PDA

View Full Version : Phase II - 2009



Jumbo
11-23-2008, 01:54 AM
After winning the 2K title, it's on to the next portion of the season. For simplicity's sake, let's define it as the Montana game through the end of 2008, which means the following phase begins with the VA Tech game, Duke's first ACC contest.

Anyway, Duke's off to a fine start, but there's still plenty of room for improvement. Here's what I'll be watching over the next seven games:

Can Duke put together a full 40 minutes?
This one's pretty simple. The team has shown flashes of outstanding play, but hasn't maintained a high level for a full game yet. That's the next step.

Can Duke stomp on some necks?
This is goes hand-in-hand with the previous question. We haven't seen Duke truly dominate yet. We haven't seen a patented Duke run. Great Duke teams push a 10-point lead to 20 and a 20-point lead to 30. This team might not be explosive enough to do that. It might not run enough. But this should be the goal, and would do a lot for developing the collective ego/edge necessary come tournament time. The harder Duke pounds teams now, the more they'll believe they can do that to anyone.

Is three-point shooting really an issue?
I don't think it will be. But there are signs of concern. Neither Paulus' nor Scheyer's strokes look particularly fluid from deep. Not sure what's going on there, but hopefully it's just a small sample size coupled with guys finding a rhythm early in the season.

Speaking of Paulus, can he find a role?
He has been displaced by Smith, and he doesn't look confident out there. Clearly, injuries have hurt his play. But even when he's healthy, he'll be in a new situation. Duke's going to need Paulus knocking down jumpers if this team is going to be really good -- can he pick things up over this next stretch and learn to embrace his new role? He has to find a niche -- soon.

Can the offense move the ball better?
Ball movement has been the biggest problem I've seen so far on offense. We've seen flashes of quick interior passes against West Virginia and good skip passes against Southern Illinois, for instance. But as Duke spreads the floor, the offense will be far more effective if players make quicker decisions with the ball.

Is Zoubek making steady progress, or was NYC just a two-game blip against teams without legit post players?
I'm not sure, but he looked confident out there. Duke mostly just needs a decent defensive/rebounding presence out of him. But even a couple of buckets a game gives the defense something else to think about. As we've talked about earlier this season, he is better catching the ball off good entries and finishing, rather than actually making a move on his own. So, he has to do a better job of posting, sealing and catching and the guards need to do a better job of creating angles to feed him the ball.

Will Duke look to G in the post a bit more?
We saw this against Michigan, and it's something I've argued in favor of during the last two seasons. G is strong and powerful with great hops, a nice touch around the hoop and the ability to draw contact. There's no reason that the team can't run more stuff for him on the block. It's basically inverting the offense. No one says post scoring has to come from the bigs only. If G can post up his man and Kyle can spot up, more power to them. And Duke has had success posting up guards before -- think back to Thomas Hill. Again, this would vary the offensive attack.

As always, there are many more issues to consider, but I'll be keeping my eyes on these issues in particular.

Bob Green
11-23-2008, 03:14 AM
Can Duke put together a full 40 minutes?

Taking into account the graduation of Nelson along with Greg Paulus and Lance Thomas not starting this year, and we are looking at a 60 percent change in the starting line-up. Singler and Henderson are the only two starters from last season that are starting so far this year. This comment is slightly skewed by the fact that Scheyer started 30+ games as a freshman. The team is still feeling itself out and jelling as a unit. I'm confident this isn't an issue and the full 40 minute efforts will come.


Is three-point shooting really an issue?

I hope not but this one has me concerned. A primary reason Duke can spread the floor so well is our ability to knock down the three-point shot. Teams will start to back off and pack it inside if we do not force them to come out and defend us. We need Scheyer, Smith, and Paulus hurting teams from behind the arc in order to exploit Henderson's ability to explode to the rim and/or knock down the pull up jumper.


Speaking of Paulus, can he find a role?

Paulus needs to get healthy. If that happens, everything else will fall into place.


Can the offense move the ball better?

We had very good ball movement against Michigan's 1-3-1 zone. That is the only game I've seen on TV as I've listened to the other games on the radio, but I'm confident we can move the ball we just need to do it consistently.


Is Zoubek making steady progress, or was NYC just a two-game blip against teams without legit post players?

The key stat in regard to Zoubek is his 85.7 percent free throw shooting over the first five games. If Big Z can consistently knock down the free ones, he will continue to be a great asset and earn his playing time. Zoubek has gone to the line 14 times and made 12 free throws to date. Opponents will not be able to handle him inside if he consistently gets to the line and makes his shots.

An added benefit with Zoubek is the fact our opponents have to guard him and their interior players end up in foul trouble. This has happened a couple of times already this season.


Will Duke look to G in the post a bit more?

I'm in favor of any strategy that results in increased touches for Henderson. We need to exploit his hops on the offensive end of the court.

dukelifer
11-23-2008, 07:19 AM
Is three-point shooting really an issue?

Speaking of Paulus, can he find a role?





Paulus is Duke's best shooter. His injury has limited him recently. But there still is a question as to whether he can jump off the bench and give scoring. Some players struggle with that instant offense role. The outside shooting is shaky this year. To me, Singler and Henderson have the most fluid looking jumpers. But they are both streaky shooters. I keep hoping that Scheyer's shot will become more fluid and quicker, but it has not really changed much- year to year. Thankfully he can do more than just shoot from deep. I honestly think the multiple three point lines is messing with them this year- but we will see.

davekay1971
11-23-2008, 07:37 AM
All good points, Jumbo. Generally, I feel like most of these issues will work out well for the team.

3 point shooting: we don't have a Redick or Langdon this year...but this team is probably as good at shooting the 3 as the 1992 championship team, which had good 3 pt shooters but not one great one. Scheyer, Singler, Henderson, Paulus, Smith and Pocius all have to be respected from deep, and perhaps Williams will be a threat as well. 3 pt shooters usually do best when they can spot up, catch, and shoot, so the ball movement point ties directly to this. If we improve our ball movement and can get crisp passes to open shooters who are ready to catch and fire, we'll probably be able to punish people from the arc.

Paulus: once healthy, I think he'll be fine.

I think Zoubs has turned the corner and will be a consistent presence for us inside. He's going to depend on good feeds on offense, and fouls will probably continue to be an issue. But he looks ready to get some rebounds and give us some interior D. Something I'd like to see before we get to the ACC season: can Plumlee give us some quality minutes to help out if Zoubek gets in foul trouble or (God forbid) injured again.

mehmattski
11-23-2008, 12:04 PM
Can Duke put together a full 40 minutes?
Duke played two good halves against Michigan. Putting together two great halves, meanwhile, goes a long way towards...


Can Duke stomp on some necks?
Looking for this suggests a preconception that teams need to stomp the hell out of early season opponents if they want to contend for championships. While fun for fans, it is not a necessity, and history is ripe with examples of championship teams taking a bit to grow into themselves (see: Carolina, 2005).

What if "stomping their necks" involves playing our top players 35+ minutes? I know this has been discussed ad infinitum on DBR, but if the choice is between winning by 35 points with our starters playing the whole time; or, we only win by 15 but go 12 men deep, I choose the latter.

More practically, looking at the opponents in Phase II, I think there are multiple opportunities in which Duke can stomp the opponent (UNC-A, Loyola, Duquesne, Montana today...)


Is three-point shooting really an issue?
I think this is largely psychological, fed by 1) the longer 3-point line and the two lines on the court-- when you play your whole life with one line, adding another may get confusing.... 2) The negative feedback loop of "oh crap I keep missing" leading to less confidence, followed by more misses... see, for example, the free throw shooting against Georgia Southern.


Speaking of Paulus, can he find a role?
To me, Paulus has been a non-factor thus far- a couple of big threes here and there, but he hasn't stood out in my memories of games. If it's because of his injury, then here's hoping he contributes as a sharpshooter off the bench the rest of the way!


Can the offense move the ball better?
Their inability to decode Rhode Island's matchup zone for much of that game was frustrating to watch. I learned in middle school basketball two simple rules: If mantoman, then dribble-drive... If zone, then pass. Singler and Scheyer will get the offense back on track, I feel. I'll be looking for a higher percentage of our FGs coming off of assists.


Is Zoubek making steady progress, or was NYC just a two-game blip against teams without legit post players?
He wasn't playing against legit post players in the first three games, either, and wasn't much of a factor then. The difference was a confidence with and around the ball that I haven't seen from him pretty much ever. He was grabbing rebounds with authority, and keeping them! That, plus what Bob Green mentioned about his excellent FT shooting, will hopefully make Duke a much more versatile team.


Will Duke look to G in the post a bit more?
I agree completely with Jumbo here. A high screen for Singler followed by a dump-off to Henderson could be a lethal combination on most half-court sets.

A tough away game and a tough neutral game await this Phase. Obviously 7-0 will be amazing, but going 6-1 here while improving in these areas will still give me a lot of confidence entering ACC play.

ncexnyc
11-23-2008, 12:27 PM
As usual lots of food for thought .

I don't know if we can discuss the typical Duke run at this point in time due to the small number of games that have been played and the fact that Coach K is still toying with the line-up. We did have very nice runs against RI and SI to close the 1st half in both of those games.

The 3 pt shooting hasn't been very good, but we've still managed to win. I'm not sure if that is a good thing or not. In the past we've come to live with the saying, "We live and die with the 3." For now I'll say better shooting will be a bonus.

Paulus hasn't played well to date, but he has been hurt and is learning a new role. Will his play improve? Hopefully yes, but it isn't a sure thing. He can say all the right things, but only he knows his true feelings on being demoted.

Brian is healthy! Size does matter and this kid has it in spades. He's been dynamite at the charity stripe so far and he plays hard. The post position isn't the negative we feared it would be.

G posting up isn't a bad idea. His handle still isn't where it needs to be for him to get to the rim at will, so if shortening the distance between himself and the rim is the answer for constant offensive from him, them I am all for it.

This should be a very interesting phase of the season. The line-ups should be more solidified and everyone should know their particular roles better.

We'll really find out just how good this team is over the next few weeks.

ncexnyc
11-23-2008, 12:31 PM
I almost forgot about TURNOVERS. We've had more of these than the typical Duke team does. Again is it because we are so early in the season or is this going to be an issue as the year progresses, only time will tell.

taiw93
11-23-2008, 12:50 PM
Is three-point shooting really an issue?
I think this is more a case of early-season jitters. Once the players start to get comfortable with the new line (as well as the two lines on the court) they will start to heat up from 3. Also, if G and Singler can go inside a little more (which they started to do during the Michigan game), and if Z and Lance continue their solid play, opportunities from 3 should open up more. Not to mention that the return to health of our best 3 point shooter, Greg Paulus, should help improve our 3 point % down the road.

Can the offense move the ball better?
I was at the Michigan game, and the team was moving the ball exceptionally well against their 1-3-1 zone, IMO. All of the players, Scheyer and Singler in particular, were making quick decisions with the ball, either passing immediately, oftentimes while still in the air from catching the pass, pumpfaking and driving, or spotting up to shoot. I came away very impressed at the way Duke handled Michigan's zone.

Is Zoubek making steady progress, or was NYC just a two-game blip against teams without legit post players?
Michigan and SIU are known for their physical inside play, and Zou handled them very well. He looked decisive and strong in his inside game, except for the occasional dribbling without purpose, and, most impressively, did not get called for many fouls or traveling violations. I think that once refs start to realize he knows what he's doing, they will stop calling him for so many silly fouls. I was also very impressed with his free-throw shooting - he single-handedly carried the team on his back in the first half against SIU. My only concern is that he has done almost all of his scroing this season in the first half of games - I'd like to see him maintain this production through an entire 40 minutes.

juise
11-23-2008, 01:45 PM
We haven't seen a patented Duke run.

I know Montana isn't a marquee opponent, but I nominate today's first half 20-4 spurt. Three's, tip-ins, steals and breakaway dunks... I love it.

ACCBBallFan
11-23-2008, 04:16 PM
That's a good phase II list, Jumbo.

I would add getting Miles oriented to be the other big with Zoubek so that Lance can back up Kyle. Their size wil be needed agianst most of the upcoming opponents, not Duquesne, Michigan(2),UNC Asheveille, Loyola MD, or Davidson, but:

Purdue has Calasan 6’9” 247
Xavier has Frease 7’ 265 and Love 6’9” 255
Georgetown has Greg Monroe 6’11” 250
St. John’s who just lost Anthony Mason Jr for the season has Coker 6’10” 270 and Evans 6’8” 242

BC has Josh Southern 6’ 10” 242
Clemson has Trevor Booker 6’7” 240
FSU(2) has Alabi 7’1” 241 and Reid 6’8” 237
GA Tech has Zack Peacock 6’8” 235
MD(2) has Dupree 6’8” 260 and Neal 6’7” 263
Miami has Ark transfer McGowan 6’9” 235, Collins 6’8” 238 Graham 6’8” 251
UNC(2) of course has Hansbrough 6’9” 250 and Deon 6’8” 240
NC State has McCauley 6’9”237, Costner 6’9”238 and Smith 6’8” 240
UVA has Sorroye 6’11” 252 and Meyinsse 6’8” 245
VA Tech(2) has Jeff Allen 6’7” 240 down from 265 last year & Davilla 6’8” 245 Fr. backup center to Diakite
Wake (2) has McFarland 7’ 235, Johnson 6’9” 245, Woods 6’1” 245 and will have Skeen 6’8” 250

Some of these guys may play a style Zoubek can’t defend but too many taller and/or heavier than Lance for him to fare well every game.

Edouble
11-23-2008, 05:09 PM
An excellent list, but my main question for Phase II is this:

Are Singler and Henderson 2 of the top 5-6 players in the country?

