MBB: UNC 79, Duke 71 Post-Game Thread

[jimsumner]

They also know they can go lots of places for a year and give only minimal lip-service to the "student" part of "student athlete." Duke actually insists that its players attend classes, write their own papers, meet with academic types, the sort of distraction that not every school inflicts on their players.

In other words, there are high school players with the academics to get into Duke but not the desire to actually take advantage of that opportunity.

[BlueintheFace]

I want another shot at them.

Not me. I'm done.

From here on out I want to SURVIVE AND ADVANCE because it is tourney time. We have played two solid games against Carolina, utilizing two very different tactics. Both times we have just come up short against a truly good team. I want to see the weakest team available game to game from here on out.

[MChambers]

For a lot of high school stars, a successful professional career is a big priority. For obvious reasons. Is Duke the best place to play with the NBA in mind? My guess is, recruiters from other schools are hammering it into prospects that Coach K is reluctant to give freshmen big playing time, and has a poor track record of churning out players with successful pro careers. These top-tier players know they can play right away at certain schools, and, for better or worse, they won't be held back. That means quicker development, and it also means a chance to be drafted high after one or two years. I bet we lose a lot of recruits on that argument.

They can make those arguments, but the facts don't support them. As to big playing time freshman year, look how Coach K held back Kyle Singler? Or, if you want to go further back, look at Jason Williams?

As to NBA careers, you've got to be kidding. Boozer? Brand? Hill? How about the No-Stats All-Star? Duke has the highest or one of the highest payrolls in the NBA.

So I think you are wrong to post those arguments here without pointing out how flawed they are.

[jipops]

This is a very pertinent post. It's a useful effort for all of us to take a moment and consider all the points Jim has made. As fans we may tend to view recruiting from a distance and without complete information.

This may be how 99.99% of the sports world views recruiting.

[ncexnyc]

I want another shot at them.

Hopefully you get your wish and this time I hope we take more advantage of the mismatch at PG. Let's put Jon down on the blocks against Lawson, Jon should be able to abuse Ty. Let's also make sure to add a winkle where we Singler can hide in the corner so when the holes adjust to Jon down low he can feed it to Kyle for a wide open 3.

[Wheat/"/"/"]

Coach K has not recruited very many true post players in his career, it's not generally his style. To each his own.

He has certainly been successful by anyone's measure of success in college basketball. So I find it hard to second guess him, even tho I would do it differently myself.

I think he depends more on "chemistry" than most coaches. When he gets it right, Duke is where you all want Duke to be. Fast, exciting, fun to watch. When he misses, he's still way up there...nobody is 100%

"Chemistry" especially in college basketball, is an inexact science.

[InSpades]

I haven't read through the thread, so don't know if this has been addressed, but I disagree with the statement that Gerald didn't have a good game. The UNC defense absolutely keyed in on him. Every time he was in a scoring position the defense would collapse around him.

Last season, when that happened G usually just took the low percentage shot. This season, and in the UNC game in particular, I thought G did an excellent job kicking it out to the open man. (Too bad we couldn't knock them down in the second half).

G played a very good game. He may not have been dominant from a points scored perspective, but he played within the offense and he created for others.

He was 4 of 11 from the field while getting atleast 2 open dunks (1 of those he may have created for himself). He also had 5 of our 11 turnovers. Defenses are going to key on Henderson, he has to do a better job of dealing with it or we will not go very far. At the very least he has to limit his turnovers. He did have a few nice dishes though (particularly the one to Lance). It just seemed like Gerald was off a little bit. He didn't have a bad game, but he didn't have a good game either. Bottom line is we need more from him, especially if we are going to beat a team like UNC.

[roywhite]

He was 4 of 11 from the field while getting atleast 2 open dunks (1 of those he may have created for himself). He also had 5 of our 11 turnovers. Defenses are going to key on Henderson, he has to do a better job of dealing with it or we will not go very far. At the very least he has to limit his turnovers. He did have a few nice dishes though (particularly the one to Lance). It just seemed like Gerald was off a little bit. He didn't have a bad game, but he didn't have a good game either. Bottom line is we need more from him, especially if we are going to beat a team like UNC.

