Duke 84, Long Beach State 63 Post-Game Thread

[Jumbo]

Post your thoughts here!

[mapei]

1st half was the best I've seen from Duke all year. O, D both clicking, only FTs were off. The second half, bleh - LBS settled down, Lance had foul trouble, we were outplayed much of the half.

Smith was the most clutch player all night. Jon's shot wasn't as hot in the 2nd as in the 1st, until late. Still, I don't remember any TOs from him. Zoubs was very good.

Overall, B+.

[Saratoga2]

Without watching the play it is difficult to form much of an opinion. Clearly, the starters had a good game against a tough opponent. It appears that neither of the Plumlees had their better performances, while Zoubek and Thomas played well. It didn't appear Kelly played his best either. Prerformances must have something to do with the competitiveness of the opponent.

Someone else will have to indicate why Dawkins didn't return as he was shooting well.

Sheyer, Singler and Smith did their thing very well.

[bass-piscator]

My thoughts.

A long time Duke fan. I am getting sick and tired of our revered coach not playing his bench. Is this to pad his stats? And has no one on the coaching staff not yet realized that Zou shouldn't dribble in the post? Flame on.

[MChambers]

Duke blows out a team that has given several top 20 teams very close games and all you can do is complain about the short bench and Zoubek dribbling? Wow.

[YmoBeThere]

I wasn't able to watch the game in my area, but was there a reason noted on why Plumlee the Younger didn't play at all? Or is it an issue with the statkeeping?

[socaldukie]

14 assists no TO--Scheyer & Smith in the backcourt

[mapei]

Mason played a good bit, Miles played more and played well. Dawkins played and played well. In the first half K was running players in and out from the start. I don't know how the stats came out, but lots of bench players seemed to get time.

[socaldukie]

I wasn't able to watch the game in my area, but was there a reason noted on why Plumlee the Younger didn't play at all? Or is it an issue with the statkeeping?

Coach K referred to the white team domolishing the blue team in practice and was not real pleased with that. That might have something to do with limited playing time for some. K always says you will play how you practice.

[Welcome2DaSlopes]

Does anyone know why Andre only played nine minutes?

[bass-piscator]

Duke blows out a team that has given several top 20 teams very close games and all you can do is complain about the short bench and Zoubek dribbling? Wow.

You tell me what I said that was not correct.

Like Tom Brady throwing bombs against Cleveland in the 4th qtr when up by 30 or 40. At least the Colts pull their starters. When this game was in hand why did coach not substitute?

I wait for a good reason.

[Mcluhan]

our revered coach

I gotta admit, by this point your intentions already seem a bit suspect.


My thoughts.
A long time Duke fan. I am getting sick and tired of our revered coach not playing his bench. Is this to pad his stats? And has no one on the coaching staff not yet realized that Zou shouldn't dribble in the post? Flame on.

I've come to accept as a longtime fan that K does not use his bench enough for my liking. I feel that he keeps the starters in long past the point that he ought to be getting the other guys real game experience. Sometimes I think he prefers for his starters to be 40 minute iron men than to have a dependable 8-9 player rotation. On this last point I think this year shows improvement, although that may have something to do with the frontcourt players struggling to decisively earn starter's minutes.

But Coach K clearly disagrees. He's disagreed for a long time. And during that time he's done pretty well for himself and for the team. So rather than root for another team, I've decided to accept this.


Is this to pad his stats?

I'm not sure I follow.

[anon]

At least the Colts pull their starters.

The Colts lost ...

[Welcome2DaSlopes]

The Colts lost ...

Bingo

[Wildcat]

I thought he (K) did play the bench more than usual. For awhile we looked like another program with the amount of subs coming in and out. I thought we played/shot really well tonight against a decent opponent. I liked how for scant moments I saw Jon and Kyle resting on the bench some. We won't make ESPN most sensational highlights much; but we've got some heady, fundamentally sound and athletic ball players. A win is a win.

[NSDukeFan]

My thoughts.

A long time Duke fan. I am getting sick and tired of our revered coach not playing his bench. Is this to pad his stats? And has no one on the coaching staff not yet realized that Zou shouldn't dribble in the post? Flame on.


You tell me what I said that was not correct.

Like Tom Brady throwing bombs against Cleveland in the 4th qtr when up by 30 or 40. At least the Colts pull their starters. When this game was in hand why did coach not substitute?

I wait for a good reason.
What you said was technically correct, but a very small part of the game. Yes, Brian had two turnovers when he put the ball on the floor in the post, but in a game that we won by over 20, where he had a double double, it seems a very odd time to complain about his play. It would be like complaining about Jon having a turnover, when he also has 22 points and 7 assists. (Of course, Jon didn't have a turnover.)
So, you are right if you are expecting people to flame away after you nit-pick a nice performance of a 20 year old kid and complain because a coaching legend likes to develop his starters during the year, as opposed to how you would rather he play the bench more.

[bass-piscator]

The Colts lost ...

and no one got hurt.

That was the point wasn't it?

[Welcome2DaSlopes]

I saw Jon and Kyle resting on the bench some.

Jon played 38 minutes.

[DevilWolf]

If this were my first time watching Duke play tonight, I'd wonder why #55 ever comes out of the game, why #5 has a scholarship, and why #21 is a starter. As someone who has been super-critical of Zoubek and super-excited about the Plumlees, this is hard for me to say. But it's the truth.

[mapei]

The bench played a lot in the first half, not so much in the second. I loved all the subbing in the first half.

[gep]

I've come to accept as a longtime fan that K does not use his bench enough for my liking. I feel that he keeps the starters in long past the point that he ought to be getting the other guys real game experience.

I recall a question from a reporter just like this (a few years ago) and Coach K's response was something to the effect that "if you think the game's over at that point, you don't know/understand basketball"... or something like that. I guess the emphasis is to win the game first... which there may be as many opinions as to when that is as there are basketball fans:rolleyes:

[Saratoga2]

For the many who watched gametracker or worse, is there someone who can provide some detailed analysis? It seems inappropriate to be complaining about the amount of PT for players, but those who must do that, keep from taking over the thread, please!

[BlueintheFace]

Zoubek with the double-double.

5-5 fg
10 pts
12 rebounds
3 Blocks
...in 25 minutes

I'm going to just keep saying it: He's our best rebounder on both ends, our best post defender, and our best post player to this point in the season.

Meanwhile, both Plumlees received double digit minutes (Miles is averaging 19.1 min/game this season and Mason with 11.8 min/game). I mention this simply to preemptively undermine those who would come along and say that the Plumlees would just be so much better if they got significant minutes.

Please Please Please can we start recognizing Zoubek for his accomplishments.

[basket1544]

Most box scores aren't accurate on minutes played until at least an hour after the game ends so don't look at the numbers quite yet. Also, as the first game in 10 days, the starters played heavy minutes to stay in game ready shape for the next one. No rest for the weary when you are trying to keep logging heavy minutes throughout the year. I think it was interesting that several times Coach K had 3 freshmen out on the floor at a time. Remember that Coach K doesn't play freshmen a lot especially early in the year. Give them time to work toward those minutes in practice.
In the meantime, what a win! Great job by the team as a whole and another perfect game by Jon.

[mapei]

I think we make a mistake by coupling "the Plumlees" together. To me they look like very different players, Miles significantly more advanced at this point in his career as well as more of a post player.

Mason plays more like Kelly than like Miles.

[bass-piscator]

The point is that the Colt's coach sees the ultimate goal as the end, not the journey. I'm not sure ours does. As much as I dislike Roy I think he may better see the bigger picture.

When I refer to coach as the "reverend" (sp) it is because he sometimes seems untouchable on this board and that's wrong.

[jgehtland]

First and foremost, our starting backcourt (this includes Singler) was amazing tonight. Their shooting, defense, control, patience, everything was clicking.

The frontcourt was more haphazard. Zoubek was the best player by far. Thomas was very active, but a little scattered. Mason showed incredible passing skills, accounting for three of Brian's buckets off nice interior passes. Miles was very very quiet outside of one spectacular block and one nice up and under move.

Andre was playing good offense, but defensively, he got backdoored and run off screens over and over again. Kelly was likewise getting lost on D a bunch. Whoever thought this was simply a blowout a) didn't see what they did at UK and b) didn't watch the run that cut the lead down to 13.

Where the stats are going to be deceiving is all the blocked shots. That's going to look like our frontcourt played stellar defense. Some of the time, that was true. But a lot of the time, it was our bigs relying on their height and/or athleticism to make up for the fact that they were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Those complaining about bench minutes, since every frontcourt player but Kelly got double digits, I'm assuming the only player we're worried about is Andre. And since I'm pretty sure he's earned solid minutes in the rotation, we can assume tonight was an aberration of some kind. Everybody else got their average minutes, including Kelly. Which means that Andre's minutes alone are causing everyone to think the game went differently than it really did, and we should just relax and hope that whatever was off with Andre (defense, rust, perhaps, oh I don't know, a really difficult holiday season) will get better over the next few games and the minutes will once again be distributed to everybody's satisfaction.

[El_Diablo]

You tell me what I said that was not correct.

Like Tom Brady throwing bombs against Cleveland in the 4th qtr when up by 30 or 40. At least the Colts pull their starters. When this game was in hand why did coach not substitute?

I wait for a good reason.

Well, I'm not sure if you follow, but we only have 4 recruited players on our bench. It's pretty thin in that respect. Those 4 players combined for 52 minutes. Zoubek (who is a bench player, in case you missed it) got a lot of those minutes, but he definitely earned them tonight. I'm sorry he dribbled the ball once and turned it over though--I'm sure he will write you a personal note of apology if you give him your address.

At one point about midway through the second half the entire bench was in the game at the same time. At another point in the first half we had all three freshmen on the court. Our experienced players were getting the job done during crunch time, and we won the game.

I'm not sure if you even watched the game, but if so, you might want to go back and check the defensive lapses and mental mistakes before complaining about playing time.

[gep]

The point is that the Colt's coach sees the ultimate goal as the end, not the journey. I'm not sure ours does. As much as I dislike Roy I think he may better see the bigger picture.

Interesting... Coach K has always spoke of the "journey" as being very important to him. To me, it also seems that winning the game at hand is very important to him, along with the champoinships (conference, regional, final NC). And he develops the journey to get to the final NC. It's just that winning every game he's in seems to be a priority. Maybe it's like "take care of business at hand first, worry about the future later" kind of thought?

[jgehtland]

The point is that the Colt's coach sees the ultimate goal as the end, not the journey. I'm not sure ours does. As much as I dislike Roy I think he may better see the bigger picture.

When I refer to coach as the "reverend" (sp) it is because he sometimes seems untouchable on this board and that's wrong.

...what are you, 8? Coach K doesn't see the end goal as important? The guy who invented the in-season 2-games-in-three-days schedule to mimic the tournament? The guy who schedules games at big arenas that are in the tourny schedule every year to get the team ready to play in those environments? The guy whose won more NCAA titles than any other active coach? The guy who had to take a year off after exhausting himself chasing the title? Are you THAT new to Duke basketball that you could possibly question whether or not Coach K knows how to win titles, or values it?

[SCMatt33]

At the 4 minute timeout, it was an 18 point game. It was very very unlikely that they could come back, but not impossible if we had put in the entire bench and they kept shooting 3's well. K felt like he had to keep his best defense on the floor. And to be honest, I don't think that playing an extra three minutes of basketball in December will affect how someone plays in March.

[diveonthefloor]

If anyone remembers the timeout K called about midway through first half while we were blowing them out....and just ripped into the guys when they came to the bench....do you know what he was angry with?

[Newton_14]

Actually K used the bench well tonight. All 9 kids played in both halves and except for a few freshman mistakes here and there all 9 contirbuted and played fairly well. LBS got hot in the 2nd half and tightened their D up and erased what was a 26 point first half lead down to 13 with 6 or 7 to go.

At that point K went to the experienced 5 (Jon, Nolan, Kyle, Zoubs, LT) to close it out which they did well.

