PDA

View Full Version : Now what...



DukeBlood
07-17-2009, 12:24 AM
I was waiting for someone to confirm Andre enrolling a year early. Now that he has. Just wondering everyone's opinion on a few things.

There are nine players that will most likely see major minutes. Smith, Scheyer, Dawkins, Kelly, Singler, Thomas, Miles P., Mason P., and Zoubek. If history repeats itself, which it usually does in this cicrumstance.. Coach K will most likely go to his Top-8 players. He may find time for that Ninth.

Whose time does he potentially take? My guess would be Ryan Kelly will lose a few minutes due to this. He was one of the players that was probably going to see some time out on the wing, atleast offensively. Defensively he would struggle against quicker, more athletic players.

Anyone believe Andre has a good chance at being on the ACC Freshman team? Not many guards that have as good of a chance as Andre. FSU's Micheal Snaer has a good chance at filling a void. Strickland and McDonald have both been having good summers. Perhaps one of them could. Anyway, where does Andre rank compared to these guys? Dawkins was the backup plan to McDonald but has since blown up as a player.

Most importantly, Does this change Dukes style of play at all? No idea here. Maybe some closer to the program may have heard something threw the grape vine.

DUKIE V(A)
07-17-2009, 01:02 AM
If Dawkins is as good as I think he is, I expect that he has a great shot at being on the All ACC Freshman team. More importantly, I think he makes us once again the team to beat in the ACC and a threat to go deep into March.

Indoor66
07-17-2009, 06:53 AM
If Dawkins is as good as I think he is, I expect that he has a great shot at being on the All ACC Freshman team. More importantly, I think he makes us once again the team to beat in the ACC and a threat to go deep into March.

Please remember that often said saying: The best thing about freshmen is that they become sophomores. True impact freshmen are few and far between. I, like others here hope the best for Andre, but lets allow him to grow up like almost all Duke basketball players have had to grow up.

Jackson
07-17-2009, 07:30 AM
Regardless of how well Dawkins progresses throughout this coming season, he at the very least provides much needed backcourt depth. At worst, he gives a few minutes rest to Smith and Scheyer and allows them to perform with more energy at crunch time. At best, he gives us a dimension of athleticism that we were certainly lacking prior to his early arrival. If he is able to turn into an All Freshmen team type performer, things are really looking up.

CardinalBlue
07-17-2009, 08:06 AM
Just for conversation's sake, considering UNC will (as usual) be our biggest competition for ACC race, thought i'd jot down my thoughts on how we'll match up:

1.
Duke- Scheyer
UNC- Drew2

Edge: Duke (different styles, i know, but unless Drew gets a lot better there's no way he's the player scheyer is this year)

2.
Duke - Smith
UNC- Strickland

Edge: Duke (easily)

3-
Duke- Singler
UNC- Ginyard

Edge: Duke (very easily, at least on offense)

4-
Duke- LT
UNC- Deon Thompson

Edge: UNC (Thompson's offense is much better than LT's)

5-
Duke- MP2
UNC- Ed Davis

Edge: UNC (hard to tell by how much given we've never seen mason, if he's even gonna be the starter... but Davis is projected as a lottery pick)

Bench-
Duke- Dawkins/Kelly/MP1/Zoubek
UNC- LMac/Henson/Zeller/Wears

Edge: Toss-up (2 incoming 5-stars each, plus a few big men subs with potential to do much more)

X-Factor-
Duke- Experience (Singler, Scheyer, Smith)
UNC- Frontcourt Athleticism (Henson, Davis, Thompson)

Edge: Gonna say Duke, because Kyle Singler is the man.

rotogod00
07-17-2009, 08:12 AM
I was waiting for someone to confirm Andre enrolling a year early. Now that he has. Just wondering everyone's opinion on a few things.

There are nine players that will most likely see major minutes. Smith, Scheyer, Dawkins, Kelly, Singler, Thomas, Miles P., Mason P., and Zoubek. If history repeats itself, which it usually does in this cicrumstance.. Coach K will most likely go to his Top-8 players. He may find time for that Ninth.

Whose time does he potentially take? My guess would be Ryan Kelly will lose a few minutes due to this. He was one of the players that was probably going to see some time out on the wing, atleast offensively. Defensively he would struggle against quicker, more athletic players.

Anyone believe Andre has a good chance at being on the ACC Freshman team? Not many guards that have as good of a chance as Andre. FSU's Micheal Snaer has a good chance at filling a void. Strickland and McDonald have both been having good summers. Perhaps one of them could. Anyway, where does Andre rank compared to these guys? Dawkins was the backup plan to McDonald but has since blown up as a player.

Most importantly, Does this change Dukes style of play at all? No idea here. Maybe some closer to the program may have heard something threw the grape vine.

I think he takes time away from Nolan and Scheyer actually. Not having to play close to 40 minutes a nite will be a very good thing.

CDu
07-17-2009, 08:35 AM
I have no expectations of what Dawkins will provide, other than that he'll give us at least 10-15 minutes at the guard spot, allowing Scheyer and Smith to get some rest and avoid serious foul trouble, and keeping Singler and the bigs to their more natural positions. Ideally, he'd be able to contribute 20-25 minutes and have Scheyer, Smith, Dawkins, and Singler cover all of the minutes at the three smaller positions on the floor. That would allow Thomas, Kelly, the Plumlees and Zoubek to rotate at the big spots, which takes pressure off of those guys to produce.

I think he'll take some minutes (5-10) from Scheyer and Smith for sure. The rest of his minutes will come (I think) from the bigger guys - whoever is least ready/able to contribute but would have been forced to play more minutes when Singler was forced to play the "2" defensively. That could be any of the five bigger guys. It's hard to say right now.

Matches
07-17-2009, 09:23 AM
I still expect to see Scheyer on the court for 35+ once we get into the meat of the schedule, possibly Smith too - but Dawkins allows them to get an occasional rest at least, provides depth in case of injury and/or foul trouble, and opens back up the possibility of playing three guards together at times.

If he takes minutes away from someone, it'll be a few here and there from Smith and Scheyer, and possibly some from the big guys as the lineup gets a little smaller.

CDu
07-17-2009, 09:29 AM
I still expect to see Scheyer on the court for 35+ once we get into the meat of the schedule, possibly Smith too - but Dawkins allows them to get an occasional rest at least, provides depth in case of injury and/or foul trouble, and opens back up the possibility of playing three guards together at times.

If he takes minutes away from someone, it'll be a few here and there from Smith and Scheyer, and possibly some from the big guys as the lineup gets a little smaller.

I definitely expect Scheyer to see 35 mpg. It was Smith that I was less sure about. We're talking about a guy who's never averaged 22 mpg, and we are/were requiring him to go 35 minutes per game. I think seeing Smith drop back to about 30 mpg and maybe cutting the expectation for Scheyer back from 37-38 mpg to around 35 mpg would allow each of them to be more aggressive defensively.

It's not as much about energy/fatigue as it is about being able to be aggressive defensively and not worry as much about the occasional foul. Without Dawkins, Scheyer and Smith would need to be much less aggressive because the can't get in foul trouble. With Dawkins, they can be a bit more aggressive. That's why I see Dawkins taking 5-10 minutes from the guards.

Beyond that, I agree. I think anything minutes beyond 5-10 for Dawkins will be taken from the frontcourt guys, with Duke playing three guards and going with Singler, Kelly, or Thomas at the "4".

BlueintheFace
07-17-2009, 09:32 AM
Ryan Kelly will lose some minutes here unless he proves to be a dead eye from deep if you ask me...

CDu
07-17-2009, 09:39 AM
Ryan Kelly will lose some minutes here unless he proves to be a dead eye from deep if you ask me...

That's definitely a possibility. It's hard to say, because we don't know exactly how the minutes would play out without Dawkins (assuming he enrolls early as expected). But it's very possible that Kelly would have been really needed to play the 3/4 to add a three point shot (even if he wasn't quite ready).

But I do think it is likely that Dawkins will take about 10-15 minutes from the frontcourt guys (maybe more if he's really good). That's probably a good thing, as those guys are all really unproven commodities at this point (even the seniors).

mgtr
07-17-2009, 09:56 AM
If Dawkins can provide us 10 good minutes when we get to ACC play, I will be delighted. That will give key players rest, and reduce the impact of backcourt fouls. Though I have to admit that it would great fun to see Singler play the 2 - he could cause a lot of problems out there. Maybe we will still see some of that.

NSDukeFan
07-17-2009, 09:58 AM
That's definitely a possibility. It's hard to say, because we don't know exactly how the minutes would play out without Dawkins (assuming he enrolls early as expected). But it's very possible that Kelly would have been really needed to play the 3/4 to add a three point shot (even if he wasn't quite ready).

But I do think it is likely that Dawkins will take about 10-15 minutes from the frontcourt guys (maybe more if he's really good). That's probably a good thing, as those guys are all really unproven commodities at this point (even the seniors).

I agree with where you see Dawkins fitting in (giving Scheyer and Smith a breather and keeping Singler or Lance from guarding other teams second quickest player very often). But the only reason I see Dawkins taking any minutes from the frontcourt players is just to keep them from guarding players much quicker than them.

To say that Dawkins is going to be taking minutes from the frontcourt guys because of them being unproven commodities seems a bit backwards to me though as Dawkins will be the most unproven guy to start the year, except maybe Olek, Davidson and walk-ons. I hope and expect Dawkins to play immediately and be a tremendous help to the team next year, but I think Lance and Z (especially), Miles (he's at least shown a few flashes of what he can do), Mason and Ryan (they have at least been here over the summer) are more proven. From reading your other posts, I doubt that's what you meant anyway.

As much as Dawkins will help for next year, I am expecting more from Mason and Ryan at this point for the coming year, though Dawkins may get more minutes because of his quickness.

jimsumner
07-17-2009, 10:01 AM
I would expect Dawkins to play around 20 mpg, nowhere near enough to make the all-freshmen team.

NSDukeFan
07-17-2009, 10:03 AM
If Dawkins can provide us 10 good minutes when we get to ACC play, I will be delighted. That will give key players rest, and reduce the impact of backcourt fouls. Though I have to admit that it would great fun to see Singler play the 2 - he could cause a lot of problems out there. Maybe we will still see some of that.

I wouldn't mind seeing Kyle guard the other team's second quickest guy and having that person guarding Kyle. Our help side may have to be good in those instances, but so would the other team's. I think Kyle would be able to get a hand up well on shorter shooters and in this situation we would have some serious size inside. I also think Kyle would do well in the post with a shorter defender on him, or as a passer from the high post. I like our chances.

CDu
07-17-2009, 10:05 AM
I agree with where you see Dawkins fitting in (giving Scheyer and Smith a breather and keeping Singler or Lance from guarding other teams second quickest player very often). But the only reason I see Dawkins taking any minutes from the frontcourt players is just to keep them from guarding players much quicker than them.

To say that Dawkins is going to be taking minutes from the frontcourt guys because of them being unproven commodities seems a bit backwards to me though as Dawkins will be the most unproven guy to start the year, except maybe Olek, Davidson and walk-ons. I hope and expect Dawkins to play immediately and be a tremendous help to the team next year, but I think Lance and Z (especially), Miles (he's at least shown a few flashes of what he can do), Mason and Ryan (they have at least been here over the summer) are more proven. From reading your other posts, I doubt that's what you meant anyway.

As much as Dawkins will help for next year, I am expecting more from Mason and Ryan at this point for the coming year, though Dawkins may get more minutes because of his quickness.

Fair points, and I didn't mean to suggest that Dawkins is more proven. Though I would say that the transition being typically smoother for guards than for big men. Guards are used to facing talented guards (there are more of them), whereas talented big men are fewer and farther between at the high school level.

But yes, the quickness issue is the biggest thing. I do suspect that Coach K will prefer to be able to go with a quicker lineup rather than trying to make Kelly guard wing players. My (probably poorly-worded) statement about requiring less minutes of the bigs was more that Dawkins gives another option. We don't HAVE to go with as much playing time from unproven big guys. We have another option that may pan out. More options is always better, especially when so many of the options are unproven.

CDu
07-17-2009, 10:11 AM
I wouldn't mind seeing Kyle guard the other team's second quickest guy and having that person guarding Kyle. Our help side may have to be good in those instances, but so would the other team's. I think Kyle would be able to get a hand up well on shorter shooters and in this situation we would have some serious size inside. I also think Kyle would do well in the post with a shorter defender on him, or as a passer from the high post. I like our chances.

I'm not as excited about that idea, based on what I've seen of Singler defending quicker players on switches. I'd love to see Singler post up guards, but that's hard to do when you have three other big guys on the floor. It's easier to post up little guys on switches. Otherwise, you need to create a situation in which your bigs can pull the other team's bigs away from the basket to avoid the double team. And aside from Kelly (and maybe Mason Plumlee), or bigs don't do that.

