South/Atlanta region discussion (Kentucky #1)

[gam7]

I've seen a lot of hand-wringing about the possibility of our playing Baylor. I'll admit that I have seen almost none of Baylor this year, but that small fact won't keep me from trying to change your opinion about them. I'm sure they are good (as they were two years ago), but they don't strike me as being as bad a matchup for us as many of you think.

First, their backcourt is not the type of backcourt with which we have struggled this year. Baylor's starting backcourt is short. Pierre Jackson is 5'10" and Heslip is 6'2" - both shorter than our usual backcourt counterparts. Heslip does not appear to be athletic, strong or quick. I'm sure he has other attributes, but bigger, stronger, quicker guards are the types that have given us fits. Heslip doesn't fit that mold. On the other hand, Jackson does seem very quick, which will help him get into the lane. Obviously, that's been a problem for this Duke team at times. But, again, the shorter guards have not given us the same trouble that bigger, quick guards have. Also, I compared Pierre's numbers to Tweety Carter's from two years ago. Not only do they look alike on the court, but they are pretty similar statistically (though Pierre is a bit more efficient - higher FG%, higher 3FG%, slightly higher FT%). But, on the down side, Jackson is averaging 3.6 TOs per game, a full TO per game more than Tweety did. Plus, his name is Pierre. We handled Tweety two years ago to the tune of 12 point on 12 shots, 4 assists, 4 TOs, and I would expect us to be pretty confident in a similar blueprint for Pierre (assuming - we have personnel who can do what we did to Tweety - which may be a big assumption).

As for the bigs, when a frontline is long, athletic and BIG - like Carolina and FSU, we struggle, but so does everyone else. But when I think back on the season, we seemed to have bigger problems with BIG (think Reggie Johnson) than athleticism. No question - Baylor has tons of athletic and long guys (PJIII, Acy, Miller, Jones), but I don't think hey don't fit the profile of the type of size that has caused all sorts of problems for us. Perry Jones obviously has the potential to cause problems down low with his size, but he seems to drift away from the basket a fair bit and disappears for long stretches (taking a page out of the Andre Dawkins Book of Disappearance). Acy likes to dunk and scowl, and Quincy Miller is a good player but again, not the types that I would consider bad match ups (assuming we have Ryan in there to counterbalance the height factor to some degree).

Anyway, I know Baylor is good, but I think we would have had a tougher time with Marquette (terrible backcourt match-up) and FSU (terrible match-up all-around even though we played well against them in all three games this year with the exception of the first half in the ACC tourney).

[sporthenry]

Friend, you brought up Harrison Barnes, not me. He's your example, so I think it is worthwhile to mention that we lost that game without him murdering us. Moreover, I don't know what I'm "justifying." It would be great if we had a shutdown three. No argument from me there. It would be great if we had a lot of things defensively. A shutdown two and a shutdown point, just as a couple for examples.

Yes, I brought up Barnes as one example. Again, you can't use the transitive property that somehow him only scoring 16 and us losing by 18 makes it seem like we would have lost even if Barnes didn't score 16. But since you didn't want to just take the example at face value, I'll break it down a bit more. Versus OSU, Buford a 6'6 wing went for 20 points. Duke struggled mightily against UW where their 6'4 guard went for 22, 6'5 guard went for 23, and 6'6 guard went for 16. 6'4 Wyatt for Temple went off for 22. 6'6 Hardaway Jr. went for 19. 6'5 Lorenzo Brown went for 20. Now I know all of these guys might not have been covered by the 3 especially in the UW game and there were a few games where we played solid on the 3 most notably would be Tennessee where Tatum was 4-8 for 10 points and Releford for KU only got something like 6 points. But on the whole, I think many would argue we don't cover big guards very well.

Barnes was just an example (and in the first game he went 8-16 for 25 points) but I never said we needed a shutdown 3 but an actual 3. Barnes isn't even the greatest example because he doesn't use his size except to shoot over the defender on his jump shots. Yes, his size helps in that respect but imagine him attacking the rim or posting up any of our guards? I just fear for the day when Curry or Rivers is trying to cover Acy in the post. Sure we can double him in the post but that will create openings other places that wouldn't necessarily occur if we actually had a 6'6 wing to keep him honest.

