Miles Plumlee - good enough to start next season?

[houstondukie]

Everyone was impressed by Plumlee's mobilty, athleticism, and shot-blocking ability in the preseason. He's had his moments this year, but he clearly has a lot to improve on.

Do you guys think he has shown enough signs that he will perhaps breakout next year? Or hopefully even this year?

We really need his athleticism to matchup against big and athletic teams like Wake Forest.

[davekay1971]

I don't know if he'll start, but it's safe to say that between him, his brother, Zoubs and Thomas back and hopefully a year better, and Ryan Kelly...we'll be a load to deal with inside. Oh yeah, and there's that Singler guy...

[roywhite]

I hope Miles continues to progress and plays an important role next year. But, really, I have higher hopes for his younger brother Mason.

[sagegrouse]

While watching the Wake game, there was a moment when MP1 flashed into the lane, received a pass and tomahawked a dunk. It happened so fast and was so unexpected that I thought it was a dream -- like the Ghost of Christmas future.

I would like to see a lot more of those plays -- now and in the future.

sagegrouse
'Also posted in another thread'

[Devilsfan]

I hope our makeup is so good next year that Miles moves up to the nine spot.

[jv001]

I expect Miles to play the #5 position for Duke next year and I expect Mason to play the #4 position next year. But that's a long way off and many practice sessions away. Go Duke!

[SMO]

Everyone was impressed by Plumlee's mobilty, athleticism, and shot-blocking ability in the preseason. He's had his moments this year, but he clearly has a lot to improve on.

Do you guys think he has shown enough signs that he will perhaps breakout next year? Or hopefully even this year?

We really need his athleticism to matchup against big and athletic teams like Wake Forest.

It all depends on how quickly he "gets it". First, he needs to not get lost on defense as happens on occasion during switches. He has the potential to be a great shot blocker with his ability to quickly get up to disrupt shots. He just can't lose his man. Second, he needs to get in the flow of the offense and not play too fast or urgent. Both of these will come with time. I think they could both happen to a degree this year. With a summer to adjust I'm optimistic we'll see big things in year 2. He's going to be a very good recruit in that he'll play 4 years and probably be very good for 3 out of those 4.

[davekay1971]

It all depends on how quickly he "gets it". First, he needs to not get lost on defense as happens on occasion during switches. He has the potential to be a great shot blocker with his ability to quickly get up to disrupt shots. He just can't lose his man. Second, he needs to get in the flow of the offense and not play too fast or urgent. Both of these will come with time. I think they could both happen to a degree this year. With a summer to adjust I'm optimistic we'll see big things in year 2. He's going to be a very good recruit in that he'll play 4 years and probably be very good for 3 out of those 4.

It's actually very possible we could be looking at a front line of Plumlee, Plumlee and Kelly through the 2011-12 season. Big, athletic, talented, and experienced. That's a championship frontcourt.

It's just too bad our big man coach is so...short :D

[DukeBlood]

Im not quite sure what to expect from Miles next year. He truly has some gifts to be a very good player. Will he put some of it together next year? Not sure, but he will improve to an extent.

With Mason and Ryan coming in next year, who are claimed to be ahead of him on the offensive end. I have heard/read that Mason is a good defender but haven't heard much of Ryan's defense.

I'm just going to stay Henderson stays so that leaves 2 positions for the big guys.

Kyle- Will take one of those spots.
Brian- Will he break out? Finally put it all together?
Miles- Can he put it all together? He's got the tools. If he does he may take the 5.
Lance- I don't see him being a starter at the 5, But maybe?
Ryan- If as good as advertised then he will get some minutes.
Mason- See above.

The two best offensive players may be the two incoming freshman, but the best overall two? No idea. I just want one or two of these players to be solid on both ends.

[Indoor66]

Im not quite sure what to expect from Miles next year. He truly has some gifts to be a very good player. Will he put some of it together next year? Not sure, but he will improve to an extent.

With Mason and Ryan coming in next year, who are claimed to be ahead of him on the offensive end. I have heard/read that Mason is a good defender but haven't heard much of Ryan's defense.

I'm just going to stay Henderson stays so that leaves 2 positions for the big guys.

Kyle- Will take one of those spots.
Brian- Will he break out? Finally put it all together?
Miles- Can he put it all together? He's got the tools. If he does he may take the 5.
Lance- I don't see him being a starter at the 5, But maybe?
Ryan- If as good as advertised then he will get some minutes.
Mason- See above.

The two best offensive players may be the two incoming freshman, but the best overall two? No idea. I just want one or two of these players to be solid on both ends.

What a nice problem to have! ;)

[CDu]

At the very least, we'll have the following players in the post rotation:

Zoubek
Thomas
Plumlee the elder
Plumlee the middle
Kelly

Mason Plumlee is considered to be better than Miles. Kelly is considered a big-time recruit as well. Zoubek and Thomas will be seniors. And this is assuming the worst-case scenario that Singler goes pro. If Singler doesn't go pro, then the picture is even more crowded.

I guess anything can happen. But if Singler stays, I'd be a bit surprised if Plumlee starts. But that's probably a good thing, as it would likely mean one of our freshman big men is good enough to start.

But we're a long way from next year.

[CameronBornAndBred]

I think he will be good enough to, but I don't know if he will. My guess is it depends entirely on Singler, if he is with the team or not, and injuries to anyone else. I don't see the starting lineup changing if nobody leaves, even Zoubs will be back under center.

[DukeBlood]

I think he will be good enough to, but I don't know if he will. My guess is it depends entirely on Singler, if he is with the team or not, and injuries to anyone else. I don't see the starting lineup changing if nobody leaves, even Zoubs will be back under center.

Im not so sure. If Zoubek improves a great deal then I can see Brian starting. We just seen this year a 3-year starter being moved to the bench for a rising sophmore. Players generally make their biggest jump between their FR and SO year, Thats why I see Miles being alot better next year.

I wouldn't be too surprised to see someone other then Brian start. I just don't know who.

With all that being said, We are a great team right now :). Its always fun to speculate though.

[SupaDave]

It's actually very possible we could be looking at a front line of Plumlee, Plumlee and Kelly through the 2011-12 season. Big, athletic, talented, and experienced. That's a championship frontcourt.

It's just too bad our big man coach is so...short :D

Don't forget Josh Hairston. He's 6'8 with a year to get bigger and stronger.

[bludvlman]

I could be wrong but isn't Kelly more of an outside guy than a post player?

[miramar]

But I don't think the important thing is whether a particular player starts or not (think Scheyer last year or McClure this year) but whether he can make a real contribution to the team. Although big men often have a big transition from high school to college, Plumlee has plenty of talent and potential. Coach K has said he is the most talented of the big men, and since the summer between the freshman and sophomore years often leads to major improvement, he should do very well.

If all the underclassmen come back next year, as I hope they will, Duke will be absolutely loaded.

[CameronBornAndBred]

If all the underclassmen come back next year, as I hope they will, Duke will be absolutely loaded.
That is an awesome thought. Preseason #1, too.

[houstondukie]

But I don't think the important thing is whether a particular player starts or not (think Scheyer last year or McClure this year) but whether he can make a real contribution to the team. Although big men often have a big transition from high school to college, Plumlee has plenty of talent and potential. Coach K has said he is the most talented of the big men, and since the summer between the freshman and sophomore years often leads to major improvement, he should do very well.

If all the underclassmen come back next year, as I hope they will, Duke will be absolutely loaded.

Imagine if John Wall came to DUKE next year.

[Indoor66]

Imagine if John Wall came to DUKE next year.

I would bet he would have one of the best seats in the house for most of all of the games.

[flyingdutchdevil]

At the very least, we'll have the following players in the post rotation:

Zoubek
Thomas
Plumlee the elder
Plumlee the middle
Kelly

Mason Plumlee is considered to be better than Miles. Kelly is considered a big-time recruit as well. Zoubek and Thomas will be seniors. And this is assuming the worst-case scenario that Singler goes pro. If Singler doesn't go pro, then the picture is even more crowded.

I guess anything can happen. But if Singler stays, I'd be a bit surprised if Plumlee starts. But that's probably a good thing, as it would likely mean one of our freshman big men is good enough to start.

But we're a long way from next year.

Both Mason and Kelly, and I'm quoting the vass majority of recruiting experts, are high-post players. Miles is more of a low post player. Thus, naturally, it would make sense to play Miles in the 5. In the past, we usually have a low-post player playing the 4. McRoberts was the exception, but that's because he didn't have anyone else. Thus, if Singler stays (and I'm sure he will - don't think he's ready for the pros yet), Miles or Zoubek will definitely play the 5 with Lance and potentially Mason backing them up. Kelly will most likely back Singler up.

(On a side note, I love Miles. From the little that he has played against ACC competition, he is extremely athletic for a 5 and plays steller D)

(On another side note, am I the only one who thinks that Mason, Miles and Marshall are fairly unique? Are they common Midwestern names? Do their parents not like names such as Michael, Matthrew, or Mark? Just so I don't piss anyone off, I have no problem with their names - I'm merely stating the fact that all three of them have unique Americna names)

[ChicagoCrazy84]

It's amazing how a couple of years changes everything. Last year we were so small and even this year, Coach K has shown he likes to play small.
Next year, Coach K will not have the option, we are going to be a big team. With Zoubs and LT being seniors, Miles being a sophomore, and his little bro Mason coming in along with 6'9 Ryan Kelly, Duke should not have any trouble with rebounds.
I think Miles is GOOD enough to start, however, I don't see Coach K playing him ahead of Zoubek. I would personally, but maybe that's why I am not a hall of fame coach, I don't know. The good thing is, Zoubek will actually have the offseason to train and work out and stuff, so maybe he can actually earn it rather than taking it by default.
I think actually that Ryan Kelly has a better chance of starting cause I think his game is a little more polished and smooth. This is only if Singler leaves. If they all stay, the starting lineup will stay exactly the same. If Henderson leaves and Singler stays, maybe they'd go big and slide Kelly in as the 3, or go with EWill. There is going to be a lot of questions, but until we know what Henderson and Singler do, we won't know a thing.

[coldriver10]

(On another side note, am I the only one who thinks that Mason, Miles and Marshall are fairly unique? Are they common Midwestern names? Do their parents not like names such as Michael, Matthrew, or Mark? Just so I don't piss anyone off, I have no problem with their names - I'm merely stating the fact that all three of them have unique Americna names)
I love unique names. I understand why people like the names you mentioned, but I personally don't plan on giving my kids names millions of other people have. Though a common name would have prevented some of the flak I took as a kid :p

[Indoor66]

I love unique names. I understand why people like the names you mentioned, but I personally don't plan on giving my kids names millions of other people have. Though a common name would have prevented some of the flak I took as a kid :p

How about the Plumlee PaPa's being called Perky? That is a little unusual.

[BlueintheFace]

I could be wrong but isn't Kelly more of an outside guy than a post player?

You are correct. With the depth of the frontcourt we will have, I foresee Kelly playing 3/4 and never posting up.

[coldriver10]

How about the Plumlee PaPa's being called Perky? That is a little unusual.
Perky Plumlee, huh? I'm hoping that's just a nickname...

[arnie]

It's actually very possible we could be looking at a front line of Plumlee, Plumlee and Kelly through the 2011-12 season. Big, athletic, talented, and experienced. That's a championship frontcourt.

It's just too bad our big man coach is so...short :D

That's an incredibly optimistic post considering none of those guys have made a significant contribution in college yet. Hope you're right, but something tells me a smaller quicker player (or 2) will be on the front line.

[DukeBlood]

That's an incredibly optimistic post considering none of those guys have made a significant contribution in college yet. Hope you're right, but something tells me a smaller quicker player (or 2) will be on the front line.

If i'm not mistaken Kyle Singler and Co. will have graduated by then, So i don't doubt that can happen. Ryan, Mason and Miles will all be upper Jr's and Sr's. There should be experience along with what will hopefully be great skills.

Now this may be a little too much getting ahead to the 2011-2012 season.

[dukestheheat]

I'm hearing that his brother, Mason, has 'the heat.'

dth.

[Kedsy]

I would bet he would have one of the best seats in the house for most of all of the games.

I'll take that bet. No question in my mind if Wall comes to Duke he starts and plays a lot. If he doesn't come to Duke he'll still start and play a lot, it just won't be for us.

[Hancock 4 Duke]

I love unique names. I understand why people like the names you mentioned, but I personally don't plan on giving my kids names millions of other people have. Though a common name would have prevented some of the flak I took as a kid :p

Say Marshall comes in, how will they have the names on the jerseys? Mas. Plumlee, Mar. Plumlee, Mil. Plumlee? I hope not. They would be better off putting their first names on there...

[Indoor66]

Say Marshall comes in, how will they have the names on the jerseys? Mas. Plumlee, Mar. Plumlee, Mil. Plumlee? I hope not. They would be better off putting their first names on there...

Just use M Plumlee and take your pick! :eek:

[pfrduke]

Say Marshall comes in, how will they have the names on the jerseys? Mas. Plumlee, Mar. Plumlee, Mil. Plumlee? I hope not. They would be better off putting their first names on there...

It would be kind of fun to have the whole team go Brazilian-style and play with first names on the jerseys.

[Hancock 4 Duke]

Just use M Plumlee and take your pick! :eek:

Well, I mean, they are all like 6' 10", and they look very much a like. I went to the Loyola game and after went down to get his autograph. On the way home I looked at the signature and it said "Mason Plumlee". I was very confused.

[WojoSay?]

Anyone else think Mason's learning curve will be smaller w/ his older brother currently picking up Duke's playbook?

[BlueintheFace]

Anyone else think Mason's learning curve will be smaller w/ his older brother currently picking up Duke's playbook?

It's usually not the playbook that gives freshman trouble. It's usually the speed and talent adjustment, and at Duke, getting wired in to the team defense to the point where you know what everybody is supposed to/going to do...

[jv001]

It's usually not the playbook that gives freshman trouble. It's usually the speed and talent adjustment, and at Duke, getting wired in to the team defense to the point where you know what everybody is supposed to/going to do...

Good point BlueintheFace. The playbook will be no problem for kids that are as intelligent as next years freshmen. Court savy and game time speed will be is a different matter. College basketball is so much faster than high school BB that it takes most freshmen a while to catch up to the speed of the game. Just look at Miles and Elliot this year. Go Duke!

[MChambers]

Good point BlueintheFace. The playbook will be no problem for kids that are as intelligent as next years freshmen. Court savy and game time speed will be is a different matter. College basketball is so much faster than high school BB that it takes most freshmen a while to catch up to the speed of the game. Just look at Miles and Elliot this year. Go Duke!

I think the harder part is Duke's defense, and the help that bigs are supposed to give. Some freshman get it pretty quickly, but they tend to be exceptional players (Grant Hill, Shane Battier, Kyle Singler, and Elton Brand come to mind).

[Rich]

They would be better off putting their first names on there...

Like they did for Hakeem Olajuwon in college. His jersey just had Hakeem. That would be cool.

[sagegrouse]

Everyone was impressed by Plumlee's mobilty, athleticism, and shot-blocking ability in the preseason. He's had his moments this year, but he clearly has a lot to improve on.

Do you guys think he has shown enough signs that he will perhaps breakout next year? Or hopefully even this year?

We really need his athleticism to matchup against big and athletic teams like Wake Forest.

Once Miles learns the game according to K, he will see a lot more minutes. Did you see what I called the "dream sequence" against Wake, when he flashed into the line, took a pass, and tomahawked a dunk. Wow! I would like to see a lot more of that.

I believe the answer to your question is whether K goes with Zoubs or Miles in the post position as the starter. I fully expect it to be "center by committee" like this year, but with MP1 getting a lot more minutes and maybe starting.

I don't see MP2 or Ryan Kelly as our big man in the middle because they are more outside players than bangers. Plus, they're freshmen.

sagegrouse
'This is a nice problem to have'

[Bay Area Duke Fan]

Like they did for Hakeem Olajuwon in college. His jersey just had Hakeem. That would be cool.

I recall that he used the name "Akeem" in college.

[Tim1515]

I don't see MP2 or Ryan Kelly as our big man in the middle because they are more outside players than bangers. Plus, they're freshmen.



While i'm pretty sure Kelly plays the 4 in college...i'm also fairly confident that Mason will play center. Next year will be an interesting mix of who plays (especially if Singler is around). But the following year i wouldn't be surprised at all if Duke does not land the prototypical "banger".

I see Miles and Mason playing center with some help from Hairston and Kelly, Hairston and Czyz playing PF.

[Rich]

Yup. I think you're right. I stand corrected.

[flyingdutchdevil]

I think we have all come to the conclusion that Ryan Kelly will never be a 5, despite the height. He is a much better high post player than a low post one. Plus, his skill set is perfect for the 4 (maybe even the 3, depending on the line up).

Also, I may be the minority here, but I don't see Mason playing the 5 either. He is also a high post player who can step out and hit the three. I wouldn't be surprised if MP2 played the 5, but I really like him at the 4. If MP1 was the 5, MP2 the 4 and Kelly the 3 after the 2010 season (and assuming Singler goes pro), that would be an awesome front line. We are going to be huge next year (barring Kyle stays) so it would be interesting to see what Coach K will do (also, we may, for the first time in the modern Duke era, be short on legit guards with Nolan, Scheyer, Williams and maybe a little Marty playing).

Also, I understand that Czyz is a project next year, but is he going to play at all during his college experience? With the plethora of big men, Czyz may be out of luck. I would love to see this project go some where, but he may be the rawest player to come to Duke in a long, long time.

[greybeard]

Z has less than one solid season under his belt. If he spends his time wisely in the off season (no, I will not inflame the masses by suggesting how I think that that time would best be spent), I think that he not only could be difficult to unseat as a starter but also difficult to get off the courrt. Not saying one or both the Plumlees wouldn't do it, just that I don't think that that will be easy or likely.

I think that the biggest boast in learning often occurs between the 3rd and 4th years. Examples JJ, Demarcus, Abernathy. Especially given that Z was injured almost all his sophomore season, I think that he might surprise some people next year. Only none of you guys, right. ;)

[MChambers]

Z has less than one solid season under his belt. If he spends his time wisely in the off season (no, I will not inflame the masses by suggesting how I think that that time would best be spent)

A combination of yoga and soccer? ;)

[Jumbo]

I think we have all come to the conclusion that Ryan Kelly will never be a 5, despite the height. He is a much better high post player than a low post one. Plus, his skill set is perfect for the 4 (maybe even the 3, depending on the line up).

Also, I may be the minority here, but I don't see Mason playing the 5 either. He is also a high post player who can step out and hit the three. I wouldn't be surprised if MP2 played the 5, but I really like him at the 4. If MP1 was the 5, MP2 the 4 and Kelly the 3 after the 2010 season (and assuming Singler goes pro), that would be an awesome front line. We are going to be huge next year (barring Kyle stays) so it would be interesting to see what Coach K will do (also, we may, for the first time in the modern Duke era, be short on legit guards with Nolan, Scheyer, Williams and maybe a little Marty playing).

Also, I understand that Czyz is a project next year, but is he going to play at all during his college experience? With the plethora of big men, Czyz may be out of luck. I would love to see this project go some where, but he may be the rawest player to come to Duke in a long, long time.

A couple of things:
1) Duke has a long tradition of playing "high-post" players at the 5 - Ferry, Laettner, Parks, etc. Given that K's M.O. has always been to get his best players on the court, those guys can certainly play the "5" at Duke if that helps make up Duke's best five. They are tall enough to hold their own, and will certainly gain strength over the course of their careers.
2) I really don't like speculating about next year when I'm so focused on this season. That said, if G leaves (which I think is likely), another poster is right -- we could really see a big Duke team. Duke would basically have two options to replace Henderson in the starting lineup -- play another wing (E-Will or Pocius) or go bigger (Mason or Kelly). If that happens, Kyle slides down to the 3 spot. And that's acutally fine -- we all know what kind of perimeter skills he has on offense, and he has proven this season that he can guard smaller players effectively, too.

Let's hope all of this is moot and no one leaves, of course.

[DukeBlood]

Z has less than one solid season under his belt. If he spends his time wisely in the off season (no, I will not inflame the masses by suggesting how I think that that time would best be spent), I think that he not only could be difficult to unseat as a starter but also difficult to get off the courrt. Not saying one or both the Plumlees wouldn't do it, just that I don't think that that will be easy or likely.

I like Brian. Think he is a hell of a player and still has alot of room to grow. With that being said, He isn't best suited for teams with athletic/quick big men. We all know the stats from the Wake, G-Town and FSU games(or any other game where they had size and athleticism.. along with some skill of course :P)

IMO Miles will be the future "5". He has the size, quickness, and just overall athleticism. Once he learns what he has to, and starts putting them together then we I believe he will be getting as many minutes as Brian. Maybe not the starter but possibly as many minutes.

Truly a great "Problem" to be discussing. Will Brian improve enough to become the steady starter? Will the Sophmore make a huge jump and uproot the SR? Will Lance decide its his turn? Or will the FR prove to be better in the low post?

