Top Players in ACC Next Year

[greybeard]

You must be turning into alzheimers-beard cause Sheld didn't graduate that long ago...and then there was this other guy, what was his name...Bane Shattier??

Can't compare the teams that Sheld and Shattier played on, and their rolls on it, and the team that McClure played on. Last year's team did not score on runouts, ran clock everytime down, and were playing in a guard dominated league. McClure would play against the likes of VT or Va and remain on the ball. First he'd be on Singletary and stay in front of him, no matter what he tried to do, then Singletary would hand it off to R, and the same, than R would have Singletary come off him while still dribbling and keep it and McClure would still be there. Ditto with Dowdell, Washington, and the other Dude. Oh, and then McClure would go get the in-the-crowd rebound.

I did not say McClure was the best defender in Duke history. Just that he was asked to and did contribute more on defense than anyone I can remember. I don't remember too good anymore but I do remember the guys you mentioned. I stand by what I said.

And, if they did more defensively than McClure for their teams, what's your point? Mine hardly depended on literal truth.

[Classof06]

The above post was dead-on. DeMarcus was our best defender, but was by no means a lock-down defender. It is not like he shut down Lawson or anything, so lets not go nuts about him on D. He is a very good defender, and the best such on our team next year.

But our offense last year was awful. Awful. Being the offensive leader on last year's team is like being the best looking girl at an ugly girl convention. Tis the epitome of darning with faint praise.

DN has huge holes in his Offensive game. Even the apologists on this board have to begrudge that. His outside shot is inconsistent, some of his drives are extremely ill-concieved, and his ball handling is mediocre.

That said, he made huge strides with his body last summer, and if his skills make a similiar jump this year, he can be All-ACC somewhere. He certainly has the raw ability, it just needs to be molded.

Regarding the All-ACC teams this year, we could be looking at a 99 type scenario. UNC is clearly the class of the conference next year. If they stay healthy, and the returning players improve (not a lot, just a modicum), UNC could be dominant. They might not lose a single conference game. At most, I see them losing only 1-3 (extreme outside, barring catastrophic injury) games this year.

If they do go undefeated, or lose only 1 game, then they should dominate the All-ACC teams. I can easily see them with 3 members of the 1st team, with TL, TH, and WE. Singletary could swoop up another spot, with the fifth slot open to whoever surprises this year. Probably someone from the next team in conference, us or Clemson.

We may not like it, but UNC has a bunch of talented players, and next year is a down year for virtually everyone else. The only team in conference stronger than usual is Clemson, and they are not world beaters. (I say that Duke is worse than usual, if better than last year, while NCSU could be approximately where they were in better Sendek years)

Which brings me to a question for the board.

Next year does not look like a NC type of year. It is not outside the realm of possibility for Duke to be a NC contender, but we are not even a darkhorse favorite at this time, nor should we be.

Next year however, we could be a team loaded with talent and experience. Most of the best players on the team are Soph or Fr. Only 3 players are older, DN, GP, and MP with the latter two almost certainly returning. Might this year not be a good one to focus on the future? I love DN, and I want him to play, a lot, but not 30+ mpg. It will not translate into significantly more wins this year, nor will a heavy dose of DN help when he is gone.

Does any one else want to see a focus on Duke building for the next NC title run, next year? Even if it may mean a few, if any, less wins this year?

All I am saying is that it wouldn't hurt for KS and GH to get used to having the reigns in their hands this year.

Patrick Yates

I'm with you in terms of Duke, Patrick. This team is 1-2 seasons away from being a legit contender. I'll lean towards one year, because a class of Henderson, Scheyer, Thomas and Zoubek as juniors should be pretty seasoned, when you consider they were thrown into the fire their freshman years. So, by the 2008-09 season, especially if we land either E. Williams or Monroe (not even both), I'd be surprised if we weren't one of the nation's elite teams heading into the season; if we're not, that means someone (Gerald, Singler, etc.) left early for the NBA, meaning they had a ridiculously good year and thus Duke probably did better as a team than we currently expect this coming season.