Danny Green is one of the more effective defenders against Gerald in the league. Yeah, Gerald probably needed to find the pass more when he was closely guarded. And rebound better (it's asking a lot for a guy in his size range to rebound well against a big team like UNC, but we need that).

If we are fortunate enough to play the Heels again in the ACC final, I'd bet on Gerald having a very good game. He is good enough to make adjustments.

[GoingFor#5]

I thought we played pretty well, but more importantly I think we've shown a toughness lately that will serve us well on neutral site games in the post-season.

[rsvman]

I am much less disappointed than I thought I would be. The team played well. The strategy of slowing the game down was the right choice, even though we walked out of there with the 'L.'

I didn't really feel like we were in danger of winning this game at any point, even though it was close.

Duke can beat any team in the nation on any given night. I expect them to do better in the NCAAT this year than they have in recent years.

Go Duke!

[jimsumner]

Getting Smith, Zoubek, and Thomas healthy and integrating them back into the new Scheyer-Williams backcourt certainly gives reason for optimism as March progresses.

[grossbus]

"I really see the way this team is constructed for long-term success."

jumbo, i am unsure what you mean by this. seems to me that this season is already in the short term. are you talking about next year?

"this could be the year that we meet up with Carolina in the Final Four. I would love to play them one more time on a neutral court with all the pressure on them."

be careful what you wish for.

[The Gordog]

I have read through about half of the posts here and I just have to address the folks who have opined that 'we got outrebounded' or something to that effect.

I am wondering if we watched the same game.

After every shot we took our guys immediately started to get back on defense in order to cut off the possability of fast breaks. That succeeded as Carolina only a couple the whole game. Giving up those rebounds was a deliberate tactical decision by K. Our players did not 'get outrebounded' at all. OK there were a couple of times I noticed Lance failing to box out Lawson, but I chalked that up to his bad wheel. If he is 100% the next time we play I feel very good about our chances.

[calltheobvious]

"Yes we recruited Monroe and Patterson,but you see guys like DeJuan Blair who was not heavily recruited and is the best power forward in college ball outside of Blake Griffin. Duke needs backup plans"


Blair had significant academic issues and grew up within walking distance of the Pitt campus. Duke was never going to sign him and any resources they devoted to him would have been wasted.

Patrick Patterson was a back-up. Duke started recruiting him after missing on Blake Griffin and Gary Johnson and deciding not to pursue Kevin Love.

Lance Thomas was a back-up to Brandon Wright.

Duke loved Spencer Hawes in the h.s. class of '06 but came to the (correct) conclusion that he would never leave the Pacifc Northwest. So,they turned their attention to Zoubek.

After getting committments from McRoberts and Boateng, Duke ardently pursued Jon Brockman.

Duke missed on Greg Monroe, signed Miles Plumlee. And Olek, who they viewed as a project but a solid ACC 4 down the road.

Duke missed on Eric Murphy and Greg Echenique, got a committment within weeks from Mason Plumlee. Then Ryan Kelly.

Long-time readers of this and other boards probably know where I'm going, to skip the next paragraphs if you've heard it before.

There exists in some portions of the Duke fan base the idea that Duke should be able to sign anyone it wants to. So, when someone like Blair or Stephen Curry or James Harden develops into a star, everyone wants to know why Duke didn't recruit them. Academics, attitude, playing style and other variables weed out the field.

And believe it or not, not everyone wants to go Duke, not everyone wants to play for Mike Krzyzewski. We all would if we were 18 and had the chance. There are numerous great high school players who are tentatively approached by Duke. Mututal flirtation. But sometimes you smile at the person across the room and they don't smile back. So you don't devote precious resources on a lost cause.