We all know that Hendo has all the physical tools and that at his size, Kyle's skill set is rare. They've both shown the ability to dominate for very limited stretches during Phase I, but can they extend their dominance while tackling more difficult opponents in Phase II? For Duke to be really feared again, I think we have to show opponents that we have two players that are unstoppable. Everyone on the team has a role to fill, and Hendo and Singler's roles, ideally, are to be All-American calibre players.

DukieInBrasil
11-23-2008, 07:16 PM
I΄m sold on Z now, he is playing better in every game. And our non-Singler post-presence beyond Z is also playing well, ie LT,Czyz,Plumlee and McClure.

Wander
11-23-2008, 07:42 PM
An excellent list, but my main question for Phase II is this:

Are Singler and Henderson 2 of the top 5-6 players in the country?


Whoa there. Do you realize what you're asking? I think Curry, Griffin, and Hansbrough are easily the top three players, so it's pretty unlikely that Singler and G are going to beat every single other guy in the country out for the last two spots. I know what you mean in that we'd like some star power, but a better goal is probably to have all three of Scheyer, Henderson, and Singler All-ACC players, and one of those as an All-American (I think Singler can be a Top 10 player in the country).

ACCBBallFan
11-23-2008, 07:54 PM
I΄m sold on Z now, he is playing better in every game. And our non-Singler post-presence beyond Z is also playing well, ie LT,Czyz,Plumlee and McClure.
Won't be able to tell much in next game, as oppnent is diminutive.

Even though Duquesne is 3-0 with victories over High Point, St Francis PA and Furman, this could be a blow out early.

Duquesne now has to play Duke and Pitt on the road in succession. they have 9 freshmen, 3 Soph, 2 juniors and one senior.

Their biggest starter is 6'7" 210 pounds so will be giving up 70 pounds and 6 inches to Zoubek.

Next biggest guy who starts is 65" 205 so will be giving up 30 pounds and 3 inches to Kyle.

They only have four guys who weigh over 210 pounds and all 4 are freshmen, plus a 205 and a 200 pound Soph with everybody else weighing less than 200 pounds.

Rating NAME
Starters
172 Aaron Jackson 6' 4" 185 Sr. G
145 Bill Clark 6'5" 205 Soph G-F
133 Damian Saunders 6'7" 210 Soph F
106 Team Totals 9 Fr, 3 Soph 2 Jr 1 Sr
99 Jason Duty 6'1" 175 Jr. G
61 B.J. Monteiro 6'5" 195 Fr. G-F

Bench
87 Eric Evans 5; 11" 195 Fr. G
71 Melquan Bolding 6' 4" 190 Fr. G-F
48 Jimmy Sherwood 6'2" 190 Jr. F
47 David Theis 6'7" 230 Fr. F
29 Rodrigo Peggau 6' 8" 230 Fr. F

Walk-ons?
23 Chase Robinson 6'2" 190 Fr.
22 Oliver Lewinson 6'9" 240 Fr.
18 Aleksandar Milovic 6'7" 220 Fr.
05 Lucas Newton 5' 10" 165 Soph
01 Shawntez Patterson 6'7" 180 Fr.

greybeard
11-23-2008, 08:05 PM
3's: the extra foot is much, much more significant than people think. Not just because of the extra foot (say what, grey, this isn't going to be one of those . . . ). See, I used to play 7 card stud, hi-lo and you could buy a card. Man, I knew what was good when I played. Hadn't read no books, didn't know percentages, just had a feel for the cards. Sat down at a game in which you could buy two cards. I was lost. (so are we, grey, you'd better pull this together and quick).

Okay, here's the deal. You play the game for years knowing where the closest spots for the three were and understanding the game from those spots--the spacing of the defense, how long the help would take, how long it took to get to a "spot" for a pull up (yes, boys and girls, guys do know where one dribble will take them and practice from that spot, will elongate the dribble if it means getting to the spot that you had picked, or your coach had picked, because it was a better look than one a step or two in a different direction).

So, instead of knowing in your gut exactly what was what when you caught it at the 3 line, now you don't know squat. So, if you do go up to shoot, even if the shot itself isn't appreciably different, you are--you simply are not the confident guy you were when the line was 12" closer. Besides, 12"s matters.

Zoubs I think will be just as effective if not more against other bigs. He will get more and more comfortable with getting the edge, only an inch or so, and, with that edge be able to defeat a defender no matter his size. Smaller guys get under you, make moving more difficult, more dangerous too. Big guys do not present that problem.

As long as the littles get better and better in getting to Z earlier and letting him make plays on receptions, athletic ones aka a wide receiver, he will do great. They start looking for surity in receptions, he loses his edge, and then there might be problems. But that will be on them, not him. And, they must: 1. read and understand the directions that Z can easily move to from his position at the moment that fits with his styles of finishes, and they must put it up there over the littles in front, and not too far so the bigs in back or to the side will knock it away. Making reads and trusting Z to make plays is the key. I now am at a point that I am getting confident with both sides of this. (Jonathan needs to stop looking to take such good care of Z and treat him like the skilled big guy he is; also to be less cute. I am sure he will be both, and when he does, Z might well up his production and value to this club.)

Paulus' floor game has improved, I think significantly. He is getting rid of the ball quickly and looks for what is easy. Often that is inside the defense. Anytime the defense is penetrated, good things happen, as long as the guy with the ball is under control (relative to his athlicism. Williams, for example, I think can seem wildly off balance and under enough control to make plays, but we shall see) good things happen. My sense is that defenses are working very hard to keep Paulus from getting clean looks from 3 distance. That is also a very good thing. Paulus's 3 game will improve over time, see discussion above.

Kedsy
11-23-2008, 08:19 PM
An excellent list, but my main question for Phase II is this:

Are Singler and Henderson 2 of the top 5-6 players in the country?

We all know that Hendo has all the physical tools and that at his size, Kyle's skill set is rare. They've both shown the ability to dominate for very limited stretches during Phase I, but can they extend their dominance while tackling more difficult opponents in Phase II? For Duke to be really feared again, I think we have to show opponents that we have two players that are unstoppable. Everyone on the team has a role to fill, and Hendo and Singler's roles, ideally, are to be All-American calibre players.

I'm sorry, but being "All-American calibre players" isn't a role. Being a go-to guy, being the guy who commands double-teams, these could be roles. But not the other.

Also, why do we keep talking about these guys being "unstoppable"? Because clearly they're not. Singler and Henderson are both really good players, but I think part of Duke's problems in recent years (to the extent you could say we've had problems, which is a debate for another day) is that our best players have been 2-3-4 players, and there are lots of guys out there who are good defenders in those slots. I think you see fewer top-flight defenders at the 1 and 5 positions, so it's in those positions that you find guys who seem like they can't be stopped. Sure, you get guys like Beasley, Durant, and Redick who may fit that bill, but these guys were NPOTY candidates. I don't think the word "unstoppable" can fairly be applied to any 2, 3, or 4 who is not a NPOTY candidate, and since Singler and Henderson really aren't, to me that ends the conversation.

I'm not trying to single out Edouble on this. A lot of people on these boards seem to think Singler and Henderson are so good they can't be guarded. Which is just silly, in my opinion. A player can be really good, even great, without being "unstoppable."

Edouble
11-23-2008, 08:39 PM
I'm sorry, but being "All-American calibre players" isn't a role. Being a go-to guy, being the guy who commands double-teams, these could be roles. But not the other.

Also, why do we keep talking about these guys being "unstoppable"? Because clearly they're not. Singler and Henderson are both really good players, but I think part of Duke's problems in recent years (to the extent you could say we've had problems, which is a debate for another day) is that our best players have been 2-3-4 players, and there are lots of guys out there who are good defenders in those slots. I think you see fewer top-flight defenders at the 1 and 5 positions, so it's in those positions that you find guys who seem like they can't be stopped. Sure, you get guys like Beasley, Durant, and Redick who may fit that bill, but these guys were NPOTY candidates. I don't think the word "unstoppable" can fairly be applied to any 2, 3, or 4 who is not a NPOTY candidate, and since Singler and Henderson really aren't, to me that ends the conversation.

I'm not trying to single out Edouble on this. A lot of people on these boards seem to think Singler and Henderson are so good they can't be guarded. Which is just silly, in my opinion. A player can be really good, even great, without being "unstoppable."

I believe that most would understand that an All-American calibre player is one who commands double-teams and is a go-to guy from time to time. I'm not sure why that becomes and issue of diction, but regardless, I'm sure that my meaning is clear. When I say unstoppable, I am not speaking 100% literally. That would be ridiculous.

Singler and Henderson both have a very high ceiling. This is my opinion and the opinion of Coach K. If you can't see that, I don't know what you've been watching. Both players are NPOY contenders, as they are both pre-season Wooden Award candidates. Both have the skills and talent to be First Team All-American players this year. But skills and talent don't always take you there. If you had shown me a young Ricky Price and a young Cwell and asked me which player would end up being and ACC POY, I would have picked Price, because jeez, look at the guy. Even Jason Williams was beaten out by Juan Dixon for ACC POY the same year he won NPOY. So, why couldn't Singler beat out Hansbrough for the same award? This would be a difficult and possibly improbable task with the distribution of our scoring thus far, but why settle for second place now?

Anyway, I think with the depth of the team and effective performance so far by our "role players", the stage is set for both Singler and Henderson to reach towards their full potential. We won't know if my judgement of these two player's ceilings is sorely off for a little while, but I hope that I have the last laugh. ;)

ACCBBallFan
11-23-2008, 08:42 PM
True, but to the extent Zoubek estbalishes an inside presence, and Nolan some dribble penetration, that helps free up Kyle-G-Jon from anyone shading to help out on them.

That does not happen when Lance/Dave are in game but Paulus does command someone guard his ability to hit the 3, and Elliott/Marty will establish themselves such that their man cannot shade away from them either.

Will be good if Miles can command some D while he is in the game too.

Singler and G will not be unstoppable, but guarding them without help adds to the challenge for the defender. Kyle Singler in particular is a matchup nightmare for whoever Duke faces, especially if he puts more emphasis on his post play to complement his 3 ball, even though G is the more explosive.

Once Elliott/Marty earn some more PT, G can stop conserving energy and go full tilt until he needs a sub. That's what Duke needs him to do to fully exploit its depth.

Jumbo
11-23-2008, 09:19 PM
Duke played two good halves against Michigan.
I'll quibble with that. The game had very little flow, and Duke played well in spurts, but Michigan isn't a really good team and missed open shots. I don't think anyone on Duke' bench felt the team played a complete game.



Looking for this suggests a preconception that teams need to stomp the hell out of early season opponents if they want to contend for championships. While fun for fans, it is not a necessity, and history is ripe with examples of championship teams taking a bit to grow into themselves (see: Carolina, 2005).

I understand, but this team finally has some experience. Unfortunately, a lot of those experiences have been negative. This team needs to learn to punish opponents to build a collective ego that will carry them when the going gets tougher. I know Coach K believes this, too.

Jumbo
11-23-2008, 09:23 PM
I was at the Michigan game, and the team was moving the ball exceptionally well against their 1-3-1 zone, IMO. All of the players, Scheyer and Singler in particular, were making quick decisions with the ball, either passing immediately, oftentimes while still in the air from catching the pass, pumpfaking and driving, or spotting up to shoot. I came away very impressed at the way Duke handled Michigan's zone.
Agreed. When Michigan was in its 1-3-1, Duke put together its best stretch of ball movement we've seen this season. But when Michigan went back to man, Duke stopped moving the ball as well. Gotta keep it going.



Michigan and SIU are known for their physical inside play, and Zou handled them very well. He looked decisive and strong in his inside game, except for the occasional dribbling without purpose, and, most impressively, did not get called for many fouls or traveling violations. I think that once refs start to realize he knows what he's doing, they will stop calling him for so many silly fouls. I was also very impressed with his free-throw shooting - he single-handedly carried the team on his back in the first half against SIU. My only concern is that he has done almost all of his scroing this season in the first half of games - I'd like to see him maintain this production through an entire 40 minutes.

Sorry, but neither team had much size or skill inside. Neither team is known for its post play. Duke's going to play teams with much better (and multiple) options down low later in the year, which is why I'm anxious to see how Zoubek continues to develop over this next stretch.

Jumbo
11-23-2008, 09:25 PM
I would add getting Miles oriented to be the other big with Zoubek so that Lance can back up Kyle.

I'd love to see Miles develop. But I don't want Lance relegated to "backing up Kyle." That basically means 8-10 minutes a game from Lance and less in close games. Kyle is going to play huge minutes against good teams. Lance and Kyle can play effectively together, including against teams that are much bigger (see the win at UNC last year). I have no problem with Lance logging minutes at the 5, regardless of the opponent. If someone is a couple of inches taller or 20 pounds heavier than Lance, there's no reason why he can't compensate with quickness, positioning and anticipation.

Jumbo
11-23-2008, 09:29 PM
Are Singler and Henderson 2 of the top 5-6 players in the country?

We all know that Hendo has all the physical tools and that at his size, Kyle's skill set is rare. They've both shown the ability to dominate for very limited stretches during Phase I, but can they extend their dominance while tackling more difficult opponents in Phase II? For Duke to be really feared again, I think we have to show opponents that we have two players that are unstoppable. Everyone on the team has a role to fill, and Hendo and Singler's roles, ideally, are to be All-American calibre players.

I agree with the critiques others have offered -- this is certainly not what I'm looking to see in the next few games. But even more to the point -- why does everyone put Gerald in this class? Is he even better than Scheyer? I don't think so. I don't think the coaches think so, either -- look at their relative minutes. And people keep talking about all of Gerald's tools, but let's be fair -- he has a number of glaring weakness too (lack of an ability to go left, lateral quickness guarding the ball, general ball-handling, court vision).

