Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789 LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 166
  1. #121
    Thanks for the clarification. I'm not that surprised - since I did notice that the ranking is somewhat volatile (I think we were #84 a few days ago). But I am surprised the figure is that volatile, with 20+ games under our belt, unless it's a moving average or something non-cumulative.

    If our defensive shortcomings are through motivation & focus, or "fist" components, he does have some levers at his disposal. Even then, I suspect he's already been pulling on those levers for some time, so I don't know how much benefit can be had through going to the well again and again, to mix a metaphor.

    If the problem is talent, I'm not sure what we can do at this point except go all-in on offense. We can't get taller or faster quickly.

  2. #122
    Quote Originally Posted by cspan37421 View Post
    Thanks for the clarification. I'm not that surprised - since I did notice that the ranking is somewhat volatile (I think we were #84 a few days ago). But I am surprised the figure is that volatile, with 20+ games under our belt, unless it's a moving average or something non-cumulative.

    If our defensive shortcomings are through motivation & focus, or "fist" components, he does have some levers at his disposal. Even then, I suspect he's already been pulling on those levers for some time, so I don't know how much benefit can be had through going to the well again and again, to mix a metaphor.

    If the problem is talent, I'm not sure what we can do at this point except go all-in on offense. We can't get taller or faster quickly.
    Pomeroy does give extra weight to more recent games, though I don't know how much. However much it is, the efficiency figures remain volatile even after 30 games, as evidenced by the movement in the Final Four teams' numbers over the course of the NCAAT.

    As far as solving our defensive woes, I think Coach K's presser was a good sign. He wouldn't have taken that particularly trick out of his bag it if he didn't think a public shaming might solve the problem.

  3. #123
    Quote Originally Posted by toooskies View Post
    Following the second half against St. John's, Duke may be 18-3, but has a 31-11 record if you score the games by halves. It's clearly a focus/consistency issue. We're much better playing to win than playing not to lose.
    Quote Originally Posted by ncexnyc View Post
    I hear what you're saying, however it is a statistic which shows the inconsistency which this team has displayed throughout the season.
    Is it? Seems more like a contrivance; a 'junk stat' that is offered without any context whatsoever and, as such, tells us nothing. In order to draw conclusions from "record if you score the games by halves," we have to know how that 31-11 record compares to other teams. No such comparison has been provided, so it is not an illuminating "statistic."

    Syracuse, which has been ranked #1 much of the season and has but a single loss, is 35-9-2 by halves. Wisconsin, #2 in KenPom's rankings, is 31-11-2 by halves (and has an additional overtime loss.) Marquette, currently 1 spot behind Duke in KenPom ratings and possessing a similar 18-4 real w/l record, is 32-12 by halves. Add in the fact that Duke has the third toughest schedule in the country, and a 31-11 "record if you score the games by halves" seems unremarkable.

  4. #124
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    20 Minutes From The Heaven That Is Cameron Indoor
    Quote Originally Posted by FellowTraveler View Post
    Is it? Seems more like a contrivance; a 'junk stat' that is offered without any context whatsoever and, as such, tells us nothing. In order to draw conclusions from "record if you score the games by halves," we have to know how that 31-11 record compares to other teams. No such comparison has been provided, so it is not an illuminating "statistic."

    Syracuse, which has been ranked #1 much of the season and has but a single loss, is 35-9-2 by halves. Wisconsin, #2 in KenPom's rankings, is 31-11-2 by halves (and has an additional overtime loss.) Marquette, currently 1 spot behind Duke in KenPom ratings and possessing a similar 18-4 real w/l record, is 32-12 by halves. Add in the fact that Duke has the third toughest schedule in the country, and a 31-11 "record if you score the games by halves" seems unremarkable.
    Thanks. I agree.

    I think this is a meaningless stat. For example, UNC dominated GaTech tonight pretty much start to finish. Up 20 at the half, and up 20 with 4 or 5 minutes to go. Roy had the starters on the pine the last 2 to 3 minutes, and Tech cut the lead to 12 at the end. So UNC "lost" the 2nd half by 8. That's supposed to mean something? Really?

