Where we go from here...

[DUKIE V(A)]

Although I expected a hard fought Duke win tonight, a loss to a hungry, talented, deep, and well-coached team like Clemson on the road does not surprise me. The manner in which we lost is a complete shock. I thought we were too good and had too much heart to ever get so thoroughly outplayed. I was wrong for tonight.

I still love this team and recognize that everyone in entitled to an off performance. This weekend's game against a rugged, talented Miami bunch offers us a nice opportunity to bounce back at home against stiff competition. Here are the top 4 things that I would like to see this team do to give me the feeling that we are heading back to becoming a top contender for a National Championship and bucking our recent trend of fading at the end of the season (I'd love to hear yours)...

1. Be willing to take open shots and shoot with confidence. I feel that a lot of our players are passing up good open looks and are looking hesitant when shooting. The not shooting open shots really limits our offense, because it allows defenses to sag off players and help on Henderson and Singler. Shooting the shots confidently (even if missed) forces a defense to at least respect everyone as an offensive threat. I would especially love to see Nolan Smith shoot more often. He seems to be passing up some open looks. Hitting a couple bombs will also make him more of a threat to drive the ball. Scheyer seems to be pressing and perhaps is pushing/aiming the ball rather than just pulling the trigger, but I have a ton of confidence in him as a shooter. I'd love to see McClure shot the open 15 footers he gets on a regular basis. Thomas has an under-rated outside shot and could be a nice weapon from 15 and in. I'm sure we can all live with misses, but if we fail to take open shots I fear our offense will be prone to periods of bogging down.

2. Push the ball up the floor in an effort to get transition baskets (aggressive slashes to the basket and drive and dish threes). Driving and dishing has always been a Duke staple. I am not seeing as much of that lately.

3. Recommit to a full out effort to get every defensive board. I saw a lot of standing and watching tonight -- this was not something I remember seeing this year. Miami and Carolina hit the offensive boards hard. This will offer some nice tests.

4. Recommit to forcing shooters (e.g., Ogelsby) to drive the ball. We gave him far too many open looks. You have to make shooters uncomfortable, especially ones like Ogelsby who (for now at least) is limited in other facets of his offensive game. This will be important going up against the likes of McClinton, Green, and Ellington in the next two games. All are talented players, but all would rather fire from distance than on the move and driving to the basket.

[Oriole Way]

I'm interested to see what K's starting 5 against Miami will be. Many times, following a bad loss, he will shake up the lineup in order to send messages to certain players, or to make more significant adjustments.

[doctorhook]

Orioleway,

I was wondering the same thing. K might bench Jon, not because he is not playing as hard as he can, but maybe to take a little pressure off. Of course, the flip side is that might hurt his confidence even more. Only problem is that no one deserves the spot because no one is playing any better. Doc

[Matches]

I don't expect major changes, just a commitment to playing harder and playing better. The whole "start the walk-ons" thing has become a gimmick - it was a great idea once or twice as a motivational tool but no one really believes it's going to last past the first TV timeout, or that the walk-ons are going to become permanent starters.

We are a good team, not a great one. Our personnel has some limitations but still has the potential for a deep run in March if it plays well and catches some breaks. Tinkering around with the lineup constantly impedes development at times, particularly with a team with lots of upperclassmen. Sometimes it's necessary, but not at 19-3.

[bjornolf]

I've been thinking about this for SEVERAL games now, but I thought I'd bring it up now cause it seems to be affecting more and more of our team. Now, I'm just a stupid old football player, so excuse my ignorance and PLEASE, educate me!

Everyone has commented on our defense and how good it has been (outside of last night's game) and how inconsistent our offense has been. Well, actually, our offense was VERY consistent last night, just not in a good way. My question is, is it possible to OVER-EXERT on defense?

I know how important defense is, and I know how much K pushes it, and rightfully so. There are guys that can give max effort 100% of the time on both ends and be successful (GH seems to be one of those guys...his defense seems to fuel his offense and vice versa, and that's awesome for him).

However, it is VERY tough on a young man both mentally and physically to remain that focused on both ends. I know we don't want to "rest" on defense, but would we play better on offense if a couple guys could dial it down A TINY bit on defense once in a while? Or maybe give guys more breathers? They can rest on the bench for a minute. What good is great defense if you can't score on the other end?

Guys like GH and McClure, who is a defensive specialist anyway, can keep killing it on the defensive end, but maybe we don't need to be QUITE so aggressive on defense 100% of the time. Still play good, solid D, just not the hectic overplay of EVERY pass, for example. That taxes the help defense too, which further tires the guys out. Maybe throw in a zone a little more often to keep the offense guessing? There's more than one way to unsettle an opposing offense, and it doesn't require our guys to completely wear themselves out. We can't "rest" on the defensive end, but I don't think we can afford to be resting on the offensive end either.

Maybe the guys just don't have the gas to be doing all this driving and dishing and protecting the ball against athletic defenders when they're wearing themselves out so completely on D.

Take Scheyer. As his defense has become more and more solid and aggressive, his offense has gone in the toilet. I'm not saying he should stop playing defense, but maybe if he didn't try to be defensive player of the year EVERY time down the floor, he wouldn't be so tight on offense. Like I said, it's as much mental focus and fatigue as it is physical fatigue, probably MORE. And that's something it's hard to measure. I'm not a finely tuned athlete anymore (never was "finely-tuned"), but I know when I play pickup ball, the better my defensive game, the worse my shot. I end up hanging out under the basket getting rebounds rather than raining 3-balls. Speaking of finely-tuned, just like a race car, if you drive it against the redline 100% of the time, eventually it's gonna blow. These guys are in amazing shape, and the thrill of competition and their adrenaline can keep them going physically, but the mental sharpness required to play solid offense, setting good screens, using good footwork, protecting the ball, putting the ball in the basket, is HURT by those things, NOT helped. It's just biology.

Shane Battier was an amazing defensive player his first two years at Duke, but he had to grow into the rest, and he was MUCH more mature and focused than most players his age. We don't need a team full of first year Battiers, and MOST guys aren't capable of being a fourth year Battier. GH maybe.

Just a thought. I'm sure the smarter people on this thread can show me the hundreds of places I'm wrong.

[DevilCastDownfromDurham]

We are who we thought we were: Outstanding wings, situational post guys, and a SG trying to learn the PG position. We do well what we always have: great D, hustle and grit (last night notwithstanding), etc. and we struggle with what we have been struggling with since Duhon and Shel left: creating easy shots, defending the post, dealing with physical teams, etc.

It's easy to point out our recruiting flaws and lament what we can't do as a result, but there's no point. We are what we are. Nolan will make better decisions, but he ain't a PG. Kyle will have off nights, but he's still the best player on this team and one of the best in the nation.

Given what we know, then, let's address the OP's question: where do we go from here? With things as they are we're a top 10 team that depends a great deal on matchups and outworking teams. On our current trajectory we're probably something like a 2-3 seed that will play until we hit a bad matchup, I'd guess around the Sweet 16 or E8. That's a great season and may lay the groundwork for a very special 2009-10 where Nolan is more comfortable and our bigs have found a way to be a net asset (and esp. if Wall decides to join the party).

The only potential changes I can imagine would be radically altering the starting lineup (really minutes played since "starting" is fairly meaningless) or changing the way we structure out O/D and I don't think any of those are especially viable. I don't think Greg brings enough to supplant Nolan at PG. G, Jon, and, Kyle need to be playing major minutes for us. And I don't think we have a game-changing move to make at the 5. We could go very small and give Dave more minutes or force-feed Plumlee and hope the light goes on, but I think using 5's situationally is going to work better. I also think it's too late in the season to try and scrap our O/D. Before the season we talked about going to a "40 Minutes of H**l"-style press and I loved that idea, but I can't imagine trying to implement that on the fly in mid-February.

