On Coaching

[jv001]

Count me in that if man to man is not working trying some zone is not a bad idea. I have a library of Duke games & I am always surprised at the times in the 80's I see Coach K go to a zone for a few possessions. But as another poster stated he is stubborn. I am not bashing him but he as well as Dean Smith have been very stubborn coaches and it has cost them.

I think this team in particular and not just because they were not good man to man had the length to play not just some token zone but some really good zone. At the very least if your guards can't stop penetration please play softer man. I still have nightmares from Paulus trying to pick his man up at half court only to be blown by repeatedly.

I know he is a hall of fame coach and I love & appreciate all that he has done but I just don't think anyone can say he did a good job this year. The potential of this team was not reached.

On another note I did not notice this as much because I was probably so nervous but I have seen a lot of Facebook posts, and comments about how he seem to just sit and hold his head in his hands when things were going south. I don't recall him being up as much but I really wasn't focused on that. Thoughts? I still wonder about his health.

I've had Duke fans and non-Duke fans say the same thing to me. From his dizzy spell check up, every thing was fine with him. I believe he has not had time to grieve from his brother's passing. I pray that he takes the time now to do just that. GoDuke!

[CDu]

Was there something that changed in 2009 that caused Duke's defense to be generally less effective over the past six seasons?

In fact, there WAS a major change to college basketball that was implemented starting with the 2009 season. It was an offensive rule change that ironically might have ended up affecting our defense given how we choose to play defense. Beginning in 2009, the 3-point arc was extended to 20'9" from the previous 19'9" that had been in place since the 1987 season.

My theory is a ridiculously simple one that I'm not sure I believe myself: The extra bit of court area our defense has had to cover since 2009 has caused our defensive rotations to suffer. That is, help defenders are coming from a little bit farther away than they had been prior to the 3-pt line extension, and therefore, sometimes help defenders arrive a little bit later than what they have to be in order to properly contest the offensive player, who is often someone that has driven into the lane.

That is a VERY interesting theory, and one that I had never considered. But it makes complete sense. From wing to wing, we're having to cover almost two feet more (note: I'm too lazy to do the geometry) to challenge the 3pt shots. It is only logical that that extra distance causes problems for our rotations.

Along those lines, I think it's interesting that our best defensive team since that rule change occurred in 2010, when we deliberately did not extend pressure on the perimeter (due to a shortage of bodies on the perimeter). Which certainly adds further support to your theory.

I think we may be stuck in a situation where a coach that has long been lauded (and correctly so) for his flexibility is starting to get more set in his ways - especially defensively. He has a defensive system that has worked for over 30 years. But in the past 5-6 years a bunch of factors have worked in concert to threaten the effectiveness of that system:
- extended 3pt line which causes defenders to have to cover more ground in their rotations/recoveries
- increased reliance on "one and done" talent which affects cohesiveness
- the rules changes this year to penalize contact on the perimeter and to make charges more difficult to earn

Hopefully the coaching staff will take a long look at this season (and the past 6 seasons) and assess the situation. Something has to change. I think it needs to be our defensive strategy rather than our recruiting approach. But something has to change.

[dyedwab]

I know some here are bearish on the coaches, but I do think they're aware of what a dropoff this year was (even though people are latching on the "very good year" comment, K knows this was bad), and they'll take this as a cue to re-evaluate everything and reload. I also think K's international work this summer will bring dividends, because he'll be working with Tom Thibodeau, one of the absolute best at taking even the most defensively challenged players and turning them into a defensive unit no other team wants to play.

This is both my hope and my fear. My hope is that they fundamentally reevaluate what happened this year. My fear is that they will treat it as a perfect storm of bad things that only require minimal tweaking.

Despite great overall talent, this team was weak in predictable ways. And "young" and "small" don't do enough accounting for it.

[jv001]

That is a VERY interesting theory, and one that I had never considered. But it makes complete sense. From wing to wing, we're having to cover almost two feet more (note: I'm too lazy to do the geometry) to challenge the 3pt shots. It is only logical that that extra distance causes problems for our rotations.

Along those lines, I think it's interesting that our best defensive team since that rule change occurred in 2010, when we deliberately did not extend pressure on the perimeter (due to a shortage of bodies on the perimeter). Which certainly adds further support to your theory.