There is more to basketball than scoring points. For instance, Mason had several nice plays tonight where he drove and dished to others for easy hoops, while also blocking/altering several shots. I was pleased with both Plumlee's tonight. You have to remember that one is a freshman coming off an injury that cost him 6 games, and the other is a sophomore who is way better than he was last year but still developing. They did not play bad at all. LT and Zoubs just played better.

Kelly also either blocked or altered 3 or 4 shots and played with poise. He had one bad turnover forcing a pass into the lane, and missed a couple of shots after really good moves, but all in all not bad.

Andre shot it well, but he is still learning on the other side of the ball. And we did not use the 3 guard line up tonight so that limited his minutes which in turn gave Kelly a little more burn.

It was a good team effort with Jon, Nolan, and Kyle leading the way in scoring and everyone else chipping in. As someone else stated the play in the first half was much better than the 2nd, but credit LBS for battling back and making shots.

Coming off a long layoff it was not a bad effort at all.

[Ultrarunner]

The point is that the Colt's coach sees the ultimate goal as the end, not the journey. I'm not sure ours does. As much as I dislike Roy I think he may better see the bigger picture.

When I refer to coach as the "reverend" (sp) it is because he sometimes seems untouchable on this board and that's wrong.

The Colts haven't won the Super Bowl yet so using them as an example might be a mite premature. Also, only three players went over 30 minutes for Duke tonight. The freshmen and Miles played giving us a nine man rotation. Why don't we let the season play out (for us and the Colts). Last time I checked, our coach had more National Championships than the Colts coach.

Coach K isn't untouchable on this board but you'd be well served to marshall facts and figures to support your arguements. Failure to do so will result in other posters shredding your statements (as BlueintheFace did with your comment regarding Zoubek. Please note the use of facts in his post.)

[roywhite]

http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?SPSID=22724&SPID=1845&DB_OEM_ID=4200&ATCLID=204862989

Observations from the stats:
The Smith/Scheyer backourt---74 minutes, 41 points, 10-18 from 3-pt, 14 assists, 0 turnovers...and great, great chemistry and teamwork.
Zoubs---10 points, 5-5 FG, 12 rebounds, 3 blocks, looking better and more comfortable all the time
Mason P.---12 minutes and he didn't score, but he had 2 assists (I thought he could have been credited with 1 or 2 more), and 4 blocks...I'm not sure if he will break out with a big game at some point, or will just have to push his way through gradually.
Team free throws---5-13; about the only statistical category that doesn't look good; probably result of the lay-off.

Long Beach is a pretty decent team and this was a good outing for Duke after the holiday break.

[El_Diablo]

My only real complaint with the way the team played was the movement and spacing on offense and some missed assignments on defense that resulted in a couple wide open shots or easy offensive rebounds.

That said, I think the bigs did a pretty good job of compensating with some good shotblocking in the paint. Miles had a wicked one in the first half that he spiked off the backboard, and Mason swatted a few back when people tried to take him head-on. Zoubek even got a couple clean blocks without fouling.

LBSU was a lot better than I expected though, and they definitely did not give up in the second half.

[Jumbo]

The point is that the Colt's coach sees the ultimate goal as the end, not the journey. I'm not sure ours does. As much as I dislike Roy I think he may better see the bigger picture.

When I refer to coach as the "reverend" (sp) it is because he sometimes seems untouchable on this board and that's wrong.

I really don't like the tone of your posts, particularly the straw man you're setting up by not only claiming that Coach K is "untouchable," but by then deciding that it is, actually, a fact on this board, because it's "wrong."

I'm not sure where to start in picking apart your various posts, meanwhile. I guess it would help if you could clarify you comments about playing the bench -- do you mean overall or just, say, in the last couple of minutes of a game where the outcome seems decided? If I'm interpreting your posts correctly, your issue seems to be more of the second kind. And if that's the case, no I don't think the point is to "pad stats." Here are a bunch of reasons why Duke's best players should have been on the court late:

1) LBSU actually made a decent run late in the game, and it certainly wasn't an "easy victory." There's a big difference between being up 15-17 with 2 minutes left and being up 30. There's experience to be gained in that first situation.

2) Duke hadn't played a game in 10 days and the ACC opener is on Sunday. If K wanted to work on specific aspects of execution with his team, he was afforded that opportunity late. And Duke ran a couple of plays at the end that he drew up and worked well. That's good experience.

3) If, as someone else mentioned, some players didn't bring it in practice the other day, this was a good way to send a message.

Meanwhile, your Colts analogy doesn't hold water at all. The Colts are resting starters in a physical, violent sport that is totally different from basketball. Playing the last two minutes of a basketball game won't leave any wear and tear on a body come March. Playing ANY couple of minutes of a football game is incredibly demandng. Night and day.

And you're picking on Zoubek for dribbling in the post? After he had 10 points (5-of-5 shooting), 12 boards and 3 blocks? Really? Guess what -- everyone has flaws in basketball. Everyone on this team does. Everyone on Kansas does. Even LeBron does. You just hope the good outweighs the bad and this season, the good has CLEARLY outweighed the bad with Zoubek. And what's more, you then place the blame for his dribbling in the post on the coaching staff? What would you like the coaches to do, sub themselves in and tackle him the next time he puts the ball on the floor?

I don't really understand the purpose of your posts in this thread, but if you're going to go after guys, you're going to have to do a much better job of actually providing reasonable information, rather than simply spewing.

[bass-piscator]

Well, I'm not sure if you follow, but we only have 4 recruited players on our bench. It's pretty thin in that respect. Those 4 players combined for 52 minutes. Zoubek (who is a bench player, in case you missed it) got a lot of those minutes, but he definitely earned them tonight. I'm sorry he dribbled the ball once and turned it over though--I'm sure he will write you a personal note of apology if you give him your address.

At one point about midway through the second half the entire bench was in the game at the same time. At another point in the first half we had all three freshmen on the court. Our experienced players were getting the job done during crunch time, and we won the game.

I'm not sure if you even watched the game, but if so, you might want to go back and check the defensive lapses and mental mistakes before complaining about playing time.

Now, dear G did I say Zou had a bad game/ No! He just shouldn't put it on the floor. He's been playing very well.

And as you say, the bench was absent in 2nd 1/2. That's all I way saying. And I don't like coach blowing off our rooks in thier 1st year.

and, and, and for you english majors.

[Wildcat]

Coach wanted to keep a healthy lead at all times with this opponent. I think we were playing for the media as well. I do hope the boys on the bench are comfortable with the minutes and experience they are getting. It's important for them to feel as though they are needed for this teams success in league play. I'm sure they (staff) are coaching them to realize this. I have always liked Zoubs; he had another good game. But I too wonder why: as a senior he keeps putting the ball on the floor down low; why he was out in three point land trying to keep up with a guard on defense? Cmon Zoubs, that's a freshman mistake.

[brevity]

I've come to accept as a longtime fan that K does not use his bench enough for my liking. I feel that he keeps the starters in long past the point that he ought to be getting the other guys real game experience. Sometimes I think he prefers for his starters to be 40 minute iron men than to have a dependable 8-9 player rotation. On this last point I think this year shows improvement, although that may have something to do with the frontcourt players struggling to decisively earn starter's minutes.

But Coach K clearly disagrees. He's disagreed for a long time. And during that time he's done pretty well for himself and for the team. So rather than root for another team, I've decided to accept this.

This is one of the better (and certainly one of the most honest) assessments I've read on this board in regards to the issue of Coach K's playing rotation. Thank you for going beyond the standard and simplistic sentiments, both for and against Coach K, that I often read here.

I've come to the conclusion that Coach K's teams generally operate with a very small margin for error. By allowing the team's best all-around players to show what they can do over the course of the season, Coach K is preparing them (and everyone else) for a postseason with very little in the way of surprises. What you see is what you get.

There's no fundamental problem with this approach, but things get dicey once injuries or even foul trouble enter the equation. With Plan A no longer possible, Coach K will of course have a Plan B, but not one that's tested often in game-time situations. Will the alternative be enough to keep winning? Maybe, maybe not. (Should be noted that in the 2001 championship season, it was enough.)

With some initial reluctance, I've come to accept this approach as well. Asking for Coach K to maximize his bench resources and create a 12-headed monster that may dominate or just as likely fall apart is, essentially, asking for a different coach.

[jgehtland]

Now, dear G did I say Zou had a bad game/ No! He just shouldn't put it on the floor. He's been playing very well.

And as you say, the bench was absent in 2nd 1/2. That's all I way saying. And I don't like coach blowing off our rooks in thier 1st year.

and, and, and for you english majors.

As somebody else mentioned, all nine players played in both halves. The ONLY player who didn't reach his average minutes was Andre, and as I said before, we simply can't know the reason why, but he has clearly earned his spot.

So I just don't understand how you can even *begin* to paint that as K "blowing off our rooks".

[roywhite]

I recognize some of the points about K's Duke teams having a short rotation and playing a few guys major minutes. Bothers me sometimes, too.

But let's not forget the obvious fact about the 2009/10 team---we have 3 and 3 only experienced perimeter players. Scheyer, Smith, and Singler are good players and will play major minutes, but there is not much of an alternative. Play Dawkins more? He's getting about the right minutes IMO and coming along fine; he is a gifted shooter, but his overall game will need to develop. Give the perimeter triumvirate more bench time when we're ahead by...15? 20? So who plays...Kelly at guard? A much bigger role for Jordan Davidson?

So much to celebrate about this team so far...and not much to criticize...and among the items for criticism, the concentrated minutes for a few players is just a fact of life and not subject to much change IMO.

[Jumbo]

But I too wonder why: as a senior he keeps putting the ball on the floor down low; why he was out in three point land trying to keep up with a guard on defense? Cmon Zoubs, that's a freshman mistake.

It's called hedging on a screen. This is a staple of Duke's defense. If you want to quibble with someone about it, quibble with K, but on a pick-and-roll, our bigs need to show and recover, and if the big gets caught with the guard, he needs to stay with him, which is what happened on that foul late in the shot clock.

[DU82]

Coach wanted to keep a healthy lead at all times with this opponent. I think we were playing for the media as well. I do hope the boys on the bench are comfortable with the minutes and experience they are getting. It's important for them to feel as though they are needed for this teams success in league play. I'm sure they (staff) are coaching them to realize this. I have always liked Zoubs; he had another good game. But I too wonder why: as a senior he keeps putting the ball on the floor down low; why he was out in three point land trying to keep up with a guard on defense? Cmon Zoubs, that's a freshman mistake.

Each of his baskets, IIRC, was a "catch, face, shoot" basket in that he didn't bring the ball down after catching the pass or rebound. He put the ball on the floor once inside, and it was a turnover. Overall, much better on not putting the ball on the floor down low. (He does dribble it in the high post if he's not able to pass inside, and that's a normal play for the high post.)

His role on the pick and roll is to stay with the guard and not let him pass until the guard recovers, then he gets back to his man underneath. That's why you see him out top fairly often. He's doing a much better job of getting back than he did previously.

I should also point out that we got burned early for two backdoors, and that's when Miles went out and Zoubek came in and took away that play quickly.

Lance and Brian are earning their time with defense, and the freshmen are not earning time with theirs.

[DU82]

It's called hedging on a screen. This is a staple of Duke's defense. If you want to quibble with someone about it, quibble with K, but on a pick-and-roll, our bigs need to show and recover, and if the big gets caught with the guard, he needs to stay with him, which is what happened on that foul late in the shot clock.

Thank you for the much better description of what I was trying to say.

[roywhite]

It's called hedging on a screen. This is a staple of Duke's defense. If you want to quibble with someone about it, quibble with K, but on a pick-and-roll, our bigs need to show and recover, and if the big gets caught with the guard, he needs to stay with him, which is what happened on that foul late in the shot clock.

And Zoubs has improved greatly on his hedge, and return to his position. The play in question was an obvious exception, but he's moving better in this situation---getting out faster, getting back faster, fouling less frequently. Played 25 minutes tonight and stayed out of foul trouble...that alone is good news.

We are watching Zoubs at a higher level of play than we've ever seen him. Keep it up, big guy.