I'm very open to other ideas, and obviously health will play a huge role, as it always does. But right now this team is basically where most folks thought it would be. Not one of the 2-3 best teams, but one of the 10-20 that can get hot and make a deep run or not. If we can play hard and show well (and that Other Team doesn't get a title) I'm planning to enjoy the ride unburdened by any great expectations beyond smart, tough kids representing Duke as best they can with a HoF coach on the sidelines.

[bjornolf]

But is it possible that they're wearing themselves out TOO much on defense, and that's why the offense is so inconsistent?

[_Gary]

Given what we know, then, let's address the OP's question: where do we go from here? With things as they are we're a top 10 team that depends a great deal on matchups and outworking teams. On our current trajectory we're probably something like a 2-3 seed that will play until we hit a bad matchup, I'd guess around the Sweet 16 or E8. That's a great season and may lay the groundwork for a very special 2009-10 where Nolan is more comfortable and our bigs have found a way to be a net asset (and esp. if Wall decides to join the party). - [emphasis mine]

DCDD, I agree with pretty much everything you wrote - with the exception that a Sweet 16 bow out for this team is a great season. And I imagine Coach K and the players would disagree as well, although I obviously can't speak for them. *If* we are a 2 or 3 seed then the only way this is a great season is to exceed that seeding in the tournament, IMHO. If we are content to compare this team to the last couple of years then I guess a Sweet 16, or even an Elite 8, bow out would be a "good" season. But even then it seems we've lowered the standards. I think for this season to be considered a "great" one we need a Final Four run. And I'll bet you that Coach and the guys feel the same way. But that's just my opinion. On all the other points you made I agree. We are what we are. It's going to come down to gelling/peaking at the right time. That and injuries (which we hopefully will not have this time around).

[geraldsneighbor]

Orioleway,

I was wondering the same thing. K might bench Jon, not because he is not playing as hard as he can, but maybe to take a little pressure off. Of course, the flip side is that might hurt his confidence even more. Only problem is that no one deserves the spot because no one is playing any better. Doc

If sitting Jon until the 16 minute time out hurts his confidence, hes much more fragile then I though. I agree though, who knows who starts.

[CDu]

But is it possible that they're wearing themselves out TOO much on defense, and that's why the offense is so inconsistent?

It is certainly possible. Playing tough defense requires a lot of exertion. It is conceivable that your legs can tire, which can result in jumpshots falling short. We've seen a lot of jumpers falling short lately.

Of course, that probably doesn't explain the poor shooting in the first half. I have trouble believing that our guys get winded straight off the bus. This is especially true for Scheyer, who's in as good a shape cardiovascularly as pretty much anybody in college basketball (or anywhere else for that matter). Yet despite his fitness, he's had the worst of the shooting slumps.

I'm thinking that illness is the culprit in some cases (someone said Singler has a cold/flu). Paulus had the injury early but should have adapted by now. And I don't know about Scheyer.

[DevilCastDownfromDurham]

- [emphasis mine]

DCDD, I agree with pretty much everything you wrote - with the exception that a Sweet 16 bow out for this team is a great season. And I imagine Coach K and the players would disagree as well, although I obviously can't speak for them. *If* we are a 2 or 3 seed then the only way this is a great season is to exceed that seeding in the tournament, IMHO. If we are content to compare this team to the last couple of years then I guess a Sweet 16, or even an Elite 8, bow out would be a "good" season. But even then it seems we've lowered the standards. I think for this season to be considered a "great" one we need a Final Four run. And I'll bet you that Coach and the guys feel the same way. But that's just my opinion. On all the other points you made I agree. We are what we are. It's going to come down to gelling/peaking at the right time. That and injuries (which we hopefully will not have this time around).

The vast majority of teams would immediately call a top 4 seed and SS berth a great season but I definitely see your point about Duke (like UNC and a handful of other powers) measuring "great" seasons differently than 95% of teams. I guess from my perspective "great" is relative to what your team has. 2000 was, IMO a great season even though we flamed out in the NCAA's because we got so much out of what we had. 2002 was, again IMO, not a great season because we fell so far short of what we should have been.

The fact is, this team is seriously flawed. We have bupkis at the two most crucial positions on the court. We have no players that reliably run the offense or set up easy shots for the team and we have a big mess in the paint. If we can take that hodge-podge, grab a 2 seed, and ride it to the second weekend (something we haven't been doing much as of late), I'll call that a great season, especially since we're doing it with guys that have been so admirable in terms of attitude and chemistry. I think we're arguing semantics here. If we perform to the expectations above, how about we say that we didn't have a great team but that flawed team gave us a great season? Fair enough?

[bjornolf]

It is certainly possible. Playing tough defense requires a lot of exertion. It is conceivable that your legs can tire, which can result in jumpshots falling short. We've seen a lot of jumpers falling short lately.

Of course, that probably doesn't explain the poor shooting in the first half. I have trouble believing that our guys get winded straight off the bus. This is especially true for Scheyer, who's in as good a shape cardiovascularly as pretty much anybody in college basketball (or anywhere else for that matter). Yet despite his fitness, he's had the worst of the shooting slumps.

I'm thinking that illness is the culprit in some cases (someone said Singler has a cold/flu). Paulus had the injury early but should have adapted by now. And I don't know about Scheyer.

I was more looking at a trend over time than just last night. Look at my first post two before that one. I point to Scheyer's shooting, guys committing turnovers, and lack of effort and USEFUL movement (good screens, offensive rebounding, driving and dishing efficiently, hitting open shots) in the offense. I don't necessarily think it's a physical thing. Like I said, these guys are in GREAT shape and conditioning isn't generally a problem (though in Kyle's case with those two FTs at the end that barely drew front rim, that might be it), but the adrenaline and physical and mental exertion required to play 100% on offense AND defense 100% of the time might be wearing on them MENTALLY. People like these guys have amazing attention and focus, but even theirs is taxed by using it that hard for that long game after game. Guys that can do that are few and far between (Battier as an upperclassman and Gerald are two that immediately come to mind). Maybe some yoga or meditation or breathing exercises might help with that stuff.

[JDev]

I don't think changing the starting line-up or amount of minutes is in order. Duke knows who their best and most important players are. Scheyer has not had a good stretch of games, but the only chance Duke has to be really good is with him playing well. Nolan has also had some tough outings recently, but defensively he is the best option Duke has at on-the-ball defense. Duke's best hope is to get these guys back in a groove, and they have both shown at various times that they are capable. These guys are paramount to Duke's ultimate success: get them on the floor and get them playing well.

[_Gary]

The vast majority of teams would immediately call a top 4 seed and SS berth a great season but I definitely see your point about Duke (like UNC and a handful of other powers) measuring "great" seasons differently than 95% of teams. I guess from my perspective "great" is relative to what your team has. 2000 was, IMO a great season even though we flamed out in the NCAA's because we got so much out of what we had. 2002 was, again IMO, not a great season because we fell so far short of what we should have been.

The fact is, this team is seriously flawed. We have bupkis at the two most crucial positions on the court. We have no players that reliably run the offense or set up easy shots for the team and we have a big mess in the paint. If we can take that hodge-podge, grab a 2 seed, and ride it to the second weekend (something we haven't been doing much as of late), I'll call that a great season, especially since we're doing it with guys that have been so admirable in terms of attitude and chemistry. I think we're arguing semantics here. If we perform to the expectations above, how about we say that we didn't have a great team but that flawed team gave us a great season? Fair enough?

Ok, although up until last night I didn't think we were seriously flawed. And I'm still not sure we are. Don't get me wrong, we have issues at the two spots you mentioned. But up until last night I thought we actually had a solid team that could overcome those deficiencies and actually make a Final Four run. Now I'm not so sure. We might and we might not. I guess time will tell.

[DevilCastDownfromDurham]

Ok, although up until last night I didn't think we were seriously flawed. And I'm still not sure we are. Don't get me wrong, we have issues at the two spots you mentioned. But up until last night I thought we actually had a solid team that could overcome those deficiencies and actually make a Final Four run. Now I'm not so sure. We might and we might not. I guess time will tell.