Singler would have a definite advantage shooting over shorter players. But I feel like his biggest advantage has been drawing bigger/slower defenders away from the basket and taking advantage of them off the dribble. I don't see that advantage (the off the dribble part) against smaller, quicker players.

But that's a big part of the reason why I'm excited about adding Dawkins to the backcourt. It means that we won't be forced to do go with Singler at the 2. And the team would have an easier opportunity to find ways to have Singler exploit smaller players in the post, while not being as exposed to the defensive risk. And if there IS an advantage to playing Singler at the 2, there's no reason the team can't still do that.

NSDukeFan
07-17-2009, 10:12 AM
Fair points, and I didn't mean to suggest that Dawkins is more proven. Though I would say that the transition being typically smoother for guards than for big men. Guards are used to facing talented guards (there are more of them), whereas talented big men are fewer and farther between at the high school level.

But yes, the quickness issue is the biggest thing. I do suspect that Coach K will prefer to be able to go with a quicker lineup rather than trying to make Kelly guard wing players. My (probably poorly-worded) statement about requiring less minutes of the bigs was more that Dawkins gives another option. We don't HAVE to go with as much playing time from unproven big guys. We have another option that may pan out. More options is always better, especially when so many of the options are unproven.

I agree completely with you here and will not complain about poorly-worded statements as you are generally quite coherent and I typically have no problem understanding what you are saying and agree with you a lot of the time. I would also have to say that what I think doesn't always translate that well to what I type, try as I might.

Sandman
07-17-2009, 11:34 AM
Based on Coach K's history, Andre's playing time will depend on how quickly and effectively he masters Duke's defensive schemes. We've seen in the past how difficult that can be for freshmen.

CDu
07-17-2009, 11:49 AM
Based on Coach K's history, Andre's playing time will depend on how quickly and effectively he masters Duke's defensive schemes. We've seen in the past how difficult that can be for freshmen.

That's true, but note that this team has only nine likely regulars. Three of them are freshman. So that leaves only six regulars who have familiarity with the system. And of those six, two have never averaged more than 12 mpg, another has never averaged 20 mpg, and a third has had a career high of 21.6 mpg.

There is going to be playing time required of the freshman, simply because we have very few guys who have proven they can play 25+ minutes per game for the season. And with only two other ACC-caliber guards on the roster, Dawkins is going to get minutes next year. Whether it's 10-15 or 20-25 depends on how ready he is to contribute. But he's going to pretty much have to see some time.

chadlee989
07-17-2009, 12:18 PM
I'm not as excited about that idea, based on what I've seen of Singler defending quicker players on switches. I'd love to see Singler post up guards, but that's hard to do when you have three other big guys on the floor. It's easier to post up little guys on switches. Otherwise, you need to create a situation in which your bigs can pull the other team's bigs away from the basket to avoid the double team. And aside from Kelly (and maybe Mason Plumlee), or bigs don't do that.

Singler would have a definite advantage shooting over shorter players. But I feel like his biggest advantage has been drawing bigger/slower defenders away from the basket and taking advantage of them off the dribble. I don't see that advantage (the off the dribble part) against smaller, quicker players.

But that's a big part of the reason why I'm excited about adding Dawkins to the backcourt. It means that we won't be forced to do go with Singler at the 2. And the team would have an easier opportunity to find ways to have Singler exploit smaller players in the post, while not being as exposed to the defensive risk. And if there IS an advantage to playing Singler at the 2, there's no reason the team can't still do that.

Remember the Rhode Island game who guarded Jimmy Baron on the last shot of the game. Kyle moved his feet wonderfully to stay in front of him and got a hand up (I think he got a piece of the ball but not sure) to alter the shot for us to win the game. However, I do agree with you that i would rather see him playing the 3.

MChambers
07-17-2009, 01:00 PM
I wouldn't mind seeing Kyle guard the other team's second quickest guy and having that person guarding Kyle. Our help side may have to be good in those instances, but so would the other team's. I think Kyle would be able to get a hand up well on shorter shooters and in this situation we would have some serious size inside. I also think Kyle would do well in the post with a shorter defender on him, or as a passer from the high post. I like our chances.

To me, it's easier to "help" down low, than on the perimeter, where Kyle might need help if he's playing the "2" [forgive me, Roy White].

Hope our bigs [Roy: is that an acceptable term?] are good at rotations to help on dribble penetration. Unfortunately, Z rarely gets that call (although he did against Xavier, as I recall), Lance has been so-so at it, and the rest are untested.

MChambers
07-17-2009, 01:03 PM
Remember the Rhode Island game who guarded Jimmy Baron on the last shot of the game. Kyle moved his feet wonderfully to stay in front of him and got a hand up (I think he got a piece of the ball but not sure) to alter the shot for us to win the game. However, I do agree with you that i would rather see him playing the 3.

I didn't see the game, but my impression is that Baron is primarily a jump shooter, not a penetrator.

CDu
07-17-2009, 01:31 PM
Remember the Rhode Island game who guarded Jimmy Baron on the last shot of the game. Kyle moved his feet wonderfully to stay in front of him and got a hand up (I think he got a piece of the ball but not sure) to alter the shot for us to win the game. However, I do agree with you that i would rather see him playing the 3.

Baron is not a quick guard. He's a shooter. Against guys like Baron (who just look to take jumpshots), Singler may be fine although I'm not sure I'd base that on Singler's success on one possession. It's the quicker guards who will be willing to attack off the dribble that would be more of a concern.

NSDukeFan
07-17-2009, 01:37 PM
Baron is not a quick guard. He's a shooter. Against guys like Baron (who just look to take jumpshots), Singler may be fine although I'm not sure I'd base that on Singler's success on one possession. It's the quicker guards who will be willing to attack off the dribble that would be more of a concern.

True, but I don't know how many teams have their second quickest guards that are great penetrators that Kyle wouldn't at least be able to contain. But, I guess now that we have an extra perimeter defender, we may match up better with some of the top 10 teams that do have this quality.

CDu
07-17-2009, 01:42 PM
True, but I don't know how many teams have their second quickest guards that are great penetrators that Kyle wouldn't at least be able to contain. But, I guess now that we have an extra perimeter defender, we may match up better with some of the top 10 teams that do have this quality.

Those second guards don't have to be great penetrators. They just have to be quick and willing to attack when possible. When you have a quickness advantage (as they'd have against Singler), you can more liberties off the dribble than normal.

And remember - it's not just that Singler would be playing against "2s". It's that we'd then have to have Kelly or Thomas playing regularly against "3s". The more positions in which we have a distinct quickness disadvantage, the more likely it is we'll get exploited by quicker teams.

Adding Dawkins will help us against the top-10 teams, and it may help discourage lesser teams with quickness from being able to exploit our lack of quickness on the perimeter. And again - getting Dawkins doesn't prevent Duke from going big if we find it to be advantageous. It just allows us the possibility of being able to avoid getting our lack of quickness exposed if it does become a problem.

MChambers
07-17-2009, 02:25 PM
Baron is not a quick guard. He's a shooter. Against guys like Baron (who just look to take jumpshots), Singler may be fine although I'm not sure I'd base that on Singler's success on one possession. It's the quicker guards who will be willing to attack off the dribble that would be more of a concern.

And in the game against FSU in Cameron, down the stretch, whenever Duke switched on Toney Douglas, so that someone other than Eliot was guarding him, he'd fake the penetration and bury a 3. I remember Kyle stayed in front of him well, but the results weren't good.

Thank goodness Douglas (and Lawson, Rice, and Teague) have moved on.

airowe
07-17-2009, 02:59 PM
And in the game against FSU in Cameron, down the stretch, whenever Duke switched on Toney Douglas, so that someone other than Eliot was guarding him, he'd fake the penetration and bury a 3. I remember Kyle stayed in front of him well, but the results weren't good.

Thank goodness Douglas (and Lawson, Rice, and Teague) have moved on.

...and Jack McClinton. I was at that Miami game in Cameron last year and none of our guys could stop him.

ACCBBallFan
07-17-2009, 06:07 PM
Based on Coach K's history, Andre's playing time will depend on how quickly and effectively he masters Duke's defensive schemes. We've seen in the past how difficult that can be for freshmen.Agree, but Andre's only competition for the 3 perimeter defensive slots is Nolan-Jon-Kyle who play there on Offense and Lance who would have had to play there defensively when one was out, even if he can't play there Offensively.

So the impact of Andre is a little more rest for Jon and more insurance against Nolan foul trouble, but also no need for Lance to play way out of position guarding a combo guard, and no need for Kyle to play or defend SG except on switches.

The ripple effect of that could be to Kelly were Andre has his outside scoring threat ability and Lance as a senior has the PF experience edge over both freshmen while Mason has the toughness edge over Ryan who still probably logs 10-15 MPG which is not all bad.

Rather than look at it negatively though, the positive is that everybody plays their natural position in daily 5 vs. 5 scrimmages, and when Duke wants to, they can actually practice a three guard set with a decent amount of defensive pressure from Seth and friends.

The other obviuous loser is Olek but not sure how many MPG were there even before Dre arrives on the scene. But now Olek is 11th man at practice if Duke ever figures out what position he is best suited to play with his odd combination of athelticim and weight with low court awareness and propensity to dunk.

The all dunk team even without Marty, G and Elliott is pretty impressive with Nolan, Andre, Olek/Kelly, and a Plumlee or two, which would be a fun combination during OOC blowouts to excite the Crazies, while Kyle and the 3 seniors get some much deserved rest, and the future upperclassmen get some experience. Could even play Jordan Davidson to rest the only other junior Nolan.

Casey Peters and Steve Johnson have great hops too.

So coach K has the luxury of ending close games with Jon-Nolan-Kyle-Lance-Z all very experienced or the all dunk team when games are well in hand, or whaetever combination suits the needs du jour.

DUKIE V(A)
07-17-2009, 11:16 PM
I will be surprised not to see a lot of Scheyer/Smith/Dawkins line-ups as well as some occasional line-ups with just one of these three (likely Scheyer or Smith) on the court depending on match-ups. I am bullish on Dawkins and MP2. I predict they will both be top 4 or 5 players on our team and think both will merit and play major minutes this season. In fact, I will be very surprised if Dawkins doesn't average 25+ minutes a game. He's going to be a special player.

Wander
07-18-2009, 08:46 AM
I will be surprised not to see a lot of Scheyer/Smith/Dawkins line-ups as well as some occasional line-ups with just one of these three (likely Scheyer or Smith) on the court depending on match-ups. I am bullish on Dawkins and MP2. I predict they will both be top 4 or 5 players on our team and think both will merit and play major minutes this season. In fact, I will be very surprised if Dawkins doesn't average 25+ minutes a game. He's going to be a special player.

I doubt we'll start all three guards, but when we're in a one possesion game with two minutes left, the best guess for now is a line-up of Nolan, Scheyer, Dawkins, Singler, Mason.

sandinmyshoes
07-18-2009, 08:51 AM
None of us really know just how much impact Dawkins will have, but at least it gives us another possibility just when we need one the most.

-jk
07-18-2009, 10:02 AM
I doubt we'll start all three guards, but when we're in a one possession game with two minutes left, the best guess for now is a line-uip of Nolan, Scheyer, Dawkins, Singler, Mason.

A one possession game with two minutes and you have two freshmen in the game? I'm quite hopeful the freshmen will contribute in more than bit roles, but can we keep expectations a bit lower and give them some room to get established first?

-jk

jimsumner
07-18-2009, 10:14 AM
One-possession game?

Who has the ball? If Duke's on D, then Thomas is absolutely on the floor. If Duke has the ball, probably not.

Duke ball, 5-point lead, ninety seconds left. You want your best ball-handlers and foul shooters and that might be Smith, Scheyer, Singler, Dawkins, and Kelly. But you've got to be able to flip Kelly and Thomas with a possession change.

Wander
07-18-2009, 11:57 AM
A one possession game with two minutes and you have two freshmen in the game?


That's my guess for now, yes. It's not unprecedented for a really good team to have multiple freshmen among their five best players.




I'm quite hopeful the freshmen will contribute in more than bit roles, but can we keep expectations a bit lower and give them some room to get established first?


You can keep your expectations wherever you'd like. I wouldn't necessarily call my statement an expectation, more of a guess, and I don't see how it takes away room from any of the players. I won't be disappointed at all if Dawkins is only ready enough this year to be a backup/role player or if Lance or Kelly really solidifies themselves as a starter/finisher. I just don't consider those the most likely scenarios right now.

Wander
07-18-2009, 12:05 PM
One-possession game?

