Point Guard Play

[shoutingncu]

There's an interesting, albeit off topic, discussion in the HB thread.

So I ask this question:

Would you rather have a senior shooting guard turned point, who makes heady plays (few turnovers), but doesn't exactly dazzle with breaking down defenses, or an inexperienced point guard not asked to do much his freshman year, and admittedly, who didn't show very much as a result?

I actually think it's a pretty fascinating sports fan hypothetical. One team has all the experience in the world, but not much NCAA tourney success. The other has youth, youth and more youth, so the jury is completely out. Obviously, Duke has very good players, and the incoming freshmen should certainly improve the core. But those very good players have faltered in the tournament, so to praise their experience as the deciding factor, to me, is to be content with very good regular season numbers and little more. On the other hand, there's no way to tell how good youth will be, but they do have the players at each position. So, would you rather have no actual point guard, but upperclassmen in the spot, or a true point guard that has not been given the keys yet? (And this is not a question of depth, first because both teams are shallow at guard, but second because a player shouldn't be judged on what would happen if he weren't in the game).

Of course, it's all hypothetical. Duke would rather have their junior combo guard have the breakout season, and Carolina would like it's second year true point to have the standard freshman to sophmore jump.

Also from the conversation in the other thread, I agree that Drew II looked a bit like young QT, but if he can improve to senior year QT (an improvement I think happened out of necessity for Thomas, and therefore, may very well happen for Drew), well, I'll take that in a "rebuilding" year any time. QT had some very fine moments in '08, and if Drew can match that, well, we'll take some lumps, but man, we could be there at the end.

[airowe]

There's an interesting, albeit off topic, discussion in the HB thread.

So I ask this question:

Would you rather have a senior shooting guard turned point, who makes heady plays (few turnovers), but doesn't exactly dazzle with breaking down defenses, or an inexperienced point guard not asked to do much his freshman year, and admittedly, who didn't show very much as a result?

I actually think it's a pretty fascinating sports fan hypothetical. One team has all the experience in the world, but not much NCAA tourney success. The other has youth, youth and more youth, so the jury is completely out. Obviously, Duke has very good players, and the incoming freshmen should certainly improve the core. But those very good players have faltered in the tournament, so to praise their experience as the deciding factor, to me, is to be content with very good regular season numbers and little more. On the other hand, there's no way to tell how good youth will be, but they do have the players at each position. So, would you rather have no actual point guard, but upperclassmen in the spot, or a true point guard that has not been given the keys yet? (And this is not a question of depth, first because both teams are shallow at guard, but second because a player shouldn't be judged on what would happen if he weren't in the game).

Of course, it's all hypothetical. Duke would rather have their junior combo guard have the breakout season, and Carolina would like it's second year true point to have the standard freshman to sophmore jump.

Also from the conversation in the other thread, I agree that Drew II looked a bit like young QT, but if he can improve to senior year QT (an improvement I think happened out of necessity for Thomas, and therefore, may very well happen for Drew), well, I'll take that in a "rebuilding" year any time. QT had some very fine moments in '08, and if Drew can match that, well, we'll take some lumps, but man, we could be there at the end.

I'll jump in here since I think I made the claim that I would much rather be in Duke's backcourt situation than in UNC's. With two "combo guards" having had at least a half a year's experience playing PG for a very difficult regular season schedule and some postseason play, I absolutely feel Duke is in a much better position in the backcourt next year. LD2 averaged less than 2 mins a game, less than 2 pts a game, etc, etc last year and one of those games was against Radford. Experience is very important, especially at the PG position and especially during ACC and tough non-conference play. It doesn't always trump talent but it certainly doesn't hurt. Comparing Nolan and Jon sharing PG duties this year (per their words) to LD2 and a rotation of Ginyard, Strickland, Watts, and Mcdonald, I'll take our guys everyday. That's before sprinkling in a little Dawkins in the mix.

[flyingdutchdevil]

I'll jump in here since I think I made the claim that I would much rather be in Duke's backcourt situation than in UNC's. With two "combo guards" having had at least a half a year's experience playing PG for a very difficult regular season schedule and some postseason play, I absolutely feel Duke is in a much better position in the backcourt next year. LD2 averaged less than 2 mins a game, less than 2 pts a game, etc, etc last year and one of those games was against Radford. Experience is very important, especially at the PG position and especially during ACC and tough non-conference play. It doesn't always trump talent but it certainly doesn't hurt. Comparing Nolan and Jon sharing PG duties this year (per their words) to LD2 and a rotation of Ginyard, Strickland, Watts, and Mcdonald, I'll take our guys everyday. That's before sprinkling in a little Dawkins in the mix.

I certainly agree with you. In this case, less is more. Smith and Scheyer are two great guards with Smith being a a) defensive stopper, b) athletic and c) having an improved shot and Scheyer a) being ridiculously smart on the court, b) great defense and c) having a game face that scares the hell out of opponents (after three years of watching the kid, I still have no idea what expression is. I also laugh when the Maryland fans have those signs...). With the exception of Ginyard, everyone in the backcourt is inexperienced. And I guarantee that someone (my money's on Strickland) will transfer at the end of the year, IMO (unfortunately, their 2010 recruits in the backcourt are looking pretty damn good).

Also, I like having Dawkins. IMO, I don't think he's ready for college ball, not to mention the ACC. However, he is a great insurance policy who will team up with Seth to provide an amazing backcourt tandem in the future. While I still wish we had Williams, I think having only Dawkins as a sub will make Smith and Scheyer play smarter and more efficiently.

[ACCBBallFan]

Drew II played 9.6 MPG and only scored 1.4 PPG with 1.9 Assists and 1.1 Turnovers.

He had a good first round game versus Radford 19 Min, 2 points, 5 assists and 1 turnover.

In the other 5 NCAA games, his totals were 24 min, 5 points, 1 assist and 0 turnovers. so his totals for the 6 NCAA games was 43 Minutes, 7 points, 6 assists and 1 turnover.

Albeit in only 3 NCAA games versus UNC's 6, Smith totaled 66 Min, 28 points, 7 assists and 3 turnovers while Scheyer logged 99 min, 41 points, 8 assists and 4 turnovers.

Smith for the season played 21.6 MPG, scored 8.4 PPG, had 1.7 Assists and 1.6 Turnovers, while Scheyer played 32.8 MPG, scored 14.9, has 2.8 Assists and 1.5 TO per game.

So, no way UNC would have an advantage over Duke at guard slots.

When I read the OP, I thought perhaps the comparison was UK having promising frosh Wall and Bledsoe versus Duke having veteran combos. not UNC where Drew II was a decent (RSCI rated 44) but not great HS player with good blood lines. By comparison Smith's RSCI was 19 and Scheyer 28.

Walls' RSCI was 2 and Bledsoe 52.

[jesus_hurley]

Also from the conversation in the other thread, I agree that Drew II looked a bit like young QT, but if he can improve to senior year QT (an improvement I think happened out of necessity for Thomas, and therefore, may very well happen for Drew), well, I'll take that in a "rebuilding" year any time. QT had some very fine moments in '08, and if Drew can match that, well, we'll take some lumps, but man, we could be there at the end.

One thing to note is that from a PG stats perspective (assists, TO, and the A/T ratio) compared to minutes played, QT had a better Sophomore season then Senior season. And if you are using QT as the measuring stick for LD2 then I hope for your sake that there is someone else on the roster ready to take his place :)

here's QT's stats - I changed the graphs on the side to reflect Assists and Turnovers and the associated ratios:
http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/player/north-carolina/quentin-thomas?per_game=1&tslug=north-carolina&tempo_neutral=1&game_type=1&totals=1&pslug=quentin-thomas&chart1=assists_avg&chart2=turnovers_avg&chart3=assist_turnover_ratio

[eightyearoldsdude]

Drew II played 9.6 MPG and only scored 1.4 PPG with 1.9 Assists and 1.1 Turnovers.

He had a good first round game versus Radford 19 Min, 2 points, 5 assists and 1 turnover.

In the other 5 NCAA games, his totals were 24 min, 5 points, 1 assist and 0 turnovers. so his totals for the 6 NCAA games was 43 Minutes, 7 points, 6 assists and 1 turnover.

Albeit in only 3 NCAA games versus UNC's 6, Smith totaled 66 Min, 28 points, 7 assists and 3 turnovers while Scheyer logged 99 min, 41 points, 8 assists and 4 turnovers.

Smith for the season played 21.6 MPG, scored 8.4 PPG, had 1.7 Assists and 1.6 Turnovers, while Scheyer played 32.8 MPG, scored 14.9, has 2.8 Assists and 1.5 TO per game.

So, no way UNC would have an advantage over Duke at guard slots.

When I read the OP, I thought perhaps the comparison was UK having promising frosh Wall and Bledsoe versus Duke having veteran combos. not UNC where Drew II was a decent (RSCI rated 44) but not great HS player with good blood lines. By comparison Smith's RSCI was 19 and Scheyer 28.

Walls' RSCI was 2 and Bledsoe 52.

I think Duke's backcourt will be better at the start of the season, but I'll take UNC's at the end of the year and during the tournament. Neither team is a likely final four contender, IMO, and our (UNC's) lack of experience in the backcourt may end our season, but we've got more athleticism (esp. Strickland) and depth (6 guys who can play one or the other guard positions), both of which matter in the tournament. What will hurt us is 3 point shooting.

Duke really can't afford an injury or foul trouble in the backcourt, and over the course of a season, both are fairly likely. I'd say you've got better shooting guards, but I'll take LD2 over Nolan Smith any day of the week. That's mostly based on future potential rather than past performance, however.

[airowe]

I think Duke's backcourt will be better at the start of the season, but I'll take UNC's at the end of the year and during the tournament. Neither team is a likely final four contender, IMO, and our (UNC's) lack of experience in the backcourt may end our season, but we've got more athleticism (esp. Strickland) and depth (6 guys who can play one or the other guard positions), both of which matter in the tournament. What will hurt us is 3 point shooting.

Duke really can't afford an injury or foul trouble in the backcourt, and over the course of a season, both are fairly likely. I'd say you've got better shooting guards, but I'll take LD2 over Nolan Smith any day of the week. That's mostly based on future potential rather than past performance, however.

Them's fighting words (http://www.fandome.com/video/88298/Old-School-Bench-Clearing-Duke--UNC-Fight/) Dude.

[eightyearoldsdude]

Them's fighting words (http://www.fandome.com/video/88298/Old-School-Bench-Clearing-Duke--UNC-Fight/) Dude.

You know Dude, I myself dabbled in pacifism once.

[Wander]

Would you rather have a senior shooting guard turned point, who makes heady plays (few turnovers), but doesn't exactly dazzle with breaking down defenses, or an inexperienced point guard not asked to do much his freshman year, and admittedly, who didn't show very much as a result?


Case by case basis. Senior Scheyer over sophomore Drew II 100 times out of 100.

[Azdukefan]

Case by case basis. Senior Scheyer over sophomore Drew II 100 times out of 100.

I'll one up you, Senior Scheyer over Senior LDII 100 times out of 100.

[gumbomoop]

Despite being a mostly Duke homer, I think LDII is pretty promising. Now, if UNC's chances at a deep tourney run depend heavily on a real breakout year by LDII, then, no, not such good odds. He's certainly their biggest ?-mark, followed, as per UNC posters here, by sketchy 3-pt production.

As for the Better Blues, we're pretty much unanimous that NS is a, probably the, key to our fortunes. NS doesn't have quite as much to "prove" as LDII, but they both got big responsibilities in '09-'10. Good luck to LDII; very best of luck to NS. K to NS: "You gotta play; no meek crap."

[shoutingncu]

Case by case basis. Senior Scheyer over sophomore Drew II 100 times out of 100.

I don't think there's much question that Jon is a better all around player than Drew, and significantly so. I guess part of my question is would you rather have to rely on a senior Scheyer running point over an inexperienced sophomore.

Looking at it slightly removed, to me, it's just a fun clash in fanbase optimism. Duke is excited about the coming season because of the talented experience they have in each player. Carolina is excited because the rebuilding effort leaves potential at each position. Duke fans don't seem too concerned with Carolina's youth or what they saw of their backcourt returnees, and Carolina fans (or at least this one) haven't been particularly impressed with Duke's experience the last few seasons.

[jv001]

Duke really can't afford an injury or foul trouble in the backcourt, and over the course of a season, both are fairly likely. I'd say you've got better shooting guards, but I'll take LD2 over Nolan Smith any day of the week. That's mostly based on future potential rather than past performance, however.

It's evident that you're looking at things through those light blue(ugly) glasses. "Fairly likely Duke will have an injury at guard". Wishful thinking me thinks? Foul trouble well that's another story. Probably will happen. But we've got the best coach on the bench to take care of that. As for LD2 over Nolan I think you will be surprised. Go Duke!

[eightyearoldsdude]

It's evident that you're looking at things through those light blue(ugly) glasses. "Fairly likely Duke will have an injury at guard". Wishful thinking me thinks? Foul trouble well that's another story. Probably will happen. But we've got the best coach on the bench to take care of that. As for LD2 over Nolan I think you will be surprised. Go Duke!

No, I don't wish injury on any player, no matter what the team. But injuries are nonetheless an unfortunate reality of what is an increasingly long and physical season. I'm not necessarily talking about season-enders, but it's not often that you see a team go completely unscathed.

[InSpades]

I love the optimism of pre-season! I'm pretty sure I actually saw someone say something along the lines of "Zeller was playing really well prior to his injury". He was injured in game #2! He had a good game against Penn and that was it. Taylor King poured in 20 points his 1st game against NC Central. A few weeks later he had 27 against Eastern Kentucky. How did his freshman year turn out?

Larry Drew II showed very very little last year. In almost 10 MPG he averaged less than 2 points. Obviously he was generally the 5th offensive option on the floor but come on. How many guys go from scoring less than 2 PPG in their freshman years to meaningful contributions their next year? If I was UNC and I was relying on him to lead my team next year I would be scared. Be thankful you have Ginyard to step in when he can't get the job done next year. If I'm Roy and I'm offered Nolan Smith straight-up trade for Drew I'm pinching myself to check if I'm dreaming or not.

Zeller and Drew could both have great years next year but to the level of optimism shown for their performances next year is a bit staggering. Drew particularly would be lucky to have a sophomore year as good as Nolan's sophomore year (which was looked at as a disappointment by pretty much everyone).

[ACCBBallFan]

Despite being a mostly Duke homer, I think LDII is pretty promising. Now, if UNC's chances at a deep tourney run depend heavily on a real breakout year by LDII, then, no, not such good odds. He's certainly their biggest ?-mark, followed, as per UNC posters here, by sketchy 3-pt production.

As for the Better Blues, we're pretty much unanimous that NS is a, probably the, key to our fortunes. NS doesn't have quite as much to "prove" as LDII, but they both got big responsibilities in '09-'10. Good luck to LDII; very best of luck to NS. K to NS: "You gotta play; no meek crap."Most unbiased observers would take Nolan Smith over Drew II at beginning of the is year.

Actually Drew II is almost certain to start for UNC as is Ginyard, Davis and Thompson.

The Heels' biggest ? is who is the 5th starter. Some say Henson but court is still out on whether he can play SF on either end of half court vs. many teams, can vs. some.

If not Henson, then either Graves who would address the long ball need or Ginyard moves to SF and a freshman albeit a very good one in Strickland/McDonald is paired with an inexperienced Larry Drew.

My guess at beginning of year is Graves so the veteran Ginyard can help steady Drew II.

It does not matter v. FIU, NC Central, Valpo, G-Web, Nevada, Presbyterian, Marshall, Rutgers, Albany and Charleston but UNC has some tough OOC fairly early vs Ohio State Nov 19; Calif or Syracuse Nov 20; Mich St Dec 1, UK Dec 5 and Texas Dec 19 and it will matter come ACC play starting with VA Tech, Clemson, GA Tech and Wake before UNC gets a breather vs. NC State.

[Welcome2DaSlopes]

i think we would all take john wall over jon Scheyer

[Bob Green]

i think we would all take john wall over jon Scheyer

I wouldn't. Jon Scheyer is an experienced senior who has been a consistent performer at the highest level of college basketball over the past three seasons. John Wall is an unknown freshman who has never played a single college basketball game.

[Bob Green]

The Heels' biggest ? is who is the 5th starter. If not Henson, then either Graves who would address the long ball need or Ginyard moves to SF and a freshman albeit a very good one in Strickland/McDonald is paired with an inexperienced Larry Drew.

I've never been impressed with Graves so I expect Dexter Strickland or Leslie McDonald will start. If Graves starts, Carolina's backcourt is in big trouble.

