2017 Roster

[DukieInBrasil]

Agree with you, flyingdutchdevil. Coach K has never, nor will be ever, used his bench much at all. The starting 5 get the majority of the minutes, and subs get very few.

Barring injuries (...and we know THAT goes at Duke!), Allen, Duval, Bagley, Carter, Trent are locks to start (32-40 min each). Bolden will get maybe 8-10 minutes of burn, Tucker and Delaurier maybe 4-7 minutes each , White and Vrank 2 min each, everyone else less than 1 minute each.

Where is that minutes prediction contest thread for 2017-2018? I am pretty sure I won it last year.

i think you are seriously "misoverestimating" how many minutes Bagley and Carter will play. 1st, Fr. tend to not play as many minutes as upperclassmen, for a variety of reasons (fatigue, fouls, Fr.). 2nd, big men tend to play fewer minutes than guards or wings. 3rd, i think you are misunderestimating Bolden, he played well below expectations last year (injuries were certainly a big factor), but he has a serious experience advantage. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see the 3 of them play roughly the same amount of minutes this year at the 4 and 5, with Javin getting the lion's share of the remainder of those 4 & 5 minutes. I wouldn't be surprised if they each got ~25 mpg, leaving Javin with ~5 mpg. I'd love to see Vrank play more than he has, but 80 total minutes in a 40 game season seems about right to me
Now, if K isn't getting what he needs from the guys we see as wings, and puts either Bagley or Javin out at the 3, that would distort the distribution a bit.
Also, a final nit to pick, i'm pretty sure that you just assumed that he'll play a ton of minutes, but your "everyone else" comment puts Grayson Allen at less than 1 mpg

[DavidBenAkiva]

We have scoring and driving, so the biggest need on the wing is defense, and an occasional open look at a 3. We need another Matt Jones.
I think DeLaurier would be fantastic if his athletism would let him keep up with smaller guards. Tucker maybe, but it seems so rare that a non elite freshman gets any meaningful minutes.
I really want to see Bolden, Carter and Bagley out there at the same time, but that's probably not a lineup that's sustainable or that we may even see.

I want to bump this from DevilFalcon. To me, it seems the focus on how the offense will work is beside the point. With and without a point guard or a back-to-the-basket post scorer, or elite wing, Duke has a consistently great offense. Duke is almost always among the most efficient offenses in the country over the past 10 years. What seems to drive the team's success is defensive efficiency. Can we generate turnovers at a high rate? Can we get defensive rebounds to limit putbacks and easy buckets? Can we prevent dribble penetration or block a shot when the shooter gets near the rim? That's what's going to matter.

I put this table together showing Duke's trends over the past decade. It shows the year, the team's rank in Ken Pomeroy's system, and then his offensive and defensive efficiency rankings. When Duke has a good defense, the team goes much farther in the tournament. Sometimes, as in 2015, the defense improved during the tournament. Still, the team's profile at the end of February more or less set their trajectory.

Year	KenPom Rank	Offensive Efficiency	Defensive Efficiency	NCAA Tournament Result
2017	14	6	47	2nd Round
2016	17	4	86	Sweet 16
2015	3	3	12	National Champions
2014	8	1	87	1st Round
2013	6	4	26	Elite 8
2012	19	8	17	1st Round
2011	3	6	10	Sweet 16
2010	1	1	5	National Champions
2009	9	7	31	Sweet 16
2008	6	14	7	2nd Round

We won't know how this team will do on the defensive side of the court for some months. They certainly have the athleticism to be good defenders on an individual basis. Will they be able to translate that into good team defense? The jury's out. Check back in this November to see if we can get a verdict.

[cbarry]

Hi DukieInBrasil,
Bagley is supposedly the second coming of Lebron or Jordan, or better than those guys. We shall see, but I think he gets major minutes. Carter is a stud also, and will get lots of playing time. Javin didn't play much last year, even when there were opportunities, and I don't see him getting much time. Bolden may get more time than I estimated, but it will depend on how well Bagley and Carter play. Those guys have a much higher ceiling than Bolden.