It's very clear that we have a strong trio with Singler, Scheyer and Henderson. Smith may be on his way to making that a quartet. Singler is already one of the best players in the country, and maybe someone else can join him. But, again, I think it's just as easy to make the argument that Scheyer is that guy as it is to point to Gerald.

phaedrus
11-23-2008, 09:32 PM
I agree with the critiques others have offered -- this is certainly not what I'm looking to see in the next few games. But even more to the point -- why does everyone put Gerald in this class? Is he even better than Scheyer? I don't think so. I don't think the coaches think so, either -- look at their relative minutes. And people keep talking about all of Gerald's tools, but let's be fair -- he has a number of glaring weakness too (lack of an ability to go left, lateral quickness guarding the ball, general ball-handling, court vision).

It's very clear that we have a strong trio with Singler, Scheyer and Henderson. Smith may be on his way to making that a quartet. Singler is already one of the best players in the country, and maybe someone else can join him. But, again, I think it's just as easy to make the argument that Scheyer is that guy as it is to point to Gerald.

All nice arguments. But Gerald can jump really, really high. And look at those guns.

ice-9
11-23-2008, 10:40 PM
I agree with the critiques others have offered -- this is certainly not what I'm looking to see in the next few games. But even more to the point -- why does everyone put Gerald in this class? Is he even better than Scheyer? I don't think so.

I think Edouble meant things from a points perspective. Henderson has the physical tools to score whenever he wants to, and he's certainly shown flashes of this, but he hasn't always scored in an All-American fashion. Scheyer is great at facilitating and putting up points on the board, but Henderson is probably the better one-on-one, 5-seconds-left-on-the-shot-clock type of scorer. In any case, we need both players to perform. So far, Henderson seems to lack that offensive aggression whereas Scheyer seems to be in a shooting slump.

Jumbo
11-23-2008, 10:46 PM
Henderson has the physical tools to score whenever he wants to ...

Again, I don't understand that point. First of all, there are few (if any) players in the country with the tools to score whenever they want. I would consider those tools to be a pure stroke, the ability to go both ways off the dribble, a variety of moves/shots and excellent vision, among other. Henderson lacks some of those tools. He is strong and fast, with an explosive vertical. He finishes well in traffic, has a solid pull-up jumper and his long-range shooting is improving. But you're not going to isolate him at the top of the key and ask him to take his man off the dribble in the same way, say, Jason Williams did. That's not his strength, and it's not ideal for creating shots for others either. In fact, given Scheyer's superior ball-handling and vision, I prefer isolating him late n the clock. We've done this, and it generally has led to a good look for Jon or someone else.

Edouble
11-23-2008, 11:48 PM
But you're not going to isolate him at the top of the key and ask him to take his man off the dribble in the same way, say, Jason Williams did.

No, of course not. But there are many other ways to score at will.



He is strong and fast, with an explosive vertical. He finishes well in traffic, has a solid pull-up jumper and his long-range shooting is improving.

Yeah, exactly. Henderson's vertical, quickness, and strength are the tools he needs to get into the lane for a pull-up jumper. When his 12-16 foot shot is falling it's hard to stop, especially if he's hitting threes like he was in MSG and you have to defend him honestly.

Now of course he can not score whenever he wants to. That's crazy talk. But I do think that he can develop into a player that can put himself in the position to get a high percentage shot very frequently. The kind of player that is a defensive nightmare and garners All-American consideration.

Coach K said in the interview that Watzone posted that Henderson is "a guy that can get his own shot" and could be "one of the best (players) in the country". My Phase II question was based off of all of the above--seeing how Kyle and G's developments play out. I think their end potential is enormously high, and we've got some big time opponents coming up.

ice-9
11-24-2008, 03:27 AM
Now of course he can not score whenever he wants to. That's crazy talk.

Come on now, the statement was clearly not meant to be taken literally.

slower
11-24-2008, 08:26 AM
He was grabbing rebounds with authority, and keeping them!

Man, we must be watching a different guy, then. He seems (to me) to be losing the battle for contested rebounds in most cases.

Looking pretty good offensively though, and free-throws are great. I'm also heartened by the low PF totals.

But rebounding is still a work in progress.

davekay1971
11-24-2008, 08:50 AM
Man, we must be watching a different guy, then. He seems (to me) to be losing the battle for contested rebounds in most cases.

Looking pretty good offensively though, and free-throws are great. I'm also heartened by the low PF totals.

But rebounding is still a work in progress.

Absolutely agree. I love the progress Zoubek has made this year, and feel very positive about what he can give us inside. But he still seems to play a little soft around the glass. Not sure if that's because he's expecting to get a foul called on him every play, or what, but I'd love to see him establish a little more presence down low and rebound with a little more intensity.

miramar
11-24-2008, 08:58 AM
Good points as always. I especially like the idea of Henderson in the post, which if we go back a few years was James Worthy's role with the Showtime Lakers.

As Kareem got older, he wasn't the post presence he had been. Since the Lakers did not have a good power forward once Mitch Kupchak blew a knee (I know, too many Tar Heels in this post) Worthy ended up taking over for Jamal Wilkes at SF, and he was always scoring in the paint. Gerald is obviously smaller, but he can certainly play a similar role at Duke. In fact, he should do it for two seasons so he can perfect his moves down low.

jv001
11-24-2008, 09:38 AM
Can Duke put together 2 good halves? Remains to be seen but I would say yes because I can see development from several players already. Nolan, Elliott, Lance, Zoubs and McClure.

Is 3 point shooting really an issue? So far yes it is an issue, but I think that will improve as well. Seems that some of our players are trying to impress with hitting the pro 3pt shot. Believe Coach K will stop that.

Speaking of Paulus can he find a role. I think Greg has been playing hard as always but the injury has affected him more than I thought. I look forward to him getting some needed rest and come back strong.

Can the offense move the ball better? Great question. It seems to me that there has been a lot of unncessary dribbling and not enough passing. The Mich. game proved this out. We moved the ball well passing against their zone. We need to do that against teams that play man to man.

Is Zoubek making steady progress or was NYC just a 2 game blip against teams w/o legit post players? I think Zoubs is making progress because he is basically injury free for the first time in a long time. It will be interesting to see how he does against ACC competiton and some out of conference teams with good inside players. We need Zoubs for tourney time.

Will Duke look to G in the post a bit more? I certainly hope so. G has a definite upside and has the hops to perform well inside. Sometimes he reminds me of David Thompson with his leaping ability. I just wish he was that good. Gerald is another key to our teams success in March.

I think that Phase I was a success and Phase II will be the same. Go Duke!

slower
11-24-2008, 09:56 AM
Scheyer=Basketball Savant. The antithesis of Sportscenter dunkfests - and I LOVE IT!

E-Will loves the alley-oop. This is just gravy on top of the already delectable E-Will total package. He looks like the real deal.

McClure should not shoot from beyond 4 feet. Ever. Other than that, how can you not love the guy?

Big 3 about to become the Big 4? Nolan is close - very close.

Looking good overall, but not scary good. Not yet.

I_am_a_Blue_Devil
11-24-2008, 10:19 AM
Zoubek frustrates me sometimes at the end of a play when he gets fired up at his teammates when something doesnt go according to plan. There are times when it isnt even a whistle blown, just a made backet, and before running back down to post up on offense, he will stand there and yell at Kyle or Nolan, etc, while they try to inbound the ball.

If he could use some of that energy to dunk on someone or use that aggresion toward the other team i would feel less critical about him. It just seems that he has a shorter fuse with his teammates sometimes then with the other team.

I have seen some improvements this year so far and hope he keeps it up. The free throw shooting will be huge down the stretch, and will be an even more vital part of what we are doing if Z can start playing with even more athority on offense.


DUNK IT ZOUBS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Kedsy
11-24-2008, 10:19 AM
Coach K said in the interview that Watzone posted that Henderson is "a guy that can get his own shot" and could be "one of the best (players) in the country". My Phase II question was based off of all of the above--seeing how Kyle and G's developments play out. I think their end potential is enormously high, and we've got some big time opponents coming up.

There are a lot of freakish athletes playing Division I basketball. Presumably, many of them could rise to be among the best in the country, if they work on eliminating their weaknesses (like G going to his left or consistently hitting 3-point shots), raise and mantain their highest intensity levels 100% of the time, and match their fundamental basketball skills to their wonderful athleticism. But very few of them are able to do all those things.

To ask a guy who has never (including the few games this year) averaged as much as 13 ppg, 5 rpg, or 2 apg to be first team All America is heaping heavy and unrealistic expectations on G's shoulders. And to what point? He knows the more attention the opponent's defense has to pay to him means they'll be able to pay less attention to Singler, Scheyer, and Smith (and Paulus, when he's in). Combined with a center (no matter which one it is) who needs to be guarded most of the time, it further means there are no breathers for the opposing defenders and it's a lot harder to help against whichever Duke players are hot that day. That's an important role for G, and it should be enough, whether he's All-America or All-ACC or just pretty darn good.

Kedsy
11-24-2008, 10:25 AM
DUNK IT ZOUBS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I agree with your final sentiment. He misses enough layups that it's frustrating that he never tries to dunk. And I can't imagine why. At his height he obviously could do it -- he'd only have to get a few inches off the ground to throw it down -- and he just as obviously gets upset at himself when he misses an easy lay in. Maybe with all his foot problems he's become afraid to try? It's very odd.

slower
11-24-2008, 10:32 AM
Zoubek frustrates me sometimes at the end of a play when he gets fired up at his teammates when something doesnt go according to plan. There are times when it isnt even a whistle blown, just a made backet, and before running back down to post up on offense, he will stand there and yell at Kyle or Nolan, etc, while they try to inbound the ball.

If he could use some of that energy to dunk on someone or use that aggresion toward the other team i would feel less critical about him. It just seems that he has a shorter fuse with his teammates sometimes then with the other team.

I have seen some improvements this year so far and hope he keeps it up. The free throw shooting will be huge down the stretch, and will be an even more vital part of what we are doing if Z can start playing with even more athority on offense.


DUNK IT ZOUBS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

To be perfectly honest, I don't think Singler cares much if Zoubek is yelling at him, just as any superior player might tend to tune out the "feedback" from an inferior player. I've noticed Pocius doing the same thing, and I'm not really sure how much of an impact it has on anybody else.

OTOH, if Singler is yelling at you, ya better listen!

phaedrus
11-24-2008, 10:33 AM
...he'd only have to get a few inches off the ground to throw it down...

And therein lies the problem.

BlueintheFace
11-24-2008, 10:43 AM
yep... sounds bad, but it is true.

I_am_a_Blue_Devil
11-24-2008, 10:51 AM
To be perfectly honest, I don't think Singler cares much if Zoubek is yelling at him, just as any superior player might tend to tune out the "feedback" from an inferior player. I've noticed Pocius doing the same thing, and I'm not really sure how much of an impact it has on anybody else.

Yes you are right I doubt if they let it get to them, however, it doesnt exactly promote team chemistry. It could become a problem later down the road i think. also it just shows weakness to me that he can get mad at our team but not the other team....

greybeard
11-24-2008, 11:03 AM
Z is just getting used to the pace of play, and needed to watch out for all the littles running around. Dunking is overrated, especially for bigs. Those who have a feel for the game will score the ball without dunking more often than not, see, for example the POTY. Most dunks by bigs are for show or simply underscore that a 6'10" guy lacks the confidence to put it in off the board in creative ways when standing a foot from the basket. What is that about? For beuatiful big man play without any dunking whatever, think to a few years back and Jeff Green.

Don't worry about Z, the game will only get easier for him. How often have players on his own team exerted control in the past over what Z could even try to do? Anybody besides me complain about that on this board. I didn't think so. The guy is feeling his oats and no one really knows how far that will take him and the rest of this team. And that's if he only gets to play 20 minutes per game, assuming that he has some input in how the flow develops. That, by the way, was how it used to be in basketball; that is why they used to call the center or 5 position the PIVOT.

davekay1971
11-24-2008, 11:13 AM
Interesting point by Greybeard that what we're seeing of Zoubs is at 20 minutes or less per game.

According to goduke.com, Zoubs has played 82 minutes and contributed 38 points, 21 boards, and 6 blocks. Per minute played, that's a fairly effective rate of production. I know this sort of half-a..ed statistical analysis only tells so much of a story, but still...

gw67
11-24-2008, 11:30 AM
Phase I ended at 6-0 which is what I expected. The six games in Phase II will be more challenging, particularly, the away games at Purdue and Xavier. I saw Purdue play one game and was not impressed. I expect the game to be close but the Devils should prevail. The game at Xavier may be a different matter. They are not a particularly good offensive team but they play tough defense and run 8-9 players at you. At CIS, the Devils win. Away, I expect a very close game and a lot depends on whether the refs allow Xavier to play a physical game.

To date, I like the team defensive play, the development of the big men, the foul shooting of the regulars less Thomas, the outstanding shooting from Smith and Henderson, and the overall play of Singler and Scheyer. Areas that need improvement include three-point shooting by Scheyer and Paulus, and lack of good passing from Smith and Henderson. I expect the outside shooting to improve and I hope that Smith does a better job passing, protecting the ball and running the team. I also hope that Paulus recovers, for his sake as well as the team’s. I see the Devils challenging for the ACC regular season title and having an outstanding season going into the NCAAT.

gw67

sagegrouse
11-24-2008, 11:39 AM
I'd love to see Miles develop. But I don't want Lance relegated to "backing up Kyle." That basically means 8-10 minutes a game from Lance and less in close games. Kyle is going to play huge minutes against good teams. Lance and Kyle can play effectively together, including against teams that are much bigger (see the win at UNC last year). I have no problem with Lance logging minutes at the 5, regardless of the opponent. If someone is a couple of inches taller or 20 pounds heavier than Lance, there's no reason why he can't compensate with quickness, positioning and anticipation.

I agree.

There are these comments on this Board and elsewhere that represent fan speculation (including my own) that really conflict with the way I believe coaches think. For example:
1. Miles (or some other freshman) needs to play so he can improve and make a contribution in March.
2. Kyle needs to get time at the small forward position, because that's what he'll do in the pros.
3. Or how about this one? Coaches would rather have one loss than go into the tournament undefeated.
Most of us come up with these things from time to time.