[whereinthehellami]

I think you have to look past a straight up who is better comparison of Scheyer versus Drew and look at what each has to do for their team to be successful. IMO Scheyer has to do alot more for Duke to be successful than Drew does for our cartoon colored brethren down the road. Scheyer is going to be one of the top three options on offense and will be logging alot of minutes on defense likley guarding quicker players (late in the season issues again). Drew only has to distribute the ball, not screw up, nail open threes, and play good defense. I'm thinking he will do okay managing that manageable plate.

[airowe]

i think we would all take john wall over jon Scheyer

Speak for yourself. I am very happy with our Senior PG, a proven commodity as opposed to an unknown like John Wall.

[airowe]

I think you have to look past a straight up who is better comparison of Scheyer versus Drew and look at what each has to do for their team to be successful. IMO Scheyer has to do alot more for Duke to be successful than Drew does for our cartoon colored brethren down the road. Scheyer is going to be one of the top three options on offense and will be logging alot of minutes on defense likley guarding quicker players (late in the season issues again). Drew only has to distribute the ball, not screw up, nail open threes, and play good defense. I'm thinking he will do okay managing that manageable plate.

I mainly agree with you, but I believe the OP was more concerning which would you rather have, proven experience or untapped potential. While we do have untapped potential in our backcourt (Dawkins) the majority of the minutes logged in our backcourt will be proven experience. I'll take our situation over PUNCs any day of the week, at least on the perimeter.

[Welcome2DaSlopes]

UGGG as much as i'm upset at John Wall for not going to Duke I can not say with a straight face that i would want Jon Scheyer over the likes of John Wall. For those who say he is not proven. O really JS isn't even a projected second round draft pick while Wall is almost assured to go top 3. I love JS and is happy he is on the team but if i had to choose... John Wall no question.

[DukieInBrasil]

I love the optimism of pre-season! I'm pretty sure I actually saw someone say something along the lines of "Zeller was playing really well prior to his injury". He was injured in game #2! He had a good game against Penn and that was it. Taylor King poured in 20 points his 1st game against NC Central. A few weeks later he had 27 against Eastern Kentucky. How did his freshman year turn out?

Larry Drew II showed very very little last year. In almost 10 MPG he averaged less than 2 points. Obviously he was generally the 5th offensive option on the floor but come on. How many guys go from scoring less than 2 PPG in their freshman years to meaningful contributions their next year? If I was UNC and I was relying on him to lead my team next year I would be scared. Be thankful you have Ginyard to step in when he can't get the job done next year. If I'm Roy and I'm offered Nolan Smith straight-up trade for Drew I'm pinching myself to check if I'm dreaming or not.

Zeller and Drew could both have great years next year but to the level of optimism shown for their performances next year is a bit staggering. Drew particularly would be lucky to have a sophomore year as good as Nolan's sophomore year (which was looked at as a disappointment by pretty much everyone).

Calling Nolan´s play last year a "disappointment" is a bit of re-writing of history, in fact Nolan played pretty well all the way up to his concussion, and was never the same afterwards. His play in the ACC was not quite as consistent as in the OOC, but still our expectations of how good he would play have to be tempered by the fact that he had (at least one) season-altering injury. I´m pumped on Nolan this year and i think he will have something akin to a "break out" year. Go Nolan!!! Go Duke!!!

[InSpades]

UGGG as much as i'm upset at John Wall for not going to Duke I can not say with a straight face that i would want Jon Scheyer over the likes of John Wall. For those who say he is not proven. O really JS isn't even a projected second round draft pick while Wall is almost assured to go top 3. I love JS and is happy he is on the team but if i had to choose... John Wall no question.

I'd rather lose next year with Jon Scheyer than win next year with John Wall. Not that it will necessarily come down to that but if it did I would definitely choose losing. Nothing against John Wall, but there's a connection you make with a guy like Scheyer who has given his all for your team for 3 years. I couldn't even imagine Duke next year without Scheyer. It would be like watching BizarroDuke. I'm also not convinced Wall would lead us to more victories next year than Scheyer would.

I could really care less who is projected to be a higher draft pick next year. I'm 99% sure they don't retroactively give a team wins based on where their players are drafted. If they do then Kentucky next year might set some sort of record.

[InSpades]

Calling Nolan´s play last year a "disappointment" is a bit of re-writing of history, in fact Nolan played pretty well all the way up to his concussion, and was never the same afterwards. His play in the ACC was not quite as consistent as in the OOC, but still our expectations of how good he would play have to be tempered by the fact that he had (at least one) season-altering injury. I´m pumped on Nolan this year and i think he will have something akin to a "break out" year. Go Nolan!!! Go Duke!!!

It's really not. Nolan's play had fallen off weeks before the concussion. He probably had a better 6 games post-concussion than he had pre-concussion. There were big expectations for him going into the year and he lived up to them for the 1st month or so. How can you say it wasn't a disappointment when he shot worse from the field and scored less per minute played than he did as a freshman? There's been some talk that he may have been injured before the concussion last year which definitely makes some sense. Regardless of the reason why I think Nolan's year last year was a disappointment. He's extremely talented though and there's no reason he can't have an amazing year this year.

[jimsumner]

Nolan's play began to drop off last year when he suffered a knee strain. He was pretty effective when he was healthy. IMO.

Had Duke signed John Wall, Scheyer would have started alongside him at the 2.

[Welcome2DaSlopes]

I'd rather lose next year with Jon Scheyer than win next year with John Wall. Not that it will necessarily come down to that but if it did I would definitely choose losing. Nothing against John Wall, but there's a connection you make with a guy like Scheyer who has given his all for your team for 3 years. I couldn't even imagine Duke next year without Scheyer. It would be like watching BizarroDuke. I'm also not convinced Wall would lead us to more victories next year than Scheyer would.

I could really care less who is projected to be a higher draft pick next year. I'm 99% sure they don't retroactively give a team wins based on where their players are drafted. If they do then Kentucky next year might set some sort of record.

Scheyer was quite inconsitant last year and especially in the clutch game against wake forest when he missed those three's.( I still somtimes cry at night about that.) John Wall is the type of point guard that can make everyone more importantly our bigs better. I don't want to turn this into a we still need John Wall discussion because we don't. I just think he is a better player that JS and would rather have him on our team.

Why would you rather LOSE. I am Duke Fan first then i associate myself with the players. So if our team was full of scrubs i would still love DUKE and would never want to see them lose. I also like JS and when it come to person character i would choose JS but when it comes to b-ball skill and on-court play. JOHN WALL.

[jv001]

I wouldn't. Jon Scheyer is an experienced senior who has been a consistent performer at the highest level of college basketball over the past three seasons. John Wall is an unknown freshman who has never played a single college basketball game.

John Wall has never led his team to a championship if I'm not mistaken. Don't tell me that he did not have some good players on his team. A good point guard is supposed to lead his team to some lofty heights. Even if it's not a championship. Maybe someone can tell me what the record was for his h/s team last year. Go Duke!

[jesus_hurley]

John Wall has never led his team to a championship if I'm not mistaken. Don't tell me that he did not have some good players on his team. A good point guard is supposed to lead his team to some lofty heights. Even if it's not a championship. Maybe someone can tell me what the record was for his h/s team last year. Go Duke!

17-11

http://www.maxpreps.com/high-schools/F-0Dg3lcJEOweqGWf6VBgQ/word-of-god-christian-academy-rams/basketball-winter-08-09/schedule.htm

[Jeffrey]

Nolan's play began to drop off last year when he suffered a knee strain. He was pretty effective when he was healthy. IMO.

Had Duke signed John Wall, Scheyer would have started alongside him at the 2.

Which intro's one of K's leadership techniques I do not understand. I stick with my employees when they're having issues (as long as they have/display a good attitude, are giving 100%, and doing as instructed) and it usually pays off for me. Recently, K has shown he will bench a three year starting PG (who had/displayed a good attitude, gave 100%, and did as instructed) and try to bring in a starting freshman PG instead of showing 100% confidence in his current guards.

I think these things may negatively affect Nolan's confidence. Few like being second (or third) choice.

[InSpades]

Which intro's one of K's leadership techniques I do not understand. I stick with my employees when they're having issues (as long as they have/display a good attitude, are giving 100%, and doing as instructed) and it usually pays off for me. Recently, K has shown he will bench a three year starting PG (who had/displayed a good attitude, gave 100%, and did as instructed) and try to bring in a starting freshman PG instead of showing 100% confidence in his current guards.

I think these things may negatively affect Nolan's confidence. Few like being second (or third) choice.

So you think watching Nolan outplay Greg every day in practice and then starting Greg out of loyalty would have a positive impact on the team? This is why K doesn't make guarantees to players about playing time. He owes it to every single one of them (and the university) to do what's best for the team. If that means benching a 3-year starter then that's what it means.

I can't really picture Nolan going out on the court and thinking "gee, if John Wall was here I wouldn't even be starting right now".

[Jeffrey]

So you think watching Nolan outplay Greg every day in practice and then starting Greg out of loyalty would have a positive impact on the team?

In theory, yes. In reality, K's approach to the PG position, last season, speaks for itself. IMO, all of our PG's were inconsistent and appeared to sometimes display lack of confidence.


This is why K doesn't make guarantees to players about playing time.

Has K told some recruits that if they come they will start as freshman? If so, then that is, IMO, "guarantees to players about playing time".


I can't really picture Nolan going out on the court and thinking "gee, if John Wall was here I wouldn't even be starting right now".

I can picture Nolan having already had that thought.

[jv001]

Which intro's one of K's leadership techniques I do not understand. I stick with my employees when they're having issues (as long as they have/display a good attitude, are giving 100%, and doing as instructed) and it usually pays off for me. Recently, K has shown he will bench a three year starting PG (who had/displayed a good attitude, gave 100%, and did as instructed) and try to bring in a starting freshman PG instead of showing 100% confidence in his current guards.

I think these things may negatively affect Nolan's confidence. Few like being second (or third) choice.

Have you ever made a bad hire and the employee did everything they could to do an outstanding job, but just was not cut out for that position. I'm not saying Greg was a bad recruit, but I think he did not turn out to be the recruit we all thought he would be. And in his defense, he was injured at the beginning of the year. Coach K has always played the guys that produced in practice time and I don't see him changing anytime soon. Go Nolan and Go Duke!

[InSpades]

In theory, yes. In reality, K's approach to the PG position, last season, speaks for itself. IMO, all of our PG's were inconsistent and appeared to sometimes display lack of confidence.

Has K told some recruits that if they come they will start as freshman? If so, then that is, IMO, "guarantees to players about playing time".

I can picture Nolan having already had that thought.

So you are honestly saying that K should have started Paulus and not recruited John Wall? Because I'm sure John Wall asked "will I get a chance to start my freshman year?" and you'd have K say "sorry John, but Nolan is a junior and he will start and get most of the minutes". You might as well not even recruit the kid if you are going to tell him that.

So when you are hiring someone do you look for employees that are good but not better than what you have already? Do you give people raises and promotions based on experience instead of performance?

I think I like the way K run things :).

[Jeffrey]

Have you ever made a bad hire and the employee did everything they could to do an outstanding job, but just was not cut out for that position.

Honestly, that's very rare for me and if it were more frequent, then, IMO, I should probably be fired because I repeatedly failed at the same task and may not have been learning from my mistakes.


I'm not saying Greg was a bad recruit, but I think he did not turn out to be the recruit we all thought he would be.

That should not happen often if one is a great predictor of talent (a critical task for most leaders).

[Jeffrey]

So you are honestly saying that K should have started Paulus and not recruited John Wall? Because I'm sure John Wall asked "will I get a chance to start my freshman year?" and you'd have K say "sorry John, but Nolan is a junior and he will start and get most of the minutes". You might as well not even recruit the kid if you are going to tell him that.

Yes, I would have started Paulus and not recruited Wall. IMO, John Wall is one & done and not worth chasing. Nolan has the potential to be a very good guard and I would have spent my time & energy on him.


So when you are hiring someone do you look for employees that are good but not better than what you have already? Do you give people raises and promotions based on experience instead of performance?

I prefer to promote from within, whenever possible. I always hire the best available, but show loyality to those who have made our company what it is today. Raises and promotions must be earned, but demotions are very, very rare! I would consider myself a managerial failure if I had to frequently demote.

[Greg_Newton]

John Wall has never led his team to a championship if I'm not mistaken. Don't tell me that he did not have some good players on his team. A good point guard is supposed to lead his team to some lofty heights. Even if it's not a championship. Maybe someone can tell me what the record was for his h/s team last year. Go Duke!

To be fair to Mr. Wall, WOG lost in the championship game on a controversial buzzer beater, and that 17-11 record was against a very tough local and national schedule. But then again, he was playing alongside CJ Leslie, so it's not like he was going at it alone.

[-jk]

I think y'all's analogy has too many flaws to bicker over.

How often does a manager "hire" teenagers, knowing they are "temps", and place them in a starring role on one of the brighter stages in the country, such that the greater the success the sooner they're gone?

It seems a remarkably unique scenario not replicated in most of corporate America.

-jk

[ACCBBallFan]

Yes, I would have started Paulus and not recruited Wall. IMO, John Wall is one & done and not worth chasing. Nolan has the potential to be a very good guard and I would have spent my time & energy on him. Paulus completed his basketball eligibility before Wall came to college this year. So no decision needed.

Seniority only goes so far. You recruit not only to replace graduating seniors but to get incremental improvements at every position.

Plus the day to day competition makes both players better, perhaps more so than the game schedule, and both are ready if other is unable to perform due to fouls or injuries.

[speedevil2001]

17-11

http://www.maxpreps.com/high-schools/F-0Dg3lcJEOweqGWf6VBgQ/word-of-god-christian-academy-rams/basketball-winter-08-09/schedule.htm

wall's team lost to plumlee's team last year and split againt kelly's.

but i still rather have him as our point guard over scheyer and smith.

[shoutingncu]

How much better statistically is Jon Scheyer at running the point than Greg Paulus?

Obviously, there are intangibles, although GP certainly had plenty of those in his favor, too, but if Nolan Smith does not improve enough to be the lead guard, how much will Duke's backcourt trio improve upon any combination from last season or the foursome from 2008?

[Jeffrey]

Paulus completed his basketball eligibility before Wall came to college this year. So no decision needed.

What do you mean? :confused:

The poster asked two questions and I answered both.

[Jeffrey]

I think y'all's analogy has too many flaws to bicker over.

How often does a manager "hire" teenagers, knowing they are "temps", and place them in a starring role on one of the brighter stages in the country, such that the greater the success the sooner they're gone?

It seems a remarkably unique scenario not replicated in most of corporate America.

-jk

Are you saying that many of K's leadership techniques are not transferable to "most of corporate America"?

IMO, a manager frequently hires rookies (sometimes recent graduates), "knowing they are "temps"" (how frequently do people job hop these days compared to the past?), and "places them in a starring role on one of the brighter stages in" their company, "such that the greater the success the sooner they're gone" (heavily recruited by other companies who are frequently competitors).

[Wheat/"/"/"]

Would you rather have a senior shooting guard turned point, who makes heady plays (few turnovers), but doesn't exactly dazzle with breaking down defenses, or an inexperienced point guard not asked to do much his freshman year, and admittedly, who didn't show very much as a result?


I am a big fan of Scheyer. The kid can play and I think he gets the most out of his physical talent, which very few players do.

Who would I want to run point at UNC in this hypothetical?
I would take the quality/experienced play of Scheyer over Drew if we could see past uniform colors for a minute, based on the play I've seen so far from both.

With that said, I do like what I saw from Drew last season. Everyone seems to want to compare him to QT, but I see him as more of a Jimmy Black. Many TO's I recall him making as a freshman were mostly from passes I thought he tried to force. No so much from ballhandling. People didn't pick his pocket like they did with QT. QT never did get comfortable as the primary ball handler. He got by, and played well at times, but when he faced stout defensive pressure he stiffened up his entire career.

Drew seemed to struggle with the mental speed of the game until late in the year, then I thought he actually looked good. He seemed much more confident with the ball as the season went along. He has deceptive quickness and he showed he can break people down off the dribble. He also finished a few nice plays at the rim, and went to the rack with confidence, which I liked.

He showed he has a PG's court vision, but had to learn the hard way not to try and make every pass he saw.

I thought he was a long/solid defender as a freshman too.

The jury is still out on his outside shooting, no doubt.

He played behind arguably the best PG in the country last year, and senior Frasor, so it's no surprise he didn't see much time on the floor, so the stats showing his minutes are not that important to me.
Keep in mind he did see some solid minutes in some big games. And don't forget he practiced everyday with some great players and against a great PG.

I would not be surprised if we are here midseason next year talking about how well he was playing.

