PDA

View Full Version : Duke will be fine with Zoubek and Thomas



dukelion
05-14-2007, 05:46 PM
Frankly I'm sick of all the PP talk and would just like to move on.

Truth is Duke is loaded with talent next year (8 HS All Americans) and the addition of PP would only mean the eventual transfer of players like Lance Thomas, Brian Zoubek or Taylor King.

Zoubek and Thomas should split time at the 5 spot until one of them emerges while Singler will start at the 4 while sharing time with King and David McClure.

That's a pretty solid front court IMO.

If anyone doubts Singler's ability to play the 4 just go to Youtube and watch part 1 of the Jordan Classic. He scores in the post against Kosta Koufous (7'1) with a great move from the center of the paint and then a bit later has a great block on a big man on the defensive end.

Zoubek in his brief playing time last year altered plenty of shots and for those of you who remember gave Hansbrough a fit with his size and length. What Zoubek needs is playing time and he'll get that with PP in Florida.

And what ever happened to love for Lance Thomas? This time last year Thomas was the center of our attention and was talked about in a very similar way to PP. People raved about Thomas' team first attitude, his non-stop motor, passion and athleticism........sound familiar? Scout.com had Thomas at 18 overall last year and has PP at 15 this year.......are they really that different?

I know some of you consider PP superior and can't miss but remember PP has yet to play a college game yet everyone seems to think he's the second coming of Carlos Boozer......for pete's sake PP isn't even ranked in the top 10 and I'm just sick of all the hype he's getting. There's also no such thing as can't miss prospects in college call these days.

I'm more than willing to wait on Zoubek and Thomas to develop rather than try to replace then before they even get a chance.

I know Zoubek and Thomas are in the gym like crazy right now and will both be bigger and stronger come the fall and I for one am quite excited by that.........more excited by that than if PP did decide to come to Duke.

jimbonelson
05-14-2007, 05:55 PM
i agree..........but i hope he still signs with duke

dbowen
05-14-2007, 05:55 PM
I couldn't agree more.
PP is way overhyped and will be expected to produce a double double everytime out. How unfair is that?
Let Thomas and Zoubek mature within the DUKE system.

Chard
05-14-2007, 06:11 PM
I second those thoughts about the current Duke players. Yes, I would like to see Patterson sign with Duke but I won't be crushed. In fact, I expect him not to sign with Duke. Duke will be fine without him. Duke will a bit better with him. I hope he goes with his heart and good luck to him unless he faces Duke at some point in his career.

kydevil
05-14-2007, 06:22 PM
I agree as well, however for LT to play a 5 he must put on some weight/muscle Im sure the Staff has had him in the weight room though!

Lord Ash
05-14-2007, 06:35 PM
I think what excites people is that mix of raw power and agility. Zoubek and Thomas, much as I love them, have basically one or the other; Zoubek power, Thomas agility. PP has both; he is built like a MAN, if you know what I mean, and can move just about as fast as any big man I've seen recently. These are traits many of us have seen recently in some of our best players; Brand, Boozer, and, to an extent, Williams (not quite as fast, but still surprisingly quick.) Having PP at the center would allow Thomas more time to develop where he deserves to develop, at the 4, and even allows Kyle to spend time at both the four and the three. I think PP would be a huge positive.

mepanchin
05-14-2007, 07:49 PM
Thomas and Patterson are very different players. Thomas is a college 3/4 who can be a good position defender, get lots of rebounds, get to the line, generally play within the system offensively and defensively, but he isn't a star on either side.

Patterson is likely the kind of Shelden Williams type player we will need with the departure of McRoberts. He's longer and bigger than Thomas and is a natural college center. You would likely see Thomas and Patterson playing side-by-side rather than one stepping over the other.

Zoubek is a work in progress. His (tempo-free) stats this year were actually somewhat encouraging, especially on the defensive side. He was turnover and foul prone (as was Thomas), but that is something that will improve. Keep in mind Zoubek only played 17% of minutes this year or so. Even with Patterson, you are looking at Zoubek playing a solid 30-40% of minutes while Patterson will likely play 55-65% (looking at previous freshman numbers for big men at Duke).

I'm certainly not anointing Patterson as a savior (because our program is fine), but it's not exactly controversial to claim that Patterson is an element we are missing. We will have guys like Nelson, Smith and Henderson as athletic slashers and solid defenders. Scheyer, Paulus and King are instant offense jump shooting specialists. Singler is the versatile point forward who can shoot, handle or drive and isn't bad defensively either (a more perimeter oriented McRoberts). Thomas and McClure are 3/4 energy guys who will contribute to our rebounding and defense, and may develop more offensively before it's all over. Zoubek is a true center who is a real work in progress. Add in a long, athletic defensively skilled true college 5 (NBA PF) who will likely stay 3-4 years (Patterson) and you have a team with almost everything covered. We'd just need experience and some time playing together and you have there a balanced team offensively and defensively who can go big, go small or go balanced and attack from every angle (driving the lane and kicking, passing around the perimeter in a 4 guard scheme, play inside-out with a big man like Patterson getting 25% of possessions, etc).

Also, I think we don't have much to worry about regarding transfers. Our 97-98 team had 9 guys playing over 30% of the minutes successfully, with another 2 over 10%. The only guy who had substantial playing time who transferred was Chris Burgess and we have to assume it was because his father had delusions of grandeur for his son (he was improving, and his playing time would have been substantial over the next 2 years). Michael Thompson played 4.44% of minutes in 03, and 0.74% in 04. Boateng played 3.46% and then transferred. Boykin played 4.84% and then immediately transferred at the start of this past year. These were guys who never played.

I suppose you could look at Mike Chappell but I'm not sure if he transferred due to playing time concerns or what, because he played 28.8% and 36.0% in his two seasons at Duke and was improving.