I have evolved a different view. Coaching is really hard work, and the basketball season is a grind. Almost all of the focus is on doing the best you can in the immediate future. I wonder if there aren't some Iron Laws of College Basketball that have little to do with making players feel good or preparing them for the NBA. For example, here are some useful quotes--

a. You earn your playing time in practice. (Coach K)
b. Or the UNC version: "I don't decide who plays -- the players do" (Roy).
c. My concern was to put the best five players on the floor at any single point in time (John Thompson).
d. Then I want to call the best play that has the highest chance of success on every single offensive or defensive possession. (John T)

Note that player development isn't on this list; that's what practice is for. Sure, the best five players don't play every minute because when they are dragging they aren't the best five players. Sure, when Martynas"s parents are in from Europe, he'll get a couple of minutes (or less).

College basketball is hard and very competitive. The other coaches (and players) are really good. There really isn't a motivation to do other than one's best every single game (and every play).

Now are there apparent exceptions? For example, "Now that Hansbrough is injured, some of the UNC freshman will get PT that will be valuable down the road." "Boy, Coach K is going to use this loss as a real motivator to get the time to focus on rebounding." Yeah but in coaches minds, I think these are the second best options, not the best.

This is my two cents -- change accepted.

sagegrouse

Kedsy
11-24-2008, 11:46 AM
The six games in Phase II will be more challenging, particularly, the away games at Purdue and Xavier. I saw Purdue play one game and was not impressed. I expect the game to be close but the Devils should prevail. The game at Xavier may be a different matter. They are not a particularly good offensive team but they play tough defense and run 8-9 players at you. At CIS, the Devils win. Away, I expect a very close game and a lot depends on whether the refs allow Xavier to play a physical game.

The Xavier game is in the Meadowlands, not at Xavier.

Kedsy
11-24-2008, 11:51 AM
Dunking is overrated, especially for bigs. Those who have a feel for the game will score the ball without dunking more often than not, see, for example the POTY. Most dunks by bigs are for show or simply underscore that a 6'10" guy lacks the confidence to put it in off the board in creative ways when standing a foot from the basket. What is that about? For beuatiful big man play without any dunking whatever, think to a few years back and Jeff Green.

I completely agree that dunking is unnecessary, but sometimes it's desirable because it's a higher percentage shot. Hansbrough hardly ever misses a chippie, so dunking would be a waste of energy for him. In Zoubek's case he seems to miss a fair number of close in shots that presumably he wouldn't have missed if he'd dunked it.

gw67
11-24-2008, 11:58 AM
Take back what I said about playing at Xavier. The Meadowlands is like a second home for the Devils. Put it down as a win.

gw67

ncexnyc
11-24-2008, 12:11 PM
Between the disaster of the WVA game and the start of this season the majority of discussion centered around our lack of solid post play.

To date Brian, Lance, and Miles have shown us we have improved greatly in that area and all 3 players have given us reason to believe the future will be even better.

Yet, what do I see here on this thread? Childish nit-picking. Let's cut these kids some slack and let them develop, we're only a handful of games into the season and there's a very long way to go.

Saratoga2
11-24-2008, 12:56 PM
One of the key areas of development in phase II, in my view, will occur with Williams. To have a big guard who is quick and plays aggressive defense will give the team a more consistent presence through 40 minutes. This kid also has offensive skills, can slash and can hit free throws. I look for him to add a lot off the bench.

Regarding the 3 point shooting, I don't expect any of our guys will be great this year. We have several average 3 point shooters, with Paulus likely to be the best. Beyond that we have Scheyer, Smith, Henderson, Singler and Pocius who are average. Pedrhaps Williams will also prove to be an average 3 point shooter as well. We have to do enough to be respectable there and rely on other parts of our game to make us winners. So far, that has been the case.

dukestheheat
11-24-2008, 01:02 PM
As the (unofficially and probably-unrecognized) President of the Nolan Smith Fan Club for the DBR, I'd like to ask anyone if they've seen THIS in regards to our stellar rising star......:)

I'm seeing a pattern of Nolan taking about six to eight minutes of game time to get warmed up and into the flow of what he needs to do as the PG. I would expect as the season wears on that that wake-up time will dramatically diminish, but this is what I'm noticing right now for him.

Anyone else seeing this?

dth.

SMO
11-24-2008, 01:39 PM
I think a lot of guys are still getting settled in the flow of the game. In Nolan's case it is more obvious because he handles the ball a lot. I've seen him pushing it too fast and also seeming a little disjointed early in games. I think it will even out nicely over the next few weeks.

elvis14
11-24-2008, 01:49 PM
I think a lot of guys are still getting settled in the flow of the game. In Nolan's case it is more obvious because he handles the ball a lot. I've seen him pushing it too fast and also seeming a little disjointed early in games. I think it will even out nicely over the next few weeks.

I don't know if I've noticed the trend dukestheheat mentioned but I'll be paying attention to it going forward. Here's 's 3 things I'd like to see from Nolan going forward:


Be more careful and precise with that first pass, I've seen a few turnovers that could have been easily avoided
If you are open, shoot
I don't need to see him dribbling around too much but if he can take his man off the dribble, I'd like to see him attack into the paint and either take a good shot or hit an open player when the D rotates to stop him

Note, I am very happy with his play and the play of the team. What fun it has been to watch these first 6 games after waiting so long for the season to start. I don't mean this to criticize, this is more along the lines of "he's playing well, here's what I think he can do to be even better!"

As for the team, I loved the ball movement and patience in the Michigan game. I'd like to see more good ball movement like that in the 1/2 court and I'd like to see us push the ball more and use some of these great athletes to get easy hoops and fouls in transition.

Bob Green
11-24-2008, 02:54 PM
For beuatiful big man play without any dunking whatever, think to a few years back and Jeff Green.

I say think back a few more years to Lew Alcindor. I agree with greybeard 100 percent - dunking is overated! Zoubek needs to continue to improve his footwork. That will pay much bigger dividends than working on dunking.

sagegrouse
11-24-2008, 03:00 PM
Between the disaster of the WVA game and the start of this season the majority of discussion centered around our lack of solid post play.



I agree. I propose we call the unwarranted fascination with the height of players an "edifice complex."

This play on words originated in higher education, where some universities concentrated on raising money for brand new buildings with little concern for the professors and the research inside. Hence, "edifice complex."

Moreover, even if Lance and Kyle end up getting the most minutes, so what? Our last NCAA championship featured a center that was about 6-8.

sagegrouse

greybeard
11-24-2008, 03:50 PM
I completely agree that dunking is unnecessary, but sometimes it's desirable because it's a higher percentage shot. Hansbrough hardly ever misses a chippie, so dunking would be a waste of energy for him. In Zoubek's case he seems to miss a fair number of close in shots that presumably he wouldn't have missed if he'd dunked it.

Stu, my good friend and teammate, was the best athlete on our team, well almost, but was only 5'6." Could grab the rim; used to say that if he was my height, he'd be dunking easy. He would have but he wasn't.

Forget about Zoubek and dunking. Just forget about it. Make believe he's Stu, who by the way could really, really play. So can Zoubek, and he will make more and more of those little shots, in ever more clever ways.

I agree that he could use to improve his footwork. So could every player. I do not think it is necessary.

I think all that is necessary is that he be thrown the ball in a direction and at a height and weight that makes sense given the floor and his strengths so that he can make an athletic catch and do his thing. That's the list.

If given lots of chances like that, I believe that he will show you plenty of effective finishes. He will score the ball his way, not yours. However, while I think those days are gone, were his teammates to try to dictate to him rather than play with him, all bets are off.

Kedsy
11-24-2008, 04:39 PM
If given lots of chances like that, I believe that he will show you plenty of effective finishes. He will score the ball his way, not yours.

I hope you're right. But I'm not talking about "his way" vs. "my way." What I'm talking about is shooting percentage. And, yes, I realize he has always shot better than 50% from the field (and this year is about 56%) but when you virtually never take a shot further than two feet from the basket, I think your percentage should be higher.

If he scores, believe me I don't care how he does it. If he makes the vast majority of his close-in shots, I don't care if he's lying down when he puts them up. If he misses too many chippies, however, as has happened all too often in his past, then I will continue to be frustrated that he doesn't go up and jam it down instead.

The Gordog
11-24-2008, 05:10 PM
I hope you're right. But I'm not talking about "his way" vs. "my way." What I'm talking about is shooting percentage. And, yes, I realize he has always shot better than 50% from the field (and this year is about 56%) but when you virtually never take a shot further than two feet from the basket, I think your percentage should be higher.

If he scores, believe me I don't care how he does it. If he makes the vast majority of his close-in shots, I don't care if he's lying down when he puts them up. If he misses too many chippies, however, as has happened all too often in his past, then I will continue to be frustrated that he doesn't go up and jam it down instead.

At 56%, correct me if I'm wrong, a 3% improvement would put him near the top of the all-time conference leaders in scoring percentage. The fact is nobody makes "the vast majority of his close-in shots." Nobody. Ever.

greybeard
11-24-2008, 06:41 PM
I hope you're right. But I'm not talking about "his way" vs. "my way." What I'm talking about is shooting percentage. And, yes, I realize he has always shot better than 50% from the field (and this year is about 56%) but when you virtually never take a shot further than two feet from the basket, I think your percentage should be higher.

If he scores, believe me I don't care how he does it. If he makes the vast majority of his close-in shots, I don't care if he's lying down when he puts them up. If he misses too many chippies, however, as has happened all too often in his past, then I will continue to be frustrated that he doesn't go up and jam it down instead.

What is he 12 of 14 or 15 from the line. Not good enough for you? How many layups did Gerald miss last year? Flat out miss! And he has no difficulty elevating way over the rim. What about Scheyer? You ever try and count em?

Z is a basketball player who is using his body to score the ball effectively, the best way for him. He cannot play your way, nor Scheyer's, nor even K's. He can only play his way, if you want it to be effective. He can learn with the help of people who create learning environments, but, like my man Stu, he ain't gonna be dunking in games. I, for one, am oh so glad.

I do expect to see him putting up little shots with his back to the basket off the backboard, hand coming from forehead height with a little wrist flick. Might take him some time, but he will get there, and when he does, I don't care how high his defender can jump because it just will not help him, not one little bit. And, it will look oh so cool, way cooler than some guy hanging and swinging on the rim, like the game was some kind of gymnastics contest or something.

Zman is just getting started with his inside play and you want him to jettison it because he is ONLY shooting over 55 percent? The more he gets to make great catches, the less he will press to shoot when it is not there, as in absolutely there, and the more better his percentages will be (purposeful). So get on the littles to be throwing it up there for Z to be making catches.

The more receptions of that kind he makes the more mistakes these athletic dunkers who are guarding him will make. Then, no one is going to be worrying about whether Z takes it to finish each and everytime a penetrating pass is made, including, most importantly, Z himself.

No one can say for sure how Z will develop (now there's a freakin concession to humility, grey, bout time, don't you think) but I like what I see just fine, and sense that Z himself is seeing much more on the horizon. I wish him all the best.

jimsumner
11-24-2008, 06:53 PM
Selected shooting percentages for ACC big men last year.

Tyrelle Blair -38.4%
Solomon Alabi-48.4%
Bambale Osby-52.1%
Dwayne Collins-55.0%
Anthony King-43.1%
Tyler Hansbrough-54.1%
Deon Thompson-48.1%
Jeff Allen-49.1%
Chas McFarland-49.0%

Brian Zoubek-59.4%

These are all big men who took most of their shots close to the basket. So being big and shooting close to the basket isn't all that automatic. Because the other team usually has big guys just as close or closer to the basket trying real, real hard to help you miss.

Charles Wicker
11-24-2008, 11:18 PM
Well, I like what I've seen thus far, but here's my thoughts on phase II. I would like to see Z get more touches, and more of our offense run through him. We will need a post presence to become a team who desires to make a decent run in March. So, we have to have in place a solid, confident, and consistent player who takes ownership of the post area; and Z has the physical makeup for that job/role.

As we prepare for conference play and tougher competition; I believe we would benefit from showing ourselves and opponents different looks. The season is still young, and we will win our share of "regular season," games. Therefore, would love to see K take more risks concerning the freshman, and for goodness sake: let Marty play!!! We will need additional scorers at the two guard who can finish at the rim, and hit the outside shot. Solely relying upon three's has hurt us late in the season in past years. And we tend to get excited when we are blowing teams out by scoring three's and our, "spurtability." A good coach/team knows how to combat this, and will do so, when they face us.


So far, this team has shown that they are better than last year. And that the offensive administrative duties have been placed solely in the hands of the "scoring machine," Nolan Smith. When I saw him play over the summer, I knew he was slated to have a break-out year, if he were turned loose. And it looks like K has done just that. Now, if we could only experiment more with the bench, take a few more risks, and view this second phase as preparation for the latter part of the season. However, this is just a wish list from an "armchair coach."

Jumbo
11-25-2008, 12:38 AM
What is he 12 of 14 or 15 from the line. Not good enough for you? How many layups did Gerald miss last year? Flat out miss! And he has no difficulty elevating way over the rim. What about Scheyer? You ever try and count em?

Z is a basketball player who is using his body to score the ball effectively, the best way for him. He cannot play your way, nor Scheyer's, nor even K's. He can only play his way, if you want it to be effective. He can learn with the help of people who create learning environments, but, like my man Stu, he ain't gonna be dunking in games. I, for one, am oh so glad.

I do expect to see him putting up little shots with his back to the basket off the backboard, hand coming from forehead height with a little wrist flick. Might take him some time, but he will get there, and when he does, I don't care how high his defender can jump because it just will not help him, not one little bit. And, it will look oh so cool, way cooler than some guy hanging and swinging on the rim, like the game was some kind of gymnastics contest or something.