[-jk]

Are you saying that many of K's leadership techniques are not transferable to "most of corporate America"?

IMO, a manager frequently hires rookies (sometimes recent graduates), "knowing they are "temps"" (how frequently do people job hop these days compared to the past?), and "places them in a starring role on one of the brighter stages in" their company, "such that the greater the success the sooner they're gone" (heavily recruited by other companies who are frequently competitors).

I'll toss it back to you: in your managerial hiring capacity, how many teens have you hired, put on national TV 10, 20, 30 times a year, who routinely get criticized in national news and attacked by thousands of competitors, all before their 20th birthday?

Much of K's leadership skills do translate, but there are some fundamental differences between top tier NCAA basketball players and "rookies" in a corporation.

Otherwise, I think we'll have to agree to disagree.

-jkr

[speedevil2001]

How much better statistically is Jon Scheyer at running the point than Greg Paulus?

Obviously, there are intangibles, although GP certainly had plenty of those in his favor, too, but if Nolan Smith does not improve enough to be the lead guard, how much will Duke's backcourt trio improve upon any combination from last season or the foursome from 2008?

scheyer will serve duke better at the sg position..too bad we dont have a better suited player to play point this season. i really hope smith step up his pg skills.

[Scorp4me]

i think we would all take john wall over jon Scheyer

Wall over Scheyer? Not a chance! Heck I'd even venture to say that we'll win more games over the next several years with Scheyer than we would with Wall. Both will be gone after one, but I think the positive impact of a Senior like Scheyer over a one and done like Wall is too much to overlook.

[jv001]

Wall over Scheyer? Not a chance! Heck I'd even venture to say that we'll win more games over the next several years with Scheyer than we would with Wall. Both will be gone after one, but I think the positive impact of a Senior like Scheyer over a one and done like Wall is too much to overlook.

I must agree with Scorp4me. This year we will see just how good Wall is at making players around him better. Which usually turns into wins. At the h/s level I don't think he did this. Kentucky will have lot's of talent this year and if Wall is good as alot of people think, they should be top5-10 in the country. We'll just have to wait and see. I'll take senior Jon Scheyer over freshman John Wall. Go Duke!

[Jeffrey]

I'll toss it back to you: in your managerial hiring capacity, how many teens have you hired, put on national TV 10, 20, 30 times a year, who routinely get criticized in national news and attacked by thousands of competitors, all before their 20th birthday?

Much of K's leadership skills do translate, but there are some fundamental differences between top tier NCAA basketball players and "rookies" in a corporation.

-jkr

I could not agree more! There's absolutley no doubt that the pressure on these young men is far greater than most teens experience and that's my point. It's critical that their leaders do everything possible to build, and then maintain, the confidence level of these young men. IMO, benching three year starters and trying to recruit starting (one & done) freshman are not the best confidence building techniques.

[jimsumner]

"IMO, benching three year starters and trying to recruit starting (one & done) freshman are not the best confidence building techniques."

Relatively few three-year starters have lost their jobs under K. In fact, Paulus is the only one I can think of and he did not lose his spot to a one-and-done freshman. John Wall would not have sent Scheyer to the bench but to another position. There's a difference.

I understand your point (no pun intended). But K has made it clear from his very first day in Durham that Duke basketball is a meritocracy and no one is grandfathered into a starting role.

A brief list of Duke starters who were moved to the bench because someone else was playing better would include Mike Tissaw, Doug McNeely (K's first Duke recruit), Chip Engelland, Marty Nessley, John Smith, Crawford Palmer, Jeff Capel, Greg Newton, Ricky Price, Taymon Domzalski, Mike Chappell, Roshown McLeod, Chris Burgess, Shavlik Randolph, and others.

K even benched Elton Brand for indifferent play one game in a season in which Brand became national Player of the Year.

So, the counter question involves rewarding a player who is not playing to his capacity by allowing him to keep a starting spot he doesn't deserve over a more-deserving player. Is that the best confidence-building technique for a team?

Remember Greg Koubek? His senior year he contemplated leaving the program in mid-season because he wasn't playing. He met with K. He and K went over the roster and K asked him "are you playing better than A? Are you playing better than B?" And so forth. Koubek responded honestly that he wasn't. K told him bluntly that if he practiced better, he would play more in games. If he didn't, he wouldn't.

We know how this turned out. Koubek re-dedicated himself to his craft and his team and ended his career starting for an NCAA title team. BTW, one of the people who had bumped Koubek from the rotation was a freshman by the name of Grant Hill. Did K owe his senior Koubek a starting spot or did he owe it to his team to start his best players?

[InSpades]

Good points by Jim. I think it's also important to note that having a policy that "rewards loyalty" would discourage top players from coming to your school. If I'm say... Harrison Barnes and I know that starting positions and minutes will be given based on seniority at Duke and talent at Kansas... which school do you think I'm choosing? I have all the talent in the world, seniority will only hold me back when I don't have it and won't benefit me at all when I do have it (because either I will be in the NBA by then or I'll be more talented anyway). Why would you want K to implement a system that discourages top players from coming to Duke? Should Shane Battier have had to wait until his sophomore year to get a starting role?

[Jeffrey]

Relatively few three-year starters have lost their jobs under K. In fact, Paulus is the only one I can think of and he did not lose his spot to a one-and-done freshman. John Wall would not have sent Scheyer to the bench but to another position. There's a difference.

John Wall would have sent Nolan to the bench which is what I'm trying to say. IMO, Nolan has great potential and I prefer sticking with him versus going after a one & done freshman (John Wall). Nolan looked great last summer and some say he does this summer (I'd love to hear your view on that, please). IMO, Nolan's confidence is one of the biggest keys to us having a very successful year.


I understand your point (no pun intended). But K has made it clear from his very first day in Durham that Duke basketball is a meritocracy and no one is grandfathered into a starting role.

Clearly, you've fogotten more about Duke hoops than I'll ever know. So, please tell me the truth about statements I've heard over the years. For example, I repeatedly heard that K told Bobby that if he came to Duke he would start as a freshman. Was that not true?


So, the counter question involves rewarding a player who is not playing to his capacity by allowing him to keep a starting spot he doesn't deserve over a more-deserving player. Is that the best confidence-building technique for a team?

As usual, you've made a very good point and I understand your perspective.

In regards to Greg, I think it would have been confidence building to start Greg and then bring in the "more-deserving player" (if it was not Greg) at the first TV timeout and, of course, end the game with the "more-deserving player". The "more-deserving player" (which may have been Greg) would, of course, get the most PT and be the finisher.

Said differently, I would not arm the media with a three year starter getting benched.

[Rudy]

How much better statistically is Jon Scheyer at running the point than Greg Paulus?

Obviously, there are intangibles, although GP certainly had plenty of those in his favor, too, but if Nolan Smith does not improve enough to be the lead guard, how much will Duke's backcourt trio improve upon any combination from last season or the foursome from 2008?

Regarding your first question, do you mean the GP of his freshman year when he still had his foot speed or his senior year when it was painfully obviously he no longer had that speed?

The Paulus debate is destined to continue for awhile, I guess.

[gumbomoop]

I am a big fan of Scheyer. The kid can play and I think he gets the most out of his physical talent, which very few players do.

Who would I want to run point at UNC in this hypothetical?
I would take the quality/experienced play of Scheyer over Drew if we could see past uniform colors for a minute, based on the play I've seen so far from both.

With that said, I do like what I saw from Drew last season. Everyone seems to want to compare him to QT, but I see him as more of a Jimmy Black. Many TO's I recall him making as a freshman were mostly from passes I thought he tried to force. No so much from ballhandling. People didn't pick his pocket like they did with QT. QT never did get comfortable as the primary ball handler. He got by, and played well at times, but when he faced stout defensive pressure he stiffened up his entire career.

Drew seemed to struggle with the mental speed of the game until late in the year, then I thought he actually looked good. He seemed much more confident with the ball as the season went along. He has deceptive quickness and he showed he can break people down off the dribble. He also finished a few nice plays at the rim, and went to the rack with confidence, which I liked.

He showed he has a PG's court vision, but had to learn the hard way not to try and make every pass he saw.

I thought he was a long/solid defender as a freshman too.

The jury is still out on his outside shooting, no doubt.

He played behind arguably the best PG in the country last year, and senior Frasor, so it's no surprise he didn't see much time on the floor, so the stats showing his minutes are not that important to me.
Keep in mind he did see some solid minutes in some big games. And don't forget he practiced everyday with some great players and against a great PG.

I would not be surprised if we are here midseason next year talking about how well he was playing.

The comparison of LDII to JB rather than QT is sort of persuasive to me, as is the analysis of LDII's promise and ?-marks, and QT's flaws. I pay attention to Wheat, for s/he knows some stuff.

Including complimenting JS, unless the ref to JS's physical talent was a sly dig, in which case, straighten up, Wheat, I'm on to you. For example, is the complimentary comparison of JS to LDII itself a sly dig at NS? Would you, Wheat, also take NS over LDII, at least to begin the season?

As to LDII himself, I think he's good, not excellent, but could well become very steady and effective, enough that, yes, possibly, we'd judge him as having a semi-breakout year. Still, and to court scorn for repeating a point I made earlier in this thread, if UNC's chances at a deep tourney run depend on LDII being really, really impressive, then no, those odds are here in preseason still a bit long [acknowledging that many Duke posters would insist such odds are very, very long].

[jimsumner]

As a general rule K doesn't promise starting spots to recruits. He will discuss his expectations. Sometimes a fine line.

Hurley was an unusual case. Quin Snyder was the starting PG in 1989 and he was a senior. Joe Cook was the only other PG in the program and he was a work-in-progress. So, the door was wide-open for a freshman to start at point. In fact, it was a necessity.

Duke, UNC, and GT were recruiting both Kenny Andersen and Hurley, the two top PGs in the class of '89. Hurley, Sr. approached Dean Smith and Mike Krzyzewski and asked them a simple question. "If my son wants to commit to your school, will you stop recruiting Kenny Anderson?" I'm not sure of the sequence.

In any event, Smith declined, Krzyzewski accepted.

Did K "promise" Hurley he would start? I suspect he made sure Hurley knew that he wasn't recruiting any other PG in the class and that he expected Hurley to be the starting PG for four years. Whether that constitutes a promise is a nuance I'll not pretend to dissect.

FWIW, Nolan Smith wasn't starting at the end of last season. Had either he or pre-transfer Williams played well enough, it's not hard to project a Wall-Smith-Scheyer lineup or a Wall-Scheyer-Williams lineup, with Singler remaining at the 4.

Let me relate another senior story. K didn't recruit Chip Engelland, he inherited him from Foster. But Engelland was a key component of K's early Duke teams. In 1982, a junior Engelland averaged 15.2 ppg, second on the team to senior Vince Taylor.

So, it was logical to assume that the senior Engelland would be the main man at Duke in 1983. This was the year that the Dawkins-Alarie-Henderson-Bilas class made its debut.

It didn't turn out that way. K wasn't impressed with Engelland's disinclination to play defense and sat him down. By sat him down, I mean four consecutive DNP-CDs. That's scoring shorthand for Did Not Play, Coach's Decision. That means you're healthy and eligible and your coach doesn't think your presence on the court for even one second will help the team.

It doesn't get much lower than that.

K was throwing the freshmen in the deep end of the pool and didn't especially need a disgruntled senior. But he didn't give up on Engelland and Engelland didn't give up on K. They worked together and got on the same page. Engelland averaged 12.2 ppg and ended his Cameron career with a career high against Michael Jordan and UNC.

Other seniors have been given the same opportunity given Engelland and Koubek and have not taken advantage of it. But I don't agree with the suggestion that K somehow has a tendency to give up on his loyal seniors.

My two cents.

[Jeffrey]

My two cents.

As always, much more than that.... Thanks!

[Wheat/"/"/"]

Including complimenting JS, unless the ref to JS's physical talent was a sly dig, in which case, straighten up, Wheat, I'm on to you. For example, is the complimentary comparison of JS to LDII itself a sly dig at NS? Would you, Wheat, also take NS over LDII, at least to begin the season?


No sly dig at Scheyer. I like players like him. Ans I wasn't even thinking about Nolan.
Everybody knows JS is not the most athletic guy on the floor, that's all I meant by "physical talents". Doesn't mean he can't be a fine player (Re: Larry Bird, not considered athletic).

There was a time last year, about mid season I think, where I openly considered here on the board that a player like Scheyer would be a better fit at 2g than Ellington was showing for the Heels. Does that tell you what I think of Scheyer? Ellington eventually proved me wrong by stepping up his play the latter part of the season while Scheyer sort of leveled out.

Sometimes when things equalize, raw physical talent can make a difference, especially late in a long, tough season.

I am having a hard time grasping an opinion on Nolan Smith. He obviously has some very good athleticism, but he's been so inconsistant that I'm just not sure if it's the injuries you guys are talking about or if it's just the quality of his opponents that has seen him playing....average...to this point.

He could be one of those players that starts to come into his game as a Jr., sort of like Shammond Williams did at UNC. So I would certainly not write him off as a player that could make major contributions to the team.

LD II or Nolan?
Tough call there. Still haven't seen enough of Drew to say he could out play Nolan consistantly, but then again, I have seen enough of Nolan to think that Drew could be a tough matchup for him.

As a tie breaker, I'll have to go with the kid who's the best decision maker, and that would be Drew...after all he chose Carolina ;)

(PS: Now THAT was a not so sly dig. :)

[Scorp4me]

To add to Jim's list Nate James was benched his Senior year in favor of Chris Duhon. We see how that turned out and Nate doesn't seem too scarred by it, I think he's even coaching somewhere now =)

You do bring up a few good points with regards to Greg. People like to point out that while he lead the ACC in assist his freshman year, he had JJ and Williams playing alongside him. They do not, however, cut him any slack for lacking an inside presence later in his career. I always thought benching Greb in favor of Nolan killed his confidence and was a big part of his less than stellar Senior season. While I agree that the best players should play, as a coach you have to look at the overall team. Maybe you do start him, but play Nolan more. K is fond of saying you have to know which buttons to push and I think last year he may have missed a few. But in his defence he didn't have alot of choices. And as you said, it certainly gave the media something to chew on, I believe we heard about him being benched as much his senior year as we heard about him playing football his freshman year, or Scheyer's 26 point in 21 seconds or whatever it was, or Nelson doing the Seals training...or was that Duhon? I forget lol.

[gumbomoop]

No sly dig at Scheyer. I like players like him. Ans I wasn't even thinking about Nolan.
Everybody knows JS is not the most athletic guy on the floor, that's all I meant by "physical talents". Doesn't mean he can't be a fine player (Re: Larry Bird, not considered athletic).

There was a time last year, about mid season I think, where I openly considered here on the board that a player like Scheyer would be a better fit at 2g than Ellington was showing for the Heels. Does that tell you what I think of Scheyer? Ellington eventually proved me wrong by stepping up his play the latter part of the season while Scheyer sort of leveled out.

Sometimes when things equalize, raw physical talent can make a difference, especially late in a long, tough season.

I am having a hard time grasping an opinion on Nolan Smith. He obviously has some very good athleticism, but he's been so inconsistant that I'm just not sure if it's the injuries you guys are talking about or if it's just the quality of his opponents that has seen him playing....average...to this point.

He could be one of those players that starts to come into his game as a Jr., sort of like Shammond Williams did at UNC. So I would certainly not write him off as a player that could make major contributions to the team.

LD II or Nolan?
Tough call there. Still haven't seen enough of Drew to say he could out play Nolan consistantly, but then again, I have seen enough of Nolan to think that Drew could be a tough matchup for him.

As a tie breaker, I'll have to go with the kid who's the best decision maker, and that would be Drew...after all he chose Carolina ;)

(PS: Now THAT was a not so sly dig. :)

I'm with you on most of this, with following exceptions:

1. If we connect your assessment of NS so far as "average" against high-quality opponents with your conclusion that LDII could prove a tough matchup for NS, we are led, I think, to an implied assessment on your part that LDII has already shown signs of being a high-quality PG. Nope, not yet, and not even close.
2. Unlike most Duke posters, I think LDII will be solid from beginning this year, and potentially very good in future [though the arrival of KM next year complicates things for LDII's future]. But unlike you - if I've connected your dots - I'd say there's no reason whatsoever to predict that LDII would be a tough matchup. That really seems illogical, and gives LDII lots of credit for potential, and none to NS's proven athleticism and defensive skills.
3. But I'm serious when I credit you for knowing stuff. So either I've misconnected your dots, or your dots are glitched-up.
4. If Duke didn't recruit LDII, it's understandable he'd swallow his disappointment and accept an offer from Roy.

