PDA

View Full Version : Duke-Virginia Tech Post Game Thread



Hancock 4 Duke
01-04-2009, 09:48 PM
Duke Has won And UNC has lost. What a Great night at Duke. Here are the Stats:
Jeff Allen 1-4 0-0 7-9 1 6 0 3 9
Terrell Bell 0-0 0-0 0-1 0 0 0 3 0
Victor Davila 0-1 0-0 0-0 1 2 0 0 0
Malcolm Delaney 6-12 0-3 0-0 1 3 0 2 12
Cheick Diakite 4-6 0-0 0-2 3 4 0 3 8
Dorenzo Hudson 0-4 0-0 0-0 0 1 1 0 0
J.T. Thompson 3-8 0-0 0-0 0 2 1 3 6
Hank Thorns 1-5 0-2 0-0 0 1 3 2 2
A.D. Vassallo 3-9 1-4 0-0 1 3 2 2 7
Lewis Witcher 0-0 0-0 0-0 0 2 0 0 0
Totals 18-49 1-9 7-12 7 24 7 18 44
Percentages: .367 .111 .583
Duke
Name FG 3Pt FT Off Reb Ast PF Pts
Gerald Henderson 5-10 1-2 4-5 2 7 4 3 15
David McClure 0-1 0-0 0-0 2 4 0 0 0
Greg Paulus 1-4 1-4 0-0 0 1 1 1 3
Martynas Pocius 0-1 0-1 0-0 0 0 0 0 0
Jon Scheyer 2-7 1-3 6-6 2 5 1 2 11
Kyle Singler 7-11 2-2 3-3 5 10 7 2 19
Nolan Smith 4-12 1-4 4-4 1 2 3 2 13
Lance Thomas 0-2 0-0 2-2 0 1 0 3 2
Elliot Williams 0-0 0-0 0-0 0 0 0 1 0
Brian Zoubek 3-6 0-0 0-0 3 4 0 3 6
Totals 22-54 6-16 19-20 15 34 16 17 69
Percentages: .407 .375 .950

Wander
01-04-2009, 09:52 PM
Singler is going to pick up a triple-double before his career at Duke is over.

mgtr
01-04-2009, 09:54 PM
This is a great night for ACC basketball -- the good guys win, and the bad guys are humiliated down the road (at home, no less!). Good going, BC and good going Duke.

geraldsneighbor
01-04-2009, 09:54 PM
Good win despite some pretty sloppy play throughout the game. I was really thrilled to see our guys show big time heart in a big spot and blow the game open.

Now to complain. FSN's coverage sucked. The camera angles were such have the shots were blocked by peoples arms in the crowd. Really annoying.

Hopefully Greg's 3 will provide some confidence. I was also thrilled to see Kyle play such an outstanding game all around.

See you all at Indoor Wednesday!

Newton_14
01-04-2009, 10:04 PM
Overall an excellent start to conference play. Holding an ACC opponent to 13 points in the 2nd half has to be a record in the shot clock/3 Point era.

I watched the entire game and except for the 20 something plays I missed due to bad camera work, saw a lot of good things. Last 10 minutes of the first half were sloppy at both ends, but after the early timeout in the 2nd half when K ripped them we saw a different team.

Zoubs was key in the 2nd half even with light stats. They played off of him really well. And several really nice ball movement plays with Kyle, Jon, and Gerald. Nolan was solid and I thought Greg contributed nicely off the bench. Very glad to see him knock that 3 down. Hopefully he can build on this game..

All in all a solid team effort in a very physical game..

bradjenk
01-04-2009, 10:07 PM
Good win despite some pretty sloppy play
Now to complain. FSN's coverage sucked. The camera angles were such have the shots were blocked by peoples arms in the crowd. Really annoying.


I was sreaming about that as well. I beg everybody who can to send an e-mail of complaint. We must have missed 12-15 plays due to crappy directing. Maybe someone can post a link to Fox Sports South so we can flood them with "constructive criticism". They always do the worst job of broadcasting. Very frustrating because it's not that hard. Just show the game from the full view while play is going on. Use the other angles for replays. Please!

mgtr
01-04-2009, 10:07 PM
Last 10 minutes of the first half were sloppy at both ends, but after the early timeout in the 2nd half when K ripped them we saw a different team.

I didn't think the coach ripped them, but rather had a few words of prayer with them!:D

DevilCastDownfromDurham
01-04-2009, 10:09 PM
Thirteen points? THIRTEEN POINTS!?! Hats off to our D for that performance! Not the prettiest game we've ever played, but we'll run into more "physical" teams and it's great to see how we competed against a team trying to ugly it up.

Especially impressed with Dave's play tonight when we had major foul issues. It's easy to forget about a glue guy like him in the sparkle of G's spectacular plays and Kyle dominance. But having him be there to step in when we need him is a major, major advantage.

We're still a work in progress with some major holes, but this team has an edge and a variety of weapons that reminds me of the old school 80's K teams. Lots of fun to watch.

El_Diablo
01-04-2009, 10:09 PM
I missed the game--did Plumlee not play at all? He's not showing up in the box scores...

should_be_working
01-04-2009, 10:10 PM
[QUOTE=geraldsneighbor;237215]

Now to complain. FSN's coverage sucked. The camera angles were such have the shots were blocked by peoples arms in the crowd. Really annoying. \QUOTE]

Yeah, the camera angles were all over the place - mid court view, behind the basket, sidlines ect... When will these people (and not just FSN) relize that the normal camera angle works just fine and its not neccessary to change it.
On to the game: We had too many tournovers, but our defense was incredible - 9 pts in the entire second half for VT is mind blowing. What a great way to start the ACC, we win and UNC looses! Oh and KY lost as well, which makes everything sweeter. When we start putting it all together on offense, and if we can maintain this defensive domination, we will be scary good, and i think we aren't that far away right now.

patentgeek
01-04-2009, 10:12 PM
Count me in the crowd that is frustrated with Fox's video coverage of games - they're awful. Missing game action is bad enough, but being unable to see shots being taken and baskets being made because a fan's arms are in the way is inexcusable.

That said, really good second half tonight after the tongue-lashing/prayer meeting led by K 2 minutes in.

BlueintheFace
01-04-2009, 10:15 PM
Ugly Ugly game on the offensive end, but great defense for the most part. The only criticism I have really is that Nolan played pretty poorly. He seemed to have no confidence, didn't seem to be talking much, and did a poor job directing the O. I'd like to blame it on the knee, but it turns out he was completely healthy for the game. Bounce back big guy. We need you to be awesome in some of these games coming up!

BlueintheFace
01-04-2009, 10:16 PM
Count me in the crowd that is frustrated with Fox's video coverage of games - they're awful. Missing game action is bad enough, but being unable to see shots being taken and baskets being made because a fan's arms are in the way is inexcusable.

That said, really good second half tonight after the tongue-lashing/prayer meeting led by K 2 minutes in.

Oh god, FSN is soooooooo bad

mo.st.dukie
01-04-2009, 10:18 PM
Good game even though it was a little choppy and Duke turned the ball over alot. I thought the starters played great but the question I have for the team going forward is how much production will we get from the bench. Of course Greg, Lance, and Dave give us certain intangibles and defense but we need at least a little more point production from those three which seems to be where the rotation ends at this point in the season.

I love how this team shares the ball and they make great reads in the offense allowing for easy buckets. That's something that I don't think last year's team did very well. Last year it was more one-on-one dribble penetration and kick out for three. This year I'm seeing more screens, cuts, and ultimately more assists, something that was mentioned by Gminski during the game. Zoubek played well considering he was in foul trouble in the first half which also limited his aggression in the second half, IMO.

dukestheheat
01-04-2009, 10:20 PM
Anybody catch this?

After K called that early timeout in the second half, at about the 17:30 mark, Duke went right to establishing its offense FIRST with a pass into the low post. Zoubek would receive and then it'd go from there. We were very successful with this strategy; coupling this with an increased defensive effort proved a double whammy to VT and this was great to see!

We are still going for very long stretches where we're going one-on-one or jacking up longer shots. That move by K to get Duke going down low was a great move; also, I wonder WHY we have to take a timeout to do this!? Can't one of our guys get that going on the floor without K having to see it and call for it??

dth.

Jarhead
01-04-2009, 10:24 PM
Fox is the only broadcaster to put cameras in the Bleachers with the fans. At least I haven't noticed any body else doing it. Fox does a terrible job, and the ACC should be looking for somebody else to carry the games. The only good thing about it is the presence of of the G-man.

roywhite
01-04-2009, 10:25 PM
Great to beat Uncle Festus and his merry band by 25 points in the conference opener...I hear even a top team can have problems in its conference opener:)

Things go better overall with Zoubs in the game. There is more room for Singler and others to operate on offense; on defense, though Zoubs is not a shot-blocker per se, the opposition doesn't often get to the rim.

Newton_14
01-04-2009, 10:28 PM
I was sreaming about that as well. I beg everybody who can to send an e-mail of complaint. We must have missed 12-15 plays due to crappy directing. Maybe someone can post a link to Fox Sports South so we can flood them with "constructive criticism". They always do the worst job of broadcasting. Very frustrating because it's not that hard. Just show the game from the full view while play is going on. Use the other angles for replays. Please!

I will gladly send an email. Is the correct email address available on the FSN website? Or does anyone have it already?

jv001
01-04-2009, 10:29 PM
Looking forward to Jumbo's numbers on this game. Go Duke!

mike88
01-04-2009, 10:33 PM
While this was not a great offensive game for us, I thought we did a nice job of moving the ball and finding the open man. I like that we have added several different looks, particularly the use of Zoubek passing from the low post and a nifty little exchange with Greg screening for Singler, popping out to get the pass at the three point line, then feeding Singler in the low post.

With a greater diversity of looks, we are less subject to the defense being able to key on one player, but it also leads to some miscommunication and bad passes until everyone gets more comfortable with seeing the ball moving from (and to) different places. I think we will be in good shape as the year moves along.

