Page 5 of 28 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 550
  1. #81
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Quote Originally Posted by uh_no View Post
    I think you're exactly right.

    I think next year coming into camp, the tone needs to be, there are 5 starting spots, and anyone on the team can have them. Nobody is guaranteed to be a starter....not seth, not andre, not austin, not mason, not tyler, not quinn, not ryan....it will probably be made abundantly clear that if you expect to be starting, you better darn well play tough defense.

    It'll be a dogfight for starting spots next year....outgoing seniors who want the PT, newcomers who want to prove they belong....should be fun.
    I get the mindset you'd like to instill, but nevertheless, if Austin and Mason are here, they're starting. Period.

  2. #82
    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    I get the mindset you'd like to instill, but nevertheless, if Austin and Mason are here, they're starting. Period.
    true, but also they'll be starting b/c they both work hard, which was made obvious by their in-season improvements and demeanor.

  3. #83
    Quote Originally Posted by uh_no View Post
    Photos are deceptive

    his wingspan is 4" shorter than miles' and 3" shorter than masons.

    When your wingspan is 4" less than your height, that is certainly bordering on t-rex proportions.....the opposite being gorilla proportions

    and this isn't a slam on Marshall, its just his build...it is what it is...no more no less.
    You're placing too much weight on this one wingspan measurement. It can vary by inches just by how you hold your arms while you're being measured.

    And you're placing too much weight on wingspan as a proxy for basketball ability.

  4. #84
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    We will either see Kelly and Marshall share the center spot or it will be a pair of Plumlees there. And at the PF spot it will be Murphy and Hairston or Kelly, Murphy, and Hairston. And it will be a darn good (and deep) frontcourt either way.
    Sorry, but if our "centers" are Kelly and Marshall and our PF's are Murphy and Hairston, I don't think that frontcourt is deep, and I don't think it's championship-level good. Kelly struggled mightily against physical inside players -- at the 4. How would he handle even stronger guys playing 5? I get it, he can take them outside on offense. But what about defense? He just isn't a banger, and trying to make him into one may affect other aspects of his game negatively, as well as exhaust him. Marshall is a complete unknown quantity. Yes, the redshirt year helped him mature physically, I'm sure. But remember that neither of his brothers was a big contributor in his first year, so I don't know what basis there is to believe Marshall will be either.

    As for the PF's in this scenario, Murphy is also unproven and by most accounts a natural 3 more than a 4. Yes, he may be able to play the 4 in our scheme, but he's likely to struggle against physical guys too. Hairston at this point has proven himself to be a servicable backup, nothing more. It's possible he could develop into a Lance Thomas-type, but he hasn't done that yet. He is not athletic; he plays below the rim and while he plays with great energy, his shot is inconsistent and he struggles defensively as well.

    Sorry guys, but Kelly-Marshall-Hairston-Murphy isn't going to scare anybody at the 4-5 next year. Not physical, not athletic, not very good defensively.

  5. #85
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Durham
    Quote Originally Posted by OldSchool View Post
    You're placing too much weight on this one wingspan measurement. It can vary by inches just by how you hold your arms while you're being measured.

    And you're placing too much weight on wingspan as a proxy for basketball ability.
    No.

    I'm simply stating that his height is mitigated by his short arms....his effective height is more like 6'10 than 7'0.

    This doesn't mean he can't play basketball or will never be a star. Simply that we can't slot him in as a first team All-ACC center next year simply because he is 7' tall, as a couple seem to be doing.
    usa

  6. #86
    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    Sorry, but if our "centers" are Kelly and Marshall and our PF's are Murphy and Hairston, I don't think that frontcourt is deep, and I don't think it's championship-level good. Kelly struggled mightily against physical inside players -- at the 4. How would he handle even stronger guys playing 5? I get it, he can take them outside on offense. But what about defense? He just isn't a banger, and trying to make him into one may affect other aspects of his game negatively, as well as exhaust him. Marshall is a complete unknown quantity. Yes, the redshirt year helped him mature physically, I'm sure. But remember that neither of his brothers was a big contributor in his first year, so I don't know what basis there is to believe Marshall will be either.