Sure you missevaluate people. The whole freaking world missed on Curry. But the idea that Duke is somehow missing on great players who want to come to Duke because Duke doesn't know what it's doing on the recruiting trail just doesn't hold water.

IMO.

Oh great Forest, how blind we have been to thee.

First, Jim, imo you should never qualify one of your posts with imo.

Second, I think your ideas about about 'spending precious resources' and 'not everyone wants to come to Duke' are most of the ballgame here.

Beyond the general myopia that almost all of us are susceptible to, I think that most of the recruiting criticisms of the last couple of years are more indicative of us being a spoiled fanbase than anything else. It's sad (or not) that it's gotten to the point where some of us feel a certain level of cognitive dissonance any time we look out onto the floor and see that Duke doesn't have the most talented group. It can't just be luck of the draw, it has to be that someone wasn't doing his job very well.

Oh well, maybe none of that adds anything to the discussion, but reading your post certainly helped me put some things into better perspective. Thanks.

[NSDukeFan]

I could not watch the game yesterday and to my dismay my TIVO did not work when I came home to watch the game.I saw in the box score that Zoubek played 7 minutes and had 3 PFs. I have seen him play several times this year and on a few occaisions I have said to myself that finally I see why Coach K recruited him, only to see him in the next game virtually contribute nothing.

It seems that in big games Coach K does not have confidence in him, which is too bad because he could offer what Duke lacks, an inside presence.

Does anyone with more basketball savy then me think that Brian will improve next year or is what we are seeing about all that we can expect?

I understand that it takes big men longer to develop but I thought that Brian would be more advanced than he has shown. I was comparing him to a recent center on Pittsburgh...forgot his name who became a very good college center.

I know that Thomas and Smith were hurt, but I did not see Plumlee's name in the box score...Was he also hurt or was it a coach's decision not to play him?

I think Aaron Gray was the center from Pitt you were thinking of. I don't think Z will be as good as he turned out, but he does have a lot of good thinks to offer (especially being 7'1). I believe Miles had a DNP-Coach's Decision. I believe injuries have limited Brian's development and, more specifically, time to develop, but see no reason why he can't help us this year and be a big factor for us next year. (An injury-free summer and chance to work on his game would help)

This reminds me a bit of the Elton Brand situation in Philly before he got hurt. (Obviously Elton being the far superior player, but just in terms of styles) Philly, early on, was trying very hard to get EB (their best player) involved, but got away from a lot of what it did best the previous year. Z can help us in a lot of ways, but when we have him on the floor (I would say the same about Greg, who could be contributing much more), it changes our identity from a lineup of 5 excellent, mostly-interchangeable defenders. I hope we get more from both Greg and Z in the tournaments, but it changes our defensive identity when we do. A difficult conundrum for the coaches.

It seems timely after the recent posts about what DBR is all about, but this has been one of my favorite threads for some good chuckles when some posters have been put in their place for absurd statements about a very good basketball team. Maybe it will also happen to me and I will add to others' entertainment.

[diesel]

From today's Wall Street Journal: the difference between the Big 10 and the ACC
"(2) UNC vs. (7) Duke

College basketball isn't known as much for its regional differences as college football, but yesterday's Duke-North Carolina game painted them starkly. After watching a weekend of walk-it-up basketball in the Big Ten, the athleticism of the Blue Devils and Tar Heels was stunning. At one point, ultra-athletic Duke forward Gerald Henderson missed a shot but leaped over two Heels to grab his own carom. CBS analyst Clark Kellogg -- a refreshing, upbeat change from dour predecessor Billy Packer -- aptly called it a "big-boy" rebound. The clearly superior Tar Heels ran away with the game at the end 79-71, but there were just enough dazzling moments to make it well worth the time.
—Darren Everson contributed to this article

Write to Tim Marchman at tlmarchman@gmail.com"

[roywhite]

From today's Wall Street Journal: the difference between the Big 10 and the ACC
"(2) UNC vs. (7) Duke

College basketball isn't known as much for its regional differences as college football, but yesterday's Duke-North Carolina game painted them starkly. After watching a weekend of walk-it-up basketball in the Big Ten, the athleticism of the Blue Devils and Tar Heels was stunning. At one point, ultra-athletic Duke forward Gerald Henderson missed a shot but leaped over two Heels to grab his own carom.

