Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 91011
Results 201 to 211 of 211
  1. #201
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Randolph View Post
    No I never said that losing Kelly was "irrevelant." As a matter of fact, I said I'm sure he would have made a difference, but not a huge one.
    No knock on Josh but given his size and current stage of development he is a big drop-off from Ryan on both the offensive and the defensive side.

    Ryan's absence makes a huge difference in our team's ability to be effective in our playing style and to match up with top teams.

    Even if he is not shooting well in a particular game, he still gets respect for his 3 pt shooting because teams know he could get hot at any moment. Pulling a big out to the perimeter opens up the lane for AR or Seth turning the corner and gives us better offensive rebounding opportunities.

    And defensively with Ryan out we have a serious depth problem matching up with teams that have a big 4 (like UNC and FSU).

    Ryan's health is the big variable in my mind for whether we have a legitimate shot at advancing to the FF.

  2. #202
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Maryland
    FSU is a very good team that got off to slow start early in the season. It is not at all surprising that they beat Duke and UNC for the acct, especially as both were missing a key player. The real mystery is this: How did FSU lose to BC? That is their only really poor performance over the last two months -- and it was very poor.

  3. #203
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Quote Originally Posted by camion View Post
    You said that losing Ryan might hurt a little, but you also said this:
    "I get the angle you are using to argue but the fact is they won 2 out of 3, regardless of how or who played. I'm just trying to give credit where it is due and FSU has earned the credit. My philosophy on who is a better team when they play multiple times is: who wins more of the games. Once you get into "so and so beat so and so who lost/or beat so and so" you run into a mess that basically disregards winning a national championship. "

    I get what you are trying to say but I disagree with your ranking method and I disagree with your assertion that Ryan's absence doesn't make much difference. I just gave my hypothetical to emphasize that losing a player or players is significant. I'm glad you think so even if only when it happens to another team.
    I said "regardless of how or who played" to emphasize that no matter what excuses people used, they were still able to beat us. Yes, I know not having a player makes a difference but you still have to win the game and FSU was able to do so. FSU proved they could beat Duke when Kelly was playing and Duke proved they could beat FSU with Kelly. So who is to say he a makes a winning difference in the game when we lost with him earlier in the year.

    Fact is this argument could go either way. I just assume give them credit for beating us twice and winning the ACC tournament

  4. #204
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Quote Originally Posted by tele View Post
    Thanks for the movie recommendation, available on netflix but just as dvd, not streaming.

    I also agree this team is pretty good, I've wondered if this might also be the team that finally turns the coach's hair grey. The effort seems to be there now on defense so maybe they can make a run in the tourney, with Kelly back they can cause the other teams matchup problems.
    Barnes and Noble, $10. Each store usually has just one, but will have a copy sent to your home free. The Funk Brothers were the sound of Motown; one guy in the video put it this way,: those guys were so good tht you could have put Deputy Dog out front instead of Marvin and still had a hit." An amazing fact, the Funk Brothers created and played the music behind more number 1 hits than Elvis, the Beattles, the Stones and sme other folksof note combined. I've watched the documentary a half dozen times; I've bought lots of copies, two for my colleague-age kids who reluctantly watched it after a summer of nagging, and many for friends, dare I say it, as 65th birthday gifts.

    Back to Duke basketball. If Kyrie didn't get hurt, would Nolan have been anywhere near the player he became his senior year? The last game of the season says absolutely not.

  5. #205
    Join Date
    Dec 2009

    Amen

    Good grief; we get beat, now we are pointing out what a huge difference Kelly would've made. Give FSU some credit; they have stronger, longer, quicker and a more balanced team than we do. K would've probably used josh earlier with Kelly healthy. Josh and Tyler offer the intangibles of toughness and strength; things you need when you play against teams who are more athletic. This is basic knowledge; cmon man....

  6. #206
    Quote Originally Posted by Wildcat View Post
    Good grief; we get beat, now we are pointing out what a huge difference Kelly would've made. Give FSU some credit; they have stronger, longer, quicker and a more balanced team than we do. K would've probably used josh earlier with Kelly healthy. Josh and Tyler offer the intangibles of toughness and strength; things you need when you play against teams who are more athletic. This is basic knowledge; cmon man....
    I'm not ready to say Fla St is better than us when we didn't play with a full team. That said, we only to Fla St by a small margin and had plenty of opportunities to win this game without Kelly. And based on how Fla St played Carolina, I think we played Fla St more competitively than UNC did; and if the team can focus on being more disciplined on the defensive and offensive ends, I think Duke is going to be ok in the NCAA tournament.