    As for the PF's in this scenario, Murphy is also unproven and by most accounts a natural 3 more than a 4. Yes, he may be able to play the 4 in our scheme, but he's likely to struggle against physical guys too. Hairston at this point has proven himself to be a servicable backup, nothing more. It's possible he could develop into a Lance Thomas-type, but he hasn't done that yet. He is not athletic; he plays below the rim and while he plays with great energy, his shot is inconsistent and he struggles defensively as well.

    Sorry guys, but Kelly-Marshall-Hairston-Murphy isn't going to scare anybody at the 4-5 next year. Not physical, not athletic, not very good defensively.
    Don't forget that Ryan had an excellent off-season last year in terms of physical development. If he does that again this year we'll see him significantly stronger again when the season starts. If he improves his shooting percentage and consistency even further, he's a candidate for all-conference at the 4.

    Both Mason (assuming he stays) and Marshall are more athletic than Ryan and I expect to seem them defending the opposing 5 before we resort to trying to use Ryan in that role.

  7. #87
    Quote Originally Posted by uh_no View Post
    No.

    I'm simply stating that his height is mitigated by his short arms....his effective height is more like 6'10 than 7'0.

    This doesn't mean he can't play basketball or will never be a star. Simply that we can't slot him in as a first team All-ACC center next year simply because he is 7' tall, as a couple seem to be doing.
    To my mind the biggest variable in how good our bigs will be next year will be our guards.

    If next year our bigs are doing jumping jacks under the rim while our guards are dribbling around pondering whether to shoot a regular 3 or an NBA 3, it won't matter what someone's wingspan is, our post guys won't be having a good offensive year.

  8. #88
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Durham
    Quote Originally Posted by OldSchool View Post
    To my mind the biggest variable in how good our bigs will be next year will be our guards.

    If next year our bigs are doing jumping jacks under the rim while our guards are dribbling around pondering whether to shoot a regular 3 or an NBA 3, it won't matter what someone's wingspan is, our post guys won't be having a good offensive year.
    Certainly.

    Who of Seth,andre,austin,tyler,quinn,new people

    are going to step up as the point guard on BOTH the offensive and defensive ends?
    usa

  9. #89
    Quote Originally Posted by OldSchool View Post
    To my mind the biggest variable in how good our bigs will be next year will be our guards.

    If next year our bigs are doing jumping jacks under the rim while our guards are dribbling around pondering whether to shoot a regular 3 or an NBA 3, it won't matter what someone's wingspan is, our post guys won't be having a good offensive year.

    Yes, and who's fault is that and why is that the case??

  10. #90
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    I can't even wrap my head around next year without too much wishful thinking (AR and MP2 returning and at least 2 out of Bazz, Amile and Jabari). Since we are talking about Marshall, how does his skill set compare to the likes of Cody Zeller? I'd be happy if he could provide us with a similar kind of production for his RS Freshman year. I know the Zellers differ in style and skill from the Plumlees when it comes to the older brothers, but I wasn't sure if MP3 differed much at all.

  11. #91
    Quote Originally Posted by #1Duke View Post
    Yes, and who's fault is that and why is that the case??
    Whose fault is it and what do you suggest the solution is to this identified problem.

  12. #92

    The way I see it

    As I see it, Duke's problems in the latter part of this season stemmed mostly because Duke played with five fingers not with a fist. Andre's shooting slump and Ryan's foot added to the woes of course. However there was plenty of talent to beat Lehigh in the NCAA tournament and plenty of talent to beat Miami at Cameron in February and we didn't.

    This team averaged 12 assists per game, the lowest number in years. While it is only 1 less than a few years, I think it tells you something.