That being said, I'm with you in that I would like to see them prepare for that by giving the reins to kids like Henderson, Scheyer, Singler, and Smith. I'd include Paulus, but he already has the reins, so he's naturally part of this group. At this point, it looks to me that any NC in the forseeable future will be on the backs of these kids in particular. Why not start prepping them now?

As far as UNC goes, to say they could possibly run through the ACC undefeated, while not impossible, is pretty bold. They should be considered the best team in the league, but as I've said numerous times before, they have a lot of kids that will be asked to fill much larger roles than they did last year; for them to run through the ACC unscatched means you assume that will be a seamless transition. I'm not so sure it will be. While I don't forsee them losing to Virginia Tech twice again, they lost 5 conference games last year and while the conference might be weaker, I believe UNC will be as well; to assume they'll be better than last year after losing Brandan Wright and Reyshawn Terry is, again, pretty bold. The ACC may be a little down this year, but it's still the ACC.

If they go undefeated or once-defeated, I guess Ellington would probably have to be an All-ACC performer, but again, I think that's a stretch. Maybe it's because he had two awful games against Duke last year, but I'm not completely sold on this kid, not enough to give him that kind of respect. By the numbers, Scheyer had a better freshman year and had to carry a much heavier load. Therefore, to see Ellington go from having a comparable but inferior year to Scheyer one year to 1st team All-ACC the next is a highly impressive (though speculative) progression.

[greybeard]

Got it. From now on I won't confuse what you said for what you meant.

Now that was funny.

McClure spent more time on the ball guarding the potential shooter than anybody I have ever seen who wore a Duke uniform, or any other for that matter. It was an extraordinary performance.

Neither Sheld nor Battier was asked to do anything comparable. Battier would play stopper on the best big, and Sheldon would provide great help defense. Neither was "on" like K asked McC to stay "on" the potential scorer/shooter for most all the time on each possession. Most extraordinary defensive performance I have seen, Sheldon and Battier included. Now, your case, sir, if you got one.

Or did you also not mean what you said, which sort of was lacking in any splanation. BTW, what's the hard edge about? You don't like McClure or something?

[SilkyJ]

I did not say McClure was the best defender in Duke history. Just that he was asked to and did contribute more on defense than anyone I can remember.

Fair enough, but you did you say he was the best player in the history of the planet, which I think would encompass Duke bball history (see below since your memory is clearly failing you)

McClure in every switch situation always remained with the ball out front, no matter who was coming off whom, and probably played the best defense for a team in the history of the planet, in my opinion, last year.

And, if they did more defensively than McClure for their teams, what's your point? Mine hardly depended on literal truth.

Got it. From now on, I won't confuse what you said for what you meant.

You don't like McClure or something?.

I Love McClure. One of my favorites on the team. I dont like the fact that you arent making any sense.

[greybeard]

Doing more for your team defensively in the history of the planet is not the same as being the best defender in the history of the planet. If that does not make sense, then it is the reader's problem not mine.

McClure played THE MAJOR role with regard to exterior defense on the team last year. The most important defender, however, was McRob. He was the anchor without whom the defense would not have worked. Period. But, the guy who worked the hardest, and who was principally responsible for stopping the shooter penetrators like those I mentioned was McClure. DeMarcus played terrific and tenacious defense, but McClure had the lead role and played it specularly, did more for his team defensively in the history of the world.

Now, make your case for someone else. Or don't.

I hardly was implying that there was dislike for McClure on this board.

[greybeard]

I don't even know what you are talking about at this point. you are clearly going senile.

Is the best player in the league the guy who does the most for his team? Is there one answer to that question?

Who is more valuable on offense, the guy who creates space two passes away that allows the guy who catches it to beat his man because there is no help, or the guy who catches it and beats his man because he sees there is no help?

We know who gets the most credit. Is he the more valuable to the team? Depends on your perspective. Dr. Jack Ramsey would answer that question differently than most lay people. You still do not know what I am talking about do you?