The nice thing about being a pessimist is that you are rarely disappointed. :p

Seriously, I think a lot of folks were going a bit overboard on what we are based on a fairly soft early-season schedule, but this is a very good team. If we get favorable matchups it's entirely possible that we do make a FF run (or more). That we are in that mix is a testament to the team, the staff, and some really exceptional wings. Now that K is back from his four-year adventures I'm hopeful that recruiting will return to form and all the hard work will give us some of the unquestionably great teams and season that we've been missing since '04. Until that happens I'm doing my best to keep my expectations in line with the talent we run out there and I've been much less stressed as a result.

[CDu]

I was more looking at a trend over time than just last night. Look at my first post two before that one. I point to Scheyer's shooting, guys committing turnovers, and lack of effort and USEFUL movement (good screens, offensive rebounding, driving and dishing efficiently, hitting open shots) in the offense. I don't necessarily think it's a physical thing. Like I said, these guys are in GREAT shape and conditioning isn't generally a problem (though in Kyle's case with those two FTs at the end that barely drew front rim, that might be it), but the adrenaline and physical and mental exertion required to play 100% on offense AND defense 100% of the time might be wearing on them MENTALLY. People like these guys have amazing attention and focus, but even theirs is taxed by using it that hard for that long game after game. Guys that can do that are few and far between (Battier as an upperclassman and Gerald are two that immediately come to mind).

The problem is that for the "wear down (whether mentally or physically)" argument to hold, we'd need to see good starts to games and bad finishes. That hasn't been the case. We've generally been better in the second half of games, which wouldn't suggest any wear down. And if we're too mentally or physically gassed to play both ends of the floor in the first half then we have bigger problems.

I don't know what it is, and it COULD be fatigue (mental or physical). In Singler's case, I'm pretty sure his recent struggles are due to illness. But in general, I'd be inclined to say it's not the stress of playing tough defense.

[roywhite]

The problem is that for the "wear down (whether mentally or physically)" argument to hold, we'd need to see good starts to games and bad finishes. That hasn't been the case. We've generally been better in the second half of games, which wouldn't suggest any wear down. And if we're too mentally or physically gassed to play both ends of the floor in the first half then we have bigger problems.

I don't know what it is, and it COULD be fatigue (mental or physical). In Singler's case, I'm pretty sure his recent struggles are due to illness. But in general, I'd be inclined to say it's not the stress of playing tough defense.

Not that we're low on fuel, just don't have the horsepower, I'm afraid.

Our little car can hit high speeds when it's working well, but going uphill (against a physically strong team on the road for example) it doesn't have the juice. Tuneups can help, efficiency can help, but the horsepower is less than some other models.

[Billy Dat]

We laid such a tremendous egg last night that I think it's hard to draw any conclusions from it.

I don't see how we could have been tired from playing defense - we played no defense last night.

What is scary is how reminiscent it was to the Wake loss last year in terms of what had come before. Going into that Wake game last year, the team was playing great. Then, out of nowhere, we played poorly against Wake and never really looked the same the rest of the year. Last night's game felt the same. Granted, we lost to Wake last week, but we played tough. That "performance" against Clemson flew right in from left field. Who would have expected the team to look so lost, so lifeless, so inept?

I think we're all holding our collective breath that yesterday's game wasn't a similar tipping point to last year's Wake game. Until the team proves otherwise on the court, there's no way to know. I'm sure SI's Stewart Mandel is getting the first few paragraphs of his "I told you so" article ready. I hope the team proves him wrong.

[alteran]

But is it possible that they're wearing themselves out TOO much on defense, and that's why the offense is so inconsistent?

It's possible it's defensive exhaustion, but I personally don't think so. I think it's more a situation where we lack playmakers, and only one guy who can really make his own shot.

Earlier in the season, we seemed to be making up for a lack of PG assists from other positions-- Kyle was particularly notable. That doesn't seem to be happening as much now. (Warning-- I'm not a number-cruncher, this is just my impression.)

Also, it seems that AT BEST we can place four real scoring threats on the floor-- more frequently it's only three, and it's not unusual to see just two. We can bring Paulus in to score, but that forces a lot of help defense / switching and a smart team can exploit that.

Personally, I think we just need to step back, rethink, retool, and recommit. I think the team has some serious work and soul-searching ahead of them. There were things we were doing earlier that we quit doing. And we have GOT to figure out why the team pretty much quit. Frankly, that's the most serious problem to me.

I think we'll get it figured out but it's going to be a tough week.

[bjornolf]

Look at Scheyer though. Is he shooting better in the second half of games than the first? Maybe he is, but I don't think he's been lights out like he used to be in either. As far as I can see, he's playing by FAR the best defense of his career...and the worst offense. It's not necessarily fatigue with him so much as a tightness caused by throwing it out there on both ends ALL the time, which is more a mental thing than a physical one. He's still shooting from the FT line pretty well (though even that's suffered a little), which is one time that he can take a deep breath and try to relax for a second.

I think the difference between mental and physical fatigue is that physical fatigue is easier to recover from. Hydrate a good, 20 year old athlete and let him rest for a day and he's good to go physically. Mental fatigue seems to be cumulative, and doesn't lessen as much between games, especially when you have other stress like classes and stuff to deal with, which just build on it.

Maybe the bad first halfs are helping the guys to refocus for the second half, like a slap in the face or a splash of cold water on a tired person.

Also, haven't other teams been scoring more points on us in the second half of games as well? As the defensive intensity settles a little bit, the offense seems to pick up, maybe? Look at the scores by the half from goduke for the last several games:

Game.........1st....2nd.....Diff......FG% change
Clemson......33......41.....+8.........-6%
Duke..........21......26......+5.........-5%

UVA...........21......33.....+12........+22%
Duke..........43......36......-5..........+4% (large lead, called off the dogs)

WFU..........33.......37.....+4.........+12%
Duke..........28.......40....+12........-12%

MD............15.......29....+14........even
Duke..........40......45.....+5.........+5% (huge lead, called off the dogs)

NCSU.........26......30.....+4..........+2%
Duke..........22......51.....+29........+47% (trailing at the half, really turned it on)

Well, that looks a lot crappier than it did when I typed it. Everything got squished. Oops. I'll try to fix it.

In every case but UVA, where we had a big lead going down the stretch, our points went up, but so did our opponents. So, is everybody a second half team, or are we dialing up the offense a lot, dialing down the defense a little, thus scoring more points but also giving them more opportunities to score? With the exception of the second half of the UVA game, our shooting percentage doesn't seem to swing way up in the second half of games. Hmm. Not sure WHAT that means, except that we don't seem to be playing THAT much better in the second half of games.

[DevilCastDownfromDurham]

Wow, we're getting parody posters now! Our little DBR is all grown up. [Sniff]

[KShip21]

Ok, so I admit. I was disgusted and turned the game off at the first official time out in the second half.

I heard K called a time out with under a minute to go and said nothing to his team except "listen to the crowd." Probably had an expletive between "the" and crowd" I'm sure. Wanted to see if anyone else heard this? If so, this is the best thing that happened all night, and I hope it sunk in and is still eating at them

[Kedsy]

But is it possible that they're wearing themselves out TOO much on defense, and that's why the offense is so inconsistent?

There may or may not be something to what you say, but I don't think the answer is coasting on defense. For one thing, K would never let them do it; he's always preaching 100% effort on every play. For another, the main reason this team has been so good this year is because they play so hard. Practically every opposing coach and player mentions it after almost every game -- how much energy Duke brought to the game and how hard it was for the other team to match it. Finally, IMO dialing it down on one end tends to lead to laziness on the other. And, conversely, ramping it up on one end energizes an athlete in all facets. It's hard to turn it on and off with any consistency.

