PDA

View Full Version : This year vs. last year



mgtr
03-05-2010, 11:47 PM
I haven't seen this point raised here. If it has, I apologize and ask the mods to just deep-six it.

Looking at this years team (at least of late), what we have is really a more experienced last years team minus Paulus, Hendo, and Williams. The three freshmen add something, but they certainly don't come close to replacing those guys. Miles is better this year than last, but not a great deal better. So, it seems to me, that either we have a team this year which is not a whole lot better than the team we had last year, or the five starters have improved so much that we are a better team this year.
OK, now that I have set up my straw man, I guess I need to knock it down. But I cannot. I do think we are better this year than last, but not lightyears better. In fact, the main way that we are better, I think, is less in individual skills and more in integrated play. Coack K probably gets about 98% of the credit for that.
After that sort of dismal lead-in, I am optimistic that we can go further in the NCAAs than in recent years. I will be disheartened if we cannot. And yes, I have my March Madness on Directv all ordered and setup.

BryanCenterBlues
03-05-2010, 11:58 PM
last year we were small, this year we are BIG.

I think being taller and being able to get more rebounds is what makes us a better team than last year.

west_coast_devil
03-06-2010, 01:21 AM
last year we were small, this year we are BIG.

I think being taller and being able to get more rebounds is what makes us a better team than last year.

agreed..... not to mention that the four to five guys playing in the 4/5 slots enable Duke to sustain through fouls trouble and match up against teams known for their "interior strength". I'm feeling a little more optimistic this March then in the past several years

DevilHorns
03-06-2010, 01:25 AM
agreed..... not to mention that the four to five guys playing in the 4/5 slots enable Duke to sustain through fouls trouble and match up against teams known for their "interior strength". I'm feeling a little more optimistic this March then in the past several years

I know this is mentioned a lot----- how we have so many fouls to give bc we have so many bigs.

I think it makes us kind of reckless. I cant believe Mason at this point in the season is still going for the steal after the turnover. I think its been successful maybe 2 times the entire year (and probably 20 fouls, at least?).

Dont get me wrong, its great to have security, but I hope players arent playing with that mindset of ''fouls to give'' bc in the end, we'll feed the opponents charity stripe if we go too far.

mo.st.dukie
03-06-2010, 01:30 AM
The guards spots are a lot more concrete this year. There were a lot of changes made during the ACC portion of last year's schedule in regards to the guard positions. Clearly our PG play is much better and the role is more defined than last year (going from Nolan to Paulus to Scheyer). Then of course the size is a lot different. A lot of times the only player 6'8 or taller that we had on the floor was Singler. It was literally a 5 out-none in offense. This year we usually have 3 players 6'8 or taller on the floor at all times.

Last year the first players off the bench were for the most part McClure, Paulus, Zoubek, and occassionally Williams (of course he switched roles with Nolan late in the year). So in terms of offensive production the bench play is relatively even with Dawkins playing the role that Elliot did last year. But instead of 6'6 and 6'1 being the first off the bench we are now bringing 6'10 and 6'10 off the bench. Personally if I had to choose between having guard depth or post depth I'd want to have post depth due to the physical nature of post play (of course having overall depth is ideal).

So the biggest differences come in the size, PG play, and experience. However, our offense is still based around 3 players and taking a lot of jumpshots although the great offensive rebounding and lesser turnovers causes for a much more efficient offense this year.

AZLA
03-06-2010, 03:17 AM
Zoubs this year is a consistent rebounding machine on both ends; sets great picks and dishes with confidence. Tons more energy which is making a distinct difference. Scheyer is shooting a bit quicker (which I believe he always should do more of) and Thomas' defense is the best its been. Nolan is more deft at driving, hitting floaters and key outside shots. Next year is going to be an amazing year for him I believe (and maybe this year in the tourney). Without G and Elliot, there's a slashing, above the rim element that's been somewhat replaced in the post and wings with the Plumlees (I'd like to see more of).

And lastly, the key difference...

COACH K has the magic and new dry erase board :D -- complete with exacting details of the home court to avoid any confusion of where players are supposed to be and do...

Bob Green
03-06-2010, 03:55 AM
I believe this year's team is better than last year's team. Of course, I am one of those irritating optimist. Here is my rationale:

1. This year's Big 3 are better than last season's Big 3. Scheyer, Singler, and Smith combine to average 53.3 points, 13.2 rebounds, and 10.4 assists per game. The three turn it over only 5.4 times per game.

Last season, Henderson, Singler, and Scheyer combined to average 47.9 points, 16.2 rebounds, and 7.7 assists per game. They turned the ball over 6.2 times per game.

This year's Big 3 score more points and take better care of the ball.

2. This season we rebound the ball better than last season. This year our rebounding margin is +6. Last year our season rebounding margin was +2.73.

3. This year we haven't lost two games in a row and are 20-0 at home and on neutral courts combined. Last year we had one stretch when we lost three out of four games including the humiliating loss at Clemson and a 14 point loss in Cameron Indoor Stadium.

