Tyler Thornton's offense

[MChambers]

I am quite certain there are things that can't be measured by stats or the eye test (at least not the ones we have access to today). My point is simply that those intangibles for Thornton don't seem to be resulting in any general improvement in team performance (at least not to this point).

And I think people are, in general, too quick to say "this guy brings intangibles" when sometimes the guy just isn't great (I'm not saying that's the case here).

I agree with both of your points. Just wanted to point out that intangibles aren't limited to improving team defense.

For all I know, Coach K could be starting Thornton in an effort to get other players to embrace some of the things Tyler brings, like leadership in huddles and help defense.

[niveklaen]

Actually, there are lots of others ways to put it. And most of them would be much more accurate than saying people want to see Thornton fail. I very much want Thornton (and every Duke player) to do well. But that doesn't mean I think he's the best option to start or (more importantly) play 25+mpg.

Also, I love the "he has the intangibles down", when by definition you can't quantify intangibles. And there are no alternative measures that currently suggest the team plays better with him on the floor, which is usually the basis for citing the "intangibles" comment.

Doesn't TT lead the team in plus-minus? Tought I saw that posted somewhere...

[Channing]

To say there is absolutely no way to measure intangibles is (I believe) false. At worst, you should be able to look at the team's aggregate performance when a player is on the court and when they are off the court to see the impact of the intangibles. Another measure would be whether there is an uptick in everyone else's stats (e.g. they become better players) when the intangibles are added to the mix.

I haven't analyzed the +/- with TT, so I can't say for certain whether he is a net positive or not. I like the kid, and am sure there is a spot for him on this team. His shots against KU were unbelievable. But, on the whole, at this point in his career I don't think he is even in Greg Paulus's zip code - and GP was fully excoriated on this board.

Perhaps K realized that this team would (could?) not develop into a championship team with Seth at the point. With that in mind, I wonder if he is trying to throw TT to the wolves to see exactly what TT has (sort of like trial by fire), so he can determine if he is capable of guiding the team down the stretch, or if it will have to be Cook. Just a thought.

[niveklaen]

I found the place where I had seen plus minus numbers for the season - it was posted on TDD by

ACCBballFan

"For the 8 games I have been tracking +/- the leaders are:

Dav TN Mich KU tOSU CSU Wash UNC-G Sum8
08 05 (4) 12 01 19 00 12 53 Tyler Thornton, G
14 06 04 (4) (24) 19 14 23 52 Austin Rivers, G
09 12 08 14 (22) 8 12 11 52 Mason Plumlee, F
14 01 03 (6) (8) 12 (1) 26 41 Miles Plumlee, F
00 08 06 06 (17) 13 06 16 38 Ryan Kelly, F
04 07 07 08 (14) 14 02 05 33 Seth Curry, G
13 01 03 02 (3) 3 (3) 15 31 Quinn Cook, G
06 12 08 03 (27) 9 03 14 28 Andre Dawkins, G
03 (2) 00 00 03 14 (1) 03 20 Josh Hairston, F
(6) 00 00 00 01 4 (2) 12 09 Michael Gbinije, G-F"

These are apparently just raw +/- numbers, once you adjust them to a per minute basis, TT leads the team by a substantial amount. Of course, TT's numbers did not take the hit that the rest of the team's did in the Ohio state game because he only played 8 minutes...

[MChambers]

To say there is absolutely no way to measure intangibles is (I believe) false. At worst, you should be able to look at the team's aggregate performance when a player is on the court and when they are off the court to see the impact of the intangibles. Another measure would be whether there is an uptick in everyone else's stats (e.g. they become better players) when the intangibles are added to the mix.

I haven't analyzed the +/- with TT, so I can't say for certain whether he is a net positive or not. I like the kid, and am sure there is a spot for him on this team. His shots against KU were unbelievable. But, on the whole, at this point in his career I don't think he is even in Greg Paulus's zip code - and GP was fully excoriated on this board.

Perhaps K realized that this team would (could?) not develop into a championship team with Seth at the point. With that in mind, I wonder if he is trying to throw TT to the wolves to see exactly what TT has (sort of like trial by fire), so he can determine if he is capable of guiding the team down the stretch, or if it will have to be Cook. Just a thought.

I like reviewing the +/- stats as much as anyone, but there are some pretty strong arguments as to why you shouldn't put too much weight on them. Just search these boards for those arguments.

I'm not saying +/- is meaningless, of course, but it's a flawed measure and gives at best a weak inference as to intangibles.

Gosh, I can't believe I'm defending sports intangibles. This is a very uncomfortable feeling.

