Charting Duke vs. Wisconsin

[Hermy-own]

This first lineup was clearly our best tonight, both by the numbers and just in watching the game. The second lineup is the one that many projected to be out best in the preseason. It's an interesting sign (either good or bad, depending on how you look at it) that one game in, it's already up so high.

In my opinion, and I think many other's around here, these are going to be the best two lineups for the bulk of the season.

You are probably right. Personally, I much prefer the
Sheyer-Singler-Smith-Mason-Miles to
Dawkins-Sheyer-Singler-Smith-Mason/Miles

Because going small is very dangerous. Going small can produce large runs, large leads, and occasionally lock down defense because our players will be quicker than theirs. The flip side is that when we go small, the opposing teams often gain confidence, especially once our small lineup is on the floor for a long time. They start pounding the ball on us and wearing us down. Basically, my feeling is that a small lineup is high risk, high reward, and being small is exactly the achilles heel that the Duke teams of the past couple years have had.

On the other hand, a lineup with 2 guards, an ACCPOY SF, and two tall athletic inside men, is perfectly balanced and hard to beat. It is also a perfect arrangement for our bench, so that Dawkins can sub for the 3 S's, while Zoub and Thomas both get respectable playing time subbing for the Plumlees.

One quick addition: Wheat, you are delirious. The lineup you proposed would be blown out by a number of Duke lineups. You are far, far overconfident after one good game by UNC and one loss by Duke.

[Wheat/"/"/"]

One quick addition: Wheat, you are delirious. The lineup you proposed would be blown out by a number of Duke lineups. You are far, far overconfident after one good game by UNC and one loss by Duke.

It's all about matchups.

Wears matched up against Plumlees in the post?...from what I've seen Wears more fundamentally sound.

Henson against Singlar? That length/quickness of Henson's is hard to deal with.

Strickland against Scheyer? We know how Scheyer struggles with the really quick guards.

Watts and Nolan? Hmmmmm...

Just jerking around here on a slow night. Of course Duke's best starting five would have a big advantage. But it wouldn't be as easy as you think.

[Jumbo]

It's all about matchups.

Wears matched up against Plumlees in the post?...from what I've seen Wears more fundamentally sound.

Henson against Singlar? That length/quickness of Henson's is hard to deal with.

Strickland against Scheyer? We know how Scheyer struggles with the really quick guards.

Watts and Nolan? Hmmmmm...

Just jerking around here on a slow night. Of course Duke's best starting five would have a big advantage. But it wouldn't be as easy as you think.

Wheat, I love you man, and we've known each other a while, but this is the wrong time, in the wrong thread, and some really, really wrong analysis. Like, as wrong as I've seen you since the Bersticker days.
(BTW, ask Ty Lawson how Scheyer does against quick guards, or do you not remember the 24 points, 7-for-7 shooting, 5 assists, 4 steals, 3 boards and 0 turnovers he put on Ty in Chapel Hill last March?)

[BlueintheFace]

Wheat, I know the quality commentary you bring to this board but...

Is it possible the Michigan St. win has you a little bit higher on the horse than you should be? Do you think you will feel comfortable saying these things in a few weeks?

[CDu]

Just to get your juices flowing...

From what Iv'e seen to this point in the season. I'll take Wear, Wear, Henson, Strickland and Watts and give any Duke team you want to put on the floor a good run.

I understand what you're trying to say, but that UNC five would get absolutely pounded by Duke. It wouldn't be close. You'd have no one to provide any consistent offense. Strickland has had one decent game, but he hasn't come close to showing the ability to consistently lead/carry an offense. And none of the other four have shown even the slightest ability to create offense for themselves at this point. The Wears can hit open jumpshots and don't make a lot of mistakes as bit-part players, but they are not impact players. Henson's game, as you've noted, is still not ready for prime time. And Watts is just an energy guy.

Over a 40-minute game, I'd guess we'd win that matchup by 30+ points. Your five might be able to hold us to 65-70 points (emphasis on "might"), but you'd have trouble scoring 40 with that group right now against Duke. I think you're seriously overrating your role players and perhaps you're a bit high off the struggles Duke had the other night.

