Bigs. Please. Bigs.

[smklin]

For the first time in near memory, it looks like the Devils could outsize some ACC opponents this year. However, IMO, they still don't have a dominant offensive OR defensive figure in the post, and I'd say that for 4-5 years that's been the case. Granted, the true big-man has largely disappeared from the game, but there are always a few in each recruiting class, and, unfortunately, it just looks like Duke hasn't been able to wrap them up.

As a guy who hasn't been tremendously religious about following Duke's recruiting efforts, I have two questions for y'all out there:

1) Does Duke have any significant, game-changing, back-to-the-basket bigs on the way in the next few years?

2) Can Duke succeed without a great post player? Am I totally off-base in thinking that the more successful teams that I've seen over the past 20 years have had a significant post presence?

[Kedsy]

2) Can Duke succeed without a great post player? Am I totally off-base in thinking that the more successful teams that I've seen over the past 20 years have had a significant post presence?

Yes, you're totally off-base.

[mgtr]

I would rather have 2 -3 -4 post players who can come at the basket in waves, than one Hibbler, who was, after all, a one-trick pony (he could block shots very well). This year we have a bunch of bigs (and in some games that means a lot of fouls to give), all of whom play different games, and, very likely, all of whom can contribute.

[BlueintheFace]

Door #2

[smklin]

i agree that having those dynamic players at the 2-3-4 positions is also important, but when i think about duke squads that have had success in the past 10-15 years, they invariably have good big men. what i would give for a boozer or a brand in the post!

[BlueintheFace]

i agree that having those dynamic players at the 2-3-4 positions is also important, but when i think about duke squads that have had success in the past 10-15 years, they invariably have good big men. what i would give for a boozer or a brand in the post!

Laettner wasn't exactly a dominant post presence. In fact, when he went head to head against a true post presence (Shaq) he dominated the matchup by taking the Big Cactus (or whatever he calls himself now) outside over and over again.

[airowe]

Quincy Miller wouldn't hurt.

[SupaDave]

I would rather have 2 -3 -4 post players who can come at the basket in waves, than one Hibbler, who was, after all, a one-trick pony (he could block shots very well). This year we have a bunch of bigs (and in some games that means a lot of fouls to give), all of whom play different games, and, very likely, all of whom can contribute.

Roy Hibbett you mean? The one in the NBA?

[airowe]

Roy Hibbett you mean? The one in the NBA?

I saw Hibler, I mean Hiblett, I mean Hibbert play in Winston in the tourney one year and all I remember about him was some guys sitting behind us calling him garbage.

[sagegrouse]

Laettner wasn't exactly a dominant post presence. In fact, when he went head to head against a true post presence (Shaq) he dominated the matchup by taking the Big Cactus (or whatever he calls himself now) outside over and over again.

I can't remember the 1992 game at LSU but in 1991 at CID, Shaq was so befuddled on D against Christian's inside moves that Dale Brown pulled him out of the game well before the end. Shaq played 28 mins. and had 15 pts, 10 RBs, and 4 fouls vs. Christian's 24 pts., 11 RBs and 3 fouls.

sagegrouse

[jimsumner]

Shaq actually outplayed Laettner in the '92 rematch in Baton Rogue. For 30 minutes. But Laettner dominated down the stretch and Duke won.

Back to the OP. Who wouldn't like another Elton Brand? Seen any lately? In college?

But Duke has a 6'11" freshman who many think will be an NBA lottery pick in 2 or 3 years. Not saying Plumlee is going to be as good as Laettner or Ferry or Parks but he's about the same size, has an advanced skill set, well above average athleticism, and his intangibles are off the charts.

So maybe Duke has its dominant post.

[Kilby]

It's not size. It's speed and strength. Just ask Charles Barkley or Dennis Rodman. Some smaller teams have given Duke fits in recent NCAA's because they were quicker to the ball. What good is a slow, weak seven footer that can't hold his position, or get to the basket without being blocked?

[gwwilburn]

We have five intriguing big men this year, but I don't know if I would necessarily call anyone of them dominant. Lance doesn't have the size to be a true dominant force down low, but his athleticism and key minutes over the last couple of years lead me to think there is no way he isn't a significant part of the rotation for his senior year. Zoubek is not a force, but he should provide experience and (hopefully) be another healthy big man down low. Of course, the word about MP I's improvement via Scheyer is encouraging, but I don't know how big of a leap we can realistically expect, but I am really excited to see what he can contribute. MP II sounds like a beast, but until I see him in action, I am a little hesitant to think he can cure all of our ills right off the bat. And, from what I've heard, Kelly is more of a cross between (If this makes any sense, maybe I am way off the mark) a cross between Kyle Singler and a young Dirk Nowitzki, not a true post player, but a tall, athletic guy who can trouble defenders with their range and shoot the lights out. (Kelly did win the 3-Point shootout at the AA game, if that means anything.) Hopefully, as someone said in another thread, this rotation will give us what we need and the whole front line is greater than the sum of its parts. Since I haven't been able to pay too much attention to Duke basketball in the last couple months, this may be way out of line.

[jv001]

We have five intriguing big men this year, but I don't know if I would necessarily call anyone of them dominant. Lance doesn't have the size to be a true dominant force down low, but his athleticism and key minutes over the last couple of years lead me to think there is no way he isn't a significant part of the rotation for his senior year. Zoubek is not a force, but he should provide experience and (hopefully) be another healthy big man down low. Of course, the word about MP I's improvement via Scheyer is encouraging, but I don't know how big of a leap we can realistically expect, but I am really excited to see what he can contribute. MP II sounds like a beast, but until I see him in action, I am a little hesitant to think he can cure all of our ills right off the bat. And, from what I've heard, Kelly is more of a cross between (If this makes any sense, maybe I am way off the mark) a cross between Kyle Singler and a young Dirk Nowitzki, not a true post player, but a tall, athletic guy who can trouble defenders with their range and shoot the lights out. (Kelly did win the 3-Point shootout at the AA game, if that means anything.) Hopefully, as someone said in another thread, this rotation will give us what we need and the whole front line is greater than the sum of its parts. Since I haven't been able to pay too much attention to Duke basketball in the last couple months, this may be way out of line.

Gotta agree on almost all your points. MP1 actually showed some pretty athletic skills last year. However it looked like he was thinking too much and not reacting and just playing. This year could very well be different. Last year was the first year that Zoubs was healthy and at times he looked pretty good. Let's hope another summer of working hard and another injury free year proves to be the coming out party for Big Z. Lance has the quickness and the skills to play D, but I have not seen the same on offense. Let's hope he has a good senior year. Kelly was said to have very good skill sets and can be a good shooter from the perimeter. And now for Mason, I look for Mason to have an outstanding freshman year. I don't expect him to avg 20ppg and 10 rpg. I do expect him to play better than the usual highly recruited freshman player. Maybe 12pts and 7 rpg. That is what we need from one of our interior guys. Like you said, the sum of the parts is what will help us down low. Go Duke!

[gwwilburn]

By the way, does anyone know if Kelly is capable of releving Kyle at the 3 position? I know the man didn't sit a minute in the ACC tournament, but he can't do that all year and I think our guard depth is too shallow to put either Scheyer or Dawkins at SF for an extended period of time, like Duke has been able to do in the past.

[airowe]

By the way, does anyone know if Kelly is capable of releving Kyle at the 3 position? I know the man didn't sit a minute in the ACC tournament, but he can't do that all year and I think our guard depth is too shallow to put either Scheyer or Dawkins at SF for an extended period of time, like Duke has been able to do in the past.

I think he can. Offensively at least. I think that will be where Kelly gets most of his minutes off the bench...

[SilkyJ]

We have five intriguing big men this year, but I don't know if I would necessarily call anyone of them dominant. Lance doesn't have the size to be a true dominant force down low, but his athleticism and key minutes over the last couple of years lead me to think there is no way he isn't a significant part of the rotation for his senior year. Zoubek is not a force, but he should provide experience and (hopefully) be another healthy big man down low. Of course, the word about MP I's improvement via Scheyer is encouraging, but I don't know how big of a leap we can realistically expect, but I am really excited to see what he can contribute. MP II sounds like a beast, but until I see him in action, I am a little hesitant to think he can cure all of our ills right off the bat. And, from what I've heard, Kelly is more of a cross between (If this makes any sense, maybe I am way off the mark) a cross between Kyle Singler and a young Dirk Nowitzki, not a true post player, but a tall, athletic guy who can trouble defenders with their range and shoot the lights out. (Kelly did win the 3-Point shootout at the AA game, if that means anything.) Hopefully, as someone said in another thread, this rotation will give us what we need and the whole front line is greater than the sum of its parts. Since I haven't been able to pay too much attention to Duke basketball in the last couple months, this may be way out of line.