Watching the game in person, I was actually pretty happy with Nolan's play for most of the game. He is still getting used to his role, but I think he may have the most offensive upside as the year progresses.

jpfrizzle
01-04-2009, 10:35 PM
Count me in.. I'll be happy to complain to FoxSports :) They sucked!!

the epic fail of the channel blacking out for about a 1minute or so, thats when i got really pissed!!

dukelifer
01-04-2009, 10:36 PM
The first ACC game is always tough- almost like an NCAA tourney game. Lots of energy and emotion. In the second half- Duke zapped all that energy right out of the Hokies. This Duke team can wear teams out with their pressure D. The Hokies had a little stretch where they looked cohesive- but for most of the game- they were completely taken out of what they wanted to do. By the end of the game- they were physically exhausted. Scheyer and McClure did a masterful job on Vassallo and even Paulus did a nice job of staying in front of guys. What stood out in this game were the assists. A wonderful job passing the ball. When Duke does this- everything seems easier. I really hope this continues. This team is not the three point bombing team of the past- but they can move without the ball and pass pretty well. Singler is on another level. He had too many turnovers but still- he can do everything out there. Just a complete basketball player. Not a thing of beauty but winning an opening game with ease is not something to take too lightly. This Duke team is coming together. Zoubek and Thomas had some more trouble staying in the game, as expected- but Zoubek played very well in the second half and could have easily had 4 more points. I expect he will continue to play well - as the season rolls along. Excellent start to the ACC season. You definitely do not want to lose your first ACC game at home- that is really bad :D

sagegrouse
01-04-2009, 10:42 PM
Count me in the crowd that is frustrated with Fox's video coverage of games - they're awful. Missing game action is bad enough, but being unable to see shots being taken and baskets being made because a fan's arms are in the way is inexcusable.



I agree with you, but I hope you have a bit of sympathy for a producer with an arm fetish.

sagegrouse

DukeDevilDeb
01-04-2009, 10:46 PM
I missed the game--did Plumlee not play at all? He's not showing up in the box scores...

Not much and not well...

DukeDevilDeb
01-04-2009, 10:49 PM
Ugly Ugly game on the offensive end, but great defense for the most part. The only criticism I have really is that Nolan played pretty poorly. He seemed to have no confidence, didn't seem to be talking much, and did a poor job directing the O. I'd like to blame it on the knee, but it turns out he was completely healthy for the game. Bounce back big guy. We need you to be awesome in some of these games coming up!

I was at the game and agree that Nolan had a pretty bad first half. But I thought he was MUCH improved in the second half, especially offensively. Going in to Zoubs, then having him relocate worked extremely well. The fact that we kept Seth and his friends under 50 was awesome!

The crowd was great too! Good to have the Devil back... the Devil is AWESOME this year... and the cheerleaders were great! Now if we can just get the student band back.

Hope we can have the same outcome on Wednesday night...

And what a beautiful sight to see.... BC over UNC! :D

jacone21
01-04-2009, 10:55 PM
I don't have comments on the game, because I quit watching. For the first time ever in my Duke watching life, I turned off the game. The camera angles were so bad, that it became a negative experience for me. Fox has done what nothing else has ever been able to do... they have made me willingly not watch. I left a message on the Contact Us link on their web site, but I'm certain it won't matter. It seems we complain every year, but every year it gets worse. How hard can it be to show the game? Seriously?

I love Duke basketball, but that was unwatchable. Thanks Fox Sports!

sagegrouse
01-04-2009, 11:00 PM
The Hokies had a little stretch where they looked cohesive- but for most of the game- they were completely taken out of what they wanted to do. By the end of the game- they were physically exhausted.

VT scored 4 points in the first 8 minutes. Then, in the final 17, they scored 9 total points. That's 13 points in 25 minutes.

The rest of the game they scored 31 points in 15 minutes -- which is pretty good against the Duke defense.

sagegrouse

roywhite
01-04-2009, 11:01 PM
Maybe we could have a thread on Fox's lousy game coverage?

I'd rather talk about an impressive win over a tough opponent. After Coach K called the early 2nd half timeout for a "teaching moment", Duke finished the game on a 30-9 run. Our defense and good ball movement on offense wore down the Hokies.

CameronCrazy'11
01-04-2009, 11:05 PM
I still can't get over the fact that we held Virginia Tech to 13 second half points. How often does that happen to a team in the top 100?

Billy Dat
01-04-2009, 11:08 PM
It was really a tale of two games, the game before the 17th minute timeout in the second half and after.

For our weaker stretch, from midway through the first half to the beginning of the second - the offense was stagnant, too many turnovers, the defense was allowing too much dribble penetration (that Malcolm Delaney isn't bad, eh?). Cheick Diakite can block some shots, too.

There really was nothing to complain about after the K early 2nd half rant, the defense was great and we played a really nice inside out game. Scheyer and Singler played their usual stellar games, they are so consistently good that it gets boring to lead every game comment by singing their praises - may the ennui continue. Scheyer did a number on Vassalo (will he draw Curry on Wednesday?) , and the fact that Singler is leading us in so many categories, despite the fact that we are a balanced, unselfish team, is really remarkable. The kid just does not get the recognition he deserves nationally. In response to the negative comments about Nolan, I thought he played well in the 2nd half, especially with his finishes around the basket. I'd still like to see more of a mid range game from G - maybe take his defender off the dribble and pull up with his crazy hops. But, he clearly can't go left and doesn't seem to be able to break his guy down - but maybe that's coming. It's exciting that we are playing well with
obvious areas where we can still get a lot better.

Highlander
01-04-2009, 11:24 PM
The defense was very good tonight, and I thought that Zoubeck really was a difference maker. I'll be interested to see Jumbo's numbers, because our offense seemed to run so much better with him in the game (both at the beginning and in the second half). When he picked up his third foul and went out, we started to play VTech even. When he came back in, we went on a run. Zoubeck is going to be making a strong case to earn more minutes if he can keep himself out of foul trouble.

My only concern reading the stat line was that we pushed Kyle pretty hard tonight (37 minutes). Granted, he was outstanding in that role, and probably had to log a lot of minutes since he was our only starting "big" not in foul trouble in the first half. So I'm hoping this was a special situation, because I don't want him to hit the wall the way he did last year. I was disappointed that EWill didn't get into the game at all until there were only 2 minutes left to go, and Plumlee got only 3 minutes despite the foul trouble of Thomas and Zoubek. I was also disappointed that when EWill finally got into the game, he had a cheap foul and a turnover. That's two bad games out of the last three for Williams. Not a good way to prove that he should have gotten more time. LT also didn't look at his best tonight.

Other than that, pretty thorough dismantling of a team that has always played us tough.

Neals384
01-04-2009, 11:24 PM
I missed the game--did Plumlee not play at all? He's not showing up in the box scores...

About 1 minute in the first half, then at the end of the game. If he touched the ball at all I missed it.

greybeard
01-04-2009, 11:27 PM
"Being a work in progress" is very exciting for all concerned I'd have to think, no? I missed the better part of the second half, the first 10 minutes, and parts of the first. I thought Lance made one awesome finish that they called a walk that wasn't.

Terrific ans smart athletes making great decisions and playing at pace against a team that tried unsuccessfully to make it ugly. I loved the way many players pushed the ball up, either off the dribble or pass, the way people went to the boards, out quicked VT's guys to loose balls, didn't back down or slow down at all, etc. There was even some wing penetration (well I saw it at leat once) aka last year. The spacing was terrific, Duke attacked the rim in a variety of ways and was effective at it. The players seemed amped and seemed to be having fun--Singler dives on it, tosses it to Scheyer or was it someone else, it goes to someone else, who gets fouled tearing diagnally across the court to take the middle on a run out--FUN.

BTW, it is officially over. Singler is my favorite Duke player ever. I do not care what might come next. I'm not sure I could say what part of his game I am most impressed with, but, if I had to chose, it would be his ability to rebound in a crowd, especially when it counts. For a guy with all his other skills, talents and responsibilities, he seems to love getting those rebounds and darn if he isn't remarkably good at it.

Watching them as they progress is gonna be a gas. BTW, what really is wild is that I think that K might well be "a work in progress" this year too, perhaps more even than last year.

wisteria
01-04-2009, 11:28 PM
Man... ACC game is indeed different. I was in Cameron. LOTS LOTS of emotion. Extremely intense. VT play us very very physically, and I'm glad that the Devils also played tough. That VT's coach is a douche. At one time he was almost in the middle of the court! The crazies were constantly shouting at him to get off our court.

Although Big Z couldn't contribute more because of his fouls, but when he was on the court, we were so much better. The last couple of minutes of the first half, with Z and Thomas both in foul trouble, our D lacked and our O sucked. If Z can cut down the fouls, I think he'll be very effective for us even in ACC play.

Lord Ash
01-04-2009, 11:35 PM
That was a good deal of fun to watch. The chemistry seems very good at this point, and the passing has gotten better all year. Good stuff to watch these guys and see what they have grown into. Let's keep it up!

RainingThrees
01-04-2009, 11:37 PM
Man... ACC game is indeed different. I was in Cameron. LOTS LOTS of emotion. Extremely intense. VT play us very very physically, and I'm glad that the Devils also played tough. That VT's coach is a douche. At one time he was almost in the middle of the court! The crazies were constantly shouting at him to get off our court.

Although Big Z couldn't contribute more because of his fouls, but when he was on the court, we were so much better. The last couple of minutes of the first half, with Z and Thomas both in foul trouble, our D lacked and our O sucked. If Z can cut down the fouls, I think he'll be very effective for us even in ACC play.

I just heard that John Wall was there. Did you hear any chants for him?

wisteria
01-04-2009, 11:41 PM
I just heard that John Wall was there. Did you hear any chants for him?

Yes, he was there. And the Crazies had some cheers for him. He put a straight face on the whole time though...So really couldn't read anything there.

By the way, loved the "Dr.Pepper" cheer and a short "Boston College" cheer. haha, good time.

Hancock 4 Duke
01-04-2009, 11:47 PM
Yes, he was there. And the Crazies had some cheers for him. He put a straight face on the whole time though...So really couldn't read anything there.

By the way, loved the "Dr.Pepper" cheer and a short "Boston College" cheer. haha, good time.
I didn't see him. I thought there was only a small chance that he would go to Duke. Please fill me in.

OZZIE4DUKE
01-04-2009, 11:49 PM
'Nuff said! :D

wisteria
01-05-2009, 12:32 AM
I didn't see him. I thought there was only a small chance that he would go to Duke. Please fill me in.

I don't know about the chance. And as far as I know, we haven't even offered him yet. But John Wall was visiting today.

ForeverBlowingBubbles
01-05-2009, 12:36 AM
The video was really annoying on certain plays - but then again on some - there were some pretty awesome shots that made me feel like I was court-side.

It seemed like they had a lot of cameras and I thought the picture looked better on FSN HD then games usually do on the ESPN HD. Hopefully they will adjust a little bit.

geraldsneighbor
01-05-2009, 01:26 AM
In FSN's defense, I do like alot of their broadcast teams. It just drove me up a freaking wall when Smith's big 3 early was blocked by a fan. There was several other instances, but just show me the freaking game. I love when Duke plays on Sunday night hoops, especially today with the slate of games they had with Duke in the middle. Mighty nice TV day between those 3 games, and my Philadelphia Eagles getting the job done in Minnesota.