I think we may be stuck in a situation where a coach that has long been lauded (and correctly so) for his flexibility is starting to get more set in his ways - especially defensively. He has a defensive system that has worked for over 30 years. But in the past 5-6 years a bunch of factors have worked in concert to threaten the effectiveness of that system:
- extended 3pt line which causes defenders to have to cover more ground in their rotations/recoveries
- increased reliance on "one and done" talent which affects cohesiveness
- the rules changes this year to penalize contact on the perimeter and to make charges more difficult to earn

Hopefully the coaching staff will take a long look at this season (and the past 6 seasons) and assess the situation. Something has to change. I think it needs to be our defensive strategy rather than our recruiting approach. But something has to change.

All kidding aside, I think you and Troublemaker may be onto something. I couldn't agree more on the bolded part of your post. GoDuke!

[richardjackson199]

Thanks for the stats. Another spork for that. I think the reason we saw a rise in 3PP as the season moved forward has direct correlation with our slowing down. Early on we'd see Jabari (and others) pull down boards and initiate fast breaks. As the season wore on we did this less and less. Once we got into half court sets we seemed to rely more and more of 3 point shots. I think this was due, in part, to the lack of a pentetrating PG on the team. The only time we saw anyone "drive" when we were in a half court was when either Jabari or Rodney went one on one with their man, or on occasion when Rasheed would try to slash. But other than that, we saw very little ball movement toward the basket. It was all perimeter passing, which led to more 3 point shooting. At least that's what I think happened.

Another great post. As has been pointed out many times, there are good 3's and bad 3's. Good 3's usually come from going inside first and kicking out to a shooter in rhythm who got enough space for a good look when the defense collapsed inside.

I also fully agree on the failure of our defensive approach this year. I don't know enough about basketball to understand the intricacies of that pack-line defense approach that Virginia and Arizona use. No doubt it's helped by having great defensive players like Akil Mitchell. But it sure seems to work. Maybe to mix things up next year, we could learn that as well and go with that sometimes if our other approach isn't working. And go with that more if it works better.

What a great article (link provided below). This sums it up for our team. Our players have nothing to hang their heads about. I think they gave it their all this year, tried their best to do all that was asked of them, and played reasonably well yesterday. The ball really did not bounce our way yesterday.

http://www.dukechronicle.com/article...on-ending-loss

Dawkins leaves Duke with a national championship he helped earn. He suffered a tragedy no one should have to endure, but his Duke education was all it could have been. He graduates knowing more about living a fulfilling life than most. He will remain one of my all-time favorite Duke players. True Duke blue 100% through and through. Keep smiling Dre!

Same with Hairston and Thornton. Their attitude, heart, leadership, and integrity represented Duke with everything I could have hoped for. I'd take 12 Thorntons and Hairstons over a PJ Hairston or Leslie McDonald every time. Winning is damn important. But even winning will never be important as representing Duke basketball right, and everyone on this team did. I couldn't say this yesterday I was so shocked and devastated. But like Coach K said, I'm proud of them too.

Jabari and Rodney have important decisions to make. I loved watching those 2 kids and how they represented Duke. One year was not enough to see them develop into accomplishing any of their realistic college goals. Well except for becoming an NBA lottery pick. Is that really worth leaving this kind of disappointing legacy at Duke? Nothing is guaranteed, but the money and NBA will still be there next year. What an amazing ride Duke's team could have next year if they both come back. Now that would be a way to go out right and into the NBA. This decision is not a no brainer. I hope they will consider it and do what is best for them. I hope they come back to Duke and lead us to a dream season, but I loved watching them play for us either way.

[_Gary]

Hopefully the coaching staff will take a long look at this season (and the past 6 seasons) and assess the situation. Something has to change. I think it needs to be our defensive strategy rather than our recruiting approach. But something has to change.

I so agree with this. Been thinking about it in short spaces for the last several years, but this year it's been front and center in my mind game after game. We simply can't put the pressure on the wings the way Coach would like us to without getting mauled in other aspects of our defense. The proposition for such overplaying is that it will lead to either out and out turnovers, or at least contest an entry pass so much as to get the other team out of it's comfort zone. This just hasn't happened with any regularity in recent years when we've tried to extend. Sure, we get a few steals that turn into easy buckets, but not nearly as much as we seem to get burned going the other way. Hopefully Coach K and the others can really take a long look in the mirror this off season and consider some modification to the way he's traditionally asked our guys to play defense. I'd say it's all but necessary at this point.