Sounds pretty spot on to me. I think MP2 is our Center of the future, we may just have to wait a year for him to put on some muscle and have that one year of experience and frosh-soph leap in improvement. I think he'll be good this year, but next year WATCH OUT.

[gumbomoop]

Sounds pretty spot on to me. I think MP2 is our Center of the future, we may just have to wait a year for him to put on some muscle and have that one year of experience and frosh-soph leap in improvement. I think he'll be good this year, but next year WATCH OUT.

A mild dissent here. I'm guessing that for '10-'11 & '11-'12, MP1 is, in effect, the 5, and MP2 the 4. Subject to new recruits, of course, but even in absence of someone better, I'd guess that the MPs will be our 28-30 mpg [each] bigs; and because of his much better handle, that MP2 plays more facing basket than his brother. But I could easily see them switching between these 2 spots on both O and D; and further, see them as very, very effective with each other in these flexible roles.

Neither of them is Brand or Boozer, but they're gonna develop some effective mobility, passing skills, shot-blocking [esp from weak side], so the inside looks pretty darned good for near-future.

[Azdukefan]

For the first time in near memory, it looks like the Devils could outsize some ACC opponents this year. However, IMO, they still don't have a dominant offensive OR defensive figure in the post, and I'd say that for 4-5 years that's been the case. Granted, the true big-man has largely disappeared from the game, but there are always a few in each recruiting class, and, unfortunately, it just looks like Duke hasn't been able to wrap them up.

As a guy who hasn't been tremendously religious about following Duke's recruiting efforts, I have two questions for y'all out there:

1) Does Duke have any significant, game-changing, back-to-the-basket bigs on the way in the next few years?

2) Can Duke succeed without a great post player? Am I totally off-base in thinking that the more successful teams that I've seen over the past 20 years have had a significant post presence?

You are beyond off base. Even some of the best post players we have had were not back to the basket guys (Ferry, Laettner, Battier, etc). The NBA is a bangers league. The NCAA is primarily a guard's game. Having a back to the basket banger is not essential in doing well in the NCAA but having solid guards is essential.

[A-Tex Devil]

You are beyond off base. Even some of the best post players we have had were not back to the basket guys (Ferry, Laettner, Battier, etc). The NBA is a bangers league. The NCAA is primarily a guard's game. Having a back to the basket banger is not essential in doing well in the NCAA but having solid guards is essential.

You really need to have some kind of offensive presence down low though to compete for a championship. Haven't felt that Duke has had any kind of consistent offense under the basket since Shelden left. Hopefully it will come this year. The post game is still important. You can't count on the outside shot dropping for six games in a row in March and April.

UNC - Hansborough
KU - Arthur and another guy who I am forgetting
UF - Horford, Noah
UNC - May
UConn - like their whole fricking team
Syracuse -- perhaps the exception, can't remember, but they had a generational player
Maryland - Baxter and (ed) Wilcox
Duke - Boozer

[gotoguy]

I read here a lot of talk about offense in the post and who is going to step up. I'm more concerned about who is going to guard Ed Davis. :confused:

[ACCBBallFan]

By the way, does anyone know if Kelly is capable of releving Kyle at the 3 position? I know the man didn't sit a minute in the ACC tournament, but he can't do that all year and I think our guard depth is too shallow to put either Scheyer or Dawkins at SF for an extended period of time, like Duke has been able to do in the past.


I think he can. Offensively at least. I think that will be where Kelly gets most of his minutes off the bench...

If Lance is in at the same time, Lance can defend the presumably quicker SF while Kelly defends the slower PF.

Ryan only has to do that for a few minutes as Kyle will not get a lot of rest, perhaps a minute or two around a TV timeout a few times a game, unles he is in foul trouble or injured.

[Kedsy]

You really need to have some kind of offensive presence down low though to compete for a championship. Haven't felt that Duke has had any kind of consistent offense under the basket since Shelden left. Hopefully it will come this year. The post game is still important. You can't count on the outside shot dropping for six games in a row in March and April.

UNC - Hansborough
KU - Arthur and another guy who I am forgetting
UF - Horford, Noah
UNC - May
UConn - like their whole fricking team
Syracuse -- perhaps the exception, can't remember, but they had a generational player
Maryland - Baxter and (ed) Wilcox
Duke - Boozer

Every team has someone that plays inside. The original question was can a team win without a "great post player" who is a "significant post presence."

So, first of all, get rid of Arthur and Baxter, who were by nobody's definition "great." So how many of the remaining guys you name above were back-to-the-basket players? You can certainly knock out Wilcox and Horford, and maybe Noah, who was really more of a garbage collector than a back-to-the-basket force.

That leaves Hansbrough, May, Okafur, and Boozer, and I would argue that if you're down to 4 of 9 you've already disproved the premise. Furthermore, I'd say that other than Okafur, the big man wasn't anywhere close to the most important player on any of those teams. Especially UNC 2009, UNC 2005, and Duke 2001 -- the most important player on all those teams was the point guard (I'm counting Jason Williams as the PG, although I understand that could be up for debate). And with a great PG, almost any competent big will look like an "offensive presence." My guess is if Ty Lawson played on last year's Duke team, you'd be putting Brian Zoubek and MP1 on your list above.

[airowe]

Every team has someone that plays inside. The original question was can a team win without a "great post player" who is a "significant post presence."

So, first of all, get rid of Arthur and Baxter, who were by nobody's definition "great." So how many of the remaining guys you name above were back-to-the-basket players? You can certainly knock out Wilcox and Horford, and maybe Noah, who was really more of a garbage collector than a back-to-the-basket force.

That leaves Hansbrough, May, Okafur, and Boozer, and I would argue that if you're down to 4 of 9 you've already disproved the premise. Furthermore, I'd say that other than Okafur, the big man wasn't anywhere close to the most important player on any of those teams. Especially UNC 2009, UNC 2005, and Duke 2001 -- the most important player on all those teams was the point guard (I'm counting Jason Williams as the PG, although I understand that could be up for debate). And with a great PG, almost any competent big will look like an "offensive presence." My guess is if Ty Lawson played on last year's Duke team, you'd be putting Brian Zoubek and MP1 on your list above.

Amen.

[A-Tex Devil]

Every team has someone that plays inside. The original question was can a team win without a "great post player" who is a "significant post presence."

So, first of all, get rid of Arthur and Baxter, who were by nobody's definition "great." So how many of the remaining guys you name above were back-to-the-basket players? You can certainly knock out Wilcox and Horford, and maybe Noah, who was really more of a garbage collector than a back-to-the-basket force.

That leaves Hansbrough, May, Okafur, and Boozer, and I would argue that if you're down to 4 of 9 you've already disproved the premise. Furthermore, I'd say that other than Okafur, the big man wasn't anywhere close to the most important player on any of those teams. Especially UNC 2009, UNC 2005, and Duke 2001 -- the most important player on all those teams was the point guard (I'm counting Jason Williams as the PG, although I understand that could be up for debate). And with a great PG, almost any competent big will look like an "offensive presence." My guess is if Ty Lawson played on last year's Duke team, you'd be putting Brian Zoubek and MP1 on your list above.


I understand what the original quesiton was. I agree guard play is more important in college. What I said was you needed "some kind of offensive post presence," and I guess what I meant was, you need one other teams had to respect that is consistent. Duke hasn't had that since Shelden left.

Unless your swingmen/guards are named "Anthony" or "Rose" you better have one or 2 players you can count on for 15 points a game down low. Without a consistent low post scorer to keep the defense honest, when our 3s haven't been falling against good teams we have been toast.

So I guess I am changing the premise --- we need to have some SEMBLANCE of a low post game in order to get better this year, and we haven't had that in 4 years.

[Greg_Newton]

I read here a lot of talk about offense in the post and who is going to step up. I'm more concerned about who is going to guard Ed Davis. :confused:

I honestly don't understand the massive hype around Ed Davis. He was great at dunking everything when Lawson drew his defender and dished to him, sure. But does he have any one-on-one or back to the basket game whatsoever? I suppose we'll see this year with Drew running the point. I just don't get how a one-dimensional 6ppg scorer is suddenly up for the Wooden award.

But to respond to your concern, I think Mason matches up perfectly with him when you look at their respective size, length and ups.

[gumbomoop]

I honestly don't understand the massive hype around Ed Davis. He was great at dunking everything when Lawson drew his defender and dished to him, sure. But does he have any one-on-one or back to the basket game whatsoever? I suppose we'll see this year with Drew running the point. I just don't get how a one-dimensional 6ppg scorer is suddenly up for the Wooden award.

But to respond to your concern, I think Mason matches up perfectly with him when you look at their respective size, length and ups.

Good point here. As one who was high early on Davis last season, I was impressed with his D, shot-blocking, and esp rbds/min, and surprised at how much taller than what he was listed as sr in hs.