[Newton_14]

It's called hedging on a screen. This is a staple of Duke's defense. If you want to quibble with someone about it, quibble with K, but on a pick-and-roll, our bigs need to show and recover, and if the big gets caught with the guard, he needs to stay with him, which is what happened on that foul late in the shot clock.

And Z and the rest of the bigs have worked the hedge and recover to perfection for most of this year. Sometimes the big recovers to his own man in time, or if not, the weakside wing defender slides over to cover the big, and as you pointed out, as with that play in reference tonight, sometimes the big is forced to stay on the guard. Overall the team has executed that defense very well this year in both the games against ranked teams and the lesser opponents. Zoubs has been great this year and has moved better than he has in his entire career. Nice to see.

[Welcome2DaSlopes]

The real questin is can he stay consistent.

[Ultrarunner]

The real questin is can he stay consistent.

Probably, yes, if he can stay healthy. This is the first time in Zoubs career at Duke that he has been healthy for an extended stretch. The difference is remarkable.

[Wildcat]

Listen I'm a veteran Duke fan. If you feel as though you can speak condescendingly towards me or my posts, then this may not be the site for me. I don't like feeling as though I don't belong; particular since I've been a Duke basketball fan for over 35 years. The beauty of life is diversity. Learn to appreciate others' points sometimes; even if you don't agree. If you ban me for this post; I probably don't need to be up here anyway. Sad because, again: I've been a Duke fan for over 35 plus years.

[roywhite]

The real questin is can he stay consistent.

Well, definitely, we want to see Zoubs play consistently well. But the interior is an area (unlike the perimeter) where we do have depth---Lance, the Plumlees, Ryan Kelly developing. If Zoubs does not play well, there are others that can step up.

Our inside defense is so much better this year than it's been in quite a while; we've got size, depth, and the ability to block or alter shots.

[Mcluhan]

The real question is can he stay consistent.

I really can't say what any one of our front court players will show us night to night-- though like many I'm currently bullish on the elders and somewhat bearish on the youngins-- but in the aggregate, I feel better about our frontcourt. The overall trends suggest that by the home stretch of conference play, we'll have at least two guys playing well enough each game-- rebounding, hitting 3+ FGs, and not fouling out.

And the upside is fairly tantalizing-- between Lance's spastic torque, the Plumlees' aerial reach, and Zoub's sheer size, opposing big men could be in for some helter skelter experiences.

[Kfanarmy]

Lance Thomas was the only Duke player to shoot over 50% from the foul line today (not negative keep reading)...the interesting, and good thing about that, is he is shooting almost 83% 11 games into the season... after shooting less than 60% the prior three years. I'm guessing he spent some time working it since last season. Hope he continues to do well.

[Spam Filter]

The Free Throw pct doesn't bother me, you're going to have an off game now and then.

The 13 FTA does bother me. We just haven't done a very good job getting to the line all year. That, and given our lack of an inside game, makes us even more dependent on making jumpshots.

[El_Diablo]

Listen I'm a veteran Duke fan. If you feel as though you can speak condescendingly towards me or my posts, then this may not be the site for me. I don't like feeling as though I don't belong; particular since I've been a Duke basketball fan for over 35 years. The beauty of life is diversity. Learn to appreciate others' points sometimes; even if you don't agree. If you ban me for this post; I probably don't need to be up here anyway. Sad because, again: I've been a Duke fan for over 35 plus years.

Chillax dude. You called out a senior player for a "freshman mistake" (in a pretty condescending tone yourself). Then others pointed out why it wasn't really a freshman mistake because it is a staple of the defense and something he is told to do, and it usually is better than the alternative--letting our guard force his way through the pick and letting the guy with the ball take an uncontested jump shot or drive into the lane.

There was another time in the second half when Zoubek got stuck on the perimeter guarding someone, but it was in transition defense and he was the only person in position to guard him for those few seconds. You don't just back off a shooter and retreat to the paint in that case--he did what he was supposed to do--match up with the nearest player--and then he called Lance over to switch as soon as the ball rotated to the other side of the floor. I thought he did fine in that particular situation.

[anon]

Listen I'm a veteran Duke fan. If you feel as though you can speak condescendingly towards me or my posts, then this may not be the site for me. I don't like feeling as though I don't belong; particular since I've been a Duke basketball fan for over 35 years. The beauty of life is diversity. Learn to appreciate others' points sometimes; even if you don't agree. If you ban me for this post; I probably don't need to be up here anyway. Sad because, again: I've been a Duke fan for over 35 plus years.

Welcome to DBR

[Wildcat]

without having the "inside scoop" regarding the exact play; I was just pointing out that as early as middle school, coaches encourage bigs to go straight up with the ball. In terms of Zoubs' D being a staple of Duke defense; I was unaware of that. I'm not an expert on basketball; just a life-long Duke fan. A cursory look at that play looked like he was trying to play D on the perimeter against a super quick guard. That was not condescending in the least; it's not my personality.

[juise]

I didn't realize that goduke.com posts free highlights, but they did for this game (http://www.goduke.com/mediaPortal/player.dbml?&db_oem_id=4200&id=666338&DB_MENU_ID=&SPSID=22724&SPID=1845&DB_OEM_ID=4200). There's nothing overly exciting, though... it's mostly threes with a couple putbacks. This was a good effort by the team after 10 days off. I would not want our back court to be rusty going into this weekend's game against Clemson.

[jipops]

Now, dear G did I say Zou had a bad game/ No! He just shouldn't put it on the floor. He's been playing very well.

And as you say, the bench was absent in 2nd 1/2. That's all I way saying. And I don't like coach blowing off our rooks in thier 1st year.

and, and, and for you english majors.

I don't like it when he puts it on the floor either. But if that was something that was going to make me flip out, I'd probably flip out during 99.9% of all college games not including Duke.

You're also completely ignoring the fact that Duke has been through a 10-day lay off. We've got another game on Thursday and then a huge conference game on Jan 3rd. It makes plenty of sense to give the starters big minutes after such a long layoff. And saying K is "blowing off our rooks" has already been proven in past games as being dead wrong. Either you haven't paid any attention at all to what has transpired this season or you're just trying to incite discussion off this statement.

[Neals384]

How does Duke compare to other top teams in terms of bench minutes? Well, I checked season stats for 5 teams, added up the 5 players with the most total minutes, and divided by the total team minutes.

Duke top 5 players got 69% of all minutes
Kentucky top 5 players got 68% of all minutes
Kansas top 5 players got 66% of all minutes
Carolina top 5 players got 61% of all minutes
Texas top 5 players got 58% of all minutes

One could conclude that Duke is using less depth than the other top teams, and significantly so in relation to UNC and Texas.

Note that I used the top five players in terms of minutes, regardless of who starts. For Duke, this meant including Dre, not Miles. Stats are updated thru games of Dec 28.

Neal

[Kfanarmy]

Some of the facial expressions that the AP photos picked up are just undescribable...
http://www.goduke.com/PhotoAlbum.dbml?SPSID=22724&SPID=1845&DB_OEM_ID=4200&PALBID=360177

[Greg_Newton]

(ETA: Sorry this got so long, it was the first game I've gotten to see in person this year...)

- Solid win. Nolan and Jon have played incredibly well together the last 2 games... best backcourt in the country right now?

- Kelly played almost exclusively at the 3 today... interesting to see. Perhaps K is trying to figure a way to work him in more regularly? We saw the Jon-Dre-Ryan-Mason-Z lineup several times today, which is 6'4-6'5-6'10'-6-11-7'1:eek:. Ginormous.

- In defense of the Plumlees, they have a much larger intangible effect on our defense than Lance and Z, IMO. I can't remember how many times I noticed a player take a big dribble toward the rim just to pick it up and kick it back out when Miles rotated over, lose a pass under the rim because Mason was elevating for the block, double clutch and miss a layup because one of them was challenging the shot above the rim. There is no such fear of Lance and Z sliding over from the weak side, which is why I like to see at least one Plumlee in. Blueintheface - I agree that Z is probably our best on-the-ball post defender, but there's no way he is a better overall defensive presence... IMHO.

That said, Z continues to be a different player and exceed all expectations... wish he had an extra redshirt year or something. How about him moving his feet and D-ing up that forward when he was isolated on the wing? :D Lance hustled his *** off today, he may as well just invest in some full-body sliders. Nice to see him nail another 18 footer, too.

2 things I don't understand:

1) What happened to the lobs off the screen and rolls? That was our best play early in the year, and the screener is still wide open most of the time. Puzzling. The Plumlees are two of the best finishing big men you'll see, but it seems like we've given up trying to get them the ball around the rim.

2) Why do we never have Miles/Mason set interior screens for each other? Very simple, have Miles come screen for Mason on the block, who pops up to the free throw line (where he is extremely effective... virtually all of Mason's best moves have started about 15 feet from the basket, facing it). Miles seals off his man and posts, the ball is swung to the guard on the wing, who passes to either of them, and we suddenly have the best opportunity for interior offense we would have seen all day.

Instead, we just have them running around frantically and screening for perimeter players, then occasionally trying to post up players 1-on-1... not their strength, and Singler and Smith are not great at looking and passing to the post anyway. Therefore, when they finally do get the ball, it's usually 10-15' from the basket or right by the baseline... places where Ed Davis wouldn't get a great shot from either. But the fact that they actually got the ball seems to make them feel like they should make a move and shoot it, so they force something up.

Lance and Z are certainly outplaying the Plumlees right now... but it's not as simple as just saying that Lance and Z are better players. They are great offensive rebounders, screeners, on-ball post defenders, disrupters, etc... all skills that translate very well into the totally guard-centric way we've been playing. The Plumlees seem much, much more comfortable when they get touches and are included in the flow of the offense (unlike Lance and Z)... and they can both create their own shots, given the proper setup. Especially Mason... I'd almost rather have him face the basket and go 1-on-1 than Kyle right now.

And no, I don't understand sitting our 4 underclassmen for the final 8 minutes of this particular game... but what are ya gonna do.

[Jim3k]

Listen I'm a veteran Duke fan. If you feel as though you can speak condescendingly towards me or my posts, then this may not be the site for me. I don't like feeling as though I don't belong; particular since I've been a Duke basketball fan for over 35 years. The beauty of life is diversity. Learn to appreciate others' points sometimes; even if you don't agree. If you ban me for this post; I probably don't need to be up here anyway. Sad because, again: I've been a Duke fan for over 35 plus years.

Don't feel bad because Jumbo disagreed with you. It has happened to many others. But...it is true that he's very knowledgeable and he was in fact correct about why Zoubs (and other bigs) sometimes go to the perimeter. Even so, he sometimes does come across more harshly than he wants to. He even acknowledges that he is a blowhard. So his bark is worse than his bite. He assumes that Duke fans have better X's and O's knowledge than they often have. Don't let him run you off.

Still, it doesn't hurt to try to understand defensive schemes. What Duke does was not in your high school playbook. Plus, Coach modifies it depending on his personnel.

Hedging, as Zoubek did, does a couple of things. Primarily, it disrupts the offense's flow and affects its use of the timeclock. No guard likes to find himself unpredictably face to face with a big on the perimeter. Second it forces that guard to retreat while losing time. It is generally designed to take away the diagonal entry pass seen in a motion offense. One of the consequences, as you note, is that our Big's bigman is momentarily left alone. Still, if the guard can't see that his bigman is uncovered, the pass that can beat the hedge is never made. Our Big must get back to his man quickly or what you are concerned about will certainly happen. Notice that Zoubs never stays out there once the guard retreats; he's never out there more than a second and only away from his own man for 2-3 seconds at most. If it works, all of our defenders can get re-positioned on their own men and the offense, unstarted, is still on the perimeter. Plus, his teammates know when he is going to hedge, so they can be ready to help out on that pass. In a sense, it's a bit of a trap.

Now, a big guard can probably defeat the hedge by throwing over it (or under it via the bounce pass) to the unguarded bigman. But we don't see that size guard very often. And if we do, we probably wouldn't ask our Big to hedge. Passing quickly around the perimeter should also be able to beat it, so hedging is not done all the time. It works best when it is not predictable.

In any event, Zoubs is carrying out instructions. He's not doing this on his own.