[CDu]

I've seen a lot of hand-wringing about the possibility of our playing Baylor. I'll admit that I have seen almost none of Baylor this year, but that small fact won't keep me from trying to change your opinion about them. I'm sure they are good (as they were two years ago), but they don't strike me as being as bad a matchup for us as many of you think.

First, their backcourt is not the type of backcourt with which we have struggled this year. Baylor's starting backcourt is short. Pierre Jackson is 5'10" and Heslip is 6'2" - both shorter than our usual backcourt counterparts. Heslip does not appear to be athletic, strong or quick. I'm sure he has other attributes, but bigger, stronger, quicker guards are the types that have given us fits. Heslip doesn't fit that mold. On the other hand, Jackson does seem very quick, which will help him get into the lane. Obviously, that's been a problem for this Duke team at times. But, again, the shorter guards have not given us the same trouble that bigger, quick guards have. Also, I compared Pierre's numbers to Tweety Carter's from two years ago. Not only do they look alike on the court, but they are pretty similar statistically (though Pierre is a bit more efficient - higher FG%, higher 3FG%, slightly higher FT%). But, on the down side, Jackson is averaging 3.6 TOs per game, a full TO per game more than Tweety did. Plus, his name is Pierre. We handled Tweety two years ago to the tune of 12 point on 12 shots, 4 assists, 4 TOs, and I would expect us to be pretty confident in a similar blueprint for Pierre (assuming - we have personnel who can do what we did to Tweety - which may be a big assumption).

As for the bigs, when a frontline is long, athletic and BIG - like Carolina and FSU, we struggle, but so does everyone else. But when I think back on the season, we seemed to have bigger problems with BIG (think Reggie Johnson) than athleticism. No question - Baylor has tons of athletic and long guys (PJIII, Acy, Miller, Jones), but I don't think hey don't fit the profile of the type of size that has caused all sorts of problems for us. Perry Jones obviously has the potential to cause problems down low with his size, but he seems to drift away from the basket a fair bit and disappears for long stretches (taking a page out of the Andre Dawkins Book of Disappearance). Acy likes to dunk and scowl, and Quincy Miller is a good player but again, not the types that I would consider bad match ups (assuming we have Ryan in there to counterbalance the height factor to some degree).

Anyway, I know Baylor is good, but I think we would have had a tougher time with Marquette (terrible backcourt match-up) and FSU (terrible match-up all-around even though we played well against them in all three games this year with the exception of the first half in the ACC tourney).

I think the biggest thing in our favor should we wind up facing Baylor is Drew's general insistence on playing zone. If we're shooting well, that is a huge advantage for us.

The biggest disadvantage will be that someone (likely Rivers) will have to guard a MUCH taller Miller. That, and Baylor has no shortage of big men to go to in the event of foul trouble. Additionally, we'll have to contain Jackson. If he can beat our guards on the perimeter, he'll have a field day throwing alleyoops to all of their athletes.

[superdave]

Sadly, the reality is that when K gave G minutes in the season, he was lost on offense and not stellar on D. K made the decision, apparently, that on the whole there were more effective options for the wings than a guy who wasn't ready on either end of the court. Maybe if K had stubbornly kept throwing G out there, G would be ready to slow down those guys, if we meet them. Maybe we would also have lost 3 or 4 more games along the way and currently be a 3 or 4 seed with an even tougher path. Who knows? Kind of pointless second guessing at this point. Assuming we don't win the tournament, you can certainly find a way to explain how G would have made the difference, if only K had seen the wisdom to play him extensively through the season.

Agreed. I think Michael will be a rotation guy next year, but he did not show in his playing time that he was ready for rotation minutes this year. Quinn did and managed to carve out a role.

I'd like for people advocating Gbinije's role retrospectively to point out specific instances where he proved himself or showed that he could stop Barnes or was deserving of a much larger role. Specifics please.