[sagegrouse]

I found the place where I had seen plus minus numbers for the season - it was posted on TDD by

ACCBballFan

"For the 8 games I have been tracking +/- the leaders are:

Dav TN Mich   KU   tOSU  CSU Wash  UNC-G     Sum8   
08   05  (4)  12     01   19    00    12       53  Tyler Thornton, G 
14   06  04  (4)   (24)   19   14     23       52  Austin Rivers, G 
09   12  08   14   (22)    8   12     11       52  Mason Plumlee, F 
14   01  03  (6)     (8)  12   (1)    26       41  Miles Plumlee, F 
00   08  06   06   (17)   13   06     16       38  Ryan Kelly, F 
04   07  07   08   (14)   14   02     05       33  Seth Curry, G 
13   01  03   02     (3)   3   (3)    15       31  Quinn Cook, G 
06   12  08   03   (27)    9   03     14       28  Andre Dawkins, G 
03  (2)  00   00     03   14   (1)    03       20  Josh Hairston, F 
(6)  00  00   00     01    4   (2)    12       09  Michael Gbinije, G-F

"

These are apparently just raw +/- numbers, once you adjust them to a per minute basis, TT leads the team by a substantial amount. Of course, TT's numbers did not take the hit that the rest of the team's did in the Ohio state game because he only played 8 minutes...

Good data. Looks like, eliminating OSU, Mason and Austin lead the team in total +/-.

sagegrouse

[Kedsy]

I found the place where I had seen plus minus numbers for the season - it was posted on TDD by ACCBballFan

Not sure how ACCBballFan calculates his numbers. Troublemaker has posted plus/minus through the Colorado State game and his numbers don't paint Tyler in as positive a light:

Cumulative thru Colorado St

+-----------------+---------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Player          | Avg Min | Duke | Opp  | +/-  | Off  | Net  |
+-----------------+---------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Miles Plumlee   | 16:06   |  286 |  208 |   78 |    7 |   71 |
| Andre Dawkins   | 25:48   |  451 |  390 |   61 |   24 |   37 |
| Austin Rivers   | 31:05   |  552 |  497 |   55 |   30 |   25 |
| Seth Curry      | 31:17   |  562 |  509 |   53 |   32 |   21 |
| Tyler Thornton  | 18:05   |  326 |  279 |   47 |   38 |    9 |
| Quinn Cook      | 09:16   |  162 |  118 |   44 |   41 |    3 |
| Josh Hairston   | 08:27   |  122 |   89 |   33 |   44 |  -11 |
| Mason Plumlee   | 30:29   |  514 |  483 |   31 |   54 |  -23 |
| Ryan Kelly      | 26:06   |  469 |  439 |   30 |   55 |  -25 |
| Todd Zafirovski | 03:04   |    3 |    4 |   -1 |   42 |  -43 |
| Michael Gbinije | 08:50   |   83 |   89 |   -6 |   62 |  -68 |
+-----------------+---------+------+------+------+------+------+

Link to data prior to Colorado St

Note: I hope to post some lineups data some time between the Washington game and the UNCG game

Per 40 thru Colorado St (Corrected "Off" and "Net")

+-----------------+---------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Player          | Avg Min | Duke | Opp  | +/-  | Off  | Net  |
+-----------------+---------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Josh Hairston   | 40:00   |   83 |   60 |   22 |    8 |   14 |
| Miles Plumlee   | 40:00   |   79 |   57 |   22 |    1 |   21 |
| Quinn Cook      | 40:00   |   78 |   57 |   21 |    6 |   15 |
| Tyler Thornton  | 40:00   |   80 |   69 |   12 |    8 |    4 |
| Andre Dawkins   | 40:00   |   78 |   67 |   11 |    8 |    3 |
| Austin Rivers   | 40:00   |   79 |   71 |    8 |   15 |   -7 |
| Seth Curry      | 40:00   |   80 |   72 |    8 |   16 |   -8 |
| Ryan Kelly      | 40:00   |   80 |   75 |    5 |   18 |  -13 |
| Mason Plumlee   | 40:00   |   75 |   70 |    5 |   25 |  -20 |
| Michael Gbinije | 40:00   |   75 |   81 |   -5 |   16 |  -21 |
| Todd Zafirovski | 40:00   |   39 |   52 |  -13 |   45 |  -58 |
+-----------------+---------+------+------+------+------+------+

So, obviously Troublemaker's numbers don't include Washington or UNCG, but according to these numbers, Tyler's in the top 4 or 5 on the team but nowhere near the top.

[CDu]

Doesn't TT lead the team in plus-minus? Tought I saw that posted somewhere...

No, Miles Plumlee leads the team in +/-. As of the Colorado State game, Thornton had a slightly positive net +/- thanks to a great +/- against CSU. That took a big hit with the Washington game, though, and I believe that he's back to a negative +/- for the season.