Oriole Way
01-05-2009, 02:21 AM
I'm a little dismayed by K continuing to shorten the bench. In the first half, Plumlee was on the floor for one possession, and I'm pretty sure Williams did not play (FSN did not start coverage until about the 17:30 mark, so I don't think Williams saw the floor unless it was for 15 seconds, like Plumlee).

A bench of Paulus, McClure, and Thomas will not cut it against the better ACC teams, especially with Paulus and McClure providing almost no offense. I love McClure defensively, but having both him and Paulus on the floor creates too much offensive liability.

I understand that the reserves did not play well against Loyola. But as I have been saying all season, we should have been developing Williams and Plumlee so that they could possibly contribute during ACC play by giving them more minutes. I guess it's a lost cause at this point.

Saratoga2
01-05-2009, 06:03 AM
The starters played a terrific defensive game and for most of the second half shared the ball and made smart passes. I don't think any one player had their best game, but collectively, as a team, that stretch in the second half has to be one of the best this year. The defense was the best form of the switching man to man, and Zoubek can be intimidating inside, even though he is not alll that mobile.

I also thought McClure had an excellent defensive game and is very solid handling the ball offensively, if not scoring.

Paulus also should be mentioned. I thought he played within himself and didn't try the spectacular passes that sometimes go awry. His defense was reasonably good and he only took open shots, making one.

I thought Thomas got into trouble with his aggression and also seemed out of sync. He did make a couple of free throws and the team as a whole shot very well from the stripe.

We really need to give Williams and Plumley more PT. In a game where we are well in the lead, it would be great to see them sub in with our better players. They are potentially an important part of the team and need to continue to develop while not feeling frustrated.

heyman25
01-05-2009, 06:06 AM
I wouldn't worry about shortening the bench. One play Williams had the ball and traveled. There will be games for Williams and Plumlee to contribute just not on Sunday. Our offense was stagnant and horrendous before the 17:32 TO in the 2nd half. After that we were a well oiled machine.Paulus needs to start making 3's consistently. he made 1 critical one but that was it. Singler had a great 2nd half,but managed 6 turnovers mostly in the 1st half.Zoubek and Thomas can play much better than they did.Plumlee still seems to lack confidence on the court.That is why McClure gets the pt. He knows what he has to do.

That was some horrendous directing of camera shots by FSN. Whoever it was should be reprimanded or fired. Gminski and his co worker were fine.I will take Gminski any day over Bilas.

Davidson will be interesting to watch. Curry will get his points,but we have to stop the other 4 from contributing offensively.

Bay Area Duke Fan
01-05-2009, 07:48 AM
That was some horrendous directing of camera shots by FSN. Whoever it was should be reprimanded or fired. Gminski and his co worker were fine.I will take Gminski any day over Bilas.



I was very annoyed when Gminski referred to "Greg Zoubek."

gw67
01-05-2009, 08:04 AM
The Devils didn't didn't play particularly well on offense; nevertheless, last night's win was sensational in my eyes. They completely shut down the Hokies and made them look like one of the cupcakes that most teams play in the OOC portion of their schedule. Sure the shooting and ballhandling weren't that great but the Devils outrebounded Tech by 10, the free throw shooting was All World and the players are contining to look for one another on offense. An ugly but very satisfying win.

gw67

Matches
01-05-2009, 10:26 AM
So far so good. I like very much that we took VT's physical *cough*thuggish*cough* play in stride, and hit right back. A few years ago this is a game we would've lost.

LOVED that give-n-go with Scheyer and Paulus.

MChambers
01-05-2009, 10:41 AM
On the Virgina Tech post-game radio show, Greenberg was asked why Vassallo didn't play in the final five or six minutes. The interviewer asked innocently if Greenberg was just resting the player. Greenberg said that Vassallo hadn't played hard enough. This just can't be a good way to coach, calling a player out publicly for not trying hard enough. Coach K would never do that.

Acymetric
01-05-2009, 12:02 PM
I was very annoyed when Gminski referred to "Greg Zoubek."

Yeah, but its not just him. Everybody does that all the time (everybody associated with Duke that is).


On the Virgina Tech post-game radio show, Greenberg was asked why Vassallo didn't play in the final five or six minutes. The interviewer asked innocently if Greenberg was just resting the player. Greenberg said that Vassallo hadn't played hard enough. This just can't be a good way to coach, calling a player out publicly for not trying hard enough. Coach K would never do that.

Coach K would never say publicly that a player didn't play hard enough? I'm not entirely sure thats true. Has he never said anything about a player not playing hard enough? I mean he once started the entire sub team because the starters weren't playing hard enough, didn't he?

MChambers
01-05-2009, 12:22 PM
Coach K would never say publicly that a player didn't play hard enough? I'm not entirely sure thats true. Has he never said anything about a player not playing hard enough? I mean he once started the entire sub team because the starters weren't playing hard enough, didn't he?

Did Coach K say anything or just start the subs? Either way, he didn't single out an individual in a negative way.

Kedsy
01-05-2009, 12:22 PM
On the Virgina Tech post-game radio show, Greenberg was asked why Vassallo didn't play in the final five or six minutes. The interviewer asked innocently if Greenberg was just resting the player. Greenberg said that Vassallo hadn't played hard enough. This just can't be a good way to coach, calling a player out publicly for not trying hard enough. Coach K would never do that.

I'd give Greenberg the benefit of the doubt on that one. He probably knows best how to motivate an all-ACC caliber player who's been playing for him for three and a half years.

As far as the broadcast, I was also grumbling at the weird camera angle that made it impossible to see a few 3-point shots. But I thought the announcers were good. After the recent discussion on this board about Len Elmore and ESPN's crew using last year's talking points and making unrelated comments while the game was going on around them, it seemed to me Gminski did and said all the right things. I was very impressed by the G-man (despite the "Greg Zoubek" mixup, which I must admit I didn't even notice).

Classof06
01-05-2009, 01:00 PM
- I love the fact that Henderson is now routinely scoring in the teens. Duke can only be at its best when Singler, Scheyer and Henderson are all hitting. And, as Vitale pointed out during either the SIU or Michigan game, Henderson is simply too talented to not be averaging around 14-16 ppg.

- Zoubek was saddled with early foul trouble, but he didn't let it take him completely out of his game. He was still able to give 15 quality minutes. The more and more you watch Zoubek, you see just how far he's come since just last season.

- Plumlee and Elliot Williams need to play more minutes, period. Especially Plumlee. We're going to need him come March.

- Not the best offensive game we've had, but we got the W.

Duvall
01-05-2009, 01:15 PM
- Plumlee and Elliot Williams need to play more minutes, period. Especially Plumlee. We're going to need him come March.

Well, then we're pretty much screwed. Have we seen anything from Plumlee to suggest that he will be ready to give us quality minutes at any point this year?

Some guys are ready to play as freshmen, some guys aren't. It happens.

Magnolia888
01-05-2009, 01:27 PM
That VT's coach is a douche. At one time he was almost in the middle of the court! The crazies were constantly shouting at him to get off our court.

Really? FSN didn't show us that, because they were too busy showing us somebody's arm. :rolleyes:

Man, the camera angles sucked, and bad. I know it's been said, but I had to put in my complaint also. I hate to yell at the TV screen when I'm by myself, but it was so freaking annoying. Grr.

I like G-man, though (although he called Zoubek "Greg," I can forgive that b/c it's such a common error -- I do it myself sometimes. Koubek, Zoubek, aargh.)

roywhite
01-05-2009, 01:43 PM
Well, then we're pretty much screwed. Have we seen anything from Plumlee to suggest that he will be ready to give us quality minutes at any point this year?

Some guys are ready to play as freshmen, some guys aren't. It happens.

Agree. There are a number of comments suggesting that Plumlee and EWill need to be given more playing time. Perhaps they need to earn more playing time; if they show well in practice and game situations they will get more opportunities.

How much of a concern is depth? We have the starters plus experienced reserves in Lance, Greg Paulus, and Dave McClure. Lance for the front court, Greg for the back court (point or shooting guard) and McClure as needed, especially as a defender. That's a reasonably deep team, more so than many previous Duke teams which accomplished great things.

Matches
01-05-2009, 02:15 PM
How much of a concern is depth? We have the starters plus experienced reserves in Lance, Greg Paulus, and Dave McClure. Lance for the front court, Greg for the back court (point or shooting guard) and McClure as needed, especially as a defender. That's a reasonably deep team, more so than many previous Duke teams which accomplished great things.

I've always felt that eight guys is the ideal rotation for a college bball team. One backcourt reserve, one big guy, and one tweener. There's only 200 minutes to go around, and it's pretty difficult to distribute them among 9+ guys while still keeping your best players on the court 30+ mpg.

greybeard
01-05-2009, 02:29 PM
I'd give Greenberg the benefit of the doubt on that one. He probably knows best how to motivate an all-ACC caliber player who's been playing for him for three and a half years.

As far as the broadcast, I was also grumbling at the weird camera angle that made it impossible to see a few 3-point shots. But I thought the announcers were good. After the recent discussion on this board about Len Elmore and ESPN's crew using last year's talking points and making unrelated comments while the game was going on around them, it seemed to me Gminski did and said all the right things. I was very impressed by the G-man (despite the "Greg Zoubek" mixup, which I must admit I didn't even notice).

Maybe he was being sarcastic? I mean, VT did stay relatively close the entire first half, at the start of the second, and then the ceiling fell in. Would K have been playing Singler the final 5 or 6 minutes in such a circumstance. It is, as many here note time and again, a bruttal season these guys, all of them, are facing. I think Seth was being "ironical." Robin Williams, Good Will Hunting.

gumbomoop
01-05-2009, 02:41 PM
LOVED that give-n-go with Scheyer and Paulus.

Scheyer and Singler, wasn't it?

And on several posters' reference to disappointment re Plumlee's very limited appearance, I'd bet a lot that K was furious with P for a fundamental error in first half. A VT switch left Singler underneath and guarded by a guard, maybe even Thorns. Teammates first had to direct Plumlee to move out of post area and toward sidelines so Singler could isolate on small defender. Then the ball was passed to Plumlee...... so from the wing he could deliver an easy entry pass over his own small defender to a sure basket by Singler.... and he couldn't/didn't do it. K furious, I'm almost sure.

