MBB: Duke 77, Tennessee 67 Post Game Thread

[CDu]

I like Tyler's intensity, but I am not sold on his being a lockdown defender yet. He is pretty good, but he got beaten out of position a few times and had to give up fouls. He impresses me with his effort, but I wonder how much of the lockdown defender reputation is just seeing him trying on the defensive end and getting people pumped.

I've been saying this for a while. He's a very good help defender and good at reading the passing lanes. But he's not a great on-ball defender. He gets beaten fairly often and fouls a lot (he's averaging nearly 4 fouls per game in less than 20mpg).

He's a sparkplug energy guy, and he can make things happen. But he's definitely not a lockdown defender.

[OldPhiKap]

At the risk of someone going Lloyd Bentsen on me, I see some of Larry Bird in Ryan Kelly. To me, he doesn't really pass the eyeball test as a great basketball player. Yet he seems to have a similar basketball IQ. Bird was relatively slow and could not jump, but he was able to compensate for these inadequacies by knowing how to play the game. Bird was also tough as nails and I can't think of anyone who wanted to win more than he. Finally, Kelly's height and range create matchup problems and open up the floor, often making his teammates more effective.

I watched Larry Bird. Larry Bird was an idol of mine . . . .

Ryan is a gifted player who is still learning how good he can be. A big guy with an outside shot, and some mobility towards the basket. Long way to go to get to Larrt Legend, but I hope you're right!

[CDu]

I watched Larry Bird. Larry Bird was an idol of mine . . . .

Ryan is a gifted player who is still learning how good he can be. A big guy with an outside shot, and some mobility towards the basket. Long way to go to get to Larrt Legend, but I hope you're right!

Yeah, he just doesn't have nearly the diverse skillset of Bird. I think poor man's Nowitzki with Kelly.

[davekay1971]

Maybe a little bit. Bird was a much better ballhandler and passer. And at the risk of quantifying an intangible quality, while Kelly has a good basketball IQ, Bird's was off the charts. I think Nowitzki is a better style comp of "tall, slowish, not a great leaper, but can get it done as a scorer."

I expect RK would be immensely flattered at either comparison. Of course, a fair comparison would have to be made with RK at age 20-21 versus Bird or Nowitzki at the same age. I have no idea what kind of game Dirk had at that age, but Bird was stunning as a college junior. Off the charts good. Overall, though, I'd agree with CDu - RK has some similarities to Dirk (perhaps the better way to put it is that RK should watch Dirk closely to see what he has the potential to become). Bird was, well, in the conversation of best of all time...and you could see that coming while he was a junior at Indiana State.

Very good second half for our guys. They took a big step forward on defense. Curry, Mason, and RK all continued their very high level of play. Dawkins was good, quite good at times. Austin really showed us in the last 10 minutes of the game what all the hype is about. He's amazing at getting to the rim. Agreed with some above sentiments that he'll just get better and more problematic for other teams as he learns to choose his spots better and distribute when the time is right. Those two floaters he hit were just spectacular shots.

[watzone]

Win and advance. The Blue Devil continue their roll with a win and that is good! Anyhow, here is Coach K's post game comments - http://bluedevilnation.net/2011/11/c...essee-in-maui/ Ryan Kelly video up next.

[basket1544]

Comparing Kelly to Larry Legend and to Dirk? Wow! Dirk was playing NBA ball at 20 years old so it's a bit difficult to compare. Ryan has the benefit of coming after both. No one 15 years ago was telling a 6'11" player to go ahead and shoot the three pointer. I think it is great and every time Ryan dribbles behind his back, it is showing another very tall player he too can be a ball handler no matter his size. I can't wait to see what Ryan does next!

