MBB: UNC-Chapel Hill 88, Duke 70, Post-Game Thread

[ncexnyc]

This has been my pov since before the game @UNC. Even if Black Pigeon gets past Kelly, which he probably would, a) HB is not a gifted passer b) Kelly has a knack for blocking shots from behind, which is helpful since he's got 3 inches on HB c) nobody else has done a particularly effective job. However, Ryan's value is primarily on O and if matched on HB, he ought to be able to shoot over him, which RK can't do vs. Henson, nor can he drive on Henson, whereas RK can post up HB or do the running hook. But if we play all our bigs at once, at least vs UNC, we're left with only Hairston as a reserve frontcourt player.

Of course they aren't that deep either, with JMM being their other big. It would certainly be a gamble on our part, but if we get to the Final on Sunday what do we have to lose?

[CDu]

But if we play all our bigs at once, at least vs UNC, we're left with only Hairston as a reserve frontcourt player.

On top of the concern about whether Kelly could stay in front of Barnes, I think this sentence is the big key. We've tried to minimize the number of minutes that Hairston has to play in big games. Playing all 3 of our main big men at the same time means we are forced to play more minutes with Hairston (typically regarded as our 9th man) and fewer minutes with one of Dawkins, Thornton, or Cook (our 6th-8th men if you assume Kelly replaces Thornton as a starter).

And we run the risk of getting really exposed if all three get in foul trouble. Then we might be stuck with Hairston and Gbinije as our frontcourt for big stretches, or else we'd have a big man playing tentative with foul trouble.

And that's assuming that Kelly could actually do a better job than our current options. I don't know that it'd be reasonable to assume such a thing. Barnes would likely run Kelly off of numerous screens - something he hasn't had to do much in the last two years playing at the 4/5. And when he didn't get wide open shots running off screens, he'd attack Kelly off the dribble (something Kelly hasn't done well at defending).

It'd be a big roll of the dice, and I just don't think it's a strategy that would work out for us.

Basically, we're a team that needs to shoot well and defend/rebound well enough to beat UNC. We shot really poorly and rebounded really poorly and lost badly in Cameron. We shot reasonably well but not shockingly so and rebounded and defended fairly poorly in Chapel Hill and won. If we have a good shooting night, make a more concerted effort on the boards (i.e., guards don't let their guards walk to the rim on missed shots), and do a remotely adequate job of staying in front of Marshall, we win.

[Wander]

Maybe it's time to reconsider that possibility. I'd rather see Barnes with his suspect handle trying to drive by Ryan, than watch him shoot over our small guards. Putting Rivers on TBP hurts us with Bullock and Marshall gaining a serious advantage over Quinn, Seth, Andre, and Tyler. Can Ryan do any worse?

I don't have any stats on this but my intuition is that Kelly is our best guy at drawing offensive fouls, and putting him on the perimeter takes away this strength. Also, note that this wasn't really an option last game because the Plumlees were in pretty bad foul trouble.

I'm not usually a fan of the "this bench player deserves more minutes" arguments, but limited minutes as a defender against teams with tall small forwards who are great jump shooters (does this describe any team except for UNC?) is the one spot that I think experimenting with Hairston or Gbinije could be useful. But it's a tough problem that our roster isn't ideally equipped to answer.

[davekay1971]

As long as we're considering all options that K may or may not ever seriously consider, going with the Jimmy B Orange Zone against UNC might be worth a what-if. About the only significant weakness UNC has, as an offense, is 3 point shooting. Their biggest strengths are Marshall's ability to create good looks, and a stellar front court. Running the zone that K learned from Boeheim would negate some of those advantages and force them to hit some 3s to beat us.

Of course, since I'm not a big believer in making radical changes 31 games into the season, I'd rather see us do what we usually do, but just do it better than we did on Saturday.

[ncexnyc]

I don't have any stats on this but my intuition is that Kelly is our best guy at drawing offensive fouls, and putting him on the perimeter takes away this strength. Also, note that this wasn't really an option last game because the Plumlees were in pretty bad foul trouble.

I'm not usually a fan of the "this bench player deserves more minutes" arguments, but limited minutes as a defender against teams with tall small forwards who are great jump shooters (does this describe any team except for UNC?) is the one spot that I think experimenting with Hairston or Gbinije could be useful. But it's a tough problem that our roster isn't ideally equipped to answer.

Took a quick look at who starts at forward for Syracuse and Kentucky.

Jones is listed at 6'9" and 252
Kidd-Gilchrist is listed 6'7" and 232

Kris Joseph is listed at 6'7" and 210
Rasheed Christmas is listed at 6'9" and 232

Haven't seen enough games to say they are good jump shooters, but they do have size.

