Rough 4-game stretch for our big guys

[CDu]

After the breakout performance from the Plumlees against Wake, we've seen the following averages over the last four games from Zoubek and the Plumlees:

Miles: 18.25 mpg, 2.5 ppg, 4.25 rpg, 31% fg, 2.5 fpg
Mason: 10.5 mpg, 1.5 ppg, 1.75 rpg, 38% fg, 2.5 fpg
Zoubek: 10.75 mpg, 3 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 44% fg, 3.75 fpg

Combined, that's 39.5 mpg, 7 ppg, 9.5 rpg, and 8.75 fpg. Essentially, we're getting fill-in minutes and some rebounding and fouls at the 5 spot from these guys, and not much more.

This puts a LOT of pressure on Lance Thomas and the big three to carry the team. For those suggesting that we need to get these guys more touches, it's hard to argue in favor of that given the results we've seen. The perimeter guys are shooting for a higher percentage than that and s.

We need these guys to provide more of a presence on the floor. I don't expect much more from Zoubek - at this point, he can only do so much out there. But the Plumlees need to do better htan 4 points, 6 rebounds, and 5 fouls per game (combined) if we're going to be an elite team come March.

Hopefully they can figure it out over the next month. The potential is there, as both have size and leaping ability. They just have to figure out how to get it done.

[Matches]

Plumlees = the key to the rest of the season. When at least one of them is playing to their potential, we're really good. When neither of them is, we're still better than average but not a serious national contender.

[CDu]

Plumlees = the key to the rest of the season. When at least one of them is playing to their potential, we're really good. When neither of them is, we're still better than average but not a serious national contender.

I agree. I don't expect either of them to start averaging 15 points and 8 rebounds or anything like that. But I would like to see the two of them be able to combine for more than 4 points, 6 rebounds, and 5 fouls in 28 minutes.

[duke4life32182]

We should expect 20+ points a game from the three combined. Is that to much to ask for? They have size and two of them have the athletic ability to average that much between the 3. I was expecting 20 between the Plumlees a game, but that isn't what we are getting. I agree that the Plumlees are the key to our season. Also I believe that Mason and Kelley are out of position. They don't look comfortable at all this far into the season, I think these two and Dawkins need to start looking for their offense a little more. Time to step it up Freshmen.

[CDu]

We should expect 20+ points a game from the three combined. Is that to much to ask for? They have size and two of them have the athletic ability to average that much between the 3. I was expecting 20 between the Plumlees a game, but that isn't what we are getting. I agree that the Plumlees are the key to our season. Also I believe that Mason and Kelley are out of position. They don't look comfortable at all this far into the season, I think these two and Dawkins need to start looking for their offense a little more. Time to step it up Freshmen.

I think 20 ppg is a reasonable expectation/hope from those three combined. Getting 8, 8, and 4, for example, would do it. They're averaging 15.7ppg combined (when you consider the 6 games Mason didn't play), but that number has been dropping over the past four games. It needs to be trending upward - not downward.

As for players playing out of position, Kelly is absolutely out of position in the limited minutes he's getting. He's a 4/5 who is being asked to often play the 3. That's not his game. I think Mason is playing his natural position (4/5). He's just struggling right now.

The good thing is that there is a month left in the season. Hopefully Mason and/or Miles steps up down the stretch. I have lower expectations for Kelly and Dawkins this year.

[BlueDevilCorvette!]

It's a given Lance is a defensive warrior, however I'd love to see one of the other bigs bring a little offensive swagger to their game. I got faith someone will step up and we haven't seen the last of reverse dunks and thunder putbacks. It's a lot of pressure on these guys and that comes with the job of playing for Duke. They will get it together.

[Kedsy]

We should expect 20+ points a game from the three combined. Is that to much to ask for?

Sorry, but I think that is way too much to ask for in less than 40 combined minutes. How many teams get 20 ppg from their center?

Lance Thomas has been playing almost 34 minutes a game over the last four and has averaged 8 ppg and 7.5 rpg. So combining all our 4s and 5s gives us 15 ppg and 17 rpg in the last four games. Which may not be eyepopping numbers but are perfectly adequate, considering our top three are the highest (or maybe second-highest) scoring trio in the nation, and we outrebounded our opponents by 3.5 per game during that stretch.

