Am I the only person who is genuinely excited about next year's team?

[jimsumner]

My biggest question for next season is how does Duke get Curry and Sulaimon on the floor at the same time. Duke certainly doesn't want to restrict them to a combined 40 mpg.

Seems there are three possibilities.

1. Curry plays point, Sulaimon plays the 2.

2.Sulaimon plays point, Curry plays the 2.

3.Duke plays both on the wings, along with one of Cook and Thornton. The proverbial three-guard lineup.

None of these are ideal. Curry and Sulaimon both appear to be better playing off the ball and the three-guard option has obvious concerns.

And there are other variables. Does Cook improve enough to stake a claim on the starting PG position? Does Dawkins play next season and share the 3 with Murphy? Does Duke sign Jefferson and if so, can he play the 3.

Will be interesting to see how this all plays out.

[loldevilz]

My biggest question for next season is how does Duke get Curry and Sulaimon on the floor at the same time. Duke certainly doesn't want to restrict them to a combined 40 mpg.

Seems there are three possibilities.

1. Curry plays point, Sulaimon plays the 2.

2.Sulaimon plays point, Curry plays the 2.

3.Duke plays both on the wings, along with one of Cook and Thornton. The proverbial three-guard lineup.

None of these are ideal. Curry and Sulaimon both appear to be better playing off the ball and the three-guard option has obvious concerns.

And there are other variables. Does Cook improve enough to stake a claim on the starting PG position? Does Dawkins play next season and share the 3 with Murphy? Does Duke sign Jefferson and if so, can he play the 3.

Will be interesting to see how this all plays out.

I totally agree that this will be the key issue next year.

You really can't play Cook with Curry because both are subpar defensively and very very small.

Curry at the point is probably the best option with Sulaimon at SG. You let Sulaimon be the on ball defender.

I think the worst case senario is Thornton and Curry like we had last year. Thornton has no offensive point guard skills whatsoever and both are really small.

I also really don't want to see a 3 guard lineup like last year because as the season went on, it proved to be a huge mistake.

I think the best plan is this if Dawkins redshirts:

Curry / Cook
Sulaimon
Murphy
Kelly/ Hairston
Plumlee / Hairston

You let Sulaimon guard on ball because he probably will be our best on ball defender from day 1. Curry runs the point in a hopefully a Scheyer-esque manner.

I like the idea of Hairston getting a lot of run because he can guard most powerforwards unlike Kelly who struggles with those 6-8 athletic types. And Murphy and Hairston at the 3 four is a great look IMO reminiscent of Singler/ Thomas. They could play next to either Kelly or Mason for stretches.

[jcastranio]

My biggest question for next season is how does Duke get Curry and Sulaimon on the floor at the same time. Duke certainly doesn't want to restrict them to a combined 40 mpg.

Seems there are three possibilities.

1. Curry plays point, Sulaimon plays the 2.

2.Sulaimon plays point, Curry plays the 2.

3.Duke plays both on the wings, along with one of Cook and Thornton. The proverbial three-guard lineup.

None of these are ideal. Curry and Sulaimon both appear to be better playing off the ball and the three-guard option has obvious concerns.

And there are other variables. Does Cook improve enough to stake a claim on the starting PG position? Does Dawkins play next season and share the 3 with Murphy? Does Duke sign Jefferson and if so, can he play the 3.

Will be interesting to see how this all plays out.

I agree that it isn't ideal - unless the situation calls for it. A smaller, 3 guard lineup might just be perfect for certain situations. There will be teams who play more guards against us. Other teams may require more Alex and Josh at the three.

I think our personnel allows for some flexibility. Certainly - we are thin at the small forward position (one person). Josh seems to play better at the PF, despite his size, than at the SF. Still, with an extra year of experience.

Perhaps we can make teams adjust to us this year.

[Dukehky]

I agree that it isn't ideal - unless the situation calls for it. A smaller, 3 guard lineup might just be perfect for certain situations. There will be teams who play more guards against us. Other teams may require more Alex and Josh at the three.

I think our personnel allows for some flexibility. Certainly - we are thin at the small forward position (one person). Josh seems to play better at the PF, despite his size, than at the SF. Still, with an extra year of experience.

Perhaps we can make teams adjust to us this year.