And Allen is definitely in my starting 5. I listed him first in my original post. Allen will play 36-40 minutes every game.

i think you are seriously "misoverestimating" how many minutes Bagley and Carter will play. 1st, Fr. tend to not play as many minutes as upperclassmen, for a variety of reasons (fatigue, fouls, Fr.). 2nd, big men tend to play fewer minutes than guards or wings. 3rd, i think you are misunderestimating Bolden, he played well below expectations last year (injuries were certainly a big factor), but he has a serious experience advantage. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see the 3 of them play roughly the same amount of minutes this year at the 4 and 5, with Javin getting the lion's share of the remainder of those 4 & 5 minutes. I wouldn't be surprised if they each got ~25 mpg, leaving Javin with ~5 mpg. I'd love to see Vrank play more than he has, but 80 total minutes in a 40 game season seems about right to me
Now, if K isn't getting what he needs from the guys we see as wings, and puts either Bagley or Javin out at the 3, that would distort the distribution a bit.
Also, a final nit to pick, i'm pretty sure that you just assumed that he'll play a ton of minutes, but your "everyone else" comment puts Grayson Allen at less than 1 mpg

[atoomer0881]

Year	KenPom Rank	Offensive Efficiency	Defensive Efficiency	NCAA Tournament Result
2017	14	6	47	2nd Round
2016	17	4	86	Sweet 16
2015	3	3	12	National Champions
2014	8	1	87	1st Round
2013	6	4	26	Elite 8
2012	19	8	17	1st Round
2011	3	6	10	Sweet 16
2010	1	1	5	National Champions
2009	9	7	31	Sweet 16
2008	6	14	7	2nd Round

We won't know how this team will do on the defensive side of the court for some months. They certainly have the athleticism to be good defenders on an individual basis. Will they be able to translate that into good team defense? The jury's out. Check back in this November to see if we can get a verdict.

Interesting that we had pretty good defenses in 2008 and 2012 and yet those resulted in first and second round exits

[Kedsy]

Interesting that we had pretty good defenses in 2008 and 2012 and yet those resulted in first and second round exits

We didn't. His table is wrong. Our final defensive KenPom rank in 2012 was #78.

More importantly, I feel obligated to point out for the zillionth time that you can't use a ranking that includes NCAAT games to predict NCAAT performance.

That said, I agree with DBA that our defense will be the key to how good a team we have this season.

[atoomer0881]

We didn't. His table is wrong. Our final defensive KenPom rank in 2012 was #78.

More importantly, I feel obligated to point out for the zillionth time that you can't use a ranking that includes NCAAT games to predict NCAAT performance.

That said, I agree with DBA that our defense will be the key to how good a team we have this season.

That makes so much more sense. And I agree with your second sentence. Using NCAAT games to predict NCAAT performance is self-serving. I'd much rather use our defensive ranking at the end of the season to predict how we will fare in the tournament.

And yea I agree with you and DBA that defense will be key (then again - isn't defense always key to winning championships?)

[jipops]

I think it is important to note that K sees depth as more than just sheer number of bodies to put in a rotation. I think K sees playing 7 guys where 1 or 2 can play multiple positions as actually being the same or deeper than playing 8 guys where each plays one defined role.

The addition of Bagley is not simply adding an extremely talented player to the roster. It has the potential of adding a player who can fill in for all 3 front court positions which in itself provides depth.

[DavidBenAkiva]

We didn't. His table is wrong. Our final defensive KenPom rank in 2012 was #78.

More importantly, I feel obligated to point out for the zillionth time that you can't use a ranking that includes NCAAT games to predict NCAAT performance.

That said, I agree with DBA that our defense will be the key to how good a team we have this season.

First time using the table feature of this forum, and it didn't go so well. Let's try bullet points!

2017: KenPom Rank 14, OffE 6, DefE 47, NCAAT 2nd Round
2016: KenPom Rank 17, OffE 4, DefE 86, NCAAT Sweet 16
2015: KenPom Rank 3, OffE 3, DefE 12, NCAAT National Champions
2014: KenPom Rank 8, OffE 1, DefE 87, NCAAT 1st Round
2013: KenPom Rank 6, OffE 4, DefE 26, NCAAT Elite 8
2012: KenPom Rank 19, OffE 8, DefE 78, NCAAT 1st Round
2011: KenPom Rank 3, OffE 6, DefE 10, NCAAT Sweet 16
2010: KenPom Rank 1, OffE 1, DefE 5, NCAAT National Champions
2009: KenPom Rank 9, OffE 7, DefE 31, NCAAT Sweet 16
2008: KenPom Rank 6, OffE 14, DefE 7, NCAAT 2nd Round

Kedsey is correct that the final KenPom rankings are not good predictors of the NCAA Tournament as they include the tournament performance. But that's a small sample and the data helps to illuminate the broader points that 1) Duke is consistently a good if not great offense and 2) the team's defensive development plays a very large role in how far the team goes. As I mentioned in my original post, the team's defensive profile in late February is going to have a strong influence on how good the team will be in March.