Zman is just getting started with his inside play and you want him to jettison it because he is ONLY shooting over 55 percent? The more he gets to make great catches, the less he will press to shoot when it is not there, as in absolutely there, and the more better his percentages will be (purposeful). So get on the littles to be throwing it up there for Z to be making catches.

The more receptions of that kind he makes the more mistakes these athletic dunkers who are guarding him will make. Then, no one is going to be worrying about whether Z takes it to finish each and everytime a penetrating pass is made, including, most importantly, Z himself.

No one can say for sure how Z will develop (now there's a freakin concession to humility, grey, bout time, don't you think) but I like what I see just fine, and sense that Z himself is seeing much more on the horizon. I wish him all the best.

GB,
I agree and disagree with you on various points you've made in this thread.

-I agree that it's ridiculous to talk about "dunking." For one thing, dunking from a standing position requires explosiveness (even at 7'1") that Zoubek doesn't have. For another, you can finish strong without dunking.

-I also agree that Zoubek needs to do his best work off the ball, learning how to post, seal, creat angles, catch high and finish in one motion. That's a better way for him to score than just dumping the ball down to him and hoping he can pull off a hook shot, drop step or up-and-under.

-I disagree that the guards are the problem in getting him the ball. Zoubek does not hold position well. Why? He doesn't have a strong base. His legs, compared to the rest of his body, are week. He doesn't set up wide. This is why he not only is awkward with the ball, but also has trouble snagging rebounds. When Zoubek positions himself well with a passing angle in the flow of the offense, he gets the ball. It's not like the guards want to make his life more difficult. He just doesn't give them opportunities often enough.

-I also disagree with the idea that Zoubek is fluid or athletic. He's still largely robotic in the post. That doesn't mean he can't be effective. It's just that he is limited. Duke isn't going to run its offense through Zoubek, nor should it. If he can hold his position better on the block, though, the rest of the offense will create easy scoring chances for him. Similarly, he needs to hold his ground and be a presence on defense, then fend off smaller, more athletic players and grab his rebounds.

-Z's ceiling isn't particularly high, but it doesn't have to be. He just needs to keep doing what he's been doing the last couple of games.

greybeard
11-25-2008, 10:48 AM
GB,
I agree and disagree with you on various points you've made in this thread.

-I agree that it's ridiculous to talk about "dunking." For one thing, dunking from a standing position requires explosiveness (even at 7'1") that Zoubek doesn't have. For another, you can finish strong without dunking.

-I also agree that Zoubek needs to do his best work off the ball, learning how to post, seal, creat angles, catch high and finish in one motion. That's a better way for him to score than just dumping the ball down to him and hoping he can pull off a hook shot, drop step or up-and-under.

-I disagree that the guards are the problem in getting him the ball. Zoubek does not hold position well. Why? He doesn't have a strong base. His legs, compared to the rest of his body, are week. He doesn't set up wide. This is why he not only is awkward with the ball, but also has trouble snagging rebounds. When Zoubek positions himself well with a passing angle in the flow of the offense, he gets the ball. It's not like the guards want to make his life more difficult. He just doesn't give them opportunities often enough.

-I also disagree with the idea that Zoubek is fluid or athletic. He's still largely robotic in the post. That doesn't mean he can't be effective. It's just that he is limited. Duke isn't going to run its offense through Zoubek, nor should it. If he can hold his position better on the block, though, the rest of the offense will create easy scoring chances for him. Similarly, he needs to hold his ground and be a presence on defense, then fend off smaller, more athletic players and grab his rebounds.

-Z's ceiling isn't particularly high, but it doesn't have to be. He just needs to keep doing what he's been doing the last couple of games.

I disagree completely with this "holding position/sealing people off" thing. Not that I disagree that they are things that Z does not do particularly well, just that I do not think that they are essential for being effective in the pivot.

I also do not think that one has to fit the mold of some graceful or powerful athlete in order to move effectively in the pivot. All that is required to be effective in the pivot is to create an edge, some space or an angle and know how to take advantage of it. That can be done in close quarters by someone who is slower and clumsier (to the outside eye) than his defender, provided the player knows how to do what he wants and can do it when he wants. Z has those abilities.

I did not say that Z should catch it high AND finish in one motion. The latter is a nice option and often effective. I think that Z should catch it high, and should be thrown the ball where he can make athletic catches that give him an advantage. A person standing in a more or less erect stance rather than the "holding your position or sealing off" stance that you advocate has much, much more mobility to go in different directions, certainly up than the latter (that is why you see tailbacks standing upright in the backfield; it is not, as some announcers say, so they simply can see the field better, although that is true; it is because they can move faster in more directions). What vector, lateral and vertical that Z can go to get the ball where it would be advantageous should be a collaboration between Z and his teammates.

If Z makes catches that take advantage of his ability to do what he wants and get an edge, I do not see him limited to finishing in any particular fashion, certainly not in the limited fashion of only shooting in one motion.

In basketball, the interesting thing is that a faster defender can still only move as fast as the offensive player if he wants to guard him. The question is whether the offensive player can use the person's athleticism against him, get him wrong footed, even a tad, and the guy is dead, assuming the offensive player feels, senses the advantage. Once the superior athlete needs to recover when a guy who has a slight edge knows it, the superior athlete puts himself in worser trouble. (BTW, it is much harder to body a guy standing upright than one who wants to fight you by trying to seal you. An upright person moves out of the way. The person in the bent over classical seal-position ain't going anywhere.)

The paradigm of fighting for position and sealing defenders has its place for blocks of granite. However, the game allows for much greater diversity inside, and I think that you are seeing it from Duke this season, in the persons of Z and L, at least. I think that you see it regularly from Kansas, and know that you have seen it from Pete-Carrill-coached teams in college and the pros, and from Carrill-disciple coached teams like Georgetown, with Green being the premier example. Hibbert, by the way, was best as a slitherer, who stood upright, made exceptional catches up high (just because he wasn't way high off the ground didn't mean they were unathletic or uneceptional) and knew how to kill people when he had the edge.

I think that Z has a much different game than the one you think is required and can be effective with it.

greybeard
11-25-2008, 11:08 AM
By the way, you get your defender standing up trying to be light on his feet, nothing stops you from getting low and playing him strong, sealing him and what not. Much easier then to seal and finish even against a guy built like a relative bull.

Rudy
11-25-2008, 11:32 AM
I saw the Michigan game and tried to pay attention to Z regarding rebounding. I did not see the Montana game but notice in the box score he came down with 7 rebounds, second only to LT.

Z is making great progress in avoiding fouls but playing pretty good defense. He altered several Michigan shots with his defense. He seems to be in better control of his unnecessary reaching, which was giving him the cheap fouls. He is now being fouled more than he is committing fouls and he is converting free throws. Also, has he had any travelling calls in the last 3 games? All areas of improvement and it gives me hope that his contributions will continue.

Rebounding is still a weakness, judging by the Michigan game (only one in I think 13 minutes). Even more than positioning was a problem he seemed to have in not anticipating when the ball will come off the rim and where. The great rebounders, of course, had great anticipation and used that to go for their positioning. I don't expect that from Z but he ought to be able to begin to anticipate when the ball will carom once it goes up. His timing seemed a bit off.

One step at a time. He has tamed his foul problems for now. I'm pulling for him to continue to improve for him and for the team. I like his attitude.

Jumbo
11-25-2008, 12:57 PM
I disagree completely with this "holding position/sealing people off" thing. Not that I disagree that they are things that Z does not do particularly well, just that I do not think that they are essential for being effective in the pivot.

Um, you've basically been saying they were essential for years. All your stuff about angles and small and everything else comes down to two things -- the big man getting in position to receive a pass and the guard feeding him so he purely has to catch and finish.


I also do not think that one has to fit the mold of some graceful or powerful athlete in order to move effectively in the pivot. All that is required to be effective in the pivot is to create an edge, some space or an angle and know how to take advantage of it.
Which is exactly what I said, and what you just dismissed above.


That can be done in close quarters by someone who is slower and clumsier (to the outside eye) than his defender, provided the player knows how to do what he wants and can do it when he wants. Z has those abilities.
The person doesn't have to be a great athlete to do that. But Z has not shown those abilities on anything resembling a consistent basis. There is simply no objective way you can defend that statement.


I did not say that Z should catch it high AND finish in one motion. The latter is a nice option and often effective. I think that Z should catch it high, and should be thrown the ball where he can make athletic catches that give him an advantage.
An advantage to do what? Not make a move to the basket? Hold the ball? What are you talking about?


A person standing in a more or less erect stance rather than the "holding your position or sealing off" stance that you advocate has much, much more mobility to go in different directions, certainly up than the latter (that is why you see tailbacks standing upright in the backfield; it is not, as some announcers say, so they simply can see the field better, although that is true; it is because they can move faster in more directions).
That is completely, utterly, totally incorrect. Standing fully upright is not an athletic stance. All athletes are taught to keep their knees bent, on the balls of their feet, so they can move in either direction. Tailbacks don't stand straight up. their knees are bent. Shortstops don't stand straight up. Their knees are bent. Tennis players receiving serves don't stand straight up. Their knees are bent. That is an athletic position.


What vector, lateral and vertical that Z can go to get the ball where it would be advantageous should be a collaboration between Z and his teammates.

I have no idea what that means.


If Z makes catches that take advantage of his ability to do what he wants and get an edge, I do not see him limited to finishing in any particular fashion, certainly not in the limited fashion of only shooting in one motion.
The point is that ideally, Zoubek can do enough good work off the ball that scoring becomes the easy part. If he moves with purpose and uses his strength to fend off his defender that creates a passing angle that leads him to the hoop, all he should need to do is complete the play with a layup. That is ideal for any player. Given Zoubek's limitations if he simply catches the ball with his back to the basket, forcing him to create on his own, his goal should be to create easy plays.


In basketball, the interesting thing is that a faster defender can still only move as fast as the offensive player if he wants to guard him.
That's not correct, especially off the ball. There's a reason why defenders try to beat offensive players to the spot. If you know where a defender is going, and you have help in the other direction, by all means, move faster on D.


The question is whether the offensive player can use the person's athleticism against him, get him wrong footed, even a tad, and the guy is dead, assuming the offensive player feels, senses the advantage. Once the superior athlete needs to recover when a guy who has a slight edge knows it, the superior athlete puts himself in worser trouble. (BTW, it is much harder to body a guy standing upright than one who wants to fight you by trying to seal you. An upright person moves out of the way. The person in the bent over classical seal-position ain't going anywhere.)
I don't really understand this point either, but I don't think you really understand the concept of "sealing." It doesn't mean "bending over" like the Hunchback of Notre Dame. It means getting your lower body in an athletic position, getting wide, and using it to hold your defender on the angle you want.


The paradigm of fighting for position and sealing defenders has its place for blocks of granite. However, the game allows for much greater diversity inside, and I think that you are seeing it from Duke this season, in the persons of Z and L, at least. I think that you see it regularly from Kansas, and know that you have seen it from Pete-Carrill-coached teams in college and the pros, and from Carrill-disciple coached teams like Georgetown, with Green being the premier example. Hibbert, by the way, was best as a slitherer, who stood upright, made exceptional catches up high (just because he wasn't way high off the ground didn't mean they were unathletic or uneceptional) and knew how to kill people when he had the edge.
I've tried to explain the Princeton Offense to you for many years, and you don't seem to want to listen. I'm well aware that bigs can catch the ball on the move. That's ideal. That's not Zoubek's strength, though. Green, btw, was hardly a post player. He's a 6'8" guy who plays small forward in the NBA.


I think that Z has a much different game than the one you think is required and can be effective with it.

I don't think any type of game is "required." I just don't think you have a feel for Zoubek's strengths and weaknesses, and it shows in this post. Again, he is a player who lacks mobility and coordination, but has the ability to finish strong off a good pass. The key for him is to create the right angle to catch the ball, which involves using his strength, height and wide base.

slower
11-25-2008, 01:10 PM
Um, you've basically been saying they were essential for years. All your stuff about angles and small and everything else comes down to two things -- the big man getting in position to receive a pass and the guard feeding him so he purely has to catch and finish.


Which is exactly what I said, and what you just dismissed above.


The person doesn't have to be a great athlete to do that. But Z has not shown those abilities on anything resembling a consistent basis. There is simply no objective way you can defend that statement.


An advantage to do what? Not make a move to the basket? Hold the ball? What are you talking about?


That is completely, utterly, totally incorrect. Standing fully upright is not an athletic stance. All athletes are taught to keep their knees bent, on the balls of their feet, so they can move in either direction. Tailbacks don't stand straight up. their knees are bent. Shortstops don't stand straight up. Their knees are bent. Tennis players receiving serves don't stand straight up. Their knees are bent. That is an athletic position.



I have no idea what that means.


The point is that ideally, Zoubek can do enough good work off the ball that scoring becomes the easy part. If he moves with purpose and uses his strength to fend off his defender that creates a passing angle that leads him to the hoop, all he should need to do is complete the play with a layup. That is ideal for any player. Given Zoubek's limitations if he simply catches the ball with his back to the basket, forcing him to create on his own, his goal should be to create easy plays.


That's not correct, especially off the ball. There's a reason why defenders try to beat offensive players to the spot. If you know where a defender is going, and you have help in the other direction, by all means, move faster on D.


I don't really understand this point either, but I don't think you really understand the concept of "sealing." It doesn't mean "bending over" like the Hunchback of Notre Dame. It means getting your lower body in an athletic position, getting wide, and using it to hold your defender on the angle you want.


I've tried to explain the Princeton Offense to you for many years, and you don't seem to want to listen. I'm well aware that bigs can catch the ball on the move. That's ideal. That's not Zoubek's strength, though. Green, btw, was hardly a post player. He's a 6'8" guy who plays small forward in the NBA.



I don't think any type of game is "required." I just don't think you have a feel for Zoubek's strengths and weaknesses, and it shows in this post. Again, he is a player who lacks mobility and coordination, but has the ability to finish strong off a good pass. The key for him is to create the right angle to catch the ball, which involves using his strength, height and wide base.