  7. #207
    FSU is a lot like Duke once was if you look at the two teams ( so is villinova ). Starters are all juniors and seniors that are solid, experienced basketball players. No superstars and basically no freshmen involved. Between Villinova and FSU, freshmen scored 6 points today,both teams combined. Between the two teams, they had 8 of 10 starters that were seniors...the other 2 were juniors...both teams play tenacious defense because they put the effort into it....we need to get back to that and stop chasing these kids who are looking to move on before they ever move in......

  8. #208
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Quote Originally Posted by Wildcat View Post
    Good grief; we get beat, now we are pointing out what a huge difference Kelly would've made. Give FSU some credit; they have stronger, longer, quicker and a more balanced team than we do. K would've probably used josh earlier with Kelly healthy. Josh and Tyler offer the intangibles of toughness and strength; things you need when you play against teams who are more athletic. This is basic knowledge; cmon man....
    1. As some others have pointed out, Duke was not simply playing essentially 4 against 5 because they conceded the 3 to Tyler, but also State didn't need to pay much attention to Josh, so it was more like 3 aganst 5. With a healthy Kelly, (a) they must guard him at the three line, as others have said, opening it up the inside for Rivers and Curry and Mason, but also he might have made some even if he was guarded (the guy is 6'11" and has a pretty off the ground game off the bouce.

    2. Kelly is the guy K uses to relay sets or plays into you have seen Ryan sqinting as he stares over to K as the ball is entiring the offensuive end);

    3. Kelly is the best at getting it inside to Mason, and usally has at lest lob to Mason or Miles for a dunk); heck, he is far and away the best passer on the team;

    4. Kelly blocks or alters shots way, way up in the air without leaving his feet; he also, with (I hate this term because it implies that he guy is isn't just as forseeing in other area) basketball IQ, he anticipates well on defense and often gets great rebonding position;

    5. Kelly getsto the line a fair amount and makes a high percentage;

    6. Kelly permits K to use Tyler alot, to run the team, to give Rivers or ad often gets to stay on the course well after the guy he subbed for rested because Duke is playing in a way that is effective in ways that you and I (well, maybe just you) don't notice;

    7. Kelly would have permitted K to give Mason and Miles, particularly Mason, longer blows because of his ability to generate offense.

    I know thta I am forgetting something improtant to refute your case. Oh, it would seem that there is conclusive evidence that K completely disagrees with you.

    That said, I thought that Josh played terrifically and is likely to grow into first a kind of defensive specialist and then maybe into a very effective mid range offensive player.

    FSU is playing great, they have size, skill, are very well organized, and are very athletic. Nevertheless, they escaped with that win against Duke; you cold have decided it by flipping a coin. I think that in their win against UNC they were much more in control. Would Ryan have been a difference maker? Who can say. FSU would have game planned differently and Josh did compete exceptionally well. In the end, we all know what K would have chosen if Ryan was ready to go. That, to me, seems to resolve the matter.

  9. #209
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Quote Originally Posted by greybeard View Post
    No one is calling this team one of Duke's very best, but "pretty darn good," and you dispute that? Let's have a look. First off, if NC scores one less basket, if one foul (for example, a charge call in Zeller's favor in the first half that should have gone the other way because Zeller walked straight into the guy), and one play happens differently in the Duke FS game, we are talking about Duke getting a one seed in the Dance, and having a 50-50 shot of winning the ACC tournament.
    True, but by the same token if a shot here or a shot there during a number of regular season games had gone the other way -- including Austin's game winner vs. UNC -- we'd have lost several more games this year.

    Quote Originally Posted by greybeard View Post
    As it is, during the regular season they went into the last game playing for the regular season championship but got blown out by a team that has 5 first round draft picks or more on its roster and was playing the best ball of anyone in the Country. They also had a chip on it's shoulder coming into that game. The other home losses were by 7, 4, and 3 points, and the 7 point loss to St. John's could only be considered one of those bad games that every team suffers (check out UNC if you want to see examples).
    We beat St. John's 83-76.

    Quote Originally Posted by greybeard View Post
    The losses to the U and to FSU, in case you have not been watching, please do--these teams might well go deep in the Dance, I'd have them that way in my bracket if I was a betting man, but I'm not.
    Miami failed to make the field of 68.

    Quote Originally Posted by greybeard View Post
    Aainst this, how many top 10 teams did they beat--4, two of whom, Kansas and UNC were rated in the top 5 all season and are legit picks to win it all, and the other two are from the conference that everyone said was the strongest in the country.
    I assume you're talking about the Michigan State and Michigan wins, and I agree with you, those both look very good considering the seasons those teams had.