[ncexnyc]

The man asked a simple question, "Where do we go from here?"

The answer after yesterday is simple, UP.

If writing several paragraphs of pseudo-analysis makes your day, then go for it.

Next play.

[KyDevilinIL]

There's no sense in attacking the players, and attacking the posters who attack the players just makes this entire situation uglier and more depressing.

Look, none of us knows what's going to happen from here. I doubt the guys in the locker room know at this point. Losses like this usually either make men or they break spirits. Knowing what we know about Coach K – and hoping that what we think we know about these guys is true – I'm inclined to believe the former will be the result. Still, that doesn't guarantee immediate success. There will be a payoff from this setback. Whether it's this season or the next or whenever, who knows. But this loss will not be for naught.

The anger expressed on this board since last night is not actually directed at the team, in my opinion. It's directed at ourselves, because so many of us wanted to believe this was one of those special, elite teams despite so much evidence to the contrary. This team has been good enough to mask its deficiencies for much of the season. Last night it wasn't, and it was a humbling moment for everyone involved with the program, no matter how distantly.

I do not expect this team to throw in the towel. And unless they do that, they continue to deserve our support. Keep in mind that all sorts of teams far inferior to this one have made March runs. We have a full month to find a formula that works, and there's still so much potential on the roster.

Sure, our expectations have been tempered. National championship teams do not lose games by 27 points to anyone, so a title probably isn't in the cards this year. Big surprise. But we've got three more shots at UNC/Wake at least, we might get Clemson again, we can still do really good things. We've just got to accept that our definitions of "good" might be dramatically different after last night.

[jtholland]

I've been thinking about this for SEVERAL games now, but I thought I'd bring it up now cause it seems to be affecting more and more of our team. Now, I'm just a stupid old football player, so excuse my ignorance and PLEASE, educate me!

Everyone has commented on our defense and how good it has been (outside of last night's game) and how inconsistent our offense has been. Well, actually, our offense was VERY consistent last night, just not in a good way. My question is, is it possible to OVER-EXERT on defense?

I know how important defense is, and I know how much K pushes it, and rightfully so. There are guys that can give max effort 100% of the time on both ends and be successful (GH seems to be one of those guys...his defense seems to fuel his offense and vice versa, and that's awesome for him).

However, it is VERY tough on a young man both mentally and physically to remain that focused on both ends. I know we don't want to "rest" on defense, but would we play better on offense if a couple guys could dial it down A TINY bit on defense once in a while? Or maybe give guys more breathers? They can rest on the bench for a minute. What good is great defense if you can't score on the other end?

Guys like GH and McClure, who is a defensive specialist anyway, can keep killing it on the defensive end, but maybe we don't need to be QUITE so aggressive on defense 100% of the time. Still play good, solid D, just not the hectic overplay of EVERY pass, for example. That taxes the help defense too, which further tires the guys out. Maybe throw in a zone a little more often to keep the offense guessing? There's more than one way to unsettle an opposing offense, and it doesn't require our guys to completely wear themselves out. We can't "rest" on the defensive end, but I don't think we can afford to be resting on the offensive end either.

Maybe the guys just don't have the gas to be doing all this driving and dishing and protecting the ball against athletic defenders when they're wearing themselves out so completely on D.

Take Scheyer. As his defense has become more and more solid and aggressive, his offense has gone in the toilet. I'm not saying he should stop playing defense, but maybe if he didn't try to be defensive player of the year EVERY time down the floor, he wouldn't be so tight on offense. Like I said, it's as much mental focus and fatigue as it is physical fatigue, probably MORE. And that's something it's hard to measure. I'm not a finely tuned athlete anymore (never was "finely-tuned"), but I know when I play pickup ball, the better my defensive game, the worse my shot. I end up hanging out under the basket getting rebounds rather than raining 3-balls. Speaking of finely-tuned, just like a race car, if you drive it against the redline 100% of the time, eventually it's gonna blow. These guys are in amazing shape, and the thrill of competition and their adrenaline can keep them going physically, but the mental sharpness required to play solid offense, setting good screens, using good footwork, protecting the ball, putting the ball in the basket, is HURT by those things, NOT helped. It's just biology.

Shane Battier was an amazing defensive player his first two years at Duke, but he had to grow into the rest, and he was MUCH more mature and focused than most players his age. We don't need a team full of first year Battiers, and MOST guys aren't capable of being a fourth year Battier. GH maybe.

Just a thought. I'm sure the smarter people on this thread can show me the hundreds of places I'm wrong.


I think your point is a good one, but as a current hoops player, I have to say, seldom do I feel like it's a choice between D and offense. Good D usually creates more easy opportunities, and you typically don't have to work so hard on offense.

Also, when the other team scores, it's easier for them to set up their press. Clemson last night was a great example, if we stop them or get a defensive rebound, it's easier for us to move the ball up the floor.

I also think that in the last couple years, K has been playing with a much deeper bench. 10 guys got significant minutes last night, and you can do that without losing too much on the defensive end. So fatigue shouldn't really be a factor.

The problem seems to be that we are a 3 man offensive team against top flight competition (Singler, Henderson, Scheyer) and Scheyer has been terrible lately. All the other guys are sub-par against good opponents (Nolan and Zoubek disappear, Thomas and McClure have less confidence in their game)

We are still a good team. We won't get a #1 seed, but we'll do well in the post-season tourneys, assuming that Henderson's wrist injury last night wasn't a big deal. We just have to stomach a humiliating loss for 3 days. I'm confident that K will right the ship.

[Reddevil]

Last night was an aberration - a mass letdown - nothing more. Better now than later. This team is no less conditioned than any other that has played suffocating D in the past. I'm willing to bet they work hard on playing against the full court press in the next few days. This is good for two reasons. The obvious - it helps against the press. The best reason though is that it forces offensive intensity. Coaches in the NFL often practice the two-minute drill to get the team out of an offensive slump. Forcing tempo in practice is a great slump breaker. To use the NFL as an example again, coaches actually have the team practice getting in and out of the huddle quickly. Millionaires are practicing the basics of just getting ready for a play! Why? Tempo and rhythm are just as important as execution, in fact they are a vital part of execution. Last night, the team was out of sorts. This is the same team that has looked great in stretches. They just need to get their bearings back, and they will. The old adage that "it is not what happens to you, but how you handle it" applies. This is a mature team, and an excellent coaching staff. They will be even better than before. Bring on the 'Canes!

[dyedwab]

The nice thing about being a pessimist is that you are rarely disappointed. :p

Seriously, I think a lot of folks were going a bit overboard on what we are based on a fairly soft early-season schedule, but this is a very good team. If we get favorable matchups it's entirely possible that we do make a FF run (or more). That we are in that mix is a testament to the team, the staff, and some really exceptional wings. Now that K is back from his four-year adventures I'm hopeful that recruiting will return to form and all the hard work will give us some of the unquestionably great teams and season that we've been missing since '04. Until that happens I'm doing my best to keep my expectations in line with the talent we run out there and I've been much less stressed as a result.


Two quick points.

1) It was NOT a soft early season schedule. According to Sagarin, Duke has the 9th rated SOS in the country. In the top 30, only Michigan State, Georgetown and West Virginia have higher SOS. We have played four games against the top 25 - only 6 teams in the top 25 have played more. I think that that idea that we had a weak schedule is brought about by the fact that we hammered 4 OOC top 30 teams (Xavier #8, Purdue #11, Davidson #26, and Georgetown #28). Playing a soft schedule is not what we did this year.

2) We have had big recruiting misses, but no more than other programs and our recruiting has been really good. We have 2, possibly 3 NBA level talents starting for us. I believe we have finally recovered from the years when it seemed like half the roster left early.

Our issue last night was not talent or matchups. We have repeatedly overcome them this year. Our issue was that Clemson did what they wanted to do better than we could do what we wanted to do, they beat us to every loose ball, and our players made bad decisions. Frankly, those things worried me more than the two above mentioned problems, which , if I agreed were true, are systemic and can't be solved before the next game if if we wanted them to be.