[greybeard]

I like Brian. Think he is a hell of a player and still has alot of room to grow. With that being said, He isn't best suited for teams with athletic/quick big men. We all know the stats from the Wake, G-Town and FSU games(or any other game where they had size and athleticism.. along with some skill of course :P)

IMO Miles will be the future "5". He has the size, quickness, and just overall athleticism. Once he learns what he has to, and starts putting them together then we I believe he will be getting as many minutes as Brian. Maybe not the starter but possibly as many minutes.

Truly a great "Problem" to be discussing. Will Brian improve enough to become the steady starter? Will the Sophmore make a huge jump and uproot the SR? Will Lance decide its his turn? Or will the FR prove to be better in the low post?

Some big people have made remarkable progress in one season. Abdelnaby, was that his name, a Duke center whom I believe was nondescript until his senior year and then had a good career as a pro. Hibbert's improvement from his sophomore year to junior year was remarkable. Not saying it will; but I see along with everyone else that Brian has shown some good stuff this year. Why conclude that scoring the ball against other 7 footers will be such a problem? I am not sold that it will be for the rest of this season, but that's just me.

[DukeBlood]

Some big people have made remarkable progress in one season. Abdelnaby, was that his name, a Duke center whom I believe was nondescript until his senior year and then had a good career as a pro. Hibbert's improvement from his sophomore year to junior year was remarkable. Not saying it will; but I see along with everyone else that Brian has shown some good stuff this year. Why conclude that scoring the ball against other 7 footers will be such a problem? I am not sold that it will be for the rest of this season, but that's just me.

Since I was born in 1987, Abdelnaby was just a little before my basketball following time. I believe he played in the late 80's and early 90's. So please excuse me for not being able to respond to that. Perhaps one of the knowledgeable posters will be able to confirm that.

Anyway, Back to Brian. I just dont see him being effective against big/athletic teams. He could improve enough to hold his own against the Wake's or FSU's of the league. Hopefully he does, it will just make this team better.

Usually players make their biggest jump from the FR to SO years. They are more adjusted to the speed of the game, had a summer to work on their weakness's. I understand Miles has a long ways to go before he is ready. Just believe after a summer of working out and practice he will be ready enough to contribute as much as Brian. I have been wrong many more times then right, So dont take my word. Just have a feeling :)

[greybeard]

Usually players make their biggest jump from the FR to SO years. They are more adjusted to the speed of the game, had a summer to work on their weakness's. I understand Miles has a long ways to go before he is ready. Just believe after a summer of working out and practice he will be ready enough to contribute as much as Brian. I have been wrong many more times then right, So dont take my word. Just have a feeling :)

I don't think that you are right about when players make their biggest jump in their games. Many, like JJ, really shed the things of youth, going into their senior seasons. DeMarcus was certainly better. Abdelnaby doubled his scoring from junior to senior years and became a go-to guy in the latter.

Plumblee looks real good. He might start scoring the ball any game now. A summer under his belt and filling out and getting used to the speed of the game, all argue in favor of your hopes for the guy. He certainly gets to great spots on the floor, in a way that fits with what is going on--not just a timing thing, it's a way of reading and fitting in. Has the feel of a talented player.

I hope that they both succeed. Z threw up a hook shot. I like that shot for a big. Me, either hand, going toward the middle, or away from the basket, either hand, backboard even from straight in front. Money. Pete Carrill would love it too. (BlueBlood, Pete coached at Princeton for a lot of years and played through the center as the pivot for the offense; all his centers shot hook shots, nobody blocked em either. Study your history, son! smiley face inadvertently ommitted

[Kedsy]

Some big people have made remarkable progress in one season. Abdelnaby, was that his name, a Duke center whom I believe was nondescript until his senior year and then had a good career as a pro. Hibbert's improvement from his sophomore year to junior year was remarkable. Not saying it will; but I see along with everyone else that Brian has shown some good stuff this year. Why conclude that scoring the ball against other 7 footers will be such a problem? I am not sold that it will be for the rest of this season, but that's just me.

As a sophomore, Alaa Abdelnaby played 9+ mpg, scored 4.9 ppg and had 2.0 rbg. As a junior, he played 16 mpg, scored 8.9 ppg and had 3.8 rpg. As a senior, he scored played 25 mpg, scored 15.1 ppg and had 6.6 rpg. Steady improvement through his career, but only exceptional as a senior. It should be noted, however, that his scoring and rebounding per minute wasn't all that different from year to year; he just was able to earn more minutes as the years went on.

[Kedsy]

I don't think that you are right about when players make their biggest jump in their games. Many, like JJ, really shed the things of youth, going into their senior seasons. DeMarcus was certainly better. Abdelnaby doubled his scoring from junior to senior years and became a go-to guy in the latter.

Plumblee looks real good...

I haven't done any statistical analysis but I'm going to agree that the biggest jump is generally between freshman and sophomore year. However, in the case of JJ, you're both wrong. His biggest jump was between sophomore and junior year:

Fresh: 31 mpg, 15.0 ppg, 2.0 apg, 2.5 rpg
Soph: 31 mpg, 15.9 ppg, 1.6 apg, 3.1 rpg
Junr: 37 mpg, 21.8 ppg, 2.6 apg, 3.3 rpg
Senr: 37 mpg, 26.8 ppg, 2.6 apg, 2.0 rpg

His scoring increased 37% between soph and jr years, and 23% between jr and sr years.

Oh, and Greybeard, his name is Plumlee, not Plumblee.

[DukeBlood]

I don't think that you are right about when players make their biggest jump in their games. Many, like JJ, really shed the things of youth, going into their senior seasons. DeMarcus was certainly better. Abdelnaby doubled his scoring from junior to senior years and became a go-to guy in the latter. [/I]

True. Those players certainly did improve a great deal from their JR to SR years. However Players like Nolan Smith and Gerald Henderson have doubled their productivity from their FR to SO years(You have me in the Nolan could really lower his stats since there is roughly a 1/3 to 1/4 of the season left). I don't see either of those two doubling their output by their senior years. Maybe though.

JJ's best statistically increased(PPG) was fromm his SO(15.9) to JR(21.8). JJ was never a good defender, Average at best. He was probably his best at defending his Senior year. Honestly, thats not saying alot though.

Im sure you could find a hundred thousand players who's best improvement was between their JR and SR years. Kyle Visser would be a good guy to use for your side. His improvement was unbelievable. I believe I could find just as many from the FR to SO years.

I will be the first to admit I have alot to learn when it comes to Duke basketball. However I think we are both partly right.

[DukeBlood]

I haven't done any statistical analysis but I'm going to agree that the biggest jump is generally between freshman and sophomore year. However, in the case of JJ, you're both wrong. His biggest jump was between sophomore and junior year:

Fresh: 31 mpg, 15.0 ppg, 2.0 apg, 2.5 rpg
Soph: 31 mpg, 15.9 ppg, 1.6 apg, 3.1 rpg
Junr: 37 mpg, 21.8 ppg, 2.6 apg, 3.3 rpg
Senr: 37 mpg, 26.8 ppg, 2.6 apg, 2.0 rpg

His scoring increased 37% between soph and jr years, and 23% between jr and sr years.

Oh, and Greybeard, his name is Plumlee, not Plumblee.

Was typing my reply when this came up. I was just too lazy to show the work. D#mn kids anyway. There are certain players that improve greatly from the Junior to Senior years. I just believe more make a bigger jump from their Freshman to Sophmore years.

[greybeard]

I haven't done any statistical analysis but I'm going to agree that the biggest jump is generally between freshman and sophomore year. However, in the case of JJ, you're both wrong. His biggest jump was between sophomore and junior year:

Fresh: 31 mpg, 15.0 ppg, 2.0 apg, 2.5 rpg
Soph: 31 mpg, 15.9 ppg, 1.6 apg, 3.1 rpg
Junr: 37 mpg, 21.8 ppg, 2.6 apg, 3.3 rpg
Senr: 37 mpg, 26.8 ppg, 2.6 apg, 2.0 rpg

His scoring increased 37% between soph and jr years, and 23% between jr and sr years.

Oh, and Greybeard, his name is Plumlee, not Plumblee.

Spellin, drats! JJ wasn't close to what he was his senior year the year before; not in the same universe. I don't care what his numbers say.

On my high school team, four guys who got almost all the minutes available at their positions my senior year barely got a minute as juniors, one made all section and another played division 1; the next year, two of the new starters later played division 1, didn't get a single minute the year before. And, Matthew Lawrence and his brother Mitchell, all I know is what they played like when they came to Cornell as juniors (Matt swore he didn't remember it but me and my boy Belkin (still a current owner of the Hawks) showed em what was what out behind Tau Delt during that visit; by the time the summer rolled around, they were oh so much better, course it is remotely possible that I was that much worse. Not! Anyway, how does the song go, "well time slips away and leaves you with nothing mister but boring stories of, glory days, a wink in a young girl's eye, . . . " Later, Go Duke!

[SilkyJ]

Also, I may be the minority here, but I don't see Mason playing the 5 either. He is also a high post player who can step out and hit the three.

Riddle me this: how does playing the high post exclude one from playing the 5, especially at Duke.



On my high school team, four guys who got almost all the minutes available at their positions my senior year barely got a minute as juniors, one made all section and another played division 1; the next year, two of the new starters later played division 1, didn't get a single minute the year before.

So you just compared JJ's production in his junior year of college where he played 35+mpg and his following year where he played 35+mpg to high school players who played 1mpg in one year and then played 35mpg the following year. So you are comparing people at completely different stagse of their careers in completely different situations on their teams. And you neglected to mention any kind of production or #'s that any of them put up during any of those years. So how was this relevant?

[Houston]

Z has less than one solid season under his belt. If he spends his time wisely in the off season (no, I will not inflame the masses by suggesting how I think that that time would best be spent), I think that he not only could be difficult to unseat as a starter but also difficult to get off the courrt. Not saying one or both the Plumlees wouldn't do it, just that I don't think that that will be easy or likely.

I think that the biggest boast in learning often occurs between the 3rd and 4th years. Examples JJ, Demarcus, Abernathy. Especially given that Z was injured almost all his sophomore season, I think that he might surprise some people next year. Only none of you guys, right. ;)

I like Z and have been impressed by his progress this year, but he is limited. He lacks lift and has troubling fininshing. I have never seen a 7 footer have their shot rejected so often.

Z has a valuable role on this years team and next but that role does not involve major minutes. I love MP's athleticism and ability to finish. I hope we see more of him. We need to ask why K decided to play those 5 players at the end of the Wake game.