[CDu]

I expect RK would be immensely flattered at either comparison. Of course, a fair comparison would have to be made with RK at age 20-21 versus Bird or Nowitzki at the same age. I have no idea what kind of game Dirk had at that age, but Bird was stunning as a college junior. Off the charts good. Overall, though, I'd agree with CDu - RK has some similarities to Dirk (perhaps the better way to put it is that RK should watch Dirk closely to see what he has the potential to become). Bird was, well, in the conversation of best of all time...and you could see that coming while he was a junior at Indiana State.

As a 21 year old, Nowitzki averaged 17.5 and 6.5... in the NBA. I definitely didn't mean to suggest Kelly is anywhere near Nowitzki - just that he's more that style. I'd agree with the way you said it.

Bird was just a unique player. He did EVERYTHING so well (shoot from anywhere, post up, pass, handle the ball, even defend on occasion) despite being too slow with no leaping ability. He was a freak.

[Newton_14]

I like Tyler's intensity, but I am not sold on his being a lockdown defender yet. He is pretty good, but he got beaten out of position a few times and had to give up fouls. He impresses me with his effort, but I wonder how much of the lockdown defender reputation is just seeing him trying on the defensive end and getting people pumped.

It's not his on-ball defensive that makes him a great defender. It's his help defense. He is the best on the team at being at the right position on the floor as a help defender and gets most if not all of his steals that way. He is very disruptive to what the other team is trying to do. He has come in and totally changed the momentum in several games in his short career. He is not a bad on-ball defender, but he is not an elite on-ball defender, and has a high foul rate at the moment. We can live with that with the depth we have.

Interestingly, his on-ball defense is much better in a pressing situation before the ball crosses half-court, than in halfcourt on-ball defense after the ball has crossed half-court.

Very pesky defender. I think the praise is justified.

[CDu]

It's not his on-ball defensive that makes him a great defender. It's his help defense. He is the best on the team at being at the right position on the floor as a help defender and gets most if not all of his steals. He is very disruptive to what the other team is trying to do. He has come in and totally changed the momentum in several games in his short career. He is not a bad on-ball defender, but he is not an elite on-ball defender, and has a high foul rate at the moment. We can live with that with the depth we have.

Interestingly, his on-ball defense is much better in a pressing situation before the ball crosses half-court, than in halfcourt on-ball defense after the ball has crossed half-court.

Very pesky defender. I think the praise is justified.

He's a good defender. He's just not a lockdown defender. Praise is justified - just not the oft-used term "lockdown defender."

[FellowTraveler]

Very happy with Kelly’s performance, and Mason’s. And Miles, too -- aggressive, energetic, physical, few mistakes.

Austin alternated between flashes of brilliance and deeply frustrating play. He’s a freshman, so he deserves some slack -- but he also dominates the ball at times, so poor decisions can derail the whole offense in a way that suboptimal play by Ryan or Andre or Miles doesn’t do, so it’s hard to to sometimes find it exasperating. Still, he seems to be forcing bad shots on drives less the last couple of games than he had been; that’s a good sign. Now if someone could just tell him about the existence of open three-point shooters when defenses collapse on his drives… (On one such drive tonight, Andre was wide open -- no defender within 15 feet -- on his right; Austin instead forced a tough pass to Mason, who was surrounded by the same Tennessee players who had collapsed on Austin.)

One play that really stood out to me: On the play with about 5 minutes remaining in which Seth came up with a steal and got fouled, the turnover was caused by Andre doing a great job of denying his man the ball, forcing the ball-handler to make the long, risky pass that Seth picked off. Maybe the best defensive play I’ve seen Andre make, and the kind that easily goes unnoticed, as his man didn’t have the ball, and Seth made good play for the steal.

***
Since Coach K said after an exhibition game that the team just plays better when Thornton comes in the game, I’ve heard television broadcasters say precisely the same thing at least once during every subsequent game, as though it’s their own original thought.

The Davidson & Tennessee games provide a reminder of the unreliability of assessments like “forget about his stats, the team just plays better when he’s in the game”: in both games, Thornton came in the game in the first half, and Duke was not more successful than it had been previously, and arguably much less so. Yet announcers didn’t mention this (even though the Davidson announcers had noted Duke’s alleged tendency to play better with Thornton upon his entrance into the game.)