And generally I think this an amazing flaw in so many players' game: the inability to make a simple entry pass into the post. Some guys just don't seem to be able to do this very basic thing, including Plumlee, on that occasion at least.

But I hope he gets out of doghouse, if he's temporarily in it, for he can help a lot.

jv001
01-05-2009, 02:48 PM
Scheyer and Singler, wasn't it?

And on several posters' reference to disappointment re Plumlee's very limited appearance, I'd bet a lot that K was furious with P for a fundamental error in first half. A VT switch left Singler underneath and guarded by a guard, maybe even Thorns. Teammates first had to direct Plumlee to move out of post area and toward sidelines so Singler could isolate on small defender. Then the ball was passed to Plumlee...... so from the wing he could deliver an easy entry pass over his own small defender to a sure basket by Singler.... and he couldn't/didn't do it. K furious, I'm almost sure.

And generally I think this an amazing flaw in so many players' game: the inability to make a simple entry pass into the post. Some guys just don't seem to be able to do this very basic thing, including Plumlee, on that occasion at least.

But I hope he gets out of doghouse, if he's temporarily in it, for he can help a lot.

Good call. It looks like Miles is nervous and thinking too much when he enters the game. But I look for him to "get it" soon. He will begin to react rather than thinking so much. He has the talent to get the job done. Go Duke!

MChambers
01-05-2009, 02:49 PM
Maybe he was being sarcastic? I mean, VT did stay relatively close the entire first half, at the start of the second, and then the ceiling fell in. Would K have been playing Singler the final 5 or 6 minutes in such a circumstance. It is, as many here note time and again, a bruttal season these guys, all of them, are facing. I think Seth was being "ironical." Robin Williams, Good Will Hunting.

No, he wasn't being sarcastic. Greenberg mentioned that Delaney was being rested at the end, and that he had played hard, but singled out Vassallo as not playing hard enough, and said that he wasn't resting Vassallo. It was very mean spirited. At least when Ol' Roy criticizes a player publicly he usually tries to make a joke out of it.

greybeard
01-05-2009, 02:57 PM
No, he wasn't being sarcastic. Greenberg mentioned that Delaney was being rested at the end, and that he had played hard, but singled out Vassallo as not playing hard enough, and said that he wasn't resting Vassallo. It was very mean spirited. At least when Ol' Roy criticizes a player publicly he usually tries to make a joke out of it.

Thanks. I always liked Seth from his days as a guest on the Rome show (which used to come right after my boy T's and I sometimes listened; never cared for Rome, even a little, but he did have some great guests). Maybe I'll have to rethink my thoughts about Seth; very bad form, VERY, I agree with you guys completely and appreciate being "wised up."

RainingThrees
01-05-2009, 04:13 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4htcM9V0qag

Virginian
01-05-2009, 04:19 PM
Thanks. I always liked Seth from his days as a guest on the Rome show (which used to come right after my boy T's and I sometimes listened; never cared for Rome, even a little, but he did have some great guests). Maybe I'll have to rethink my thoughts about Seth; very bad form, VERY, I agree with you guys completely and appreciate being "wised up."

I don't have any strong feelings about Greenberg, but I've never found anything about him that merits admiration. I was surprised to hear one of the game's broadcast guys (don't know if it was Gminski or not) say something like "Seth is one of my very favorite guys in all of college basketball." To which his partner responded by agreeing whole-heartedly.

All I could think was "what's THAT all about?" Greenberg's not a lovable character. He seems regularly to be sarcastic and dyspeptic. His teams adopt a real thug-like approach to the game. He may not be a cad, but he's no teddy bear either.

Lord Ash
01-05-2009, 04:21 PM
Vassallo had TERRIBLE body language. He didn't look like he wanted it at all.

FerryFor50
01-05-2009, 04:23 PM
I've always felt that eight guys is the ideal rotation for a college bball team. One backcourt reserve, one big guy, and one tweener. There's only 200 minutes to go around, and it's pretty difficult to distribute them among 9+ guys while still keeping your best players on the court 30+ mpg.


Agreed, but it's a lot easier to get experience for players in a 25 point blowout... we could have stood to see the reserves sooner to get them some gametime experience.

Lord Ash
01-05-2009, 04:26 PM
I think why people love depth isn't only so that the starters are well rested come March; it is also because it is good to give players in-game experience so that if your main guys ARE struggling you can turn to another player who may not have been the "big game" guy in the past but who HAS been in before and who might spark something. I have found, in my years of playing sports including at Duke in D1, that sometimes someone steps up who you might never expect to and who hasn't in the past and that moment serves as a HUGE moment in their development... indeed, they are a different player after that moment than before. You can't have those moments in practice.

For me, at least, that is a big part of the "let the young guys play" mentality.

FerryFor50
01-05-2009, 04:50 PM
I think why people love depth isn't only so that the starters are well rested come March; it is also because it is good to give players in-game experience so that if your main guys ARE struggling you can turn to another player who may not have been the "big game" guy in the past but who HAS been in before and who might spark something. I have found, in my years of playing sports including at Duke in D1, that sometimes someone steps up who you might never expect to and who hasn't in the past and that moment serves as a HUGE moment in their development... indeed, they are a different player after that moment than before. You can't have those moments in practice.

For me, at least, that is a big part of the "let the young guys play" mentality.

Agreed. And I'll add to it - it's not necessarily if someone's playing bad.

It's if Duke runs into one of those inevitable horribly officiated games, where your two best players are in foul trouble and the other guys are floundering, where the inexperienced guys are pressed into action. I remember Pocius being thrust into this position a year or two ago, and he definitely did not look ready.

In-game experiences is invaluable, IMO.

jv001
01-05-2009, 04:56 PM
Agreed. And I'll add to it - it's not necessarily if someone's playing bad.

It's if Duke runs into one of those inevitable horribly officiated games, where your two best players are in foul trouble and the other guys are floundering, where the inexperienced guys are pressed into action. I remember Pocius being thrust into this position a year or two ago, and he definitely did not look ready.

In-game experiences is invaluable, IMO.

I agree if the said reserves are playing well in practice and have been showing improvment. But to just get them in games so they can have game time experience evidently is not the way Coach K sees it. And I have to defer to him(HOF coach). Go Duke!

FerryFor50
01-05-2009, 05:02 PM
I agree if the said reserves are playing well in practice and have been showing improvment. But to just get them in games so they can have game time experience evidently is not the way Coach K sees it. And I have to defer to him(HOF coach). Go Duke!

Oh, I know. I'm sure Coach K could give a rat's butt about what I think about playing reserves. :)

jv001
01-05-2009, 05:07 PM
Oh, I know. I'm sure Coach K could give a rat's butt about what I think about playing reserves. :)

But it's your right to have your opinion. Go Duke!

Oriole Way
01-05-2009, 05:11 PM
I think why people love depth isn't only so that the starters are well rested come March; it is also because it is good to give players in-game experience so that if your main guys ARE struggling you can turn to another player who may not have been the "big game" guy in the past but who HAS been in before and who might spark something. I have found, in my years of playing sports including at Duke in D1, that sometimes someone steps up who you might never expect to and who hasn't in the past and that moment serves as a HUGE moment in their development... indeed, they are a different player after that moment than before. You can't have those moments in practice.

For me, at least, that is a big part of the "let the young guys play" mentality.


Agreed. And I'll add to it - it's not necessarily if someone's playing bad.

It's if Duke runs into one of those inevitable horribly officiated games, where your two best players are in foul trouble and the other guys are floundering, where the inexperienced guys are pressed into action. I remember Pocius being thrust into this position a year or two ago, and he definitely did not look ready.

In-game experiences is invaluable, IMO.

Couldn't agree more with both of these posts.

I am growing increasingly frustrated and disappointed with K's handling of Plumlee, Williams, and Pocius.

FerryFor50 mentioning Pocius, albeit him struggling, reminds me of the fact Pocius stepped up in a big way during his sophomore year against NC State and VCU, our final two games. Now, this kid gets no meaningful minutes against far less talented teams. I refuse to believe that, two years later, Pocius hasn't made any improvements whatsoever. One big reason, aside from injuries, is that he has never been given any minutes when he was healthy. I'm not claiming that Pocius is any kind of impact player, but he has some talent. It's almost as if K decides that a player isn't talented enough, or doesn't play NBA-caliber defense, and consequently deems them incapable or unworthy of receiving minutes.

I don't want to focus on Pocius, because the real source of my frustration is K's handling of Plumlee and Williams. They should be getting time against Virginia Tech in the first half, well more than one possession. It's really amazing how K extremely tightens his rotation in ACC play.

As Ferry mentioned, there will be games where foul trouble becomes an issue. I'll never forget the Wake game 3 or 4 years ago where six guys fouled out, including the whole starting 5 + Melchionni. Last season, we had 4 or 5 guys foul out against Wake. I would not be surprised to see that happen again this season. If Zoubek and Thomas both foul out in that game, I would feel better about Plumlee coming in and performing adequately if he had gotten a lot more minutes up to this point. Instead, K will probably play McClure at the 5 and we will lose the game as we yell in vain because we can't get a single defensive rebound.

We have 10 guys who can/possibly could contribute at the ACC level. It seems like such a waste to only play 7 or 8 of them.

jv001
01-05-2009, 05:18 PM
Couldn't agree more with both of these posts.

I am growing increasingly frustrated and disappointed with K's handling of Plumlee, Williams, and Pocius.

FerryFor50 mentioning Pocius, albeit him struggling, reminds me of the fact Pocius stepped up in a big way during his sophomore year against NC State and VCU, our final two games. Now, this kid gets no meaningful minutes against far less talented teams. I refuse to believe that, two years later, Pocius hasn't made any improvements whatsoever. One big reason, aside from injuries, is that he has never been given any minutes when he was healthy. I'm not claiming that Pocius is any kind of impact player, but he has some talent. It's almost as if K decides that a player isn't talented enough, or doesn't play NBA-caliber defense, and consequently deems them incapable or unworthy of receiving minutes.

I don't want to focus on Pocius, because the real source of my frustration is K's handling of Plumlee and Williams. They should be getting time against Virginia Tech in the first half, well more than one possession. It's really amazing how K extremely tightens his rotation in ACC play.

As Ferry mentioned, there will be games where foul trouble becomes an issue. I'll never forget the Wake game 3 or 4 years ago where six guys fouled out, including the whole starting 5 + Melchionni. Last season, we had 4 or 5 guys foul out against Wake. I would not be surprised to see that happen again this season. If Zoubek and Thomas both foul out in that game, I would feel better about Plumlee coming in and performing adequately if he had gotten a lot more minutes up to this point. Instead, K will probably play McClure at the 5 and we will lose the game as we yell in vain because we can't get a single defensive rebound.