    Quote Originally Posted by greybeard View Post
    And, by the way, home court advantage all over the country and in most sports just ai't what it used to be. In college basketball, before league play begins, Duke and other top teams play the toughest part of their schedules, none of it at home. "The times they are a changin." And, while while all the heads are talkin about parody, you seem to ignore it, perhaps because you buy the head's simplistic explanation--kids leaving early which makes no sense. Before the one and done rule, the kids who leave early never came, so that cannot explain the parity. What I think explains the parity is a combination of several things that begins with dollars, dolloars from cable, dollars from shoe companies, dollars that have built basketball from AAU on up to a huge industry. Where there is unspoken parity is in the coaching ranks; guys can really, really coach em up, guys at no name schools all over the place. And, with dollars, and the emphasis on high end free clinics, and then shoe sponsored AAU teams that travel all over the place, that feed money around to identify and then develop talent, guys with potential, we, or at least I, am noticing a large number of impressive ballplayers whose names I do not know.
    The two most important factors in parity, to the degree it even exists, are a) the saturation television coverage of college basketball, and b) the cultural change whereby kids all want to be a star, and they want to be a star right now. A) and B) are not unrelated. Kids think, "why should I sit on the bench for two years as the 10th man at Duke and maybe never star there when I can start right away at VCU or Davidson or Xavier or Belmont or any of dozens of teams?" "I can start at, say, Memphis, and almost all my games will be on ESPN anyway, mom and my guys can watch me from home, I'll get all the exposure I need to the pro's, and I'll just go from there."

    When I say "if parity even exists" that's because while it is more common for a "mid-major" to rise up and make a decent run in the tournament, and there are more good basketball teams out there than ever, there are still very few big upsets, relatively speaking, that happen in the tournament, and the Cinderellas only rarely make it very far, and never win the whole thing.

    Quote Originally Posted by greybeard View Post
    Now, let's take a quick look at this roster. Rivers and Mason are sure pros.
    Mason Plumlee is sure to be drafted. He is far from sure to make it in the league. Duke started this year with Coach K stating that we were going to emphasize pounding the ball into the post, and we did. Mason has had some excellent outings, but many times has been unproductive. Hence, the middling 11 point average. I know you think we should have fed him more, and maybe you're right, but he has not exhibited a "give me the damn ball" mentality and has not exhibited the willingness to just take over games on the interior. He's been dominated by more than one college big man this year.

    He is a freak athlete, and the NBA loves that and will draft him on it, but that is not a guarantee of success in the league. He has a lot of work to do with his footwork, with developing a face-up jump shot, with his defensive positioning, and with his overall intensity before he is anything close to a sure thing in the NBA.

    Quote Originally Posted by greybeard View Post
    If anyone says that they KNOW that Ryan, Dre and Curry will not play in the NBA, I'd like to see their money.
    Well, nobody knows that anyone will play in the NBA. Anthony Davis could get run over by a truck tomorrow. I can't say I KNOW those three guys won't play in the NBA, but I would bet some folding money on it. Sure, they could improve in a number of areas, and I could lose that bet, but based on their performances so far in their college careers, and the skill sets they have and don't have, none of those three guys is in my mind anywhere close to an NBA player.

    I love all three guys, but here's the reality: Ryan shoots it very well for a big, and he has a high basketball IQ. He's not nearly physical enough or quick enough for the league at the 4 position, and he'd have a lot harder time getting that jumpshot off against NBA-level athletes.

    Dawkins is a one-dimensional player. He has shown no ability to do anything on the floor other than make catch-and-shoot jump shots. No handle, no drive to the hoop, no defense. And even his shot is extremely streaky, and his whole game deteriorates when he isn't seeing the ball go through the net. There are tons of excellent college shooters who never sniff the NBA because all they do is shoot. Unfortunately, I think that's going to be Andre's fate as well.

    Curry's game is also not multi-faceted enough for the league. He's a good shooter when he has space to get it off. I have not seen NBA range from him, however. He's improved his ability to get to the hoop this year, but he's not going to be able to do that against NBA defenders. His overall quickness is average. His handle is pretty shaky, and his defense is just OK. He's short and slight, so he gets overpowered a lot on defense and shot over. Those problems will only be exacerbated once he gets into an NBA camp.

    Quote Originally Posted by greybeard View Post
    Curry is a terrific shooter, and gets to the basket and finishes very, very well--if he had their size, you might even be talking about Curry's being at least within shooting range (cute huh) of the likes of JWill, JJ, and even Johnny D.
    Jason Williams was the National Player of the Year and the #2 pick in the NBA draft. He absolutely dominated college guards physically. He was overwhelming in terms of quickness with the ball, quickness without it, and brute strength. He could also drain outside jumpshots with range. The complete package.