[Indoor66]

Pete Carrill would love it too. (BlueBlood, Pete coached at Princeton for a lot of years and played through the center as the pivot for the offense; all his centers shot hook shots, nobody blocked em either. Study your history, son! smiley face inadvertently ommitted

Hey, Greybeard, did you know that Pete Carrill taught geometry when coaching Reading, PA Senior High School basketball? Maybe that played into his coaching philosophy.

[sagegrouse]

I really hate to ask, but is there really that much to like about Z? yes, he is tall. Very tall. Yes, he has pretty good court vision for a center. Yes, he is a pretty good passer.

But as we've pointed out time and time again, he has absolutely no athleticism. He struggles grabbing rebounds on the defensive end. He gets his shot blocked all the time. Put backs are not in his game plan, which is so sad considering his height. In other words, he doesn't have much potential at all.


I agree about Z's limitations. I am pulling for the big guy, and he is effective as a wide tall presence in the lane. He makes good decisions, and he has a couple of post moves. But Z is painful to watch as an athlete on this Duke team.

Really tall players are much slower to get their coordination than smaller players, so maybe, maybe.... But I expect Miles to move past Z next year.

WRT Mason and Ryan, we'll see what they have when they join a top five college team.

sagegrouse

[Kedsy]

I really hate to ask, but is there really that much to like about Z? yes, he is tall. Very tall. Yes, he has pretty good court vision for a center. Yes, he is a pretty good passer.

But as we've pointed out time and time again, he has absolutely no athleticism. He struggles grabbing rebounds on the defensive end. He gets his shot blocked all the time. Put backs are not in his game plan, which is so sad considering his height. In other words, he doesn't have much potential at all.


If you really think Zoubek struggles to get rebounds, check this out:

REBOUNDS PER MINUTE

Kyle Singler: 0.27
Miles Plumlee: 0.22
Lance Thomas: 0.19
Gerald Henderson: 0.18
Elliot Williams: 0.16
Jon Scheyer: 0.13
Brian Zoubek: 0.33

For comparison purposes, here are some of the top rebounders in the ACC:

Gani Lawal (top rebounder in ACC): 0.34
Alade Aminu: 0.32
Chas McFarland: 0.31
Al-Farouq Aminu: 0.30
James Johnson: 0.26
Tyler Hansbrough: 0.26

So I'd say Mr. Zoubek doesn't "struggle grabbing rebounds" as much as you think. Plus, his shooting percentage is 57.8%, which is virtually impossible unless you get a lot of putbacks, so your impression of his "game plan" also seems a little off.

He blocks shots, and alters a lot more than he blocks. He needs to be guarded on offense, thus occupying a defender who can't really help on our primary offensive threats. It seems to me there's a great deal to like about him. In fact, the only true knock on him in my mind is he has trouble guarding extremely athletic players, which obviously limits his minutes in an athletic league like the ACC.

[MChambers]

If you really think Zoubek struggles to get rebounds, check this out:

REBOUNDS PER MINUTE

Kyle Singler: 0.27
Miles Plumlee: 0.22
Lance Thomas: 0.19
Gerald Henderson: 0.18
Elliot Williams: 0.16
Jon Scheyer: 0.13
Brian Zoubek: 0.33

For comparison purposes, here are some of the top rebounders in the ACC:

Gani Lawal (top rebounder in ACC): 0.34
Alade Aminu: 0.32
Chas McFarland: 0.31
Al-Farouq Aminu: 0.30
James Johnson: 0.26
Tyler Hansbrough: 0.26

So I'd say Mr. Zoubek doesn't "struggle grabbing rebounds" as much as you think. Plus, his shooting percentage is 57.8%, which is virtually impossible unless you get a lot of putbacks, so your impression of his "game plan" also seems a little off.

He blocks shots, and alters a lot more than he blocks. He needs to be guarded on offense, thus occupying a defender who can't really help on our primary offensive threats. It seems to me there's a great deal to like about him. In fact, the only true knock on him in my mind is he has trouble guarding extremely athletic players, which obviously limits his minutes in an athletic league like the ACC.

Elsewhere, I think someone has pointed out that Duke's defense actually improves when Z's on the floor, at least with an appropriate matchup.

Plus, let's remember that he's missed much of his first two years with serious foot problems. Had he not had the foot problem, I'm sure he'd be much better, and I think he's got more "upside" than many of you seem to think.

[davekay1971]

The only knock I really have on Zoubs is that he's sometimes soft with the ball. He still has a bad habit of bringing the ball down to gather himself, and then he sometimes doesn't finish with the authority I'd like to see.

That said, here are some undeniable positives:
1) He's a good rebounder...period, end of story.
2) He's a good post defender, though still foul prone and still not as strong and quick as some of the other low post players in the ACC. Strength can and will be improved. Quickness will probably always be a bit of a liability.
3) We're a better defensive team with him in.
4) He is not and probably never will be a huge offensive threat - but he provides a useful low post option for us (both as a finisher and with his ability to pass out of the post) that probably overall improves our offense.

As we bring in two talented big men next year and with the anticipated improvement in Miles Plumlee's game, Zoubs will have to compete for minutes next year. But I think it's a reasonable assumption that he will be a significant part of our inside strength next year.

[Acymetric]

Look at Z's plus minus numbers (courtesy of Jumbo). Even accounting for skewed numbers against early opponents, +/- is pretty impressive. He may not be a great offensive player, and is certainly at times weak with the ball. Finally having a summer without injury would be great for him.

But where we can really use him is on defense, where he blocks his share of shots, and alters others. On a team that prides itself on defense first, he seems to fit right in.

[Fish80]

I really hate to ask, but is there really that much to like about Z? yes, he is tall. Very tall. Yes, he has pretty good court vision for a center. Yes, he is a pretty good passer.

But as we've pointed out time and time again, he has absolutely no athleticism. He struggles grabbing rebounds on the defensive end. He gets his shot blocked all the time. Put backs are not in his game plan, which is so sad considering his height. In other words, he doesn't have much potential at all.

I love this Duke team. 1-4, I love the players. But our 5 is so bad. I'd say that outside of Maryland and Virginia, we have the worst 5 in the ACC. Hell, even Virginia's 5 may be better. I am extremely critical of Z - his play in ACC competition has drastically lowered. As each game goes by, I am jumping on the MP1 bandwagon for him to start and let him learn the game through playing time. May probably even lead to more losses in the ACC. But come March, it will definitely pay off.

flyingdutchdevil, why so harsh? I'm surprised the mods let this post stay.

Z is one of ours. He's very smart, an extremely hard worker, and IMHO a great ambassador for Duke.

He is an athlete. You don't play D-1 ball anywhere if you're not an athlete. You are confusing jump out of the gym and grace of the gazelle with athleticism.

As other posters have pointed out, Z has good rebounding stats and our team defense performs better when he's on the floor. He's a key contributor to our team and deserves our support.

I am a huge Z fan and know that I am one of many. ZOOOOOOOOOOOO!

[allenmurray]

(On another side note, am I the only one who thinks that Mason, Miles and Marshall are fairly unique? Are they common Midwestern names? Do their parents not like names such as Michael, Matthrew, or Mark? Just so I don't piss anyone off, I have no problem with their names - I'm merely stating the fact that all three of them have unique Americna names)


I don't think they are common names, but I know at one Mason, one Miles, and two Marshalls.

Will they have their first names instead of their last name on their jersey? They can't even use last name, first initial. They will be like madonna, or Prince, or Pele, or Bono.

[greybeard]

flyingdutchdevil, why so harsh? I'm surprised the mods let this post stay.

Z is one of ours. He's very smart, an extremely hard worker, and IMHO a great ambassador for Duke.

He is an athlete. You don't play D-1 ball anywhere if you're not an athlete. You are confusing jump out of the gym and grace of the gazelle with athleticism.

As other posters have pointed out, Z has good rebounding stats and our team defense performs better when he's on the floor. He's a key contributor to our team and deserves our support.

I am a huge Z fan and know that I am one of many. ZOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Well said! BTW, except for the Wake game which I did not see the first half of and he did not play in the second, and the Georgetown game from which he was largely held out for strategic defensive reasons, Z's presence in the middle on offense is a plus, and I expect it will continue to be, ever more if he develops that hook shot that I read about.

Look, if you get the ball to a 7 footer like Z near the basket and a guy like that freshman from Wake makes a play and Z misses one, the reality is that the defense has been penetrated and the rim has been put in danger. The benefits of that can not be quantified, except perhaps by that strange alchemy (only teasing) that Jumbo has come up with. Threatening the rim is something every team must do on offense to get easy shots elsewhere. Z helps do that for Duke. He might not be pretty; he might not throw it down; but he is far from the ineffectual ball player than some would portray.

He is on a short leash, and will not hurt you on offense by going 2 for 10 or commiting more than a few turnovers. Maybe if the leash were longer, he'd hang himself. Or maybe, he'd surprise some people. K, it seems to me, does not see enough of the things that he wants out of Z, maybe the types of things that Bilas just wrote about, to leave him out there long enough for us to find out. In the games where he has been given extended minutes, usually the softer games, I do know that his percentages on the types of things we measure guys by, percentages from the floor and foul line, rebounds, blocks, assists, give aways, fouls, Z has done extremely well except for the foul number. That, boys and girls, is all we know.
The rest is barbershop talk.

I am sure that K has his reasons for deploying his talent the way that he does, and I am in the bag for K. Do I think that Z would start for any number of big time programs. Yeap. Would some, maybe a team like Georgetown for example, be much, much, much more competative if they had him, I think so. I think that, and hold the jokes, say Maryland would too.

Does that mean that I am saying that K underutilizes Z? ABSOLUTELY NOT. However, I am also saying that it ain't over yet and would not be surprised if Z, before he is done, gets a whole lot more done. I root for the kid, and do not think that this game of basketball is all that difficult, and certainly not outside his reach. ;)

[Fish80]

. . . it ain't over yet and would not be surprised if Z, before he is done, gets a whole lot more done. . . .

I love this quote!

[HaveFunExpectToWin]

I don't think they are common names, but I know at one Mason, one Miles, and two Marshalls.

Will they have their first names instead of their last name on their jersey? They can't even use last name, first initial. They will be like madonna, or Prince, or Pele, or Bono.

I imagine that they'll both just have Plumlee, much like T Hill & G Hill on the 1991-93 teams. Unlike Hill & Hill, they probably won't be sporting the fresh flattops.

[dball]

flyingdutchdevil, why so harsh? I'm surprised the mods let this post stay.

Z is one of ours. He's very smart, an extremely hard worker, and IMHO a great ambassador for Duke.

He is an athlete. You don't play D-1 ball anywhere if you're not an athlete. You are confusing jump out of the gym and grace of the gazelle with athleticism.