[cspan37421]

That is a VERY interesting theory, and one that I had never considered. But it makes complete sense. From wing to wing, we're having to cover almost two feet more (note: I'm too lazy to do the geometry) to challenge the 3pt shots. It is only logical that that extra distance causes problems for our rotations.

The main problem with the theory is that EVERY team has had to adapt due to this change; we didn't, or couldn't.

[pfrduke]

The main problem with the theory is that EVERY team has had to adapt due to this change; we didn't, or couldn't.

Well, the point of the theory is that we did need to adapt due to this change and didn't.

[Wander]

The main problem with the theory is that EVERY team has had to adapt due to this change; we didn't, or couldn't.

But defensive styles aren't equal. It would hurt teams more that place a lot of emphasis on pressuring the perimeter. Like Duke does, except in 2010. I agree it is a very interesting theory.

One thing that could help, if that theory is correct and Coach K doesn't want to give up the style of defense, is more of an emphasis on shot blockers in the middle to make up for the extra space. This is more of a recruiting thing, I guess.

[robed deity]

But defensive styles aren't equal. It would hurt teams more that place a lot of emphasis on pressuring the perimeter. Like Duke does, except in 2010. I agree it is a very interesting theory.

One thing that could help, if that theory is correct and Coach K doesn't want to give up the style of defense, is more of an emphasis on shot blockers in the middle to make up for the extra space. This is more of a recruiting thing, I guess.

Or, using more size and length at the lead and off guards (like Scheyer and Smith, for example) to make it easier to play a little more sagging man to man and still contest 3's. Also a recruiting issue, maybe.

[CDu]

The main problem with the theory is that EVERY team has had to adapt due to this change; we didn't, or couldn't.

That's not a problem with the theory. That IS the theory. The theory is that the reason that our defense has struggled more in recent years is in part because the 3pt line and rules changes made our long-standing defensive strategy much harder to do. Since we stuck with that strategy rather than adjusting, we've struggled.

Other teams either had less aggressive perimeter defense or made adjustments or suffered the same fate.

So what you're basically saying is EXACTLY the theory that Troublemaker was positing: we need to adjust, because the new rules make our defensive strategy MUCH harder to succeed with.

[SoCalDukeFan]

The team could not close out games. I do not know why. As K has said, just did not have IT. I don't blame the coaches.

The team had other issues which are discussed at length on the board. Where I do have a problem with the coaching is not exploiting the depth. The platoon deal worked and was then dropped. I can understand why K does not like the idea, but I don't understand dropping it when it was working. Especially when the alternative was an inconsistent rotation.

SoCal

[Billy Dat]

We finished the season taking 39.7% of our attempts from 3, which was 40th in the country. The only year since 2003 (which is as far back as Pomeroy data goes) where we were higher was 2005 (39.8% of our attempts from 33, 33rd in the country). We were also high in 2012 and 2008, over 38% both years. More often we're in the 33-35% range.

I recall us being at a lower attempt percentage earlier in the season as well, so it may have been that we got more reliant on the 3 as the season went on.

Thanks, again. Is KenPom the only place to get these stats? I am not a paid subscriber...maybe I will next year. Just curious, of the 39 teams ahead of us on the list, how many are top 40 teams? I am wondering if we are an anomaly - are most highly ranked teams taking less of a % of their shots from 3 - a lot less or a little less?

[CDu]

The team could not close out games. I do not know why. As K has said, just did not have IT. I don't blame the coaches.

The team had other issues which are discussed at length on the board. Where I do have a problem with the coaching is not exploiting the depth. The platoon deal worked and was then dropped. I can understand why K does not like the idea, but I don't understand dropping it when it was working. Especially when the alternative was an inconsistent rotation.