[Wheat/"/"/"]

I've connected your dots - I'd say there's no reason whatsoever to predict that LDII would be a tough matchup. That really seems illogical, and gives LDII lots of credit for potential, and none to NS's proven athleticism and defensive skills.


Are you saying LD II won't be a tough matchup for Nolan and Nolan will clearly out play him?

I do give LD II lots of credit for potential here, he didn't get on the floor enough last year to show the true strengths of his game. That shouldn't be viewed as a slight of his game, but rather a nod at the quality of the players above him.

That will not be the case this year. He will play, a lot.
He can handle the ball, he keeps his head up and sees the floor. He can take good defenders off the dribble and get in the lane, where he will have lots of options. We saw him finish at the rim a few times, but along with his outside shooting, questions remain how sucessful he will be there.

Defensively, he played relatively smart and conservative as a freshman, few mistakes that I saw, which was above average for freshmen. He moves his feet,has a nice reach, and a little sneakyness to his defense too, which I liked.

He also knows his role, it's very clear he needs to lead on the court. And he seems to have embraced that role from what I read, which tells me the has some confidence. Confidence goes a long way on the floor.

A Drew/Smith matchup will be competitive an interesting thing for us to watch this season.

[ACCBBallFan]

The backwards logic seems to be Drew played behind Lawson who was better than Paulus who Smith played behind. Therefore Drew is better than Smith.

Their production and HS rankings do not support that

Drew II Smith
Games 38 34
MPG 9.6 21.6
Pts 1.4 8.4
Reb 1.1 2.2
Ast 1.9 1.7
T.O 1.2 1.6
Stl 0.4 0.9
PF 0.9 2.1
RSCI 42 19
Yr: Soph Jr.

They may guard one another, but Scheyer runs the Duke offense while Smith is more of a SG (not that Scheyer isn't as well). Nolan smith is expected to be the penetrator, now that Henderson and Elliott Williams have moved on.

If you more than triple Drew II metrics @3.1 and multiply Smith's by 1.4, to get both close to 30 MPG, Drew's stats are not superior:

more assists (5.9 vs. 2.4),
more turnovers (3.7 vs. 2.2) and
far less points (4.3 vs 11.8).

Both will benefit this year by not having as much ACC competition at the guard slots without Lawson/Ellington; Rice; McClinton; Teague; Douglas; Clinch; Rivers/Ogelsby; Vassallo; and Fells.

[eightyearoldsdude]

The backwards logic seems to be Drew played behind Lawson who was better than Paulus who Smith played behind. Therefore Drew is better than Smith.

Their production and HS rankings do not support that

Drew II Smith
Games 38 34
MPG 9.6 21.6
Pts 1.4 8.4
Reb 1.1 2.2
Ast 1.9 1.7
T.O 1.2 1.6
Stl 0.4 0.9
PF 0.9 2.1
RSCI 42 19
Yr: Soph Jr.

They may guard one another, but Scheyer runs the Duke offense while Smith is more of a SG (not that Scheyer isn't as well). Nolan smith is expected to be the penetrator, now that Henderson and Elliott Williams have moved on.

If you more than triple Drew II metrics @3.1 and multiply Smith's by 1.4, to get both close to 30 MPG, Drew's stats are not superior:

more assists (5.9 vs. 2.4),
more turnovers (3.7 vs. 2.2) and
far less points (4.3 vs 11.8).

Both will benefit this year by not having as much ACC competition at the guard slots without Lawson/Ellington; Rice; McClinton; Teague; Douglas; Clinch; Rivers/Ogelsby; Vassallo; and Fells.

I don't think it makes a lot of sense to try to extrapolate from statistics based on a freshman's spot minutes. Smith is a known commodity. Drew is not, for the most part. If he only plays as well as he did his freshman year, we're in some trouble. He'll blow some possessions this season, but I think he'll improve to the point where he compares favorably to QT as a senior, since he (by all accounts) has improved his jumper dramatically and is already a good defender and ball handler. We'll see.

Scheyer is a capable point guard, but he's a much better scorer, and if I was a Duke fan I'd worry that PG duties will hurt his scoring. Smith's low assist numbers are little puzzling and IMO, he's got to prove he can start at PG if y'all are going to threaten for the ACC title.

[sagegrouse]

Smith's low assist numbers are little puzzling and IMO, he's got to prove he can start at PG if y'all are going to threaten for the ACC title.

With Scheyer at PG and Smith at SG I thought we won the ACC last year.:):):)


sagegrouse

[jesus_hurley]

With Scheyer at PG and Smith at SG I thought we won the ACC last year.:):):)

Not only that, but if I'm not mistaken, Scheyer's numbers went UP after his move to PG last year

[shoutingncu]

With Scheyer at PG and Smith at SG I thought we won the ACC last year.:):):)


sagegrouse

But can Duke improve upon that this year?

If Scheyer is forced to be lead guard, have we seen the ceiling for this Duke team?

[NSDukeFan]

But can Duke improve upon that this year?

If Scheyer is forced to be lead guard, have we seen the ceiling for this Duke team?

I haven't actually seen anything from this team yet? I didn't miss the season by some chance did I?;)

I don't think whether Scheyer plays lead guard or not will determine a ceiling on this year's team IF we can get dribble penetration, and interior scoring. I don't think it matters that much whether this comes from a lead guard or our other players. I am not saying that this team will be a final four favorite, but I see no reason if things fall in place (few significant injuries, especially in the backcourt) that this team (whether Nolan or Jon is considered point guard) would not have a great chance to make a long tournament run. Unfortunately, I would have to say the same for another school 8 miles down the road.

[eightyearoldsdude]

Not only that, but if I'm not mistaken, Scheyer's numbers went UP after his move to PG last year

I'm guessing his minutes also went up. Anyone feel like checking on Scheyer's points per 30 minutes before and after? Like I said, I think he's a capable PG, but I just don't think it's his best and highest use.

But if there ever was a year to have an inexperienced or thin backcourt in the ACC, this is it. And I'm thankful for that.

[Bob Green]

I'm guessing his minutes also went up.

Jon Scheyer averaged 31.04 mpg and 13.08 ppg during the first 25 games of last season. Over the last 12 games, he averaged 36.41 mpg and 18.58 ppg.

[gumbomoop]

Are you saying LD II won't be a tough matchup for Nolan and Nolan will clearly out play him?

A Drew/Smith matchup will be competitive an interesting thing for us to watch this season.

We're getting closer to understanding each other.

It depends on what "tough matchup" means. I inferred it meant you predict LDII will cause NS serious problems. I don't agree. But, because I think LDII is more promising than do some other posters, I wouldn't yet predict NS "will clearly outplay him."

A "competitive matchup" and "interesting to watch"? Yes, agree. Otherwise, we still disagree "on the merits," as they say, for in truth you think LDII is superior to NS as a PG; whereas I think that (a) NS, not JS, will be our primary PG this year, (b) NS will obviously defend the opposing PG for roughly 30 mpg, (c) therefore NS will defend against LDII, and (d) NS will outplay LDII [not totally, not embarrassingly for LDII].

Competitive and interesting. And we disagree on who's the better player. Fair enough.

[jimsumner]

"Jon Scheyer averaged 31.04 mpg and 13.08 ppg during the first 25 games of last season. Over the last 12 games, he averaged 36.41 mpg and 18.58 ppg. "

Keep in mind that the increase in PT coincides with Nolan Smith's unfortunate meeting with David Neal's shoulder.

[ACCBBallFan]

"Jon Scheyer averaged 31.04 mpg and 13.08 ppg during the first 25 games of last season. Over the last 12 games, he averaged 36.41 mpg and 18.58 ppg. "

Keep in mind that the increase in PT coincides with Nolan Smith's unfortunate meeting with David Neal's shoulder.Yes, and the increase in scoring may be attriibuted to the opponents having to put their best two defenders on Henderson and Elliott Williams.

At least until Jay Wright bucked the trend and dared Elliott to beat him from outside.

Same will probably happen this year with most teams having to stop Singler first and putting their fastest guy on Nolan, leaving whoever is left guarding Jon.

It will be interesting to see whether Roy puts Ginyard on Kyle or Jon. Some think Henson will match up with Singler, but I am not sure he is a SF in half court on either end of the floor. and that UNC will not need Graves' long ball, or gi with Ginyard at 3 and Strickand/McDonald at SG.

[eightyearoldsdude]

Yes, and the increase in scoring may be attriibuted to the opponents having to put their best two defenders on Henderson and Elliott Williams.

At least until Jay Wright bucked the trend and dared Elliott to beat him from outside.

Same will probably happen this year with most teams having to stop Singler first and putting their fastest guy on Nolan, leaving whoever is left guarding Jon.

It will be interesting to see whether Roy puts Ginyard on Kyle or Jon. Some think Henson will match up with Singler, but I am not sure he is a SF in half court on either end of the floor. and that UNC will not need Graves' long ball, or gi with Ginyard at 3 and Strickand/McDonald at SG.

I'm not sure Henson is going to start, but I think we'll see him guard Singler for a lot of the game, leaving Ginyard to guard Scheyer and Drew to guard Smith. Singler will get his points, but I think Henson matches up well with him.

[Jumbo]

Wow, this is a rather silly conversation, isn't it? Still, I want to highlight a couple of things.


In regards to Greg, I think it would have been confidence building to start Greg and then bring in the "more-deserving player" (if it was not Greg) at the first TV timeout and, of course, end the game with the "more-deserving player". The "more-deserving player" (which may have been Greg) would, of course, get the most PT and be the finisher.

Said differently, I would not arm the media with a three year starter getting benched.

Sorry, but that would have been a lousy idea. Last year, K couldn't hide the fact that Duke had three (and eventually four) guards on the roster who were significantly better than Greg Paulus. If he'd started Paulus after the way Smith dominated him in practice, etc., it would have sent a lousy message to the rest of the team -- and a "token" starting move would have been an even worse message. Greg's play dictated his role, and if K wanted to get optimal play out of the rest of the team, that role needed to be diminished. K has more feelings to worry about than just those of a particular senior -- most of all, he has to be concerned about earning the trust of the other really good players. I don't think they would have respected him had he not put his best lineup on the floor.


No sly dig at Scheyer. I like players like him. Ans I wasn't even thinking about Nolan.
Everybody knows JS is not the most athletic guy on the floor, that's all I meant by "physical talents". Doesn't mean he can't be a fine player (Re: Larry Bird, not considered athletic).

There was a time last year, about mid season I think, where I openly considered here on the board that a player like Scheyer would be a better fit at 2g than Ellington was showing for the Heels. Does that tell you what I think of Scheyer? Ellington eventually proved me wrong by stepping up his play the latter part of the season while Scheyer sort of leveled out.

Sometimes when things equalize, raw physical talent can make a difference, especially late in a long, tough season.

Just have to make my yearly comment about how laughable it is when people a) say Scheyer "isn't athletic" and b) only compare him to other white players. Scheyer isn't a great leaper, and he's certainly not a superb run-jump player. But he is more than quick enough for his position, fast, has great body control and has incredibly endurance. Were he not a good athlete, he wouldn't be such a good defender. And he's a terrific defender. Oh, and when you say Scheyer "leveled out" at the end of the season, are you referring to the fact that he averaged 18.2 ppg over his last 15 games? Or shot 43.2% from 3-point range and and a ridiculous eight more steals than turnovers over is last 12 games? Or that someone who supposedly is unathletic and can't get to the basket averaged nearly eight FT attempts over that stretch? Or that he put up this line in the final regular season game at UNC: 24 points, 7-7 FG (3-3 3FG), 7-8 FT, 5 AST, 4 STL, 3 REB, 0 TO? Or that he won the ACC Tourney MVP with these numbers: 21.7 ppg, 4.0 rpg. 1.7 apg, .516 FG%, .480 3FG%, .840 FT%? C'mon.

A final point on Scheyer. I've been saying since a freshman that both he and Duke are best when the ball is in his hands and he's making decisions. Even after he moved to the point last year, we didn't fully see that -- it was too late in the season to radically alter an offense that wasn't functioning with a true PG role anyway. And the team was used to playing a different way. Now he's had an entire offseason to improve his skills. Coach K has had an entire offseason to craft an offense that features him at the point. The team has had an entire offseason getting used to playing off him at the point. I don't think he'll be breaking ankles with crossovers, but I think he'll get the chance to create off the dribble more, and he's shown that in that role, he can get good shots for himself or others. He's a much more natural distributor than Smith or Paulus. And I wouldn't look at assist numbers -- it's one of the most flawed stats in basketball (just read the article on the Grizzlies' statistician). Instead, watch how many times he makes the pass that might lead to the next pass that leads to the basket. I think Duke's ball movement will be better than we've seen in several seasons, and I think that will be a direct result of Scheyer's ability to direct an offense, create and get people playing the right way. The more I've thought about it, the more I've realized he's actually more valuable to this team as a de facto point guard than in a shooting guard role that limits his ability to make plays. I think you'll all see some things you didn't expect this season. And it's going to be a good season. A really, really good season.

[Jumbo]

Yes, and the increase in scoring may be attriibuted to the opponents having to put their best two defenders on Henderson and Elliott Williams.

That's not what happened at all, and teams dared Elliot Williams to shoot long before Jay Wright supposdly "bucked the trend" in the Villanova game. In particular, Gary Williams' strategy in the ACCT game against Maryland stands out, but teams shrugged off Elliot as soon as he entered the starting lineup, and no team ever structured its defense with idea of putting a top defender on him.

[ACCBBallFan]

That's not what happened at all, and teams dared Elliot Williams to shoot long before Jay Wright supposdly "bucked the trend" in the Villanova game. In particular, Gary Williams' strategy in the ACCT game against Maryland stands out, but teams shrugged off Elliot as soon as he entered the starting lineup, and no team ever structured its defense with idea of putting a top defender on him.You are probably right. Perhaps I should have said quicker defender rather than best defender.

As I recall, with MD's post weaknesses, Duke did what they should have done more often and fed the big guy in the post. So Elliott ability or inability to shoot was not an issue.

On your reply to Wheat, I do agree that this could be one of Duke's better passing teams with Scheyer, Singler, and Zoubek, plus the Plumlees and Kelly all purportedly being pretty good passers.

Nolan could get some assists off the penetrate and pass.

Though you cited assists as a flawed statistic, it has never been Lance's forte, two years ago I think he ended up with a total of ten assists in almost 600 minutes of play, and was only slightly better last year with 17 in almost 700 minutes to average 1 per 40 minutes.

Not sure about Dawkins who will be in a learning mode, but on balance Duke should move the ball and spread the court very well.

[Wheat/"/"/"]

Just have to make my yearly comment about how laughable it is when people a) say Scheyer "isn't athletic" and b) only compare him to other white players. Scheyer isn't a great leaper, and he's certainly not a superb run-jump player. But he is more than quick enough for his position, fast, has great body control and has incredibly endurance. Were he not a good athlete, he wouldn't be such a good defender. And he's a terrific defender. Oh, and when you say Scheyer "leveled out" at the end of the season, are you referring to the fact that he averaged 18.2 ppg over his last 15 games? Or shot 43.2% from 3-point range and and a ridiculous eight more steals than turnovers over is last 12 games? Or that someone who supposedly is unathletic and can't get to the basket averaged nearly eight FT attempts over that stretch? Or that he put up this line in the final regular season game at UNC: 24 points, 7-7 FG (3-3 3FG), 7-8 FT, 5 AST, 4 STL, 3 REB, 0 TO? Or that he won the ACC Tourney MVP with these numbers: 21.7 ppg, 4.0 rpg. 1.7 apg, .516 FG%, .480 3FG%, .840 FT%? C'mon.

A final point on Scheyer. I've been saying since a freshman that both he and Duke are best when the ball is in his hands and he's making decisions. Even after he moved to the point last year, we didn't fully see that -- it was too late in the season to radically alter an offense that wasn't functioning with a true PG role anyway. And the team was used to playing a different way. Now he's had an entire offseason to improve his skills. Coach K has had an entire offseason to craft an offense that features him at the point. The team has had an entire offseason getting used to playing off him at the point. I don't think he'll be breaking ankles with crossovers, but I think he'll get the chance to create off the dribble more, and he's shown that in that role, he can get good shots for himself or others. He's a much more natural distributor than Smith or Paulus. And I wouldn't look at assist numbers -- it's one of the most flawed stats in basketball (just read the article on the Grizzlies' statistician). Instead, watch how many times he makes the pass that might lead to the next pass that leads to the basket. I think Duke's ball movement will be better than we've seen in several seasons, and I think that will be a direct result of Scheyer's ability to direct an offense, create and get people playing the right way. The more I've thought about it, the more I've realized he's actually more valuable to this team as a de facto point guard than in a shooting guard role that limits his ability to make plays. I think you'll all see some things you didn't expect this season. And it's going to be a good season. A really, really good season.