    JJ Redick was one of the greatest shooters to ever play college basketball, who, along with Shelden Williams, carried Duke teams to places they really had no business going. He is Duke's alltime leading scorer, was the National Player of the Year, and a lottery pick.

    Johnny D was also the National Player of the Year and was Duke's alltime leading scorer at the time he graduated. He was lightning quick with and without the ball, had an excellent handle and quick hands.

    Again, I love Seth, but he shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath with any of these Duke immortals.


    Quote Originally Posted by greybeard View Post
    Then there is Tyler, who I am sure no one in the Western world wants to be matched against. This kid gets you the ball when the other team has it, when he goes for loose balls he usually gets them and the guys on the other team, whether they get it or not, much of the time wish after-the-fact they hadn't tried. K really, really likes this guy, has had him lead the team at the most significant times all season, and when he is only expected to take a few key shots or take it to the basket at crucial times to keep a defense honest has delivered admirably. Think Tommy Amakar here in a much stronger body but without Amakar's amazing quickness.
    No one in the Western world? So long as you're not overstating it . . .

    But sorry, he's nowhere close to Tommy Amaker. I'll give you stronger body, but Tommy was the consummate playmaker, setting up teammates all day and night with the ball right where they wanted it and in positions they were comfortable in. He made the game easy for his teammates on offense, which is not something Tyler does. Nor does Tyler hit open jumpshots with the same regularity that Tommy did.

    Oh, and Tommy was also the National Defensive Player of the Year. Tyler has not been in that conversation, as he has been only a part-time starter on this team and frankly, his defense leaves much to be desired in some key areas, primarily moving his feet to stop dribble penetration.

    Quote Originally Posted by greybeard View Post
    You haven't seen Duke play what is referred to as "lock down" defense for several years now, which I think is nice because, except for this ankle sprain, the number of broken 5th metatarsals and such have all but disappeared.
    Wait, are you saying that our playing "lock down defense" has been a contributing factor in a number of our guys suffering broken feet over the years?

    Quote Originally Posted by greybeard View Post
    So, here's the deal, right now you cannot say that this team is not in the same league as any of the other Duke teams preceeding the 2010 Champions who were 1 or 2 seeds and went out early, first or second round in the dance. You can't say that either based upon performance or talent. Maybe you can say that this team wasn't exactly on par with one or two of those tems, but nobody actually did, all anyone same that this team was and is "pretty darn good." In fact, I'm not a beating man, but if I were, I would not bet the ranch that this team doesn't end up making a name for itself in this tournament by getting a step or two farther than those other Duke teams had.
    Can't really disagree with you on this one. This team has been Jekyll-and-Hyde. They have the ability to make a run, and they could get bounced early like those pre-2010 teams did.

    Quote Originally Posted by greybeard View Post
    Mason just was asked to do too many things for two long as a slightly undersized center, usually playing against talent that had an inch or two on him, that is a team, that had at least two players who fit that category.
    How is Mason undersized for a college center? He's 6'10" - 6'11" and 245-250 lbs. That is a perfectly good sized college center. And what teams did we play that had two players that each had an inch or two on him -- that played any real minutes, anyway? When you add Miles' size, and for that matter Ryan's 6'11" frame, our team was in no way undersized at the 4-5 positions this year. The 3, obviously, but not underneath.

    Quote Originally Posted by greybeard View Post
    Now, there have not been but two clusters of players during the K era at Duke that comprised the core of some great teams: Laetner, Grant, Hurley and different very talented guys who ran with them, JWill, Dunley, Boozer, Brand, Battier, and some of the guys that ran with them. This group is not on a par with them. They are, however, "pretty darn good," as compared with K's other teams, including the JJ-Shelden one that seemed so promising. They also are "pretty darn good" when measured against the current era of Division one basketball, in which the number of teams that can really, really play has, in my mind, expanded greatly in recent years, not because of delution due to loses to the pros, but because there are more, and more players who can really play and more and more coaches that can really coach.

    No body is excusing nothing here, johnpope: these guys have been ranked in the top 10 all year, often in the top 3, ended ranked 6th, beat four top ten teams, were in it to the end for the regular season championship, can within a whisker of making the tournament finals without a key big in an undermanned front court, and are good enough to beat any team, teams as good as UNC and Kansas, on any given night. I think that your measuring stick here is a little out of whack.
    Amen to that.

  10. #210
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    True, but by the same token if a shot here or a shot there during a number of regular season games had gone the other way -- including Austin's game winner vs. UNC -- we'd have lost several more games this year.
    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    Miami failed to make the field of 68..
    Look, Duke was ranked in the sixth after losing to NC, which played the best game of the year. For most of the season, Duke was ranked higher than sixth. I think that Dukehad had the better of the play against FSU. You disagree or think that Duke, having beat whom they did, was overrated the entire season; it's a free country.