When people take note when the team’s play improves when a player enters the game but do not make note when the team plays worse (or the same) upon his entrance, that creates skewed perceptions.

I say this not to criticize Thornton, who I like (though it’s probably true that I have less appreciation for the relative merits of his game than does the coaching staff.) I say it rather as an illustration of the ways our subjective observations can be misleading. And I very much include myself in that. For example: One of the points I’ve made most frequently in my limited posting on this site is that good things happen when Mason Plumlee gets the ball, a point based not only on statistical measures of his performance, but also on my subjective observations as well. But it’s true that I sometimes catch myself excusing or explaining away negative results of Mason getting the ball that don’t match the established narrative in my head.

[Newton_14]

He's a good defender. He's just not a lockdown defender. Praise is justified - just not the oft-used term "lockdown defender."

Fair enough, though I don't think I have ever used the word "lockdown defender" describing Tyler. Others have. But, no, K does not send Tyler in there to lock an opposing player down. He sends him in there to disrupt.

So we agree there.

[Greg_Newton]

As a basketball official, I get a kick out of hearing fans utter this phrase, just as I'm sure Coach K and the staff must get a kick out of people saying "that was a terribly coached game." The multitude of intricacies and nuance that go into officiating a game would absolutely boggle the mind. Yes, there were some missed calls, especially the late knee when Dawkins was on the floor.

But I'd love to hear your armchair view of how, other than a few incidents or calls that didn't go Duke's way, how this game was "terribly, terribly officiated..."

Wow. Seriously? If you're an official and thought that was an accurately, consistently called game... well, I just hope you're not working any Duke games.

I'm talking both ways, not just for Duke - contact was called EXTREMELY inconsistently, and there were more than a few calls they flat out missed. If I had time to go through the whole game, I could give you at least 20 plays. Off the top of my head:


-The Dawkins knee to the head you mentioned.
-The late play where Dawkins was literally punched in the face.
-The play in the first half where Miles clearly shifted his pivot foot twice before driving baseline.
-The play in the 2nd half where Ryan got shoved in the back on the rebound, the TN player picked up the loose ball and blatantly took 3 steps without dribbling, yet was rewarded with a foul.
-The play in the 2nd half where Ryan took a huge shove on the box out sending him 5' forward, another shove on the jump, and then was called for a phantom foul on the shot of the guy who pushed him and got the ball.
-Mason's and-1 (off a great post move) where the defender never contacted him. Perhaps a make-up call for his early spin-move, on which there was uncalled, significant contact?
-The rebound where Mason knocked the ball off of his own foot, but it was given to Duke.
-The phantom foul on Dawkins on a fast break following significant contact on a Rivers missed layup.
-The sequence preceding the late Curry-to-Kelly oop where Rivers lost the ball, and the defender had his hands on him the entire time, culminating with a flat-out, extended-arm shove.


Plus about 20 more plays where contact on finishes and rebounds was called incredibly inconsistently. You can talk down to me all you want, but it won't change the fact that this was a terribly officiated game.

[CDu]

Fair enough, though I don't think I have ever used the word "lockdown defender" describing Tyler. Others have. But, no, K does not send Tyler in there to lock an opposing player down. He sends him in there to disrupt.

So we agree there.

I wasn't saying you did. Your previous post was seemingly a counter to a comment that Thornton wasn't a lockdown defender. I was just clarifying that both your statement about praiseworthiness and the previous poster's statement about nonlockdownness were both accurate.