  5. #125
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Mount Kisco, NY
    In all the post St. Johns game chatter, I didn't see anyone include K's specific call-out of our defense:

    http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.db...CLID=205369999
    On his concerns about the defense
    “The defense in the first half was very good. I think a very big part of it was we just let it up. These kids are more offensive players and they won’t win big unless they become defensive players that can play offense that’s the bottom line. At Maryland, we played really well defensively, first half against Florida State, so we can do it. It’s just not in our nature to do it.”

    This is a very interesting peek behind the practice curtain - K goes so far as it say it's not in their nature to play the kind of defense he wants them to play.

  6. #126
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Bahama (that is NC)
    With the current status of the best HS players playing the majority of their games in an AAU environment where a group of stars fly into a weekend venue and play a multitude of games, it should be no surprise that it is not in many players "nature" to understand how to play the team oriented defense that Duke demands. Those teams struggle to put in a couple of offensive and inbound sets in their limited amount of practice time and coaching knowledge of team defensive principles. This will be an ongoing problem, but we have the best staff to work within that framework. We also recruit kids that for the most part want to learn those principles. This team will improve on defense this year. Will it be enough to carry us deep in the postseason, I can'r project that. But they will improve as has every Duke team.

  7. #127
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington DC

    An Awakening

    If most people here agree that defense is our major issue and that focus and effort are what needs to remain consistently elevated on defense for us to jump a level as a team, what are the in-season changes that might make Duke dial in and play focused, intense defense for entire games and for weeks at a time?

    The 2010 Duke team started to rebound and defend better in February when Zoubek entered the starting lineup. So I think a lineup change, or perhaps an increase in minutes for one of our guys, could be a possible focus-inducing change. Tyler and Miles would seem to be the two candidates who could spur our D to better heights. I'd argue that Tyler's offensive deficiencies could actually offset what he brings to the team on D, so perhaps a strong run by Miles is more likely to spark Duke to play better team D.

    Similarly, the team's starting lineup and (more importantly) its rotation has been in flux all season. If the lineup and rotation become fixed and guys know what minutes they can expect each game, that could be one dynamic that helps spur some greater defensive consistency as well.

    Last year, Connecticut was 9th in the Big East at the end of the regular season. They would have been a low-seeded tourney team, but they got hot. They won 5 games in 5 days to win the Big East tournament, then won 6 games to win the NCAAs. They went from 21-9 to 32-9 and champions. There's something to be said for a team that feels like it has its back against a wall. They fight. The Packers rode a similar wave last year to win the Super Bowl and the Giants are trying to use that same magic this year. Duke is 18-3 and in all likelihood is too good to look like a low seed. But they could feel like their backs are against the wall with the talk of a lackadaisical Cameron and consistently inconsistent play. It could cause leaders to emerge and the team to come out swinging.

    Doug Gottlieb mentioned according to some DBR posters that this particular Duke roster might just be tired of one another after China, Maui and the season to date. I doubt there's any spite or bad blood in the locker room. I certainly have not heard of any. But there could be some fatigue. After all these are the dog days of the season - no more Maui, no more MSG, no more Ohio State. But, could the game in Chapel Hill and all the energy and pomp that goes with that wake this team up? Do they need a big game and a little hatred to get the blood flowing again? I think it will help. Unc is a good measuring stick for us. Heck, they are the measuring stick for us. I recall the game in Chapel Hill two years ago. Duke was the better team, but was really unsure of whether it was the better team. Down the stretch Mason got an offensive rebound and a really nice reverse dunk in traffic. The team sort of collected themselves and carried themselves as if they were superior the rest of that game. Competition is often about attitude and we started developing some attitude at that moment. That team knew how to play, but that day they started believing they knew how to win. This team has further to go because it is more green, but could have a similar awakening in Chapel Hill or when Unc comes to Cameron.

    I am skeptical there is a wildcard like Gbinije that will emerge to change the team's current dynamic but it's always possible. I do think the season is a long one. Kids go hot and cold for stretches. They play beat up a lot and grow tired of 5am practices and the grind.