4. Taking a look at starters four and five. The 2010 versions of Zoubek and Thomas are much improved over the 2009 versions. Zoubek has come on strong and is currently the team's leading rebounder at 7.1 per game. His ability to avoid foul trouble and stay on the court has significantly improved. Thomas is a vocal leader, hustles all over the place, and keeps defenses honest by knocking down a jump shot now and then.

5. Finally, let's take a look at bench production. Last year the bench contributed 20.2 points per game. This year the bench is averaging 16.7 points per game.

While last year's bench scored a few more points than this year's has to date, I am confident this year's bench players are more capable of exploding in the post season. Miles Plumlee, Mason Plumlee, and Andre Dawkins are all capable of walking onto the court and delivering a double digit scoring performance. Miles and Mason have double-double potential.

I'm not sure whether or not my points will sway anyone's opinion, but it is my strong opinion this team has the capability to make a deep run in the NCAAT.

CDu
03-06-2010, 05:40 AM
There are several key reasons why we're doing better this year than last year (in no particular order):

1. We're bigger, which has made us a much better rebounding team and a much better defensive team inside.

2. Our six returning players are substantially better and more experienced than last year. Zoubek, Smith, and Scheyer are way better, while Singler, Thomas, and Miles are noticeably better too.

3. We have a lot more frontcourt depth this year, which means we can maintain our size on the court.

4. We've had really good fortune in that our lack of perimeter depth hasn't mattered, basically because our big three have been so consistently good and so consistently able to stay on the floor.

5. Most of the rest of the good teams we faced or teams that gave us trouble last year got substantially worse. UNC, Clemson, FSU, Wake, UConn, Miami, and BC all had very big losses. That means we didn't necessarily have to get better to end up with as good or better results.

oldnavy
03-06-2010, 07:25 AM
One thing I haven't seen brought up is chemistry. This team seems to have a better feel for each other than last year’s team. Both on offense and defense. I don't know if they communicate better, but they all seem to know what each other is doing. Only rarely will you see a play where it looked like one of the players crossed another player up. Our help defense has been very good as well, and the boys all just seem to have fun playing together. Can't really throw a number or quantify that, but I see it.

Another thing is Zoubek. He has actually been able to stay on the court for extended periods of time this year for the first time in his career. His offensive rebounding is a tremendous pressure release for our guys. Knowing that he is under the basket and has a very good chance to rebound a miss has to help the confidence of our shooters. We have won games this year that we would have obviously lost last year because of second chances. Zoub has had an outstanding impact on this team, and he just seems to be getting more and more confident each game.

K mentioned in an interview that he has not had a game this year where he got angry with this team. He explained that he gets angry when players do not do what they know they should do or when they do not give effort. He mentioned that this year that has not been a problem and that he really, likes this team. I think that speaks to the chemistry aspect between the players and the coaching staff.

GODUKEGO
03-06-2010, 08:10 AM
And lastly, the key difference...

COACH K has the magic and new dry erase board :D -- complete with exacting details of the home court to avoid any confusion of where players are supposed to be and do...

I think your key difference is right on!! Like to add the blue ACC just in case they forget what conference they are playing. I think the teams are very close to each other. Very different but close. We were ranked #1 last year even if it was for a brief time. Both years however I think we are to dependent on the outside shot.

gumbomoop
03-06-2010, 08:58 AM
I believe this year's team is better than last year's team. Of course, I am one of those irritating optimist. Here is my rationale:

1. This year's Big 3 are better than last season's Big 3. Scheyer, Singler, and Smith combine to average 53.3 points, 13.2 rebounds, and 10.4 assists per game. The three turn it over only 5.4 times per game.

Last season, Henderson, Singler, and Scheyer combined to average 47.9 points, 16.2 rebounds, and 7.7 assists per game. They turned the ball over 6.2 times per game.

This year's Big 3 score more points and take better care of the ball.

Actually I sense that those many of us who are optimists have become somewhat, but not entirely, less irritating by now. Despite the disappointment at Md, I sense that at least a few skeptics are willing to say this team has been a pleasant surprise.

Among the pleasant surprises is ...... a surprise: Of course we miss G's brilliant individual fluidity, but overall team fluidity on O is substantially improved this year. Two reasons, I surmise: (1) G's departure opened things up for NS to blossom, to take and make some key baskets [a few real daggers], and to develop chem esp with JS. (2) G's intermittent brilliance depended on one-on-one moves, great athleticism. But a bit too often when he had the ball on the wing, his teammates tended to wait to see what G would do. Nobody's doing much standing/waiting in this year's motion O.

So, our guys don't always look fluid individually, lacking G's powerful hops and Kobe-like-hang-jumper, but the overall O is a whole lot smoother than it appears, and than last year's. It's an unusual team, whose strengths are not visually striking, and therefore underappreciated. The most obvious example is JS's non-athletic-looking athleticism.

Exiled_Devil
03-06-2010, 09:00 AM
I haven't seen this point raised here. If it has, I apologize and ask the mods to just deep-six it.

