MBB: Duke 90, UNC-G 63 Post-Game Thread

[Newton_14]

I agree that Duke should be able to play Austin off the ball and find a solution at the 1 amongst Curry, Thornton and Cook. But what if each of the three proves to have some deficiency in their game by mid-January? Say Thornton is an offensive liability that allows teams to help off him a lot, Cook just is not ready defensively and Curry cannot score from the PG position and is only an average distributor. That could provide room for some adjustments, among them:

• Turn the keys over to Quinn and hope he grows. You wont hear the end of this on these boards, I predict.
• Keep Seth running the point with the acknowledgement that Austin will have the ball in his hands. Essentially, keep the current four-man backcourt rotation.
• Switch Austin and Seth and make it a total switch.

I personally think Seth is trying to figure out how he relates on the court to everyone and he's going to get a lot better once that settles out for him. As long as Austin has the ball a lot, it lessens the need to lean on Seth's natural point guard abilities. But as long as we have defensive deficiencies, Tyler is going to play significant minutes at the expense of our our best backcourt/wing lineup (Dawkins, Curry,Rivers).

Ahhhhhghh. Tradeoffs. I really want this to start to get fixed.

The thing is though, during the tough 8 game stretch where Duke went 7-1 with the only loss being the blowout at OSU, Seth was great at scoring and did ok distributing. He was shooting lights out from 3 and from 2. His drop in points coincided with being moved where many were screaming for him to be moved to (off the ball to SG). He actually scored the ball much better playing the point. I know there is a theory that having Tyler at the point hurts Seth somehow. I won't dismiss that theory, but I also will not buy into the theory until someone can actually show clear evidence that is the case. (Not that that is fair, as not sure how one could even show that).

I still think the OSU game caused an over reaction to a certain degree. The team looked really good in those first 7 games with Seth running the point and Andre and Austin on the wings. K does not like getting embarrassed in big games though, so he went to work trying to fix the perimeter defense. Offensively though, we are still better with the Seth/Austin/Andre perimeter imo. So it is a definite trade off. After 3 games with the new look, my assessment is that the change helped Andre, as he has been better on both ends for some reason in a 6th man role. It has hurt Seth on the offensive end, and there has been possibly a slight improvement in the perimeter defense on the whole.

So most definitely there has been trade offs.

A few questions to consider. 1. Was the perimeter defense in the first 8 games as bad as it appeared to be in the one OSU game, meaning it was really that bad in the first 7 games too, but the other teams just couldn't exploit it to the extent OSU did? and 2. If it was that bad, did the change in the starting lineup improve the perimeter defense to where it was better in the 3 games since OSU than in the first 8 games? and 3. Was the offense in the 3 games post OSU better or worse than in the first 8 games?

[ncexnyc]

I finally got around to watching last night’s game and here are my observations:

Mason: The big man played another solid game. It’s nice to see him get his points game in and game out no matter who the competition is. He really did a super job of taking over the backboards in the 2nd half last night. A really nice outlet pass to Quinn for his highlight reel basket. Aside from his terrible free throw shooting, the other area I’d like to see him improve on is moving towards the pass. A couple of times last night he didn’t move to meet the pass and the defender was able to come around him for a steal.

Miles: Played another solid game. His board work was exceptional. Unfortunately he lost a couple of rebounds from behind. The first time didn’t hurt, as the defender knocked the ball off his own player, but the second time did result in a turnover.

Ryan: Another solid performance.

Josh: It’s easy to see why people love this kid. He brings the energy every game a lot like Lance did. Two sequences define his game. The first was late in the 2nd half where he had several consecutive put back attempts on the same play before being fouled. The other was a missed shot from the corner where he ran diagonally across the length of the court and broke-up a long pass.

Silent G: Nice to see him get some solid minutes yesterday. One nice baseline basket that I recall and he does seem very fluid with the ball in his hands.

Andre: He looks a lot more comfortable as our sixth man. Got burned on a backdoor play and he was badly beaten on a long pass, but as long as he’s bringing it on the offensive end these minor flaws can be overlooked.

Austin: Why does this young man always look so angry? Ok, I get that he’s super competitive, but like the Joker said, “Why so serious?” He’s got a nice inside/outside game, which makes him near impossible to guard.

Seth: Wish we could find a way to get him back on track. Unfortunately, I’m not sure that’s going to happen until we figure out our PG situation.

Tyler: Not our most gifted guard, but Coach K sees something in him many on this board can’t or won’t acknowledge. His first turnover was really Mason’s fault for not moving to the ball and that blocking foul he picked-up early on I’ve got no beef with. It takes a lot of guts to be the only guy back on defense and put your body in front of someone bearing down on you at full speed.