    But we are at the point in the season where players have a lot of reps under their belt. That especially helps when learning Coach K's defense. We're 2-3 stops per game more from being a good defensive team. It's within the realm of possibility. I think some combination of the factors I detailed above could get this team to focus and start playing at a higher level defensively so we can get those stops and eliminate some of our mistakes.

  8. #128
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Winston Salem, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by superdave View Post
    If most people here agree that defense is our major issue and that focus and effort are what needs to remain consistently elevated on defense for us to jump a level as a team, what are the in-season changes that might make Duke dial in and play focused, intense defense for entire games and for weeks at a time?

    The 2010 Duke team started to rebound and defend better in February when Zoubek entered the starting lineup. So I think a lineup change, or perhaps an increase in minutes for one of our guys, could be a possible focus-inducing change. Tyler and Miles would seem to be the two candidates who could spur our D to better heights. I'd argue that Tyler's offensive deficiencies could actually offset what he brings to the team on D, so perhaps a strong run by Miles is more likely to spark Duke to play better team D.

    Similarly, the team's starting lineup and (more importantly) its rotation has been in flux all season. If the lineup and rotation become fixed and guys know what minutes they can expect each game, that could be one dynamic that helps spur some greater defensive consistency as well.

    Doug Gottlieb mentioned according to some DBR posters that this particular Duke roster might just be tired of one another after China, Maui and the season to date. I doubt there's any spite or bad blood in the locker room. I certainly have not heard of any. But there could be some fatigue. After all these are the dog days of the season - no more Maui, no more MSG, no more Ohio State.

    I am skeptical there is a wildcard like Gbinije that will emerge to change the team's current dynamic but it's always possible. I do think the season is a long one. Kids go hot and cold for stretches. They play beat up a lot and grow tired of 5am practices and the grind.

    But we are at the point in the season where players have a lot of reps under their belt. That especially helps when learning Coach K's defense. We're 2-3 stops per game more from being a good defensive team. It's within the realm of possibility. I think some combination of the factors I detailed above could get this team to focus and start playing at a higher level defensively so we can get those stops and eliminate some of our mistakes.
    superdave you make some good points here. The 2010 team stepped up their play with Zoubs and Lance leading the way. They played the way we expected them to play earlier in their careers. I could see Miles becoming that player this year. But who can be the Lance Thomas player for this years team? I don't see anyone that can play that type of defense. However if all our players improve on defense we could see a similar improvement for the team. Keeping their focus and wanting to play defense could be what Coach K is looking for. As for Gotlip's comments, who knows what he was trying to do. He may have wanted to start a controversy that Duke is having chemistry problems. I don't think they are. If we can pick up the defense and continue to play efficient offense, I think attitudes will change and we will see the the team improve. Like you, I don't think Michael Binijie will be the answer. However I could be wrong. Coach K may do as you say, cut back minutes for some of the guys and go with a 7 man rotation for the most part. It's going to be interesting to see what Coach K will do. I'm pretty sure he won't let it stay as it is. GoDuke!

  9. #129
    Quote Originally Posted by jv001 View Post
    Coach K may do as you say, cut back minutes for some of the guys and go with a 7 man rotation for the most part.
    Who from our current 8 man rotation do you think will drop out?

  10. #130
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    Who from our current 8 man rotation do you think will drop out?
    Maybe he thinks that the short stature of both Tyler and Quinn equals one player?
    Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things. - Winston Churchill

    President of the "Nolan Smith Should Have His Jersey in The Rafters" Club

  11. #131
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Winston Salem, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    Who from our current 8 man rotation do you think will drop out?
    I don't really know and would hate to guess. It won't be: Mason, Ryan, Miles, Seth, or Austin. If he does cut the rotation to 7, the odd man out will come from Andre, Tyler or Quinn. Andre and Tyler are healthy. So that goes in their favor. Quinn I don't know anything about his health. I stated he may go with a 7 man rotation. I don't think he will unless there's an injury or illness. This team will only improve if they play better as a team and not as individuals. GoDuke!