I don't know what you all have seen of Josh that makes you think he's capable of guarding a 3. Speed/lateral quickness is not something you'd put in the pros part of his game. He has a lot of trouble handling most 4's, whether they be stretch or power. I don't see much time on the court for Josh at any position. I like how he comes in and brings a little toughness and energy. He works hard, but that can/should only get you so much time. I think dropping a little bit of that bulk will help Josh with his quickness and ups, but I don't know if the staff is going to try and get him to do that. We'll see, but in my optimism for this team, I'm not counting on Hairston to give me more than 5-7 minutes as an energy guy off the bench at most. Obviously if he improves enough to get a lot of run in, then I take it all back. As I've said before, I like having the problem of finding minutes for guys who deserve to play, especially in the front court. I'm haunted by that 04 FF game when our bigs got in foul trouble and there was nothing we could do about it.

[Ima Facultiwyfe]

I'm still looking for a garbage man with a killer focus. Then I'll get real excited.
Love, Ima

[OldPhiKap]

I'm still looking for a garbage man with a killer focus. Then I'll get real excited.
Love, Ima

Interesting point. I think Josh could be that man.

[UrinalCake]

My biggest question for next season is how does Duke get Curry and Sulaimon on the floor at the same time.

This is the exact same problem we had last year, with Rasheed substituted for Austin. I'm thinking we'll see Curry play the point before we see Rasheed there, based on Curry having much more experience. With Tyler we basically have three guys that can play either guard position; only Quinn is considered a "pure" point.

[jcastranio]

I am not a "Josh needs to start and play 30 minutes" guy. But he is growing into a more viable option. Against the right team - he could play some 3. I think he is most comfortable at the 4. He is 6'7". If we play defense right (which we didn't this year), it doesn't matter whether he can stay with a quick 3 - it matters what he can influence that quick 3 to do. Good team defense covers up for individual shortcomings - we just didn't have that last year. I think it changes next year. Josh is willing to throw his body around and bring some energy. He isn't afraid to shoot (although it makes me a little fearful sometimes). I think he is more than a 5 minute guy for us.

[gumbomoop]

I agree that it isn't ideal - unless the situation calls for it. A smaller, 3 guard lineup might just be perfect for certain situations. There will be teams who play more guards against us.

I agree with this, and just want to try to identify some likely situations. Assuming a "worst case scenario" - Andre redshirts, no additional recruits, thus 9 players total:

1. A 3-guard lineup might be near-perfect on occasion, but against many teams probably only for relatively short bursts of time.
2. A 3-guard lineup will be necessary for roughly 15-20 mpg, as Alex cannot play 40 mpg. It might be expecting a whole lot for him to play even 25 mpg.
3. K can put several different 3-guard lineups on the floor.
4. In not-ideal situations, K's coaching acumen will be tested, as he must, at least for short bursts of time, put 3 guards on the floor who can, among them, provide some D, and some O.
5. Opponents' rosters will affect K's decisions. Against some teams, for some minutes, K might use guards X,Y, and Z; but against another team, K might not use the XYZ troika at all, going with VYZ, instead.
6. If by chance something like 3 of the 4 guards excel defensively, and 3 of the 4 excel offensively, there will be almost no not-ideal situations. In which case, we're even more golden than usual.

Friendly amendments gladly accepted. Even within the limitations of this 9-man scenario, I'm guessing I've neglected a few additional possibilities.

[jcastranio]

I agree with this, and just want to try to identify some likely situations. Assuming a "worst case scenario" - Andre redshirts, no additional recruits, thus 9 players total:

1. A 3-guard lineup might be near-perfect on occasion, but against many teams probably only for relatively short bursts of time.
2. A 3-guard lineup will be necessary for roughly 15-20 mpg, as Alex cannot play 40 mpg. It might be expecting a whole lot for him to play even 25 mpg.
3. K can put several different 3-guard lineups on the floor.
4. In not-ideal situations, K's coaching acumen will be tested, as he must, at least for short bursts of time, put 3 guards on the floor who can, among them, provide some D, and some O.
5. Opponents' rosters will affect K's decisions. Against some teams, for some minutes, K might use guards X,Y, and Z; but against another team, K might not use the XYZ troika at all, going with VYZ, instead.
6. If by chance something like 3 of the 4 guards excel defensively, and 3 of the 4 excel offensively, there will be almost no not-ideal situations. In which case, we're even more golden than usual.