But G_N is correct here that his O is much more of an unknown. Still, as a strong rebounder, he's bound [ouch] to be trouble on O-boards, too; but the key, I think, is not so much guarding his so-far-undeveloped-O-moves, but..... blocking him out. And that has been a Duke weakness in recent years.

[Kedsy]

I understand what the original quesiton was. I agree guard play is more important in college. What I said was you needed "some kind of offensive post presence," and I guess what I meant was, you need one other teams had to respect that is consistent. Duke hasn't had that since Shelden left.

Unless your swingmen/guards are named "Anthony" or "Rose" you better have one or 2 players you can count on for 15 points a game down low. Without a consistent low post scorer to keep the defense honest, when our 3s haven't been falling against good teams we have been toast.

So I guess I am changing the premise --- we need to have some SEMBLANCE of a low post game in order to get better this year, and we haven't had that in 4 years.

OK, you can change the premise. Although I still more or less disagree. The starting center on the 2008 Kansas team was Arthur, who averaged 12.8 ppg (based on the Kansas games I saw that year they were mostly on rebound putbacks, rather than post moves, but put that aside for now). I would argue that Arthur (and/or his backups) was not what saved Kansas on the occasions where their shots didn't fall, but even if he was we've for the most part had at least as credible an inside presence as he was.

We've only had three seasons since Shelden left and in two of them our primary inside player scored more than Arthur in Kansas' championship season (McBob, 13.0 in 2007 and Kyle, 13.3 in 2008, when he was playing primarily inside). Only last year did we fail to have that sort of scorer inside, and frankly that was the best team of the three.

I'm not going to dissect every championship team, but I don't think 2008 Kansas and 2003 Syracuse were the only championship contenders this decade who didn't have a massive post presence (Noah, for example, averaged only 12 ppg his last year at Florida).

So I hear what you're saying, and obviously the more weapons you have the better you're going to be, but I still don't think a beast in the post is a requirement to be a championship contender.

[ACCBBallFan]

I honestly don't understand the massive hype around Ed Davis. He was great at dunking everything when Lawson drew his defender and dished to him, sure. But does he have any one-on-one or back to the basket game whatsoever? I suppose we'll see this year with Drew running the point. I just don't get how a one-dimensional 6ppg scorer is suddenly up for the Wooden award.

But to respond to your concern, I think Mason matches up perfectly with him when you look at their respective size, length and ups. I am not disagreeing with you on that one.

Davis already played 18.8 MPG last year and only scored 6.7 PPG and 6.6 Rebounds on average. I am not sure he gets much more than 20 MPG this year sharing the 4/5 spot with Deon, Zeller and Henson unless the latter can play a significant amount of time at SF on both ends of the floor which is debateable.

If for example Henson averages 10 MPG at SF, those may be split in garbage time by the Wear twins at 5 MPG each. leaving only 70 to be split by Deon, Davis and Zeller plus the balance of Henson's PT.

So I just don't see how the math works out for all these UNC studs to each play 25-30 MPG. Even at 25 MPG each, that mean Henson plays half the game at SF and Wears don't play at all.

At 30 MPG each, Graves plays none @ SF and one of Deon, Zeller or Davis has to play 10 MPG at SF.

Then Drew II, Ginyard, Strikcland and McDonald have to split 80 minutes at combo slots. So if Marcus's 30 MPG, Drew II and the two frosh share 50 MPG minus whatever time Graves gets at SG.

This is just an analysis based on MPG not even considering your other point that Tyler and Ty demanded attention as did Wayne and Danny which got him open for the dunk in the first place, as 5th guy not guarded.

Same analysis applies to Deon who already played 24.8 MPG, scored 10.6 PPG and grabbed 5.7 boards. Having better defenders and not having any more MPG this year does not lead to him being a game changer.

I guess it could be argued that instead of ball going to Tyler it goes to Ed and Deon.

Tyler's 30,3 MPG go to Henson and Zeller (plus his 3 MPG last year which is 117 minutes played in 15 games spread over 38 games where he was out of action for 23 of them).

Tyler's 20.7 PPG and 8.1 boards get spread to all 4.

Collectively UNC bigs scored 39.2 PPG last year and perhaps that gets spread across 4 bigs this year or they take up more of the scoring slack vacated by Ty, Wayne and Danny.

[Devils Rock]

My lasting impression from the Kansas-Mempis championship a couple of years ago was that Kansas was beating Memphis at their own game (speed) and doing it with bigger players who could handle and passed over the top of the Memphis players. I don't recall a lot of banging in that game, but I do recall several beautiful fast breaks from Kansas wherein a bunch of big guys passed their way down the court along with one of the guards. I remember thinking that it was extremely effective and incredibly efficient. If that's what we can get out of MP1/Mp2 and Kelly (and please dear God Harrison Barnes and/or Kyle if he stays), then I would imagine we do not need the second coming of Elton or Boozer as much as I loved those guys.

[jimsumner]

"I am not sure he [Davis] gets much more than 20 MPG this year sharing the 4/5 spot with Deon, Zeller and Henson unless the latter can play a significant amount of time at SF on both ends of the floor which is debateable."

This definitely is a minority opinion. Davis is being mentioned on all the pre-season watch lists and projects as a top-five pick in the 2010 NBA draft. I think he'll be a monster and a legit threat to be ACC POY. I'll be astonished if he isn't first team All-ACC.

[Scoring Point]

Every team has someone that plays inside. The original question was can a team win without a "great post player" who is a "significant post presence."

So, first of all, get rid of Arthur and Baxter, who were by nobody's definition "great." So how many of the remaining guys you name above were back-to-the-basket players? You can certainly knock out Wilcox and Horford, and maybe Noah, who was really more of a garbage collector than a back-to-the-basket force.

That leaves Hansbrough, May, Okafur, and Boozer, and I would argue that if you're down to 4 of 9 you've already disproved the premise. Furthermore, I'd say that other than Okafur, the big man wasn't anywhere close to the most important player on any of those teams. Especially UNC 2009, UNC 2005, and Duke 2001 -- the most important player on all those teams was the point guard (I'm counting Jason Williams as the PG, although I understand that could be up for debate). And with a great PG, almost any competent big will look like an "offensive presence." My guess is if Ty Lawson played on last year's Duke team, you'd be putting Brian Zoubek and MP1 on your list above.

Some valid points, but a few quibbles

1) I have to disagree with your assessment of Sean May - he was easily the most important player on the 2005 Heels in my view. May was the MOP of the Final Four, and arguably the most dominant player in the ACC, and if not the country, from the mid-point of the conference schedule to the Championship Game. He received more votes than Felton in the 2005 All-ACC ballotting and IIRC, also clearly outplayed Shelden in their last 3 or 4 head-to-head matchups.

2) I would consider Horford a back-to-the-basket post player, one whose game complemented that of the more frenetic Noah perfectly. I would also say he was the important player on Florida's 2007 champion (I believe Donovan said as much during the year), though that team was as balanced as any in recent memory.

[Kedsy]

Some valid points, but a few quibbles

1) I have to disagree with your assessment of Sean May - he was easily the most important player on the 2005 Heels in my view. May was the MOP of the Final Four, and arguably the most dominant player in the ACC, and if not the country, from the mid-point of the conference schedule to the Championship Game. He received more votes than Felton in the 2005 All-ACC ballotting and IIRC, also clearly outplayed Shelden in their last 3 or 4 head-to-head matchups.

2) I would consider Horford a back-to-the-basket post player, one whose game complemented that of the more frenetic Noah perfectly. I would also say he was the important player on Florida's 2007 champion (I believe Donovan said as much during the year), though that team was as balanced as any in recent memory.

Well, I don't know. I understand May was the MOP and played very well the 2nd half of the year, but the one game Felton missed that year the Heels lost to Santa Clara. If that team had Felton but not May for a game, I would still feel like they had a very good chance to win, but in my opinion if they had May but not Felton they were probably going down. Just my opinion, of course.

And I didn't see too much of Florida in those years, except in the NCAA tourney both years but my recollection (which could be faulty) is that Horford played facing the basket, at least in the Final Fours (both of which I attended). I'm pretty sure he didn't play center on defense.

But your viewpoint is certainly as valid as mine.

[ACCBBallFan]

"I am not sure he [Davis] gets much more than 20 MPG this year sharing the 4/5 spot with Deon, Zeller and Henson unless the latter can play a significant amount of time at SF on both ends of the floor which is debateable."

This definitely is a minority opinion. Davis is being mentioned on all the pre-season watch lists and projects as a top-five pick in the 2010 NBA draft. I think he'll be a monster and a legit threat to be ACC POY. I'll be astonished if he isn't first team All-ACC.

Jim, I will spare you the details I posted on THR for UNC PT based on last year's MPG replacements, and go to the concluding stats that showed a way to get Davis PT at about 26 MPG up from last year's 18.8.