[UrinalCake]

The purpose of playing these preseason games against lesser opponents is not just to win the game. The goal is to develop our team in preparation for march. A lot can be gained by leaving the starters in. How else will they learn to maintain intensity over an entire game, or shoot free throws while they're fatigued, or run the delay offense, or countless other nuances that must be played through? When K says the game isn't over, I don't think he's just talking about the score. These games are used as learning opportunities, even while the outcome is no longer in doubt.

[El_Diablo]

Some of the facial expressions that the AP photos picked up are just undescribable...
http://www.goduke.com/PhotoAlbum.dbml?SPSID=22724&SPID=1845&DB_OEM_ID=4200&PALBID=360177

If this is the play I'm thinking of, I believe the action in the picture labeled "02" was a foul on Kyle. That was a complete head-scratcher at the time, and I'm still convinced it was the worst call of the night. I mean, did Kyle's head get in the way of Robinson's elbow while he was jumping on Kyle's back??? Whether that was the same play or not...Robinson did not get called for a foul there; he only had one foul in the first half (when this picture was taken), and it was in the open court after a Duke defensive rebound. Really terrible call.

The refs let a lot of physical plays go uncalled tonight (Kyle leveled on a moving screen, Nolan knocked down by a defender on the perimeter right in front of a ref, lots of body contact in the post). Not dirty on LBSU's part...just pretty physical. It should be good for us in the long run to be able to tough a game out like that when the calls aren't always there.

[Tappan Zee Devil]

How does Duke compare to other top teams in terms of bench minutes? Well, I checked season stats for 5 teams, added up the 5 players with the most total minutes, and divided by the total team minutes.

Duke top 5 players got 69% of all minutes
Kentucky top 5 players got 68% of all minutes
Kansas top 5 players got 66% of all minutes
Carolina top 5 players got 61% of all minutes
Texas top 5 players got 58% of all minutes

One could conclude that Duke is using less depth than the other top teams, and significantly so in relation to UNC and Texas.

Note that I used the top five players in terms of minutes, regardless of who starts. For Duke, this meant including Dre, not Miles. Stats are updated thru games of Dec 28.

Neal

So our top five are on average playing 1.44 minutes longer than at Kansas (33.12 vs 31.68 min). Is that significant? I mean it as an honest question. Is that significant? I don't know.

Jim

[ChicagoCrazy84]

So our top five are on average playing 1.44 minutes longer than at Kansas (33.12 vs 31.68 min). Is that significant? I mean it as an honest question. Is that significant? I don't know.

Jim


I don't know either, but I do think that Scheyer playing 38 minutes is a little over the top, at least compared to Dawkins 8. You're up by 20 at halftime, why not give Andre more run? I didn't watch 1 second of the game, so I don't know what went on. I am purely going by what I am seeing on the stat sheet. I do know that you are going to need this kid come conference time and if you are hesitant on giving him run now, what will it be like a month from now? I am not going to be critical of Coach K as that other guy was, but it's a legit question. Good stuff though, I'll take a 21 point win.

BTW, I did predict a score of 87-62. Not too far off!

[Jumbo]

Listen I'm a veteran Duke fan. If you feel as though you can speak condescendingly towards me or my posts, then this may not be the site for me. I don't like feeling as though I don't belong; particular since I've been a Duke basketball fan for over 35 years. The beauty of life is diversity. Learn to appreciate others' points sometimes; even if you don't agree. If you ban me for this post; I probably don't need to be up here anyway. Sad because, again: I've been a Duke fan for over 35 plus years.

I'm not sure whether you're replying to me or one of the several other posters who wrote back to you. But I don't understand your response. I don't think anyone was condescending toward you. I know that I explained what hedging was, and that if you were going to take issue with a big man covering a guard for a moment (which happens in any game of basketball), it's not fair to criticize Zoubek -- that's on Coach K. Others basically said the same thing.

No one wants to ban you. No one is holding a competition for the best Duke fan or the longest-running Duke fan. And I'm all for diversity of thoughts. But you later admitted that you weren't familiar with the concept of hedging, so given that, maybe you'll hesitate to be quite so harsh on a player next time, and instead throw a question out to the group about something that looks unfamiliar. You said it yourself -- we should try to learn from others' points, and in this case, several other posters were able to explain what you saw during the game.

[turnandburn55]

and no one got hurt.

That was the point wasn't it?

Thankfully (and unlike the Colts), our revered coach was able to accomplish both goals in one fell swoop.

[Troublemaker]

The Duke bench played 54 minutes tonight. That's plenty. If anyone disagrees, then please provide a list of teams that consistently give their bench players much more playing time than 54 minutes.

The idea that Coach K doesn't see the "big picture" is idiotic. The idea that some dork internet fan can see the "big picture" better than Coach K who works with the players every day, coaching them to improve both individually and as a team towards long-term goals, is ridiculously stupid and pompous.

Honestly, I sometimes hate our fans.

[striker219]

First a shoutout to westwall, thanks again, game was awesome!

And in no particular order...***

-First ten minutes of the second half saw some very, uhm, spirited physical play from the visiting team without a whistle in sight. I'm not a complain-about-the-officiating kind of guy, and overall I won't complain, but there was a stretch there where there were quite a few Long Beach players made quite a few very enthusiastic defensive plays much to the chagrin of the home crowd. I'll leave it there.

-Minutes. Andre was mostly fine, stumbled just a bit on occasion in the flow of the offense, but I hear rumor that the Louvre is clearing space in their sculptures department for what I'm told will be a life size replica of his jump shot. He is getting lost on the defensive end, but not alarmingly so. Everything else was pretty much par for the course.

-Zoubek is earning his minutes, although I still cringe when he gets the ball down low. He doesn't have the physical abilities of the Plumlees, but he knows his role in this defense as well as anyone on the court and executes, and he's becoming a heck of a rebounder. I'm a huge Zoubek critic, probably too much so, but I have to give credit where credit is due. And it's probably the critic part in me coming out, but I am somewhat inclined to attribute his impressive stats tonight to the considerable size advantage he had over Long Beach. Except the limited fouls, nice job! (note: I really don't want to take away from his game today, I was impressed)

-Maybe it just doesn't come across on TV the way it did in person tonight, but Lance is intense. Like, scary unstable at times intense, but in a good way. The vein popping out of his head as he was coming to the sideline during the second or third TV timeout in the second half, damn... And I'm freaking loving his mid-range jumper.

-Kyle still seems like he's trying to do too much on the offensive end.

-Nolan, nice! Loved the shooters touch tonight, loved the head-up-keeping-others-involved, hated the free throws, didn't really mind the trying-to-do-too-much off balance jumper inside fifteen feet that I normally hate.

-Jon being Jon. I've always loved his game, but in every game something new seems to stand out. I'm glad that the national media is starting to accept that he's doing OK as a point guard stand in since we don't have a real point guard, (is there a vomiting/sarcastic smiley thing?) because the offense is just plain better when he has the ball in his hands. And I'm loving the way that Jon and Nolan really seem to enjoy being on the court together, and the way they feed off of each other.

-What happened when Kyle dove for the ball and a ref ended up on the scorers table? I had a crowd walk in front of me right then and missed it.

-Our defense is frequently ugly, but effective. Too much getting beat on the ball, but lots of help. Really good team D. Too many defensive break-downs/back door/wide open under the basket moments, but I'm picky.

-I laughed at the "shave the mohawk" chant, but not as hard as I did when Zoub made the mohawk eat the ball. Vicious block.

-Free throws. Ugh. Please don't do that again.

-It's kind of hard to take guys named Eugene, Larry, and Casper seriously, but if I were a mid major I wouldn't want to be in their conference. These guys are good. (I mean no offense to any Eugene's, Larry's, or Casper's; lots of love!)


***The preceding game observations were brought to you by Eagle Rare Bourbon; Eagle Rare, when you want the best but don't want to pay for it. All observations are the opinion of the poster and don't necessarily reflect the opinions of DBR or its advertisers. Also, they may or may not be based in reality.


Sorry for the wall of text. Eagle Rare!

[m g]

i think he loses minutes because of his defense. k seems to go to the defensive unit after guys start getting burned too much, like during long beach state's second half run. in my opinion, dawkins gets burned for defensive awareness more than anyone (now that olek has transferred, haha). plus, the juniors and seniors on this team really know how to play d

hopefully his defensive awareness will improve as the season progresses

[Dukeford]

Some of the facial expressions that the AP photos picked up are just undescribable...
http://www.goduke.com/PhotoAlbum.dbml?SPSID=22724&SPID=1845&DB_OEM_ID=4200&PALBID=360177

Those are some darn awesome facial expressions!, from some very emphatic dudes. I like the one of Coach K near the end, his face poking out amongst the players, flush with momentary anger. And I like the face on the Long Beach player in 2nd photo where he's trying to block Nolan from behind. Reminds me of a modern day sleepy Floyd pose.

But the best one has to be Mason blocking the shot. Look at the definition in those shoulders and biceps! That's why he has a scholarship.

[Bob Green]

Through the first 11 games of the season, Duke is shooting .434 from behind the 3-point line. There are three players making over 40 percent of their attempts and our "worst" 3-point shooter is making over 30 percent of his attempts:


Player Pct FG Attempts
Dawkins 0.490 25 51
Smith 0.486 17 35
Scheyer 0.437 31 71
Singler 0.367 18 49
Kelly 0.308 4 13
Team 0.434 95 219

In order to gain a perspective, in 2004, our last Final Four season, the team shot .364, and in our championship season of 2001, the team shot .385. I realize it is early and the level of competition is about to stiffen, but this team is a really good shooting basketball team.

* I removed the 1-4 performance of Olek Czyz from the results as he is gone. With Czyz included the team is shooting .429.

[jgehtland]

Somebody earlier asked why K was so animated in one timeout, really getting after the team: that timeout came after the third play where either a turnover by us or defensive rebound by LBSU led to an uncontested layup at the other end. It would have been 4 except for Kyle intimidating the LBSU player so much *from 5 feet behind him* that he blew the dunk. K was pretty clearly miffed about the lack of rotation and letting guys leak all the way downcourt.

This *might* have had somethingn to do with the minutes distribution for Andre, though I continue to assert that a lot could have been going on with the young man, game related or not, and given his recent history, we shouldn't be worrying too much about his minutes in one particular holiday game.

[airowe]

I haven't read K's postgame comments yet, but from various reports the White Team (starters) blew the Blue Team (non-starters) out in practice. Apparently, he was pretty upset with their performance. This could have had a lot to do with the time Dawkins played. He was the only player to play under his average. I'm not too surprised the youngsters had a lackluster practice after a 10 day Holiday layover, it was either their first or second time experiencing this break, and in Andre's case was probably less than enjoyable. Regardless, with a game against Clemson coming up on Sunday, these guys need to get shocked back into game shape. K is a master motivator, and I'm sure he knows which buttons to push with which players.

That being said, it's nice to see Kyle only playing 31 mpg, although I'm not really sure what the difference is between 31 and 34 (which I believe his average is). 3 mpg more or less don't matter that much to a guy like Kyle. I don't really get why people freak out so much about minutes for our backcourt guys, and I don't want to start a discussion on it, but Scheyer and Smith are going to play major minutes this year, simply out of nevessity. Thankfully, Scheyer has an ungodly VO2 number and seemingly can't get tired. It was nice to see the shuttling that occurred in the first half, I assume we'll see a lot of that on Sunday against a pressing, physical team like Clemson.

Back to the game, I was really impressed with our team defense, especially shotblocking (at one point in the first half, we had more blocked shots (7) than LBSU had made field goals (5). It's clear that we have the ability to make up for perimeter defensive mistakes with our ballhawks on the inside either blocking or disrupting the penetrator's next move. It is a luxury we haven't had in a few years, to say the least, and will go a long way towards us being able to hang with the big boys in March.