SoCal

Yeah, where I think the coaching staff failed this year is:
1. Not adjusting to our defensive issues. I'm not even suggesting zone; I'm saying we never attempted to sag off of the perimeter pressure defense to try to prevent dribble penetration.
2. Never figuring out the optimal rotation for the team. The line-change system definitely seemed to be effective for the brief time we used it. But it is hard to teach and old dog new tricks, and I don't think Coach K ever really embraced the idea.
3. Never identifying an end-of-game strategy. When the game got late, teams played tougher defensively and we wilted. And on the other end, we were in foul trouble and couldn't defend aggressively. Both of those are on the coaching staff for (a) not coming up with an offensive plan down the stretch and (b) not recognizing the value in using our deep bench just a bit more in hopes of avoiding foul trouble for our key players down the stretch.
4. Never figuring out a good recipe for beating the zone on offense. I'm still not sure how we practice a zone offense since we clearly don't practice a zone defense. But it would seem that we'd need to practice both more moving forward, as I expect more and more teams to implement zone against us with the new rules.

[Des Esseintes]

That is a VERY interesting theory, and one that I had never considered. But it makes complete sense. From wing to wing, we're having to cover almost two feet more (note: I'm too lazy to do the geometry) to challenge the 3pt shots. It is only logical that that extra distance causes problems for our rotations.

Along those lines, I think it's interesting that our best defensive team since that rule change occurred in 2010, when we deliberately did not extend pressure on the perimeter (due to a shortage of bodies on the perimeter). Which certainly adds further support to your theory.

I think we may be stuck in a situation where a coach that has long been lauded (and correctly so) for his flexibility is starting to get more set in his ways - especially defensively. He has a defensive system that has worked for over 30 years. But in the past 5-6 years a bunch of factors have worked in concert to threaten the effectiveness of that system:
- extended 3pt line which causes defenders to have to cover more ground in their rotations/recoveries
- increased reliance on "one and done" talent which affects cohesiveness
- the rules changes this year to penalize contact on the perimeter and to make charges more difficult to earn

Hopefully the coaching staff will take a long look at this season (and the past 6 seasons) and assess the situation. Something has to change. I think it needs to be our defensive strategy rather than our recruiting approach. But something has to change.

I want to piggyback on what you and Troublemaker are suggesting, which sounds highly plausible. Moving the 3-point line out may also have hurt us defensively because, by making threes harder to hit, it slightly lowered the *value* of our primary defensive focus. If a taken three returns fewer expected points in the new environment than it used to, that raises the importance of other forms of scoring on the court. Defenses need to shift focus slightly toward those other forms. If a defense remains equivalently predicated on stopping threes as it did before the environment changed, it must be expending its resources less efficiently than before.

[sagegrouse]

Lot of good points here by my colleagues. I would reemphasize one thing:

In the one-and-done era, capabilities of college teams have been leveled, and many more teams are capable of making a deep run in the NCAAs.

Maybe we should have an electronic stamp that reads, "Lot of good teams nowadays!"

In that same vein, I thought we were outplayed by Mercer. After all, we made our 3's. I thought our misses on 2's reflected their defense as much as our jitters. Moreover, Mercer exploited weaknesses in the defense that have been all too obvious throughout the season. I mean, our lack of defense almost saved Bzdelik's job!

Sage

[Des Esseintes]

Lot of good points here by my colleagues. I would reemphasize one thing:

In the one-and-done era, capabilities of college teams have been leveled, and many more teams are capable of making a deep run in the NCAAs.

Maybe we should have an electronic stamp that reads, "Lot of good teams nowadays!"

In that same vein, I thought we were outplayed by Mercer. After all, we made our 3's. I thought our misses on 2's reflected their defense as much as our jitters. Moreover, Mercer exploited weaknesses in the defense that have been all too obvious throughout the season. I mean, our lack of defense almost saved Bzdelik's job!

Sage

Sure, the playing field is leveled, but *somebody* is atop those defensive efficiency rankings. While the gulf between best defensive team and an average defensive may have shrunk in college basketball (is that true? maybe it's true?), that still doesn't explain why Duke in particular has lost its perch as a perennially excellent defensive team. In previous years, we thought the problem was an artifact of roster construction, that we were small on the perimeter and lacked a 6'7" guy to throw at wings. Neither was the case this year, where we had speed and length at multiple positions pretty much all the time, and we yet we played catastrophic, worse-than-ever-before defense. Why? The answer has to be more involved than appeals to parity.