29.6 Drew II
28.4 Ginyard
25.9 Davis (minus some time for Wear twins)
24.8 Deon only same as last year - find more time from somewhere
23.1 Zeller (minus some time for Wear twins)
22.2 Henson (minus some time for Wear twins)
15.9 Graves
15.0 Strickland
13.0 McDonald
02.2 Watts
00.0 Wear twins (shave some time from the bigs)
00.0 walk-ons will get some time in blow outs
200.1 Total MPG

Thompson, Davis and Zeller sub-total 73.8 of the 80 MG at C/PF though some of their individual MPG would go down to give PT to Wears when games are out of hand.

Of course to do this I had to assume Henson's 22.2 MPG is only 6.2 MPG (80 minutes 73.8) at PF/C and 16 MPG at SF, and that SF was formerly played by Frasor and all others (Copeland and walk ons).

Graves 15.9 plus Henson's 16 @ SF and Watts 2.2 subtotal 34.1 of the 40 MPG at SF implying Ginyard only plays about 6 MPG at SF and 22.4 MPG at SG which is not all bad to steady Drew II and the freshmen combos.

If Henson cannot play SF 16 of his 22.2 MPG, all bets are off on PT for the bigs, but the good news is more time for Dexter Strickland and Leslie McDonald.

[Scoring Point]

Well, I don't know. I understand May was the MOP and played very well the 2nd half of the year, but the one game Felton missed that year the Heels lost to Santa Clara. If that team had Felton but not May for a game, I would still feel like they had a very good chance to win, but in my opinion if they had May but not Felton they were probably going down. Just my opinion, of course.

And I didn't see too much of Florida in those years, except in the NCAA tourney both years but my recollection (which could be faulty) is that Horford played facing the basket, at least in the Final Fours (both of which I attended). I'm pretty sure he didn't play center on defense.

But your viewpoint is certainly as valid as mine.


I guess you didn't watch Carolina much in '03 and '04. May being healthy for the whole year was the biggest difference between the '05 Championship teams and the up and down squads of those years.

As for Horford, while he could score facing, he was generally more effective in the paint and was a beast on the glass at both ends. I recall he and Noah both defending the center spot depending on the matchup. I'm pretty sure it was Horford who defended Oden in the '07 title game, albeit not very effectively.

[crimsonandblue]

OK, you can change the premise. Although I still more or less disagree. The starting center on the 2008 Kansas team was Arthur, who averaged 12.8 ppg (based on the Kansas games I saw that year they were mostly on rebound putbacks, rather than post moves, but put that aside for now). I would argue that Arthur (and/or his backups) was not what saved Kansas on the occasions where their shots didn't fall, but even if he was we've for the most part had at least as credible an inside presence as he was.

We've only had three seasons since Shelden left and in two of them our primary inside player scored more than Arthur in Kansas' championship season (McBob, 13.0 in 2007 and Kyle, 13.3 in 2008, when he was playing primarily inside). Only last year did we fail to have that sort of scorer inside, and frankly that was the best team of the three.

I'm not going to dissect every championship team, but I don't think 2008 Kansas and 2003 Syracuse were the only championship contenders this decade who didn't have a massive post presence (Noah, for example, averaged only 12 ppg his last year at Florida).

So I hear what you're saying, and obviously the more weapons you have the better you're going to be, but I still don't think a beast in the post is a requirement to be a championship contender.

You keep comparing Duke's top interior player to other teams' top interior player and seem to think you're demonstrating something of importance. Kansas didn't have a massive post presence in 2008? Well, KU didn't have a Luke Harangody who took all the shots in the post. They didn't have a Kevin Love to look to or push the ball into on every possession. But they did have Arthur (6'9" and unbelievably athletic and very skilled), Darnell Jackson (6'8" athletic, fairly skilled, and beefy), and Sasha Kaun (6'10" and your typical back-to-basket post). We used all of them and had Cole Aldrich (6'11" and raw as a freshman, but with a fairly classic back-to-basket approach) in reserve to use for support when fouls or injury hit during the year. We also had 6'7" Brandon Rush who was a strong rebounder from the small forward position.

And you mention Noah only scoring 12 a game. Do you understand how balanced the Kansas and Florida teams were? Florida had Noah and Horford down low. They had Brewer too. 12 (in Noah's case) and 13 (in Arthur's) is a ton of points to put up on teams like those. And Florida and Kansas put an emphasis on getting the ball inside, either pitching it in low, lobbing it in for dunks or off of penetration by guards. To try and compare Duke's one top interior player to the bigs of these national title teams is missing the point. Duke's got great players, but until this infusion of bigs, you haven't had enough of them. And it still remains to be seen what you'll actually do with them.

You can win, hell, you can win it all, without the commitment to the interior shown by recent tourney winners, but it will be hard. You take a look at the shot chart for the Kansas-Memphis game (http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/gamecenter/shotchart/NCAAB_20080407_KS@MEM) in 2008. Kansas had 6 dunks and 13 layups. Arthur posted continually and hit turnarounds and hooks and stepped out. He had 20 and 10 on the night. Kansas also had three guys off that team start the following year for their NBA teams, including Arthur. And Kaun (Russia) and Jackson (Cavs) are both playing for serious dough (Kaun moreso, but Jackson at least in the NBA).

To compare that or Florida with Horford, Noah and Brewer to Duke's interior since Shelden Williams is a pretty massive reach. Not because Duke hasn't had a singular player who could compare, but because it's largely been one guy and the commitment to the interior hasn't been there.

[quickgtp]

"I am not sure he [Davis] gets much more than 20 MPG this year sharing the 4/5 spot with Deon, Zeller and Henson unless the latter can play a significant amount of time at SF on both ends of the floor which is debateable."

This definitely is a minority opinion. Davis is being mentioned on all the pre-season watch lists and projects as a top-five pick in the 2010 NBA draft. I think he'll be a monster and a legit threat to be ACC POY. I'll be astonished if he isn't first team All-ACC.

I totally agree with you Jim. I also think some people sell Davis short with his offensive post moves. He has a nice left-handed hook shot that, with his length, can get around/over defenders 6'10 or taller.

[Kedsy]

You keep comparing Duke's top interior player to other teams' top interior player and seem to think you're demonstrating something of importance. Kansas didn't have a massive post presence in 2008? Well, KU didn't have a Luke Harangody who took all the shots in the post. They didn't have a Kevin Love to look to or push the ball into on every possession. But they did have Arthur (6'9" and unbelievably athletic and very skilled), Darnell Jackson (6'8" athletic, fairly skilled, and beefy), and Sasha Kaun (6'10" and your typical back-to-basket post). We used all of them and had Cole Aldrich (6'11" and raw as a freshman, but with a fairly classic back-to-basket approach) in reserve to use for support when fouls or injury hit during the year. We also had 6'7" Brandon Rush who was a strong rebounder from the small forward position.

And you mention Noah only scoring 12 a game. Do you understand how balanced the Kansas and Florida teams were? Florida had Noah and Horford down low. They had Brewer too. 12 (in Noah's case) and 13 (in Arthur's) is a ton of points to put up on teams like those. And Florida and Kansas put an emphasis on getting the ball inside, either pitching it in low, lobbing it in for dunks or off of penetration by guards. To try and compare Duke's one top interior player to the bigs of these national title teams is missing the point. Duke's got great players, but until this infusion of bigs, you haven't had enough of them. And it still remains to be seen what you'll actually do with them.

You can win, hell, you can win it all, without the commitment to the interior shown by recent tourney winners, but it will be hard. You take a look at the shot chart for the Kansas-Memphis game (http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/gamecenter/shotchart/NCAAB_20080407_KS@MEM) in 2008. Kansas had 6 dunks and 13 layups. Arthur posted continually and hit turnarounds and hooks and stepped out. He had 20 and 10 on the night. Kansas also had three guys off that team start the following year for their NBA teams, including Arthur. And Kaun (Russia) and Jackson (Cavs) are both playing for serious dough (Kaun moreso, but Jackson at least in the NBA).

To compare that or Florida with Horford, Noah and Brewer to Duke's interior since Shelden Williams is a pretty massive reach. Not because Duke hasn't had a singular player who could compare, but because it's largely been one guy and the commitment to the interior hasn't been there.

I wasn't attempting to denigrate Kansas (or Florida). I attended all of those Final Fours and I know how good the Florida and Kansas teams were. (I even rooted for Kansas in the 2008 Final Four.) I wasn't saying Duke's frontcourt in 2007 or 2008 was anywhere close to as good as either of those teams.

