Bigs. Please. Bigs.

[superdave]

I think McDonald and Strickland play more minutes than shown above, right? Isnt there a good chance Strickland soaks up a lot of minutes at PG? I dont think anyone views Drew as much more than a complimantary player.

Davis will be a stud. 14 and 12 is my guess for him. Doubt he scores a lot but he will rule the paint while the other guys score.

[smklin]

I think, for whatever reason, we've been concentrating too much on offense and not enough on the defensive importance of a real big man. This may have been my fault for not specifically mentioning it in the OP. Regardless, there is a big difference in having a guy at the 5 who may be able to put up a few points a game (McBob) but can't body up against bigger guys on the defensive end of the floor. This creates very real problems when teams come up against squads with 2 or 3 legit big guys, especially in the tournament.

The other thing to consider is that when you have guys at the 5 spot like McBob or Kyle, they're going to be getting some (or most) of their points outside on jumpers and 3-pointers, which, in some aspects, is the last thing you want from your bigs. Sometimes, the things you need most are dependable, easy buckets from inside 7 feet and free throws from fouls on the other team, creating foul trouble. When your 4 and 5 are out heaving up 3's, it:

1) isn't going to lead to any foul trouble for the other team, meaning that their REAL big men can continue to create havok while we're on defense

2) just makes your team that much more dependent upon the 3

3) makes your team that much more succeptable to having a cold night behind the line.

[crimsonandblue]

I think, for whatever reason, we've been concentrating too much on offense and not enough on the defensive importance of a real big man. This may have been my fault for not specifically mentioning it in the OP. Regardless, there is a big difference in having a guy at the 5 who may be able to put up a few points a game (McBob) but can't body up against bigger guys on the defensive end of the floor. This creates very real problems when teams come up against squads with 2 or 3 legit big guys, especially in the tournament.

The other thing to consider is that when you have guys at the 5 spot like McBob or Kyle, they're going to be getting some (or most) of their points outside on jumpers and 3-pointers, which, in some aspects, is the last thing you want from your bigs. Sometimes, the things you need most are dependable, easy buckets from inside 7 feet and free throws from fouls on the other team, creating foul trouble. When your 4 and 5 are out heaving up 3's, it:

1) isn't going to lead to any foul trouble for the other team, meaning that their REAL big men can continue to create havok while we're on defense

2) just makes your team that much more dependent upon the 3

3) makes your team that much more succeptable to having a cold night behind the line.

I'm not going to denigrate the Duke/Suns approach and the four out one in concept that killed people in 1999 and 2001. I think that bringing the four man out in college, particularly when you combine that athletic four man with a relentless defense that can generate turnovers and easy baskets, is really effective. And it's an attractive and fun brand of basketball to watch.

What I would say, is that you're right that you need to find an easy way to get baskets. That has to come from either defensive pressure creating turnovers, penetration, or post play. You look at those turn of the century Duke teams and they did all three (or at least had personnel capable of all three). Not sure that the Duke teams of late have completely fallen off in any category, but each category seems more like Duke light of late.

Again, I think it will be interesting to see whether Duke tries to play through its bigs more this year, now that you have six of them. It will also be interesting to see whether a Smith, Scheyer, Singler combo can generate turnovers up top and on the wing the way elite Duke teams have in the past. I figure Duke will be a top team regardless. The question will be whether they'll be elite.

[jimsumner]

"The other thing to consider is that when you have guys at the 5 spot like McBob or Kyle, they're going to be getting some (or most) of their points outside on jumpers and 3-pointers"

Singler, sure. But McRoberts? The guy's effective shooting range was about two feet. He made all of five three-pointers in 2007 but lead the team in dunks.

And, McRoberts was a very good defensive player. Duke would kill for that kind of D from Zoubek or the Plumlees.

[Quo Vadis]

I'm not going to denigrate the Duke/Suns approach and the four out one in concept that killed people in 1999 and 2001. I think that bringing the four man out in college, particularly when you combine that athletic four man with a relentless defense that can generate turnovers and easy baskets, is really effective. And it's an attractive and fun brand of basketball to watch.

In 1999 and 2001 we were anything but four out 1 in. On those teams we had Brand and Boozer, far different, and so far, far superior, to any true low post plaers we currently have.

But they weren't the only guys we had operating in the low post. In 1999 and 2001 we also had a PF by the name of Shane Battier, who was far superior as a low post banger than anyone on Duke's current team. Shane was capable of playing against true low post bangers both on O, in low post mind you, not just on the perimeter, and he was capable of defending the low post.

I won't get into how any of Burgess, Casey, Chritensen, and Domzalski, spot minute getters on those teams, would have played 30 mpg the last few years.