We have 10 guys who can/possibly could contribute at the ACC level. It seems like such a waste to only play 7 or 8 of them.

Well I guess Coach K needs to start playing Okek about 10-15 mins if all those guys are going to foul out. Olek can really jump and he can get those rebounds. In all seriousness I believe that we will see Plumlee and Williams improve and then they will get the mins everyone would like to see. Go Duke!

Dr. Rosenrosen
01-05-2009, 05:34 PM
I wrote to FSN South to share my opinion of their game coverage. Below is the surprisingly candid response I just got from them. Hopefully they understand that fans watching from home want to see the game and do not expect them to try to reproduce an "in Cameron" experience... an impossible task as many of us know!

--------

From:
"FSN South (FOX Sports Net)" <FSN.South@fox.com>
Add sender to Contacts
To:
undisclosed-recipients

Thank you for taking the time to write. We truly appreciate your comments and believe that your assessment is correct. We got away from our traditional game coverage in an attempt to try something new, creative and different. We wanted to provide viewers at home with the viewpoint inside Cameron Indoor, as if they were at the game. We evaluated this creative decision during the game telecast, cut away from it as the game progressed and returned to more traditional coverage. Again, we do appreciate your feedback.

VaDukie
01-05-2009, 05:58 PM
I wrote to FSN South to share my opinion of their game coverage. Below is the surprisingly candid response I just got from them. Hopefully they understand that fans watching from home want to see the game and do not expect them to try to reproduce an "in Cameron" experience... an impossible task as many of us know!

--------

From:
"FSN South (FOX Sports Net)" <FSN.South@fox.com>
Add sender to Contacts
To:
undisclosed-recipients

Thank you for taking the time to write. We truly appreciate your comments and believe that your assessment is correct. We got away from our traditional game coverage in an attempt to try something new, creative and different. We wanted to provide viewers at home with the viewpoint inside Cameron Indoor, as if they were at the game. We evaluated this creative decision during the game telecast, cut away from it as the game progressed and returned to more traditional coverage. Again, we do appreciate your feedback.



Truth is the "Cameron" experience isn't all its cracked up to be in terms of watching the game itself. The energy is what makes the student section fun, and you can't get that on TV.

-jk
01-05-2009, 07:00 PM
Truth is the "Cameron" experience isn't all its cracked up to be in terms of watching the game itself. The energy is what makes the student section fun, and you can't get that on TV.

Bite your tongue! Or ask the Maryland students that were relegated to a single end zone in Comcast or UNC students that finally fought their way down to a corner (from upstairs).

The bleacher risers are a lot lower than they were - once upon a time - before the students started standing all game long. Some of the upstairs folks can't stand.

-jk

HateCarolina
01-05-2009, 08:43 PM
Here is the link to send them a message of your own:

http://msn.foxsports.com/feedback

And here is what I wrote to them. I will let you know when/if they respond and what they say:

I would normally never write and complain about much of anything, but when it comes to my Duke Basketball and the TV coverage I feel I must speak up. I went out to a fan website today to see if anyone else noticed the horrible camera angles your team utilized last night and was horrified/amused to see that there was mention of last night's bad coverage (against VT) in almost every post. I did see you responded to one person and stated that you were trying to provide the "Cameron" experience. Please do not attempt to try that again since the only Cameron experience can be had live and in person. When I tune in to watch a game I expect to be able to see all of the action (and see it well). I know they are your rival, but ESPN did a similiar thing with Duke/Carolina a couple of years ago where they showed the game on ESPN, ESPN 2, and ESPNU all with different angles...guess what...they all sucked except for ESPN which showed the game like they normally do. Please just show us the game!!!!

greybeard
01-05-2009, 08:48 PM
I don't have any strong feelings about Greenberg, but I've never found anything about him that merits admiration. I was surprised to hear one of the game's broadcast guys (don't know if it was Gminski or not) say something like "Seth is one of my very favorite guys in all of college basketball." To which his partner responded by agreeing whole-heartedly.

All I could think was "what's THAT all about?" Greenberg's not a lovable character. He seems regularly to be sarcastic and dyspeptic. His teams adopt a real thug-like approach to the game. He may not be a cad, but he's no teddy bear either.

When he was on the Rome show while coaching at South Florida (?), he showed differently--real knowledgible and thankful to be able to be part of a game he clearly adored). And, he at least looks older. An older guy sticks with it--makes a feel good story. But, wow, I get your drift; the reality sounds way different.

dukelifer
01-05-2009, 09:05 PM
Agreed, but it's a lot easier to get experience for players in a 25 point blowout... we could have stood to see the reserves sooner to get them some gametime experience.

How many minutes would you have played Plumlee and Williams in the game to get real experience and who should have lost minutes? Is 6 enough? Do you need to get 10 minutes to get experience? If tech had reduced the lead to 12 in that stretch would you keep them in or take them out? It is easy to say that these guys should play more but the question is how do you do it and potentially not lose that big lead?

FerryFor50
01-05-2009, 09:42 PM
How many minutes would you have played Plumlee and Williams in the game to get real experience and who should have lost minutes? Is 6 enough? Do you need to get 10 minutes to get experience? If tech had reduced the lead to 12 in that stretch would you keep them in or take them out? It is easy to say that these guys should play more but the question is how do you do it and potentially not lose that big lead?


I say you play them when the lead balloons to 20. Let them play to stay out there. If the lead drops below 15, you sub the starters back in. It's that easy. There's not any set amount of minutes I want them to get; I just want there to be some sort of real game-time experience, and lessons learned with keeping a lead and playing smart.

Another positive aspect of playing your blue chippers a little bit more is that you show potential incoming recruits that it's not impossible to crack the rotation at Duke.

DukeDevilDeb
01-05-2009, 09:49 PM
Couldn't agree more with both of these posts.

I am growing increasingly frustrated and disappointed with K's handling of Plumlee, Williams, and Pocius.

FerryFor50 mentioning Pocius, albeit him struggling, reminds me of the fact Pocius stepped up in a big way during his sophomore year against NC State and VCU, our final two games. Now, this kid gets no meaningful minutes against far less talented teams. I refuse to believe that, two years later, Pocius hasn't made any improvements whatsoever. One big reason, aside from injuries, is that he has never been given any minutes when he was healthy. I'm not claiming that Pocius is any kind of impact player, but he has some talent. It's almost as if K decides that a player isn't talented enough, or doesn't play NBA-caliber defense, and consequently deems them incapable or unworthy of receiving minutes.

I have really liked Marty since he arrived, especially when he has lots of energy on the court. But I have now watched him play this season, and he's still doing the things he did before... although I must admit his defense is better. Almost no matter where he gets the ball, as soon as he touches it, Marty throws up a 3. Now some fans say that's confidence; I say it's thoughtless. I'm bothered by the fact that it appears that he thinks he has to make 3 pointers to be valuable, and therefore he tries at every turn.

Passing stops when the ball gets to Marty in a way it doesn't with our other 3 point shooters (Scheyer, Greg, G, Kyle, Nolan). Anybody want to speculate on why that happens or what could reasonably be done about it? :confused:

jv001
01-05-2009, 09:52 PM
If Coach K subs Williams & Plumlee with a 20point lead and leaves them in until it drops to 15 it may give the opponent confidence and then they start believing they can comeback. I say put your foot on their throat and don't put them away. Give them mins when the game is out of reach. Go Duke!

jv001
01-05-2009, 09:52 PM
That was suppose to be put them away. Go Duke!

Acymetric
01-05-2009, 09:56 PM
I say you play them when the lead balloons to 20. Let them play to stay out there. If the lead drops below 15, you sub the starters back in. It's that easy. There's not any set amount of minutes I want them to get; I just want there to be some sort of real game-time experience, and lessons learned with keeping a lead and playing smart.

Another positive aspect of playing your blue chippers a little bit more is that you show potential incoming recruits that it's not impossible to crack the rotation at Duke.

However, do that and people will complain about how we need to hold and extend our big leads, and that winning by 10-20 isn't enough, and that we should win by 30+ margins. Some part of the fanbase is going to whine and complain regardless, so he may as well just do whatever he wants anyways.

For my part the only freshman I think should play more is Williams, and its not something I'm worried about. If K gave him a few extra minutes thats good, but if he doesn't I'm just as happy seeing our other guys out there.

And as for people who would decrease Dave's minutes, I would actually like to INCREASE them. He is our best and most versatile defender right now. If he would try more drives like the one in the last couple minutes of the game last night and put 6-8 points up he would be a force. The problem with that is who do you take minutes from? My answer would be LT, except I like Dave at the 3, and if he subbed in for LT he would probably be playing at the 4 or 5, or you would have to put Z in for Lance and Dave in for someone else, which would mean Z is in more because Lance is in less.

Which reminds me, when adding up minutes like this, make sure you consider the lineups that you create. Which might be a better way to do this. Write out how many minutes you would want for particular lineups, rather than individual players. 40 minutes for as many lineup combination as you want. I'll take a crack at it later.

FerryFor50
01-05-2009, 10:20 PM
However, do that and people will complain about how we need to hold and extend our big leads, and that winning by 10-20 isn't enough, and that we should win by 30+ margins. Some part of the fanbase is going to whine and complain regardless, so he may as well just do whatever he wants anyways.

For my part the only freshman I think should play more is Williams, and its not something I'm worried about. If K gave him a few extra minutes thats good, but if he doesn't I'm just as happy seeing our other guys out there.

And as for people who would decrease Dave's minutes, I would actually like to INCREASE them. He is our best and most versatile defender right now. If he would try more drives like the one in the last couple minutes of the game last night and put 6-8 points up he would be a force. The problem with that is who do you take minutes from? My answer would be LT, except I like Dave at the 3, and if he subbed in for LT he would probably be playing at the 4 or 5, or you would have to put Z in for Lance and Dave in for someone else, which would mean Z is in more because Lance is in less.

Which reminds me, when adding up minutes like this, make sure you consider the lineups that you create. Which might be a better way to do this. Write out how many minutes you would want for particular lineups, rather than individual players. 40 minutes for as many lineup combination as you want. I'll take a crack at it later.

I like Elliott as well. I'd like to see more Plumlee minutes, though. I think we need depth with size more than depth on the wings. Though Elliott rebounds like crazy...