[NYBri]

Lot of good points here by my colleagues. I would reemphasize one thing:

In the one-and-done era, capabilities of college teams have been leveled, and many more teams are capable of making a deep run in the NCAAs.

Maybe we should have an electronic stamp that reads, "Lot of good teams nowadays!"

In that same vein, I thought we were outplayed by Mercer. After all, we made our 3's. I thought our misses on 2's reflected their defense as much as our jitters. Moreover, Mercer exploited weaknesses in the defense that have been all too obvious throughout the season. I mean, our lack of defense almost saved Bzdelik's job!

Sage

That and the fact that other coaches have had a good long look at K and his strengths and weaknesses, and they are adapting...especially when there is little chance that he'll change things up. Notice how effective the line change was...a good part was due to the fact that the other teams weren't prepared. Mercer knew exactly what we were going to try to do and they took it away.

If an opponent knows that we are going to go into our set trip after trip, and we don't perfectly execute, then we are totally capable of going into those long stretches where we just can't score.

[DukeAlumBS]

The team could not close out games. I do not know why. As K has said, just did not have IT. I don't blame the coaches.

The team had other issues which are discussed at length on the board. Where I do have a problem with the coaching is not exploiting the depth. The platoon deal worked and was then dropped. I can understand why K does not like the idea, but I don't understand dropping it when it was working. Especially when the alternative was an inconsistent rotation.

SoCal

The platoon deal caught me off guard as well. It worked. It was to help with a tiring team. This "should not" be the issue. The team gets top notch training from 2 plus hours of practice every day. Weight training. And a daily 6-8 mile run at 7-8 minute mile pace. I do not think this was the flaw in our team regarding being fit.
I have no qualms about this team. Yes, am upset to the max. A bottle of scotch helps with these fevers!

We beat a few great teams this year UCLA, Syracuse, Virginia, Michigan, PITT at home, and of course UNC! We lost the ACC title to Virginia. We went to the tourney and got beat in the first round. We were top 10 all year. I am waiting for next year!
I feel Parker will realize he may need time to work his "complete" game, IMO.
We start again. The coaches did a great job IMO with what they had, what we saw.
They need to key on all aspects of the game IMO. A PG , very athletic. That can score in the low post at will. Or from the 3. And DEFENSE! This we lacked this year IMO.
Again, top ten or less, a great win/loss record, runner up in ACC tourney.
I am looking for next year!
You all have a nice day.

Jimmy

[Atlanta Duke]

Interesting to read this interview with Coach K on how he sees USA Basketball to be his only opportunity to get outside input

USA Basketball gave me an opportunity to work with as good a man as there is in this country, Jerry Colangelo — business-wise, character, passion for the game, I’ve loved my relationship with him.

Jim Tooley [executive director], Sean Ford [national team director] … now you throw in [coaches] Jim Boeheim, Nate McMillan, Mike D’Antoni.

Who do I share ideas with, as one of the top coaches? People aren’t going to share ideas with me. Which clinic do I go to? I don’t go to clinics, I give clinics. Now I have a chance to work with these great minds.

http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Jou...-Sit-Down.aspx

If that is going to be the extent of the outside input there may be a problem - Coach Boeheim certainly knows zone defense but there is no indication that expertise is being applied at Duke

It may have been a bygone time, but when another coaching legend hit a rough patch in the mid-80s (although not as rough as what was ahead) he sought outside advice

[Joe] Paterno sent his staff to the University of Miami to study how one of the more successful football programs in the 1980's was run. He also asked Buddy Ryan, the defensive coordinator of the Chicago Bears, to evaluate the Penn State system

http://www.nytimes.com/1985/10/14/sp...s-paterno.html

And Bill Belichick has consulted with top shelf college coaches

[Nick] Saban served four years under Belichick in Cleveland as his defensive coordinator and Belichick often picks Saban’s brain on defense. [Urban] Meyer and Belichick met when Meyer took the job at Florida in the winter of 2005, and the two trade off-season visits.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/05/sp...05coaches.html

I assume K is not in a bubble but if he really thinks this past season was a good one by his standards (and he was not just saying it out of support for the players) I wonder