    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    The two most important factors in parity, to the degree it even exists, are a) the saturation television coverage of college basketball, and b) the cultural change whereby kids all want to be a star, and they want to be a star right now. A) and B) are not unrelated. Kids think, "why should I sit on the bench for two years as the 10th man at Duke and maybe never star there when I can start right away at VCU or Davidson or Xavier or Belmont or any of dozens of teams?" "I can start at, say, Memphis, and almost all my games will be on ESPN anyway, mom and my guys can watch me from home, I'll get all the exposure I need to the pro's, and I'll just go from there."

    When I say "if parity even exists" that's because while it is more common for a "mid-major" to rise up and make a decent run in the tournament, and there are more good basketball teams out there than ever, there are still very few big upsets, relatively speaking, that happen in the tournament, and the Cinderellas only rarely make it very far, and never win the whole thing..
    You're telling me that you don't se amazing ball players at the guard spots on most all credible division one teams who are amazing athletes, can shot the three, score off the dribble, score at the rim and mid range, and play within the offenses created, I mean a million of them, we see things differently. The same for the three position; I'd take FSU's three/four guy over Barnes. There are many others. Will the scouts agree? We'll see who emerges as star 3s and who doesn't on the next level.

    As for coaches, I'm not even going to engage this one. The schemes that I've seen out there all over the place, the discipline and ability of teams to execute in them, the bench coaching--read an article, I think it was in the Sunday Times a while back, about the mid majors--the job that the coach from VCU has done in organizing a fair at which ADs can meet and interview mid-major coaches, how the numbers of participants has exploded. Please.

    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    Mason Plumlee is sure to be drafted. He is far from sure to make it in the league. Duke started this year with Coach K stating that we were going to emphasize pounding the ball into the post, and we did. Mason has had some excellent outings, but many times has been unproductive. Hence, the middling 11 point average. I know you think we should have fed him more, and maybe you're right, but he has not exhibited a "give me the damn ball" mentality and has not exhibited the willingness to just take over games on the interior. He's been dominated by more than one college big man this year.

    He is a freak athlete, and the NBA loves that and will draft him on it, but that is not a guarantee of success in the league. He has a lot of work to do with his footwork, with developing a face-up jump shot, with his defensive positioning, and with his overall intensity before he is anything close to a sure thing in the NBA..
    Mason is a power forward; Duke polayed an offense the first few games that ran things for Mason, he was getting it early and often, on the move, guys, when they caught it often were INSIDE the 3 line and their first option was to find a way to get it to Mason, quickly.

    I don't know when K made that statement but the loss of Marshall created an entirely different landscape. Some games to compete and win, K had to get it to Mason often; the team did; Mason delivered.

    Otherwise, K needed Mason to devote max energy for entirely too many minutes being a beast on defense and the defensive boards to feature him on offense, couldn't risk the fouls and tiring him out. The tiring out issue was magnified because K had Mason muscling it to the rim as the exclucive means of scoring because he needed that type of attack and Mason was the list (for reasons, listen to Bopb Knight).

    K declared pretty early that his team was going to live and die with the three. Not easy making qualoity entry passses from the 3 line, especially if tightly guarded by longerathletic defenders, and impossible to coming off a sreen set so you are figting through two guys and end up 5 feet behind the three line and if you break through, your job is to get in the paint and finish, except for an occasional lob over the rim when Mason had inside position. Penetrating off the bounce, or catching it inside the line, where you would have better passing lanes, was not what K wanted. Very few plays were run for Mason. When they were, you could tell, or at least I could.

    We never saw a 10 foot jump shot from Mason. Impossible that he doesn't have that shot. K wanted him at the rim, not taking 10 footers.

    Mason was a horrible foul shooter until past the middle of the season, and, while he improved, he was at best iffy. He shoots better, he scores more, and they can go to him more. My golf instructor told me once, you should be a single handicapper." He never saw be put or chip.

    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    Well, nobody knows that anyone will play in the NBA. Anthony Davis could get run over by a truck tomorrow. I can't say I KNOW those three guys won't play in the NBA, but I would bet some folding money on it. Sure, they could improve in a number of areas, and I could lose that bet, but based on their performances so far in their college careers, and the skill sets they have and don't have, none of those three guys is in my mind anywhere close to an NBA player.
    Cute. We'll get to the meat now.