Having a game in which our players appeared to lack the desire to be playing? Now that's a problem.

[DevilCastDownfromDurham]

Two quick points.

1) It was NOT a soft early season schedule. According to Sagarin, Duke has the 9th rated SOS in the country. In the top 30, only Michigan State, Georgetown and West Virginia have higher SOS. We have played four games against the top 25 - only 6 teams in the top 25 have played more. I think that that idea that we had a weak schedule is brought about by the fact that we hammered 4 OOC top 30 teams (Xavier #8, Purdue #11, Davidson #26, and Georgetown #28). Playing a soft schedule is not what we did this year.

Sorry, I was unclear. I meant a soft ACC schedule. Until Wake we had played: V. Tech, FSU, Ga. Tech, N.C. State, and Maryland. We're now in a stretch of Wake, UVa, Clemson, Miami, UNC. If you'd asked me before the season I'd have expected that we'd look really good in those first five and less good in the second five. As a result folks were a bit too high on us then and are going to be a bit too down on us after the UNC game. The reality about Duke lies somewhere in between those two perceptions.


2) We have had big recruiting misses, but no more than other programs and our recruiting has been really good. We have 2, possibly 3 NBA level talents starting for us. I believe we have finally recovered from the years when it seemed like half the roster left early.

I agree that things are looking much better on the recruiting front, and we may not miss any more than the other top teams, but I'm more worried about how we stack up in terms of gets. We've been over this too many times but we haven't landed a legit C since Shel or a legit PG since Duhon. Any time a kid chooses Duke I'm very happy, but 1,000 more 5 star wings won't run the team or control the post like UNC, UConn, etc are able to do.

I love this team and I think I'm being more optimistic than a lot of Duke fans today (including a lot who were openly mocking anyone who expressed reservations about the team before last night). We're a strong-minded group that is doing a ton of great things to overcome our deficiencies. But roywhite's car analogy is dead on. This team doesn't have the horsepower to overcome "uphill" situations so we need things to break our way if we hope to have the sort of success K built earlier in the decade. Even so we're ahead of 90% of the teams out there and on par with almost everyone else. Let's be realistic about what we don't have and celebrate the character and effort we're seeing to make the most of what we do have.

[mike88]

I think the next few games will tell us alot about our team. In a "best case" scenario, Coach K will rally the troops, using the Clemson game as a wake-up call, and we will beat Miami and UNC at home, BC on the road, and St John's in NY; we may drop 1-2 more after that, but we will enter the ACC trnmt near the top and advance to the finals, followed by a trip to the Elite Eight.

On the other hand, if the Clemson loss is just a sign of our inability to compete with the better teams, we could drop 4-5 more conference games (UNC x 2, BC, VT, WF, and maybe 1-2 more), enter the ACC as a 4-6 seed, and be in the same position in the NCAAS as past years- struggling to get out of the first weekend.

I think the truth will lie somewhere between the two. One of Coach K's greatest achievements is convincing his players (and us fans) that the outcomes are dependent on what we do- if we win, it is because we played well; if we lose, it is because we didn't play well. At times (like last night) he acknowledges that this is not always the case: sometimes, our lack of success is as much the play of our opponents as our own performance. This is a careful psychological balance- our players need to feel "agency" or "self-efficacy" but sometimes it helps to be able to say "we just got out-played" and then try to figure out how to make sure the next time that we don't put ourselves in a position to allow the other team to do what they do best. That has been a trademark of our team over the years, but we have seemed to have trouble doing that later in the season the last few years. I hope we can regain it, starting on Saturday. If we don't, it could be a long day.

[bjornolf]

There may or may not be something to what you say, but I don't think the answer is coasting on defense. For one thing, K would never let them do it; he's always preaching 100% effort on every play. For another, the main reason this team has been so good this year is because they play so hard. Practically every opposing coach and player mentions it after almost every game -- how much energy Duke brought to the game and how hard it was for the other team to match it. Finally, IMO dialing it down on one end tends to lead to laziness on the other. And, conversely, ramping it up on one end energizes an athlete in all facets. It's hard to turn it on and off with any consistency.

Oh, I didn't mean coasting on defense at all. That's not what I meant. But when you start overplaying the passing lanes as much as we do, and being as aggressive as we are, we open ourselves to the backdoor cuts and drives that put pressure on our help defense, which not only wears out the guy playing the passing lanes, but also the help defenders. They all have to be just that much sharper mentally and physically. I'm just saying we don't have to play that kind of defense EVERY time down the court. You can play good defense without going for a steal every time a pass is thrown. Also, throwing in an extra zone or two here or there might help confuse the offense without having to wear down our guys so much. That's all I meant. I think in a way, we're almost TOO predictible with the agressiveness of our defense, especially in the first half. If we played a few possessions looking to shut off the backdoor cuts instead of overplaying and recovering constantly, we might keep them even more off-balance, cause they won't know what to expect. That's all I'm saying. I'm definitely not saying that our guys should coast. I'm just saying switch it up a little more. I love our defense. I just think it could be tweaked just a tiny bit so it's not so hard on our players.

You're absolutely right, though. They can't coast on defense. Not only would that go against everything Duke, it would take away their playing time!

[bjornolf]

Geraldsneighbor in the postgame thread had this to say: "Jon's release IMO has been off since the Xavier game. Jon used to penetrate and open the floor up for himself but as of late he has been so stationary with where he plays on offense it hasn't helped."

If he is indeed correct, wouldn't this play right to my theory about playing so hard on defense that he's got nothing left on the offensive end? Of course, geraldsneighbor could be wrong.

[MChambers]

Geraldsneighbor in the postgame thread had this to say: "Jon's release IMO has been off since the Xavier game. Jon used to penetrate and open the floor up for himself but as of late he has been so stationary with where he plays on offense it hasn't helped."

If he is indeed correct, wouldn't this play right to my theory about playing so hard on defense that he's got nothing left on the offensive end? Of course, geraldsneighbor could be wrong.

The weakness in this theory is that Duke almost every year plays defense this way, yet somehow usually has a pretty good offense.

[mike88]

I think the Xavier game was somewhat of an anomoly- they left Jon open a couple of times, he got hot, then he couldn't miss. Apart from that game, I think Jon has had consistent struggles getting his shot off against good defenders. Since we play better teams as the year progresses, this tends to appear more frequently as the year goes on, but i don't think it is fatigue in his case- it seems to have more to do with his (in)ability to spped up his release. He can mitigate it somewhat with shot-fakes and use of the drive to pass or get fouled, but very good defenses (and Clemson is one of them) don't bite on the fakes or commit bad fouls.

That said, I think Jon can be a very good 3rd or 4th threat (along with Nolan) when we run our offense through Gerald and Kyle. They are going to have to be the main scoring threats, as they have the athletic upside to beat strong defenders. Right now, task #1 is getting Kyle's mojo back. If that is fixed, I think we will be in much better shape.

Task #2 is getting Nolan to look for and take his shot more often. If both these things happen, I bet Jon's offense will return.

Running some possessions through the post may help as well, just to give the defenses some different looks.

[bjornolf]

Yeah, but I don't think Scheyer's ever played defense with quite this much intensity. He always played hard on defense, but this year, he looks like he wants to win DPOY EVERY time down the court. I don't think he's the type of player that can do that AND be successful offensively. Hey, I'm probably wrong. All I know is I keep hearing "this is the best duke defense I've seen in years" followed closely by "this is the most inconsistent duke offense I've seen in years". What's really changed? By logic, Scheyer, Paulus, Henderson, Singler, Zoubek, Smith, and Thomas have ALL been here over the last few years. If anything, their offense should be getting BETTER, not worse. What's the difference? They seem to be playing MUCH harder on defense. That seems to be the main difference to me.