Now, I'm on record as not being the biggest fan of +/-. But if you do believe in that statistic, it doesn't support an argument for Thornton. And it's certainly not evidence that Thornton is improving the team's performance on the court at the moment.

[CDu]

To say there is absolutely no way to measure intangibles is (I believe) false. At worst, you should be able to look at the team's aggregate performance when a player is on the court and when they are off the court to see the impact of the intangibles. Another measure would be whether there is an uptick in everyone else's stats (e.g. they become better players) when the intangibles are added to the mix.

I didn't say there's absolutely no way to measure intangibles. I just said (perhaps poorly-worded) that we don't have a good way to measure it currently. What you're suggesting is essentially +/-, and (as MChambers said) there are lots of problems with using +/- to measure intangibles. I won't go into it again (there are plenty of threads on this), but essentially there's too much other stuff going on that isn't controlled for in +/- that it doesn't really capture intangible benefit.

The same problem exists for using teammates' performance with and without. There are so many other variables in play that it's just not a good measure.

Ignoring this, I'll add that the two suggestions you use for measuring intangibles (+/- and teammates' performance) can both be presented as negatives for Thornton. He has a negative net +/- for the season and several have discussed specifically how Curry plays worse with Thornton on the floor.

[dcdrumsinc]

I can understand many Duke fans supporting the old school train of thought. Keeping the hard nosed, gritty defensive player and sophomore (thornton) over a more talented freshman (cook). But a team doesn't need the gritty leader to be a starter. That guy can always come off the bench or play in key moments of the game. But reality is, TT has not shown me much of an ability to break down defenders or dribble drive. Duke is so easy to guard when TT is playing the point. We can't convert turnovers into to easy points because TT is not that quick. TT is not an elite passer. Not an elite shooter. Not good at creating his own shot. Not good at changing pace or dictating tempo other than bringing the ball up the court. All reasons why our other guards struggle to get open clean looks against good defense from other teams like Ohio state who hounded andre and seth. And an amazing desperation 3 and another key shot against Kansas does not automatically mean he will be productive during the early course of games. Don't get me wrong, I like TT and the leadership qualities he brings and how he came up clutch against Kansas, but he is not going to be the long term answer against athletic guards we will face in the ACC and beyond into the tournament. Calling quin cook

[Kedsy]

All reasons why our other guards struggle to get open clean looks against good defense from other teams like Ohio state who hounded andre and seth.

Well, Tyler didn't start against Ohio State and only played 8 minutes, so I don't think your litany of what he doesn't do had much of a bearing on why we struggled against OSU.

[Bob Green]

Many of the posts in this thread seem to view the Tyler Thornton/Quinn Cook situation with an "either/or" perspective whereas my believe is it is an "and" situation. Coach Krzyzewski has both Tyler Thornton and Quinn Cook available on the roster to mix into the rotation as the game situation dictates. Both players are talented guys who bring skills on the court. Currently, like every early season, the rotations are being mixed and matched by the staff in order to gain an understanding of which player combinations will work best when conference play begins. We've played an extremely tough early season schedule and have looked very good except against Ohio State. My glass half full perspective is feeling very optimistic as 2012 rapidly approaches so the angst present in this thread is perplexing.

I'm a huge fan of Tyler Thornton and Quinn Cook and hope to see them both play a significant role as the seaon rolls on.

[CDu]

Many of the posts in this thread seem to view the Tyler Thornton/Quinn Cook situation with an "either/or" perspective whereas my believe is it is an "and" situation.

I'm a huge fan of Tyler Thornton and Quinn Cook and hope to see them both play a significant role as the seaon rolls on.

I also hope both do well. That can only mean good things for the team. But unfortunately there are only 120 minutes available at the positions they can conceivably play. If you assume that Curry and Rivers will get at least 60-65 of those minutes and that Dawkins and Gbinije combine for another 30, that leaves only about 25-30 minutes. And that's assuming no expansion of Gbinije's role as the season progresses.

So, depending on your definition of "siginificant role" it's hard to see a way for both guys to do so game in and game out. There's certainly not a way for both guys to be 20+ mpg contributors unless we see a huge decline in minutes for the combo of Rivers, Curry, and Dawkins. If you define "significant" as "averaging 10+ mpg and taking turns getting 20+ minute games throughout the season," then both can certainly have a significant role. But the discussion has (to my understanding) been about becoming the primary PG for the offense. That would imply that it'd be a 20+ mpg role. And I just don't see any realistic way that both guys can do that. I'm not even sure I see both guys being 15+ mpg guys. So in many ways, I think it really is an "either/or/neither" situation and not an "and" situation.