It is a tough quandary, whichever way you look at it though. That's why we speculate on forums rather than winning NCAA championships. :p

mgtr
01-05-2009, 10:37 PM
I don't recall seeing Pocius do much that was useful. The lore is that he can shoot threes (has he made any this year?) and that he can take it to the rim (has he done so this year?) I don't want to rag on the guy, but he has so many people rooting for him, I believe he probably can make threes and can take it to the rim. Is it a confidence issue? Does he not get sufficient time to feel confident, so he just hoists up any old shot? Does he make those shots in practice but not in games? I really don't know.

wilko
01-05-2009, 11:00 PM
And as for people who would decrease Dave's minutes, I would actually like to INCREASE them. He is our best and most versatile defender right now. If he would try more drives like the one in the last couple minutes of the game last night and put 6-8 points up he would be a force.


I love McClure. Hes paid his dues with some health issues, stuck thru it, has a good team 1st attitude. What more do you want?

Perhaps some aggression and confidence in attacking the basket better, but aything he gives on O is gravy. His job is to make opposing players miserable by defending them and use his fouls to protect the other bigs. I like what he brings to the table. Hes a glue guy.



On a note that shows my age..

Who the heck is Uncle Festus?

I know Festus was a character on Gunsmoke and that Jackie Coogan played Uncle Fester on the Addams family.... but Uncle Festus is beyond me.

jimsumner
01-05-2009, 11:11 PM
"Another positive aspect of playing your blue chippers a little bit more is that you show potential incoming recruits that it's not impossible to crack the rotation at Duke."

You mean like Singler and Smith couldn't get off the bench last year? Or Scheyer and Henderson the year before or McRoberts and Paulus the year before that? I'm pretty sure we could find some examples of blue-chip freshmen getting a little playing time, just a little, if we tried hard enough.
:rolleyes:

Kedsy
01-05-2009, 11:16 PM
I don't recall seeing Pocius do much that was useful. The lore is that he can shoot threes (has he made any this year?) and that he can take it to the rim (has he done so this year?) I don't want to rag on the guy, but he has so many people rooting for him, I believe he probably can make threes and can take it to the rim. Is it a confidence issue? Does he not get sufficient time to feel confident, so he just hoists up any old shot? Does he make those shots in practice but not in games? I really don't know.

Has anyone else noticed how Marty fades away on all his (missed) three-pointers? I bet he doesn't do that in practice, and if he didn't do it in the games he'd hit some.

Kedsy
01-05-2009, 11:17 PM
On a note that shows my age..

Who the heck is Uncle Festus?

I know Festus was a character on Gunsmoke and that Jackie Coogan played Uncle Fester on the Addams family.... but Uncle Festus is beyond me.


I'm pretty sure whoever said "Uncle Festus" meant "Uncle Fester." But you probably already know that, right?

FerryFor50
01-05-2009, 11:43 PM
"Another positive aspect of playing your blue chippers a little bit more is that you show potential incoming recruits that it's not impossible to crack the rotation at Duke."

You mean like Singler and Smith couldn't get off the bench last year? Or Scheyer and Henderson the year before or McRoberts and Paulus the year before that? I'm pretty sure we could find some examples of blue-chip freshmen getting a little playing time, just a little, if we tried hard enough.
:rolleyes:

It was mainly because they had to, due to departures, injury and mistakes in recruiting.

ncexnyc
01-06-2009, 01:50 AM
Does this team actually have depth?

We've got Lance, Greg, and Dave as the first off the bench.

Then we drop down to Ewill, Marty, Miles, and finally Olek.

Lance subs for Brian and gives us energy, solid defense and a stickback every now and then. I'm not so sure he's the perfect sub for Brian due to his lack of bulk and I hope that Miles can eventually progress to that role.

Dave gives us awesome defense, rebounding and is a major pest to the opposition, but again he's very limited offensively.

Greg, who is supposed to be the primary scorer off the bench hasn't lived up to that role as of yet and I believe he needs to get it going in order for the team to meet it's full potential.

Watching Ewill and Miles, it's easy to see that the talent is there, it's just going to take a while for everything to gel.

I hate to say it, but Marty just isn't cutting it. He's been given many chances, but I have to agree with a number of other posters, he seems to be trying to hard.

Olek appears to be a major project and it's very obvious that he's not going to contribute much on the court this year.

So while we do have a number of bodies who are getting playing time and some of them major minutes, my concern is for what happens when one of the regulars into very serious foul trouble or gets the inevitable injury, it doesn't have to be anything major, just a sprained ankle, pulled groin or hammy. Something where the player misses a game or two.

Matches
01-06-2009, 08:56 AM
As Ferry mentioned, there will be games where foul trouble becomes an issue. I'll never forget the Wake game 3 or 4 years ago where six guys fouled out, including the whole starting 5 + Melchionni. Last season, we had 4 or 5 guys foul out against Wake. I would not be surprised to see that happen again this season.

If we have 4-5 guys foul out of one game, we're going to lose. It's really as simple as that - there isn't a team in D1 other than *maybe* the Smurfs that can win with its "B" team. (And even they would have a really tough time.)

I'm just not convinced that playing guys who aren't ready for a few minutes here or there (and realistically, looking at what Plumlee is doing on the floor right now, that's all we could afford), is going to make a significant difference in their development. If anything I think you run the risk of having an adverse effect on them by destroying their confidence. If they're ready, fine - a guy like Singler who was ready right off the bat played right away, and would have no matter our recruiting/ personnel situation. But if they're not ready, don't toss them to the wolves and let them get eaten up. I have been critical of K's non-use of the bench in the past, but in the past season plus he's used it a lot more - I just don't see a situation where the 9-12 guys are playing significant minutes.

jv001
01-06-2009, 09:20 AM
It was mainly because they had to, due to departures, injury and mistakes in recruiting.

Kyle and Nolan played last year because they were good enough to earn the mins they played. If Williams, Miles and Olek work like they did they will see their mins go up as well. Go Duke!

jimsumner
01-06-2009, 09:49 AM
"It was mainly because they had to, due to departures, injury and mistakes in recruiting. "


That's right. They had to play. Like Amaker and Ferry and Laettner and Hurley and Hill and Capel and Brand and Duhon and Redick and Deng just had to play to freshmen. Because of lousy recruiting.

Of all the ridiculous things to complain about. Duke is 12-1, ranked 2nd in the country, and coming off a 25-point beatdown of a pretty good VT team, which scored all of 13 points in the second half. Duke has a cohesive, veteran, eight-man rotation that gives them size, depth, experience, balance, shooting, defense, ball-handling, rebounding, and pert near anything else a college basketball team could ask for.

So what's the problem? Well, Mike Krzyzewski clearly did a lousy job of developing Marty Pocius last year after Marty had season-ending ankle surgery after four games. After all, Pocius scored 14 points one time in 2007, followed by that career-defining 3-point game against VCU. What's K thinking playing Scheyer and Henderson ahead of Pocius?

Then, we come to the freshmen, raw, talented, promising, very much still works in progress. Doesn't matter what they do in practice, doesn't matter what they do in games. Force feed them minutes over players who are more deserving of minutes. Because the members of this board see them in practice all the time and have such keen insights as a result.

And to top if off, we're now told that this will hinder recruiting because blue-chip recruits don't think they can crack the rotation. Guess what? Duke has had at least one freshman average at least 10 mpg every single season since K's first. Singler last year became the 24th freshman under K to play at least 20 mpg. He also joined Dawkins, JWill, Redick, and Deng as freshmen who made All-ACC.

So, I suspect K isn't any more worried about this than the five blue-chip recruits in the high-school classes of 2009 and 2010 who have already signed/committed to Duke. When E Williams and Plumlee earn PT, they'll get PT. It's been that way for some time now and the head coach has something of a track record in managing his program.

Sometimes I think this board just looks for things to fret about.

wilko
01-06-2009, 10:02 AM
I'm pretty sure whoever said "Uncle Festus" meant "Uncle Fester." But you probably already know that, right?

Well, that would be my assumption, but you know what happens when you assume. For all I know hes the frontman for some band or whatever.

It took me forever to figure out what "crunk" is all about...

So what do I know?

jv001
01-06-2009, 10:07 AM
"It was mainly because they had to, due to departures, injury and mistakes in recruiting. "


That's right. They had to play. Like Amaker and Ferry and Laettner and Hurley and Hill and Capel and Brand and Duhon and Redick and Deng just had to play to freshmen. Because of lousy recruiting.

Of all the ridiculous things to complain about. Duke is 12-1, ranked 2nd in the country, and coming off a 25-point beatdown of a pretty good VT team, which scored all of 13 points in the second half. Duke has a cohesive, veteran, eight-man rotation that gives them size, depth, experience, balance, shooting, defense, ball-handling, rebounding, and pert near anything else a college basketball team could ask for.

So what's the problem? Well, Mike Krzyzewski clearly did a lousy job of developing Marty Pocius last year after Marty had season-ending ankle surgery after four games. After all, Pocius scored 14 points one time in 2007, followed by that career-defining 3-point game against VCU. What's K thinking playing Scheyer and Henderson ahead of Pocius?

Then, we come to the freshmen, raw, talented, promising, very much still works in progress. Doesn't matter what they do in practice, doesn't matter what they do in games. Force feed them minutes over players who are more deserving of minutes. Because the members of this board see them in practice all the time and have such keen insights as a result.

And to top if off, we're now told that this will hinder recruiting because blue-chip recruits don't think they can crack the rotation. Guess what? Duke has had at least one freshman average at least 10 mpg every single season since K's first. Singler last year became the 24th freshman under K to play at least 20 mpg. He also joined Dawkins, JWill, Redick, and Deng as freshmen who made All-ACC.

So, I suspect K isn't any more worried about this than the five blue-chip recruits in the high-school classes of 2009 and 2010 who have already signed/committed to Duke. When E Williams and Plumlee earn PT, they'll get PT. It's been that way for some time now and the head coach has something of a track record in managing his program.

Sometimes I think this board just looks for things to fret about.

Amen Jim!

SMO
01-06-2009, 10:10 AM
Sometimes I think this board just looks for things to fret about.

Ya think?:D

It's always amusing to see once we hit the 3+ page of a post-game thread how the most bizarre critiques of the game show up. We could beat Carolina by 20 at the Ding Dong and someone would find a complaint.

FerryFor50
01-06-2009, 10:58 AM
Kyle and Nolan played last year because they were good enough to earn the mins they played. If Williams, Miles and Olek work like they did they will see their mins go up as well. Go Duke!

I think Kyle played last year because he was good enough. Nolan played last year because he had to, especially when Marty went down with his injury, as jimsumner so "kindly" reminded us all of.