[Kedsy]

Maybe it's time to reconsider that possibility. I'd rather see Barnes with his suspect handle trying to drive by Ryan, than watch him shoot over our small guards. Putting Rivers on TBP hurts us with Bullock and Marshall gaining a serious advantage over Quinn, Seth, Andre, and Tyler. Can Ryan do any worse?

Barnes only scored 16 points against us in our last game, a bit under his average. I don't see any reason to radically change what we're doing just for him.

[ncexnyc]

Maybe the stat that we should be concerned about is 42-22 and not the 16 pts. by Barnes. Barnes didn't have to score since Bullock and Marshall were having there way with Quinn and Seth, who were at a serious seize disadvantage.

Now I might be overreacting to Saturday night and maybe I should put my trust in a better shooting day on Sunday as well as the team being able to execute a basic such as boxing out. Or we could throw a monkey wrench at Ol' Roy by having Kelly guard Barnes and see if Roy is able to make a suitable adjustment.

Heck, TBP might even decide to play hero and school Ryan, which results in numerous bad shots, turnovers, and charges.

[DukieInBrasil]

I don't have any stats on this but my intuition is that Kelly is our best guy at drawing offensive fouls, and putting him on the perimeter takes away this strength. Also, note that this wasn't really an option last game because the Plumlees were in pretty bad foul trouble.

I disagree with Kelly taking charges well. He flops in the paint far too much, giving up basically un-contested shots after flopping and then also un-contested Oboards cuz he's on the ground. I'd like to see Ryan be more aggressive on D, he's not a great run-jump athlete, but you don't have to be to be an effective defender. You can't defend effectively if you are on the floor.

[jv001]

In neither game did hbarnes beat Duke. He scored double figures in each game, but he also made some bad plays by trying to be "the man". On the other hand, marshall hurt us more. Especially in the loss at Cameron. I don't want to see Tyler guarding barnes because I feel he has the best chance of getting marshall off his game. With our 3 guards(Tyler,Seth and Austin) we are forced to guard hb with a small player. I think Austin is the best rebounder of our guards and we would be better served by having Austin on hb. When Andre is in the game, I would have him on hb. Just my thought on the Duke defense which has not been very good this year. GoDuke!

[Kedsy]

Maybe the stat that we should be concerned about is 42-22 and not the 16 pts. by Barnes.

I don't know how many rebounds Ryan would get if he was all the way out at the 3-point line guarding Barnes. And anyway, Barnes only outrebounded his defenders (Tyler and Andre) by 4 to 3. The biggest component of our rebounding problem in that game was Marshall/Bullock/PJ Hairston getting 14 rebounds while their counterparts, Austin/Seth/Quinn only got 3. (The rest was on Mason and Ryan, who only combined for 5 rebounds while Henson and McAdoo got 14.)

I don't want to see Tyler guarding barnes because I feel he has the best chance of getting marshall off his game.

I actually think Austin would have a better chance of putting Marshall off his game. Tyler did a pretty creditable job on Barnes, despite the height differential, but he'd have a hard time staying in front of Marshall. He's better off the ball than on. Rather than put him on Marshall and Austin on Barnes, I'd switch them.

[dyedwab]

I . Tyler did a pretty creditable job on Barnes, despite the height differential, but he'd have a hard time staying in front of Marshall. He's better off the ball than on. Rather than put him on Marshall and Austin on Barnes, I'd switch them.

The bolded part. Given how much size and speed he gives up to Barnes, I think that Tyler's effective defense on him, for the most part, has been one of the best, and underrated performances of the season. And it is because he is, IMHO, the best off-the-ball defender we have, especially on the perimeter.

And it does illustrate something - physical disadvantages do no inevitably lead to overwhelming performances by the opposition.

[ncexnyc]

I don't know how many rebounds Ryan would get if he was all the way out at the 3-point line guarding Barnes. And anyway, Barnes only outrebounded his defenders (Tyler and Andre) by 4 to 3. The biggest component of our rebounding problem in that game was Marshall/Bullock/PJ Hairston getting 14 rebounds while their counterparts, Austin/Seth/Quinn only got 3. (The rest was on Mason and Ryan, who only combined for 5 rebounds while Henson and McAdoo got 14.)



I actually think Austin would have a better chance of putting Marshall off his game. Tyler did a pretty creditable job on Barnes, despite the height differential, but he'd have a hard time staying in front of Marshall. He's better off the ball than on. Rather than put him on Marshall and Austin on Barnes, I'd switch them.

Tyler on Barnes, while Austin guards Marshall sounds great, but then that leaves Seth on Reggie and that match-up screams out total disaster with Reggie camping out on the blocks.

