PM
Do you think we matched their intensity from tip to final whistle?

No. I also don't think we "showed no effort" "rolled over" or "gave up."

I think we were careless with the ball early and gave them a lot of easy points. I think that our intensity on defense was limited by frequent whistles and being unprepared for the offense. If you don't fully understand what's coming at you wave after wave, it is hard to show the trademark intensity. I think our boys were lost and didn't get the offensive principles of georgetown as a team defense. I also think Monroe committed 20 offensive fouls on LT.

ChicagoCrazy84
01-30-2010, 03:36 PM
If you think a talk is all they need....you're mistaken.

Hey, sometimes that's all it takes. It worked with Scheyer last year.

MChambers
01-30-2010, 03:36 PM
i still love this team and i still think obama is a jinx to dark blue in a basketball game somehow..

Has Duke ever won playing with a president in attendance. I remember losing in 1989 in NJ before Nixon, losing in 1994 in Charlotte(?) before Clinton, and now this. Do we have a President jinx?

CDu
01-30-2010, 03:37 PM
No. I also don't think we "showed no effort" "rolled over" or "gave up."

I think we were careless with the ball early and gave them a lot of easy points. I think that our intensity on defense was limited by frequent whistles and being unprepared for the offense. If you don't fully understand what's coming at you wave after wave, it is hard to show the trademark intensity. I think our boys were lost and didn't get the offensive principles of georgetown as a team defense. I also think Monroe committed 20 offensive fouls on LT.

I agree with all of this, but will add that Thomas committed about 20 defensive fouls on Monroe as well. The two were banging throughout the entire game.

KandG
01-30-2010, 03:38 PM
This thread is going to devolve quickly, so let me say that I support and love the team, no matter who's playing. I haven't been crazy about the college game generally the last few years, but I still like watching our guys. All this despite the entitled narratives of "poor recruiting", "no big man coach", "Duke no longer a priority for Coach K" and the other silly stuff people like to dominate conversations with around here.

With all that said, this was a pretty awful effort all the way around, especially on D -- allowing nearly 90 points and 70 percent shooting to a team that averages just over 70 doesn't cut it. Whether you think this is a Final Four level team or a first round exit, it's reasonable to expect better quality defense than what we saw this afternoon. Seems like once the referees started calling things tighter, we couldn't keep people from going by us. I'm not sure Georgetown could have run their offense any better against the coaching staff in an empty gym.

And on offense, the turnovers and inability to generate anything in the paint was just as bad. Very discouraging.

SCMatt33
01-30-2010, 03:38 PM
The most troubling thing for me is that they got so many easy looks on our set defense, not just the TO's.

I think part of the reason that we appear to get worse over the course of time over the last few years is that we tend to be stagnant. Coach K does a wonderful job of having his team ready for the start of the year, and by the time we get 20 games in, everyone knows what Duke can and can't do. Right now, teams that beat us attack us on both ends of the floor. When Duke has the ball, they guard everyone as tightly as possible and force Duke to try and dribble by them, which we can't do for the most part. When Duke is on D, they attack the paint any way possible, either dumping it down low, or driving into the lane.

kydukie
01-30-2010, 03:39 PM
Can someone tell me what has changed since the Wake Forest game for the Plumlees? Things seemed to be looking up after that game, but they've gone the other direction instead.

Saratoga2
01-30-2010, 03:39 PM
This game was like a reprise of the NC State game. Our defense was non existent over much of the game. They pretty much could do anything they wanted to. They drove in, shot the three and got many points in the paint. They turned us over way too often.

I think they also had the refs on their side as well. Lots of fouls by Georgetown went uncalled and virtually all questionable calls went against Duke. That said, the fouls were not the difference. I don't buy the tired excuse either.

Then the offense. Our shooting was poor from three and we had trouble going inside. We lost the turnover battle as well.

On the good side:
Thomas played well. He isn't a guy who can score a lot against Monroe, but he still played a very solid game.

Scheyer looked fairly well. He did make a couple of mental mistakes out there, but his offense was reasonable. I liked it better when Jon took a little better care of the ball. He has started to make a few careless turnovers.

Dawkins showed he belongs on offense, but his defense is still that of a freshman. I'll take the good offense as a sign he is coming along.

The Plumlees competed. Miles missed a couple of bunnies, but he can defend and rebound. Mason also looked like he belonged. His defense is still that of a freshman as well, but he is out there competing

Smith played a much better second half. He just couldn't get an open look in the first half but scored the majority of his points in the second.

On the bad side:
Zoubek was not able to compete against Monroe and quickly made two fouls which came as the game started to turn in Georgetown's favor.

Singler played hard and scored 19, I think, but it took him a lot of shots to get that number. The head down drive into a crowd and the telegraphed passes plus fouling out were all negatives. He tends to play on the limit most of the time and would be better to take better care of the ball. He still is a very important player and just needs to ask himself how he can avoid the mistakes.

Kelly also didn't look good out there. He had trouble getting back and was no help to the offense. He does look quite a bit stronger out there, so there is hope.

A bad game for our Dukies. Maybe some rest will get them ready for Georgia Tech.

1Devil
01-30-2010, 03:40 PM
Can someone tell me what has changed since the Wake Forest game for the Plumlees? Things seemed to be looking up after that game, but they've gone the other direction instead.

Lance is just too good to take out of the lineup.

devildeac
01-30-2010, 03:40 PM
You mean like the 1991 Duke championship team that lost to UNC by 22 in the ACC Tourney final?

Except I don't see Hurley or Laettner suiting up for us this year.:(

Or G. Hill either.:(

chrisheery
01-30-2010, 03:41 PM
If Coach K set forth 3-4 points in a game plan for us to "win," I would guess we achieved zero of those.

Mine would have been:

1. Dominate the paint.

2. Make Monroe shoot from mid range or the perimeter. I mean, why would we pressure a guy 12 feet from the basket who rarely even attempts a shot from there?

3. Go to the hole, a lot. Even if you get fouled and no call is made repeatedly. Keep going until they do make the call. Then, go some more. That doesn't mean one on one moves, which is not our strong suit. Move off the ball, make plays with motion and as a team.

4. Don't turn the ball over (always).

5. Keep them out of the paint, especially on back door cuts.

Which of these did we do? None. The turnovers at half court, I think there were three in short succession, that let them get a 10 point lead, really ended the game, essentially.

Saratoga2
01-30-2010, 03:41 PM
Why is it that Duke seems to regress as the season progresses the last 5 years? That's what really bothers me. I can remember when Duke teams used to improve over the course of the year and hit their stride in March. We started the year with 3 good players and it was clear this team needed more than that. Now we sit at the end of January and I have little hope that we're going to get serious contributions from anyone else on the roster the rest of the way. Depressing.

Thomas is also playing very well

JBDuke
01-30-2010, 03:41 PM
Except I don't see Hurley or Laettner suiting up for us this year.:(

Or G. Hill either.:(

Yeah, but Hill, Hurley, and Laettner were on that team and played that day in March 1991. Even players with retired jerseys can have bad days.

CDu
01-30-2010, 03:41 PM
We just couldn't stop them one on one, and they did a great job of identifying cutters when our guys tried to play help defense. And it didn't help that so many of our turnovers went for fast break layups/dunks.

The team that showed up for us today wasn't ready for the team that showed up for Georgetown. Hopefully we'll be better prepared/focused when we face a well-coached team in March.

loldevilz
01-30-2010, 03:42 PM
trying to have hope in this duke team is difficult because they simply haven't prooved anything yet...this was their chance and they came up short

BlueintheFace
01-30-2010, 03:42 PM
Make Monroe shoot from mid range or the perimeter. I mean, why would we pressure a guy 12 feet from the basket who rarely even attempts a shot from there?

Agreed, too much exterior pressure. I think K deserves some blame here. I don't think our defensive plan was smart at all.

devildownunder
01-30-2010, 03:45 PM
Our defense was obviously terrible and offensively we missed some shots we simply had to make to keep it close when we were still down single digits. We couldn't defend without fouling and even when fouling, we didn't foul enough to prevent a shot.

I think Clark called it, Georgetown looked fresher. having a game 2.5 days ago and having to travel obviously took a toll. I wouldn't read too much in how we played since the schedule had to play at least a part. Monroe obviously made up for some past performances against us. Now that we have the bad taste of an "L" in our mouths, here's to our taking it out on Tech, BC, and kerlina!

-c

I am getting very tired of hearing that we were tired every time we lose this year.


I saw only the last 15 minutes or so (tuned in when we were down 54-46). In that time, we had zero balance in our offense and our defense was so poor that we allowed Gtown to score on 13 straight possessions at one point. That is an eye-popping stat to me. I don't know what to say, really. Other than the fact that we have to get consistent, focused effort on defense or we have no chance.

ice-9
01-30-2010, 03:47 PM
If Coach K set forth 3-4 points in a game plan for us to "win," I would guess we achieved zero of those.

Mine would have been:

1. Dominate the paint.

2. Make Monroe shoot from mid range or the perimeter. I mean, why would we pressure a guy 12 feet from the basket who rarely even attempts a shot from there?

3. Go to the hole, a lot. Even if you get fouled and no call is made repeatedly. Keep going until they do make the call. Then, go some more. That doesn't mean one on one moves, which is not our strong suit. Move off the ball, make plays with motion and as a team.

4. Don't turn the ball over (always).

5. Keep them out of the paint, especially on back door cuts.

Which of these did we do? None. The turnovers at half court, I think there were three in short succession, that let them get a 10 point lead, really ended the game, essentially.

We did OK with #3, especially in the second half. We shot 26 free throws which is about 20% above our season average.

arnie is still king
01-30-2010, 03:49 PM
Thomas is also playing very well

Thomas is playing very well as compared with Thomas in previous years; but he is still light years away from the level of other forwards on top 10 teams. We applaud him when he scores 8 points and only has 4 turnovers. I think that says more about our current and recent capabilities at the 4 and 5 than it does about Thomas.

dukepsy1963
01-30-2010, 03:50 PM
Some days it's harder to be a Duke fan(atic) than others........

But I do remember many great moments over the years...........
And that keeps me going...................

______________
Trinity '63

chrisheery
01-30-2010, 03:50 PM
We did OK with #3, especially in the second half. We shot 26 free throws which is about 20% above our season average.

I guess you are right. 1/5. Nice. Sorta like Singler's shooting percentage (again).

DukeBlueNikeShox
01-30-2010, 03:50 PM
Being tired and having to travel are not excuses, considering the team went to DC on Thursday on a private jet (rather than taking the 4 hour bus ride).

Spam Filter
01-30-2010, 03:51 PM
I am getting very tired of hearing that we were tired every time we lose this year.


Me too, especially when the same people who make this excuse are the same people who jump on anyone who dares to suggest that certain players are playing too many minutes. How is it that we can be tired but at the same time minutes played for certain players is not a concern?

91devil
01-30-2010, 03:52 PM
I would have liked to have seen some more zone defense. I think we have grown to be pretty competent at it, and it would have slowed down G'Town's dribble penetration. We didn't have good help side / back side defense, which led to the many uncontested layups.

Also agree with a previous poster who said we should run some plays for our bigs, or at least let them create their own shots. Throughout the year, it seems like most of the inside points come off of rebounds or finishes from our guards penetration. I'd like to see some clear out for the Plumlees to see how they are at creating their shots, and to keep the defense more honest.

rotogod00
01-30-2010, 03:52 PM
Being tired and having to travel are not excuses, considering the team went to DC on Thursday on a private jet (rather than taking the 4 hour bus ride).

yup, this team is just short on talent. good talent, yes. talent to make a run, not quite

JBDuke
01-30-2010, 03:53 PM
Thomas is playing very well as compared with Thomas in previous years; but he is still light years away from the level of other forwards on top 10 teams. We applaud him when he scores 8 points and only has 4 turnovers. I think that says more about our current and recent capabilities at the 4 and 5 than it does about Thomas.

You don't have to look beyond Duke's own history to find plenty of important contributors that weren't prolific scorers (think Brian Davis, Billy King, Dan Meagher, etc.). If points per game and turnovers are the only statistics you look at to determine if a player belongs on a top 10 team, then you're being shortsighted.

Lance is a significant contributor to this team - most especially on defense, where he has the size and quickness to bother a wide variety of players. This is a key factor in our ability to play the switching man-to-man defense that Coach K has preferred of late. Lance is also a team captain and one of the vocals leaders on the court.

soccerstud2210
01-30-2010, 03:55 PM
didnt see the entire game. just the last 10 minutes or so.

was the 72% FG shooting legitimate? or were most of the those on open looks and layups?

rotogod00
01-30-2010, 03:55 PM
didnt see the entire game. just the last 10 minutes or so.

was the 72% FG shooting legitimate? or were most of the those on open looks and layups?

the latter. defense was terrible

devildownunder
01-30-2010, 03:56 PM
Last year Williams wasn't a factor until February. Hopefully Andre Dawkins can get over everything and begin to contribute.

I guess I'd agree he's the best shot at adding some firepower this year, if he can fill it up like he did in a few early games. We'll see.

chrisheery
01-30-2010, 03:56 PM
Me too, especially when the same people who make this excuse are the same people who jump on anyone who dares to suggest that certain players are playing too many minutes. How is it that we can be tired but at the same time minutes played for certain players is not a concern?

For what it is worth, I don't think the amount of minutes our top 3 play is an issue for them. I think it is more of an issue for the rest of the team. It is reminiscent of teams including JJ. He was amazing almost all the time, but when he was off, the team was going to lose. We had no back up plan. Its the same principle for these three. Two of the three have to play well for us to win, but we usually need someone else to step up. In the last few games, though, no one else has. Miles, Mason, Dre, and maybe Ryan all have the capability to be offensive threats, and yet we do not make an effort to get them comfortable in game situations. I think if the big 3 played less, it would make more time for other guys. But, I don't think the "tired legs" thing is the main issue. It is more that they look "tired" when the play badly. Those are the days I wish we had a plan B, C, and D.

And the point about our big guys making mistakes is not a good one in my mind. They did drop passes and miss open shots, but guess what, so did Nolan, Jon and Kyle. We have to get these guys confident or they will never be reliable on a game to game basis.

BlueintheFace
01-30-2010, 03:56 PM
didnt see the entire game. just the last 10 minutes or so.

was the 72% FG shooting legitimate? or were most of the those on open looks and layups?

a lot of layups, but they were not missing jumpers either. They only missed 13 fg all game

jv001
01-30-2010, 03:57 PM
We just couldn't stop them one on one, and they did a great job of identifying cutters when our guys tried to play help defense. And it didn't help that so many of our turnovers went for fast break layups/dunks.

The team that showed up for us today wasn't ready for the team that showed up for Georgetown. Hopefully we'll be better prepared/focused when we face a well-coached team in March.

From Monroe to Wright and everyone in between we were beaten on the dribble. Having almost a week to prepare for our man to man hedge defense helped them tremendously. We just don't have great on the ball defenders and if the help is not there, we're in big trouble. That's what happened today. As for our offense, the big 3 dribble way too much hoping for screens that get them open. It's not a bad offense but it is if it's almost all you run. As for the post play, Miles fumbled the ball way too much at the begining of the game. Then it looked like the perimeter guys were reluctant to throw the ball into the post. And it didn't help that our interior guys gave very little help in making the entry pass. Just not a good game anyway you look at it. I guess I'm joining those that would like to see Andre get some more playing time. Today was better, but maybe he'll keep improving in practice and Coach K will give him some more minutes. Go Duke!

arnie is still king
01-30-2010, 03:59 PM
You don't have to look beyond Duke's own history to find plenty of important contributors that weren't prolific scorers (think Brian Davis, Billy King, Dan Meagher, etc.). If points per game and turnovers are the only statistics you look at to determine if a player belongs on a top 10 team, then you're being shortsighted.

Lance is a significant contributor to this team - most especially on defense, where he has the size and quickness to bother a wide variety of players. This is a key factor in our ability to play the switching man-to-man defense that Coach K has preferred of late. Lance is also a team captain and one of the vocals leaders on the court.

That's fine, but if his perfomance today is considered a positive, then we've fallen a lot further off from the glory years than I thought.

BlueintheFace
01-30-2010, 03:59 PM
I am almost never in the "more zone" camp, but today I was.

We needed to see more zone. It was a mistake by K not to adjust.

soccerstud2210
01-30-2010, 04:00 PM
Lance is a significant contributor to this team - most especially on defense, where he has the size and quickness to bother a wide variety of players. This is a key factor in our ability to play the switching man-to-man defense that Coach K has preferred of late. Lance is also a team captain and one of the vocals leaders on the court.

how do we say this? lance was the one guarding booker last time we played clemson and he gave up 22 pts. and today who was he guarding? monroe? gives up 21... how is that good shut down defense?

like i said i did not see the whole game, so i can't comment on this completely intelligently, but playing good defense to me is not giving your player 21 pts or the opposing team 89 pts

we've got major issues. bottom line

devildownunder
01-30-2010, 04:01 PM
No. I also don't think we "showed no effort" "rolled over" or "gave up."

I think we were careless with the ball early and gave them a lot of easy points. I think that our intensity on defense was limited by frequent whistles and being unprepared for the offense. If you don't fully understand what's coming at you wave after wave, it is hard to show the trademark intensity. I think our boys were lost and didn't get the offensive principles of georgetown as a team defense. I also think Monroe committed 20 offensive fouls on LT.

why on earth would we have been unprepared for Georgetown's offense? We have been in a series w/them for a while now and our last game was at home, 3 days ago.

soccerstud2210
01-30-2010, 04:02 PM
I am almost never in the "more zone" camp, but today I was.

We needed to see more zone. It was a mistake by K not to adjust.

it seemed to work for 'cuse the other day when they shut them down on offense with the zone. we could have at least tried right?

Oriole Way
01-30-2010, 04:02 PM
You don't have to look beyond Duke's own history to find plenty of important contributors that weren't prolific scorers (think Brian Davis, Billy King, Dan Meagher, etc.). If points per game and turnovers are the only statistics you look at to determine if a player belongs on a top 10 team, then you're being shortsighted.

Lance is a significant contributor to this team - most especially on defense, where he has the size and quickness to bother a wide variety of players. This is a key factor in our ability to play the switching man-to-man defense that Coach K has preferred of late. Lance is also a team captain and one of the vocals leaders on the court.

Greg Paulus was a senior team captain and a vocal leader last season, but that didn't mean he deserved to start.

Arnie wasn't saying that he only looks at points and turnovers to determine the value. He pointed those out to say that he didn't necessarily play great today. He did say that Thomas is playing well compared to years past, but that he still isn't an adequate forward for an elite team. I agree with both of those assertions.

You said that Coach K prefers Thomas for his ability to play switching man-to-man defense. I think it's well past the point of admitting that K's switching man-to-man defense does not particularly work against good teams on the road this season, especially given makeup of our roster overall.

dukeblue1206
01-30-2010, 04:03 PM
I was excited when I heard the announcers say Coach K wanted to feed the post and try to get their bigs in foul trouble. There is one key element to that though, YOU HAVE TO FEED THE POST!!!...At least let the big guys get some touches. Miles got a couple early and nothing came of the chances so it was like they figured that was a waste and never went back to it. The only player I ever see who looks first to feed the post is Ryan Kelly. Watch him next time, he catches and looks inside for a post up. The big 3 seem to catch and look for their own or the other 2 that are running around screens. Granted I know these 3 are our best players but they need to throw a bone to the bigs a little more.

Now gotta move on to G.T. and another physical contest. Luckily it is at home and I like our chances!!

BlueintheFace
01-30-2010, 04:03 PM
why on earth would we have been unprepared for Georgetown's offense? We have been in a series w/them for a while now and our last game was at home, 3 days ago.

Did you watch the game? We looked pretty unprepared. When the other team gets uncontested layups in the halfcourt set, that isn't effort... that's confusion. That is a player getting lost or not rotating. That is unprepared.

Cameron
01-30-2010, 04:04 PM
Let's please refrain from the I love our guys so so much the most in the whole worldest drivel.

This team has been knocked out harder than Trevor Berbick twice in the last four games, I mean smashed in ... the ... face. Hopefully, Coach takes them through defensive slide and ball handling drill hell the next couple of days and makes them earn that jersey.

We need a Bobby Knight practice first thing Monday. Once is bound to happen, but two blowout losses in four games with this kind of talent on a team that is expected to win championships (ACC) and challenge for a Final Four is not Duke basketball. Call me crazy, but I don't recall this happening twice in the same season, let alone twice in four games, in any other year besides '95 or '96 in the mordern (past 20 or so years) Duke era (and I think we can all agree that those teams don't come close to the talent we have here right now. This is a team full of star power and star potential).

As another poster said, the last two seasons have featured more blowout losses than we had the previous 10 years combined. Hell, in 2007, our worst season in terms of losses since the mid '90s, we only lost one game by 12 and never repeated that scenario again. (The scoreboard today and against NC State might not have read 25-point shellacking, but that's what we got.) Until we prove the past few March performances otherwise, I will be shaking in my chair when we hit the floor in a Sweet 16 game.

Don't get me wrong, I love this team, too, but I can't bear to read all of the sandbagging around here that tends to follow losses.

devildownunder
01-30-2010, 04:06 PM
Did you watch the game? We looked pretty unprepared. When the other team gets uncontested layups in the halfcourt set, that isn't effort... that's confusion. That is a player getting lost or not rotating. That is unprepared.

I watched the last 15 minutes of the game, it was 54-46 when I tuned in. It didn't look to me like there was an intense effort on defense, for whatever reason. If you think it was confusion, fine. Your guess is as good as mine. I'm just saying that there is no good reason, that I can think of, for us to have been unprepared. So that seems like an unlikely answer to me.

JBDuke
01-30-2010, 04:07 PM
That's fine, but if his perfomance today is considered a positive, then we've fallen a lot further off from the glory years than I thought.

But your post said that the praise for Lance's play, given his points and turnovers today, said more about our "current and recent capabilities". As I said in other posts, everybody has bad days. Today, just about all of our players did. I think it's reasonable for someone to single out Lance's performance as a relative positive. And I certainly think it's wrong to say that this teams "capabilities" are limited because a defensive-oriented starter scored 8 points and turned it over 4 times today.

rotogod00
01-30-2010, 04:07 PM
I watched the last 15 minutes of the game, it was 54-46 when I tuned in. It didn't look to me like there was an intense effort on defense, for whatever reason. If you think it was confusion, fine. Your guess is as good as mine. I'm just saying that there is no good reason, that I can think of, for us to have been unprepared. So that seems like an unlikely answer to me.

we're just not as good. people have a tough time swallowing that, however

BlueintheFace
01-30-2010, 04:08 PM
I watched the last 15 minutes of the game, it was 54-46 when I tuned in. It didn't look to me like there was an intense effort on defense, for whatever reason. If you think it was confusion, fine. Your guess is as good as mine. I'm just saying that there is no good reason, that I can think of, for us to have been unprepared. So that seems like an unlikely answer to me.

Well, you get one practice on thursday and pre-game on saturday for court time preparation. That isn't a whole lot. In fact, that is very very little preparation time on the court.

CameronBlue
01-30-2010, 04:11 PM
A lot of clutching at straws in some of the logic I see posted in this thread so I'll add my own working theory:

Duke is talented but not in ways that are evident within this version of the motion/dribble-drive offense that K has trotted out this year. This team just does not have the horses to be effective. A continuity based scheme would serve the fortunes of this team better. K's choice to "let Scheyer be Scheyer" is fine provided the coaches are content to risk more results like today.

devildownunder
01-30-2010, 04:12 PM
it seemed to work for 'cuse the other day when they shut them down on offense with the zone. we could have at least tried right?

In K's defense, you don't just snap your fingers and get a team to play the kind of coordinated, shifting, flexing, smothering zone defense that Syracuse put on Georgetown. Boeheim's been running that 2-3 forever and he's reached the point where he knows how to teach it. But he does that from day one of practice, all the time. If the zone is something you rarely play, I doubt you'd get your players to perform nearly as well in it. Particularly since defensing Georgetown's offense in the 2-3 requires real attention to detail WRT identifying shooters or cutters on the wing, when to pinch and when to stay home if you're one of the big guards at the top, etc. Just sitting back in a passive little trapezoid with your hands out doesn't cut it against the Hoyas' princeton scheme.

moonpie23
01-30-2010, 04:12 PM
i know we played ruff D today, but watching the game, i thought Gtown was as crisp in offense as any team i've seen this year (tx and ku as well.)

we do not have a scoring threat.....someone that the other teams fear and then plan around..

no one knows what FEB holds......we shall see...

KandG
01-30-2010, 04:13 PM
One more point. I'm generally in the "it's just one game" camp, even though I know today's game may reflect some unnerving patterns in our defense.

However, my twitter feed is more NBA oriented but also has some HS/college scouts, reporters, TV personalities, columnists etc who don't comment a ton on college games. Today they're all commenting on how bad Duke looked, and how this is "not your father's Duke". Seth Davis said this loss will shake the confidence of the current Duke team badly, and he seems to be backing down from his original claim about Duke being an outside shot for the Final Four.

Sometimes it's just one loss, but sometimes losses are so loud and ugly that unwanted extra attention is impossible to avoid. Maybe it was the President being at the game that had a lot of press tuning in. Not a good time to lay an egg, that's for sure.

devildownunder
01-30-2010, 04:14 PM
Well, you get one practice on thursday and pre-game on saturday for court time preparation. That isn't a whole lot. In fact, that is very very little preparation time on the court.

it's more time than you get for the 2nd, 4th and 6th rounds of the NCAA tournament.

We had plenty of time to prepare. I'm not saying whether we were prepared or not because I have no way of knowing. I'm just saying that, just from looking at the schedule there was no reason to believe we weren't prepared.

NYBri
01-30-2010, 04:17 PM
...on the offensive or defensive side of things.

They killed us. Period.

hq2
01-30-2010, 04:17 PM
This is the second recent game where the Plumlees didn't do anything against good comp. Admittedly, Aminu and Greg Monroe are probably NBA players, but the Plumlees couldn't do anything against either of them. Our offense was bad; almost no drive and dish, too many late-in-the-count 3s. The defense showed that we are vulnerable to quick, good-passing guards. (See Villanova last year). Just the kind of team we don't match up against.

BlueintheFace
01-30-2010, 04:18 PM
it's more time than you get for the 2nd, 4th and 6th rounds of the NCAA tournament.

We had plenty of time to prepare. I'm not saying whether we were prepared or not because I have no way of knowing. I'm just saying that, just from looking at the schedule there was no reason to believe we weren't prepared.

There is one big difference in March. The other team is just as prepared. Georgetown had 5 days of preparation. It's about the discrepancy in time.

devildownunder
01-30-2010, 04:18 PM
Well, you get one practice on thursday and pre-game on saturday for court time preparation. That isn't a whole lot. In fact, that is very very little preparation time on the court.

just fyi, we played Georgetown at Georgetown in 2004 as well. Also 3 days after our last game. Here's how that turned out:

1/21 * at Maryland 1 College Park, Md. (Comcast Center) W 68-60 17,950 9 p.m. ESPN
1/24 at Georgetown 1 Washington, D.C. (MCI Center) W 85-66 20,193 2 p.m. CBS

JBDuke
01-30-2010, 04:21 PM
just fyi, we played Georgetown at Georgetown in 2004 as well. Also 3 days after our last game. Here's how that turned out:

1/21 * at Maryland 1 College Park, Md. (Comcast Center) W 68-60 17,950 9 p.m. ESPN
1/24 at Georgetown 1 Washington, D.C. (MCI Center) W 85-66 20,193 2 p.m. CBS

Yeah, but that's a completely bogus comparison. That Georgetown team was on its way to a 13-15 season, and that Duke team was #1 at the time.

soccerstud2210
01-30-2010, 04:24 PM
In K's defense, you don't just snap your fingers and get a team to play the kind of coordinated, shifting, flexing, smothering zone defense that Syracuse put on Georgetown. Boeheim's been running that 2-3 forever and he's reached the point where he knows how to teach it. But he does that from day one of practice, all the time. If the zone is something you rarely play, I doubt you'd get your players to perform nearly as well in it. Particularly since defensing Georgetown's offense in the 2-3 requires real attention to detail WRT identifying shooters or cutters on the wing, when to pinch and when to stay home if you're one of the big guards at the top, etc. Just sitting back in a passive little trapezoid with your hands out doesn't cut it against the Hoyas' princeton scheme.

not saying that we switch to zone and everything works happily and merrily. im simply saying heck, give it a try for a couple possessions and see what happens. maybe it slows them down. maybe they take some bad shots. maybe it cools them off a little. maybe we get some TO. stuff like that.

KandG
01-30-2010, 04:26 PM
Don't get me wrong, I love this team, too, but I can't bear to read all of the sandbagging around here that tends to follow losses.

What sandbagging? This looks like a pretty critical thread to me -- I see very little sugarcoating of the issues around a terrible loss.

Now if you want some "Win one for the Gipper" smashmouth drivel -- which insults the players and coaching staff who you assume aren't taking the loss with the appropriate loss of urgency, well there's not much to be done. One of the funniest things I see on every message board -- across every sport -- is how people think throwing chairs and yelling and getting in players' faces equates to effective coaching in the face of a slump or bad loss.

Fans that propose these motivational methods wouldn't last two seconds in a real locker room before being tuned out...but that's the internet for you.

Wildcat
01-30-2010, 04:26 PM
But we could use another scorer; ala Olek Cyz. We need someone who is tough, strong and that can get to the basket and finish with authority. Yeah its spilled milk now; but who can we mine from this bench to be a consistent scoring addition to the Big 3 when they and the "three," are limited? Maybe he (K) ought to try starting Dre, and possibly "call up" an Elliot Williams-like resurgence from last year. That's bout the only thing I can think of right now that can shake things up and give us a different look right now.

As one poster said; teams by now, know what we can and cannot do. A little mix-up in the lineup, or a different look here or there might be able to accent our latent strengths and mask some of our glaring weaknesses. I don't know; but we got to find some additional scoring consistently in the paint. I like what others have suggested: feed the paint more. But I still think we are missing that mature/confident/role-player/slasher/offensive minded player whose PRIMARY DUTY is to score without shooting threes.

I don't know if we have that.

devildownunder
01-30-2010, 04:30 PM
There is one big difference in March. The other team is just as prepared. Georgetown had 5 days of preparation. It's about the discrepancy in time.

Georgetown had 4 days and we had two. This preparation thing is a weak argument, though. Georgetown is not an unfamiliar opponent and they did not come out and blow us away with a bunch of stuff we'd never seen before. In fact, the score was 17-16 with 9:52 to play in the first half and 54-46 with 13:48 to play in the game.

They beat us, badly, because we had absolutely no answer for Greg Monroe on defense and our offense had no balance whatsoever. The only way we could consistently get a decent look was dribble-drive kick, which means we got open looks from 3 and nowhere else. And we just don't have the kind of talent that allows us to fill it up from 3 like that and win. We have to get some easier baskets -- like any team -- and we weren't able to do it.

airowe
01-30-2010, 04:30 PM
Best thing about this game was it wasn't in the tournament.

loldevilz
01-30-2010, 04:32 PM
But we could use another scorer; ala Olek Cyz. We need someone who is tough, strong and that can get to the basket and finish with authority. Yeah its spilled milk now; but who can we mine from this bench to be a consistent scoring addition to the Big 3 when they and the "three," are limited? Maybe he (K) ought to try starting Dre, and possibly "call up" an Elliot Williams-like resurgence from last year. That's bout the only thing I can think of right now that can shake things up and give us a different look right now.

As one poster said; teams by now, know what we can and cannot do. A little mix-up in the lineup, or a different look here or there might be able to accent our latent strengths and mask some of our glaring weaknesses. I don't know; but we got to find some additional scoring consistently in the paint. I like what others have suggested: feed the paint more. But I still think we are missing that mature/confident/role-player/slasher/offensive minded player whose PRIMARY DUTY is to score without shooting threes.

I don't know if we have that.

I totally agree...we need a change in the line-up to give us a jolt going forward. It may not be an actual improvement, but it can help the moralle like it did last year. I'm thinking that dre or mason should start...maybe both. Also we could give ryan kelly some more time at the four instead of LT.

BlueintheFace
01-30-2010, 04:32 PM
Georgetown had 4 days and we had two.

4 and pre-game v 1 and pre-game

not sure how it is a bogus argument unless.... wait, does calling it a bogus argument make it so?

devildownunder
01-30-2010, 04:33 PM
Yeah, but that's a completely bogus comparison. That Georgetown team was on its way to a 13-15 season, and that Duke team was #1 at the time.

My point exactly. It's the abilities of the teams involved that led to the outcome, not the scheduling.

devildownunder
01-30-2010, 04:34 PM
4 and pre-game v 1 and pre-game

not sure how it is a bogus argument unless.... wait, does calling it a bogus argument make it so?

didn't i give my reasons in the post? I sure thought I did.

BlueintheFace
01-30-2010, 04:35 PM
My point exactly. It's the abilities of the teams involved that led to the outcome, not the scheduling.

Nobody said it wasn't about ability. People (including myself) are however pointing out that the defensive struggles (a factor in the loss) were not about effort so much as unpreparedness. Scheduling is the reason.

CDu
01-30-2010, 04:37 PM
We NEED to get more from the Plumlees.

Since the Wake game (4 games), here's what we've gotten from the Plumlees combined:
16 points, 7-21 shooting, 24 rebounds, 20 fouls

That's a four game combined average of 4ppg, 6rpg, 5fpg, and 33% fg.

We can beat a lot of teams with our big three and Thomas playing good defense. But if we're going to become a consistently elite team, at least one of those guys has to become a consistent presence on the court.

I know they're young and inexperienced, but I'd like to see some progress. I'm okay with the occasional tough night. I'm even okay if they only show up every other game. But the last four games have been a big step back, especially for Mason.

devildownunder
01-30-2010, 04:38 PM
4 and pre-game v 1 and pre-game

not sure how it is a bogus argument unless.... wait, does calling it a bogus argument make it so?

we played wednesday night at home, they played monday night on the road. Please explain to me how that gives them three more days of practice.


This whole exchange reminds me of a conversation i had earlier today with a fan of the New Zealand rugby team, who won't go see Invictus to this day she's convinced the All Blacks were deliberatly given food poisoning in some conspiracy. Why is it so hard to just say "they were better than us"?

BlueintheFace
01-30-2010, 04:38 PM
didn't i give my reasons in the post? I sure thought I did.

Were "We've played them before" and "the game was close a few times" your reasons why preparedness was not relevant to defensive performance today?

BlueintheFace
01-30-2010, 04:40 PM
we played wednesday night at home, they played monday night on the road. Please explain to me how that gives them three more days of practice.


This whole exchange reminds me of a conversation i had earlier today with a fan of the New Zealand rugby team, who won't go see Invictus to this day she's convinced the All Blacks were deliberatly given food poisoning in some conspiracy. Why is it so hard to just say "they were better than us"?

(1) I already said they were better than us. Please read the thread before posting.

(2) I'll break it down for you.

Georgetown Practices:

Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday pre-game

Duke Practices:
Thursday
NOT Friday (they flew to DC after classes)
Saturday pre-game

gofurman
01-30-2010, 04:41 PM
I am incredibly bummed out. I hate feeling like this at the end of every January.

Few points I have made a few times this (and a few previous) season(s):

1. Get the ball inside, even if we miss a shot or two. Keep the big guys involved.

2. Let the younger guys play more and learn. A loss 2 months ago wouldn't have bothered me as much as this does. There are some games, really important games, where you need to have your best players in all the time, but we have had plenty of games to get guys ready, didn't do it, and now we are stuck with bench players who can't contribute much.

But, today's loss was really more about two (connected) problems. Defense and rebounding. There was no point in this game where Georgetown felt they couldn't score. That's too bad. I know we can play better on D and today was an anomaly for whatever reason, but it still makes me scared for what might happen down the road. Defense should be consistent and our best players were burned on backdoor cuts as much as our inexperienced players today. Singler and Nolan were burned at key times when we had a chance at a come back. Rebounding was terrible. Did we get more than 4 or 5 offensive rebounds? I didn't look it up, but I would be shocked if we did. We had size on them, but we didn't use it at all.

I'm sure we will play better next game, but this was a really poor effort and brings to bear all the concerns so many of us have had as the season has gone on.

12 o rebounds

devildownunder
01-30-2010, 04:42 PM
Nobody said it wasn't about ability. People (including myself) are however pointing out that the defensive struggles (a factor in the loss) were not about effort so much as unpreparedness. Scheduling is the reason.

they had plenty of time to prepare. If you are saying they are unprepared, then you need to look places other than the schedule to figure out why.

It's not really that complicated. We had awful matchup and tried to compensate with a lot of hedging and doubles that left people wide open for dunks and layups on cuts to the basket. It's not like they threw something crazy at us that we needed all kinds of time to dissect.

Mcluhan
01-30-2010, 04:43 PM
Alaa and Antonio Lang are the gold standards for senior year growth spurts, but Lance is playing his I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this. off.

cruxer
01-30-2010, 04:43 PM
I am getting very tired of hearing that we were tired every time we lose this year.


I saw only the last 15 minutes or so (tuned in when we were down 54-46). In that time, we had zero balance in our offense and our defense was so poor that we allowed Gtown to score on 13 straight possessions at one point. That is an eye-popping stat to me. I don't know what to say, really. Other than the fact that we have to get consistent, focused effort on defense or we have no chance.

I was careful not to say that we were tired, but that G'town was fresher. There's a difference. I think that led to inattentiveness, especially on the defensive end. Not only did we fail to cover cutters, leaving the basket area wide open, but we also failed to rotate effectively on screens, leading to big-time guard penetration. The G-men were a step quicker than we were today.

-c

Wander
01-30-2010, 04:44 PM
Drop the scheduling thing guys, it's embarrassing. Maybe in a close game, but when you have your worst defensive performance in a decade or more it comes across as incredibly petty.

I don't think today had anything to do with effort. Talent, strategy, dumb play, and match-ups, yes, but not effort.

Everyone was mediocre or worse across the board today, including Coach K. Ryan Kelly 7 minutes and Zoubek 2 minutes? I don't understand that at all.

The team doesn't have realistically have the talent/balance needed to win a national championship. That's not throwing the guys under the bus, and it's not a conclusion I make after one game, but we should have proper expectations. We're probably on par with, say, West Virginia or Kansas State - a really solid Sweet 16 team that can maybe sneak into the Final Four if the chips fall exactly the right way in March.

Mcluhan
01-30-2010, 04:47 PM
Alaa and Antonio Lang are the gold standards for senior year growth spurts, but Lance is playing his I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this. off.

Uh, I didn't write that last part. Auto-censors? Whoops.

BlueintheFace
01-30-2010, 04:47 PM
they had plenty of time to prepare. If you are saying they are unprepared, then you need to look places other than the schedule to figure out why.

It's not really that complicated. We had awful matchup and tried to compensate with a lot of hedging and doubles that left people wide open for dunks and layups on cuts to the basket. It's not like they threw something crazy at us that we needed all kinds of time to dissect.

Georgetown runs a pretty sophisticated offense. I will not explain it to you. Look elsewhere for that.

That being said, they executed almost to perfection today and deserve a lot of credit for that.

devildownunder
01-30-2010, 04:48 PM
(1) I already said they were better than us. Please read the thread before posting.

(2) I'll break it down for you.

Georgetown Practices:

Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday pre-game

Duke Practices:
Thursday
NOT Friday (they flew to DC after classes)
Saturday pre-game

I don't see how taking an extremely short flight to DC precludes getting any practice or walkthrough time on Friday. And I know you have no idea how often Georgetown practiced this week. But even if you are correct, Georgetown did nothing fancy and we have been playing these guys regularly for years now.


Oh, I read the thread before posting, which you knew anyway. But you don't get to say on the one hand "oh they were better than us" and on the other hand "but we needed more time to prepare". You either own up to your shortcomings and don't try to color it, or you make an excuse. There is no way to do both. As soon as you start talking about lack of prep time, any claims you make that you're owning up to the loss and crediting the other team lose all value.

Duvall
01-30-2010, 04:48 PM
Everyone was mediocre or worse across the board today, including Coach K. Ryan Kelly 7 minutes and Zoubek 2 minutes? I don't understand that at all.


For f-

Did you see Ryan Kelly today?

dukelifer
01-30-2010, 04:48 PM
I have watched a lot of Duke basketball- more that most of you. I have seen Duke destroy teams and be destroyed. I have learned when you just need to turn off the TV because it is not their night (day). This was a bad beating to be sure. Duke got hit in the mouth and never recovered. Credit Georgetown who played great and almost did not miss. When a teams sees everything they throw up go in- it gives them great confidence. Duke never responded. It happens- it is not fun AND it does not define a team. Georgetown just got killed against Cuse- they looked as bad as a team can look. Today they looked as good as a team can look. That is one game difference. Georgetown has lost their last 3 of their last 4 road games- sound familiar?

This is basketball folks when there is no dominant team. Duke got blasted today and they have blasted others this year. At home, Duke is winning by a huge margin. I believe the problem is in a large part mental and that leads to inconsistent play- particularly up front- where Duke has the most opportunity for growth. Will they get there- who knows. But they will try to work it out. Today was a bad game- no question- but it was not the last game and it does not determine the next game-unless somebody got hurt. Time to rally the troops - make some adjustments and lace em up again. Tech is a good opponent to see how Duke responds to the loss. Still it is not going to be easy to right the ship and K cannot use the same old same old- but he will adjust.

This is a very unusual season - all around- for lots of teams. Duke needs to figure it out. I will continue to watch to see whether they can pull it together- Right now that is what will keep the season interesting- can this good but not great team somehow get on a run late. I still think it is possible- because I have seen glimpses in the huge wins they have had at home and on neutral courts. Right now this team has to work on how to keep their focus and intensity on the road.

GoingFor#5
01-30-2010, 04:49 PM
Reminded me of the Villanova game last year. We are not going to beat a team like Georgetown. I would just hope we don't face them in the post-season. If we do happen to see a team like that, I just hope we try something drastically different. Every team has teams they don't matchup well against though so I'm not overly concerned at this point. I think the NCSU loss was a fluke and I don't put that in the same bucket as this one. As long as we bounce back, I still think we are in the position of being a very good team who will need some breaks to get to the Final Four. I really doubt this team is as "bad" as the last few year's teams have been.

devildownunder
01-30-2010, 04:50 PM
Georgetown runs a pretty sophisticated offense. I will not explain it to you. Look elsewhere for that.

That being said, they executed almost to perfection today and deserve a lot of credit for that.

Now you are being very rude, Blueintheface. How long have both of us been posting on this board. But I disagree with you and now all of a sudden you insult me with a patronizing comment like this. Nice.

You should check yourself. This conversation is over.

Wander
01-30-2010, 04:50 PM
For f-

Did you see Ryan Kelly today?

I think you're misunderstanding me - I'm saying Kelly should have gotten zero minutes, and I don't understand why he got any with Zoubek perfectly available to play in the 2nd half.

ncexnyc
01-30-2010, 04:52 PM
I am shocked that there are people who have the nerve to defend the effort/performance/preparedness of the team today. You can use whatever word you like, but the bottom line is that we stunk it up today.

Since this is the last game of January for us I believe it's fair to make some statements about trends both positive and negative.

NEGATIVES:
If we can't stay focused for consecutive games against quality opponents, then you can forget about us having a successful March.

If we can't get consistent production/contributions from Miles, Mason, and or Dre, then our season will end poorly. And I'm talking about not making a deep run in March.

If we don't find a way to control teams with a bonafide inside and outside threat then this team won't be around deep into March.

POSITIVES:
This team has both TALENT and POTENTIAL!

There isn't much more to say. The bottom line is that all the pieces are there, but so far everything hasn't come together just yet. Can Coach K do it? That's a question we'll have to wait to have answered.

dukelifer
01-30-2010, 04:53 PM
I think you're misunderstanding me - I'm saying Kelly should have gotten zero minutes, and I don't understand why he got any with Zoubek perfectly available to play in the 2nd half.

You must not be in the "K needs to play its bench more- even if they mess up" camp

GoingFor#5
01-30-2010, 04:54 PM
one of the previous posters is right. we need to feed the post and get them some confidence that the big 3 have confidence in them. they don't get the ball and with the exception of LT lately, aren't confident in what to do with it. it doesn't help that we RARELY get a good post pass in (it would help if they were getting good position more consistently). that should be the focus of an entire practice before GT.. getting in position and feeding the post

It would help if our post guys didn't immediately lower the ball to 2 feet off the ground and invite the opposing guards to swarm them upon catching it!

Let the Wojo comments commence....

devildownunder
01-30-2010, 04:55 PM
I think you're misunderstanding me - I'm saying Kelly should have gotten zero minutes, and I don't understand why he got any with Zoubek perfectly available to play in the 2nd half.

I suspect K felt Z just didn't create good matchups for us today.

Greg_Newton
01-30-2010, 04:55 PM
Here's what I think needs to happen - I've been thinking this for a while, today was just the culmination - We NEED to learn how to play defense with our feet, not our hands.

We're talking basic fundamentals of defensive stance here - getting low, getting your thighs horizontal, and moving your feet quickly and LATERALLY. It's most glaringly obvious with the Plumlees - they could literally pick up a foul every single play because they constantly lean forward, don't bend their knees, and lead with their arms and hands. But really, outside of Lance, Nolan, and sometimes Z, our whole team has a tendency of staying too vertical and chasing the ballhandler rather than moving laterally to cut off driving lanes. When we get manhandled and it looks like the other team is getting into the lane at will, this is why.

Teams that play disciplined defense should be able to go long stretches without a single body foul, because they stay on balance and move their feet. When I watch this year's team, I don't know if it's a quickness thing, a fatigue thing, or just a discipline/mental thing, but I don't usually see that type of controlled movement on D.

My best hope is that we have some kind of late-season defensive rebirth - a kind of "Oh yeah..." moment, where we get back to the fundamentals of defense and taking in not letting your man break you down. IMO, we've got the physical talent to defend Georgetown, we just didn't do it today.

GoingFor#5
01-30-2010, 04:56 PM
I think you're misunderstanding me - I'm saying Kelly should have gotten zero minutes, and I don't understand why he got any with Zoubek perfectly available to play in the 2nd half.

I agree with this. I'm not sure what the purpose of giving Kelly minutes is at this point. He hasn't done much and it's hard to expect much out of him until he commits to adding 30 pounds of muscle which will need to take place in the off-season. Miles Plumlee should be his workout buddy in that quest as well.

BlueintheFace
01-30-2010, 04:57 PM
Oh, I read the thread before posting, which you knew anyway. But you don't get to say on the one hand "oh they were better than us" and on the other hand "but we needed more time to prepare". You either own up to your shortcomings and don't try to color it, or you make an excuse. There is no way to do both. As soon as you start talking about lack of prep time, any claims you make that you're owning up to the loss and crediting the other team lose all value.

I don't know how you can say this? It makes no sense.... NONE!!

So I can't say,

"Duke lost for the following reasons:

1) Uncharacteristic turnovers
2) Great execution by Georgetown on both ends
3) Poor defense, cause in part by unpreparedness"

???

Cause, that is what I have said this entire thread. A lot of factors go into a loss and it is not all black and white. You and I have specifically gone back and forth on whether the poor defense was about effort or preparedness.

Additionally, If you think preparation time doesn't matter, than I can give you one person who disagrees: Coach K (http://www.heraldsun.com/view/full_story_sports/5638929/article-Maybe-this-ACC-schedule-is-stacked-against-Blue-Devils?instance=main_article)

Also, to settle the matter on preparation time once and for all: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cUhT_oIcnO8&feature=player_embedded

jhoagland
01-30-2010, 05:01 PM
I love this board...one day Kelly doesn't play enough, the next...too much! You have a lot of young talent that needs to progress...one loss to a top 10 team in January does not a season make!

BlueintheFace
01-30-2010, 05:02 PM
29 PF... wow

Wander
01-30-2010, 05:02 PM
I suspect K felt Z just didn't create good matchups for us today.

Even so, I've consistently found Kelly this year unready to contribute at a high level. He's not a bad guy to have as a reserve, but I think the only way he should get significant playing time against good teams is in a blowout or if foul trouble on all of our bigs absolutely demand it. Just my opinion of course.


I love this board...one day Kelly doesn't play enough, the next...too much! You have a lot of young talent that needs to progress...one loss to a top 10 team in January does not a season make!

You realize that there's more than one person posting here, right? I've never once during this entire season that Kelly should get more minutes. Not once.

Genedoc
01-30-2010, 05:04 PM
It would help if our post guys didn't immediately lower the ball to 2 feet off the ground and invite the opposing guards to swarm them upon catching it!

Let the Wojo comments commence....

My favorite post move that I've seen countless times this year is when someone catches the ball wide open, pauses and looks around for the defenders and lets said defenders recover and get back into position, and then attempt a more complicated than necessary shot now that there are defenders in the way.

dukelifer
01-30-2010, 05:05 PM
I don't know how you can say this? It makes no sense.... NONE!!

So I can't say,

"Duke lost for the following reasons:

1) Uncharacteristic turnovers
2) Great execution by Georgetown on both ends
3) Poor defense, cause in part by unpreparedness"

???

Cause, that is what I have said this entire thread. A lot of factors go into a loss and it is not all black and white. You and I have specifically gone back and forth on whether the poor defense was about effort or preparedness.

Additionally, If you think preparation time doesn't matter, than I can give you one person who disagrees: Coach K (http://www.heraldsun.com/view/full_story_sports/5638929/article-Maybe-this-ACC-schedule-is-stacked-against-Blue-Devils?instance=main_article)

Also, to settle the matter on preparation time once and for all: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cUhT_oIcnO8&feature=player_embedded

Preparation matters and also having time to heal matters. Duke's schedule has been really bad for them. Not an excuse- a fact. I was telling folks Duke should have left RDU this morning and of course they would have missed the game due to the snow- and had time to heal. No one listens to me.

Pernell
01-30-2010, 05:28 PM
Let's please refrain from the I love our guys so so much the most in the whole worldest drivel.


We need a Bobby Knight practice first thing Monday. Once is bound to happen, but two blowout losses in four games with this kind of talent on a team that is expected to win championships (ACC) and challenge for a Final Four is not Duke basketball. Call me crazy, but I don't recall this happening twice in the same season, let alone twice in four games, in any other year besides '95 or '96 in the mordern (past 20 or so years) Duke era (and I think we can all agree that those teams don't come close to the talent we have here right now. This is a team full of star power and star potential).



Couldn't agree more. But while this maybe necessary after a blowout loss, I'm curious what Coach K has said during half-time. And even during the game, I'm wondering if he's gettin in their @#$@. I've seen and heard of Coach K getting in player's grills during the game and also during halftime in years past. But I haven't seen him do that as much in recent years.

Can anyone tell who is the Vocal leader of our team? Not scoring leader. But the guy who through their play and through their mouth gets the team going. I sure couldn't tell ya. And today it was quite evident. Who is going to get in the chest of somebody and let them know they need to raise the bar on their play? While Wojo wasn't the most gifted player, you knew that he was channeling Coach K's passion into the team. I'm just wondering who is doing that for us.

As Seth Davis said at halftime, Gtown is the #10 team in scoring offense(http://www.bigeast.org/fls/19400/stats/mbasketball/2009-2010/CONFLDRS.HTM) but playing against us today, they looked like they were #1. As someone previously mentioned, Georgetown never seemed like they had trouble scoring when they wanted to. And with a number of their points coming from back door passes(hello they run Princeton) I do think their was a level--I don't know how much--of unpreparedness on display. Granted some of these points were of turnovers and in transition but a number of them were not.

I think the only way Andre improves--not really rocket science--is give him more minutes. He really can be a difference maker for us. I've heard and I know of his defensive liabilities. But he's athletic enough where I think that part of his game can improve quickly. We really need him.

Should we or rather the team panic....no. But the team really needs to get in gear.

Exiled_Devil
01-30-2010, 05:37 PM
Me too, especially when the same people who make this excuse are the same people who jump on anyone who dares to suggest that certain players are playing too many minutes. How is it that we can be tired but at the same time minutes played for certain players is not a concern?

Umm...I'm pretty sure that cruxer hasn't made the argument about excessive minutes being okay.

And the thing about the short turn around is less about tired and more about preparation. Coach K actually said in his Thursday "Duke Basketball Report" radio spot that Gtown would have more time to prepare than Duke. I hadn't thought about how much preparation for individual teams matters, but I am getting the impression that it is a big deal to K.

mapei
01-30-2010, 05:38 PM
Because these are our two favorite teams, the spouse and I did not sit in our usual Hoya seats today but up in the restaurant. We weren't as close as usual but had a great view of the play under the near basket. Lotsa fouls that could have been called on one or the other team but were missed. Some fouls that were called on both teams easily could have been no-calls, too.

I don't think Duke lost because of a lack of intensity or preparation, or because of bad strategy. I don't think Duke lost because K didn't play enough zone or (the incredibly foul-prone) Zou today. Duke certainly didn't lose because of foul calls, which I thought had the same degree of fairness/unfairness on both sides.

I think Georgetown won because (1) they had one of those games where everything worked, on both O and D - there really is a certain amount of luck involved - and (2) they were noticably quicker/faster. I'm surprised only one other poster has mentioned the difference in quickness, because to me it was the biggest factor in the game. The loss of Elliott Williams really hurts in games like this.

oldnavy
01-30-2010, 05:44 PM
I have calmed down enough now to post. :(

What I saw today was a team that looked tired and slow up against a team that looked energized and quick. Not looking to make excuses for our poor play and horrible execution, but what I saw today was not the same team I saw play at Clemson.

Had we played a mid major or a weaker team today, I think we could have still pulled out a victory despite the poor play. Problem was that we played an extremely good team, on their home court who wanted to beat us in the worst way and they in fact did that.

I am not ready to bail on this team, not even close to that, but today exposed that we are not a team made of super humans who can just show up and win.

The good news about the game is that all the things that were exposed are potentially fixable. We can play better defense, in fact I am not sure we could play much worse D. We can shoot better, we can play with more energy. So, I will file this game away as a bad loss and wait to see if we can build on it going forward. It is not a season ending loss, and who knows it may just be the thing this team needed.

Some dude named Nietzsche said something about stuff that doesn't kill you makes you stronger... well we ain't dead yet! Of course I think he also had a mental breakdown later on and died a sad and lonely death, but anyway, you know what I mean. NEXT PLAY!

jhoagland
01-30-2010, 05:46 PM
Even so, I've consistently found Kelly this year unready to contribute at a high level. He's not a bad guy to have as a reserve, but I think the only way he should get significant playing time against good teams is in a blowout or if foul trouble on all of our bigs absolutely demand it. Just my opinion of course.



You realize that there's more than one person posting here, right? I've never once during this entire season that Kelly should get more minutes. Not once.

Oh yeah...I know that...however it is a variation a continous theme...so and so doesn't get enough minutes...oh, we lost, so and so got too many minutes....why doesn't K play so and so more. Have you watched the games...inconsistency seems to be the rule for anyone whose name does not begin with the letter S!

Exiled_Devil
01-30-2010, 05:47 PM
i know we played ruff D today, but watching the game, i thought Gtown was as crisp in offense as any team i've seen this year (tx and ku as well.)

we do not have a scoring threat.....someone that the other teams fear and then plan around..

no one knows what FEB holds......we shall see...

Thank you! Amongst the angst, whacked out critiques and legitimate critiques, I hadn't seen anyone complement the Hoyas before this.

Georgetown played really well. Even when defense sucks against you, you don't shoot 70% from the floor unless you are playing well. They were much better than us today. I don't like the loss - I think we could have handled them easily - but I don't think this is a bad loss.

Wildling
01-30-2010, 05:54 PM
It would help if our post guys didn't immediately lower the ball to 2 feet off the ground and invite the opposing guards to swarm them upon catching it!

Let the Wojo comments commence....

This has bothered me all season long. Coach Knight while announcing one of Dukes games brought that point up a few games ago.

Either the coaches don't see it, and aren't teaching them to keep the ball above your chest in the post. I seriously doubt it.........

Or the coaches are, and the big fellas aren't doing as they were taught. Which baffles me considering when you first start playing ball and going to basketball summer camps as a kid, this is one of the many things they teach you, and for me the most obvious thing to learn when someone smaller is guarding you, or about to double team you under the hoop. This little piece of advice to not bring the ball below your waist is something that is taught, and hopefully learned long before college bball comes into play.

jv001
01-30-2010, 05:56 PM
Thank you! Amongst the angst, whacked out critiques and legitimate critiques, I hadn't seen anyone complement the Hoyas before this.

Georgetown played really well. Even when defense sucks against you, you don't shoot 70% from the floor unless you are playing well. They were much better than us today. I don't like the loss - I think we could have handled them easily - but I don't think this is a bad loss.

I was watching the game and thought to my self, is Georgetown this good and underachieved or are we just this bad and have overachieved. After having some time to think, I guess it's somewhere in between. They're better than I thought and we're not as good as I thought.

ncexnyc
01-30-2010, 05:59 PM
What I saw today was a team that looked tired and slow up against a team that looked energized and quick. Not looking to make excuses for our poor play and horrible execution, but what I saw today was not the same team I saw play at Clemson.



Of course this $64,000 question is, "Which is the real Duke team?" Is it the one that handled Clemson easily twice this season and went toe to toe with a brutally tough Wake Forest team and left them lying on the canvass or are we the team that lacked intensity and couldn't defend against NCSU and Georgetown?

As someone has already pointed out, our so-called good wins aren't looking so good right now.:(

devildeac
01-30-2010, 06:04 PM
29 PF... wow

Please elaborate. This could be interpreted in several different ways:

1. the refs were whistle-happy against us and failed to whistle GU for another 5-10 fouls they coulda/shoulda called.
2. we were tired/lazy/unprepared from too short a turn-around/unfocused/inadequately coached.
3. we played too much D with our hands instead or our heads/feet (ie. not thinking or being in the proper position)
4. a combination of the above

Somewhat surprisingly, we did shoot more FT than they did.

BlueintheFace
01-30-2010, 06:06 PM
Please elaborate. This could be interpreted in several different ways:

1. the refs were whistle-happy against us and failed to whistle GU for another 5-10 fouls they coulda/shoulda called.
2. we were tired/lazy/unprepared from too short a turn-around/unfocused/inadequately coached.
3. we played too much D with our hands instead or our heads/feet (ie. not thinking or being in the proper position)
4. a combination of the above

probably 4, but that is just a very very high number.

BlueDevilCorvette!
01-30-2010, 06:06 PM
I have calmed down enough now to post. :(

What I saw today was a team that looked tired and slow up against a team that looked energized and quick. Not looking to make excuses for our poor play and horrible execution, but what I saw today was not the same team I saw play at Clemson.

Had we played a mid major or a weaker team today, I think we could have still pulled out a victory despite the poor play. Problem was that we played an extremely good team, on their home court who wanted to beat us in the worst way and they in fact did that.

I am not ready to bail on this team, not even close to that, but today exposed that we are not a team made of super humans who can just show up and win.

The good news about the game is that all the things that were exposed are potentially fixable. We can play better defense, in fact I am not sure we could play much worse D. We can shoot better, we can play with more energy. So, I will file this game away as a bad loss and wait to see if we can build on it going forward. It is not a season ending loss, and who knows it may just be the thing this team needed.

Some dude named Nietzsche said something about stuff that doesn't kill you makes you stronger... well we ain't dead yet! Of course I think he also had a mental breakdown later on and died a sad and lonely death, but anyway, you know what I mean. NEXT PLAY!

I agree with you oldnavy. On the bright side (if there is one), I don't think we have consistently played to our potential yet, thus we have not peaked and hopefully as we get closer to March, the light bulb will come on and Duke will start doing some damage again. I have faith that better days are ahead.

BlueintheFace
01-30-2010, 06:08 PM
I'll be very interested to see if K feels the need to make any significant changes after this game.

hudlow
01-30-2010, 06:14 PM
Break it down any way you like.

Bottom line...Georgetown was unconscious.

GO DUKE!

hud

WhiteboardGuy
01-30-2010, 06:16 PM
Please elaborate. This could be interpreted in several different ways:

2. we were tired/lazy/unprepared from too short a turn-around/unfocused/inadequately coached.


Somewhat surprisingly, we did shoot more FT than they did.

Duke had more than enough time to prepare. If you aren't prepared enough to play well on three days rest, how are you expected to compete in the NCAA tournament with two days rest, let alone next week when we have a Thursday night game into a Saturday afternoon road game (36 hours rest), let alone the ACC Tournament when you need to play three days in a row to win?

devildeac
01-30-2010, 06:17 PM
probably 4, but that is just a very very high number.

Interesting. The only other times I recall that many PF against us in the last ~ 5 years or so were @Wake, @md and @f$u when we had 3-4 starters DQ'ed, our foes had 0-1 and they shot about 2X as many FT as us. Several of us have had discussions about those games at the time and over the years and there appeared to be a distinct "disparity" in the calls, depending on which end of the court you were (cough, cough). I felt much less so today.

RelativeWays
01-30-2010, 06:20 PM
You know they talk about how there is no true dominant team this year and really anyone can win it ranked 1-10, maybe top 15 even. Duke proved today that they shouldn't be considered one of those teams. I'm really in doubt on how this season will go. We look good in some games, downright awful in others. There isn't a team in the ACC that couldn't beat us thoroughly if they shoot like Gtown and State. Kyrie Irving needs to get here SOON!

dukelifer
01-30-2010, 06:24 PM
i don't mind the loss, especially to a quality team like g'town. I mind how horribly the team played today. It is so frustrating to me, that this team has played great defense essentially all year, then they allow g'town to shoot 70% from the field. How does this happen??? I just can't believe the defense never adapted, you can't hedge like duke does on ball screens and overplay passing lanes against a team like g'town who can absolutely kill you back door.
I still love this team, i think they definitely have final four potential, but i was really disappointed with the effort today.

Effort or execution? Duke tried today. Georgetown was better today. I still believe this is a much closer game at Duke. Can't beat a team shooting 70+ percent- some of that is bad D and most of that is great offensive execution.

Wander
01-30-2010, 06:25 PM
You know they talk about how there is no true dominant team this year and really anyone can win it ranked 1-10, maybe top 15 even.

Personally, I've never bought that, and I'd be surprised if someone other than Kansas, Kentucky, or Texas was the national champion (yes, yes, I know Texas is slipping a bit recently, but they have too much talent and I think they'll get it back together by March).

devildeac
01-30-2010, 06:32 PM
Duke had more than enough time to prepare. If you aren't prepared enough to play well on three days rest, how are you expected to compete in the NCAA tournament with two days rest, let alone next week when we have a Thursday night game into a Saturday afternoon road game (36 hours rest), let alone the ACC Tournament when you need to play three days in a row to win?

I'll disagree with this to some degree. IIRC, an earlier poster noted that GU had Tues, Wed, Thurs and Fri to prepare-at home. We only had Thurs and Fri., not 3 days. And one of those days was a travel day, albeit a short travel day but nonetheless, a several hour ordeal whether it be a bus ride or flight to DC.

I share your concern about the short turn-around we have 10 times this year, in addition to the ACC and NCAA tourneys. We have more than any other ACC team this year, IIRC from the article from earlier this week on the Front Page. But of course, someone with a far better sports memory than mine, will point out JJ's and/or Kyle's iron man performances in recent years which propelled us to a W in the ACC Tourney final game.

jhoagland
01-30-2010, 06:32 PM
Two questions and two questions only...do any of you believe that Coach K is slacking on recruiting? and do you really believe that everyone out there wants to go to Duke?

ncexnyc
01-30-2010, 06:32 PM
Stewart Mandel has already got a piece up on SI about today's game and he isn't being very kind to the team.

dukelifer
01-30-2010, 06:37 PM
Personally, I've never bought that, and I'd be surprised if someone other than Kansas, Kentucky, or Texas was the national champion (yes, yes, I know Texas is slipping a bit recently, but they have too much talent and I think they'll get it back together by March).

How will Texas overcome their limitations in March- will they suddenly be able to shoot the ball? They have lost 2 games in a row on the road and just lost to Baylor at home. Texas is the same team as last year.

WhiteboardGuy
01-30-2010, 06:39 PM
I'll disagree with this to some degree. IIRC, an earlier poster noted that GU had Tues, Wed, Thurs and Fri to prepare-at home. We only had Thurs and Fri., not 3 days. And one of those days was a travel day, albeit a short travel day but nonetheless, a several hour ordeal whether it be a bus ride or flight to DC.

They flew a private jet to DC. We're talking an hour door to door.

dukelifer
01-30-2010, 06:40 PM
Two questions and two questions only...do any of you believe that Coach K is slacking on recruiting? and do you really believe that everyone out there wants to go to Duke?

Answers to both questions- no.

Kewlswim
01-30-2010, 06:41 PM
Hi,


Please stop! The people who keep writing in that our bigs need to be taught to keep the ball up, well they know. It was on the Mike Kryzyzewski Show this morning where one of the players, think it was Z, talked about how the Coaches (Wojo) are teaching that, but he did not do a good job of following it. In the locker room Lance said that everything that happened today the Coaches had prepared them for. Please, we had a horrible game today. Tip our caps to the Hoyas and then "next play."

GO DUKE!

Duvall
01-30-2010, 06:41 PM
How will Texas overcome their limitations in March- will they suddenly be able to shoot the ball? They have lost 2 games in a row on the road and just lost to Baylor at home. Texas is the same team as last year.

Well, I think Avery Bradley makes them more than they were last year. Then again, what they were last year wasn't much.

dukelifer
01-30-2010, 06:41 PM
They flew a private jet to DC. We're talking an hour door to door.

Yep- they took off at the runway behind Cameron and each player took a helicopter to the game site.

jhoagland
01-30-2010, 06:42 PM
Thank you. Sometimes while reading these boards that is the impression I get. I.E. Harrison Barnes.

dball
01-30-2010, 06:44 PM
just fyi, we played Georgetown at Georgetown in 2004 as well. Also 3 days after our last game. Here's how that turned out:

1/21 * at Maryland 1 College Park, Md. (Comcast Center) W 68-60 17,950 9 p.m. ESPN
1/24 at Georgetown 1 Washington, D.C. (MCI Center) W 85-66 20,193 2 p.m. CBS

Wasn't that the year stayed in the D.C. area? Hence no travel between the two. Or am I confusing with another year?

dukelifer
01-30-2010, 06:44 PM
Well, I think Avery Bradley makes them more than they were last year. Then again, what they were last year wasn't much.
Which Avery Bradley- the one who was 2-11 against Texas A&M or the one that scored 29 against Colorado. Duke may only be a sweet 16 team- but Texas did not even get that far.

sagegrouse
01-30-2010, 06:47 PM
Reminded me of the Villanova game last year. We are not going to beat a team like Georgetown. I would just hope we don't face them in the post-season. If we do happen to see a team like that, I just hope we try something drastically different. Every team has teams they don't matchup well against though so I'm not overly concerned at this point. I think the NCSU loss was a fluke and I don't put that in the same bucket as this one. As long as we bounce back, I still think we are in the position of being a very good team who will need some breaks to get to the Final Four. I really doubt this team is as "bad" as the last few year's teams have been.

I would look forward to playing the Hoyas again. Did you watch Georgetown sleep-walk through the game Monday night at the Carrier Dome? This is by far the best this team has played. Their fans would be delirious if the team plays this well 3-4 more times.

I thought we were in it in the first half and trailing only because they couldn't miss a shot (77%) and we were shooting 33%. I know, I know -- the defense could have been better. But they couldn't miss! If we hadn't played fairly well, we would have trailed by 20.

In the second half, after we hit that 6-minute dry spell, we began to play awful, making mistake after mistake and giving up TOs and fastbreaks end on end.

We had no answer for Greg Monroe. [Sigh!]

For the game, Georgetown shot 27 for 33 inside the arc (78%!). From 3-pt range, the Hoyas couldn't miss in the 1st half but made only 1-for-6 in the 2nd.

sagegrouse

houstondukie
01-30-2010, 06:47 PM
The effort was there, but we just didn't play very smart.

This team is what it is. It's essentially no different from the team of the last couple of years, and will probably end the season is very similar manner in March.

This is a very flawed team.

I agree, and we shouldn't be surprised since that was what we knew before the season started. This season is one of Coach K's best coaching seasons. No way I would of thought this team would be in the top 10 all season long, up until this point of course.

dukelifer
01-30-2010, 06:49 PM
Hi,


Please stop! The people who keep writing in that our bigs need to be taught to keep the ball up, well they know. It was on the Mike Kryzyzewski Show this morning where one of the players, think it was Z, talked about the Coaches (Wojo) are teaching that, but he did not do a good job of following it. In the locker room Lance said that everything that happened today the Coaches had prepared them for. Please, we had a horrible game today. Tip our caps to the Hoyas and then "next play."

GO DUKE!
Are you sure the coaches are teaching them to keep the ball high? I am pretty sure K and his guys work on turning the ball over in traffic and missing wide open threes. Clearly that is what Duke did today and it must be what the coaches are teaching them. Can't be any other explanation for what is happening out there. (sarcasm folks)

Wander
01-30-2010, 06:50 PM
How will Texas overcome their limitations in March- will they suddenly be able to shoot the ball? They have lost 2 games in a row on the road and just lost to Baylor at home. Texas is the same team as last year.

Texas has one of the best freshman classes in the country. They're much better than last year by any reasonable metric, even with their recent losses.

WhiteboardGuy
01-30-2010, 06:54 PM
Yep- they took off at the runway behind Cameron and each player took a helicopter to the game site.

How do you figure? 15 minutes to RDU, 30 minutes to DC, 15 to the hotel. Plus the managers handle all the bags and equipment. So yes, it literally takes them about an hour or so.

Virginian
01-30-2010, 06:56 PM
Let's just hope that we show up with the same fire and energy after this loss that Georgetown did after their last debacle.

Losing to the No. 7 team isn't a crime, losing without giving much of a fight is worrisome however. Let's just bring it for the rest of the season and put this behind us.

Please.

dukelifer
01-30-2010, 06:57 PM
Texas has one of the best freshman classes in the country. They're much better than last year by any reasonable metric, even with their recent losses.

From what I am reading in this thread- you are only as good as your last few games.

devildeac
01-30-2010, 06:57 PM
They flew a private jet to DC. We're talking an hour door to door.

Try timing it from the time they leave their dorms to the time they arrive at their hotel and then get to the Verizon Center for their practice there, should they choose to practice there instead of at CIS. We can quibble about 3 vs 4 hours but they can't get from Derm to their door in DC, whether it be the visitors locker room at the VC or their hotel in an hour.

BlueintheFace
01-30-2010, 06:59 PM
I too would like another shot at Georgetown.

WhiteboardGuy
01-30-2010, 07:05 PM
Try timing it from the time they leave their dorms to the time they arrive at their hotel and then get to the Verizon Center for their practice there, should they choose to practice there instead of at CIS. We can quibble about 3 vs 4 hours but they can't get from Derm to their door in DC, whether it be the visitors locker room at the VC or their hotel in an hour.

Last point I'll make about this, but starting from the time they leave their dorms is moot because if it was a home game they would need to go to Cameron anyway for practice (not only that, the dorm the sophomore+ players live on in West is maybe a five minute stroll from the arena). Also, the managers set things up in the hotel while the team goes right to the arena to practice--the players aren't waiting in line to check in and unpack. They have things down to a science.

dukelifer
01-30-2010, 07:11 PM
I would look forward to playing the Hoyas again. Did you watch Georgetown sleep-walk through the game Monday night at the Carrier Dome? This is by far the best this team has played. Their fans would be delirious if the team plays this well 3-4 more times.

I thought we were in it in the first half and trailing only because they couldn't miss a shot (77%) and we were shooting 33%. I know, I know -- the defense could have been better. But they couldn't miss! If we hadn't played fairly well, we would have trailed by 20.

In the second half, after we hit that 6-minute dry spell, we began to play awful, making mistake after mistake and giving up TOs and fastbreaks end on end.

We had no answer for Greg Monroe. [Sigh!]

For the game, Georgetown shot 27 for 33 inside the arc (78%!). From 3-pt range, the Hoyas couldn't miss in the 1st half but made only 1-for-6 in the 2nd.

sagegrouse
I wager to bet that if Georgetown gets 5 days between games- shoots 72% from here on out they will win the NC. But of course, they have no bench (only 6 guys with double digit minutes) and will get tired in March- so in the end they will be lucky to be sweet 16 team. Duke caught a rested, need-a-win-in-a-big-way team at home and got taken to school. It happens.

BD80
01-30-2010, 07:16 PM
Nolan was just awful. If someone said he spent last night out late with family/friends visiting/partying, I would completely believe it. He wasn't one of the 3 Ss. He was zzz.

Nolan was consistently late rotating back to defend the fast break, and often lost his man on D (and not because he was helping somewhere else). What really bothered me was his total lack of on-ball pressure. I lost count of assists that came from his man into traffic. Such passes would be nigh on impossible if Nolan was in his man's face and had his hands in position. Several times, Nolan was 6 feet out of position on those passes.

It seemed that the only time Nolan was paying attention was when he had the ball. Poor shooting or getting beat on D doesn't bother me, but poor effort does. Nolan's effort today was poor.

The good news is, I can't imagine Nolan playing that poorly again. You might see more of Andre if he does.

It looked to me like Miles was way too nervous (thanks Mr President!). I remember the early sequence when he put up a 20 footer with over 20 seconds left on the clock and then made a mistake on D at the other end. Sure enough, Z got off the bench. Miles is learning, but has a ways to go. I luaghed when Singler shoved him back into the paint one possession when Miles tried to show defensively on Kyle's man outside of the 3point line.

It takes a great team or a very good team on a hot streak to win it all. We could get hot enough with this team to win it all.

I am still convinced that the game today was a dream. My evidence? I agreed with everything Clark Kellog said, and found myself thinking that Clark was doing a very good job! Pinch me, I MUST be dreaming!

Kfanarmy
01-30-2010, 07:20 PM
Let's please refrain from the I love our guys so so much the most in the whole worldest drivel.

This team has been knocked out harder than Trevor Berbick twice in the last four games, I mean smashed in ... the ... face. Hopefully, Coach takes them through defensive slide and ball handling drill hell the next couple of days and makes them earn that jersey..
That'll be great for their legs on Wednesday!!!

seriously, I can understand folks believing that more minutes in-game would help the bench players contribute, but can't for the life of me understand why folks believe that 40 minutes in a game is worse than having two less days to rest than another team.

I thought they lost the game in about a four minute period toward the end of the first half when they took the lead briefly then shot three or so missed threes and turned the ball over a couple of times. Gtown played a good game, but Duke's poor shooting and turnovers really allowed the runouts and layups to happen, and shook the Duke players a bit. after that it was, by score at least, an even game. They were mostly open shots that were missed during that period, but you can't miss four outside shots in a row and allow the other team to score each time.

Newton_14
01-30-2010, 07:24 PM
Nolan was just awful. If someone said he spent last night out late with family/friends visiting/partying, I would completely believe it. He wasn't one of the 3 Ss. He was zzz.

Nolan was consistently late rotating back to defend the fast break, and often lost his man on D (and not because he was helping somewhere else). What really bothered me was his total lack of on-ball pressure. I lost count of assists that came from his man into traffic. Such passes would be nigh on impossible if Nolan was in his man's face and had his hands in position. Several times, Nolan was 6 feet out of position on those passes.

It seemed that the only time Nolan was paying attention was when he had the ball. Poor shooting or getting beat on D doesn't bother me, but poor effort does. Nolan's effort today was poor.

The good news is, I can't imagine Nolan playing that poorly again. You might see more of Andre if he does.

It looked to me like Miles was way too nervous (thanks Mr President!). I remember the early sequence when he put up a 20 footer with over 20 seconds left on the clock and then made a mistake on D at the other end. Sure enough, Z got off the bench. Miles is learning, but has a ways to go. I luaghed when Singler shoved him back into the paint one possession when Miles tried to show defensively on Kyle's man outside of the 3point line.

It takes a great team or a very good team on a hot streak to win it all. We could get hot enough with this team to win it all.

I am still convinced that the game today was a dream. My evidence? I agreed with everything Clark Kellog said, and found myself thinking that Clark was doing a very good job! Pinch me, I MUST be dreaming!

In defense of Nolan, he likely was with family last night as his grandfather passed away this week. Plus he was playing in his hometown which can cause one to put pressure on himself. It was not one of his better games for sure, though he did play better in the 2nd half. But it is tough to play well when all of your teammates are out of sync.

Not trying to make it excuses. It was a bad day all the way around. Just feel maybe Nolan had other things on his mind that hurt his focus.

dukelifer
01-30-2010, 07:26 PM
It takes a great team or a very good team on a hot streak to win it all. We could get hot enough with this team to win it all.


This team has elements of the Duke teams of the late 80's where they got spanked 4 out of 5 games in late Jan early Feb and then pulled it together late and got to the final four.

Troublemaker
01-30-2010, 07:26 PM
I continue to be surprised at how seldom we are using Kyle Singler in the post. I wish there were a website that charts individual plays in college basketball (I know that's a monumental task, but maybe the site can start with just the BCS teams). Am I crazy or has Duke been extremely successful this season when Singler gets the ball in the post? I mean, we've probably only posted him up 20 times all season (and none in the Georgetown game that I can recall) but I bet 15 out of those 20 times, he either scored or something good happened. This offense has been poor away from home this season, and I think it needs to focus more on getting the ball into Kyle against shorter, smaller players on the block. Especially early in the game, if he can get a few buckets scoring inside, then he gains confidence and Duke forces the opponent to adjust. If the defense switches a bigger player onto Singler, then all of a sudden he can use his perimeter skills again like he did the past two seasons. Bottom line, Kyle should be a matchup problem but he isn't or hasn't been yet while playing almost exclusively on the perimeter against other wings. We need to punish those wings more on the block.

This Duke team can improve upon where it stands right now, but a lot of its potential improvement or upside is contained in getting Singler to play like a star. I hate to harp so much on it, but in essence, the biggest difference between any high preseason expectations for Duke and the more subdued current expectations for Duke is Singler. Most of us thought he'd play like an All-American, and if you had told me that instead he'd only play like a good player, I would've thought Duke would struggle. I still think there's plenty of season left for him to go from good to great, but the coaches can probably help him out a bit by taking more advantage of his good size and postscoring ability at the 3 position.

airowe
01-30-2010, 07:26 PM
As someone has already pointed out, our so-called good wins aren't looking so good right now.:(

Gonzaga.

weezie
01-30-2010, 08:37 PM
This Duke team can improve upon where it stands right now, but a lot of its potential improvement or upside is contained in getting Singler to play like a star.

But, he is playing as the heart and engine of this team already. He's doubling on opposing centers and then often covering the shooting guard. He's being asked to do so much, move so widely and then score at will? During today's game I spent lots of time just watching him with binoculars (wasn't much else to distract me) and he's directing traffic at both ends, too. He's clearly our most talented player, as you say, but he's unable to shoulder the dead weight that this team sometime turns into.
Battier had his Duhon and Williams and Dunleavy and Boozer. Who does Kyle have to rely on?

gumbomoop
01-30-2010, 08:50 PM
You know they talk about how there is no true dominant team this year and really anyone can win it ranked 1-10, maybe top 15 even. Duke proved today that they shouldn't be considered one of those teams. I'm really in doubt on how this season will go. We look good in some games, downright awful in others. There isn't a team in the ACC that couldn't beat us thoroughly if they shoot like Gtown and State. Kyrie Irving needs to get here SOON!

I enter this thread with more than a little trepidation, for there's a helluva lot of friendly fire after a loss. Shoot [to coin a phrase], there's a fair amount of it when our guys win!

Anyhow, RW, allow me to disagree, respectfully. Surely you will rethink the idea that Duke isn't a likely top-15. I can see that, come Monday, the FSU win will have understandably dimmed, in view of the dismal G'town debacle, thus pushing the Devils down to, say, 12. And admitting that the ACC is yet wide open, I'm pressed to think who should be, even now, at this lowdown moment, favored above the Devils in conference. We'll sure know more late Thurs eve.

I could see an argument that it'll be a 4-way tie at 10-6, and assuming Duke is there, I guess I could see - could I?? - a top-15 with zero ACC teams. But maybe I couldn't, for even if one believes there are 3 teams the equivalent of '08-'09's UNC/UConn/Pitt - and I don't - that still means the next 10-12 teams are gonna lose some conf games, occasionally umbarrassingly [a sorta triple embarrassment, like Duke today].

While you're definitely correct that we'll get mugged by any conf teams that shoot like G'town and, alas, State, I am genuinely skeptical that this Duke team will lose again in this fashion. I don't doubt that they'll lose again in the ACC, but not because an opponent shoots and plays as wonderfully as G'town did today.

Finally, speaking of friendly fire, I assume it must be that so many posters are shell-shocked, for I'd have thought RK's performance today would have been used to bolster both sides of the "RK's minutes" debate: either (1) RK's not ready, as he showed today, or (2) if RK had gotten more experience in previous games, he wouldn't have played as he did today.

Today's game proves everything, or not much.

DukeDevilDeb
01-30-2010, 09:01 PM
But, he is playing as the heart and engine of this team already. He's doubling on opposing centers and then often covering the shooting guard. He's being asked to do so much, move so widely and then score at will? During today's game I spent lots of time just watching him with binoculars (wasn't much else to distract me) and he's directing traffic at both ends, too. He's clearly our most talented player, as you say, but he's unable to shoulder the dead weight that this team sometime turns into.
Battier had his Duhon and Williams and Dunleavy and Boozer. Who does Kyle have to rely on?

I would disagree with two of your statements. First, I don't think Kyle is the heart and engine of this team. He had a very long dry spell, and it seems to me that he overplays at times and makes terrible turnovers. He may be directing traffic at both ends, but I would really like him to concentrate on getting back to the place where people were saying he was a pre-season All American and ACC POY.

In every one of our championship games, we have had three absolutely outstanding players. The combo of Laettner, Hurley and Hill gave us our first two banners; the triad of Battier, Williams and...? Well, sometimes Dunleavy; sometimes Boozer; sometimes Nate; sometimes Duhon; sometimes others. But someone always stepped up so there was a third strong player.

You don't think we have three strong players this year? Do the names Singler, Scheyer and Smith ring any bells? In today's game, Kyle scored 18, Nolan scored 19, and Jon scored 17... no real statistical difference. And that's how it has been most of the season. In fact, when one of the "Big Three" (not my term and I'm not sure I like it) hasn't performed, it has more frequently been Kyle.

Now, please don't misunderstand. I think Kyle is a truly stunning player and has the capacity to do more than the vast majority of players. But in some ways, he reminds me of Duhon during his junior slump. Chris took the weight of the world on his shoulders and found it difficult to carry... but his senior season, he did all the things right that he hadn't performed well at the year before.

This whole point of this was that Kyle has some pretty darn good teammates! But nobody showed up to play defense today--nobody!

Dukeface88
01-30-2010, 09:11 PM
We've played one other team with a Princeton offense this year, specifically ASU. We looked sloppy that game too, but we got by on sheer talent. It seems to me that the players don't understand their assignments for the Princeton- which goes back to issue of preparation (or our help scheme is weak against it, or both). While the S's looked fine against Georgetown last year, they were all playing different roles then; and the rest of our current team played a combined 15 minutes in that game.

KyDevilinIL
01-30-2010, 09:16 PM
This team has elements of the Duke teams of the late 80's where they got spanked 4 out of 5 games in late Jan early Feb and then pulled it together late and got to the final four.

I agree, but i've wanted to believe such a turnaround was possible the last three years. I want to believe now, but I'm being realistic.

Past four games, it's alarming how far we have played under what I perceive our potential to be. And in two of those games, we never had a chance. I know some will argue that we were a stop or two or a shot or two from getting back into it. But the fact is that we didn't do those things, and we were never a threat to actually win today.

I don't know where the turnaround is gonna come from. Our offense, once again, revolves entirely around jump shots. We know that doesn't work in March. Our defense seems to be gradually disappearing, at least in terms of something we can count on night in and night out.

The teams that flip switches do so because they were losing while they are improving, working out kinks, etc. They are building toward something, then they start winning and everyone says a switch was flipped. But I don't know what we are building toward. I'd love to be enlightened by someone, but overall it sure seems like we're just a less efficient, less energetic and less confident version of what we were in November. And it's a bummer, because I really think we're capable of being so much better. We've seen it.

Devilsfan
01-30-2010, 09:21 PM
I didn't watch the game but got calls that said it looked like a new reality show entitled "men against boys". We need to get tougher on the road. We play all our games in late March "on the road".

Newton_14
01-30-2010, 09:23 PM
That'll be great for their legs on Wednesday!!!

I thought they lost the game in about a four minute period toward the end of the first half when they took the lead briefly then shot three or so missed threes and turned the ball over a couple of times. Gtown played a good game, but Duke's poor shooting and turnovers really allowed the runouts and layups to happen, and shook the Duke players a bit. after that it was, by score at least, an even game. They were mostly open shots that were missed during that period, but you can't miss four outside shots in a row and allow the other team to score each time.

What you touch on above is kind of how I saw it as well. We actually outscored GT 44-43 in the 2nd half. As bad as the defense was, and as good as GT shot the ball, I felt the turnovers is what killed us. Especially since so many of the turnovers were the kind that led to quick runouts and easy baskets. GT came out riding high with energy and emotion and we fed that ego with TO's leading to ESPN highlight reel fast breaks. That is a killer. It was the perfect storm.

Also, when they were in the midst of that run, like you said we took like 3 or 4 open 3's. To me that was not a good approach. Even given they were good looks. Sometimes, even, especially in a situation like that, it is a better idea to turn down that open look and instead attack the basket to score or draw fouls. The refs were calling almost everything in the paint today both ways. Had we chosen to drive and attack at that point in the game, it may have led to points, fouls on GT, and prevented the big run.

It may be we lose anyway, but I just thought the turnovers were killers and a different approach offensively during that key stretch may have changed things.

It's disappointing to get run like that in a big game, but there is a lot of basketball left to be played and this team still has a chance to improve and play better.

Wheat/"/"/"
01-30-2010, 09:32 PM
My .02 cents...

Georgetown played very well offensively. They made sound decisions off their dribble and finished.

They obviously shot it well too.

Defensively Georgetown took the wings out of the game, and Duke's game is all about the wings. Duke had no post threat to score which allowed GT to stay with the perimiter guys and not drop to double team. Did we see a clean entry pass to a big and a score the entire game? An attempt?

I also thought Duke's lack of overall team quickness really showed in this game.

Here's why.

This is a Duke team that is tough and scrappy. They like the pushing and the banging, the bodying up, it hides the lack of team quickness. And in LT's case, it hides his lack of size in the post.

Today, they ran into some refs that were not going to allow that sort of play from either team and Duke had to give some space. Offensively, the ball screening was not as strong as Duke likes, because they knew they would get called for it in this one. Scheyer and Singlar could not find space for clean looks or to create on their own without the tough screens, and Nolan just didn't have a good game.

GT was not all that quick either as a team, but they were quicker than Duke. Duke's defense had to give up the physical, aggressive "get in their space" D they like to use due to how the game was called.

Quickness that has space is a recipe for trouble against this Duke team.

I wouldn't be too worried about it. Not many teams will be in a game at GTown when they play that well.

Neals384
01-30-2010, 09:39 PM
I wouldn't draw any conclusions about Duke's chances for the rest of the year. GT played great, simply great. Sure, the Duke D wasn't very good, but GT had a tremendous amount of movement away from the ball, good dribble penetration, excellent passing, and lights out shooting. Duke should watch the tape and try to emulate the GT offense.

GT was clearly the better team today, because they played well as a team. But except for Monroe, they do not have better talent. With better team play, Duke can become much better than GT. I hope we play 'em again in the tourney.

Coballs
01-30-2010, 09:39 PM
This team has elements of the Duke teams of the late 80's where they got spanked 4 out of 5 games in late Jan early Feb and then pulled it together late and got to the final four.

And what are those elements?

Kedsy
01-30-2010, 10:01 PM
And what are those elements?

Lack of consistency from the big men; no "true" center who is a threat on offense; PG lacking blow-by quickness; inconsistent defensive effort; played some really good games but lost to the only ranked OOC team they played; lost 4 of 5 games from 1/18 to 2/2, including getting badly blown out twice and also losing to two unranked teams.

Sound familiar? I'm talking, of course, about the 1989 team that went to the Final Four. They also lost 2 of their last 3 going into the ACC tournament.

Obviously lightning doesn't necessarily strike twice, and I'd personally prefer if we didn't see such a poor defensive showing again anytime soon, but two bad games out of four in mid- to late-January doesn't mean the team has no future or isn't any good. It just means the team has some issues that need to be worked out.

77devil
01-30-2010, 10:05 PM
You mean like the 1991 Duke championship team that lost to UNC by 22 in the ACC Tourney final?

I hope your not suggesting that this is a meaningful comparison.

dukelifer
01-30-2010, 10:05 PM
And what are those elements?

A large number of big guys- none great (Abdelnaby, Laettner, Buckley, Burgin, Palmer vs, Kelly, Plumlee, Plumlee, Zoubek)- A forward who can score and bound (Ferry vs Singler), a decent but streaky shooting guard (Henderson vs Smith), a defensive minded forward (Brickey vs Thomas), a tall point guard (Snyder vs Scheyer). This team was all over the place- had some blowouts and were blownout. Showed very good D at times and sometimes not. The team started number 1 and then dropped as low as 14 and then got it back. Ferry was outstanding that year- but the rest of the team was not quite at his level although eventually some got very good (Laettner). Singler is not having the Ferry season that many expected- averaging 20+ per game and that has been an issue for this team's performance. The 88-89 Devils were a good team that faded mid season and then pulled it together late. Not a perfect match but you get the picture.

Kewlswim
01-30-2010, 10:11 PM
Hi,

Let's just say you nay-sayers are right! Duke can't win anymore. We aren't going to play in any elite-8's, Final Four's forget it. Going to the ACC Championship...ha...NCAA Chamionship BE Serious! Let's just say you are all "right" (not that I am agreeing, just trying to make a point). It feels like many of you are going to stop rooting for the Devils if they don't "turn it around." Perhaps it is just me, but even if the Devils were at the bottom of the ACC for the remainder of my life I would still root for them unabashedly and to the point of repeatedly going hoarse. I am willing to tip my cap to a team that beats us, but I am not going to stop loving the Devils.

If you guys want to give constructive criticism, I am happy to hear it. Nobody promises us anything, we have to take it. Jon, Kyle, Nolan, Mason and the rest of the gang hate losing. Coach K hates losing. We have played one hard and physical game after another. These kids are learning what it means to bring it every night. We are learning that winning is hard and every win is precious.

I am still and will always be proud of our Duke Blue Devils! Thanks guys, from one class to another, for giving me many years of joy. I am so happy to be a Blue Devil. :)

GO DUKE!

devil84
01-30-2010, 10:37 PM
To all posters in this thread: many posts have been deleted tonight. We don't have time to individually notify you of why your post was deleted. Some reminders to everyone of a few rules around here:

* Do not attack the poster. Instead, refute the poster's content with reasons and facts.
* Discuss your frustrations with the game in a constructive, reasoned manner. Nobody's asking you to be a Pollyanna. We do ask that you do not make statements that trash the team, coaches, and staff.
* Refrain from discussing politics.

If your post was deleted, it's likely due to one of the reasons listed above.

If you find an offensive post, do not hesitate to report it using the Report Post button (the red triangle button in the header of the post).

sagegrouse
01-30-2010, 10:49 PM
a. We outrebounded GU or G'town (not GT, for heaven's sake) 32-22 and on the offensive board, 17-2!

b. Of course, just like Scheyer can't record an assist unless someone, anyone puts the stinking ball in the hole, Duke missed 39 shots and GU missed only 13. So, the Hoyas couldn't have gotten 17 offensive RBs.:)

sagegrouse

Verga3
01-30-2010, 11:01 PM
Georgetown is a very good team that shot a historical % against another top 10 team on their home court. Congrats to the Hoyas! Could we have played better D or shot better....of course. Are we done now.....no. Learn and play the next game.

I did enjoy watching Mason Plumlee's steal from just inside midcourt and attacking on his own to an emphatic two-handed slam dunk finish near the end of the game....good things to come, dukies.

NYDukie
01-30-2010, 11:02 PM
Ok, here goes! Went into this afternoon both anxious and excited to watch the game, figuring it would be a battle. One that Duke would win or lose in the last couple of minutes. However, I came away as frustrated as I have been all year and probably the past few years. Maybe its because of the expectations I had of this team. I honestly thought this team was better than last years and had shot at the Final 4, maybe a championship. Did I or do I think they are favorites? No, but I thought they had a shot. I'm not going to sit here with "Duke glasses" on and make things seem ok and all is grand in Duke land nor am I about to say this team sucks, they're an embarrassment or anything like that. I will though make some critical observations.

1. NBA talent - in general, NBA talent is prevelant on championship teams, usually 2 or 3 players that start and one or two off the bench that may be frosh or sophs. G'Town by virtue of having a lottery pick in Monroe made a huge difference. Duke 2001 had JWill, Batter, Dunleavy, Boozer, Duhon - Floride had Noah, Horford, Brewer - UNC each of their years had upwards of 4+ guys - UCONN had Okafor, Gordon, Villaneuva, Boone. I think you get the hint. When I look at this Duke team, do I see NBA talent? To me, it's questionable at best. I love Scheyer but I don't see a NBA rotation guy. Singler probably has no NBA position as he is NBA 3 1/2. Mason? Maybe but he isn't really being productive enough this year to help the cause. Nolan, maybe the best shot IMO, similar to a Rodney Stuckey IMO but more as a 3rd guard type. All the above are good players but not NBA types.

2. Athleticism - lack thereof stands out against the top teams, especially on teh road and at true "neutral" sites that do not include MSG, Meadowlands or Chicage which are quasi-Duke home games. At games at Cameron, the lack thereof is mitigated by the overwhelming support of the Crazies which helps pump the team up not one but more than one level. Today I felt that Monroe, Wright and Freemand ran circles around their defenders and honestly felt there big 3 to be better than ours now, though slightly overall. I had thought otherwise initially.

3. Post presence - yes we have more big man depth this year but none provides a consistent post presence. When the outside shots are falling, or when we are having trouble getting to the basket there is no one to say, go post up and lets drop it down there for a nice drop step, turn around jumper or baby hook. There is nothing there. And now that it appears over the last 5 games or so that the team is falling in love more with the 3 point shot, I this this lack of post presence becomes more apparant. Although Monroe is more a perimeter big man, he did at least provide a presence during certain sets.

I think these are the main issues. Unfortunately, I don't this any of these can be fixed now but only over the next few years with recruiting. Do we need all 3 to win? No but one or two need to be addressed to be able to meet the expectations of everyone.

Do I now temper my expectations? Probably a bit! I still see a Sweet 16 team but one that could as easily lose in the 2nd round as it could find itself in the Elite 8 depending on matchups. I do at this moment fear the 2nd round loss more so than think they can get to the Elite 8.

At to my fellow posters, don't be embarrassed by team. That is harsh! Frustrated is fine but not embarrassed.

sagegrouse
01-30-2010, 11:03 PM
Why single out the interior play? The perimeter effort was no better.

This is just flatly not a very good team right now. The defense is so bad we're capable of giving up 100 points to anyone we play, and it looks like there are 4-5 different agendas on the floor at any given time on offense.

At the same time, the two games against Clemson and the WF beatdown were vintage performances by a very, very tough team.

This edition ofthe Devils seems to be more up-and-down than any in memory.

sagegrouse

sagegrouse
01-30-2010, 11:05 PM
My thoughts: we need a real point guard... we need a big man...most of all we need some toughness

I think we have a pretty good team, but I sure would like to have Greg Monroe suiting up for the Devils.

sagegrouse

JBDuke
01-30-2010, 11:26 PM
I hope your not suggesting that this is a meaningful comparison.

No, I'm not comparing this team to Duke's 1991 team. The OP stated that his theory was that no championship team gets blown out by 20 or more in their season, so I provided some historical context.

rotogod00
01-30-2010, 11:27 PM
kyrie irving will prove to be duke's most important recruit in a half dozen years. his ability to break down the defense will provide us with a dimension on offense we haven't seen in a long, long time. not sure we've had an easy basket in the half-court set since jason williams.

Wildcat
01-30-2010, 11:29 PM
Our true depth and scoring left last year and earlier this year. Can you say Marty Pocius (5th year) and Olek Cyz? Both scorers with passion, energy, vocal potential and a tremendous capacity to score in a variety of ways/at the rim, from three, create own shot, and in Oleks case; tough. There's our depth.

Verga3
01-30-2010, 11:38 PM
I agree, but i've wanted to believe such a turnaround was possible the last three years. I want to believe now, but I'm being realistic.

Past four games, it's alarming how far we have played under what I perceive our potential to be. And in two of those games, we never had a chance. I know some will argue that we were a stop or two or a shot or two from getting back into it. But the fact is that we didn't do those things, and we were never a threat to actually win today.

I don't know where the turnaround is gonna come from. Our offense, once again, revolves entirely around jump shots. We know that doesn't work in March. Our defense seems to be gradually disappearing, at least in terms of something we can count on night in and night out.

The teams that flip switches do so because they were losing while they are improving, working out kinks, etc. They are building toward something, then they start winning and everyone says a switch was flipped. But I don't know what we are building toward. I'd love to be enlightened by someone, but overall it sure seems like we're just a less efficient, less energetic and less confident version of what we were in November. And it's a bummer, because I really think we're capable of being so much better. We've seen it.

Hang in....I feel you. It's been pretty choppy lately. My belief is that Coach K and the staff have the best feel for what needs to happen to make a serious run in the NCAA this year. Consistent, smothering Duke D is one thing, as you address....and our shots will fall again. Dre got a few more minutes today and Mason is progressing. If these guys continue to gain confidence and learn more about the mental and physical chops it takes to excell, we will get better. Our veterans will be fine, and am sure they realize what needs to be done. I'm confident in this team's present abilities....and even more so in what is to come!

77devil
01-30-2010, 11:51 PM
Our true depth and scoring left last year and earlier this year. Can you say Marty Pocius (5th year) and Olek Cyz? Both scorers with passion, energy, vocal potential and a tremendous capacity to score in a variety of ways/at the rim, from three, create own shot, and in Oleks case; tough. There's our depth.

I thought this thread had plumed the depths of what this team may be missing until I read the above. We all wish Marty and Olek had achieved the expectation they arrived with. But they are not the answer. Not even close.

ice-9
01-31-2010, 12:22 AM
No, I'm not comparing this team to Duke's 1991 team. The OP stated that his theory was that no championship team gets blown out by 20 or more in their season, so I provided some historical context.

You have to admit though it's quite rare for a championship team to get blown out by more than 20 points in their season. I see now that it happens, but I'm guessing it doesn't happen very often.

Vincetaylor
01-31-2010, 12:26 AM
Ok, here goes! Went into this afternoon both anxious and excited to watch the game, figuring it would be a battle. One that Duke would win or lose in the last couple of minutes. However, I came away as frustrated as I have been all year and probably the past few years. Maybe its because of the expectations I had of this team. I honestly thought this team was better than last years and had shot at the Final 4, maybe a championship. Did I or do I think they are favorites? No, but I thought they had a shot. I'm not going to sit here with "Duke glasses" on and make things seem ok and all is grand in Duke land nor am I about to say this team sucks, they're an embarrassment or anything like that. I will though make some critical observations.

1. NBA talent - in general, NBA talent is prevelant on championship teams, usually 2 or 3 players that start and one or two off the bench that may be frosh or sophs. G'Town by virtue of having a lottery pick in Monroe made a huge difference. Duke 2001 had JWill, Batter, Dunleavy, Boozer, Duhon - Floride had Noah, Horford, Brewer - UNC each of their years had upwards of 4+ guys - UCONN had Okafor, Gordon, Villaneuva, Boone. I think you get the hint. When I look at this Duke team, do I see NBA talent? To me, it's questionable at best. I love Scheyer but I don't see a NBA rotation guy. Singler probably has no NBA position as he is NBA 3 1/2. Mason? Maybe but he isn't really being productive enough this year to help the cause. Nolan, maybe the best shot IMO, similar to a Rodney Stuckey IMO but more as a 3rd guard type. All the above are good players but not NBA types.

2. Athleticism - lack thereof stands out against the top teams, especially on teh road and at true "neutral" sites that do not include MSG, Meadowlands or Chicage which are quasi-Duke home games. At games at Cameron, the lack thereof is mitigated by the overwhelming support of the Crazies which helps pump the team up not one but more than one level. Today I felt that Monroe, Wright and Freemand ran circles around their defenders and honestly felt there big 3 to be better than ours now, though slightly overall. I had thought otherwise initially.

3. Post presence - yes we have more big man depth this year but none provides a consistent post presence. When the outside shots are falling, or when we are having trouble getting to the basket there is no one to say, go post up and lets drop it down there for a nice drop step, turn around jumper or baby hook. There is nothing there. And now that it appears over the last 5 games or so that the team is falling in love more with the 3 point shot, I this this lack of post presence becomes more apparant. Although Monroe is more a perimeter big man, he did at least provide a presence during certain sets.

I think these are the main issues. Unfortunately, I don't this any of these can be fixed now but only over the next few years with recruiting. Do we need all 3 to win? No but one or two need to be addressed to be able to meet the expectations of everyone.

Do I now temper my expectations? Probably a bit! I still see a Sweet 16 team but one that could as easily lose in the 2nd round as it could find itself in the Elite 8 depending on matchups. I do at this moment fear the 2nd round loss more so than think they can get to the Elite 8.

At to my fellow posters, don't be embarrassed by team. That is harsh! Frustrated is fine but not embarrassed.

Good points and I agree with you. A Patterson or Monroe on this team would be nice(or Elliot and Gerald).

pfrduke
01-31-2010, 12:33 AM
Our true depth and scoring left last year and earlier this year. Can you say Marty Pocius (5th year) and Olek Cyz? Both scorers with passion, energy, vocal potential and a tremendous capacity to score in a variety of ways/at the rim, from three, create own shot, and in Oleks case; tough. There's our depth.

Olek played 111 minutes at Duke. In that time, he had 23 points and 11 turnovers, and shot 10 for 25. I'm not sure he ever displayed a "tremendous capacity to score" during his time here.

UrinalCake
01-31-2010, 12:38 AM
I know this has been said ad nauseum, but we are too reliant on the three. We are simply not a great three-point shooting team and shouldn't be constructing our offense around it. Not only does shooting a lot of threes leave you vulnerable for a "cold" game, but it doesn't force the other team to work on defense at all. With each missed shot their confidence grows as they feel we're simply afraid to challenge them. On our end, the big guys are asked simply to screen and rebound, so it's tough for them to really feel involved.

Even in the second half when we were down by around 10 or so, I didn't think we needed to panic and shoot so many threes. I do recognize that we did a good job working the ball and getting some open looks, and if those had gone it we'd have been in decent shape. Still, the big guys need to get more touches.

Let me say that I'm not in the camp that believes you can shoot threes some games, but then when they're not falling you should stop and do other things. I think you need to define your identity. And this team's identity should NOT be one that hoists 29 threes a game.

dukemsu
01-31-2010, 12:54 AM
A few thoughts:

1. Perhaps one or two teams could have beaten the Hoyas in that environment today with them playing at that level. Duke isn't one of them.
The Hoyas wereelectric, and clearly they had been pointing to this game for a long time.

2. The "not athletic" stuff to me is a cop-out. Miles and Mason can match almost anyone in that area. The problem isn't that Duke doesn't have athletic players. It certainly wasn't a problem against Clemson, Florida State or UConn. The problem is that today, several players didn't execute. Miles and Mason have to be excellent for Duke to beat teams like Georgetown. They fought hard but consistently got caught in bad positions at both ends of the floor.

3. This team has advantages over many teams. However, they have problems with dribble penetration defensively, and it sure seems like a good zone defense could help. However, people wishing Duke could play Syracuse's 2-3 zone are being shortsighted. The zone Syracuse plays has multiple variations, and it's as much a way of life at Syracuse as the overplay man to man is at Duke. Expecting Duke to run a zone defense at that level if they don't commit to it as a program is simply unrealistic.

I don't believe that mystical intangibles like leadership and desire are lacking with this team. The team does have structural flaws that can be exploited by teams who match up a certain way. That's what happened today. I don't think that's anything that can be switched up by having someone yell and scream at them (I believe the post that made a point saying that players yelling and screaming does not correlate to "leadership" was deleted, but I heartily second that point) or by Olek or Marty still being around. If they were the answers, they'd still be here.

I'm backing this group, and I think they present problems for many, many teams. Today didn't change that.

dukemsu

DukeBlood
01-31-2010, 12:57 AM
Some of you need to relax. One game in January will not make or break this Duke team. Ever think of giving credit to JTIII and Georgetown? They played beautifully. They made Duke pay for mistakes(which they had a number of).. Still, They hit everything. This season is FAR from over! Is this a championship team? I personally dont think so, but they are a very good team that if they get hot.. You never know.

For the posters that have given up and are looking towards next year, You could do us(or me) a favor and just disappear til after the season. Maybe im being too harsh by saying some of these things, but you guys act like this Duke team doesn't deserve to be ranked in the Top-25.

I don't have alot of things to say about the game that haven't been said so Congrats to Georgetown.

dukemsu
01-31-2010, 01:00 AM
Stewart Mandel has already got a piece up on SI about today's game and he isn't being very kind to the team.

Whatever. Mandel is a football writer who knows jack about basketball. He didn't even cover college basketball last year.

dukemsu

pfrduke
01-31-2010, 01:15 AM
I know this has been said ad nauseum, but we are too reliant on the three. We are simply not a great three-point shooting team and shouldn't be constructing our offense around it. Not only does shooting a lot of threes leave you vulnerable for a "cold" game, but it doesn't force the other team to work on defense at all. With each missed shot their confidence grows as they feel we're simply afraid to challenge them. On our end, the big guys are asked simply to screen and rebound, so it's tough for them to really feel involved.

Even in the second half when we were down by around 10 or so, I didn't think we needed to panic and shoot so many threes. I do recognize that we did a good job working the ball and getting some open looks, and if those had gone it we'd have been in decent shape. Still, the big guys need to get more touches.

Let me say that I'm not in the camp that believes you can shoot threes some games, but then when they're not falling you should stop and do other things. I think you need to define your identity. And this team's identity should NOT be one that hoists 29 threes a game.

For what it's worth, this team's identity is not one that hoists 29 threes a game. Actually, we hoist just under 20 a game, and those 20 represent only 32% of our overall shot attempts. We actually take fewer threes in ACC play - 17 a game, and just 29.4% of our shots. Overreliance on the 3 isn't even a hallmark of our losses; yes, today we shot a lot from outside, but across our 4 losses we've only shot 36% of our attempts from 3, which still is not that highly reliant.

This is not a team that lives and dies by the three. It does, however, do a lot of jump shooting. We need to get a lot more layups and dunks, and shoot a lot fewer 15 footers. If we want to reduce jump shots, it's the one's between the paint and the 3-point line that we should minimize, and not the 3s.

greybeard
01-31-2010, 01:21 AM
1. Georgetown played terrifically. Flawlessly. Have to think that their focus was helped by two beatdowns, one at the hands of Syracuse which they might have been looking past because this was payback time, baby, and they were ready.

2. I don't like how this offense moves the ball. Three men occupy it way too much. The ball needs to enter and exit the post a couple of times a possession most of the time, eith on dribble or pass penetration. I cannot understand how few catches are made by bigs, and how little the offense depends on such catches.

3. Scheyer seemed to pull the string on his shots and, as one poster noticed last week, seems to make himself small after the catch which is a position to attack with force only he don't. He seems off balance in that position. They tried to post him some in the second half but no one seemed comfortable.

My thought, if you don't worry, stress the other team with your offense, and actually give up easy ones off of give ups, it's hard to play good d.

I think Duke was looking past Georgetown. I think that they really want Tech. I know that I would. I'm predicting a very different showing against Tech. I'm predicting Duke wins.

pfrduke
01-31-2010, 01:29 AM
My thought, if you don't worry, stress the other team with your offense, and actually give up easy ones off of give ups, it's hard to play good d.

This may not have been what you meant, but one thing I've noticed is that we don't do a good job on offense dictating what's going to happen. We too often let the defense decide what is available, and just take what the defense leaves open, rather than try to impose a certain result on the defense and make them react.

UrinalCake
01-31-2010, 02:12 AM
This is not a team that lives and dies by the three. It does, however, do a lot of jump shooting.

Well stated, and I agree with your points however I personally feel that shooting threes on 30% of our shots is still too much. I guess it's more of a mindset issue for me. It seems like our first goal is to shoot a three or, as you say, a 15-foot jump shot. We never look for the bigs, and they only get the ball if it's off an offensive rebound or a broken play. Whenever a guard does happen to get into the lane, the defense can play for the pass because it's usually going to be kicked out; or if a shot is taken it's an off-balance runner. Perhaps our coaching staff has decided that a 15-foot jump shot is a higher percentage play than posting up inside, and I'm not one to argue with them, but after a day like today it just feels like we need to try something different.

dukelifer
01-31-2010, 09:07 AM
A few thoughts:

1. Perhaps one or two teams could have beaten the Hoyas in that environment today with them playing at that level. Duke isn't one of them.
The Hoyas wereelectric, and clearly they had been pointing to this game for a long time.

2. The "not athletic" stuff to me is a cop-out. Miles and Mason can match almost anyone in that area. The problem isn't that Duke doesn't have athletic players. It certainly wasn't a problem against Clemson, Florida State or UConn. The problem is that today, several players didn't execute. Miles and Mason have to be excellent for Duke to beat teams like Georgetown. They fought hard but consistently got caught in bad positions at both ends of the floor.

3. This team has advantages over many teams. However, they have problems with dribble penetration defensively, and it sure seems like a good zone defense could help. However, people wishing Duke could play Syracuse's 2-3 zone are being shortsighted. The zone Syracuse plays has multiple variations, and it's as much a way of life at Syracuse as the overplay man to man is at Duke. Expecting Duke to run a zone defense at that level if they don't commit to it as a program is simply unrealistic.

I don't believe that mystical intangibles like leadership and desire are lacking with this team. The team does have structural flaws that can be exploited by teams who match up a certain way. That's what happened today. I don't think that's anything that can be switched up by having someone yell and scream at them (I believe the post that made a point saying that players yelling and screaming does not correlate to "leadership" was deleted, but I heartily second that point) or by Olek or Marty still being around. If they were the answers, they'd still be here.

I'm backing this group, and I think they present problems for many, many teams. Today didn't change that.

dukemsu
I agree. Duke has the pieces- but those pieces are young up front. Miles and Mason need to be a bigger focus of the offense to be sure. There needs to be more passing and patience. I agree that Duke cannot zone- but they can mix it in and be effective. But Duke struggles with big strong guards and I do not see that changing. Still, Duke needs to get more effective scoring up front and developing that is important not just for this year but for future years. This needs to be the point of emphasis for this team. My sense is that Duke tried to do this yesterday and it quickly fell apart when Georgetown got on a roll. Once down, they reverted to what was comfortable.

Cockabeau
01-31-2010, 09:33 AM
I agree. We must try to integrate Miles and Mason into the offense. It just seems like teams are playing 5 vs. 3 again.
Thats not going to cut it in March.

They did a better job of feeding the post against Georgetown but it needs to continue.

oldnavy
01-31-2010, 09:38 AM
In defense of Nolan, he likely was with family last night as his grandfather passed away this week. Plus he was playing in his hometown which can cause one to put pressure on himself. It was not one of his better games for sure, though he did play better in the 2nd half. But it is tough to play well when all of your teammates are out of sync.

Not trying to make it excuses. It was a bad day all the way around. Just feel maybe Nolan had other things on his mind that hurt his focus.

I remember thinking that Nolan in particular was standing around a lot. He did seem to lack focus, so maybe this explains it.

We needed him for this game, but everyone has an off day or two. He has proven that he is a very, very good player, and I do not expect that he will have a repeat of Saturdays performance.

dukestheheat
01-31-2010, 09:44 AM
I was able to catch about 5 minutes of the game while in St. Maarten, and to me, based on what i could see over that stretch, the bottom-line is this:

'Town could have probably beaten any team out there yesterday, hitting shots like they did. Duke's D was there from what I could see: 'Town was 'on' and it was their destiny, yesterday. Frustrating for us? Of course. But does it really tell us a whole lot about our team, about our guys? I don't think so. This game is like that one test in a class that stands out in terms of grading; this game showed an opponent shooting the lights way out and 'blowing the curve'. So, we should throw it out in terms of a final say, a final look.

That is the way it goes, with us or with anybody.

Next play.

dukestheheat.

camion
01-31-2010, 09:57 AM
Georgetown played good.

Duke didn't play good.


Breaking it down into specific areas the analysis above suffices.

Wildcat
01-31-2010, 10:05 AM
wanted to say that Olek and Marty possessed the very same skills we need on offense. The reason they left was because of playing time; not because they couldn't contribute. Anyone who is/was a player of the game knew that these two players were scorers. Quote all the stats you want; there used to be a form of expression used coming up that "game recognizes game." Those two defensive liability players could take the ball to the rim and dunk on you with authority, athletic ability, energy and passion. Don't know about you but: I think that would be a great addition to the current skill sets of Mase and Miles; Kyle and Lance; Nolan and Jon; even Dre and Kelly.

They're gone now, so my point is quasi-irrelevant. Hopefully we can find some additional scoring from our bigs when our threes are not going in. Again, it just pains me to a point because: I really feel that Marty a fifth year senior could've provided something for us at this juncture. And Olek was a human highlight reel. One poster said we need easier baskets, more dunks, transitions etc. etc.., those two players had that capacity. I'm through, I promise; just having a catharsis moment.

dukelifer
01-31-2010, 10:15 AM
wanted to say that Olek and Marty possessed the very same skills we need on offense. The reason they left was because of playing time; not because they couldn't contribute. Anyone who is/was a player of the game knew that these two players were scorers. Quote all the stats you want; there used to be a form of expression used coming up that "game recognizes game." Those two defensive liability players could take the ball to the rim and dunk on you with authority, athletic ability, energy and passion. Don't know about you but: I think that would be a great addition to the current skill sets of Mase and Miles; Kyle and Lance; Nolan and Jon; even Dre and Kelly.

They're gone now, so my point is quasi-irrelevant. Hopefully we can find some additional scoring from our bigs when our threes are not going in. Again, it just pains me to a point because: I really feel that Marty a fifth year senior could've provided something for us at this juncture. And Olek was a human highlight reel. One poster said we need easier baskets, more dunks, transitions etc. etc.., those two players had that capacity. I'm through, I promise; just having a catharsis moment.

I am pretty sure Marty decided to leave before the team knew they were going to lose Elliot Williams. Marty saw Elliot in front of him and with degree in hand- it was time to follow his dream of playing in Europe. Elliot would have also brought a significant skill set to this team- but things happen.

Genedoc
01-31-2010, 10:18 AM
wanted to say that Olek and Marty possessed the very same skills we need on offense. The reason they left was because of playing time; not because they couldn't contribute. Anyone who is/was a player of the game knew that these two players were scorers. Quote all the stats you want; there used to be a form of expression used coming up that "game recognizes game." Those two defensive liability players could take the ball to the rim and dunk on you with authority, athletic ability, energy and passion. Don't know about you but: I think that would be a great addition to the current skill sets of Mase and Miles; Kyle and Lance; Nolan and Jon; even Dre and Kelly.

They're gone now, so my point is quasi-irrelevant. Hopefully we can find some additional scoring from our bigs when our threes are not going in. Again, it just pains me to a point because: I really feel that Marty a fifth year senior could've provided something for us at this juncture. And Olek was a human highlight reel. One poster said we need easier baskets, more dunks, transitions etc. etc.., those two players had that capacity. I'm through, I promise; just having a catharsis moment.

This degree of cognitive dissonance baffles me. The notion that Olek and Marty could be major offensive weapons in the Duke offense, despite 5+ combined years of them never displaying said offensive ability, simply baffles me.

Losing Olek and Marty didn't change much at all about the face of this team. Losing Elliot Williams, on the other hand, changed it completely.

dukelifer
01-31-2010, 10:19 AM
Georgetown played good.

Duke didn't play good.


Breaking it down into specific areas the analysis above suffices.

Ockham's razor- that the simplest explanation tends to be the best. Teams that shoot 72% win- and usually big.

60's Devil
01-31-2010, 10:21 AM
Two questions and two questions only...do any of you believe that Coach K is slacking on recruiting? and do you really believe that everyone out there wants to go to Duke?

We are certainly trying as hard as we can with what we have. I think we are giving our best. One problem is Roy Williams. A personable good ole boy who reminds me of the best fraternity rush chairman you have ever met....and I have met him in a golf setting.
It doesn't seem we go head to head with the Heels on many recruits, but when we do the outcome isn't so good recently.
Did the Heels even recruit or offer the Plumlees and Kelly. Based on the ACC Sports Newsletter, I think not. Why not?
As far as wanting to go to Duke, most of the top twenty or thirty guys mention UNC on their list and sometimes us.
I think we also need a few pleasant surprises. In other words finding a diamond in the rough. Can't recall any of those. By that I mean a top 100 type who really surprises. It is clear to me that McD's All Americans are overrated. How else could we lose with four or five on the floor and none for the other team ( not referring to this game but rather recent years losses to teams like Maryland) In other words maybe we need to concentrate a little less on the top 50 list ( Roy is working on them) and really look hard for talent. How else did Davidson get to the Final Four.

roywhite
01-31-2010, 10:38 AM
Georgetown played good.

Duke didn't play good.