I don't care if Olek gets minutes - he's nowhere near ready. I was just pointing out that I thought Plumlee and Williams should be getting 10-12 minutes in a blowout game and people think I'm complaining.

FerryFor50
01-06-2009, 11:28 AM
Your initial post was about Singler, Smith, Scheyer, Henderson, McRoberts and Paulus. I disagreed with your sentiments about those guys because MOST of them were pressed into more action due to the reasons I stated. Then you went back another 10-15 years for more examples, some of which were valid, but each of which had a different reasoning behind it. Some were playing as freshmen because they were that good. Some were playing limited minutes.

Ferry played 22.8 MPG as a freshman - why so many? he was the 6th or 7th option
Laettner played about 17 MPG - why so few? Blocked by Ferry, split minutes with the less talented Abdelnaby
McRoberts played 24.5 MPG - why so many? Only big man option after Shelden Williams (unless you count Eric Boateng - would you count him as a recruiting mistake?)
Nolan Smith played 14.7 MPG - why so few? a glut at guard - scheyer, paulus, nelson, henderson
Redick played 30.7 MPG - why so many? he was better than Horvath, Dockery and Melchionni and was the best pure shooter on the team
Gerald Henderson played 19.3 mpg - why so many? 6th or 7th best option
Paulus played 32.3 MPG - why so many? pretty sure Demarcus got hurt that year, so only guards left were Dockery and JJ; heck, even Pocius played 28 games, and Boykin played sparingly before transferring (and ending up a pretty decent player)
Luol Deng played 31.1 mpg - why so many? Freak of nature, obviously, since he was a one and done with a successful NBA career (the golden years of Duke recruiting)

I could go on and on, but the point is, each player played due to some sort of extraneous circumstance outside of the anomalies during the Deng/Brand/Maggette years where those players were just that much better than the ones they currently have. You could also raise the point that other Duke players who didn't get PT either left and became solid players (McCaffrey, Boykin... heck, even Boateng is a decent role player for ASU), or they never panned out to what they could have been (Ricky Price comes to mind), or they became solid players (Sean Dockery comes to mind).

My stance is that I like to see Duke recruits stay and succeed. I think Plumlee and Williams could stay and succeed. I hated that Taylor King transferred, because I could see him playing a big role for Villanova next season, and I'd hate to see a player with potential transfer because they couldn't get playing time in a blowout game. By saying they need to "earn" the playing time, you're inferring that they don't work as hard in practice. So unless you're privy to some information I am not, then your opinions are as qualified as mine are.

Kedsy
01-06-2009, 12:15 PM
Ferry played 22.8 MPG as a freshman - why so many? he was the 6th or 7th option
Laettner played about 17 MPG - why so few? Blocked by Ferry, split minutes with the less talented Abdelnaby
McRoberts played 24.5 MPG - why so many? Only big man option after Shelden Williams (unless you count Eric Boateng - would you count him as a recruiting mistake?)
Nolan Smith played 14.7 MPG - why so few? a glut at guard - scheyer, paulus, nelson, henderson
Redick played 30.7 MPG - why so many? he was better than Horvath, Dockery and Melchionni and was the best pure shooter on the team
Gerald Henderson played 19.3 mpg - why so many? 6th or 7th best option
Paulus played 32.3 MPG - why so many? pretty sure Demarcus got hurt that year, so only guards left were Dockery and JJ; heck, even Pocius played 28 games, and Boykin played sparingly before transferring (and ending up a pretty decent player)
Luol Deng played 31.1 mpg - why so many? Freak of nature, obviously, since he was a one and done with a successful NBA career (the golden years of Duke recruiting)

I could go on and on, but the point is, each player played due to some sort of extraneous circumstance outside of the anomalies during the Deng/Brand/Maggette years where those players were just that much better than the ones they currently have. You could also raise the point that other Duke players who didn't get PT either left and became solid players (McCaffrey, Boykin... heck, even Boateng is a decent role player for ASU), or they never panned out to what they could have been (Ricky Price comes to mind), or they became solid players (Sean Dockery comes to mind).


I'm not trying to be mean or argumentative, but your chart doesn't make sense to me. First of all, I don't see how 17 mpg is "so few" while 19 mpg is "so many." Second, you say being the "6th or 7th best option" is a justification for a lot of minutes, but isn't that Jim Sumner's point? If a freshman is good enough to be in the rotation he gets minutes. If he's not, he doesn't. Isn't that the way it's supposed to work?

Also, Nolan Smith had the 7th-most minutes on last year's team and thus presumably was the "7th best option," so that sort of discounts your explanation of Ferry and Henderson. Although I would argue that a freshman who is the 7th or 8th option getting nearly 15 mpg is pretty good. The third freshman on last year's team, Taylor King, was the 10th guy in the rotation and played nearly 10 mpg (although admittedly he played less as the year went on).

Oh, and you forgot Jon Scheyer, who played almost 34 mpg his freshman year. Presumably because he was good enough to do so.

Also, you talk about the "Deng/Brand/Maggette years," but Deng played five years after Brand and Maggette left. That's an eternity in college hoops and I don't understand how you could group them together for the purposes of this discussion.

Finally, if Deng in 2004 represented "the golden years of Duke recruiting," then what recruiting mistakes are you lamenting? If Deng had stayed four years he would have overlapped Scheyer and Henderson and would have left the year before Singler came to school. And in the two years between Deng's recruitment and Scheyer/Henderson/Thomas/Zoubek we successfully recruited Shawn Livingston, DeMarcus Nelson, Josh McRoberts, and Greg Paulus who were all big time recruits. If you want to call the McRoberts/Paulus/Pocius/Boykin/Boateng class a mistake, go ahead, but (a) it had more than its share of McDonald's All Americans and highly ranked recruits; (b) had at least moderate success on the court including one guy currently in the NBA; (c) was just two years after the so-called "golden age" and only one year before the current junior class. Which I suppose is a long-winded way of saying I don't understand your point.

jipops
01-06-2009, 12:21 PM
So unless you're privy to some information I am not, then your opinions are as qualified as mine are.


Chances are, he is.

jv001
01-06-2009, 12:26 PM
What was this thread about? Oh Duke-VT Post Game Thread..I had forgotten. Man did we play well. Great defense(13pts allowed n 2nd half), lot's of assists, outrebounded VT by 10. 38% from 3 point land, 95% freethrow %, Greg hits a big 3 pointer, Gerald continues to get better and Jon and Kyle continue to be outstanding. Next Play guys! and oh Go Duke!

jipops
01-06-2009, 12:31 PM
Did anyone else point out in this thread that we held an ACC opponent to 44 points? Not only that, we did this with two of our primary bigs saddled with foul trouble the entire 2nd half. This was a truly brilliant performance. Loved the unselfishness on display as well.

davekay1971
01-06-2009, 12:48 PM
My takeaway points for the game:

1) Great defense...that's an understatement. Stunning defense in the second half. If we can play team defense like that on anything resembling a regular basis, we will be very tough to beat

2) Henderson turns in another solid performance. He's tuning his game up as we get into better competition.

3) McClure is one of the best glue guys around. Just don't expect the bimboys at ESPN to figure that out.

4) Zoubek is turning into a very good passer. Adding that to his obvious improvements as a rebounder, defender, and scorer, and he's turning into a very solid post player. If he can just keep improving on the foul trouble...

Oriole Way
01-06-2009, 01:03 PM
If we have 4-5 guys foul out of one game, we're going to lose. It's really as simple as that - there isn't a team in D1 other than *maybe* the Smurfs that can win with its "B" team. (And even they would have a really tough time.)

I'm just not convinced that playing guys who aren't ready for a few minutes here or there (and realistically, looking at what Plumlee is doing on the floor right now, that's all we could afford), is going to make a significant difference in their development. If anything I think you run the risk of having an adverse effect on them by destroying their confidence. If they're ready, fine - a guy like Singler who was ready right off the bat played right away, and would have no matter our recruiting/ personnel situation. But if they're not ready, don't toss them to the wolves and let them get eaten up. I have been critical of K's non-use of the bench in the past, but in the past season plus he's used it a lot more - I just don't see a situation where the 9-12 guys are playing significant minutes.

I was just illustrating an extreme example of foul trouble - although I do think the Wake game will be a foul fest, since it always is. What is more concerning to me, and more likely to happen, is two or three key guys getting into foul trouble. Just this past game, both Thomas and Zoubek picked up 3 fouls in the first half. Going small (like we did against VT) against teams like UNC, Wake, and Clemson will kill us. Getting Plumlee in could potentially be a solution, but K has made it clear that he does not think he is ready to contribute.



So what's the problem? Well, Mike Krzyzewski clearly did a lousy job of developing Marty Pocius last year after Marty had season-ending ankle surgery after four games. After all, Pocius scored 14 points one time in 2007, followed by that career-defining 3-point game against VCU. What's K thinking playing Scheyer and Henderson ahead of Pocius?


Who said that Pocius needs to be playing ahead of Scheyer and Henderson, or even getting minutes at their expense?

Let me be very clear, as I stated before, that I'm not terribly concerned about the minutes Pocius gets.

My main concern with this team is the handling of Williams and Plumlee thus far. It's just my opinion that they haven't been handled well.


Of all the ridiculous things to complain about. Duke is 12-1, ranked 2nd in the country, and coming off a 25-point beatdown of a pretty good VT team, which scored all of 13 points in the second half. Duke has a cohesive, veteran, eight-man rotation that gives them size, depth, experience, balance, shooting, defense, ball-handling, rebounding, and pert near anything else a college basketball team could ask for.


We could have said almost the exact same thing last year at the exact same point of the season, and we'd be wrong.



Sometimes I think this board just looks for things to fret about.

While this may be the case sometimes, I don't think there's anything wrong with expressing concern over the team's depth and distribution of minutes. We've had a fantastic season thus far, but I'd like to be allowed to express my concerns. When this team loses again, I really believe that the way Duke uses its bench will be one of the reasons for it.

I don't think it's fair to criticize posters who are trying to get into a lively discussion regarding the team's roster and bench. One of the reasons I like this board is that I can discuss one of my favorite teams and nitpick and analyze its strengths and weaknesses. I am allowed to be wrong about what I say as long as I am civil in doing so. Fans of all sports teams, even the best ones, will criticize every move, assess the least important of bench players, and speculate about the dynamic of the team without the full picture. Very few fans, media members, or observers have full access to any sports team. We don't attend the closed practices or know whether players are injured or sick. But we watch the games, and it's alright to form an opinion based on what we see.