I would like to see our offense go through the low post a little more often, but we are one of the highest scoring teams in the Nation for a reason, and it's not just our 3 point shooting (although we are shooting it really well from there as well.) Our semi-motion offense seemed to really throw LBSU for a loop and led to a number of open looks from mid-range and outside, and if Jon keeps being able to drive and find the open man on the perimeter, we're going to see a lot more open looks as the season progresses. That is just as, if not more, effective at drawing the defense in as an entry pass into the low post because guys rreally have to honor Jon's ability to score when he gets into the lane, whereas you probably won't see a perimeter defender sag off his man to double up one of our bigs since they really don't demand that kind of attention right now.

I really liked what I saw with the "Orange" 1-3-1 zone with Lance as the point man. He is so ferocious on the ball out there, it's hard to get anything around him. I saw numerous possessions while we were in that D go down to the very end of the shot clock and at least one result in a shot clock violation. I think we'll see some of that defense on Senior Night.

Really impressed with our ability to create open shots and ability to hit them. The most exciting thing to me is that there is much room for improvement with the young guys on this team, and I don't think the learning curve is that steep. Kyle played well last night, but if he can start hitting more shots, we are going to be a very dangerous team. Looking forward to the Penn game tomorrow night.

[dukelifer]

The purpose of playing these preseason games against lesser opponents is not just to win the game. The goal is to develop our team in preparation for march. A lot can be gained by leaving the starters in. How else will they learn to maintain intensity over an entire game, or shoot free throws while they're fatigued, or run the delay offense, or countless other nuances that must be played through? When K says the game isn't over, I don't think he's just talking about the score. These games are used as learning opportunities, even while the outcome is no longer in doubt.

I agree with you. Long Beach State kept playing hard to the end and this gave Duke a chance to work on their end of game sets with mostly starters out there. This is a good idea given that they have Clemson on Sunday. Penn is a much worse team than Long Beach and likely will be way out of the game by the end. Duke is also coming off a long lay off. The other guys should see plenty of minutes next game.

As for game thoughts, Zoubs is really playing much better. He is not an All American- but he is moving much better on the floor. He is not thinking as much - and is making many more good plays than bad. The Zoubek shuffle appears to be a thing of the past. We are beginning to see the Zoubs that many predicted when he first arrived at Duke- a very solid center. Although Miles and Mason did not light up the score board- both were very active on O and D. Mason in particular made a few very nice passes to Zoubs down low and showed an ability to handle the ball. Miles had a spectacular block and continues to show strength when rebounding the ball. As for the guards- Smith has been very impressive of late. His shooting stroke is much quicker this year and seems to be much more comfortable out there- playing with a purpose. Dawkins will get his minutes- but right now it is critical that both Scheyer and Smith play at a very high level and with confidence. Of course, Scheyer has been a rock so far - not much more you can say. The kid is having a great start to the season.

This is a very skilled team and the big guys can all offer something positive- even Kelly who does a lot of little things. They will wear out a few front lines and they are collectively making Duke a much different team this year- you cannot ignore the big guys any more. Duke still needs Singler to be better to beat the elite teams. ACC play is right around the corner and it should be an interesting year. Clemson is going to be a very good test.

[thewiseben]

What a wonderful way to spend an evening. It had been way too long since I'd been in CIS. I got there an hour before the game, and watching things get warmed up and seeing that place fill up was the most religious experience I can remember.

This is a long post, so ignore whatever you want.

The game was fantastic in the first half, with the offense playing brilliantly and in sync. The defense was just smothering. Even Zoubek actually played some great pressure D against his smaller man.

The second half Long Beach State came out much stronger and actually gave their big men some time on the floor (they've got a couple of 7 footers who normally don't even catch a whiff of playing time). The defense for our guys broke down a number of times, it was not great, and when the defense isn't making stops, our offense does not click. LBS was also hitting some of the most ridiculously contested shots I've ever seen, so I won't say too much bad about our guys, they hit three pointers that simply had no business getting near the backboard. Duke forced them to use the entire shot clock and take terrible shots, they simply made them.

Scheyer and Smith both played as well as we would hope. I really am struck when watching Scheyer out there with just how smart he is with the ball, he always knows where the ball needs to go and where his man needs to be. Nolan Smith was on fire, he came up with huge three after huge three to keep us right around a 20pt margin (though he still passed up the open man to take contested mid-range floaters a couple times). There's something amazing about watching those two guys play together, they always know where the other one is and know how to play off each other's strengths.

Zoubek indeed played the game of his life. The four blocks he had were just great, and he definitely was out there scaring the heck out of the LBS guys trying to drive into the paint. He also was popping up out of nowhere to put back shots, playing like the huge beast he is. He was playing like the guy we've all been waiting four years to see. He still lopes awkwardly down the court, but he somehow does it with energy and joy.

Thomas played a strong game, picked up a couple of imaginary fouls that slowed him down a bit, but that guy can really guard ANYONE. He kept up with their 5'11" guy and just harassed the hell out of him when they switched on screens.

Singler continues to struggle with getting the ball in the hoop lately. He hit a couple of big shots in the first half, but took some really just ugly shots in the 2nd. He continues to do all the little things right, but this does not look like a year in which he'll be an AA (or a draft pick). I don't know if he's injured or something, he's just not moving as smoothly or confidently as I remember.

The brothers Plumlee came in and played very effectively I thought, Miles got the start over Zoubek, but when Zoubek came in and started playing like a man, Miles sat for long stretches. Mason played few minutes for a couple of reasons: he matched up poorly with the guys on LBS, Lance Thomas had a much easier time keeping up with smaller faster guys. Got a couple saves with those blocks, but his man kept getting past him. He also wasn't producing much offensively, he missed a couple of dunks (one of which was almost the most ridiculous alley-oop I'd ever seen).

Ryan Kelly got a fair number of minutes in the second half, but he was making some bad passes and not hitting his shots, so I do not blame K at all for benching him. Much as I want to see him develop, he's got a ways to go before he's ready. I will say though that he is going to be a great point-forward for us one of these days. If you guys have ever seen Mike Miller (former Timberwolf, now at Washington) play from the NBA, that's what Kelly's game is going to look like. Lots of intangibles, lots of assists, an unselfish player who improves ball movement and can hit jump shots and embarrass the defense occasionally.

[Chicago 1995]

Is that I hate the stupid blackout rule that DirecTV and Fox Sports applied to keep me from watching the game.

AARRGGHHHHH!! My local Fox Sports is showing Bulls - Pacers, so a college basketball game is blacked out?

Having not watched the game, I'm not going to delve too deeply into the rest of the thread or the discussion, but I will agree that in a game that's well in hand, I think it would have been nice to rest Jon a little bit more than we did. 38 minutes is a bit much, in my opinion.

[NSDukeFan]

... and the minutes will once again be distributed to everybody's satisfaction.
I thought you made some good points in your post game posts, but I thought this line was funny. You can please some of the people some of the time...:D


I didn't realize that goduke.com posts free highlights, but they did for this game (http://www.goduke.com/mediaPortal/player.dbml?&db_oem_id=4200&id=666338&DB_MENU_ID=&SPSID=22724&SPID=1845&DB_OEM_ID=4200). There's nothing overly exciting, though... it's mostly threes with a couple putbacks. This was a good effort by the team after 10 days off. I would not want our back court to be rusty going into this weekend's game against Clemson.

Thanks for pointing this out; I wasn't aware of it either.

[BD80]

So our top five are on average playing 1.44 minutes longer than at Kansas (33.12 vs 31.68 min). Is that significant? I mean it as an honest question. Is that significant? I don't know.

Jim

It must be! Kansas is the second deepest team in the nation (Texas is clearly the deepest). Duke, on the other hand, only has 10 recruited players on its current roster, and only three of those are guards. Kansas has played a group of cupcakes, with the 3 "challenges" out of 12 games being Memphis, Michigan, and Cal. Duke has played ASU, uCon, Wisc, St Johns, and Gonzaga in our 11 games, and the other 6 weren't as soft as KU's schedule.

So playing the "bench" 41.6 min/game instead of 34.4 min/game must be HUGE to justify the complaints that are directed at Coach K.

[NSDukeFan]

- Kelly played almost exclusively at the 3 today... interesting to see. Perhaps K is trying to figure a way to work him in more regularly? We saw the Jon-Dre-Ryan-Mason-Z lineup several times today, which is 6'4-6'5-6'10'-6-11-7'1:eek:. Ginormous.

- In defense of the Plumlees, they have a much larger intangible effect on our defense than Lance and Z, IMO. ... Blueintheface - I agree that Z is probably our best on-the-ball post defender, but there's no way he is a better overall defensive presence... IMHO.

Lance and Z are certainly outplaying the Plumlees right now... but it's not as simple as just saying that Lance and Z are better players. They are great offensive rebounders, screeners, on-ball post defenders, disrupters, etc... all skills that translate very well into the totally guard-centric way we've been playing. The Plumlees seem much, much more comfortable when they get touches and are included in the flow of the offense (unlike Lance and Z)... and they can both create their own shots, given the proper setup. Especially Mason... I'd almost rather have him face the basket and go 1-on-1 than Kyle right now.

And no, I don't understand sitting our 4 underclassmen for the final 8 minutes of this particular game... but what are ya gonna do.

Thanks for your post for a live perspective. I hadn't noticed that Kelly had played mostly at the 3. That is encouraging that K may be looking for more ways to get him involved in the game.

I do have to disagree with you about the Plumlees having a larger intangible effect on D than Zoubek. What has made Brian such an impact player this year, besides his fantastic rebounding, is his positioning. He is almost always in the right place at the right time, which IMO is much more of an intangible benefit than the threat of a shot block from Mason or Miles. Having a 7 footer in good help side position is why teams tend to struggle scoring when Brian is on the floor, besides his solid post defense.

I think you make an interesting point about Miles and Mason not getting as involved in the our guard oriented offense. I hope we continue to see Mason and Kelly as high post threats and look inside to pass the ball in the post to all our post players. I also don't mind Brian trying a post move with a dribble every once in awhile. He just has to make sure he makes one strong dribble and gets the ball back up high quickly so guards can't strip him. Lance also seems to make strong post moves, but he is not often getting by people and he is having a tough time finishing over players.

I would also have to disagree with wanting Mason to go one-on-one more than Kyle right now. If we need a score off a one-on-one play, I would rather have the ball in Kyle's hands then anyone's (even after the end of the Wisconsin game), with Nolan not far behind. The best option, though, may be to have the ball in Jon's hands and let him make the best decision if there are more than 6 seconds left. Mason going one-on-one would be way down on my list at this point, though I have been encouraged by some of the moves he has made.

I think some other posters have made some good comments about playing our top unit for the last 8 minutes to ensure a solid victory, maintain defensive focus, not allow a good team back in the game, develop our best players, keep them fit after a 10 day break from games, etc.

I think it is interesting comparing K's philosophy vs. that of the Colts, though I think Jumbo already debunked that theory a bit by highlighting how physical NFL football is. I still think the Colts comparison is relevant in that they have no idea how they are going to do in the one and done playoffs and my opinion is that they should have gone for the undefeated season and tried to win every game as that would be a major accomplishment in itself. Would that lessen their chance at a Super Bowl? Maybe, but I don't know that resting their players and avoiding injuries increases their chances much, either. To me, it parallels the decisions to rest players, play the bench more vs. trying to win all your games, including the ACC tournament. I guess I like the idea of trying to win all the games you can, as there are no guarantees in the tournament, even if you are "better rested."

[detule]

Where the stats are going to be deceiving is all the blocked shots. That's going to look like our frontcourt played stellar defense. Some of the time, that was true. But a lot of the time, it was our bigs relying on their height and/or athleticism to make up for the fact that they were in the wrong place at the wrong time.


Huh? They were in the wrong place at the wrong time but yet managed the block (due to their athleticism?) Sounds to me like they were correctly positioned after all.

For a time in the first half, LBSU could not get anything up in between the forest of hands in the paint - i was most impressed with both the primary as well as the weak side defense in the paint. For a while we looked like a very, very intimidating shot-blocking team.

[NSDukeFan]

Huh? They were in the wrong place at the wrong time but yet managed the block (due to their athleticism?) Sounds to me like they were correctly positioned after all.