Maybe their new coach, the king of b**a**, is injecting some of his defensive intensity into them, and their poor systems can't handle it. We can't all be the king, baby. ;) It's like that Wojo commercial a few years ago where he was injecting his dark blue blood into the rats. Some rats survived and became tenacious maneaters and ballhawks, but I'm sure some of them exploded like bloody popcorn! :eek:

[dukelifer]

Last night's game was unlike any most of us have ever seen in the regular season for a ranked Duke team. Even great Duke teams have had moments where they have been on their way to a 30 point loss and then somewhere in that process, they find themselves and manage to get the game in control. Some of those have led to miracle comebacks and some have led to 15 point losses. But in all those losses, Duke, at least, made it interesting. That did not happen last night and THAT to me is most concerning.

I am one who thinks that sport at this level is more about what is between the ears than athletic ability. The athletic difference between Gerald Henderson and KC Rivers is very small. The difference between Booker and Singler is small-Oglesby and Scheyer is small- and so on. What was different last night was the mind set going into the game and more importantly during the game. Clemson took that game from Duke and never let it go. There was some mention that Clemson is using a sports psychologist these days to help the team find a focus. Here, Purnell realizes that it is mindset of his team that needs tweaking - perhaps more that the X's and O's. Playing at a high level all the time is very hard. Great teams can do it over a season. We have seen Duke teams do it. That is what it takes to get to the top of the pile. Last night, Clemson was focused not to let that game get away from them and Duke had nothing to match it.

Until this team finds its focus, it will be hard to fight the battles that lay ahead. While not ideal, the talent and experience is there on this team to make a post season run- but the players need to play much better as a group when things are tough- particularly when on the road. Right now on offense, the whole is less than the sum of its parts. This needs to change.

It is also important to note that there is only one player left on this team (McClure) who knows what it takes to win a post-season tournament championship- and there is no player who has been on a final four team. This is a rare thing for a Duke team since 1986. In fact, I am not sure if there has been such a drought. We will see if this Duke team has the fight in them- but that, more than anything, is what it will take for this team to win in March.

[Matches]

It is also important to note that there is only one player left on this team (McClure) who knows what it takes to win a post-season tournament championship- and there is no player who has been on a final four team. This is a rare thing for a Duke team since 1986. In fact, I am not sure if there has been such a drought.

Paulus and Pocius were both on the 2006 ACC Championship team, and Paulus was the starting PG.

The Final Four is drought is getting (for us) long - but neither Wojo nor Ricky Price won a championship during their time at Duke, or played in a Final Four.

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

To borrow one of Coach Cutcliffe's sayings, the team's got to get off the floor like it was a hot iron and get back in the game.

[dukelifer]

Paulus and Pocius were both on the 2006 ACC Championship team, and Paulus was the starting PG.

The Final Four is drought is getting (for us) long - but neither Wojo nor Ricky Price won a championship during their time at Duke, or played in a Final Four.

Thanks for correcting on the ACC. I had forgotten about that one. You are right that Wojo/Ricky's senior year team did not have a player who had been on a final four team.

[elvis14]

I was glad to see this thread. After last night's game I wasn't very interested in coming on here and reading or posting about that game. Let's face it, it was pretty bad, next play. What was on my mind was "Where do we go from here" and it's been on my mind for a few games. I enjoyed reading this thread so far. Here are a few thoughts I have if anyone's interested :D



I don't need to win a national championship to consider a season a success.
I truly want Duke to be a legitimate contender for a NC, however
Last's night's game was "one of those games" and I'm not going to get too worked up over it. But we can use it as a game that magnifies some weaknesses
I'd like to see us push the ball more take the ball to the hole more on the break. It seems like we pull up and try to set something up unless we have obvious numbers. Forget that, guys like G and Nolan need to attack the hoop on the break and get some baskets and pick up some fouls (I'm a big fan of picking up fouls)
I'd like to see Nolan attack more off the dribble (not just off the break). It seems as though he can get in the lane and do damage when he wants (or when K wants) but he doesn't try that often. Get him driving more and practice not just taking it to the hole and hitting pull ups (two of his strengths) but also passing for layups and open 3's (two of his weaknesses)
Even Gerald seems like he could attack more off the dribble. It seems like at times he gets the ball, we clear out and give him an NBA-game like 1 on 1 opportunity and he passes many of them up when he could attack. I'd like to see him try to beat his man off the dribble more and make things happen for himself and others. Note, this is somewhat minor b/c G! has been playing fantastic of late.
I love Z but he is really only effective in certain situations where he has a favorable match up. Lance continues to play hard but just isn't real effective game in game out
I'd start playing MP1 more. I'd start him for a while and give him more minutes at the expense of Z and Lance. You can practice all you want but the game won't slow down for you until you play in real game situations. MP1 brings more to the table than Z or Lance but he needs to learn to use it.
I love Dave McClure. Not in a man-crush way :D but I love how he plays defense and rebounds. I'd like to see him look for his shot more. No, I don't want to see him jacking up 15 shots a game but if he's wide open for 3, take it. If the lane is there, take it. Pull up available, take it. Last night he gave a ball fake, moved into the lane and took a jumper. He missed it but I loved it. I don't need a scoring machine there but he could score more than he has been if he simply takes what the defense is giving him more often
Speaking of taking what the D is giving, Nolan needs to pull the trigger when he's open....without hesitation
Jon? What, if anything can be done to get him going. To truly contend, I've thought we needed Kyle, G and Jon playing at a high level, Nolan to play pretty good and aggressive, and everyone else to fill their roles. I'm not attacking Jon here. We all know he's struggling and those struggles have really affected our offense. He brings so much to the table in all parts of the game but right now, he can't throw it in the ocean. If he gets it back, great. If not, then what? We would need him to shoot less and maybe even play less time??? I hate that idea. In that scenario who do we turn to on offense? Also, scoring is not the only thing he brings to the offense but right now things are just not working with him shooting poorly.

I'm not suggesting that "it's over" or that we need to overhaul everything. Kyle and G are a great foundation to build around but I think there are few adjustments we can make to improve. I think we are very good but every team can make improvements. If we make some adjustments now (like starting MP1) we might be able to build some momentum going into the tournaments.

[ChicagoCrazy84]

Everyone, stop with the 5 paragraph long posts on your thoughts on what Duke should do to regroup.

It's quite simple actually with my two suggestions. Number 1? Bring Scheyer in from off the bench and go with McClure for a couple games. Number 2? Put Zoubek near the end of the bench, put him in for certain situations, but not for extensive minutes. Play Plumlee 10-15 minutes. If I was Coach K, I would actually have Zoubek play Plumlee 1 on 1 in practice and whoever wins, that's who gets the minutes. I am sure Plum would win.

[RelativeWays]

How about the Ric Flair Guide to Victory: Win at all costs and cheat if necessary. We would have had a lot less trouble with Trevor Booker had LT thwacked him with a steel chair when the refs weren't looking. Classy? well no, but effective.......very effective. WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

[Ian]

The problem with the offense is that we can't get easy baskets. How often have you seen a drive and dish for a layup or dunk this year from our offense?

Even the creators on this team aren't very good at creating for others, only for themselves, and the shots they create for others usually involve a long jump shot. because we don't have anyone near the hoop who can finish. Lance and Z get's blocked all the time in there on the few times we try to create for them and the guards have mostly given up trying to set them up.

Which is why I don't understand why we don't run and gun more. We can't get easy baskets in half court, we need to get it in transition before the defense sets.

Last night for example, even on the occasions when we broke the press, we always pulled it back instead of attacking. The only way to beat the press is to make the other team pay by getting easy baskets, you do that a few times and they'll have to take it off. We never made them pay once last night, so of course they felt free to throw the kitchen sink at us all night with the press.