    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    I love all three guys, but here's the reality: Ryan shoots it very well for a big, and he has a high basketball IQ. He's not nearly physical enough or quick enough for the league at the 4 position, and he'd have a lot harder time getting that jumpshot off against NBA-level athletes...
    How much did Ryan improve physically from his sophomore season to this season. Ryan shot the 3 ball, see above. We rarely saw him catch it mid range and have the option of a shot, going left or right, pulling up and shooting, or taking it to the basket, try to score the ball or dish. I think he has that game, and certainly will with another 10-15-20 pounds. He also is smarter on the court thn the average bear, which helps to catch it in that range with advantage. We rarely saw Ryan post up, have a little baseline game, or high post game. See the three ball offense.

    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    Dawkins is a one-dimensional player. He has shown no ability to do anything on the floor other than make catch-and-shoot jump shots. No handle, no drive to the hoop, no defense. And even his shot is extremely streaky, and his whole game deteriorates when he isn't seeing the ball go through the net. There are tons of excellent college shooters who never sniff the NBA because all they do is shoot. Unfortunately, I think that's going to be Andre's fate as well...
    The fact that Dawkins was a catch and shoot guy does not mean that he didn't have an off-the-bounce game. K built his offense around two guys taking it off the bounce, and they took it all the way, not for a mid range game. That's the list. How many guys can you have dribbling the thing with a three ball offense that features as its principle way of attacking the rim having two guards dribble until they see a lane and go?

    Dawkins may not have a mid range game with an ability to shoot off the dribble, but I doubt it. There are pros who made their living as spot up shooters. Curry's pops comes mind. So you say that Dawkins is not that guy, but that guy was the featured guy in college; Drawkins has always played the extra guy to whomever since he arrived.

    Defense. When you are scoring the ball, your defense improves dramatically. Dawkins, one might say, does not have a chance to get in the flow of the game, to miss three or four and stay out there, shoot his way out of it, score on some run outs, play mid-range if his three ain't falling, so we do not know how well he can defend. Besides, according to you, none of the guards can defend, including Austin and including Tyler. You make Austin a spot player, and see how well he defends. Tyler is a terrific defender. Look, no one guards anyone one-on-one. The lack of length in the backcourt and the absence of an athletic 3, creates much more space for an offensive guy to get around someone than when all your defenders are under 6'2".


    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    Curry's game is also not multi-faceted enough for the league. He's a good shooter when he has space to get it off. I have not seen NBA range from him, however. He's improved his ability to get to the hoop this year, but he's not going to be able to do that against NBA defenders. His overall quickness is average. His handle is pretty shaky, and his defense is just OK. He's short and slight, so he gets overpowered a lot on defense and shot over. Those problems will only be exacerbated once he gets into an NBA camp.
    He has all the range he will need and has shown it. Why shoot from 5 feet from behind the line if you can get your shot from 5 feet closer. The guy has great feel for the game and gets in great position to receive the ball. He gets to the rim pretty darn good and is scoring the ball against some pretty tall and athletic defenders. His job is to do that and only that when he takes it inside except for the occasional lob. If he had broader options, like giving it up to a big who had moved into the space currently left open so Seth could get to the rim, the defense has to be worried about that. Curry rarely stops to make a mid ranged. He doesn't have that game? Really. K paraphraised, "we live or die with the three ball."


    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    Jason Williams was the National Player of the Year and the #2 pick in the NBA draft. He absolutely dominated college guards physically. He was overwhelming in terms of quickness with the ball, quickness without it, and brute strength. He could also drain outside jumpshots with range. The complete packag...
    Absolutely. You put Curry in a 6'3" body (I think that he is a powerfully built young guy), he is not JWill, and I never said he was. I said he is close (I forget the exact words). JWill's move was the step back off the dribble, holding it sideways with a pause, if the defender came, JWill crossed over and went to the basket; if he didn't, JWill nailed the three. Maybe that move was not available on the next level? Curry has the same dribble step back shot, he has not shown the pause pair-of pants move (checkers, you have a king and slide it between two of the other guys pieces), he catches in better spots for his threes (moves better without the ball), and I think is terrific at getting inside the defense and finishing at the rim. If not JWill, then maybe his brother, only with more muscle. Fair?



    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    JJ Redick was one of the greatest shooters to ever play college basketball, who, along with Shelden Williams, carried Duke teams to places they really had no business going. He is Duke's alltime leading scorer, was the National Player of the Year, and a lottery pick...
    Reddick was the best jump shooter the cololege game has seen. The entire offense was geared to getting him a shot. You feature a Seth with JJ's size and Seth's greater quickness, speed, bribling ability, and ability to get to the rim and score, and you might have a guy who walks into the pros and has a bigger impact than JJ, at least in his first 3 years. You might have Seth's older brother with muscle.