[ACCBBallFan]

Here are the +/- versus TN:

Duke TN +/- Min
65 53 12 30.4 Dre
61 49 12 28.3 Mason

61 53 08 27.4 Ryan
62 55 07 30.6 Austin
71 65 06 33.5 Seth
25 20 05 11.4 Tyler

27 26 01 16.6 Miles
11 10 01 08.3 Quinn

02 04 (2) 02.4 Josh

Though coach K played the starters together the most, 8 times for a total of 16.8 of the 40 minutes, with no other combination more than twice or more than 4 minutes, it was not the most effective lineup:

Occurs +/- Duke TN Min Line-Up

8 +2 33 31 16.8 Austin-Seth-Dre-Mason-Ryan

1 +5 5 0 03.8 Seth-Dre-Mason-Miles-Tyler

2 +4 8 4 03.0 Austin-Seth-Dre-Ryan-Miles

1 (3) 5 8 02.6 Austin-Seth-Mason-Miles-Tyler

1 (2) 2 4 02.4 Austin-Seth-Miles-Quinn-Josh

1 +3 5 2 02.4 Austin-Seth-Mason-Ryan-Quinn

1 (1) 5 6 02.2 Seth-Dre-Mason-Ryan-Tyler

1 (2) 0 2 02.2 Dre-Ryan-Miles-Tyler-Quinn

1 +1 5 4 01.3 Seth-Dre-Ryan-Miles-Tyler

2 +4 4 0 01.2 Austin-Dre-Mason-Ryan-Tyler

1 +2 2 0 01.0 Austin-Dre-Mason-Miles-Quinn

1 (4) 0 4 00.5 Austin-Seth-Dre-Mason-Miles

1 00 2 2 00.4 Austin-Seth-Dre-Ryan-Quinn

2 +1 1 0 00.2 Austin-Seth-Dre-Ryan-Tyler

1 00 0 0 00.2 Austin-Seth-Dre-Mason-Tyler


25 10 77 67 40.0 Total

On the bolded lineups that were 3 or more in absolute value, the name that occurs the most is

+3 Ryan Kelly

+2 Dre Dawkins

+1 Seth , Mason, Tyler, Austin and Quinn
-0- Miles

[House G]

As a 21 year old, Nowitzki averaged 17.5 and 6.5... in the NBA. I definitely didn't mean to suggest Kelly is anywhere near Nowitzki - just that he's more that style. I'd agree with the way you said it.

Bird was just a unique player. He did EVERYTHING so well (shoot from anywhere, post up, pass, handle the ball, even defend on occasion) despite being too slow with no leaping ability. He was a freak.

And i never meant to suggest Kelly has anywhere near Bird's skillset (hence the Bentsen reference). I was thinking more of his basketball acumen.

[Billy Dat]

Fair enough, though I don't think I have ever used the word "lockdown defender" describing Tyler. Others have. But, no, K does not send Tyler in there to lock an opposing player down. He sends him in there to disrupt.

I've been part of the "Tyler's D is overrated" camp this season, but tonight I had a different impression, one that is more closely tied to Newton_14's characterization of Thornton as disrupter. We caught a break when Golden picked up those two quick fouls and only played 4 first half minutes. When he started to get rolling in the second half, K put Tyler on him. More then anything else, he basically got in his face. He was denying him the ball, bumping him, getting physical with him, being a real nuisance. He's got a real toughness to him, he gets in other players' heads. He is winning me over on that alone. The game was getting pretty chippy at times, and I felt like Tyler and, to my surprise, Andre, were the ones pushing back. Granted, Andre was taking kind of a beating, but I liked the fight in him, as I did with Thornton. We needed that fight today.

I love how we are isolating Mason and Kelly on the elbow and letting them go to work. Both are proving, this year, to be quality ball handlers for their height and when matched man-to-man, most 6'10" guys and above are not going to be able to stay with them. As long as they protect the ball against the guards who dig down, and find open guys when those guards do collapse, then we'll reap a lot of offensive benefit from those efforts.

Based on our early games, if I was a coach with the right personnel, I'd be driving on us all day long. I hope that team's inability to finish at the rim against us is a continuing trend (Tenn missed a lot of lay-ups, as did MSU), but I'll credit their fear of being blocked by our tall frontline (yeah, yeah, that's the ticket).