Who has the ball? If Duke's on D, then Thomas is absolutely on the floor. If Duke has the ball, probably not.

Duke ball, 5-point lead, ninety seconds left. You want your best ball-handlers and foul shooters and that might be Smith, Scheyer, Singler, Dawkins, and Kelly. But you've got to be able to flip Kelly and Thomas with a possession change.

You're most likely right. I just meant more of our default finishing lineup - like Paulus/Scheyer/G/Nelson/Singler was a couple years ago, even though they weren't the five "starters."

ACCBBallFan
07-19-2009, 01:15 AM
I know most fans prefer a lineup of Scheyer-Smith-Singler-Lance-Mason, but have you looked at the competition?

Sure Lance and Mason are athletic for their size but so are a lot of ACC guys who play C/PF/SF.

Versus UNC Deon 6’9” 240 Davis/Henson/Zeller a front line of 6'11" 205 and 6'8" 220 even if paired with Singler at SF would get killed.

Same with GA Tech Favors 6’9” 220, Peacock 6’8” 233 and Lawal 6’9” 233, or

Clemson Booker 6’7”240 and Sykes 6’9”220/Jennings 6’9” 210 or

FSU Alabi 7’1” 241 and Reid 6’9”235/Singleton 6’9” 220 or

Wake MacFarland 7’ 235, Aminu 6’9” 215 and Weaver 6’11” 240 or

BC Southern 6’10” 242 and Trapani 6’8” 218 or

Miami Collins 6’8” 238 and McGowan 6’9”236,

maybe even NC State Tracy Smith 6’8” 240 and Painter 6’9”210.

So it only works vs. UVA Brandenberg 6’11” 241 Scott 6’8”233,

VA Tech Allen 6’7” 230, Davilla 6’8” 245 and

MD Dupree 6’8” 260, Williams 6’8” 245 due to skill set not size.

So what happened to this Duke biggest team ever?

Gotta go with Zoubek 7' 1' 270 and Miles 6'10" 245 for about 25-30 MPG and Mason for the other 10-15 MPG n the center slot, except vs. guys like Sims and Monroe when Plumlees man the post and Lance/Kelly share the PF slot.

[Miles/Z] paired with Singler and one of [Mason/Lance/Kelly] and now Duke again has the mythical size advantage.

So even when any combination would work vs. weak OOC teams, the bigs need the practice to develop their craft.

For the most part the ACC centers are just big, but not the type who are gazelles that would leave Zoubek and particularly Miles in the dust, just the type who would bully Mason and Lance without a big brother there to help even the fight.

I have high hopes for Mason but let's not make him play the under dog role Singler did and wore out doing for one year and Lance has done for 3.

It's great to let Lance be Lance but not if you are not going to let Mason be Mason another 5* PF and an undersized center, even if more skilled than Lance there, just not nearly big enough this year for ACC play and NCAA later rounds. That can change as his brother has proven.

El_Diablo
07-19-2009, 05:03 AM
Coach K has a lot of tools to work with this year, and he will match up his lineups accordingly. If someone is consistently getting beat in the post defensively, there are now enough people able to step in and take his minutes.

gumbomoop
07-19-2009, 10:42 AM
I know most fans prefer a lineup of Scheyer-Smith-Singler-Lance-Mason, but have you looked at the competition?

Sure Lance and Mason are athletic for their size but so are a lot of ACC guys who play C/PF/SF.

Versus UNC Deon 6’9” 240 Davis/Henson/Zeller a front line of 6'11" 205 and 6'8" 220 even if paired with Singler at SF would get killed.

Same with GA Tech Favors 6’9” 220, Peacock 6’8” 233 and Lawal 6’9” 233, or

Clemson Booker 6’7”240 and Sykes 6’9”220/Jennings 6’9” 210 or

FSU Alabi 7’1” 241 and Reid 6’9”235/Singleton 6’9” 220 or

Wake MacFarland 7’ 235, Aminu 6’9” 215 and Weaver 6’11” 240 or

BC Southern 6’10” 242 and Trapani 6’8” 218 or

Miami Collins 6’8” 238 and McGowan 6’9”236,

maybe even NC State Tracy Smith 6’8” 240 and Painter 6’9”210.

So it only works vs. UVA Brandenberg 6’11” 241 Scott 6’8”233,

VA Tech Allen 6’7” 230, Davilla 6’8” 245 and

MD Dupree 6’8” 260, Williams 6’8” 245 due to skill set not size.

So what happened to this Duke biggest team ever?

Gotta go with Zoubek 7' 1' 270 and Miles 6'10" 245 for about 25-30 MPG and Mason for the other 10-15 MPG n the center slot, except vs. guys like Sims and Monroe when Plumlees man the post and Lance/Kelly share the PF slot.

[Miles/Z] paired with Singler and one of [Mason/Lance/Kelly] and now Duke again has the mythical size advantage.

So even when any combination would work vs. weak OOC teams, the bigs need the practice to develop their craft.

For the most part the ACC centers are just big, but not the type who are gazelles that would leave Zoubek and particularly Miles in the dust, just the type who would bully Mason and Lance without a big brother there to help even the fight.

I have high hopes for Mason but let's not make him play the under dog role Singler did and wore out doing for one year and Lance has done for 3.

It's great to let Lance be Lance but not if you are not going to let Mason be Mason another 5* PF and an undersized center, even if more skilled than Lance there, just not nearly big enough this year for ACC play and NCAA later rounds. That can change as his brother has proven.

Not for the first time am I impressed with the details of ACCBBF's analysis. And I'm right with her/him in thinking that there's a lotta beef in ACC front lines this year; and therefore that even those of us, like me, so very, very high on MP2 should not pencil [much less pen] him in for major minutes at C.

I'm right with ACCBBF's guesstimate that Z and MP1 will share C-duties most of the time, with some relief from MP2, say 10-12 mpg, depending on game situation and MP2's adjustment to rigors of tough competition. I trust that ACCBBF will agree, however, that even 10-12+ mpg from MP2 at C would constitute some meaningful minutes. I can't quite tell just how beefy MP2 is, but I demur from ACCBBF's implication that, size/beef-wise, MP2 is another LT. I think, but am willing to be corrected, that MP2 is beefier than LT, and substantially so.

As to not-so-beefy LT, I'll risk criticism for repeating a point I and others have made, to wit, that when LT is on floor with KS, "sharing" the SF/PF duties, that on O LT is the "4" and KS the "3," but on D KS is the "4" and LT the "3." KS is beefier than LT, and in all a much superior rebounder. In fact, I'm expecting LT to get more rebounds/min than previously, for as an inside blocker-outer, he's inefficient [see videotape of lousy block-outs on free throws; totally maddening]. I realize, too, there's some over-specific crockiness to all this detail I'm blathering about, what with all the switching that K implements. Despite that, as long as KS isn't having to guard opposing C's, he's beefy enough, and certainly [court]smart enough, to defend and out-rebound for some minutes all the PF's that ACCBBF lists.

Whatever our maddening differences and irritating counterpoints to each other on this board, we all surely agree that if Z and MP1 are improved enough to share 25-30 mpg at C - anybody, anybody? disagree with that as a preseason guesstimate?? - that we got, and will definitely need, some more beef than last year, and further, that KS, MP2, and LT are beefy enough to each play some "beefy" minutes, as long as none of those 3 is the "chief beef."

Finally, after the dismaying but perfectly understandable losses of G and EW, we are poised here on July 19, 2009, to welcome DreDawk [I haven't read any of the Dawkins nickname post, but I can't imagine I'm the only one to think of that moniker], whose early arrival would immeasurably buoy our spirits, not to mention affording K valuable perimeter depth and thus, domino-effect-like, ability to use beef where it will be required, just as ACCBBF warns us.

jimsumner
07-19-2009, 11:22 AM
ACCBBFAN,

I see your point and agree with it to an extent. But it seems to me that your examples include an awful lot of non-beef. If John Henson, DeShaun Painter, Milton Jennings, Al-Faroq Aminu, and Chris Singleton constitute beef, then surely Lance Thomas and Ryan Kelly meet that standard. Or at least the Plumlees.

K has always had a predilection for lean, mobile gazelles who can run all day and guard multiple positions on switche. And that does sometimes put Duke at a disadvantage on the blocks and the boards. But it also creates mismatches that work to Duke's advantage.

I think the prospective Singer-Thomas-big man to be named later-starting front court gives Duke lots of attractive options. It's certainly a step up from having 6'6" Lee Melchionni and walk-on Patrick Johnson playing major minutes inside.

Duke has made it to the FF with the likes of Mark Alarie, Robert Brickey, Grant Hill, Tony Lang, Shane Battier, and Luol Deng as starting 4s. None of these guys exactly beat you death inside.

But they somehow managed to get the job done.

ACCBBallFan
07-19-2009, 02:38 PM
ACCBBFAN,

I see your point and agree with it to an extent. But it seems to me that your examples include an awful lot of non-beef. If John Henson, DeShaun Painter, Milton Jennings, Al-Farouq Aminu, and Chris Singleton constitute beef, then surely Lance Thomas and Ryan Kelly meet that standard. Or at least the Plumlees.

K has always had a predilection for lean, mobile gazelles who can run all day and guard multiple positions on switches. And that does sometimes put Duke at a disadvantage on the blocks and the boards. But it also creates mismatches that work to Duke's advantage.

I think the prospective Singer-Thomas-big man to be named later-starting front court gives Duke lots of attractive options. It's certainly a step up from having 6'6" Lee Melchionni and walk-on Patrick Johnson playing major minutes inside.

Duke has made it to the FF with the likes of Mark Alarie, Robert Bricked, Grant Hill, Tony Lang, Shane Battier, and Lou Deng as starting 4s. None of these guys exactly beat you death inside.

But they somehow managed to get the job done.

Thanks, Jim. I always enjoy reading your posts.

I only had the pleasure of watching about half of the greats you listed with same size (you could also include Laettner) but would venture to say that most if not all were much better results than Lance, and of course Mason has not has the time to show his stuff.

No knock on Lance who has willingly played out of position his first three years and would have had to this year too if Dawkins had not fallen like manna from heaven. They were all Duke legends.

Also not interested at this point in comparing their freshman years to what Mason's or Ryan's may potentially be as it is just guessing.

I would also say that either Lance or Mason playing the power forward along side Miles 6'10" 245 or Zoubek 7' 1" 270 would be great (Kelly too as a PF) but not both Lance/Mason as the primary front court.

By my count there were about 28 names listed across the other 11 ACC teams.

Number shorter than Lance 6'8" is two: Booker 6'7" 240 and Jeff Allen 6'7" 230 (formerly 260 or so). Those guys would man handle 205 pound Mason and 220 pound Lance as they do guys their own weight. It's not like Duke's two out athlete Booker or Allen.

Number about same weight is pretty much same guys you listed (about 7 of the 28 if I throw in Milbourne who will probably have to play PF for MD).

So the presumably closest to biggest ever Duke team has opponents with 26 of 28 guys as tall or taller and 21 of 28 guys heavier than one or both of them , not because Duke doe snot indeed have the guys, just that in most Duke internet posters minds they should sit on the bench.

Davis, Aminu, Henson and Singleton are all jumping jacks. So again Lance/Mason at best and I ma being real generous with that statement keep up with them athletically.

Some are the third forward who would pair off with Kyle, and backed up by taller/heavier guys Deon, MacFarland, Alabi just as Mason/Lance need to be backer up by bigger guys.

That was my point,

not that across the three 5* PF's Lance PF-4, Kelly PF-4 and Mason PF-6 that Duke could not have a very competitive PF by committee,

just that they need to also have a beefy center by committee with height/weight to offset these guys' dance partners.

I have not heard anything about Zoubek this summer, other than he was on an NCCU pro-AM roster, which is not all bad not hearing that he is injured, and reports on Miles at that glorified Pick up game venue are pretty encouraging, as well as Mason, Kyle and Jon.

I don't know anything about Jennings and Painter other than they too are paired with Tracy Smith and Booker/Sykes.

It turns out that a lot of ACC teams are going to have SFs this year almost as big as Singler, just that none of them were SF-1 in their class or ACC, nor ACC fourth leading career returnee, nor third leading scorer from last year returning. That company is Delaney, Vasquez and Scheyer which also bodes well for Duke.

To your other point, yes Zoubek has his limitations on potential switches. IMO, he only plays about 10-15 MPG perhaps a little more than last year’s 12 MPG with an injury free summer and another year of whiskers, or in his case beard.

As you reference, Miles Plumlee best fits that athletic big man who can hedge/switch and who knows they may be able to get 15-20 MPG out of him (I was assuming 10-15). So that still leaves 10-15 MPG in post for Mason during end of game, foul trouble, matchups with guys like Sims and Monroe, etc. plus another 10-15 MPG at PF, maybe 20-25 total MPG for the very promising Mason Plumlee.