The original premise of this thread was a team can't win without a dominant, back-to-the-basket beast who scores at least 15ppg and I think the balance of the Florida and Kansas teams is a strong argument to the contrary. I think there are many ways to get layups and dunks without a traditional center (so I'm not sure of the relevance of your shot chart). I don't think Jackson and Brewer (neither of whom were anything close to back-to-the-basket players) have any place in this discussion. I think Kaun and Aldrich being back-to-the-basket players doesn't advance the argument because they didn't start and were by no means dominant forces for their teams (although Aldrich had some dominant moments in that Final Four, but it appeared to surprise everyone in the arena, including Kansas fans).

You're talking about frontcourt depth and overall talent and I'm trying to respond to what I believe to be an inaccurate premise underlying the thread. It may not be "something of importance," but it's what the thread's about.

[hq2]

I think if anyone is going to make a difference down low this year, it will be the Plumlees. The Zoubster has shown that he doesn't have the right head (or feet) to be a dominant 7 footer, and Lance has never shown any consistency down low. In fact, I think they may play Lance more at 3 this year behind Singler and use him to guard some of the quicker shooting forwards, playing more away from the basket. Which leaves MPs 1 and 2. I don't think we need a lot from them; Scheyer, Singler, and maybe Smith can give decent scoring. They just need them to be able to clean up some garbage, catch the ball and not throw it away, and shoot a layup or tipin here and there. That would be enough, assuming they also rebound and play some D

[MChambers]

You keep comparing Duke's top interior player to other teams' top interior player and seem to think you're demonstrating something of importance. Kansas didn't have a massive post presence in 2008? Well, KU didn't have a Luke Harangody who took all the shots in the post. They didn't have a Kevin Love to look to or push the ball into on every possession. But they did have Arthur (6'9" and unbelievably athletic and very skilled), Darnell Jackson (6'8" athletic, fairly skilled, and beefy), and Sasha Kaun (6'10" and your typical back-to-basket post). We used all of them and had Cole Aldrich (6'11" and raw as a freshman, but with a fairly classic back-to-basket approach) in reserve to use for support when fouls or injury hit during the year. We also had 6'7" Brandon Rush who was a strong rebounder from the small forward position.

And you mention Noah only scoring 12 a game. Do you understand how balanced the Kansas and Florida teams were? Florida had Noah and Horford down low. They had Brewer too. 12 (in Noah's case) and 13 (in Arthur's) is a ton of points to put up on teams like those. And Florida and Kansas put an emphasis on getting the ball inside, either pitching it in low, lobbing it in for dunks or off of penetration by guards. To try and compare Duke's one top interior player to the bigs of these national title teams is missing the point. Duke's got great players, but until this infusion of bigs, you haven't had enough of them. And it still remains to be seen what you'll actually do with them.

You can win, hell, you can win it all, without the commitment to the interior shown by recent tourney winners, but it will be hard. You take a look at the shot chart for the Kansas-Memphis game (http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/gamecenter/shotchart/NCAAB_20080407_KS@MEM) in 2008. Kansas had 6 dunks and 13 layups. Arthur posted continually and hit turnarounds and hooks and stepped out. He had 20 and 10 on the night. Kansas also had three guys off that team start the following year for their NBA teams, including Arthur. And Kaun (Russia) and Jackson (Cavs) are both playing for serious dough (Kaun moreso, but Jackson at least in the NBA).

To compare that or Florida with Horford, Noah and Brewer to Duke's interior since Shelden Williams is a pretty massive reach. Not because Duke hasn't had a singular player who could compare, but because it's largely been one guy and the commitment to the interior hasn't been there.

If you go back and watch the UNC-Kansas game (or just remember it), you'll see that Kansas succeeded by getting the ball inside and by largely stopping UNC's inside game. Maybe the Kansas bigs weren't exactly the second coming of Wilt, but they dominated the paint in that game. Duke hasn't been able to do that in recent years.

[superdave]

I think McDonald and Strickland play more minutes than shown above, right? Isnt there a good chance Strickland soaks up a lot of minutes at PG? I dont think anyone views Drew as much more than a complimantary player.

Davis will be a stud. 14 and 12 is my guess for him. Doubt he scores a lot but he will rule the paint while the other guys score.

[smklin]

I think, for whatever reason, we've been concentrating too much on offense and not enough on the defensive importance of a real big man. This may have been my fault for not specifically mentioning it in the OP. Regardless, there is a big difference in having a guy at the 5 who may be able to put up a few points a game (McBob) but can't body up against bigger guys on the defensive end of the floor. This creates very real problems when teams come up against squads with 2 or 3 legit big guys, especially in the tournament.

The other thing to consider is that when you have guys at the 5 spot like McBob or Kyle, they're going to be getting some (or most) of their points outside on jumpers and 3-pointers, which, in some aspects, is the last thing you want from your bigs. Sometimes, the things you need most are dependable, easy buckets from inside 7 feet and free throws from fouls on the other team, creating foul trouble. When your 4 and 5 are out heaving up 3's, it:

1) isn't going to lead to any foul trouble for the other team, meaning that their REAL big men can continue to create havok while we're on defense

2) just makes your team that much more dependent upon the 3

3) makes your team that much more succeptable to having a cold night behind the line.

[crimsonandblue]

I think, for whatever reason, we've been concentrating too much on offense and not enough on the defensive importance of a real big man. This may have been my fault for not specifically mentioning it in the OP. Regardless, there is a big difference in having a guy at the 5 who may be able to put up a few points a game (McBob) but can't body up against bigger guys on the defensive end of the floor. This creates very real problems when teams come up against squads with 2 or 3 legit big guys, especially in the tournament.

The other thing to consider is that when you have guys at the 5 spot like McBob or Kyle, they're going to be getting some (or most) of their points outside on jumpers and 3-pointers, which, in some aspects, is the last thing you want from your bigs. Sometimes, the things you need most are dependable, easy buckets from inside 7 feet and free throws from fouls on the other team, creating foul trouble. When your 4 and 5 are out heaving up 3's, it:

1) isn't going to lead to any foul trouble for the other team, meaning that their REAL big men can continue to create havok while we're on defense

2) just makes your team that much more dependent upon the 3

3) makes your team that much more succeptable to having a cold night behind the line.


I'm not going to denigrate the Duke/Suns approach and the four out one in concept that killed people in 1999 and 2001. I think that bringing the four man out in college, particularly when you combine that athletic four man with a relentless defense that can generate turnovers and easy baskets, is really effective. And it's an attractive and fun brand of basketball to watch.

What I would say, is that you're right that you need to find an easy way to get baskets. That has to come from either defensive pressure creating turnovers, penetration, or post play. You look at those turn of the century Duke teams and they did all three (or at least had personnel capable of all three). Not sure that the Duke teams of late have completely fallen off in any category, but each category seems more like Duke light of late.

Again, I think it will be interesting to see whether Duke tries to play through its bigs more this year, now that you have six of them. It will also be interesting to see whether a Smith, Scheyer, Singler combo can generate turnovers up top and on the wing the way elite Duke teams have in the past. I figure Duke will be a top team regardless. The question will be whether they'll be elite.

[jimsumner]

"The other thing to consider is that when you have guys at the 5 spot like McBob or Kyle, they're going to be getting some (or most) of their points outside on jumpers and 3-pointers"

Singler, sure. But McRoberts? The guy's effective shooting range was about two feet. He made all of five three-pointers in 2007 but lead the team in dunks.

And, McRoberts was a very good defensive player. Duke would kill for that kind of D from Zoubek or the Plumlees.

[Quo Vadis]

I'm not going to denigrate the Duke/Suns approach and the four out one in concept that killed people in 1999 and 2001. I think that bringing the four man out in college, particularly when you combine that athletic four man with a relentless defense that can generate turnovers and easy baskets, is really effective. And it's an attractive and fun brand of basketball to watch.



In 1999 and 2001 we were anything but four out 1 in. On those teams we had Brand and Boozer, far different, and so far, far superior, to any true low post plaers we currently have.

But they weren't the only guys we had operating in the low post. In 1999 and 2001 we also had a PF by the name of Shane Battier, who was far superior as a low post banger than anyone on Duke's current team. Shane was capable of playing against true low post bangers both on O, in low post mind you, not just on the perimeter, and he was capable of defending the low post.

I won't get into how any of Burgess, Casey, Chritensen, and Domzalski, spot minute getters on those teams, would have played 30 mpg the last few years.

We look back at Los and Brand and think they were the only low post guys we had, but that is simply wrong. Battier was very effective in the low post, and 1999 had several quality backups down there. Heck 2001 was thin in the low post, but again we had Battier, Nate and Dun were at least as effective down there as anyone outside Singler has been so far, and Casey and Reggie were quality Defenders in the low blocks.

I won't get into the 4 out 1 in style itself. I am not crazy about it, but it can work.

Also, I feel the low post will be fine this year. I feel that the 5 guys we have down there will be fine. Maybe not back to the basket operators on O, but solid shotblockers at the very least.

But 99 and 01 are NOT examples of 1 in 4 out. 1 to 2 guys on each team was capable of in or out play, but we had a superstar as a second inside player both years. The same superstar, in fact.

[Quo Vadis]

And, McRoberts was a very good defensive player. Duke would kill for that kind of D from Zoubek or the Plumlees.

Amen.

As woeful as the O in the low post has been the last few years, outside Kyle, the funnel-like D has been what has really killed us. McBob's shotblocking at the rim might have dramatically changed the Nova game last year. McBob was a quality Defender. I know he was a dissappointment, but he wasn't as bad as we like to make out, nor was it all his fault.

[gwwilburn]

In the little I saw him last year, MP I seemed to be a good defender with the ability to affect shots in the paint, but nothing like a McRoberts. Hopefully he has come a long way, as Jon says he has.

[airowe]

In the little I saw him last year, MP I seemed to be a good defender with the ability to affect shots in the paint, but nothing like a McRoberts. Hopefully he has come a long way, as Jon says he has.

He certainly looks like a monster in this picture:

http://rushthecourt.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/plumleee-with-pink-girl.jpg

[Quo Vadis]

In the little I saw him last year, MP I seemed to be a good defender with the ability to affect shots in the paint, but nothing like a McRoberts. Hopefully he has come a long way, as Jon says he has.

I have high hopes for MP2 here. In the few televised games I saw him in, he was a rejector. He really controlled the air space in the Oak Hill game. As for O, I don't know. But I have this vision of the Plums playing together and discouraging a lot of teams from driving into the paint.

Here's Hoping.

[crimsonandblue]

In 1999 and 2001 we were anything but four out 1 in. On those teams we had Brand and Boozer, far different, and so far, far superior, to any true low post plaers we currently have.

But they weren't the only guys we had operating in the low post. In 1999 and 2001 we also had a PF by the name of Shane Battier, who was far superior as a low post banger than anyone on Duke's current team. Shane was capable of playing against true low post bangers both on O, in low post mind you, not just on the perimeter, and he was capable of defending the low post.

I won't get into how any of Burgess, Casey, Chritensen, and Domzalski, spot minute getters on those teams, would have played 30 mpg the last few years.

We look back at Los and Brand and think they were the only low post guys we had, but that is simply wrong. Battier was very effective in the low post, and 1999 had several quality backups down there. Heck 2001 was thin in the low post, but again we had Battier, Nate and Dun were at least as effective down there as anyone outside Singler has been so far, and Casey and Reggie were quality Defenders in the low blocks.

I won't get into the 4 out 1 in style itself. I am not crazy about it, but it can work.

Also, I feel the low post will be fine this year. I feel that the 5 guys we have down there will be fine. Maybe not back to the basket operators on O, but solid shotblockers at the very least.

But 99 and 01 are NOT examples of 1 in 4 out. 1 to 2 guys on each team was capable of in or out play, but we had a superstar as a second inside player both years. The same superstar, in fact.

Yeah, well you followed those teams (99 and 01) obviously closer than I did. I just remember Battier, particularly in 01, killing people from distance. He took 296 threes that year. I know his offensive game progressed wildly through his career and in his soph year he took only 94. Still, as an outsider it seems like the Battier at power forward was a guy who clearly was capable of mixing it up inside and was a great free safety in the paint on D, but it seemed like he was part of four out on offense. You look at Collison and Gooden, two bookend forwards for Kansas in 2001. They combined to take 15 threes total.

Maybe my terminology is bad.

[NSDukeFan]

I'm not going to denigrate the Duke/Suns approach and the four out one in concept that killed people in 1999 and 2001. I think that bringing the four man out in college, particularly when you combine that athletic four man with a relentless defense that can generate turnovers and easy baskets, is really effective. And it's an attractive and fun brand of basketball to watch.

What I would say, is that you're right that you need to find an easy way to get baskets. That has to come from either defensive pressure creating turnovers, penetration, or post play. You look at those turn of the century Duke teams and they did all three (or at least had personnel capable of all three). Not sure that the Duke teams of late have completely fallen off in any category, but each category seems more like Duke light of late.

Again, I think it will be interesting to see whether Duke tries to play through its bigs more this year, now that you have six of them. It will also be interesting to see whether a Smith, Scheyer, Singler combo can generate turnovers up top and on the wing the way elite Duke teams have in the past. I figure Duke will be a top team regardless. The question will be whether they'll be elite.

I agree that more important than whether you have a back to the basket scorer (there aren't many great ones in college basketball anymore) is the ability to get easy baskets. I expect Duke's post scoring will increase this year. One thing that pleased me about last year's team though, except for a few games, (notably the loss to Michigan) was the team didn't settle for the outside jumper as much as the previous couple of years. I look forward to lots of easy baskets this year from post play, penetration and turnovers. Maybe more post play this year and fewer turnovers created due to our personnel. I am also hoping form more penetration due to better ball movement from having more offensive options. At least that's my hope.

[Wheat/"/"/"]

I read here a lot of talk about offense in the post and who is going to step up. I'm more concerned about who is going to guard Ed Davis. :confused:

...and people continue to underestimate Deon Thompson's post play too. For a disiplined team that can run a play, having a player like Deon with advanced offensive post moves is a huge asset when you need to get a good look at a shot inside. We'll see how disiplined a young UNC team can be this year getting him the ball, should be interesting.

Tyler Zeller is also flying under the radar at the moment and is poised to wake some people up as well with some inside play.

In a nutshell, IMO, good teams- the elite teams- have to have some above average inside strength- whatever their style. Could be a Laettner, or a Brand, but the best teams have to have some strong inside play.

Duke has been average at best since the Sheldon days...very good teams, but a lack of high quality post play has kept those teams just under elite status the past few years.

The good news for Duke fans is that maybe times are changing. Mason Plumblee looks to be a potential stud inside...beyond him though, I have my questions who can step it up to help out the high quality of wings Duke has to take them to that next level...

[jv001]

Wheat you say that Zeller could have a coming out year. But you dismiss all of Duke inside guys except Mason. What about his big brother, Miles. He showed some promise last year and has added strength and weight over the summer. And what about Kelly. We don't know how good he will be, but he could excel as well. I agree that davis and thompson are likely to have good solid years, but just how good depends on the guard play. Will they receive the ball at the correct time and correct position. Last year they had lawson who could break down any defense and get them the ball. This year they are not so lucky. And they had ellington and green that could shoot the ball from the perimeter. That had to open up the inside. This year they are not so lucky. And by the way it's Mason Plumlee not Plumblee. Go Duke!

[jimsumner]

We were talking earlier about PT and Ed Davis. I see Davis and Thompson getting lots of minutes inside, with Henson playing the 3 and 4. In that scenario, Zeller is the odd man out. I just don't see him getting enough minutes to have a break-out season.

[budwom]

Zeller is way better than you think.

[jimsumner]

"Zeller is way better than you think"

Buddy, I actually think he's pretty good. But you've got 80 mpg at the 4/5 and he's fighting against two Wooden Award candidates and a consensus top-five freshman for PT. Do you think he's good enough to put either Thompson or Davis on the bench?

Even if Henson primarily (or exclusively plays the 3), I just don't see where the minutes come from. Not the minutes for a break-out season.

Next year Thompson and Davis will be gone and I wouldn't be surprised to see Henson flirt with the NBA. That's Zeller's break-out.

[Kedsy]

"Zeller is way better than you think"

Buddy, I actually think he's pretty good. But you've got 80 mpg at the 4/5 and he's fighting against two Wooden Award candidates and a consensus top-five freshman for PT. Do you think he's good enough to put either Thompson or Davis on the bench?

Even if Henson primarily (or exclusively plays the 3), I just don't see where the minutes come from. Not the minutes for a break-out season.

Next year Thompson and Davis will be gone and I wouldn't be surprised to see Henson flirt with the NBA. That's Zeller's break-out.

Well, in fairness, if Henson plays mostly at the 3, Zeller could play 20 mpg. Those may not be break-out minutes, but it would be enough to show what he has. If Henson has to spend significant time at the 4, then I think Zeller will be the odd man out. I don't think the Wears are going to play very much.

[Wheat/"/"/"]

Wheat you say that Zeller could have a coming out year. But you dismiss all of Duke inside guys except Mason. What about his big brother, Miles. He showed some promise last year and has added strength and weight over the summer. And what about Kelly. We don't know how good he will be, but he could excel as well. I agree that davis and thompson are likely to have good solid years, but just how good depends on the guard play. Will they receive the ball at the correct time and correct position. Last year they had lawson who could break down any defense and get them the ball. This year they are not so lucky. And they had ellington and green that could shoot the ball from the perimeter. That had to open up the inside. This year they are not so lucky. And by the way it's Mason Plumlee not Plumblee. Go Duke!

To be clear, I never dismissed anybody's play, I just said I have my questions.