[Lauderdevil]

Everything about this game suggests to me that Coach K saw that his team had been punched in the mouth and was unlikely to recover, and that by midway through the second half he was coaching for the long-term learning. That's why he played the deep bench (putting Elliot and Marty in fairly early), why he sat impassively for the latter part of the game, why he didn't call time-outs. He wanted the team to feel how painful losing your composure can be. He wanted the team -- everyone on the team, hence the heavy substitutions -- to be accountable for the drubbing. And, as the AP story said, it's why he called the timeout at the end.

To the extent this team was feeling pretty good about itself -- number one, trouncing Maryland by 41 and all -- they've now been broken down. They went to practice today knowing they need K to build them back up (whether he did it today or he took them down another several steps today, he'll build them up before Miami). They will run through any wall he sets up. Any time they show signs of complacency, or of fear, from here on out, he'll remind them of Clemson. They know they're not good enough to win without complete discipline.

This one was emphatically NOT "Next Play." He wants them to think about this for a long time.

My own view: this is a damn good team, a Final Four candidate and a shot at a national championship. I think K could have coached them to a more respectable 15-point loss last night. But he chose a route that will more likely lead to future success. And hell if I'm going to doubt him on that.

[dukegirlinsc]

I have NOTHING but confidence in Coach K, the entire coaching staff, and the entire team. These games happen. They aren't fun, by any means at all. I always try to look at the positive in these situations (sometimes it's hard, I knowww) and I'm hoping this is one of those motivational games that turns the entire season around.

[geraldsneighbor]

Everyone, stop with the 5 paragraph long posts on your thoughts on what Duke should do to regroup.

It's quite simple actually with my two suggestions. Number 1? Bring Scheyer in from off the bench and go with McClure for a couple games. Number 2? Put Zoubek near the end of the bench, put him in for certain situations, but not for extensive minutes. Play Plumlee 10-15 minutes. If I was Coach K, I would actually have Zoubek play Plumlee 1 on 1 in practice and whoever wins, that's who gets the minutes. I am sure Plum would win.

That would be entertaining. But in all seriousness, Plumlee defensively is decent because he can move laterally. I think EW needs to sort of take a seat as well.

[DU Band Prez 88]

Everything about this game suggests to me that Coach K saw that his team had been punched in the mouth and was unlikely to recover, and that by midway through the second half he was coaching for the long-term learning. That's why he played the deep bench (putting Elliot and Marty in fairly early), why he sat impassively for the latter part of the game, why he didn't call time-outs. He wanted the team to feel how painful losing your composure can be. He wanted the team -- everyone on the team, hence the heavy substitutions -- to be accountable for the drubbing. And, as the AP story said, it's why he called the timeout at the end.

To the extent this team was feeling pretty good about itself -- number one, trouncing Maryland by 41 and all -- they've now been broken down. They went to practice today knowing they need K to build them back up (whether he did it today or he took them down another several steps today, he'll build them up before Miami). They will run through any wall he sets up. Any time they show signs of complacency, or of fear, from here on out, he'll remind them of Clemson. They know they're not good enough to win without complete discipline.

This one was emphatically NOT "Next Play." He wants them to think about this for a long time.

My own view: this is a damn good team, a Final Four candidate and a shot at a national championship. I think K could have coached them to a more respectable 15-point loss last night. But he chose a route that will more likely lead to future success. And hell if I'm going to doubt him on that.

Thank you for your post, I agree with everything you say, especially the last two paragraphs & also your opinion that he could have coached them to a "more respectable" 15-point (or 16-point, or however many points) loss, vs. the rout the game turned into capped with the last-minute time out. The team will recover, significantly, and learn from this loss.

Go Duke, beat Miami, and beat UNC!

[Oriole Way]

I have NOTHING but confidence in Coach K, the entire coaching staff, and the entire team. These games happen. They aren't fun, by any means at all. I always try to look at the positive in these situations (sometimes it's hard, I knowww) and I'm hoping this is one of those motivational games that turns the entire season around.

To be honest, these games don't happen. Not to Duke. Sure, we will have losses where we look flat, the shots don't fall, and the other team is playing their best game. But a near 30-pt blowout simply never happens under Coach K, even when he was out of commission in 1995 and the team was in shambles. You have to go back to UNLV in '90 to find a similar margin.

[Chitowndevil]

To be honest, these games don't happen. Not to Duke. Sure, we will have losses where we look flat, the shots don't fall, and the other team is playing their best game. But a near 30-pt blowout simply never happens under Coach K, even when he was out of commission in 1995 and the team was in shambles. You have to go back to UNLV in '90 to find a similar margin.

So this is related to a question that's been bothering me all day. It's a little off topic but this seemed the closest related thread.

The question is, do Final Four teams get blown out like that in February or March? I looked back the last few years, and the worst regular season losses suffered by Final Four teams were by 2007 Ohio State, which lost I believe 86-60 to Florida on 12/23 (Greg Oden was just coming back from hand injury and was 2-6 from the floor), and by 2006 George Mason, which lost to Creighton 72-52 on 11/22. Going back to 2003, I couldn't find any other Final Four teams which lost a game by 20 points or more before the tournament.

I know 1991 Duke last badly in the ACC tournament to Carolina. But can people come up with any other examples of a team that lost a game by 20+ points and came back to make the Final Four? Particularly if the loss was in February or March?

By the way this is not a "sky is falling" thing. It's just trivia; I'm a stat geek and just like to know stuff like this.

[Vincetaylor]

The problem is point guard play. No Duke team in history has gone to a final four with PG play like this. We have point guards who turn it over just as much as they get assists. Just look back at the stats. Quin Snyder was the worst PG to take us to the FF and I would definitely take him over Nolan or Greg this year. The others...Tommy Amaker, Bobby Hurley, Chris Duhon, Will Avery, and Grant Hill(Grant basically played point in '94). With no improvement at PG, I will be very surprised if we make the Elite 8.

[arnie]

The problem is point guard play. No Duke team in history has gone to a final four with PG play like this. We have point guards who turn it over just as much as they get assists. Just look back at the stats. Quin Snyder was the worst PG to take us to the FF and I would definitely take him over Nolan or Greg this year. The others...Tommy Amaker, Bobby Hurley, Chris Duhon, Will Avery, and Grant Hill(Grant basically played point in '94). With no improvement at PG, I will be very surprised if we make the Elite 8.

Good point - the only point guards K recruited (and started at that position) that did not go to the final four are Wojo and Paulus - at least Paulus has one more shot.

[House G]

I have 2 questions that have probably been discussed at some point in the past--they are unrelated and more points of curiousity for me:

1) Obviously Coach K prefers man-to-man defense over any other. Can someone (with more basketball knowledge than I) explain to me why a 7 foot center is frequently trying to guard any opposing player 18-20 feet from the basket?

2) Does anyone know or would anyone like to speculate as to whether any of the Duke coaches read DBR and any of these posts?

[JDev]

I have 2 questions that have probably been discussed at some point in the past--they are unrelated and more points of curiousity for me:

1) Obviously Coach K prefers man-to-man defense over any other. Can someone (with more basketball knowledge than I) explain to me why a 7 foot center is frequently trying to guard any opposing player 18-20 feet from the basket?

2) Does anyone know or would anyone like to speculate as to whether any of the Duke coaches read DBR and any of these posts?

1.) I think because so much of what Duke does defensively is predicated on making offenses uncomfortable, and forcing them to operate farther away from the basket than they are accustomed. This involves things like hawking the passing lanes and hounding the ball-handler so that they have to turn their body and can't initiate as they regularly would, and altering a team's sets (and ideally generating turnovers). Obviously, most of the people Zoo is guarding don't have much range after 15 feet, if that far. Plus, his skill set is not one to do a lot of aggressive perimeter defending. That being said, he has to get out there as best he can, because if a big is that far out and left basically unguarded, he becomes something of a safety valve to the ball handlers. If they are in a jam and can't run their sets, or the wings are denied, they can drop it off to the big guy, cut, receive the ball back, and re-initiate, for example. Most bigs aren't going to score the ball from there, but it counteracts what Duke is trying to do if there is an unguarded man out there. There is obviously more to it, but that is some in the name of brevity.