[Wheat/"/"/"]

Wheat, I know the quality commentary you bring to this board but...

Is it possible the Michigan St. win has you a little bit higher on the horse than you should be? Do you think you will feel comfortable saying these things in a few weeks?

Sorry if the post came across as a high horse thing..

But yes, I am very comfortable with the quality of UNC's front court against any team I've seen so far this year. You guys know that I believe the best ball is played inside out, not outside in. And I'm happy that this UNC team seems to understand that. They are looking inside every trip down as first option if the break is not there.

I was just having a little fun on a slow night with a thread talking about line ups. Just trying to stimulate a little conversation , ya know?
And I thought this thread was as good a place as any to talk players and lineups...no way I open up a new UNC player thread

In all seriousness...

Everybody, including me, knows I missed on Bersticker. He turned out to be a poor mans Josh McRoberts. In my defense, it's hard to get inside a kids head from a keyboard. He had really nice skills for a 6'11" kid, but not the work ethic to use them. One bad miss in 15 years I'll always have to live with around here

So here's the next deal that many of you are likely to challenge me on...

The Wear kids are very good players. Very good players.

I've probably focused on them when they are on the floor more than any other players with the possible exception of Henson because I had never seen them before the season started. I am impressed.

I would absolutly match those two up with the Plumlees at this point and feel confident in their play. The Plumblee boys have one advantage at this time, they are more athletic than the Wear boys. (It is ok if I say that about 2 white players right? But the Wear boys do everything pretty darn well on the floor as freshmen. Plumlees are not as fundamentally sound at this point.

I really can't recall any freshmen big men that came right in at UNC and hit the floor with a more well rounded game than the Wear two. And keep in mind they are 6'10, 235lbs when you watch them. I find myself forgetting just how big they are watching them because they are so active and mobile, along with the fact that they are often out there with 7'0" and a long 6'10" (Zeller,Henson) who are quicker.

Now don't get me wrong here. I really like Miles Plumlee's game. He has a great upside. And he has an NBA body. I like his aggressiveness and he has the hands he needs to have, which is the back breaker if a player does not have them. He's getting better and better. He just needs to get more comfortable with his passing, his D, and his ball handling, specifically putting it on the floor.

Mason? I need to see more of him, but ten minutes was enough to see he belongs out there.

One last thought...

Henson... The out of bounds play where he reached on the run, falling out of bounds, and threw it back in play between his legs got my attention.

Not so much from the athleticism it took for a 6'10" player to do that, but from the fact that he mentally saw that opportunity unfold and had the confidence to attempt it and succeeded. He's got a lot of work to do on his game, but he's one of those athletic "freak" type players.

[CDu]

So here's the next deal that many of you are likely to challenge me on...

The Wear kids are very good players. Very good players.

Here's the problem with the extension you're making. The Wears are fundamentally sound players. They hit their shots when open. They make the right passes when available. They don't force things. They don't look horrible defensively. They get in the right spots on the floor. And when they're playing with guys like Drew (who has really improved so far this year), Davis, and Thompson, they can be useful sometimes. But playing alongside much better players has helped to hide their weaknesses. They aren't being asked to do anything but fill minutes, they aren't being put in position to make mistakes.

Where you went wrong in this discussion is suggesting that a group of fundamentally sound role players (the Wears and Watts) can compete with an elite team without substantial star power around them. They simply can't (at least not yet for the Wears, and probably never for Watts). And right now, neither Strickland nor Henson have shown that they're ready to be that star power at the ACC level.

The Wears have been useful in 5-10 minute roles as the 4th/5th man on the court with much better players doing the heavy lifting. But they are periphery players at this point. Watts is even more of a periphery player. Henson and Strickland certainly have talent (I think Henson will become a force if he stays around long enough to get it), but they are far from ready to do the heavy lifting offensively for those other three. And that team just isn't going to be close to competing with a team as good as Duke.

Luckily for you, Roy knows this and will play Davis, Thompson, Ginyard, and Drew 25-30 minutes, and Zeller ~20 minutes, and we will see limited minutes from the Wears and Watts.

[UrinalCake]

We really need to organize a two-on-two match between these guys. Can someone make this happen?