Charting Duke vs. Clemson

[Jumbo]

Nothing to see here. Just move along ... on to the numbers ...

Individuals
Marty Pocius 0-2 (-2)
Kyle Singler 33-40 (-7)
Miles Plumlee 13-20 (-7)
Nolan Smith 27-38 (-11)
Brian Zoubek 13-24 (-11)
Jon Scheyer 36-49 (-13)
Lance Thomas 31-44 (-13)
Elliot Williams 10-25 (-15)
Greg Paulus 20-36 (-16)
Gerald Henderson 36-56 (-20)
Dave McClure 16-36 (-20)

Per 40 Minutes
Kyle Singler -11.7
Jon Scheyer -17.9
Nolan Smith -19.1
Lance Thomas -20
Miles Plumlee -23.3
Gerald Henderson -30.8
Greg Paulus -35.6
Brian Zoubek -40
Marty Pocius -40
Dave McClure -44.4
Elliot Williams -54.5

Lineups
Paulus-Scheyer-Henderson-McClure-Singler 4-3 (+1)
Smith-Scheyer-Singler-Thomas-Plumlee (x2) 10-10 (0)
Smith-Scheyer-Henderson-Singler-Zoubek 2-2 (0)
Paulus-Scheyer-Henderson-Singler-Thomas 2-2 (0)
Paulus-Scheyer-Pocius-McClure-Zoubek 0-0 (0)
Paulus-Scheyer-Pocius-Henderson-Singler 0-0 (0)
Paulus-Scheyer-Henderson-Thomas-Plumlee 2-3 (-1)
Paulus-Henderson-McClure-Thomas-Zoubek 2-4 (-2)
Paulus-Scheyer-McClure-Singler-Zoubek 0-2 (-2)
Paulus-Scheyer-Pocius-McClure-Thomas 0-2 (-2)
Smith-Williams-Henderson-McClure-Thomas 0-2 (-2)
Smith-Scheyer-Henderson-Singler-Thomas (x3) 15-18 (-3)
Paulus-Scheyer-Williams-McClure-Plumlee 1-4 (-3)
Smith-Scheyer-Henderson-Thomas-Plumlee 0-3 (-3)
Smith-Williams-Henderson-McClure-Singler 0-3 (-3)
Paulus-Williams-Henderson-McClure-Zoubek (x2) 9-16 (-7)

[Bob Green]

I only watched about eight minutes of the game due to an extremely busy day at work so I cannot comment on anything positive or negative. However, in reviewing the +/-, this line-up caught my eye:


Smith-Scheyer-Singler-Thomas-Plumlee (x2) 10-10 (0)

It would be interesting to hear comments from those who did watch the game.

[Highlander]

I only watched about eight minutes of the game due to an extremely busy day at work so I cannot comment on anything positive or negative..

Don't worry, there really wasn't anything positive to report, other than Lance Thomas showed some offensive fire. It was a good game to miss.


However, in reviewing the +/-, this line-up caught my eye:

Smith-Scheyer-Singler-Thomas-Plumlee (x2) 10-10 (0)

It would be interesting to hear comments from those who did watch the game.

Honestly, not much of anything we did worked. Plumlee had a few nice plays, but everytime we got a couple of stops and started a run, Clemson would answer and we'd go back down by 20. That lineup was probably in there for one of those sequences. Ogilsby is Clemson's 3 point specialist, and he was particularly effective in killing momentum on our side.

Then again, when your center (Booker) is banking in 3 pointers (shades of Hansbrough doing so last year), it just ain't your night.

[CDu]

I only watched about eight minutes of the game due to an extremely busy day at work so I cannot comment on anything positive or negative. However, in reviewing the +/-, this line-up caught my eye:



It would be interesting to hear comments from those who did watch the game.

Hard to take anything away from that line, as it's hard to tell if that line was matched against Booker for substantial time. And I'm guessing that was a second-half lineup, which means all bets are off as to the way in which the game was being played by Clemson.

Once Duke got down big in the second half, Clemson started fooling around. Sure - Clemson still scored some points, but Oglesby jacking up long threes and missing dunks illustrates that they were in playground mode.

[Nittany Devil]

If only Coach K played the Paulus-Scheyer-Henderson-McClure-Singler combination for 40 minutes, then we would have won!



(Just kidding...)