At 1:34 of the first round, winner by TKO is Jumbo!

Also:

1. I used to return serves standing fully upright. Once I got aced a few times, I stopped.

2. Maybe Quasimodo should be our new big man coach.

sagegrouse
11-25-2008, 01:50 PM
1. I used to return serves standing fully upright. Once I got aced a few times, I stopped.

2. Maybe Quasimodo should be our new big man coach.

There is a famous golf video by Jack Nicklaus that begins with these words: "Take an athletic stance, like a shortstop or a defensive back. Make sure your knees are flexed slightly and that your upper body is loose, not stiff. Your arms should hang straight down from your shoulders."

I wonder how universal this advice is? I, for one, have found it very effective in defending myself against verbal onslaughts from my wife or daughters.

sagegrouse

edensquad
11-25-2008, 05:24 PM
Through the first 6 games, Duke has 77 assists and 89 turnovers. In Phase II, I would sure like to see more of the former and less of the latter.

greybeard
11-25-2008, 07:16 PM
Jumbo, apart from your having misstated everything I said, you're 100 percent correct.

I never said that anyone should stand stiff legged--that is an idiotic statement and I'd never say that. Your description of what "an athletic position" is happens to be a good power position, but if you want to maximize your ability to slither, to move in all directions without prior adjustment, that is not the position you want to be in. You think otherwise, let me see if I can put this nicely, YOU ARE WRONG. Now, this is understandable because many sports people think that there is one "best" athletic position. There is not, and, if there was such a position, it would not be BEST for everyone.

It certainly is not BEST for Zoubek. He does not function well in that stance. If you do not know that you have not been watching. Now you can try to change him, or K or one of his assistants can, but they are wasting his time and theirs.

The sealing position you have described IS A POWER POSITION. Most people, sports people, confuse that with "athletic" and then assume that that subsumes "mobility." You want to see a mobile position, take a look at T.O. or Moss when they are waiting for the ball to be snapped.

BTW, I learned to play the pivot from an All-American (Joel Kaplan was his name--he worked with a bunch of us sophomores one season at the coach's invitation) and held my own against some very, very, accomplished centers in my day, including Brian McSweeney, UNC captain '63, who were vastly superior to me athletically (hell, everyone was). I understand the pivot position and the fundamentals associated with it quite well.

I never said that Zoubek was a great basketball player. I never said that he is a master at any particular part of the game.

This is what I think of Zoubek, have since I began watching him, and now that he is healthy he is showing the way I've seen him.

1. He understands momentum.

2. He sees passing lanes and knows how to set up his man and move to them.

3. He has very good hands and good hand-eye coordination. He can make catches, as difficult as you want to present them.

4. He can shoot the ball better than the average good big man. BETTER!

5. He has played a sport, soccer, from a position, goalie, where you make reads or you die. I think that he reads people extremely well.

6. If people get him the ball when they should where they should he will be very effective on offense. I have seen Z make terrific catches in a crowd (they seemed terrific to me, perhaps not to you because they weren't "athletic") and score the ball easily (think that play where Marty lobbed it between defenders, Z came to the ball and slipped to the basket, spectacular!).

7. You try to make him into something other than he is, rather than allow him to spend time experimenting with different ways to bring the ball from waist high to shooting and vise versa, and shooting little shots from different angles and in different ways, you are wasting your time and his.

That's about it. I think that the kid can really play and if the team plays to his strengths, and no one wastes his time, he will develop greater flexibility and reliability in his scoring the ball, and might well become amazingly efficient in points per minute and hurting people where every team needs to hurt them most--near the basket. That is what I think.

MChambers
11-25-2008, 08:03 PM
Jumbo, apart from your having misstated everything I said, you're 100 percent correct.

I never said that anyone should stand stiff legged--that is an idiotic statement and I'd never say that. Your description of what "an athletic position" is happens to be a good power position, but if you want to maximize your ability to slither, to move in all directions without prior adjustment, that is not the position you want to be in. You think otherwise, let me see if I can put this nicely, YOU ARE WRONG. Now, this is understandable because many sports people think that there is one "best" athletic position. There is not, and, if there was such a position, it would not be BEST for everyone.

It certainly is not BEST for Zoubek. He does not function well in that stance. If you do not know that you have not been watching. Now you can try to change him, or K or one of his assistants can, but they are wasting his time and theirs.

The sealing position you have described IS A POWER POSITION. Most people, sports people, confuse that with "athletic" and then assume that that subsumes "mobility." You want to see a mobile position, take a look at T.O. or Moss when they are waiting for the ball to be snapped.

BTW, I learned to play the pivot from an All-American (Joel Kaplan was his name--he worked with a bunch of us sophomores one season at the coach's invitation) and held my own against some very, very, accomplished centers in my day, including Brian McSweeney, UNC captain '63, who were vastly superior to me athletically (hell, everyone was). I understand the pivot position and the fundamentals associated with it quite well.

I never said that Zoubek was a great basketball player. I never said that he is a master at any particular part of the game.

This is what I think of Zoubek, have since I began watching him, and now that he is healthy he is showing the way I've seen him.

1. He understands momentum.

2. He sees passing lanes and knows how to set up his man and move to them.

3. He has very good hands and good hand-eye coordination. He can make catches, as difficult as you want to present them.

4. He can shoot the ball better than the average good big man. BETTER!

5. He has played a sport, soccer, from a position, goalie, where you make reads or you die. I think that he reads people extremely well.

6. If people get him the ball when they should where they should he will be very effective on offense. I have seen Z make terrific catches in a crowd (they seemed terrific to me, perhaps not to you because they weren't "athletic") and score the ball easily (think that play where Marty lobbed it between defenders, Z came to the ball and slipped to the basket, spectacular!).

7. You try to make him into something other than he is, rather than allow him to spend time experimenting with different ways to bring the ball from waist high to shooting and vise versa, and shooting little shots from different angles and in different ways, you are wasting your time and his.

That's about it. I think that the kid can really play and if the team plays to his strengths, and no one wastes his time, he will develop greater flexibility and reliability in his scoring the ball, and might well become amazingly efficient in points per minute and hurting people where every team needs to hurt them most--near the basket. That is what I think.

Greybeard gets back off the mat and staggers Jumbo!

Man, this is fun. I'm rooting for Greybeard, only because he sees more potential for Zoubs than Jumbo does!

greybeard
11-25-2008, 08:08 PM
a few other things. I really don't think that arguing about these things is all that productive. Jumbo obviously knows the game quite well. Why he assumes that I don't, I don't know.

Green player center for Georgetown his first year, and often after that, in particular against Duke at the Verizon Center when he killed SW. At any rate, as a freshman, he often caught it in the low post and beat people off of little hooks. No. I do not think that Zoubek moves as well as Green. I think few players anywhere do, when it comes to moving without the ball near the basket. I am only pointing out the possible.

Your concept that you understand the Princeton and no one else does is silly. The point of reference to Carrill and JTIII is that they see interior scoring by bigs as coming off the move with grace, not force--that, once you have the edge, you have the guy beat and just need to deliver the ball in a protected and reliable fashion, which for them more often than not was a little hook, or in Vladi's case, a little hook scoop. The important point to be made was the catch on the move, not the sealed force and then make a move.

By vector I meant direction in three dimensions. How do you describe up but at an angle forward and slightly sideways. I thought that movement in direction as described in science as a vector. Help me out here scientists. So, I might be in a position to reach up and to the right and slightly forward but would have a difficult time making a catch along that same angle to the right only going slightly backwards. One either sees these things or not.

Sealing is an art that Zoubek has mastered. He uses it all the time. If he gets too low, he has trouble moving out of that stance and delivering the ball. Sure, he might get better at it, but he does much better from a catch in a more mobile stance, imo, if your interest is in seeing him score the ball.

Zoubek does not have the mobility of Henderson or Singler, but that does not mean that he lacks mobility. He moves well to the ball when the vectors available to him are seen by those throwing it to him. Then he moves quite well. Zoubek seems to me to be well coordinated. Is he pretty in his movements? Nope. Is he as dexterous as say Singler? Nope again. Can he do what he wants and know what he wants, you bet. And, being 7 foot tall, and having good hands, being able to do that makes him very dangerous.

The rest of it is what ifs. If my man Stu was my height, he'd have been putting his elbow in the rim. No, I swear it.

greybeard
11-25-2008, 08:45 PM
There is a famous golf video by Jack Nicklaus that begins with these words: "Take an athletic stance, like a shortstop or a defensive back. Make sure your knees are flexed slightly and that your upper body is loose, not stiff. Your arms should hang straight down from your shoulders."

I wonder how universal this advice is? I, for one, have found it very effective in defending myself against verbal onslaughts from my wife or daughters.

sagegrouse

My point exactly. Athletic=power. Jack was interested in hitting it far, right? Or did that just happen by chance.

I never said keep your knees locked. Shortstops need to get to where, oh, I forgot for a second, the ground, for ground balls.

Tell you what, take an "athletic" stance, and try to pivot, all the way around. Now try it from a narrower, more upright stance.

From which is it easier to turn? From which can you turn faster? Yeah, I know, sage, its okay, you can say it.

Now, take a few studder steps in place standing relatively upright, step the right foot slightly out and forward like you are going right only plant and then dart left. Now try that from an athletic position. Good luck!

Watch film or OJ or Gayle Sayers, see if they are more upright then most backs.

By the way, most tennis players I have watched who start in a shortstop-like stance jump up in the air as the server's arm starts forward. When they land, they are, hello, relatively upright. Check it out!

BTW, my guess is they do that to get their quads super charged, really firing, which they will need in excelerating to the ball, and more importantly, in stabilizing themselves to pivot. To move well in any direction, they need to be more upright. Were it otherwise, we would have stayed on all fours in all probability.

slower
11-25-2008, 09:50 PM
Greybeard gets back off the mat and staggers Jumbo!

Man, this is fun. I'm rooting for Greybeard, only because he sees more potential for Zoubs than Jumbo does!

Greybeard is up off the mat. But judging by his comments (Zoubek has good hands and "Can do what he wants"), it seems that he has taken too many blows to the head.

slower
11-25-2008, 10:17 PM
Greybeard is up off the mat. But judging by his comments (Zoubek has good hands and "Can do what he wants"), it seems that he has taken too many blows to the head.

...you know I'm just playing with you. Hopefully, we all approach this message board with a spirit of fun and camaraderie. Although our opinions on Zoubek's hands may differ, we ALL obviously want him to succeed and are pleased with his improvement this year.

Keep it up, big guy!!

greybeard
11-25-2008, 10:41 PM
Greybeard is up off the mat. But judging by his comments (Zoubek has good hands and "Can do what he wants"), it seems that he has taken too many blows to the head.

If you do not know how you do what you do, you cannot chose to do what you want. You do not shoot 85 percent for the line without knowing how it is that you do what you do. Not possible.

So, my meaning was this: while Zman might be more limited than some with respect to certain options, he knows what he is doing and makes choices that play to what he does well because he knows how he wants his body to execute the tasks he choses. If his teammates trust him and play to his strengths, he can be very effective. The rest is a bunch of barbershop talk, my-man-Stu, if-I-was-six-feet-tall-I-could-dunk, kind of talk.

Or, to put it differently, as Jack Nicholas would probably say, if you can strike the ball so that you know where it is going to go, you can play. Zoubek, all 7 feet of him, can play by that definition, imo.

Not that it matters, but I checked and the guy I remember as "Joel Kaplan" was in all probability either Ralph Kaplowitz or his brother Dan, both of whom were All Americas at NYU. I'm betting it was Ralph, who was a member of the original Knicks (caught a picture of him on the net when he was young and it looks like I remember him). My first coach in 8th grade rec ball, and the father of a younger guy who ended up a teammate of mine in high school several years later, was also a member of that team, Sonny Hertzberg.

Finally, when I was 13, I went with a bunch of guys to a clinic for high school coaches put on by another member of that Knick team, Butch vanBredakoff. A 55 year old coach of U of Minn presented at the clinic. He took a 6'2" all county player onto the court and told him to guard him. The coach went to the top of the key, and, without ever going beyond a trot, if that, tore that kid apart for 10 straight minutes. I mean tore him apart. Jumping and running ain't all that the game is about.

Charles Wicker
11-25-2008, 10:50 PM
can you give me some thoughts concerning Marty?

greybeard
11-25-2008, 11:29 PM
...you know I'm just playing with you. Hopefully, we all approach this message board with a spirit of fun and camaraderie. Although our opinions on Zoubek's hands may differ, we ALL obviously want him to succeed and are pleased with his improvement this year.

Keep it up, big guy!!

I do take myself a tad serious at times (you think!):eek:

greybeard
11-25-2008, 11:32 PM
can you give me some thoughts concerning Marty?

Did he play for the original Knicks too?

Jumbo
11-25-2008, 11:59 PM
a few other things. I really don't think that arguing about these things is all that productive. Jumbo obviously knows the game quite well. Why he assumes that I don't, I don't know.

I think you're the one making the faulty assumption. I believe you know the game. I think your opinions are wrong at times, or at least influenced by some odd sources, but I certainly think you know the game. I do have trouble understanding you from time to time, because you choose to write in a particular fashion. As you know, it can be tough to follow.

The thing that I don't think you realize is that we agree on a lot of this. We both think that Zoubek's best work should be done without the ball. What you consider power (sealing) I actually consider finesse. Yes, it takes strength to hold a man off, but it's really more about creating a good angle. That's finesse.

That's all.

greybeard
11-26-2008, 12:26 AM
I think you're the one making the faulty assumption. I believe you know the game. I think your opinions are wrong at times, or at least influenced by some odd sources, but I certainly think you know the game. I do have trouble understanding you from time to time, because you choose to write in a particular fashion. As you know, it can be tough to follow.