[A-Tex Devil]

I think the biggest thing in our favor should we wind up facing Baylor is Drew's general insistence on playing zone. If we're shooting well, that is a huge advantage for us.

The biggest disadvantage will be that someone (likely Rivers) will have to guard a MUCH taller Miller. That, and Baylor has no shortage of big men to go to in the event of foul trouble. Additionally, we'll have to contain Jackson. If he can beat our guards on the perimeter, he'll have a field day throwing alleyoops to all of their athletes.

I've watched Baylor about 5 or 6 times this year. Their beta is HUGE. They could lose to SDSU and they could beat Kentucky by 10.

Since this is a "regional" discussion, I don't think it's out of line to discuss Baylor's pros and cons vis a vis Duke, even though both teams have 2 games to play to get to the 2010 rematch. Purely hypothetical.

Here is where Baylor has the advantage:
1. Size: Their front line size is the only one in America that can rival North Carolina in terms of talent and size, and their forwards compliment each other well. Perry Jones is the offensive star in the Lamar Odom mold, Quincy Acy, if you remember, is an offensive rebounding force and can block shots. He is also not to be with as a low post player as he will score if you don't guard him well. Quincy Miller is a talent, but like John Michael McAdoo on the heels, he is young and has to wait his turn (if he doesn't come out anyway). He would be our starting 3 right now and would be the type of player that would make a huge difference at Duke. They've also got about 3 more guys that go 6'10" off the bench, so they can ring up fouls on our big men.

2. Skill up front: As mentioned, Perry Jones is skilled in the Lamar Odom mold. Quincy Miller will be a top 10 pick if he sticks around a year. This team is very talented and skilled.

3. Adequate complimentary guard play. Their guards are average, but Heslip can fill it up from 3 and often finds himself open when teams have to double Jones and Miller. Pierre Jackson is their second leading scorer, and will burn you if you ignore them. Ty Thornton will have to guard Quincy Miller like he did Barnes, and Miller is taller. Curry, Dawkins, Cook and Rivers need to be able to handle their business on these 2 average guards on the defensive end. As CDU mentioned, Jackson will have a field day throwing alley oops if our big men have to help on penetration. An absolute field day. Have to, have to, have to stay in front of him.

Here is where Duke has the advantate:
1. Coaching. Enough said. Drew is finally starting to see the light of the man-to-man, though, so if we start raining 3s, expect him to go to that. If we play Baylor, I expect K to have a wrinkle to throw at them with several days to prepare.

2. Guard play. While Baylor's guards are adequate, they aren't great defenders, and can be downright bad sometimes (see how Mizzou just torched them). We should have the advantage here, and we'll need to exploit it on the offensive end. We need to also make sure we hold are own on the defensive end.

3. Shooting. As mentioned, Baylor plays a ton of zone. This is one of K's best shooting teams ever. If we are shooting well from threes, that will be huge, and if we can continue to hit when Drew inevitably switches to man, we will be in really good shape.

Baylor is nothing to be sneezed at, but our advantages in coaching and guard play could overcome the huge size and talent advantage they have up front.

[Des Esseintes]

Yes, I brought up Barnes as one example. Again, you can't use the transitive property that somehow him only scoring 16 and us losing by 18 makes it seem like we would have lost even if Barnes didn't score 16. But since you didn't want to just take the example at face value, I'll break it down a bit more. Versus OSU, Buford a 6'6 wing went for 20 points. Duke struggled mightily against UW where their 6'4 guard went for 22, 6'5 guard went for 23, and 6'6 guard went for 16. 6'4 Wyatt for Temple went off for 22. 6'6 Hardaway Jr. went for 19. 6'5 Lorenzo Brown went for 20. Now I know all of these guys might not have been covered by the 3 especially in the UW game and there were a few games where we played solid on the 3 most notably would be Tennessee where Tatum was 4-8 for 10 points and Releford for KU only got something like 6 points. But on the whole, I think many would argue we don't cover big guards very well.