So rather than Kyle-Lance and a big man to be paired later, I lean to Kyle – (Mason/Kelly) and choose big man from (Miles/Z) but that apparently would be later in the season per Kyle’s quote in NY Times that Mason is ready but Ryan needs to get tougher.

At beginning of year at least it would be Kyle – (Lance or Mason) – (Zoubs or Miles) with Ryan Kelly playing the specialist role until he gains strength

Lance can be a valuable contributor PF/SF in a Dave McClure role particularly if he can hit FT’s in end of game situations, sharing time with both Ryan and Mason as situation warrants.

That is when that Duke message board lineup Scheyer-Smith- Singler-Lance-Mason may then be the way to go, along with Andre Dawkins and Ryan Kelly and maybe Miles mixing in.

Personally I would pair the siblings (don’t really care who starts and it may vary by opponent and all will get about same amount of PT) and also pair Zoubek/Kelly the forgotten man, to spread the floor more, when he is ready.

Greg_Newton
07-19-2009, 03:23 PM
ACCBBallFan: where are you getting that Mason still only weighs 205? ESPN has him listed at 220 (http://insider.espn.go.com/ncb/recruiting/tracker/player?recruitId=42917), and I assume the weight room is a big priority this summer. If he's really only 205 next season, we're in trouble.

That said, I agree with you - everything I've seen from Mason these past few months has indicated that he is a power forward, not a center. I personally believe Miles is making huge strides this summer and expect him to start next to Lance at least early next season, with Mason and Andre first off the bench and getting a solid 20-25 mpg each. I expect Z to be more of a change-of-pace weapon that comes in and bangs for 10-20 mpg depending on the game. And I hate to say it, but I think this may be a "learning" year for Ryan, who I'm not sure is quite ready for the speed and intensity of the D-1 game quite yet. I think he'll see some minutes and show a few promising scoring spurts, but I just don't see him being one of the first three off the bench in most games. The Pocious syndrome, if you will. I could be wrong.

Anyway, here's my carefully calculated (:D) estimation of the minutes breakdown:

Kyle - 34 mpg
Jon - 32 mpg
Nolan - 27 mpg
Lance/Miles/Mason - 20-25 mpg
Andre - 20 mpg
Zoub - 14 mpg
Ryan - 7 mpg

grossbus
07-19-2009, 03:55 PM
"I personally believe Miles is making huge strides this summer ..."

evidence? or wishful thinking?

ricks68
07-19-2009, 04:34 PM
I think that there have been some really good posts on this thread involving some really well thought out and time-consuming analyses of many players.

As far as the new Dawkins is concerned, however, I think that if K sees that his defense is inadequate, and can't get adequate help-side from either Nolan or Jon (or others), that may severely cut into his playing time and put more of a burden on the other guards. I'm not saying that Andre's defense is poor, but that if that is the case, what the consequences may be.

So, the prediction of Andre's playing time, and consequently the successful integration of his addition to the team, may very well hinge on his learning curve regarding his defensive abilities to a large extent.

Just my 2 cents.

ricks

Azdukefan
07-19-2009, 06:01 PM
I think it is a pretty good assumption that both Smith and Scheyer will start and see a bulk amount of minutes. While I know Jon has been working hard at his PG abilities don't you think Nolan is more along what we need to run this team (moves north and south quickly, makes plays for others, and be a defensive hawk)? It is documented that we have good to great basketball players but lack the athletic ability on both sides of the ball. Had Nolan not gotten hurt last year, I think he was in the processing of breaking out at the point. I know neither is a true PG (but I have to think instinctively Nolan is better), but Jon is a true SG. Some are going to say Nolan lost his spot to E-mail but I also think the talk of his potential transferring affected his placement into the starting lineup (I am sure that is not a statement too many will agree with either). Anyone care to agree/disagree?

jimsumner
07-19-2009, 06:43 PM
I think it is a pretty good assumption that both Smith and Scheyer will start and see a bulk amount of minutes. While I know Jon has been working hard at his PG abilities don't you think Nolan is more along what we need to run this team (moves north and south quickly, makes plays for others, and be a defensive hawk)? It is documented that we have good to great basketball players but lack the athletic ability on both sides of the ball. Had Nolan not gotten hurt last year, I think he was in the processing of breaking out at the point. I know neither is a true PG (but I have to think instinctively Nolan is better), but Jon is a true SG. Some are going to say Nolan lost his spot to E-mail but I also think the talk of his potential transferring affected his placement into the starting lineup (I am sure that is not a statement too many will agree with either). Anyone care to agree/disagree?

Duke has had some teams where the PG pretty much monopolized the ball. Hurley in particular but also Avery, JWill in '00, Duhon in '03 and '04.

Duke also has had some teams with two ball-handlers, either of whom were capable of initiating the offense. Amaker/Dawkins, Capel/Collins, Williams/Duhon. Sometimes a point forward like Ferry or G. Hill would interpose.

I suspect we'll see something along the latter lines, with both Scheyer and Smith handling the ball. Whether Singler effectively plays the point-forward role is TBD. 'twould be nice.

MChambers
07-19-2009, 07:31 PM
It's silly to discuss who plays point without realizing that the job(s) may be divided. When Duke is defending, I'd expect Nolan to challenge the other team's point. On offense, I wonder if we'll really have a single point.

ACCBBallFan
07-20-2009, 12:17 AM
ACCBBallFan: where are you getting that Mason still only weighs 205? ESPN has him listed at 220 (http://insider.espn.go.com/ncb/recruiting/tracker/player?recruitId=42917), and I assume the weight room is a big priority this summer. If he's really only 205 next season, we're in trouble.

That said, I agree with you - everything I've seen from Mason these past few months has indicated that he is a power forward, not a center. I personally believe Miles is making huge strides this summer and expect him to start next to Lance at least early next season, with Mason and Andre first off the bench and getting a solid 20-25 mpg each. I expect Z to be more of a change-of-pace weapon that comes in and bangs for 10-20 mpg depending on the game. And I hate to say it, but I think this may be a "learning" year for Ryan, who I'm not sure is quite ready for the speed and intensity of the D-1 game quite yet. I think he'll see some minutes and show a few promising scoring spurts, but I just don't see him being one of the first three off the bench in most games. The Pocious syndrome, if you will. I could be wrong.

Anyway, here's my carefully calculated (:D) estimation of the minutes breakdown:

Kyle - 34 mpg
Jon - 32 mpg
Nolan - 27 mpg
Lance/Miles/Mason - 20-25 mpg
Andre - 20 mpg
Zoub - 14 mpg
Ryan - 7 mpg
Thanks for the link, Greg. I was on a scout recruiting board at the time and just used the height-weight, position and rating for the 2009 guys to prevent having to look up twice I prefer the RCSI or whatevber it is called but could not find my link. So all the frosh metrics are probably dated a bit. I agree 220 is better than 205 but same basic issue.

I think your MPG guesses are as good as any others I have seen and very close to the ones I came up after slightly amending JML's where Nolan and Ryan were 3 mnutes higher and Miles 6 minutes lower.

I think you may be right on Kelly as it is tough to share PF across Mason/Lance and Ryan and center across Miles/Z and Mason. Five guys sharing the 2 positions is easier to manage, four being even easier but maybe not realistic since all have some plus/minus.

Andre being the same long ball threat makes Kelly skill set less unique as does Mason/Lance as forwards.

Convesely if Andre defense is not up to par, then Kelly may play some more SF on Offense/PF on defense (Lance the reverse) if Ryan can defend PF any better than Andre can defend perimeter guys.

So may be better to just say Ryan/Andre share 27 MPG until more is known.

Just noticed they also ranked him as C-2 which is kind of strange given the weights of most of the others, quite a tribute to his viability:

Class of 2009 (Prospects - C - All States - All Statuses)
NAME POS HT WT SCHOOL RANK GRADE STATUS SCHOOL NOTES
C-1 DeMarcus Cousins C 6'9" 260 LeFlore H.S. (AL) C #1 98 Signed Kentucky
C-2 Mason Plumlee C 6'11" 220 Christ School (NC) C #2 98 Signed Duke
C-3 Keith Gallon C 6'9" 300 Oak Hill Academy (VA) C #3 97 Signed Oklahoma
C-4 Daniel Orton C 6'10" 260 Bishop McGuinness H.S. (OK) C #4 97 Signed Kentucky
C-5 Alex Oriakhi C 6'8" 230 The Tilton School (NH) C #5 96 Signed Connecticut
C-6 Jeff Withey C 6'11" 215 TR 96 Signed Kansas
C-7 Kyryl Natyazhko C 6'10" 250 IMG Academy (FL) C #6 94 Signed Arizona
C-8 John Riek C 7'2" 260 IMG Academy (FL) POST 94 Signed Mississippi State
C-9 Bawa Muniru C 6'11" 255 Mount

superdave
07-20-2009, 09:03 AM
Is he still on Duke's radar?

Just kidding...

InSpades
07-20-2009, 09:32 AM
I would expect Dawkins to play around 20 mpg, nowhere near enough to make the all-freshmen team.

Ed Davis didn't play 20 mpg last year and made it. I'm sure there have been plenty of other examples of guys playing around 20 minutes and making it (Marvin Williams?). Next year might be a bit different due to the mass exodus of talent but I don't think it's unreasonable to think Dawkins could play 20 minutes per game and be all-freshman. It's probably true that 20 mpg is not enough on a lesser team but for a team competing for the ACC title I'd say 20 mpg is plenty.

COYS
07-20-2009, 09:52 AM
Ed Davis didn't play 20 mpg last year and made it. I'm sure there have been plenty of other examples of guys playing around 20 minutes and making it (Marvin Williams?). Next year might be a bit different due to the mass exodus of talent but I don't think it's unreasonable to think Dawkins could play 20 minutes per game and be all-freshman. It's probably true that 20 mpg is not enough on a lesser team but for a team competing for the ACC title I'd say 20 mpg is plenty.

Especially if he hits a few big shots along the way. I think its definitely a possibility as long as Duke competes for the ACC title, as we expect we will, and Dawkins plays an important role on that run. Since all of our games are on national TV, a big bucket from Dawkins in front of a national TV audience would be enough to put him in the conversation as long as his other numbers are solid.

mo.st.dukie
07-20-2009, 10:07 AM
Just noticed they also ranked him as C-2 which is kind of strange given the weights of most of the others, quite a tribute to his viability:

Class of 2009 (Prospects - C - All States - All Statuses)
NAME POS HT WT SCHOOL RANK GRADE STATUS SCHOOL NOTES
C-1 DeMarcus Cousins C 6'9" 260 LeFlore H.S. (AL) C #1 98 Signed Kentucky
C-2 Mason Plumlee C 6'11" 220 Christ School (NC) C #2 98 Signed Duke
C-3 Keith Gallon C 6'9" 300 Oak Hill Academy (VA) C #3 97 Signed Oklahoma
C-4 Daniel Orton C 6'10" 260 Bishop McGuinness H.S. (OK) C #4 97 Signed Kentucky
C-5 Alex Oriakhi C 6'8" 230 The Tilton School (NH) C #5 96 Signed Connecticut
C-6 Jeff Withey C 6'11" 215 TR 96 Signed Kansas
C-7 Kyryl Natyazhko C 6'10" 250 IMG Academy (FL) C #6 94 Signed Arizona
C-8 John Riek C 7'2" 260 IMG Academy (FL) POST 94 Signed Mississippi State
C-9 Bawa Muniru C 6'11" 255 Mount

It's not all about weight when it comes to being an effective post player. People get too caught up in using weight to measure how good of a big man a player will be. For instance, Ed Davis was listed at 215 last year yet was a very good big man and has the potential to be dominant. I don't think Mason will dominate in year one but could have a similar year to McRoberts freshman season (8ppg, 5rpg) which would be good.

jimsumner
07-20-2009, 10:26 AM
"Ed Davis didn't play 20 mpg last year and made it. I'm sure there have been plenty of other examples of guys playing around 20 minutes and making it (Marvin Williams?). Next year might be a bit different due to the mass exodus of talent"

Ed Davis would have been a lottery pick after his freshman year. Marvin Williams went number two IIRC.

I don't think Dawkins is at that level. But I could be wrong. :)

But your last sentence sums it up. The ACC is going to be pretty young next season and I supect lots of frosh will get more PT than Dawkins and thus the ability to fill up stat sheets. Some fairly ordinary players, e.g. Chris Hobbs, Michael Joiner, Vincent Whitt, have made all-freshman on that basis.

And the competition does vary. Taymon Domzalski made all-freshman in a weak 1996 class but Mike Dunleavy didn't in a much stronger 2000 class.