[Verga3]

Many of the posts in this thread seem to view the Tyler Thornton/Quinn Cook situation with an "either/or" perspective whereas my believe is it is an "and" situation. Coach Krzyzewski has both Tyler Thornton and Quinn Cook available on the roster to mix into the rotation as the game situation dictates. Both players are talented guys who bring skills on the court. Currently, like every early season, the rotations are being mixed and matched by the staff in order to gain an understanding of which player combinations will work best when conference play begins. We've played an extremely tough early season schedule and have looked very good except against Ohio State. My glass half full perspective is feeling very optimistic as 2012 rapidly approaches so the angst present in this thread is perplexing.

I'm a huge fan of Tyler Thornton and Quinn Cook and hope to see them both play a significant role as the seaon rolls on.

Amen, Bob.

[Saratoga2]

Many of the posts in this thread seem to view the Tyler Thornton/Quinn Cook situation with an "either/or" perspective whereas my believe is it is an "and" situation. Coach Krzyzewski has both Tyler Thornton and Quinn Cook available on the roster to mix into the rotation as the game situation dictates. Both players are talented guys who bring skills on the court. Currently, like every early season, the rotations are being mixed and matched by the staff in order to gain an understanding of which player combinations will work best when conference play begins. We've played an extremely tough early season schedule and have looked very good except against Ohio State. My glass half full perspective is feeling very optimistic as 2012 rapidly approaches so the angst present in this thread is perplexing.

I'm a huge fan of Tyler Thornton and Quinn Cook and hope to see them both play a significant role as the seaon rolls on.

They both have their skill sets and no doubt both will continue to improve. It will be up to the coaches to determine how best to use these skills, but they probably will look at matcvhups and substitute accordingly. The one thing that bothers me about our guard choices is that we have three who are 6'2" and under and I don't believe any of them will match up well against teams with big guards. UNC for instance has a lot of size to deal with and we will probably see others that are quick and much bigger than we are. I don't see our speed as negating those sorts of situations.

[UrinalCake]

I agree that both players bring something to the table, but when was the last time a Duke team, or any team for that matter, went deep into the tournament with a point guard-by-committee kind of situation? I'm sure it's possible but difficult. And Coach K especially likes to identify his leader on the court, and it's usually the point guard. By the time we're halfway through the conference season everyone's roles are usually pretty set, except in case of injuries. So I think a decision is going to have to be made that someone takes over the point guard role and plays the majority of the minutes - be it Seth, Tyler, or Quinn - while the others play supporting roles.

Edit: if I remember correctly the Illinois team that lost to UNC in the 2005 final had essentially three point guards - Deron Williams, Luther Head, and someone else. But they all started and played at the same time, so it wasn't quite the same situation as ours.

[CDu]

I agree that both players bring something to the table, but when was the last time a Duke team, or any team for that matter, went deep into the tournament with a point guard-by-committee kind of situation? I'm sure it's possible but difficult. And Coach K especially likes to identify his leader on the court, and it's usually the point guard. By the time we're halfway through the conference season everyone's roles are usually pretty set, except in case of injuries. So I think a decision is going to have to be made that someone takes over the point guard role and plays the majority of the minutes - be it Seth, Tyler, or Quinn - while the others play supporting roles.

Edit: if I remember correctly the Illinois team that lost to UNC in the 2005 final had essentially three point guards - Deron Williams, Luther Head, and someone else. But they all started and played at the same time, so it wasn't quite the same situation as ours.

The other one was Dee Brown. It was really a 2-point guard team, though (Head wasn't really a PG type). But as you said, all three were starters. They just happened to run a 3-guard lineup. And the two PG they had were both elite players.

[sagegrouse]

I agree that both players bring something to the table, but when was the last time a Duke team, or any team for that matter, went deep into the tournament with a point guard-by-committee kind of situation? I'm sure it's possible but difficult. And Coach K especially likes to identify his leader on the court, and it's usually the point guard.

1994 for Duke, where Grant played the point some of the time, but I believe Jeff Capel was the starting PG.

sage

[jimsumner]

1994 for Duke, where Grant played the point some of the time, but I believe Jeff Capel was the starting PG.

sage

IIRC, Mario Chalmers, Russell Robinson and Sherron Collins all took turns running the point for Kansas in 2008. That seemed to turn out okay.

[Greg_Newton]

1994 for Duke, where Grant played the point some of the time, but I believe Jeff Capel was the starting PG.

sage

IIRC, Mario Chalmers, Russell Robinson and Sherron Collins all took turns running the point for Kansas in 2008. That seemed to turn out okay.

If our PG committee included a NPOY, future perennial NBA All-Star (Hill), or an NBA PG (Chalmers) and consensus 1st team All-American PG (Collins), I'd feel a little bit better about that. However, I don't think Curry is quite Hill, nor are Cook and Thornton Chalmers and Collins.