I think Scheyer is a very good player. Very good. Possibly 1st team All-Acc good this year. And I like his play for all the reasons you list.

When I said he "leveled out"- what I meant was he played as good as I think he is likely going to play late last season. He was very impressive. And he gets the most of his considerable talents. And he will probably play as well again this year. He's pretty consistant. But better? We'll see, it's going to be hard for him to play much better.

Ellington surprised me and just kept getting better and better as the season went on. His athleticism stood out late in the season. That was my point there.

You said it yourself..."Scheyer isn't a great leaper, and he's certainly not a superb run-jump player". That's what I meant by "not athletic".

I can agree he's and excellent athlete. I know it sounds odd, but a player can be an excellent athlete and not be exceptionally athletic. We have two different concepts working here.

The Larry Bird analogy had nothing to do comparing him to JS or the fact that both happen to be white. It would be crazy to compare JS to Bird. It was to make the point that a player needs not be super athletic to be a very good player, even one of the best, something we seem to agree on.

If you want me to compare JS to another player, even a black player (and it hardly matters), and to one we've all seen... I'll compare him to Adam Boone.

That should get you guys attention:)

JS is tougher and more aggressive version of Boone, but similar in phsyical skills. Neither are exceptionally athletic, but both are excellent players.
(Easy now, not saying Boone is better, or worse,... just similar:)

Boone was way under appreciated by UNC fans, mainly because he was not as athletic as they wanted in a guard during a time when UNC needed more athleticism on the floor. He was a very good player, as he proved after transfering to Minn. and doing well there, all the while fighting injuries.

I think Boone's still a starter in the European league somewhere, and has been for a few years.

Edit: Found some Boone stats (http://www.eurobasket.com/player.asp?Cntry=AUT&PlayerID=35637&AmNotSure=1).

[eightyearoldsdude]

I'm a Heel fan, and did not understand the Boone hate, but Scheyer is quite a bit better. Much better shooter. I know Boone shot a good percentage from 3, but he was taking wide open shots usually, not creating opportunities under pressure. I think he's a much better ballhandler as well. I won season tickets during the 8-20 season and went to all the home games--Boone had *significant* difficulty bringing the ball across midcourt under single coverage. It was a frustrating time, to say the least.

But I agree that while Scheyer is very good, I don't see him having some kind of break-out year. In fact, if he's stuck playing PG, I would expect a minor regression.

[COYS]

But I agree that while Scheyer is very good, I don't see him having some kind of break-out year. In fact, if he's stuck playing PG, I would expect a minor regression.

Based on his improved play after moving to the point last year, I i'm not sure why you would expect a regression. Also, Scheyer endured a terrible, terrible shooting slump in the middle of the season last year that kept his overall numbers from being more impressive. I think it's far more likely that since Scheyer will see the court more this year than the previous two and since it is also unlikely he will endure an equivalent shooting slump, I'd expect a slight increase in his numbers, even if he fails to improve significantly in any noticeable way. His increased minutes will lead to more opportunities to score and as long as his shooting doesn't leave him for any significant amount of time as it did last season, his season scoring average and shooting percentages should all be noticeably better.

[jv001]

[QUOTE=Wheat/"/"/";314449]

When I said he "leveled out"- what I meant was he played as good as I think he is likely going to play late last season. He was very impressive. And he gets the most of his considerable talents. And he will probably play as well again this year. He's pretty consistant. But better? We'll see, it's going to be hard for him to play much better.

If you want me to compare JS to another player, even a black player (and it hardly matters), and to one we've all seen... I'll compare him to Adam Boone.

That should get you guys attention:)

JS is tougher and more aggressive version of Boone, but similar in phsyical skills. Neither are exceptionally athletic, but both are excellent players.
(Easy now, not saying Boone is better, or worse,... just similar:)

Boone was way under appreciated by UNC fans, mainly because he was not as athletic as they wanted in a guard during a time when UNC needed more athleticism on the floor. He was a very good player, as he proved after transfering to Minn. and doing well there, all the while fighting injuries.

I think Boone's still a starter in the European league somewhere, and has been for a few years.

Jon may not have better numbers this year than he had the last 12 or so games, but I thinnk Duke will be better. Jumbo gave those reasons in his post. The team will have more time to practice with the ball in Jon's hands and that should make the offense run smoother. So when you say he will not be better, I disagree. If the teams better because of Jon, then he's better.

Your comparison of Jon to Adam Boone is seen through light blue eyes. Jon is a better player and a better athlete. I want even discuss that post. Go Duke!

[ACCBBallFan]

I too don't buy slight regression hypothesis for Scheyer.

Last year he was thrust into the PG role at end of season, to spring Elliott into the mix. He and coach K and Nolan as Jon points out on Blue Planet have had all summer to plan for it this year, are teaming well, with no Paulus alternative and therefore Jon not having a primary SG role and emergency PG role as he did most of last year.

The bench guy Andre is even less of a PG than Jon or Nolan. So Jon knows as a senior captain it is his offense to run, and can plan and execute accordingly.

With no Henderson or Elliott, with more alternatives in the front court and some good passers among the bigs, offense will have a few different wrinkles than last year. It will be important for Nolan to establish himself as a dribble penetrate and pass player.

Kyle having played the front court should be better at looking for the bigs, and getting the ball to them on time and in proper location. Opponents have to stick with Jon and Kyle which will give the bigs room to operate.

[Wheat/"/"/"]

[QUOTE=Wheat/"/"/";314449]
Your comparison of Jon to Adam Boone is seen through light blue eyes. Jon is a better player and a better athlete. I want even discuss that post. Go Duke!


You guys are missing the point of my post here with the Boone reference.

Yea, Scheyer is a better player. He's a little bigger, a better ballhandler, defender, etc...

It was in response to Jumbo and his reference that saying JS "isn't athletic", and then only comparing him other white players is laughable.
So I came up with the first accomplished, non-athletic guard I thought of who happened to be black, and who plays the game very well without exceptional athleticism. (Oh, an a UNC guy, sort of).
His game has lots of similarities to JS's game, even if JS does it better.

Boone is a very good player who has a nice professional career going over in Europe. No-one will call him an athletic player, but he gets it done. He's not over there playing above the rim though, and where ever JS ends up, he won't be either.

[gumbomoop]

Wow, this is a rather silly conversation, isn't it? Still, I want to highlight a couple of things.

Just have to make my yearly comment about how laughable it is when people a) say Scheyer "isn't athletic" and b) only compare him to other white players. Scheyer isn't a great leaper, and he's certainly not a superb run-jump player. But he is more than quick enough for his position, fast, has great body control and has incredibly endurance. Were he not a good athlete, he wouldn't be such a good defender. And he's a terrific defender. n.

A final point on Scheyer. I've been saying since a freshman that both he and Duke are best when the ball is in his hands and he's making decisions. Even after he moved to the point last year, we didn't fully see that -- it was too late in the season to radically alter an offense that wasn't functioning with a true PG role anyway. And the team was used to playing a different way. Now he's had an entire offseason to improve his skills. Coach K has had an entire offseason to craft an offense that features him at the point. The team has had an entire offseason getting used to playing off him at the point. I don't think he'll be breaking ankles with crossovers, but I think he'll get the chance to create off the dribble more, and he's shown that in that role, he can get good shots for himself or others. He's a much more natural distributor than Smith or Paulus. And I wouldn't look at assist numbers -- it's one of the most flawed stats in basketball (just read the article on the Grizzlies' statistician). Instead, watch how many times he makes the pass that might lead to the next pass that leads to the basket. I think Duke's ball movement will be better than we've seen in several seasons, and I think that will be a direct result of Scheyer's ability to direct an offense, create and get people playing the right way. The more I've thought about it, the more I've realized he's actually more valuable to this team as a de facto point guard than in a shooting guard role that limits his ability to make plays. I think you'll all see some things you didn't expect this season. And it's going to be a good season. A really, really good season.

I appreciate your self-effacing description of yourself as a blowhard, as just very occasionally it's spot on, as evidenced here. Kindly and gently award yourself a demerit, go stand in the bloody corner just briefly, so the sillly among us, most assuredly including me, can have some fun.

Now, having deigned to join our silly conversation, you make persuasive arguments. I think most Duke posters [I cannot speak for the less-informed who visit the boards] appreciate JS's sneaky athleticism, and would remember fondly, for example, JS's miraculous plays, e.g., v. FSU in ACC final, and v. Texas in NCAA. JS knew how to make those unmakable plays, and knew he could, and so did. You remind us that JS is also sneaky good on D, because he moves his feet, and has world-class court sense. I asked last season and am pleased to inquire again: who right now in college ball has court sense to match that of JS? Name them. Name one. Recall, as well, Playcaller's [last Dec-Jan] deliberately understated admiration for JS: "Jon Scheyer is real good at playing basketball."

It's sensible, if still a bit irritating, to allow you out of the naughty corner, for your analysis is admirably cogent, especially when it advances my own oft-brilliant observations. And it is even more useful, and surprisingly satisfying, when it corrects my insufficiently-informed ruminations. Namely: I have argued in other posts that NS is our main PG, but here you [and elsewhere others, not forgetting JS himself, in his recent "take"] make a solid case for JS as our main PG. Ok, I'm seeing the logic in this, and now assume JS could well be the main PG on O, while NS usually guards the opposing PG.

Finally, as an admitted wild optimist [I've still got Duke top 10 preseason], I note with genuine interest your final, pretty confidently stated words.

[jimsumner]

"Finally, as an admitted wild optimist [I've still got Duke top 10 preseason], "

Wild optimism? There's so much whimsy in the above post, I'm not entirely sure how serious this is, but I'm pretty sure Duke will begin the season in the top ten of the polls.

Now, if you were predicting an undefeated season, that would be wild-eyed optimism.

[eightyearoldsdude]

Based on his improved play after moving to the point last year, I i'm not sure why you would expect a regression. Also, Scheyer endured a terrible, terrible shooting slump in the middle of the season last year that kept his overall numbers from being more impressive. I think it's far more likely that since Scheyer will see the court more this year than the previous two and since it is also unlikely he will endure an equivalent shooting slump, I'd expect a slight increase in his numbers, even if he fails to improve significantly in any noticeable way. His increased minutes will lead to more opportunities to score and as long as his shooting doesn't leave him for any significant amount of time as it did last season, his season scoring average and shooting percentages should all be noticeably better.

I guess we'll see. I don't think it's optimal for Duke if Scheyer is playing point guard and averaging more than 18 a game (which is what he averaged while playing PG). If he's doing that it means Nolan still isn't capable of playing point guard at the ACC level and the freshmen big men probably aren't getting enough touches, neither of which bode well for the postseason, IMO.

[gumbomoop]

"Finally, as an admitted wild optimist , "

Wild optimism? There's so much whimsy in the above post, I'm not entirely sure how serious this is, but I'm pretty sure Duke will begin the season in the top ten of the polls.

Now, if you were predicting an undefeated season, that would be wild-eyed optimism.

Yes, the world could use more whimsy at times. Also a lot more seriousness, not to mention semi-intelligent competence, at other times.

The optimism comment really harkens back to post-season, post-'Nova, post-G-and-then-EW departures, but pre-DD-Christmas-in-July gift. There was in May-June a thread [or 2 or 3] in which we debated our '09-'10 preseason rank. I fluctuated between about 7 and 10 [as did other optimists], but others said, "Don't be dumb, get real, maybe we're about 15-20." Remember, I was on the top-10 bandwagon [I]before the Christmas-in-July news.

Now, it may well be that those who pooh-poohed such a thought may have changed their view, now that DD is on board. You could ask them.

Or, it may well be that my continued optimism is sorta dumb; thus, my heartfelt delight in Jumbo's clearly confident final words ["really, really good season"]. Anyhow, nothing close to predicting undefeated, but I tell you - and surely a few other posters will confirm this in their own comments - they're not at all sure we're top-10.

Right now, despite my optimism, I am intrigued by the prediction in the first hard [actually soft] cover pub out, Athlon Sports, which pegs us at 18. Equally interesting to me, they've got us 3d, behind UNC and GTech in conf. I'm on record as predicting GTech the most likely to emerge from '09-'10 ACC "middle muddle" [everybody but 1-2 UNC/Duke and 10-11-12 Miami/UVA/NCSt] to challenge the Heels and Devils, and by golly Athlon sure took me up on it. Wonder if they're right??

[jimsumner]

"I am intrigued by the prediction in the first hard [actually soft] cover pub out, Athlon Sports, which pegs us at 18."

Yes, I saw that. I've never written for Athlon (make me an offer, guys) but I have written for some pre-season mags and have some idea of when this stuff had to be finished in order to make an early September street-date.

This is just speculation but I suspect they made their picks during that period after Williams and before Dawkins and then inserted Dawkins on the roster late without changing their rankings.

Or maybe they really do think there are 17 better teams than Duke. But I'm pretty sure the major polls won't agree with them.

I buy this stuff because I'm genetically encoded that way. But I do wonder why it's necessary to get a college basketball magazine in the stores before the NFL has even kicked off. You can't even get the schedules in for crying out loud and that's one of the first things people will look for.

Oh, well, Athlon's, Lindy's et. al. just fill the time until Blue Ribbon shows up. Sometimes it's better to take your time and get it right.

[Jumbo]

I appreciate your self-effacing description of yourself as a blowhard, as just very occasionally it's spot on, as evidenced here. Kindly and gently award yourself a demerit, go stand in the bloody corner just briefly, so the sillly among us, most assuredly including me, can have some fun.

Now, having deigned to join our silly conversation, you make persuasive arguments. I think most Duke posters [I cannot speak for the less-informed who visit the boards] appreciate JS's sneaky athleticism, and would remember fondly, for example, JS's miraculous plays, e.g., v. FSU in ACC final, and v. Texas in NCAA. JS knew how to make those unmakable plays, and knew he could, and so did. You remind us that JS is also sneaky good on D, because he moves his feet, and has world-class court sense. I asked last season and am pleased to inquire again: who right now in college ball has court sense to match that of JS? Name them. Name one. Recall, as well, Playcaller's [last Dec-Jan] deliberately understated admiration for JS: "Jon Scheyer is real good at playing basketball."

It's sensible, if still a bit irritating, to allow you out of the naughty corner, for your analysis is admirably cogent, especially when it advances my own oft-brilliant observations. And it is even more useful, and surprisingly satisfying, when it corrects my insufficiently-informed ruminations. Namely: I have argued in other posts that NS is our main PG, but here you [and elsewhere others, not forgetting JS himself, in his recent "take"] make a solid case for JS as our main PG. Ok, I'm seeing the logic in this, and now assume JS could well be the main PG on O, while NS usually guards the opposing PG.

Finally, as an admitted wild optimist [I've still got Duke top 10 preseason], I note with genuine interest your final, pretty confidently stated words.

Wit has been sorely lacking around here. Well done -- made me smile.

And I don't like to make predictions, but I'll stand by what I said about "really, really good." Let's just say I think this could be a special season. I think a lot of people are going to be shocked when they see:
A) Scheyer as a full-time point guard.
B) Singler's versatility on the wing.
C) Nolan Smith getting consistent, big minutes, without having to worry about running the team but just being attack-minded.
D) Mason Plumlee play. Period

And what will be even more impressive is how those four things mesh so well with one another, and how they allow the other guys to just fit into limited, but key roles complementing those Big 4. There's a lot of work to be done, of course, but there is an awful lot of upside that isn't getting recognized -- not just around the college basketball world, but even among Duke fans. And I'm hardly the Pollyanna-optimist type. Let's leave it at that for now.

[Wheat/"/"/"]

Count me in on the side that thinks Duke will be very good this year.
And I think JS stays at the point. Why not? he played that spot very well last season.

I'd say it's a safe bet that Duke will spend more time inside the top ten nationally than outside this year. Anytime you have a top ten team, all you need is a couple of breaks to have a great year.

I think the key player to see a move into top five territory will be Mason Plumlee. He may be the power player out of the blocks the team needs to take that step up, maybe not. I am eagerly looking forward to seeing him play.

[Greg_Newton]

I think a lot of people are going to be shocked when they see... D) Mason Plumlee play. Period...