The thing that I don't think you realize is that we agree on a lot of this. We both think that Zoubek's best work should be done without the ball. What you consider power (sealing) I actually consider finesse. Yes, it takes strength to hold a man off, but it's really more about creating a good angle. That's finesse.

That's all.

Well done Jumbo. Extremely--from a terrific start to this thread, as always, to a terrific run, to, well, as my man Bob Zimmerman put it: "When a trembling distant voice, unclear, Startles your sleeping ears to hear That somebody thinks They really found you. ..."

Just Feldenkrais speak in the main. BTW, Moshe's work turned me onto the reality that the greatest mobility comes from a position in which moving from stability into instability (the essence of ambulation) is easiest. When I heard that from the person who leads my training in this stuff and had experiences that made me understand the reality of what he (Moshe) had posited, I said, "This would be a terrific thing to make explicit in the world of athletics." David replied that he thought it would be unnecessary; I didn't argue with him, but sensed that people, knowledgible folks, would recoil just as I had. Seems I was/am in good company. Thanks, this is a beyond-terrific place to toss things around. And, with that, gentleman, on the morrow. Go Duke!

BTW, that recent Arizona game, well, all I can say that it was nice to see that Sonny's kid might finally be off the hook. Suffice it to say that he wasn't called "Wrong way Herzberg" for nothing.

dw0827
11-26-2008, 09:38 AM
I'm glad you two stay up late preparing these thought-provoking discussions for us.

I, for one, enjoy arriving for work, getting my joe, firing up the pc, and heading straight for dbr to see who jumbo has chewed on since my last visit.

EGAD! Its greybeard . . . in a fight to the finish . . . refereed by slower!

WHAM! POW! SOCKO!

Great fun . . . and I learn a hell of a lot. Thanks, guys.

davekay1971
11-26-2008, 09:43 AM
Aw hell, they're shaking hands and talking about grabbing a beer. I hate missing a good scrum.

gw67
11-26-2008, 10:22 AM
dave - Like you and dw, I enjoyed the back and forth between Jumbo and Greybeard. Both are bright, knowledgable about basketball, and they present their points of view very well. I duked it out with Jumbo several years ago concerning a comment he made about the play of Danelius of Wake. At that time, one poster sent me an email suggesting that the next time Jumbo knocked me to the canvas I ought to stay there. The lesson I learned is that I can disagree with many on the board but there are certain posters who know a lot more basketball than I.

gw67

Jumbo
11-26-2008, 10:30 AM
dave - Like you and dw, I enjoyed the back and forth between Jumbo and Greybeard. Both are bright, knowledgable about basketball, and they present their points of view very well. I duked it out with Jumbo several years ago concerning a comment he made about the play of Danelius of Wake. At that time, one poster sent me an email suggesting that the next time Jumbo knocked me to the canvas I ought to stay there. The lesson I learned is that I can disagree with many on the board but there are certain posters who know a lot more basketball than I.

gw67

Gosh, I don't remember that at all. Maybe I'm not doing enough to promote this kinder/gentler side! ;)

pfrduke
11-26-2008, 10:48 AM
Well done Jumbo. Extremely--from a terrific start to this thread, as always, to a terrific run, to, well, as my man Bob Zimmerman put it: "When a trembling distant voice, unclear, Startles your sleeping ears to hear That somebody thinks They really found you. ..."

Just Feldenkrais speak in the main. BTW, Moshe's work turned me onto the reality that the greatest mobility comes from a position in which moving from stability into instability (the essence of ambulation) is easiest. When I heard that from the person who leads my training in this stuff and had experiences that made me understand the reality of what he (Moshe) had posited, I said, "This would be a terrific thing to make explicit in the world of athletics." David replied that he thought it would be unnecessary; I didn't argue with him, but sensed that people, knowledgible folks, would recoil just as I had. Seems I was/am in good company. Thanks, this is a beyond-terrific place to toss things around. And, with that, gentleman, on the morrow. Go Duke!

BTW, that recent Arizona game, well, all I can say that it was nice to see that Sonny's kid might finally be off the hook. Suffice it to say that he wasn't called "Wrong way Herzberg" for nothing.

And that officially gets one of these...

http://bickar.org/files/images/bunny_pancake.jpg

davekay1971
11-26-2008, 11:03 AM
dave - Like you and dw, I enjoyed the back and forth between Jumbo and Greybeard. Both are bright, knowledgable about basketball, and they present their points of view very well. I duked it out with Jumbo several years ago concerning a comment he made about the play of Danelius of Wake. At that time, one poster sent me an email suggesting that the next time Jumbo knocked me to the canvas I ought to stay there. The lesson I learned is that I can disagree with many on the board but there are certain posters who know a lot more basketball than I.

gw67

If I ever find myself cross-ways with Jumbo, I plan to abandon all hoops logic and just start throwing irrational, incendiary remarks and unsupported personal insults at him until I get banned. If you're going to go down in flames, might as well do it spectacularly...

greybeard
11-26-2008, 11:42 AM
And that officially gets one of these...

http://bickar.org/files/images/bunny_pancake.jpg

I understand your confusion. One might equate balance with stability and stability as being essential for good movement. The reality is that there is a point in taking a step when you chose whether you are aware of it or not to place yourself into a position of complete instability.

Many older folks try to fight that feeling of instability because of a fear of falling. As a consequence their ability to "balance" is hampered and they are more likely to fall. They certainly have a less enjoyable time when they try to get from one place to another. This is but one example of how upside down concepts that seem logical can hamper significantly making progress with the tasks at hand.

It also happens to underscore why practicing over and over again the same type of movement that one does not do well (that one does not "get") will not lead to progress. How does the saying go, "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results . . . ."

My man Moshe, the first Westerner to earn a black belt in Judo and a very accomplished scientist, spent years exploring how it is that humans learn, and how movement is the clearest measure of whether learning has occurred. He developed a number of strategies for facilating learning if one's aim is to learn to do things better, more easily, pleasurably, and effectively.

I can tell you as a work very much in progress that learning to move parts of oneself in different ways in conjunction with different parts of oneself can be terrifically rewarding. It can open the doors to the movements that one simply accepts as outside his keen--"I just can't do . . . ."

If you were to lay on your back and I asked you to turn your head to one side and back to the middle again, a seemingly simple task, and to go only so far as it is easy, and to come to complete stop after doing that task, and to repeat it several times, and notice how far "was easy," you could accomplish that with no problem. I can assure you that within 10 minutes I could show you that there are more ways of organizing yourself to accomplish that simple task than you could imagine, that some are more efficacious than others, and that doing some of them, will produce a freedom and quality of movement that is dramaticly different than the choice you made to begin with.

The intersting thing, among many interesting things, is that after doing some of the permutations that produce the most dramatic improvements, and exploring modes also that restrict your ability to turn your head, and exploring still others that cause a differentiation in moving parts of you (your eyes) in opposition to what is intuative (look left while turning right), when you go back to what is familar, with your own choice, the quality and range of your movement will have improved dramaticly.

Now, that will last for a while, but will not have the same amplitude of improvement over time that you originally experienced. Do enough of these type sessions, however, and you begin to appreciate how you are choosing to do things and what other choices you have that might be better. Then you will become more human, more effective, you will have learned something. You will have greater choice.

Most all animals hit the ground running, literally. If they did not, they'd be eaten. Movement, how it is accomplished, is not a function of choice, not for them. We are not of that sort. We learn how to move, thankfully, during the earliest stages, completely on our own, and with no models. Babies are not taught how to roll over, lift their heads, turn their heads, move their hands to their mouth, crawl, etc. Remember that the next time you have a golf lesson and you get a bunch of "how to" directions and make no long term progress.

Most ball players start out with highly developed learning skill sets when it comes to movement. More and more, however, at ever earlier ages, that ability to learn is stultified by adult interventions, over coaching. Many skill coaches produce short-term improvement in their students, but, because of an inadequate appreciation of what learning to improve movement is about, do not achieve the results anyone is looking for and long-term progress is elusive. How many foul shots with how much instruction did DeMarcus take?

(BTW, habituation in modes of movement that do not make sense often results in parts of us becoming frozen, aka, shoulder blades that no longer slide over the ribs in one or more directions as they should, ribs that do not soften, collar bones that do not respond to movements of the arm (many of which might be falsely diagnosed as the symptom, the dreaded rotator cuff "problems" that lead to unneceassary surgeries, don't get me started).

With respect to certain skill aspects of basketball, I was able to use my body as a laboratory and figure out how moves, modes of shooting, etc. that I witnessed as being effective, needed to be performed. I can still shoot a jump shot (well, okay, I never exactly could jump) in five different ways equally well, each best suited for a different context, have several variety of hook shots, etc.

Other very basic aspects of physical movement were and remain outside my reach. However, I have found that working with Moshe's strategies has made those things more visable, more within reach; in fact, I have found that, as I do what I like to think of as my dance, I am moving parts of me I did not know I could and in ways I never thought of, all to the better. Interesting stuff, at least to me.

edensquad
11-26-2008, 12:17 PM
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Much too complicated; after all, didn't Descartes say, "I dunk, therefore I am???" :D

sagegrouse
11-26-2008, 12:25 PM
My point exactly. Athletic=power. Jack was interested in hitting it far, right? Or did that just happen by chance.

I never said keep your knees locked. Shortstops need to get to where, oh, I forgot for a second, the ground, for ground balls.

Tell you what, take an "athletic" stance, and try to pivot, all the way around. Now try it from a narrower, more upright stance.

From which is it easier to turn? From which can you turn faster? Yeah, I know, sage, its okay, you can say it.

Now, take a few studder steps in place standing relatively upright, step the right foot slightly out and forward like you are going right only plant and then dart left. Now try that from an athletic position. Good luck!

Watch film or OJ or Gayle Sayers, see if they are more upright then most backs.

By the way, most tennis players I have watched who start in a shortstop-like stance jump up in the air as the server's arm starts forward. When they land, they are, hello, relatively upright. Check it out!

BTW, my guess is they do that to get their quads super charged, really firing, which they will need in excelerating to the ball, and more importantly, in stabilizing themselves to pivot. To move well in any direction, they need to be more upright. Were it otherwise, we would have stayed on all fours in all probability.

First, you will note I attempted to inject a lighter tone by putting a comment on a message by another innocent bystander, not you or Jumbo. Therefore, I am somewhat ambivalent about your taunting remark.

Second, your explanations (and Jumbo's) remind me why I could never get anything out of golf books that wrote about the golf swing (Hogan and Harvey Penick, for example). I work a lot better off of video demos than text narrative of body movements.

Third, I would point out that there is one way in which you are correct. When athletes or dancers or skaters (or basketball players) need to rotate quickly, they pull in their arms and elongate their bodies. They usually, however, move into this position from what I described as an athletic position. When athletes need to move quickly or jump high, they always begin in the athletic position, which enables them to use all of their muscles effectively. Only at full stride are most runners upright.

Fourth, you guys can have this thread.

sagegrouse

UrinalCake
11-26-2008, 01:08 PM
An aspect of this season that I don't think has yet been mentioned is the change in assistant coaching. No knock on the guys we have, but you cannot lose a guy like Johnny Dawkins and not have it negatively impact your team. Thankfully we have a veteran team and the players can help bridge the gap, but I think the adjustment has to be affecting the team.

greybeard
11-26-2008, 01:21 PM
First, you will note I attempted to inject a lighter tone by putting a comment on a message by another innocent bystander, not you or Jumbo. Therefore, I am somewhat ambivalent about your taunting remark.

Second, your explanations (and Jumbo's) remind me why I could never get anything out of golf books that wrote about the golf swing (Hogan and Harvey Penick, for example). I work a lot better off of video demos than text narrative of body movements.

Third, I would point out that there is one way in which you are correct. When athletes or dancers or skaters (or basketball players) need to rotate quickly, they pull in their arms and elongate their bodies. They usually, however, move into this position from what I described as an athletic position. When athletes need to move quickly or jump high, they always begin in the athletic position, which enables them to use all of their muscles effectively. Only at full stride are most runners upright.

Fourth, you guys can have this thread.

sagegrouse

I caught that and do apologize. What you wrote was funny and light and I was, as Jumbo put it, caught up in myself and misreading things. My response was inappropriate in tone, completely!

When in athletic position, try to jump. When athletes are in the center circle and in an athletic stance, they gather themselves into an upright position to elevate, using their momentum to jump. They do not jump from the athletic position.

So, in order to move from that athletic position upward, you need to adjust yourself, which takes time. Athletes who want to throw a ball, stand relatively upright, not in an athletic position. Wide receivers ditto. Foul shooters ditto. Jump shot shooters, ditto.

With feet spread in an athletic position, and the center of gravity lower, and back, an adjustment needs to take place that would be unnecessary in a more upright stance to move in most any direction, with the exception of down. Sorry, it is the way it is.

On the other hand, if the center of gravity is lower, as in a defensive stance in basketball, being SLOWER to move can be A VERY, VERY GOOD THING--it prevents you from being thrown off balance by fakes and permits you to present a solid obstacle to directional movement by an opponent--to body him. It also produces tremendous power, force, acceleration.

If you want a good model for learning golf check out my man at michaelhebron.com; Michael's views on golf instruction, which are founded on years of study on the subject of learning, are much closer to Moshe's, then the how-to directions of those you have mentioned. Micael has received a number of awards as a teacher's teacher, PGA teaching professional of the year among them.

If you read anything into anything I said that even remotely suggested how it is that you or anyone else, Z included, should go about doing anything, I can assure you that it was unintended.

Having a good picture of what you want to do in your mind's eye is essential to performance, providing what you think you see is what is going on. Michael is a big advocate of that. Moshe was one of the pioneers in using imagined movement to improve performance. Having a system to follow, one that has strategies behind them, can be quite helpful in testing what you think you are seeing against functionality, and thus to get to where you want.