[rsvman]

The bolded part. Given how much size and speed he gives up to Barnes, I think that Tyler's effective defense on him, for the most part, has been one of the best, and underrated performances of the season. And it is because he is, IMHO, the best off-the-ball defender we have, especially on the perimeter.

And it does illustrate something - physical disadvantages do no inevitably lead to overwhelming performances by the opposition.

Agree. The first half of the game at the Dean Dome was a perfect example; Barnes did nothing, but for the most part it was because he almost never got the ball in the first place. The passing lane between anybody else and Harrison Barnes was clogged up by Thornton at almost all times. A remarkable defensive performance.

[Kedsy]

Tyler on Barnes, while Austin guards Marshall sounds great, but then that leaves Seth on Reggie and that match-up screams out total disaster with Reggie camping out on the blocks.

Well, if we're playing Austin/Seth/Tyler, there are no good options, height-wise. Choosing the lesser of various evils, I'd take my chances with Seth on Bullock, because with Zeller and Henson already camping out down low, (a) there's not much room for Bullock on the blocks; and (b) there's plenty of help defense (the guys guarding Zeller and Henson).

[Duvall]

Tyler on Barnes, while Austin guards Marshall sounds great, but then that leaves Seth on Reggie and that match-up screams out total disaster with Reggie camping out on the blocks.

How many times this season has Bullock camped out on the blocks against anyone? I can't recall him taking anything other a jumpshot or a transition layup.

[DukieinSoCal]

If going with Ryan at SF to offset some of Carolina's size and rebounding isn't a great option, then what about playing Quinn more to try to match their offense. I know it's folly to try and run with UNC but it doesn't seem like we can slow down good offensive teams this year, anyways. Why not try to boost our offense a bit? I really liked how the team was playing with Quinn before his mid-season setback. He's clearly a gifted scorer/PG and the Plumlees are better finishing in transition than posting up in a half-court offense. I think our bigs can run as well as almost anyone else's. We would probably also get better looks at 3s in transition.
I know we can beat a lot of teams playing the way we have been most of the year, but I wonder if playing faster would give us a better chance against the elite teams.

[ncexnyc]

How many times this season has Bullock camped out on the blocks against anyone? I can't recall him taking anything other a jumpshot or a transition layup.

Now I know we often say that Ol' Roy isn't the greatest in game coach, but if we approached the game as you suggest, I'm sure even he would see it and try to take advantage of it.

Again, as I previously stated maybe I'm overreacting to what took place Saturday night, but in both games they scored over 80 pts. Do you really believe should we face them on Sunday that they won't go over 80 again and that this time we'll score more?

I'm not sure the status quo is really what we need.

[jv001]

I don't know how many rebounds Ryan would get if he was all the way out at the 3-point line guarding Barnes. And anyway, Barnes only outrebounded his defenders (Tyler and Andre) by 4 to 3. The biggest component of our rebounding problem in that game was Marshall/Bullock/PJ Hairston getting 14 rebounds while their counterparts, Austin/Seth/Quinn only got 3. (The rest was on Mason and Ryan, who only combined for 5 rebounds while Henson and McAdoo got 14.)



I actually think Austin would have a better chance of putting Marshall off his game. Tyler did a pretty creditable job on Barnes, despite the height differential, but he'd have a hard time staying in front of Marshall. He's better off the ball than on. Rather than put him on Marshall and Austin on Barnes, I'd switch them.

Good point. I've said many times Austin is the best on the ball defender we have. Maybe the only good on the ball defender. Tyler is a good ball denial defender and Seth has quick hands but cannot defend elite ball handlers. Against unc, we are between the rock and the hard place. We give up size on barnes and get a better defender on marshall. If our guards will do the job of helping our bigs on rebounds, we will be ok. I look for the 3 ball to fall next time we play the heels. GoDuke!

[Kedsy]

If going with Ryan at SF to offset some of Carolina's size and rebounding isn't a great option, then what about playing Quinn more to try to match their offense. I know it's folly to try and run with UNC but it doesn't seem like we can slow down good offensive teams this year, anyways. Why not try to boost our offense a bit?

Based on our offensive efficiency numbers over the course of the season, there's not any real evidence that our offense is better with Quinn in it. But replacing Tyler with Quinn (presumably alongside Austin and Seth) would make it nearly impossible to contain UNC's perimeter from a defensive standpoint. Hard to imagine the questionable tradeoff would be worth it.

[tommy]

If going with Ryan at SF to offset some of Carolina's size and rebounding isn't a great option, then what about playing Quinn more to try to match their offense. I know it's folly to try and run with UNC but it doesn't seem like we can slow down good offensive teams this year, anyways. Why not try to boost our offense a bit?

We've outscored UNC in two of the four halves we've played against them.