For a time in the first half, LBSU could not get anything up in between the forest of hands in the paint - i was most impressed with both the primary as well as the weak side defense in the paint. For a while we looked like a very, very intimidating shot-blocking team.

jgehtland actually had made a very good point. Blocking shots does not equal being in good position. It can, if you are playing good defense and block your man if you force him to shoot over you. More often it indicates someone getting beat and a help side defender having to come over to help out as a desperation play. I agree with you that our inside presence was intimidating and hard for LBSU to get good shots inside, but don't associate defensive stats (especially steals) with good defense.

[detule]

jgehtland actually had made a very good point. Blocking shots does not equal being in good position. It can, if you are playing good defense and block your man if you force him to shoot over you. More often it indicates someone getting beat and a help side defender having to come over to help out as a desperation play. I agree with you that our inside presence was intimidating and hard for LBSU to get good shots inside, but don't associate defensive stats (especially steals) with good defense.

In the spirit of Cameron, I beg to differ - in Duke's aggressive defensive scheme, weak side defense is certainly not a "desperation play." In fact, K's bread and butter in whatever little time I have spent watching him coach, is his ability to impart on his players the necessary skill set to rotate one or two passes ahead of the offense. So to continue with what you are saying - if the primary defender got the block then that is all fine and dandy, if the weak side defender got the block, then in my book this means he was correctly positioned to do so and we should praise him for it rather than qualify it as a "desperation play."

I am not going to even get into steals != good defense, but you can see where I am going with this - agressive defense + good rotation + overplaying the lanes intelligently....

Oliver

[NSDukeFan]

In the spirit of Cameron, I beg to differ - in Duke's aggressive defensive scheme, weak side defense is certainly not a "desperation play." In fact, K's bread and butter in whatever little time I have spent watching him coach, is his ability to impart on his players the necessary skill set to rotate one or two passes ahead of the offense. So to continue with what you are saying - if the primary defender got the block then that is all fine and dandy, if the weak side defender got the block, then in my book this means he was correctly positioned to do so and we should praise him for it rather than qualify it as a "desperation play."

I am not going to even get into steals != good defense, but you can see where I am going with this - agressive defense + good rotation + overplaying the lanes intelligently....

Oliver

You make some good points, as having shot-blockers on the help side are a huge benefit in an aggressive defensive scheme, which Duke normally employs. I would just say that Duke's D is not nearly as aggressive this year, so lessening penetration is a big goal and is ideally done further away from the basket.

I agree that my use of "desperation play" may not have been the correct way of putting it as the team should always have players in help-side defensive position. The ideal defense though is not having to use help-side switches because players are not getting beat at all. The more players have to switch or help out, the more potential there is for an open player. If someone is coming over for a help-side block, unless our rotation is very quick (which fortunately in most of our games it has been) someone is open. This can result in a pass to this open player or a rebound depending where the ball is blocked, or if it is just altered.

I guess I just think there are many situations where more blocks does not necessarily equate to playing great defense. Some of Miles' blocks have been great athletic recoveries, but I wouldn't say that our defense was great on those plays.

[Johnboy]

Blocking shots does not equal being in good position. It can, if you are playing good defense and block your man if you force him to shoot over you. More often it indicates someone getting beat and a help side defender having to come over to help out as a desperation play. I agree with you that our inside presence was intimidating and hard for LBSU to get good shots inside, but don't associate defensive stats (especially steals) with good defense.

Don't associate steals and blocked shots with good defense? FAIL.

Your post shows a complete misunderstanding of what Coach K usually is trying to accomplish, on so many levels that I don't have time to explain it fully. Duke overplays to create turnovers, to get in the heads of the opponent and wear them down. When we have a shotblocking presence, we funnel the ball to the stopper(s) - it's not a desperation play, but by design. "Getting beat" by your man is not necessarily a function of playing bad defense or being in bad position - if you are in the right position and the team is playing good team defense, if your man beats you, he's right in the teeth of the defense.

What do we give up by overplaying passing lanes and trying to wreak havoc with ball pressure? Back door baskets and especially rebounds. This means we can be successful even though we give up some dunks and get outrebounded, because we get steals and other turnovers and because we block shots, many of which go the other way.

Other teams play other defenses, and everything is relative - am I happy when we are outrebounded? No, but I at least understand the reasons why it happens.

[bass-piscator]

Thanks for your post for a live perspective. I hadn't noticed that Kelly had played mostly at the 3. That is encouraging that K may be looking for more ways to get him involved in the game.

I do have to disagree with you about the Plumlees having a larger intangible effect on D than Zoubek. What has made Brian such an impact player this year, besides his fantastic rebounding, is his positioning. He is almost always in the right place at the right time, which IMO is much more of an intangible benefit than the threat of a shot block from Mason or Miles. Having a 7 footer in good help side position is why teams tend to struggle scoring when Brian is on the floor, besides his solid post defense.

I think you make an interesting point about Miles and Mason not getting as involved in the our guard oriented offense. I hope we continue to see Mason and Kelly as high post threats and look inside to pass the ball in the post to all our post players. I also don't mind Brian trying a post move with a dribble every once in awhile. He just has to make sure he makes one strong dribble and gets the ball back up high quickly so guards can't strip him. Lance also seems to make strong post moves, but he is not often getting by people and he is having a tough time finishing over players.

I would also have to disagree with wanting Mason to go one-on-one more than Kyle right now. If we need a score off a one-on-one play, I would rather have the ball in Kyle's hands then anyone's (even after the end of the Wisconsin game), with Nolan not far behind. The best option, though, may be to have the ball in Jon's hands and let him make the best decision if there are more than 6 seconds left. Mason going one-on-one would be way down on my list at this point, though I have been encouraged by some of the moves he has made.

I think some other posters have made some good comments about playing our top unit for the last 8 minutes to ensure a solid victory, maintain defensive focus, not allow a good team back in the game, develop our best players, keep them fit after a 10 day break from games, etc.

I think it is interesting comparing K's philosophy vs. that of the Colts, though I think Jumbo already debunked that theory a bit by highlighting how physical NFL football is. I still think the Colts comparison is relevant in that they have no idea how they are going to do in the one and done playoffs and my opinion is that they should have gone for the undefeated season and tried to win every game as that would be a major accomplishment in itself. Would that lessen their chance at a Super Bowl? Maybe, but I don't know that resting their players and avoiding injuries increases their chances much, either. To me, it parallels the decisions to rest players, play the bench more vs. trying to win all your games, including the ACC tournament. I guess I like the idea of trying to win all the games you can, as there are no guarantees in the tournament, even if you are "better rested."

The possibility of Peyton (or Kyle) going down in the final minute of a meaningless game wouldn't lessen their chances?

[Johnboy]

The ideal defense though is not having to use help-side switches because players are not getting beat at all.

First, I apologize for my tone above.

But I'm sorry, this is another statement that's not realistic. Good offensive players will beat their man, no matter how well-positioned. Duke's answer is to play good team defense and give help.

Other teams play other defenses effectively and get different defensive stats - fewer steals/ turnovers, maybe, but more rebounds and lower opponent shooting percentages. There's more than one way to skin this cat.

[Ultrarunner]

The possibility of Peyton (or Kyle) going down in the final minute of a meaningless game wouldn't lessen their chances?

As compared with either of them going down in the first minute of a meaningful game? My crystal ball simply isn't that precise. And you still don't have results for this season's Colts to point to - you're projecting your expectations on the future of two sports teams in different sports that have completely different scheduling, physicality and are at substantially different points in their respective seasons.

But, hey, presuming you must be Edgar Cayce's grandson, who am I to stop your prognosticating.

[dukelifer]

The possibility of Peyton (or Kyle) going down in the final minute of a meaningless game wouldn't lessen their chances?

A lot of injuries happen during practice as well. As many have said- it is the grind of the ACC season that takes it toll- particularly because no one takes a night off against Duke. They do take nights off against other teams, however. The top 9 players have all played in the middle of games so far and all have performed pretty well. This team is much deeper than most of the recent past - and I expect during the long ACC season all 9 will have their moments.

[jgehtland]

Don't associate steals and blocked shots with good defense? FAIL.

Your post shows a complete misunderstanding of what Coach K usually is trying to accomplish, on so many levels that I don't have time to explain it fully. Duke overplays to create turnovers, to get in the heads of the opponent and wear them down. When we have a shotblocking presence, we funnel the ball to the stopper(s) - it's not a desperation play, but by design. "Getting beat" by your man is not necessarily a function of playing bad defense or being in bad position - if you are in the right position and the team is playing good team defense, if your man beats you, he's right in the teeth of the defense.

What do we give up by overplaying passing lanes and trying to wreak havoc with ball pressure? Back door baskets and especially rebounds. This means we can be successful even though we give up some dunks and get outrebounded, because we get steals and other turnovers and because we block shots, many of which go the other way.

Other teams play other defenses, and everything is relative - am I happy when we are outrebounded? No, but I at least understand the reasons why it happens.


Seems my post generated some spirited discussion (thanks, NSDukeFan for chiming in for me in my absence). I completely agree with everyone who noted that weak side help defense is a staple of Duke's D, and does not represent players being out of position. Specifically, Battier and Williams got the grand majority of their blocks swooping in from the weak side, and both of them were defensive players of the year.

Some of our blocks last night were straight up man defense, staying in front of their guy and going up strong to get it (Z and Mason both got one or two of those) and some were good weak side help (Z coming over after the primary got beat, Miles swooping up from behind on a layup). But several of them were neither of these; they were somebody getting beat, realizing there was no help, and rushing back and blocking from behind. These are plays that against bigger competition are going to result in fouls, not blocks.

Now, I'm not saying our 10 blocks were all bad or misleading; just that, IMHO, 3 or 4 of them were just stellar athletic plays making up for lack of good positioning (by either the primary or secondary defender, depending on the play). Thank goodness Mason and Miles are as athletic as they are, and I'm happy that they have the ability to recover in those kinds of scenarios. It is pretty awesome to watch a Duke team with a swarming mass of 6-10 guys jumping and swatting at everything in the paint.

[striker219]

http://www.lbpost.com/sports/lbsu/7828

Really good video of the coming to Cameron experience from the perspective of Long Beach, including game highlights.

I love the Zou-block at about 4:55.

[Jumbo]

Some of our blocks last night were straight up man defense, staying in front of their guy and going up strong to get it (Z and Mason both got one or two of those) and some were good weak side help (Z coming over after the primary got beat, Miles swooping up from behind on a layup). But several of them were neither of these; they were somebody getting beat, realizing there was no help, and rushing back and blocking from behind. These are plays that against bigger competition are going to result in fouls, not blocks.

Now, I'm not saying our 10 blocks were all bad or misleading; just that, IMHO, 3 or 4 of them were just stellar athletic plays making up for lack of good positioning (by either the primary or secondary defender, depending on the play). Thank goodness Mason and Miles are as athletic as they are, and I'm happy that they have the ability to recover in those kinds of scenarios. It is pretty awesome to watch a Duke team with a swarming mass of 6-10 guys jumping and swatting at everything in the paint.

This is what I thought you meant, and I'm glad you clarified. In the back-and-forth with JohnB and NS, JohnB is indeed correct: Good defense does not mean "not getting beaten." It's best to look at defense as a single unit, rather than individual players. The defense isn't beaten if a player breaks down "his man" so long as the rest of the organism is functioning as one. Help isn't just a bail out -- it's part of the way good teams play man. You react to the ball and the other men around you. That's why I don't love straight zones, because the best man-to-man defenses incorporate zone principles anyway.

And as far as blocks go, jgehtland correctly identifies that there are two types of help blocks (in addition to swatting your own own guy). One is a properly positioned, "funnel block" -- think of Shelden Williams just waiting in the lane for a penetrating guard who was foolish enough to try to attack the basket. Then there are "scrambling blocks" -- where the help defender isn't waiting, and has to come flying in from a crazy angle to deflect the ball. As JG was saying, while that takes quite a bit of athleticism, it's not a recipe for success against good teams. So, yes, it is possible for Mason and Miles to have been out of position yet still able to block a shot against LBSU. That will be tougher against Clemson.

[MB in MD]

First, I apologize for my tone above.