  12. #132
    Quote Originally Posted by Newton_14 View Post
    Thanks. I agree.

    I think this is a meaningless stat. For example, UNC dominated GaTech tonight pretty much start to finish. Up 20 at the half, and up 20 with 4 or 5 minutes to go. Roy had the starters on the pine the last 2 to 3 minutes, and Tech cut the lead to 12 at the end. So UNC "lost" the 2nd half by 8. That's supposed to mean something? Really?
    After reading the discussion on the relative utility of following "halves" as a measure of a team's effectiveness/success, I recall this article published on Basketball Prospectus a couple of years ago that takes a different look at how to assess a team's strength - it's based on the running score of the game and the win probability at any point in the game. I'm not sure whether I agree or not, but it's an interesting take on the issue.

    http://basketballprospectus.com/arti...articleid=1183

  13. #133
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Oregon

    own the paint

    Good ideas. Make defending more fun and less predictable by mixing it up.

    We have only two players with any size on the court, we need to work harder at keeping them in the paint. Pack it in, lose the hedge, add a bit of zone. And more Miles - he's best of the 3 at not getting suckered out past the 3 point line.

    Quote Originally Posted by superdave View Post
    A quick brainstorm on the possible changes Coach K could implement to make our D better:

    1. Pack it in more. Have the guards sag back to cut off driving lanes, forcing opponents to shoot more jump shots. Use our interior size to control the defensive boards.

    2. Ratchet up the pressure D. Have the guards and wings overplay the passing lanes and bring pressure starting at the mid-court line.

    3. Utilize depth more and play full-court defense.

    4. Junk defenses. Throw zones, traps and full-court D at opponents a couple of possessions each half to break their rhythm.

    5. Maximize effort on one or two strengths. I'm not sure what those might be but potentially defending the 3, defensive rebounding, taking out the opponents best player.

    6. Keep the same scheme, hope everyone improves with more practice and games. Consistent intensity is important here (and in all of these, for that matter)

    What am I missing? I'll be interested in seeing what wrinkles Coach K brings the next few weeks. We are getting close to the point this season where we are who we are and our guys just have to buckle down and start executing at a higher level.

  14. #134
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    San Francisco
    Quote Originally Posted by Neals384 View Post
    Good ideas. Make defending more fun and less predictable by mixing it up.

    We have only two players with any size on the court, we need to work harder at keeping them in the paint. Pack it in, lose the hedge, add a bit of zone. And more Miles - he's best of the 3 at not getting suckered out past the 3 point line.
    We haven't been consistent with our hedges, by any means, but hedging is almost a necessity if we want to stop perimeter penetration. A good hedge will force the opponent's ball handler to go perpendicular to or even away from the basket after rubbing off his defender on the screen. If we take away the hedge, we run the risk of dribblers penetrating the defense even easier or getting more open looks from beyond the arc. Packing it in might help a bit so that our hedges aren't way out beyond the three point line where a relative lack of quickness gives the opposing guards time to out-quick our guys into the lane, but I don't think losing the hedge entirely is a recipe for success. Watching Zoubs and Lance hedge while Jon and Nolan recovered on defense was a thing of beauty. I doubt this team will ever get that good, but even a marginal improvement in this regard will have significant results on our overall defense.

    Also, while I really have liked Miles' defense for the most part, he doesn't get suckered out beyond the three point line mostly because when he's in, he guards the opposing team's biggest player who is the least likely to venture beyond the arc. Honestly, this might not be good for our defense, anyway, since Miles is our best hedger.

  15. #135
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    raleigh
    i guess i'm like everyone else...i'm frustrated when i watch...after i cooled off following the SJ game, my wife made a point that i felt was important...

    1. EVERY single team, no matter WHO, gets up for duke....if you can beat duke, you've accomplished something special...maybe SJ just played their brains out in the 2nd half...


    add to that, i thought of a few other things..

    2. THIS duke team doesn't seem to intimidate anyone. They don't put teams out with patented duke "runs"...you used to be able to count on the first two minutes of the 2nd half scaring the crap outta the other team....now, for some reason, we don't have that as a dependable weapon. We have runs, but not the ones that SHOW the other team that they are going to lose...