2.) No idea, but that would be neat to know

[dukelifer]

So this is related to a question that's been bothering me all day. It's a little off topic but this seemed the closest related thread.

The question is, do Final Four teams get blown out like that in February or March? I looked back the last few years, and the worst regular season losses suffered by Final Four teams were by 2007 Ohio State, which lost I believe 86-60 to Florida on 12/23 (Greg Oden was just coming back from hand injury and was 2-6 from the floor), and by 2006 George Mason, which lost to Creighton 72-52 on 11/22. Going back to 2003, I couldn't find any other Final Four teams which lost a game by 20 points or more before the tournament.

I know 1991 Duke last badly in the ACC tournament to Carolina. But can people come up with any other examples of a team that lost a game by 20+ points and came back to make the Final Four? Particularly if the loss was in February or March?

By the way this is not a "sky is falling" thing. It's just trivia; I'm a stat geek and just like to know stuff like this.

I wondered the same thing but was too lazy to check it out. But I wondered whether there is something telling about the 20 point mark. Does a last minute run to take a 24 point loss to a 16 point loss mean that the loss was any less bad. Unless one wants to dissect all the games, it is hard to know what really happened that led to the big deficit- did someone get in early foul trouble- did a player get ejected- was another team playing out of their heads? One example from the past was Maryland vs Virginia 2001. Maryland was #9 and Virginia #11. Maryland was down by 12 at the half and ended up losing by 21. Not sure what exactly happened in between though. That Maryland team also lost 5 out of 6 games in the middle of the ACC season (Jan 27-Feb 14) with two blowout losses and still made it to the final four. So you never know.

[House G]

Thanks. I understand what you are saying. It seems to me, however, that there is a tradeoff for Zoo being this far from the low post--it negates much of his shot-blocking ability and takes away the intimidation factor for guards penetrating to the basket. I believe it is also easier for teams with more than one big to post up one of our (perhaps) smaller/weaker players.

[dukelifer]

The problem is point guard play. No Duke team in history has gone to a final four with PG play like this. We have point guards who turn it over just as much as they get assists. Just look back at the stats. Quin Snyder was the worst PG to take us to the FF and I would definitely take him over Nolan or Greg this year. The others...Tommy Amaker, Bobby Hurley, Chris Duhon, Will Avery, and Grant Hill(Grant basically played point in '94). With no improvement at PG, I will be very surprised if we make the Elite 8.

History is a long time. The 1977-1978 team did not have an elite point guard and made it to the championship game.

[ron mckernan]

- I know Grant Wahl (I think) does his Magic 8 every year around now of teams who he believes can legitimately win the NCAA title. He claims great success, and bases it on some very specific criteria. One of which is "championship teams don't get blown out...if you've lost by 25-30 points, you're out." Ominous for us, though it would be awfully funny if Wake or Duke breaks that rule the year that Grant is MIA.

- Regarding the "let's just run & gun" theory, it would seem to me that if your team isn't fast enough, athletic enough, or good enough ball handlers to create their own shots or get to the basket in the halfcourt, they're probably also not fast/athletic/skilled enough to consistently outrun defenders on the fastbreak or avoid getting their shot blocked when they get to the hoop.

- That being said, I don't buy the "we can't create our own shot" theory either. Nolan, G, Singler and are all be fast/athletic/skilled enough (and Scheyer should be crafty enough), they're just not all doing it for some reason. Lack of confidence, defenses sagging off the post players, and never really setting up an offense in the 1st place that might lead to such an opportunity would seem the obvious culprits. No college team has 3+ Kobe/MJ/LeBron-type guys who can "create their own shot" at will.

- I find the "Coack K let it get away to teach them a lesson" idea very interesting. Conventional wisdom says he would never leave a team rudderless and allow them to (let's face it) give up. But, obviously the "model" of the last few years, in which we're in every game, even when maybe we don't deserve to be, hasn't led to March success. Only time will tell...

- Yes, I'm sure Coach K is taking notes from the DBR boards at this very minute! Sure.

- Not being able to watch the Miami game out here on the West Coast, next Wed. will be the most anxiety-inducing UNC matchup I can remember...

[-bdbd]

Call me clairvoyant, but I strongly suspect that K has already taken care of much of this as we speak... in the form of incredibly brutal practice sessions the last couple of days. Remember Grant Hill breaking his nose in one such post-bad-loss practice circa 93-94? I'd lay good money that the paint was peeling on the walls from some of the "coaching" that was going on! :eek:

That said, I expect he'll do something more visible on Sat to shake them up in the Miami game - start a couple guys who've been coming off the bench. One I wouldn't be surprised to see starting Sat. is Lance, given his effort and PRIDE on Wed. (apparently him alone). Wouldn't be terrible to see Scheyer come off the bench again, if just to take the pressure off him some, maybe giving way to McClure or a second PG. :confused:

We'll see soon, but I don't think I'd want to be in Miami's shoes Saturday. The Dukies will be fired up, to be sure. C'mon Crazies -- give em an intensity lift!!

-BDBD :mad:

[Kedsy]

So this is related to a question that's been bothering me all day. It's a little off topic but this seemed the closest related thread.

The question is, do Final Four teams get blown out like that in February or March? I looked back the last few years, and the worst regular season losses suffered by Final Four teams were by 2007 Ohio State, which lost I believe 86-60 to Florida on 12/23 (Greg Oden was just coming back from hand injury and was 2-6 from the floor), and by 2006 George Mason, which lost to Creighton 72-52 on 11/22. Going back to 2003, I couldn't find any other Final Four teams which lost a game by 20 points or more before the tournament.

I know 1991 Duke last badly in the ACC tournament to Carolina. But can people come up with any other examples of a team that lost a game by 20+ points and came back to make the Final Four? Particularly if the loss was in February or March?

By the way this is not a "sky is falling" thing. It's just trivia; I'm a stat geek and just like to know stuff like this.

I'm know the 2002 Maryland national champion lost by 20+ to Duke, in mid- to late-January. I know the 1983 NCSU national champion had two 18 point losses in a row (UNC and Wake) at the end of January. I know the 1999 UConn national champion lost by 17 in February and that the 2004 UConn national champs lost by 16 to Georgia Tech who they later defeated in the championship game. I know the 1979 Michigan State national champs with Magic Johnson lost by 18 in late January to Northwestern, who was one of the worst teams in the Big 10 at the time. I don't feel like doing the full research, but I'm sure there were other Final Four teams who suffered 20+ point defeats, or at least high-teen defeats. Personally, I'm not sure any of it matters. As others have suggested, how is a 30 point deficit with 10 minutes to play that gets down to 17 during scrub time any different from a 24 point shellacking? A bad loss is a bad loss.

It's certainly possible that neither Duke nor Wake will make the Final Four, but I don't think it will be because the teams last Wednesday couldn't lower the deficits from 27 to 19 in the final minutes.

[sivartrenrag]

All I know is that if I don't see some floor-slappin' tomorrow I'm going to be disappointed.

[DukeDevilDeb]

It's like that Wojo commercial a few years ago where he was injecting his dark blue blood into the rats. Some rats survived and became tenacious maneaters and ballhawks, but I'm sure some of them exploded like bloody popcorn! :eek:

Do you have any idea that "a few years ago" is really a decade ago?!? That was Steve's senior year: 1998.

Time flies when you're having fun! :D

[sivartrenrag]

I think all the Duke players should sit around and watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9_pPqWfI84

That should get them fired up.

[ArnieMc]

Do you have any idea that "a few years ago" is really a decade ago?!? That was Steve's senior year: 1998.

Time flies when you're having fun! :DTime flies when you don't get enough oxygen to your brain! Now, dagnabit, where's that remote?