Wouldn't mind seeing a few B10/11 teams in our bracket.

[ChicagoHeel]

I am a long-time reader, but this is my first post to DBR. As the username makes clear, I’m a Tarheel fan and hope to convince you that Wheat is not the only reasonable one out there. I’ve long been impressed with this board. The discussion- both in terms of its civility and substance- reflects well on Duke fans and I’m envious that UNC has nothing that approaches it.

Just a quick comment on yesterday’s game- it basically played out as it should have. There have been a lot of “what if” comments in this thread, but if you look at opponents shooting percentage the game went according to script. Since the last UNC-Duke meeting, Duke’s six opponents have averaged 52.4% from the field and UNC’s five opponents have shot 44.7%. Yesterday, UNC shot 52.8% and Duke shot 44%. Obviously, Duke can take a lot of positives out of the game and it is clear that Duke is a better team than they were in the first meeting, but that FG percentage should be cause for considerable concern. We agonize about our defensive lapses, but I’ll take our numbers over yours in a heartbeat.

[ClosetHurleyFan]

I am a long-time reader, but this is my first post to DBR. As the username makes clear, I’m a Tarheel fan and hope to convince you that Wheat is not the only reasonable one out there. I’ve long been impressed with this board. The discussion- both in terms of its civility and substance- reflects well on Duke fans and I’m envious that UNC has nothing that approaches it.

Just a quick comment on yesterday’s game- it basically played out as it should have. There have been a lot of “what if” comments in this thread, but if you look at opponents shooting percentage the game went according to script. Since the last UNC-Duke meeting, Duke’s six opponents have averaged 52.4% from the field and UNC’s five opponents have shot 44.7%. Yesterday, UNC shot 52.8% and Duke shot 44%. Obviously, Duke can take a lot of positives out of the game and it is clear that Duke is a better team than they were in the first meeting, but that FG percentage should be cause for considerable concern. We agonize about our defensive lapses, but I’ll take our numbers over yours in a heartbeat.

Good to see another well mannered heel fan out here. This is a fantastic site. I dont post very often either (used to more back in the 2002-2005 timeframe) but enjoy the thoughts of guys like Wheat, GW67, Jason Evans, etc....

[MChambers]

I am a long-time reader, but this is my first post to DBR. As the username makes clear, I’m a Tarheel fan and hope to convince you that Wheat is not the only reasonable one out there. I’ve long been impressed with this board. The discussion- both in terms of its civility and substance- reflects well on Duke fans and I’m envious that UNC has nothing that approaches it.

Just a quick comment on yesterday’s game- it basically played out as it should have. There have been a lot of “what if” comments in this thread, but if you look at opponents shooting percentage the game went according to script. Since the last UNC-Duke meeting, Duke’s six opponents have averaged 52.4% from the field and UNC’s five opponents have shot 44.7%. Yesterday, UNC shot 52.8% and Duke shot 44%. Obviously, Duke can take a lot of positives out of the game and it is clear that Duke is a better team than they were in the first meeting, but that FG percentage should be cause for considerable concern. We agonize about our defensive lapses, but I’ll take our numbers over yours in a heartbeat.

While I'd always rather be holding opponents to a lower shooting percentage, I don't think you should draw too much from that statistic. First, Duke didn't get to play GT at home, like UNC did, which has to skew the numbers. We also played Wake, which is a tough team to defend (as UNC knows). Second, Duke's defense is predicated less on lowering shooting percentage than UNC's. Duke tends to take away the 3s and force turnover; UNC doesn't.