But I'm sorry, this is another statement that's not realistic. Good offensive players will beat their man, no matter how well-positioned. Duke's answer is to play good team defense and give help.

Other teams play other defenses effectively and get different defensive stats - fewer steals/ turnovers, maybe, but more rebounds and lower opponent shooting percentages. There's more than one way to skin this cat.

I think Johnboy has it exactly right. This is the defense that K teaches and that his teams play. Gary Williams's, Ben Howland's, and, for that matter Jim Boeheim's teams can all play defense (not too sure about Roy), but they all look very different from Duke. I think in some ways K's approach is the hardest, because it seems to me the most dependent on all 5 players working in synch together. That's why he doesn't give crowd favorites like Marty and Olek (and maybe Andre in this game) as much playing time than people think they deserve, because having one of five players not doing his job is nearly the same as having no one doing his job--at least against good teams. It can be very frustrating to watch when things are not going well, and the teams we've had in the past few years have had some frustrating moments on the defensive end to be sure. The good news is that so far this year's team really does seem to get it, and when it is working right it is beautiful.

[NSDukeFan]

Don't associate steals and blocked shots with good defense? FAIL.

Your post shows a complete misunderstanding of what Coach K usually is trying to accomplish, on so many levels that I don't have time to explain it fully. Duke overplays to create turnovers, to get in the heads of the opponent and wear them down. When we have a shotblocking presence, we funnel the ball to the stopper(s) - it's not a desperation play, but by design. "Getting beat" by your man is not necessarily a function of playing bad defense or being in bad position - if you are in the right position and the team is playing good team defense, if your man beats you, he's right in the teeth of the defense.

What do we give up by overplaying passing lanes and trying to wreak havoc with ball pressure? Back door baskets and especially rebounds. This means we can be successful even though we give up some dunks and get outrebounded, because we get steals and other turnovers and because we block shots, many of which go the other way.

Other teams play other defenses, and everything is relative - am I happy when we are outrebounded? No, but I at least understand the reasons why it happens.

Ever hear of block and steal defense? It's when a player is too lazy to play positional defense and so just goes for the block or steal. I am not at all saying that is what Duke does, but just saying that steals and blocks are not all that is involved in playing good defense. The leaders in steals and blocks are not necessarily (and especially in the case of steals) the best defensive players. It's kind of like judging a baseball pitcher solely by wins as to how good they are. According to your criteria, Ryan Kelly (tied for team lead with 10 steals) and Miles Plumlee (team lead with 15 blocks) are our two best defensive players?

I may have some misunderstandings of what coach K is trying to accomplish, but I am pretty sure it is not complete. :) As I also stated in my post, the team is not defending the passing lanes as aggressively on the perimeter this year. So, we are not generating as many steals or opposition turnovers (16.6 per game last year vs. 15.1 per game this year), but that does not mean we are not playing better defense. (84.2 adj ppg efficiency so far this year vs. 90.8 last year according to KenPom http://kenpom.com/rate.php).

I guess I have one fundamental disagreement with you and maybe you can explain it to me since I have a complete misunderstanding on so many levels. My impression is that coach K preaches help side defense to always be ready in case someone gets beat and he wants the team to be aggressive denying the passing lanes (less so this year, but still) but I believe he would rather the players not get beat, if at all possible. Sorry, that is a bit long for one sentence. I don't think his intention is to have us get beat to force players into the teeth of the D, but to have our help D ready in the likely event that at some point we will.

Originally Posted by NSDukeFan View Post
The ideal defense though is not having to use help-side switches because players are not getting beat at all.


First, I apologize for my tone above.

But I'm sorry, this is another statement that's not realistic. Good offensive players will beat their man, no matter how well-positioned. Duke's answer is to play good team defense and give help.

Other teams play other defenses effectively and get different defensive stats - fewer steals/ turnovers, maybe, but more rebounds and lower opponent shooting percentages. There's more than one way to skin this cat.
Apology accepted.

I agree completely with you that good offensive players will beat their man, sometimes. Where I disagree is that I believe the less often this happens the better and IDEALLY, you would never need help side defense. Is that realistic against a very quick player? Of course, not, but it is ideal.

I also agree there is more than one way to skin this cat, but I don't think in coach K's view having the most steals and blocks is his measure of great defense.

[ncexnyc]

I was very impressed with the way the team passed the ball in the 1st half. Duke had the ball skipping from one side of the court to the other and in rapid fashion. The LBS players were clearly on their heels and we were getting some really wide open shots. Of course it doesn't hurt when the kids bury those open looks, which they did last night.

Kudos to Jon and Nolan for becoming an outstanding backcourt duo.

Kyle showed some signs of life with his long range shooting and hopefully he is out of his funk.

Brian continues to impress. Yes, he had a couple of boneheaded turnovers by commiting the big man's cardinal sin of bringing the ball down, but unlike the past his positive plays now far outnumber his bad plays. Let's be honest, Kyle makes a couple of ugly turnovers a game, but those never get mentioned on this board because of all the positive things he does for the team. It's good to Brian playing himself into a similar situation as far as board respect goes.

Lance was solid. Another excellent effort and capitalizing on his offensive opportunities, especially converting those free throws.

I thought Miles played well. He seemed absent in the 2nd half, but I guess that was because Brian was playing so well.

Andre had a big 1st half, but he too seemed to disappear in the 2nd half. Like others have already said it probably had to do with LBS making a run and in these situations Coach K is going to go with his best defensive line-up.

Mason and Ryan got some solid minutes, but while it's obvious they do have some great upside, they are still learning. I'm sure we'll see alot more from them as the season progresses.

All in all a very solid game against a very gritty LBS team.

[jv001]

First, I apologize for my tone above.

But I'm sorry, this is another statement that's not realistic. Good offensive players will beat their man, no matter how well-positioned. Duke's answer is to play good team defense and give help.

. There's more than one way to skin this cat.

In college basketball and in the NBA, good offensive players beat their man because they are allowed to "carry the ball'. I was watching the Duke vs. Maryland 2001 game and Brad Daugherty(sp?) made mention of players doing it because the refs allow them to get away with it. It's almost impossible for a good defender to keep his man in front of him because of this. Coach K has developed a team defense that plays the passing lanes and has great help defense. If one player is out of position, the defense fails. I have seen many more Duke players jerked from the game for not playing Duke D than for messing up on offense. Just my 2 cents on the subject. Go Duke!

[Dukeface88]

I agree completely with you that good offensive players will beat their man, sometimes. Where I disagree is that I believe the less often this happens the better and IDEALLY, you would never need help side defense. Is that realistic against a very quick player? Of course, not, but it is ideal.


Ideally you wouldn't have to play defense at all because the other team forfeits the game. Since the ideal situation isn't likely to arise very often, the better measure is whether the defense is "working as intended" or not. In Duke's case, that means successful help side defense. I would agree that blocks are not necessarily indicative of good defense, but neither do they mean that something is going wrong.

[Johnboy]

<snip>
I guess I have one fundamental disagreement with you and maybe you can explain it to me since I have a complete misunderstanding on so many levels. My impression is that coach K preaches help side defense to always be ready in case someone gets beat and he wants the team to be aggressive denying the passing lanes (less so this year, but still) but I believe he would rather the players not get beat, if at all possible. Sorry, that is a bit long for one sentence. I don't think his intention is to have us get beat to force players into the teeth of the D, but to have our help D ready in the likely event that at some point we will. <snip>

[2] I also agree there is more than one way to skin this cat, but I don't think in Coach K's view having the most steals and blocks is his measure of great defense.

Before I address point 1 and 2 above, let me respond by saying that I agree with you and jghetland that there are blocks that are made despite poor positioning by the on-ball defender (either the on-ball defender gets beat and swats it from behind himself or a late-rotating help defender gets it), and that these are not the foundation of a good defensive scheme. What got my dander up is the impression I got form your post that shot blocks from the help side are "desperation plays" - and you've retracted that statement. I think we're close to agreeing on blocks, so let's talk about steals.

Addressing point #1 above: My observation is that Coach K usually gives his players (or at least, whoever is guarding the primary ballhandler) a green light on steals - he employs a ballhawking defense as a general rule. So, using your unrealistic terminology of some Platonic ideal defense, every steal attempt would result in a steal. But that's not how the game works, so we employ help defense. Wojo wasn't the quickest guy on the court. He got beat a lot by top-flight point guards - but he was still a great defender because he pressured the ball and when he got beat, he got beat in where he expected to have help. Coach K knows guys will get beat and he's comfortable with that, provided they are playing good team defense which is to say, making the on-ball plays they can, communicating with their teammates and rotating to help. One can (appear to be) beaten regularly and still be playing solid defense. So, yes, there are some times when the idea is to funnel your man into the defense (or the baseline where he will be cut off), and appear to be beaten.

As for #2: I agree that counting blocks and steals may not be the best measure of defense - but getting turnovers, as long as we value the ball ourselves, is a pretty good indicator. Here's what I remember from waaay back when Barry Jacobs was still publishing his Fan's Guide to ACC Basketball - Duke was the only school in the ACC whose winning percentage didn't correlate with rebounding. What does this have to do with steals and blocks? Turnovers seemed to account for that discrepancy. So, sure, a block out of bounds may not really help, but if we get the ball back, it's just as good as a rebound (better, actually), same thing for steals. Tell me which of the top shot blockers or steal leaders (http://www.dukereport.com/history.php) from Duke weren't great defenders, and why. Shane Battier is in the top five in both categories, BTW (#2 steals, #4 blocks) and Grant Hill is #6 in both categories. To your point, though, Billy King, who was an absolute lock-down on-ball defender, doesn't appear in either list (but his lack of offense kept him from playing major minutes - he averaged 20.9mpg for his career vs. 29.7mpg for Shane (http://www.sportsstats.com/bball/)).

Edited to Add: . . . or you could just read Dukeface 88's post above, which expresses my opinion more succinctly than I did.

[Mcluhan]

http://www.lbpost.com/sports/lbsu/7828

Really good video of the coming to Cameron experience from the perspective of Long Beach, including game highlights.

I love the Zou-block at about 4:55.

Wow, that was an excellent look at the Cameron experience from the eyes of the opposing underdogs. One of those times when I realize what I take for granted being a Duke fan. I come away from that rooting for them to be the one bid coming out of the Big West.

And no matter what we've decided about whether or not blocks are 'good' or 'bad'.... those were some blocks!

[NSDukeFan]

Before I address point 1 and 2 above, let me respond by saying that I agree with you and jghetland that there are blocks that are made despite poor positioning by the on-ball defender (either the on-ball defender gets beat and swats it from behind himself or a late-rotating help defender gets it), and that these are not the foundation of a good defensive scheme. What got my dander up is the impression I got form your post that shot blocks from the help side are "desperation plays" - and you've retracted that statement. I think we're close to agreeing on blocks, so let's talk about steals.

Addressing point #1 above: My observation is that Coach K usually gives his players (or at least, whoever is guarding the primary ballhandler) a green light on steals - he employs a ballhawking defense as a general rule. So, using your unrealistic terminology of some Platonic ideal defense, every steal attempt would result in a steal. But that's not how the game works, so we employ help defense. Wojo wasn't the quickest guy on the court. He got beat a lot by top-flight point guards - but he was still a great defender because he pressured the ball and when he got beat, he got beat in where he expected to have help. Coach K knows guys will get beat and he's comfortable with that, provided they are playing good team defense which is to say, making the on-ball plays they can, communicating with their teammates and rotating to help. One can (appear to be) beaten regularly and still be playing solid defense. So, yes, there are some times when the idea is to funnel your man into the defense (or the baseline where he will be cut off), and appear to be beaten.