    3. Our "stars" are mason and austin....they don't exude the typical duke "killer instinct"..although i think if austin stays another year, you WILL see that in him...

    4. They look more like a group of individuals, going about their jobs, but looking for a leader..

    jmho (and mrs. moonpie's)
    "One POSSIBLE future. From your point of view... I don't know tech stuff.".... Kyle Reese

  16. #136
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington DC
    Quote Originally Posted by moonpie23 View Post

    1. EVERY single team, no matter WHO, gets up for duke....if you can beat duke, you've accomplished something special...maybe SJ just played their brains out in the 2nd half...
    Along these lines, does it feel like opponents are hitting a high percentage of well-defended shots vs. us this year? I wonder if that has to do with our perimeter height, meaning it's easier for offensive players to elevate and shoot over us than the past few years. Just a feeling I have - our opponents are hitting a high percentage of tough shots.

  17. #137
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Quote Originally Posted by COYS View Post
    We haven't been consistent with our hedges, by any means, but hedging is almost a necessity if we want to stop perimeter penetration. A good hedge will force the opponent's ball handler to go perpendicular to or even away from the basket after rubbing off his defender on the screen. If we take away the hedge, we run the risk of dribblers penetrating the defense even easier or getting more open looks from beyond the arc. Packing it in might help a bit so that our hedges aren't way out beyond the three point line where a relative lack of quickness gives the opposing guards time to out-quick our guys into the lane, but I don't think losing the hedge entirely is a recipe for success.
    I agree with you that the hedge is pretty much a necessity. If you don't hedge, the man defending the dribbler, that is to say, the man getting screened, if he is able to get through the screen at all will constantly be playing catch up, trailing his man into the lane. The opponent will essentially have a 4 on 3 situation. Not good.

    But I actually think our hedging has been pretty good this year. A few weeks ago I started a thread on the subject, and was tracking it with stats, but I haven't had the time to continue it. I may chart it on an individual game basis going forward here and there just to check in on how we're doing, but I will say that even though I haven't been doing the stats on it lately I have been watching for it and taking some notes on our performance on the hedge, and it has been pretty good. I am not seeing a lot of instances where a poor hedge, or a poor recovery from the high screen/hedge play, is leading to open shots, or really many shots at all. We're recovering pretty well in most instances. Like I say, I'll try to get some numbers on it when I can.

  18. #138
    Addressing the topic I brought up, which was scoring by halves...

    Perhaps why that stat jumped out at me wasn't that it was necessarily bad, but that it didn't seem like what I expect from Duke. Compared to last year, Duke had lost 6 halves up to this point of the year (and tied two more). Duke lost 14 halves all of last year. That was a more talented defensive team, so you'd expect some advantage, but

    But it was also a more consistent team. A team that didn't take many possessions off. When a consistent mantra of the school is "next play", and a game like St. John's is the latest of many games this year where we're playing to finish the 40 minutes with a W instead of trying to win every possession. That's not to say there isn't some X and O tweaks to better guarantee the end result is a W in a closely contested game. But our weaknesses aren't in stall-ball or defensive adjustments. It's entirely in losing intensity, particularly on defense. It's about focusing on the outcome of the game instead of the outcome of every play.

    And perhaps it's because of the focus put on Coach K's achievement over his career, particularly at the beginning of the year. It's the one time where I didn't hear any rhetoric from Coach K about doing things the right way and letting the accolades come. Part of that is being gracious in the moment, but it seems like the team is less focused on the plays in front of them and more focused on the W.

    And when you do that, you lose a lot of 2nd halves. You play inconsistently because what you're trying to achieve changes.

    The positive here is the Duke is capable of beating anyone in March and April. The negative is that they need to remain focused to do it, and that's a weakness of this team.

  19. #139
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by moonpie23 View Post
    i guess i'm like everyone else...i'm frustrated when i watch...after i cooled off following the SJ game, my wife made a point that i felt was important...

    1. EVERY single team, no matter WHO, gets up for duke....if you can beat duke, you've accomplished something special...maybe SJ just played their brains out in the 2nd half...


    add to that, i thought of a few other things..

    2. THIS duke team doesn't seem to intimidate anyone. They don't put teams out with patented duke "runs"...you used to be able to count on the first two minutes of the 2nd half scaring the crap outta the other team....now, for some reason, we don't have that as a dependable weapon. We have runs, but not the ones that SHOW the other team that they are going to lose...

    3. Our "stars" are mason and austin....they don't exude the typical duke "killer instinct"..although i think if austin stays another year, you WILL see that in him...

    4. They look more like a group of individuals, going about their jobs, but looking for a leader..

    jmho (and mrs. moonpie's)
    1. I just don't think this is a good excuse. Kentucky for the last few years has had top 5 defense and everyone gets up to play them. Plus if you compare this Duke defense to others it is by far the worst.

    2. I think this is the best reason. We aren't physical intimidating. That's why I think Gbinije should play a lot more or even start. He brings that big athletic frame that makes us a lot more physically intimidating. Dawkins and Kelly in particular don't have the physical gifts to play lock down defense.

    3. I think Austin absolutely has that "killer instinct". That's almost always been his calling card.

    4. I think that may be the case, but Mason I think is definitely starting to look like the leader of this team as each week passes. The only problem is that he doesn't seem to have the ball in his hands enough.

  20. #140

    Shortening the rotation?

    Quote Originally Posted by jv001 View Post
    I don't really know and would hate to guess. It won't be: Mason, Ryan, Miles, Seth, or Austin. If he does cut the rotation to 7, the odd man out will come from Andre, Tyler or Quinn. Andre and Tyler are healthy. So that goes in their favor. Quinn I don't know anything about his health. I stated he may go with a 7 man rotation. I don't think he will unless there's an injury or illness. This team will only improve if they play better as a team and not as individuals. GoDuke!
    Pretty clearly we need at least 3 big men to play to fill the center/power forward positions. Just from the foul risk and physical conditioning aspect you have to have at least three so I expect no real change from what we have been doing there.

    In the case of our guards, even as a freshman, Austin really needs to play starter minutes. That leaves two positions, SF/SG and PG. While we can all see issues that our guards have defensively, with ball security, passing skills and scoring ability we can'r compare them with some ideal play, but against the others available to play their position. I personally have thought Seth has had ball handling problems all year and his shooting has also dipped to only so-so. Compared to Tyler, he may be as good defensively and probably better than Quinn. Tyler has a better handle perhaps, but the offense doesn't flow so well with him in the game and the defense may be able to sag off him. Quinn seems to have both the handle and court awareness to get the offense flowing, but gives away defensive efficiency. Really, I can see why coach K struggles trying to select between them and may continue with Seth getting the majority of the time and hope that someone emerges. With Andre, he has his ups and downs. When he is hitting, he is a tremendous weapon, but then he can disappear. His size is a plus defensively, but on the defensive side he also seems to lose focus and get beaten. Since it is really difficult to start two 6'1" guards against the teams with big quick and experienced guards/SFs, that leaves us with the hope that Michael will somehow emerge. I haven't seen that much to encourage me about Michaels play except for brief flashes.

    The bottom line is that I think we will stay with Austin, Seth and Andre with Tyler and Quinn the primary subs at guard depending on matchups. They are who we have and we will win or lose based on their abilities and shortcomings.

    The same issue we mull over this year is likely to return again next year. If Austin goes, we will have the same number of guards, including a good 6'3" freshman. If Austin stays we will try to figure how to utilize our guards. The one difference is that we may have alternatives at the SF position with Michael having a year of PT plus Alex being ready to play.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 46
    Last Post: 12-03-2011, 03:17 PM
  2. What's wrong with this picture?
    By Deladev in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 03-14-2011, 11:17 AM
  3. Is something wrong with Miles??? NO!!
    By redick4pres in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 66
    Last Post: 01-22-2011, 06:14 AM
  4. We're in the wrong division
    By Olympic Fan in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 10-14-2009, 01:26 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
  •