Looking at this years team (at least of late), what we have is really a more experienced last years team minus Paulus, Hendo, and Williams. The three freshmen add something, but they certainly don't come close to replacing those guys. Miles is better this year than last, but not a great deal better. So, it seems to me, that either we have a team this year which is not a whole lot better than the team we had last year, or the five starters have improved so much that we are a better team this year.
OK, now that I have set up my straw man, I guess I need to knock it down. But I cannot. I do think we are better this year than last, but not lightyears better. In fact, the main way that we are better, I think, is less in individual skills and more in integrated play. Coack K probably gets about 98% of the credit for that.
After that sort of dismal lead-in, I am optimistic that we can go further in the NCAAs than in recent years. I will be disheartened if we cannot. And yes, I have my March Madness on Directv all ordered and setup.

Even considering this question falls into one of the great flasehoods of fandom - the equivalence of sporting seasons.

Last season's team is irrelevant to this year's team, because the entire conference and nation are not the same. You can't compare the 2009 team to the 2010 team because they are playing different schedules with different teams and different players.

Just looking at the Duke team and saying "They lost this piece and didn't gain much in another piece" forgets that this description is equally applicable to the other 300+ teams in division I.

I can understand the urge to find some certainty in the future by looking at the teams of the past, but that is not the way that games and play works - the outcome is always in question. To be the first to say it for March 2010, "That's why they play the game."

On a side-rant, I think that one of the biggest mistakes fans make in evaluating teams' development is underestimating the development of individuals through the summer and in the season. I think it is because we don't see anything outside of the games, so we think that games are the only part of the process that exists. With that, the idea that the big 3 are much better than last year is simple assumption to make. (But, to my overall point, not very good to measure because there are too many unaccounted variables to make the comparison worthwhile.)

mgtr
03-06-2010, 09:30 AM
I was not trying to compare last season and this season, I was merely commenting that the basis of this year's team is very to similar to last year's. This ties in with Jumbo's +/- analyses for this year, where he has pointed out that sometimes the most successful combo is the one he labels "experience." And I agree that some players do develop a lot between seasons.

Olympic Fan
03-06-2010, 10:39 AM
Interesting that the team hit rock bottom in 2007 -- some bottom ... 22-11, 8-8 ACC and an NCAA bid (you think UNC or UCLA this year would take that?).

But the 2007 lost its best player -- 2007 second-team All-ACC Josh McRoberts jumped to the NBA.

Duke got better in 2008 -- 28-6, No. 9 in the final AP poll and two postseason wins (one in the ACC, one in the NCAA) after no postseason wins in 2007.

That team lost its best player -- first-team All-ACC DeMarcus Nelson graduated.

Duke got better in 2009 -- 30-7, ACC championship, No. 6 in the final AP poll and five postseason wins (three in the ACC; two in the NCAA).

THAT team lost its best player -- first-team All-ACC Gerald Henderson.

I would argue that this team is better -- one win from an ACC regular season championship and currently a stronger contender for the No. 1 seed in the NCAA Tournament.

That's three seasons of steady improvement ... and in each case, Duke has to replace its best player (among other parts).

It just goes to show that it's not always as simple as counting returning players and impact freshmen. If Duke is better this season (and I think they are) it's because Scheyer, Smith and Zoubek are significantly better than ever for.

And I also think it's interesting that the haters like to taunt that K doesn't develop players, yet when Scheyer makes first-team All-ACC this year, it will be the second time in three years that K has had a senior who never made all-acc (even third team) before wind up on the first team. And in the other year, he had a junior who had never even been third-team All-ACC make first team.

PS I hope the trend continues ... Duke will lose the best player on this year's team (Scheyer). Could K have a fourth straight year when he loses his best player and gets better the next year??

Kedsy
03-06-2010, 02:02 PM
Even considering this question falls into one of the great flasehoods of fandom - the equivalence of sporting seasons.

This is soooooooooooo true. Especially in college sports you really can't compare just by subtracting players who left and adding freshmen. It never ever works that way.


On a side-rant, I think that one of the biggest mistakes fans make in evaluating teams' development is underestimating the development of individuals through the summer and in the season.

I think this is even more important than your first point. College players often improve and mature so much that they are not the same player as the year before, even if they look the same and have the same name.


I was not trying to compare last season and this season, I was merely commenting that the basis of this year's team is very to similar to last year's.

Except you are and it's not. This team plays a completely different offense than last season and also a completely different defense. The average height on the floor is much taller and the frontcourt/backcourt scoring mix is much different (since Kyle is now primarily a backcourt player and last year he was primarily frontcourt). The names and faces are similar. The teams are not.


That's three seasons of steady improvement ... and in each case, Duke has to replace its best player (among other parts).

Exactly. If you have returning upperclassmen this is almost always the case.


It just goes to show that it's not always as simple as counting returning players and impact freshmen. If Duke is better this season (and I think they are) it's because Scheyer, Smith and Zoubek are significantly better than ever for.

Miles Plumlee as well. To say he is "better... but not a great deal better" (as the original poster did) is ridiculous. He may not be producing as much as he did in the beginning of this season, but last season by this time he didn't play at all.


PS I hope the trend continues ... Duke will lose the best player on this year's team (Scheyer). Could K have a fourth straight year when he loses his best player and gets better the next year??

Personally, I think it's going to happen again. Obviously time will tell.