Barnes was just an example (and in the first game he went 8-16 for 25 points) but I never said we needed a shutdown 3 but an actual 3. Barnes isn't even the greatest example because he doesn't use his size except to shoot over the defender on his jump shots. Yes, his size helps in that respect but imagine him attacking the rim or posting up any of our guards? I just fear for the day when Curry or Rivers is trying to cover Acy in the post. Sure we can double him in the post but that will create openings other places that wouldn't necessarily occur if we actually had a 6'6 wing to keep him honest.

I agree with most of what you're saying here. A couple of points.

1) We did not struggle "mightily" with Washington. We built a huge lead in that game and coasted to the finish line. They cut the lead considerably, but the game never felt in danger. That was a game in which we failed to maintain intensity. We were in the clearest possible way the superior squad on the court, however.

2) Many of the guys you mention are really good players. I mean Hardaway has lit us up before, when we actually had suffocating perimeter D. Every year there is a list of wings who have fantastic games against Duke; in and of itself, that fact does not mean we have a problem at the three. We do have a problem at the three this year, but some cherrypicked individual performances are not especially persuasive on that score.

3) We could do this exact same exercise with opposing point guards who get in the lane. We miss Nolan every bit as much (on defense) as we miss Kyle. I mean, it would be great if we had a guy to check Barnes better. But what would fan-effing-tastic would be someone who could turn Marshall's evening into a hall of mirrors like Nolan did last ACC tourney final. And I think you point to that yourself in mentioning the possibility of Curry getting posted up by Acy. Curry never plays the three. He's either getting posted up on a switch, which would indicate little about the effectiveness of our three, or he's getting posted up by an opposing two, which speaks to our general lack of size on the perimeter, not the three.

But I don't want to sound as though I'm dismissing your point. We have a legit size issue on the wing this season. To your list of issues it creates, I'd add that rebounding is more of a problem than it should be, considering how excellent we are in the post.

[A-Tex Devil]

Just watched the end of the WKU/MVSU play in game. Amazing comeback by WKU. MVSU hit a meaning less bucket at end as time expired to make a 3 point game a 1 point game. They cut to Obama at end and he is intently looking at scoreboard... to see if the last bucket counted? What I couldn't tell is whether he had WKU -2.5 or MVSU +2.5. Hopefully for the latter.

In all seriousness, UK v. WKU should be a fun crowd for a 1-16 game.

[-jk]

The South's off to a rollicking start. Western Kentucky came back from 16 down and under five minutes to beat Mississippi Valley, 59-58. An astonishing box score: Combined 6 for 39 from 3. 45 turnovers. 42 fouls. 92 rebounds.

16 v 16. Parity?

-jk

[Duvall]

The South's off to a rollicking start. Western Kentucky came back from 16 down and under five minutes to beat Mississippi Valley, 59-58.

Would be interesting to ask the Mississippi Valley coach if this was a worse way to lose than his last NCAA tournament experience.

[ice-9]

I've watched Baylor about 5 or 6 times this year. Their beta is HUGE. They could lose to SDSU and they could beat Kentucky by 10.

Since this is a "regional" discussion, I don't think it's out of line to discuss Baylor's pros and cons vis a vis Duke, even though both teams have 2 games to play to get to the 2010 rematch. Purely hypothetical...

Pretty much everyone has Baylor circled in the Sweet 16 as our possible kryptonite...while I don't think they are our ideal match-up, Baylor isn't a team without flaws. They can be vulnerable. Baylor turns it over a lot (21% of possessions), they don't rebound well defensively despite all that size and athleticism (208th in the country), and they're bad at preventing the 3-point shot (120th among all teams).

These are weaknesses that Duke can exploit. While we don't force many turnovers, we have the depth to press. We're an above-average offensive rebounding team, and we are excellent 3-point shooters. If the shot is falling and if the Plumlees can get those offensive rebounds, we can be explosive against the Bears.

Baylor also likes to force turnovers, but we're good in taking care of the ball.

The area where we are most troubled in is defensive rebounding, because Baylor is a very good offensive rebounding team. We will have to make a conscious effort to block out.