Anyway, I agree that we will be fine without him, but let's not give up at this point. If we get Patterson we can legitimately have a range of expectations that include a Final Four. Otherwise, we will see a lot of small ball and will be a less versatile and more volatile/risky team relying more on 3s than if we had a guy like Patterson.

Patrick Yates
05-14-2007, 09:44 PM
PP is at least an inch shorter, and 15 - 20 lbs lighter than Boozer. Personally, I have not seen anything that indicates his post moves are that developed.

I agree with the above poster who thinks that PP would force a transfer. PP is more ready to compete immediately, even more prepared that BZ or LT who have a year of experience. But, PP has a low ceiling imho. He has made a living by out muscling people in HS. At 6-8 (ish, looks closer to 6-7) and 225-235, he aint out muscling many people in College. TH will destroy him. Not close.

I am not certain that BZ and LT will be better than PP. But they could be better, maybe significantly so, in 2-3 years.

I would love to get PP. He would help, no doubt. But, he is not a saviour of this, or any, program.

This goes double for Lucas at the pg. I think many programs are dodging a bullet known as mediocrity with this kid. He is just good enough to deter an elite PG, but not good enough to truly dominate. Anchor.

Patrick Yates

ACCBBallFan
05-14-2007, 10:55 PM
Anyway, I agree that we will be fine without him, but let's not give up at this point. If we get Patterson we can legitimately have a range of expectations that include a Final Four. Otherwise, we will see a lot of small ball and will be a less versatile and more volatile/risky team relying more on 3s than if we had a guy like Patterson.

Fine may be too strong a word, perhaps adequate is more descriptive.

I also doubt there would be much danger of Zoubek or Lance transferring if Patrick comes to Duke.

If anything the three would make each other better practicing against one another every day. Zoubek would get used to playing against a true power player and Lance playing against a quick front line guy, and vice versa for Patrick playing every day with and against Lance.

Similarly Patrick would get accustomed to practicing against the 7 footers he will face in the NBA, though they would be more skilled than Zoubek as he continues to improve.

I am not sure what UK and UF offer Patrick in the way of guys as big as Zoubek or as quick as Lance. Though on the one hand that may help his short term goal of freshman PT, it could hinder his linger term goal of improving enough to be a bona fide NBA Power guy.

VaDukie
05-15-2007, 12:09 AM
I've thought this for some time. Let Thomas and Zoubek develop and wait for Monroe.

dukemomLA
05-15-2007, 01:46 AM
I agree with VaDukie. I think the potential of Zoubek and L. Thomas outweigh the hype of PP. Overated?? I think so. Our team will be fine with the talent we've got -- and really can do without PP. I truly don't want to even think about transfers. Enough is enough. We already have the talent, passion and drive to challenge for our next National Championship. Go Devils!

Skitzle
05-15-2007, 06:41 AM
I think you can't deny that the Duke team would be better with PP. I also think Duke would be fine with Zou and LT.

I hope we get him, but if we don't its no big deal.

Houston
05-15-2007, 06:51 AM
I agree with VaDukie. I think the potential of Zoubek and L. Thomas outweigh the hype of PP. Overated?? I think so. Our team will be fine with the talent we've got -- and really can do without PP. I truly don't want to even think about transfers. Enough is enough. We already have the talent, passion and drive to challenge for our next National Championship. Go Devils!


I don't know if PP is overhyped, but I do know we need him! Josh leaves awfully big shoes to fill. We need as much frontcourt depth as possible. Although McDonald's AAs are nice to have on ones roster, it does not guarntee success. How many McDonalds AAs did VCU have? PP helps Duke return the elite level much sooner. The alternative may be another transition year as most ACC players will improve in the summer not just Duke's. Do the right thing PP and get ready for Maui in November!

whereinthehellami
05-15-2007, 07:33 AM
I think some people are expecting too much improvement from Thomas and Zoubek for this coming year. I don't think that either of these guys will start on a consistent basis next season. But I also don't think that patterson will fit that role either, though he wuold be another piece like Thomas and Zoubek that could be used in certain situations. The ACC is a big adjustment from HS ball and I don't think that Patterson looked that dominant in the HS games I saw to lead one to believe that he would make an effortless transition (like Shelden Williams) in his first year in the ACC.

CMS2478
05-15-2007, 07:44 AM
I have already stated on this board before and I hold to it, that we would be a much better team next year with Patterson.......duh, no brainer there. However, in the bigger scheme of things, if we don't get Patterson that means Z and Thomas will have to play major minutes and that is what they are lacking to develop into great players. They may struggle at first, but by the their junior years they should be great. Add Monroe (possibly) to an experienced Thomas and Z and we will be stacked in the post in two years. :)

kydevil
05-15-2007, 07:54 AM
I've thought this for some time. Let Thomas and Zoubek develop and wait for Monroe.

That sounds like a great plan to me, that is as long as we land Monroe. I've heard before that we were pretty confident we were gonna get a big time player (Wright) and then it fell through and we were left back at the drawing backboard!

Saratoga2
05-15-2007, 08:15 AM
I think what excites people is that mix of raw power and agility. Zoubek and Thomas, much as I love them, have basically one or the other; Zoubek power, Thomas agility. PP has both; he is built like a MAN, if you know what I mean, and can move just about as fast as any big man I've seen recently. These are traits many of us have seen recently in some of our best players; Brand, Boozer, and, to an extent, Williams (not quite as fast, but still surprisingly quick.) Having PP at the center would allow Thomas more time to develop where he deserves to develop, at the 4, and even allows Kyle to spend time at both the four and the three. I think PP would be a huge positive.

To be a championship level team, we need depth at the 4 and 5 positions. Florida made that point in the finals of the NCAA's this year by bringing in at least 4 power players to contest Oden.