Stop the childish stuff, or don't. Senile ain't nearly as bad as nasty.

[Classof06]

Doing more for your team defensively in the history of the planet is not the same as being the best defender in the history of the planet. If that does not make sense, then it is the reader's problem not mine.

McClure played THE MAJOR role with regard to exterior defense on the team last year. The most important defender, however, was McRob. He was the anchor without whom the defense would not have worked. Period. But, the guy who worked the hardest, and who was principally responsible for stopping the shooter penetrators like those I mentioned was McClure. DeMarcus played terrific and tenacious defense, but McClure had the lead role and played it specularly, did more for his team defensively in the history of the world.

Now, make your case for someone else. Or don't.

I hardly was implying that there was dislike for McClure on this board.

Go take a look at Shelden Williams' senior year. Talk about ridiculous responsibilities. Not only was he the backbone of the whole defense, he got absolutely no help defensively (we never double-teamed or trapped the post), and he had to help out on EVERY dribble penetration. Each night we relied on Shelden to be the ultimate help defender, to be the last line of defense, to be "The Landlord," all while guarding his own man on an island. Keep in mind, our perimeter routinely featured Paulus and Redick, along with significant minutes from Melchionni; these are 3 average defenders at best. And on top of all this, we couldn’t even afford for him to foul out of a game! McRoberts was wet behind the ears and Boateng surely wasn’t going to cut it (even if he could, we'll never know). IMO, Shelden was as valuable to the 05-06 team defensively as JJ was offensively. Maybe even more.

Krzyzewski couldn't have asked any more of this kid defensively, and I suspect that's one reason why nobody at Duke will ever wear #23 again.

[RepoMan]

Does any one else want to see a focus on Duke building for the next NC title run, next year? Even if it may mean a few, if any, less wins this year?


Patrick Yates

Patrick: I like to read your posts, but you suggest a most unpalatable strategy. If Coack K ever adopted such a loser mentality (sacrifice the potential accomplishments of this team for that which might be realized by the next team), I would hope for a replacement coach.

What would you say to DeMarcus? "Look son, I know you've worked your a** off for me for four years, and I know you give us the best chance to win games, but I think Gerald needs more experience so that he is better next year, so you need to ride the pine. Sorry."

It doesn't get much worse than that. I hope you don't really think that's a good idea. Frankly, its unethical.

[greybeard]

Go take a look at Shelden Williams' senior year. Talk about ridiculous responsibilities. Not only was he the backbone of the whole defense, he got absolutely no help defensively (we never double-teamed or trapped the post), and he had to help out on EVERY dribble penetration. Each night we relied on Shelden to be the ultimate help defender, to be the last line of defense, to be "The Landlord," all while guarding his own man on an island. Keep in mind, our perimeter routinely featured Paulus and Redick, along with significant minutes from Melchionni; these are 3 average defenders at best. And on top of all this, we couldn’t even afford for him to foul out of a game! McRoberts was wet behind the ears and Boateng surely wasn’t going to cut it (even if he could, we'll never know). IMO, Shelden was as valuable to the 05-06 team defensively as JJ was offensively. Maybe even more.

Krzyzewski couldn't have asked any more of this kid defensively, and I suspect that's one reason why nobody at Duke will ever wear #23 again.

Good case.

Perhaps I was just too taken with the unusual quality of everybody on the team switching on all screens except McClure who stayed with the ball no matter what. I found that extraordinary, and could only imagine how strong and solid and balanced he'd have had to be to stay in front of the guys he was on and how long he had to stay down in a defensive stance on the ball.

Your case for Shelden is strong. In fact, I was "sure" as a frequent ajc poster that a principal reason he went at 5 was that he would absolutely shut down the pick and roll at key times, particularly at the end of games. If I posted that onceon the ajc site, I posted it a thousand times. Can't help but think that Woody has badly misused the guy.

I have to say also that I was even more impressed with Shelden's performance on offense his last year than his defense. His dominance inside was astounding. I also saw Duke that year as an offensive powerhouse built around a Mr. OUTSIDE extraordinaire and a dominent Mr. Inside. Stops seemed to be made at more strategic times that year; last year, each time down was the Battle of the Bulge.