Friendly amendments gladly accepted. Even within the limitations of this 9-man scenario, I'm guessing I've neglected a few additional possibilities.

The composition of the team and the possible situations listed here are where K will earn his money and prove his worth. Each game, heck - each half - may bring something different. It won't always be traditional - but we got options. If K gets the guys to buy into it and not fret about playing time each game, the team will come out ahead.

[nocilla]

This is the exact same problem we had last year, with Rasheed substituted for Austin. I'm thinking we'll see Curry play the point before we see Rasheed there, based on Curry having much more experience. With Tyler we basically have three guys that can play either guard position; only Quinn is considered a "pure" point.

I don't think Sulaimon will demand the minutes that Austin did for one. (when I say demand I mean talent wise, not that he verbally demanded) Also, having Alex at the 3 will alleviate the dreaded 3-guard lineup that a lot of people seem to think was the root of our 'failures' last year. If Alex can play 25+ minutes at the 3 then we will only have 10-15 minutes for someone else there. If Dawkins does red-shirt then I think Sulaimon will get those minutes plus however many minutes Curry needs for breathers. So I think we will see Sulaimon and Curry both on the floor for stretches in games but for the most part Alex will be in with 2 guards. There is a big difference in having the flexibility to go to a 3 guard lineup for stretches as opposed to having to play a 3 guard lineup for 40 minutes like last year.

[Steven43]

I am not a "Josh needs to start and play 30 minutes" guy. But he is growing into a more viable option. Against the right team - he could play some 3. I think he is most comfortable at the 4. He is 6'7". If we play defense right (which we didn't this year), it doesn't matter whether he can stay with a quick 3 - it matters what he can influence that quick 3 to do. Good team defense covers up for individual shortcomings - we just didn't have that last year. I think it changes next year. Josh is willing to throw his body around and bring some energy. He isn't afraid to shoot (although it makes me a little fearful sometimes). I think he is more than a 5 minute guy for us.

I hope you're right about Josh becoming a more viable option. The way his body changed from early in year one to year two seemed fairly dramatic. I don't know if he was purposely consuming extra calories, drinking protein shakes with nearly every meal, lifting weights with the express purpose of adding bulk or what, but the changes were obvious. At least it seemed so to me. I think that if it is possible, he should go back to being thinner and less muscle-bound which would likely give him considerably more quickness and lift. If it was an experiment by him and the coaching staff, I don't think the results were what they hoped. If he were 6'10" and had the ability to score on the inside then it would probably be a good idea to bulk up, but a 6'7" forward who shoots jump shots needs to be quicker and more agile than he showed last season.

[jcastranio]

Why do you have the opinion that Josh is 'growing into a more viable option'? I'm not being sarcastic, I'm asking seriously.

There was a time in his senior year that I suddenly felt comfortable with Lance Thomas in the lineup. Don't know where it came from - just seemed like the team played better with him in there. He never scored a bunch, sometimes could be individually overwhelmed by a bigger, stronger player - but he made a difference.

Somewhere near the end of last season, I just started to get that feeling when Josh came in. He hustled, he seemed fearless, he was vocal. I believe that he will continue to grow. I think that his ability to blend in with the "team" on defense and offense will be more apparent when our "team" works better together.

Again, doesn't mean he starts or even plays major minutes all the time. But I think he becomes a crucial "glue" guy. I wish I had lots of stats to back all that up - but I don't. Just a feeling about him. I trust him to give 110%.

[Saratoga2]

I don't know what you all have seen of Josh that makes you think he's capable of guarding a 3. Speed/lateral quickness is not something you'd put in the pros part of his game. He has a lot of trouble handling most 4's, whether they be stretch or power. I don't see much time on the court for Josh at any position. I like how he comes in and brings a little toughness and energy. He works hard, but that can/should only get you so much time. I think dropping a little bit of that bulk will help Josh with his quickness and ups, but I don't know if the staff is going to try and get him to do that. We'll see, but in my optimism for this team, I'm not counting on Hairston to give me more than 5-7 minutes as an energy guy off the bench at most. Obviously if he improves enough to get a lot of run in, then I take it all back. As I've said before, I like having the problem of finding minutes for guys who deserve to play, especially in the front court. I'm haunted by that 04 FF game when our bigs got in foul trouble and there was nothing we could do about it.