    I really don't know how good Murphy, Marshall or Sulaimon are. However if Mason and Andre come back then we again should have plenty of talent. It will be a struggle without them, unless the new players turn out to be super stars. In any case, if we don't play as a team then the season will be disappointing, and if we do then it will be fun.

    SoCal

  13. #93
    Quote Originally Posted by OldSchool View Post
    Both Mason (assuming he stays) and Marshall are more athletic than Ryan and I expect to seem them defending the opposing 5 before we resort to trying to use Ryan in that role.
    I post a response here just to clarify, not to get into a pissing contest.

    IMO, no one does - or at least no one should - disagree with your point that Mason and Marshall would play the 5 before Ryan. But as CDu has stated, very precisely .......

    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    We will either see Kelly and Marshall share the center spot or it will be a pair of Plumlees there. And at the PF spot it will be Murphy and Hairston or Kelly, Murphy, and Hairston.
    So the key issue is whether Mason returns. If he does, there's no reason to think the staff would need to resort to using Ryan at the 5, except for a few mpg at most, if at all. But if Mason leaves, then the 5 will likely by Ryan and Marshall. It's conceivable that, practically speaking, Josh could play the 5 some. I could be persuaded that, absent Mason, Josh might actually be a 4/5.

  14. #94
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Quote Originally Posted by gumbomoop View Post
    It's conceivable that, practically speaking, Josh could play the 5 some. I could be persuaded that, absent Mason, Josh might actually be a 4/5.
    How do you figure that a guy 6'7" and 235 pounds, without much jumping ability at all, and without long arms, can play center effectively against the type of competition that Duke faces every year?

  15. #95
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO

    Reggie and Chris?

    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    How do you figure that a guy 6'7" and 235 pounds, without much jumping ability at all, and without long arms, can play center effectively against the type of competition that Duke faces every year?
    Well, there's at least precedent. K used Chris Carrawell (6-6) against Tim Duncan in the game at Wake in 1997. And the keeper of the Holy Blackberry, Reggie Love (6-4, 220), was used effectively against 7-0 Brendan Haywood in the 2001 winning game at Chapel Hill after Boozer went down.

    sagegrouse

  16. #96
    Quote Originally Posted by gumbomoop View Post
    So the key issue is whether Mason returns. If he does, there's no reason to think the staff would need to resort to using Ryan at the 5, except for a few mpg at most, if at all. But if Mason leaves, then the 5 will likely by Ryan and Marshall.
    If Mason leaves, I believe the starting 5 spot will be Marshall's to take if he can make me look smart by stepping up.

    To me, there is a parallel with the Quinn situation. If Quinn can raise his defensive play and run the point on offense showing maturity, poise and good decision-making, the starting 1 spot is there for him to take, and I think he may be able to step into that role next season.

    If Quinn can step up at the point and Marshall can step up at the 5 position, then IMO that gives us the highest ceiling next year in terms of potential.

    If we are playing Tyler at point and Ryan at 5, we can win a lot of games but I don't see our ceiling being as high.

    Even if Mason returns, having Marshall step up and be the first sub at the 5 position (and perhaps even sometimes playing MP3 at 5 and MP2 at 4) will still be important to realizing our potential.

  17. #97
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    How do you figure that a guy 6'7" and 235 pounds, without much jumping ability at all, and without long arms, can play center effectively against the type of competition that Duke faces every year?
    Richard Howell is 6-8 and of similar build. Frankly, Hairston is a better rebounder than Kelly and has the best technique of all of them. He uses his weight to get good position. I wouldn't want to see it either, but he could be a serviceable center, especially against smaller competition.

  18. #98
    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    How do you figure that a guy 6'7" and 235 pounds, without much jumping ability at all, and without long arms, can play center effectively against the type of competition that Duke faces every year?
    I don't prefer - at all - to have to depend on an undersized 5, but, if Mason departs, we pretty much know that Marshall will play some 5, but not likely 25 mpg. We pretty much know Alex will play most of his 20-25 mpg [??] at the 4.