Quinn: Well this game gave Quinn’s supporters a ton of ammo to support their case. He’s definitely not shy about pulling the trigger and he really seemed to get after it on the defensive end. Of course the big question is can he do it night after night?

Not sure we can take much away from this game other than the fact that we are still a team searching for a set line-up with clearly defined roles for each player. I’m getting quite a good laugh reading one of Seth’s biggest supporters suddenly buying into the suggestion that we try Austin as our PG. I honestly don’t know who our best PG is or what our optimum starting line-up is, but I do believe that this year Coach K will play his bench more than any other year, as we’ve got a lot of talent available to put out on the court on any given day.

[loldevilz]

I agree that Duke should be able to play Austin off the ball and find a solution at the 1 amongst Curry, Thornton and Cook. But what if each of the three proves to have some deficiency in their game by mid-January? Say Thornton is an offensive liability that allows teams to help off him a lot, Cook just is not ready defensively and Curry cannot score from the PG position and is only an average distributor. That could provide room for some adjustments, among them:

• Turn the keys over to Quinn and hope he grows. You wont hear the end of this on these boards, I predict.
• Keep Seth running the point with the acknowledgement that Austin will have the ball in his hands. Essentially, keep the current four-man backcourt rotation.
• Switch Austin and Seth and make it a total switch.

I personally think Seth is trying to figure out how he relates on the court to everyone and he's going to get a lot better once that settles out for him. As long as Austin has the ball a lot, it lessens the need to lean on Seth's natural point guard abilities. But as long as we have defensive deficiencies, Tyler is going to play significant minutes at the expense of our our best backcourt/wing lineup (Dawkins, Curry,Rivers).

Ahhhhhghh. Tradeoffs. I really want this to start to get fixed.

I really disagree with the notion that Curry can't score as a point guard. The stats show that Curry has only scored from the PG position. Since making Thornton the point guard Curry has only been in double figures once. Not only that but before at PG he was both our top scorer and our most efficient scorer. Don't forget that the year before with Nolan Smith they shared the point guard position and Curry was one of our best players. I for one do not think its worth putting in a pure point guard if that is going to keep the ball our of Currys hands.

Also, I don't think that Duke really needs a pure point guard. Austin doesn't need someone to create a shot for him and neither does Mason. Since Curry is best with the ball in his hands let him run the show.

[Waynne]

May I quote Bobby Knight? "What's a point guard?" Austin Rivers will be on the floor much of the time (his 30.1 MPG is tied for #1), and he is no stranger to the ball. The question is, who will be in the game with him? And, if you concede that Mason, Ryan and Austin would normally be on the floor, what other attributes are needed? Offense is always nice, but Duke has a lot of weapons. I would say defense and ballhandling. K and others think that leadership is important, which is awfully hard to evaluate on the TV.

sagegrouse

But the estimable Mr. Knight also defined a PG as the player who usually initiates the offense, either by passing to another player or by taking the shot himself. Playing Austin at point might get Seth back into the flow of the offense and thereby improve the team offensively. Others have noted Seth's production is down when Tyler plays big minutes. I have no idea why that is, and it may well have nothing to do with Tyler, but if Tyler and Seth are on the floor togather and neither is scoring much, then we at best have only three offensive threats on the floor. I'd rather have four or five.

Austin also may be able to quard opposing PGs better than Seth or Tyler, because he is bigger and appears to have quicker feet than either, although Seth has very quick hands. If Austin can adequately guard opposing PGs there may be less justification for Tyler to start. Obviously Coach K places great value on Tyler's defensive intensity, toughness, and leadership, and that's why he's starting. But he could bring the same valuable qualities coming off the bench.

All of this is of course just uninformed speculation on my part. Playing Austin at point probably has been tried in practice and may not have worked out for various reasons, perhaps because it places too much of a burden on a young player who is developing his game in a very good way. Austin, Seth, and Andre make up our best perimeter lineup IMO, so that's why I'm playing "Devil's advocate". Apparently this is all moot anyway, because as Jim Sumner points out, the coaches have other plans for Austin.

[UrinalCake]

1. Was the perimeter defense in the first 8 games as bad as it appeared to be in the one OSU game, meaning it was really that bad in the first 7 games too, but the other teams just couldn't exploit it to the extent OSU did?

I think it's the latter. Even though we won our first 7 games, our perimeter defense was poor. Pretty much every team we played had a guard that could get into the lane fairly easily, but our interior defense and prolific offense would make up for it. And the Kansas win, which is our biggest win of the year, is looking less impressive now that they lost again. So I think the decision to shake up the starting lineup was about more than just the OSU game.

As for whether we're a better team overall with Quin or Tyler starting in place of Andre, that's really hard to say since a.) it takes time to adjust to a new system and b.) our quality of competition has dropped significantly.