Anyway, I just have never seen anybody deployed on defense the way that McClure was. Was, am, blown away with K's vision and the kid's performance.

[jaimedun34]

The idea of losing games now to win games later is just ridiculous, and I'm a bit disappointed to hear it from Duke fans. After seasons like '95 and '07, you would think that every win is appreciated. Who's to say that Henderson is even here for his junior year? You never, ever know how the next season is going to shake out and you should never base what you do this season on what you want to do next season (unless you are installing your system offensively/defensivly ex: motion offense and man to man) That is what the summer and preseason are for!

It's just funny that everyone dumps on Nelson for having major holes in his game. He seriously might as well give his scholarship to Patrick Davidson, because he can offer nothing to the team. He can't shoot, he can't handle the ball, he can't distribute... I mean, what does he bring to the table for this Duke team?

[ACCBBallFan]

I do not consider it playing inferior this year to be superior next but rather playing less than optimal in early part of season to be most proficient at end of season, and I am thinking Zoubek, not the guys others have mentioned.

Zoubek is the only true post player, and even getting Monroe does not change that. Duke may still win without Zoubek but chances are greatly improved if he is allowed to learn in games.

[whereinthehellami]

After reading the thread, a couple of points jumped out to me:

• Our offense next year should be a strength. Our guys have the talent to put the ball in the bucket and now they have the experience. The leadership of Paulus (his team) should help the "chemistry issues" from last year and IMO Singler is going to infuse the team with a jolt of offense (creativity).

• McClure did play great defense last year (especially pre-injury) and was a good rebounder for his size. If he regains his confidence from re-aggravating his knee I think he will start. I think we will have enough offense from the other guys that McClure's energy, defense, rebounding, and overall "glueness" will make him one of the most important players on the team next season, especially when you consider our frontcourt issues.

[jimsumner]

"The idea of losing games now to win games later is just ridiculous, and I'm a bit disappointed to hear it from Duke fans."

Krzyzewski did pretty much this in 1983 when he threw a bunch of freshman to the wolves in preference to more experienced players like Chip Engelland, Mike Tissaw and Doug McNeely. The context was different, of course. K was building his program in 1983 and he's maintaining it now. But the idea of giving up short-term benefits for better long-term benefits is not inherently ridiculous.

That said, I fully expect K to play the lineup that gives Duke the best chance of winning. He has said on numerous occasions that he expects Duke to compete for the NCAA title every year. Just because Duke didn't compete for the NCAA title last year doesn't mean he's abandoned that philosophy.

[ACCBBallFan]

After reading the thread, a couple of points jumped out to me:

• Our offense next year should be a strength. Our guys have the talent to put the ball in the bucket and now they have the experience. The leadership of Paulus (his team) should help the "chemistry issues" from last year and IMO Singler is going to infuse the team with a jolt of offense (creativity).

• McClure did play great defense last year (especially pre-injury) and was a good rebounder for his size. If he regains his confidence from re-aggravating his knee I think he will start. I think we will have enough offense from the other guys that McClure's energy, defense, rebounding, and overall "glueness" will make him one of the most important players on the team next season, especially when you consider our frontcourt issues.

Your two points seem to contradict one another. McClure no doubt adds value on defense, but that would be at expense of offense.

Unless Duke plays small ball with Singler at 5 center and McClure at forward, along with Paulus, Nelson and Scheyer/Henderson, are you saying McClure starts in lieu of Singler, which may happen in early part of year due to experience.

If small ball with Singler at center were the lineup in Blue-White game, Zoubek could guard McClure (as could any opponent's slower big) leaving Lance/King to guard Singler. Paulus-Scheyer-Nelson match up with Smith-Henderson-Pocius.

The difference might boil down to Singler, whether he can be as effective guarding Zoubek as he was against Kousfas, and whether he can be the scoring difference between the two teams, plus how well the other frosh play vis a vis Duke's returning nucleus.

