PDA

View Full Version : MBB: Duke 90, Wake Forest 70 Post-Game Thread



Jumbo
01-17-2010, 10:22 PM
Let's talk it out.

Lulu
01-17-2010, 10:23 PM
It's too bad the refs gave that game to us with the intentional foul call. Glad the announcers, at least Brando, picked up on it - right through to the end, too.

Ultrarunner
01-17-2010, 10:24 PM
but I'm glad we don't appear to have any major injuries. A couple of those falls were scary.

jipops
01-17-2010, 10:25 PM
A great, entertaining ACC battle. No lack of toughness in our guys. Miles will probably get most of the pub from this one but major shouts to Nolan Smith to his ridiculously great D on Ish Smith who was held to no points in the 2nd half. Much due to Duke's excellent switches, but Ish was Nolan's assignment.

rthomas
01-17-2010, 10:25 PM
A hockey game against thugs. Is this what Wake has become?

Sgt. Dingleberry
01-17-2010, 10:26 PM
I thought that was a big coming out party of the Plumlees...Their confidence is building and that is directly proportional to the quality of their play...

Kyle turned it up in the second half and played well, I hope he can can build off of that effort...

Greg_Newton
01-17-2010, 10:26 PM
Great, great effort. That was a Sweet 16 game right there. I'm exhausted just from watching it.

I just hope everyone is okay... I'm especially praying that Mason's back isn't an issue, because that's a hard thing to get over. Kyle's wrist, Andre's ankle, and whatever had Jon grimacing also scared me a little bit... hopefully everyone can rest up and get better.

Misunderestimated
01-17-2010, 10:27 PM
I feel like I'm going to wake up sore in the morning.

CameronDuke
01-17-2010, 10:27 PM
If I hear Mike Gminski's partner commentator (was it Tim Brando) say that the intentional foul on Mason Plumlee was the turning point of the game and the implication that Duke won ONE MORE TIME, I think I am going to puke. Breakout game for Miles Plumlee, Singler is a warrior though he didn't shoot particularily well, Nolan continues to have a breakout year, and Mason Plumlee will be a STAR for Duke in the next few years. Never been prouder of a team's effort! Let's Go Duke!

wisteria
01-17-2010, 10:28 PM
A MEN's game tonight! The Plumlee brothers claimed their arrival to the ACC.

I got so emotional that I got banned at TDD. :o

The turning point IMO was in the 2nd half when WF pulled even. Singler hit a 3 right away, and we got a defensive stop. Scheyer converted a 2+1, and Mason got SLAMed resulting in 2 free throws. Completely shifted the momentum, and we pulled away.

Singler is tough as nails. When he airballed that freethrow, you just knew that he was banged up pretty badly. Hope both him and Mason are OK. The entirely team may need a few days to recover from this murderous fight.

gwwilburn
01-17-2010, 10:31 PM
What I take away: Scheyer has his second "bad" game, this time shooting 3-11, but Kyle, Nolan, MPI, and MPII stepped up big. Nice D, but Lance needs to stay out of foul trouble if we are going to stay in lock down mode.

Saratoga2
01-17-2010, 10:31 PM
This was the most physical game of the year. Good for us that we had Miles and Mason. Miles in particular showed what he can do for us around the basket, both in low post scoring and rebounding. Miles also looked solid and his game is coming together well. I hope he doesn't have a hip pointer after that fall.

It was a game where the big three didn't do all that much in the first half. Singler and Smith really stepped it up in the second half.

To beat Wake by 20 points in this game is a reflection of what our bigs can offer. I believe Miles had 19 and 15 rebounds while Mason must have had a dozen and Zoubek chipped in for 3 or 4, while Thomas had 4 as well. That is close to 40 points from our bigs. Put that together with a good Singler and Smith game and an okay Scheyer game and we scored 90 points.

The 3 point game wasn't there for us that much tonight, but this is the second game in a row where the 3 point shot was not that important.

CAT Blue Devil
01-17-2010, 10:32 PM
Was it just me or was Coach K's demeanor significantly icy at WF as he shook hands after the game? Not that I blame him, pretty rough game. Very solid win that I don't think happens without some great toughness across the board by the devils.

Exiled_Devil
01-17-2010, 10:32 PM
A hockey game against thugs. Is this what Wake has become?

They've been like that for at least 10 years.

This happens to me every year - I spend 8 months thinking Wake isn't so bad, becuase they are part of Tobacco Road. And then they commence to physically attack our players for a game and hurt someone. Ugh.

Also, did anyone notice that McFarlane's rebounding strategy involved one hand reaching for the ball and one hand on a Duke player's shoulder? That really irritated me with them calling over the back on us. Isn't holding the shoulder down over the back by definition?

CDu
01-17-2010, 10:32 PM
It always seems to be physical against Wake. This was no different. Hopefully Singler and Mason will be okay once the adrenaline wears off. They took some rough falls for sure.

Unbelievable first halves from the Plumlee brothers. They were just a force on the offensive glass. Mason's reverse dunk will get a lot of pub, but Miles was just such a force early in the game. Mason was no slouch either.

Singler didn't shoot well, but he was such a force on the boards. He really took off late in the second half when he got switched to the four offensively. You could just see his eyes light up as he took the Wake bigs to the hole a few times.

Nolan Smith (along with great help defense) did a great job on Ish Smith. He's been so big for Wake this year, and we took him completely away.

It's nice to have so many big bodies. We were in horrible foul trouble up front throughout the game, but we had waves of bigs. It was nice to see us go small with Singler at the 4 to steal some minutes for our bigs.

It's nice to win big even though our big three all had fairly poor shooting games. I'm very excited about the progress of the Plumlees. Getting 30 and 21 from them was amazing. Obviously that's not going to happen a lot, but if they can keep progressing we look REALLY good.

Cameron
01-17-2010, 10:32 PM
A hockey game against thugs. Is this what Wake has become?


It's not a question of have they become this as much as it is for how long. Chase and his past buddies have been doing this for quite awhile.

Great, scrapped out win tonight for our boys. This is a game that we would have lost a year ago, and that impresses this Duke fan. To paraphrase Yul Brenner, we're a bad *** team that ain't gonna take no **** from nobody.

We've got a long way to go to be a legit national title contender, but we can get there, and do so this year. This team has the goods; it's just a matter of perfecting our craft. If we can get everyone on the same page, and the Brothers Plumlee continue to improve, we're going places.

Go Duke!

SCMatt33
01-17-2010, 10:32 PM
I think its great that we face a team known for inside play and beat them on the inside.

superdave
01-17-2010, 10:32 PM
We won by 20 so no intentional foul call decided this one. Thanks.

Bluedevil114
01-17-2010, 10:33 PM
If I hear Mike Gminski's partner commentator (was it Tim Brando) say that the intentional foul on Mason Plumlee was the turning point of the game and the implication that Duke won ONE MORE TIME, I think I am going to puke. Breakout game for Miles Plumlee, Singler is a warrior though he didn't shoot particularily well, Nolan continues to have a breakout year, and Mason Plumlee will be a STAR for Duke in the next few years. Never been prouder of a team's effort! Let's Go Duke!

I agree....when you win by 20 points it does not come down to one extra possession for the intentional foul. The turning point was Singler got going in the second half, Nolan is a beast and Ish Smith was shut out in the second half.

I really hope Singler is OK. His wrist was bothering him the rest of the game and afterwards in his post game interview.

Welcome2DaSlopes
01-17-2010, 10:33 PM
Can we stop saying it was a Plumlee coming out party? We have been saying that the last 5 games.

Mcluhan
01-17-2010, 10:33 PM
A potentially pivotal game. The Jedi teachings are sinking in.

wisteria
01-17-2010, 10:34 PM
Oh, and even though Lance didn't play much due to the fouls, his 18-ft mid-range shots have become MONEY!

hq2
01-17-2010, 10:36 PM
Good game by our bigs, although the Wake front line didn't look all that imposing. Nice that Kyle is taking it to the bucket again; looked like the Kyle of old. Enough of this outside shooting nonsense already! Couple of nice jumpers by Lance; need to get that in the offense more.

mgtr
01-17-2010, 10:37 PM
Is it basketball or is it rugby? I always think of Duke of more of a finesse team, and am happy to see we can survive down in the trenches. Still, a W is a W. Glad we don't have to go back and play Wake at Wake this year.
I may buy some stock in horse lineament -- we have guys who could use a bunch of it. Wasn't Dawkins limping at one point?

jv001
01-17-2010, 10:37 PM
This team has the toughness to be very good if our shooting improves. I liked the hard foul Andre gave Mcfarland at the end of the game. No easy lay up to the big guy. Go Duke!

Cameron
01-17-2010, 10:39 PM
Can we stop saying it was a Plumlee coming out party? We have been saying that the last 5 games.


This made me laugh out loud.

The Plumlees were certainly playing like they were in their backyard today. What a game. Without them in the first half, we're down big at the break. These guys saved us tonight, and then Nolan and Kyle drove us into the moonlight (OK, that was really gay. But it's night, so sunset didn't work, IMO).

mgtr
01-17-2010, 10:41 PM
I guess if I were Marshall Plumlee, I would sign up for Duke right now!

Bluedevil114
01-17-2010, 10:42 PM
Was Quincy Miller in attendance tonight? Any other recruits?

roywhite
01-17-2010, 10:43 PM
Good win, and glad to see the Devils pull away in the second half. Haven't liked Wake's physical style against us for several years now; won't miss McFarland. Aminu has NBA talent, but was huffing and puffing midway through the first half and was not effective late in either half. In a hot, physical game, Duke's conditioning was better.

Kyle is nails.

JaMarcus Russell
01-17-2010, 10:43 PM
I am glad that we will never have to see Chas McFarland play against Duke. That guy always brings out his inner hockey goon against us.

Kyle and Nolan did not have a good first half, but they really played well in the second. The team seemed to be more balanced and in control in the second half. Although I thought Singler didn't look to pass enough, he did an outstanding job with tough rebounds and picking up loose balls. I hope Scheyer and Dawkins can get their shooting back on track before the Clemson game.

Welcome2DaSlopes
01-17-2010, 10:43 PM
Was Quincy Miller in attendance tonight? Any other recruits?

Yes he was right behind the bench

jv001
01-17-2010, 10:45 PM
[QUOTE=JaMarcus Russell;352407]I am glad that we will never have to see Chas McFarland play against Duke. That guy always brings out his inner hockey goon against us.

Don't forget the ACC Tourney. Go Duke!

basket1544
01-17-2010, 10:47 PM
The Brothers Plumlee have come out. Now I'm ready to party. Can't wait to watch the next one. I hope that Kyle, Mason and everyone else aren't too battered and bruised tomorrow. The winning play wasn't the hard foul on Mason but the previous two back to back buckets that put Duke up 6. I was very worried early in the season that if Jon wasn't perfect, Duke would lose. I'm not nearly as worried now.
Does anyone know why Miles shot the flagerant free throws as opposed to anyone else on the court (say our 90% free throw shooter)? No complaints, I didn't doubt Miles could do it, just curious.

Greg_Newton
01-17-2010, 10:47 PM
Another big takeaway from this is that we may be able to play at a very high level even when our big 3 are off AND when we don't have a big guy we can dump it down to and let go to work.

The announcers said something to the effect of "The best pass for Duke in the first half has been a missed shot" - and it was true. I don't know how many second chance points we had in the first half, but it had to be at least 20. That's like doubling our guards' shooting percentage right there.

I don't think it can be stressed enough how much the Plumlees carried the team through the first half... that was a truly incredible performance. If they can build on how they played in that half, look out. We're going to be fun to watch.

jipops
01-17-2010, 10:49 PM
Good win, and glad to see the Devils pull away in the second half. Haven't liked Wake's physical style against us for several years now; won't miss McFarland. Aminu has NBA talent, but was huffing and puffing midway through the first half and was not effective late in either half. In a hot, physical game, Duke's conditioning was better.

Kyle is nails.

Aminu's conditioning was a huge issue for Wake. He would dominate the game for a stretch but then disappear for another stretch and rotate late on D. Maybe this is why K wanted Duke to keep the pace up. We had no answer for Aminu, the guy is a huge talent.

roywhite
01-17-2010, 10:51 PM
The Brothers Plumlee have come out. Now I'm ready to party. Can't wait to watch the next one. I hope that Kyle, Mason and everyone else aren't too battered and bruised tomorrow. The winning play wasn't the hard foul on Mason but the previous two back to back buckets that put Duke up 6. I was very worried early in the season that if Jon wasn't perfect, Duke would lose. I'm not nearly as worried now.
Does anyone know why Miles shot the flagerant free throws as opposed to anyone else on the court (say our 90% free throw shooter)? No complaints, I didn't doubt Miles could do it, just curious.

Miles was the substitute for Mason, who was hurt on the play, so the sub shoots the fouls.

Great to have the Plumlees on our side when a war breaks out in the paint.

Cameron
01-17-2010, 10:55 PM
Wonder who will win the battle of brothers, Wears or Plumlees?

Daniel tosh
01-17-2010, 10:56 PM
I have read that Ross was there with Hairston and Miller.Anyone know if that is true?

slower
01-17-2010, 10:56 PM
Miles was the substitute for Mason, who was hurt on the play, so the sub shoots the fouls.

Great to have the Plumlees on our side when a war breaks out in the paint.

Great to have Kyle on our side when a war breaks out ANYWHERE.

Hermy-own
01-17-2010, 10:57 PM
Quincy was right behind the bench, and he could not have come to a better game. Any recruit (I hope) would just be blown away with the intensity, the toughness, the backwards dunk, and the crowd tonight! It was probably our most exciting game the year - tied in the 2nd half, yet still managed to win by 20, so we had the best of both a close game and a big win.

But our focus should be on this season. WOW Miles! And Mason, doing a nice job there. M & M (possible nickname?) went absolutely crazy on their offensive rebounding, second chance points, and crazy dunks. My only concern is that WF's three leading scorers were two forwards and a center. Watching the game it didn't feel like our big guys were playing bad defense, but that is something to keep an eye on in the future. Some of those points were caused by dribble penetration and dishing.

Kyle - congratulations on breaking out of your slump. I saw Kyle miss some wide open 3's in the 1st and early 2nd half. Then at one point Kyle took the ball early in the shot clock at the top of the key and confidently stepped into a deepish three, draining it. I think that was the turning point on his shooting and offensive confidence.

Jon - maybe trying to do a little too much, maybe missing a few open layups and open 3's. Mostly he just needs to find his shot again, there aren't any huge problems with him. He had a few of his trademark sneaky drives, that somehow get by 3 people when you think he will be stopped easily.

Nolan, Mason - great game. Both of them.

This is exactly the kind of game we wouldn't win last year, and a 20 point win feels sweet.

Welcome2DaSlopes
01-17-2010, 10:57 PM
I have read that Ross was there with Hairston and Miller.Anyone know if that is true?

It's not because Hairston high school team was playing today in Northern VA

Kfanarmy
01-17-2010, 10:57 PM
It was surely a physical game, and the two hard fouls wake had (against Mason and Kyle) stand out, but I'm not sure it is fair to impune Wake. There was an awful lot of physical play from the Duke team as well. That was one reason for all the fouls in the 1st half. Wake in the second half was trying to make it as tough as possible for Duke to control the interior and it got more and more physical until Kyle and Nolan really got going. Yes they were physical, but I think they were playing hard, the refs could have stopped it if they had wanted to.

devildownunder
01-17-2010, 10:59 PM
This game was so encouraging. We're looking versatile and tough-minded. That's a great combination. The Plumlees' abilities caused problems all night and Smith is developing into a more consistent leader on both ends. Meanwhile, Kyle got his scoring back on track tonight, even without having a great shooting performance. These are all great signs. Things don't go perfectly all the time. You have to be able to get it done even when plan A doesn't work so well. Beat back a stiff challenge tonight to win going away. Nice job and STILL plenty of room for lots of guys, and the team, to get better.

Finally, just want to repeat something i posted on the in-game thread right before it closed because i think others might have thoughts on it: We're up by 15 with under 2 minutes to go, in a bit of foul trouble and have a couple of guys who can attack from the top w/the handle. That, IMO, is exactly when we should be using the spread. And that's what we did.

I've called out K many times when I thought he misused it. Tonight I'm saying "well done". I'm sure K's thrilled he's made me happy! :)

Welcome2DaSlopes
01-17-2010, 10:59 PM
Wonder who will win the battle of brothers, Wears or Plumlees?

Must you really wonder? Plumlee's anyday of the week.

Lord Ash
01-17-2010, 11:00 PM
I have never, EVER heard an announcer harp on a foul call that resulted in 2 points with a third of a game to go more in my LIFE.