    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    Johnny D was also the National Player of the Year and was Duke's alltime leading scorer at the time he graduated. He was lightning quick with and without the ball, had an excellent handle and quick hands.
    But, could he shoot from range, you know, the three? We don't know. He certainly never featured anything much beyond 15-16 feet to my memory. Again, you put a few inches on Seth, I think you have his older brother. I never said he would have been Dawkin's equal.

    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    Again, I love Seth, but he shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath with any of these Duke immortals..
    See above. And, here's another one, with the added size, Seth might well be a better pro than Austin, who could not have played with Kyle in the same backcourt, could not have played with Scheyer, Nelson and Singler, while I think tht Seth would have been a tremendous asset playing with those guys.

    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    But sorry, he's nowhere close to Tommy Amaker. I'll give you stronger body, but Tommy was the consummate playmaker, setting up teammates all day and night with the ball right where they wanted it and in positions they were comfortable in. He made the game easy for his teammates on offense, which is not something Tyler does. Nor does Tyler hit open jumpshots with the same regularity that Tommy did..
    Oh, and Tommy was also the National Defensive Player of the Year. Tyler has not been in that conversation, as he has been only a part-time starter on this team and frankly, his defense leaves much to be desired in some key areas, primarily moving his feet to stop dribble penetration...
    Amaker played on a much different team, in a much different era. He ran with Dawkins at least his first year, whose long arms, smarts, and speed helped a bit. Amakar was the play maker for Duke. The play makers for this Duke team are Rivers, Curry, and Kelly in that order. When Tyler leads the team it is with the same authority that Amakar did; his job is different. It is to put more structure around the chaos, get more scoring from others, especially Mason, and let the other team know that they will be working much longer and harder on each possession, which is what happens.

    As for defense, I think that Tyler is a terrific defender but plays in a defense different than the slap-the-floor defense that Amakar lead. He does things for this team that it desparately needs and that no one else can do, and that defense was a major, major contributer to Duke's wins. I don't know the exact wording I used. What I have said before, and what I should have said now, is that Tyler is the closest thing to Amaker that Duke has had other than Amaker himself. By the way, I think that Tyler is as insightful and knowledgible about the game as Amaker, and, if he choses to, will be a terrific head coach.

    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    Wait, are you saying that our playing "lock down defense" has been a contributing factor in a number of our guys suffering broken feet over the years?.
    Yes, most definitely.

    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    How is Mason undersized for a college center? He's 6'10" - 6'11" and 245-250 lbs. That is a perfectly good sized college center. And what teams did we play that had two players that each had an inch or two on him -- that played any real minutes, anyway? When you add Miles' size, and for that matter Ryan's 6'11" frame, our team was in no way undersized at the 4-5 positions this year. The 3, obviously, but not underneath.
    Mason is a power forward. He was made to play deep inside, and his sole job on offense was to take it to the basket. That significantly detracted from his offensive output and effectiveness. You never saw him take a 10-12 foot jump sot. You will on the next level, and he will make them. Taller players have bothered Mason, especially long armed and intense ones that side guard in a scheme that makies him work extremely hard to make a catch down low where K insists he catch it if he is to score the ball.

    With a different offensive scheme, I see Mason playing much more on the high post or posting higher on the lane, playing 8-12 feet off the lane, catching and facing up, and catching it on the move, in those positions, especially on or in the paintl. You know, a power forward. We disagree.

    I cannot name names. As the season wound down, so did Mason's ability to overpower, so did his quickness on defense, and so did his ability to get off his feet. I think that that is why there were so many loose balls on rebounds, so many times that Mason could not help and recover, so many times that guys were able to reach over the top and keep rebounds in play, tap them out to themselves or teammates. I use the term "so many" but I don't mean that there were a lot of these, or that Mason was ineffectual. Through the first half of the season, if he went up in a crowd on the defensive end, the ball was his. When the ball went up, he showed real facility in getting to good space quickly and got rebounds that one wouldn't have expected a guy of his size to be around.

    Ryan, probably because he got so little opportunity, was a non factor on offense as an inside player. His length allowed him to shoot the three ball with space, and K called a few plays that had Ryan dribbling at speed from left to right from the wing and finishing, usually getting fouled first, on the opposite side. I think that Ryan would have been a real asset, maybe even a force, in a high/low rotation game, but that is not how K chose to roll. I'm not quarelling with it, but I think that it was pretty lonely in there for Mason.

    Kelly did a really good job guarding bigs and posing a shot block threat to guys attacking the basket. Was he a force? Sneakily at times, and I think that he could compete at a [retty, maybe even very high level. I do not know whether guys with quicker hopes, feet, and strength, could do more things and/or do them more effectively. Ryan's ability to see the game as it is developing is off the charts and I think was manifest most on defense--it upped his game beyond what one would expect.