The diverse reaction to Rivers on this board and in the media is really interesting. I feel like I am being objective when I say that his ability to beat guys off the bounce is unlike anything I have seen in a Duke Uniform since Jason Williams, including Kyrie, and that his ability to do so, and his threat to do so, put other teams' defenses at a huge disadvantage. Game by game, I see him getting better and better at passing, and being under control. He's 5 games into his freshman year. I love the kid's game.

Curry, Mason and Kelly are establishing themselves as every-game producers. Rivers is right there, too, and Dawkins seems like he finally wants to earn that title as well. We aren't a well oiled machine by any stretch, but we keep getting better. Michigan will be an interesting test as it is a completely different style.

Kudos to Coach Cuonzo. Man, that team plays hard. Looks like that was a good hire.

[feldspar]

Wow. Seriously? If you're an official and thought that was an accurately, consistently called game... well, I just hope you're not working any Duke games.

I'm talking both ways, not just for Duke - contact was called EXTREMELY inconsistently, and there were more than a few calls they flat out missed. If I had time to go through the whole game, I could give you at least 20 plays. Off the top of my head:


-The Dawkins knee to the head you mentioned.
-The late play where Dawkins was literally punched in the face.
-The play in the first half where Miles clearly shifted his pivot foot twice before driving baseline.
-The play in the 2nd half where Ryan got shoved in the back on the rebound, the TN player picked up the loose ball and blatantly took 3 steps without dribbling, yet was rewarded with a foul.
-The play in the 2nd half where Ryan took a huge shove on the box out sending him 5' forward, another shove on the jump, and then was called for a phantom foul on the shot of the guy who pushed him and got the ball.
-Mason's and-1 (off a great post move) where the defender never contacted him. Perhaps a make-up call for his early spin-move, on which there was uncalled, significant contact?
-The rebound where Mason knocked the ball off of his own foot, but it was given to Duke.
-The phantom foul on Dawkins on a fast break following significant contact on a Rivers missed layup.
-The sequence preceding the late Curry-to-Kelly oop where Rivers lost the ball, and the defender had his hands on him the entire time, culminating with a flat-out, extended-arm shove.


Plus about 20 more plays where contact on finishes and rebounds was called incredibly inconsistently. You can talk down to me all you want, but it won't change the fact that this was a terribly officiated game.

Saying a game is horribly officiated and that the referees are inconsistent because there were calls missed is like saying Duke is horribly coached or the players are horrible because some players missed some shots or committed some fouls. You're expecting perfection, when that's not the standard for quality officiating. There are six eyes on the floor trying to watch 20 hands and 20 feet and 10 bodies at all times. You do the math.

I read nothing in your post about an overall inconsistency in calling the game (Tennessee's bigs were allowed to push in the paint but ours weren't; Duke's guards handchecked all game but the refs called 10 handchecks on the Vols). All I saw was a bunch of specific plays you thought should get called one way or the other.

I'm not talking down to you. I do, however, find it very convenient for someone who is sitting in their barcalounger thousands of miles away watching a game on TV, limited to two or three camera angles to think they got every call "right" that the refs got "wrong" when they are just a few feet from the play, with a much better angle on things. Do I think the refs called everything right tonight? No, I've still yet to see any official call a perfect game, just as I've yet to see a coach coach a perfect game, where none of his players turn the ball over, miss a shot, or commit a foul. Is it okay to say things like "I thought that was a foul" or "Boy, that looked like a travel to me"? Sure.

But I'm also willing to concede that 1) Those guys know a helluva lot more than I do about calling a good basketball game (what to let go, what to watch for, what to call in order to keep the game in hand, etc) and 2) I'm watching the game on TV or from the stands, where my angle and view of the game is RADICALLY different from on the floor, a mere few feet away from the action. In my opinion, going out of your way to completely disparage three guys who are some of the best in the business just because you think you saw some plays differently when, in fact, you and almost everyone on the board and in the stands knows probably 1/100th of the ins and outs of calling a complete, consistent, accurate game to me just, I dunno, rubs me the wrong way, much as it rubs a lot of people here the wrong way when someone comes on the board and says "Coach K coached a horrible, inconsistent game tonight." It strikes me as incredibly arrogant. It strikes me as ignorant.