What Duke has is a light Singler, probably a bulked up Thomas and a stronger Zoubec. An injury or foul trouble to one player and we get into a weak position against teams with multiple bigs. Sure we have McClure and King, but can they really be effective inside against the bigs of other teams?

What Patterson would give us is another strong and quick inside player who could share time with the others and give us a championship contending team. Frankly I don't know how time would be apportioned and no doubt some people would be disappointed but the team would be better.

ACCBBallFan
05-15-2007, 08:18 AM
I have already stated on this board before and I hold to it, that we would be a much better team next year with Patterson.......duh, no brainer there. However, in the bigger scheme of things, if we don't get Patterson that means Z and Thomas will have to play major minutes and that is what they are lacking to develop into great players. They may struggle at first, but by the their junior years they should be great. Add Monroe (possibly) to an experienced Thomas and Z and we will be stacked in the post in two years. :)I completely agree.

Troublemaker
05-15-2007, 08:27 AM
Getting Patterson would be huge. No offense to LT and Z, but I think it's plainly obvious that PPat is a level of talent a notch or two above those guys. He's one of the best rebounders and shotblockers in his class (better than LT here) with enough quickness to allow Duke to switch on screens and play Duke-type defense (better than Z here). With PPat on the roster, Duke could, with some luck, get to a Final Four in 08 or perhaps even win it all (with a lot of luck). Getting PPat effectively doubles Duke's window of opportunity to do major damage in the NCAA tournament from one to two years (after the 09 season, it's very questionable whether guys like Singler and Henderson will still be around, and Paulus graduates). To double your opportunity like that is huge.

DukieUGA
05-15-2007, 08:36 AM
LT can be a good 4 but it is unwise to think that he could be a good 5. Z, on the other hand, could be a good 5 if he keeps developing, tho that might not be til his Jr. year, it's just such a long process for big men like him. He can do it tho. McClure needs to add a reliable jumper to his game so he can be more of a swing 3/4, cuz he just isn't tall or beefy enough to be a legit answer as a 4. I don't see how adding PP would be a bad thing although i do remember how much hype this board was generating last year for LT. LT had a nice year for a Fr. but was far from dominating anyone. In that light, adding PP would certainly be a bonus, but it's a bit early to annoint him with some special redemptive power.

duketaylor
05-15-2007, 08:55 AM
Patterson would be a huge addition to the Devils, even if it's only for depth. Remember, Zou and Lance were fouls waiting to happen so we need some big bodies. Singler's more of a 3/4 although he looked good against Koufos (sp).
I'm very cautiously optimistic with PP.

Bay Area Duke Fan
05-15-2007, 10:51 AM
Patterson has something that very few others have. He wins championships. His HS team won the WVA state championship three times. That indicates to me that he possesses that intangible factor that leads his team to victories. That's more important than many of the physical and athletic factors that make a great player.

It will be a big disappointment if PP doesn't come to Duke. Duke will be very good in 2007-08 without him. He is not THE savior. But he is a real winner and could make Duke a terrific team in the coming seasons.

Olympic Fan
05-15-2007, 11:36 AM
Let's not go nuts in either direction. Clearly, Duke will be better next year with Patrick Patterson. He brings a strength and a level of athleticism to the post that nobody else on the team offers (very simply -- he's a lot stronger than Lance and a lot quicker than Zoubs).

But don't make him out to be the savious of the program either. Duke will be fine without him -- okay in the short run and excellent in the long run.

Just a few observations:

-- As for expectations for Patterson ... he does not have a very developed offensive game. He's not going to be a big scorer as a freshman. On the other hand, he's a born rebounder and a very good shotblocker. If he comes, I would "expect" his freshman numbers to look much like Shelden's (another raw offensive player): 8.2 ppg., 5.9 rpg., 1.8 blocks in 19.2 mpg. I'm not saying that PP would develop into the same kind of monster Shelden became -- I don't know if he has that kind or work ethic or will stay four years -- but in terms of physical ability, they are similar. Comparisons with Brand and/or Boozer are silly -- they were very different kinds of players who both arrived with MUCH more polished offensive post skills.

-- Don't be surprised to see Taylor King play a lot of post defense. He's a husky 6-7/6-8 (I've seen him listed both heights) with very long arms. I've seen him play a good deal of post defense on the AAU circuit and IMO, he's a better post defender than AAU teammate Kevin Love (who is a great offensive center with the best outlet pass since Walton). It would be fun to see him match up with somebody like Dion Thompson ... I think he could hold his own on the offensive end, then give Thompson fits chasing him at the other end. King, with his lack of foot quickness (I almost just wrote quickness, but while King may run relatively slowly, his hands are amazingly quick -- kind of like Jim Spanarkel), is actually better suited to defend in the post than on the wing.

-- I expect to see Lance Thomas made a significant jump in his level of play. His freshman year was disrupted twice -- once with an ankle injury and once with a lingering case of the flu. That's the kind of thing a veteran can play through, but it's tough on a freshman to sustain his learning curve when he's sidelined or just below par physically. Plus, I suspect a year in the weight room will help him immeasurably.

-- I expect Zoubek to be better too, but I think he's got a little longer to go. I think Patterson's decision will impact his minutes more than anybody else on the team ...

crote
05-15-2007, 11:49 AM
As others have pointed out, even if Patterson isn't as talented as some make him out to be he would still be huge addition just for depth purposes. Connecticut '04 ring a bell?

Plus, I'd also throw in toughness. We need some nastiness down low, someone who will make other teams work hard for boards and pay the price if they go inside. I don't see Singler or Thomas being that player. Z is a possibility, but I doubt it. From what I gather, though, Patterson fits that mold nicely.

Classof06
05-15-2007, 11:50 AM
Whether or not we get Patterson, I think Duke will be in a position to contend for a title within the next 2-3 seasons. That being said, I think having Patterson will quicken the process of becoming a contender. Zoubek will be good when it's all said and done, but he will not become a star overnight. I think Lance will make a bigger jump over this offseason than maybe anybody on the team and we'll need that. But at the end of the day, this team is missing a legitimate post presence and until Zoubek becomes what we think he can be, there's no getting around that need; it's a need I believe Patterson would satisfy very effectively.

To be fair, many of us are putting the same unrealistic expectations on Patterson that we did on Lance Thomas this time last year. Lance Thomas didn't have a bad freshman year whatsoever, but given the expectations many Duke fans had for him, there are probably many that would disagree with me. You can't expect Patterson to dominate right away when we've never seen him play a college-level game.

Contrarily, it's hard to judge Patterson's ability and say he's overrated when OJ Mayo is taking 90% of the shots on his HS team and every player on the floor is gunning in these HS all-star games. So, to be impartial to both sides, we as college bball fans obviously don't have an accurate grasp of what this kid can really do. However, I feel pretty good about his prospects if Krzyzewski has been after him this long and didn't go after one other post player in this year's recruiting class (and I am aware of Greg Monroe). Krzyzewski's giving this kid attention for a reason, and I'm willing to give Mike the benefit of the doubt.

Classof06
05-15-2007, 11:54 AM
Plus, I'd also throw in toughness. We need some nastiness down low, someone who will make other teams work hard for boards and pay the price if they go inside. I don't see Singler or Thomas being that player. Z is a possibility, but I doubt it. From what I gather, though, Patterson fits that mold nicely.

I agree with everything you said, but after watching Singler play a couple of times, I believe he has the competitive spirit and mean streak that Duke has been missing for the past couple of years. Jimmy Dykes and whoever else called the Jordan All-Star game on ESPN said the EXACT same thing. Patterson's addition, combined with Singler, Paulus' grit and Lance Thomas' enthusiasm would do wonders for this team. This is one of the reasons I'm so high on Singler besides his obvious skills.

mepanchin
05-15-2007, 12:23 PM
Patterson is actually probably taller than Boozer. Remember that while Boozer dominated at a college level, his draft stock severely slipped because scouts measured him at 6'7" with a moderate wing span.

Boston Dukie
05-15-2007, 12:26 PM
We have no idea how good PP will be in college, but he does seem to have a much higher talent level and mix of size and athleticism than Thomas or Zoubek.

We DO know what to expect from Zoubek and Thomas because we have seen them for a year.

Thomas needs to get much, much stronger, cut down on his fouls, cut down on turnovers, and fix his mid-range shot. This is a lot to ask for a kid to fix over one summer especially when thrown into a postion (the 5) that he is undersized for and not used to playing to begin with. I think Thomas will eventually be very good, but it could be his junior or even senior year. This is the benefit of recruiting a 4 year player.

In Zoubek, you have size and decent post moves (albeit very, very slow moves) and that is it. He needs to improve his strength, his hands, his handle, adjust to the pace of the game, work on his footwork, gain a better understanding on the defensive scheme, and fix his shot. Plus, he has no athleticism at all (how many 7-1 players go an ENTIRE season without dunking the ball?). This is a lot to ask a kid to fix over 1 summer. I worry he will never be a very good player, but hope I am wrong.

With all of the improvements we are hoping for from Thomas and Zoubek, the team is taking a huge risk by relying on this to happen. They absolutely need PP to lower this risk (giving them 3 players to bet on rather than 2), to give them more depth, and to provide a big upgrade in the size/athleticism department.

mepanchin
05-15-2007, 12:34 PM
I worry he will never be a very good player, but hope I am wrong.


Duke's history is full of players like Zoubek. Big men who did not play much their first year, but by their 2nd or 3rd year were legitimate productive offensive players. Erik Meek logged 70% of total minutes his senior year and contributed 10.3 points a game at a 116.5 efficiency. Greg Newton played 73.4% of the minutes his junior year and contributed 11.4 points at a 112.4 efficiency. These are not overwhelming numbers (as compared to, say, Brand's 99 season or Boozer's 02 season) but they are solid big man numbers. To add, they were both good defensively.

Zoubek will be fine. The guy has to be adjusting still even to just being 7'1", but a summer of weight lifting and just constantly learning about the game at this level and about his position will help him tremendously.

dkbaseball
05-15-2007, 12:55 PM
I don't find Meek or Newton to be particularly reassuring prototypes for Zoubs. Meek played as a senior only because the cupboard was a bit bare in the lost season of '94-'95. (Somebody was asleep at the recruiting switch for a while there -- it's really hard to believe that following a national championship our next two entering classes consisted of Parks, Meek, Collins and Tony Moore). Newton came to school touted as an unusually athletic four man. A very different type of player from Meek.

More apt comparisons would be Nessley, Palmer, Burgess, Domzalski, Christiansen and Thompson, none of whom ever played much. That said, I'm not down on Zoubs. The guy is huge, a real space eater, who can score when he gets the ball down low. Great work ethic. His contribution, I think, will hinge on how flexible the coaching staff is with defensive schemes. He can't be chasing guys all over the perimeter.

mepanchin
05-15-2007, 01:13 PM
Looking over the numbers for that 94-95 season, it was not Meek's fault that the team was 13-18. He had a very good season in spite of Duke's struggles (which were strange - we were a much better team than our record indicated that year). Looking over numbers of floor %, stop %, points produced per game, % of possessions, and offensive/defensive efficiency for individuals, Jeff Capel and Chris Collins were the biggest liabilities for that team. Capel had a 99 offensive efficiency and a 108 defensive efficiency while consuming 25% of our possessions and playing substantial minutes. Collins was even worse, with a 91 offensive efficiency and a 110 defensive efficiency consuming 17.5% of our possessions.

Cherokee Parks had a solid season, as did Langdon and Meek.

Maybe Domzalski is a better fit. Nonetheless, Domzalski had productive seasons at Duke, but sadly, his career was mostly marred by injury. It's hard to make a statistical comparison.

As a freshman, Zoubek logged some encouraging minutes. Offensively, he struggled. His floor % (chance to score whenever he tried) was only 47%, and his offensive rating was only 89, but while on the court he consumed 28.6% of the team's possessions (a very high number). If he fits more into the 18-20% range, you will probably see him producing a lot more offensively. Defensively, however, he was pretty solid. 66.9 stop%, and 87.5 defensive rating. Very good numbers, though in limited minutes. In more substantial minutes, I would expect those both to dip, but not substantially. Maybe a 93-95 defensive rating at worst - which is not great, but it is not awful, especially if his offense picks up a little in a more limited offensive role.

It's also worth noting that he is a pretty good rebounder as you'd expect from someone his size.

The Gordog
05-15-2007, 01:14 PM
Patterson has something that very few others have. He wins championships. His HS team won the WVA state championship three times. That indicates to me that he possesses that intangible factor that leads his team to victories. That's more important than many of the physical and athletic factors that make a great player.

It will be a big disappointment if PP doesn't come to Duke. Duke will be very good in 2007-08 without him. He is not THE savior. But he is a real winner and could make Duke a terrific team in the coming seasons.

McClure won 4 State Championships. He's a gamer for sure but at the next level it means little.

SMO
05-15-2007, 01:27 PM
This reminds me of something Shaq said early in his NBA career along the lines of:

"I've won at every level, except college and pro."

I think given his HS championship we should recruit his entire HS team. You can mark us down for the next 4 NCAA championships.


Patterson has something that very few others have. He wins championships. His HS team won the WVA state championship three times. That indicates to me that he possesses that intangible factor that leads his team to victories. That's more important than many of the physical and athletic factors that make a great player.

It will be a big disappointment if PP doesn't come to Duke. Duke will be very good in 2007-08 without him. He is not THE savior. But he is a real winner and could make Duke a terrific team in the coming seasons.

rsvman
05-15-2007, 02:25 PM
McClure won 4 State Championships. He's a gamer for sure but at the next level it means little.

This is blatantly unfair. McClure IS a winner, even at the college level. McClure is the "glue guy" who contributes all the intangibles; he gets the extra offensive rebound when we really need it, the extra loose ball that changes the outcome of the game, the extra blocked shot when it's tight, etc. He plays like a winner, even in college.

In the midseason when we won five ACC games in a row, McClure was an important factor in each and every one of them. Things changed after he injured his knee in the Boston College game. If his knee heels up properly and he gets back to 100%, you will again see McClure do every little thing the team needs him to do.

awich1
05-16-2007, 01:08 AM
the problems for duke next year are the same as this past year- even more pronounced will be the obvious lack of an inside game. one thing about zoubek is that while i agree he has some promise, he has to be able to stay on the floor- it seemed like every time he stepped on the floor he had 2 fouls before he'd worked up a sweat. thomas is not big enough to be an effective 5. we're going to have even more trouble matching up with the hansboroughs of the world than last year. the other issues were lack of defense against athletic back courts and lack of back-up for paulus. hopefully nolan smith will help in both of those areas but i don't think enough. we have a lot of talent, but too much of it is at the same positions. missing out on patterson is the difference between a really good top 10 type team and another relatively disappointing year in my opinion.

Lulu
05-16-2007, 05:06 AM
ugh, we have become so spoiled.

Lord Ash
05-16-2007, 06:32 AM
I don't think it is spoiled to say "I would like our team to have a center who has shown he has decent footwork and can score," especially when our team is at the caliber of Duke. IMHO the point guard and center positions are key to having a good team, and at the moment we only have one of those positions covered.

I am afraid next year won't be too flashy. Zoubek hasn't shown me, at least, that he will be able to shoulder the load on a championship caliber team, and Thomas simply isn't a center, and asking him to BE a center would be unfair. We have to hope that the year after is the year we get back into the title hunt.

dball
05-16-2007, 06:54 AM
Patterson is actually probably taller than Boozer. Remember that while Boozer dominated at a college level, his draft stock severely slipped because scouts measured him at 6'7" with a moderate wing span.

Boozer was 6'9 1/2" with shoes and a 7' 2 1/4" wingspan (which is wide).
Dunleavy, for example, was the same height with a 3 1/4 inch shorter wingspan. Uche Okafur, Yao Ming, Nene, Melvin Ely and maybe 1 or 2 other guys were a bit wider. Even then, Boozer's reach is longer than Nene's.

Reach is usually the most important since you're rarely using the top of your head in b-ball, except when some goof bounces it off your noggin in the rookie game.;)

Olympic Fan
05-16-2007, 08:45 AM
You are absolutely right about reach being more important than height ... you do play with your arms extended, not with the top of your head.

However, for the average human being the breath of his reach is almost exactly equal to his height -- that's the point of Leonardo Da Vinci's famous drawing of the man with his arms extended inscribed inside a circle.

A few unique individuals have longer arms than usual and have a significantly longer reach than their height. That translates into a higher "reaching Height"

I haven't seen their reach measured, but I've seen both Kyle Singler and Taylor King play numerous times and both have exceptionally long arms -- I'm sure their reach is significantly longer than their height (especially King!).

But Patrick Patterson's arms are even longer -- I would guess that he has the longest arms I've seen since Sam Perkins -- and he's the all-time chimp ... er, champ.

dball
05-16-2007, 09:22 AM
You are absolutely right about reach being more important than height ... you do play with your arms extended, not with the top of your head.

However, for the average human being the breath of his reach is almost exactly equal to his height -- that's the point of Leonardo Da Vinci's famous drawing of the man with his arms extended inscribed inside a circle.

A few unique individuals have longer arms than usual and have a significantly longer reach than their height. That translates into a higher "reaching Height"


Not sure if Leo relates to this since there are few average humans in the NBA. Draft camp measures the reach (which you appear to call 'reaching height') and wing span (which would be the da Vinci picture). Because of differences in body types, Boozer has a higher reach than Nene but a shorter wingspan. My response was to the notion that Boozer's wing span was somehow 'moderate' when it is indeed a good deal greater than his height.
I suspect a significant portion of NBA players have above average wingspan (meaning greater than their already above average height).

The Gordog
05-16-2007, 09:38 AM
This is blatantly unfair. McClure IS a winner, even at the college level. McClure is the "glue guy" who contributes all the intangibles; he gets the extra offensive rebound when we really need it, the extra loose ball that changes the outcome of the game, the extra blocked shot when it's tight, etc. He plays like a winner, even in college.

In the midseason when we won five ACC games in a row, McClure was an important factor in each and every one of them. Things changed after he injured his knee in the Boston College game. If his knee heels up properly and he gets back to 100%, you will again see McClure do every little thing the team needs him to do.

I agree with everything you said, I just don't think it automatically means we will win because he's on the team.

CMS2478
05-16-2007, 10:02 AM
I agree with everything you said, I just don't think it automatically means we will win because he's on the team.

I won all my t-ball games when I was 5, but that didn't guarantee success when I moved up to fast-pitch......we were awful. ;)

ScreechTDX
05-16-2007, 10:14 AM
Zoubek is extremely clumsy around the basket and has horrible hands. When he gets the ball in the post he travels/offensive fouls 2/3 of the time.

He needs playing time to get better at those things, nothing in the offseason is going to make that miraculously better. Lance in the player with the real potential and i expect him to be 10X better next year. He's already got the mid range game, he just doesnt take the shots. In addition, once he gets stronger he will get more confidence at going for the baset and cleaning up everyone's garbage.

We will have a good season without PP. But, we will lack a nasty post scoring threat for at least 2 more years.:mad:

RelativeWays
05-16-2007, 10:20 AM
I am very optimistic and confident with the 07-08 line-up we have, Patterson or no Patterson. Those who are hoping to dance on the casket of Duke basketball should have gotten their jollies last season, they will be very disappointed next season.

johnb
05-16-2007, 11:21 AM
Zoubek is extremely clumsy around the basket and has horrible hands. When he gets the ball in the post he travels/offensive fouls 2/3 of the time.

He needs playing time to get better at those things, nothing in the offseason is going to make that miraculously better. Lance in the player with the real potential and i expect him to be 10X better next year. He's already got the mid range game, he just doesnt take the shots. In addition, once he gets stronger he will get more confidence at going for the baset and cleaning up everyone's garbage.

We will have a good season without PP. But, we will lack a nasty post scoring threat for at least 2 more years.:mad:


Zoubs had trouble getting his footwork organized while posting up, but I don't see him as clumsy, and I thought his "hands" were fine. In fact, he struck me as unusually smooth and quick for a 7 footer.

Both of those guys have the potential for super sophomore years.

If the coaching staff wants PP, then I'd be happy to see him show up in September. But there are lots of ways that it could work out just as well or better if he decides to go to Florida or Kentucky.

jawk24
05-16-2007, 11:28 AM
If you honestly believe your comment about being fine with Zoubek and Thomas, then you need to be committed.

thebur
05-16-2007, 11:36 AM
I agree 100%, it would be great to have Patterson but without him we have decent size, and we have a coaching staff that has made some pretty nasty runs with teams that utilized a similar amount of size to what we would have without Patterson. The 1999 Final Four team with Taymon and Burgess averaging a combined 25 minutes a game was similar in size, but made a great run. We will see how Thomas develops, I think like many others he will make some significant strides this year, and Zoubek will become reliable. If not a double digit scorer yet he will be at least a solid contributor.

All that being said, Patrick would take us to the next level and I really hope that this Alex Legion quote is just him having some fun and throwing the trail off... stranger things have happened in recruiting. C'mon down to Durham Mr. Patterson, let's win some trophies.

Patrick Yates
05-16-2007, 11:45 AM
Given his size and athleticism, Duke needs may be hurting us. DeCourcy's article on the front page were chilling to me. He believes that PP, who is apparanly more athletic than I believed, may want to work on his J and transition to SF while in College. At Duke, that is hightly unlikely.

At best he could play a Shane type PF at Duke, but given the way recruiting has gone recently, He could be chained to post for 3-4 years. Given PP's already maxed out frame, he cannot get big enough to excell the way that Shel, or Booz did, over time. For him to have a career, he needs to be able to move to the wing, and Duke has developed a habit of making kids play up a position size wize, rather than down, which PP needs/wants.

We need him in the post, almost exclusively. If he does not want to play exclusively in the post, then we are indeed a bad fit for him. On a going forward basis we are very crowded at the SF, WF, and WG, which are largely interchangeable under K. Any player capable of playing more in the post will spend the majority of his minutes there.

Patrick Yates

(say what you will about PP's motives, but stringing Duke along and then ditching us at the end will make him a folk hero in some circles)

mepanchin
05-16-2007, 12:46 PM
If you honestly believe your comment about being fine with Zoubek and Thomas, then you need to be committed.

I mean, obviously it depends what you mean by fine. With or without Patterson, I didn't think we would be competing for a national championship next season, but I thought with a sophomore Patterson and a mostly unchanged lineup from what we'll have next year, plus the prospect of a freshman Monroe, we had a very good chance in 2008-2009.

Now that is a far more unclear prospect because we will be depending on guys to improve who fit a different archetype than Patterson does. Occasionally I read posts on various forums of people thinking that without Patterson, we'll be middle of the pack ACC and a bubble team. Surely you can't think that is the case? Thomas and Zoubek are maligned precisely because we have had guys like Shelden Williams, Carlos Boozer, Elton Brand, and yes, even Josh McRoberts who came in big, strong and fairly well prepared to play at this level. Zoubek and Thomas resemble players we had before the renaissance in 1998 who need a bit more seasoning, but turn out to be excellent players who are efficient at both ends of the floor, experienced and full of energy and spirit.

My gut feeling is, without Patterson, our offense is much better this coming year than it was last year, but our defense may suffer a little (that really will depend on how many minutes Zoubek can play). After some seasoning, Zoubek/Thomas will show a noticeable amount of improvement. Then, in 09 (hopefully) we land Monroe who can then learn from experienced and skilled forwards to improve a great deal over his freshman year. I still think next year we are #2 or possibly #3 in the ACC, and a potential 2-4 seed with a good chance at an exciting tournament run if we are playing well and get a good draw. I also still think with some luck (no injuries, etc) and some recruiting luck, we can compete for a national championship in 09.

ACCBBallFan
05-16-2007, 01:58 PM
Zoubs had trouble getting his footwork organized while posting up, but I don't see him as clumsy, and I thought his "hands" were fine. In fact, he struck me as unusually smooth and quick for a 7 footer.
.

You are both right. Zoubek's hands with respect to catching the ball were fine. With respect to protecting the ball and holding it high rather than bringing it down where Wojo could reach it and knock it loose, Zoubek needs to lost that habit.

MrBisonDevil
05-16-2007, 02:14 PM
Match Duke talent vs. every other ACC team. Match Duke talent against every other D1 NCAA team. We match up nicely.

Duke is blessed to have 6 kids coming back who started more than 10 games and averaged more than 15mpg each. We carry over experience into '07-'08. How many games did Duke lose by a few points? Experience will erase similar loses in '07-'08. Also, Duke lost 1 player and gained (at least) 3 All-Americans. I'll take that sway any year. IMO, Duke has improved. :)

I think we will improve by 5-9 games (including ACC & NCAA tourneys). I don't have any worries about '07-'08 (not one). Duke will be fine and continue to be hated because of our success... :D

ron mckernan
05-16-2007, 03:43 PM
First and foremost, this thread needs bumped up above all the PP threads. Zoubek & Thomas are both gonna be wayyyy better with a year of strength training, coaching, practice, and game experience.

But, I was thinking...if you have to play smallball, next year might be the year to do it. Hansbrough's the notable exception, but next year will be missing a lot of good bigs and heavy on guards. No Oden, Durant, Brandan Wright, Julian Wright, Aaron Grey, Noah, Horford, Randolph Morris, BC's suspended shot-blocker. Maybe no Thaddeus Young, Hibbert, USC & Wash. big guys. Kevin Love's good, but a freshman. I'm sure there will be some new stars at PF & C, but no one of the Oden/Durant/Wright/Hibbert variety.

So, whereas last year, sneaking into the Final 4 was impossible without going through at least one stud big man, next year could look very different.

ScreechTDX
05-16-2007, 04:07 PM
Up for Zoubek and Lance becoming the "Danger Duo" in '07-'08.

freedevil
05-16-2007, 09:22 PM
I would like to see K let Lance display his offensive skills.

I hate the people on IC (I'm vomitting even invoking their input), but every now and then they have a point - many a big man has been relegated to setting picks, rebounding, and taking charges while at Duke. Let Lance put the ball on the floor, and let's not rely on two people to get all our points.

Go DUKE!

ACCBBallFan
05-17-2007, 07:46 AM
First and foremost, this thread needs bumped up above all the PP threads. Zoubek & Thomas are both gonna be wayyyy better with a year of strength training, coaching, practice, and game experience.

But, I was thinking...if you have to play smallball, next year might be the year to do it. Hansbrough's the notable exception, but next year will be missing a lot of good bigs and heavy on guards. No Oden, Durant, Brandan Wright, Julian Wright, Aaron Grey, Noah, Horford, Randolph Morris, BC's suspended shot-blocker. Maybe no Thaddeus Young, Hibbert, USC & Wash. big guys. Kevin Love's good, but a freshman. I'm sure there will be some new stars at PF & C, but no one of the Oden/Durant/Wright/Hibbert variety.

So, whereas last year, sneaking into the Final 4 was impossible without going through at least one stud big man, next year could look very different.I agree with you. As far as the weakened ACC despite what some UNC fans are saying on their boards Duke will finish above 500.

It is not even a given that UNC will again sweep Duke who improved more than any ACC team in net adds minus nets subtractions with Singler Smith and King minus Josh. UNC has Graves minus Wright minus Terry minus Wes Miller.

But even if you concede 2 losses to UNC where would the other 6 losses come from?

Playing MD twice (lost Strawberry Ibekwe, Mike Jones, their 7 footer and Parrish Brown);

Playing NCS twice could be close (lost Atsur and gained a forward)

Playing UVA twice (lost Singletary JR Reynolds and Cain, not sure what they gained) and won’t have the favorable ACC unbalanced schedule they had last year

Playing Miami twice which negates the not conceded UNC losses

Playing BC at Home (lost Dudley and Marshall and Sean Williams and Duke beat them twice last year);
Playing Clemson at Home (lost Mays and one of their guards and finished behind Duke last year)
Playing GT at Home could be close (lost Crittenden, Young and Mario West, get Lewis clinch back and a forward)
Play @ FSU (Lost Thornton, former JUCO Jerel Allen and possibly Mims not sure what they gained)
Play @ VA Tech (lost Coleman Collins, Dowdell, Gordon, Sailes, Krabbendan and a recruit reneged)
Play @ WF (lost Visser and Drum gained a forward)

So hard to imagine Duke not finishing in top third of ACC even with small ball.

As you say, lots of non-ACC top teams also lost more than they gained, but Duke's NCAA prospects likely involved not getting matched up against a team with dominant bigs and ability to live or die by the 3, but by then Zoubek, Lance, the three recruits et all will have gotten PT by default and presumably will be more ready than last year.

Boston Dukie
05-17-2007, 10:00 AM
To be clear, even in the absolute best case, Zoubekis no Burgess.

Burgess had his problems, but he was the #1 or #2 rated highschool player, almost went directly to the NBA, and was much more athletic and polished than Zoubek. His confidence took a hit when he met Brand and Battier, but he was worlds better than Zoubek.

I don't think it was a mistake by the Duke staff to miss out on Patterson (if he is more comfortable somewhere else, he should go somewhere else, and I hope he does well), but it was a huge mistake by the staff to be left with Zoubek as our only legitimate #5. They had to know McRoberts was leaving (or highly likely) and I don't understand why they didn't have other recruits in the pipeline. Especially after watching Zoubek play this past year, he needs a ton of work, and in a best case is a decent player in a couple of years.

He is very slow and clumbsy, and his post moves are robotic. He is 7-1 and didn't dunk the ball the entire year! I bet that is the first time in the last 20 years, that an ACC player 7 ft or taller who played as many minutesd as Zoubek did went the whole year without dunking the ball.

This team really lacks athleticism as well - with Paulus, Scheyer, McClure, King, and Zoubek all sub-par athletes.

I think Lance Thomas will be very good, and will surprise people, but he is just too small to be our biggest player on the court.

I can only hope this means we get 2 real inside players (Monroe and some one else) next year.

This will be small ball like never before!

10B13
05-17-2007, 11:45 AM
I seem to recall that he had at least one and maybe two dunks last year, but couldn't identify which games they might have been.

In any event, he needs serious agility drills more than anything else, not just with his feet, but his hands.;)

SilkyJ
05-17-2007, 11:54 AM
I don't think it was a mistake by the Duke staff to miss out on Patterson (if he is more comfortable somewhere else, he should go somewhere else, and I hope he does well), but it was a huge mistake by the staff to be left with Zoubek as our only legitimate #5. They had to know McRoberts was leaving (or highly likely) and I don't understand why they didn't have other recruits in the pipeline. Especially after watching Zoubek play this past year, he needs a ton of work, and in a best case is a decent player in a couple of years.



I said something similar on another thread, and forgot to mention that we DID have boateng AND jamal. Before they transfered. Boateng would have been a legit 5 and jamal, while a more natural fit to guard the 4, could have spelled at the 5 with his tenacity and bulk.

johnb
05-17-2007, 12:26 PM
It would be nice to have a set of 6'11" bruisers around whom we could assemble all of our wings.

Unfortunately, there aren't many legitimate 5's in college who would earn 20 minutes/game at Duke. If there were, they would have ben placed on our radar screen, and we likely would have recruited them. When we do recruit a 7 footer who is fairly athletic, they don't get PT since they aren't as effective as our shorter guys. I'm not sure that Zoubek will get more than 10 minutes a game next year, and he won't if he doesn't work on his footwork, but--with a few years of work--I bet he gets 10 minutes per game in the NBA, and I think he has more potential than either Boateng and Boykin.

Classof06
05-17-2007, 01:22 PM
I seem to recall that he had at least one and maybe two dunks last year, but couldn't identify which games they might have been.

In any event, he needs serious agility drills more than anything else, not just with his feet, but his hands.;)

For being 7 foot, I think Zoubek is extremely agile, on the defensive side of the floor at least. I think it's just a matter of him getting used to the speed of the game. In HS, he could probably post up, get the ball, and then think about what he was going to do for a second. In college, that second turns to less than half a second, and you could tell Zoubek struggled with the physicality and the speed. But if we're talking natural God-given agility, then Zoubek's fine for his size. Now we need to see him add strength.

phaedrus
05-17-2007, 01:30 PM
i'm no watzone, but from what i can gather greg monroe is more of an inside/outside player than people here seem to realize. he will not be a shelden or elton type bruiser. more like brandan wright with a jump shot, which is still great defensively but not exactly a low-post anchor on the offensive end.

mepanchin
05-17-2007, 01:47 PM
This team really lacks athleticism as well - with Paulus, Scheyer, McClure, King, and Zoubek all sub-par athletes.


Thomas, Nelson, Henderson and Smith are all great athletes! I bet Henderson and Nelson see more PT than any of those guys but Paulus anyway.

For all the crap McClure gets for being unathletic, he is probably the best defender on the team. He is gritty, and has great energy. If he's healthy, he's a superb role player/glue guy.

Scheyer will, hopefully, be a 6th man. Despite late season struggles, he was our most efficient offensive player last year and is a definite asset with a year of experience.

But I agree that we really should not have to play Paulus and Scheyer together much. Together they are a bit of a defensive liability - if just 1 is on the floor, we can be ok covering for them. Hey, they are both already better defenders than JJ was in any of his 4 years.

Boston Dukie
05-17-2007, 08:07 PM
I think you are right on all counts

I love McClure, but did see a huge drop-off after he hurt his knee. Let's hope that we get the pre-knee injury McClure next year, for the whole year

I also agree on having Paulus and Scheyer together for long stretches is tough - it was just brutal to watch those 2 try to defend the peremiter at the end of each tight game (which we usually lost).

The one guy no one is talking about is Marty. He is a great athlete, very quick, great hops, strong, etc (in the NC State game and the NCAA game, he was great). I would like to see him get 20+ mins a game, especially since we are going small.

Marty, Nelson, Smith, Singler, Henderson, and Thomas are all above average athletes, and Henderson, Nelson, and Smith are way above. So I hope this offsets the other guys I mentioned before.