In case anyone's not salivating yet: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lge2VOEsQlo

[gumbomoop]

And I don't like to make predictions, but I'll stand by what I said about "really, really good." Let's just say I think this could be a special season. I think a lot of people are going to be shocked when they see:
A) Scheyer as a full-time point guard.
B) Singler's versatility on the wing.
C) Nolan Smith getting consistent, big minutes, without having to worry about running the team but just being attack-minded.
D) Mason Plumlee play. Period

And what will be even more impressive is how those four things mesh so well with one another, and how they allow the other guys to just fit into limited, but key roles complementing those Big 4. There's a lot of work to be done, of course, but there is an awful lot of upside that isn't getting recognized -- not just around the college basketball world, but even among Duke fans. And I'm hardly the Pollyanna-optimist type. Let's leave it at that for now.

(A) Even though as recently as a couple of days ago I was asserting that NS would be our main PG, I'm now persuaded by more informed posters such as you [and, again, by JS's own "take"] that it's JS. I guess I was reluctant to acknowledge this likelihood, as it always seemed that NS was a "combo" guard and JS a winger, and so NS was the "logical" main PG. But that just shows, I now see, that even I, who claim to be among JS's most fervent admirers, was implicitly selling him short. I repent.
(B) I definitely agree with the substance of your point here, but is it true that folks will be "shocked"? Don't even uninformed boors [most UK fans, many UNC fans, ubiquitous Duke-haters] already know, however boorishly they might comment otherwise, that KS is versatile? Are these people just dumber than dirt? Well, they are if they think KS is not versatile.
(C) This makes sense, and is obviously related to (A). Again, I'm saying you and others have changed my mind. I am not persuaded that NS is incapable of running the team [and you've not said that here], but I am persuaded by your point that we're more likely to see an attack-minded NS as a winger. Even while assuming NS would be our main PG, I've repeated [ad nauseam, I can't help myself] a K-to-NS-scene: "You gotta play; no meek crap." We all believe - certainly I do - that a key to the season will be NS's confidence. All indications are that he's now got that. And your scenario says he'll display that in his winger role. I'm persuaded.
(D) I could prove, if challenged, that I've been on the MP2 bandwagon since I saw him on TV in 2 all-star games. No domination, but he's got stuff, several kinds of stuff. Yes: Period.

[jv001]

Wit has been sorely lacking around here. Well done -- made me smile.

And I don't like to make predictions, but I'll stand by what I said about "really, really good." Let's just say I think this could be a special season. I think a lot of people are going to be shocked when they see:
A) Scheyer as a full-time point guard.
B) Singler's versatility on the wing.
C) Nolan Smith getting consistent, big minutes, without having to worry about running the team but just being attack-minded.
D) Mason Plumlee play. Period

And what will be even more impressive is how those four things mesh so well with one another, and how they allow the other guys to just fit into limited, but key roles complementing those Big 4. There's a lot of work to be done, of course, but there is an awful lot of upside that isn't getting recognized -- not just around the college basketball world, but even among Duke fans. And I'm hardly the Pollyanna-optimist type. Let's leave it at that for now.

I'm in 100% agreement with these 4 players as being our strength. My questions to Jumbo is who do you think the 5th player will be? Three of these guys are perimeter players (Jon, Kyle & Nolan). I look for Mason to be PF at times and Center at times (K doesn't use positions). Then what other big man plays with this group? It could be Zoubs against teams he matches up against. It could be Lance for his defense. It could be Miles if he's improved as much as I hear. The dark horse could be Kelly. I don't know what to expect from him. Major mins will certainly go the the 4 named by Jumbo. It's surely going to be an interesting season. I say we begin in the top 10 in major publications and I agree with Jumbo (barring injuries to Jon, Kyle and Nolan) it could be a special season. Go Duke!

[Jeffrey]

Sorry, but that would have been a lousy idea. Last year, K couldn't hide the fact that Duke had three (and eventually four) guards on the roster who were significantly better than Greg Paulus. If he'd started Paulus after the way Smith dominated him in practice, etc., it would have sent a lousy message to the rest of the team -- and a "token" starting move would have been an even worse message. Greg's play dictated his role, and if K wanted to get optimal play out of the rest of the team, that role needed to be diminished. K has more feelings to worry about than just those of a particular senior -- most of all, he has to be concerned about earning the trust of the other really good players. I don't think they would have respected him had he not put his best lineup on the floor.

We'll never know what would have happened if K had gone with my ("lousy idea") approach. We know exactly what happened with your strongly preferred approach. IMO, the confidence issue/outcome with Greg & Nolan (our two original PGs) was obvious.

[jv001]

We'll never know what would have happened if K had gone with my ("lousy idea") approach. We know exactly what happened with your strongly preferred approach. IMO, the confidence issue/outcome with Greg & Nolan (our two original PGs) was obvious.

Do you think having Greg guarding the elite guards in the ACC last year would have helped his confidence. I don't think getting beaten off the dribble time and time again would have instilled much confidence in him. Greg never hung his head and supported his teammates. That's what leaders do. I like Greg just as much as the next person, but the truth is the truth. Now he's playing the sport he loves at Syracuse. So I wish him well. But as always, Go Duke!

[InSpades]

We'll never know what would have happened if K had gone with my ("lousy idea") approach. We know exactly what happened with your strongly preferred approach. IMO, the confidence issue/outcome with Greg & Nolan (our two original PGs) was obvious.

I think it's pretty clear what would have happened if K had stuck w/ "status quo". We never would have found out that our best lineup had Jon Scheyer at point guard. You can argue that Greg and Nolan would have played better if shown confidence but I think you are stretching it. Without Jon manning the point I doubt we win an ACC Championship last year. We may not make it to play against Villanova either. More importantly for this year, we are definitely better off having found out that Jon is more than capable of being the point guard for Duke this year.

[Jeffrey]

Do you think having Greg guarding the elite guards in the ACC last year would have helped his confidence. I don't think getting beaten off the dribble time and time again would have instilled much confidence in him.

Greg guarded the elite PGs in the ACC for three seasons. I don't think the first step issue would have caused any more confidence issues than it had the three previous seasons. IMO, having the media constantly emphasize he was benched after being a three year starter would have probably affected his confidence more.

Again, I would have started my three year starter and given the vast majority of the PT to my best player. I also would have finished with my best player. IMO, giving the starts to Nolan did not seem to help Nolan's or Greg's confidence by the end of the season (when it really matters). You'll must have been more impressed with our PG play last season than I was.

[jv001]

Greg guarded the elite PGs in the ACC for three seasons. I don't think the first step issue would have caused any more confidence issues than it had the three previous seasons. IMO, having the media constantly emphasize he was benched after being a three year starter would have probably affected his confidence more.

Again, I would have started my three year starter and given the vast majority of the PT to my best player. I also would have finished with my best player. IMO, giving the starts to Nolan did not seem to help Nolan's or Greg's confidence by the end of the season (when it really matters). You'll must have been more impressed with our PG play last season than I was.

I was impressed with Jon Scheyer as our PG. Nolan was our next option and Greg was our 3rd option. You have to remember Greg was injured much of last year and that caused a drop off in his play. However he did not shoot nearly as well as he had in the past. I do not get to watch Duke's practice sessions. Therefore I cannot say what went on there, but I would think Greg did little to merit being the starting point guard for Duke University. As Jim said Nolan beat him in the practice sessions. And if that was the case, then Nolan should have started. Sometimes liking a player too much causes our objectivity to be off. Go Duke!

[COYS]

I guess we'll see. I don't think it's optimal for Duke if Scheyer is playing point guard and averaging more than 18 a game (which is what he averaged while playing PG). If he's doing that it means Nolan still isn't capable of playing point guard at the ACC level and the freshmen big men probably aren't getting enough touches, neither of which bode well for the postseason, IMO.

This doesn't seem to make much sense to me, either. Duke is losing Henderson's 16.5 ppg. That's a lot of touches to go around to other players. Also, Scheyer increased his scoring output over the last 12 games of the season even with Henderson taking a lot of shots. Even if you're of the opinion that Duke won't be able to completely replace Henderson's production, it doesn't seem outlandish to think that Scheyer could score as much as 18 ppg while still allowing Smith, Singler, and the post players to add to their scoring totals, as well. Scheyer still managed 1.49 points per shot despite his relatively poor fg percentage (39%). With that percentage likely to go up and his free throw percentage likely to remain the same, Scheyer's ppg will go up based solely on an increase in his pps. Add to that increase more minutes per game and more touches and it seems completely realistic that 18ppg is within his grasp without even worrying about the rest of the team. If Singler and Scheyer reach 18ppg and Nolan works up to 14, there will still be plenty of opportunities for our post players and frosh to make a significant contribution.

I'm not saying that Scheyer will average 18ppg for sure, but I think your argument that Scheyer handling the ball for a significant portion of the game and scoring 18ppg as bad for Duke because it somehow shows a lack of progress in our other players doesn't really hold up. Scheyer is our most efficient offensive player. He makes smart decisions with the ball. He gets to the free throw line with regularity, and if he's shooting well from outside, he's capable of lighting up the scoreboard for 20+ with regularity. Plus, the more attention Scheyer and Singler attract from opposing defenses, the more opportunities for Smith and the frosh to make their marks.

[Jeffrey]

I think it's pretty clear what would have happened if K had stuck w/ "status quo". We never would have found out that our best lineup had Jon Scheyer at point guard. You can argue that Greg and Nolan would have played better if shown confidence but I think you are stretching it. Without Jon manning the point I doubt we win an ACC Championship last year. We may not make it to play against Villanova either. More importantly for this year, we are definitely better off having found out that Jon is more than capable of being the point guard for Duke this year.

What last season told me is we do not appear to be recruiting and building well rounded PGs. Last year we liked Nolan and Elliot for D and Jon and Greg for O at the PG position. Even this year, I don't think we will be looking for Jon to guard most PGs.

This is somewhat surprising to me given the background of our coaching staff.

[Jeffrey]

You have to remember Greg was injured much of last year and that caused a drop off in his play. However he did not shoot nearly as well as he had in the past.

Do you think Greg's confidence may have been a factor in his shooting?

[BlueintheFace]

Do you think Greg's confidence may have been a factor in his shooting?

More likely not being in the flow of the game.

[-jk]

More likely not being in the flow of the game.

Or perhaps the arm injury that was wrapped most of the season.

-jk

[BlueintheFace]

Or perhaps the arm injury that was wrapped most of the season.

-jk

also, a solid explanation. Point being, I think confidence was not topping the list for why he struggled.

[Jeffrey]

also, a solid explanation. Point being, I think confidence was not topping the list for why he struggled.

Not sure I ever said it topped the list. I do think it was a significant factor.

[Jumbo]

We'll never know what would have happened if K had gone with my ("lousy idea") approach. We know exactly what happened with your strongly preferred approach. IMO, the confidence issue/outcome with Greg & Nolan (our two original PGs) was obvious.

We do know that we won an ACC title. So, that's a pretty good thing. We also know what we did with Greg Paulus starting for three years. I think it was painfully obvious that Greg just couldn't defend at the level we needed at that spot, but maybe we can stop debating Greg Paulus' playing time by now.

[Jumbo]

Greg guarded the elite PGs in the ACC for three seasons. I don't think the first step issue would have caused any more confidence issues than it had the three previous seasons. IMO, having the media constantly emphasize he was benched after being a three year starter would have probably affected his confidence more.

Again, I would have started my three year starter and given the vast majority of the PT to my best player. I also would have finished with my best player. IMO, giving the starts to Nolan did not seem to help Nolan's or Greg's confidence by the end of the season (when it really matters). You'll must have been more impressed with our PG play last season than I was.

You do realize that Nolan Smith played arguably his best ball at the end of the season (after returning from his concussion), when he could just focus on attacking the basket rather than running the offense, right? And you also know he was injured for most of the season, right?

[Jeffrey]

You do realize that Nolan Smith played arguably his best ball at the end of the season (after returning from his concussion), when he could just focus on attacking the basket rather than running the offense, right?

Yes, I realize that Nolan is not as well suited to play PG, on the offensive end, as we were being told at the beginning of last season. As I said:


What last season told me is we do not appear to be successfully recruiting and building well rounded PGs. Last year we liked Nolan and Elliot for D and Jon and Greg for O at the PG position. Even this year, I don't think we will be looking for Jon to guard most PGs.

At a more macro level, I do not believe a K team can win a national title without one of the three best PGs in college hoops. IMO, we can win a national title without one of the three best 2's, 3's, 4's, or 5's. I think it's critical we do a better job "successfully recruiting and building well rounded PGs".

[Kedsy]

At a more macro level, I do not believe a K team can win a national title without one of the three best PGs in college hoops.

So when Tony Lang's fingers grazed Scotty Thurman's shot instead of blocking it cleanly in 1994, it was because we didn't have one of the top three PGs in the country? Could've fooled me.

We've made many Final Fours without one of the top 3 PGs, and personally I believe that if you get there you usually have a chance to win it. No doubt it helps to have a great PG, but there are lots of ways to win and Coach K knows most of them.

[jv001]

At a more macro level, I do not believe a K team can win a national title without one of the three best PGs in college hoops. IMO, we can win a national title without one of the three best 2's, 3's, 4's, or 5's. I think it's critical we do a better job "successfully recruiting and building well rounded PGs".

Now we agree on something. The coaching staff missed on their evaluation of Greg Paulus being a good division 1 point guard. But look at how many times they've nailed it. But we almost one it with Grant Hill handling the ball. A lot like Jon's going to do this year. But before you say I'm comparing Jon with Grant, I'm not they are different type of players. Grant is one of the 5 best Duke players. Jon has not reached that level yet. Go Duke!

[jimsumner]

Duke made two Final Fours with Quin Snyder as the starting PG. Now, I like Quin and all but he wasn't exactly an unstoppable force at the college level.

[Jeffrey]

Duke made two Final Fours with Quin Snyder as the starting PG. Now, I like Quin and all but he wasn't exactly an unstoppable force at the college level.

In your opinion, what percentage of the time has a K final four team not had one of the three best PGs in the country?

In your opinion, what percentage of the time has a K national championship team not had one of the three best PGs in the country?


I do not believe a K team can win a national title without one of the three best PGs in college hoops.

[BlueintheFace]

In your opinion, what percentage of the time has a K final four team not had one of the three best PGs in the country?

No offense to any of our PGs but off the top of my head...

1994
1999
2004

[cwaugh]

I would bet a lot of money that Lance starts at the 4.


I'm in 100% agreement with these 4 players as being our strength. My questions to Jumbo is who do you think the 5th player will be? Three of these guys are perimeter players (Jon, Kyle & Nolan). I look for Mason to be PF at times and Center at times (K doesn't use positions). Then what other big man plays with this group? It could be Zoubs against teams he matches up against. It could be Lance for his defense. It could be Miles if he's improved as much as I hear. The dark horse could be Kelly. I don't know what to expect from him. Major mins will certainly go the the 4 named by Jumbo. It's surely going to be an interesting season. I say we begin in the top 10 in major publications and I agree with Jumbo (barring injuries to Jon, Kyle and Nolan) it could be a special season. Go Duke!

[sagegrouse]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey
In your opinion, what percentage of the time has a K final four team not had one of the three best PGs in the country?


No offense to any of our PGs but off the top of my head...

1994
1999
2004
__________________
GTHC


Not to mention 1988 and 1989 (sorry Quinn).

And FWIW, I don't think Hurley was even in the top ten as a freshman in 1990.


sagegrouse
'I might object to 2004 because Duhon was pretty darn good'

[BlueintheFace]

'I might object to 2004 because Duhon was pretty darn good'

Duhon is a really tough call... It's just that Jameer Nelson, Devin Harris, Royal Ivey, Chris Paul, and Deron Williams were all bouncing around that year and I remember some of them being pretty darn good. Not to mention players like Delonte West and Antonio Burks who were pretty underrated IMO.

[eightyearoldsdude]

Duhon is a really tough call... It's just that Jameer Nelson, Devin Harris, Royal Ivey, Chris Paul, and Deron Williams were all bouncing around that year and I remember some of them being pretty darn good. Not to mention players like Delonte West and Antonio Burks who were pretty underrated IMO.

Ed Cota went to 3 final fours. I love me some Easy Ed, but he wasn't a top-3 PG. Solid ballhandler, good passer, but not a superstar. Most agree the PG is the most important position on the floor, but you don't need to have an All-American playing it if you have stars at other spots (esp. the post).

[jimsumner]

Top 3 PGs in the country?

Let's assume for sake of argument that a player would at the very least have to be first-team All-ACC to be in the top three national mix.

Here are K's Final Four PGs

1986-Amaker-did not make All-ACC
1988-Snyder-did not make All-ACC
1989-Snyder-did not make All-ACC
1990-Hurley-did not make All-ACC
1991-Hurley-3rd-team All-ACC
1992-Hurley-2nd-team All-ACC
1994-Capel-did not make All-ACC
1999-Avery-second team All-ACC
2001-Williams-first-team All-ACC [if we put Duhon here, it changes the
equation]
2004-Duhon-1st-team All-ACC

So, only Williams in 2001 and Duhon in 2004 even make the entry level here.

Hurley was first-team All-ACC in 1993 and might have made it in 1992 had the voting been taken in April. The 1992 consensus All-America team did not have a true PG, so maybe Hurley was top three that year.

But even if we elevate 1992 Hurley, that still leaves seven of K's ten Final Four teams well short of the top-three standard.

Jason Williams in 2001 was the only consensus first-team A-A on this list, with Duhon a consensus second-team in '04. None were ever ACC POY.

Let me add that Hurley in '93 and JWill in '02 were top three (with qualifiers about Williams/Duhon in '02) and neither of those teams made the Elite Eight.

So, it is possible to have a Final Four caliber team without an elite point guard. I think Scheyer and/or Smith can at least rise to the Snyder/Capel level. Note that those three teams boasted a great, versatile forward. Comparisons to this year's team welcome.

[Kedsy]

In your opinion, what percentage of the time has a K final four team not had one of the three best PGs in the country?

In your opinion, what percentage of the time has a K national championship team not had one of the three best PGs in the country?

Well, I don't know that 3 championships is a big enough sample to make any statements, and I don't know if in 2001 Jason Williams was the PG or the SG, so I'm going to pass on the 2nd question.

Regarding the first question:

1986: Tommy Amaker -- great PG, but top 3 in the country? I don't think so.
1988: Quin Snyder -- not top 3
1989: Snyder -- again, not top 3
1990: freshman Bobby Hurley, not there yet, so no.
1991: Hurley, probably yes
1992: Hurley, yes
1994: Jeff Capel, not top 3
1999: Will Avery, not top 3
2001: who was the PG? If Jason Williams, yes; if freshman Chris Duhon, no.
2004: Duhon -- a great guard, but I don't think top 3.

So I'm going with either 20% or 30%, either way not a particularly high percentage.

Your idea that a great guard increases our chances of success is indisputable. IMO, you just stretched it a bit too far in saying we need a top 3 PG to win.


Edit: OK, Jim beat me to the punch, and he even used facts to back up his statement, which is more than I did. So I guess this post is unneccessary.

[NSDukeFan]

Not to mention 1988 and 1989 (sorry Quinn).

And FWIW, I don't think Hurley was even in the top ten as a freshman in 1990.


sagegrouse
'I might object to 2004 because Duhon was pretty darn good'

I agree with your post, but disagree with the original one saying coach K couldn't make a final four without a top 3 PG, which sounded both ridiculous and insulting to coach K. So I did some research.

Out of the 10 final fours coach K has reached he has had a point guard make at least one of the all-american teams (top 3 PG in the country) 3 of those years: 90-91 (Hurley' Jr. year, he was obviously very good the two previous years but was not AA), 2000-01 calling Jason Williams the point, (though Duhon shared some of that responsibility) and 03-04 (Duhon made a second team, NABC, and a 3rd team, AP).

Amaker was also very good in 85-86 and was NABC 3rd team AA in 86-87, Snyder was good but not AA in 88 and 89, Grant Hill was the primary ball handler in 94 but by no means was a point guard. Avery was great in 98-99 but not quite AA.

Duke has obviously had some great point guards in the past and will in the future, but to say that coach K has to have a certain defined star at a certain position to win is absurd.

Edit: Sorry I was beaten to the punch by the above posters.

[Jumbo]

I do not believe a K team can win a national title without one of the three best PGs in college hoops ...

Uh, what? It has to be one of the "three best?" Better make sure we don't end up with point guard No. 4, then! What about in a year where there are really poor point guards? Or how about in a year where there are tons of stud point guards like, I dunno, last year? Let's say, for argument's sake, that Jonny Flynn was the best point guard in college basketball last year, since he was the first one to go in the draft. Let's not count Tyreke Evans, and say Stephen Curry was the second. And then (just based on draft order) Jrue Holiday was the third. Who was 4th? Why, Mr. Ty Lawson! Think someone could have won a national title with him?
Okay, he was way better than Holiday. Think K could've won with Darren Collison? Jeff Teague? Eric Maynor? Toney Douglas? Is this "top-3 PG" thing you just made up on the spot, or do you have some calculus, perhaps, that leads to such a narrow conclusion.

Geez. Do you watch much basketball?

[Jumbo]

1992-Hurley-2nd-team All-ACC

It still burns me up that he didn't make first team that year ...

[BlueintheFace]

Geez. Do you watch much basketball?

Jumbo. tsk tsk, that's dangerously close to the kind of personal attack one might close down a thread for. ;)

I agree though, One can look at this another way. Look at all of the national champions over the last 20 years and their PGs. Plenty of those teams did not have a top3 PG.

[airowe]

Uh, what? It has to be one of the "three best?" Better make sure we don't end up with point guard No. 4, then! What about in a year where there are really poor point guards? Or how about in a year where there are tons of stud point guards like, I dunno, last year? Let's say, for argument's sake, that Jonny Flynn was the best point guard in college basketball last year, since he was the first one to go in the draft. Let's not count Tyreke Evans, and say Stephen Curry was the second. And then (just based on draft order) Jrue Holiday was the third. Who was 4th? Why, Mr. Ty Lawson! Think someone could have won a national title with him?
Okay, he was way better than Holiday. Think K could've won with Darren Collison? Jeff Teague? Eric Maynor? Toney Douglas? Is this "top-3 PG" thing you just made up on the spot, or do you have some calculus, perhaps, that leads to such a narrow conclusion.

Geez. Do you watch much basketball?

Maybe it's recruiting rankings?

Nope, no. That doesn't work either.

Chris Duhon (http://statsheet.com/bhsb/players/chris-duhon)

[Jumbo]

Jumbo. tsk tsk, that's dangerously close to the kind of personal attack one might close down a thread for. ;)
Touche. ;)


I agree though, One can look at this another way. Look at all of the national champions over the last 20 years and their PGs. Plenty of those teams did not have a top3 PG.

Yes, but clearly those other coaches didn't need a top-3 PG. Only Coach K does ...

[Jeffrey]

Geez. Do you watch much basketball?

Are you a moderator? Do you believe one should lead by example?

[Jeffrey]

I agree with your post, but disagree with the original one saying coach K couldn't make a final four without a top 3 PG, which sounded both ridiculous and insulting to coach K. So I did some research.

Who said that?

[Jeffrey]

Top 3 PGs in the country?

Let's assume for sake of argument that a player would at the very least have to be first-team All-ACC to be in the top three national mix.

Here are K's Final Four PGs

1986-Amaker-did not make All-ACC
1988-Snyder-did not make All-ACC
1989-Snyder-did not make All-ACC
1990-Hurley-did not make All-ACC
1991-Hurley-3rd-team All-ACC
1992-Hurley-2nd-team All-ACC
1994-Capel-did not make All-ACC
1999-Avery-second team All-ACC
2001-Williams-first-team All-ACC [if we put Duhon here, it changes the
equation]
2004-Duhon-1st-team All-ACC

So, only Williams in 2001 and Duhon in 2004 even make the entry level here.

Hurley was first-team All-ACC in 1993 and might have made it in 1992 had the voting been taken in April. The 1992 consensus All-America team did not have a true PG, so maybe Hurley was top three that year.

But even if we elevate 1992 Hurley, that still leaves seven of K's ten Final Four teams well short of the top-three standard.

Jason Williams in 2001 was the only consensus first-team A-A on this list, with Duhon a consensus second-team in '04. None were ever ACC POY.

Let me add that Hurley in '93 and JWill in '02 were top three (with qualifiers about Williams/Duhon in '02) and neither of those teams made the Elite Eight.

So, it is possible to have a Final Four caliber team without an elite point guard. I think Scheyer and/or Smith can at least rise to the Snyder/Capel level. Note that those three teams boasted a great, versatile forward. Comparisons to this year's team welcome.

Jim, thanks, as always, for a detailed and informative post. Your knowledge is amazing.


In your opinion, what percentage of the time has a K final four team not had one of the three best PGs in the country?

IMO, Jim's post clearly illustrates that Coach K gets to the final four, the majority of the time, without one of the three best PGs in the country. I have absolutely no doubt about that and never started to state otherwise. As Jumbo said, you're not watching much Duke basketball if you do not realize that fact.


In your opinion, what percentage of the time has a K national championship team not had one of the three best PGs in the country?

Historically speaking, it has been rare (only happened once) for Coach K to win the national championship without one of the three best PGs in the country. In order to do so, he had, IMO, the best player in the history of Duke basketball on that team. Statistically speaking, you're only going to have the best player in the history of Duke basketball play for you one time.

[Jeffrey]

IMO, Bobby and Jason are the best PGs that K has coached at Duke.

[jimsumner]

"It still burns me up that he didn't make first team that year ... "

For reference sake, here's the voting for 1992 All-ACC

Laettner-314 pts
Walt Williams-310
Tom Gugliotta-289
Rodney Rogers-277
Bryant Stith-268

Hubert Davis-241
Hurley-232
Grant Hill-193
Sam Cassell-177
Doug Edwards-132

T-Hill made third team

So, Hurley wasn't exactly beaten out by a bunch of stiffs.

I've always felt more aggrieved by Avery missing in 1999. He finished sixth in the voting at 221 points, 5 behind Ademola Okulaja. Brand and Langdon made 1st-team sure, but remember that 1999 Duke team went 16-0 and just obliterated the opposition. If any team deserved three first-teamers, it was the '99 team.

[BlueintheFace]

"It still burns me up that he didn't make first team that year ... "

For reference sake, here's the voting for 1992 All-ACC

Laettner-314 pts
Walt Williams-310
Tom Gugliotta-289
Rodney Rogers-277
Bryant Stith-268

Hubert Davis-241
Hurley-232
Grant Hill-193
Sam Cassell-177
Doug Edwards-132

T-Hill made third team

So, Hurley wasn't exactly beaten out by a bunch of stiffs.

I've always felt more aggrieved by Avery missing in 1999. He finished sixth in the voting at 221 points, 5 behind Ademola Okulaja. Brand and Langdon made 1st-team sure, but remember that 1999 Duke team went 16-0 and just obliterated the opposition. If any team deserved three first-teamers, it was the '99 team.

Rodney Rogers... psssh

[InSpades]

Historically speaking, it has been rare (only happened once) for Coach K to win the national championship without one of the three best PGs in the country. In order to do so, he had, IMO, the best player in the history of Duke basketball on that team. Statistically speaking, you're only going to have the best player in the history of Duke basketball play for you one time.

Historically speaking, it has been rare for Coach K to win the national championship. The same can be said for every other college basketball coach (with the possible exception of John Wooden).

Do you realize how statistically insignificant 2 out of 3 is? By your logic we could say it is rare for Coach K to win a national championship without Hurley, Laettner and Grant Hill on his roster. Clearly he should be spending his time petitioning the NCAA to grant them eligibility instead of trying to recruit new players.

The difference between making a final four and winning a national champtionship can be ever so slight (ask Trajan and Elton). The difference between the #3 PG in the country and the #8 PG in the country could be just as slight. Are you honestly trying to say that if Duke had the best SG, SF, PF and Center in the country but only the 4th best PG that they would probably lose?

I do find it somewhat ironic that in 1 post you mention that Duke needs a top 3 PG to win and in another post you say Duke never should have recruited John Wall. So K should only recruit top flight point guards who promise they will stay multiple years? Or do we recruit lesser PGs and somehow magically (by instilling tons of confidence in them!) turn them into top 3 PGs?

[airowe]

Historically speaking, it has been rare for Coach K to win the national championship. The same can be said for every other college basketball coach (with the possible exception of John Wooden).

Do you realize how statistically insignificant 2 out of 3 is? By your logic we could say it is rare for Coach K to win a national championship without Hurley, Laettner and Grant Hill on his roster. Clearly he should be spending his time petitioning the NCAA to grant them eligibility instead of trying to recruit new players.

The difference between making a final four and winning a national champtionship can be ever so slight (ask Trajan and Elton). The difference between the #3 PG in the country and the #8 PG in the country could be just as slight. Are you honestly trying to say that if Duke had the best SG, SF, PF and Center in the country but only the 4th best PG that they would probably lose?

I do find it somewhat ironic that in 1 post you mention that Duke needs a top 3 PG to win and in another post you say Duke never should have recruited John Wall. So K should only recruit top flight point guards who promise they will stay multiple years? Or do we recruit lesser PGs and somehow magically (by instilling tons of confidence in them!) turn them into top 3 PGs?

I may be wrong, but I think InSpades just ended this argument.

[Jeffrey]

The difference between making a final four and winning a national champtionship can be ever so slight (ask Trajan and Elton). The difference between the #3 PG in the country and the #8 PG in the country could be just as slight. Are you honestly trying to say that if Duke had the best SG, SF, PF and Center in the country but only the 4th best PG that they would probably lose?

I think the PG position is the most important in college hoops but not crucial for most coaching styles. I think the PG position is more crucial for K's style (which, of course, I love).


I do find it somewhat ironic that in 1 post you mention that Duke needs a top 3 PG to win and in another post you say Duke never should have recruited John Wall. So K should only recruit top flight point guards who promise they will stay multiple years?

Valid point.

The game is changing in ways I do not like (for example, I really miss home/away against all ACC schools). I do not enjoy one & done players. Nevertheless, we may have to go after one & dones, if we want one of the top three PGs in the country. I find this a sad change which I tend to resist.

[Jeffrey]

I may be wrong, but I think InSpades just ended this argument.

If you please, don't back up the track;
this train's got to run today.

[NSDukeFan]

Who said that?



I do not believe a K team can win a national title without one of the three best PGs in college hoops.



In your opinion, what percentage of the time has a K final four team not had one of the three best PGs in the country?

Sorry, I did combine two of your quotes. I guess I still think it ridiculous to assert that coach K cannot win a national championship without a top 3 PG, as I and other posters have suggested. As it has been shown, the majority of coach K's FF appearances have been without a top 3 PG, though of course PG is important in the college game. I don't think I can even agree that it is more important for Duke than other teams as I think coach K works with whatever players he has. If we miss on a PG for next year, get Mr. Barnes and Kyle stays, I will be as confident in coach K's chances at getting to a FF as about any other team, even if we don't have an AA PG.

[Jeffrey]

Sorry, I did combine two of your quotes.

No problem, I just want to make sure my point is clear. I'm not talking about getting to a final four (which I do not think is K's goal). I'm talking about winning a national championship (which I do think is K's goal).

[DU Band Prez 88]

Jim, thanks, as always, for a detailed and informative post. Your knowledge is amazing.



IMO, Jim's post clearly illustrates that Coach K gets to the final four, the majority of the time, without one of the three best PGs in the country. I have absolutely no doubt about that and never started to state otherwise. As Jumbo said, you're not watching much Duke basketball if you do not realize that fact.


Historically speaking, it has been rare (only happened once) for Coach K to win the national championship without one of the three best PGs in the country. In order to do so, he had, IMO, the best player in the history of Duke basketball on that team. Statistically speaking, you're only going to have the best player in the history of Duke basketball play for you one time.

To the first point, about Coach K's Duke teams getting to the Final Four w/out one of the top 3 PGs...some of Duke's teams under Coach K have also had THE BEST PG in the country, have been excellent during the regular season, and have missed not only the Final Four, but the Sweet 16:
- 1993 (Hurley, lost to Cal round of 32)
- 2002 (Williams, lost to Indiana round of 32)

Also, as another poster has already noted, it's rare historically speaking for ANY coach to EVER win the national championship. Duke 1991-92 had not just a great PG but a great overall team & chemistry. Ditto for 2001. The great talents at PG in Hurley, Williams were but one of several reasons these teams were champions.

To your last point - it will always be the case that you're going to have the best player in Duke basketball history play for you one time...and that person isn't necessarily Christian Laettner! Who knows what great star in, say, 2017-19 will lead the nation in scoring and lead Duke to three consecutive NCAA titles? Stay tuned!

[Indoor66]

Who knows what great star in, say, 2017-19 will lead the nation in scoring and lead Duke to three consecutive NCAA titles? Stay tuned!

I hope it isn't that long...I'm getting older and I want to see the next banner....:mad:

[Jeffrey]

To the first point, about Coach K's Duke teams getting to the Final Four w/out one of the top 3 PGs...some of Duke's teams under Coach K have also had THE BEST PG in the country, have been excellent during the regular season, and have missed not only the Final Four, but the Sweet 16:
- 1993 (Hurley, lost to Cal round of 32)
- 2002 (Williams, lost to Indiana round of 32)[/I]

[I]Also, as another poster has already noted, it's rare historically speaking for ANY coach to EVER win the national championship. Duke 1991-92 had not just a great PG but a great overall team & chemistry. Ditto for 2001. The great talents at PG in Hurley, Williams were but one of several reasons these teams were champions.

I'm not sure whether you'll merely disagree with me (which is absolutely fine), or you'll truly do not understand my stated opinion (which is the reason I keep responding to these types of posts).

When did I say, "I think a K team will always win a national championship, if we have one of the three best PGs in college hoops."?


To your last point - it will always be the case that you're going to have the best player in Duke basketball history play for you one time...and that person isn't necessarily Christian Laettner! Who knows what great star in, say, 2017-19 will lead the nation in scoring and lead Duke to three consecutive NCAA titles? Stay tuned!

All Duke head basketball coaches will not "have the best player in Duke basketball history play for" them "one time".

When did I say, I think Christian Laettner will always be the best player in the history of Duke basketball? I do believe that the increase in one & dones (and, even, two & dones) will really help his odds.

[jimsumner]

"1993 (Hurley, lost to Cal round of 32)
- 2002 (Williams, lost to Indiana round of 32)"

The IU loss in '02 was in the third round, AKA Sweet Sixteen,

[Jumbo]

Are you a moderator? Do you believe one should lead by example?

Yup. And yup. But I literally want to know whether you watch much basketball. Some people don't watch a lot of basketball. I think someone like Throatybeard, for instance, would admit that he doesn't understand the game as well as, say, Jim Sumner, and doesn't enjoy watching it as much either. It's a legitimate question -- just interested in whether you watch much.

[Jumbo]

Historically speaking, it has been rare for Coach K to win the national championship. The same can be said for every other college basketball coach (with the possible exception of John Wooden).

Do you realize how statistically insignificant 2 out of 3 is? By your logic we could say it is rare for Coach K to win a national championship without Hurley, Laettner and Grant Hill on his roster. Clearly he should be spending his time petitioning the NCAA to grant them eligibility instead of trying to recruit new players.

The difference between making a final four and winning a national champtionship can be ever so slight (ask Trajan and Elton). The difference between the #3 PG in the country and the #8 PG in the country could be just as slight. Are you honestly trying to say that if Duke had the best SG, SF, PF and Center in the country but only the 4th best PG that they would probably lose?

I do find it somewhat ironic that in 1 post you mention that Duke needs a top 3 PG to win and in another post you say Duke never should have recruited John Wall. So K should only recruit top flight point guards who promise they will stay multiple years? Or do we recruit lesser PGs and somehow magically (by instilling tons of confidence in them!) turn them into top 3 PGs?

Exactly. You could also state that K has never won the national title without a starting guard from New Jersey. So I guess it's Kyrie Irving or bust ...

[Wander]

Better hope the Miami Hurricanes win the BCS championship this year!

[jimsumner]

Duke also has never won the national title without someone named Bush in the White House.

Should we root for a Jeb come-back?

[BlueintheFace]

Duke also has never won the national title without someone named Bush in the White House.

Should we root for a Jeb come-back?

Jim, put your can of worms away ;)

[Jeffrey]

Yup. And yup. But I literally want to know whether you watch much basketball. Some people don't watch a lot of basketball. I think someone like Throatybeard, for instance, would admit that he doesn't understand the game as well as, say, Jim Sumner, and doesn't enjoy watching it as much either. It's a legitimate question -- just interested in whether you watch much.

Fair enough. I'm not sure of the correct answer. My wife and I frequently disagree about whether I do or not.

I'll try to give you details I think you want. Jim has forgotten more about college hoops than I will probably ever know. I love watching college hoops. My father and brother have coached and I grew up on Duke hoops (born in Durham). I know some former Duke players & coaches and try to learn from them. Is that what you want to know?

[Jeffrey]

Duke also has never won the national title without someone named Bush in the White House.

Should we root for a Jeb come-back?

So, you think it's just a coincidence that K has won his three national titles with, IMO, his two best PGs?

If so, I'd like to restate my previous response to Jumbo.

[sagegrouse]

So, you think it's just a coincidence that K has won his three national titles with, IMO, his two best PGs?

If so, I'd like to restate my previous response to Jumbo.

Jeffrey:

"Coincidence" is a good word for it. You have proposed a really weak test in the scientific sense. First, the line between winning the NC and being the best team but not winning is very thin. After all, the NCAA is a single-elimination tournament. Second, you have only three data points. How can you possible reach a conclusion?

On the first of my two points, here's what I think. Duke would have been just as likely to win national titles in these four years as in 1991, 1992, and 2001:

1986 (best team),
1994 (ten point lead with 7 mins. to go plus a lucky shot at the end),
1999 (don't spot UConn ten pts. early) and
2004 (seven point lead with 2:30 to go plus horrible officiating)

Yeah, I know, the 1992 Duke team is one of the best in history, but suppose that Christian is only nine of ten from the field in the Ky game instead of 10 for 10. Also, yeah I know, in 2004 Duke lost in the semis not the finals -- but do you really think that team would have lost to GT playing for the NC?

How were the point guards in those years?

1986: Amaker was very good but not A-A, but his running mate JD was arguably the best player in the country.

1994: No true point guard, just all everything Grant Hill.

1999: Avery wasn't one of the best PGs in the country, and Trajan really wqsn't a PG at all.

2004: Kudos to Duhon, who probably was one of the three best PGs in the country, although he didn't have the recognition.

The second point is that you are doing "curve-fitting" with only three data points, which will conform to a zillion different patterns. Sumner and others have pointed out that fallacy (NJ, e.g.).

Now if you take all the FF teams, as I believe Sumner has done, you get something quite different.

sagegrouse

[NSDukeFan]

So, you think it's just a coincidence that K has won his three national titles with, IMO, his two best PGs?

If so, I'd like to restate my previous response to Jumbo.

Using this logic, I guess I don't have to worry about UNC winning anytime soon as Roy has only won national titles with ultra-quick point guards. As far as I understand he doesn't have one now and doesn't have one recruited and isn't targeting one. I guess there is no worry if he also gets Barnes as that wouldn't fit the template for his title teams. Or is it just coach K that needs to have a certain caliber of point guard to win?

[Jeffrey]

"Coincidence" is a good word for it. You have proposed a really weak test in the scientific sense.

The second point is that you are doing "curve-fitting" with only three data points, which will conform to a zillion different patterns.

Clearly, my stated opinion cannot be proven with facts. I asked for all available data knowing (as we all do) there are only three data points to address. My opinion still is that it was more than coincidence that K won his three national titles with, IMO, his two best PGs. It appears that everyone else here thinks it was merely coincidence.

I have some follow-up questions to see how differently my opinions are than most other DBR posters:

1. In your opinion, what is the most important position in college hoops?

2. In your opinion, is a well-rounded PG more important to a team that plays more aggressively or more passively?

[Jeffrey]

Using this logic, I guess I don't have to worry about UNC winning anytime soon as Roy has only won national titles with ultra-quick point guards. As far as I understand he doesn't have one now and doesn't have one recruited and isn't targeting one. I guess there is no worry if he also gets Barnes as that wouldn't fit the template for his title teams. Or is it just coach K that needs to have a certain caliber of point guard to win?

If your definition of the best PG is merely one who is "ultra-quick", then you appear to have nothing to worry about.

[Kedsy]

Clearly, my stated opinion cannot be proven with facts. I asked for all available data knowing (as we all do) there are only three data points to address. My opinion still is that it was more than coincidence that K won his three national titles with, IMO, his two best PGs. It appears that everyone else here thinks it was merely coincidence.

I have some follow-up questions to see how differently my opinions are than most other DBR posters:

1. In your opinion, what is the most important position in college hoops?

2. In your opinion, is a well-rounded PG more important to a team that plays more aggressively or more passively?

I'm not sure why you keep arguing. Nobody disagrees with your beliefs regarding the two questions you pose above. What many people (including myself) disagree with is your previous assertion that it is impossible to win without a "top 3" point guard, and your apparent belief that a good coach with good players cannot find ways to win just because none of his players happen to fit the classic one-of-the-best-in-the-nation point guard mold.

[sagegrouse]

Clearly, my stated opinion cannot be proven with facts. I asked for all available data knowing (as we all do) there are only three data points to address. My opinion still is that it was more than coincidence that K won his three national titles with, IMO, his two best PGs. It appears that everyone else here thinks it was merely coincidence.

I have some follow-up questions to see how differently my opinions are than most other DBR posters:

1. In your opinion, what is the most important position in college hoops?

2. In your opinion, is a well-rounded PG more important to a team that plays more aggressively or more passively?

I will repeat my advice not to focus on just the three data points of NC teams; there were other Duke teams arguably as good: you get more data that way.

Here are my thoughts on your two questions:

1. College is a guards game. PG, SG, combo guard, whatever. These are the folks with the ball and are key to success.

2. I would quiblle with your term "well-rounded PG," in that it implies a do-everything player like JWill. My advice is, if you can get a player like JWill, do so... for any team... at any time. If you mean a John Stockton, Bobby Hurley type guard, they are essential when -- passive team or not -- if you have big men who can score.

Back to your original question, I think that with a Christian Laettner at center, Duke had to have a really good PG to get him the ball. In that sense, your original proposition was on target. WRT to the 2001 team, the fact that JWill was the best PG in the country is arguable and a bit irrelevant: he was the best guard of any kind in the country and was real force in penetrating, scoring and rebounding, not just in distributing the ball.

sagegrouse
'As Bones McKinney once said, "I told my guards, 'This here is my man [center] Len Chappell. If you don't get him the ball, you are going to be sitting next to me on the bench.'"'

[NSDukeFan]

If your definition of the best PG is merely one who is "ultra-quick", then you appear to have nothing to worry about.



1. In your opinion, what is the most important position in college hoops?

2. In your opinion, is a well-rounded PG more important to a team that plays more aggressively or more passively?

My definition of the best PG is not necessarily one who is ultra-quick. I was stating that if you use an N=2 study of UNC's last two title teams, they both had ultra-quick guards and using your logic, they must need that to win a championship.

As far as answers to your questions, I would say guard play in general has become more important lately, due perhaps in part to the three pointer, lack of many dominant inside players, etc. I would go with coach K though and say that positions aren't as important as simply having great players.

I'm not sure how to answer question #2 as it depends on your definitions of well-rounded. (UConn PG El-Amin certainly was;) or do you mean triple double threat like J-Kidd or Magic, or offensively and defensively solid perhaps like Billups, or offensively can score and pass like Nash, CP3?) Playing aggressively (does this mean attacking fast break e.g. last year's UNC or 90's LMU with Kimble and Gathers, defensive aggression like the Salukis when they are good or Nova last year, pressing like Mizzou last year or Arkansas w/Nolan Richardson or Iowa w/Tom Davis, or playing the passing lanes like Duke?)

A good point guard is always a great thing to have for defensive pressure, breaking defensive pressure, penetrating to create scoring opportunities, preventing the other team's perimeter players from penetrating, distributing the ball to scorers in their best scoring positions, etc. Many if not all the above roles can also be filled by players not defined as point guards. I think Duke won titles and made final fours not because they had great point guards, but because they had a great coach and great players, some of whom happened to be point guards.

[Jeffrey]

I'm not sure why you keep arguing.

I'm truly not trying to upset people..... but, obviously, I am..... so, I'll stop posting to this thread.

[DU Band Prez 88]

"1993 (Hurley, lost to Cal round of 32)
- 2002 (Williams, lost to Indiana round of 32)"

The IU loss in '02 was in the third round, AKA Sweet Sixteen,

Thanks, you're right - didn't they beat Notre Dame the previous game?

[Kedsy]

I'm truly not trying to upset people..... but, obviously, I am..... so, I'll stop posting to this thread.

I don't think you're upsetting anyone. You had a valid point, you extended it too far, people called you on it, and you kept trying to justify your overextension.

I don't think you really believe you need a top-3 PG to win the NCAA championship. After all, one could make a pretty good argument that every champion after 2001 has done so without such a PG, with the exception of the two UNC champions. I don't think you really believe Coach K is such a limited tactician that he's incapable of doing something that Self, Donovan, Boeheim, Calhoun, and (Md's) Williams have all done in the past eight years. So why not just say, "I overstated my case" and move on?

[Jeffrey]

I don't think you're upsetting anyone. You had a valid point, you extended it too far, people called you on it, and you kept trying to justify your overextension.

I don't think you really believe you need a top-3 PG to win the NCAA championship. After all, one could make a pretty good argument that every champion after 2001 has done so without such a PG, with the exception of the two UNC champions. I don't think you really believe Coach K is such a limited tactician that he's incapable of doing something that Self, Donovan, Boeheim, Calhoun, and (Md's) Williams have all done in the past eight years. So why not just say, "I overstated my case" and move on?

In your opinion, what was my valid point?

[Kedsy]

In your opinion, what was my valid point?

That having a top notch point guard is important in today's college game.

Was that not your point?

[Jeffrey]

That having a top notch point guard is important in today's college game.

Was that not your point?

One of my many on this thread. That's why I was unsure which one you were addressing.

Do you think that a "top notch point guard" is more important to a team that constantly runs M2M than zone?

[Kedsy]

One of my many on this thread. That's why I was unsure which one you were addressing.

Do you think that a "top notch point guard" is more important to a team that constantly runs M2M than zone?

Well, I'd say no to that, because when I think of a top notch point guard I'm thinking mostly about offensive responsibilities, rather than defensive. I don't want my PG to be a liability on defense, but he doesn't have to be my best or quickest defender, either. Sure it would be great to have someone who could do both, but as long as my PG can guard somebody on the other team and I also have someone on my team who can guard the other team's quick PG, I'm going to be OK.

So while it's true that Duke's team defense tends to be better when we have an exceptional defender at the top, it doesn't have to be an All-America PG (e.g., Tommy Amaker) and frankly it doesn't have to be a PG at all (e.g., Billy King). This year, I'm hoping Nolan Smith can fit that bill, whether he plays on the ball or off the ball on offense.

[Jeffrey]

Well, I'd say no to that, because when I think of a top notch point guard I'm thinking mostly about offensive responsibilities, rather than defensive.

When I think of K, I think D first. So, I was addressing the rare PG who can do both very well. I think that PG is the perfect fit for a K team and substantially increases the probability of us winning another national championship.

Upon reflection, I prefer your approach of saying a "top notch point guard" than my approach of saying a "top three PG". Honestly, the reason I didn't go with it originally is that everyone will differ over the definition of a "top notch point guard" (like we just did) and there will probably be more agreement (such as Jim's approach) to defining a "top three PG". Nevertheless, I certainly understand Jumbo's point that the #2 PG this season may be weaker than the #4 PG next season.

[Kedsy]

When I think of K, I think D first. So, I was addressing the rare PG who can do both very well. I think that PG is the perfect fit for a K team and substantially increases the probability of us winning another national championship.

Upon reflection, I prefer your approach of saying a "top notch point guard" than my approach of saying a "top three PG". Honestly, the reason I didn't go with it originally is that everyone will differ over the definition of a "top notch point guard" (like we just did) and there will probably be more agreement (such as Jim's approach) to defining a "top three PG".

Well, I agree a two-way PG like that would increase the probability, but I also think with the right combination of talents we could still win without a player like that.

Interestingly enough, I haven't heard so much about the defensive prowess of Irving, Knight, or McCallum (or Wall, Boynton, or Bledsoe, for that matter). I've only heard about their offense. Are any of them supposed to be the two-way superstar you crave?

[Jeffrey]

Interestingly enough, I haven't heard so much about the defensive prowess of Irving, Knight, or McCallum (or Wall, Boynton, or Bledsoe, for that matter). I've only heard about their offense.

Thank you! I do not understand why we are not hearing more about their D. We know exactly what happens to recruits who end up not being able to play D at K standards.


Are any of them supposed to be the two-way superstar you crave?

I have never seen any of them play and have learned, over the years, to doubt many of the "expert" opinions on the matter. How many top recruits have we had who ultimately were not able to play D at K standards?

[Indoor66]

Thank you! I do not understand why we are not hearing more about their D. We know exactly what happens to recruits who end up not being able to play D at K standards.



I have never seen any of them play and have learned, over the years, to doubt many of the "expert" opinions on the matter. How many top recruits have we had who ultimately were not able to play D at K standards?

I think you make great points about the requirement of K standard defense to get playing time. That is one reason I have so little interest in the highlite tapes posted on the board. They show spectacular plays, dunks and made shots, not in-the-trenches defense.

It is defense that gets one off the bench at Duke.

[ACCBBallFan]

Of all these 2010 and 2011 recruits, the only two that speak much about defense are Thornton and Beal who sounded like Kobe saying I'll guard the best opponent.