We look back at Los and Brand and think they were the only low post guys we had, but that is simply wrong. Battier was very effective in the low post, and 1999 had several quality backups down there. Heck 2001 was thin in the low post, but again we had Battier, Nate and Dun were at least as effective down there as anyone outside Singler has been so far, and Casey and Reggie were quality Defenders in the low blocks.

I won't get into the 4 out 1 in style itself. I am not crazy about it, but it can work.

Also, I feel the low post will be fine this year. I feel that the 5 guys we have down there will be fine. Maybe not back to the basket operators on O, but solid shotblockers at the very least.

But 99 and 01 are NOT examples of 1 in 4 out. 1 to 2 guys on each team was capable of in or out play, but we had a superstar as a second inside player both years. The same superstar, in fact.

[Quo Vadis]

And, McRoberts was a very good defensive player. Duke would kill for that kind of D from Zoubek or the Plumlees.

Amen.

As woeful as the O in the low post has been the last few years, outside Kyle, the funnel-like D has been what has really killed us. McBob's shotblocking at the rim might have dramatically changed the Nova game last year. McBob was a quality Defender. I know he was a dissappointment, but he wasn't as bad as we like to make out, nor was it all his fault.

[gwwilburn]

In the little I saw him last year, MP I seemed to be a good defender with the ability to affect shots in the paint, but nothing like a McRoberts. Hopefully he has come a long way, as Jon says he has.

[airowe]

In the little I saw him last year, MP I seemed to be a good defender with the ability to affect shots in the paint, but nothing like a McRoberts. Hopefully he has come a long way, as Jon says he has.

He certainly looks like a monster in this picture:

[Quo Vadis]

In the little I saw him last year, MP I seemed to be a good defender with the ability to affect shots in the paint, but nothing like a McRoberts. Hopefully he has come a long way, as Jon says he has.

I have high hopes for MP2 here. In the few televised games I saw him in, he was a rejector. He really controlled the air space in the Oak Hill game. As for O, I don't know. But I have this vision of the Plums playing together and discouraging a lot of teams from driving into the paint.

Here's Hoping.

[crimsonandblue]

In 1999 and 2001 we were anything but four out 1 in. On those teams we had Brand and Boozer, far different, and so far, far superior, to any true low post plaers we currently have.

But they weren't the only guys we had operating in the low post. In 1999 and 2001 we also had a PF by the name of Shane Battier, who was far superior as a low post banger than anyone on Duke's current team. Shane was capable of playing against true low post bangers both on O, in low post mind you, not just on the perimeter, and he was capable of defending the low post.

I won't get into how any of Burgess, Casey, Chritensen, and Domzalski, spot minute getters on those teams, would have played 30 mpg the last few years.

We look back at Los and Brand and think they were the only low post guys we had, but that is simply wrong. Battier was very effective in the low post, and 1999 had several quality backups down there. Heck 2001 was thin in the low post, but again we had Battier, Nate and Dun were at least as effective down there as anyone outside Singler has been so far, and Casey and Reggie were quality Defenders in the low blocks.

I won't get into the 4 out 1 in style itself. I am not crazy about it, but it can work.

Also, I feel the low post will be fine this year. I feel that the 5 guys we have down there will be fine. Maybe not back to the basket operators on O, but solid shotblockers at the very least.

But 99 and 01 are NOT examples of 1 in 4 out. 1 to 2 guys on each team was capable of in or out play, but we had a superstar as a second inside player both years. The same superstar, in fact.

Yeah, well you followed those teams (99 and 01) obviously closer than I did. I just remember Battier, particularly in 01, killing people from distance. He took 296 threes that year. I know his offensive game progressed wildly through his career and in his soph year he took only 94. Still, as an outsider it seems like the Battier at power forward was a guy who clearly was capable of mixing it up inside and was a great free safety in the paint on D, but it seemed like he was part of four out on offense. You look at Collison and Gooden, two bookend forwards for Kansas in 2001. They combined to take 15 threes total.

Maybe my terminology is bad.

[NSDukeFan]

I'm not going to denigrate the Duke/Suns approach and the four out one in concept that killed people in 1999 and 2001. I think that bringing the four man out in college, particularly when you combine that athletic four man with a relentless defense that can generate turnovers and easy baskets, is really effective. And it's an attractive and fun brand of basketball to watch.

What I would say, is that you're right that you need to find an easy way to get baskets. That has to come from either defensive pressure creating turnovers, penetration, or post play. You look at those turn of the century Duke teams and they did all three (or at least had personnel capable of all three). Not sure that the Duke teams of late have completely fallen off in any category, but each category seems more like Duke light of late.