That's all I was trying to say.

[stixof96]

Tennesseee was far too successful driving the lane and got way too many 2nd and 3rd shots. Better stop that sooner rather than later.

[DukieTiger]

Tennesseee was far too successful driving the lane and got way too many 2nd and 3rd shots. Better stop that sooner rather than later.

I responded to this on the other thread, but Tennessee was successful driving the lane because we gameplanned to take away the 3. Sure, we'd like to limit 2nd chance points, but you also don't mention how many point-blank shots UT missed because they were seemingly bothered by our post defense. The defense is far from perfect, and had me frustrated any number of times tonight. They need to get better at communicating with one another and learn to maintain a certain level of intensity. But saying that it is a critical weakness of allowing another team to get into the lane, and not acknowledging that we held them to ZERO made 3pt'ers (and they've been averaging 10+ per game) is a little unbalanced.

[Olympic Fan]

With his play so far (and with the recent Grantland article), a lot of people will be (and are) talking about Austin's decision-making, mostly saying that he needs to start passing out of his drives. I think that, on this particular issue, we are just going to need to be patient.

Even when Austin was at Winter Park, when he was scoring 29 points a game, when he had the ball in his hands nearly every single possession, he only averaged two assists per game. Just two. He's not a drive-and-dish player; he's a drive-and-drive player. He simply never needed to pass out of his drives in high school. So it's not just a matter of concentration or "making better decisions." It's a matter of adding a whole new aspect to his game. It's about teaching him to keep an eye out for open players while also keeping an eye on the rim. This is not something you do by just magically "paying more attention." It has to be learned. And that takes time.

Jeez, I wonder what people want from Austin.

He actually averaged 2.2 assists a game at Winter Park -- and his selfishness didn't hurt too much as he led Winter Park to back to back 6-A state titles in Florida.

One recruiting guy told me not to worry about Rivers' assist totals -- it was a function of the offensive skills of his teammates. It's worth nothing that in his two national all-star games -- when selfishness is common and players love to showcase their offensive skills -- Austin had four assists in the McDonald's Game and four assists in the Jordan Brand Classic.

He had six assists in his second college game. He's averaging 2.4 assists through his first five college games -- which might not sould like a lot, but it's more than almost any Duke shooting guard in modern times averaged as a freshman -- a better per game average than Redick, Nolan Smith, Trajan Langdon, William Avery, or Seth Curry had in their first season at Duke (it's significantly better than Curry averaged as a freshman at Liberty). Heck, he already has just one less assist in five games than Andre Dawkins managed his entire freshman season.

I believe he IS doing his best to incorporate the drive-and-dish to his game. One reason his turnover total is too high is because he's getting into the lane and trying to make the pass (definitely not all of his turnovers, but a good number). He and his teammates are feeling each other out. Think back to the last play of the first half of the Davidson game -- Austin drove and tried to feel Kelly who was breaking open for the layup. But they misconnected -- Ryan was looking for the lob and Austin gave him the bounce pass.

All the anguish about Austin's decision-making is a bit ridiculous. He's a freshman with five college games to his credit and he's still getting comfortable with this team and with the college game. In Bobby Hurley's fifth college game, he had six assists and six turnovers. He had 18 turnovers in his first five games ...Jason Williams had 22 turnovers in his first five college games. Johnny Dawkins had 17 turnovers in his first five games (and seven more in Game 6).

Rivers has had 13 turnovers in his first five games.

I think we can live with that learning curve. Yeah, his decision making needs to get better, but that's true of almost every young player. I think his learning curve is normal or ahead of schedule, not some cause for concern or alarm.