This Duke team has started out no differently than it has the past two seasons. Each of the past two years, posters expressed concerns about the team's shortcomings, especially after losses. And each year, other posters would say that it's ridiculous to criticize a team that was 12-1 or 11-0. Posts like "Sometimes I think this board just looks for things to fret about." would be made. And each of the past two years, Duke collapsed and many posters were correct to criticize certain aspects of team play they thought were lacking. Injuries and inexperience were major reasons for the disappointing final two months each time, but there were other flaws as well.

I think this season's Duke team is much improved over the past two. But I still see some problems which could end our season prematurely if they aren't addressed. A bench of Thomas, Paulus, and McClure is not going to cut it (again, just my opinion). Thus far, Coach K has made it clear that he's cutting down his bench again for ACC play, and those three guys will see the lion's share of minutes in close games. It's just my thinking that K will not be maximizing the efficiency of his roster when he has two talented players who provide skills which can help the team win.



Then, we come to the freshmen, raw, talented, promising, very much still works in progress. Doesn't matter what they do in practice, doesn't matter what they do in games. Force feed them minutes over players who are more deserving of minutes. Because the members of this board see them in practice all the time and have such keen insights as a result.


I am pretty dismayed by the overall condescending tone of much of your post. But that last statement is just unfair. Sure, I don't see them in practice. I'm sure you have, since you're a member of the media. But I'm making observations based on what I've seen in games, as everyone else who posts here has. You've basically stated that I can't express any opinions about this team because I don't watch them practice. I'm not sure what we're all doing here, then.

I'd like get into into a discussion about the freshmen, but that's probably best to hold off for another post, because I really don't know if you'd be interested in hearing what I have to say since I'm not a student manager on the team.

Matches
01-06-2009, 01:12 PM
I was just illustrating an extreme example of foul trouble - although I do think the Wake game will be a foul fest, since it always is. What is more concerning to me, and more likely to happen, is two or three key guys getting into foul trouble. Just this past game, both Thomas and Zoubek picked up 3 fouls in the first half. Going small (like we did against VT) against teams like UNC, Wake, and Clemson will kill us. Getting Plumlee in could potentially be a solution, but K has made it clear that he does not think he is ready to contribute.



K seems to gush over Plumlee in interviews. Granted that hasn't translated into minutes yet but K seems to be of the opinion that Plumlee is on the cusp. I think that before the season is over you probably will see Plumlee in to fill space and/or give a few fouls in spots where Zoubek and Thomas are both in foul trouble.

jv001
01-06-2009, 01:27 PM
I like to see everyones opinion on who plays, who starts, mins played etc. Even posts that don't make sense are ok. What I don't like to see is the bickering between Duke fans. Everyone has an opinion and as long as it's communicated in a friendly tone I don't see anything wrong with it. That's what makes this site one of the best. Now on this year's team. We are not the same team as last year. Last year's squad had to depend on D-Mark playing well above his capabilities on offense. He played his heart out but at the end of the year we could not overcome his diminished play. We did not have a healthy Zoubek and that makes all the difference in the world. Kyle does not have to guard the #5 and makes him dangerous. And as for foul trouble, we now have 10 fouls go give between Zoubs and Thomas. Plus 5 more from Miles. We are just a better team this year. So let's enjoy this team. I am. Go Duke!

jimsumner
01-06-2009, 02:38 PM
"Who said that Pocius needs to be playing ahead of Scheyer and Henderson, or even getting minutes at their expense? "

Who else would Pocius be getting minutes from? There seems to be some criticism here that Pocius is being mishandled and didn't develop last season, even though he was on crutches most of last season. How am I misreading this?


"We could have said almost the exact same thing last year at the exact same point of the season, and we'd be wrong."

I would disagree. Last year Duke had one senior and two juniors in the rotation. This year Duke has two seniors and four juniors in the rotation. Big difference in experience. IMO.

Last year Zoubek had a broken foot, Thomas was ineffective, and McClure was playing major minutes at the 5. This year Zoubek is healthy, Thomas is much improved, and McClure has gone from a 4/5 to a 3/4. Big improvement in post play. IMO. Big improvement in the utilization of McClure. IMO.

Smith has supplanted Paulus as the starting point. An upgrade. IMO.

Singler is playing likr an All-American. No one played like an All-American last year. Big improvement. IMO.


"We don't attend the closed practices or know whether players are injured or sick. But we watch the games, and it's alright to form an opinion based on what we see."

I did not express my point very well here. Let me elaborate. K has always used practices as a key determining factor in allocating PT. Maybe that's a flaw, maybe not but that's a different discussion. But it is the way the man works. Inasmuch as we don't see these practices, then we don't have access to the information on which he makes these decisions. That significantly impacts the accuracy of our insights into those decisions.

Nobody is questioning anyone's right to express an opinion here. Subject to the guidelines of folks who own, pay for, and operate this site, than everyone has the right to express any opinion they wish.

But that doesn't mean that everyone has the right to express an unchallenged opinion. People are going to respond to opinions, agree, disagree, attempt to refine, and so forth. The orginal opinion can be defended, modified, thrown out, or any range in between.

But it makes no sense to defend an opinion just by saying it's one's opinion and one is entited to it. That's a straw man. IMO.

For the record. I do not think Mike Krzyzewski has a predisposition not to use freshmen. I think I've provided plenty of examples to support that view.

I think Duke will be a better team this season when and if Williams and Plumlee practice and play their way into the rotation. But the burden is on them. If it doesn't happen this year, then plenty of teams with eight-player rotations have cut down the nets in April.

I do not think there is a scintilla of evidence to suggest that a lack of PT for freshmen has hurt recruiting. Of course, the quality of returning competition impacts how much a freshman will play. Coaches recruit players coming in to replace players going out. Sometimes players go out the door sooner than expected and the system has to adjust. But there is system.

And the system is working pretty well right now. Can Duke get better? Darn tootin' and they'd better if they want to be playing deep into March. But if the biggest complaint we can come up with is that the 9th, 10th, and 11th guys in the rotation aren't playing enough, then I'd say the glass is more than half full.

MChambers
01-06-2009, 03:14 PM
"Who said that Pocius needs to be playing ahead of Scheyer and Henderson, or even getting minutes at their expense? "

Who else would Pocius be getting minutes from? There seems to be some criticism here that Pocius is being mishandled and didn't develop last season, even though he was on crutches most of last season. How am I misreading this?


"We could have said almost the exact same thing last year at the exact same point of the season, and we'd be wrong."

I would disagree. Last year Duke had one senior and two juniors in the rotation. This year Duke has two seniors and four juniors in the rotation. Big difference in experience. IMO.

Last year Zoubek had a broken foot, Thomas was ineffective, and McClure was playing major minutes at the 5. This year Zoubek is healthy, Thomas is much improved, and McClure has gone from a 4/5 to a 3/4. Big improvement in post play. IMO. Big improvement in the utilization of McClure. IMO.

Smith has supplanted Paulus as the starting point. An upgrade. IMO.

Singler is playing likr an All-American. No one played like an All-American last year. Big improvement. IMO.


"We don't attend the closed practices or know whether players are injured or sick. But we watch the games, and it's alright to form an opinion based on what we see."

I did not express my point very well here. Let me elaborate. K has always used practices as a key determining factor in allocating PT. Maybe that's a flaw, maybe not but that's a different discussion. But it is the way the man works. Inasmuch as we don't see these practices, then we don't have access to the information on which he makes these decisions. That significantly impacts the accuracy of our insights into those decisions.

Nobody is questioning anyone's right to express an opinion here. Subject to the guidelines of folks who own, pay for, and operate this site, than everyone has the right to express any opinion they wish.

But that doesn't mean that everyone has the right to express an unchallenged opinion. People are going to respond to opinions, agree, disagree, attempt to refine, and so forth. The orginal opinion can be defended, modified, thrown out, or any range in between.

But it makes no sense to defend an opinion just by saying it's one's opinion and one is entited to it. That's a straw man. IMO.

For the record. I do not think Mike Krzyzewski has a predisposition not to use freshmen. I think I've provided plenty of examples to support that view.

I think Duke will be a better team this season when and if Williams and Plumlee practice and play their way into the rotation. But the burden is on them. If it doesn't happen this year, then plenty of teams with eight-player rotations have cut down the nets in April.

I do not think there is a scintilla of evidence to suggest that a lack of PT for freshmen has hurt recruiting. Of course, the quality of returning competition impacts how much a freshman will play. Coaches recruit players coming in to replace players going out. Sometimes players go out the door sooner than expected and the system has to adjust. But there is system.

And the system is working pretty well right now. Can Duke get better? Darn tootin' and they'd better if they want to be playing deep into March. But if the biggest complaint we can come up with is that the 9th, 10th, and 11th guys in the rotation aren't playing enough, then I'd say the glass is more than half full.

Amen!

Virginian
01-06-2009, 07:13 PM
This is kinda off topic, but I just want to say that this thread has been a real hoot to read. There is so much variety of opinion and breadth of topics, and all without any of the rancor or disrespect that permeate so many fan websites around the country. It just really reminds me of what I love about Duke University, the Duke community, Duke basketball, Duke fans and this wonderful Duke site.

So let's pause and appreciate this really special website. And thank to its owners and all its admins and moderators who spend so much time to provide all of us Dukies with what is without question the best college basketball fan site in the country.

Thanks.

Now, on with the debate!

A Virginian who ain't no fan of UVA or VT!

Newton_14
01-06-2009, 08:45 PM
This is kinda off topic, but I just want to say that this thread has been a real hoot to read. There is so much variety of opinion and breadth of topics, and all without any of the rancor or disrespect that permeate so many fan websites around the country. It just really reminds me of what I love about Duke University, the Duke community, Duke basketball, Duke fans and this wonderful Duke site.

So let's pause and appreciate this really special website. And thank to its owners and all its admins and moderators who spend so much time to provide all of us Dukies with what is without question the best college basketball fan site in the country.

Thanks.

Now, on with the debate!

A Virginian who ain't no fan of UVA or VT!


I second those thoughts!

And would also like to share that when I wandered over to IC yesterday I learned that Hanswalk is a blackhole that cannot defend, pass out of double teams or make foul shots under pressure, Green and Ellington have no heart and cannot defend or hit big shots, Ginyard should not be playing, Davis should start over Hanswalk, Deon Thompson has no heart and should be sitting, they have good players but no great players, ol roy can recruit but is a terrible bench coach, and best of all they had a thread entitled "Roy Williams cannot teach Defense"

It is nice that this board does not throw our brethren under the bus like that!