If we can rebound and have a decent shooting night, we should be able to win this match-up.

[jv001]

Just watched the end of the WKU/MVSU play in game. Amazing comeback by WKU. MVSU hit a meaning less bucket at end as time expired to make a 3 point game a 1 point game. They cut to Obama at end and he is intently looking at scoreboard... to see if the last bucket counted? What I couldn't tell is whether he had WKU -2.5 or MVSU +2.5. Hopefully for the latter.

In all seriousness, UK v. WKU should be a fun crowd for a 1-16 game.

Just watched Obama make his bracket public and once again he picks the tarheels to win it all(over Kentucky). He picked them the last year they won it all. He picks Baylor to beat Duke. But for what it's worth he picked Kansas the last two years. Bilas picked Kentucky to beat unc in the final. I like Bilas much more than Obama. GoDuke!

[superdave]

Just watched Obama make his bracket public and once again he picks the tarheels to win it all(over Kentucky). He picked them the last year they won it all. He picks Baylor to beat Duke. But for what it's worth he picked Kansas the last two years. Bilas picked Kentucky to beat unc in the final. I like Bilas much more than Obama. GoDuke!

Obama thinks North Carolina is a swing state this year.

Read nothing more into it!

[A-Tex Devil]

Obama thinks North Carolina is a swing state this year.

Read nothing more into it!

Then he probably should have picked Ohio St.

[superdave]

I finally filled out my brackets. I have a terrible feeling that Kentucky is just too good this year with Davis in the middle. He reminds me of Marcus Camby. I think UK knocks off Duke in the Elite 8 and rolls to the title.

When I watched the UK-Unc game back in December I thought they were the two most talented teams this year. I dont think either has been that impressive all season. Unc has under-whelmed consistently by loafing and disappearing at times. You cannot lose at FSU by 33 and convince me you are a top 3-4 team. There's too much downside with the collective apathy on the roster and the inability to adjust in the coach. But I think UK only really has to overcome Teague's youth and mistakes and they can run through this field. You know what you are getting from Davis and MKG is an incredible glue guy who does everything. If they get average play out of Jones and Teague, they might not be contested.

My pick is for Calipari's talent to finally come through for him.

Super "Darn it all" Dave

[Kedsy]

My pick is for Calipari's talent to finally come through for him.

They're good, of course, but if they win the championship it will be a historic first. No team with such a young roster has ever won it. Kentucky starts 3 freshmen and 2 sophomores, and the rest of the rotation consists of a freshman and a senior. One upperclassman of their players who get meaningful minutes.

Even the Fab Five Michigan team had three upperclassmen in its rotation. Plus, they didn't win, though obviously they came close.

[DukieinSoCal]

I don't particularly like Calipari, either, but if we can't win it all, I just hope it's anyone but Carolina.

And Ky will probably have to vacate the wins eventually, anyways, if Calipari's track record holds.

I finally filled out my brackets. I have a terrible feeling that Kentucky is just too good this year with Davis in the middle. He reminds me of Marcus Camby. I think UK knocks off Duke in the Elite 8 and rolls to the title.

When I watched the UK-Unc game back in December I thought they were the two most talented teams this year. I dont think either has been that impressive all season. Unc has under-whelmed consistently by loafing and disappearing at times. You cannot lose at FSU by 33 and convince me you are a top 3-4 team. There's too much downside with the collective apathy on the roster and the inability to adjust in the coach. But I think UK only really has to overcome Teague's youth and mistakes and they can run through this field. You know what you are getting from Davis and MKG is an incredible glue guy who does everything. If they get average play out of Jones and Teague, they might not be contested.

My pick is for Calipari's talent to finally come through for him.

Super "Darn it all" Dave

[timmy c]

Will Alex Murphy and MP3 get rings when Duke wins the 2012 title? Or will they have to wait until Duke's 2013 title?

Go Duke!

[Jderf]

Will Alex Murphy and MP3 get rings when Duke wins the 2012 title? Or will they have to wait until Duke's 2013 title?