Hey Brando, what do you think had a bigger impact on the game... a call by an official that resulted in no one fouling out and 2 points, or the fact that Duke held Ish Smith to just about a big goose egg in the second and that the Brothers Plumlee outmanned and outmuscled one of the most talented bigs in the country?

Ridiculous... I have never heard an announcer get stuck on a call like that more in my entire life.

gwwilburn
01-17-2010, 11:00 PM
In Appendix III, Section 4, Part F of the 2009 NCAA Men's and Women's Basketball Rules, an Intentional Personal foul is defined as "while playing the ball, a player
causes excessive contact with an opponent."
Seems to me the contact from Smith was pretty excessive. Also, I believe there was another foul in the BC game that fits under this category.
http://www.ncaapublications.com/Uploads/PDF/Basketball_Rules_2008-09fb2fc956-75 92-4877-993e-dae20a6f90ed.pdf

DukeBlood
01-17-2010, 11:03 PM
Huge win. I thought the GT or Clemson game was going to be some of the more physical games we had this year(except FSU). I was wrong, very wrong. This was a test of man-hood for Duke, and they passed. I doubt if too many more teams will want to try and test the old "Duke is a soft team" theory. These Blue Devils will not back down.

As one poster already pointed out we are lucky Amino isn't the best conditioned player on that roster. Let's hope this is his last year at Wake, He already has a NBA skill set. Give credit to all the bigs who guarded him for keeping him from blowing up.

Really great game by Miles, Nolan and Kyle. With a very good game to Mason. What can I say that hasn't realy been said? Duke had 20 offensive rebounds, which is right up there with the best of them. Great, Great win.

Cameron
01-17-2010, 11:03 PM
Must you really wonder? Plumlee's anyday of the week.


Easy, tiger. I was being sarcastic:)

I can't wait to see these guys playing side by side in two years. That's a truly beautiful thought.

El_Diablo
01-17-2010, 11:05 PM
I have read that Ross was there with Hairston and Miller.Anyone know if that is true?

Miller = yes
Hairston = yes
Ross = ?

Montrose Christian played last night.

Welcome2DaSlopes
01-17-2010, 11:08 PM
Easy, tiger. I was being sarcastic:)

I can't wait to see these guys playing side by side in two years. That's a truly beautiful thought.

Oh yea of course i wasn't coming at you. I two am excited to see them match up.

hokiedevil
01-17-2010, 11:21 PM
Having been in Seattle for the original intentional foul (Seton Hall jerk!), I take offense at Brando not knowing the spirit of the rule! We are trying to keep the kids from being hurt. Going for the ball has only secondary signifigance.

Good, tough game for the boys! Foreshadows good things in the tournament...

Hope the girls play as well tomorrow night!

jipops
01-17-2010, 11:26 PM
I have never, EVER heard an announcer harp on a foul call that resulted in 2 points with a third of a game to go more in my LIFE.


You must have Len Elmore games put on mute.

gumbomoop
01-17-2010, 11:26 PM
Ted Valentine, that is. IIRC, Valentine is a big-time ref, calls many big, incl NCAAT, games. He may well be a fine ref - I'm no expert - but I found his overdramatic gesticulations more than a little provocative this eve.

I have to assume the refs understood early on that they needed to get control of this mugfest. That being the case, it strikes me that the refs needed to exude calm confidence, talk to the players and coaches firmly, etc. Now I can't tell whether most of the time Valentine was doing this, but on several occasions his mannerisms and gestures in indicating a foul call were way over the top, distinctly unhelpful in this heated, heated confrontation.

What with all the talk about controlling physical play, the refs need to calm down, too. Bad marks to Valentine this eve. Unless I'm way off-base for some reason.

moonpie23
01-17-2010, 11:27 PM
here's hoping mason and kyle didn't sustain any injury...:eek:

striker219
01-17-2010, 11:35 PM
In Appendix III, Section 4, Part F of the 2009 NCAA Men's and Women's Basketball Rules, an Intentional Personal foul is defined as "while playing the ball, a player
causes excessive contact with an opponent."
Seems to me the contact from Smith was pretty excessive. Also, I believe there was another foul in the BC game that fits under this category.
http://www.ncaapublications.com/Uploads/PDF/Basketball_Rules_2008-09fb2fc956-75 92-4877-993e-dae20a6f90ed.pdf

Someone needs to e-mail this, along with with a video of the play in question, to Mr. Brawndo (IT'S GOT ELECTROLYTES!). That was asinine.

Sgt. Dingleberry
01-17-2010, 11:36 PM
Can we stop saying it was a Plumlee coming out party? We have been saying that the last 5 games.

You may have been saying that, I haven't...

Tonight was the first time either of them have dominated a game and they both dominated, especially Miles, the entire first half...Non-Plumlees were 7-32 in the first half...

They have been solid role players all season, but tonight they took over an entire half of ACC basketball against a 4 year senior and a first team ACCer...That is what I call a coming out party...

Greg_Newton
01-17-2010, 11:41 PM
Ted Valentine, that is. IIRC, Valentine is a big-time ref, calls many big, incl NCAAT, games. He may well be a fine ref - I'm no expert - but I found his overdramatic gesticulations more than a little provocative this eve.

I have to assume the refs understood early on that they needed to get control of this mugfest. That being the case, it strikes me that the refs needed to exude calm confidence, talk to the players and coaches firmly, etc. Now I can't tell whether most of the time Valentine was doing this, but on several occasions his mannerisms and gestures in indicating a foul call were way over the top, distinctly unhelpful in this heated, heated confrontation.

What with all the talk about controlling physical play, the refs need to calm down, too. Bad marks to Valentine this eve. Unless I'm way off-base for some reason.

I actually agree with you on this... emphatic refs get on my nerves, and they just seemed flat-out angry tonight.

In case anyone missed Valentine's antics tonight, I've compiled a short video of them: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86AJje3ElDc

tbyers11
01-17-2010, 11:42 PM
I have never, EVER heard an announcer harp on a foul call that resulted in 2 points with a third of a game to go more in my LIFE.


You must have Len Elmore games put on mute.

Awesome response. I was literally laughing out loud when I read it :D

gep
01-17-2010, 11:43 PM
here's hoping mason and kyle didn't sustain any injury...:eek:

If I recall... didn't Mason go back into the game after the intentional foul and Miles made the 2 FT's? And, after the hard foul on Kyle... air-balled the first FT but money on the second, he went out of the game, but came back in later?

I also didn't hear much on this, but Andre came up limping at one point late in the game. In any case, I liked how he took on McFarland... great to see from the freshman.

Sgt. Dingleberry
01-17-2010, 11:46 PM
Ted Valentine, that is. IIRC, Valentine is a big-time ref, calls many big, incl NCAAT, games. He may well be a fine ref - I'm no expert - but I found his overdramatic gesticulations more than a little provocative this eve.

It was absurd...We were all commenting on it in the chat...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kUuI-bsN4o

Valentine was on the verge of looking like he was in that video at points...

Dar95
01-17-2010, 11:47 PM
Miles was the substitute for Mason, who was hurt on the play, so the sub shoots the fouls.


This is incorrect - there is a new rule this year that if the foulee is unable to shoot, the opposing coach is able to choose amongst the other 4 players on the court. The choices for Gaudio were Miles, Kyle, Jon, and Nolan, so he chose Miles. Lance came in for Mason.

JaMarcus Russell
01-17-2010, 11:49 PM
I think this was up there amongst the most physical Duke games I have seen. I will never forget the 2006 games at Boston College where Jared Dudley repeatedly gave cheap shots to JJ Redick.

I would have expected this kind of game against Wake in Winston-Salem, but I was surprised that they would play so aggressively in Cameron (and the refs would allow it). What other games stick out in your minds from the past 5 or 6 years for their physicality?

Dar95
01-17-2010, 11:49 PM
When I heard Teddy was one of the refs, it was clear this was going to be yet another Duke-Wake foulfest. The only shock is that he didn't T someone up at some point.

Sgt. Dingleberry
01-17-2010, 11:52 PM
What other games stick out in your minds from the past 5 or 6 years for their physicality?

I remember some brutal slugfests with FSU the past couple of years...It seems like we are always on the verge of Ryan Reid getting so frustrated that he is going to start swinging at somebody...

gep
01-17-2010, 11:54 PM
This is incorrect - there is a new rule this year that if the foulee is unable to shoot, the opposing coach is able to choose amongst the other 4 players on the court. The choices for Gaudio were Miles, Kyle, Jon, and Nolan, so he chose Miles. Lance came in for Mason.

But... if Mason was unable to shoot the FT's, is he then allowed back in the game? I think Mason got back in the game later?

quickgtp
01-17-2010, 11:57 PM
Yes, Miller, Hairston AND Ross were all there this evening....

http://twitter.com/BlueDevilNation

Dar95
01-17-2010, 11:57 PM
But... if Mason was unable to shoot the FT's, is he then allowed back in the game? I think Mason got back in the game later?

Yes - the not allowed back in the game was only ever an NBA rule, I believe. There had been an issue previously because the injured team had been able to select the shooter, which led to the possibility of teams faking injuries to get a better shooter (this happened in an NCAA game last year that I forget...). So now the opposing coach gets to choose amongst the other players on the court, but there's no impact on the injured player's return.

duke09hms
01-18-2010, 12:05 AM
I got a good nickname for the plumlees. Everyone remember the mighty ducks movie? Okay, how about the BASH BROTHERS! Eh, eh?

Anyway, I was so happy I could take a break from med school to come back to good ol' Duke for this game. (God I love Duke!) Here's some of my thoughts on tonight.

-Singler and Scheyer were pretty terrible the first half, the only thought keeping me going was that kyle would probably be back next year. Smith had an okay first half. We missed a lot of close-in shots. Big three definitely stepped up in the 2nd half, especially kyle and nolan

-The emergence of the Plumlees this year is SO striking in comparison to the teams of the last three years. This is the first complete team Duke has had in a while. We are definitely not peaking too early, and if we keep developing and improving, we can realistically go far in March. Even though their post games arent entirely polished, they are at least a physical presence in the post that MUST be accounted for. The days of defenses playing 5 on 3 against Duke are over!

-It was a physical game, and I'm so proud of us for not backing down. We've been a finesse (you could say "soft"), jump-shooting, 3-point team for a while, and it was refreshing to see so many easy points (dunks and put-backs).

-Quincy Miller and Hairston were having a good time at the game, future teammates maybe? Hope Josh was getting his recruiting on, hehe

-I loved how Andre wasn't backing down when assigned to a bigger forward on D. Dre Dawk was banging with the best of them. AND his drive to the basket was totally baller, this kid aint just a 3-point shooter! Plus I loved his foul on Chas McFarlan(?), I hope Zoub was taking notes. If you're going to foul, at least make sure the guy misses the shot.

-How sweet it was to see LT stroke those Js tonight. I couldnt believe my eyes; I guess actually seeing it in person is just different from tv.

Tough game for the good guys tonight, but they came through big time. Hope K gives them some well-deserved rest the next couple days.

Native
01-18-2010, 12:08 AM
I'll say one thing about tonight's game -- this team is TOUGH. They played through foul trouble, physical play, cuts, bruises, scrapes, and everything else -- and they still emerge with a 20 point win over a legitimate ACC opponent.

Jumbo
01-18-2010, 12:08 AM
Miles was the substitute for Mason, who was hurt on the play, so the sub shoots the fouls.

Great to have the Plumlees on our side when a war breaks out in the paint.

Actually, Thomas was the sub for Mason. And the opposing coach is supposed to be able to pick anyone -- couldn't understand why Gaudio didn't send Steve Johnson in there. Call it the Ronald Curry Rule.

RainingThrees
01-18-2010, 12:10 AM
I got a good nickname for the plumlees. Everyone remember the mighty ducks movie? Okay, how about the BASH BROTHERS! Eh, eh?

Anyway, I was so happy I could take a break from med school to come back to good ol' Duke for this game. (God I love Duke!) Here's some of my thoughts on tonight.

-Singler and Scheyer were pretty terrible the first half, the only thought keeping me going was that kyle would probably be back next year. Smith had an okay first half. We missed a lot of close-in shots. Big three definitely stepped up in the 2nd half, especially kyle and nolan

-The emergence of the Plumlees this year is SO striking in comparison to the teams of the last three years. This is the first complete team Duke has had in a while. We are definitely not peaking too early, and if we keep developing and improving, we can realistically go far in March. Even though their post games arent entirely polished, they are at least a physical presence in the post that MUST be accounted for. The days of defenses playing 5 on 3 against Duke are over!

-It was a physical game, and I'm so proud of us for not backing down. We've been a finesse (you could say "soft"), jump-shooting, 3-point team for a while, and it was refreshing to see so many easy points (dunks and put-backs).

-Quincy Miller and Hairston were having a good time at the game, future teammates maybe? Hope Josh was getting his recruiting on, hehe

-I loved how Andre wasn't backing down when assigned to a bigger forward on D. Dre Dawk was banging with the best of them. AND his drive to the basket was totally baller, this kid aint just a 3-point shooter! Plus I loved his foul on Chas McFarlan(?), I hope Zoub was taking notes. If you're going to foul, at least make sure the guy misses the shot.

-How sweet it was to see LT stroke those Js tonight. I couldnt believe my eyes; I guess actually seeing it in person is just different from tv.

Tough game for the good guys tonight, but they came through big time. Hope K gives them some well-deserved rest the next couple days.

in the past I would see LT take those 15 ft shots and yell NO!! at the tv. Now I actually like him taking those shots, it helps the offense by forcing the other team to guard him and not back off. instead of teams only guarding 3 of our players they have to guard all 5.

Jumbo
01-18-2010, 12:14 AM
I think this was up there amongst the most physical Duke games I have seen. I will never forget the 2006 games at Boston College where Jared Dudley repeatedly gave cheap shots to JJ Redick.

I would have expected this kind of game against Wake in Winston-Salem, but I was surprised that they would play so aggressively in Cameron (and the refs would allow it). What other games stick out in your minds from the past 5 or 6 years for their physicality?

Was it Dudley or Sean Marshall?

-bdbd
01-18-2010, 12:18 AM
It seems like, once again, this team is growing, finding ways to win in different style games. In recent years this is the type of physical conference game where we frequently wilted after a while - couldn't match the physicality. Am certainly glad we have that front court depth now.

Fans will focus on Miles and Mason (and maybe Kyle) who all had strong offensive games, but I wish more folks recognized and appreciated game-changing DEFENSIVE efforts. Nolan Smith just shut down an all-ACC cailber guard. That means at least as much as someone on our squad going off for 20 points! (Which Nolan also did! And with ZERO fouls!) Also, very happy to see us man-up and out-rebound this big, tough team.

Looking forward to State College on Wed. I think we'll make them pay for not havinbg a real good PG to speak of...

Go Duke!!


P.S. Can anyone offer any comments on how the recruits were enjoying the game behind the bench?? Miller, TR, Hairston. Go Josh go!! Sell, sell, sell!!! :rolleyes:

BD80
01-18-2010, 12:20 AM
A hockey game against thugs. Is this what Wake has become?

Lance gave a cheap shot early in the game when setting a pick. Let;s not point fingers. It was a great learning eerience for the team.


I guess if I were Marshall Plumlee, I would sign up for Duke right now!

I've heard he's the best of the three. Can you imagine?


The Brothers Plumlee have come out. ...

It is great fun watching these two develop. They both "get it." They are making fewer and fewer mistakes, and making more and more positve plays.

I remember Cole Aldrich come off of the bench for Kansas at the end of the year 2 years ago and going for a double double, I was hoping Mason could get to that level by the end of this year. I was selling him short.

Ryan clearly isn't ready to contribute yet, but he is looking better.

This team will continue to improve through April!

Sgt. Dingleberry
01-18-2010, 12:22 AM
in the past I would see LT take those 15 ft shots and yell NO!! at the tv. Now I actually like him taking those shots, it helps the offense by forcing the other team to guard him and not back off. instead of teams only guarding 3 of our players they have to guard all 5.

Last year before the first 2 NCAA tournament games they had open practices in Greensboro. I went and watched Duke...

The two things I learned about Duke that I didn't know was that Olek Czyz was the best dunker on the team and that Lance could really shoot...Now, shooting jumpers in practice and in a game are two different things, and maybe he was just having a good day....But, I am not suprised to see Lance hitting jumpers, he has a good shot...

Welcome2DaSlopes
01-18-2010, 12:23 AM
I think that was Kyle who took a cheap shot when setting a pick ealier in the game.