Michael, who played basketball at UNC Charlotte in your era I think, and whose brother was the head assistant to the white haired guy at Georgia Tech, is an acquired taste worth acquiring in my experience. He works relatively inexpensively. The last time I saw him it was $135 a lesson. For a top 50 instructor, that is terrific. How long does a lesson last--"As long as we are making progress." Hebron.

Funny story, the first time I saw Hebron was at a clinic he offers for it is now $200. Principal focus of the clinic is on what impact feels and looks like, lots of small shots to get that feel. Also the importance of being on plane at impact, which he often points out can be best accomplished if you stay on plane throughout.

Well, part of the clinic was getting your full swing videoed and then having a private review of the tape with the Man. They would come and get each of us--maybe 8-10 people in the clinic, a terrific day if you have the chance--when it was your turn. Anyway, my turn finally came, and the video begins and Michael the Irishman says, "C (my last name), I like your set up," he moves it further along the backswing, stops it, says, "we're on plane here," stops it several more times until shortly before the club starts approaching the hitting zone, says "We're still on plane here," moves it along a tad, takes his high light pencil or whatever it was, draws a circle around my middle and says, "C, maybe a little less cheesecake." :o

greybeard
11-26-2008, 01:48 PM
By the way, defensive backs and soccer defenders now utilize in the main a much more erect stance than the one many have presumed here. The parallelogram of sustainization (sorry boys) is much less stable, the feet are narrower, with one slightly in front of the other, and the knees much less flexed, making one less stable but much, much more able to move in every direction; however, the upper body is bent forward, in an apparent partial compromise to stability over reactability and also to permit singular focus on the part of the body that tells about about the offensive player's intentions. Later.

Faison1
11-26-2008, 01:50 PM
^WTF^

slower
11-26-2008, 01:57 PM
^WTF^

"Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor...?"

Forget it - he's on a roll!

davekay1971
11-26-2008, 02:06 PM
"Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor...?"

Forget it - he's on a roll!

"We're mutts! Our forefathers were kicked out of every decent country in the world...We're America! We're 10 and 1."

All all-time Billy Murray monologue, right up there with the Dalai Lama moment.

davekay1971
11-26-2008, 02:09 PM
"We're mutts! Our forefathers were kicked out of every decent country in the world...We're America! We're 10 and 1."

All all-time Billy Murray monologue, right up there with the Dalai Lama moment.

Oh, crap! Retraction. You even posted the Animal House quote and still my mind went to Bill Murray's pep talk in Stripes. Major pop-culture faux pas, and I apologize. Time to take a step back and get ready something less confusing, like the Duquesne-Duke-Dukes-Devils game

slower
11-26-2008, 03:03 PM
Oh, crap! Retraction. You even posted the Animal House quote and still my mind went to Bill Murray's pep talk in Stripes. Major pop-culture faux pas, and I apologize. Time to take a step back and get ready something less confusing, like the Duquesne-Duke-Dukes-Devils game

There's no need to EVER apologize for quoting Bill Murray! :D

greybeard
11-26-2008, 03:07 PM
Who I am, WHO I AM, who am I, who am I is a question for the ages. That’s one we are all searching for, to find out who I am, who’s in there, who wants to come out and say, hey, I'm hungry. Who I am is too deep and prof-, almost, you gotta go in deep and pull out the thing like with the movie with the thing came out of the stomach and up the people on the f#@X spaceship, may they rest in peace. My name is Ben Sobol... lione. Ben Soblione. I'm also known as Benny the Groins, Sammy the Snoz, Elmer the Fudd, Tubby the Tuba, and once as Miss Fillis Lavine, but that was at a party, it was years ago, I smoked a te-te-bet and I had a quc-ca-lude and suddenly, I'm in fishnets and singing show tunes. These things happen, but it has nothing to do with what I'm here with you fine gentlemen today so I apologize.

You guys have been a great audience. Now onto the next game, what sport were we talking about?

Jumbo
01-01-2009, 06:31 PM
Phase II is over. How did Duke do in the areas that interested me? Let's recap.

"Can Duke put together a full 40 minutes?"
We're getting closer. Duke's two best wins of this phase -- at Purdue and against Xavier -- weren't 40 minutes of pure domination. Duke played an incredible first half against Xavier, then coasted. Against Purdue, Duke performed well in sputs, but considering the game was against a good team on the road in a hyped environment, that was pretty close to a "full 40 minutes" performance.

"Can Duke stomp on some necks?"
Yes, and this was important. The team is no longer comfortable getting up 20 on an inferior foe and settling with that (which we saw against Montana and Duquesne). Against Asheville and Loyola, Duke kept pumping up the lead. I like that. The team's collective ego is growing.

"Is three-point shooting really an issue?"
Statistically, it is. I'm a little concerned, but not as concerned as many other fans. Why? The sample size is still really small. Duke has played 12 games, and several were against completely overmatched opponents. That's just not much of a frame of reference. To put it in perspective, no one would judge anything about an NBA team based on a 12-game stretch. So, yeah, that's basically a third of a college season. But it's still too short a time period to draw any conclusions. The team seemed to find a rhythm before the break, culminating in the Xavier outburst. Duke has too many good shooters -- Scheyer, Smith, Singler, Paulus, Henderson -- to struggle long term. Still, it would be nice to find more consistency from beyond the arc, sooner rather than later.

"Speaking of Paulus, can he find a role?"
I don't know. I hoped he'd embrace a sixth-man role, become a deadly spot-up shooter, etc. Instead, he continues to struggle. Blame it on injuries, lack of confidence, whatever you want, but Greg's in a real funk. Right now, his role really is just "backup point guard," and even in that role, Scheyer is more of the playmaker when they are on the court together. At this point, we know that Greg is limited defensively and isn't going to break people down off the dribble. Duke has developed an offense that allows its best players to create for everyone. Paulus' best hope is to get healthy and adopt a shooter's mentality. If he can spread the floor in the corner by knocking down triples, he can really help this team. If not, his minutes could continue to dwindle.

"Can the offense move the ball better?"
Yes! This was one of the two or three biggest developments during Phase II. The team's passing is SO much better. Scheyer, Singler and Henderson are all creating for other people. We're attacking from a variety of angles and making the extra pass. And K has clearly added more motion back into the mix -- the guys aren't nearly as stationary as last year without the ball. The result is a much, much more attractive offensive approach, and a healthier one, at that.

"Is Zoubek making steady progress, or was NYC just a two-game blip against teams without legit post players?"
Steady progress, indeed! It's been a real pleasure not only watching his confidence grow, but also seeing his teammates' confidence in him rise accordingly. Way to go, Zoubs!

"Will Duke look to G in the post a bit more?"
It seemed that way. K seemed to run more set plays for him in the past few games, including a bunch on the block. As I've mentioned countless times, I really like inverting the offense that way. It diversifies our approach, enables Duke to get post scoring from a different source and helps us get to the FT line. Plus, G generally has a matchup advantage on the block against the guy guarding him. It's a great way to utilize him a few times each game.

Newton_14
01-01-2009, 07:45 PM
I agree on most all of your points. Offense is way better, Zoubs is growing up before our eyes, and Henderson is stepping up. Regarding Henderson posting, I have noticed several games where the very first offensive set after halftime is a post up play for him. Would love to see several of those per game..

All in all the team progressed well in Phase II..

dw0827
01-01-2009, 09:19 PM
About 4 or 6 games ago, I noted that BZ was yelling at his teammates on occasion (seemingly when he got beat and the help wasn't there) and I wondered what the deal was. I wondered how his teammates reacted to it and if it could become a problem.

Since then, I haven't seen it happen once. And at the same time he is playing better. They may be related. He doesn't seem frustrated anymore. He is playing with much much more confidence. His teammates are looking for him more and he has become a very solid contributor.

I hope he can keep it up as we enter the next phase and we play better teams . . . . teams with size and talent. For the sake of offensive (and defensive) balance, I still think we need an inside presence that, at a minimum, commands respect from other teams . . .

dukestheheat
01-01-2009, 09:41 PM
On Gerald: So gifted as an athlete overall, I wonder if G is still working through just where he's supposed to fit into Duke's offense as a leader when it comes to scoring (and not just making athletic, highlight reel moves to rebound or block a shot)?! I think he'll continue to work on developing a patented, dependable mid-range and long-range jumper.

dth.

COYS
01-01-2009, 09:49 PM
Phase II is over. How did Duke do in the areas that interested me? Let's recap.
"Speaking of Paulus, can he find a role?"
I don't know. I hoped he'd embrace a sixth-man role, become a deadly spot-up shooter, etc. Instead, he continues to struggle. Blame it on injuries, lack of confidence, whatever you want, but Greg's in a real funk. Right now, his role really is just "backup point guard," and even in that role, Scheyer is more of the playmaker when they are on the court together. At this point, we know that Greg is limited defensively and isn't going to break people down off the dribble. Duke has developed an offense that allows its best players to create for everyone. Paulus' best hope is to get healthy and adopt a shooter's mentality. If he can spread the floor in the corner by knocking down triples, he can really help this team. If not, his minutes could continue to dwindle.

I share this concern for Paulus' role. Despite his limitations, I loved his shooting stroke and his no fear attitude last year. This year, whether because of injuries or what not, I don't see any of that fire. And his confidence seems shot, even if his body language has remained positive. If Paulus is knocking down threes, our offense is exponentially better and, I really think the team as a whole will feed off of that. I also think Paulus' ability to knock down the three will go a long way toward determining whether or not the shot from distance becomes a long term problem. One thing that's is even more apparent now than it was earlier in the season is that this year's team is completely different from last year's. Paulus' role and outside shooting were definitely not the concerns we held this time last year. And, based on precedent, I'd much rather have our shooters cold from outside, be 11-1, have Zoubek and Thomas playing better, and have our defense playing well and rebounding well rather than be shooting lights out and be where we were this time last year. This team's definitely got a higher ceiling.

bird
01-01-2009, 09:56 PM
My No. 1 concern right now is three-point shooting. Unless we become an excellent three-point shooting team, IMO there is simply a ceiling on the season. In part its because we will absolutely need good three-point shooting to overcome the very best teams, and in part I wonder whether we can adjust adequately to not being reliant on three-point shooting, given how integral that has been to Duke's offense for many years now.

Put another way, if three-point shooting gets better, the sky's the limit, and I'm not necessarily referring to sky blue.

dukestheheat
01-01-2009, 10:01 PM
My No. 1 concern right now is three-point shooting. Unless we become an excellent three-point shooting team, IMO there is simply a ceiling on the season. In part its because we will absolutely need good three-point shooting to overcome the very best teams, and in part I wonder whether we can adjust adequately to not being reliant on three-point shooting, given how integral that has been to Duke's offense for many years now.

Put another way, if three-point shooting gets better, the sky's the limit, and I'm not necessarily referring to sky blue.

establishing itself inside the paint and then inside the three point line? They did just that versus Loyola, hitting a large percentage of shots in the paint and within the line. If anything, I was very encouraged to see Duke NOT work to push the three point shots so much (at one time, we were 1-11 from outside the three line).

So I'm not worried about three-ball shooting that much IF we can establish ourselves from 2-land. Look at what our inability to hit the three did to us up at Michigan! We couldn't hit a thing from out there, and we came home soundly beaten.

I think we should shift our thinking away from the three (or, greatly lessen it) and instead push to develop the 2-ball game as a benchmark for the team. Then, we can enjoy some longer shots on the kick-outs.

dth.

dukestheheat
01-01-2009, 10:13 PM
On Paulus: Yes, he's struggling right now, but I contend that this year he's going to factor heavily in several ACC games and will help us to win those games. He's a money 3 point shooter and he's going to bring it big when we need it most.

dth.

geraldsneighbor
01-01-2009, 11:01 PM
Hold the phone people. Duke shot 60 percent from beyond vs. Xavier. Everyone chill, it was coming off an 11 day lay-off. I am a bit concerned about Greg, but hell, if all we have to be concerned over is Jon and companies 3 point shooting we are set.

The thing I'm encouraged over is, that we aren't relying on the 3 as much. I love to see us shoot the 3, but Gerald shooting 3's drives me up a freaking wall, when he can take anyone in the conference off the bounce.

Acymetric
01-01-2009, 11:07 PM
Hold the phone people. Duke shot 60 percent from beyond vs. Xavier. Everyone chill, it was coming off an 11 day lay-off. I am a bit concerned about Greg, but hell, if all we have to be concerned over is Jon and companies 3 point shooting we are set.

The thing I'm encouraged over is, that we aren't relying on the 3 as much. I love to see us shoot the 3, but Gerald shooting 3's drives me up a freaking wall, when he can take anyone in the conference off the bounce.

If we shot 60% in a game and the average is still as low as it is I think that is actually more concerning. That said, I'm not that worried about it. We haven't shot well from the 3 so far, but I think we will improve as the season goes on. I'm looking forward to seeing where this team takes us this year, should be fun.

DukieInBrasil
01-02-2009, 10:09 AM
I saw us have an up and down ride from behind the arc, due in part to some irregularity in the scheduling, 2 10+ day off breaks. We had a couple of excellent 3pt shooting games and a couple of horrible ones. It happens.
I saw Z and LT grow exponentially in terms of confidence and productivity. McClure also showed that he is going to be able to give us a lot more this year than last year.
Gerald is doing lots of stuff that we opined that he would need to do, and his scoring is starting to round into form. Improved passing (aka a/to)? Check. Improved 3pt%? Check. Improved FT%? Check. His rebounding is down, but that΄s ok b/c the rest of our post is rebounding better. His minutes are down slightly, but i suspect that they΄ll go up some during ACC play.
Singler is playing excellent ball. He is leading the team in ppg, rpg, apg and all around bad-a55edness.
Jon Scheyer sometimes seems to be in a kind of malaise, but in general has played very good ball.
Nolan Smith, IMHO, has done a good job at making the transition to starting PG. The team plays so much more smoothly when he is the PG.