As other posters have pointed out, Z has good rebounding stats and our team defense performs better when he's on the floor. He's a key contributor to our team and deserves our support.

I am a huge Z fan and know that I am one of many. ZOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Agree. Let's cut Z a little slack and consider he's still a young guy. Interesting to note that Lance and Z are both 20, same age as Nolan, Miles and Kyle.

Youngest on the team is Czyz at 18 with Williams at 19. All others 21 or 22.

[greybeard]

So you just compared JJ's production in his junior year of college where he played 35+mpg and his following year where he played 35+mpg to high school players who played 1mpg in one year and then played 35mpg the following year. So you are comparing people at completely different stagse of their careers in completely different situations on their teams. And you neglected to mention any kind of production or #'s that any of them put up during any of those years. So how was this relevant?

Not exactly what I did, although I could have done better. What I did was to begin by saying that JJ improved to an entirely different level between his junior and senior years, no matter what story the statistics tell.

The rest was just an old man basically talking about "glory days." However, there is in some of that story some "relevance," perhaps too subtle.

Many have argued that because Z did not get almost any playing time against Georgetown and got none in the second half against Wake, then we know what the outcome would have been had he played. We don't. Sorry, the game is a sport to be played, not a dream to be made up.

My reference was intended to illuminate that it is not always accurate to draw conclusions about how well somebody might have performed had they performed, or predicting how they will develop before they do. My high school example was meant to provide some anechdotal first hand observation that that is not always the case that the guys on the court are better than those who are sitting; just different from the coach's perspective to be utilized differently (sitting) in favor of others for the task at hand.

Done in an old gym-rat's story telling in an attempt to soften some unnecessarily hard lines being drawn about who could do what if they played and who will do what next year. I find that such discussions can be great fun, have engaged in em my whole life. However, I think that they are the most fun when infused with a certain amount of humor; I tried to provide some.

In other words, reading someone's take on how good Plumlee is going to be "once he gets the speed of the game" or some such is great fun; it starts to be less fun when juxtaposed with statements on a thread about the perceived limitations on progress others would impose on Z. In that context, your question about relevance becomes relative, if you see my point?

[greybeard]

Hey, Greybeard, did you know that Pete Carrill taught geometry when coaching Reading, PA Senior High School basketball? Maybe that played into his coaching philosophy.

How could it not? But I wouldn't call it "philosophy," I'd call it his "understanding of the game" and its myriad relationships, bringing order to the chaos. I wouldn't be surprised if he was well versed in physics and that that understanding influenced his understanding as well.

Say, I wonder if Phil was great student of geometry sometime in his life? They do call it "the Triangle," right? ;)

What do I know; I went to the school of Industrial and Labor Relations at Cornell precisely because it had neither a math nor a science requirement. Oh, I take that back. You had to take one science course. Physics 101 was the introductory physics course, which anyone who knew anything about science at Cornell scorned as being "physics without math" (aka calculus). Me and my friend, David (who went back to school at 45 to become a molecular biologist), we found a course taught to chicks in the Home Economics school (don't ask), Physics 100 (otherwise known as "Physics for Poets"), which the regulars called "physics without physics." True story. Later. :o

[flyingdutchdevil]

flyingdutchdevil, why so harsh? I'm surprised the mods let this post stay.

Z is one of ours. He's very smart, an extremely hard worker, and IMHO a great ambassador for Duke.

He is an athlete. You don't play D-1 ball anywhere if you're not an athlete. You are confusing jump out of the gym and grace of the gazelle with athleticism.

As other posters have pointed out, Z has good rebounding stats and our team defense performs better when he's on the floor. He's a key contributor to our team and deserves our support.

I am a huge Z fan and know that I am one of many. ZOOOOOOOOOOOO!

For the record, after reading a few of the posts, I stand corrected regarding the rebounding comment - it just seems that Z struggles to hold on to a lot of his rebounds.

As for Z as a person, the guy is a stellar human being. I fully agree that he exemplifies the 'Duke' standard. I think he got something ridiculous on his SATs - good enough to get into Duke without the basketball skills.

That said, from watching him on the floor, I often cringe when he was the floor down low. Against athletic 5s (and compared to our non-conference foes, the ACC has very athletic 5s), he really really struggles. The majority of 5 opponents in the Big Tourney will be athletic and will give Z a lot of fits.

Lastly, and for the record, I am a huge Blue Devil fan. The team has my support 100%, but that doesn't mean I turn a blind eye to imperfection. As both a fan and an alumni, you should want your team to be perfect in every way possible. That is part of the purpose of a board - for fans to post and argue their thoughts. Hope I'm not stepping on any toes.

[BD80]

Anyone else think Mason's learning curve will be smaller w/ his older brother currently picking up Duke's playbook?

As an early commit who lives in NC and whose family attends games to see Miles play, Mason gets to see many Duke games live and up close. I am not sure if he gets to be in the locker room at halftime or before or after games, but he undoubtedly gets more insight to Coach K's preparations for and reaction to games, so his learning is being accelerated as to the team aspect of the game - particularly as to defensive movement and communication, an area that may be very difficult to adjust to. Add to that communication with his brother who is going through that transition, and pick-up games with the team. I agree that Mason will be ahead of the curve.

Imagine how far ahead Marshall will be :D

[Fish80]

For the record, after reading a few of the posts, I stand corrected regarding the rebounding comment - it just seems that Z struggles to hold on to a lot of his rebounds.

As for Z as a person, the guy is a stellar human being. I fully agree that he exemplifies the 'Duke' standard. I think he got something ridiculous on his SATs - good enough to get into Duke without the basketball skills.

That said, from watching him on the floor, I often cringe when he was the floor down low. Against athletic 5s (and compared to our non-conference foes, the ACC has very athletic 5s), he really really struggles. The majority of 5 opponents in the Big Tourney will be athletic and will give Z a lot of fits.

Lastly, and for the record, I am a huge Blue Devil fan. The team has my support 100%, but that doesn't mean I turn a blind eye to imperfection. As both a fan and an alumni, you should want your team to be perfect in every way possible. That is part of the purpose of a board - for fans to post and argue their thoughts. Hope I'm not stepping on any toes.

Sure, provocation, criticism, and debate are a healthy part of this board. You haven't posted a lot, so I don't have a lot of other data for measuring your perspective and this post struck me as unnecessarily harsh.


. . . he has absolutely no athleticism . . . he doesn't have much potential at all.

IMO, those words are a couple of steps beyond criticism. We've all heard worse from turtle fans. I just don't like it coming from people who claim "I am a huge Blue Devil fan. The team has my support 100%."

If you come flying in with guns blazing, don't expect to be greeted like a royal princess in a party dress. And I deliberately made a very tempered response rather than fire back with both barrels.

[Diddy]

We need more out of the post. Period. Regardless of who is playing there, what their limitations may or may not be, or whatever excuses are made for their current of lack of development.

Like it or not, we lost to WFU because our posts could not match their posts. If you told me before the game that Teague would have a mediocre game, and MacFarland would have foul trouble, I would have said that Duke wins. Instead, their bigs did enough to beat us.

And I know it is only one game, but it was the most important game of the season, to date. So far the WFU game is the only game Duke has played against a national elite. I don't really care about the games we play against the bottom 97 % of college basketball. I expect to win those games. Duke should be able to play medicre games against those bottom 97 % and still win handily. That is what elite teams do to lesser squads.

WFU is not a lesser squad. WFU is exactly the type of team we would face from the Sweet 16 on. Good bigs, good guards, well coached. Beating those teams is the stuff of March Success. And that is what matters, like it or not.

And yes, I know we almost beat WFU, at WFU. But it remains that we had the most success with McClure (or Singler) at the five. And we still lost. The rotation of 5's beat us. G and Kyle played great. Jon laid an egg, but so did Teague, so that cancels out. With minimal help from the Fives, Duke wins a huge game. Instead, when our fives were in, WFU had the most success.

We need more from the 5. I don't care who, but one of Z, LT, or MP1 needs to do more. MP1 is a frosh who is still feeling his way out vs top notch comp, so I will let him slide. Not so the Jrs. Hurt, tired, not getting it, whatever. They need to get it. Fast.

This team has a ton of potential. We have 2 elite players, and a host of quality complimentary players everywhere else but the 5. We need quality games from our bigs against quality competition. Bullying nothing teams like UVA, NCSU, or the like mean nothing. Absolutely nothing. Until it carries over into quality minutes when WE ACTUALLY NEED THEM, I remain unimpressed.

Duke is close to being Duke again. But until we get more out of the 5, we remain dangerously vulnerable. I too like MP1 because he seems to have more athleticism than the others, but I defer to the staff as to why they aren't playing him more. I like his flashes of goodness, but I am cognizant of his recurring failures. More PT might help him iron them out, but we are in a real race for favorable seeding in March. I get that, without being in love with it.

Call me negative or whatever, but I am dissappointed with our production from our bigs. I had very, very low expectations in that quarter, but even those low hopes have been dashed. Combined with how the rest of the team is now better than I had hoped, the post disappointments are especially frustrating.

As for next year, too many variables. The addition of Wall means more running. Who leaves, who stays, and Wall's decision would all DRASTICALLY alter the team. Ask me after the roster is locked up.

[greybeard]

Diddy, maybe a little less expresso, no? So, who is it that you are fearing will beat Duke because of the 5? If it is Wake, I think you're a little over-the-top here, since the freshman played the game of his season against Duke, especially defensively. Bill Russell could not have done more.

The kid blocked so many shots in such a fashion that K could not get his players to attack the rim in the last 10 minutes. Someone on the board here said that Matt Lawrence was reporting that K had been pleading, extolling, yelling at guys to attack the rim yet none did.

The game is played with five players. Each set of five presents differently, has a different understanding of one another, puts it together differently. This makes Duke a very interesting squad, especially since it changes so much at what you call the "5" position. The changes are so dramatic, it might well make gaming Duke, planning to play them and matching them during games, that much more difficult. Or maybe not. I doubt either of us could say with any certainty.

I also doubt that what you say about what Duke gets from the 5 position is accurate, or that any so-called deficiencies at that position will cost Duke a shot at the championship.

I definitely do not think that the play at the 5 position cost Duke the Wake game, in no way, shape or form, at least as you mean it. Heck, a three point difference from anywhere and your major piece of proof goes out the door.

In the meantime, I'm looking forward to seeing how Duke competes, how K deploys the troups, and how they meet the challenges. Oh, I'd also like for them to win, as in win it all. Nothing you have said persuades me that they either can or will not.

[Kedsy]

Like it or not, we lost to WFU because our posts could not match their posts.

What game were you watching?

[JDev]

If it is Wake, I think you're a little over-the-top here, since the freshman played the game of his season against Duke, especially defensively. Bill Russell could not have done more.