[pfrduke]

Lineups
Paulus-Scheyer-Henderson-McClure-Singler 4-3 (+1)
Smith-Scheyer-Singler-Thomas-Plumlee (x2) 10-10 (0)
Smith-Scheyer-Henderson-Singler-Zoubek 2-2 (0)
Paulus-Scheyer-Henderson-Singler-Thomas 2-2 (0)
Paulus-Scheyer-Pocius-McClure-Zoubek 0-0 (0)
Paulus-Scheyer-Pocius-Henderson-Singler 0-0 (0)
Paulus-Scheyer-Henderson-Thomas-Plumlee 2-3 (-1)
Paulus-Henderson-McClure-Thomas-Zoubek 2-4 (-2)
Paulus-Scheyer-McClure-Singler-Zoubek 0-2 (-2)
Paulus-Scheyer-Pocius-McClure-Thomas 0-2 (-2)
Smith-Williams-Henderson-McClure-Thomas 0-2 (-2)
Smith-Scheyer-Henderson-Singler-Thomas (x3) 15-18 (-3)
Paulus-Scheyer-Williams-McClure-Plumlee 1-4 (-3)
Smith-Scheyer-Henderson-Thomas-Plumlee 0-3 (-3)
Smith-Williams-Henderson-McClure-Singler 0-3 (-3)
Paulus-Williams-Henderson-McClure-Zoubek (x2) 9-16 (-7)

That really shows how soundly we were beaten when only one lineup outscored Clemson. Usually there's a little more in-game variation, but there was just nothing we threw out there that worked.

[MIKESJ73]

With Hendo, Kyle, and Jon on the court at the same time we were only outscored 23-25. It seems like they never (7 out of the 20 line-ups) were out there together. The loss does remind me of the uNC game in 91. Completely overmatched and dominated. Hopelessness ensued but I think the team finished out pretty well that year. Did it appear to anyone else that K may have wanted our guys to get a slap down? I don't know if he really was "looking for a spark" or just a calculated beat down. Some of those lineups obviously wouldn't score points. I'm not trying to take anything from Clemson, they beat us, but they aren't 20 points better than us.

[tbyers11]

With Hendo, Kyle, and Jon on the court at the same time we were only outscored 23-25. It seems like they never (7 out of the 20 line-ups) were out there together. The loss does remind me of the uNC game in 91. Completely overmatched and dominated. Hopelessness ensued but I think the team finished out pretty well that year. Did it appear to anyone else that K may have wanted our guys to get a slap down? I don't know if he really was "looking for a spark" or just a calculated beat down. Some of those lineups obviously wouldn't score points. I'm not trying to take anything from Clemson, they beat us, but they aren't 20 points better than us.

I don't think that K wanted our guys to get a smackdown, but it did appear that he wanted the team to try and play through their troubles without making any drastic strategy changes. Particularly in the first half, it seemed to me that he thought that our strategy was sound but the execution was sorely lacking.

In the second half, there were definitely some strategy changes (we full court pressed for a little bit and went to a 1-3-1 zone for a bit on defense) that appeared to be an attempt to shake things up. In the last 8 minutes or so, we never really saw our "top" lineup (Jon, Gerald, Kyle, Nolan/Greg, Dave/Lance/Zoubek) out there together because I think K may have realized that nothing was working and he just wanted to see how his top 10 players (scholarship players minus Marty and Olek) played in that difficult situation.

There must have been some reasoning behind those hockey-like substitution patterns at the end, right? :confused:

[mgtr]

If only Coach K played the Paulus-Scheyer-Henderson-McClure-Singler combination for 40 minutes, then we would have won!



(Just kidding...)

I don't think that we would have won, but I like that lineup a lot. Of course, it also depends what team you playing -- Smith might well need to be in there against a quick point guard (like, for just a randomly picked example, Lawson). However, I like almost any lineup with McClure, as long as there is some scoring potential in with him.

[allenmurray]

I don't think that we would have won, but I like that lineup a lot. Of course, it also depends what team you playing -- Smith might well need to be in there against a quick point guard (like, for just a randomly picked example, Lawson). However, I like almost any lineup with McClure, as long as there is some scoring potential in with him.

I like any line-up that has McClure in it. I'm not saying he is one of the best players, or deserves to start over anyone else, I just love to watch him play. Good things happen when he is on the court. He is also an incredibly nice guy.

[ChicagoCrazy84]

I personally would have liked to see Coach K bench all the starters for the last 10 minutes and just played the reserves. I know it's like conceeding (sp.?) a loss, but that would have sent a strong message.
For the starters to sit there and see the bench gut it out against a dominant team like Clemson would have gotten their emotions going.

[mgtr]

I might try to second-guess Coach K on whether a given player should be playing more or less minutes, but I sure wouldn't second-guess him on psychology.

[chrisheery]

he should have been +/- 0. His layup should have been called a goaltend, which would have kept things even.