To take a more positive attitude, Josh has a decent mid range shot. I think he could improve that and his free throws by putting more arc on the ball. Right now he throws up lasers that have to be perfect to go in. With a better shot, he could give us some valuable minutes in the coming season.

[Saratoga2]

I agree with this, and just want to try to identify some likely situations. Assuming a "worst case scenario" - Andre redshirts, no additional recruits, thus 9 players total:

1. A 3-guard lineup might be near-perfect on occasion, but against many teams probably only for relatively short bursts of time.
2. A 3-guard lineup will be necessary for roughly 15-20 mpg, as Alex cannot play 40 mpg. It might be expecting a whole lot for him to play even 25 mpg.
3. K can put several different 3-guard lineups on the floor.
4. In not-ideal situations, K's coaching acumen will be tested, as he must, at least for short bursts of time, put 3 guards on the floor who can, among them, provide some D, and some O.
5. Opponents' rosters will affect K's decisions. Against some teams, for some minutes, K might use guards X,Y, and Z; but against another team, K might not use the XYZ troika at all, going with VYZ, instead.
6. If by chance something like 3 of the 4 guards excel defensively, and 3 of the 4 excel offensively, there will be almost no not-ideal situations. In which case, we're even more golden than usual.

Friendly amendments gladly accepted. Even within the limitations of this 9-man scenario, I'm guessing I've neglected a few additional possibilities.

Andre is still a solid option at SF. If he does decide to red shirt, then the best option is to pick up another SF through recruiting to complement Alex. Playing three small guards on the floor together won't cut it against teams with big guards and small forwards. While we have good quality guards, they do not have that super quickness needed to offset the size disadvantage. We saw it against Ohio State and others. It makes sense to see what coach K will do before trying to speculate on lineups.

[loldevilz]

There was a time in his senior year that I suddenly felt comfortable with Lance Thomas in the lineup. Don't know where it came from - just seemed like the team played better with him in there. He never scored a bunch, sometimes could be individually overwhelmed by a bigger, stronger player - but he made a difference.

Somewhere near the end of last season, I just started to get that feeling when Josh came in. He hustled, he seemed fearless, he was vocal. I believe that he will continue to grow. I think that his ability to blend in with the "team" on defense and offense will be more apparent when our "team" works better together.

Again, doesn't mean he starts or even plays major minutes all the time. But I think he becomes a crucial "glue" guy. I wish I had lots of stats to back all that up - but I don't. Just a feeling about him. I trust him to give 110%.

I don't think its just feeling comfortable. Josh was at least partially responsible for our defensive improvement towards the end of the year. I think many underestimate the effect of having an energetic mobile four that can play good team defense. Obviously Josh is no Lance but he is a vast defensive improvement over Kelly.

I have said this before, but I really like having the big small forward and athletic power forward. Singler & Thomas, Battier & Dunleavy, Hairston & Murphy. Last year we had Kelly and Dawkins at pf and sg and they both struggled mightily.

[NM Duke Fan]

I'm still looking for a garbage man with a killer focus. Then I'll get real excited.
Love, Ima

What a great phrase, pure poetry! And I think Josh can do this, especially if he loses a pound or two, could play a bit of a Lance Thomas type role.

[davekay1971]

Assuming Alex can start at the 3 and play effectively for the majority of the game, we'll be can probably do all right working through the minutes he's off the court. We can work with what the other team gives us, but we'll basically be going with a very big, relatively less quick 3, or a very undersized 3. I'm in general agreement with many posters that, with 3 relatively small guards, the 3 guard lineup isn't a great option for the majority of the game. A 3 guard lineup, on this team, would have the 1-3 all about 6'1"-6'3". That'll be okay for periods of time, as long as we're able to play aggressive defense to interrupt passing lanes and try not to leave our undersized 3 exposed to be posted up. The other option, is to go very big, putting a lineup of Mason/Marshall, Josh, and Ryan out on the floor. That would make for a nice matchup problem for the other team as a 3 tries to guard Kelly, but it leaves us similarly exposed on defense as neither Josh nor Ryan has shown the ability to defend a relatively quick 3.