Jumbo
01-18-2010, 12:27 AM
1) I'm a bit tired of hearing after several games how "thuggish" the other team is. It sounds whiney after a while. And you know what? We often give as good as we get. Duke is physical. Duke has attitude (just watch Mason and Kyle after Mason's reverse dunk). Duke won't back down. And that's a good thing.

2) It's funny that in such an ugly game -- with so many fouls, with airballs on free throws, with horrific perimeter shooting, with turnovers all over the place, with crazy Ted Valentine -- a version of Duke that I envisioned months ago really emerged. We became an equal opportunity offense. And it didn't have to come from straight post-ups. We finallly have guys -- particularly the Plumlees -- who can pick up garbage points. So let our perimeter guys fire away -- Miles and Mason will grab the board and finish. Zoubs too. That's the difference in a game like, say, Villanova last year. And we also saw more hi-low stuff, particularly late with Lance hitting the two 15-footers, which allowed him to feed guys from the elbow after that. Nice. Really nice.

3) Ish Smith was guarding Scheyer. He was probably giving up 8 inches. On the first play of the game, Scheyer looked to post up Smith. As usual, we did a lousy job of setting ourselves up to make a proper entry pass. We never tried to post Scheyer on Smith again. I found that frustrating -- Duke needs to do a better job of recognizing mismatches in the post, whether it's Scheyer on a small guard, a big being guarded by a perimeter player of a switch or, my favorite, inverting the offense when Kyle is guarded by someone smaller.

4) Speaking of Jon, he hasn't looked like himself for a couple of games now. Tonight he looked like he was pushing his jump shot and was off balance. For all we know, he could be hurt or sick, but something didn't look right. Someone, please convince me that we're not witnessing the early stages of another shooting slump similar to last season's.

5) Coach K mentioned this, but one of the reasons why we were so good on the offensive boards was that Wake was switching all screens, and our bigs were being boxed out by their guards. This is another difference in Duke's team this year, as opposed to in the past. You could get away with that before, because our previous teams were small. We just showed everyone what happens when you gear everything toward stopping Earth, Wind and Scheyer and let some athletic 6-10 guys roam free. They get the ball. And they dunk on you. And make no mistake -- teams are going to come out and keep doing this. They'll invent new ways to take Scheyer out of it, believing that will disrupt the whole flow of Duke's offense. They'll keep switching screens. They'll trap. If we can keep converting offensive rebounds into baskets at a high rate and -- maybe -- even create offense with our bigs, we can be really, really good.

6) Nolan Smith is getting a ton of credit for the job he did on Ish Smith, but I just want to make sure his teammates and the staff receive equal credit. That wasn't the case of leaving him on an island -- Duke had an excellent help scheme that freed up some other things for Wake, but took Smith out of it. Nice game plan.

7) Most important thing? Kyle's wrist. Coach K mentioned that they were concerned in the post-game press conference. The kid is as tough as they come, but man did he look hurt when he went to the line. Here's the link (http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?SPSID=22724&SPID=1845&DB_OEM_ID=4200&ATCLID=204870709) for anyone who wants to read K's comments.

diveonthefloor
01-18-2010, 12:47 AM
Isn't holding the shoulder down over the back by definition?

My referee buddies are quick to tell me that there is not such foul as "over the back."

If it is to be a foul, it apparently has to involve "pushing", which indeed is a foul.

I assume they are right, but I've never looked it up in the book.

striker219
01-18-2010, 01:20 AM
"On the bench late in the game, Duke forward Kyle Singler asked teammate Mason Plumlee what it felt like when he broke his wrist in the preseason."

http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/duke/story/289982.html

El_Diablo
01-18-2010, 01:26 AM
My favorite moment:

http://media2.newsobserver.com/smedia/2010/01/18/00/Duke_90__Wake_Forest_70___01.17.10_Foici2OY_014.em bedded.prod_affiliate.156.JPG
Credit: TED RICHARDSON

Lulu
01-18-2010, 01:27 AM
I'm going to avoid the word "thuggish", but I disagree that Duke gives as good as it gets. We might be physical, but I don't see Duke putting other team's players in potentially season-ending situations as often as it happens to us. Against certain teams it seems to happen at least a couple times a game, or basically, whenever one of our guys has an open floor and the opposing player has no real play on the ball so they just decide to lay him out. It's not really a play on the ball if the only way to the ball is through the other player, imo. There have been a couple times when I thought the opposing player could have actually made a better attempt at stopping a shot from going up (still meaning to foul, of course), but instead deliberately undercut the legs or tried to take out the upper torso and leave our player flailing.

I just don't see the intent to hurt from Duke that I see from other teams; I can be thinking this when I watch two Big East teams play each other, too, it's not just Duke and ACC games. I wouldn't be surprised if we were on the receiving end of more than our fair share of cheap shots though.

Personally, I just generally dislike the whole notion that if you can get away with hurting someone you should do so, even when it comes to something legal like setting a hard pick. It's completely accepted as part of the game now. Coaches have to do what they can with the personnel that they have to win games - and they're rich men because of it - not that some players don't bring it with them to campus.

SCMatt33
01-18-2010, 01:31 AM
My referee buddies are quick to tell me that there is not such foul as "over the back."

If it is to be a foul, it apparently has to involve "pushing", which indeed is a foul.

I assume they are right, but I've never looked it up in the book.

I looked it up.

Art. 2. To attain or maintain legal rebounding position, a player shall not:
a. Displace, charge or push an opponent.
b. Extend either or both shoulders, hips, knees or extend either or both arms
or elbows fully or partially in a position other than vertical so that the
freedom of movement of an opponent is hindered when contact with any
of these body parts occurs.
c. Bend his/her body in an abnormal position to hold or displace an
opponent.
d. Violate the principle of verticality.
Art. 3. Every player shall be entitled to a spot on the playing court, provided that
such player gets there first without illegally contacting an opponent.

I think the misconception that occurs is that you can't reach over a player for a rebound. This is indeed legal, but if you contact that player in doing so in a way that hinders his motion. So if you try and reach over and your arms hit the opponents shoulder or head while he is trying to jump for it, its a foul.

In essence, you don't have to "push" for a foul, but just reaching over isn't a violation on its own.

gotham devil
01-18-2010, 01:47 AM
1) I'm a bit tired of hearing after several games how "thuggish" the other team is. It sounds whiney after a while. And you know what? We often give as good as we get. Duke is physical. Duke has attitude (just watch Mason and Kyle after Mason's reverse dunk). Duke won't back down. And that's a good thing.

May the moderators here one day put "thug" and its variations on the banned words list.

Lulu
01-18-2010, 01:49 AM
Well that's great. It sounds like Singler's getting X-Rays. There's really very little chance of coming out of a couple games against GT and the new Wake without something like this happening - it just seemed like we were too lucky. There are certain teams we play that have me wondering if anyone's going to get hurt before the game even starts, I almost wish we could just forfeit them or make the rest of the league choose which team they want to keep.

Mrezt
01-18-2010, 02:09 AM
Was a really weird game. Too physical for me.. Anyways

After watching the first half i would have said that theres no way Kyle gets 21 and 15.. awesome to see though

Miles and Mason led us to victory, their play in the first half kept us alive

And after watching the game i saw nolan got 20 points, was a quiet 20 but he played well

SCMatt33
01-18-2010, 02:39 AM
Just to put the physical and sometimes sloppy play, as well as the tightly called officiating in perspective, I submit last week's L'ville-Nova game which combined for 44 TO's, 67 fouls, and 94 FT's, compared with 31, 47, and 57 respectively for tonight's game. I'm not defending anyone or anything like that, just saying it could have been worse.

Bob Green
01-18-2010, 04:19 AM
1) I'm a bit tired of hearing after several games how "thuggish" the other team is. It sounds whiney after a while. And you know what? We often give as good as we get. Duke is physical. Duke has attitude (just watch Mason and Kyle after Mason's reverse dunk). Duke won't back down. And that's a good thing.

Bravo! Bravo! Bravo! I'll offer up some historical perspective for those who aren't as long in the tooth as I. Back "in the day" the ACC was considered a touch league. Of course, observing from my Duke Blue tinted glasses this was because Dean Smith intimidated refs to the point if an opposing player looked at a Tar Heel, the refs called a foul. This really hurt the league in tournament play as ACC teams couldn't stand up to physical play.

A specific example is when Alabama defeated UNC, in the first round in 1976, 79-64 with Leon Douglas scoring 35 points for the Crimson Tide who simply dumped the ball inside and overpowered the Tar Heels all game long. All the Carolina fans in my neighborhood were crying for days about all the pushing and shoving the refs allowed Alabama to get away with during the game.

With the resurgence of Duke basketball, starting with the Bill Foster teams and followed by Coach Krzyzewski, physicality once again became a part of ACC basketball. Duke has had a lot of physical tough teams over the years and this year is no exception.

This year we have the players to match up and go head to head with the best of the rest so as Jumbo states: "Duke is physical. Duke has attitude. Duke won't back down."

There is no need for any whining on DBR as our players can hang tough!

hurleyfor3
01-18-2010, 06:51 AM
I got to see this game in Thailand! ESPN had it on around 3 this afternoon (the equivalent of 3am US Eastern). This surprised me, because "ESPN World" mostly shows this useless sport where a bunch of people interminably kick a white ball around a field with no apparent purpose in mind. By the way, why are there like 53 different ESPNs in the US, but go anywhere else and all you get is soccer?

Anyway, yeah, it loooked pretty physical. The refs were still calling "ACC fouls" however, which was the real reason why half the building was in foul trouble. I'm warming to the belief that the nature of ACC officiating, not the actual physicality of play, is what hurts us and other ACC teams in the NCAA Tournament.

flyingdutchdevil
01-18-2010, 06:58 AM
This surprised me, because "ESPN World" mostly shows is this useless sport where a bunch a people interminably kick a white ball around a field with no apparent purpose in mind. By the way, why are there like 53 different ESPNs in the US, but go anywhere else and all you get is soccer?

Ouch. Soccer, or footy, is the greatest sport ever to be played - bar none. And that is an objective statement, not a subjective one. :)

Anyway, back to the game, great team effort. Everyone played well, even Scheyer, who didn't have his usual out-of-this-world stat game. The guards' including Singler's) shots were all fairly off and the 3-point shot was also off and we still beat an above-average ACC team by 20. Wow. Impressive.

Last thing - going back to the 3 Ss - the "Big" 3 doesn't really make sense. Shouldn't it be "Little" 3? That said, I still love Earth, Wind and Scheyer. Makes me chuckle...

MChambers
01-18-2010, 07:44 AM
I looked it up.

Art. 2. To attain or maintain legal rebounding position, a player shall not:
a. Displace, charge or push an opponent.
b. Extend either or both shoulders, hips, knees or extend either or both arms
or elbows fully or partially in a position other than vertical so that the
freedom of movement of an opponent is hindered when contact with any
of these body parts occurs.
c. Bend his/her body in an abnormal position to hold or displace an
opponent.
d. Violate the principle of verticality.
Art. 3. Every player shall be entitled to a spot on the playing court, provided that
such player gets there first without illegally contacting an opponent.

I think the misconception that occurs is that you can't reach over a player for a rebound. This is indeed legal, but if you contact that player in doing so in a way that hinders his motion. So if you try and reach over and your arms hit the opponents shoulder or head while he is trying to jump for it, its a foul.

In essence, you don't have to "push" for a foul, but just reaching over isn't a violation on its own.

If the refs really called it that way, it would be great. But they often allow the inside player to jump back into the outside player, and then call the outside player.

MChambers
01-18-2010, 07:46 AM
Miles was the substitute for Mason, who was hurt on the play, so the sub shoots the fouls.

Great to have the Plumlees on our side when a war breaks out in the paint.

I loved it when Miles was being interviewed after the game, and was asked if his pickup games at home with Mason were that rough, and he said some thing like, "Yes, well maybe a little dirtier."

oldnavy
01-18-2010, 07:55 AM
I loved it when Miles was being interviewed after the game, and was asked if his pickup games at home with Mason were that rough, and he said some thing like, "Yes, well maybe a little dirtier."

I can only imagine how physical those games must have been after watching these two go at it over the last few games. I was more than impressed with the way they played tonight. To think that in the last few games we would shoot so poorly from 3 pt range and still score the number of points we have, plus win the games would have been, well "unthinkable" last year.

The depth is a key point too. Last year we would not have been able to stay in this game with the number of fouls being called on the bigs.

slower
01-18-2010, 08:29 AM
Hope the girls play as well tomorrow night!

Who are the Holes playing?

I keed, I keed!! :D

slower
01-18-2010, 08:35 AM
Lance gave a cheap shot early in the game when setting a pick. Let;s not point fingers.

Look, giving a "cheap shot" on a pick is one thing. Taking people out while they're up in the air at full speed is an ENTIRELY different thing. Those are potentially career-ending fouls/assaults. Don't act like it's the same thing, because it is most assuredly NOT.

slower
01-18-2010, 08:46 AM
1) I'm a bit tired of hearing after several games how "thuggish" the other team is. It sounds whiney after a while. And you know what? We often give as good as we get. Duke is physical. Duke has attitude (just watch Mason and Kyle after Mason's reverse dunk). Duke won't back down. And that's a good thing.

Just because you're tired of hearing it, doesn't necessarily mean it isn't true. Yes, Duke IS (or can be) a physical team, but the tone and quality of their physical play is different than some of the "thuggish" teams that get called out.

Personally, I don't remember the last time a Duke player took out somebody in mid-air as Kyle and Mason got taken out last night. I honestly believe that trying to rough up Duke is part of the game plan for some teams.

And while Duke may have "attitude", it doesn't exist in a vacuum. You don't think that Mason and Kyle's display is a REACTION to Wake's attitude? Yes, Duke has some tough players, but I can't recall a time where they STARTED the trash-talking (I wouldn't think that K would allow it).

And yeah, K looked pissed about the proceedings. Bob Knight probably would have jabbed a finger through Gaudio's sternum in the handshake line.

rthomas
01-18-2010, 09:07 AM
1) I'm a bit tired of hearing after several games how "thuggish" the other team is.

I don't know exactly what you are talking about BUT if you look up "thug" in the dictionary there is a picture of Chas McFarland.

There is a difference between being physical and being thuggish.

NYDukie
01-18-2010, 09:10 AM
1) I'm a bit tired of hearing after several games how "thuggish" the other team is. It sounds whiney after a while. And you know what? We often give as good as we get. Duke is physical. Duke has attitude (just watch Mason and Kyle after Mason's reverse dunk). Duke won't back down. And that's a good thing.
Here's the link (http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?SPSID=22724&SPID=1845&DB_OEM_ID=4200&ATCLID=204870709) for anyone who wants to read K's comments.

100% agree. This seems to be one of Duke's tougher teams in my opinion since the 99-02 era of teams. We've had teams since 02 that would talk but this team can bring the physical element too. And though some may not agree, I do actually love how Miles and Mason have brung both a physicality and bravado to the game to match each element that we haven't seen in a while. Mason chirping after the reverse dunk may not be the most "sportsman" thing to do but every once in a while that type of emotion is needed even if a bit over the line. I see so many other teams have that "toughness" and wonder where it's been for a while the past number of years and am glad I am seeing it.

cascadedevil
01-18-2010, 09:12 AM
I may have missed this in another thread, but I was wondering if anyone knows who it was who came in just before tip, greeted all the assistants and then sat just behind the bench? K went into the stands to say hello when he came onto the court. From my vantage point up in the stands he looked to be about a 6-7 high school student.

slower
01-18-2010, 09:20 AM
100% agree. This seems to be one of Duke's tougher teams in my opinion since the 99-02 era of teams. We've had teams since 02 that would talk but this team can bring the physical element too. And though some may not agree, I do actually love how Miles and Mason have brung both a physicality and bravado to the game to match each element that we haven't seen in a while. Mason chirping after the reverse dunk may not be the most "sportsman" thing to do but every once in a while that type of emotion is needed even if a bit over the line. I see so many other teams have that "toughness" and wonder where it's been for a while the past number of years and am glad I am seeing it.

I love it, too. I was just stating (in a previous post) that Duke players aren't usually the ones that START the trash-talk or woofing. I'd prefer that they weren't the instigators of that kind of thing, but I don't want them to back down from ANYBODY.

RainingThrees
01-18-2010, 09:21 AM
I may have missed this in another thread, but I was wondering if anyone knows who it was who came in just before tip, greeted all the assistants and then sat just behind the bench? K went into the stands to say hello when he came onto the court. From my vantage point up in the stands he looked to be about a 6-7 high school student.