Over the past decade, when the team was outside the top 50 in defensive efficiency, they lost in the first round of the NCAA Tournament 2 our of 3 trips. When the team has ended up in the top 50, the team has won 2 National Championships, 4 ACC Tournaments, an Elite 8, and 3 Sweet 16's.

[Kedsy]

First time using the table feature of this forum, and it didn't go so well. Let's try bullet points!

2017: KenPom Rank 14, OffE 6, DefE 47, NCAAT 2nd Round
2016: KenPom Rank 17, OffE 4, DefE 86, NCAAT Sweet 16
2015: KenPom Rank 3, OffE 3, DefE 12, NCAAT National Champions
2014: KenPom Rank 8, OffE 1, DefE 87, NCAAT 1st Round
2013: KenPom Rank 6, OffE 4, DefE 26, NCAAT Elite 8
2012: KenPom Rank 19, OffE 8, DefE 78, NCAAT 1st Round
2011: KenPom Rank 3, OffE 6, DefE 10, NCAAT Sweet 16
2010: KenPom Rank 1, OffE 1, DefE 5, NCAAT National Champions
2009: KenPom Rank 9, OffE 7, DefE 31, NCAAT Sweet 16
2008: KenPom Rank 6, OffE 14, DefE 7, NCAAT 2nd Round

Kedsey is correct that the final KenPom rankings are not good predictors of the NCAA Tournament as they include the tournament performance. But that's a small sample and the data helps to illuminate the broader points that 1) Duke is consistently a good if not great offense and 2) the team's defensive development plays a very large role in how far the team goes. As I mentioned in my original post, the team's defensive profile in late February is going to have a strong influence on how good the team will be in March.

Over the past decade, when the team was outside the top 50 in defensive efficiency, they lost in the first round of the NCAA Tournament 2 our of 3 trips. When the team has ended up in the top 50, the team has won 2 National Championships, 4 ACC Tournaments, an Elite 8, and 3 Sweet 16's.

I'm not sure that we were inside the top 50 in late February 2015. I can check that later today when I get to my computer.

[SCMatt33]

I'm not sure that we were inside the top 50 in late February 2015. I can check that later today when I get to my computer.

I'm not sure if KenPom changed his formula (he often applies those retroactively to better help future predictions) or something, but I see I discrepancy. On his site, KenPom does now have a downloadable sheet for pre tourney numbers, which lists Duke at the #37 adjusted defense. Using archive.org however, his page had Duke at #57 for adjusted defensive efficiency through games played on selection Sunday. That second number matches my recollection on the topic.

[uh_no]

I'm not sure if KenPom changed his formula (he often applies those retroactively to better help future predictions) or something, but I see I discrepancy. On his site, KenPom does now have a downloadable sheet for pre tourney numbers, which lists Duke at the #37 adjusted defense. Using archive.org however, his page had Duke at #57 for adjusted defensive efficiency through games played on selection Sunday. That second number matches my recollection on the topic.

he changed everything before this past season. moved from his log5 to a more linear approach, I think?

[SCMatt33]

he changed everything before this past season. moved from his log5 to a more linear approach, I think?

Close. He changed his Pythagorean rating to a lineear efficiency margin. But that only impacts how offensive and defensive efficiency are translated into an overall rating, not the offensive and defensive ratings themselves. He probably did change the efficiency formula as well at some point, though.

[DukieInBrasil]

Hi DukieInBrasil,
Bagley is supposedly the second coming of Lebron or Jordan, or better than those guys. We shall see, but I think he gets major minutes. Carter is a stud also, and will get lots of playing time. Javin didn't play much last year, even when there were opportunities, and I don't see him getting much time. Bolden may get more time than I estimated, but it will depend on how well Bagley and Carter play. Those guys have a much higher ceiling than Bolden.

And Allen is definitely in my starting 5. I listed him first in my original post. Allen will play 36-40 minutes every game.

This sort of thing gets said every so often. I'm sure Bagley is very, very good, but Jordan didn't play 35mpg as a Fr. Who knows how much Bron woulda played as a Fr in college, but in the NBA he played 39.5 mpg, which would be equivalent to 32.9 mpg in a 40 minute game. So, let's lower the bar for how many mpg we think Bagley will play. Additionally, on that CLE squad they had SG of note DaJuan Wagner and Ricky Davis. At SF a menagerie of guys i've never heard of. This is to say that Bron had no competition for minutes. Bagley, however, will have plenty of competition for minutes. So, i don't think it's outrageous to estimate 25 mpg as a low end for Bagley and 30 mpg as a high end.
I will always reserve my estimates for how high the ceiling is for Fr. since they've never played college ball. I've seen Bolden play, hurt, and while he left a lot to be desired, i saw a good motor, good hands, decent rebounding and a rushed, somewhat confused player on offense. I'm sure the rushed/confused nature of Bolden's game will not show up as much this year. Besides, who cares how high their ceiling is, what's important is how well they play at. this. moment. I'm looking forward to Bagley and Carter being very good. I'm also looking for Bolden to not only be much better than last year but to give them a serious run for their money when it comes to playing time.