[jimsumner]

RE: Seth Curry.

It should be noted that he had a pretty bad sprained ankle and barely practiced last week.

[Newton_14]

RE: Seth Curry.

It should be noted that he had a pretty bad sprained ankle and barely practiced last week.

Agree 100% Jim. I mentioned that in one of the other threads but don't believe it was mentioned in this thread. I felt that definitely impacted his performance last night. I believe Seth will get back on track soon. Too much talent there.

[Greg_Newton]

Are you sure? Have you read the NCAA rulebook? War and Peace is a quicker read. It could be buried in there somewhere.

Seriously, Nolan Smith usually guarded the other team's PG in 2010.

Duke has been pretty consistent on Rivers. They want the ball in his hands. A lot. But they want him to attack the glass at every reasonable opportunity. They would like him to respond to help D better by finding the open man. But initiating the offense is not his primary job.

Between Curry, Thornton and Cook, Duke should be able to let Rivers play off the ball.

Why do they want him to though?

I mean, it's in his best interests, NBA-wise, to learn some PG skills and mentality. And him adopting the lead guard role would also give us a dynamic engine that our offense would run through (even if we have some growing pains in the beginning).

It seems like the staff wants to make sure they don't "hold him back" or restrain his attacking mentality at all. I would personally rather see them try to teach him how to harness his skills and become less one-dimensional; he can break down the defense at will, sure, but right now, it's only 5-10 times a game where he sees a clear lane and attacks the rim. If he could get comfortable with his second dribble - i.e. able to reassess the situation and whether he should continue to attack, pull up or pass - he could consistently break down the defense as part of our offense, which could make us an entirely different, elite team. There's some risk, but also extremely high reward.

Plus, it gives you more good lineup options. The other two guards would only need to be complimentary players that can do their jobs - whether that be defend, hit the 3, rebound, create on offense - which, alongside a 6'4, penetrating, 3-point shooting PG that is an elite perimeter defender, would allow us to explore several different looks. I like that better than forcing another PG into the starting lineup (arguably on positional necessity, rather than virtue).

Plus, right now, that's really what our other guards are, IMO; solid players, often great at one or two things, but we don't have any backcourt stars this year that need the ball in their hands more than Rivers. He's a quick learner... give him the keys.

[superdave]

I really disagree with the notion that Curry can't score as a point guard. The stats show that Curry has only scored from the PG position. Since making Thornton the point guard Curry has only been in double figures once. Not only that but before at PG he was both our top scorer and our most efficient scorer. Don't forget that the year before with Nolan Smith they shared the point guard position and Curry was one of our best players. I for one do not think its worth putting in a pure point guard if that is going to keep the ball our of Currys hands.

Also, I don't think that Duke really needs a pure point guard. Austin doesn't need someone to create a shot for him and neither does Mason. Since Curry is best with the ball in his hands let him run the show.

Oh I agree that Seth can and should be our point guard and can score from that position. I was just throwing arguments out there - namely, why did Thornton start which took Curry off the ball? Was it the notion that Seth should be the 2 because running the offense was hurting his scoring?

I know a shorter bench is coming. We all know that. I also firmly believe we are at our best offensively with Seth, Austin and Andre on the court. But that is not our best defensive lineup.

My prescription would be to do what we did vs. Colorado State and pick up full court a lot more in order to use some of our depths to get teams out of their rhythm and game plan, then go to Seth at the point when we are in more half court sets. After CSU, I thought we'd see more full court pressure and more pushing of the ball, but I did not see it vs. Washington or Greensboro. Was it a one game thing or what?

[CDu]

Oh I agree that Seth can and should be our point guard and can score from that position. I was just throwing arguments out there - namely, why did Thornton start which took Curry off the ball? Was it the notion that Seth should be the 2 because running the offense was hurting his scoring?

Well, Thornton starting hasn't really moved Curry off the ball. Curry still brings the ball up quite a bit (Thornton does as well), and once we get in the half court set, Curry and Rivers still initiate the offense the vast majority of the time. Thornton's role on offense has been VERY minimal. On the times he does bring the ball up court, he usually passes to Curry or Rivers and then moves to a spot on the 3pt line.

My prescription would be to do what we did vs. Colorado State and pick up full court a lot more in order to use some of our depths to get teams out of their rhythm and game plan, then go to Seth at the point when we are in more half court sets. After CSU, I thought we'd see more full court pressure and more pushing of the ball, but I did not see it vs. Washington or Greensboro. Was it a one game thing or what?

I imagine there's still quite a lot of figuring out to do for the team (players and staff). I don't think we've settled on a lineup yet, and I don't think we've fully defined our offensive/defensive identity yet (except that we'll play man-to-man defense, of course!). So we may yet see that approach return.