Again, I think it will be interesting to see whether Duke tries to play through its bigs more this year, now that you have six of them. It will also be interesting to see whether a Smith, Scheyer, Singler combo can generate turnovers up top and on the wing the way elite Duke teams have in the past. I figure Duke will be a top team regardless. The question will be whether they'll be elite.

I agree that more important than whether you have a back to the basket scorer (there aren't many great ones in college basketball anymore) is the ability to get easy baskets. I expect Duke's post scoring will increase this year. One thing that pleased me about last year's team though, except for a few games, (notably the loss to Michigan) was the team didn't settle for the outside jumper as much as the previous couple of years. I look forward to lots of easy baskets this year from post play, penetration and turnovers. Maybe more post play this year and fewer turnovers created due to our personnel. I am also hoping form more penetration due to better ball movement from having more offensive options. At least that's my hope.

[Wheat/"/"/"]

I read here a lot of talk about offense in the post and who is going to step up. I'm more concerned about who is going to guard Ed Davis.

...and people continue to underestimate Deon Thompson's post play too. For a disiplined team that can run a play, having a player like Deon with advanced offensive post moves is a huge asset when you need to get a good look at a shot inside. We'll see how disiplined a young UNC team can be this year getting him the ball, should be interesting.

Tyler Zeller is also flying under the radar at the moment and is poised to wake some people up as well with some inside play.

In a nutshell, IMO, good teams- the elite teams- have to have some above average inside strength- whatever their style. Could be a Laettner, or a Brand, but the best teams have to have some strong inside play.

Duke has been average at best since the Sheldon days...very good teams, but a lack of high quality post play has kept those teams just under elite status the past few years.

The good news for Duke fans is that maybe times are changing. Mason Plumblee looks to be a potential stud inside...beyond him though, I have my questions who can step it up to help out the high quality of wings Duke has to take them to that next level...

[jv001]

Wheat you say that Zeller could have a coming out year. But you dismiss all of Duke inside guys except Mason. What about his big brother, Miles. He showed some promise last year and has added strength and weight over the summer. And what about Kelly. We don't know how good he will be, but he could excel as well. I agree that davis and thompson are likely to have good solid years, but just how good depends on the guard play. Will they receive the ball at the correct time and correct position. Last year they had lawson who could break down any defense and get them the ball. This year they are not so lucky. And they had ellington and green that could shoot the ball from the perimeter. That had to open up the inside. This year they are not so lucky. And by the way it's Mason Plumlee not Plumblee. Go Duke!

[jimsumner]

We were talking earlier about PT and Ed Davis. I see Davis and Thompson getting lots of minutes inside, with Henson playing the 3 and 4. In that scenario, Zeller is the odd man out. I just don't see him getting enough minutes to have a break-out season.

[budwom]

Zeller is way better than you think.

[jimsumner]

"Zeller is way better than you think"

Buddy, I actually think he's pretty good. But you've got 80 mpg at the 4/5 and he's fighting against two Wooden Award candidates and a consensus top-five freshman for PT. Do you think he's good enough to put either Thompson or Davis on the bench?

Even if Henson primarily (or exclusively plays the 3), I just don't see where the minutes come from. Not the minutes for a break-out season.

Next year Thompson and Davis will be gone and I wouldn't be surprised to see Henson flirt with the NBA. That's Zeller's break-out.

[Kedsy]

"Zeller is way better than you think"

Buddy, I actually think he's pretty good. But you've got 80 mpg at the 4/5 and he's fighting against two Wooden Award candidates and a consensus top-five freshman for PT. Do you think he's good enough to put either Thompson or Davis on the bench?

Even if Henson primarily (or exclusively plays the 3), I just don't see where the minutes come from. Not the minutes for a break-out season.

Next year Thompson and Davis will be gone and I wouldn't be surprised to see Henson flirt with the NBA. That's Zeller's break-out.

Well, in fairness, if Henson plays mostly at the 3, Zeller could play 20 mpg. Those may not be break-out minutes, but it would be enough to show what he has. If Henson has to spend significant time at the 4, then I think Zeller will be the odd man out. I don't think the Wears are going to play very much.

[Wheat/"/"/"]

Wheat you say that Zeller could have a coming out year. But you dismiss all of Duke inside guys except Mason. What about his big brother, Miles. He showed some promise last year and has added strength and weight over the summer. And what about Kelly. We don't know how good he will be, but he could excel as well. I agree that davis and thompson are likely to have good solid years, but just how good depends on the guard play. Will they receive the ball at the correct time and correct position. Last year they had lawson who could break down any defense and get them the ball. This year they are not so lucky. And they had ellington and green that could shoot the ball from the perimeter. That had to open up the inside. This year they are not so lucky. And by the way it's Mason Plumlee not Plumblee. Go Duke!