[flyingdutchdevil]

1. Goldwire
2. O'Connell
3. Tucker
4. White
5. DeLaurier

That's probably a better line-up than Pitt, BC, or NC State this year.

[uh_no]

This sort of thing gets said every so often. I'm sure Bagley is very, very good, but Jordan didn't play 35mpg as a Fr. Who knows how much Bron woulda played as a Fr in college, but in the NBA he played 39.5 mpg, which would be equivalent to 32.9 mpg in a 40 minute game. So, let's lower the bar for how many mpg we think Bagley will play. Additionally, on that CLE squad they had SG of note DaJuan Wagner and Ricky Davis. At SF a menagerie of guys i've never heard of. This is to say that Bron had no competition for minutes. Bagley, however, will have plenty of competition for minutes. So, i don't think it's outrageous to estimate 25 mpg as a low end for Bagley and 30 mpg as a high end.
I will always reserve my estimates for how high the ceiling is for Fr. since they've never played college ball. I've seen Bolden play, hurt, and while he left a lot to be desired, i saw a good motor, good hands, decent rebounding and a rushed, somewhat confused player on offense. I'm sure the rushed/confused nature of Bolden's game will not show up as much this year. Besides, who cares how high their ceiling is, what's important is how well they play at. this. moment. I'm looking forward to Bagley and Carter being very good. I'm also looking for Bolden to not only be much better than last year but to give them a serious run for their money when it comes to playing time.

The only reservation I have is that freshman bigs rarely get that much at duke. okafor only got 30 MPG, and that was with little competition there. Carter, bolden and bagley will all be fighting for the same minutes, though perhaps spread across two positions.

So ultimatley you're right. 30 mpg is high end in best case. I could see the low end even at below 20 if there are defensive issues.

[proelitedota]

1. Goldwire
2. O'Connell
3. Tucker
4. White
5. DeLaurier

That's probably a better line-up than Pitt, BC, or NC State this year.

Replace Javin with Vrank. If everyone was a senior then this group can place top 4 in the ACC with K's ability to maximize his team during regular season.

Tucker and OConnel will average 15 pts a night.

[DukieInBrasil]

The only reservation I have is that freshman bigs rarely get that much at duke. okafor only got 30 MPG, and that was with little competition there. Carter, bolden and bagley will all be fighting for the same minutes, though perhaps spread across two positions.

So ultimatley you're right. 30 mpg is high end in best case. I could see the low end even at below 20 if there are defensive issues.

i agree with you there. I don't think Okafor could have handled more than 30. He had a few bouts of foul trouble and had a stretch of games where he played somewhat injured. Additionally, his defense was atrocious, even in college, so if he had had competition for C/PF minutes, i don't think he would have broken 25 mpg.
My estimate was an attempt to temper on an earlier estimate that all of Carter, Bagley and Trent were gonna play 32-40 minutes in every game.

[MarkD83]

So another way to look at the roster is potential blue white teams. Starters in bold

White
Allen
Duval
Besser
White
DeLaurier
Bagley III
Bolden


Blue
Trent
O'Connell
Goldwire
Tucker
Carter
Robinson
Vrank

[brevity]

So another way to look at the roster is potential blue white teams. Starters in bold

White
Allen
Duval
Besser
White
DeLaurier
Bagley III
Bolden


Blue
Trent
O'Connell
Goldwire
Tucker
Carter
Robinson
Vrank

Maybe. But I'll make a guarantee today: when splitting the roster into Blue and White for the scrimmage, Coach K is going to put all the seniors on the same team.

[timmy c]

Maybe. But I'll make a guarantee today: when splitting the roster into Blue and White for the scrimmage, Coach K is going to put all the seniors on the same team.

Mark did put all the seniors on the same team. :-)

How about the freshman vs the upperclassman?
Duval, Goldwire, Trent, o'connell, tucker, carter, bagley
Vs
Allen, besser, white, delaurier, Robinson, vrankovic, bolden