Ultimately, I don't think all-freshman matters that much.

ACCBBallFan
07-21-2009, 01:47 AM
It's not all about weight when it comes to being an effective post player. People get too caught up in using weight to measure how good of a big man a player will be. For instance, Ed Davis was listed at 215 last year yet was a very good big man and has the potential to be dominant. I don't think Mason will dominate in year one but could have a similar year to McRoberts freshman season (8ppg, 5rpg) which would be good.
Yes but Davis was paired with either Tyler Hansbrough or 245 pound Deon Thompson, albeit with smaller jumping jack Danny Green @ SF.

vs being paired with 6'8" 220 Lance Thomas and similarly sized Kyle @ SF. So he was more of a PF or second center.

It is not as bad being 6'11" 220 as what I had seen listed @ 205 but Duke leverages its height advantage when paired with Miles 6'10" 245 or Zoubek 7'1" 270 and is no bigger than a lot of ACC teams, in fact smaller than everybody except MD and VA Tech and NC State a couple of whom, if not all 3 will be at bottom half of ACC, if not.

Guys like Laettner were similarly sized to Mason, but I just think for Duke to consider itself truly playing Big, Lance and Mason are usually alternating @ PF with Kelly while Miles/Z are the jumbos.

There are situations and opponents where Kyle-Lance-Mason is more ideal than a jumbo center, but vs weak OOC teams where Duke will win anyway better to give the big guys some PT than mask what will eventually be a problem versus true big men, better ACC and NCAA tourney teams.

mo.st.dukie
07-21-2009, 09:20 AM
Yes but Davis was paired with either Tyler Hansbrough or 245 pound Deon Thompson, albeit with smaller jumping jack Danny Green @ SF.

vs being paired with 6'8" 220 Lance Thomas and similarly sized Kyle @ SF. So he was more of a PF or second center.

It is not as bad being 6'11" 220 as what I had seen listed @ 205 but Duke leverages its height advantage when paired with Miles 6'10" 245 or Zoubek 7'1" 270 and is no bigger than a lot of ACC teams, in fact smaller than everybody except MD and VA Tech and NC State a couple of whom, if not all 3 will be at bottom half of ACC, if not.

Guys like Laettner were similarly sized to Mason, but I just think for Duke to consider itself truly playing Big, Lance and Mason are usually alternating @ PF with Kelly while Miles/Z are the jumbos.

There are situations and opponents where Kyle-Lance-Mason is more ideal than a jumbo center, but vs weak OOC teams where Duke will win anyway better to give the big guys some PT than mask what will eventually be a problem versus true big men, better ACC and NCAA tourney teams.

I could see that but it would have to mean that Miles and Zoubek both improve quite a bit. It's tough to say because we don't really know how Mason is going to handle the physicality of college play, his athleticism and length could help to cover up some of his weaknesses in the post. All I know is that Coach K will have alot of different types of lineups he could throw out there.

But don't forget that just because you have a lineup of Singler-Thomas-Mason doesn't necessarily mean that Singler can only play on the perimeter, Thomas can only do things that a traditional 4 would, and Mason can only be anchored to the post. It's said time and time again that Coach K doesn't use "positions". So with Kyle-Lance-Mason, Coach K could do a number of things such as running high-low invert plays where Lance is at the high post and Kyle is on the blocks getting good position on a smaller SF with Mason floating out on the perimeter drawing centers away from the paint because of his shooting ability. Also, Singler is a strong player who did a decent job in the post for two years so even though he will basically be a guard this year that doesn't mean that he won't ever be posting up and we know he won't be getting pushed around (probably be our leading rebounder).

But i can see where you're coming from having a stronger player like Miles or Zoubek alongside Mason and Kyle. That may be the ideal lineup againts teams that have two strong post players like UNC/GT. If Coach K did decide to go with Mason/Lance with Miles/Zoubek then Kelly's time could be significantly lower than I thought it would be, he would probably be primarily Kyle's backup on the perimeter.

SupaDave
07-21-2009, 12:04 PM
Yes but Davis was paired with either Tyler Hansbrough or 245 pound Deon Thompson, albeit with smaller jumping jack Danny Green @ SF.

vs being paired with 6'8" 220 Lance Thomas and similarly sized Kyle @ SF. So he was more of a PF or second center.

It is not as bad being 6'11" 220 as what I had seen listed @ 205 but Duke leverages its height advantage when paired with Miles 6'10" 245 or Zoubek 7'1" 270 and is no bigger than a lot of ACC teams, in fact smaller than everybody except MD and VA Tech and NC State a couple of whom, if not all 3 will be at bottom half of ACC, if not.

Guys like Laettner were similarly sized to Mason, but I just think for Duke to consider itself truly playing Big, Lance and Mason are usually alternating @ PF with Kelly while Miles/Z are the jumbos.

There are situations and opponents where Kyle-Lance-Mason is more ideal than a jumbo center, but vs weak OOC teams where Duke will win anyway better to give the big guys some PT than mask what will eventually be a problem versus true big men, better ACC and NCAA tourney teams.

For history's sake, David Robinson was a 6'10" 210 lb center who dominated in his last two years of college.

Kfanarmy
07-21-2009, 01:02 PM
For history's sake, David Robinson was a 6'10" 210 lb center who dominated in his last two years of college. I believe he may have been 6'10 at some point during his junior year, but he graduated at 7'1"...

SupaDave
07-21-2009, 01:08 PM
I believe he may have been 6'10 at some point during his junior year, but he graduated at 7'1"...

Yep he had a huge growth spurt in college as you mention. He also never got much heavier at that point but what made him an outstanding center were many of the qualities that MP2 already has.

jimsumner
07-21-2009, 01:18 PM
I'm pretty sure David Robinson weighed a good bit more than 210 pounds at Navy.

And this is the first time I've seen David Robinson and Mason Plumlee referenced in the same sentence.

Greg_Newton
07-21-2009, 01:20 PM
Yep he had a huge growth spurt in college as you mention. He also never got much heavier at that point but what made him an outstanding center were many of the qualities that MP2 already has.

True... along with the footwork, timing and discipline that we hope MP2 can start to develop this season. People seem to be assuming that the "starting big man" job is Mason's unless Miles/Z improves, but from what I've seen and heard, Mason has just as much work to do as them before he establishes himself as "the" guy down low. As it stands, his skill set seems better suited for playing a versatile inside/outside position alongside a thicker center-type, as ACCBballFan suggested.

CDu
07-21-2009, 01:46 PM
Yep he had a huge growth spurt in college as you mention. He also never got much heavier at that point but what made him an outstanding center were many of the qualities that MP2 already has.

From a physical standpoint, the two have similar qualities. But there was no question that Robinson was a big-time post presence. It remains to be seen if that will be the case for Plumlee, who by most accounts I've seen seems more comfortable working outside the post in rather than truly in the post.

But I definitely agree that thin(ner) big guys can still be effective in the ACC. You don't have to be 260lbs to be successful on the blocks. Just look at Ed Davis for evidence of a skinny guy that can play big inside. It's a matter of desire, skill, and "know-how" as much is it is purely size. Now, a guy who has all of those things AND the size is at an advantage over a thinner version. But size isn't the only (or even the most important) factor.

The question will simply be "will Plumlee make his athleticism and size work as a post defender?," rather than "is it possible for a thin guy to succeed?"

eightyearoldsdude
07-21-2009, 02:24 PM
I think you're selling Strickland really short, and I also would give UNC a big edge in terms of bench (Henson alone justifies this, IMO). But Duke definitely has the experience edge, and UNC will have trouble with both Singler and Scheyer. UNC is thin at point, but Duke is thin at both backcourt spots, so both teams would be really hurt by an injury to a guard. It will be an interesting series.

As to the OP, I suspect that the three guards + Singler will get more PT than they'll even want. I think Kelly is the real deal, and so is MP2 (though he needs to develop his back-to-the-basket game). That's 6. I suspect that K will end his Zoubek experiment, and I don't anticipate MP1 getting much time. I think LT will get more minutes than those two because of his mobility.



Just for conversation's sake, considering UNC will (as usual) be our biggest competition for ACC race, thought i'd jot down my thoughts on how we'll match up:

1.
Duke- Scheyer
UNC- Drew2

Edge: Duke (different styles, i know, but unless Drew gets a lot better there's no way he's the player scheyer is this year)

2.
Duke - Smith
UNC- Strickland

Edge: Duke (easily)

3-
Duke- Singler
UNC- Ginyard

Edge: Duke (very easily, at least on offense)

4-
Duke- LT
UNC- Deon Thompson

Edge: UNC (Thompson's offense is much better than LT's)

5-
Duke- MP2
UNC- Ed Davis

Edge: UNC (hard to tell by how much given we've never seen mason, if he's even gonna be the starter... but Davis is projected as a lottery pick)

Bench-
Duke- Dawkins/Kelly/MP1/Zoubek
UNC- LMac/Henson/Zeller/Wears

Edge: Toss-up (2 incoming 5-stars each, plus a few big men subs with potential to do much more)

X-Factor-
Duke- Experience (Singler, Scheyer, Smith)
UNC- Frontcourt Athleticism (Henson, Davis, Thompson)

Edge: Gonna say Duke, because Kyle Singler is the man.

elvis14
07-21-2009, 03:25 PM
I suspect that K will end his Zoubek experiment, and I don't anticipate MP1 getting much time. I think LT will get more minutes than those two because of his mobility.

Wow, I couldn't disagree more. Z isn't an experiment. He's a player that is very effective in certain situations. Why do you think he would start a game and then not see 1 minute the next? Match ups. I suspect that K will continue to use Z when appropriate and thus maximize his effectiveness. I also suspect that Z will have improved after having a healthy off season for the first time in several years. As for MP1, many college players improve greatly between their freshman and sophomore years. There's a pretty good chance we'll see this with MP1. He has mobility that Z does not and size that LT does not. If MP1 comes around he could be a really good player. Truth be told, I'm not a big LT fan. Or to be more clear, I'm not a fan of his game, he seems like a great kid. I think that the more of Lance's minutes that go to MP1 at the 5 the better. If LT is going to get PT, it shouldn't be at the expense of Z and MP1 completely. Lance's issue is that he's too small to play the 5 and can't shoot well enough to beat out others at the 4 or 3 (Singler).

SupaDave
07-21-2009, 03:25 PM
I'm pretty sure David Robinson weighed a good bit more than 210 pounds at Navy.

And this is the first time I've seen David Robinson and Mason Plumlee referenced in the same sentence.

http://www.usabasketball.com/news.php?news_page=mwc_1986

jimsumner
07-21-2009, 03:40 PM
http://www.thedraftreview.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2335

jv001
07-21-2009, 03:48 PM
http://www.usabasketball.com/news.php?news_page=mwc_1986

Had to look twice at Tommy Amaker's shooting from 3 point line. He hit 1 for 11. Glad he shot better at Duke. Go Duke!

SupaDave
07-21-2009, 04:01 PM
http://www.thedraftreview.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2335

But this makes sense. He has a summer with no rest and plays at 215-220 and then a year later while preparing for the draft - he bulked up...

He WAS small and it seems much smaller than 210 his freshman year...


In his freshman year, he did not start a single game and averaged 7.6 points and four rebounds a game. But the next year Robinson's height and ability in basketball would change dramatically. Robinson grew to be 6 feet, 11 inches tall and began to dominate on the basketball court.

eightyearoldsdude
07-21-2009, 04:34 PM
Wow, I couldn't disagree more. Z isn't an experiment. He's a player that is very effective in certain situations. Why do you think he would start a game and then not see 1 minute the next? Match ups. I suspect that K will continue to use Z when appropriate and thus maximize his effectiveness. I also suspect that Z will have improved after having a healthy off season for the first time in several years. As for MP1, many college players improve greatly between their freshman and sophomore years. There's a pretty good chance we'll see this with MP1. He has mobility that Z does not and size that LT does not. If MP1 comes around he could be a really good player. Truth be told, I'm not a big LT fan. Or to be more clear, I'm not a fan of his game, he seems like a great kid. I think that the more of Lance's minutes that go to MP1 at the 5 the better. If LT is going to get PT, it shouldn't be at the expense of Z and MP1 completely. Lance's issue is that he's too small to play the 5 and can't shoot well enough to beat out others at the 4 or 3 (Singler).

Yeah, I could be wrong, but watching you guys the past few years I always had the feeling that K was playing Z out of necessity. Even if he's healthy, he'll never fit the fast-paced game K likes to play. My bet is that Z, MP1 and LT will compete for the 7th & 8th spots. I guess my main point is that I really, really doubt that one of those three will beat Kelly out for a regular rotation spot.