The kid blocked so many shots in such a fashion that K could not get his players to attack the rim in the last 10 minutes. Someone on the board here said that Matt Lawrence was reporting that K had been pleading, extolling, yelling at guys to attack the rim yet none did.

I remember reading your mention of this in the Wake postgame thread, in reference to Aminu I believe (as you stated he was a freshmen). He definitely played well and is a heck of a player, but I think you may be giving praise that is a bit too lavish. He was credited with 2 blocks in the game, one of which was a clear goaltend on a G layup. I do think he will probably become the player you describe, and his stint in Winston-Salem will be a short one. I just don't feel his effect on the Duke game was quite as drastic as you have described (just my opinion though).
I only mention this because after watching UConn dismantle Louisville last night, I know what a big guy altering game plans looks like. Thabeet is a dominant force inside, one much closer to your description. He changed virtually everything UL wanted to do, and no one took the ball inside without him altering or blocking the shot, which clearly got into the UL players' heads. Many times UL's bigs would receive the ball deep in the post and not even look at the rim.

[greybeard]

I remember reading your mention of this in the Wake postgame thread, in reference to Aminu I believe (as you stated he was a freshmen). He definitely played well and is a heck of a player, but I think you may be giving praise that is a bit too lavish. He was credited with 2 blocks in the game, one of which was a clear goaltend on a G layup. I do think he will probably become the player you describe, and his stint in Winston-Salem will be a short one. I just don't feel his effect on the Duke game was quite as drastic as you have described (just my opinion though).
I only mention this because after watching UConn dismantle Louisville last night, I know what a big guy altering game plans looks like. Thabeet is a dominant force inside, one much closer to your description. He changed virtually everything UL wanted to do, and no one took the ball inside without him altering or blocking the shot, which clearly got into the UL players' heads. Many times UL's bigs would receive the ball deep in the post and not even look at the rim.

I thought it was the freshman, Aminu, who got EWill's attempted dunk about a minute before the half, which EWill next time will take all the way to the ohter side of the rim and finish with a little loop hook with him under the basket and his arm extended so whoever it was that stuffed him will be prevented by the rim from getting to the ball. I also thought that it was the same guy who got G when G took the mirror of EWill's attempted stuff in the second half and a Wake guy hit it out of his hand at G's apex (that's a 3 out of 10 play twice in like 10 minutes), and who then got Singler on one of those swooping down the middle attempted dunks a short while later. I also thought it was the same guy who later got Singler on a beautiful baseline move from the left corner when Singler was high and tried to dunk or lay it in on the short side of the rim (again, next time maybe he takes it underneath). Now, maybe it was no. 44 who made some of those plays but I thought that they were all the kid.

Whoever it was, he (they) were everywhere, and were getting to balls nobody could. He, they, do that every game and they will be very difficult to beat. K obviously thought that they had warned him (them) out and that, if Duke continued to press the rim in the last 10 minutes, they'd get there or get fouled or both. Bold strategy which might work the next time. (I loved Singler's fake jump shot in the lane, step through with a huge right step, extension and flip underhand with his right off the board beginning from like 12feet.) No, I'm not fearing any team, shotblockers or no.

If a 7'3" center plays super defense anybody is going to have problems with him. I only caught the first half of the game and (1) I thought that Louisville was playing poorly on offense, unless, as is possible, what's his name wanted a completely helter skelter game, which is what he was getting on offense from what I saw and helter skelter was ugly with the ball turning over like pancakes; 2. I thought that UConn looked much more composed on offense, getting shots that seemed to be what they were looking for, when they weren't on runouts off of Louisville's errant play. The only thing that Louisville did well when I was watching was turn UConn over. But, even on those, they failed to capitalize. I did not notice the big guy while I was watching do anything special.

If the 7'3" plays well, and their offense hangs together, they can be tough, no doubt. For whatever it is worth, I think that Duke might change its mode of attack against shot blockers of these sorts. Do some of what I suggested above, really practice the inside the lane floater shots, maybe pull up jump shots although they might be tough, and perhaps find a way to draw the shotblocker a tad too soon. Definitely get to lay some off and somebody has got to be prepared to catch and shoot. (Me, I'd probably have my three 5s standing 10 feet from the basket shooting little jump shots off of all sorts of catches until their arms fall off; not a tough shot if you practice and practice it (first hand) and stay completely soft in your upper body) Who knows. UConn on all cylindars is formidable. So is Wake. And, so too is Duke. We'll see.

[greybeard]

I think that all the blocks I mentioned, and the one goal tend when Aminu tool Gerald's shot off the rim, came from weak side help that committed at just the right time, might even with position to make seeing the open man very difficult. Perhaps it is fools gold that Wake is sending: put up resistence on the ball, get beat and the guy explodes and then elevates for a smashing finish. Maybe a little more cat and mouse and less spectacular finishes with the rim as a shield, or drawing the big to commit before you lose your dribble, I don't know, the look in your eyes, your shoulders like you're about to pull and pop, and the whole thing works better from Duke's point of view.

There's a lot of ball to be played, against some tough opponents; Duke's offense has yet to really come around, and that's not just from the 5 spot.

Who will win? I can't say. Who will people be watching, who will they be aiming for, let's just say that that was rhetorical.

[arnie]

Diddy, maybe a little less expresso, no? So, who is it that you are fearing will beat Duke because of the 5? If it is Wake, I think you're a little over-the-top here, since the freshman played the game of his season against Duke, especially defensively. Bill Russell could not have done more.

The kid blocked so many shots in such a fashion that K could not get his players to attack the rim in the last 10 minutes. Someone on the board here said that Matt Lawrence was reporting that K had been pleading, extolling, yelling at guys to attack the rim yet none did.

The game is played with five players. Each set of five presents differently, has a different understanding of one another, puts it together differently. This makes Duke a very interesting squad, especially since it changes so much at what you call the "5" position. The changes are so dramatic, it might well make gaming Duke, planning to play them and matching them during games, that much more difficult. Or maybe not. I doubt either of us could say with any certainty.

I also doubt that what you say about what Duke gets from the 5 position is accurate, or that any so-called deficiencies at that position will cost Duke a shot at the championship.

I definitely do not think that the play at the 5 position cost Duke the Wake game, in no way, shape or form, at least as you mean it. Heck, a three point difference from anywhere and your major piece of proof goes out the door.

In the meantime, I'm looking forward to seeing how Duke competes, how K deploys the troups, and how they meet the challenges. Oh, I'd also like for them to win, as in win it all. Nothing you have said persuades me that they either can or will not.

Quite a post - based on that diatribe I guess we don't really need anything out of the 5 position. Believe it or not, some of us think if one of the Big 3 doesn't step up during crunch time, we're coming home in Mid-March.

[DukeBlood]

Some pretty good interesting points on both sides.

Greybeard. I believe you called me "BlueBlood" in earlier post, Its DukeBlood. I think thats the third or fourth time someone has made that same mistake. Oh well, All in good fun none the less.

Mr. Zoubek was pretty much a no show against Georgetown. Yes he only played 5 minutes, but thats because the he couldn't match up against their post players. Against FSU in 14 minutes he had 2 points and 3 boards.

The Wake, Georgetown, and FSU games were some of the more talented post players we have faced so far. Brian has yet to really make his presence felt against a team of their size and skillset.

Brian has his place on this team, I just don't believe its against the teams with size and athleticism in the post. Also I believe Zoubek matches up alot better against Tyler Hansbrough. then he does Trevor Booker or Aminu.

Like I said, I hope you are right and he greatly improves and anchors next years team. I just haven't seen alot this year to believe thats going to happen. Could it be injury setting him back from a great off-season training? Most likely. So I should probably relax a little. There, Happy? ;)

[greybeard]

Some pretty good interesting points on both sides.

Greybeard. I believe you called me "BlueBlood" in earlier post, Its DukeBlood. I think thats the third or fourth time someone has made that same mistake. Oh well, All in good fun none the less.

Mr. Zoubek was pretty much a no show against Georgetown. Yes he only played 5 minutes, but thats because the he couldn't match up against their post players. Against FSU in 14 minutes he had 2 points and 3 boards.

The Wake, Georgetown, and FSU games were some of the more talented post players we have faced so far. Brian has yet to really make his presence felt against a team of their size and skillset.

Brian has his place on this team, I just don't believe its against the teams with size and athleticism in the post. Also I believe Zoubek matches up alot better against Tyler Hansbrough. then he does Trevor Booker or Aminu.

Like I said, I hope you are right and he greatly improves and anchors next years team. I just haven't seen alot this year to believe thats going to happen. Could it be injury setting him back from a great off-season training? Most likely. So I should probably relax a little. There, Happy? ;)

He that has no name but does an ESPN show with JWill keeps raving about Zoubs, I mean raving. Heard him tonight again.

Z was held out of the Georgetown game for strategic reasons. Monroe likes to play high and drive from that position. When he catches down low, he passes it. I have yet to see him turn and shoot. Occasionally, if he catches it real close with an angle he finishes. K surprised JTIII with McCloud and it worked and he stayed with it.

Against Wake, V said that he heard Mike tell Z the team needed him to go hard to the rim. Z never got in again. Sounds like one of those Bilas things.

I think that Z has plenty to contribute this season, which is far from over. I expect that the center/pivot/5 will be by committee throughout, unless a particular matchup works really well--playing McClure big minutes against Pitts could work, but then again, it would be way cool if Z could make a few good receptions and finish against Blair, maybe make him pick up a foul or two. Softening in the middle in that fashion, like I saw, it's like Joe Frazier going to the body.

We'll see. There is definitely uncertainty in that position, but I do not see it as a choice between bad choices.

Learning physical things surprises. You can work and try different things (am very much in favor of doing that instead of the same old, same old all the time) and something clicks. All of a sudden a guy who can barely keep his card has won twice on the PGA. Twenty years old, smart enough to go to duke, playing what really is his first full season, on a very different foot that he has known all his life, and, oh did I mention 7'1" and a little unsure about how to use all of it simply to gain advantage, I still like his upside. I also like where he is now, but understand that K demands more than he sometimes shows and his playing time will reflect that.

In the end, the less that Singler has to play big against bigs other bigs should handle, and the more he can play big against the power forwards, the more I like Duke's chances. I think that that is the subtext of this entire discussion.

A one cede, and what is it, four great games from Singler and anything can happen. The rest will have to do their jobs, but if Singler were to rock, and that means be able to hit what they give him in terms of the long ball with reasonable proficiency, and anything can happen. Everyone will have to do their jobs, which includes the center by committee, and which includes efficiency and numbers (go to scores from G), it could be pretty interesting.