Go Duke!

We shouldn't get too far ahead of ourselves, but I believe they would receive rings. Although they are redshirts, they are still alowed to get the jewelry because they are technically eligible to play (if the staff wanted them to). This is unlike the situation with Seth in 2010, when he was a transfer redshirt and was ineligible under any circumstances. More educated posters, please correct me if I'm wrong.

[superdave]

They're good, of course, but if they win the championship it will be a historic first. No team with such a young roster has ever won it. Kentucky starts 3 freshmen and 2 sophomores, and the rest of the rotation consists of a freshman and a senior. One upperclassman of their players who get meaningful minutes.

Even the Fab Five Michigan team had three upperclassmen in its rotation. Plus, they didn't win, though obviously they came close.

Yes, I understand their limitations, namely youth. I think Teague is the key. If he goes out and plays even with his point guard opponent, I think the rest of the UK roster is that good. I am really high on Davis and Gilchrist. I think whatever they get out of Jones is gravy.

I think Ohio State is the one team that has a high probability of getting hot and winning 6 games. I'd compare OSU to 2010 Duke - mature, great defense, some real gamers. Unc should and could be in that conversation, but I've seen too much bad out of them this year. And with Henson not being full strength, it is easy to dismiss their chances of winning 6.

The rest of the contenders - Syracuse with Melo out; Duke, Kansas and Michigan State not quite being in the same class - would have to have help to win 6 games in a row. If the tournament goes into upset mode like last year, any of the 1 and 2 seeds could make a run without having to play their toughest potential opponent. But if the top seeds hang around, I like UK's chances of besting each one. Again, for me it comes back to MKG and Davis.

[NSDukeFan]

They're good, of course, but if they win the championship it will be a historic first. No team with such a young roster has ever won it. Kentucky starts 3 freshmen and 2 sophomores, and the rest of the rotation consists of a freshman and a senior. One upperclassman of their players who get meaningful minutes.

Even the Fab Five Michigan team had three upperclassmen in its rotation. Plus, they didn't win, though obviously they came close.

I agree that it would be a first for a team that young to win a title, but I also wonder if it is also a first for a team that young to be that much more talented than the rest of the field. I don't think they will win, just because I would definitely pick the field vs. them, but do think they have as good a chance as anyone to win it. What a wishy-washy point, I know.

Will Alex Murphy and MP3 get rings when Duke wins the 2012 title? Or will they have to wait until Duke's 2013 title?

Go Duke!

We shouldn't get too far ahead of ourselves, but I believe they would receive rings. Although they are redshirts, they are still alowed to get the jewelry because they are technically eligible to play (if the staff wanted them to). This is unlike the situation with Seth in 2010, when he was a transfer redshirt and was ineligible under any circumstances. More educated posters, please correct me if I'm wrong.

I agree we shouldn't get too far ahead of ourselves. We don't know exactly what the team will look like in 2013.

Yes, I understand their limitations, namely youth. I think Teague is the key. If he goes out and plays even with his point guard opponent, I think the rest of the UK roster is that good. I am really high on Davis and Gilchrist. I think whatever they get out of Jones is gravy.

I think Ohio State is the one team that has a high probability of getting hot and winning 6 games. I'd compare OSU to 2010 Duke - mature, great defense, some real gamers. Unc should and could be in that conversation, but I've seen too much bad out of them this year. And with Henson not being full strength, it is easy to dismiss their chances of winning 6.

The rest of the contenders - Syracuse with Melo out; Duke, Kansas and Michigan State not quite being in the same class - would have to have help to win 6 games in a row. If the tournament goes into upset mode like last year, any of the 1 and 2 seeds could make a run without having to play their toughest potential opponent. But if the top seeds hang around, I like UK's chances of besting each one. Again, for me it comes back to MKG and Davis.

I agree that Davis and Gilchrist are outstanding players, and Jones seems to be again playing like the lottery pick he will be. They are very tough defensively and I would pick them in a best of seven vs. anyone. One game situation, though, I think they will get beat by someone (hopefully, Duke.)