Breaking it down into specific areas the analysis above suffices.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7lKg1Rlyxs

Pretty much what Coach K said in his post-game presser.

dukelifer
01-31-2010, 10:38 AM
We are certainly trying as hard as we can with what we have. I think we are giving our best. One problem is Roy Williams. A personable good ole boy who reminds me of the best fraternity rush chairman you have ever met....and I have met him in a golf setting.
It doesn't seem we go head to head with the Heels on many recruits, but when we do the outcome isn't so good recently.
Did the Heels even recruit or offer the Plumlees and Kelly. Based on the ACC Sports Newsletter, I think not. Why not?
As far as wanting to go to Duke, most of the top twenty or thirty guys mention UNC on their list and sometimes us.
I think we also need a few pleasant surprises. In other words finding a diamond in the rough. Can't recall any of those. By that I mean a top 100 type who really surprises. It is clear to me that McD's All Americans are overrated. How else could we lose with four or five on the floor and none for the other team ( not referring to this game but rather recent years losses to teams like Maryland) In other words maybe we need to concentrate a little less on the top 50 list ( Roy is working on them) and really look hard for talent. How else did Davidson get to the Final Four.

First of all, Davidson did not get to the final four. And Duke did get Curry's little brother- not a top 50 player out of HS. UNC did offer Kelly. Duke has offered a few other players like Czyz who were not McD's AA and have one coming in next year in Thornton. So I am not sure I see your point here. What team would you like to see Duke emulate in recruiting? Maryland who has struggled to make the NCAA? Wake? Davidson?

DevilHorns
01-31-2010, 11:06 AM
We are certainly trying as hard as we can with what we have. I think we are giving our best. One problem is Roy Williams. A personable good ole boy who reminds me of the best fraternity rush chairman you have ever met....and I have met him in a golf setting.
It doesn't seem we go head to head with the Heels on many recruits, but when we do the outcome isn't so good recently.
Did the Heels even recruit or offer the Plumlees and Kelly. Based on the ACC Sports Newsletter, I think not. Why not?
As far as wanting to go to Duke, most of the top twenty or thirty guys mention UNC on their list and sometimes us.
I think we also need a few pleasant surprises. In other words finding a diamond in the rough. Can't recall any of those. By that I mean a top 100 type who really surprises. It is clear to me that McD's All Americans are overrated. How else could we lose with four or five on the floor and none for the other team ( not referring to this game but rather recent years losses to teams like Maryland) In other words maybe we need to concentrate a little less on the top 50 list ( Roy is working on them) and really look hard for talent. How else did Davidson get to the Final Four.

MCD All-Americans are not obviously all equal. There is a pretty big range of talent that can win this honor. Duke hasn't gotten the nasty Kevin Durant or Derek Favors MCD All-American since arguably Josh McBob. Luckily we have a really nasty recruit coming next year in Kyrie Irving. And though I love the duo of Jon and Nolan, I think many short-term Duke fans don't really know how awesome Duke can be with a top notch point guard. It completely changes our game, and coach can excercise that talent to perfection.

And I completely agree with you in terms of recruiting a player that actually is a diamond in the rough (I am excluding "average" MCD All americans like JJ who definitely did overproduce than expected). One is on our team currently: Miles. Miles was definitely not a strong player like his brother coming out of HS. He obviously needs improvement (who doesnt) but he is IMO playing above his HS recruit status. Now finding a diamond in the rough like Stephen Curry? that wont happen at Duke. We simply have to good of a recruiting pull to go after players like that. Only players I can think for us would be backup point guards or role players turning into stars (such as if Dockery turned out better than Duhon). We do have Tyler Thornton coming next year as a back up. Lets see what happens.

Wildcat
01-31-2010, 11:56 AM
We are certainly trying as hard as we can with what we have. I think we are giving our best. One problem is Roy Williams. A personable good ole boy who reminds me of the best fraternity rush chairman you have ever met....and I have met him in a golf setting.
It doesn't seem we go head to head with the Heels on many recruits, but when we do the outcome isn't so good recently.
Did the Heels even recruit or offer the Plumlees and Kelly. Based on the ACC Sports Newsletter, I think not. Why not?
As far as wanting to go to Duke, most of the top twenty or thirty guys mention UNC on their list and sometimes us.
I think we also need a few pleasant surprises. In other words finding a diamond in the rough. Can't recall any of those. By that I mean a top 100 type who really surprises. It is clear to me that McD's All Americans are overrated. How else could we lose with four or five on the floor and none for the other team ( not referring to this game but rather recent years losses to teams like Maryland) In other words maybe we need to concentrate a little less on the top 50 list ( Roy is working on them) and really look hard for talent. How else did Davidson get to the Final Four.

Are you sure you're a true blue devil fan? Good post though

roywhite
01-31-2010, 11:57 AM
Fatigue and minutes update---the "Big 3" played 40, 40, and 38 minutes yesterday in a game that was a double-digit difference nearly the whole 2nd half, and rose to a 19 point margin in the last couple minutes.

Oooops....that was the Georgetown trio of Monroe, Wright, and Freeman that played those minutes...:)

Will their fanbase be alarmed at the minutes played?

DevilHorns
01-31-2010, 12:04 PM
Are you sure you're a true blue devil fan? Good post though

You can be critical of the team and its recruiting and still remain a fan. There is absolutely nothing wrong with his post.

mcdukie
01-31-2010, 12:25 PM
I agree too that you can be critical and still remain a fan. Sometimes people take it so personal when you criticize the recruiting. The fact is that we haven't landed a solid interior presence in quite a while. For all we did wrong yesterday, who do we have that can make another teams big man have to play some defense? Our recruiting is going to have to pick up to be an elite program again. I like what we have coming in next year but we are still missing that post player. We did get the top notch point guard so I am very excited. The teams that challenge for NC's have both. No matter what, I am a Dukie!

mayrer
01-31-2010, 12:31 PM
They are Duke's weakness. When Duke plays a team with quickness on the perimeter that plays an aggressive defensive style, it's difficult for Duke to get into its offense. If the quick opponent also has an attacking style on offense, that's another serious challenge.

Players don't get a lot quicker, especially during the season, so we'll have to wait for Kyrie Irving and Seth Curry to remedy this deficiency.

dukegirlinsc
01-31-2010, 12:31 PM
thank the good lord there is no bcs in college basketball. duke WILL be going to the tournament and WILL have a serious shot at the national title...but not playing like this. i hate the "better to lose now than in march" attitude, because in my opinion there's never a "better time" to lose, it sucks every time.

i feel like this team has too much potential to play like this, it's borderline heartbreaking. i can only hope that this game will make needed improvements obvious, and hopefully easily fixable.

jhoagland
01-31-2010, 12:55 PM
I agree too that you can be critical and still remain a fan. Sometimes people take it so personal when you criticize the recruiting. The fact is that we haven't landed a solid interior presence in quite a while.

This goes to the point I was trying to make. Duke did not get Patterson, Monroe, Barnes, etc., they all decided to go somewhere else for whatever reason.
I guess my question is: why is this? Can't be TV time, "cause Duke's on TV all the time (just ask someone from anywhere else!); can't be the coach, 'cause K's the best there is (truly); can't be the facilities, 'cause they're the best! So, what is it? Personally, I believe that when you are dealing with High School seniors and their parents/guardians you are going to get quite a few surprises. Sometimes it's as simple as a whim. I'm just curious as to other's points of view to these facts and/or perceptions.
If someone finds this post out of line, please let me know. However, after being a casual reader most of the time I thought I'd seek some observations. Thanks.

ChicagoCrazy84
01-31-2010, 01:02 PM
I agree too that you can be critical and still remain a fan. Sometimes people take it so personal when you criticize the recruiting. The fact is that we haven't landed a solid interior presence in quite a while.

This goes to the point I was trying to make. Duke did not get Patterson, Monroe, Barnes, etc., they all decided to go somewhere else for whatever reason.
I guess my question is: why is this? Can't be TV time, "cause Duke's on TV all the time (just ask someone from anywhere else!); can't be the coach, 'cause K's the best there is (truly); can't be the facilities, 'cause they're the best! So, what is it? Personally, I believe that when you are dealing with High School seniors and their parents/guardians you are going to get quite a few surprises. Sometimes it's as simple as a whim. I'm just curious as to other's points of view to these facts and/or perceptions.
If someone finds this post out of line, please let me know. However, after being a casual reader most of the time I thought I'd seek some observations. Thanks.


Can we not turn this into a recruiting thread? We lost, there are bigger tragedies in life. I still firmly believe that Miles and Mason will become 2 of the best interior players in the conference. They have a lot of growing to do both physically and mentally. Add in Josh Hairston, a PG that can actually make defenses collapse and double team, and Seth Curry who can flat out ball, we will be just fine.

Kewlswim
01-31-2010, 01:17 PM
Hi,

I think it was Coach K's second or third Final Four team. I remember watching them against Clemson at the end of the season (not the very end, I think we always end with UNC) and thinking we are awful, we are not going anywhere, I hope this team does not get bounced in the first round. All I am trying to say is that even in the "glory" days of the Coach K era the team has always had some games like yesterday.

GO DUKE!

CDu
01-31-2010, 02:05 PM
Hi,

I think it was Coach K's second or third Final Four team. I remember watching them against Clemson at the end of the season (not the very end, I think we always end with UNC) and thinking we are awful, we are not going anywhere, I hope this team does not get bounced in the first round. All I am trying to say is that even in the "glory" days of the Coach K era the team has always had some games like yesterday.

GO DUKE!

The team is a top-10 or top-20 team. As such, there's no reason that we can't make the Final Four if things play out right. However, there are weaknesses that have shown up repeatedly this year. Luckily, this year in the ACC there aren't too many teams that can punish our weaknesses.

With the team as is, if we get the right bracket, I think the Final Four is a reasonable possibility (though not probability). We just have to avoid teams that play a 4-out, 1-in approach on offense as much as possible, and hope that those teams don't have a great night against us (or that we have a great night against them).

ncexnyc
01-31-2010, 02:32 PM
It definitely looks like several board members are experiencing STML. Yes, Georgetown played a great game and they spanked us. I'm sure most people who've made so-called negative posts on this thread realize the Hoyas had a great game. I believe what worries those people is that this isn't, "Just one game in late January", but rather this is the second such game within a short period of time. In both of these games the opposition's FG% was extremely high. I think many can except the perfect storm hitting us once, but twice makes people wonder and rightly so.

Indoor66
01-31-2010, 03:52 PM
It definitely looks like several board members are experiencing STML. Yes, Georgetown played a great game and they spanked us. I'm sure most people who've made so-called negative posts on this thread realize the Hoyas had a great game. I believe what worries those people is that this isn't, "Just one game in late January", but rather this is the second such game within a short period of time. In both of these games the opposition's FG% was extremely high. I think many can except the perfect storm hitting us once, but twice makes people wonder and rightly so.

If such a perfect storm is hitting us and our opponents are going to shoot 70% against us, what would you or others propose the coaches and players do about this?

left_hook_lacey
01-31-2010, 04:32 PM
I didn't see much indifference or laziness on defense so much as bewilderment. I think Duke was unprepared for Georgetown's offense. You can blame that on having 1.5 days or bad coaching, but this wasn't like NC State.

I agree with you. I don't think there was anything lazy about the wake that Duke played. They always play hard, they were still playing hard even though the game looked out of reach with a minute or two left. It's just not in their nature to be lazy, that's not how they're coached.


Bewilderment is a good word for it. I saw a lot of misplaced energy. Playing hard on defense does not always lead to positive results. Activity does not always lead to positive results. I don't think that Duke was unprepared from a coaching stand point, I think they were just unprepared for Georgetown's length, size and athleticism at almost every position and it surprised them. It's like Mike Tyson used to say, "Everyone has a game plan to win, until they get hit in the nose."

Add in that it was in front of a rowdy crowd, with the commander-in-chief in the seats, and a surprisingly disciplined Georgetown team, and it will be a tough game to win every time.

And people please stop freaking out because Georgetown shot 70+% from the field. I read posters saying "How could we allow that" and "Our defense was awful because we should NEVER allow a team to shoot 70+%, that scares me" etc. etc.

Stop looking at the numbers only and look at the game, Georgetown got a lot of uncontested layups and fast break points, its not like they "shot the lights out" as some have suggested. Poor offensive execution on our end lead to a lot of easy points on their end. Our defense is fine. And let's give Georgetown a little credit for playing good defense that lead to those easy shots. We've played teams that are just as big and athletic as Georgetown this year, but none were as prepared and well-coached as Georgetown was.

roywhite
01-31-2010, 05:44 PM
I agree with you. I don't think there was anything lazy about the wake that Duke played. They always play hard, they were still playing hard even though the game looked out of reach with a minute or two left. It's just not in their nature to be lazy, that's not how they're coached.

Bewilderment is a good word for it. I saw a lot of misplaced energy. Playing hard on defense does not always lead to positive results. Activity does not always lead to positive results. I don't think that Duke was unprepared from a coaching stand point, I think they were just unprepared for Georgetown's length, size and athleticism at almost every position and it surprised them. It's like Mike Tyson used to say, "Everyone has a game plan to win, until they get hit in the nose."

Add in that it was in front of a rowdy crowd, with the commander-in-chief in the seats, and a surprisingly disciplined Georgetown team, and it will be a tough game to win every time.

And people please stop freaking out because Georgetown shot 70+% from the field. I read posters saying "How could we allow that" and "Our defense was awful because we should NEVER allow a team to shoot 70+%, that scares me" etc. etc.

Stop looking at the numbers only and look at the game, Georgetown got a lot of uncontested layups and fast break points, its not like they "shot the lights out" as some have suggested. Poor offensive execution on our end lead to a lot of easy points on their end. Our defense is fine. And let's give Georgetown a little credit for playing good defense that lead to those easy shots. We've played teams that are just as big and athletic as Georgetown this year, but none were as prepared and well-coached as Georgetown was.

You had me in agreement, until you maintained that Georgetown did not shoot lights out. I watched the game.

devildownunder
01-31-2010, 08:58 PM
They are Duke's weakness. When Duke plays a team with quickness on the perimeter that plays an aggressive defensive style, it's difficult for Duke to get into its offense. If the quick opponent also has an attacking style on offense, that's another serious challenge.

Players don't get a lot quicker, especially during the season, so we'll have to wait for Kyrie Irving and Seth Curry to remedy this deficiency.

For the most part, we have avoided this year the kinds of problems you mention, which were just huge obstacles for us last year. I saw only the last 15 minutes or so of playing time in the G'town game and during that time they, for whatever reason, were able to pressure us on the perimeter very effectively. The tipped or intercepted passes and generally kept us from ever getting into our offense on many possessions. I'm not sure why they were able to do it and no one else has been. Are they that much quicker than anyone else we've faced this year?

ncexnyc
01-31-2010, 10:58 PM
If such a perfect storm is hitting us and our opponents are going to shoot 70% against us, what would you or others propose the coaches and players do about this?

Not sure if you're being sincere or sarcastic, but I'll give it a go anyway.

It's time for the staff and players take a good long look in the mirror. The staff needs to reevaluate their preceptions of this team. They need to specifically address where the breakdowns, both offensively and defensively are occurring and why. Once this is done, they can then make the necessary adjustments if at all possible.

As for the players, each and everyone of them needs to think about what their role on this team is supposed to be and ask themselves, "Am I doing what's expected of me?" From where I am sitting, some are trying to do to much and should tone it down, while others need to be more assertive.

I'm just a fan and the team is run by a HOF Coach, but I do know this team has serious issues that need to be addressed if they are to go as far as they possibly can.

Kfanarmy
01-31-2010, 11:19 PM
Duke took 16 more shots
Duke shot 84% from the foul line.
Duke got an offensive rebound 43% of the time they missed; while Georgetown got 15%

Things I note; Duke hit 4 of 10 threes in the 1st half and was down by 13; Duke shot 5 of 19 thees in the second half and won the half.

What killed the team: 5 of 17 two-point shooting in the 1st half and 1st half turnovers. Defense didn't perform up to par, but offense inside the arc really hurt the team in the 1st half.

trinity79
01-31-2010, 11:40 PM
there's such a thing as consistency. After our showings at NC State and GTown you can't really say we have any. The GTown game really brought back visions of the Villanova game last year.
I hate to say I told you so, and it's never my intention to hate on anybody, but here's what I posted about 7 months ago. This far into the season, I don't really see where I got much wrong:
===============================>
07-10-2009, 01:57 AM
trinity79
Hoop Dreams Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 8

What concerns me in all this . . .

-
is that if somebody (or a very small group of somebodies) does not establish himself/themselves at the 5, then we could possibly face a situation where we are "teaming" with big men, but still don't really scare anyone inside. Truth be told, Zoubek has had flashes of brilliance, and I loved that tomahawk dunk that Miles threw down at Wake Forest. But Zoubs is what he is and Miles, Mason, and Kelly are all young and unproven. I hope time will prove me wrong to worry about Mason in this regard.

Don't get me wrong. It'll be fantastic to have true depth at the 4/5 like we have not had recently. I think we'll certainly be stacked at the 3 and 4 spots. But I think we make a mistake to assume that just because we have loads of size that means the 5 spot will magically take care of itself. And I'm betting Coach K is just as concerned about the post as he is about the perimeter.