We were talking about the necessity of strong inside post play. And I think Mason Plumlee might fit that bill for Duke. I have only seen him in the HS all star games, but he impressed me in the paint...looked like a gritty...the scratches and blood will follow him kind of kid..... and that's something you need. Sort of a TH lite :)

I have not seen Kelly play, but from what I read it seems pretty clear he's not likely to be a low post player, much less a "banger" type, but I don't know his game.

Miles Plumlee has nice size and some skill, and I think he can be a good player, an above average player.
He could step it up inside, he could be one of those kids that grows into his game, like Deon Thompson has done, we'll see, but honestly that's not something we see very often from Duke players in the post so I'll believe it when I see it ;)

Zoubek and Thomas are in the good, but average camp. You are not likely to get where you want to go with these players.

Now about Zeller....People like to forget that he had beat out Davis for PT until his injury last year...and that he's a true 7'. My sources tell me he has put on about 25lbs this summer. He lost some confidence coming back last year and his game showed it, but if he's back healthy and stronger, this kid will show he can ball.
In my mind, UNC will have a post rotation of Deon,Davis,and Zeller. They will all get about equal PT, unless one of them is hot in a particular game.

IMO, Henson will be a SF. for the most part. His body is just too immature to hang in the paint and he has to get stronger at the college level to play down there. And he won't beat out any one UNC's big three, despite the hype.

I am very comfortable with Drew at the point. He can play D, take care of the ball, get in the lane, and he was the best interior passer on the floor last season. There are lot's of dunks coming from UNC this season, and we should see the return of the ally-oop too.

UNC's questions are at the 2 and 3, especially the outside shooting, as you pointed out.
There is a ton of talent, but all unproven.

[jimsumner]

"He could step it up inside, he could be one of those kids that grows into his game, like Deon Thompson has done, we'll see, but honestly that's not something we see very often from Duke players in the post so I'll believe it when I see it "

Wheat, check out the freshman stats of Danny Ferry, John Smith, Alaa Abdelnaby, Christian Laettner, Cherokee Parks, Eric Meek, Greg Newton, Casey Sanders, and Shelden Williams and get back to us on how Duke big men never improve. :)

[Wheat/"/"/"]

"He could step it up inside, he could be one of those kids that grows into his game, like Deon Thompson has done, we'll see, but honestly that's not something we see very often from Duke players in the post so I'll believe it when I see it "

Wheat, check out the freshman stats of Danny Ferry, John Smith, Alaa Abdelnaby, Christian Laettner, Cherokee Parks, Eric Meek, Greg Newton, Casey Sanders, and Shelden Williams and get back to us on how Duke big men never improve. :)

OK Jim, I'm guilty of a little rival dig there and throw myself before the mercy of the court. :)
It's a chillin' kind of day so I took a look at the stats as you suggested....

Keep in mind that my point about Deon/MP was Deon's gone from a soft overweight solid skills freshman to the preseason Wooden award list in his career...from an average post player to an above average one...and maybe Miles Plumlee can do that too. I'm not writing MP off just yet.

Now about your list... I wouldn't trot out all these guys to make your point that Duke has any real history of developing those average post players... to reach the ranks of above average post players we were talking about that the really good teams need.
While all on your list did improve..... it was often from bad to average at best.

Meek? He "improved" to a career avg of....5.1 PPG, 4.3 RPG, .6 BPG, .5 SPG, .598 FT% and I'm sure he meant to make a 3pt shot at some point (.000 3pt%)

Newton? Newton?....He improved for a career avg of....7.6 PPG, 5.1 RPG, .4APG, .9 BPG.

6'7" John Smith?.... Career avg 7.9 PPG, 3.0 RPG, .5 APG, .2 BPG, .6 SPG.

Abdelnaby had a good senior year, but that was over 20 years ago. His career avg was 8.5 PPG, 3.7 RPG, .4 APG, .5 BPG, .4 SPG

Casey Sanders? Now that is a stretch. He way underachieved from his rep coming in... career avg...2.7 PPG, 2.5 RPG, .2 APG, 1.0 BPG, .2 SPG and a, .518 FT %. He's the poster boy that proves no coach can teach good hands.

Ferry, Laettner, Parks and Williams all had NBA talent coming in... and I will concede they got better each year. And it's no coincidence that they were members of some of Duke's best teams.

[jimsumner]

Wheat,

It makes no sense to quote career stats to show progression. Compare Abdelnaby's freshman stats to his senior stats. Meek averaged 2/5/1.2 as a freshman, 10.3/8.3 as a senior. No improvement there?

Newton went from 1.1/1.3 as a freshman to 12.2/8.2 as a junior and was ahead of those stats as a senior before he imploded. Sanders was 1.8/1.2 to 4.6/5.2. That's a lot more improvement than demonstrated by Hansbrough from his freshman season to his senior season. :)

Want to discount Ferry, Laettner, et. al.? Fine. We'll do the same with Mitch Kupchak, Tom LaGarde, J.R. Reid, Rasheed Wallace, and consensus top-five recruit Eric Montross.

I don't know what we do with prep All-Americans turned college scrubs Geoff Crompton, Pete Budko, Chris Brust, and Matt Wenstrom. Guess the Smith/Guthridge magic didn't quite work there, did it?

C'mon admit it, the Duke-doesn't-develop-big-men is a pernicious myth, no more deserving of mention than Duke-doesn't-develop-NBA players myth.

Especially on a Duke board.

[smklin]

C'mon admit it, the Duke-doesn't-develop-big-men is a pernicious myth, no more deserving of mention than Duke-doesn't-develop-NBA players myth.

Sorry jim, im going to have to side at least partially with wheat on this one. While a lot of those big men did in fact develop, i would argue that it was not the result of k pouring into them. i think that for a lot of those guys, it was the result of being around for four years, learning the college game, and putting on muscle. and as far as shelden williams goes, it was well-known that he had a great relationship with wojo, so that's why he improved so drastically.

while i think the "duke doesn't develop big men" gets overplayed, i also think that there is some truth in it. k naturally gravitates toward and connects with guards. now i know tons of guys are going to come out of the woodwork and point out 47680 examples of how i'm wrong, but i think we can all agree that GENERALLY the guys k has really poured himself into and connected with have been at the 1-2-3 positions.

[airowe]

Sorry jim, im going to have to side at least partially with wheat on this one. While a lot of those big men did in fact develop, i would argue that it was not the result of k pouring into them. i think that for a lot of those guys, it was the result of being around for four years, learning the college game, and putting on muscle. and as far as shelden williams goes, it was well-known that he had a great relationship with wojo, so that's why he improved so drastically.

while i think the "duke doesn't develop big men" gets overplayed,


Wheat,


C'mon admit it, the Duke-doesn't-develop-big-men is a pernicious myth, no more deserving of mention than Duke-doesn't-develop-NBA players myth.

Especially on a Duke board.

You just proved Jim's argument and should have stopped right there.

[Wheat/"/"/"]

Wheat,

It makes no sense to quote career stats to show progression. Compare Abdelnaby's freshman stats to his senior stats. Meek averaged 2/5/1.2 as a freshman, 10.3/8.3 as a senior. No improvement there?

Newton went from 1.1/1.3 as a freshman to 12.2/8.2 as a junior and was ahead of those stats as a senior before he imploded. Sanders was 1.8/1.2 to 4.6/5.2. That's a lot more improvement than demonstrated by Hansbrough from his freshman season to his senior season. :)

Want to discount Ferry, Laettner, et. al.? Fine. We'll do the same with Mitch Kupchak, Tom LaGarde, J.R. Reid, Rasheed Wallace, and consensus top-five recruit Eric Montross.

I don't know what we do with prep All-Americans turned college scrubs Geoff Crompton, Pete Budko, Chris Brust, and Matt Wenstrom. Guess the Smith/Guthridge magic didn't quite work there, did it?

C'mon admit it, the Duke-doesn't-develop-big-men is a pernicious myth, no more deserving of mention than Duke-doesn't-develop-NBA players myth.

Especially on a Duke board.

Jim,
I can agree the career stats don't show progression, but can you agree that even as a seniors, playing their best, those players were average college players and not what you need to field an elite team?

I know the "Duke doesn't-develop-big-men" is probably over played. I was just joshing ya...:)

The real issue is lately Duke has failed to get the type of strong inside post play we were discussing that to be an elite team you need to have.

Coach K has tried, but missed on a couple, Monroe for instance, but that's how it goes in recruiting. If I was a Duke fan I would want coach K to put greater effort into getting more players with post skills.

Unfortunately the last few seasons secondary guys, like Thomas, Zoubek, an the under sized McClure, along with the highly recruited McRoberts have been weak in the post, and it has shown with quick exits from the tourney.

That is no coincidence.

When Duke had strong post play, a Brand, Boozer or Williams they were an elite team.

IMO, for Duke to get back to where they want to be, they need to get more quality post committed players on the roster. The only one I see now is probably Mason Plumlee, and possibly Miles. No way Thomas and Zoubek take you where you want to go.

The best teams play inside out, or at the very least really play inside...That's all I'm trying to say.

[jimsumner]

"but can you agree that even as a seniors, playing their best, those players were average college players and not what you need to field an elite team"

We have a different definition of average college players.

[ACCBBallFan]

...
Now about Zeller....People like to forget that he had beat out Davis for PT until his injury last year...and that he's a true 7'. My sources tell me he has put on about 25lbs this summer. He lost some confidence coming back last year and his game showed it, but if he's back healthy and stronger, this kid will show he can ball.
In my mind, UNC will have a post rotation of Deon,Davis,and Zeller. They will all get about equal PT, unless one of them is hot in a particular game.

IMO, Henson will be a SF. for the most part. His body is just too immature to hang in the paint and he has to get stronger at the college level to play down there. And he won't beat out any one UNC's big three, despite the hype.

I am very comfortable with Drew at the point. He can play D, take care of the ball, get in the lane, and he was the best interior passer on the floor last season. There are lot's of dunks coming from UNC this season, and we should see the return of the ally-oop too.

UNC's questions are at the 2 and 3, especially the outside shooting, as you pointed out.
There is a ton of talent, but all unproven.With a healthy Ginyard one of your concerns at the 2 or 3 is solved.

Just because Henson does not have the body for a C/PF does not make him a SF. His FT shooting is atrocious but so was Brandan Wright who he reminds me of a little.

Whether he can play SF on either end of the floor remains to be seen, but I do agree that is the key to solving the PT dilemmma since I am pretty sure none of Deon, Davis or Zeller can play SF. Also agree the Wear twins only see garbage time.

Despite his near anorexia, Henson can be a good above the rim player on both ends of the floor, just not sure sure nor are many THR faithful whether Henson can play the 3. As a PF/C, he may get pushed outside his comfort zone by heavier opponents like Zoubek or Miles though they would probably be lined up on someone else, with Lance or Mason on Henson.

It is probably not all or nothing. He may be able to play SF vs. some ACC teams and not versus others. It would be interesting matchups both ways with Singler, Singleton, Aminu and Milton Jennings. Not sure how he matches up with Raji from BC or Dequan Jones from Maimi or JT Thompson from VA Tech.

What Henson lacks in lateral quickness he makes up for with length on the recovery and he does have the eraser Ed Davis there to cover when his man gets by him.

When matched up with a 3 guard set vs UVA or MD for example Ginyard takes Vasquez or Landesberg, so not sure who Henson can defend. It is not like Henson can post his man up since middle is already clogged by Deon and Davis, and not clear yet who besides possibly Graves who would not be on the floor in this scenario can hit from outside to open things up.

Assuming it is primarily Drew II and Ginyard paired with Henson the SF and two of Deon-Davis-Zeller, not sure there is a legit outside threat, despite assurances they are all working on their shot in off season. Isn't everybody and have they not been doing that every year?

[sagegrouse]

Sorry jim, im going to have to side at least partially with wheat on this one. While a lot of those big men did in fact develop, i would argue that it was not the result of k pouring into them. i think that for a lot of those guys, it was the result of being around for four years, learning the college game, and putting on muscle. and as far as shelden williams goes, it was well-known that he had a great relationship with wojo, so that's why he improved so drastically.

while i think the "duke doesn't develop big men" gets overplayed, i also think that there is some truth in it. k naturally gravitates toward and connects with guards. now i know tons of guys are going to come out of the woodwork and point out 47680 examples of how i'm wrong, but i think we can all agree that GENERALLY the guys k has really poured himself into and connected with have been at the 1-2-3 positions.

I think your statement is wrong and even unreasonable.

Most observers, including his peers, would rate coach K among the top ten all-time coaches, based on NCAA championships, conference championships, winning percentage, consistency, character-builing, and leadership in his profession (Olympic coach, e.g.). Saying that the Duke program is deficient in coaching big men is roughly like saying that a Michelin Three Star resaurant ("Worth a trip" in the guide's lingo) doesn't do a good job with fish. Maybe, if you had said, "In the five percent (or one percent)of game situations where a zone is needed, Duke doesn't do that very well"......?

There is no way Duke and K are as successful as they have been over the long haul without being consistently outstanding in coaching and developing players in every major part of the game, especially in coaching big men and the inside game, which is the stuff that really has to be taught, because the seven-footers are typically way behind in coordination and moves.

Ferry, Alaa, Parks, Laettner, Brand, Boozer, Shelden, and even Shav (w/ injuries) developed significantly through their years at Duke.

There's more, but I am out of time.

sagegrouse

[Wheat/"/"/"]

With a healthy Ginyard one of your concerns at the 2 or 3 is solved.

Just because Henson does not have the body for a C/PF does not make him a SF. His FT shooting is atrocious but so was Brandan Wright who he reminds me of a little.

Whether he can play SF on either end of the floor remains to be seen, but I do agree that is the key to solving the PT dilemmma since I am pretty sure none of Deon, Davis or Zeller can play SF. Also agree the Wear twins only see garbage time.

Despite his near anorexia, Henson can be a good above the rim player on both ends of the floor, just not sure sure nor are many THR faithful whether Henson can play the 3. As a PF/C, he may get pushed outside his comfort zone by heavier opponents like Zoubek or Miles though they would probably be lined up on someone else, with Lance or Mason on Henson.

It is probably not all or nothing. He may be able to play SF vs. some ACC teams and not versus others. It would be interesting matchups both ways with Singler, Singleton, Aminu and Milton Jennings. Not sure how he matches up with Raji from BC or Dequan Jones from Maimi or JT Thompson from VA Tech.

What Henson lacks in lateral quickness he makes up for with length on the recovery and he does have the eraser Ed Davis there to cover when his man gets by him.

When matched up with a 3 guard set vs UVA or MD for example Ginyard takes Vasquez or Landesberg, so not sure who Henson can defend. It is not like Henson can post his man up since middle is already clogged by Deon and Davis, and not clear yet who besides possibly Graves who would not be on the floor in this scenario can hit from outside to open things up.

Assuming it is primarily Drew II and Ginyard paired with Henson the SF and two of Deon-Davis-Zeller, not sure there is a legit outside threat, despite assurances they are all working on their shot in off season. Isn't everybody and have they not been doing that every year?

I have not seen much of Henson, certainly not enough to have a set opinion of his skills. I know the media seems to think he walks on water, but i've seen that movie before. They get way to carried away with potential.

That said, I just don't see how he is going to beat out any of the three NBA quality big men ahead of him as a rail thin freshman.

I think Henson is in the rotation this year mainly as a backup to Ginyard at the 3 and a small amount of time backing up the 4.

Maybe he is just too good to keep off the floor, but I'll have to see him play before I'll believe that considering his competition.

[Duvall]

Sorry jim, im going to have to side at least partially with wheat on this one. While a lot of those big men did in fact develop, i would argue that it was not the result of k pouring into them. i think that for a lot of those guys, it was the result of being around for four years, learning the college game, and putting on muscle. and as far as shelden williams goes, it was well-known that he had a great relationship with wojo, so that's why he improved so drastically.

Wait, what? What does development mean, if not this?

[House G]

:
I can't remember the 1992 game at LSU but in 1991 at CID, Shaq was so befuddled on D against Christian's inside moves that Dale Brown pulled him out of the game well before the end. Shaq played 28 mins. and had 15 pts, 10 RBs, and 4 fouls vs. Christian's 24 pts., 11 RBs and 3 fouls.

sagegrouse
In fairness to Shaq, the LSU team that visited CIS in 1991 looked like they had me playing point guard (in more ways than one :D). LSU literally could not get the ball across mid-court because of Duke's pressure. When they did succeed, Shaq found himself triple-teamed because LSU had no outside shooters. Shaq was frustrated all day and ended up in foul trouble.

[House G]

Shaq actually outplayed Laettner in the '92 rematch in Baton Rogue. For 30 minutes. But Laettner dominated down the stretch and Duke won.

Back to the OP. Who wouldn't like another Elton Brand? Seen any lately? In college?

But Duke has a 6'11" freshman who many think will be an NBA lottery pick in 2 or 3 years. Not saying Plumlee is going to be as good as Laettner or Ferry or Parks but he's about the same size, has an advanced skill set, well above average athleticism, and his intangibles are off the charts.

So maybe Duke has its dominant post.
I had the pleasure of being at this game in Baton Rouge. Bobby Hurley was hurt and Coach K asked Grant Hill to play the point. LSU had Duke dominated all day until Laettner hit two monster 3-pointers and Duke went to the "hack-a-Shaq" strategy. I don't remember how many free throws Shaq missed in the last two minutes but those bricks are still clanging in my ears.:D