Greg_Newton
07-21-2009, 05:26 PM
I suspect that K will end his Zoubek experiment, and I don't anticipate MP1 getting much time.

I would also strongly disagree with this, and I feel like Chris Collins probably would too:
We feel Miles Plumlee is going to be an outstanding post-player, and we feel that Brian Zoubek as a senior is going to have a great year.Zoubek has proven himself quite effective in spots and should continue to do so as a senior coming off of his first healthy off-season, and as I have previously stated I expect Miles to pleasantly surprise some folks this year.

(quote from http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/news?slug=uwire-qampadukebasketballassista&prov=uwire&type=lgns)

jimsumner
07-21-2009, 05:31 PM
"But this makes sense. He has a summer with no rest and plays at 215-220 and then a year later while preparing for the draft - he bulked up..."

Right. Give a 22-year-old a summer off and they're pretty much guaranteed to grow three inches. :)

sagegrouse
07-21-2009, 05:35 PM
I would also strongly disagree with this, and I feel like Chris Collins probably would too: Zoubek has proven himself quite effective in spots and should continue to do so as a senior coming off of his first healthy off-season, and as I have previously stated I expect Miles to pleasantly surprise some folks this year.

(quote from http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/news?slug=uwire-qampadukebasketballassista&prov=uwire&type=lgns)

It seems to me that neither Zoubs nor Miles will willingly take a backseat to freshmen. I would expect a high degree of effort and motivation, and one of them (probably Z) will start. And Miles's motivation to beat out his brother must be off the charts. Luckily, it is not a zero-sum game and both Plumlees can play at the same time.

sagegrouse

DUKIE V(A)
07-21-2009, 05:36 PM
MP2 looks plenty long and athletic enough to be very effective in the ACC to me. I think often length and athleticism is much more important factor than weight. Anyway, I really like what I see and hear about MP2. I think he will prove to be our most talented and best big man not named Singler this season. This isn't implying that there is anything wrong with the other guys or that they aren't going to be better (I agree with those who think they will), but MP2 seems more athletically gifted than our other guys. He also seems to have some moxie about him and I can't help but love the kid's confidence.

I also don't think we are going to need to worry about young Mr. Dawkins. Dude can flat out ball and we are going to need him to play a lot in order to be great. Although I won't be disappointed if he develops more along the lines of many of our other freshmen, it seems to me he is a unique player (a once every few seasons kind of guy) even by Duke standards. I predict that he will be our third leading scorer and be a huge factor in deciding the ACC race this season.

eightyearoldsdude
07-21-2009, 05:39 PM
I would also strongly disagree with this, and I feel like Chris Collins probably would too: Zoubek has proven himself quite effective in spots and should continue to do so as a senior coming off of his first healthy off-season, and as I have previously stated I expect Miles to pleasantly surprise some folks this year.

(quote from http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/news?slug=uwire-qampadukebasketballassista&prov=uwire&type=lgns)

OK, so who do you have sitting? Kelly? I'm not one to be enamored of freshmen, but I think that kid has skills that will work in Duke's system (perhaps more than MP2, in fact). I just don't see him sitting so that Zoubek plays.

And for the record, I bet I could find assistant coaches saying similarly nice things about guys who wound up not playing. That's what they do.

FireOgilvie
07-21-2009, 05:52 PM
OK, so who do you have sitting? Kelly? I'm not one to be enamored of freshmen, but I think that kid has skills that will work in Duke's system (perhaps more than MP2, in fact). I just don't see him sitting so that Zoubek plays.

And for the record, I bet I could find assistant coaches saying similarly nice things about guys who wound up not playing. That's what they do.

Who do you have starting? Zoubek and Kelly don't play the same position and you said earlier that LT and MP1 are on the bench. You have Kelly at PF and MP2 at center? I would love it if the freshmen were both good enough to start immediately, but I'd say that's highly unlikely. Also, Kelly is probably not strong enough at this point to start at PF, while MP2 is also smaller than Zoubek and MP1 at center. Not enough size down low, IMO.

Greg_Newton
07-21-2009, 06:14 PM
OK, so who do you have sitting? Kelly? I'm not one to be enamored of freshmen, but I think that kid has skills that will work in Duke's system (perhaps more than MP2, in fact). I just don't see him sitting so that Zoubek plays.

And for the record, I bet I could find assistant coaches saying similarly nice things about guys who wound up not playing. That's what they do.

I do, actually. I'm not really expecting Kelly to "blossom" for a year or two. He is certainly a unique talent and I think he'll get some minutes, but I'm not sure his all-around game and (perhaps just as important) his speed of play will be at the level required for big minutes next year. And if it is, I think it will be at combo forward, because he has looked very hesitant when forced to "bang" inside... which means he's probably competing with Singler, Lance, and MP2 for PT, not Miles/Zoubek.

Certainly a fair point about the quote, but Collins did offer that up without being specifically asked about either one of them.

eightyearoldsdude
07-21-2009, 06:18 PM
Who do you have starting? Zoubek and Kelly don't play the same position and you said earlier that LT and MP1 are on the bench. You have Kelly at PF and MP2 at center? I would love it if the freshmen were both good enough to start immediately, but I'd say that's highly unlikely. Also, Kelly is probably not strong enough at this point to start at PF, while MP2 is also smaller than Zoubek and MP1 at center. Not enough size down low, IMO.

From what I've seen of the incoming freshmen, I'd start Scheyer, Smith, Singler, MP2, and Kelly. It's a little light on beef and rebounding (though Z and LT are hardly glasscleaners), but you've got mobility, athleticism, and shooting. I wouldn't be surprised if Dawkins stole Nolan's starting spot by midseason, esp. if Scheyer can handle the point. In today's game, I don't think it's a huge deal to start two freshmen, especially with such experience around them. Just my $0.02.

sagegrouse
07-21-2009, 06:22 PM
MP2 looks plenty long and athletic enough to be very effective in the ACC to me. I think often length and athleticism is much more important factor than weight. Anyway, I really like what I see and hear about MP2. I think he will prove to be our most talented and best big man not named Singler this season.

I also don't think we are going to need to worry about young Mr. Dawkins. Dude can flat out ball and we are going to need him to play a lot in order to be great.... I predict that he will be our third leading scorer and be a huge factor in deciding the ACC race this season.

You know how the most popular player in an NFL city is the back-up quarterback? Here the most popular players are incoming freshmen who have nover worn a Duke uniform.

Be very careful of big men as freshmen. MP1 won the starting job but was quickly relegated to the bench as a TO machine. Even guys in the rafters like Ferry and Laettner were not huge contributors as freshmen. G-man was, but boy was that Duke team bad!

I believe all the hype on Andre, but having been around Coach K's program since the inception, if he can't play solid Duke defense, he isn't going to get a lot of minutes.

Ryan Kelley is a natural backup to KS and that sounds like a great job.

So, we'll see, although all the returning big man have a lot to prove and few laurels to rest on...

sagegrouse
'Isn't laurel something good to eat?'

jimsumner
07-21-2009, 06:42 PM
"G-man was, but boy was that Duke team bad!"

No, no, no. That 1977 team was 11-3, with wins over Washington and Tennessee when Tate Armstrong broke his right wrist. Then, the wheels came off. But Armstrong, Spanarkel, Gminski, Mark Crow, and Harold Morrison were a pretty solid quintet. No bench, however.

A good point about freshmen bigs, although Laettner sure closed with a surge.

On the other hand, Elton Brand and Carlos Boozer were pretty good out the gate, so it can be done.

For me, Lance is one of the more intriguing story-lines. With Kyle at the 3 and the firm of Plumlee-Kelly-Plumlee hopefully covering the 5, what can Thomas do at his natural position? I suspect he's going to be more important than some posters feel.

SupaDave
07-21-2009, 07:10 PM
"But this makes sense. He has a summer with no rest and plays at 215-220 and then a year later while preparing for the draft - he bulked up..."

Right. Give a 22-year-old a summer off and they're pretty much guaranteed to grow three inches. :)

Actually I'm still pretty stunned from reading that he grew so much in college. That's absurd. I mean I grew like two inches in college but 6"?!!!

That's actually what made me think of Mason - the growth spurt in comparison to the weight.

SupaDave
07-21-2009, 07:15 PM
For me, Lance is one of the more intriguing story-lines. With Kyle at the 3 and the firm of Plumlee-Kelly-Plumlee hopefully covering the 5, what can Thomas do at his natural position? I suspect he's going to be more important than some posters feel.

I'll second that. It seemed to me that Lance was growing comfortable last year.

sagegrouse
07-21-2009, 07:38 PM
"G-man was, but boy was that Duke team bad!"

No, no, no. That 1977 team was 11-3, with wins over Washington and Tennessee when Tate Armstrong broke his right wrist. Then, the wheels came off. But Armstrong, Spanarkel, Gminski, Mark Crow, and Harold Morrison were a pretty solid quintet. No bench, however.



Well, maybe I should have said that the 1977 team, not counting Gminski, was really weak in the middle. But the team, despite an 11-3 start, finished 14-13 and 2-10 in the ACC -- "bad?" maybe or maybe not. Anyway, for whatever reason Gminski had ample opportunity to play and averaged 15 PPG.

sagegrouse

Bob Green
07-21-2009, 07:47 PM
I suspect that K will end his Zoubek experiment....

Zoubek averaged 11.9 minutes per game last season and tallied 4.1 ppg and 3.7 rpg. I expect his numbers to increase across the board as he benefits from solid off season work as a result of extended good health. I believe Zoubek is capable of 15 mpg, 6 ppg, and 6 rpg.

As previously noted, Zoubek will be utilized in favorly match-up situations. Once again, Zoubek will see major minutes some games and little to no minutes in some games. Coach K is a master at bench management.

COYS
07-21-2009, 08:30 PM
(though Z and LT are hardly glasscleaners)

Definitely true about LT, but Zoubek is a great per minute rebounder. He's not the smoothest and he's had a few go through his hands, but nevertheless, he still brings 'em down based on his sheer size. With a full summer off to work on strengthening his lower body (rather than rehabbing), hopefully his positioning will be better and his size will be an even better asset.

jimsumner
07-21-2009, 09:36 PM
The '77 team is one of my favorites. After years of wandering in the wilderness, it was this team that began the climb back to respectability. Their win at Knoxville over Bernie and Ernie may have been Duke's most impressive non-conference, regular-season win of the 1970s.

Gminski certainly was Duke's only credible low-post presence. And he was a prodigy. He outplayed Washington's James Edwards and outplayed Tree Rollins twice in three meetings. And Edwards and Rollins were seniors.

I'll always wonder what would happened to that team had Armstrong not been injured. Even without Tate, Duke was competitive with teams like NCSU and Maryland but suffered a series of improbable, gut-wrenching, last-second losses.

So Sagegrouse, I'm sure this was just an off-hand remark and I apologize if I seemed harsh in my response. But I'm gonna defend that bunch.

BTW, four future NBA players.

Back to your regular programming.

roywhite
07-21-2009, 10:07 PM
The '77 team is one of my favorites. After years of wandering in the wilderness, it was this team that began the climb back to respectability. Their win at Knoxville over Bernie and Ernie may have been Duke's most impressive non-conference, regular-season win of the 1970s.

Gminski certainly was Duke's only credible low-post presence. And he was a prodigy. He outplayed Washington's James Edwards and outplayed Tree Rollins twice in three meetings. And Edwards and Rollins were seniors.

I'll always wonder what would happened to that team had Armstrong not been injured. Even without Tate, Duke was competitive with teams like NCSU and Maryland but suffered a series of improbable, gut-wrenching, last-second losses.

So Sagegrouse, I'm sure this was just an off-hand remark and I apologize if I seemed harsh in my response. But I'm gonna defend that bunch.

BTW, four future NBA players.

Back to your regular programming.

You got me on the four NBA players, jimsumner...

Sure enough, Mark Crow played 15 games for the NJ Nets, in addition to Armstrong, Gminski, and Spanarkel being pros.

Yeah, I liked that '77 team also. So close to a good season.

The next year Tinker Bell came along and sprinkled a little pixie dust around, and those close losses turned into wins. :)

ice-9
07-22-2009, 02:41 AM
My predictions:

Our two starting guards are Nolan and Scheyer. Both will handle but Nolan is probably closer to a 1 than is Scheyer as per last season. Dawkins will back these two players and will always play the 2 (i.e. when he's in the game Nolan and Scheyer will play PG exclusively). I think only special circumstances will call on all three to play at the same time. Why? Because we have so many capable forwards:

Singler will play the 3 and backed by Kelly. I agree with previous posters who say that Kelly would likely play limited minutes. However, if one of our guards get into foul trouble I wouldn't be surprised to see Singler or Kelly playing the 2 and 3.