It's possible we should have a goal of 20 and 20 from our 4/5, but 15 and 15 is more realistic and is exactly what we've gotten in the last four games. Deciding that the Plumlees should score more and Thomas should score less is merely a redistribution of minutes, and I personally think that topic has been hashed and rehashed more than enough times around here in recent weeks.

[Kfanarmy]

Sorry, but I think that is way too much to ask for in less than 40 combined minutes. How many teams get 20 ppg from their center? ...
It's possible we should have a goal of 20 and 20 from our 4/5, but 15 and 15 is more realistic and is exactly what we've gotten in the last four games.

I would normally agree with this, but their shooting percentage has actually been good...really think they could hit 20 and 20 if they were getting the ball just a bit more inside. Against Georgetown 12 of 17 2pts were missed in the 1st half, primarily by the SSSs. Would be good to see if getting the ball inside to the bigs a bit more, might help with the interior shooting %.

[jimrowe0]

I would normally agree with this, but their shooting percentage has actually been good...really think they could hit 20 and 20 if they were getting the ball just a bit more inside. Against Georgetown 12 of 17 2pts were missed in the 1st half, primarily by the SSSs. Would be good to see if getting the ball inside to the bigs a bit more, might help with the interior shooting %.

And they need to get the ball deep in the paint. Some of the problem is where they are catching the ball when they do get. Better positioning would help.

Quote from another fan today at work...and I agree
…I’ve thought about the big man coach quite a bit lately. I don’t know why we can’t get anything going inside with the talent we have…
Coach K seems to think everything is good with the asst. coaches he has… but as a fan, I’m not too sure…

[CDu]

Sorry, but I think that is way too much to ask for in less than 40 combined minutes. How many teams get 20 ppg from their center?

The point is that the Plumlees should be able to play more than 28 mpg combined. Thus, they should be able to average more than 4 ppg combined.

It's possible we should have a goal of 20 and 20 from our 4/5, but 15 and 15 is more realistic and is exactly what we've gotten in the last four games. Deciding that the Plumlees should score more and Thomas should score less is merely a redistribution of minutes, and I personally think that topic has been hashed and rehashed more than enough times around here in recent weeks.

In our last four games, we've averaged as a team only 70.25 ppg, and our efficiency has not been over 106.8. In other words, our offense has been just okay during that four game stretch. And this is despite the fact that we've gotten fairly efficient scoring efforts from our big three. That suggests to me that the bigs need to be scoring more.

Only getting 15 ppg from our 4/5 spot means we're playing with a really thin margin of error. For illustration, during this stretch in which we've gotten only 15 ppg from our bigs, we've gone 2-2 with a +0.25 ppg differential. Getting an extra 5+ ppg from our bigs would make a big difference.

[Kedsy]

I would normally agree with this, but their shooting percentage has actually been good...really think they could hit 20 and 20 if they were getting the ball just a bit more inside. Against Georgetown 12 of 17 2pts were missed in the 1st half, primarily by the SSSs. Would be good to see if getting the ball inside to the bigs a bit more, might help with the interior shooting %.

I agree that some balance in our shot attempts (i.e., more plays inside to our big men) would be a good thing. Particularly, I've noticed that when we run a few alley oop plays, early in the game, to one or both Plumlees, they seem to play better for the entire game (although of course it's possible I'm imagining it or it's coincidence).

But whether or not we should try that, the idea of expecting 20 ppg from three players playing a combined 40 minutes is very unrealistic. If you count Lance and Ryan and ask for 20/20 from the five of them, who play a combined 77 minutes, I don't think that's too much to ask. But it is ambitious (how many teams have both the 4 and 5 positions averaging double/doubles?), and since they're at 15/17 now, we're really only talking about 2 or 3 more baskets a game from the group of them, which would be nice but doesn't seem like it would change anything.

And they need to get the ball deep in the paint. Some of the problem is where they are catching the ball when they do get. Better positioning would help.

Quote from another fan today at work...and I agree
…I’ve thought about the big man coach quite a bit lately. I don’t know why we can’t get anything going inside with the talent we have…
Coach K seems to think everything is good with the asst. coaches he has… but as a fan, I’m not too sure…

I strongly disagree with your co-worker. Looking at the incredible progress/development we've seen in Miles, Z, and Lance from last year to this year, I don't see how anyone could argue the big man coach at Duke has done anything less than an amazing job.

[Wander]

So combining all our 4s and 5s gives us 15 ppg and 17 rpg in the last four games. Which may not be eyepopping numbers but are perfectly adequate

I don't like to make hard if-then conclusions that are based on a statistic, because there are lots of ways to win basketball games, and as you said the three S's are awesome.

But I'll make an exception here. I guarantee we will not make the Final Four if all four (five, if you want to include Kelly) of our big guys are combining to give us 15ppg in March.

[duke4life32182]

Sorry, but I don't think 20 ppg between 3 guys is asking too much. As many outside shots as our big 3 take from the perimeter and mid range (what would you say 25 shots a game between the 3) thats 25 chances at an offensive board/put back. With Smith's driving ability there are plenty of chances for big men to cut to the basket for alley oops or put backs b/c Smith is normally getting the help side defender on him leaving, that's right you got it-one of our big men wide open for an easy flush. Also if they start wanting the ball on screen and rolls from Singler and Scheyer. I'm glad LT has started to up his game, but I am expecting the Plumlees to start elevating their game. They have it in them to get 8-10 pts a night and 6-8 rebounds a game a piece if they start playing to their potential. I know Mason has a lot of potential, but I see glimpse where I think Miles could be very good if he attacks. Sometimes he is to passive. We need some back screen alley oop plays in our play book. Miles and Mason would do good on these plays. Like they used to with Henderson. Anyway I don't think 20 is to much to ask for.

[Kedsy]

The point is that the Plumlees should be able to play more than 28 mpg combined. Thus, they should be able to average more than 4 ppg combined.

I agree with this in a vacuum, but where should the minutes have come from? The only realistic possibility would have been for Lance to have played fewer minutes. Except he's been scoring 8ppg himself. If you took 10 of his minutes away and gave them to one or both Plumlee, they would probably have scored a few more points -- for argument's sake let's say 6 or 8, although the Plumlees' per 40 stats don't necessarily support that assumption. But Lance would probably have scored 2 to 4 fewer points, so the overall gain for our offense would have been around 4 points, maybe 6. Based on what we've seen defensively from the Plumlees, it's hard to argue that them taking 10 of Lance's minutes wouldn't have allowed 2 or 3 more opposition baskets, so it seems to me it's at best a wash.

In our last four games, we've averaged as a team only 70.25 ppg, and our efficiency has not been over 106.8. In other words, our offense has been just okay during that four game stretch. And this is despite the fact that we've gotten fairly efficient scoring efforts from our big three. That suggests to me that the bigs need to be scoring more.

Only getting 15 ppg from our 4/5 spot means we're playing with a really thin margin of error. For illustration, during this stretch in which we've gotten only 15 ppg from our bigs, we've gone 2-2 with a +0.25 ppg differential. Getting an extra 5+ ppg from our bigs would make a big difference.

Possibly. But if we'd scored 5 more points in each of the games we still would have gone 2-2.

[CDu]

I agree with this in a vacuum, but where should the minutes have come from? The only realistic possibility would have been for Lance to have played fewer minutes. Except he's been scoring 8ppg himself. If you took 10 of his minutes away and gave them to one or both Plumlee, they would probably have scored a few more points -- for argument's sake let's say 6 or 8, although the Plumlees' per 40 stats don't necessarily support that assumption. But Lance would probably have scored 2 to 4 fewer points, so the overall gain for our offense would have been around 4 points, maybe 6. Based on what we've seen defensively from the Plumlees, it's hard to argue that them taking 10 of Lance's minutes wouldn't have allowed 2 or 3 more opposition baskets, so it seems to me it's at best a wash.

I think you're missing the point. Thomas doesn't have the skillset to score more than 8 or so points per 30 minutes. The Plumlees currently average slightly more points per minute than Thomas or Zoubek. If you trade 5 mpg from Thomas and 5 mpg from Zoubek to the Plumlees, they have the ability to score more points. The key is that the Plumlees aren't close to their scoring potential.

I'm not suggesting that we trade 5 minutes of Thomas and 5 minutes of Zoubek for 10 minutes of the Plumlees as is. I agree that this would be close to a wash I'm suggesting that we need to trade 5 minutes of Zoubek and 5 minutes of Thomas for an improved version of the Plumlees. I'm not simply asking for a redistribution of minutes. I'm asking/hoping that the Plumlees improve their play such that it warrants a redistribution of minutes due to better production.

Possibly. But if we'd scored 5 more points in each of the games we still would have gone 2-2.