It was probably either Quincy Miller or Josh Hairston, both were at the game last night.

airowe
01-18-2010, 09:23 AM
I may have missed this in another thread, but I was wondering if anyone knows who it was who came in just before tip, greeted all the assistants and then sat just behind the bench? K went into the stands to say hello when he came onto the court. From my vantage point up in the stands he looked to be about a 6-7 high school student.

That was Quincy Miller. Josh Hairston was also in the house, but Terrence Ross was or was not, depending on who you ask. I've received different accounts based on who was talking.

NYDukie
01-18-2010, 09:36 AM
I love it, too. I was just stating (in a previous post) that Duke players aren't usually the ones that START the trash-talk or woofing. I'd prefer that they weren't the instigators of that kind of thing, but I don't want them to back down from ANYBODY.

I wasn't thinking you were. It's been a few years since we had someone who really trashed talked and wouldn't be afraid to start it up (i.e. JJ) but I don't see anyone on this team who would do that unless instigated to do so. But it is a bit refreshing to see them go back at another team when mouths start chirping and it gets overly physical.

slower
01-18-2010, 09:45 AM
I wasn't thinking you were. It's been a few years since we had someone who really trashed talked and wouldn't be afraid to start it up (i.e. JJ) but I don't see anyone on this team who would do that unless instigated to do so. But it is a bit refreshing to see them go back at another team when mouths start chirping and it gets overly physical.

I'm with you on that. You can't afford to back down at this level. It's pretty much the same principle as dealing with a bully.

CDu
01-18-2010, 09:45 AM
I can't say enough about how tough our bigs were today. The Plumlee brothers and Singler were just awesome inside. I think it's important to give Miles Plumlee individual credit here. Not only did he have a career day in points and rebounds, but he was able to play 32 minutes. That was absolutely crucial given that foul trouble limited the other three bigs. Thomas played just 14 minutes, Zoubek just 9, and Mason just 15. If Miles had played his typical game and picked up some quick fouls, we might have been in some trouble early.

I'm just keeping my fingers crossed that Singler's wrist injury isn't serious. The postgame comments by him (and apparently later by Coach K) do make me a bit nervous. He's had his struggles with efficiency in making the transition to the 3, but I think it goes without saying that we absolutely need him on the floor to be a contender nationally.

I'm not nervous yet, but I agree with Jumbo that Scheyer's shooting bears watching at the moment. That's three straight games of awful 3-pt shooting by him. Hopefully he's just dealing with a cold. This was his worst game of the season so far (it's nice when your worst game is 9 points, 6 assists, 1.5 a/to, and 2 steals). Hopefully he'll bounce back soon, but he's 5-25 from 3pt range in his last three games.

Hopefully we'll be healthy for NC State. They're a bit undersized and not that strong on the wings, so we should have a bit easier time if we are at or near full strength (even though it's on the road). But I'm excited about how the Plumlees are progressing.

davekay1971
01-18-2010, 09:49 AM
I'm incredibly proud of the way our team stepped up and handled themselves in this one. The defense was stellar in the second half. Our inside play was great throughout. Wake tried to rough it up, and our guys didn't back down. That game felt like a 15 round fight, and our team won the last 7 rounds decisively.

Here's hoping Singler and Mason are okay (sounds like Mason definitely is, though I bet he's popping some Tylenol today).

The Plumlees are bringing a whole new dimension to our team. 2 straight games with little contribution from behind the arc, and we dominated both. We're getting great production in the paint. Can't remember who made the post-game comment (think it was Miles), but it was dead on: teams now have to pick their poison against us. Focus on shutting down the perimeter, and our big guys can hurt you.

hq2
01-18-2010, 09:55 AM
It is timely. The Big 3 have been a little erratic lately, and clearly need some help from inside. Nice to see it arriving. Now, they just have to keep it up on a consistent basis.

tbyers11
01-18-2010, 10:01 AM
1) I'm a bit tired of hearing after several games how "thuggish" the other team is. It sounds whiney after a while. And you know what? We often give as good as we get. Duke is physical. Duke has attitude (just watch Mason and Kyle after Mason's reverse dunk). Duke won't back down. And that's a good thing.


I've got to agree with Jumbo here. Wake was quite physical and McFarland is a cheap shot artist but I don't think they were in any way "thuggish". There were not any of the cheap shots with intent to injure that we seen at times from some teams (notably FSU and Georgia Tech) in recent years.

I don't think that either of the two plays that most will remember from this game (Ish Smith fouling Mason on the break or Woods challenging Singler) were dirty. They were very hard fouls but I don't think there was intent to injure on either one. Ish Smith tried to make a play on the ball, he is just so much shorter than Mason that he got all body. Woods went up hard to challenge Singler's dunk attempt but he didn't go for the head or bring his arms down in an aggressive fashion. I think part of the reason Kyle went down so awkwardly is that he went up so strong. He basically went to the basket with an authority that said I am going to dunk this ball try and stop me. Kyle seems to have a little of what Coach K called "being a MF'er" when referring to Laettner once. Gotta love that.

Put it this way, if the roles were reversed and Nolan tried to stop Aminu on a breakaway dunk attempt and made a legit challenge for the ball but got a lot of body contact would we be calling him dirty? Does Andre's tough, but not excessively hard, foul on McFarland later make him a thug?

I don't like trash talking and chest bumping and when it is done in a "look at me I am the best" manner, but a little bravado and chirping after big physical plays does add a bit of swagger and a won't-back-down attitude to the team and I like that Duke has more of that this year than in recent years.

RainingThrees
01-18-2010, 10:01 AM
I can't say enough about how tough our bigs were today. The Plumlee brothers and Singler were just awesome inside. I think it's important to give Miles Plumlee individual credit here. Not only did he have a career day in points and rebounds, but he was able to play 32 minutes. That was absolutely crucial given that foul trouble limited the other three bigs. Thomas played just 14 minutes, Zoubek just 9, and Mason just 15. If Miles had played his typical game and picked up some quick fouls, we might have been in some trouble early.

I'm just keeping my fingers crossed that Singler's wrist injury isn't serious. The postgame comments by him (and apparently later by Coach K) do make me a bit nervous. He's had his struggles with efficiency in making the transition to the 3, but I think it goes without saying that we absolutely need him on the floor to be a contender nationally.

I'm not nervous yet, but I agree with Jumbo that Scheyer's shooting bears watching at the moment. That's three straight games of awful 3-pt shooting by him. Hopefully he's just dealing with a cold. This was his worst game of the season so far (it's nice when your worst game is 9 points, 6 assists, 1.5 a/to, and 2 steals). Hopefully he'll bounce back soon, but he's 5-25 from 3pt range in his last three games.

Hopefully we'll be healthy for NC State. They're a bit undersized and not that strong on the wings, so we should have a bit easier time if we are at or near full strength (even though it's on the road). But I'm excited about how the Plumlees are progressing.

I'm still trying to figure out how Zoubs fouled out in 9 minutes of playing time. That dude is an offensive rebounding and foul machine.

roywhite
01-18-2010, 10:06 AM
Here's hoping Singler and Mason are okay (sounds like Mason definitely is, though I bet he's popping some Tylenol today).



If some who are close to the scene can pass along an "all clear" on Kyle, that would be great to hear. Apparently, there was enough concern last evening to take X-rays.

hurleyfor3
01-18-2010, 10:09 AM
I'm still trying to figure out how Zoubs fouled out in 9 minutes of playing time. That dude is an offensive rebounding and foul machine.

Must have been channeling Shavlik Randolph.

gumbomoop
01-18-2010, 10:27 AM
I posted earlier in this thread my view that ref Ted Valentine added to the chaos of the game with inappropriately dramatic calls. Posters even more familiar than I with Mr. V. confirmed his behavior as sometimes over-the-top.

I have another speculation - and am willing to be corrected - that the non-intentional/flagrant call on Woods' foul on KS was a kind of make-up call. That is, given the debate on this thread re Smith's earlier called-flagrant-foul on MP2 - including the irritation at Brando's insistence that it was not intentional and was some kind of turning point - I'm wondering whether the ref who made the call on Woods' foul was "making up" for the "debatable" call [i.e., Gaudio would have been protesting the intentional issue pretty firmly] against Smith earlier.

I ask this because my memory [I haven't seen repeated replays to study the 2 fouls] is that Woods' foul was the more flagrant and intentional. Am I being influenced by the fact that Smith is a lot smaller than MP2, whereas Woods is larger than KS? Or that, post-game, it appears [in advance of news] that there may be a bit more concern re KS's wrist than MP2?

They were certainly both hard fouls. I am aware that K asserted post-game that this was "ACC basketball at its toughest and best." I think I understand the spirit of K's comment, which probably refers to the intensity of the competition, but there's sure a fine line between fierce and flagrant play.

Waiting for good news re KS and MP2.....

DCDeac
01-18-2010, 10:40 AM
1. In the interest of full disclosure, I am a Wake Alum who reads the DBR boards every day. Great site with really solid information and spirited conversation. I have a brother who graduated from Duke, which means that you will hear no "Duke Hate" from me; in fact, I routinely cheer for them and pull for them when they are not matched up against WFU.

2. You won't hear any defense of Macfarland from me, ever...he's a guy who has potential to be a decent player and just self-destructs. Any other respectable Wake fan would agree. The funny/depressing part is that he has actually improved his attitude and antics - scary thought.

Now, that I got that out of the way, I have a few observations that some may take issue with. Hopefully they can be read and considered with an open mind.

3. Wake was called for 1 more foul than Duke (24 v. 23) for the game. Wake was charged with no technical fouls and was assessed one intentional foul. I am not going to speak to the merits or impartiality of Brando and G-Man (a former Duke player, as you all know), but it was a judgment call that went against Ish Smith. I am not going to quote the NCAA handbook here, as has been done a few times - simply, I believe Ish was trying to make a play on the ball. (it was also just a 5 or 6 point game at the time) Ish, by all accounts, is a good kid with a reputation for playing hard and fair. The foul on Singler, I am sorry to say for those who disagree, was a hard foul which resulted in an awkward fall and very hard fall to the floor. Tony Woods is a big man - would those outraged fans out there prefer that Ish and Tony give up dunks and lay-ups? Sure, there is a fine line between hard and dirty, I grant you that - I just don't think it was crossed last night.

4. As someone who reads this site every day, I do believe at times there can be too much complaining about calls/no-calls/hard fouls that you perceive going against Duke. In my opinion, complaining about the physicality of last night's game so much appears to send a message that Duke Fans don't want their players to get hit hard (or at all) in a sport where there is an increasing amount of contact allowed. I would celebrate (as some of you have) the fact that your team didn't back down and showed a real toughness. Sure, Duke may have taken a couple cheap-ish shots at us in the first half (a nice forearm shiver by Singler and multiple pushes in the back on rebounds), but Duke did NOT back down to a physical opponent and showed the ability to adjust to a style it has not often employed. Complaining about the physicality does give off the impression that your team is soft or can't handle it - the truth is, they are not soft and can handle it.

5. I have been in CIS 3 or 4 times and enjoyed myself tremendously. It ranks up there for me as the greatest places to see a game that I have been to. The fans can be, and often are, pretty funny and quite witty...but screaming "Stop...Don't Shoot" irked me a little bit. First of all, the fans are not factually correct in their cheer - Aminu was in fact NOT the person who fired the b-b gun in the alleged incident before coming to WFU. He was a passenger in the car, but was not the person to fire the b-b gun. The cheer is also in bad taste, but hey, Wake fans don't show class all of the time either. I just hope that Duke fans won't mind that if I ever visit Duke again (which I have many times), I will feel justified in screaming "STOP...DON'T SHOOT" as I walk by Jarvis Residence Hall. There was a real gun involved in that incident folks, so maybe reconsider what you put on your cheer sheets in the future for a couple of reasons: 1) Make sure what you believe to be true is...well...actually true 2) You are only witty and funny until three or your athletes are charged with a felony involving a real gun.

Thanks for reading and sorry for the long post.

CDu
01-18-2010, 10:47 AM
4. As someone who reads this site every day, I do believe at times there can be too much complaining about calls/no-calls/hard fouls that you perceive going against Duke. In my opinion, complaining about the physicality of last night's game so much appears to send a message that Duke Fans don't want their players to get hit hard (or at all) in a sport where there is an increasing amount of contact allowed. I would celebrate (as some of you have) the fact that your team didn't back down and showed a real toughness. Sure, Duke may have taken a couple cheap-ish shots at us in the first half (a nice forearm shiver by Singler and multiple pushes in the back on rebounds), but Duke did NOT back down to a physical opponent and showed the ability to adjust to a style it has not often employed. Complaining about the physicality does give off the impression that your team is soft or can't handle it - the truth is, they are not soft and can handle it.

The bolded text is the problem here. Basketball is not meant to be played like football. The game last night wasn't out of line with what we see regularly in the Big East, but that's the problem. Basketball was not intended to be a contact sport - at least not nearly to the degree to which the contact has developed. It has evolved into this, and in doing so it has detracted from the quality of the game and increased the risk for serious injuries.

I don't think that (aside from McFarland) Wake played dirty. And the Duke team is certainly tough enough to handle it. But we can celebrate the team's ability to withstand an overly physical game and also lament the nature of the way the college game is being played these days.

DCDeac
01-18-2010, 10:54 AM
Fair points - however, if basketball is going to become more of a contact sport, Duke will need to continue to adjust or perhaps suffer as a result. I don't think Duke teams will ever play dirty or cross the line, but they may have to adjust. Lamenting is fine, but you may just be banging your head against a brick wall - doesn't do much good and can really hurt. If the game is becoming more physical, respond accordingly.

jv001
01-18-2010, 11:01 AM
With the resurgence of Duke basketball, starting with the Bill Foster teams and followed by Coach Krzyzewski, physicality once again became a part of ACC basketball. Duke has had a lot of physical tough teams over the years and this year is no exception.

This year we have the players to match up and go head to head with the best of the rest so as Jumbo states: "Duke is physical. Duke has attitude. Duke won't back down."

There is no need for any whining on DBR as our players can hang tough!

I liked what Mason said about physical play in last night's game. "it's tougher than this in our practices". We can play physical with the best of them. Go Duke!

tbyers11
01-18-2010, 11:07 AM
Jeff Goodman (@goodmanonfox (http://twitter.com/goodmanonfox/status/7908020662)) reports on his twitter that Coach K says that preliminary reports on Kyle's wrist look good and JohnTDD over at the Devil's Den says that Kyle is expected to play on Wednesday.

BD80
01-18-2010, 11:14 AM
I agreed with both of the foul calls when Mason and Kyle were taken down.

I am certain someone can cite the rules on intentional and flagrant fouls, but to me the difference in the two calls last night was the intention of contact. Both were technically going for the ball, but Smith INTENDED to make contact with Mason, going through his left shoulder and head just to make contact with the right wrist just below the ball. (It was actually incredible that Smith got that close, he must really have some elevation and wingspan). The foul on Kyle was directed toward the ball and the contact unintended but inevitable.

Jumbo
01-18-2010, 11:14 AM
Just because you're tired of hearing it, doesn't necessarily mean it isn't true. Yes, Duke IS (or can be) a physical team, but the tone and quality of their physical play is different than some of the "thuggish" teams that get called out.

Personally, I don't remember the last time a Duke player took out somebody in mid-air as Kyle and Mason got taken out last night. I honestly believe that trying to rough up Duke is part of the game plan for some teams.

And while Duke may have "attitude", it doesn't exist in a vacuum. You don't think that Mason and Kyle's display is a REACTION to Wake's attitude? Yes, Duke has some tough players, but I can't recall a time where they STARTED the trash-talking (I wouldn't think that K would allow it).

And yeah, K looked pissed about the proceedings. Bob Knight probably would have jabbed a finger through Gaudio's sternum in the handshake line.

Oh man, you don't watch Kyle closely, then. He talks A LOT of smack. So do some of Duke's other guys. And there's plenty of history of players like that, from Laettner to C-Well to Dahntay Jones.

Look, I agree with everyone that Chas McFarland is a dirty player, largely due to a vast body of work. But Ish Smith's foul wasn't "thuggish," even though I'm now extremely worried that Kyle has a serious injury. It was rightly called an intentional foul for excessive contact, but, honestly, with the size and athleticism of players and the amount we're playing above the rim this year, there are bound to be hard collisions. It sucks, but it's basketball.

CDu
01-18-2010, 11:21 AM
Oh man, you don't watch Kyle closely, then. He talks A LOT of smack. So do some of Duke's other guys. And there's plenty of history of players like that, from Laettner to C-Well to Dahntay Jones.

Look, I agree with everyone that Chas McFarland is a dirty player, largely due to a vast body of work. But Ish Smith's foul wasn't "thuggish," even though I'm now extremely worried that Kyle has a serious injury. It was rightly called an intentional foul for excessive contact, but, honestly, with the size and athleticism of players and the amount we're playing above the rim this year, there are bound to be hard collisions. It sucks, but it's basketball.

Slight quibble: Smith's intentional foul was on Mason Plumlee. Kyle was fouled by either Weaver or Woods and was not called an intentional.

Jumbo
01-18-2010, 11:27 AM
Slight quibble: Smith's intentional foul was on Mason Plumlee. Kyle was fouled by either Weaver or Woods and was not called an intentional.

Yeah, got 'em backwards this morning.

CDu
01-18-2010, 11:27 AM
Jeff Goodman (@goodmanonfox (http://twitter.com/goodmanonfox/status/7908020662)) reports on his twitter that Coach K says that preliminary reports on Kyle's wrist look good and JohnTDD over at the Devil's Den says that Kyle is expected to play on Wednesday.

Let's hope that's correct. That would be a huge sigh of relief for me.

greybeard
01-18-2010, 11:28 AM
Couple of observations on the second half (didn't see the first). The TV commentor who questioned that call is an idiot. The kid from Wake might have had a legit shot at the ball only he had to take out Mason's body to even think about getting to it. Tremendously dangerous and irresponsible play. No way he blocks the ball without slamming into Mason's side. If the kid didn't know that, he shouldn't be on the floor. He did and he went for it anyway which is by definition a dangerous intentional foul.

There were several moments when people, especially Jon, had an easy entry to Miles in deep. But it had to be let go quick. That pass is one that Duke has been reluctant to make for years. The game will be even that much easier when they start making it now. The Plumlees will catch and threaten the rim by definition almost, and are good and poised distributors. So is Kyle.

I thought I saw Kyle running off screens for inside-the-line catches the second half, at least a few times. Not sure he got the ball, but I like that a lot. I also liked very much the penetration from the three into the lane for a pull up, the play before he got put down. While he missed the rim because his footwork and body angle gave him less than ideal options, it is precisely that type play that I think a true 3 must make, and that play showed me Kyle is on his way. Slowing down a tad as he enters the lane, being able to modulate his dribble and change to maybe choppy feet, well, he'll figure out to make that pull up a real threat that is completely under control and can convert into a feigned pull up into a charge to the rim in a nano second.

The 3s Kyle missed in the 3d, at least two of them, you could see that hyperextension of his shoulder girdle which makes him such an uncanny stand still rebounder and should make him into a deadly 15 jump shooter over smaller or same-sized 3s, but is not how he shoots from distance. Again, this is a guy going to school on a big stage. Be patient.

Smith has matured tremendously. One play to me said it all. I believe this was after Mason was taken down when one would expect everyone's juices were flowing and Wake was getting close. Smith drove from the left when he got inside the circle in the middle he exloded past the guy. The last two years he would have kept that same pace and rose to the rim to throw it down, exposing himself to injury, having to regroup to change direction, and accomplishing nothing. This time he slowed down and laid it up like he was in grade school, letting Wake know that he knew that there was nothing anyone could do to stop him. He didn't expose himself to injury and was ready to play defense immediately. His entire game was played with that type of thoughtfulness and poise. He seemed always ready to make the play at hand, which included some wonderful shooting and trolling while dribbling to see what might open. His defense last night had to bespeak the same maturity. He was guarding a guy known to be a blur. I din't see no blur last night. Terrific game by a seasoned Duke talent.

killerleft
01-18-2010, 11:31 AM
1. In the interest of full disclosure, I am a Wake Alum who reads the DBR boards every day. Great site with really solid information and spirited conversation. I have a brother who graduated from Duke, which means that you will hear no "Duke Hate" from me; in fact, I routinely cheer for them and pull for them when they are not matched up against WFU.

2. You won't hear any defense of Macfarland from me, ever...he's a guy who has potential to be a decent player and just self-destructs. Any other respectable Wake fan would agree. The funny/depressing part is that he has actually improved his attitude and antics - scary thought.

Now, that I got that out of the way, I have a few observations that some may take issue with. Hopefully they can be read and considered with an open mind.

3. Wake was called for 1 more foul than Duke (24 v. 23) for the game. Wake was charged with no technical fouls and was assessed one intentional foul. I am not going to speak to the merits or impartiality of Brando and G-Man (a former Duke player, as you all know), but it was a judgment call that went against Ish Smith. I am not going to quote the NCAA handbook here, as has been done a few times - simply, I believe Ish was trying to make a play on the ball. (it was also just a 5 or 6 point game at the time) Ish, by all accounts, is a good kid with a reputation for playing hard and fair. The foul on Singler, I am sorry to say for those who disagree, was a hard foul which resulted in an awkward fall and very hard fall to the floor. Tony Woods is a big man - would those outraged fans out there prefer that Ish and Tony give up dunks and lay-ups? Sure, there is a fine line between hard and dirty, I grant you that - I just don't think it was crossed last night.

4. As someone who reads this site every day, I do believe at times there can be too much complaining about calls/no-calls/hard fouls that you perceive going against Duke. In my opinion, complaining about the physicality of last night's game so much appears to send a message that Duke Fans don't want their players to get hit hard (or at all) in a sport where there is an increasing amount of contact allowed. I would celebrate (as some of you have) the fact that your team didn't back down and showed a real toughness. Sure, Duke may have taken a couple cheap-ish shots at us in the first half (a nice forearm shiver by Singler and multiple pushes in the back on rebounds), but Duke did NOT back down to a physical opponent and showed the ability to adjust to a style it has not often employed. Complaining about the physicality does give off the impression that your team is soft or can't handle it - the truth is, they are not soft and can handle it.

5. I have been in CIS 3 or 4 times and enjoyed myself tremendously. It ranks up there for me as the greatest places to see a game that I have been to. The fans can be, and often are, pretty funny and quite witty...but screaming "Stop...Don't Shoot" irked me a little bit. First of all, the fans are not factually correct in their cheer - Aminu was in fact NOT the person who fired the b-b gun in the alleged incident before coming to WFU. He was a passenger in the car, but was not the person to fire the b-b gun. The cheer is also in bad taste, but hey, Wake fans don't show class all of the time either. I just hope that Duke fans won't mind that if I ever visit Duke again (which I have many times), I will feel justified in screaming "STOP...DON'T SHOOT" as I walk by Jarvis Residence Hall. There was a real gun involved in that incident folks, so maybe reconsider what you put on your cheer sheets in the future for a couple of reasons: 1) Make sure what you believe to be true is...well...actually true 2) You are only witty and funny until three or your athletes are charged with a felony involving a real gun.

Thanks for reading and sorry for the long post.

I agree with you. Ish Smith's problem was getting far enough in the air to reach the tomahawk try by the unathletic Mason Plumlee (!). But I don't have a problem with the penalty incurred by Wake as a result. Obviously, the chance for harm to a defenseless player was real.

After seeing the replay, Kyle was as much to blame as the Wake guy on the drive. Kyle tried to give the guy a forearm shiver and physics took over from there, resulting in a scary flip.

Kyle is the most aggresive Duke player in a few years. He plays hard and plays fair - until he perceives the other team is playing dirty. Then his mindset is to get even. This should be obvious to Duke fans. He reminds me of bad boy Danny Meagher in some ways. The big difference is that Kyle is more talented. I'm glad he's on our side, because he WILL find a way to influence a ball game. He's going to make a pro roster precisely because of these qualities - his talent alone is not enough. Kyle is not going pro this year. He IS going to help make Duke one of the toughest teams to beat in the country. Can you say Kurt Rambis?

slower
01-18-2010, 11:37 AM
Oh man, you don't watch Kyle closely, then. He talks A LOT of smack.

Yeah, I've seen that, but is it PROACTIVE or REACTIVE smack? In other words, if nobody says a word to him, is he the one who smack-talks first? I think that does make a difference. Of course, in my perfect world, Kyle is a choirboy who only gives AFTER he gets. ;)

I realize it's sometimes a fine line. And, obviously, I have a habit of reacting "in the moment" on DBR. But it DOES seem to me that our guys are overwhelmingly on the receiving end of these "hard knocks" (Kyle on several occasions, Mason, Nolan at MD, Jon against VCU), with the notable exception of Hans' nose. I guess we all see the game through different colored glasses, though.

McFarland, though, is a punk.

devildeac
01-18-2010, 11:42 AM
1. In the interest of full disclosure, I am a Wake Alum who reads the DBR boards every day. Great site with really solid information and spirited conversation. I have a brother who graduated from Duke, which means that you will hear no "Duke Hate" from me; in fact, I routinely cheer for them and pull for them when they are not matched up against WFU.

2. You won't hear any defense of Macfarland from me, ever...he's a guy who has potential to be a decent player and just self-destructs. Any other respectable Wake fan would agree. The funny/depressing part is that he has actually improved his attitude and antics - scary thought.

Now, that I got that out of the way, I have a few observations that some may take issue with. Hopefully they can be read and considered with an open mind.

3. Wake was called for 1 more foul than Duke (24 v. 23) for the game. Wake was charged with no technical fouls and was assessed one intentional foul. I am not going to speak to the merits or impartiality of Brando and G-Man (a former Duke player, as you all know), but it was a judgment call that went against Ish Smith. I am not going to quote the NCAA handbook here, as has been done a few times - simply, I believe Ish was trying to make a play on the ball. (it was also just a 5 or 6 point game at the time) Ish, by all accounts, is a good kid with a reputation for playing hard and fair. The foul on Singler, I am sorry to say for those who disagree, was a hard foul which resulted in an awkward fall and very hard fall to the floor. Tony Woods is a big man - would those outraged fans out there prefer that Ish and Tony give up dunks and lay-ups? Sure, there is a fine line between hard and dirty, I grant you that - I just don't think it was crossed last night.

4. As someone who reads this site every day, I do believe at times there can be too much complaining about calls/no-calls/hard fouls that you perceive going against Duke. In my opinion, complaining about the physicality of last night's game so much appears to send a message that Duke Fans don't want their players to get hit hard (or at all) in a sport where there is an increasing amount of contact allowed. I would celebrate (as some of you have) the fact that your team didn't back down and showed a real toughness. Sure, Duke may have taken a couple cheap-ish shots at us in the first half (a nice forearm shiver by Singler and multiple pushes in the back on rebounds), but Duke did NOT back down to a physical opponent and showed the ability to adjust to a style it has not often employed. Complaining about the physicality does give off the impression that your team is soft or can't handle it - the truth is, they are not soft and can handle it.

5. I have been in CIS 3 or 4 times and enjoyed myself tremendously. It ranks up there for me as the greatest places to see a game that I have been to. The fans can be, and often are, pretty funny and quite witty...but screaming "Stop...Don't Shoot" irked me a little bit. First of all, the fans are not factually correct in their cheer - Aminu was in fact NOT the person who fired the b-b gun in the alleged incident before coming to WFU. He was a passenger in the car, but was not the person to fire the b-b gun. The cheer is also in bad taste, but hey, Wake fans don't show class all of the time either. I just hope that Duke fans won't mind that if I ever visit Duke again (which I have many times), I will feel justified in screaming "STOP...DON'T SHOOT" as I walk by Jarvis Residence Hall. There was a real gun involved in that incident folks, so maybe reconsider what you put on your cheer sheets in the future for a couple of reasons: 1) Make sure what you believe to be true is...well...actually true 2) You are only witty and funny until three or your athletes are charged with a felony involving a real gun.

Thanks for reading and sorry for the long post.

Good thoughts. I thought they were both flagrant, not intentional, but if someone wants to enlighten me a bit more, I'm reading/listening. I'll use Jon as one of our examples from last PM when he was close behind someone (Ish?) on a breakaway. Coulda fouled him hard going for the ball/steal/block but chose not to pick up another PF/risk the intentional/flagrant call. Glad we played tough.

A "minor" quibble: the 3 FB players have been suspended from the team (?university) so it doesn't look much like Cut is gonna tolerate that kinda crap. So you can yell that stuff walking through East Campus but I don't think they'll hear you.:rolleyes:;)

grad_devil
01-18-2010, 11:44 AM
Actually, Thomas was the sub for Mason. And the opposing coach is supposed to be able to pick anyone -- couldn't understand why Gaudio didn't send Steve Johnson in there. Call it the Ronald Curry Rule.

Actually, that was the old rule. The new one adopted for 2010 states (emphasis mine):



Injured Free Throw Shooter. 8-2.3 When a player is injured and is unable to attempt his free throw attempt(s), the coach from the opposing team shall select one of the four remaining players on the playing court to attempt the free throw(s)....

Not trying to be picky, just wanted the new information out there.

--grad_devil

oldnavy
01-18-2010, 12:06 PM
Must have been channeling Shavlik Randolph.

Unfortunately I believe it is a case of him being a marked man more than anything else. Zoubs almost NEVER gets the benefit of a doubt that others seem to get. He is almost always whistled for some infraction unless he gets the ball immediately under the basket and tips it or puts it back in. If he has to do a "basketball" move, then he will be whistled for something.

NO ONE on this planet can tell me that Zoubs was fouling more last night than MacFarland... yet Zoubs is out of the game in under 10 minutes. Come on!!

ncexnyc
01-18-2010, 12:08 PM
A couple of games back I used the word relentless to describe our teams play. I guess the secret word for today is PHYSICAL!

There's been a lot of back and forth about what is or isn't "thuggish" play. I'd say it's in the eye of the beholder. I'm sure that over the years many teams felt our aggressive, in your face type defensive was pushing the envelope on what constituted clean play. We can split hairs on what is or isn't excessive, but all I know is that we now have the players to play any type of game that an opponnent could throw at us.

Just a word of caution. Don't sell State short. We're coming off a tough, emotional, physical win. This is the perfect trap game.

El_Diablo
01-18-2010, 12:09 PM
would those outraged fans out there prefer that Ish and Tony give up dunks and lay-ups?

If they are so out of position that they can't make an actual play on the ball, then YES. Allow the dunk, inbound it quickly, go back upcourt, and move on. It's only two points.

If a defender is out of position and all he can do is launch himself into our player's body from the side as he goes up for a running dunk, then it's not just a hard foul. Ish may have been "making a play on the ball" because he flailed one of his arms in the general direction of the ball, but he got a ton of body contact, which is what he was intending as Mason went up for the running dunk. Hence, intentional foul...pretty simple really. Come on, did Ish really think he was going to make a clean block on that play? No way...he was just trying to knock Mason down by using as much contact as possible.

It's up to the refs to realize that and make the call. I watched the game in person, not on TV, so I didn't hear all the harping on it by the announcer. But of course, the refs don't get to watch endless replays before making the call--they have to do it in real time. I'd rather they err on the side of caution and prevent these types of plays rather than just let them go. Considering all the touch calls and offensive/loose-ball fouls that went against Duke in the first half, this is a pretty stupid thing to be complaining about for a Wake fan.

How did the Crazies get their facts wrong with the "STOP...DON'T SHOOT!" chant? What facts in that brief statement are wrong? Maybe the inference is factually incorrect, but what makes it work as a chant. You can walk around Duke chanting it all you want, but then you might just get people worried that Aminu and his buddies are lurking somewhere nearby. And I'm not sure what you mean by cheer sheets; maybe you should check your facts. The Crazies don't use them.

Jumbo
01-18-2010, 12:11 PM
Yeah, I've seen that, but is it PROACTIVE or REACTIVE smack? In other words, if nobody says a word to him, is he the one who smack-talks first? I think that does make a difference. Of course, in my perfect world, Kyle is a choirboy who only gives AFTER he gets. ;)

I realize it's sometimes a fine line. And, obviously, I have a habit of reacting "in the moment" on DBR. But it DOES seem to me that our guys are overwhelmingly on the receiving end of these "hard knocks" (Kyle on several occasions, Mason, Nolan at MD, Jon against VCU), with the notable exception of Hans' nose. I guess we all see the game through different colored glasses, though.

McFarland, though, is a punk.

Obviously, no one who talks that much is constantly "reacting."

Jumbo
01-18-2010, 12:12 PM
Actually, that was the old rule. The new one adopted for 2010 states (emphasis mine):



Not trying to be picky, just wanted the new information out there.

--grad_devil

Aha! Good stuff -- thanks for the clarification.

MChambers
01-18-2010, 12:16 PM
If they are so out of position that they can't make an actual play on the ball, then YES. Allow the dunk, inbound it quickly, go back upcourt, and move on. It's only two points.

If a defender is out of position and all he can do is launch himself into our player's body from the side as he goes up for a running dunk, then it's not just a hard foul. Ish may have been "making a play on the ball" because he flailed one of his arms in the general direction of the ball, but he got a ton of body contact, which is what he was intending as Mason went up for the running dunk. Hence, intentional foul...pretty simple really. Come on, did Ish really think he was going to make a clean block on that play? No way...he was just trying to knock Mason down by using as much contact as possible.

It's up to the refs to realize that and make the call. I watched the game in person, not on TV, so I didn't hear all the harping on it by the announcer. But of course, the refs don't get to watch endless replays before making the call--they have to do it in real time. I'd rather they err on the side of caution and prevent these types of plays rather than just let them go. Considering all the touch calls and offensive/loose-ball fouls that went against Duke in the first half, this is a pretty stupid thing to be complaining about for a Wake fan.

I agree. If you have absolutely no shot at making a clean play, it should be intentional. (On an aside, why aren't most of the fouls in the last two minutes called intentional?) Smith had no shot at a clean play.

DCDeac
01-18-2010, 12:29 PM
If they are so out of position that they can't make an actual play on the ball, then YES. Allow the dunk, inbound it quickly, go back upcourt, and move on. It's only two points.

If a defender is out of position and all he can do is launch himself into our player's body from the side as he goes up for a running dunk, then it's not just a hard foul. Ish may have been "making a play on the ball" because he flailed one of his arms in the general direction of the ball, but he got a ton of body contact, which is what he was intending as Mason went up for the running dunk. Hence, intentional foul...pretty simple really. Come on, did Ish really think he was going to make a clean block on that play? No way...he was just trying to knock Mason down by using as much contact as possible.

It's up to the refs to realize that and make the call. I watched the game in person, not on TV, so I didn't hear all the harping on it by the announcer. But of course, the refs don't get to watch endless replays before making the call--they have to do it in real time. I'd rather they err on the side of caution and prevent these types of plays rather than just let them go. Considering all the touch calls and offensive/loose-ball fouls that went against Duke in the first half, this is a pretty stupid thing to be complaining about for a Wake fan.

How did the Crazies get their facts wrong with the "STOP...DON'T SHOOT!" chant? What facts in that brief statement are wrong? Maybe the inference is factually incorrect, but what makes it work as a chant. You can walk around Duke chanting it all you want, but then you might just get people worried that Aminu and his buddies are lurking somewhere nearby. And I'm not sure what you mean by cheer sheets; maybe you should check your facts. The Crazies don't use them.

The facts that are wrong wit the cheer is that Aminu did not shoot at anyone with a b-b gun, he was just in the car when someone else did. Was it that unclear from what I wrote before? Seemed fairly clear. As far as cheer sheets, I have been in line with other Duke fans waiting to get into CIS and people were handing out Cheer Sheets to those sitting in the Crazies' section. I am not making this up because it sounds like fun or because I imagined it - it happened on more than one occasion. These are the facts, and they are are undisputed.

If you watch a replay of Ish's attempted block, he touches the ball against the backboard. He did make pretty hard contact with the body, but to say there was "No Play" is a soft statement and far too protective of your players.

ncexnyc
01-18-2010, 12:38 PM
DCDeac it appears that your brother never let you in on a secret. I could be booted from this site, but I am willing to share this secret with you in the spirit of friendship.

Duke fans are issued an electrical device, which they wear while watching games on tv that allows them to know the exact thought's and intention's of every oppossing player.

Clearly if you had one of these devices you would have known that Ish was trying to hurt Mason.;)

arnie
01-18-2010, 12:43 PM
The facts that are wrong wit the cheer is that Aminu did not shoot at anyone with a b-b gun, he was just in the car when someone else did. Was it that unclear from what I wrote before? Seemed fairly clear. As far as cheer sheets, I have been in line with other Duke fans waiting to get into CIS and people were handing out Cheer Sheets to those sitting in the Crazies' section. I am not making this up because it sounds like fun or because I imagined it - it happened on more than one occasion. These are the facts, and they are are undisputed.

If you watch a replay of Ish's attempted block, he touches the ball against the backboard. He did make pretty hard contact with the body, but to say there was "No Play" is a soft statement and far too protective of your players.


We should appreciate DCDeac's efforts at educating all of us regarding our collective ineptitude at understanding basketball rules, proper crowd behavior, etc. I'm sure he is also doing this on the Terp, Heels and Pack boards as well, since only the Deacs understand these topics. Too bad their favorite alum (Billy P) isn't on TV every night anymore to help us understand civility.

Classof06
01-18-2010, 12:43 PM
I personally don't think Smith's foul on Mason Plumlee was intentional. He made a clean play on the ball, which created a hard foul and a harder fall by Plumlee. Unfortunate? Yes. Dirty/intentional? Not at all. I think it was a hard foul in the context of a chippy game and so some want to jump to conclusions. Smith was also jawing back and forth with Duke players throughout the course of the game, so some might assume the foul was intentional.

I hate Wake as much as the next Duke fan and probably lost a little respect for Gaudio given the way his team played last night. But that particular foul was just that...a foul.

DCDeac
01-18-2010, 01:00 PM
We should appreciate DCDeac's efforts at educating all of us regarding our collective ineptitude at understanding basketball rules, proper crowd behavior, etc. I'm sure he is also doing this on the Terp, Heels and Pack boards as well, since only the Deacs understand these topics. Too bad their favorite alum (Billy P) isn't on TV every night anymore to help us understand civility.


I am pretty confused by your post, but I will still try to respond? If you read my original (long) post, I never made any assertions about anyone ineptitude at understanding basketball rules, crowd behavior, etc. What I was doing...wait for it...was offering an outside (non-Duke) opinion!! Having read these boards for years, they appeared to be welcome and not always shot down or berated...and if you read some of the replies to what I wrote, more than a couple people agree with some of the things I said. I wouldn't waste my time on MD, NC-High School, or UNC boards...this site has far better information and conversation. Let's not forget the disclaimer/first thing I said --- I am far from anti-Duke. In fact, I pull for them in pretty much every game they play outside of WFU.

I know the Duke-Blue tinted glasses are pretty strong, but just realize I am trying to offer a different/outside perspective on the game, the fouls, and the crowd.

For the record, not many Wake people are proud of having Billy P as an alum...my personal favorite is Brian Piccolo. Not sure it would be smart to take a shot at that guy, but have at it if you wish.

MChambers
01-18-2010, 01:22 PM
If you watch a replay of Ish's attempted block, he touches the ball against the backboard. He did make pretty hard contact with the body, but to say there was "No Play" is a soft statement and far too protective of your players.

First of all, DCDeac, welcome to DBR. It's nice to have fans from other teams add their thoughts here.

I don't know anything about the cheer, but it sounds like a cheer that would have been best not used.

On the foul, you and I just disagree. It doesn't matter if Smith hit the ball. He had to crash into MP2's body, which is a foul, and a hard and dangerous one at that, if he were to have any chance of stopping the basket. In part it was so dangerous because he was behind the play. I'd call it intentional or flagrant every time.

NYDukie
01-18-2010, 01:26 PM
Just a couple of thoughts. My first comment is that I did not think Ish's foul on Mason was intentional (disclaimer as my 2nd thought may contradict this initial comment). Upon my initial observation, it appeared to me he hustled back to make a play on the ball, and since he is so fast and athletic (he was up there on Mason), that all his momentum got the better of Mason who was in awkward, if not defenseless position since I'm not so sure he expected Ish to come out of no where. In addition, we are shown the replays in slow motion more often than in real motion and I think that tends to sway our opinions and jump on the refs too. I tend to remember only seeing the slow-mo replays last night during the game of that play.

My second thought is this with regards to what determines or how a intential foul is determined. I constantly hear about if the defender makes a play on the ball that then it is not a flagrant foul. However, and this is my disclaimer to the above as I don't recall whether Ish did this or not, is that many defenders today tend to wind up, bring their arms and hand from their waste and swing up towards the ball. To me this is where the "grey" area becomes apparent. In my opinion, the intent by the defender when taking this action is more to make sure the offensive player does not score at all costs rather than try to block the shot. The action to block the ball seems to be more a effort to mask the real intention of stopping a shot since they have no real shot at blocking the shot. This is just something I've seen more of the past 5 or so years and I think will cause a severe injury, if it hasn't already. Definitely would appreciate the other posters comments and thoughts about this.

DukieInKansas
01-18-2010, 01:30 PM
I am pretty confused by your post, but I will still try to respond? If you read my original (long) post, I never made any assertions about anyone ineptitude at understanding basketball rules, crowd behavior, etc. What I was doing...wait for it...was offering an outside (non-Duke) opinion!! Having read these boards for years, they appeared to be welcome and not always shot down or berated...and if you read some of the replies to what I wrote, more than a couple people agree with some of the things I said. I wouldn't waste my time on MD, NC-High School, or UNC boards...this site has far better information and conversation. Let's not forget the disclaimer/first thing I said --- I am far from anti-Duke. In fact, I pull for them in pretty much every game they play outside of WFU.

I know the Duke-Blue tinted glasses are pretty strong, but just realize I am trying to offer a different/outside perspective on the game, the fouls, and the crowd.

For the record, not many Wake people are proud of having Billy P as an alum...my personal favorite is Brian Piccolo. Not sure it would be smart to take a shot at that guy, but have at it if you wish.

DCDeac - welcome to the boards. I appreciated your view point. It is always nice to read a thoughtful and though provoking post from another perspective.

I don't blame you for not wanting to claim Billy P. I didn't realize Brian Piccolo was an alum. My favorite Wake alum - Tim Duncan. Although, I really like Muggsy Bogues, too. I remember an article about Muggsy where they talked about the neighborhood kids coming over to ask his wife if he could come out to play. :D

El_Diablo
01-18-2010, 01:32 PM
The facts that are wrong wit the cheer is that Aminu did not shoot at anyone with a b-b gun, he was just in the car when someone else did. Was it that unclear from what I wrote before? Seemed fairly clear. As far as cheer sheets, I have been in line with other Duke fans waiting to get into CIS and people were handing out Cheer Sheets to those sitting in the Crazies' section. I am not making this up because it sounds like fun or because I imagined it - it happened on more than one occasion. These are the facts, and they are are undisputed.

Not it wasn't unclear at all. But I guess I have to spell things out.

There's a difference between a stated fact and an inference. No one said "Aminu shot someone!" That type of lowbrow chant could be expected at, say, Maryland, but it would be factually inaccurate (if you accept his version of the incident, which I am willing to do). But the "STOP...don't shoot!" refers to the incident as a whole, which he was clearly involved in. You can't dispute that. It's clever because it takes a logical step to connect the dots from what was said to what the underlying inference is...and when the dots are connected, it paints the opposing player in an overly negative light given the actual circumstances of the event referred to. BUT THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT.

For example, when UNC fans held up "Wanted" signs for Gerald Henderson the year after he broke Hansbrough's nose. I can't think of anyone here who was dense enough to go to IC and point out that the fans were factually inaccurate in stating that Henderson was a wanted fugitive.

And FYI...there aren't any cheer sheets anymore.

CDu
01-18-2010, 01:38 PM
My second thought is this with regards to what determines or how a intential foul is determined. I constantly hear about if the defender makes a play on the ball that then it is not a flagrant foul. However, and this is my disclaimer to the above as I don't recall whether Ish did this or not, is that many defenders today tend to wind up, bring their arms and hand from their waste and swing up towards the ball. To me this is where the "grey" area becomes apparent. In my opinion, the intent by the defender when taking this action is more to make sure the offensive player does not score at all costs rather than try to block the shot. The action to block the ball seems to be more a effort to mask the real intention of stopping a shot since they have no real shot at blocking the shot. This is just something I've seen more of the past 5 or so years and I think will cause a severe injury, if it hasn't already. Definitely would appreciate the other posters comments and thoughts about this.

Well, we don't have to look very far for an example of what you're talking about. Our very own Gerald Henderson made a hard foul on Hansbrough in a "prevent a score at all costs" mentality, and that resulted in a broken nose for Hansbrough.

But you're right - I think we see tons of examples of defenders going up with the intention of preventing a bucket by any means necessary. If they get a clean block, great. But they fully expect to get called for a foul.

I actually think the foul on Singler was a more glaring example of what you're talking about. Smith's foul on Plumlee didn't really involve a swing of the arm so much as heavy body contact. The foul by Weaver (or Woods, can't remember which) was a better example in that he came down forcefully with the arms.

But I do think Smith probably expected to commit a foul, and was probably simply trying to prevent a dunk however possible. The odds of a guy making a clean block on a breakaway when giving up an 8+ inch height advantage are next to none.

I think that type of call is a difficult one. It was clearly a dangerous foul to make that much contact at that high a speed and that high in the air. As such, I'm supportive of the "dangerous foul" concept with intentional fouls. I don't want to see serious injuries as a result of such fouls. On the other hand, it's admittedly a very gray area in making that determination. There are plenty of cases where a guy has a legit play on the ball but makes enough contact to alter a player's balance, resulting in a dangerous landing. It's just a complicated situation.

SCMatt33
01-18-2010, 01:44 PM
I'm pretty sure this was posted somewhere earlier, but here are the rules for intentional fouls as of 2009.

Section 4. Intentional Personal Fouling
Guidelines for calling the intentional personal foul are:
a. Any personal foul that is not a legitimate attempt to directly play the ball
or a player is an intentional personal foul.
b. Running into the back of a player who has the ball, wrapping the arm(s)
around a player and grabbing a player around the torso or legs are
intentional personal fouls.
c. Grabbing a player’s arm or body while initially attempting to gain
control by playing the ball directly is an intentional personal foul.
d. Grabbing, holding or pushing a player away from the ball is an
intentional personal foul.
e. Undue roughness used to stop the game clock is an intentional personal
foul and, if severe, should be called a flagrant personal foul.
f. It is an intentional personal foul when, while playing the ball, a player
causes excessive contact with an opponent.
The intentional personal foul must be called within the spirit and
intent of the intentional-foul rule.

You can be playing the ball, but if you are out of control and cause excessive contact, as the ref determined was the case with Smith, an intentional foul is appropriate. This often gets confused with flagrant fouls, such as punching, which come with automatic ejection.

CDu
01-18-2010, 01:47 PM
I'm pretty sure this was posted somewhere earlier, but here are the rules for intentional fouls as of 2009.

Section 4. Intentional Personal Fouling
Guidelines for calling the intentional personal foul are:
a. Any personal foul that is not a legitimate attempt to directly play the ball
or a player is an intentional personal foul.
b. Running into the back of a player who has the ball, wrapping the arm(s)
around a player and grabbing a player around the torso or legs are
intentional personal fouls.
c. Grabbing a player’s arm or body while initially attempting to gain
control by playing the ball directly is an intentional personal foul.
d. Grabbing, holding or pushing a player away from the ball is an
intentional personal foul.
e. Undue roughness used to stop the game clock is an intentional personal
foul and, if severe, should be called a flagrant personal foul.
f. It is an intentional personal foul when, while playing the ball, a player
causes excessive contact with an opponent.
The intentional personal foul must be called within the spirit and
intent of the intentional-foul rule.

You can be playing the ball, but if you are out of control and cause excessive contact, as the ref determined was the case with Smith, an intentional foul is appropriate. This often gets confused with flagrant fouls, such as punching, which come with automatic ejection.

Yeah, this is the thing people aren't realizing. There was a lot of body contact committed by a player who wasn't under control. According to the rules, it was the correct call. Admittedly, by the letter of the law there could be many more intentional fouls called in any week of college ball. But the fact that not all intentional fouls that occur are called doesn't mean that this wasn't correctly called.

NYDukie
01-18-2010, 01:50 PM
I think that type of call is a difficult one. It was clearly a dangerous foul to make that much contact at that high a speed and that high in the air. As such, I'm supportive of the "dangerous foul" concept with intentional fouls. I don't want to see serious injuries as a result of such fouls. On the other hand, it's admittedly a very gray area in making that determination. There are plenty of cases where a guy has a legit play on the ball but makes enough contact to alter a player's balance, resulting in a dangerous landing. It's just a complicated situation.

My main concern is not for players to get hurt. This is not football, though it is ironic that it seems at times that they have made more of a effort to curb some of the physicality of the game more than basketbal. . We all know that their is a physical element to the game, be it at the Y, at the park, the projects, or organized games but it's something that is becoming a bigger issue. You can see it by many coaches comments, rules committees (see NBA), etc. trying to curb such activity while no totally hand-cuffing defenders or eliminating the physcial nature of the game.

NYDukie
01-18-2010, 01:52 PM
I'm pretty sure this was posted somewhere earlier, but here are the rules for intentional fouls as of 2009.

Section 4. Intentional Personal Fouling
Guidelines for calling the intentional personal foul are:
a. Any personal foul that is not a legitimate attempt to directly play the ball
or a player is an intentional personal foul.
b. Running into the back of a player who has the ball, wrapping the arm(s)
around a player and grabbing a player around the torso or legs are
intentional personal fouls.
c. Grabbing a player’s arm or body while initially attempting to gain
control by playing the ball directly is an intentional personal foul.
d. Grabbing, holding or pushing a player away from the ball is an
intentional personal foul.
e. Undue roughness used to stop the game clock is an intentional personal
foul and, if severe, should be called a flagrant personal foul.
f. It is an intentional personal foul when, while playing the ball, a player
causes excessive contact with an opponent.
The intentional personal foul must be called within the spirit and
intent of the intentional-foul rule.

You can be playing the ball, but if you are out of control and cause excessive contact, as the ref determined was the case with Smith, an intentional foul is appropriate. This often gets confused with flagrant fouls, such as punching, which come with automatic ejection.

Ahhh, thanks for the clarification. With that said, though I'm not overly upset with what Smith did and could have lived with it not being called intentionanl, I do agree with the call the referee had made.

arnie
01-18-2010, 02:03 PM
I am pretty confused by your post, but I will still try to respond? If you read my original (long) post, I never made any assertions about anyone ineptitude at understanding basketball rules, crowd behavior, etc. What I was doing...wait for it...was offering an outside (non-Duke) opinion!! Having read these boards for years, they appeared to be welcome and not always shot down or berated...and if you read some of the replies to what I wrote, more than a couple people agree with some of the things I said. I wouldn't waste my time on MD, NC-High School, or UNC boards...this site has far better information and conversation. Let's not forget the disclaimer/first thing I said --- I am far from anti-Duke. In fact, I pull for them in pretty much every game they play outside of WFU.

I know the Duke-Blue tinted glasses are pretty strong, but just realize I am trying to offer a different/outside perspective on the game, the fouls, and the crowd.

For the record, not many Wake people are proud of having Billy P as an alum...my personal favorite is Brian Piccolo. Not sure it would be smart to take a shot at that guy, but have at it if you wish.

No, taking a shot at Billy P is good enough for me.

Kedsy
01-18-2010, 02:11 PM
If you watch a replay of Ish's attempted block, he touches the ball against the backboard. He did make pretty hard contact with the body, but to say there was "No Play" is a soft statement and far too protective of your players.

Actually what the previous poster said was there was "no chance at a clean play." And I think he's right. Whether or not Ish touched the ball, unless he was wearing rocket boots he had no chance to touch the ball without hitting the player. If you know (or should know) you have no chance of making the play without fouling and you try to make the play anyway, then you "intended" to commit the foul, because you knew it was going to be the end result of your action. If you go up and hit the player hard (as Ish did), it certainly could be seen as "excessive contact," since you had no chance of a clean play. Could it have legitimately been called the other way? Sure, it's a judgment call on the part of the ref. Was it a bad call? I don't think so.

Saratoga2
01-18-2010, 02:12 PM
While he only was in the game a short period, it looked like Kelly was a little out of his element. He seemed unsure of himself and perhaps the physical nature of the game was difficult for him. Clearly, with the foul trouble mounting, it would have been beneficial for him as a 6'10" player to be in a few more minutes, however, he didn't seem to be ready in last nights game.

striker219
01-18-2010, 02:12 PM
I loved it when Miles was being interviewed after the game, and was asked if his pickup games at home with Mason were that rough, and he said some thing like, "Yes, well maybe a little dirtier."

How awesome would it be to be driveway-side at the Plumlee house for a MP1-MP2-MP3 game of 21?

CDu
01-18-2010, 02:19 PM
While he only was in the game a short period, it looked like Kelly was a little out of his element. He seemed unsure of himself and perhaps the physical nature of the game was difficult for him. Clearly, with the foul trouble mounting, it would have been beneficial for him as a 6'10" player to be in a few more minutes, however, he didn't seem to be ready in last nights game.

Yeah, he was overwhelmed. Wake had good size, was very active, and played very physically. As many have been saying since the early fall, Kelly is not quite ready physically to contribute regularly at the ACC level. Maybe next year or the year after he'll be ready. But this shouldn't be a surprise.

I thought Coach K handled the rotations fairly well, with the exception of letting Thomas get his 3rd foul in the first half. Other than that, Coach K rotated the bigs through, played Kelly long enough to see he was overmatched, and then went back to the original rotation. When things got hairy in the middle of the second half, he went "small" with Singler at the 4 and it worked perfectly.

jv001
01-18-2010, 02:20 PM
DCDeac - welcome to the boards. I appreciated your view point. It is always nice to read a thoughtful and though provoking post from another perspective.

I don't blame you for not wanting to claim Billy P. I didn't realize Brian Piccolo was an alum. My favorite Wake alum - Tim Duncan. Although, I really like Muggsy Bogues, too. I remember an article about Muggsy where they talked about the neighborhood kids coming over to ask his wife if he could come out to play. :D

Yes welcome DCDeac, my favorite Deac is Randolph Childress for those great shots he made against the unc tarholes. Go Duke!

kmspeaks
01-18-2010, 02:22 PM
How awesome would it be to be driveway-side at the Plumlee house for a MP1-MP2-MP3 game of 21?

Probably something like being front-row for a UFC fight.

DCDeac
01-18-2010, 02:24 PM
Not it wasn't unclear at all. But I guess I have to spell things out.

There's a difference between a stated fact and an inference. No one said "Aminu shot someone!" That type of lowbrow chant could be expected at, say, Maryland, but it would be factually inaccurate (if you accept his version of the incident, which I am willing to do). But the "STOP...don't shoot!" refers to the incident as a whole, which he was clearly involved in. You can't dispute that. It's clever because it takes a logical step to connect the dots from what was said to what the underlying inference is...and when the dots are connected, it paints the opposing player in an overly negative light given the actual circumstances of the event referred to. BUT THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT.

For example, when UNC fans held up "Wanted" signs for Gerald Henderson the year after he broke Hansbrough's nose. I can't think of anyone here who was dense enough to go to IC and point out that the fans were factually inaccurate in stating that Henderson was a wanted fugitive.

And FYI...there aren't any cheer sheets anymore.

Oh Diablo - do you really want to revert to condescending tones? Do you really want to try to represent me as beneath your intelligence level? I think, personally, maybe you just have a case of the Mondays. But, hey, for a lot of us today is a holiday...so buddy, cool your soup...have a coke and a smile - whatever makes you tick. (or at least not come off as arrogant and condescending)

I am pretty sure that after graduating from Wake Forest I can almost, just barely, see the distinction btw a stated fact and an inference. Thank goodness Wake has become harder to get into - no more dummies like me. Anyway, the inference or connecting the dots is still a huge reach and far from clever or even that funny. If I were riding in a car with you (how lucky could I be?) and 4 other people, and someone knucklehead pulled a b-b gun and shot at some people...I don't think you or I would be all that thrilled to be associated with it, especially since we had nothing to do with it. Maybe I am going to far speaking for you. My point is - the attempt at low-brow humor and the connecting the dots isn't all that funny or clever because AFA really had nothing to do with it. And the Henderson signs are funnier/more clever b/c he came a lot closer to committing a crime than AFA did.

Cheer up Diablo, Jersey Shore is on in a couple days...that's enough for me to get over a case of the Mondays.

striker219
01-18-2010, 02:25 PM
Yes welcome DCDeac, my favorite Deac is Randolph Childress for those great shots he made against the unc tarholes. Go Duke!

Was it the ACC tourney final his senior year where he hit that leaner in the lane to beat Carolina? Am I remembering that correctly? He was a fun player to watch. Aside from their play against Duke, that was a fun team to watch.

oldnavy
01-18-2010, 02:28 PM
Is there any chance that refs can call a game too tight and make it worse from the roughness standpoint?

My theory is that when the refs blow the whistle for every little foul, the players get frustrated, and a "well if I am going to get whistled, then by goodness, I am going to get my money’s worth" attitude sets in. You simply cannot play the game without contact and I would rather the refs let the players play, and only call the fouls that impede a player from movement or unfairly give them an advantage. I hate the tic- tac calls even the ones that go our way. It makes the games very difficult to watch and I am sure frustrate the players.

I am not sold on this, but it makes me wonder if that factors in... thoughts?

airowe
01-18-2010, 02:28 PM
While he only was in the game a short period, it looked like Kelly was a little out of his element. He seemed unsure of himself and perhaps the physical nature of the game was difficult for him. Clearly, with the foul trouble mounting, it would have been beneficial for him as a 6'10" player to be in a few more minutes, however, he didn't seem to be ready in last nights game.

I agree. I thought it was a little strange for Ryan an Zoubek to be in the game at the same time but it must have been due to foul trouble issues. It was nice to see what happned on the offensive end when that pairing was in there though, as Kelly stayed towards the perimeter and high post and Kyle and Jon used their height advantages to post their defenders up. I think with Ryan's great ability to make entry passes this is the best way to utilize Ryan.

Yet another example of Coach K using his players in a way to utilize their strengths.

roywhite
01-18-2010, 02:29 PM
Yeah, he was overwhelmed. Wake had good size, was very active, and played very physically. As many have been saying since the early fall, Kelly is not quite ready physically to contribute regularly at the ACC level. Maybe next year or the year after he'll be ready. But this shouldn't be a surprise.



Yep. Look at the difference in comfort level for Miles P. from last year to this year. He's physically stronger than Ryan and was last year for that matter, but the speed of the game, the nerves involved in trying to do well in a short stint, and just overall confidence....huge jump from freshman to sophomore in most cases.

NYDukie
01-18-2010, 02:34 PM
Yeah, he was overwhelmed. Wake had good size, was very active, and played very physically. As many have been saying since the early fall, Kelly is not quite ready physically to contribute regularly at the ACC level. Maybe next year or the year after he'll be ready. But this shouldn't be a surprise.

I thought Coach K handled the rotations fairly well, with the exception of letting Thomas get his 3rd foul in the first half. Other than that, Coach K rotated the bigs through, played Kelly long enough to see he was overmatched, and then went back to the original rotation. When things got hairy in the middle of the second half, he went "small" with Singler at the 4 and it worked perfectly.

This is probably another "thread" all together but Kelly does look like a fish out of water. I have been a proponent of Kelly getting some playing time, be it of the 4 mpg or 10 mpg variety, so long as he is not a detriment to the teams effort. He has looked lost of late and the combination of Wake's size/athleticism combos was a big factor last night. Combine that with him having to learning how to play solid D at this level and probably having his confidence broken a bit and you have a frosh having a lot imposed on him as many frosh learn their first year. Hopefully, and I do think it is the case, the playing time he gets will be a important development tool for him in going forward.

oldnavy
01-18-2010, 02:38 PM
Oh Diablo - do you really want to revert to condescending tones? Do you really want to try to represent me as beneath your intelligence level? I think, personally, maybe you just have a case of the Mondays. But, hey, for a lot of us today is a holiday...so buddy, cool your soup...have a coke and a smile - whatever makes you tick. (or at least not come off as arrogant and condescending)

I am pretty sure that after graduating from Wake Forest I can almost, just barely, see the distinction btw a stated fact and an inference. Thank goodness Wake has become harder to get into - no more dummies like me. Anyway, the inference or connecting the dots is still a huge reach and far from clever or even that funny. If I were riding in a car with you (how lucky could I be?) and 4 other people, and someone knucklehead pulled a b-b gun and shot at some people...I don't think you or I would be all that thrilled to be associated with it, especially since we had nothing to do with it. Maybe I am going to far speaking for you. My point is - the attempt at low-brow humor and the connecting the dots isn't all that funny or clever because AFA really had nothing to do with it. And the Henderson signs are funnier/more clever b/c he came a lot closer to committing a crime than AFA did.

Cheer up Diablo, Jersey Shore is on in a couple days...that's enough for me to get over a case of the Mondays.
Of course the cheer was funny, take some advice from one of the wisest men of all time, John Riggins, and "Lighten up Sandy Baby!"
As for AFA's quilt or innocence, "you sleep with dogs, you get fleas"...
CIS is not a court room, there is no ...beyond a shadow of doubt qualification...

BD80
01-18-2010, 02:40 PM
... For the record, not many Wake people are proud of having Billy P as an alum...my personal favorite is Brian Piccolo. Not sure it would be smart to take a shot at that guy, but have at it if you wish.

The movies about him are WAY too sad!

Other than Chris Paul, I can't remember a Demon Deac that I have disliked! And I've been around a llllonnngggg while (but I can't remember sh!t). I don't even really dislike ol' Chas McFouland, maybe its because I keep thinking of "There's Something About Mary":

http://www2.pictures.gi.zimbio.com/Wake+Forest+v+North+Carolina+FQP-0atDFTqm.jpg

http://www.nbc.com/TGYH/images/photos/bio_harland_williams.jpg


No, no, not 6! I said 7. Nobody's comin' up with 6. Who works out in 6 minutes? ... 7's the key number here. Think about it. 7-Elevens. 7 dwarves. 7, man, that's the number. 7 chipmunks twirlin' on a branch, eatin' lots of sunflowers on my uncle's ranch. You know that old children's tale from the sea. It's like you're dreamin' about Gorgonzola cheese when it's clearly Brie time, baby. Step into my office. ... You're [friggin] fired!


But if we're talking Deacs, just say Arnie and stop. Just stop.

94duke
01-18-2010, 02:41 PM
Was it the ACC tourney final his senior year where he hit that leaner in the lane to beat Carolina? Am I remembering that correctly? He was a fun player to watch. Aside from their play against Duke, that was a fun team to watch.

Yes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgsVItGvRQo&feature=related

Don't forget the nasty crossover:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRJMsoIptQo

jv001
01-18-2010, 02:42 PM
Was it the ACC tourney final his senior year where he hit that leaner in the lane to beat Carolina? Am I remembering that correctly? He was a fun player to watch. Aside from their play against Duke, that was a fun team to watch.

I think you are correct it was Randolph's senior year when he lit them up. Made one shot and then motioned with his finger to the unc defender like "come on, you can't stop me". Loved it. Go Duke!

greybeard
01-18-2010, 02:51 PM
A couple of games back I used the word relentless to describe our teams play. I guess the secret word for today is PHYSICAL!

There's been a lot of back and forth about what is or isn't "thuggish" play. I'd say it's in the eye of the beholder. I'm sure that over the years many teams felt our aggressive, in your face type defensive was pushing the envelope on what constituted clean play. We can split hairs on what is or isn't excessive, but all I know is that we now have the players to play any type of game that an opponnent could throw at us.

Just a word of caution. Don't sell State short. We're coming off a tough, emotional, physical win. This is the perfect trap game.

I didn't think Wake thuggish. I thought that there were two flagrant fouls, certainly the first, which was poor form no matter how you slice it. Ish had Mason in his sights, Mason did not see Ish, and no way Ish gets even near the ball without taking Mason down. The Singler play, they both saw eachother, so I suppose Singler might have defended himself though I don't know how. If you make a play that is as low percentage to pull off with sufficient force to put a guy down like that, it should be a flagrant.

The team that goes over the line routinely is Georgia Tech. They will be in games to the extent that refs allow their bruising play. Against Duke, they allowed it all game. Against NC, it wasn't needed til deep in the second half and once it was deployed it began to look ugly. This is a "defense" called by the coach that involves lots of very physical confrontations. If called, Tech will be out of any competative game. If they don't deploy in that fashion, Tech will not be in many competative games against good teams. This to me stinks and it is up to the refs to call the game straight up and put a stop to it. One would have hoped that a coach wouldn't go there. Hewitt has, way there, and he diminishes himself in the process, in my opinion.

jv001
01-18-2010, 02:53 PM
The movies about him are WAY too sad!

Other than Chris Paul, I can't remember a Demon Deac that I have disliked! And I've been around a llllonnngggg while (but I can't remember sh!t). I don't even really dislike ol' Chas McFouland, maybe its because I keep thinking of "There's Something About Mary":

http://www2.pictures.gi.zimbio.com/Wake+Forest+v+North+Carolina+FQP-0atDFTqm.jpg

http://www.nbc.com/TGYH/images/photos/bio_harland_williams.jpg




But if we're talking Deacs, just say Arnie and stop. Just stop.

Met both McFarland and Brian Piccolo. Sad to say never met Arnie. Met McFarland at a wings diner here in W/S and he was a perfect gentleman. Seems like a nice young man(off the court). Met Brian Piccolo when I was flying from the Gbo/HP/WS airport. I was on my way to my permanent duty station in Hawaii(Army). He was on his way to Chicago(drafted him). Of course he was flying first class and I was flying coach. He was an extremely nice man who was cordial to everyone around him in the airport lounge. Wake Forest has always been my next to favorite college bb team. Go Duke!

El_Diablo
01-18-2010, 02:55 PM
Oh Diablo - do you really want to revert to condescending tones? Do you really want to try to represent me as beneath your intelligence level? I think, personally, maybe you just have a case of the Mondays. But, hey, for a lot of us today is a holiday...so buddy, cool your soup...have a coke and a smile - whatever makes you tick. (or at least not come off as arrogant and condescending)

I am pretty sure that after graduating from Wake Forest I can almost, just barely, see the distinction btw a stated fact and an inference. Thank goodness Wake has become harder to get into - no more dummies like me. Anyway, the inference or connecting the dots is still a huge reach and far from clever or even that funny. If I were riding in a car with you (how lucky could I be?) and 4 other people, and someone knucklehead pulled a b-b gun and shot at some people...I don't think you or I would be all that thrilled to be associated with it, especially since we had nothing to do with it. Maybe I am going to far speaking for you. My point is - the attempt at low-brow humor and the connecting the dots isn't all that funny or clever because AFA really had nothing to do with it. And the Henderson signs are funnier/more clever b/c he came a lot closer to committing a crime than AFA did.

Cheer up Diablo, Jersey Shore is on in a couple days...that's enough for me to get over a case of the Mondays.

Hey, you're the one who brought out the sarcastic "was I really that unclear?" comments and then continued to assert erroneously that we had our facts wrong. Believe me, we read the same reports and knew the story just as well as you. You may believe he's a completely innocent bystander--practically a victim himself!--but that's not the only way to see it, or portray it. And he obviously won't get a free pass when he comes into our house.

Of course, nothing appears clever when it has to be explained after the fact. But then again, the point of the cheer is not to be clever. It's to get under the skin of the player just a little bit. The fact that he's "not thrilled to be associated with it" is the point. He is associated with it, and we'll continue to remind of that fact when he comes into our house. Besides, "You were in a car with someone who shot someone with a bb gun" doesn't quite roll off the tongue quite as well. :)

Kedsy
01-18-2010, 02:57 PM
My point is - the attempt at low-brow humor and the connecting the dots isn't all that funny or clever because AFA really had nothing to do with it. And the Henderson signs are funnier/more clever b/c he came a lot closer to committing a crime than AFA did.

From a legal standpoint you are incorrect.

From a humor standpoint, both sets of signs/cheers were funny but perhaps not in the best taste.

Greg_Newton
01-18-2010, 03:27 PM
Apologies if posted already: Duke vs. Wake Top 5 Plays (http://www.youtube.com/user/DukeBluePlanet#p/u/0/PzcobUQAOTs)

DukieInKansas
01-18-2010, 03:27 PM
From a legal standpoint you are incorrect.

From a humor standpoint, both sets of signs/cheers were funny but perhaps not in the best taste.

Since I watched on TV, where you can't always understand the cheers, and I didn't know about the previous incident with the Wake player, when I read the "Stop . . . Don't Shoot" in the original post, I thought maybe it was the cheer being used just as a Wake player was getting ready to release the ball on a free throw.

Thanks for the explanations. Given the recent incident with 3 players on the FB team, I'd guess this cheer won't be used in CIS - but may be used in other arenas.

DCDeac
01-18-2010, 03:58 PM
From a legal standpoint you are incorrect.

From a humor standpoint, both sets of signs/cheers were funny but perhaps not in the best taste.


Kedsy, this is not the proper place for a legal discussion, however, being a law student myself, I feel pretty confident about my assertion. AFA being in the same place as someone who pulled a b-b gun and shot it, unless he played some sort of role (which he didn't), has no legal ramifications at all. Wildly swinging your arm and connecting on someone's face, even in an athletic environment, is closer...however, the point is, neither are considered criminal acts at this point anyway.

Kedsy
01-18-2010, 04:38 PM
Kedsy, this is not the proper place for a legal discussion, however, being a law student myself, I feel pretty confident about my assertion. AFA being in the same place as someone who pulled a b-b gun and shot it, unless he played some sort of role (which he didn't), has no legal ramifications at all. Wildly swinging your arm and connecting on someone's face, even in an athletic environment, is closer...however, the point is, neither are considered criminal acts at this point anyway.

OK, I don't know the circumstances surrounding Aminu's incident, but if you are a companion to someone who commits a crime in your presence, it likely could be aiding and abetting, especially if you rode in the "getaway" car and/or failed to report the crime to the authorities. Conversely, there's no way G's hard foul in the flow of an organized game was anywhere close to assault.

I graduated law school 25 years ago, and I'm pretty confident that for many of the things I was confident of while in law school, my confidence was misplaced. Still is, sometimes. Not saying it's necessarily the same for you or in this instance -- just sayin'.

1999ballboy
01-18-2010, 04:43 PM
Someone who was at the game told me that at one point, for several possessions, McFarland stayed under Wake Forest's basket the whole time and didn't run to the other end of the court with the other 9 guys. Can anyone confirm this? I couldn't see it on TV and if it's true, it sounds pretty bizarre. Allegedly, it led to a "Good hustle Chas" chant from the Crazies.

Jumbo
01-18-2010, 04:47 PM
OK, I don't know the circumstances surrounding Aminu's incident, but if you are a companion to someone who commits a crime in your presence, it likely could be aiding and abetting, especially if you rode in the "getaway" car and/or failed to report the crime to the authorities. Conversely, there's no way G's hard foul in the flow of an organized game was anywhere close to assault.

I graduated law school 25 years ago, and I'm pretty confident that for many of the things I was confident of while in law school, my confidence was misplaced. Still is, sometimes. Not saying it's necessarily the same for you or in this instance -- just sayin'.

Not sure this is going anywhere good -- the points have been made on both sides of the Aminu issue; maybe it's time to move on.

DCDeac
01-18-2010, 05:32 PM
Agreed and agreed. No hard feelings on this end. I will continue to read the boards daily and maybe occassionally post. Great site and a lot of good insights.

Closing thought - most people were at least willing to consider an outside perspective, and for that, I tip my cap. Just have to look at some other message boards (WFU included) to see how bad it can get. A couple of you took some shots and were borderline condescending, but if that's the worst I get for being in "enemy" territory, I can handle it. Just as your team can handle a physical match-up. Go Deacs and Devils...and yes, it's possible to root for both.

gwwilburn
01-18-2010, 05:58 PM
I'm pretty sure this was posted somewhere earlier, but here are the rules for intentional fouls as of 2009.


f. It is an intentional personal foul when, while playing the ball, a player
causes excessive contact with an opponent.
The intentional personal foul must be called within the spirit and
intent of the intentional-foul rule..

I brought this up before, but thanks for posting it again, as it seems to have been lost by page 7 or 8 of this thread. In my interpretation of this rule, Smith's foul was intentional, but the one on Singler might not have been, as I think Singler might have initiated some of that contact.
Is this a new rule, or has it existed for a while? Brando didn't seem to know about it, and neither did Knight on Wednesday.

striker219
01-18-2010, 06:00 PM
Closing thought - most people were at least willing to consider an outside perspective, and for that, I tip my cap. Just have to look at some other message boards (WFU included) to see how bad it can get. A couple of you took some shots and were borderline condescending, but if that's the worst I get for being in "enemy" territory, I can handle it. Just as your team can handle a physical match-up. Go Deacs and Devils...and yes, it's possible to root for both.

Well said.

Give 'em hell Wednesday night!

Devil in the Blue Dress
01-18-2010, 06:43 PM
Someone who was at the game told me that at one point, for several possessions, McFarland stayed under Wake Forest's basket the whole time and didn't run to the other end of the court with the other 9 guys. Can anyone confirm this? I couldn't see it on TV and if it's true, it sounds pretty bizarre. Allegedly, it led to a "Good hustle Chas" chant from the Crazies.

I was at the game. McFarland did remain under the basket without trying to continue in play at the other end.

Kedsy
01-18-2010, 08:11 PM
Go Deacs and Devils...and yes, it's possible to root for both.

Agreed. I've always liked Wake, except when they play Duke.

HowBoutDemDevils
01-18-2010, 08:27 PM
I'll LOVE Wake when they throttle UNC.

RainingThrees
01-18-2010, 08:35 PM
I'll LOVE Wake when they throttle UNC.

I'm a fan of just about any team that beats UNC. So I've been a fan of 5 teams this year, the only one I refuse to support is Kentucky, although they are the lesser of two evils.

Eternal Outlaw
01-18-2010, 08:49 PM
I didn't think the Smith play was intentional however I do believe the refs had to call it the way they had been calling the game. Whether or not there was any bad blood by the participants on the floor, they were officiating that game like they were defusing a problem before it started. They called the double foul when two guys got tangled up so when this place came along, they had to either call it or risk people taking hard fouls anytime someone came into the lane. Rule wise, it was a judgement call, game wise, I think they had left themselves very little option they way they called the game to that point.

Hermy-own
01-18-2010, 08:53 PM
Is there any place I can watch a replay? I tried to watch the game on channelsurfer.net, but it became too laggy in the 2nd half.

moonpie23
01-18-2010, 09:18 PM
you know....i've watched ACC basketball for a lot of years, and i've seen plenty of coaching rivalries back to the frank mcquire / lefty drisell days, but i swear, i don't think i've ever seen a more bent-out-of-shape coach as gino when he's losing to K.

maybe i'm reading something into it, but when i look at gino during the game, he looks as if his life depends on beating K.....NOT winning for wake, but beating K.

devildeac
01-18-2010, 10:20 PM
Agreed and agreed. No hard feelings on this end. I will continue to read the boards daily and maybe occassionally post. Great site and a lot of good insights.

Closing thought - most people were at least willing to consider an outside perspective, and for that, I tip my cap. Just have to look at some other message boards (WFU included) to see how bad it can get. A couple of you took some shots and were borderline condescending, but if that's the worst I get for being in "enemy" territory, I can handle it. Just as your team can handle a physical match-up. Go Deacs and Devils...and yes, it's possible to root for both.

Just not as much as I used to...

;)

roywhite
01-18-2010, 10:24 PM
you know....i've watched ACC basketball for a lot of years, and i've seen plenty of coaching rivalries back to the frank mcquire / lefty drisell days, but i swear, i don't think i've ever seen a more bent-out-of-shape coach as gino when he's losing to K.

maybe i'm reading something into it, but when i look at gino during the game, he looks as if his life depends on beating K.....NOT winning for wake, but beating K.

Gino was the coach who beat the women's team tonight. Dino is the guy who is desperate to beat Coach K. :)

At any rate, I agree with your point; probably goes back to the Army connection; Gaudio went 36-72 at Army and got tired of hearing about Coach K (and Bob Knight for that matter). Gaudio was then 32-52 at Loyola before joining up with Skip Prosser again.

There is plenty of evidence that Gaudio is just not a very good coach; if one needs more than his record at Army and Loyola, consider how he took a Wake team with some major NBA talent from a #1 ranking to a steep decline, ending in an embarrassing NCAA loss by 15 to Cleveland State.

Then there's the whole McFarland thing, and the fact that Aminu was huffing and puffing midway through the first half---a major talent, but not even in good shape.

Dino's style is not fun to play against, but not very effective either.

Newton_14
01-18-2010, 10:57 PM
Gino was the coach who beat the women's team tonight. Dino is the guy who is desperate to beat Coach K. :)


There is plenty of evidence that Gaudio is just not a very good coach; if one needs more than his record at Army and Loyola, consider how he took a Wake team with some major NBA talent from a #1 ranking to a steep decline, ending in an embarrassing NCAA loss by 15 to Cleveland State.

Then there's the whole McFarland thing, and the fact that Aminu was huffing and puffing midway through the first half---a major talent, but not even in good shape.

Agreed on all points Roy. I was amazed at seeing how out of shape Aminu is and also Ish Smith. Unreal. I realize Ish has to play heavy minutes but it is rare to see a PG get gassed like that. But Aminu was huffing and puffing like an out of shape smoker or something. And then the reports of McFarland not even getting back up the court on some trips. Add it all up and you have to question the conditioning program they have going over at Wake.

For all the talk of Duke not utilizing their bench and playing starters heavy minutes, Duke was clearly the fresher team late last night and it showed pretty clearly.

gep
01-18-2010, 11:30 PM
Actually what the previous poster said was there was "no chance at a clean play." And I think he's right. Whether or not Ish touched the ball, unless he was wearing rocket boots he had no chance to touch the ball without hitting the player. If you know (or should know) you have no chance of making the play without fouling and you try to make the play anyway, then you "intended" to commit the foul, because you knew it was going to be the end result of your action. If you go up and hit the player hard (as Ish did), it certainly could be seen as "excessive contact," since you had no chance of a clean play. Could it have legitimately been called the other way? Sure, it's a judgment call on the part of the ref. Was it a bad call? I don't think so.

I wanted to mention this, but also wanted to read through as much of this thread as possible first...

I've heard commentators many times... say that if you're going to foul, make sure your foul is "good" enough so the shooter doesn't get the basket and the foul. This, in many cases, meant to me that the foul should be "hard" enough to insure that the basket is not made. I think I saw Jon and a few others concede the basket rather than foul, which I think is the better way to go especially if you're beat... than to try to foul as hard as possible to prevent the basket, even with the foul call. I think this may be a source of "hard" fouls that are unnecessary, especially on a run-out. I cringe every time I see a run-out, the defender chasing... the potential for disaster is in the making... :rolleyes:

Chitowndevil
01-19-2010, 11:17 AM
I don't have time to read through the whole 10 pages, so apologies if this has already been posted. But this bugged the heck out of me, so from the NCAA Basketball 2010 and 2011 Men's and Women's Rules:



Appendix III, Section 4f. It is an intentional personal foul when, while playing the ball, a player causes excessive contact with an opponent.


In other words, as the playcaller said, Brando's commentary was completely wrong. In fairness an intentional foul IS broadly referred to at several points as "an act that is not a legitimate attempt to play the ball or player" (see Appendix IV). But excessive contact IS explicitly listed as an exception.

NCAA Basketball 2010 and 2011 Men's and Women's Rules (http://www.ncaapublications.com/Uploads/PDF/Basketball_Rules_9_3973f69a0-c408-43c9-81be-b4e85513c6e6.pdf)

Welcome2DaSlopes
01-20-2010, 08:49 AM
No Duke vs. Nc state thread?

CDu
01-20-2010, 09:18 AM
No Duke vs. Nc state thread?

Your request continues to fall on deaf ears. I concur... does our fanbase not care about the game tonight? There's already a thread for the UNC/Wake game, for crying out loud.

airowe
01-20-2010, 09:23 AM
Your request continues to fall on deaf ears. I concur... does our fanbase not care about the game tonight? There's already a thread for the UNC/Wake game, for crying out loud.

If you want something done right, ...

CDu
01-20-2010, 09:25 AM
If you want something done right, ...

Touche. I've never been much of a thread-starter myself.

slower
01-20-2010, 09:28 AM
Agreed on all points Roy. I was amazed at seeing how out of shape Aminu is and also Ish Smith. Unreal. I realize Ish has to play heavy minutes but it is rare to see a PG get gassed like that. But Aminu was huffing and puffing like an out of shape smoker or something. And then the reports of McFarland not even getting back up the court on some trips. Add it all up and you have to question the conditioning program they have going over at Wake.

For all the talk of Duke not utilizing their bench and playing starters heavy minutes, Duke was clearly the fresher team late last night and it showed pretty clearly.

considering their lack of conditioning, shouldn't the Holes be able to run them off the court, theoretically?

CDu
01-20-2010, 09:42 AM
considering their lack of conditioning, shouldn't the Holes be able to run them off the court, theoretically?

That is my concern as well. Smith can run with the Heels, but I'm not sure anyone else at Wake is up for it - especially Aminu. If Davis plays (and I suspect he'll play and be just fine in typical UNC fashion), I think UNC wears them down with the full-court play. Unless Wake gets way out ahead early, I think UNC wins. I very much hope I'm wrong and that Wake has the legs to win this one.

moonpie23
01-20-2010, 09:47 AM
i don't think the heels will be their usual turnover machine tonight.... in fact, they may beat wake handily...

moonpie23
01-20-2010, 09:53 AM
If you want something done right, ...

hire a professional....

CDu
01-20-2010, 09:57 AM
i don't think the heels will be their usual turnover machine tonight.... in fact, they may beat wake handily...

I think they'll continue to turn it over a lot (probably not as much as against Clemson, but still a lot), but I do think they'll win.