Lance will start at the 4. I don't think we've seen the best of Lance -- not by a long shot. The 4 is the position he should play in college, and unfortunately, for the past three seasons he hasn't had many chances to do that. He's not big enough at the 5 and his shot is not good enough at the 3, but at the 4 he can use his quickness to get close to the basket and the length to convert the high percentage short range basket. I think he has the potential to be the poor man college version of David West.

Mason will back Lance up to the point he "gets it" and takes off. I expect Mason will play big minutes when he does, but Lance's experience and hustle should keep him in the starting position.

Zoubek and Miles will play the 5; the starter will depend on matchups. Zoubek has earned at least 10-15 minutes per game and hopefully Miles will as well. If Miles falters however look for his brother to take his place in the 5 rotation with Lance playing more minutes at the 4.

Olek is a wild card in all of this. I can see him at the 3 or at the 4 backing up the above respective players.

(Note: I'm aware that there are no positions at Duke. The numerical designations are simply for convenient communication.)

CDu
07-22-2009, 06:20 AM
My predictions:

Our two starting guards are Nolan and Scheyer. Both will handle but Nolan is probably closer to a 1 than is Scheyer as per last season. Dawkins will back these two players and will always play the 2 (i.e. when he's in the game Nolan and Scheyer will play PG exclusively). I think only special circumstances will call on all three to play at the same time. Why? Because we have so many capable forwards:

Singler will play the 3 and backed by Kelly. I agree with previous posters who say that Kelly would likely play limited minutes. However, if one of our guards get into foul trouble I wouldn't be surprised to see Singler or Kelly playing the 2 and 3.

Lance will start at the 4. I don't think we've seen the best of Lance -- not by a long shot. The 4 is the position he should play in college, and unfortunately, for the past three seasons he hasn't had many chances to do that. He's not big enough at the 5 and his shot is not good enough at the 3, but at the 4 he can use his quickness to get close to the basket and the length to convert the high percentage short range basket. I think he has the potential to be the poor man college version of David West.

Mason will back Lance up to the point he "gets it" and takes off. I expect Mason will play big minutes when he does, but Lance's experience and hustle should keep him in the starting position.

Zoubek and Miles will play the 5; the starter will depend on matchups. Zoubek has earned at least 10-15 minutes per game and hopefully Miles will as well. If Miles falters however look for his brother to take his place in the 5 rotation with Lance playing more minutes at the 4.

Olek is a wild card in all of this. I can see him at the 3 or at the 4 backing up the above respective players.

(Note: I'm aware that there are no positions at Duke. The numerical designations are simply for convenient communication.)

I feel the same about most of what you said, except for a few things:

1. I don't see Kelly playing at the 2, and I'll be surprised to see him playing at the 3. Everything I've read about him suggests "Euro-style big man", rather than "Dunleavy-style wing forward." I doubt he'll have the quickness to defend guards/wings. As such, I suspect he'll play the 4 when necessary. But I'm expecting this to be a development year for Kelly as he gets ready to play the 4. Hopefully I'm wrong about him though.
2. Related to point#1, I think that Dawkins and Thomas will pick up the remaining minutes at the 3 behind Singler. They're quicker and more likely to be able to defend players at that position.
3. If Mason Plumlee is as good as people are saying, I think he'll get minutes at the 4 (backing up Thomas) AND at the 5. I still don't see Zoubek or Miles Plumlee being ready to contribute 20+ minutes per game. I'm thinking those two will get 25-30 minutes per game, and Plumlee will get the rest of the minutes at the 5. Then, he and Kelly will share the duties as backup 4.

The minutes at the 4 and 5 spot are the most uncertain. None of the guys available have ever averaged 20mpg in a college season, and only one has averaged more than 12mpg. So there may very well be a lot of minutes to go around for Plumlee and Kelly at the 4 and 5 spots this year.

jv001
07-22-2009, 07:16 AM
You got me on the four NBA players, jimsumner...

Sure enough, Mark Crow played 15 games for the NJ Nets, in addition to Armstrong, Gminski, and Spanarkel being pros.

Yeah, I liked that '77 team also. So close to a good season.

The next year Tinker Bell came along and sprinkled a little pixie dust around, and those close losses turned into wins. :)

Oh yes, G-Man, Tate and Spanarkel are three of my alltime favorite Duke players. With Tate maybe my favorite. That injury in '77 killed us. But as Jim said that team may have been the sign of good things ahead. Go Duke!

NSDukeFan
07-22-2009, 08:08 AM
I feel the same about most of what you said, except for a few things:

1. I don't see Kelly playing at the 2, and I'll be surprised to see him playing at the 3. Everything I've read about him suggests "Euro-style big man", rather than "Dunleavy-style wing forward." I doubt he'll have the quickness to defend guards/wings. As such, I suspect he'll play the 4 when necessary. But I'm expecting this to be a development year for Kelly as he gets ready to play the 4. Hopefully I'm wrong about him though.
2. Related to point#1, I think that Dawkins and Thomas will pick up the remaining minutes at the 3 behind Singler. They're quicker and more likely to be able to defend players at that position.
3. If Mason Plumlee is as good as people are saying, I think he'll get minutes at the 4 (backing up Thomas) AND at the 5. I still don't see Zoubek or Miles Plumlee being ready to contribute 20+ minutes per game. I'm thinking those two will get 25-30 minutes per game, and Plumlee will get the rest of the minutes at the 5. Then, he and Kelly will share the duties as backup 4.

The minutes at the 4 and 5 spot are the most uncertain. None of the guys available have ever averaged 20mpg in a college season, and only one has averaged more than 12mpg. So there may very well be a lot of minutes to go around for Plumlee and Kelly at the 4 and 5 spots this year.

I agree with most of your post, as well as jywuono and bob green. The one thing I wonder about, and it maybe wishful thinking, is whether we won't still a little bit of Singler at the 2, Kelly at the 3 on offense, 4 on defense and Lance at the 4 offensively, 3 on defense (if we had positions). I guess I am maybe a little higher on Kelly getting some minutes instead of Dawkins, very uneducated guesses based solely on discussion, highlights, recruiting rankings, etc.

I am also, maybe overly optimistically, hoping for some good results from the Brian Zoubek experiment. I think the numbers Bob mentioned 15mpg, 6ppg, 6rpg are attainable and am hoping for more. I hope Miles can also provide something similar, though that is less predictable and with perhaps a higher ceiling. Less predictable and higher ceiling may also apply to his brother and like everyone else am hoping (and expecting) for some solid contributions from Mason as well, though I am less sure than some that he will start.

I guess at this point I see Jon, Nolan, Kyle and Lance as the starters, with Z starting at least some of the time and someone or someones out of MP1, MP2 and Kelly starting the rest and all contributing minutes at 4, 5 and maybe Lance defending the wing and Kelly and/or MP2 playing offensively on the wing for some minutes for a big lineup. Wow, Dawk coming early certainly does give K lots of options.

CDu
07-22-2009, 08:35 AM
I agree with most of your post, as well as jywuono and bob green. The one thing I wonder about, and it maybe wishful thinking, is whether we won't still a little bit of Singler at the 2, Kelly at the 3 on offense, 4 on defense and Lance at the 4 offensively, 3 on defense (if we had positions). I guess I am maybe a little higher on Kelly getting some minutes instead of Dawkins, very uneducated guesses based solely on discussion, highlights, recruiting rankings, etc.

I'm not overly excited about the idea of Thomas defending at the 3, and I'm definitely not excited about the idea of Singler defending at the 2. So I'll be surprised if Singler plays much at the 2 this year. I think Dawkins will fill in those ~15 minutes behind Scheyer and Smith and Singler will play the 3 pretty much exclusively. From there, it may be that we see Thomas and Kelly on the floor together when Singler is out, with Thomas defending the 3 and Kelly playing on the perimeter on offense. But that wouldn't be for very long, as I don't think Singler will sit for very long.

Now, we definitely could see the Singler/Kelly/Thomas combination that you described, especially if Kelly is indeed more ready to contribute than Dawkins. But remember that big men frequently have a bigger adjustment to college competition than guards, and Kelly has been mentioned as needing time to develop physically. As such, I'll be surprised if we see much of Singler at the 2 this year (assuming Dawkins does come to Duke early).

You are right that Dawkins gives us more options and that's huge. If nothing else, being able to play Dawkins for 15 minutes at the guard spot allows Singler to play full-time at the 3, and minimizes the amount of time required of our bigs. As excited as everyone (including me) is about having a lot of size, we have to remember that it's a lot of unproven size. Given that all of the bigs are question marks, it's better to be able to limit the need to play them to around 80 minutes, rather than being forced to play them around 100 minutes whether they're ready or not. It's always better to have too many guys able/ready to contribute than to have too few and be forced to play guys who aren't ready to contribute.

eightyearoldsdude
07-22-2009, 11:32 AM
Given K's preferences in the past, I think it would take foul trouble or an injury among the guards for Singler to play the 2. I'd be willing to put money on that.

IMO, Singler is going to play the 3 when there are two guards on the floor, and on the occasions (and I do think there will be such occasions) that all 3 guards on the floor, Singler will be at the 4. Given that K generally plays with a short bench, those 4 guys (3 guards + Singler) will eat up most of the minutes at their positions. Which, realistically, probably leaves 50 minutes for other post players, at most. There will probably be some shifting around during the season, but my guess is that MP1 won't make the cut, and Z will fall by the wayside as well. This won't be the lightning fast Duke team of years past, so K will probably want quicker, more athletic big men --> LT, MP2, and Kelly.

MChambers
07-22-2009, 11:53 AM
Well, maybe I should have said that the 1977 team, not counting Gminski, was really weak in the middle. But the team, despite an 11-3 start, finished 14-13 and 2-10 in the ACC -- "bad?" maybe or maybe not. Anyway, for whatever reason Gminski had ample opportunity to play and averaged 15 PPG.

sagegrouse

After Armstrong got hurt, we had no true point. Steve Gray tried to do the job, but just wasn't a good enough ball handler (he was an excellent shooter, however). (I still can see him dribbling the ball off his foot in the final seconds against NCSU.) The final game of the regular season, he was benched in favor of Bruce Bell, a walk-on, who gamely tried to cover Phil Ford.

Now maybe you understand why I worry about having only 2 or 3 scholarship guards this fall.

sagegrouse
07-22-2009, 12:18 PM
Given K's preferences in the past, I think it would take foul trouble or an injury among the guards for Singler to play the 2. I'd be willing to put money on that.

.

If I were you, I wouldn't make the wager.

You are saying that K would never go with one guard and four forwards or three F and a C. I would think that Jon or Nolan (or Andre) plus Singler, Kelly, LT and a big guy would be a very effective line-up against most teams. Moreover, we have been promised by K, Chris and Wojo that it will happen.

Do you remember the game last year where Coach Knight praised K's "all forward lineup?" I believe that team, which played a lot of minutes, included Jon at the point plus Kyle, Gerald, McClure and Lance. Kelly for Gerald and one of the Plumees (or Olek) for McClure could be an interesting team.

sagegrouse

Kedsy
07-22-2009, 12:39 PM
Given K's preferences in the past, I think it would take foul trouble or an injury among the guards for Singler to play the 2. I'd be willing to put money on that.

IMO, Singler is going to play the 3 when there are two guards on the floor, and on the occasions (and I do think there will be such occasions) that all 3 guards on the floor, Singler will be at the 4. Given that K generally plays with a short bench, those 4 guys (3 guards + Singler) will eat up most of the minutes at their positions. Which, realistically, probably leaves 50 minutes for other post players, at most. There will probably be some shifting around during the season, but my guess is that MP1 won't make the cut, and Z will fall by the wayside as well. This won't be the lightning fast Duke team of years past, so K will probably want quicker, more athletic big men --> LT, MP2, and Kelly.


Only 50 minutes? You're suggesting KS, JS, NS, and AD will play 150 minutes between them? That's 40, 40, 40, and 30 (for the freshman). If you cut that down to 35, 35, 30, 20 (which IMO seems much more reasonable), it leaves 80 minutes for MP2, LT, Z, MP1, and RK (and possibly OC, but for now I'll leave him out). Which could pan out something like 20, 20, 15, 15, and 10, although who gets 20 and who gets 10 we obviously won't know until it happens. If we end up going with an 8 man rotation instead of 9, then it could be 25, 20, 20, 15 for the bigs, but the point is there should be plenty of minutes for all of them. I'll be very surprised if K goes with a 7 man rotation, as you seem to be assuming.

CDu
07-22-2009, 12:40 PM
If I were you, I wouldn't make the wager.