Duke has a lot of guys like McClure, with Taylor King his antithesis, that may be plusses on one end of the floor but minuses on the other. Similarly Duke needs Paulus's leadership and playmaking but defense is not his forte, with Marty vice versa.

Nobody is better than coach K at mixing and matching. This could be a year where who plays game to game depends on the matchups the opponent presents.

[whereinthehellami]

Your two points seem to contradict one another. McClure no doubt adds value on defense, but that would be at expense of offense.

Unless Duke plays small ball with Singler at 5 center and McClure at forward, along with Paulus, Nelson and Scheyer/Henderson, are you saying McClure starts in lieu of Singler, which may happen in early part of year due to experience.

My point was that with a year of experience and obvious talent/skills Duke's offense should no longer be a liability. I don't think the fact that McClure isn't a great offensive threat will be as big of a deal as alot of people are making it out to be. The rest of the line-up has punch and can score. I think McClure showed that he could hit the 10-15 footer early last year before he lost a little bit of confidence. I wouldn't be suprised to see him hold his own if let open. I'd be more worried about BZ and LT being able to be productive on the offensive end. And as far as the other aspects of the game/intaglibles, I would take McClure ahead of BZ and LT. I think it gets dicier between McClure/GH but I think I'd still start with Dave as his energy, stamina, and experience give him the edge in my book.

Gotta run...mid thought.

[RepoMan]

Krzyzewski did pretty much this in 1983 when he threw a bunch of freshman to the wolves in preference to more experienced players like Chip Engelland, Mike Tissaw and Doug McNeely. The context was different, of course.

I think the context was substantially different.

The suggestion made above is that K should sacrifice wins today to gain wins tomorrow. Do you think Duke would have won more games in 82-83 if Johnny Dawkins et al played less?

I guess no one will know the answer, but I'd bet my last dollar that K believed that playing the Freshman as much as he did in 82-83 gave the team the best chance of winning THAT season.

PS: Seniors England and Emma were in the top 6 rotation, averaging over 20 minutes a game in 82-83 after K brought in his key Freshman class.

[jimsumner]

Repoman,

I've written extensively about the class of '86 and have talked about that '83 season with all the principles, including K. There is absolutely no doubt that Mike Krzyzewski made a conscious decision to go with the lineup that brought Duke the best chance of winning down the line. That included diminishing the playing time of holdovers Mike Tissaw, Chip Engelland, Doug McNeely, Todd Anderson, Dan Meagher, Greg Wendt, and Jay Bryan. Every single holdover from '82 played less in '83.

Chip Engelland sat on the bench for four games before he bought into the program. By sat on the bench, I mean zero minutes played. Engelland was sixth in the ACC in scoring in 1982 and was a senior in '83. His PT dropped from 1008 minutes in '82 to 516 in '83. That's a pretty steep drop. Tissaw went from 728 mp in '81 to 611 in '82 to 46 in '83. And he also was a senior. McNeely went from 23 mpg to 7.5 mpg before dropping off the team; he came back in '84.

The other decision made by K that season was to play man-to-man even though a judicious use of zone likely would have helped the short-term w/l record. Duke got absolutely toasted that year on D. But they learned.

K's thinking was that he was going to win with the freshmen and they were going to be playing man-to-man when they won, whether it was this year or next.

Trust me, lots of young coaches on the spot would not have had the nerve to bypass the experience for youth. It took a lot of confidence for K to do so and a lot of support for Butters to tell the critics--many of whom were prominent high rollers--to take a hike. I have a great deal of admiration for both men.


As stated in a prior post, I neither want nor expect K to make comparable decisions this season. But I still maintain that the CONCEPT of playing more talented but less experienced players ahead of less talented but more experienced players in order to develop a program for the future is not inherently illogical.

[RepoMan]

Sounds like you know more than me, so I defer.

I have absolutely zero first-hand knowledge, so your judgment is much better informed than my opinion.