Remember, unlike the situation at many schools, these are student athletes learning many lessons from a master life teacher and leader of men, who have a real shot. I hope that the kids, all of them, get to give it a real run.

What I see from you which I understand is that you do not see in Z anything approaching the ideal big man. I see a guy who has been effective, who has certain skills and other qualities that shine, and who have things that hold him back that I think must be addressed for him to realize his potential but that they are subtle and workable. I think he has made progress with those things that along with certain other qualities make him a real asset right now.

More importantly, if my guess is correct, the type of learning Z needs will come from playing around with his game in the offseason, not repetition after repetition, and the use of his intellect to see when he is onto something and run with it. To the extent that you see the traditional "practice the drop step" kind of off season training that is oh so typical, I can't say that I think that your skepticism about a big chunk of progress coming Z's way is unreasonable at all. By the way, I'd say the same thing about Plumlee, either one of them.

[Kedsy]

Z was held out of the Georgetown game for strategic reasons. Monroe likes to play high and drive from that position. When he catches down low, he passes it. I have yet to see him turn and shoot. Occasionally, if he catches it real close with an angle he finishes. K surprised JTIII with McCloud and it worked and he stayed with it.

McCloud? Forget it, he's on a roll...

[DukeBlood]

I think that Z has plenty to contribute this season, which is far from over. I expect that the center/pivot/5 will be by committee throughout, unless a particular matchup works really well--playing McClure big minutes against Pitts could work, but then again, it would be way cool if Z could make a few good receptions and finish against Blair, maybe make him pick up a foul or two. Softening in the middle in that fashion, like I saw, it's like Joe Frazier going to the body.

I agree there is alot more to come from him this season. Tomorrow should be a good test for Brian. If he plays well, I will admit i was partly wrong. If Booker outperforms and Brian is held down then I think you have to admit that maybe he isn't the best match up against these type of teams I have been talking about.

Anyway, I was mainly talking about next year. Miles isn't quite ready yet, but I fully believe he will be next year. Plus I feel he matches up better against the Wake's or the Georgetown's of the league.

I will say this though. When Brian has a favorable match-up he takes full advantage and makes himself look great. He does have the best +/- per 40 minutes for a reason. However, It would be a different story IF he played 25 minutes against these teams with a more quality inside player.

Too each their own. We may just have to agree to disagree. With that being said, I hope both Brian and Miles grow into great men and basketball players.

[greybeard]

I got news for you, if everybody does not step up during crunch time come Mid-March, the outcome is probably not going to be what we'd all like. By everybody, I am not meaning to say every last one of the top nine in each game. Certain people there will be more pressure on to get it done than others. They know who they are, and so do most of us. The others are more fungible, aka the big three--one, perhaps two, can be relative non contributors and the game will still be on.

Pretending that the sky is falling and that you know why does not impress; they made that movie already. This team is ranked 3; there are at least two teams in the top 10, Pittsburgh and Marquette, of whom I am aware who have no big man to speak of and have a real shot. Duke I think has an advantage in the middle, even though Pitt has the beast known as Blair. You might think otherwise. That's what makes this board fun.

By the way, so you don't have to guess: I think that Duke is getting PLENTY out of what you call "the 5 position" and I think that it will get even more as the season progresses.

[arnie]

I got news for you, if everybody does not step up during crunch time come Mid-March, the outcome is probably not going to be what we'd all like. By everybody, I am not meaning to say every last one of the top nine in each game. Certain people there will be more pressure on to get it done than others. They know who they are, and so do most of us. The others are more fungible, aka the big three--one, perhaps two, can be relative non contributors and the game will still be on.

Pretending that the sky is falling and that you know why does not impress; they made that movie already. This team is ranked 3; there are at least two teams in the top 10, Pittsburgh and Marquette, of whom I am aware who have no big man to speak of and have a real shot. Duke I think has an advantage in the middle, even though Pitt has the beast known as Blair. You might think otherwise. That's what makes this board fun.

By the way, so you don't have to guess: I think that Duke is getting PLENTY out of what you call "the 5 position" and I think that it will get even more as the season progresses.

We choose to disagree about the output from the "5" position and that's fine. I think David's contributions are phenomenal considering his size and the other 3 have had their moments this year. I just choose to be concerned about this when March comes around - it's simply my nature after watching our last few teams and others struggle in March without a power presence.

[Fish80]

Through 21 games, we're averaging 9.3 rebounds and 13.2 points from the triumvirate of Brian, Lance, and Miles.

Brian: 99 / 126 (rebounds / points)
Lance: 67 / 117
Miles: 30 / 35
Total: 196 / 278
Per game: 9.3 / 13.2

For the 7 ACC games, we're averaging 7.4 rebounds and 7.1 points.

Brian: 30 / 27 (rebounds / points)
Lance: 16 / 17
Miles: 6 / 6
Total: 52 / 50
Per game: 7.4 / 7.1

Obviously, the total stats are higher if you include production from the "5" spot when none of these 3 were in the game.

[DukeBlood]

I got news for you, if everybody does not step up during crunch time come Mid-March, the outcome is probably not going to be what we'd all like. By everybody, I am not meaning to say every last one of the top nine in each game. Certain people there will be more pressure on to get it done than others. They know who they are, and so do most of us. The others are more fungible, aka the big three--one, perhaps two, can be relative non contributors and the game will still be on.

Pretending that the sky is falling and that you know why does not impress; they made that movie already. This team is ranked 3; there are at least two teams in the top 10, Pittsburgh and Marquette, of whom I am aware who have no big man to speak of and have a real shot. Duke I think has an advantage in the middle, even though Pitt has the beast known as Blair. You might think otherwise. That's what makes this board fun.

By the way, so you don't have to guess: I think that Duke is getting PLENTY out of what you call "the 5 position" and I think that it will get even more as the season progresses.

Assuming you are talking to me, I understand we will need 3 or more players to step up come March. Depending on the match-up we may not need Brian, Lance or Miles to be a force inside.

In no way do I believe the sky is falling, and I am enjoying this season with a huge smile; even the Wake loss was fun(Except the final play). I am not quite sure how you can say Blair isn't a big man. He is only 6'7" but has a reach of 7'3"(or was it 7'1"?). He plays big, and dominates inside. DeJaun is the 4th leading rebounder in the country. Maybe I am just misunderstanding your posts as you are mine.

Look forward to a great game tonight.

[SilkyJ]

McCloud? Forget it, he's on a roll...

First of all, nice animal house reference. Very well played.



By the way, so you don't have to guess: I think that Duke is getting PLENTY out of what you call "the 5 position" and I think that it will get even more as the season progresses.

Allow me to point you to this thread on MP2 and how our 3 headed-monster isn't all that great, IMHO.
http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12884&page=3&highlight=mason+plumlee

Our 3 headed monster of Zoubs, Lace, Miles has the following COMBINED stats this year:

38.4mpg
13.5ppg
9.6rpg
1.2apg
2.0bpg
1.1spg
2.8 turnovers-pg

I guess if thats a single person those are some solid stats, aside from the 1-2 a/to ratio, but considering thats the production of 3 people combined, I'm not impressed. And I point out in the thread linked above, their production in some more recent games has been even poorer.

I like MP1 a lot. In fact my biggest criticism of him is that he tries to block too many shots off of help defense, and ends up missing, and when he does that he leaves the basket wide open for an offensive putback by the other team. Youthful exuberance that will corrected soon enough I hope.

I think the door is wide open for him and/or his brother and/or kelly to step up next year and have a serious role on this team....but for now I'm enjoying G-funk era :)

[gumbomoop]

This team is ranked 3; there are at least two teams in the top 10, Pittsburgh and Marquette, of whom I am aware who have no big man to speak of and have a real shot. Duke I think has an advantage in the middle, even though Pitt has the beast known as Blair. You might think otherwise. That's what makes this board fun.

Glad you bring up Pitt/Blair, though I don't buy the Pitt-Marquette comparison. Pitt and Marquette seem quite different teams: M has superb perimeter; Pitt has solid pt guard, excellent wing, and, yes, absolute beast, Blair, who isn't tall, but is real, real beast-big. I recall Blair's utter dominance inside against Duke last year. Now maybe Z's health held him back then, and he'd do better against Blair this year, but I'd prefer a now-healthy McClure, who will block out.

This is all speculation, but a problem worth thinking about, because at this moment it appears that 4 Big East and 3 ACC teams may be 1-2 seeds. That means Duke might well face a Pitt or UConn in Elite 8. Or substitute Oklahoma [clever NCAA com likes to pit "family" teams, so I'm guessing we'll get ND earlier.....], and beast-Griffin. Same problem. We don't need much offense at the 5 (but we gotta have the easy put-back when it's there), but we have to block out and prevent a beast-big from getting 15-20 rebounds.

DMc blocks out.

[Kedsy]

First of all, nice animal house reference. Very well played.

Thanks. I suppose it's an indictment of our entire American society.



Our 3 headed monster of Zoubs, Lace, Miles has the following COMBINED stats this year:

38.4mpg
13.5ppg
9.6rpg
1.2apg
2.0bpg
1.1spg
2.8 turnovers-pg

I guess if thats a single person those are some solid stats, aside from the 1-2 a/to ratio, but considering thats the production of 3 people combined, I'm not impressed. And I point out in the thread linked above, their production in some more recent games has been even poorer.


Since the minutes per game are under 40, I'm not sure I understand why you'd be impressed if this was one person but not three. If you assume these three guys are never on the court at the same time (and I know that's not ironclad but it's pretty close) then the only differences I can see between this "three-headed beast" and a single person playing 38 minutes are: (a) the "beast" gets 15 fouls rather than just 5, which is a plus; and (b) the intangible of both teams knowing we have a single beast in the post, which is hard to define but is most likely a minus for the three-headed approach.

It would be different if these guys were playing together, e.g., they were collectively playing 55 minutes which would mean the stats are inflated. But if they're not (as your chart indicates) then I'm thrilled to get 13 and 10 with 2 blocks and a steal a game from our 5. Be impressed.

[SilkyJ]

Thanks. I suppose it's an indictment of our entire American society.


Well I'm not going to sit here and let you bad mouth the United States of America.



Since the minutes per game are under 40, I'm not sure I understand why you'd be impressed if this was one person but not three. If you assume these three guys are never on the court at the same time (and I know that's not ironclad but it's pretty close) then the only differences I can see between this "three-headed beast" and a single person playing 38 minutes are: (a) the "beast" gets 15 fouls rather than just 5, which is a plus; and (b) the intangible of both teams knowing we have a single beast in the post, which is hard to define but is most likely a minus for the three-headed approach.

It would be different if these guys were playing together, e.g., they were collectively playing 55 minutes which would mean the stats are inflated. But if they're not (as your chart indicates) then I'm thrilled to get 13 and 10 with 2 blocks and a steal a game from our 5. Be impressed.

What you're negating to consider is the fact that they are only getting those minutes b/c they aren't good enough to be on the floor, and we are again being forced to go small. And are you excited about the 3 tos per game we're getting from the 5?

[DukeBlood]

It would be different if these guys were playing together, e.g., they were collectively playing 55 minutes which would mean the stats are inflated. But if they're not (as your chart indicates) then I'm thrilled to get 13 and 10 with 2 blocks and a steal a game from our 5. Be impressed.

Brian, Lance and Miles against Wake Forest.
33 Minutes
2 Points
4 Rebounds
2 Blocks

Brian, Lance and Miles against Georgetown.
15 Minutes
4 Points
2 Rebounds
0 Blocks

Brian, and Lance against Florida State.
37 Minutes
3 Points
6 Rebounds
1 Block

Brian and Lance against Georgia Tech.
29 Minutes
2 Points
6 Rebounds
1 Block

Brian, Lance and Miles against Virginia Tech.
30 Minutes
8 Points
5 Rebounds
1 Block

I wouldn't have a problem if they averaged the numbers Silky pointed out. The fact is they feed off lesser competition. When it comes down to it, They have beat up against the weaker ACC teams(Maryland and Virginia) but really have yet to show up against average ACC teams or top ACC teams.

[Kedsy]

What you're negating to consider is the fact that they are only getting those minutes b/c they aren't good enough to be on the floor, and we are again being forced to go small. And are you excited about the 3 tos per game we're getting from the 5?

They're good enough to be on the floor collectively for 38 minutes, which is more than a single great post player would be able to do. Again assuming Z, LT, and MP1 are not on the floor at the same time we're only going small for an average of 2 minutes a game. Granted, it happened for a lot longer in a couple important games, but presumably it wasn't a bad thing to do it in those games since we performed reasonably well.

And while I'm not thrilled about the 2.8 turnovers in 38 minutes, Kyle Singler has 2.5 turnovers per game in 30 minutes, and that doesn't bother me so much. Why hold the "5" to a higher standard?

So, to sum up, if I was in your shoes, I'd be...

[Kedsy]

I wouldn't have a problem if they averaged the numbers Silky pointed out. The fact is they feed off lesser competition. When it comes down to it, They have beat up against the weaker ACC teams(Maryland and Virginia) but really have yet to show up against average ACC teams or top ACC teams.

In 1986, our starting center (Jay Bilas) averaged 6.8 ppg and 4.9 rpg. I don't have the figures in front of me, but I assume his numbers against top ACC opponents were worse, yet it was a pretty good year for Duke basketball. The John Smith years had similar production from the 5-spot, but those teams did OK for themselves.

I would posit that on the current Duke squad, scoring from the 5 position is irrelevant since we have so many other potent options. Even in the five games you mention, the three-headed center had around 5 rpg and played decent defense, and Duke won four of the games and lost the other on a last-second shot.

I'm not saying you have to be happy with the production from that spot in the lineup (although I'm not certain why your happiness -- or mine -- is important to the conversation). But I am saying that people who declare that if we don't get more production from the 5 spot we can't win basketball games -- in March or at any other time -- are not correct.

[DukeBlood]

In 1986, our starting center (Jay Bilas) averaged 6.8 ppg and 4.9 rpg. I don't have the figures in front of me, but I assume his numbers against top ACC opponents were worse, yet it was a pretty good year for Duke basketball. The John Smith years had similar production from the 5-spot, but those teams did OK for themselves.

I would posit that on the current Duke squad, scoring from the 5 position is irrelevant since we have so many other potent options. Even in the five games you mention, the three-headed center had around 5 rpg and played decent defense, and Duke won four of the games and lost the other on a last-second shot.

I'm not saying you have to be happy with the production from that spot in the lineup (although I'm not certain why your happiness -- or mine -- is important to the conversation). But I am saying that people who declare that if we don't get more production from the 5 spot we can't win basketball games -- in March or at any other time -- are not correct.

My goal is a Final Four run or a National Championship. I just have my beliefs that the "5" spot has to be a little more productive, Or more consistent. As long as we keep winning games this year, I am happy then.

When I started getting into this thread it was more about Miles and next year. It really has taken a change of course to Brian and this year. I have showed you all the numbers against some of the better teams from this year. Will those type of performances be enough? I hope so.

[greybeard]

I like McLure against Blair also. And, I like getting Z the ball against him 2-3 times during the short time he is in, hey, maybe he'll draw a foul and make a shot and the short time will be longer? Who knows? You guys seem to think you do. I do not share your confidence.

What I think is that the matchup between Pittsburgh and its Blair will be against Duke and its Singler. Period.

As for numbers, how do you count in terms of stats the following: you have a big on McLure, who is much more active in terms of changing the positioning of himself on the floor relative to the ball and the other offensive players than anyone the big is used to playing. McLure is out there setting screens, off the ball and on, and oh, he can take the ball by you on the bounce if you ain't careful. What stat does that show up in?

Did I mention how he gets under the big's center of gravity and makes it a challenge for the guy to move without falling on his face? Is there a stat for that. Then, how bout how when he boxes you he is under you and then, he explodes to the ball and has hands that are ten times quicker than yours.

What does it do to that big's head, his effectiveness. Then, when the dude thinks he is getting it, you send in Z, who presents a whole different set of things to concern yourself with and also try to exploit. So you try to remember all the things your coach told you about playing against Z only by the time you remember and actually start to do them, you are looking at Lance. etc.

In the meantime, if one or more of those guys makes a play or two, and I do hope that you guys are understanding what I mean by that, then all this nonsense about playing 5 on 4 becomes even more silly. You just got hurt by a "stiff." Heck, even the guys on DBR are calling them that, in so many words. How do you think you are feeling now, if you are a big? What if all of a sudden your coach surrenders and says, "Guys, we need to stop the ball from going into that guy?" Now, this team is doing something that they neither planned nor practiced.

Anyway, this is just barbershop talk by me. Throwing my BS into the mix of it being slung around on this thread.

This team goes as far as Singler takes it. That's no BS; it ain't fact, but it's as close as I can get. Singler. That, as the orange man would put it, "is the list."

[chrisheery]

My goal is a Final Four run or a National Championship. I just have my beliefs that the "5" spot has to be a little more productive, Or more consistent. As long as we keep winning games this year, I am happy then.

When I started getting into this thread it was more about Miles and next year. It really has taken a change of course to Brian and this year. I have showed you all the numbers against some of the better teams from this year. Will those type of performances be enough? I hope so.

The truth is that only one team wins a national championship each year. Only four make the final four (obviously). So, to base how good a team is on that alone is probably not a fair criteria. Even the best teams lose games they should win and teams that aren't quite as well put together win games they shouldn't. Perhaps the best college basketball team I have ever seen was the 1999 Duke team. I thought they would win the national championship game by 20. They had a big man, plenty of size, great guards, etc. Even that team didn't achieve final success by the strictest definition.

My point is that this team COULD win a national championship exactly how it is built now. It could lose in the 2nd or 3rd round too. But that is true for many teams in college basketball today. Of those teams, though, we are clearly in an upper echelon this year.

To say that we would be better if we had a better player at any spot is just obvious. To say that our 5 spot is more important than any of our other spots is simply not true. We have an advantage, usually, at 3 positions no matter who we play against. Having a big man play better would help, as would having more consistent PG play, but it is not essential to why this team wins. The reason this team wins is because it plays as a team. They play great defense as a unit and get scoring from any of 3-4 studs who start for us. The 5 spot, in my opinion, would be a bonus that would make us a near lock for a final four, but we have what we have. Complaining that it isn't good enough in a forum where the players might read it probably isn't going to help that in any way.

With all that said, I agree that it might make sense to give more of a try to a guy who seems to have he most natural talent down low (Plumlee) with regard to finishing and rebounding. However, he has done nothing to this point to prove that he will be far superior to the options already playing ahead of him.

[slower]

McCloud? Forget it, he's on a roll...

Perfect! Most of his posts make me think of that scene in "Animal House".

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

[Diddy]

The truth is that only one team wins a national championship each year. Only four make the final four (obviously). So, to base how good a team is on that alone is probably not a fair criteria. Even the best teams lose games they should win and teams that aren't quite as well put together win games they shouldn't. Perhaps the best college basketball team I have ever seen was the 1999 Duke team. I thought they would win the national championship game by 20. They had a big man, plenty of size, great guards, etc. Even that team didn't achieve final success by the strictest definition.

My point is that this team COULD win a national championship exactly how it is built now. It could lose in the 2nd or 3rd round too. But that is true for many teams in college basketball today. Of those teams, though, we are clearly in an upper echelon this year.

To say that we would be better if we had a better player at any spot is just obvious. To say that our 5 spot is more important than any of our other spots is simply not true. We have an advantage, usually, at 3 positions no matter who we play against. Having a big man play better would help, as would having more consistent PG play, but it is not essential to why this team wins. The reason this team wins is because it plays as a team. They play great defense as a unit and get scoring from any of 3-4 studs who start for us. The 5 spot, in my opinion, would be a bonus that would make us a near lock for a final four, but we have what we have. Complaining that it isn't good enough in a forum where the players might read it probably isn't going to help that in any way.

With all that said, I agree that it might make sense to give more of a try to a guy who seems to have he most natural talent down low (Plumlee) with regard to finishing and rebounding. However, he has done nothing to this point to prove that he will be far superior to the options already playing ahead of him.

True, only 1 team wins it all, and only 3 others get to the FF. But there are 8 teams that compete for the FF. If Duke is one of those 8 teams, and performs solidly in a loss to a quality team, I will be happy.

Actually, I will whine and moan about it, but deep down, I will be OK. I will say that a big would have made the difference, and I would probably be correct. But, given the expectations of this team in the preseason, I will bounce back, quickly.

Getting beaten solidly in the Elite 8, or losing before then would be upsetting. One game at a time and all that BS, but for the season, any season, to be successful the team has to have made a serious postseason push.

And we haven't done that for going on 4 years now. No one on the team has been past the Sweet 16, and that was a bad loss to LSU. Yes, they went to the FF, but Duke really laid an egg in that one. Not playing well, or god forbid, playing ok and still getting slapped arround is not pleasant.

Some on this board may not like it, but K built Duke's rep on NCAA successes. To be without that success makes lots of people question the program. It makes me sad, personally.

I am perhaps wrong in saying the season hinges on post season success, The opposite opinion, that the post season doesn't matter that much, is equally wrong.