Any thoughts on going into a zone look when we have Alex on the bench? This could help cover our defensive matchup problem at the 3, whether we are in a big or small lineup, but, of course, it's against K's nature to go zone for significant periods of time, so I think we're unlikely to see much of it.

[Sixthman]

My biggest question for next season is how does Duke get Curry and Sulaimon on the floor at the same time. Duke certainly doesn't want to restrict them to a combined 40 mpg.

Seems there are three possibilities.

1. Curry plays point, Sulaimon plays the 2.

2.Sulaimon plays point, Curry plays the 2.

3.Duke plays both on the wings, along with one of Cook and Thornton. The proverbial three-guard lineup.

None of these are ideal. Curry and Sulaimon both appear to be better playing off the ball and the three-guard option has obvious concerns.

And there are other variables. Does Cook improve enough to stake a claim on the starting PG position? Does Dawkins play next season and share the 3 with Murphy? Does Duke sign Jefferson and if so, can he play the 3.

Will be interesting to see how this all plays out.

With Mason back, I don't think there is any doubt that the top priority for next year will be getting the ball to him in positions where he can score. I believe that was the goal this year, but we didn't have the team to get it done consistently. Of all the possibilities, a 100% healthly Cook is the best case scenario at the point. If we have that, I believe he will get minutes over Thornton and there won't be much opportunity for anyone other than the two of them at the point (I was suprised to see that combined, Cook and Thorton played 33 minutes a game this year. It won't be much of a change to see that go to 40). Sulaimon is more appealing at the 2, if for no reason other than size and lateral quickness for defense. That having been said, Seth Curry played thirty minutes a game as a junior. I find it pretty hard to believe that Austin Rivers leaves and then Curry plays significantly fewer minutes as a senior. I've read some people who are worried about our guard depth if Andre is not there, but, unless we face an injury, I think this group of four looks pretty solid. I think Murphy is likely to get a lot of minutes under any scenario next year. I have no idea if he can defend the 3 and would be interested in your opinion. Miles, Austin and Gbinije played 59 minutes a game this year. If Dawkins isn't playing, kick that up to 81 available minutes. I'd say Cook get's at least 15 of those minutes to bring him up to at least 27 minutes per game (he might get a few of those minutes from a reduction for Tyler). I hope Murphy is playing well enough that he gets the 20 minutes a game Miles was playing plus a a few more from somewhere -- let's say up to 25 total. That still leaves 17 if Andre plays and 39 if he doesn't. I'd bet Sulaimon gets closer to 30 than 20.

[COYS]

Assuming Alex can start at the 3 and play effectively for the majority of the game, we'll be can probably do all right working through the minutes he's off the court. We can work with what the other team gives us, but we'll basically be going with a very big, relatively less quick 3, or a very undersized 3. I'm in general agreement with many posters that, with 3 relatively small guards, the 3 guard lineup isn't a great option for the majority of the game. A 3 guard lineup, on this team, would have the 1-3 all about 6'1"-6'3". That'll be okay for periods of time, as long as we're able to play aggressive defense to interrupt passing lanes and try not to leave our undersized 3 exposed to be posted up. The other option, is to go very big, putting a lineup of Mason/Marshall, Josh, and Ryan out on the floor. That would make for a nice matchup problem for the other team as a 3 tries to guard Kelly, but it leaves us similarly exposed on defense as neither Josh nor Ryan has shown the ability to defend a relatively quick 3.

Any thoughts on going into a zone look when we have Alex on the bench? This could help cover our defensive matchup problem at the 3, whether we are in a big or small lineup, but, of course, it's against K's nature to go zone for significant periods of time, so I think we're unlikely to see much of it.

I think that people sometimes underestimate just how poorly zones do with defensive rebounding. Syracuse, for all the length and quickness they have, are almost always a mediocre to bad defensive rebounding team. Even their biggest and most athletic teams haven't been dominant on the glass as one might expect. A smaller duke lineup playing zone would probably get eaten alive on the glass. We would limit Mason and Ryan's ability to grab boards while throwing a guard (Rasheed?) into the middle of the zone assuming we run a 2-3. If a zone is going to work for next years team, I think it would be best with a bigger lineup with some combo of Ryan, Mason, Alex, and Josh on the court at the same time. However, even in that situation I still doubt K will use much of it except for a few possessions here and there.