Making the question abstract, I have no problem with playing youth over experience, if you think that youth gives you a better chance to win (perhaps because the youth in question includes massive talent that far exceeds that of the experienced players). But, a decision to sacrifice a current season, along with the senior year of athletes who have very short careers (esp if they have no pro options), because it will help the next season, while not inherently illogical, strikes me as fundamentally unfair, and, well, inconsistent with a winning attitude.

[Classof06]

Sounds like you know more than me, so I defer.

I have absolutely zero first-hand knowledge, so your judgment is much better informed than my opinion.

Making the question abstract, I have no problem with playing youth over experience, if you think that youth gives you a better chance to win (perhaps because the youth in question includes massive talent that far exceeds that of the experienced players). But, a decision to sacrifice a current season, along with the senior year of athletes who have very short careers (esp if they have no pro options), because it will help the next season, while not inherently illogical, strikes me as fundamentally unfair, and, well, inconsistent with a winning attitude.

I agree with you that would be ethically problematic, but I think you're looking at it from an extreme point of view. What I mean is just what Lance said in his interview the other day; it doesn't have to be just the upperclassmen taking the leadership roles, especially when we have so few upperclassmen. These kids don't or shouldn't have to defer, especially when they're going to be the core of what looks like a very bright future for this program. As was expected, so much relied on the makeshift upperclassmen last year that when Paulus misses a month of preseason, McClure re-aggravates his knee, and Josh doesn't seem to take the reins like people expect, you become a team with no direction, losing 4 out of your last 5 games. Lance was the most vocal freshman last year and even he said he deferred too much. That's how it is when you're as young as we were last year, but this isn't last year.

My point is that I wanna see these sophomores like Scheyer, Henderson, Thomas, Zoubek and maybe even a Singler or a Nolan Smith take as much ownership in this thing as a Nelson. Because as I said earlier, any championship (ACC or NCAA) we win in the forseeable future will be won on the backs of those kids, and most likely not Nelson's. That's not Demarcus' fault, but given both the size and promise of the last, present and next recruiting classes, Duke is headed straight for a situation where they have both superior depth and talent to last year, and maybe even this year (depending on who signs, who defects, etc).That's more of a reason to put these kids on the front line ASAP, and last year was a good start despite the end result. The quicker our youth develops, the closer we'll get to the promise land. I think it's a situation where you want to place as much onus on the young kids as you would a Demarcus as opposed to minimalizing Demarcus' role.

[greybeard]

Your two points seem to contradict one another. McClure no doubt adds value on defense, but that would be at expense of offense.

Unless Duke plays small ball with Singler at 5 center and McClure at forward, along with Paulus, Nelson and Scheyer/Henderson, are you saying McClure starts in lieu of Singler, which may happen in early part of year due to experience.

If small ball with Singler at center were the lineup in Blue-White game, Zoubek could guard McClure (as could any opponent's slower big) leaving Lance/King to guard Singler. Paulus-Scheyer-Nelson match up with Smith-Henderson-Pocius.

The difference might boil down to Singler, whether he can be as effective guarding Zoubek as he was against Kousfas, and whether he can be the scoring difference between the two teams, plus how well the other frosh play vis a vis Duke's returning nucleus.

Duke has a lot of guys like McClure, with Taylor King his antithesis, that may be plusses on one end of the floor but minuses on the other. Similarly Duke needs Paulus's leadership and playmaking but defense is not his forte, with Marty vice versa.

Nobody is better than coach K at mixing and matching. This could be a year where who plays game to game depends on the matchups the opponent presents.

Also, it might be that with less a defensive load, McClure might show better on offense. Last year K obviously wanted to keep the score down and he had in McRob the sweeper (soccer term, sorry guys) to make the half court strangle-hold approach to defense work. Might not use that tack this year, and ask less of McClure on the defensive end. If so, he might have more to give, physically and otherwise, on the offensive end. That game-ender showed some specialness with the ball in his hands.

Who knows. All I know is that I wouldn't want to have to play him head up to compete for playing time. You beat him, game day is a vacation.