Yes, 5 more points per game wouldn't have changed either outcomes of those particular games. HOWEVER, if we're averaging 5 more points per game, it's less likely that we lose games like the NC State game and the Georgetown game. I'm willing to assume those are fairly extreme examples. But let's say we face a similar bad matchup in the future. If the Plumlees are scoring more and a few more shots don't fall, then maybe we can still win in spite of the bad matchup. It's all about increasing the margin for error.

I'm pretty sure you and I agreed that the Plumlees developing can make a little bit of difference offensively and maybe a little bit defensively. Am I mistaken? If I'm not mistaken, then why do you disagree with this now? All this is is a quantitative illustration of the exact same point.

[Kedsy]

Sorry, but I don't think 20 ppg between 3 guys is asking too much.

In less than 40 combined minutes? Not many teams get 20 points out of the 40 minutes played by their centers. That kind of production would probably be among the best in the country, and whether or not you think it's too much to ask, it's extremely unrealistic, especially on a team that has the highest (or second highest) scoring perimeter trio in the nation.

As many outside shots as our big 3 take from the perimeter and mid range (what would you say 25 shots a game between the 3) thats 25 chances at an offensive board/put back.

We're one of the top offensive rebounding teams in the country, so I'm not sure what more you think we can accomplish there. But our top 12 offensive rebounding percentage is approximately 40%, so using your numbers that's only 10 chances of an offensive board put back, which is even smaller when you consider that missed outside shots often result in long rebounds that are not easy put backs. And whatever's left the Duke bigs are already trying to put back and they have decent success with it, since their shooting percentages are pretty good. So I don't entirely understand your point here.

With Smith's driving ability there are plenty of chances for big men to cut to the basket for alley oops or put backs b/c Smith is normally getting the help side defender on him leaving, that's right you got it-one of our big men wide open for an easy flush.

Well, if that's true then it's Smith's fault, not the big men's.

Also if they start wanting the ball on screen and rolls from Singler and Scheyer.

Our big men roll after almost every screen. I agree it might be nice to get them the ball more, but you certainly can't blame the bigs for that.

I'm glad LT has started to up his game, but I am expecting the Plumlees to start elevating their game. They have it in them to get 8-10 pts a night and 6-8 rebounds a game a piece if they start playing to their potential.

Well, first of all, Miles is already averaging 7 and 6. Second, there are currently approximately 12 big men in the ACC who average as many as 8 ppg and also 6 rpg. Both Plumlees may have it in them to be top 12 ACC big men, but it's a bit much to ask in essentially the first year of college play for both of them. Moreover, in order for the Plumlees to get enough minutes to average 8 and 6 (or better), you'd have to reduce Lance's minutes to only 10 or 12 a game, which I think would be very detrimental to the team from a defensive standpoint.

I know Mason has a lot of potential, but I see glimpse where I think Miles could be very good if he attacks. Sometimes he is to passive. We need some back screen alley oop plays in our play book. Miles and Mason would do good on these plays.

I completely agree we should run a few more alley oop plays to the Plumlees.

[Kfanarmy]

Possibly. But if we'd scored 5 more points in each of the games we still would have gone 2-2.

I'm not so sure...It depends on when/where they come. If you get two-three more two point field goals during the critical 4 minute stretch of the 1st half, instead of the misses that had a direct impact on the defense you may very well decrease the other team's score by 5, changing the whole dynamic in the final 5 minutes of the game. Really just think a slight increase in efficiency inside the arc makes a world of difference. I'm one of the fans who thinks that increase in efficiency is doable between now and the ACC tourney. A little bit of positive reinforcement, seeing the ball go through the hoop, may make a whole lot of difference. I frankly think they'll get there with some emphasis on finishing inside.

Of note though, most of the shots inside are not coming from z, the Plees and RK.

[Kedsy]

I'm pretty sure you and I agreed that the Plumlees developing can make a little bit of difference offensively and maybe a little bit defensively. Am I mistaken? If I'm not mistaken, then why do you disagree with this now? All this is is a quantitative illustration of the exact same point.

You're not mistaken. And I apologize if I've seemed argumentative. I completely agree that continued development by the Plumlees would make us a much more formidable team, and is a big key to the rest of our season. Increase our margin for error, as you said.