To be clear, I never dismissed anybody's play, I just said I have my questions.

We were talking about the necessity of strong inside post play. And I think Mason Plumlee might fit that bill for Duke. I have only seen him in the HS all star games, but he impressed me in the paint...looked like a gritty...the scratches and blood will follow him kind of kid.... and that's something you need. Sort of a TH lite

I have not seen Kelly play, but from what I read it seems pretty clear he's not likely to be a low post player, much less a "banger" type, but I don't know his game.

Miles Plumlee has nice size and some skill, and I think he can be a good player, an above average player.
He could step it up inside, he could be one of those kids that grows into his game, like Deon Thompson has done, we'll see, but honestly that's not something we see very often from Duke players in the post so I'll believe it when I see it

Zoubek and Thomas are in the good, but average camp. You are not likely to get where you want to go with these players.

Now about Zeller...People like to forget that he had beat out Davis for PT until his injury last year...and that he's a true 7'. My sources tell me he has put on about 25lbs this summer. He lost some confidence coming back last year and his game showed it, but if he's back healthy and stronger, this kid will show he can ball.
In my mind, UNC will have a post rotation of Deon,Davis,and Zeller. They will all get about equal PT, unless one of them is hot in a particular game.

IMO, Henson will be a SF. for the most part. His body is just too immature to hang in the paint and he has to get stronger at the college level to play down there. And he won't beat out any one UNC's big three, despite the hype.

I am very comfortable with Drew at the point. He can play D, take care of the ball, get in the lane, and he was the best interior passer on the floor last season. There are lot's of dunks coming from UNC this season, and we should see the return of the ally-oop too.

UNC's questions are at the 2 and 3, especially the outside shooting, as you pointed out.
There is a ton of talent, but all unproven.

[jimsumner]

"He could step it up inside, he could be one of those kids that grows into his game, like Deon Thompson has done, we'll see, but honestly that's not something we see very often from Duke players in the post so I'll believe it when I see it "

Wheat, check out the freshman stats of Danny Ferry, John Smith, Alaa Abdelnaby, Christian Laettner, Cherokee Parks, Eric Meek, Greg Newton, Casey Sanders, and Shelden Williams and get back to us on how Duke big men never improve.

[Wheat/"/"/"]

"He could step it up inside, he could be one of those kids that grows into his game, like Deon Thompson has done, we'll see, but honestly that's not something we see very often from Duke players in the post so I'll believe it when I see it "

Wheat, check out the freshman stats of Danny Ferry, John Smith, Alaa Abdelnaby, Christian Laettner, Cherokee Parks, Eric Meek, Greg Newton, Casey Sanders, and Shelden Williams and get back to us on how Duke big men never improve.

OK Jim, I'm guilty of a little rival dig there and throw myself before the mercy of the court.
It's a chillin' kind of day so I took a look at the stats as you suggested...

Keep in mind that my point about Deon/MP was Deon's gone from a soft overweight solid skills freshman to the preseason Wooden award list in his career...from an average post player to an above average one...and maybe Miles Plumlee can do that too. I'm not writing MP off just yet.

Now about your list... I wouldn't trot out all these guys to make your point that Duke has any real history of developing those average post players... to reach the ranks of above average post players we were talking about that the really good teams need.
While all on your list did improve.... it was often from bad to average at best.

Meek? He "improved" to a career avg of...5.1 PPG, 4.3 RPG, .6 BPG, .5 SPG, .598 FT% and I'm sure he meant to make a 3pt shot at some point (.000 3pt%)

Newton? Newton?...He improved for a career avg of...7.6 PPG, 5.1 RPG, .4APG, .9 BPG.

6'7" John Smith?... Career avg 7.9 PPG, 3.0 RPG, .5 APG, .2 BPG, .6 SPG.

Abdelnaby had a good senior year, but that was over 20 years ago. His career avg was 8.5 PPG, 3.7 RPG, .4 APG, .5 BPG, .4 SPG

Casey Sanders? Now that is a stretch. He way underachieved from his rep coming in... career avg...2.7 PPG, 2.5 RPG, .2 APG, 1.0 BPG, .2 SPG and a, .518 FT %. He's the poster boy that proves no coach can teach good hands.

Ferry, Laettner, Parks and Williams all had NBA talent coming in... and I will concede they got better each year. And it's no coincidence that they were members of some of Duke's best teams.