    We know Ryan and Josh are the other 2 bigs, or maybe "bigs." I'm thinking that when Ryan and Josh are the 2 bigs on the floor, they might well switch between the 4 and 5. Josh can't really play the 3/wing, so he's a sort of an outside-inside guy on O. On D, he could, arguably, guard certain 5s as well as Ryan. Josh has some muscle. He'll have to use it, and his footwork, effectively on D next year, whether guarding 4s or 5s.

  19. #99
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Charlotte, North Carolina
    Quote Originally Posted by loldevilz View Post
    Richard Howell is 6-8 and of similar build. Frankly, Hairston is a better rebounder than Kelly and has the best technique of all of them. He uses his weight to get good position. I wouldn't want to see it either, but he could be a serviceable center, especially against smaller competition.
    K's done more creative things in his time than starting a guy Hairston's size at center.

    Look at it this way: if Mason leaves, our 4-5 is Kelly, Hairston, Marshall, and Alex. Alex is going to play a more outside-inside game, and Kelly is much more dangerous on offense when he's on the perimeter. Marshall is a classic 5. Hairston hasn't shown much more range than low post play and a medium range jumper. But he's an energetic defender and rebounder. I could very easily see K looking to rotate Hairston and Marshall at the 5, opting to keep Kelly and Murphy at the 4 (with Murphy also playing some 3) to maximize their offensive skillset.

    All this underscores my view that Mason staying is crucially important. Mason gives us an All-ACC caliber starter at the 5, with Marshall to back him up. It allows Ryan and Hairston to play exclusively at the four, and allows Murphy to play more at the 3 along with G.
    Brian Zoubek on what was going through his mind walking to the free throw line with 3.6 seconds remaining in the 2010 National Championship game and Duke up by 1: "Fifty percent [of me is] thinking, This is what I've been dreaming of doing my entire life. Fifty percent I'm crapping my pants."

  20. #100
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado

    Same Song, Second Verse?

    My fear is we are back here next year wondering what went wrong because we still have a ton of a. small guards who don't defend well b. Offensively unproductive big men who have had three years (in Mason's case) to develop one post move c. ZERO wing players (or at least none we actually play) d. we continue to be "Alarmingly unathletic" at the 1-4 position, relying heavily on tacticion basketball players e. Dribble, dribble, dribble, chunk a three offense.

    My fear is that without the addition of a Jefferson or Muhommed, very few of these deficiencies are going to be answered by Marshall and Murphy. Yes, Sulaimon should help us with some athleticism and defense, but the glaring holes that made themselves all to easy to exploit in March appear to sadly still be lingering.

    I am just tired of Duke having fewer athletes than Lehigh, VCU, Baylor, Ohio, NC State, etc.. We may have missed on too many recruits lately, but I find it difficult to believe we can't go into the 75-100 range and get a 6'6 or 6'7 slasher who can lock your butt down on defense, my god, everyteam in the tournament has 3 or four of them it seems, and here we are at home.

    I don't believe K will allow this to repeat itself, but the roster is the roster, and nobody is expecting miracles, nor should they be...

Similar Threads

  1. 2013 Duke Recruiting Thread
    By rotogod00 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 945
    Last Post: 06-14-2013, 08:22 PM
  2. Duke Football 2013 Recruiting Thread
    By pbc2 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 129
    Last Post: 02-06-2013, 03:59 PM
  3. 2012 and 2013 predictions
    By norra5 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 09-15-2011, 01:37 PM
  4. 2013 recruit Matt Jones has been offered
    By JasonEvans in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 07-19-2011, 11:26 AM
  5. Real Life Ivan brothers, Class of 2012 and 2013
    By Welcome2DaSlopes in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 05-03-2010, 08:06 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
  •