I suppose the reason I chimed in here is twofold. First, I don't want to see the avalanche of "play the Plumlees and bench Lance and Z," when currently Lance and Z are clearly making more of their time on the floor than Miles and Mason are (and I realize you aren't advocating this, but I fear it's a natural extension of the thread). Second, and more importantly, I think what the Plumlees really need to do is defend better. If they could defend well enough to justify additional minutes, then (a) the points would come; and (b) we might not need those points so much. I guess I don't think the problem is they aren't asserting themselves enough on offense as much as it is they can't stay on the floor long enough to get into an offensive flow. And because I think it all comes back to defense, I suppose I'm objecting to the assertion that they have put more effort into offense.

However, I apologize again for arguing with you when we essentially agree.

[CDu]

In less than 40 combined minutes? Not many teams get 20 points out of the 40 minutes played by their centers. That kind of production would probably be among the best in the country, and whether or not you think it's too much to ask, it's extremely unrealistic, especially on a team that has the highest (or second highest) scoring perimeter trio in the nation.

The point is that if the Plumlees play more like they're capable of playing, they'll earn the trio more than 40 minutes.

The last four games, the 4/5 spot has averaged 73.25 mpg, 15 ppg, and 17 rpg. The offense has struggled during this stretch, scoring only 70.25 ppg on about 104 efficiency (or about 1.04 points per possession).

The four big men are averaging, for the season, 21.6 ppg and 19.4 rpg. And that's considering that the Plumlees are really inconsistent and have been undoubtedly playing below their potential. Yet all you're expecting from the quartet is 15 and 15? That's asking too little.

I think we need them to average at least 20 and 18 from the 4/5 spot. That way, our margin for error goes up, and maybe we can withstand some of these bad matchups come tourney time. We can only expect 60+ from the big three so many times.

Edit: Kedsy - I see your last post after having posted this. I agree that defense is the first thing the Plumlees need to improve upon. But I think they also need to play better offensively, as evidenced by their sub-40% fg shooting and low point totals. I was certainly not suggesting that we merely reallocate minutes just to reallocate minutes. I was merely looking for more productivity (and I agree it needs to be at both ends) from the Plumlees, because that's where I think this team has the most room for improvement. Since we agree about that, I see no need for further debate between us on this.

[dubcee83]

First of all, I am new here and I love the activity on the boards. It really makes me proud to be a Duke fan. I do want to apologize about the length for starters and I guess I should start by saying I am not trying to bash Lance Thomas, but I speak from what I see each game.

I agree with most on here that the Plumlee's should start. I would even be satisfied with a Plumlee/Zoubek combination starting. I say this because Lance Thomas has no offensive skillset and he's in his 4th year. Everyone of you in here know that every time Lance Thomas gets a entry pass in the post, you will 98% of the time get a pumpfake, pumpfake, missed layup or blocked shot. Of all of Thomas 8ppg, 6 are normally from putbacks. Occasionally Thomas hits a midrange, but he threatens no team with his offensive ability. I notice people mention that Thomas has been really good defensively. I slightly agree. Yes he face guarded T. Booker well a couple games and he played well against lesser competition, but overall he gets exposed by bigger, more skilled big men(See: G. Monroe, any G. Tech post player, etc.).

So the argument I constantly hear is that the Plumlee's pick up cheapies. I would definitely agree with this. But wouldn't you all agree the cheapies would lessen with more significant playing time. The more you get accustomed to the college game, the more effective you will be. Mason comes in so aggressive because he is eager to make plays. He is by FAR our most skilled big man and needs the opportunity to play before its too late. Thomas is a great leader with great energy, but his skill level just hasn't developed under the Duke system in 4 years. I say let Lance be the 6th or 7th man. Be an energy guy when the Devils need more enthusiasm (See: Jamal Boykin pre-transfer).

Another issue I have is foul trouble. Specifically, there is a reason why opposing Bigs are never in foul trouble. They have absolutely nothing to worry
about when guarding any of Duke's bigs. For the majority of the game its 3 vs 5. And I put a lot of that blame of Coach K and the 3S's. I get so tired of watching any of the bigs (and no Thomas is not a big) post-up and not get the entry pass. I guarantee you if we fed the posts at least 10-12 possessions a game, our bigs would either put up points or get fouled at least. The threat of an inside game opens up wide open shots for the perimeter guys. Duke has become one dimensional like the past few seasons and they are going to get exposed by the upper echelon teams. Games vs. the likes of Georgetown are no fluke. Unless Duke changes the way it plays, we will not make it past the Sweet 16. I, like many others, can't wait until Coach K realizes enough is enough. I could go on, but I'll stop here. I look forward to your feedback!