You are saying that K would never go with one guard and four forwards or three F and a C. I would think that Jon or Nolan (or Andre) plus Singler, Kelly, LT and a big guy would be a very effective line-up against most teams. Moreover, we have been promised by K, Chris and Wojo that it will happen.

Do you remember the game last year where Coach Knight praised K's "all forward lineup?" I believe that team, which played a lot of minutes, included Jon at the point plus Kyle, Gerald, McClure and Lance. Kelly for Gerald and one of the Plumees (or Olek) for McClure could be an interesting team.

sagegrouse

That "five forward" lineup is not remotely comparable to a lineup of Scheyer/Smith and Singler, Kelly, Thomas, and a big guy. Also, I believe you've misidentified the five forwards from last year. If I'm not mistaken, it was the St John's game in which the lineup was Scheyer, Williams, Henderson, Singler, and Thomas.

That lineup last year still basically had three guard types in terms of size and quickness (Scheyer, Williams, and Henderson), with Singler and Thomas being basically two PF. Conversely, the lineup you're discussing for this year is one guard, 3 PF, and a C, or one guard and four PF. That's a very different animal - the team would be MUCH slower.

All of the quotes discussing playing Singler at the 2 were theoretically based on the idea that there was no choice but play him at the 2. Until Dawkins is on the team, Singler is the third option at guard. With Dawkins, the situation changes, and because of that I'll be surprised if Singler sees time at the 2 (assuming Dawkins arrives this year). I wouldn't bet on it as I'm not a betting man, but I'd be pretty surprised.

CDu
07-22-2009, 12:48 PM
Only 50 minutes? You're suggesting KS, JS, NS, and AD will play 150 minutes between them? That's 40, 40, 40, and 30 (for the freshman). If you cut that down to 35, 35, 30, 20 (which IMO seems much more reasonable), it leaves 80 minutes for MP2, LT, Z, MP1, and RK (and possibly OC, but for now I'll leave him out). Which could pan out something like 20, 20, 15, 15, and 10, although who gets 20 and who gets 10 we obviously won't know until it happens. If we end up going with an 8 man rotation instead of 9, then it could be 25, 20, 20, 15 for the bigs, but the point is there should be plenty of minutes for all of them. I'll be very surprised if K goes with a 7 man rotation, as you seem to be assuming.

I think this is the more accurate assessment. I think the bigs will get 75 minutes for sure at a minimum. I think there'll be 10 minutes floating around that would be split between Dawkins and the bigs, depending upon who is more ready:
- If Dawkins isn't really ready, he'll see 10-15 minutes providing spot time for Scheyer and Smith. In that scenario, the bigs would pick up the full 80 minutes at the 4/5, and then fill in the ~5 backup minutes at the 3, meaning around 85 minutes for the bigs.
- If Dawkins is ready, he'd get those backup minutes as well as the backup minutes at the 3, leaving around 80 minutes to the bigs.
- And if he's REALLY ready, he could play extended (20-25) minutes and allow Singler to even spend ~5 minutes per game at the 4. That'd leave around 75 minutes for the bigs.

Of course, it's all pure speculation at this point as (1) we have little idea how good the bigs will be this year, and (2) Dawkins has still yet to enroll, so we have no idea what impact - if any - he'll have.

eightyearoldsdude
07-22-2009, 12:55 PM
Only 50 minutes? You're suggesting KS, JS, NS, and AD will play 150 minutes between them? That's 40, 40, 40, and 30 (for the freshman). If you cut that down to 35, 35, 30, 20 (which IMO seems much more reasonable), it leaves 80 minutes for MP2, LT, Z, MP1, and RK (and possibly OC, but for now I'll leave him out). Which could pan out something like 20, 20, 15, 15, and 10, although who gets 20 and who gets 10 we obviously won't know until it happens. If we end up going with an 8 man rotation instead of 9, then it could be 25, 20, 20, 15 for the bigs, but the point is there should be plenty of minutes for all of them. I'll be very surprised if K goes with a 7 man rotation, as you seem to be assuming.

Good catch on my math. I'm a bit hungover this morning. Clearly 50 is too few, but I think 80 is too many. I'd anticipate something close to 35 for Scheyer, Singler, and Smith, and I think Dawkins will be closer to 30 if you can believe the hype. that leaves 65-70 minutes for the post players. My guess is that one of those guys (and I think it will be Kelly) will gobble up 25 minutes, leaving 40-45 for LT, MP2, and Z (in that order).

I guess the main point is that I think Z and MP1 are going to feel the minutes crunch the most.

ice-9
07-22-2009, 01:08 PM
I feel the same about most of what you said, except for a few things:

1. I don't see Kelly playing at the 2, and I'll be surprised to see him playing at the 3. Everything I've read about him suggests "Euro-style big man", rather than "Dunleavy-style wing forward." I doubt he'll have the quickness to defend guards/wings. As such, I suspect he'll play the 4 when necessary. But I'm expecting this to be a development year for Kelly as he gets ready to play the 4. Hopefully I'm wrong about him though.
2. Related to point#1, I think that Dawkins and Thomas will pick up the remaining minutes at the 3 behind Singler. They're quicker and more likely to be able to defend players at that position.
3. If Mason Plumlee is as good as people are saying, I think he'll get minutes at the 4 (backing up Thomas) AND at the 5. I still don't see Zoubek or Miles Plumlee being ready to contribute 20+ minutes per game. I'm thinking those two will get 25-30 minutes per game, and Plumlee will get the rest of the minutes at the 5. Then, he and Kelly will share the duties as backup 4.

The minutes at the 4 and 5 spot are the most uncertain. None of the guys available have ever averaged 20mpg in a college season, and only one has averaged more than 12mpg. So there may very well be a lot of minutes to go around for Plumlee and Kelly at the 4 and 5 spots this year.


I agree that Singler is most definitely more likely to play the 2 than Kelly. But if Singler was also in foul trouble, I think Kelly can make an adequate (though definitely not ideal) substitute at the 2.

He has serious ball handling skills -- at least in high school (see his youtube clips). I don't expect him to be dribbling like a Harlem Globetrotter, but I think he can handle reasonably well. Plus, his 6'10 height will pretty much allow him to shoot with an open look every single time.

On defense, if Kelly is at the 2, the team would most definitely have to play zone.

But on offense I think an argument can be made for Kelly, assuming two of our three guards and Singler are in foul trouble.

eightyearoldsdude
07-22-2009, 02:41 PM
I agree that Singler is most definitely more likely to play the 2 than Kelly. But if Singler was also in foul trouble, I think Kelly can make an adequate (though definitely not ideal) substitute at the 2.

He has serious ball handling skills -- at least in high school (see his youtube clips). I don't expect him to be dribbling like a Harlem Globetrotter, but I think he can handle reasonably well. Plus, his 6'10 height will pretty much allow him to shoot with an open look every single time.

On defense, if Kelly is at the 2, the team would most definitely have to play zone.

But on offense I think an argument can be made for Kelly, assuming two of our three guards and Singler are in foul trouble.

I think you'll see Scheyer or Dawkins playing the 3 far more often than you'll see Singler playing the 2.

CDu
07-22-2009, 03:31 PM
I agree that Singler is most definitely more likely to play the 2 than Kelly. But if Singler was also in foul trouble, I think Kelly can make an adequate (though definitely not ideal) substitute at the 2.

He has serious ball handling skills -- at least in high school (see his youtube clips). I don't expect him to be dribbling like a Harlem Globetrotter, but I think he can handle reasonably well. Plus, his 6'10 height will pretty much allow him to shoot with an open look every single time.

On defense, if Kelly is at the 2, the team would most definitely have to play zone.

But on offense I think an argument can be made for Kelly, assuming two of our three guards and Singler are in foul trouble.

Well, I don't think Singler is likely to play much 2 this year if we get Dawkins. I think he'll be playing the 3 almost exclusively, and maybe briefly at the 4. The only way Singler plays the 2 is if we have a lot of guard foul trouble/injury, or if Dawkins isn't ready (or available) to contribute.

As for Kelly - if we're talking about foul trouble/injury in which three of our four wing players are forced to the bench, then it's sort of a moot point. One of our bigs will have to play at the 2. In that extreme scenario, then either Thomas or Kelly will have no choice but to play there.

But I think the question was more in response to the idea of Singler/Kelly playing instead of Dawkins as the backup 2, not as an emergency backup to Dawkins. And for the defensive reasons (i.e., Kelly isn't likely to be able to guard college 2s), I'm going to say the most likely scenario will be Dawkins getting the backup time at the 2, with Kelly competing for PT at the 4 spot.

ACCBBallFan
07-22-2009, 08:38 PM
Given K's preferences in the past, I think it would take foul trouble or an injury among the guards for Singler to play the 2. I'd be willing to put money on that.

IMO, Singler is going to play the 3 when there are two guards on the floor, and on the occasions (and I do think there will be such occasions) that all 3 guards on the floor, Singler will be at the 4. Given that K generally plays with a short bench, those 4 guys (3 guards + Singler) will eat up most of the minutes at their positions. Which, realistically, probably leaves 50 minutes for other post players, at most. There will probably be some shifting around during the season, but my guess is that MP1 won't make the cut, and Z will fall by the wayside as well. This won't be the lightning fast Duke team of years past, so K will probably want quicker, more athletic big men --> LT, MP2, and Kelly.Good discussion by Bob, 80, CDu, Sagegrouse, COYS, jyuwono, Kedsy, NSDukeFan and others last couple of pages.

80- I was following you logic and had already made the mental adjustment that you meant they play most if not all of the 120 perimeter minutes, leaving perhaps 80 to spread across the Plumlees, Lance, Kelly and Z, and I agree up to there.

I think if anybody gets squeezed it is Kelly, not Miles or Z.

PF - Lance (20 MPG) Kelly (10 MPG) Mason 10+10-15 MPG as center)
C - Miles (10-15 MPG) Zoubek (10-15 MPG) Mason (10-15 MPG) from above

with Olek picking up any crumbs the 3 guards and Singler leave behind and any extra minutes from the 5 bigs.

Kelly could also get some SF crumbs with Lance there to guard the SF while Ryan guards the PF. If Dawkins is not much of a defender either, edge could go to Ryan since he is surely better able to defend the PF than Dre as Lance picks up the 3 on defense.

Lance minutes would be higher if he hits FT’s and Duke can afford to have him on floor during stall ball and not risking so much hack a Shaq 2 or 3 for 1 by foes trying to come from behind fouling Lance who at best hits 1 of 2 if same as last year. He apparently hit a "3" at NCCU Pro-Am so maybe he can hit a FT better.

With only 9 guys, not counting Olek and Curry, I do not think coach K necessarily shortens his bench overall, just varies it based on opponents like Sims and Monroe versus smaller sized teams like MD and mid-majors.

ice-9
07-22-2009, 08:54 PM
Well, I don't think Singler is likely to play much 2 this year if we get Dawkins. I think he'll be playing the 3 almost exclusively, and maybe briefly at the 4. The only way Singler plays the 2 is if we have a lot of guard foul trouble/injury, or if Dawkins isn't ready (or available) to contribute.

As for Kelly - if we're talking about foul trouble/injury in which three of our four wing players are forced to the bench, then it's sort of a moot point. One of our bigs will have to play at the 2. In that extreme scenario, then either Thomas or Kelly will have no choice but to play there.

But I think the question was more in response to the idea of Singler/Kelly playing instead of Dawkins as the backup 2, not as an emergency backup to Dawkins. And for the defensive reasons (i.e., Kelly isn't likely to be able to guard college 2s), I'm going to say the most likely scenario will be Dawkins getting the backup time at the 2, with Kelly competing for PT at the 4 spot.


Agreed 100%.

It'll be our three guards at the 1 and 2 for the majority of the time. For as many minutes they can take actually.

Singler can play the 2 in situations where two of our three guards have foul trouble. (More so than Jordan, for example.)

In the extreme situation that two guards and Singler are in foul trouble, Kelly is the next best at the 2 spot though that would be far less than ideal. But I think Kelly's ball handling is good enough that he can do it.

Though in retrospect maybe Jordan would be a better sub at the 2...

ACCBBallFan
07-23-2009, 03:56 PM
Agreed 100%.

It'll be our three guards at the 1 and 2 for the majority of the time. For as many minutes they can take actually.

Singler can play the 2 in situations where two of our three guards have foul trouble. (More so than Jordan, for example.)

In the extreme situation that two guards and Singler are in foul trouble, Kelly is the next best at the 2 spot though that would be far less than ideal. But I think Kelly's ball handling is good enough that he can do it.

Though in retrospect maybe Jordan would be a better sub at the 2...

http://greaterncproambasketballleague.blogspot.com/

Aside from Ryan Kelly’s occasional point guard moves and control under the basket, Navy pulled away with the win, 74-59