PDA

View Full Version : 2009-2010 Starting Five



BlueintheFace
09-29-2009, 10:00 PM
On Nolan's U-Stream he said the starting five will be:

Jon Scheyer
Nolan Smith
Kyle Singler
Mason Plumlee
Lance Thomas/ Brian Zoubek

There you have it

ScreechTDX1847
09-29-2009, 10:30 PM
I like the look of that lineup. Mason was the only person I wasn't sure about but thought there was a good chance he would start.

meloveduke
09-29-2009, 11:36 PM
Nice, mason and lance should be be a good combo down low. What do you guys think?

Greg_Newton
09-29-2009, 11:38 PM
On Nolan's U-Stream he said the starting five will be:

Jon Scheyer
Nolan Smith
Kyle Singler
Mason Plumlee
Lance Thomas/ Brian Zoubek

There you have it

Pretty cool if Mason really has locked up starting spot already. Bodes very well for the team's prospects.

My one question... does the order you typed the names imply that Lance would be the center in that lineup, or was that just coincidental? It boggles my mind that Lance would spend any time at the 5 on this team. And by "5", I mean guarding the opposing team's center and spending the most time in the post, before all the "K doesn't play positions" nonsense starts... :rolleyes:

Azdukefan
09-29-2009, 11:54 PM
On Nolan's U-Stream he said the starting five will be:

Jon Scheyer
Nolan Smith
Kyle Singler
Mason Plumlee
Lance Thomas/ Brian Zoubek

There you have it

If it comes down to Z or LT, I would prefer LT. His mobility will serve us much better. While we will have a very big team, I really think our mobility will still be there if Lance plays the bulk of the minutes. I look forward to seeing Mason in the starting lineup and playing alongside his brother at times! Hell I look forward to watching a Duke game period!;)

DukieTiger
09-30-2009, 12:00 AM
Pretty cool if Mason really has locked up starting spot already. Bodes very well for the team's prospects.

My one question... does the order you typed the names imply that Lance would be the center in that lineup, or was that just coincidental? It boggles my mind that Lance would spend any time at the 5 on this team. And by "5", I mean guarding the opposing team's center and spending the most time in the post, before all the "K doesn't play positions" nonsense starts... :rolleyes:

I dunno if that's why the OP listed them this way, but that was the order that Nolan listed them off. And it was more of Nolan's prediction than anything concrete, but that's just my impression.

I wouldn't worry about Lance guarding the other team's "5" if Mason is playing. Just like I wouldn't worry about Jon guarding quick PGs with Nolan at his side.

Speaking of the "K doesn't play positions" thing... One thing Nolan said a few times when people asked if he was gonna be PG or SG... He said he's just going to be a guard, and do the things that both a PG and an SG would do (create, score, shoot, etc.) So that would give you an indication that we're going to have a lot of flexible, versatile guys out there (not that we didn't already know that.)

BlueintheFace
09-30-2009, 12:53 AM
A recruit doing U-stream is one thing, but I don't like our players doing it. Too much risk there. Coach K might need to shut it down.

DukieTiger
09-30-2009, 01:42 AM
I dunno, these guys are trained to handle the media, press conferences and the like. They are also trained, instructed and expected to be great representatives of the University. It's the only official rule Coach K has for the team, iirc, to act/live in a way that is a good representation of self/team/university- something along those lines. Finally, the guys are seemingly well looked after when it comes to NCAA regulations. I'm sure they are well instructed to the extent where they would know better than to do anything that is blatantly a violation or anything like that.

I just think it's such a grey area, because it's all (twitter, ustream, etc.) so new. It will be fascinating to see how the NCAA and individual teams adapt to all these changes.

All that said, I agree with you and think that they will probably be encouraged to tone it down a bit, at the least.

flyingdutchdevil
09-30-2009, 04:24 AM
A recruit doing U-stream is one thing, but I don't like our players doing it. Too much risk there. Coach K might need to shut it down.

I couldn't disagree more. Social media is a way for athletes to engage with their fans. And while some college athletes (I'm really thinking of Kansas right now) will say inappropriate things, I have a lot of faith in Duke kids using social media. Also, we are always talking about how this player is such a "good" and "responsible" kid and "fits the Duke mold." If you truly believe that, then let Duke players act on their own accord - no need for K to pull the plug on Twitter, Facebook, youtube, uStream, etc.

sagegrouse
09-30-2009, 09:07 AM
On Nolan's U-Stream he said the starting five will be:

Jon Scheyer
Nolan Smith
Kyle Singler
Mason Plumlee
Lance Thomas/ Brian Zoubek

There you have it

What does this really mean?

(a) Practice doesn't officially start until o/a October 15.

(b) Players are allowed to scrimmage, of course, but coaches are forbidden from even watching.

How can there as yet be a "starting five?" Says who? Coaches who haven't seen the players play a minute? Or, maybe its the consensus of the veterans on the team? Or, maybe just Nolan? And, of course, he named six players for his starting five..

sagegrouse
'BTW with each thread now evolving into colloquys on Twitter and U-Stream, does that mean that Marshall McLuhan was stating an eternal truth -- "The medium is the message?"'

NovaScotian
09-30-2009, 09:11 AM
A recruit doing U-stream is one thing, but I don't like our players doing it. Too much risk there. Coach K might need to shut it down.

yea! and get off my lawn!

JasonEvans
09-30-2009, 09:19 AM
Pretty cool if Mason really has locked up starting spot already.

What sage said.

How about we wait until practice actually begins before anyone goes and locks down a starting position.... mmmmkay?

--Jason "or, we could just go ahead and retire Mason's jersey now and get it over with... now where have I head that before? ;) " Evans

MChambers
09-30-2009, 09:36 AM
What does this really mean?

(a) Practice doesn't officially start until o/a October 15.

(b) Players are allowed to scrimmage, of course, but coaches are forbidden from even watching.

How can there as yet be a "starting five?" Says who? Coaches who haven't seen the players play a minute? Or, maybe its the consensus of the veterans on the team? Or, maybe just Nolan? And, of course, he named six players for his starting five..

sagegrouse
'BTW with each thread now evolving into colloquys on Twitter and U-Stream, does that mean that Marshall McLuhan was stating an eternal truth -- "The medium is the message?"'

McLuhan? Where is he coaching now? :)

flyingdutchdevil
09-30-2009, 09:38 AM
What sage said.

How about we wait until practice actually begins before anyone goes and locks down a starting position.... mmmmkay?

--Jason "or, we could just go ahead and retire Mason's jersey now and get it over with... now where have I head that before? ;) " Evans

I don't see why we are being dissuaded from speculating the starting 5, even if it's before practice season. This type of chatter gets everyone excited for the future season, which is always positive. Plus, these aren't the starting five of us, but rather of Nolan.

This is the most exciting recruiting class since the 2005 class (even if they didn't pan out, it was one hell of an exciting class to follow at the time). I think Mason can easily be a starter, with Dawkins and Kelly as the 6th, 7th, or 8th guys off the bench (with Miles will come off the bench as well). I am really excited for this season.

slower
09-30-2009, 09:49 AM
McLuhan? Where is he coaching now? :)

Haven't you heard? He's a close personal friend/advisor to Calipari ;)

Indoor66
09-30-2009, 09:51 AM
What the heck is ustream?

flyingdutchdevil
09-30-2009, 09:53 AM
What the heck is ustream?

As per wikipedia:

"Ustream, established March 2007, is a website which consists of network of diverse channels providing a platform for lifecasting and live video streaming of events online. The website has over 2,000,000 registered users who generate 1,500,000+ hours of live streamed content per month with over ten million unique hits per month. It received $11.1 million in Series A funding for new product development from DCM and investors Labrador Ventures and Band of Angels."

Basically - live youtube

JasonEvans
09-30-2009, 10:03 AM
I don't see why we are being dissuaded from speculating the starting 5, even if it's before practice season. This type of chatter gets everyone excited for the future season, which is always positive. Plus, these aren't the starting five of us, but rather of Nolan.


I cannot speak for others, but the point I was trying to make is that nothing is set in stone. Some folks are acting like Nolan's comments are the final word and that the starting 5 is a done deal. While Nolan's five/six may very well be the starters this season, I can guarantee you that it is not a done deal at this point because practice has not even started yet.

So, I have no objection to speculating about starting fives and interesting combos of players and the such, but treating any of this as if it is a done deal is just foolish...

...and that was what I was trying to convey.

--Jason "anyone dreaming of a big lineup with Scheyer, Singler, Kelly, Mason, and Miles?" Evans

InSpades
09-30-2009, 10:09 AM
I don't see why we are being dissuaded from speculating the starting 5, even if it's before practice season. This type of chatter gets everyone excited for the future season, which is always positive. Plus, these aren't the starting five of us, but rather of Nolan.


No one is saying don't speculate on a starting 5. It's just that Nolan was asked a question in a very informal setting and gave his opinion on what will happen. From there people jump to conclusions like "Mason has locked up a starting spot". It's somewhat silly. Obviously Nolan was just taking a guess. There's no way the starting 5 has been decided before practice even begins.

I watched some of the ustream last night and had very mixed feelings. I thought it was very cool to see Nolan in a relaxed setting just interacting with people. That's something you really don't get to see very often. He came across very well I think. Just a normal kid who happens to be really good at basketball. On the other hand I could see it getting out of hand and he could easily say something "wrong" and things could totally be taken the wrong way. The more things like this happen the more that non-Duke fans will try to disrupt and cause problems with it.

SMO
09-30-2009, 10:14 AM
What sage said.

How about we wait until practice actually begins before anyone goes and locks down a starting position.... mmmmkay?

--Jason "or, we could just go ahead and retire Mason's jersey now and get it over with... now where have I head that before? ;) " Evans

Plus, this isn't even a starting 5. It's a starting 5 or 6!

jv001
09-30-2009, 10:15 AM
All Duke fans know the starting five and the 7 to 9 man rotation will be determined by Coach K during his tough practices. This year as in previous years spots will be won on a weekly basis. Those who perform up to Coach's expectations will be the players getting the minutes. I think Kyle, Jon and Nolan will get the major minutes but I have no idea who gets the other minutes in the rotation. It is fun to predict and helps pass these waiting hours until tipoff. I imagine Nolan is going off pickup games and it's based on his personal feelings. Since Coach K has not seen these pickup games, it's certainly not etched in stone by any means. It's getting closer guys. Go Duke!

slower
09-30-2009, 10:23 AM
Jason "anyone dreaming of a big lineup with Scheyer, Singler, Kelly, Mason, and Miles?" Evans

Do I even need to spell out what the Duke-haters would say about this lineup?

It's a fine lineup - but I'm just sayin'.

jv001
09-30-2009, 10:27 AM
Do I even need to spell out what the Duke-haters would say about this lineup?

It's a fine lineup - but I'm just sayin'.

At first I didn't get it. Went right over my head. But I see where you're going and I would not be surprised if another coach used that against us in recruiting. Go Duke!

BlueintheFace
09-30-2009, 10:31 AM
I couldn't disagree more. Social media is a way for athletes to engage with their fans. And while some college athletes (I'm really thinking of Kansas right now) will say inappropriate things, I have a lot of faith in Duke kids using social media. Also, we are always talking about how this player is such a "good" and "responsible" kid and "fits the Duke mold." If you truly believe that, then let Duke players act on their own accord - no need for K to pull the plug on Twitter, Facebook, youtube, uStream, etc.

If you look through the Kyrie Irving thread, you will find that I vigorously defended Twitter, U-Stream, and those who follow recruits on it to an extent.

HOWEVER, recruits are different because they do not yet represent a program. Last night was very dangerous for Nolan and Duke Basketball. He handled it fairly well but really pushed the envelopes a few times.

1) He accidentally showed Seth Curry's phone # on the video chat
2) He made jokes about ethnicities ("What do you call a short mexican?....)
3) When people started telling "homos" to get out of the chat he laughed and repeated one of the statements accidentally.
4) He made somewhat disparaging comments about Carolina players
5) He made speculations (or assertions) depending on what you believe about the lineup before practice has even started (Not sure K is down with that).
6) He talked about potential recruits, some of which have not been offered.

... there is just a lot of gray area and a lot of room to slip up. When a recruit does it, no big deal, because the media won't jump all over it. When a player for an NCAA team gets caught slipping on something... WHEN A DUKE BASKETBALL PLAYER IN THE SPOTLIGHT slips up... not good.

I wouldn't be surprised to see K put some restrictions on Twitter and U-stream once the season starts.

Back to the starting lineup... We are going to be SOOOOO big. It still hasn't hit me yet how different this team will be this season.

airowe
09-30-2009, 10:51 AM
Do I even need to spell out what the Duke-haters would say about this lineup?

It's a fine lineup - but I'm just sayin'.

Good luck using that against us in recruiting if we ride it to the Final Four. Even with the lack of quickness on defense, we might score enough points where it wouldn't even matter.

jesus_hurley
09-30-2009, 11:00 AM
Good luck using that against us in recruiting if we ride it to the Final Four. Even with the lack of quickness on defense, we might score enough points where it wouldn't even matter.

I seem to recall a team down the road using this strategy...

Duvall
09-30-2009, 11:29 AM
--Jason "anyone dreaming of a big lineup with Scheyer, Singler, Kelly, Mason, and Miles?" Evans

Good lord, why? That sounds like a great lineup for getting Kyle in foul trouble in about a minute and a half.

InSpades
09-30-2009, 11:57 AM
--Jason "anyone dreaming of a big lineup with Scheyer, Singler, Kelly, Mason, and Miles?" Evans

I'm glad that most of us thought "wow that lineup is slow" or "wow that lineup is tall" when thinking about that lineup instead of anything else.

I fall into the latter group myself. It would certainly present some problems for other defenses I would think. Do you play man-to-man and risk height mismatches inside? Do you play zone and watch as Scheyer/Singler/Kelly pick it apart from 3? I definitly think Singler at the 2 would present some matchup problems for other teams. Hopefully on defense your lack of quickness could be made up for by a ton of height.

Indoor66
09-30-2009, 12:09 PM
A big lineup with Scheyer, Singler, Kelly, Mason, and Miles

...would average 6'8.8"! Try shooting over that... and consider the space covered by the long arms waiving and reaching for the ball. An interesting lineup.

Kedsy
09-30-2009, 12:10 PM
A big lineup with Scheyer, Singler, Kelly, Mason, and Miles

...would average 6'8.8"! Try shooting over that... and consider the space covered by the long arms waiving and reaching for the ball. An interesting lineup.

With Z instead of Miles it's even taller (as well as slower).

JasonEvans
09-30-2009, 02:08 PM
Scheyer, Singler, Kelly, Mason, and Miles isn't nearly as slow a lineup as some of ya'll seem to think.

But, if speed -- particularly on D -- is a big concern, then plug Thomas in for Kelley. Still a very large and long lineup with better defensive quickness.

--Jason "we have size to burn this year... quite a change from the past" Evans

meloveduke
09-30-2009, 03:59 PM
This is my pick:
starter/bench)
1. Scheyer/?
2. Smith/dawkins
3. Singler/Kelly
4. Lance/miles
5. Mason/z


I would think dawkins would back up smith and scheyer, and just have smith running the point when scheyer is not on the floor. I did see that scheyer said that both him and smith will kinda share the point. I think scheyer will do most of the point running but, this is just my guess. Anyway you line them up we have a good nine man rotation this year.

ACCBBallFan
09-30-2009, 05:52 PM
How is Nolan's statement any different than what posters have been saying on these boards for months? or what Kyle said about Mason being more ready than Ryan? or what coach K saying one or both of the frosh could start?

BTW, Nolan did say he scans these boards occasionally.

The order with Lance 5th was just that the other 4 were in his opinion starters and the 5th was not, not that Lance would play the 5 spot.

He also said he is a guard no PG and no SG, as is Scheyer.

so those two plus either

Singler
Lance
Mason

or

Singler
Mason
Zoubek

I think it varies by opponent and to just keep the other coach guessing. More often it will be lance as defense comes first, but vs. Favors, Alabi, type centers Zoubek for bulk.

Nolan also said he takes Miles over Mason in 1 vs. 1 as big brother would never let his little brother win (same think he said about himself and his honorary little brother Quinn Cook).

Says Miles playing much more confidently with his brother on board.

SilkyJ
09-30-2009, 06:43 PM
I think it varies by opponent and to just keep the other coach guessing. More often it will be lance as defense comes first, but vs. Favors, Alabi, type centers Zoubek for bulk.


I agree with you in theory, but I don't know that I put FAVORS in the category of big/bulky centers. He's 6'9 220. That's LT/Mason territory, though Favors is more explosive than LT. I think Favors would do some serious damage against Zoubs.

Alabi on the other hand is 7'1 250. Thats Zoubs Territory.

basket1544
09-30-2009, 10:44 PM
This is Coach K's team we're talking about. Sure I think we can all nail down two or three (probably 3) of the starters, but he plays a 9 man rotation almost all the time and changes things up frequently. The 5 players that have the most minutes at the end of the game (not necessarily the 5 that start the game) will vary depending on who the opponent is, who is healthiest, who is feeling their three point shot, etc. I do love the speculation though because it makes me start getting my old knees in shape to be ready to jump throughout a few games. My starting five: the 3 S's, a MP (don't know which one at the moment because I haven't seen Mason play yet), and depending on the opponent either Z or LT. Anyway you slice it, I can't wait!

speedevil2001
09-30-2009, 10:54 PM
On Nolan's U-Stream he said the starting five will be:

Jon Scheyer
Nolan Smith
Kyle Singler
Mason Plumlee
Lance Thomas/ Brian Zoubek

There you have it

pg: scheyer
sg: smith
sf: singler
pf: thomas
c: mason

NovaScotian
09-30-2009, 11:00 PM
This is Coach K's team we're talking about. Sure I think we can all nail down two or three (probably 3) of the starters, but he plays a 9 man rotation almost all the time and changes things up frequently.

excuse me? nine? who were 8 and 9 in 2005, 2006 or 2007? please - the biggest criticism of coach mike over the last ~10 years is that his rotations have been too small (basically seven players). this year he will be forced to increase the size because we'll need to play taller players out of position more, but let's not pretend that a 9-man rotation has been part of coach mike's game plan in the recent past.

basket1544
09-30-2009, 11:32 PM
Not that it matters one way or the other, but:
2004-05 season 11 different players started. 2005-06 I'll give you only 7 different players started, but who would you start instead of JJ and Sheld? 2006-07 8 different starters. 2007-08 9 different starters.
My point is that Coach K likes to mix things up.

NovaScotian
09-30-2009, 11:49 PM
Not that it matters one way or the other, but:
2004-05 season 11 different players started. 2005-06 I'll give you only 7 different players started, but who would you start instead of JJ and Sheld? 2006-07 8 different starters. 2007-08 9 different starters.
My point is that Coach K likes to mix things up.

just as an example of the 11 starters in 04-05 - David McClure, Patrick Davidson, Patrick Johnson, Reggie Love (remember wake forest?). The other seven (JJ, DEwing, Shelden, Dockery, DeMarcus, Shav, and Lee) were the rotation.

05-06
JJ, Shelden, Dockery, Paulus, McRoberts, DeMarcus (barely) and Lee = 7

06-07
DeMarcus, Paulus, McRoberts, Scheyer, Henderson, McClure, Lance/Zoubek =8

07-08
DeMarcus, Kyle, Paulus, Scheyer, Henderson, McClure and Lance = 7

08-09
Kyle, Scheyer, Henderson, Paulus, Smith, Lance, Zoubek, Elliott, McClure = 9
Last year was the first year in a while with a deeper rotation.

my points - 1) coach mike generally uses a short rotation
2) number of players who start a game is not a valid indicator of players in the rotation
3) you're right - none of this matters. with our thin backcourt and guys playing out of position, coach mike will definitely be playing more than seven guys this year.

speedevil2001
10-01-2009, 02:39 AM
A big lineup with Scheyer, Singler, Kelly, Mason, and Miles

...would average 6'8.8"! Try shooting over that... and consider the space covered by the long arms waiving and reaching for the ball. An interesting lineup.

how about a small lineup:

pg: scheyer
sg: smith
sf: dawkins
pf: singler
c: thomas

duke might have to use this lineup a lot this year to match up with quicker teams.

it would be nice if elliot williams was still around..even a more smaller and quicker lineup.

pg: scheyer
sg: smith
sf: dawkins
pf: williams
c: singler

Oriole Way
10-01-2009, 03:02 AM
I have a hunch that Duke's best hypothetical lineup, if they reach their potential, would feature both of the Plumlee brothers starting.

Nolan Smith and Miles Plumlee are the two players I would most like to see improve - really think they would make Duke much better if they become the players I envision (Nolan a more effective scoring and passing guard and Miles an athletic center who can grab 5-7 rebounds a game and be a consistent threat to put up double digit points scoring).

flyingdutchdevil
10-01-2009, 04:33 AM
how about a small lineup:

pg: scheyer
sg: smith
sf: dawkins
pf: singler
c: thomas

duke might have to use this lineup a lot this year to match up with quicker teams.

it would be nice if elliot williams was still around..even a more smaller and quicker lineup.

pg: scheyer
sg: smith
sf: dawkins
pf: williams
c: singler

That small lineup you talk about scares the hell out of me and, in all honesty, I hope K doesn't play it unless there is 2 minutes to go and we need to put up points in a hurry. It's not that I don't like that lineup - I love that lineup - it's that if any of 1-4 get into foul trouble, we are screwed.

I think K's biggest challenge is not going to be integrating the freshman, or defense, or scoring in the half court, or turnovers - it's going to be making sure the backcourt STAYS out of foul trouble. If one of them is in foul trouble, then the other backcourt players play too many minutes. Not the strategy for staying fresh come March.

UrinalCake
10-01-2009, 12:09 PM
These extreme lineups may be fun when playing NBA Live, but in reality any team needs balance. I don't suspect we'll see the "big team" or the "fast team" or the "white team" (there, I said it!) very often this year.

I do recall in 1999 I was hoping to see the "muscle team" on the floor. It was something like Maggette, James, Brand, Carrawell, and Domzalski. Sadly, it never happened :).

sagegrouse
10-01-2009, 12:49 PM
These extreme lineups may be fun when playing NBA Live, but in reality any team needs balance. I don't suspect we'll see the "big team" or the "fast team" or the "white team" (there, I said it!) very often this year.

I do recall in 1999 I was hoping to see the "muscle team" on the floor. It was something like Maggette, James, Brand, Carrawell, and Domzalski. Sadly, it never happened :).

Lst season BOb Knight referred to K's "all-forward team:" Kyle, LT, Gerald, EWill, and Scheyer," which was effective against certain teams.

Given Duke's motion offense and switching defense, I have always felt that a team like that would really appeal to K. In particular, I can imagine a team of five Grant-Hill types that would be stunningly effective. That isn't going to happen with the current roster, which is the largest I can remember at Duke.

sagegrouse

COYS
10-02-2009, 10:01 AM
Lst season BOb Knight referred to K's "all-forward team:" Kyle, LT, Gerald, EWill, and Scheyer," which was effective against certain teams.

Given Duke's motion offense and switching defense, I have always felt that a team like that would really appeal to K. In particular, I can imagine a team of five Grant-Hill types that would be stunningly effective. That isn't going to happen with the current roster, which is the largest I can remember at Duke.

sagegrouse

Of course, why wouldn't you play five Grant Hill's if you could? Ok, maybe you need one true three point threat on the court, but seriously, I could live with 5 6-9 guys with insane athleticism, basketball IQ, court vision, ball-handling ability, and rebounding ability who are capable of averaging 20ppg apiece and who all stay for four years and lead Duke to four more titles. How's that cloning experiment going again?

Seriously, though, I can see a big lineup working well if Kyle is the nominal "2" as long as Mason, Zoubs, Miles and Kelly are effective at help defense and protecting the rim. Zoubs isn't the fastest on defensive rotations, but he's tall enough to alter shots. Both Mason and Miles should be able to move quickly enough to help out if one of the perimeter defenders is beaten. We'll see if Kelly can get up to game speed quickly enough. However, if these guys can rotate well enough and provide enough of a shot blocking presence, a lineup like this could work. I'd actually be slightly more concerned on the offensive end. Kyle would be restricted to the perimeter because there wouldn't be any driving lanes with our bigs clogging the lane. Unless our bigs develop quality go-to moves in the post, I'm not sure that the spacing at the offensive end would favor our strengths.

Kedsy
10-02-2009, 10:29 AM
Of course, why wouldn't you play five Grant Hill's if you could? Ok, maybe you need one true three point threat on the court, but seriously, I could live with 5 6-9 guys with insane athleticism, basketball IQ, court vision, ball-handling ability, and rebounding ability who are capable of averaging 20ppg apiece and who all stay for four years and lead Duke to four more titles. How's that cloning experiment going again?

Seriously, though, I can see a big lineup working well if Kyle is the nominal "2" as long as Mason, Zoubs, Miles and Kelly are effective at help defense and protecting the rim. Zoubs isn't the fastest on defensive rotations, but he's tall enough to alter shots. Both Mason and Miles should be able to move quickly enough to help out if one of the perimeter defenders is beaten. We'll see if Kelly can get up to game speed quickly enough. However, if these guys can rotate well enough and provide enough of a shot blocking presence, a lineup like this could work. I'd actually be slightly more concerned on the offensive end. Kyle would be restricted to the perimeter because there wouldn't be any driving lanes with our bigs clogging the lane. Unless our bigs develop quality go-to moves in the post, I'm not sure that the spacing at the offensive end would favor our strengths.

Well, Kelly would roam the perimeter as well, and from the youtube clips it looks like Mason has a mid-range game. I don't think offense would be our problem in the scenario you envision.

NSDukeFan
10-02-2009, 10:31 AM
Of course, why wouldn't you play five Grant Hill's if you could? Ok, maybe you need one true three point threat on the court, but seriously, I could live with 5 6-9 guys with insane athleticism, basketball IQ, court vision, ball-handling ability, and rebounding ability who are capable of averaging 20ppg apiece and who all stay for four years and lead Duke to four more titles. How's that cloning experiment going again?

Seriously, though, I can see a big lineup working well if Kyle is the nominal "2" as long as Mason, Zoubs, Miles and Kelly are effective at help defense and protecting the rim. Zoubs isn't the fastest on defensive rotations, but he's tall enough to alter shots. Both Mason and Miles should be able to move quickly enough to help out if one of the perimeter defenders is beaten. We'll see if Kelly can get up to game speed quickly enough. However, if these guys can rotate well enough and provide enough of a shot blocking presence, a lineup like this could work. I'd actually be slightly more concerned on the offensive end. Kyle would be restricted to the perimeter because there wouldn't be any driving lanes with our bigs clogging the lane. Unless our bigs develop quality go-to moves in the post, I'm not sure that the spacing at the offensive end would favor our strengths.

I would take five Grant Hills over any other lineup we can come up with as well :) I don't worry as much about a big lineup (not as a starting lineup) with Kyle at the 2 on offense. My impression is that Mason and Ryan can both play on the perimeter offensively, so that should help with spacing, leaving Zoubs and Miles in the post and/or to set screens.

I expect a starting line-up of Jon, Nolan, Kyle, Lance and Brian or Mason.

flyingdutchdevil
10-02-2009, 10:35 AM
I would take five Grant Hills over any other lineup we can come up with as well

Over five Lebrons?
Or five Carmelos?
How about five, oh no he didn't, MJs? ;)

1Devil
10-02-2009, 10:49 AM
On Nolan's U-Stream he said the starting five will be:

Jon Scheyer
Nolan Smith
Kyle Singler
Mason Plumlee
Lance Thomas/ Brian Zoubek

There you have it

I'd prefer a lineup that includes 5 guys who are a threat to score. I've had enough of these 3-on-5 and 4-on-5 games. Of course Lance and Z will play a fair amount and we'll be shorthanded on offense when that occurs. But the offense with 5 scorers should be a predominant one.

NSDukeFan
10-02-2009, 10:52 AM
I'd prefer a lineup that includes 5 guys who are a threat to score. I've had enough of these 3-on-5 and 4-on-5 games. Of course Lance and Z will play a fair amount and we'll be shorthanded on offense when that occurs. But the offense with 5 scorers should be a predominant one.

There is also the possibility that Lance and Z have improved over the summer and will provide more offensively this year.

MChambers
10-02-2009, 10:57 AM
Of course, why wouldn't you play five Grant Hill's if you could? Ok, maybe you need one true three point threat on the court, but seriously, I could live with 5 6-9 guys with insane athleticism, basketball IQ, court vision, ball-handling ability, and rebounding ability who are capable of averaging 20ppg apiece and who all stay for four years and lead Duke to four more titles. How's that cloning experiment going again?

Once in the NBA All-Star team the coach (maybe Phil Jackson?) of the East had on the floor Grant, Jordan, Pippen, and Anfernee Hardway. Oh, and he moved some guy named Laettner to the center spot. The West didn't know what hit them. Laettner knew his job was to rebound and distribute. The other four ran fast breaks like you wouldn't believe.

I don't remember the defense being anything exceptional, but it was an All-Star game.

NSDukeFan
10-02-2009, 11:07 AM
Over five Lebrons?
Or five Carmelos?
How about five, oh no he didn't, MJs? ;)

Before they turned pro, I would take Duke senior Grant Hill over Syracuse Carmelo, high school LeBron and I started paying attention to college hoops around the time Jordan was pro, so I won't comment about him.

JasonEvans
10-02-2009, 12:08 PM
Before they turned pro, I would take Duke senior Grant Hill over Syracuse Carmelo, high school LeBron and I started paying attention to college hoops around the time Jordan was pro, so I won't comment about him.

I think people forget how good Grant Hill was his first few years in the NBA, before he got hurt. He was waaaay better than Melo. I am not saying he was Lebron or MJ, but Melo?? Puh-lease!

--Jason "oh, and Grant played fabulous defense-- just ask Big Dog" Evans

SilkyJ
10-02-2009, 12:42 PM
I think people forget how good Grant Hill was his first few years in the NBA, before he got hurt. He was waaaay better than Melo. I am not saying he was Lebron or MJ, but Melo?? Puh-lease!


Seriously. He was an all-star as a rookie, which is very rare in and of itself, but a lot of people don't remember he LED THE LEAGUE IN FAN BALLOTING for the all-star game his rookie year, was all nba 2nd team as a super soph and then all nba 1st team in his 3rd year, and made like 5 straight all star teams.

I'll stop now.



--Jason "oh, and Grant played fabulous defense-- just ask Big Dog" Evans

Big Who? ;)

airowe
10-15-2009, 12:27 AM
http://sports.chronicleblogs.com/2009/10/14/coach-k-asks-students-to-be-spontaneous-in-cameron/

"If the season were to start now, Krzyzewski said the starters would be Jon Scheyer, Nolan Smith, Kyle Singler, and both Mason and Miles Plumlee. Krzyzewski did say, though, that Lance Thomas would play essentially as a sixth starter, and mentioned that freshman Andre Dawkins would be the first guard off the bench."

Another interesting tidbit, "Because of illness, freshman Ryan Kelly lost a significant amount of weight over the summer, and for that reason Krzyzewski said Kelly played mainly on the perimeter during preseason practice. Now, though, Kelly has regained that weight and has started to practice more on the interior as well."

Duvall
10-15-2009, 12:32 AM
http://sports.chronicleblogs.com/2009/10/14/coach-k-asks-students-to-be-spontaneous-in-cameron/

"If the season were to start now, Krzyzewski said the starters would be Jon Scheyer, Nolan Smith, Kyle Singler, and both Mason and Miles Plumlee. Krzyzewski did say, though, that Lance Thomas would play essentially as a sixth starter, and mentioned that freshman Andre Dawkins would be the first guard off the bench."

I'm glad Krzyzewski hasn't lost his sense of humor.

FireOgilvie
10-15-2009, 01:00 AM
http://sports.chronicleblogs.com/2009/10/14/coach-k-asks-students-to-be-spontaneous-in-cameron/



"Finally, Krzyzewski asked students to be harsher on the referees at home this season, adding that he doesn’t think his star players, like Scheyer or Singler, ever commit a foul, especially in Cameron."

Haha this is a completely ridiculous statement. I like how it's reported as if it's a fact.

I think it's great that the Plumlees have earned starting spots at this point. That means they are both playing really well at this time. I think the Plumlees getting a lot of PT gives Duke a much higher ceiling than with Lance and Zoubek, although I think both will also contribute.

BlueintheFace
10-15-2009, 01:13 AM
The Plumlees AND Singler AND Scheyer.... jesus we are big

Greg_Newton
10-15-2009, 01:56 AM
http://sports.chronicleblogs.com/2009/10/14/coach-k-asks-students-to-be-spontaneous-in-cameron/

"If the season were to start now, Krzyzewski said the starters would be Jon Scheyer, Nolan Smith, Kyle Singler, and both Mason and Miles Plumlee.

That is AWESOME news. I really think Miles can be a force and own the paint if he learns to play within himself and make the most of his considerable physical gifts... we're talking about a burly 6'10 who jumped over his coach's head in a dunk contest this summer. I don't think a Cole Aldrich-like effect on defense and the boards is out of the question for him down the road, and that's a great vote of confidence from K that he's maturing and coming along nicely.

Counting the days...:D

flyingdutchdevil
10-15-2009, 05:10 AM
Wow. Miles seems to be awesome now. I remember last season - whenever he was on the court - he looked completely lost. You saw the raw athleticism and the potential, but he just looked so lost, especially on D. Two things must have happened: a) he had one hell of a summer and b) he must feel more comfortable playing with his brother than without. Both of these make complete sense, and I expect the MPs to form a sick frontcourt with Lance and Z.

superdave
10-15-2009, 10:26 AM
...but who finishes. And I suspect who finishes will be the the 5 who get defensive stops. Unless of course you sub for O and D which K did semmingly more last year than in previous years.

JG Nothing
10-15-2009, 10:40 AM
http://sports.chronicleblogs.com/2009/10/14/coach-k-asks-students-to-be-spontaneous-in-cameron/

"If the season were to start now, Krzyzewski said the starters would be Jon Scheyer, Nolan Smith, Kyle Singler, and both Mason and Miles Plumlee. Krzyzewski did say, though, that Lance Thomas would play essentially as a sixth starter, and mentioned that freshman Andre Dawkins would be the first guard off the bench."


I suspect this statement was meant to send a message to the players as much as anything else. K is a master psychologist and motivator.

Duvall
10-15-2009, 12:02 PM
I know that it has been a while, but we aren't that big. That starting lineup is
(approx)
6'10
6'11
6'8
6'5
6'2

That is what a traditional basketball team is supposed to look like.


I'm not sure a traditional basketball team is, but I'm fairly concerned about the ability of that lineup to play Duke basketball, particularly on defense. But it's not like we have much of a choice.

Kedsy
10-15-2009, 12:06 PM
I'm not sure a traditional basketball team is, but I'm fairly concerned about the ability of that lineup to play Duke basketball, particularly on defense. But it's not like we have much of a choice.

Why are you concerned? Do you think Kyle won't be able to guard the other team's "3"?

None of the others would seem disadvantaged on defense, unless you think K's wrong about Miles being ready to start (and yes, I know he started at the beginning of last year, too, but this year we have several more options and if K thinks he's the one then my guess is he'll be able to bring it on D).

Reddevil
10-15-2009, 12:12 PM
I know that it has been a while, but we aren't that big. That starting lineup is
(approx)
6'10
6'11
6'8
6'5
6'2

That is what a traditional basketball team is supposed to look like.

A six foot ish PG
A six five ish SG
A six eight ish SF
A six nine ish PF
A seven foot ish C


In this day and age it is pretty common to see
PG 5'11
SG 6'3
SF 6'6
PF 6'7
C 6'9

Many recent Duke teams have had this look too.

This year's edition is pretty darn tall. Of course height really doesn't matter as long as the performance is there, but it can help to create matchup problems, and all things being equal - it is a game of inches. Small ball can be fun, but it is nice to be the big team once in a while.

The excitement builds...

JG Nothing
10-15-2009, 12:15 PM
I'm not sure a traditional basketball team is, but I'm fairly concerned about the ability of that lineup to play Duke basketball, particularly on defense. But it's not like we have much of a choice.

I may be wrong, but wasn't the word "zone" being mentioned by K and some Duke players several months ago? I seem to recall talk about it. I wonder how much changes with the addition of Dawkins.

BlueintheFace
10-15-2009, 12:24 PM
I'm not sure a traditional basketball team is, but I'm fairly concerned about the ability of that lineup to play Duke basketball, particularly on defense. But it's not like we have much of a choice.

That is my fear too. We better be pretty darn effective on offense or lay off that duke defense I love so much. Then again, having two rim protectors could be nice.

devilboomer
10-15-2009, 12:58 PM
FWIW, Collins recently said that Nolan is 6'3". I don't believe it, but he said it.

Fish80
10-15-2009, 01:22 PM
FWIW, Collins recently said that Nolan is 6'3". I don't believe it, but he said it.

Maybe he's using the same tape that measured DeMarcus at 6'4". ;)

Exiled_Devil
10-15-2009, 01:32 PM
Listening to Coach K's presser right now, and he said that the starting lineup, if it was today:

Smith
Scheyer
Singler
Plumlee
Plumlee

With Lance playing starter level minutes and defending 1-5
Zou getting solid minutes in the 5

Kyle is dedicated perimeter layer this year

All this before practice really starts, of course.

One nice note - no one was rehabbing this summer, which is a first in 3-4 years.

flyingdutchdevil
10-15-2009, 02:08 PM
One nice note - no one was rehabbing this summer, which is a first in 3-4 years.

Guess Olek counts as no one ;)

This lineup is typical for the NBA; not college.

In the NBA, PGs are around 6'0-6'3, SGs are 6'4-6'7, SFs are 6'6-6'9, PFs are 6'8-7'0 and Cs are around 6'9-7'1 (these are the averages. I know that Jameer Nelson is shorter and Shaq is taller, but these are generalizations. Please don't hit me with the exceptions).

This is exciting - have we ever had a starting line-up like this before?

MChambers
10-15-2009, 02:31 PM
Guess Olek counts as no one ;)

This lineup is typical for the NBA; not college.

In the NBA, PGs are around 6'0-6'3, SGs are 6'4-6'7, SFs are 6'6-6'9, PFs are 6'8-7'0 and Cs are around 6'9-7'1 (these are the averages. I know that Jameer Nelson is shorter and Shaq is taller, but these are generalizations. Please don't hit me with the exceptions).

This is exciting - have we ever had a starting line-up like this before?
In 1990, we had Abdelnaby and Laettner starting, both around 6'11", with Brickey (a very strong and athletic player) at 6'5" or so as the "3". It wasn't a great regular season, although we made the NCAA finals.

elvis14
10-15-2009, 03:00 PM
Listening to Coach K's presser right now, and he said that the starting lineup, if it was today:

Smith
Scheyer
Singler
Plumlee
Plumlee


We will see what happens as the season starts but I'm really happy to hear that from K as a potential starting lineup. Hope it's the starting line up when the season starts. I thought Miles should have been given more playing time last year so he could become less lost and have time for the game to slow down for him. I've thought this in the past with other players as well but it's just my humble opinion.

ACCBBallFan
10-15-2009, 06:04 PM
Lance does not need motivation, but the Plumlees need confidence and they are the future forwards as long as they stay at Duke.

I don't think it is a ploy to garner excitement only to swap in Lance or Z later. K also said, BTW that Lance plays starter minutes (like Jon did a couple seasons ago).

It also makes sense from a practice perspective to give Seth and Andre and Ryan experience to practice against, while pairing them with experienced forwards. conversely the Plumlees practice vs. two senior forwards/center, and have experienced wing men.

When substitutions are made, no drop off, and these are Duke's 5 most balanced players with respect to overall game. coach K can sub in to tinker with match-ups based on the opponent.

Jon Scheyer / Seth Curry (0nly in Blue/White and practices)
Nolan Smith / Andre Dawkins
Kyle Singler / Ryan Kelly
Mason Plumlee / Lance Thomas
Miles Plumlee / Brian Zoubek

with Olek Czyz, Jordan Davidson, Steve Johnson and Casey Peters in reserve.

The perimeter guys on second team help Duke starters adjust to faster top shooting opponents, and the Plumlees give Lance and Z practice vs. the type of forwards that can be problematic for them.

From an overall short term and long term balancing perspective, these formations make a lot of sense. Seth develops as Jon's successor with or without Irving and Thornton will be there as true PG.

Andre develops, Kelly is a possibility if Singler leaves early and no Barnes to replace him. Lance and Zoubek are second stringers that get replaced by Hairston and Czyz and if Barnes comes, Kelly slides to 4.

That's probably Duke's biggest weakness at this point, the 5-10 MPG when Singler subs out either an undersized frosh or a tall too slow frosh both of whom can shoot or a senior who can defend but can't shoot. Which one minimizes the loss in productivity those 5-10 MPG will vary based on the opponent.

Duvall
10-15-2009, 06:12 PM
That's probably Duke's biggest weakness at this point, the 5-10 MPG when Singler subs out either an undersized frosh or a tall too slow frosh both of whom can shoot or a senior who can defend but can't shoot. Which one minimizes the loss in productivity those 5-10 MPG will vary based on the opponent.

Barring foul trouble, that 5-10 minutes is going to be more like zero-5.

Edouble
10-17-2009, 12:55 PM
I do think that Kyle and Jon will have varying degrees of trouble staying in front of their respective assignments. This isn't a crack on them. They are great players and great defenders. However, they also have the responsibility of staying in front of some of the most athletic players in the game at SF and SG.

I sort of disagree with this, especially with regards to Singler. Kyle is very athletic himself. He's also so smart, mean, and hard working on the court. I am not worried at all about his ability to guard the 3 spot.

I do not mean to direct anything at you Framed, but I am not seeing a whole lot of talk about Kyle on the boards this week. I know we are all excited to see if Mason is the real deal, and if Nolan has improved, but Kyle is our best player, and the real key to our season. He's the most legitimate NPOY candidate we've had in 4 years. His ability to defend the 3 is nothing to worry about.

Memphis Devil
10-17-2009, 01:14 PM
I'm not sure a traditional basketball team is, but I'm fairly concerned about the ability of that lineup to play Duke basketball, particularly on defense. But it's not like we have much of a choice.

The uniforms will still read "Duke" and there will be basketball being played both offensive and defensive. While K has shown a propensity to play a certain style of both offense and defense, you don't do what he has done without adjusting for the make up of the team. I don't forsee any square pegs being forced into round holes this season. If you know what I mean.

cwaugh
10-17-2009, 01:34 PM
I sort of disagree with this, especially with regards to Singler. Kyle is very athletic himself. He's also so smart, mean, and hard working on the court. I am not worried at all about his ability to guard the 3 spot.

I do not mean to direct anything at you Framed, but I am not seeing a whole lot of talk about Kyle on the boards this week. I know we are all excited to see if Mason is the real deal, and if Nolan has improved, but Kyle is our best player, and the real key to our season. He's the most legitimate NPOY candidate we've had in 4 years. His ability to defend the 3 is nothing to worry about.

Remember when Kyle was put on that guy from Rhode Island last year? He was more of a 2 so I think Kyle can handle most college 3s.

gumbomoop
10-17-2009, 02:14 PM
I am not seeing a whole lot of talk about Kyle on the boards this week. I know we are all excited to see if Mason is the real deal, and if Nolan has improved, but Kyle is our best player, and the real key to our season. He's the most legitimate NPOY candidate we've had in 4 years. His ability to defend the 3 is nothing to worry about.

This is definitely a good reminder point. The reason there's more talk about NS is probably due to the fact that we assume the expected excellence from KS and JS isn't quite enough to get to Final 4. It may be unfair, shortsighted even, to take JS and KS for granted, because, indeed, we can't imagine a steadier-excellent player in the country - none - than JS; nor can we imagine a better all-rounder - none - than KS [who will defend brilliantly all but the fastest guys]. But if it's shortsighted to take these 2 very, very special players for granted, surely it isn't shortsighted to say the Devils are unlikely to get to F4 absent major improvement from NS.

Given lack of depth at "traditional" 1-2 guard spots, NS's health and improvement are big, big issues. Those who have noted that NS has a whole new attitude/demeanor provide great encouragement to those of us who didn't see Craziness game.

I bet we could [almost] all agree that NS's improvement, JS's consistent steadiness and intermittent brilliance, and KS's rising to CPOY and NPOY are all roughly equally important to get us to this year's NC.

chadlee989
10-17-2009, 02:25 PM
Kyle is the best player we have had since JJ. He can guard all 5 spots if need be. I understand all the concern but when can we remember Kyle getting beat on the perimeter. Down the stretch of the RI game he was put on Jimmy Baron and on the last shot of the game got a piece of the ball to hold on for the win.

All the talk out of Carolina is that Henson will be starting at the 3 for them. Are we worried that a 6 10 freshmen will be blowing by Kyle? Why is it that we are worried sick about playing Kyle against opposing 3's but yet Carolina is not worried about starting a bigger player at the 3 who is not a NPOY type player?

Kedsy
10-17-2009, 03:18 PM
Kyle is the best player we have had since JJ. He can guard all 5 spots if need be. I understand all the concern but when can we remember Kyle getting beat on the perimeter. Down the stretch of the RI game he was put on Jimmy Baron and on the last shot of the game got a piece of the ball to hold on for the win.

All the talk out of Carolina is that Henson will be starting at the 3 for them. Are we worried that a 6 10 freshmen will be blowing by Kyle? Why is it that we are worried sick about playing Kyle against opposing 3's but yet Carolina is not worried about starting a bigger player at the 3 who is not a NPOY type player?

Jimmy Baron was a shooter, not known for his quickness or devastating crossover. I don't think he's really a great example. And nobody's worried about any 6'10" small forward blowing by Kyle. Regarding Carolina and Henson, my guess is they won't be able to start him against teams with three lightning quick guards. Against those teams they'll probably play Strickland or McDonald and stick Ginyard at the 3.

I think Kyle will be a better-than-adequate defender at the 3 (if Duke played positions, that is), but we shouldn't shut our eyes and think he'll be able to stay in front of Villanova-quick wing players. The good news is I'm not sure how many teams can trot out three of those guys at once this year, so Kyle should be fine most of the time.

I also think we need to differentiate between playing on-ball and off-ball defense. On the ball, a small, quick player is going to have an advantage against Kyle, and we'll have to rely on our big front line to step up and provide shot-blocking threats. Off the ball, Kyle is a lot taller and longer and may be able to deny passes to these guys and/or keep them further out than is optimal for slashing. We can hope, anyway.

sagegrouse
10-17-2009, 03:38 PM
Because Henson will probably be a NPOY next year should he return. He also has NFOY potential. He is a super athletic, highly skilled player. If he were 20 lbs heavier, he might be the best frosh in the nation, hands down. He will be a dangerous player.

Don't discount him. I am still not sold on him as a three. That talk may have more to do with UNC's shaky guard rotation, and playing Ginyard at SG rather than SF to hide that shaky guard rotation. I don't know.

But I really hate it when we discount our UNC rivals merely because they are our rivals.

Last year, this board poo-poo'd UNC's title hopes by saying that Hans woud shoot too many mid range jumpers, Lawson couldn't shoot threes, and that there would be serious chemistry issues. I myself beleived two out of those three. Well, we were all dead wrong about each point.

Never underestimate your opponent. Kyle will give Henson fits, sure. But the athletic and skilled Henson will not exactly be a walk in the park for Kyle or Duke.

First, does the "discount our UNC rivals" statement mean that some folks discount UNC because they hate the team, the players, the coaches, etc.? Otherwise, it's circular and makes no sense.

Some people, not necessarily me, would be reasonably inclined to discount the championship prospects of a team that lost their top four players in terms of minutes and scoring.

Second, I don't think that "this board poo-poo'd [pooh-poohed?] UNC title hopes." Many of us here thought that UNC was the best team in the country all year long, reserving judgment during a couple of mid-season hiccoughs and not missing a chance to have some fun at H'brough's and Ol' Roy's expense. So I don't know what you mean.

Third, the logic in your earlier post was tortuous, seeming to slam Kyle and Jon but then backing off

Fourth, your posts are a bit on the provocative side, esp. for an unknown quantity with only five posts. Are you trolling? Perhaps it would be a good idea to add some detail to your account info. I see the moderators are already sniffing around.

sagegrouse
'I returned from Colorado this week to spend two months on the East Coast before returning for ski season. Ye Gods! This weather is awful!'