As for #2: I agree that counting blocks and steals may not be the best measure of defense - but getting turnovers, as long as we value the ball ourselves, is a pretty good indicator. Here's what I remember from waaay back when Barry Jacobs was still publishing his Fan's Guide to ACC Basketball - Duke was the only school in the ACC whose winning percentage didn't correlate with rebounding. What does this have to do with steals and blocks? Turnovers seemed to account for that discrepancy. So, sure, a block out of bounds may not really help, but if we get the ball back, it's just as good as a rebound (better, actually), same thing for steals. Tell me which of the top shot blockers or steal leaders (http://www.dukereport.com/history.php) from Duke weren't great defenders, and why. Shane Battier is in the top five in both categories, BTW (#2 steals, #4 blocks) and Grant Hill is #6 in both categories. To your point, though, Billy King, who was an absolute lock-down on-ball defender, doesn't appear in either list (but his lack of offense kept him from playing major minutes - he averaged 20.9mpg for his career vs. 29.7mpg for Shane (http://www.sportsstats.com/bball/)).

Edited to Add: . . . or you could just read Dukeface 88's post above, which expresses my opinion more succinctly than I did.

Sorry if I was also snarky previously. I can't say that I disagree with your point #1, and this may be something that you have taught me about coach K's philosophy. I expect he would rather not have guys get beat that often, but maybe coaches to be prepared when that happens.

As for point #2, I would agree that the leaders in steals and blocks may have all been good defenders, I would not agree that the number of blocks and steals is necessarily the reason in all cases. A more glaring example may be from last year's team where as much as I think Paulus was a fantastic player, I don't think he was a better defensive player than McClure last year, yet he had more steals than him. Jason Kidd is a very smart player in the NBA and very good at getting steals because of his anticipation, but by no means is he considered a great defender anymore. Allen Iverson is another player who can get lots of steals (when he is playing) but is not considered a great defensive player. A great defensive player certainly can get a lot of steals and blocks, but they don't always correlate.

[detule]

Seems my post generated some spirited discussion (thanks, NSDukeFan for chiming in for me in my absence).

Thanks for explaining your earlier post in more detail.

It would be silly to contend that when blocking from behind, (like Z did on one occasion I can recall from last night) the defender is positioned correctly - I guess I was just confused by the original statement that the blocks came from an incorrectly positioned defender "a lot of the time." Since most of the time, I saw nice help defense on the interior, I felt like I needed to give the guys some props.

[Lord Ash]

Anyone else notice that the video from LB actually noted "Yes, THAT Michael Buffer?":)

[snowdenscold]

Wow, that was an excellent look at the Cameron experience from the eyes of the opposing underdogs. One of those times when I realize what I take for granted being a Duke fan. I come away from that rooting for them to be the one bid coming out of the Big West.


I concur. And that was a pretty cool video to watch - if for nothing else than different camera angles.

[Johnboy]

Sorry if I was also snarky previously. I can't say that I disagree with your point #1, and this may be something that you have taught me about coach K's philosophy. I expect he would rather not have guys get beat that often, but maybe coaches to be prepared when that happens.

As for point #2, I would agree that the leaders in steals and blocks may have all been good defenders, I would not agree that the number of blocks and steals is necessarily the reason in all cases. A more glaring example may be from last year's team where as much as I think Paulus was a fantastic player, I don't think he was a better defensive player than McClure last year, yet he had more steals than him. Jason Kidd is a very smart player in the NBA and very good at getting steals because of his anticipation, but by no means is he considered a great defender anymore. Allen Iverson is another player who can get lots of steals (when he is playing) but is not considered a great defensive player. A great defensive player certainly can get a lot of steals and blocks, but they don't always correlate.

Well, then we mostly agree - I certainly agree with your last sentence. There have been plenty of excellent defensive players who don't get oodles of steals or blocks, even in Coach K's system. Even so, our best players have piled up good defensive stats - even if looking at particular stats in isolation for one game doesn't necessarily count for much. Points per possession, shooting percentages and turnover differential are probably better indicators as to whether the team is playing good defense.

I've enjoyed this discussion. Thanks.

[HCheek37]

Who's the kid sitting next to Curry on the bench?

Briefly heard the "Drive Home Safely" chant before it was quieted...

Nolan and Jon stayed for awhile and signed every autograph, definitely guys that enjoy the fans and spending time with them

The assistant coaches seemed to be enjoying the DBP video more than watching warmups....pretty cool to see Nate James watch his piece of the Miracle Minute

Coach K can't be thrilled with the 2nd half performance or the Cameron Crazies-substitutes performance

Weird still seeing Czyz in the pregame videos

Met Mickie Krzyzewski after the game, she stayed and chatted with a bunch of people outside before she headed home...very sociable and fun conversation

Also got a peek at the underground tunnel that connects Cameron to Card, pretty cool stuff

[Greg_Newton]

I do have to disagree with you about the Plumlees having a larger intangible effect on D than Zoubek. What has made Brian such an impact player this year, besides his fantastic rebounding, is his positioning. He is almost always in the right place at the right time, which IMO is much more of an intangible benefit than the threat of a shot block from Mason or Miles. Having a 7 footer in good help side position is why teams tend to struggle scoring when Brian is on the floor, besides his solid post defense.

Good point, and that certainly makes sense. I just haven't noticed that happening as much with Zoubek as I have with the Plumlees, and that's something I'll try to keep an eye on going forward because I am curious... it might just be a case of selective perception! Either way, it's nice to have someone intimidating under the rim after watching opponents viciously take it at Kyle and Lance the past 2 years with no fear whatsoever. This debate is a win-win for me!

I will say that driving towards an athletic big guy that's going to challenge your shot above the rim is much more intimidating than driving towards an unathletic big guy that is in position to take a charge or challenge your shot on the release... from my experience, at least. The potential to have somebody just wipe your shot off the glass and make you look ridiculous is something that gets into your head and makes you think twice, rather than just adjusting to a well-positioned help defender. It's demasculating - no one wants to be on the wrong side of a highlight...


I would also have to disagree with wanting Mason to go one-on-one more than Kyle right now. If we need a score off a one-on-one play, I would rather have the ball in Kyle's hands then anyone's (even after the end of the Wisconsin game), with Nolan not far behind. The best option, though, may be to have the ball in Jon's hands and let him make the best decision if there are more than 6 seconds left. Mason going one-on-one would be way down on my list at this point, though I have been encouraged by some of the moves he has made.

I didn't mean that I'd prefer Mason over Jon or Nolan going one-on-one, or really Kyle either in crunch time. I just meant that in general, Mason has been very good when he catches the ball at 15-18 feet and takes it at the rim... more often that not, we've ended up with a bucket in that scenario. His ineffective/awkward plays have almost all been back-to-basket. Granted, it's a limited sample size, but I'd like to see a lot more of it and less of Kyle trying to beat 3's off the dribble, because...

Kyle has just looked very "off" when penetrating this year. It's like he's worried about getting stripped or fouled - leaning too far forward, pounding the ball, and generally not leaving himself much chance to read the defender and pull up/change direction. It seems like most of his one-on-one attempts have ended in off-balance jumpers or borderline charges as he's barreling into a help defender. I'm sure things will click and he'll get that "silky smooth" quality back to his game, but it just ain't there right now... I would rather he slow down a little and let the game come to him.

(To touch one something else you said, I also like Z going on-one-on when he's got position, as long as he keeps it simple... his turnaround jump hook and little shoulder-barge-then-layup are both legit post moves.)


I think some other posters have made some good comments about playing our top unit for the last 8 minutes to ensure a solid victory, maintain defensive focus, not allow a good team back in the game, develop our best players, keep them fit after a 10 day break from games, etc.

I think it is interesting comparing K's philosophy vs. that of the Colts, though I think Jumbo already debunked that theory a bit by highlighting how physical NFL football is. I still think the Colts comparison is relevant in that they have no idea how they are going to do in the one and done playoffs and my opinion is that they should have gone for the undefeated season and tried to win every game as that would be a major accomplishment in itself. Would that lessen their chance at a Super Bowl? Maybe, but I don't know that resting their players and avoiding injuries increases their chances much, either. To me, it parallels the decisions to rest players, play the bench more vs. trying to win all your games, including the ACC tournament. I guess I like the idea of trying to win all the games you can, as there are no guarantees in the tournament, even if you are "better rested."

I think there's a lot of middle ground between taking a loss in order to rest your first team and trying to win every game at all costs without regard to postseason preparation. K certainly falls in this middle ground, but there are also times when I find myself wishing he would give a little more burn to our high-potential low-experience guys. Leaving in the 5 upperclassmen at 8 minutes because they were playing well? Sure, makes sense. Continuing to leave them in at 3-4 minutes with a 20 point lead? Not so much, to me.

I'm not saying sub in 5 walk-ons and forfiet... just put in Kelly, Dawkins, or a Plumlee to see if they can get something going and gain some badly needed confidence. If there would be a drop-off in play by putting one or two of them in, it would be extremely small and certainly wouldn't risk the game. I don't think the marginal benefit that comes from playing seniors Z and Lance in that situation is anywhere near what it would be for our underclassmen. That's all I meant by that.

But I mean, I certainly respect that our 30-year HOF coach is strategizing a little more than we realize or understand, and do my best to give him the benefit of the doubt at least until the season is over. It can just get a little frustrating at times, as we all know... :rolleyes: I wasn't really trying to stir the P.T. pot again!

[NSDukeFan]

I will say that driving towards an athletic big guy that's going to challenge your shot above the rim is much more intimidating than driving towards an unathletic big guy that is in position to take a charge or challenge your shot on the release... from my experience, at least. The potential to have somebody just wipe your shot off the glass and make you look ridiculous is something that gets into your head and makes you think twice, rather than just adjusting to a well-positioned help defender. It's demasculating - no one wants to be on the wrong side of a highlight...

I agree, but just think that so far, Brian has been in better position more often than Miles or Mason and for that reason has been a big defensive help.


I didn't mean that I'd prefer Mason over Jon or Nolan going one-on-one, or really Kyle either in crunch time. I just meant that in general, Mason has been very good when he catches the ball at 15-18 feet and takes it at the rim... more often that not, we've ended up with a bucket in that scenario. His ineffective/awkward plays have almost all been back-to-basket. Granted, it's a limited sample size, but I'd like to see a lot more of it and less of Kyle trying to beat 3's off the dribble, because...

Kyle has just looked very "off" when penetrating this year. It's like he's worried about getting stripped or fouled - leaning too far forward, pounding the ball, and generally not leaving himself much chance to read the defender and pull up/change direction. It seems like most of his one-on-one attempts have ended in off-balance jumpers or borderline charges as he's barreling into a help defender. I'm sure things will click and he'll get that "silky smooth" quality back to his game, but it just ain't there right now... I would rather he slow down a little and let the game come to him.
I agree it has been encouraging to see Mason take his man one-on-one from the perimeter but I hope we still see him getting post touches as well, even if he isn't very smooth right now. I am not worried about Kyle and expect he will have many more great games and improve his shooting percentage on drives greatly, no matter who is guarding him.


I think there's a lot of middle ground between taking a loss in order to rest your first team and trying to win every game at all costs without regard to postseason preparation. K certainly falls in this middle ground, but there are also times when I find myself wishing he would give a little more burn to our high-potential low-experience guys. Leaving in the 5 upperclassmen at 8 minutes because they were playing well? Sure, makes sense. Continuing to leave them in at 3-4 minutes with a 20 point lead? Not so much, to me.

I'm not saying sub in 5 walk-ons and forfiet... just put in Kelly, Dawkins, or a Plumlee to see if they can get something going and gain some badly needed confidence. If there would be a drop-off in play by putting one or two of them in, it would be extremely small and certainly wouldn't risk the game. I don't think the marginal benefit that comes from playing seniors Z and Lance in that situation is anywhere near what it would be for our underclassmen. That's all I meant by that.

But I mean, I certainly respect that our 30-year HOF coach is strategizing a little more than we realize or understand, and do my best to give him the benefit of the doubt at least until the season is over. It can just get a little frustrating at times, as we all know... :rolleyes: I wasn't really trying to stir the P.T. pot again!

Yeah, I think K is definitely in the middle ground as are most of us here on this board. It is where in that middle ground we fall. I would have also liked to see our freshmen get more minutes, but I do think there is a benefit in playing seniors Z and Lance to maintain their rhythm and confidence as well. I expect Ryan, Miles, Mason and Andre to all get significant minutes today. I just hope Jon, Kyle and Nolan don't get out of shape if they don't get enough minutes. ;)