    Done.
    Last edited by greybeard; 03-12-2012 at 12:14 PM.

  11. #211
    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    Mason Plumlee is sure to be drafted. He is far from sure to make it in the league. Duke started this year with Coach K stating that we were going to emphasize pounding the ball into the post, and we did. Mason has had some excellent outings, but many times has been unproductive. Hence, the middling 11 point average. I know you think we should have fed him more, and maybe you're right, but he has not exhibited a "give me the damn ball" mentality and has not exhibited the willingness to just take over games on the interior. He's been dominated by more than one college big man this year.

    He is a freak athlete, and the NBA loves that and will draft him on it, but that is not a guarantee of success in the league. He has a lot of work to do with his footwork, with developing a face-up jump shot, with his defensive positioning, and with his overall intensity before he is anything close to a sure thing in the NBA.

    Well, nobody knows that anyone will play in the NBA. Anthony Davis could get run over by a truck tomorrow. I can't say I KNOW those three guys won't play in the NBA, but I would bet some folding money on it. Sure, they could improve in a number of areas, and I could lose that bet, but based on their performances so far in their college careers, and the skill sets they have and don't have, none of those three guys is in my mind anywhere close to an NBA player.

    I love all three guys, but here's the reality: Ryan shoots it very well for a big, and he has a high basketball IQ. He's not nearly physical enough or quick enough for the league at the 4 position, and he'd have a lot harder time getting that jumpshot off against NBA-level athletes.

    Dawkins is a one-dimensional player. He has shown no ability to do anything on the floor other than make catch-and-shoot jump shots. No handle, no drive to the hoop, no defense. And even his shot is extremely streaky, and his whole game deteriorates when he isn't seeing the ball go through the net. There are tons of excellent college shooters who never sniff the NBA because all they do is shoot. Unfortunately, I think that's going to be Andre's fate as well.

    Curry's game is also not multi-faceted enough for the league. He's a good shooter when he has space to get it off. I have not seen NBA range from him, however. He's improved his ability to get to the hoop this year, but he's not going to be able to do that against NBA defenders. His overall quickness is average. His handle is pretty shaky, and his defense is just OK. He's short and slight, so he gets overpowered a lot on defense and shot over. Those problems will only be exacerbated once he gets into an NBA camp.
    You are selling both Mason and Ryan short. It is very unlikely that Mason won't stick for at least a few years with an NBA team. Whether he can be a starter on a high-seed playoff caliber team, I don't know. The NBA game and college game are so different that you can't make a direct comparison between a player's role on a college team and what his role would be in the NBA. In the NBA there are a few stars and everyone else is a role player. You have to look at the role Mason would play in the NBA, and IMO he has very strong skills for that role.

    It is true that Ryan needs to develop himself more physically. However, he made good strides in the last off-season and if he does the same again this year, he can become a potential NBA player. A good model for him would be Ryan Anderson of Orlando. Ryan needs to get stronger physically and continue to work on his 3-pt shot. If he does, I can see Ryan in the NBA playing a similar role as Ryan Anderson.

    Andre needs to do a lot of work to become an NBA player, but it is not out of the question. IMO he should lower his body fat % and instead of trying to be stronger and match up physically at the 3, he should work on quickness and intensity. Someone at his size with NBA aspirations needs to demonstrate more quickness on both ends as well as more mental focus and intensity. Even JJ with his great shooting stroke had to work hard to become an acceptable defender and playmaker in order to get minutes at the NBA level. It will be interesting to see how Andre does this off-season and next year.

    At his size, for Seth to make it in the NBA he will have to do so as a point guard. He has a lot of work to do to get there as a point guard but I wouldn't rule out the possibility that he can make those improvements.

Similar Threads

  1. MBB: Duke 60, VPI 56 ACCT Post-Game Thread
    By hurleyfor3 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 102
    Last Post: 03-10-2012, 10:02 PM
  2. Replies: 51
    Last Post: 03-13-2011, 07:36 PM
  3. MBB: Duke v. Virginia Tech (ACCT) Pre-Game and In-Game Thread
    By pfrduke in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 128
    Last Post: 03-12-2011, 06:06 PM
  4. MBB: (ACCT Quarters) Duke 87, Maryland 71 Post-Game Thread
    By pfrduke in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 66
    Last Post: 03-12-2011, 01:56 PM
  5. MBB: Duke-MD in ACCT Semi-finals pre-game and in-game thread
    By Bob Green in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 96
    Last Post: 03-14-2009, 06:11 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •