Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 29
  1. #1

    a different perspective about the Point

    As much as Duke under Coach K has been called "Point Guard U" by some commentators, revealing as much about how prevalent good PGs have been in that time as to how much K values good PGs, I find it kind of odd (almost ironic) that this year's team, one with a true PG, may be one of K's teams that needs a true PG the least of them all. Let me explain, while Greg is a true PG and a captain and a very good player and an important part of this team, this team may be at its best when he is not playing PG; either at SG or with only Nolan on the floor.
    One reason for this is the emergence of Nolan Smith as a more comfortable and self-assured player. Although he did not come to Duke as a typical PG (more of a SG), he will be playing point a lot this year. His defensive prowess and his slashing offensive potential make him a very capable player.

    Another reason for my observation is the variety of versatile guards this team has. Jon Scheyer is a good passer and good at creating opportunities for himself and others; Jon plays a hybrid off-guard-PG. Gerald Henderson is much better at finishing those opportunities created by Jon (and others) than creating them himself, but he showed last year an increased awareness of his teammates and passing to them, aka, he has become a better passer. I've already listed Nolan's attributes. EWill comes in with high regards and will probably be used in much the way Gerald was used as Fr., as a versatile scorer, but he played PG in the waning minutes against VUU and may do so again at times this year.
    Duke will probably not want Kyle Singler to bring the ball up the court very much this year (if ever) however, he is also capable of distributing the ball and creating offense by passing.
    With the amount of versatile players enumerated it is possible that we will see quite a few combinations that don't really use a PG in the traditional sense of the position. Even with Paulus in the game (with or without NS) he may not be the one who truly initiates the offensive attack. Even if Nolan is in on the floor without GP he may not be the player used to set up scoring plays.
    I do not mean this post to denigrate either Greg or Nolan's capability of playing PG, but rather to illustrate that the versatility of this team, especially among the guards, borders on insane and that this team will not depend on traditionally defined concepts of positions (which has been pointed out before). I hope that Greg and Nolan continue to push each other and bring out the absolute best that both can produce this year, the team will be the better for it.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    I've heard Georgia Tech and Arizona referred to as "Point Guard U" much more often than Duke.

    I think that G's greatest strength is probably his ability to create for himself. That's certainly what saved us in the Belmont game.

    I don't see how you think that Duke's versatility means that we don't need a point guard. I don't see how you can even think that we're insanely versitile if our point guard is better suited as a shooting guard and our small forward can't create for himself.

    Everything that you say is somewhat obvious, yet I get the feeling that you think it's really profound, i.e. Kyle can create offense by passing, Nolan's defensive prowess makes him capable, players that do not play the point guard position can set up a "scoring play", EWill came in with "high regards".

    Yeah, we're not a team where the shooting guard stands at the three point line waiting for the ball, while the center stands at the low block waiting for the ball. We've long had versatile players at Duke, though, so I'm not sure why another versatile team means that we can just chuck the idea of having a point guard.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Bethesda, MD

    this seems a bit harsh

    Quote Originally Posted by Edouble View Post
    Everything that you say is somewhat obvious, yet I get the feeling that you think it's really profound
    Seems like all he was trying to say is that we have a lot of ball handlers and a true PG may not be necessary all the time.

    That said, I agree with Edouble's point. Just because you have a versatile team doesn't mean you don't need a dependable point guard. We showed, even last year when we had a similarly versatile team, that we were subject breaking down when pressed. Clearly, a dependable point guard is one key to preventing teams from thinking we are a team that can be pressed.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Skinker-DeBaliviere, Saint Louis
    Quote Originally Posted by Edouble View Post
    Everything that you say is somewhat obvious, yet I get the feeling that you think it's really profound
    So you've noticed that this is an internet bulletin board, I guess.

    A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
    ---Roger Ebert


    Some questions cannot be answered
    Who’s gonna bury who
    We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
    ---Over the Rhine

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO

    Wink Not so fast there...

    Quote Originally Posted by Edouble View Post
    Everything that you say is somewhat obvious, yet I get the feeling that you think it's really profound...
    There is a difference between being "obvious" and being "trivial," so I don't know why you think obvious and profound are necessarily in conflict.

    sagegrouse
    'Martha:... "Biology is even better. It's less... abstruse."
    GEORGE: "Abstract."
    MARTHA: "Abstruse! In the sense of recondite. Don't you tell me words."
    [Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf]'

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Edouble View Post
    Everything that you say is somewhat obvious, yet I get the feeling that you think it's really profound
    I actually got that impression more from your post, than from the original poster.

  7. #7
    I feel like this was a lot truer last year when we had Paulus, Nelson, Scheyer, Henderson, and Singler on the court. All of them were capable of creating their own shot and passing out to a shooter. A traditional point guard to feed the bigs wasn't really necessary. Notice how many less assists Paulus had last year than his freshman year when he could dump the ball to Shelden or JJ.

    Since we're going a little bigger this year, a traditional pg who can create might be a little more useful, but still not as necessary as in a more traditional offense.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by CameronCrazy'11 View Post
    I feel like this was a lot truer last year when we had Paulus, Nelson, Scheyer, Henderson, and Singler on the court. All of them were capable of creating their own shot and passing out to a shooter. A traditional point guard to feed the bigs wasn't really necessary. Notice how many less assists Paulus had last year than his freshman year when he could dump the ball to Shelden or JJ.

    Since we're going a little bigger this year, a traditional pg who can create might be a little more useful, but still not as necessary as in a more traditional offense.
    It depends how Duke plans to run its offense this year. If we're in last year's version of the Phoenix, errrr, D'Antoni offense, then I'm not sure a true PG is required. We initiated stuff from the wings with a lot of pick-and-roll action. We kept a shooter in the corner to spread the floor (that could easily be Paulus). When the shot clock would run down, we'd go to the high pick-and-roll. Ideally, you'd love Jason Williams running that, someone who could get to the basket at will. But more realistically, you want someone who can shoot, dribble and pass, know how to read the screen, etc. We have a number of guys who can do that, and I think Scheyer is particularly adept at it.

    The other way to minimize the need of a pure PG is to go back to more motion. We really haven't run that in ages, but anyone can initiate an offense that revolves around constant passing, picking away, etc.

    I suspect that whatever Duke runs this year will not be something that requires a pure PG (i.e. a 1-4 set). We have enough people who can make plays that the lack of a pure PG shouldn't be a major problem.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by jumbo View Post
    It depends how Duke plans to run its offense this year. If we're in last year's version of the Phoenix, errrr, D'Antoni offense, then I'm not sure a true PG is required. We initiated stuff from the wings with a lot of pick-and-roll action. We kept a shooter in the corner to spread the floor (that could easily be Paulus). When the shot clock would run down, we'd go to the high pick-and-roll. Ideally, you'd love Jason Williams running that, someone who could get to the basket at will. But more realistically, you want someone who can shoot, dribble and pass, know how to read the screen, etc. We have a number of guys who can do that, and I think Scheyer is particularly adept at it.

    The other way to minimize the need of a pure PG is to go back to more motion. We really haven't run that in ages, but anyone can initiate an offense that revolves around constant passing, picking away, etc.

    I suspect that whatever Duke runs this year will not be something that requires a pure PG (i.e. a 1-4 set). We have enough people who can make plays that the lack of a pure PG shouldn't be a major problem.

    Didn't D'Antoni heavily rely on the true point guard Steve Nash to run his offense?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by RainingThrees View Post
    Didn't D'Antoni heavily rely on the true point guard Steve Nash to run his offense?
    The way he ran it, yes. Phoenix ran all its ball-screens with Nash and let him probe. But the signature part of D'Antoni's offense is the spacing. Duke took that aspect (which really wasn't vastly different from Duke's traditional 4-out offense), but used its wing players more often in the pick-and-roll situations instead. The key is the spacing.

  11. #11
    I would guess that a lot of the time Duke wll do some of the same things they did last year when it comes to initiating the offense, even though the make-up of the team will be different. G and Scheyer will do just as much initiating as Paulus and/or Nolan.

  12. #12
    I like the thought of the pick-and-roll possibilities, and with this line-up the best way for that to work would probably be with Paulus on the floor, but not involved in the pick-and-roll, but spotted up as a shooter. Scheyer has shown himself to be a very good decision maker in that function. I anticipate G flourishing as well, and now there are bigs more adept at finishing when the defense is drawn.

  13. #13
    Alright thanks for the explanation Jumbo. So who do think will start at point when the real games begin?

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by RainingThrees View Post
    Alright thanks for the explanation Jumbo. So who do think will start at point when the real games begin?
    I think the lineup we saw against Virginia Union will start the opener (in two weeks -- can you believe it?!?). I have no idea whether K will stick with Nolan -- obviously it's all based on how he and Greg play. Either way, they'll both get plenty of PT. I'll be more convinced that something drastic has changed if Smith is in the lineup to finish a close game and Paulus isn't. But that discussion (small lineup, etc.) has been beaten to death already, and we haven't even played a real game yet.

  15. #15
    It seems to be very valuable to this team that Paulus has such high character. This turn of events could upset a lot of three year starters, but I don't think it will have that effect here. And, as you said, I think they all realize that it is not necessarily about starting, but playing, contributing, and finishing.

  16. #16
    Hold on now, nothing is set in stone yet, that was just the first exhibition. I agree with you if that situation does become the case.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    From the Herald-Sun article linked on the Front Page:

    "Since we play man-to-man defense, that disciplined pressure on the ball is a key factor, so Nolan is going to have a very prominent role on our team," Krzyzewski said. "Right now, Nolan would be a starter."
    It sounds to me like the job currently belongs to Nolan Smith. As the season progresses, we will all see whether he remains the starter.
    Bob Green

  18. #18
    Yeah at this point it sounds like Nolan's job going forward. Coach K's philosophy always starts with defense, and Nolan is better at that by a good margin. He has the defense, now he will get his chance to see if he can run a team with ample scorers.
    That being said, it still not solely Nolan's job, just his job at the very beginning of games.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Charlotte, North Carolina
    From what Jumbo and some of the other "insiders" are reporting, I infer (perhaps incorrectly) that we can expect to see a very fluid offense and very fluid lineup. By that I mean that the offense will play to the talents of our guys by being spread out, with plenty of motion (as is typical for Duke), and with a variety of players being able to set up the play. With this in mind, it probably doesn't matter so much who's in at the "1" spot, as we're as likely to see Scheyer or Singler passing to the finisher as we are Smith or Paulus. What's nice for Duke is that teams have to deal with us having 3 to 4 guys on the court at any time who can find the open guy, drain an open jumper, or create their own shot.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Outside Philadelphia

    Paulus = Gerry McNamara?

    I've been wondering whether Paulus' role is evolving into something akin to Gerry McNamara's with Syracuse in his junior and senior seasons. He moved from more of a point guard into a combo scoring guard and was very effective, despite a size deficiency.

    Seems like this could be very effective towards the end of games, particularly as a spot-up three point shooter. Also good to have our best three point shooter not having to initiate the play, which often meant that Greg was shooting off the dribble, off-balance and under pressure, rather than from a balanced and open shot coming off a screen.

Similar Threads

  1. Perspective
    By duke98 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 03-24-2008, 11:17 AM
  2. Recruiting Perspective
    By mr. synellinden in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 03-13-2008, 10:37 PM
  3. Some Perspective on Paulus
    By dukehick in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 03-19-2007, 08:20 AM
  4. Thanks, DBR for the perspective
    By feldspar in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-16-2007, 02:08 PM
  5. Perspective
    By drion97 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 03-15-2007, 11:35 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •