PDA

View Full Version : MBB: Duke vs. Purdue Pre-Game and In-Game Thread



Pages : [1] 2 3

sagegrouse
03-21-2010, 07:23 PM
Not until Friday. According to ESPN, Duke-Purdue is the late game, scheduled to start at 9:57PM ET. (Fortunately, in MDT it starts at a more civilized hour.)

Here are some obvious questions:

1. With the loss of Robbie Hummel (6-8), Purdue only starts one player taller than 6-4 (6-10 JaJuan Johnson). Can Duke continue to exploit a size advantage over smaller teams.

2. Reliant Stadium will likely have difficult sight lines for shooting (football field, raised floor, etc.). Can Duke improve on its 3-pt shooting over the 3-17 against Cal?

3. What's the potential for a Scheyer resurgence now that he has passed 2,000 points?

sagegrouse

Dukeknights
03-21-2010, 07:27 PM
1.) JaJuan Johnson is the only guy taller then 6'4(he is 6'10 like you mentioned) but he is VERY good and athletic. With that said i think we beast them down low.

2.) Jon Scheyer will go off Friday night so the 3-pointers made will increase.(he takes more threes than anyone else.)

3.) read #2

i think we beat Purdue with ease...who will Kramer guard? Smith or Scheyer? They will most likely put him on Nolan considering Scheyer's recent struggles. This makes it more vital for Jon to break out of this slump.

-bdbd
03-21-2010, 07:29 PM
I think we match up well, and was rooting for them over us having to face a home-standing A&M squad.

The injury hurts them vs a Duke, and I DO expect us to take advantage of our size again, Look for good numbers from Kyle and the Plumlees, with shorter match-ups.

Hard to say, but I don't know if wouyld have wanted to play the Boilermaker squad of a month ago. This one we can beat. Looking good Devils!!


Oh and Jon comes back big Friday - he's just too good to string together poor efforts. 'like our odds.

:D :D :D :cool:

CDu
03-21-2010, 07:44 PM
With Hummel, this is the type of Purdue team that could give us some trouble by spreading the floor and taking advantage of two very talented bigs. But without Hummel, they're REALLY small. They also lack the firepower to shoot from the perimeter.

Offensively, they've relied on E'twaun Moore and JaJuan Johnson to completely carry the scoring load in Hummel's absence, with occasional double-digit efforts from another guy here and there. Grant, Jackson, and Kramer are not offensive threats. They just try to get to 60 and hope they can keep you under 60.

They've been winning largely with smoke and mirrors. That said, they are tough and play hard, and won't go down without a fight. But they haven't faced a team as good offensively as us since Hummel got hurt. Hopefully our combination of size and variety of scoring options will be too much for them.

hq2
03-21-2010, 07:49 PM
They'll put up a fight, but we should handle 'em. Without Hummel, they don't have anyone who can really light it up. Plus, they look short and slow (read white) on defense. Unless they have a lights out shooting game, I don't think they can stay with us on either end of the floor. They're lucky to have gotten as far as they did, given how they lost in the Big 10 tournament.

Spam Filter
03-21-2010, 07:50 PM
According to Kenpom, Duke is the #1 Defensive and #1 Offensive team among the 16 that are still alive.

Interestingly enough the 2nd best defensive team that's left is Purdue, and the 2nd best Offensive team that's left is Baylor, and we may very well have to beat them both to get to the FF.

Purdue is exactly the opposite of Cal, Cal had great O and a very mediocre D, Purdue has great D and a very mediocre O.

Our defense proved up to the task of stopping the highly efficient Cal offense, can our offense get it done against the tough Purdue defense?

houstondukie
03-21-2010, 07:53 PM
Duke dodged a huge bullet by avoiding Texas A&M in Houston. Aggie fans would of turned Reliant Stadium into Kyle Field.

Not only does Purdue start only one guy taller than 6'4'', they have only 2 players on their entire roster taller than 6'5'' (J. Johnson and P. Bade). They also have a below-average and very young bench (Duke has a similarly young bench).

Starters:

L. Jackson - Sophomore - 5’9 165
C. Kramer - Senior - 6’3 214
E. Moore - Junior - 6’4 184
K. Grant - Senior - 6’4 201
J. Johnson - Junior - 6’10 215

Bench:

J. Hart - Freshman - 6’2 195
R. Smith - Sophomore - 6’3 178
D.J. Byrd - Freshman - 6’5 214
K. Barlow - Freshman - 6’5 199
P. Bade - Freshman - 6’8 235

Every Duke starter will have a 2-4 inch height advantage.

Prediction: Duke in a blow-out

DukeDevilDeb
03-21-2010, 07:56 PM
According to Kenpom, Duke is the #1 Defensive and #1 Offensive team among the 16 that are still alive.

Interestingly enough the 2nd best defensive team that's left is Purdue, and the 2nd best Offensive team that's left is Baylor, and we may very well have to beat them both to get to the FF.

Purdue is exactly the opposite of Cal, Cal had great O and a very mediocre D, Purdue has great D and a very mediocre O.

Our defense proved up to the task of stopping the highly efficient Cal offense, can our offense get it done against the tough Purdue defense?

I could have told you that we are the best! ;)

77devil
03-21-2010, 07:56 PM
With Hummel, this is the type of Purdue team that could give us some trouble by spreading the floor and taking advantage of two very talented bigs.

Like last year when Duke smoked them with Hummel on their home court. Unless the Devils are stone cold, they win going away.

MChambers
03-21-2010, 07:59 PM
Not until Friday. According to ESPN, Duke-Purdue is the late game, scheduled to start at 9:57PM ET. (Fortunately, in MDT it starts at a more civilized hour.)

Here are some obvious questions:

1. With the loss of Robbie Hummel (6-8), Purdue only starts one player taller than 6-4 (6-10 JaJuan Johnson). Can Duke continue to exploit a size advantage over smaller teams.

2. Reliant Stadium will likely have difficult sight lines for shooting (football field, raised floor, etc.). Can Duke improve on its 3-pt shooting over the 3-17 against Cal?

3. What's the potential for a Scheyer resurgence now that he has passed 2,000 points?

sagegrouse

10 p.m. is my bedtime, but I guess I'll make an exception. To answer your questins:

1. Absolutely. Seems like, without Hummel, Purdue is Cal without the quickness. Johnson is better than Boykin, but I think we have the inside depth to deal with that.

2. Maybe not, but both teams have those sightlines. I think we can deal without outside shooting better than Purdue.

3. Keeping my fingers crossed. I really think Jon isn't all that healthy, but hope that four days off will help.

Saratoga2
03-21-2010, 08:00 PM
We have really been cold shooting 3's. Purdue could pull their defense in and make us shoot the 3's. It isn't just Scheyer, but he is most noticeable. I doubt his issue has much to do with hitting 2000 points. We simply don't know what is going on with him, but tonight he didn't drive to the rim. Was that due to the defender on him, or is his back hurting or something else? This has now been going on with him for quite a while, so it may not be resolved anytime soon.

We have a size advantage with Purdue and have the offense to put pressure on them. It should be a good game on Friday.

GODUKEGO
03-21-2010, 08:01 PM
1.) They will most likely put him on Nolan considering Scheyer's recent struggles. This makes it more vital for Jon to break out of this slump.

Jon is 18-58 for 31% in the last five games (ACC Tournament and NCAA Tournament). He will find his shot!!!

delfrio
03-21-2010, 08:01 PM
Like last year when Duke smoked them with Hummel on their home court. Unless the Devils are stone cold, they win going away.

Shhh... WGs are lurking.

CDu
03-21-2010, 08:03 PM
Like last year when Duke smoked them with Hummel on their home court. Unless the Devils are stone cold, they win going away.

Last year Duke played an entirely different game than this year.

west_coast_devil
03-21-2010, 08:07 PM
some of you guys are stoking the bad juju.
You're suposed to say things like " it will be a hard fought game", "We must play well in all areas to win", and "Purde's D will be tough, we need our big three to be on point".

With that said................... go DUKE! Cant wait till friday.

proelitedota
03-21-2010, 08:09 PM
"This will be a tough game for Duke. I hope we pull through."

is how you're supposed to do it.

DevilHorns
03-21-2010, 08:10 PM
Keeping my fingers crossed. I really think Jon isn't all that healthy, but hope that four days off will help.

Why is he playing complete, close to 40 min, games then? I honestly don't think Jon's slump is due to health reasons. I appreciate and understand that K doesn't dwell on injury problems, but at this point, we have heard no evidence or seen any evidence that indicates he is not 100% healthy (unless I have missed something?). I think Jon's slump is simply a slump. He needs to get out of it. The issue with Jon IMO is that when his shooting touch isn't there, it tends to disrupt other aspects of his game (passing, running the offense, etc).

Here's to hoping that beautiful 3 point stroke returns!

gofurman
03-21-2010, 08:17 PM
Duke dodged a huge bullet by avoiding Texas A&M in Houston. Aggie fans would of turned Reliant Stadium into Kyle Field.

Not only does Purdue start only one guy taller than 6'4'', they have only 2 players on their entire roster taller than 6'5'' (J. Johnson and P. Bade). They also have a below-average and very young bench (Duke has a similarly young bench).

Starters:

L. Jackson - Sophomore - 5’9 165
C. Kramer - Senior - 6’3 214
E. Moore - Junior - 6’4 184
K. Grant - Senior - 6’4 201
J. Johnson - Junior - 6’10 215

Bench:

J. Hart - Freshman - 6’2 195
R. Smith - Sophomore - 6’3 178
D.J. Byrd - Freshman - 6’5 214
K. Barlow - Freshman - 6’5 199
P. Bade - Freshman - 6’8 235

Every Duke starter will have a 2-4 inch height advantage.

Prediction: Duke in a blow-out

no "woofing" (sp). no jinxes

purdue is a good team and well coached

however - yes, P has 10 guys that play and 8 are guards/wings. 1 true and v good center in Johnson and one f that played 11 or so minutes - bade?

COYS
03-21-2010, 08:21 PM
The issue with Jon IMO is that when his shooting touch isn't there, it tends to disrupt other aspects of his game (passing, running the offense, etc).

Funny, I think the exact opposite. Jon may have appeared uncharacteristically frustrated at times during the ACCT, but otherwise, he has done an exceedingly good job taking care of the basketball, setting up the offense, and playing great defense. In fact, what makes Jon so valuable is that he is so talented in every aspect of the game he continues to make a positive impact on the game regardless of his shooting efficiency (just look at his +/- stats). He is perhaps the most underrated defender in the country and did an excellent job today. Coach K has seemed to take some of the ball handling duties off of his hands as Nolan has been setting up the offense a lot more (and doing a much better job than earlier in the season although he still pounds the ball into the hardwood a little too much for my liking). Hopefully this will allow Jon to relax and let his shot come to him.

I think most players are able to feed off their offense and it is true that Jon may be an even better defender and distributor when his shot is falling, but he, more so than the majority of other players, does not allow his shooting to dictate other aspects of his game.

With Purdue's lack of size, I expect us to play a similar game to the one we played against Cal. I hope we continue to make a point to work the ball into the paint either through dribble penetration or by running Kyle, Nolan, or one of the bigs to the elbow to allow them to attack the basket or distribute. I also hope that Jon's shot returns as that will be the factor that allows us to truly stomp on an opponent's neck, which is a gear we will need to put away a tough, gritty, veteran team like Purdue.

dukemsu
03-21-2010, 08:25 PM
Purdue, even with Hummel, is an average rebounding team at best.

If our guards and Kyle can handle the perimeter pressure, this game won't be close.

dukemsu

77devil
03-21-2010, 08:29 PM
Last year Duke played an entirely different game than this year.

Duke's offensive and defensive efficiency this year are markedly better and Purdue is essentially the same but decidedly worse off sans Hummel.

west_coast_devil
03-21-2010, 08:36 PM
"This will be a tough game for Duke. I hope we pull through."

is how you're supposed to do it.

hahaha... yup:D

CDu
03-21-2010, 08:41 PM
Duke's offensive and defensive efficiency this year are markedly better and Purdue is essentially the same but decidedly worse off sans Hummel.

I'm talking purely about style of play, not efficiency. The teams that have generally given us the most trouble have been teams with a talented big man that can play 4-out, 1-in with a face-up 4. We haven't played many of those teams this year, as the ACC is a big man's league this year. Purdue was one of those teams prior to Hummel's injury.

Now, they're going to have to scrap it out defensively and hope they can make it a 60-55 type of game.

As is, I think it'll take a pretty poor scoring game from us and a pretty good scoring game from them to win. That can of course happen, but I completely agree that the odds are in our favor. They're very small, not explosively quick/athletic, and they don't shoot particularly well.

monkey
03-21-2010, 08:44 PM
Don't really know much about Purdue. Did see a very much shorter Chris Carawell defend Tim Duncan back in the day. Size isn't necessarily everything.

cptnflash
03-21-2010, 08:50 PM
Purdue minus Hummel is not nearly as good as the Cal team we just beat, so we should certainly win on Friday. Granted, we played one of our best defensive games of the year tonight, so some regression to the mean should be expected. Nevertheless, Purdue has overachieved to get this far and their emotional run should come to an end now that they are finally facing a really good team.

Regarding the other questions...

1) Our size and skill inside should allow us to accrue a consequential rebounding margin.

2) I haven't seen any empirical evidence that individual venues matter from a shooting perspective. If anyone has some, please share.

3) There is no good reason (other than hope and/or loyalty to a great player) to believe that Jon will shoot materially better from here on out. He was never a great shooter to begin with (look at the numbers before you disagree), and he is clearly deteriorating. I believe it's fatigue, but in the end the reason doesn't really matter. He's a formerly average shooter who has become a poor one, and there isn't enough time to retool his mechanics now.

The good news is that we don't need him to shoot well in order to beat Purdue (or Baylor, for that matter). Kentucky and Syracuse might be a different story.

78Devil
03-21-2010, 08:52 PM
I live in Houston and have tickets to the game. Can't wait.

Unfortunately, CBS didn't show the Duke game. So I got to watch A&M vs. Purdue. In the first half, I remember thinking that Duke could beat either of those teams. They weren't shooting well, and didn't have good poise. Lots of stupid errors and poor shooting (this was before I learned that Duke had such poor 3 point shooting itself!).

But I have to say, in the second half Purdue showed that it has alot of grit and character. They stuck it out, and never gave up. Duke should be favored, but don't take this Purdue team lightly. They will not make it easy for us, and they play smart.

By the way, why the $#@$% is CBS showing so few games? I can't beleive they didn't subcontract for SOMEONE to show the games they couldn't. It was really frustrating when only 1 out of 3 games going on were being telecast at any time/ No wonder they are losing money on this if they get 16 games this weekend, and only show about 6-8 of them!!!! Poor planning.

Give me ESPN any day.

dukelifer
03-21-2010, 08:56 PM
Jon is 18-58 for 31% in the last five games (ACC Tournament and NCAA Tournament). He will find his shot!!!

It is not how many you hit but when you hit them. With that shooting from him, Duke is 5-0. Still it would be nice to see the stroke back- but he is streaky and every weekend in the tourney is different.

Newton_14
03-21-2010, 09:05 PM
I live in Houston and have tickets to the game. Can't wait.

Unfortunately, CBS didn't show the Duke game. So I got to watch A&M vs. Purdue. In the first half, I remember thinking that Duke could beat either of those teams. They weren't shooting well, and didn't have good poise. Lots of stupid errors and poor shooting (this was before I learned that Duke had such poor 3 point shooting itself!).

But I have to say, in the second half Purdue showed that it has alot of grit and character. They stuck it out, and never gave up. Duke should be favored, but don't take this Purdue team lightly. They will not make it easy for us, and they play smart.

By the way, why the $#@$% is CBS showing so few games? I can't beleive they didn't subcontract for SOMEONE to show the games they couldn't. It was really frustrating when only 1 out of 3 games going on were being telecast at any time/ No wonder they are losing money on this if they get 16 games this weekend, and only show about 6-8 of them!!!! Poor planning.

Give me ESPN any day.

Here in the Triangle area, if you have cable, you had your choice of games from 4 different channels. I have satellite so I did not get that choice, however, through the over air antenna, WRAL showed 1 game on the main CBS channel (5.1) and showed an alternate game on the SD Channel (5.2). I did not check the 5.2 channel during the Duke game today so not sure if they were showing the Purdue/A&M or Pitt/X. I would have thought other regions would have done something similar, but guess not.

Edouble
03-21-2010, 09:18 PM
They'll put up a fight, but we should handle 'em. Without Hummel, they don't have anyone who can really light it up. Plus, they look short and slow (read white) on defense. Unless they have a lights out shooting game, I don't think they can stay with us on either end of the floor. They're lucky to have gotten as far as they did, given how they lost in the Big 10 tournament.

Is this white=slow stuff really on the boards? Please. :mad:

Kfanarmy
03-21-2010, 09:23 PM
Here in the Triangle area, if you have cable, you had your choice of games from 4 different channels. I have satellite so I did not get that choice, however, through the over air antenna, WRAL showed 1 game on the main CBS channel (5.1) and showed an alternate game on the SD Channel (5.2). I did not check the 5.2 channel during the Duke game today so not sure if they were showing the Purdue/A&M or Pitt/X. I would have thought other regions would have done something similar, but guess not. on DirectTV for a price!

rickymoyer
03-21-2010, 09:27 PM
By the way, why the $#@$% is CBS showing so few games? I can't beleive they didn't subcontract for SOMEONE to show the games they couldn't. It was really frustrating when only 1 out of 3 games going on were being telecast at any time/ No wonder they are losing money on this if they get 16 games this weekend, and only show about 6-8 of them!!!! Poor planning.

Give me ESPN any day.

CBS/NCAA has had every game available online, that's how I watched today's game. I am pretty sure that they even advertised it during the games.

Andre Buckner Fan
03-21-2010, 09:29 PM
Duke's offensive and defensive efficiency this year are markedly better and Purdue is essentially the same but decidedly worse off sans Hummel.

Never underestimate the power of "Nobody Believed in Us" with the remnants of a once excellent team. If it weren't for Coach K who never takes any team lightly, I would be worried by Purdue.

Troublemaker
03-21-2010, 09:31 PM
There's too much overconfidence in this thread. Let's keep in mind a few things.

(1) Duke hasn't been past the Sweet 16 since 2004. Not that it matters (except maybe karmically), but until we make it past this round, I'd prefer us fans not talk about how we're going to handle an opponent easily.

(2) One year ago, in this very round, the general pre-game sentiment among Duke fans was that Villanova was a good matchup for Duke. (And to be fair, that could've even been true -- one game proves nothing).

(3) Last season's beatdown of Purdue is almost completely irrelevant to this year's game. We've talked all season about how this Duke team is stylistically different from previous Duke teams. So why forget that now? The matchups against Purdue are completely different. Greg Paulus played 22 minutes at point guard against them last season, for example!

(4) If anything, last year's result against the Boilermakers does more harm than good. Can we agree that Purdue is a well-coached team full of tough, hard-nosed kids? Do you think maybe they're itching for some revenge? If the shoe were on the other foot, wouldn't we be pretty confident that Coach K and the team could exact revenge? Think about how Duke played against Clemson this season.

(5) Purdue's roster is filled to the brim with physical guards. Duke's roster has hardly any guards at all. It's a very, VERY real possibility that Purdue's rotation of guards will wear out Duke's backcourt over the course of 40 minutes. We're going to need Andre to play some valuable minutes in this game. In other words, Purdue does not enter this game without weapons that can hurt us. I'm most concerned about the guard depth.

(6) I think last season's game (and Purdue's membership in the Big 10) also has us fooled into thinking that Purdue is not quick. They're quick. They'll get up into us on defense, which is their main strength, but they'll also spread us out and challenge us with drives on offense. We did fine against Cal but let's see how we do here. Don't assume anything. Purdue might be quicker than Cal.

78Devil
03-21-2010, 09:33 PM
I agree that all the games were on line. But so what. Even after hooking up the laptop to the big screen t.v., it was poor quality.

I could swear in prior years that they subcontracted out to ESPN during the first weekend to carry the games they didn't highlight in each market. But that may be creative memory. Or at least an old enough memory that it betrays my age.

Also, other than Clark Kellogg, Spanarcle and the "ESPN loaners" (like Bilas and GMan, who is really good), I have NOT enjoyed most of the CBS announcers.

DevilHorns
03-21-2010, 09:35 PM
Don't assume anything.

Amen.

Wander
03-21-2010, 09:35 PM
Is this white=slow stuff really on the boards? Please. :mad:

Especially dumb in the case of Purdue - they have one of the best perimeter defenders in the entire country, who happens to be a white dude. It'll be interesting to see who Kramer guards - Scheyer because he has the ball in his hands more often or Nolan because he's been a more dangerous scoring threat lately?

And on the other side of things, do we put Scheyer on Moore because he did such a good job on him last year or try something different because of the small vs. big nature of the two teams?

jipops
03-21-2010, 09:37 PM
Not going to be a lot of scoring in this one. Could be a slow moving, grind it out type. It will be especially important to take care of the ball. Purdue will put much more ball pressure on us than Cal did. An earlier poster predicted something of a blowout - puhhlease!? Only thing getting blown out in this game is the back of the rim. I expect a lot of clangers on both sides in this one. According to the Pomeroy index, this will be the 3rd best team we've played all year. Make sure your nerves are ready for this one.

ncexnyc
03-21-2010, 09:41 PM
I'm shocked. With all that has transpired these past few days you would think that people would know better. I said it prior to the start of the tourney when people were talking about computer stats and eye tests and I'll say it again, "Anything can and will happen in this tournament."

Those hookshots Brian has been making these past two games have been available all season long. He's taking and making them now, because he believes he has an advantage, it's all mental, and he now has the confidence in his ability. I'm not going to sell Purdue short in a one and done situation, they've won two games so far and that is minus Hummel. If they believe they can do it, which I'm sure they do, it won't be an easy game.

DukeGirl4ever
03-21-2010, 09:46 PM
Do we need to bring back the NO WOOFING thread?

I'd rather discuss strengths/weaknesses about Purdue than come on here and make a statement about the outcome.

Prior to tonight's game, I thought we'd take it to the rim and get Cal in to foul trouble. I didn't think that was necessarily the case, but Cal picked up some dumb fouls to get a few players in trouble. I also thought we'd dominate the boards....and after today I think I'm going to make a MARRY ME ZOUBEK sign.

So, prior to Friday's game, I again think we've got the nice size advantage and I think Lance is athletic enough to guard against a 4out/1in offensive set. Even in tonight's game, he switched on screens with Randle and guarded him quite effectively.

My question is, what is the bench productivity like from Purdue? I think we can again try to attack and create foul trouble.

And, please...let's not trash talk. Everyone that tried to trash talk with me on Friday about Duke losing to Louisville and NOVA going to the FF NOW LOOK LIKE MORONS!

Leck
03-21-2010, 09:48 PM
Purdue is an excellent defensive team with lots of upper classmen that have experience and, most importantly, they get better every game they play without Hummel. Matt Painter is a great coach and he'll take this extra week to begin to refine their offense without Hummel. Any team with guys like Moore and Johnson are dangerous, particularly when they play great defense and feel like they have a chip on their shoulder.

Let us not forget that this was a top 5 team for most of the year. Even without Hummel, they're really good and surprisingly quick, which could give us trouble. It's gonna be a defensive battle with buckets tough to come by in the end...for both teams.

Devil up!!!

CDu
03-21-2010, 09:59 PM
In comparison to the Cal game, the Purdue game will have little similarity. Cal was a very efficient offensive team this year, with a bunch of really good shooters. They don't defend very well and don't force turnovers. Purdue is a very efficient defensive team, with very few decent shooters, but they do force a lot of turnovers. The only similarity is that neither is a very good rebounding team.

We'll look to exploit the same advantages we did against Cal in terms of pounding the glass, though we may not get as many points in the paint with Johnson challenging shots. If we can avoid turnovers, though, we should get a lot of second-chance points. And of course, if we draw fouls on Johnson, they are REALLY thin in the frontcourt.

Purdue is going to try to make this a VERY low-scoring game, because quite frankly they don't have much offense without Hummel. If we score 65, we'll probably win. But Purdue will try to ugly the game up enough to keep us from scoring 65.

It would be great if we could start shooting well again. Hitting 3s will make it very hard for Purdue to keep up.

gofurman
03-21-2010, 10:00 PM
Purdue, even with Hummel, is an average rebounding team at best.

If our guards and Kyle can handle the perimeter pressure, this game won't be close.

dukemsu

what we meant is purdue is awesome - we are proud just to take the floor with them. yes, that is what we said. no braggin' here.

lotusland
03-21-2010, 10:03 PM
Also, other than Clark Kellogg, Spanarcle and the "ESPN loaners" (like Bilas and GMan, who is really good), I have NOT enjoyed most of the CBS announcers.

On the Kentucky boards someone was complaining about all the former duke announcers. I couldn't help thinking that we would need subtitles if Bledsoe was calling the game.

mehmattski
03-21-2010, 10:08 PM
Geez, either the pregame threads get criticized for being too tough on our own team, or they get criticized for being too confident.

Without Hummel, here's the Offensive Rebounding Percentage for Purdue:

vs MSU: 14.6%
vs Indiana: 16.9%
@ Penn St: 26.3%

Big Ten Tourney:
Northwestern: 42.9% (Northwestern is one of the worst rebounding teams in the country)
Minnesota: 17.6%

NCAA Tourney:
Siena: 17.1%
TAMU: 19.1%

That is really bad. Their defensive rebounding numbers weren't good even with Hummel, and so I expect this to go a certain way: even if both teams are playing the perimeter defense they are capable of, the shots that don't fall will mostly be grabbed by Duke, on both ends of the floor. This means lots of extra opportunities for Duke, and not many for Purdue.

This is the second toughest defense Duke will face this year (FSU has the nation's best defense by adjusted efficiency). What they don't do is limit the opponents' 3-point percentage. While Purdue holds opponents to just 41.7% from inside the arc (7th in the nation), they allow 35.2% from beyond the arc (221st). This has improved somewhat since Hummel left.

Besides, Duke has (in adjusted efficiency) the best offense Purdue has faced this season. There are significant matchup problems. No game is easy when you get to the top 16 teams in the country, but if you ranked the sweet-16 teams in order of how tough they are for Duke, Purdue would certainly be among the easiest match-ups.

ChicagoCrazy84
03-21-2010, 10:13 PM
I was really surprised to see Purdue pull this one out. The way it looked in the 1st half, I thought we would have seen A&M win by 8-12. So, props to Purdue for gutting it out and JaJuan Johnson who had a great 2nd half. With all that said, I just have trouble being afraid of a team that got BLOWN OUT by Minnesota. That game was a joke. I just think we're too good of a team to lose this game. We're on a mission and I think we'll play well.

Here is to Scheyer going 10-16 for 25 points in a 77-64 win! Let's go Duke!

lotusland
03-21-2010, 10:17 PM
That is really bad. Their defensive rebounding numbers weren't good even with Hummel, and so I expect this to go a certain way: even if both teams are playing the perimeter defense they are capable of, the shots that don't fall will mostly be grabbed by Duke, on both ends of the floor. This means lots of extra opportunities for Duke, and not many for Purdue.

This is the second toughest defense Duke will face this year (FSU has the nation's best defense by adjusted efficiency). What they don't do is limit the opponents' 3-point percentage. While Purdue holds opponents to just 41.7% from inside the arc (7th in the nation), they allow 35.2% from beyond the arc (221st). This has improved somewhat since Hummel left.



seems odd that they can play good defense without rebounding well on the defensive end. I don't mind that we shoot a low percentage if we get lots of second shots.

lotusland
03-21-2010, 10:30 PM
Is this white=slow stuff really on the boards? Please. :mad:

I think that cat is out of the bag. ESPN360 had a segment at halftime of a duke game about the dirth of white Americans in the NBA. A couple of NBA GMs said flat out that they thought white players often lacked the qickness to defend NBA players. I know it was controversial when Jimmy the Greek said it in the 70s but I think most people have come to grips with it by now. Don't take it too hard but white guys generally don't jump as well either.

Dr. Tina
03-21-2010, 10:48 PM
I think our boys can take Purdue and win, but I'm with those who feel we need to just be focused on talking about what the team needs to do to beat Purdue and advance. We need to take this one round at a time. Last year, Duke made it to the Sweet 16 and now our boys need to improve upon that and get into the Elite Eight. I want to show Purdue as much respect as possible because this is a team that would have been seeded higher if it weren't for losing Hummel. They have something to prove and I'm sure they'd like nothing more than to do that by taking Duke down.

Andre Buckner Fan
03-21-2010, 10:48 PM
I was really surprised to see Purdue pull this one out. The way it looked in the 1st half, I thought we would have seen A&M win by 8-12. So, props to Purdue for gutting it out and JaJuan Johnson who had a great 2nd half.

Purdue looked beat by A&M. Purdue trailed at the half to Siena.

Purdue is not giving up. Duke fans need to knock off our gloating. If Duke lost Scheyer we'd still be a tough out. Purdue minus Hummel is no cupcake.

Don't refer to the Minnesota game; it is ancient history. Look at the two opponents who matched up well against Purdue and had the lead in the second half only to lose.


"You got the president picking against you, so it's a different thing," Boilermakers senior Keaton Grant said of the national chorus- including Barack Obama -- who expected 13th-seeded Siena to beat the Boilermakers because Robbie Hummel is out. "We were very aware, and just used it as motivation." (from the AP write up)

In all sports never underestimate the "nobody believed in us" edge. Duke fans cannot give Purdue more fuel for their fire.

They are a legit opponent.

DevilHorns
03-21-2010, 10:52 PM
Ok so I'm all for the respect your next opponent no matter what since this is a one-and-done tourney, but come on....

WHAT FANS THINK IS EXACTLY THAT. WHAT WE THINK MEANS EXACTLY JACK-DIDDLY SQUAT.

Im pretty sure that this team will not take any opponent lightly. For all the fans out there, go ahead and think what you want, it doesn't matter.

hotbutteredseoul
03-21-2010, 10:53 PM
Just a note: For the last few games, Kramer, even though he's not a tall guy, has been defending the 4 for Purdue. Unsurprisingly, since he's probably about the best defender in the country (4 consecutive 1st team all-D teams in a power conference? Wow), he's actually been REALLY good at it. This guy is strong and quick and plays with great positioning.

I think he will end up guarding our 4s, particularly Lance, for much of the game. While he does give up some (a lot of) height to LT, I don't think that that would be a matchup that we would have a huge advantage in during normal offensive sets. I WOULD look for LT to really try to get after it on the offensive glass, where his height really would be a big problem.

ikiru36
03-21-2010, 11:14 PM
Just a note: For the last few games, Kramer, even though he's not a tall guy, has been defending the 4 for Purdue. Unsurprisingly, since he's probably about the best defender in the country (4 consecutive 1st team all-D teams in a power conference? Wow), he's actually been REALLY good at it. This guy is strong and quick and plays with great positioning.

I think he will end up guarding our 4s, particularly Lance, for much of the game. While he does give up some (a lot of) height to LT, I don't think that that would be a matchup that we would have a huge advantage in during normal offensive sets. I WOULD look for LT to really try to get after it on the offensive glass, where his height really would be a big problem.

I haven't looked at the overall match-ups yet, but I would say that if Purdue has the finest defender in the Nation, and for other match-up reasons needs to use him on Lance Thomas, that's good for us. ;)

That said, I sure as heck wouldn't take defeating any tough nosed team for granted (They make boilers for crying out loud. That's pretty darned blue collar! :D), especially if Jon continues to struggle with his shot and (at least to me) appears less comfortable driving as well. I'm loving this Duke team more and more but the margin for error is certainly not overwhelming.

Go Duke!!!!!!!!!!!! Go Blue Devils!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! GTHCGTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Spam Filter
03-21-2010, 11:23 PM
Yeah, if he's as good a defender as you say he is, he's going to be guarding Singler, not LT.

AlaskanAssassin
03-21-2010, 11:27 PM
Purdue will definitely be looking for payback. They were embarrassed when Duke last played them. So Duke must focus.

ChrisP
03-21-2010, 11:50 PM
Through the first 2 rounds, Duke has allowed - by far - the fewest points of any team. We are the only team of the 16 remaining that has had fewer than 100 points scored against us (we're at 97 through the APB and Cal games). The next closest team is WVU at 109 and then Butler at 111.

Now...I'm not sure what all that means but...I like it!

I went to the ACC Tourney and maybe it started to occur before then and I just didn't notice since I was just watching on TV, but our halfcourt D is a thing of beauty right now. In the ACCT, I noticed early on in the first game against UVA that the main impediment to us winning would be if we gave up lots of points in transition. It has happened in spurts since then, but, for the most part, we keep opponents in check in transition and with our bigs rebounding like they've been, there are a lot of "one & done" possessions for our D. After watching Cal push it against L'vile, I was concerned that we wouldn't be able to keep up with them in transition but I guess we shot well enough (and got back quick enough) that it didn't happen.

I really think that if we can limit the transition buckets, we'll go very, very far in this tourney. The one team that worries me the most is Kentucky, I guess, but obviously, we have much business to tend to before that would even happen (as do the Cats).

I'd love to see some kind of stat showing our defensive efficiency in the halfcourt (i.e. with all fast break/transition baskets taken out of the numbers). I bet the numbers would be jaw-dropping - especially over the past 5 games or so.

cptnflash
03-22-2010, 12:06 AM
Through the first 2 rounds, Duke has allowed - by far - the fewest points of any team. We are the only team of the 16 remaining that has had fewer than 100 points scored against us (we're at 97 through the APB and Cal games). The next closest team is WVU at 109 and then Butler at 111.

Not a fair comparison, given that our first round game was against BY FAR the worst team in the tournament. I actually was disappointed with our defense against APB... there is no way that team should have scored 40 points against us.

But today's game was a different story... holding one of the best offensive teams in the country to an efficiency rating of 94.0 on a neutral court is an awesome performance.

Wander
03-22-2010, 12:15 AM
If the Purdue coach decides to put Kramer on Lance, he should be fired before the first TV timeout. Seriously, there's zero percent chance that will happen. I am curious to see who he does guard.

Welcome2DaSlopes
03-22-2010, 12:25 AM
This gives Coach K nineteen trips to the sweet sixteen, most by any coach

PumpkinFunk
03-22-2010, 01:18 AM
While this matchup looks great on paper and in theory, Purdue has been playing lights-out in the tourney. Perhaps a Ewing Theory (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/010509a) example in the making? I'm nervous as I always am, especially since I'll be courtside in Houston... all the more nervewracking.

RelativeWays
03-22-2010, 07:34 AM
Purdue will fight tooth and nail. They have nothing to lose and the crowd will root for them anyway as the natural underdog vs one of college BBs top "villains".

I do not see Duke taking Purdue lightly, that would be stupid. Duke would be wise to be the aggressor and dictate the pace, let Purdue react. If Duke asserts its own pace in the game and Purdue has to respond, Duke will win. Tha'ts not overconfidence, its logic. That being said, Purdue is capable and will be motivated to win. Making the elite 8 would be a huge accomplishment for how their season ended.

davekay1971
03-22-2010, 07:51 AM
You have to figure this is going to be a tough, defensive game. I didn't understand all the dirt being piled on Purdue after Hummel went down. Someone mentioned above - imagine Duke without Scheyer. Good point, but perhaps a better comparison would be imagine Duke without Singler. We'd still be a tough team to beat, because, despite the loss of offensive firepower, we'd still be a team that played very good defense and wouldn't quit, no matter what.

Purdue was a legit 1 seed with Hummel. Without him, they were probably seeded correctly at a 4. In other words, they're still a good team that we're going to have to play well to beat.

Duke's been getting it done with rebounding, defense, and brutal effeciency in the half-court game on both sides of the court. We don't have to shoot lights out to beat anybody, but we have to play with focus and intensity to beat everybody. Even with Hummel injured, we aren't going to roll the ball out and out-talent Purdue. But we do have a size advantage, and if we use that and our defense we can shut them down, own the boards, and get second chance opportunities.

I'm expecting a game that's low scoring, hard fought, and probably pretty close. We can win, no doubt, but we'll earn it.

Underdog5
03-22-2010, 08:18 AM
I like our match ups against Purdue. Perhaps Nolan will guard Moore and do another great job against a potentially explosive talented guard. Assuming Lance gets Johnson to neutralize his athleticsm. Kramer is tough as nails and look forward to hopefully him vs Kyle which matches up two of the toughest (mentally and physically) players I've watched this year.

If Z keeps being Z, Plumlees continue to give us more good minutes and Jon returns to form I like our chances. Not gloating, just developing a lot of confidence in this team.

gofurman
03-22-2010, 08:24 AM
Purdue looked beat by A&M. Purdue trailed at the half to Siena.

Purdue is not giving up. Duke fans need to knock off our gloating. If Duke lost Scheyer we'd still be a tough out. Purdue minus Hummel is no cupcake.

Don't refer to the Minnesota game; it is ancient history. Look at the two opponents who matched up well against Purdue and had the lead in the second half only to lose.



In all sports never underestimate the "nobody believed in us" edge. Duke fans cannot give Purdue more fuel for their fire.

They are a legit opponent.

recall we "took" the very one seed purdue was in line for - the kind of thing I am sure they will mention

CDu
03-22-2010, 08:30 AM
I like our match ups against Purdue. Perhaps Nolan will guard Moore and do another great job against a potentially explosive talented guard. Assuming Lance gets Johnson to neutralize his athleticsm. Kramer is tough as nails and look forward to hopefully him vs Kyle which matches up two of the toughest (mentally and physically) players I've watched this year.

If Z keeps being Z, Plumlees continue to give us more good minutes and Jon returns to form I like our chances. Not gloating, just developing a lot of confidence in this team.

I doubt Thomas will get assigned to Johnson. If we do that, then Zoubek has to guard somebody under 6'5". That's not a great matchup. I agree that Johnson will be a tough matchup for Zoubek, but I think that's the path we'll have to take. While Purdue's guards aren't great shooters, we can't afford to have Zoubek basically not guard them on the perimeter, and I don't think he'll be able to stay in front of them if he does step out to guard them.

I do think that Smith will get Moore, and I look forward to that matchup. I expect Singler to guard and be guarded by Kramer. Defensively, I'm guessing Purdue will put Jackson on Smith (for size purposes) and Moore or Grant on Scheyer. That will leave the other of Moore/Grant to defend Thomas or Mason.

flyingdutchdevil
03-22-2010, 08:34 AM
I'd be surprised if Kramer didn't guard Singler. Kramer has the strength and mental capabilities to successfully guard Singler. I think it would be THE match-up of the game.

While our Big 3 are obviously going to be key, I'm interested in seeing how Duke exploits its height. It was done a great job of that in the past two games and I'm looking forward to how they get it done this time around. With Purdue being an average rebounding team at best, it will give Z, LT, and MP1&2 ample opportunity to grab offensive rebounds and put-backs.

Even though Purdue has struggled lately, I am a little worried. This has been the craziest tournament in a long time, and anything is possible. Just ask Kansas.

Bottomline - take Purdue very very seriously. This is where Coach K will shine: our guys will come into this game with a "take-nothing-for-granted" mentality but with that ego / swagga that our starting 5 always carry with them.

sagegrouse
03-22-2010, 08:50 AM
I doubt Thomas will get assigned to Johnson. If we do that, then Zoubek has to guard somebody under 6'5". That's not a great matchup. I agree that Johnson will be a tough matchup for Zoubek, but I think that's the path we'll have to take. .

And, of course, there are Miles and Mason, who are both pretty mobile.

sagegrouse

CDu
03-22-2010, 08:54 AM
And, of course, there is also Miles and Mason, who are both pretty mobile.

sagegrouse

Well, I was referring more to the Thomas/Zoubek lineup. The Plumlees have been playing about 12-15 mpg each since Zoubek emerged, and they've been playing almost exclusively together. So I don't know that their athleticism will affect Thomas playing Johnson.

But I agree that when the Plumlees are in the game they are plenty athletic to guard Johnson. And we may well see more of the Plumlees in this one - certainly if Zoubek happens to struggle with this matchup (hopefully he won't).

94duke
03-22-2010, 08:55 AM
I doubt Thomas will get assigned to Johnson. If we do that, then Zoubek has to guard somebody under 6'5". That's not a great matchup. I agree that Johnson will be a tough matchup for Zoubek, but I think that's the path we'll have to take. While Purdue's guards aren't great shooters, we can't afford to have Zoubek basically not guard them on the perimeter, and I don't think he'll be able to stay in front of them if he does step out to guard them.

I do think that Smith will get Moore, and I look forward to that matchup. I expect Singler to guard and be guarded by Kramer. Defensively, I'm guessing Purdue will put Jackson on Smith (for size purposes) and Moore or Grant on Scheyer. That will leave the other of Moore/Grant to defend Thomas or Mason.

Zoubek fared pretty well against a smaller Boykin last night.
He has been moving his feet quite well over the last several weeks.

CDu
03-22-2010, 08:57 AM
Zoubek fared pretty well against a smaller Boykin last night.
He has been moving his feet quite well over the last several weeks.

Johnson is far taller, quicker, a better leaper, and a better player than Boykin (but not as muscular). So the fact that Zoubek did well against Boykin doesn't mean much. Think more on the lines of Favors with a jumpshot (minus some rebounding) when you think of Johnson.

I'm not saying that Zoubek will certainly struggle against Johnson. I'm just saying that it may not be a great matchup for him.

94duke
03-22-2010, 09:00 AM
Johnson is far taller, quicker, a better leaper, and a better player than Boykin (but not as muscular). So the fact that Zoubek did well against Boykin doesn't mean much. Think more on the lines of Favors with a jumpshot (minus some rebounding) when you think of Johnson.

I'm not saying that Zoubek will certainly struggle against Johnson. I'm just saying that it may not be a great matchup for him.

Gotcha. Thanks. :)

CrazieDUMB
03-22-2010, 09:10 AM
Basically agree with what's being said here. Although in wrt Zoubek/Johnson matchup, remember that K isn't afraid to bench people when he feels that they're not a good matchup defensively. We could see (unfortunately) that despite Z's performance he won't get a lot of playing time, as I think Mason and Miles match up better. The question will be whether the better matchup defensively will offset Z's O-reb potential and putbacks.

As far as Singler-Kramer, this is going to be explosive. Two kids who certainly aren't afraid to jaw with an opponent. Expect a lot of stare downs- IMO, this favors Singler as I think he plays better when throw trash talk at him, not to mention that he's a much better player.

roywhite
03-22-2010, 09:11 AM
So, how does Purdue cope with Duke?

Duke's size
Ball movement
Duke's great perimeter defense
Nolan Smith's driving ability
Kyle Singler's movement
Alley-oop feeds to Duke's big men

Just my .02, but Purdue seems to have the matchup problems here, not Duke.

JohnGalt
03-22-2010, 09:13 AM
Johnson is far taller, quicker, a better leaper, and a better player than Boykin (but not as muscular). So the fact that Zoubek did well against Boykin doesn't mean much. Think more on the lines of Favors with a jumpshot (minus some rebounding) when you think of Johnson.

I'm not saying that Zoubek will certainly struggle against Johnson. I'm just saying that it may not be a great matchup for him.

What Z has going for him is Johnson's lack of size. He's tall, but skinny. If Z can manage to slide his feet and keep his hands straight up, I have a hard time believing Johnson has a career night. He'll get his points, but won't go off. Z's transformation over the latter half of the season has been nothing short of miraculous, the sort of stuff needed to win championships. He's finally started doing the things I thought he would begin doing middle of the way through is junior year.

These baby hook shots almost bring tears to my eyes...

JohnGalt
03-22-2010, 09:14 AM
As far as Singler-Kramer, this is going to be explosive. Two kids who certainly aren't afraid to jaw with an opponent. Expect a lot of stare downs- IMO, this favors Singler as I think he plays better when throw trash talk at him, not to mention that he's a much better player.

or that he has a 5 inch size advantage...

CDu
03-22-2010, 09:24 AM
Basically agree with what's being said here. Although in wrt Zoubek/Johnson matchup, remember that K isn't afraid to bench people when he feels that they're not a good matchup defensively. We could see (unfortunately) that despite Z's performance he won't get a lot of playing time, as I think Mason and Miles match up better. The question will be whether the better matchup defensively will offset Z's O-reb potential and putbacks.

As far as Singler-Kramer, this is going to be explosive. Two kids who certainly aren't afraid to jaw with an opponent. Expect a lot of stare downs- IMO, this favors Singler as I think he plays better when throw trash talk at him, not to mention that he's a much better player.

A large part of Kramer's advantage defensively is that he's usually stronger and more physical than the guard/wing he guards. So he's able to bump/bang the guy and get him off his game. Well, bumping and banging is a strength of Singler's game. If anything, it's the more athletic defenders that give him the most trouble (though right now not many are giving him trouble period).

It will be a very interesting matchup to see who wins. I think Singler has a big edge given that he's strong and more talented but also a lot taller. Kramer will try to get under Singler's skin, and he'll try to draw a lot of charges. How the officials handle that matchup will be a key to the game.

As for the matchup with Johnson vs our bigs, the nice thing is that we have a lot of bodies to throw at him. If Zoubek can handle the job, then that makes life much easier. But if he struggles or gets fouls, then we can still throw the Plumlees and occasionally Thomas at him for stretches, and Kelly if we're in an absolute pinch (though that would be a bad matchup for us).

Basically, I expect us to turn Johnson into a 15-18' jumpshooter, and keep him away from the rim. If we do that, we should have a big advantage on the glass, with a 4-5" height edge at three of the other four spots on the floor (only Scheyer will be matched up with a similarly-sized defender). If Johnson is hitting that shot, Purdue can hang around. If he's not hitting, they're likely to struggle offensively.

BD80
03-22-2010, 09:29 AM
1.) ...who will Kramer guard? Smith or Scheyer? They will most likely put him on Nolan considering Scheyer's recent struggles. ...


... It'll be interesting to see who Kramer guards - Scheyer because he has the ball in his hands more often or Nolan because he's been a more dangerous scoring threat lately? ...


Just a note: For the last few games, Kramer, even though he's not a tall guy, has been defending the 4 for Purdue. ...

I think he will end up guarding our 4s, particularly Lance, for much of the game. ...


I'd be surprised if Kramer didn't guard Singler. Kramer has the strength and mental capabilities to successfully guard Singler. ...

Man, Kramer's going to be busy, guarding four players! Poor Z will have four players guarding him!

I agree that Kramer will guard Singler, but that will lead to Singler posting up. It would be a good match-up for us.

JohnGalt
03-22-2010, 09:35 AM
A large part of Kramer's advantage defensively is that he's usually stronger and more physical than the guard/wing he guards. So he's able to bump/bang the guy and get him off his game. Well, bumping and banging is a strength of Singler's game. If anything, it's the more athletic defenders that give him the most trouble (though right now not many are giving him trouble period).

It will be a very interesting matchup to see who wins. I think Singler has a big edge given that he's strong and more talented but also a lot taller. Kramer will try to get under Singler's skin, and he'll try to draw a lot of charges. How the officials handle that matchup will be a key to the game.

As for the matchup with Johnson vs our bigs, the nice thing is that we have a lot of bodies to throw at him. If Zoubek can handle the job, then that makes life much easier. But if he struggles or gets fouls, then we can still throw the Plumlees and occasionally Thomas at him for stretches, and Kelly if we're in an absolute pinch (though that would be a bad matchup for us).

Basically, I expect us to turn Johnson into a 15-18' jumpshooter, and keep him away from the rim. If we do that, we should have a big advantage on the glass, with a 4-5" height edge at three of the other four spots on the floor (only Scheyer will be matched up with a similarly-sized defender). If Johnson is hitting that shot, Purdue can hang around. If he's not hitting, they're likely to struggle offensively.

Agreed. He's a pretty decent free throw shooter too. Hopefully Z, the Plumlees, et al who are guarding him can manage to shuffle their feet, keep their hands up and just make his life difficult without fouling. Something else that will be uber-important will be his fouling on the other end. Can Duke's frontcourt manage to get Johnson into foul trouble? If so, Purdue could be in for a long night.

That being said, if Purdue shoots lights out from the perimeter none of this could matter. Stranger things have happened...

DukeUsul
03-22-2010, 09:46 AM
Like BD80 said, if Kramer is on Kyle, look for Kyle to post him up. That should force Johnson to rotate to double (how could you not double in that situation). Look for Kyle to pass to a now open Z, Lance, MP1 or MP2 for the dunk. Hopefully Purdue won't have a third guy looking to cut the passing lane for the steal (they're #104 in the nation in steals, per Ken Pom).

CDu
03-22-2010, 09:49 AM
Agreed. He's a pretty decent free throw shooter too. Hopefully Z, the Plumlees, et al who are guarding him can manage to shuffle their feet, keep their hands up and just make his life difficult without fouling. Something else that will be uber-important will be his fouling on the other end. Can Duke's frontcourt manage to get Johnson into foul trouble? If so, Purdue could be in for a long night.

That being said, if Purdue shoots lights out from the perimeter none of this could matter. Stranger things have happened...

Yeah, Johnson basically can't commit fouls. If he does, they go to Bade as literally the only other player over 6'5", and Bade is a substantial dropoff from Johnson on both ends of the floor.

Again, I don't think Duke should try to go out of its game to try to draw fouls on Johnson. I think we should focus on executing our offense. But if, in the flow of our game, we get Johnson in foul trouble, all the better for us.

As for Purdue's shooting, it would be surprising if they shot the lights out from the perimeter given that their season averages from deep are very poor. But as you said, stranger things have happened. And if Moore catches fire (and he's a very streaky shooter), they could definitely be trouble. Limiting Moore and Johnson will make it very difficult for Purdue to score, because after those two guys the offensive production really drops off.

airowe
03-22-2010, 10:15 AM
Many times you can beat size with quickness. I don't know that much about Purdue's guards. Are they quick enough to be able to offset our size advantage at EVERY position?

We know Purdue's a good team defensively, but they've been scoring under 1 PPS in the tourney. Duke hasn't lost to a team shooting under 1 PPS all year. Can their defense hold our very efficient offense back enough to overcome their inefficient offense? Duke's defense is obviously very efficient and has been an even more dangerous weapon than our offense lately. On paper, this seems to be a mismatch in our favor but at this point in the year, no game is easy.

M B Walker
03-22-2010, 10:19 AM
That being said, if Purdue shoots lights out from the perimeter none of this could matter. Stranger things have happened...

If Duke shoots light out from the perimeter none of this could matter. Stranger things have happened...

Starter
03-22-2010, 10:26 AM
On paper, this seems to be a mismatch in our favor but at this point in the year, no game is easy.

Absolutely. I mean, maybe that works out like that, but let's see how it goes. I bet Kansas fans were feeling pretty good right around this time, and then Saturday night happened. I think Duke is very good this year and has an excellent opportunity, but this isn't like the Brand-Battier teams where we expect them to roll it out and beat people by 50. They win with solid execution. I like that we're playing Purdue instead of A&M in Houston. I just prefer to stay cautiously optimistic.

CDu
03-22-2010, 10:28 AM
Many times you can beat size with quickness. I don't know that much about Purdue's guards. Are they quick enough to be able to offset our size advantage at EVERY position?

We know Purdue's a good team defensively, but they've been scoring under 1 PPS in the tourney. Duke hasn't lost to a team shooting under 1 PPS all year. Can their defense hold our very efficient offense back enough to overcome their inefficient offense? Duke's defense is obviously very efficient and has been an even more dangerous weapon than our offense lately. On paper, this seems to be a mismatch in our favor but at this point in the year, no game is easy.

Their guards aren't slow (even Kramer is pretty quick). But offensively, they aren't as good as the guards from Cal. Jackson, Kramer, and Grant just don't shoot at all well, and they don't really create much off the dribble either. What they are is very strong with the ball. Kramer is tough if he gets his shoulders by you and he finishes well around the basket. But he can't shoot. Grant used to be able to shoot, but for some reason has lost his touch as a senior. Jackson is just too small to be any sort of scoring threat.

Moore and Johnson are the key guys for them. Moore can shoot it from 3 some (he's streaky though), and can attack off the dribble and draw fouls. They rely heavily on him from the perimeter. Johnson, is a very good shooter and very athletic at 6'10", but he's a finesse big man. He gets 3-4 offensive rebounds per game and can definitely get mop-up buckets. If those two guys can go for 20 each, Purdue can score 60-70, as they'll typically get 10-15 from one other guy (usually either Kramer or Grant). But if you can limit Johnson and Moore, then Purdue has HUGE problems scoring.

NM Duke Fan
03-22-2010, 10:39 AM
If Duke shoots light out from the perimeter none of this could matter. Stranger things have happened...

No guarantees that it will hold up, but I do take some comfort in the fact that Duke this year has held opponents to a very low 3 point shooting percentage, isnt it the best in the nation this year, or close?

CDu
03-22-2010, 10:41 AM
No guarantees that it will hold up, but I do take some comfort in the fact that Duke this year has held opponents to a very low 3 point shooting percentage, isnt it the best in the nation this year, or close?

Yes, it's the lowest in the nation. And our effective FG% on defense is the 8th lowest in the nation.

Andre Buckner Fan
03-22-2010, 10:43 AM
I think Duke is very good this year and has an excellent opportunity, but this isn't like the Brand-Battier teams where we expect them to roll it out and beat people by 50. They win with solid execution. I like that we're playing Purdue instead of A&M in Houston. I just prefer to stay cautiously optimistic.

Cautiously optimistic. I like that.

Rudy
03-22-2010, 11:10 AM
2. Reliant Stadium will likely have difficult sight lines for shooting (football field, raised floor, etc.). Can Duke improve on its 3-pt shooting over the 3-17 against Cal?
IIRC, most teams in the ACC tournament last year had trouble shooting 3's in Atlanta's football stadium, particularly in their first game on the floor, with the exception of two players, one of them Hayes from Maryland and another guy, maybe Tony Rice. The phenomenon generally affects everyone, with exceptions (heh), so it's a wild-card factor.

I expect more driving to the basket by Scheyer than he did last game. I expect and hope that the rebounding differential will be the key difference in the two teams.

I will predict Z will continue to do well. Refs don't seem to be calling ticky-tack fouls on anyone and Z benefits from this.

Two great developments in the last game. Z dunked. Lance actually finished a drive to the basket by making it (instead of just being fouled). :D

KyDevilinIL
03-22-2010, 11:18 AM
I remember the last time a top-seeded Duke team won its first two games in the NCAAT by double-digits and advanced to the Sweet 16 to face a No. 4 seed that had eked out a victory in a low-scoring second-round game against Texas A&M.

It was 2006, and Duke lost that Sweet 16 game.

The big talk in this thread in regard to Purdue is baffling. Purdue was a likely No. 1 seed until Hummel went down. It's a little unclear exactly what they are now, but they've still got some players and they've had weeks to get used to playing without Hummel. They proved this weekend that a lot of the naysayers – and I was one of them – need to take a step back.

Purdue will defend the daylights out of us. They are not tall, but they will be strong mentally and physically. We will not hold them to single-digit halves and I expect a tight game. We have to be ready to pull out a close one late, which we haven't done much of this season, and still haven't done against a good team.

We also, frankly, have a Sweet 16 hurdle to get over mentally. This game has been our nemesis for the better part of this decade, and because of that, I fully expect us to look pretty tight in the early going.

NSDukeFan
03-22-2010, 11:31 AM
Man, Kramer's going to be busy, guarding four players! Poor Z will have four players guarding him!

I agree that Kramer will guard Singler, but that will lead to Singler posting up. It would be a good match-up for us.
It may take 4 players to keep Z off the boards.

Basically agree with what's being said here. Although in wrt Zoubek/Johnson matchup, remember that K isn't afraid to bench people when he feels that they're not a good matchup defensively. We could see (unfortunately) that despite Z's performance he won't get a lot of playing time, as I think Mason and Miles match up better. The question will be whether the better matchup defensively will offset Z's O-reb potential and putbacks.


Based on performance lately, I can't see a situation or matchup in which Z is benched. At this point in their careers, I don't know if there is anyone that the Plumlees match up with better than Z as he is just a smarter, stronger defender at this point and he really is moving his feet quite well. Granted the Plumlees have vastly improved in this area during tournament play and I love the way they are challenging shots in the paint right now.

I agree that on paper, Duke looks like the stronger squad, but I would also say that about Kansas vs. Northern Iowa, Georgetown vs. Ohio and of course, Mississippi State vs. UNC and we all know how those turned out. I would be very (pleasantly) surprised if this game turns into a blowout. I expect Purdue to play very hard, defend well, move the ball around and keep the game low-scoring. I hope and expect Duke to prevail and am excited for the game.

Rudy
03-22-2010, 11:38 AM
. . . maybe Tony Rice.

Sorry, it was Toney Douglas at FSU last year. He made all tournament first team and his shooting was why. Tyrese Rice was BC's hot shot guard.

DevilHorns
03-22-2010, 11:40 AM
ESPN's Sportsnation poll (135000+ votes so far)

which team wins? Purdue (72%) and Duke (23%)

....and some other interesting upsets. I think Purdue fans do a great job of supporting their team via the interweb (ie, see the vote for Jon Scheyer Lowe's Award thread).

http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/poll/_/id/4135/ncaa-tournament-sweet-16

CDu
03-22-2010, 11:43 AM
The big talk in this thread in regard to Purdue is baffling. Purdue was a likely No. 1 seed until Hummel went down. It's a little unclear exactly what they are now, but they've still got some players and they've had weeks to get used to playing without Hummel. They proved this weekend that a lot of the naysayers – and I was one of them – need to take a step back.

Purdue was a possible #1 seed and then lost (by far) their best player. They were a thin squad up front to begin with, and now they're down to basically one guy up front. The discussion about them as a #1 seed is pointless. They have played only three teams rated high enough to be an at large team since losing Hummel, and they are 1-2 in such games with the two losses being pretty bad defeats. And they've yet to face a team nearly as good as Duke since the injury.

It's not big talk to say that they aren't nearly as good without Hummel. It's just reality. They are still a good team that plays very tough defense. But offensively, they're a shell of their former selves without Hummel.


Purdue will defend the daylights out of us. They are not tall, but they will be strong mentally and physically. We will not hold them to single-digit halves and I expect a tight game. We have to be ready to pull out a close one late, which we haven't done much of this season, and still haven't done against a good team.

I don't anticipate a huge blowout. I also don't expect to hold them to single-digit scoring. But I do think they'll have a lot of trouble getting to 55 points against us, and I think they'll have trouble keeping us below 60.

Can they beat us? Absolutely. They'll ugly the game up and hope to hit a few more shots than normal and hope to force us into a few more misses than normal and a few more turnovers than normal. But it will take perhaps their best effort of the season on both ends of the floor to beat us. And that is absolutely a possibility. But I'm not going to ignore the facts and just say "this team we're playing against is awesome."


We also, frankly, have a Sweet 16 hurdle to get over mentally. This game has been our nemesis for the better part of this decade, and because of that, I fully expect us to look pretty tight in the early going.

Nerves, injury, and foul trouble would be my biggest concerns (along with an uncharacteristically hot-shooting Purdue team). It is a very valid point that we're at the bugaboo point for this program for much of the last 10 years. But if we do hit a few shots early, I think the nerves will go away.

DukeSean
03-22-2010, 11:46 AM
ESPN's Sportsnation poll (135000+ votes so far)

which team wins? Purdue (72%) and Duke (23%)

....and some other interesting upsets. I think Purdue fans do a great job of supporting their team via the interweb (ie, see the vote for Jon Scheyer Lowe's Award thread).

http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/poll/_/id/4135/ncaa-tournament-sweet-16

I actually like that - gives our players motivation. We can't go into this game thinking we have it in the bag. If we do, we'll almost certainly lose.

Although I continue to be nervous about Scheyer's recent shooting woes, I will say that when it comes to clutch shots, he still seems to hit the big ones. So in that respect, I am less nervous.

I like our size advantage in the game, if we truly take advantage of it. If we can attack the rim early with our bigs, possibly get Johnson in a bit of foul trouble, then we'll really take over. I will reiterate the "cautiously optimistic"

CDu
03-22-2010, 11:49 AM
I actually like that - gives our players motivation. We can't go into this game thinking we have it in the bag. If we do, we'll almost certainly lose.

Although I continue to be nervous about Scheyer's recent shooting woes, I will say that when it comes to clutch shots, he still seems to hit the big ones. So in that respect, I am less nervous.

I like our size advantage in the game, if we truly take advantage of it. If we can attack the rim early with our bigs, possibly get Johnson in a bit of foul trouble, then we'll really take over. I will reiterate the "cautiously optimistic"

I don't think there's any threat that our players will look past Purdue. The team has been through too much for that, and the coaching staff will be sure to remind them. If this was an inexperienced team loaded with freshmen and sophomores, maybe that's different. But the upperclassmen have known too well the pain of losing to a lower-seeded team over the past 3-4 years. They'll be ready to play. If anything, I'd be more concerned about them being TOO ready.

jv001
03-22-2010, 11:56 AM
I get idea that Purdue is a good defensive team from the posts on this thread. What I have not read, do they pressure full court, trap or do they mostly play good half court defense? I think the game will be close unless we shoot lights out from 3. I don't see that happening in an arena like this one. Look for Duke to go inside to Zoubs and Kyle. Go Duke!

MChambers
03-22-2010, 12:03 PM
I worry about foul trouble, especially for Singler, Smith and Zoubek. I haven't see a lot of Purdue, but my guess is that they will try to draw charging fouls at every opportunity. At the other end of the floor, Johnson does a good job of drawing fouls.

Other than that, I'm not particularly worried about any aspect of this game, just because I think Purdue will have a hard time getting into its offense in the half court. Doesn't mean I don't think it will be a tough game, but I think we match up well with Purdue.

jhole
03-22-2010, 12:05 PM
Does anyone have a feeling for when Duke would play on Sunday, assuming all goes well on Friday evening? I have a potential family conflict that I can schedule around if I know it's going to be early afternoon (say 1:00) or late afternoon (say 5:00). Thanks in advance if anyone has some insight!

aimo
03-22-2010, 12:12 PM
Here in the Triangle area, if you have cable, you had your choice of games from 4 different channels. I have satellite so I did not get that choice, however, through the over air antenna, WRAL showed 1 game on the main CBS channel (5.1) and showed an alternate game on the SD Channel (5.2). I did not check the 5.2 channel during the Duke game today so not sure if they were showing the Purdue/A&M or Pitt/X. I would have thought other regions would have done something similar, but guess not.


Which works great if you can actually get a signal. My cable went out Saturday night, 10 minutes left in the Kansas/N. Iowa game, and I tried my digital box on both tvs (one upstairs, one down) and couldn't get squat. I got ion and another bogus indie channel, but no WRAL or WTVD. I have gotten WRAL in the past, last year when the Georgetown game was late airing b/c of a football game and they switched it to digital, but not this time. Thank goodness cable was back up by Sunday.

Mal
03-22-2010, 12:21 PM
It's sunny and unseasonably warm here today, and after the workmanlike drubbing we provided to a potentially dangerous team in the second round yesterday (as opposed to the nailbiter we had with Texas last year), it's hard not to feel pretty good about this coming Friday's matchup. Most of y'all have analyzed it to death here, but I'll add just a couple notes:

1. I don't care if it's Kramer or any other guy on Purdue who's guarding Singler - I'd like to see him posting up consistently. His interior passing yesterday was fantastic and I see no reason that should stop. I also feel like, when Kyle gets the ball inside and either MP is in the game, he's less likely to take a heavily defended or off-balance shot inside and get stuffed, etc. - he tends to look to get it to a Plumlee, and easy bucket hilarity ensues. For this reason, I envision Miles getting lots of action, regardless of how Zoubs is playing.

2. I imagine that, in addition to pulling out President Obama discounting them as a motivational tool for another week, Matt Painter's in his office today watching Grant Hill take down the Big Dog back in '94 and working on his speech about how (i) Purdue never quite made the Final Four under Gene Keady, and hasn't been in 30 years generally, (ii) Duke kept us out when we had our best chance, and (iii) Keady doesn't look like he's got too many years left in him and we owe it to him.

3. Whoever cautioned waaaaay upthread that there was an eerily similar general positive feeling about a year ago over how well we matched up with Villanova has a completely different recollection than I do. 'Nova was hot as a pistol and the obviously Chosen by Destiny team in last year's tourney. In addition, we all knew they had guards who could break us down off the dribble and a couple big guys who could dominate inside. We were notoriously vulnerable to off nights from Henderson and/or poor 3-point shooting, both of which were often induced by teams with solid exterior defense and perimeter speed/depth. Maybe this is hindsight being 20/20, but for all those reasons, I seem to recall thinking that 'Nova was a potentially terrible matchup for us. I'll remain cautious in my optimism throughout this week, but it'll be because of Purdue's intangibles and our Sweet 16 mental block in recent years, not because of the obvious matchup issues they present, as Villanova did.

Billy Dat
03-22-2010, 12:51 PM
Since this thread is full to bursting with everyone wanting everyone else to not get too cocky about the Purdue game, I offer an eerily similar lesson from history.

The 2003/4 Blue Devils destroy the Michigan State Spartans on their home court as part of the ACC/Big 10 Challenge. The game was enormously hyped by the local populace and Duke really embarrassed the Spartans. The following season, the two teams met again in the Sweet 16, in Texas, and the 1 seed Devils dropped the game to the #4 seed Spartans.

The 2008/8 Blue Devils destroy the Purdue Boilermakers on their home court as part of the ACC/Big 10 Challenge. The game was enormously hyped by the local populace and Duke really embarrassed Purdue. The following season, the two teams met again in the Sweet 16, in Texas, Duke as the #1 seed, Purdue as the #4...

Just a little fun, I hope 2010 is different than 2005. There are a ton of differences between the two scenarios as well, not the least of which is the loss of Robbie Hummell. Since 2005 was kind of the beginning of our current NCAA tourny funk, maybe this parallelism is fitting since we're going to break that cycle this year.

Among all the positives of our recent play, I am really excited by 2 things:
-The emergence of Nolan as a deadly, break you down offensive threat. I know people are frustrated by his head down pound the ball routine, but the kid is ELECTRIC. This aspect of his game has jumped up a few notches in the postseason and I don't think it gets enough attention. K spent a good deal of his post-game comments talking about Nolan. I really think he's the best we've had since J-Will in getting his own shot..and I think he's better than G in that regard because he's a better ballhandler and doesn't rely on jumping over people. He's breaking ankles!!!
-The expanding confidence of our frontcourt on offense. The more I see Lance and Z and the MPs looking to score and not hesitating, the greater my confidence in our ability to keep winning in the tournament. Nothing makes me happier then when they high-lo to each other. Want to focus on EW&S? Do so at your own peril, opposing defenses!

CDu
03-22-2010, 01:05 PM
Since this thread is full to bursting with everyone wanting everyone else to not get too cocky about the Purdue game, I offer an eerily similar lesson from history.

The 2003/4 Blue Devils destroy the Michigan State Spartans on their home court as part of the ACC/Big 10 Challenge. The game was enormously hyped by the local populace and Duke really embarrassed the Spartans. The following season, the two teams met again in the Sweet 16, in Texas, and the 1 seed Devils dropped the game to the #4 seed Spartans.

The 2008/8 Blue Devils destroy the Purdue Boilermakers on their home court as part of the ACC/Big 10 Challenge. The game was enormously hyped by the local populace and Duke really embarrassed Purdue. The following season, the two teams met again in the Sweet 16, in Texas, Duke as the #1 seed, Purdue as the #4...

Just a little fun, I hope 2010 is different than 2005. There are a ton of differences between the two scenarios as well, not the least of which is the loss of Robbie Hummell. Since 2005 was kind of the beginning of our current NCAA tourny funk, maybe this parallelism is fitting since we're going to break that cycle this year.

Of course, that MSU team returned its entire roster while we lost our starting PG and primary playmaker. This Purdue team lost its best player and both of its backup big men.


Among all the positives of our recent play, I am really excited by 2 things:
-The emergence of Nolan as a deadly, break you down offensive threat. I know people are frustrated by his head down pound the ball routine, but the kid is ELECTRIC. This aspect of his game has jumped up a few notches in the postseason and I don't think it gets enough attention. K spent a good deal of his post-game comments talking about Nolan. I really think he's the best we've had since J-Will in getting his own shot..and I think he's better than G in that regard because he's a better ballhandler and doesn't rely on jumping over people. He's breaking ankles!!!
-The expanding confidence of our frontcourt on offense. The more I see Lance and Z and the MPs looking to score and not hesitating, the greater my confidence in our ability to keep winning in the tournament. Nothing makes me happier then when they high-lo to each other. Want to focus on EW&S? Do so at your own peril, opposing defenses!

I'm very pleased with the way our frontcourt has stepped up. Earlier in the year, many were asking for at least 20 and 20 from the frontcourt. Well, in the tournament, we're getting 25.5 and 24. I don't know if that can continue, but it's been really nice to see given that Scheyer struggled a bit in the second round game. Even if the frontcourt cools off a bit, if Scheyer bounces back we should still have plenty of offensive punch.

tbyers11
03-22-2010, 01:16 PM
Does anyone have a feeling for when Duke would play on Sunday, assuming all goes well on Friday evening? I have a potential family conflict that I can schedule around if I know it's going to be early afternoon (say 1:00) or late afternoon (say 5:00). Thanks in advance if anyone has some insight!

The games on Sunday will be played at ~2:30 and ~5:15pm. If Duke beats Purdue, I would bet on the fact that we will play in the late game. It all depends on the possible matchups though. I could see CBS put a Ohio St/Michigan St matchup in the late time lost over a Duke/St Mary's matchup.

In your situation, I would schedule your conflict early.

Kedsy
03-22-2010, 01:27 PM
So, how does Purdue cope with Duke?

Purdue can cope by playing a four-out, one-in offense that Duke has had trouble against this year. The good news is we defended well against Cal's four-out, one-in, and Purdue doesn't shoot so well, so our second big may be able to play enough off them to be able to help after penetration.

However, if Purdue's 3 and 4 start hitting some outside shots, we could have trouble defensively, and since their defense is good enough to frustrate us, that could be enough for them to win. I hope not, and Duke is certainly the favorite, but Purdue probably has a better chance to beat us than NC State did, and we all know how that turned out.

On the other hand, if Purdue doesn't have a super-shooting game, they will have a very difficult time against us because we should be able to dominate them on the boards. The key there is don't let them outhustle us, but that has rarely been a problem for us, so I am hopeful we will bust after rebounds and loose balls the way we have done pretty much the entire year (with two notable exceptions (State, G-town) that hopefully won't be repeated). If we come out flat, though, and they can hold us even on the glass, we could be in for a barn burner.

There are rarely easy games once we get to this stage.

Troublemaker
03-22-2010, 02:18 PM
Duke matches up very well with Purdue, but because I'm contrarian by habit and because I'm worried about the karmic nature of the entire world picking Duke to win on Friday, I'll make a case for the Boilermakers by expanding on something I briefly mentioned above.

The one thing I feel is being a bit overlooked is that Purdue's greatest strength, its withering perimeter defense, plays into Duke's greatest weakness, our lack of depth at guard. From almost every other basketball angle, Duke matches up well, but it only takes one crack in the dam to lead to a burst. We've gotten used to Duke's Big 3 playing 35-40 minutes a game and playing well, but there are teams out there that have the defensive talent to perhaps wear the Big 3 down and cause out-of-character mistakes. Purdue is one of them.

Kramer, Moore, Grant, Jackson, and Barlow are quick guys that really get after you chest-to-chest on defense. And Purdue has even more guards it can use if needed; they just have a lot of guards on their roster, period, and Duke doesn't. We have to hope that the Big 3 are strong with the ball in the face of this pressure and don't wear down, or if they do wear down at the end, we have to hope that Duke has a comfortable lead at that point and can withstand some slippage. Purdue's best chance to win this game is to beat up our Big 3 and force them to make poor, tired decisions that lead to turnovers and fast break chances. The odds are against them being successful but it's not impossible; Purdue is one of the better teams in the country at forcing turnovers. Hopefully Andre can provide some minutes in this game, but his ball-handling might not be strong enough to be trusted.

There's also the unpredictability factor of a tough, well-coached team carrying an underdog mentality, seeking revenge, and having 4-5 days to prepare. When a team is injury-depleted and feeling outmatched, that's often when a coach becomes most emboldened to try new things that can perhaps throw an opponent off its game. What if, for example, Painter decides to full court press Duke the entire second half to try and exploit his greater guard depth? Would Duke react well to that? We certainly performed well against Clemson when we knew the press was coming, but it's maybe a different animal to adjust on-the-fly. Actually, I'm sure Coach K would be prepared for that, but I guess I'm saying I expect Purdue to throw some wrinkles at us. It's a one-and-done format. In a 7-game series, there's not much Painter could do but he and his team just needs to win Game 1 here.

BD80
03-22-2010, 02:42 PM
ESPN's Sportsnation poll (135000+ votes so far)

which team wins? Purdue (72%) and Duke (23%)

....

http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/poll/_/id/4135/ncaa-tournament-sweet-16

Just curious, who wins the other 5% of the time?

Knowing ESPN, it is probably uCon.

94duke
03-22-2010, 02:46 PM
Just curious, who wins the other 5% of the time?

Knowing ESPN, it is probably uCon.

Ted Valentine. :p

DevilHorns
03-22-2010, 02:48 PM
Just curious, who wins the other 5% of the time?

Knowing ESPN, it is probably uCon.

Woops it was supposed to be Duke (28%).

juise
03-22-2010, 03:14 PM
Woops it was supposed to be Duke (28%).

There are similar percentages saying that Cornell will upset Kentucky and that Saint Mary's will upset Baylor. Either SportsNation is upset-happy or a few schools have been doing some skewing.

juise
03-22-2010, 03:22 PM
The 2008/8 Blue Devils destroy the Purdue Boilermakers on their home court as part of the ACC/Big 10 Challenge. The game was enormously hyped by the local populace and Duke really embarrassed Purdue. The following season, the two teams met again in the Sweet 16, in Texas, Duke as the #1 seed, Purdue as the #4...

One of the Purdue players (Moore?) made a reference to that loss during yesterday's post-game press conference. They have not forgotten and they will be motivated by that game.

Having siad that, I like this year's Duke team a little better than last year's squad. The two missing key players from last season's game are:
Hummel - lead Purdue is scoring (15) and rebounding (8)
Henderson - scored 2 points on 1-8 shooting, but had 9 boards

Duke's three leading scorers were... Scheyer (20), Singler (20), Smith (12).

Kedsy
03-22-2010, 03:28 PM
One of the Purdue players (Moore?) made a reference to that loss during yesterday's post-game press conference. They have not forgotten and they will be motivated by that game.

Having siad that, I like this year's Duke team a little better than last year's squad. The two missing key players from last season's game are:
Hummel - lead Purdue is scoring (15) and rebounding (8)
Henderson - scored 2 points on 1-8 shooting, but had 9 boards

Duke's three leading scorers were... Scheyer (20), Singler (20), Smith (12).

Yeah, but whoever guarded Henderson and hounded him into 1 for 8 shooting is now free to defend Singler or Scheyer or Smith. Other than Purdue's desire for revenge, I don't think you can translate too much from a single game played a year ago between teams who have different rosters now then they did then.

superdave
03-22-2010, 03:37 PM
Purdue's best chance to win this game is to beat up our Big 3 and force them to make poor, tired decisions that lead to turnovers and fast break chances. The odds are against them being successful but it's not impossible;

I feel like this has been our downfall in the tourney every year for a while now, probably since the 2004 Final Four. Our wings and guards get bumped, roughed up and out-worked by their defenders. I dont see Kyle letting that happen to him this year - he's developing a nasty streak. And Zoubek's big wide screens will help too. Hopefully Nolan and Scheyer can create in spite of physical D.

It would be nice to get the same early scoring from our secondary options though to keep the defense honest.

ElSid
03-22-2010, 03:38 PM
I went to the ACC Tourney and maybe it started to occur before then and I just didn't notice since I was just watching on TV, but our halfcourt D is a thing of beauty right now. In the ACCT, I noticed early on in the first game against UVA that the main impediment to us winning would be if we gave up lots of points in transition. It has happened in spurts since then, but, for the most part, we keep opponents in check in transition and with our bigs rebounding like they've been, there are a lot of "one & done" possessions for our D. After watching Cal push it against L'vile, I was concerned that we wouldn't be able to keep up with them in transition but I guess we shot well enough (and got back quick enough) that it didn't happen.

-i don't have stats to show it...but when you can switch lance thomas onto jerome randle in the half court and have little drop off, your half court d is nasty. Cal players said it was by far the toughest defense they've seen all year.

ElSid
03-22-2010, 03:45 PM
I'd be surprised if Kramer didn't guard Singler. Kramer has the strength and mental capabilities to successfully guard Singler. I think it would be THE match-up of the game.

While our Big 3 are obviously going to be key, I'm interested in seeing how Duke exploits its height. It was done a great job of that in the past two games and I'm looking forward to how they get it done this time around. With Purdue being an average rebounding team at best, it will give Z, LT, and MP1&2 ample opportunity to grab offensive rebounds and put-backs.

Even though Purdue has struggled lately, I am a little worried. This has been the craziest tournament in a long time, and anything is possible. Just ask Kansas.

Bottomline - take Purdue very very seriously. This is where Coach K will shine: our guys will come into this game with a "take-nothing-for-granted" mentality but with that ego / swagga that our starting 5 always carry with them.

Kramer is perfect to defend singler, except just a smidge short maybe. Kramer is an AMAZING athlete and I implore whoever on this board called him a slow white guy to read a bit further. He's very capable of playing SECONDARY for the Purdue football team...last I checked, that's a speed position. He is one of the scariest players on the team because he has huge heart, probably has the "white guy" chip on his shoulder, and can jump over a volkswagon. i wouldn't have been worried about Purdue as much, but they played so tough the last couple games.

What else, though, is that Duke also has a chip on its shoulder. They said we didn't deserve a one seed, they said we got an easy bracket, they say we're slow and unathletic. Coach K will use both of these chips on shoulders to motivate his team. No way we walk into this game with anything other than our strongest effort level of the year.

BD80
03-22-2010, 04:07 PM
... Kramer is an AMAZING athlete ... and can jump over a volkswagon. ...

Good thing we start an Escalade :D

CDu
03-22-2010, 04:18 PM
Kramer is perfect to defend singler, except just a smidge short maybe. Kramer is an AMAZING athlete and I implore whoever on this board called him a slow white guy to read a bit further. He's very capable of playing SECONDARY for the Purdue football team...last I checked, that's a speed position. He is one of the scariest players on the team because he has huge heart, probably has the "white guy" chip on his shoulder, and can jump over a volkswagon. i wouldn't have been worried about Purdue as much, but they played so tough the last couple games.

Yeah, I'm calling shenanigans on the bolded text. Kramer is certainly quick and fast and very strong. And he definitely doesn't deserve the label of unathletic. The kid is certainly an athlete. But leaping ability is not a strength of his.

airowe
03-22-2010, 04:39 PM
Yeah, I'm calling shenanigans on the bolded text. Kramer is certainly quick and fast and very strong. And he definitely doesn't deserve the label of unathletic. The kid is certainly an athlete. But leaping ability is not a strength of his.

Seriously, let's not put him in the pantheon of Jordan Davidson...

ElSid
03-22-2010, 04:48 PM
Yeah, I'm calling shenanigans on the bolded text. Kramer is certainly quick and fast and very strong. And he definitely doesn't deserve the label of unathletic. The kid is certainly an athlete. But leaping ability is not a strength of his.

haha fair enough. i was trying to pick a very small car. maybe an original VW bug.

i would never have used BOLD. he's not that good. just trying to point out that the football team is asking him to come back for a fifth year and play football. no one does that if they're not a good athlete. oh wait, paulus had a pretty terrible tournament career didn't he.

DukeGirl4ever
03-22-2010, 06:18 PM
3. Whoever cautioned waaaaay upthread that there was an eerily similar general positive feeling about a year ago over how well we matched up with Villanova has a completely different recollection than I do. 'Nova was hot as a pistol and the obviously Chosen by Destiny team in last year's tourney. In addition, we all knew they had guards who could break us down off the dribble and a couple big guys who could dominate inside. We were notoriously vulnerable to off nights from Henderson and/or poor 3-point shooting, both of which were often induced by teams with solid exterior defense and perimeter speed/depth. Maybe this is hindsight being 20/20, but for all those reasons, I seem to recall thinking that 'Nova was a potentially terrible matchup for us. I'll remain cautious in my optimism throughout this week, but it'll be because of Purdue's intangibles and our Sweet 16 mental block in recent years, not because of the obvious matchup issues they present, as Villanova did.


HERE, HERE! I saw that too and I though huh? I was a worried mess for a whole week with that match-up because I KNEW NOVA was more athletic and was going to beat us up! They were hot at that time. I even took a personal day for that Friday (game was Thursday night) because I just knew it was going in our favor and I did not need to be around my co-workers (we live an hour from Philly).
If anyone last year thought that we had a good chance to beat NOVA, they were on crack! Kidding...maybe they were just more confident than me!

devildownunder
03-22-2010, 07:43 PM
HERE, HERE! I saw that too and I though huh? I was a worried mess for a whole week with that match-up because I KNEW NOVA was more athletic and was going to beat us up! They were hot at that time. I even took a personal day for that Friday (game was Thursday night) because I just knew it was going in our favor and I did not need to be around my co-workers (we live an hour from Philly).
If anyone last year thought that we had a good chance to beat NOVA, they were on crack! Kidding...maybe they were just more confident than me!

I don't know what the prevailing thought was but I do remember Troublemaker responding to some highly optimistic posts with the comment "this is the nightmare matchup for us. we have our hands full". Boy was he right. Even I didn't think it was going to be as bad as it was for us, and I wasn't optimistic. Villanova was basically just like us except they actually had the right personnel for it, as opposed to just going with that style by default because we didn't have the horses to do anything else.

devildownunder
03-22-2010, 07:46 PM
Very relieved that this regional hasn't turned into the Big 12 challenge for us. Still, just how much of a road game will this be for us? I know we're never the fave in the tourney but going up against baylor in big 12 territory, I have to believe the crowd will be VERY much against us. I think being in such a cavernous building may actually help, though. Those places don't really get that loud unless EVERYONE is vehemently cheering against you. We play after Baylor. I think that helps as well.

Going to watch both Purdue's games later this week to get a better feel for how they're playing.

mehmattski
03-22-2010, 07:52 PM
I don't know what the prevailing thought was but I do remember Troublemaker responding to some highly optimistic posts with the comment "this is the nightmare matchup for us. we have our hands full". Boy was he right. Even I didn't think it was going to be as bad as it was for us, and I wasn't optimistic. Villanova was basically just like us except they actually had the right personnel for it, as opposed to just going with that style by default because we didn't have the horses to do anything else.

No need to guess, the thread is right here (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15297&highlight=Villanova). Troublemaker did seem to be the wisest one in this case, so it's a good sign that he considers Purdue a good matchup and is "only playing devil's advocate" with his critique in this one.

Overall, the mood was much more pessimistic than in this current thread. On the other hand, I didn't post in that thread, and I tend to be more optimistic, so we've got some observer bias right there. Still, Purdue 2010 < Nova 2009.

DevilHorns
03-22-2010, 07:54 PM
Andy Katz (most recent ESPN article): "I'm not sure whether I'm alone here, but don't you get the sense that everyone is waiting for Duke to fall?"

Well ya Andy, since you fools at ESPN continue to peddle this dirt to the public.

DukeGirl4ever
03-22-2010, 07:57 PM
No need to guess, the thread is right here (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15297&highlight=Villanova). Troublemaker did seem to be the wisest one in this case, so it's a good sign that he considers Purdue a good matchup and is "only playing devil's advocate" with his critique in this one.

Overall, the mood was much more pessimistic than in this current thread. On the other hand, I didn't post in that thread, and I tend to be more optimistic, so we've got some observer bias right there. Still, Purdue 2010 < Nova 2009.

And I wasn't a member then but I would have been trying to back up Troublemaker's "pessimism," if that's what you call it. I can honestly say I am much more calm this year and I am not freaking out about this match-up but know it will be a hard fought game. Whoever executes their game plan will win...last year, I didn't give us a chance in the burning gates....

NashvilleDevil
03-22-2010, 08:35 PM
Andy Katz (most recent ESPN article): "I'm not sure whether I'm alone here, but don't you get the sense that everyone is waiting for Duke to fall?"

Well ya Andy, since you fools at ESPN continue to peddle this dirt to the public.

From the same article: "Duke will face gritty Purdue on Friday, then would meet either of Sweet 16 rookies Baylor or Saint Mary's in the Elite Eight. The path won't be smooth, but it doesn't look as daunting as it did before the tournament."

I am now confused. I thought Duke had the easiest path to the Final Four?

devildownunder
03-22-2010, 08:36 PM
From the same article: "Duke will face gritty Purdue on Friday, then would meet either of Sweet 16 rookies Baylor or Saint Mary's in the Elite Eight. The path won't be smooth, but it doesn't look as daunting as it did before the tournament."

I am now confused. I thought Duke had the easiest path to the Final Four?

Well, was Katz saying it was smooth and easy? Just askin'.

NashvilleDevil
03-22-2010, 08:40 PM
Well, was Katz saying it was smooth and easy? Just askin'.

From Katz's breakdown of the South region: "Although the Blue Devils' seed isn't a problem, they were placed in the easiest bracket despite being the third-ranked No. 1 seed behind Kansas and Kentucky."

JohnGalt
03-22-2010, 09:05 PM
These guys do so much talking this time of year they can't help but become self-contradictory. There was a recent thread along this subject line. The fact that we post and comment ad nauseam is precisely what they're going after. It's all about the entertainment factor.

DoubleDuke Dad
03-22-2010, 10:05 PM
Andy Katz (most recent ESPN article): "I'm not sure whether I'm alone here, but don't you get the sense that everyone is waiting for Duke to fall?"

Well ya Andy, since you fools at ESPN continue to peddle this dirt to the public.

So why did he pick us to make the final four?

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/tournament

DevilHorns
03-22-2010, 10:11 PM
So why did he pick us to make the final four?

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/tournament

Interesting.

I get that Andy Katz and the rest of 'em at ESPN need random niblets in every article to cater to different aspects of the greater reader base (ie, they need to include a little bit of Duke hate so that a large majority of their readers continue to read their spew), but for the love of flying spaghetti monster, be consistent. If you pick someone in the 4, don't claim that you see them itching to lose early.

-bdbd
03-22-2010, 10:20 PM
Very relieved that this regional hasn't turned into the Big 12 challenge for us. Still, just how much of a road game will this be for us? I know we're never the fave in the tourney but going up against baylor in big 12 territory, I have to believe the crowd will be VERY much against us. I think being in such a cavernous building may actually help, though. Those places don't really get that loud unless EVERYONE is vehemently cheering against you. We play after Baylor. I think that helps as well.

Yes, I was very concerned over a huge A&M crowd. I do think the neutrals, as well as the SM and Baylor fans (who perceive us as a greater threat than Purdue), will be rooting against Duke. However, don't expect the loud, venomous cheering of a place like Comcast. Especially if Duke gets an early lead they won't be that into it (neutrals cheerers against a team are easier to quiet than our opponent's faithful diehards). Also, as Downunder states, these domes just don't get as loud as the smaller boxes.

I do worry that the perspective, however, of shooting in a dome could hurt our perimeter shooters. It has happened before.

The crowd won't be pro-Duke. But it could have been much, much worse. Just ask any Aggie fans.

:cool:

devildownunder
03-22-2010, 10:23 PM
From Katz's breakdown of the South region: "Although the Blue Devils' seed isn't a problem, they were placed in the easiest bracket despite being the third-ranked No. 1 seed behind Kansas and Kentucky."

Now that's well spotted. Somebody should put this back in Katz's face. I'd love to hear what he'd say.

juise
03-22-2010, 10:37 PM
Yes, I was very concerned over a huge A&M crowd. I do think the neutrals, as well as the SM and Baylor fans (who perceive us as a greater threat than Purdue), will be rooting against Duke.

I agree that not having A&M there will be good thing. Their fan base in larger and has a demonstrated history of bringing a rabid presence. Not to mention that having both A&M and Baylor means two fan bases that will cheer against Duke. Also, there would be a greater attraction for locals to come and make noise for the Texas schools.

I've been to tourney games and I know how likely it is that everyone will cheer against Duke. As far as crowd noise goes, I think that having the late game will be beneficial because the St. Mary's and Baylor crowds will be tired. One of them will also be pretty dejected, I would think.

SCMatt33
03-22-2010, 11:35 PM
Many times you can beat size with quickness. I don't know that much about Purdue's guards. Are they quick enough to be able to offset our size advantage at EVERY position?

Let's put it this way, you could have asked the same question about Cal and Purdue's guards aren't as quick as Cal's. They will likely need a career night from Johnson to have any chance. What's worse is that they are a pretty bad 3-pt shooting team at 32% on the year, and Hummel was their best shooter at about 36% from 3. Moore shoots a little over 34% and no other player who gets significant minutes shoots much over 30%.

If Duke can avoid being totally stopped on the offensive end, there is a very very good chance of winning the game.

MarkD83
03-23-2010, 12:39 AM
Now that's well spotted. Somebody should put this back in Katz's face. I'd love to hear what he'd say.

This is exactly why sports writers write these things. The more emails and "hits" they get for their artilces the better. If you don't like his opinion don't respond and the sound of "crickets" will get him to write something different.

devildownunder
03-23-2010, 04:18 AM
This is exactly why sports writers write these things. The more emails and "hits" they get for their artilces the better. If you don't like his opinion don't respond and the sound of "crickets" will get him to write something different.

I disagree. If he were just spouting Duke hatred, then maybe I could see ignoring him -- although I'm not sure even that's the case these days, the internet has changed the rules. But Katz said one thing in one column, then turned around and contradicted it in another. Enough of that, and enough of getting called on it, will hurt him, not help him. I know credibility doesn't matter like it used to (how pathetic is that?) but I do think that if people start to get the sense that you routinely talk out of both sides of your mouth, it's bad for business. We're talking sports, not politics. I think people still want information and opinions they can respect and trust, not just someone to tell them exactly what they already believe.

moonpie23
03-23-2010, 06:17 AM
"talking" about sports = "writing" about music = "dancing" about architecture.

Troublemaker
03-23-2010, 07:22 AM
Troublemaker did seem to be the wisest one in this case, so it's a good sign that he considers Purdue a good matchup and is "only playing devil's advocate" with his critique in this one.

Nah, I'm not a good judge of things as I've been wrong many times before.

I'm just trying to keep a healthy respect for Purdue, that's all. Those wounded bear type teams are dangerous and unpredictable. One thing I wanted to add is that Purdue is relentless. A&M had a nice lead on them but they fought back and won, so if Duke is in the same situation on Friday, don't get too comfortable. Especially since I think fatigue could play a role vs Purdue.

Overall, I think Duke should win this game 80% of the time and I'm just hoping the 20% doesn't happen to occur on Friday.

KyDevilinIL
03-23-2010, 07:30 AM
Not exactly following the prevailing topic here, but anyone notice how invisible we continue to be in the national discussion? I certainly don't mind being on the fringe of the chatter, but I can't tell you how many times I've heard talking heads no TV and radio rehash the first weekend, and we hardly warrant a mention. And in some cases, the commentators talked about the impressive performances by No. 1 seeds "Syracuse and Kentucky," without acknowledging in the least that we were pretty decent in our own right.

Again, I don't care. I know it's been going on all season, and it's kind of nice for once. But it's just bizarre. It's almost as if all the folks who ragged on us after Selection Sunday refuse to pay any attention to us, hoping the readers/viewers/listeners wouldn't notice how wrong the "experts" were about us (so far).

Oh well. Just and observation.

davekay1971
03-23-2010, 09:07 AM
While the talking heads are largely ignoring Duke as a viable contender for the championship, the "ho-hum, Duke's going to make the final four because they're bracket sucks" theme on ESPN and in other national media makes lovely bulletin-board fodder for our competition. Purdue looked in rounds 1 and 2 like they really wanted to prove to everyone that they were still a good team wtihout Hummel (which, of course, they are). They'll undoubtedly want to prove that they still are a final four threat without him, and beating us will be a great way to do that. Baylor, assuming they beat St. Mary's, will have multiple motivations: the "nobody believes in us" angle, the "win this and go to our first final four ever" angle, the "beat a traditional powerhouse and live forever" angle, the home crowd, etc.

If we get to Indianapolis, we'll have earned the trip, regardless of what the Duke-haters and talking pinheads say.

JohnGalt
03-23-2010, 09:12 AM
Not exactly following the prevailing topic here, but anyone notice how invisible we continue to be in the national discussion? I certainly don't mind being on the fringe of the chatter, but I can't tell you how many times I've heard talking heads no TV and radio rehash the first weekend, and we hardly warrant a mention. And in some cases, the commentators talked about the impressive performances by No. 1 seeds "Syracuse and Kentucky," without acknowledging in the least that we were pretty decent in our own right.

Again, I don't care. I know it's been going on all season, and it's kind of nice for once. But it's just bizarre. It's almost as if all the folks who ragged on us after Selection Sunday refuse to pay any attention to us, hoping the readers/viewers/listeners wouldn't notice how wrong the "experts" were about us (so far).

Oh well. Just and observation.

I think part of it too is the fact that we don't seem to have that one, polarizing Duke figure that's become a staple of the Duke-haters. Who is there really to despise on this team? The "Scheyer-face" is really the most anybody goes after...

To agree with your point, I'm enjoying flying under the radar as well.

roywhite
03-23-2010, 09:20 AM
Baylor, assuming they beat St. Mary's, will have multiple motivations: the "nobody believes in us" angle, the "win this and go to our first final four ever" angle, the "beat a traditional powerhouse and live forever" angle, the home crowd, etc.

If we get to Indianapolis, we'll have earned the trip, regardless of what the Duke-haters and talking pinheads say.


I agree with your points, but I think St. Mary's could well beat Baylor. They've got good ballhandling and a very productive big man.

I'm impressed with the lower seeds that have made it this far...Cornell, Washington, Northern Iowa, and St. Mary's all look pretty good. Wouldn't be surprised to see some more wins out of this group.

Channing
03-23-2010, 09:26 AM
Interesting.

I get that Andy Katz and the rest of 'em at ESPN need random niblets in every article to cater to different aspects of the greater reader base (ie, they need to include a little bit of Duke hate so that a large majority of their readers continue to read their spew), but for the love of flying spaghetti monster, be consistent. If you pick someone in the 4, don't claim that you see them itching to lose early.

I'm confused. How is Andy Katz contradicting himself. On one hand, he said Duke had the easiest bracket at the beginning of the tournament. Fine. Now, Villanova, the #2 seed in that bracket lost and Purdue (who many thought would lose during the first weekend) advanced to the sweet 16. So while Duke had an easy road, their road is now easier (i.e. less daunting) than it was at the beginning of the tournament.

If you want to get indignant over the connotation of daunting so be it, but I don't really see any contradictions.

cbnaylor
03-23-2010, 09:33 AM
I'm confused. How is Andy Katz contradicting himself. On one hand, he said Duke had the easiest bracket at the beginning of the tournament. Fine. Now, Villanova, the #2 seed in that bracket lost and Purdue (who many thought would lose during the first weekend) advanced to the sweet 16. So while Duke had an easy road, their road is now easier (i.e. less daunting) than it was at the beginning of the tournament.

If you want to get indignant over the connotation of daunting so be it, but I don't really see any contradictions.

Katz also made the statement, "The Blue Devils have been consistent at home and on neutral courts in the past month." I'm sorry but I do believe Andy that the Blue Devils are not only consistent but are undefeated at home and on neutral courts.....once again, somebody isn't doing their homework.

Link: http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/tournament/2010/columns/story?columnist=katz_andy&id=5018002

JohnGalt
03-23-2010, 09:50 AM
Katz also made the statement, "The Blue Devils have been consistent at home and on neutral courts in the past month." I'm sorry but I do believe Andy that the Blue Devils are not only consistent but are undefeated at home and on neutral courts.....once again, somebody isn't doing their homework.

Link: http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/tournament/2010/columns/story?columnist=katz_andy&id=5018002

I think you just unwittingly echoed Steven's point.

Isn't being undefeated the very definition of consistent?

davekay1971
03-23-2010, 09:57 AM
I think you just unwittingly echoed Steven's point.

Isn't being undefeated the very definition of consistent?

Katz statement was that Duke had been consistent on neutal courts and at home the last month, while Duke has actually been undefeated on home and neutral courts all season. A fine point, but does reflect a lack of attention on his part.

I don't actually get worked up over these expert predictions and evaluations. Ultimately, it's just airspace filler. What Duke does on the court is far more important. Win the NC, and the airspace will fill with guys like Katz ringing our praises. Lose to Purdue, and they'll blather on about how we were fundamentally flawed and they saw losing all along.

cbnaylor
03-23-2010, 10:01 AM
I think you just unwittingly echoed Steven's point.

Isn't being undefeated the very definition of consistent?

Can't really say that I agree with you on this one John. Consistent and being undefeated are different. "Consistent" is being consistent with winning and having a habit of winning but undefeated is more than being consistent. Was the Indiana 1976 basketball team consistent or undefeated?

KyDevilinIL
03-23-2010, 10:07 AM
Win the NC, and the airspace will fill with guys like Katz ringing our praises.

If we are fortunate enough to win a championship this season, I'd be willing to bet we'll be the least heralded title winner in some time. It'll be some sort of, "Yeah, I guess they were pretty good, but the bracket fell into place and then apart for them" gibberish.

Not that I care, though. It just seems like the national media – that blob of writers/heads that essentially parrots each other throughout the season – can muster praise for this team only grudgingly. And for two reasons, I suspect: 1) Praising Duke fills their Twitters and inboxes with tons of anti-Duke nonsense, and the heads are tired of it, and 2) Their access to K and the program as a whole is much more limited than it is at other places, so they have no "sources" or "relationships" to protect by constantly saying nice things. "Homerism" applies not just to someone's alma mater or favorite team; journos who are afraid of burning a bridge are very much guilty of homerism, and you see it every single time you turn on ESPN, especially.

roywhite
03-23-2010, 10:14 AM
Not that I care, though. It just seems like the national media – that blob of writers/heads that essentially parrots each other throughout the season – can muster praise for this team only grudgingly. And for two reasons, I suspect: 1) Praising Duke fills their Twitters and inboxes with tons of anti-Duke nonsense, and the heads are tired of it, and 2) Their access to K and the program as a whole is much more limited than it is at other places, so they have no "sources" or "relationships" to protect by constantly saying nice things. "Homerism" applies not just to someone's alma mater or favorite team; journos who are afraid of burning a bridge are very much guilty of homerism, and you see it every single time you turn on ESPN, especially.

Agree with your point. The problem for some of these talking heads occurs when they actually watch Duke play these days. It becomes harder for them to ignore or underrate this team.

Ask Jim Nantz and Clark Kellogg, who did our games in Jax-ville. I don't think they have any doubt of Duke's ability to reach the Final Four and compete for the championship.

mehmattski
03-23-2010, 10:26 AM
Most of the people here seem to believe in some sort of karmic retribution associated with feeling too confident about this weekend's games.

I am a graduate student, and the student ticket lottery for Indianapolis is on Wednesday night.

I feel good enough about Duke's Final Four chances that I want to write a check and put my name into the lottery. Clearly, some believe that my decision tomorrow night, and the associated underlying confidence in Duke, could affect the performance of Duke's men's basketball team on Friday/Sunday.

So I ask: what is the karmic scenario associated with my decision to join the Final Four lottery. Would it be my fault if Duke loses?

roywhite
03-23-2010, 10:29 AM
Most of the people here seem to believe in some sort of karmic retribution associated with feeling too confident about this weekend's games.

I am a graduate student, and the student ticket lottery for Indianapolis is on Wednesday night.

I feel good enough about Duke's Final Four chances that I want to write a check and put my name into the lottery. Clearly, some believe that my decision tomorrow night, and the associated underlying confidence in Duke, could affect the performance of Duke's men's basketball team on Friday/Sunday.

So I ask: what is the karmic scenario associated with my decision to join the Final Four lottery. Would it be my fault if Duke loses?


Hey, I like your attitude. You're willing to "take the charge" and submit yourself to the block/charge decision, whether it's a foul, or a good play.

Play on, I say. :)

cbnaylor
03-23-2010, 10:32 AM
Hey, I like your attitude. You're willing to "take the charge" and submit yourself to the block/charge decision, whether it's a foul, or a good play.

Play on, I say. :)

Nice Metaphor Roy!

stals
03-23-2010, 10:45 AM
Nah, I'm not a good judge of things as I've been wrong many times before.

I'm just trying to keep a healthy respect for Purdue, that's all. Those wounded bear type teams are dangerous and unpredictable. One thing I wanted to add is that Purdue is relentless. A&M had a nice lead on them but they fought back and won, so if Duke is in the same situation on Friday, don't get too comfortable. Especially since I think fatigue could play a role vs Purdue.

Overall, I think Duke should win this game 80% of the time and I'm just hoping the 20% doesn't happen to occur on Friday.
Troublemaker- Pomeroy is with you. He has Duke with a 79% probability of winning and predicts a 7 point win.

NM Duke Fan
03-23-2010, 10:53 AM
I agree with your points, but I think St. Mary's could well beat Baylor. They've got good ballhandling and a very productive big man.

I'm impressed with the lower seeds that have made it this far...Cornell, Washington, Northern Iowa, and St. Mary's all look pretty good. Wouldn't be surprised to see some more wins out of this group.

I am in total agreement with the above statements, 4 really good fundamentally excellent teams that have a decent chance at winning their next games.

DevilHorns
03-23-2010, 10:57 AM
Troublemaker- Pomeroy is with you. He has Duke with a 79% probability of winning and predicts a 7 point win.

Accuscore on ESPN (10000+ simulations)

Prediction for the Duke - Cal game:

Duke 57%, Cal 43% ---- Average score Duke 76.1, Cal 72.9 (+3.2 Duke)

Prediction for the Duke - Purdue game:

Duke 65%, Purdue 35% ---- Average score Duke 69.4, Purdue 64.1 (+5.3 Duke)

flyingdutchdevil
03-23-2010, 11:00 AM
I am in total agreement with the above statements, 4 really good fundamentally excellent teams that have a decent chance at winning their next games.

Not to mention that every one of these teams has a player with an incredible name:

Cornell (Chris Wroblewski - okay, not that cool)
UNI (Ali Farokhmanesh)
St. Mary's (Omar Samhan)
Washington (the greatest name in the NCAA - Quincy Pondexter)

AlaskanAssassin
03-23-2010, 11:19 AM
Nolan tweeted that he is sick. I hope he gets better and that doesn't affect his game.

NM Duke Fan
03-23-2010, 11:22 AM
Not to mention that every one of these teams has a player with an incredible name:

Cornell (Chris Wroblewski - okay, not that cool)
UNI (Ali Farokhmanesh)
St. Mary's (Omar Samhan)
Washington (the greatest name in the NCAA - Quincy Pondexter)

Then maybe a slightly cooler Cornell first name: Cornell freshman Eitan Chemerinski. For those who have not seen him with a Rubik's Cube, a must see video:


http://johnclay.bloginky.com/2010/03/21/cornell-basketball-takes-on-rubiks-cube/

sagegrouse
03-23-2010, 11:29 AM
Most of the people here seem to believe in some sort of karmic retribution associated with feeling too confident about this weekend's games.

I am a graduate student, and the student ticket lottery for Indianapolis is on Wednesday night.

....

So I ask: what is the karmic scenario associated with my decision to join the Final Four lottery. Would it be my fault if Duke loses?

You are a graduate student, scorned by the undergraduates and despised by the professors for whom you are merely an indentured servant. It is always your fault, whether you enter or not.

Advice: write the check and enter the lottery.

sagegrouse

GLTBD
03-23-2010, 11:55 AM
Nolan tweeted that he is sick. I hope he gets better and that doesn't affect his game.

I did not want to read this. Do we know how sick? Get better Nolan we need you.

Kedsy
03-23-2010, 11:57 AM
So I ask: what is the karmic scenario associated with my decision to join the Final Four lottery. Would it be my fault if Duke loses?

If the lottery is before the game and you want the tickets if they win, you have no choice but to go ahead with it, and absolutely no blame can be attached to you (for this, anyway).

When I was a freshman, the Duke store was selling "ACC Champion" shirts before the ACC championship game (which we lost, to UNC). That, my friend, was bad karma.

cbnaylor
03-23-2010, 12:04 PM
I did not want to read this. Do we know how sick? Get better Nolan we need you.

It would probably be better if it was a bug instead of a cold. At least he would recover within 24-48 hours.

KyDevilinIL
03-23-2010, 12:09 PM
Nolan tweeted that he is sick. I hope he gets better and that doesn't affect his game.

Michael Jordan often played pretty well when he was ill. :)

flyingdutchdevil
03-23-2010, 12:13 PM
Michael Jordan often played pretty well when he was ill. :)

Unfortunately Demarcus Nelson didn't

The Gordog
03-23-2010, 12:20 PM
Not going to be a lot of scoring in this one. Could be a slow moving, grind it out type. It will be especially important to take care of the ball. Purdue will put much more ball pressure on us than Cal did. An earlier poster predicted something of a blowout - puhhlease!? Only thing getting blown out in this game is the back of the rim. I expect a lot of clangers on both sides in this one. According to the Pomeroy index, this will be the 3rd best team we've played all year. Make sure your nerves are ready for this one.

While I don't disagree with your analysis in general, I would note that Pomeroy offers no support at all to your argument because the stats are based on their whole season - mostly with RH. The team we will actually face is in no way the 3rd best we've played.

Mal
03-23-2010, 12:40 PM
If we are fortunate enough to win a championship this season, I'd be willing to bet we'll be the least heralded title winner in some time. It'll be some sort of, "Yeah, I guess they were pretty good, but the bracket fell into place and then apart for them" gibberish.


Agree with this, although if we had to beat Kentucky and Syracuse to do it, I think there'd be begrudging respect handed out. Also agree that being painted as a "weak" national champion wouldn't bother me in the least. :) Not to get ahead of ourselves. Must...focus...on...Purdue!

I will say that, had they not repeated the next year, the 2006 Florida team would be quite unheralded too, and could give any team that lucks into a broken bracket title a run for its money. That team lost 6 SEC games, played one team higher than a 7 seed to make the Final Four, then got an out of gas George Mason and the most offensively challenged top seed in decades in UCLA to win it all. I was at that Final Four and my sole impression was "Congrats to them, but that's easily the weakest champion I've seen." Well, that and "We lost to those guys?!?!" re: LSU. :mad:

Classof06
03-23-2010, 01:20 PM
Just watched the Cal game again, and what stood out to me the second time was how we made the extra interior pass. Now Duke only had 11 assists, below their season average of 14, but it was the fact that six of those assists were from frontcourt players (Singler - 3, Thomas - 2, Mason - 1). So not only did Duke get into the paint, they made great decisions when they did. By the way, has anyone else noticed how good a passer Mason is?

If Duke can move the ball and execute like they have been, they should be in really good shape.

Yeah, it could be a low-scoring defensive battle. But even in that case, Duke is, by far, the more offensively talented team. Purdue played very well in the opening weekend but this is still the same team that was held to 11 first half points by Minnesota in the Big 10 Tourney 2 weeks ago.

lpd1982
03-23-2010, 01:42 PM
Most of the people here seem to believe in some sort of karmic retribution associated with feeling too confident about this weekend's games.

I am a graduate student, and the student ticket lottery for Indianapolis is on Wednesday night.

I feel good enough about Duke's Final Four chances that I want to write a check and put my name into the lottery. Clearly, some believe that my decision tomorrow night, and the associated underlying confidence in Duke, could affect the performance of Duke's men's basketball team on Friday/Sunday.

So I ask: what is the karmic scenario associated with my decision to join the Final Four lottery. Would it be my fault if Duke loses?

Duke has 660 seats to fill with students. If everyone felt that particpation could cause a karmic loss, or at least a karmic fault line rumbling, our truly amazing team would not have their allotment of fans cheering for them. Taken one step further, if fandom predicted potential lack of success then no one should attend games in Cameron, or certainly tent for months to see a hopeful trouncing of heels. Go ahead my friend and sign that check, fill that seat and if you end up going, cheer on behalf of all of us who don't have the opportunity. (You should hear me rationalize that second helping of cake)

gofurman
03-23-2010, 02:38 PM
I did not want to read this. Do we know how sick? Get better Nolan we need you.

Ughhh. We need an it's over thread.

watzone
03-23-2010, 06:27 PM
Here is the audio from Coach K's press conference just minutes ago.

http://bluedevilnation.net/2010/03/coach-k-addresses-the-media-as-duke-prepares-for-sweet-16-play/

Nolan, Jon, Zoubs to come. BTW, shouldn't it be Zoubs and not Zoobs? Just a minor quibble.

WiJoe
03-23-2010, 07:40 PM
Nolan, Jon, Zoubs to come. BTW, shouldn't it be Zoubs and not Zoobs? Just a minor quibble.

NOT a minor quibble! Z-O-U-B-S! Just like it should ALWAYS be D-U-K-I-E-S.

GODUKEGO
03-23-2010, 08:07 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qedRFfFIyb8&feature=sports-sm-TheLatest

Hope he is right this time. I also believe, the only way we lose is if we beat ourselves with poor shooting. If we are on, we are in the final 4!!

Dr. Tina
03-23-2010, 08:44 PM
I was very impressed with the passing from our post players in the Cal game. Mason had some great passes!

Dr. Tina
03-23-2010, 08:56 PM
Here is the audio from Coach K's press conference just minutes ago.

http://bluedevilnation.net/2010/03/coach-k-addresses-the-media-as-duke-prepares-for-sweet-16-play/

Nolan, Jon, Zoubs to come. BTW, shouldn't it be Zoubs and not Zoobs? Just a minor quibble.

I've tried the link a few times and it's not working. Maybe something is afoul with Bluedevilnation.net? Not sure.

-bdbd
03-23-2010, 10:25 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qedRFfFIyb8&feature=sports-sm-TheLatest

Hope he is right this time. I also believe, the only way we lose is if we beat ourselves with poor shooting. If we are on, we are in the final 4!!

Yes, I agree with GoDukeGo (and Dickie V). This is one of those where we should be largely focusing on ourselves. If Duke plays its game, and plays well, then we should win. I just don't see Purdue winning short of Duke helping them (by playing poorly -- poor shooting, poor defense, lack of intensity, etc). Anybody think those things are going to happen with Coach K and four strong Seniors???

No way.




:)

devildownunder
03-23-2010, 10:54 PM
Not exactly following the prevailing topic here, but anyone notice how invisible we continue to be in the national discussion? I certainly don't mind being on the fringe of the chatter, but I can't tell you how many times I've heard talking heads no TV and radio rehash the first weekend, and we hardly warrant a mention. And in some cases, the commentators talked about the impressive performances by No. 1 seeds "Syracuse and Kentucky," without acknowledging in the least that we were pretty decent in our own right.

Again, I don't care. I know it's been going on all season, and it's kind of nice for once. But it's just bizarre. It's almost as if all the folks who ragged on us after Selection Sunday refuse to pay any attention to us, hoping the readers/viewers/listeners wouldn't notice how wrong the "experts" were about us (so far).

Oh well. Just and observation.

We don't play the most scintillating style this year, so SU and Kentucky "looked" -- i mean that literally -- more exciting and impressive than we did, so I think that's why they're getting more juice. As for the rest of it, a no.1 seed winning is ho-hum, it's when they lose that people talk. Kansas is getting PLENTY of ink right now.

The reports I have read have been complimentary of us, just not over the top. I don't have a problem with it.

whereinthehellami
03-24-2010, 02:31 PM
I've seen alot of Purdue fans mention toughness as the wild card in this game. As in how will Duke handle Purdue's toughness. I think toughness is a big reason as to why Duke did so well this year. Singler is one of the toughest players out there. And you can always count on coach K to demand toughness during the game. If I was a Purdue fan, I would find something other than toughness to circle the wagons around as that is not a Duke weakness.

OldPhiKap
03-24-2010, 02:37 PM
I've seen alot of Purdue fans mention toughness as the wild card in this game. As in how will Duke handle Purdue's toughness. I think toughness is a big reason as to why Duke did so well this year. Singler is one of the toughest players out there. And you can always count on coach K to demand toughness during the game. If I was a Purdue fan, I would find something other than toughness to circle the wagons around as that is not a Duke weakness.

Again, I think it goes back to the perception that this team falls under the generalizations of the last few years -- reliant on the 3-ball, soft, overplay defense, etc. This is a very different team than we have seen in quite some time.

If anyone is assuming that Lance, Zoubs or Kyle are "soft," they'll find out soon enough.

greybeard
03-24-2010, 10:42 PM
Key match up is Perdue's Krammer and Singler. Krammer is a physical specimen who plays like a madman and is committed to stopping people. I worry that he slams into Zoubek's leg and takes him out. That, to me, is a real possibility. If that don't happen, I think that Kyle will show why everyone picked him preseason first team All American. And, if it all turns out the way we all want, it just might happen that Brian freakin Zoubek makes the all final four team (there is such a thing isn't there).

devildownunder
03-24-2010, 10:49 PM
I've seen alot of Purdue fans mention toughness as the wild card in this game. As in how will Duke handle Purdue's toughness. I think toughness is a big reason as to why Duke did so well this year. Singler is one of the toughest players out there. And you can always count on coach K to demand toughness during the game. If I was a Purdue fan, I would find something other than toughness to circle the wagons around as that is not a Duke weakness.

Common uninformed opinion among the fanbase of whoever we're about to play is "Duke is soft." K's teams have had various deficiencies at times over the years, never has toughness been one of them.

mehmattski
03-24-2010, 10:52 PM
You are a graduate student, scorned by the undergraduates and despised by the professors for whom you are merely an indentured servant. It is always your fault, whether you enter or not.

Advice: write the check and enter the lottery.

sagegrouse

It turns out that there wasn't a lottery after all:

http://www.studentaffairs.duke.edu/deanofstudents/news

Not sure what it says about my fellow current Duke Students, but fewer than 660 students signed up for the "lottery," so all who put our names in are eligible should we win twice this weekend! There was generally poor publicity of the event, so that can partially explain the low turnout, along with distance to Indianapolis (only 10 hours drive, people!).

Kewlswim
03-24-2010, 11:18 PM
It turns out that there wasn't a lottery after all:

http://www.studentaffairs.duke.edu/deanofstudents/news

Not sure what it says about my fellow current Duke Students, but fewer than 660 students signed up for the "lottery," so all who put our names in are eligible should we win twice this weekend! There was generally poor publicity of the event, so that can partially explain the low turnout, along with distance to Indianapolis (only 10 hours drive, people!).

Hi,

If (no woofing) we go to the FF, will Iron Dukes get the seats students don't want or do they sit in a separate area?

GO DUKE!!

BigZ
03-25-2010, 12:48 AM
Anyone know what former Duke Players will be at the game? I looked up and saw that the Rockets are off and in between home games so I wonder if Battier will be at the game?

pfrduke
03-25-2010, 02:04 AM
It turns out that there wasn't a lottery after all:

http://www.studentaffairs.duke.edu/deanofstudents/news

Not sure what it says about my fellow current Duke Students, but fewer than 660 students signed up for the "lottery," so all who put our names in are eligible should we win twice this weekend! There was generally poor publicity of the event, so that can partially explain the low turnout, along with distance to Indianapolis (only 10 hours drive, people!).

If it makes you feel any better, in 2001, when they did the same thing, there was no need for a lottery either. Fewer students signed up than they had available tickets. I put in, got tickets easily, and made the overnight drive to Minneapolis to go (worth every mile). Yes, Minneapolis is quite a bit further then Indianapolis (we stopped at a Fazoli's outside of Indy for dinner, if I recall correctly), but given that the 2001 team was more of a conventional favorite to win the title (and had Shane) and they still didn't use the full ticket allotment makes it less of a surprise that the 2010 ticket allotment went undersubscribed as well.

94duke
03-25-2010, 08:04 AM
If it makes you feel any better, in 2001, when they did the same thing, there was no need for a lottery either. Fewer students signed up than they had available tickets. I put in, got tickets easily, and made the overnight drive to Minneapolis to go (worth every mile). Yes, Minneapolis is quite a bit further then Indianapolis (we stopped at a Fazoli's outside of Indy for dinner, if I recall correctly), but given that the 2001 team was more of a conventional favorite to win the title (and had Shane) and they still didn't use the full ticket allotment makes it less of a surprise that the 2010 ticket allotment went undersubscribed as well.

This sounds pretty normal to me.
Travel costs money and missed class time, so not too many people decide to go.
In '91 & '92, every student that put into the lottery got tickets. :)
'94 (Charlotte) was a different story. ;)

UrinalCake
03-25-2010, 10:08 AM
In 1999 I believe there were still student tickets available too. I think a lot of people just assume there won't be any, so they don't bother to put their names in. Some classmates of mine did make the trip down to St. Petersburg and were offered $5k on the street for their tickets. They declined, which probably made the eventual outcome feel all the more worse :(

NM Duke Fan
03-25-2010, 12:23 PM
You just never know about tickets, sometimes they just kind of fall out of the sky in your direction, always pays to try various avenues. In 1980 I had given up seeing the Super Bowl, which was being played at the Rose Bowl, and I lived just a couple miles away. I had put the word out I wanted a ticket. The day before the game a lady was awarded a ticket at work, and she sold it to me for the face price of $35! I was able to walk to the game and sit with a bunch of fellow Steelers fans who had flown in from Pittsburgh, and we had a great time!

DukieInKansas
03-25-2010, 01:00 PM
You just never know about tickets, sometimes they just kind of fall out of the sky in your direction, always pays to try various avenues. In 1980 I had given up seeing the Super Bowl, which was being played at the Rose Bowl, and I lived just a couple miles away. I had put the word out I wanted a ticket. The day before the game a lady was awarded a ticket at work, and she sold it to me for the face price of $35! I was able to walk to the game and sit with a bunch of fellow Steelers fans who had flown in from Pittsburgh, and we had a great time!

You get bonus points - you're a Duke fan and a Steeler fan. :D

Billy Dat
03-25-2010, 01:33 PM
“That’s probably the hardest someone has played against us, that includes conference play, in the past five years,” Painter said Tuesday. “So we always reference what we think is the hard-playing team or the toughest team. Michigan State is a tough team. Wisconsin is a tough team. Duke nationally is very, very good, but I think the respect they gained from our players and just how tough they are and their strong willpower in that game really helped us. A lot of times when you get beat like that it can really help your program if your guys will look in the mirror and understand it. Sometimes kids will be nonchalant about it and say, ‘It wasn’t our day.’ But that wasn’t the case. They realized what playing hard was and Duke showed that. Now you have an opportunity to play them again and try to play harder than somebody that really raised the bar for our program.”
http://www.journalgazette.net/article/20100325/SPORTS0303/303259992/1085/SPORTS03

mkirsh
03-25-2010, 02:25 PM
Not sure if this was posted anywhere else, but there is a Chicago teen who has a perfect bracket right now - he has predicted every round 1 and 2 game correctly (Ohio over G'town, Cornell to sweet 16, N. Iowa over Kansas, etc). Cool story, right? Except that he has PURDUE winning it all. Hope his luck runs out this round.

http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/sports/Autistic-Teen-Picks-First-Two-NCAA-Rounds-Perfectly-88916437.html

mgtr
03-25-2010, 02:37 PM
“That’s probably the hardest someone has played against us, that includes conference play, in the past five years,” Painter said Tuesday. “So we always reference what we think is the hard-playing team or the toughest team. Michigan State is a tough team. Wisconsin is a tough team. Duke nationally is very, very good, but I think the respect they gained from our players and just how tough they are and their strong willpower in that game really helped us. A lot of times when you get beat like that it can really help your program if your guys will look in the mirror and understand it. Sometimes kids will be nonchalant about it and say, ‘It wasn’t our day.’ But that wasn’t the case. They realized what playing hard was and Duke showed that. Now you have an opportunity to play them again and try to play harder than somebody that really raised the bar for our program.”
http://www.journalgazette.net/article/20100325/SPORTS0303/303259992/1085/SPORTS03

Assuming Painter is being straight about it, this is quite a tribute to Coach K and our team! Great to get some recognition from the opposition. And, if you play as hard as you possibly can, then by definition that was the best you could do. Then it is either good enough or not good enough.

Chitowndevil
03-25-2010, 03:12 PM
Assuming Painter is being straight about it, this is quite a tribute to Coach K and our team! Great to get some recognition from the opposition. And, if you play as hard as you possibly can, then by definition that was the best you could do. Then it is either good enough or not good enough.

My sentiments exactly. An opposing coach at a major school calling your team "somebody who really raised the bar for our program" one heckuva compliment, especially when it's in the context of playing hard, not just being talented.

On a slightly different topic, as a (amateur) handicapper I would absolutely take Duke -8.5 points (current line) against Purdue, and make them about -3.5 against Baylor. As a fan I am quite apprehensive about this game and terrified of Baylor. Go figure.

scheyersbiggestfan
03-25-2010, 04:21 PM
duke94: In '91 & '92, every student that put into the lottery got tickets. :)


But that's not entirely accurate - I didn't get a lottery ticket in 92. Complained (ok, cried) to a dean that I knew fairly well and Uncle Harry gave me one of his. Even wrote a column in the Chronicle about it.

BD80
03-25-2010, 04:29 PM
You get bonus points - you're a Duke fan and a Steeler fan. :D

Tru dat!

Extra bonus points if you became a fan when they each sucked.

For me it was late 60s with my dad at Pitt Stadium watching the Stillers get lambasted by the Redskins, and in the mid 70s when I got accepted to Duke. You can't accuse me of being a bandwagon jumper!

arydolphin
03-25-2010, 08:20 PM
Here's the transcript of the Duke press conference from earlier today, with Coach K, Scheyer, Z, and LT: http://www.asapsports.com/show_interview.php?id=62391

Atlanta Duke
03-25-2010, 08:40 PM
Here's the transcript of the Duke press conference from earlier today, with Coach K, Scheyer, Z, and LT: http://www.asapsports.com/show_interview.php?id=62391

Money quote from K

Q. It's been, I guess since 2004, you guys last went to a Final Four. How would you explain the lull between then and now in terms of not making it?

COACH KRZYZEWSKI: You know, there are two words when you compete that are interesting -- since and never. Since and never. I'm glad we're in the since. Let me leave it at that

jipops
03-25-2010, 10:10 PM
While I don't disagree with your analysis in general, I would note that Pomeroy offers no support at all to your argument because the stats are based on their whole season - mostly with RH. The team we will actually face is in no way the 3rd best we've played.

It's not my argument, just re-iteration of what the Pomeroy index displays. An interesting stat nonetheless.

COYS
03-26-2010, 12:13 AM
It's not my argument, just re-iteration of what the Pomeroy index displays. An interesting stat nonetheless.

I don't think losing Hummel makes Purdue so much worse than their current Pomeroy rating. Their offensive efficiency has dropped, but their defensive efficiency has remained constant. Defensively, they will present a big challenge to our players. No, they don't have the size to match us down low, but their perimeter defenders are tough and strong. They will fight over picks and try to make our perimeter hand-offs as difficult as possible. They have the strength to force our guards a few extra feet away from the basket while running our motion sets. I like our team because we are designed to gut out games just like this and our team is certainly tough enough to handle Purdue's defense. However, Purdue will be no worse than the tough, defensively adept and offensively challenged teams in the ACC like Clemson or FSU. We handled those teams well during the season, but Purdue is likely still a few notches above those teams. I'm expecting a Duke win, but I'm not expecting it to be as pretty as our demolition of Cal.

Greg_Newton
03-26-2010, 02:04 AM
Wow, I didn't realize just how small Purdue was. Besides Johnson (who only weighs 215 pounds), their second biggest player that gets meaningful minutes is DJ Byrd... who is 6'5, 215. (ETA: I guess we might see 6'8 235 freshman Patrick Bade some, but he has totaled 12 points in 2010). Sure hope we can exploit their size more than they can exploit our quickness.

Z and LT will probably be the keys to the game, which is a pretty cool thing for them as seniors. I love how far they've come:


Q. You seem to have a pretty significant size advantage against Purdue. Can you talk about how you can exploit that tomorrow?
LANCE THOMAS: We're going to have to play big. We have to make sure we dominate the boards, and we're also going to just have to be able to play defense. They start us a pretty short lineup. So it's going to be big to guard them, but they also have to guard our size as well. So myself and Brian have to make sure we play a big game.
BRIAN ZOUBEK: We're going to have to establish ourselves early on on the offensive end, especially on the glass. Then, I mean, they only have really one big guy and then a sub for him. So they play four guards and that four position, we have a little bit of a size advantage. And so we've just got to take advantage of it.

Here's hoping they help Duke get the monkey off their back tomorrow.

flyingdutchdevil
03-26-2010, 02:51 AM
I really like this article by Gary Parrish:

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/story/13114774/what-does-duke-have-to-do-to-get-some-attention-around-here?source=rss_teams_Duke_Blue_Devils

And I really think he's right. While Duke isn't a 'boring' basketball team to watch, they are non-controversial which does make them, in the eyes of the media, to be 'boring'

bluepenguin
03-26-2010, 07:06 AM
Money quote from K

Q. It's been, I guess since 2004, you guys last went to a Final Four. How would you explain the lull between then and now in terms of not making it?

COACH KRZYZEWSKI: You know, there are two words when you compete that are interesting -- since and never. Since and never. I'm glad we're in the since. Let me leave it at that

He was also quoted in the NY Times article as saying: "Try to look at those words and see which category you would rather be in."

Exactly.

JohnGalt
03-26-2010, 07:45 AM
Hubert Davis just said "The key to Purdue winning will be how JaJuan Johnson fairs against Duke's 3 big men of Zoubek, Mason and Miles Plumlee."

I guess since Lance and Zoubs are generally on the court together, Zoubs will be forced to guard Johnson because of Purdue's lack of size anywhere else. That being said, I have a hard time believing Lance won't get at least a few minutes on him...

CDu
03-26-2010, 07:58 AM
Hubert Davis just said "The key to Purdue winning will be how JaJuan Johnson fairs against Duke's 3 big men of Zoubek, Mason and Miles Plumlee."

I guess since Lance and Zoubs are generally on the court together, Zoubs will be forced to guard Johnson because of Purdue's lack of size anywhere else. That being said, I have a hard time believing Lance won't get at least a few minutes on him...

I agree that Thomas is the best suited to defend Johnson. But if Thomas guards Johnson, then that means that either Zoubek or one of the Plumlees (typically Miles) would have to defend against one of Purdue's guards. That's really not ideal. As such, unless we go "small" (with Singler or Kelly at the 4) or we get stuck on a switch, I don't see Thomas getting to match up against Johnson. I don't think the team will want to have Miles or Zoubek defending on the perimeter.

JohnGalt
03-26-2010, 08:02 AM
I agree that Thomas is the best suited to defend Johnson. But if Thomas guards Johnson, then that means that either Zoubek or one of the Plumlees (typically Miles) would have to defend against one of Purdue's guards. That's really not ideal. As such, unless we go "small" (with Singler or Kelly at the 4) or we get stuck on a switch, I don't see Thomas getting to match up against Johnson. I don't think the team will want to have Miles or Zoubek defending on the perimeter.

I agree. That's what I was hinting at above. I think it's been mentioned on here before, but I doubt K "goes small" or does anything too drastically different when game planning for Purdue. We have the size; we should use it to our advantage.

CDu
03-26-2010, 08:54 AM
I agree. That's what I was hinting at above. I think it's been mentioned on here before, but I doubt K "goes small" or does anything too drastically different when game planning for Purdue. We have the size; we should use it to our advantage.

Exactly. Which is why I don't think we'll see Thomas guarding Johnson. I think the advantage gained by having Thomas guard Johnson would be more than offset by the disadvantage of having Miles or Zoubek defend a guard. But, we'll see soon enough, I guess.

94duke
03-26-2010, 09:14 AM
duke94: In '91 & '92, every student that put into the lottery got tickets. :)


But that's not entirely accurate - I didn't get a lottery ticket in 92. Complained (ok, cried) to a dean that I knew fairly well and Uncle Harry gave me one of his. Even wrote a column in the Chronicle about it.

I thought I remembered hearing that everyone got a ticket. My mistake. :o
Glad you got to go, though. :)

mehmattski
03-26-2010, 09:35 AM
I guess we all know about Purdue's defense, but I think a few are forgetting the strength of Duke's own defense. The third best defense in adjusted efficiency, Duke held Cal's #3 rated offense to 0.908 points/possession, the Bears' third worst performance of the season.

Purdue's offense, meanwhile, was anemic with Hummel and is basically nonexistent without him. In seven games without Hummel, their offensive efficiency has been about 0.909 points/possession, significantly inflated by games against terrible Indiana and Penn State teams. Putting that in perspective, some teams with season-long offensive outputs at that level: Gardner-Webb (.908) Coppin State (.906), Southeast Missouri St (.905).

Clearly, Purdue is in the sweet 16 because their defense held down two teams with weaker offenses than Duke's. I think Duke's defense is more than capable of holding Purdue to below 0.90 points/possession (Their post-Hummel average). I also think Duke is more than capable of exceeding that level on offense, because they have in every game this season except one (89.9 against Virginia in the ACCT).

On the other hand, exactly the same things could be said about Duke and LSU in 2006...

watzone
03-26-2010, 10:11 AM
http://bluedevilnation.net/2010/03/bdn-catches-up-with-jon-scheyer-in-houston/

Jon Scheyer audio fro Houston. Other players as well ..

Chitowndevil
03-26-2010, 11:13 AM
On the other hand, exactly the same things could be said about Duke and LSU in 2006...

Nah, LSU in '06 had one of the better frontcourts in college hoops in Glen Davis and Tyrus Thomas, and a quick, efficient scorer/distributor in Darrel Mitchell. They were one of the best shot blocking teams in the country and rarely put opponents on the line.

This year's Purdue team is solid defensively but relies much more on forcing turnovers and good positioning as opposed to raw athleticism. They commit a fair number of fouls, preferring to put an opponent on the line versus giving up an open shot. Despite not having great height, they hold opponents to 41.7% from 2pt (7th in the country). The cost is the aforementioned fouls and allowing opponents to shoot 35.2% from 3 (224th nationally).

As for matchups I do think Zoubek plays JaJuan Johnson with Lance playing E'Twuan Moore or one of Purdue's 3 freshman forwards when they're in the game. Johnson is NOT a good passer, so I don't see Duke getting burned too badly if Singler or Thomas needs to help Z. And Thomas has proven capable of guarding smaller players on the perimeter.

CDu
03-26-2010, 11:19 AM
Purdue's offense, meanwhile, was anemic with Hummel and is basically nonexistent without him. In seven games without Hummel, their offensive efficiency has been about 0.909 points/possession, significantly inflated by games against terrible Indiana and Penn State teams. Putting that in perspective, some teams with season-long offensive outputs at that level: Gardner-Webb (.908) Coppin State (.906), Southeast Missouri St (.905).

The part I bolded isn't really true. With Hummel, Purdue had an above-average offense. Their efficiency in games with Hummel was 109.3. Considering strength of competition, I'd guess their adjusted efficiency would probably be around 112. An adjusted efficiency of 112 would put them in the top-40 offenses. That's not spectacular, but it's not anemic.

However, I completely agree though that without Hummel their offense has been pretty anemic. Even after adjusting that 90.9 efficiency for level of competition, they'd still be really low on the list.

Since Hummel's injury, Purdue has been winning in part because they've played some bad teams (they're 1-2 against at-large quality teams) and in part because they've played strong defense.

Saratoga2
03-26-2010, 11:31 AM
It's been mentioned that Duke needs to match the intensity of Purdue. I agree with that totally and would remind posters that we have as starters Scheyer, Zoubek, Thomas and potentially Singler who could now be lookiing at their last game for Duke unless they win and advance. I am sure they are aware of that and are proud kids with a determination to do their very best. Of those, I would want to remind Thomas that he needs to mete is intensity out so he can be in the game for critical periods.

Not to forget Jordan Davidson. It would be a pleasure to see him in at the end. That would mean we were up with a safe margin.

Welcome2DaSlopes
03-26-2010, 12:31 PM
If Lance and Zoubs can stop Jajuan Johnson, this is all Duke.

Kewlswim
03-26-2010, 01:10 PM
Nah, LSU in '06 had one of the better frontcourts in college hoops in Glen Davis and Tyrus Thomas, and a quick, efficient scorer/distributor in Darrel Mitchell. They were one of the best shot blocking teams in the country and rarely put opponents on the line.

This year's Purdue team is solid defensively but relies much more on forcing turnovers and good positioning as opposed to raw athleticism. They commit a fair number of fouls, preferring to put an opponent on the line versus giving up an open shot. Despite not having great height, they hold opponents to 41.7% from 2pt (7th in the country). The cost is the aforementioned fouls and allowing opponents to shoot 35.2% from 3 (224th nationally).

As for matchups I do think Zoubek plays JaJuan Johnson with Lance playing E'Twuan Moore or one of Purdue's 3 freshman forwards when they're in the game. Johnson is NOT a good passer, so I don't see Duke getting burned too badly if Singler or Thomas needs to help Z. And Thomas has proven capable of guarding smaller players on the perimeter.

Hi,

Duke relied almost entirely on Shelden and JJ for scoring. Granted the Big 3 only provides 33% more options :), but there are complimentary players who also score. We are more versatile than we were against LSU.

I am not saying we are in any way guaranteed to win, I just think that comparisons to LSU vs Duke circa a few years back are not good comparisons.

GO DUKE!

Greg_Newton
03-26-2010, 02:18 PM
For some reason, I feel like Chris Kramer will be one of the biggest keys to the game. If Scheyer can emerge as the superior player, we should be able to overcome the talent of Johnson and Moore. However, if he ends up bullying our guys on the perimeter, throwing them off their games and scoring 15-20 points (like he did last game), we could be in trouble. IMO, it's the most important matchup to "win".

Plus, he's beating Jon in the senior class award fan vote!

Atlanta Duke
03-26-2010, 03:40 PM
Glad to read in this article that Shane Battier will be in the stands tonight but surprised to read this will be the first Duke game he has attended since he graduated in 2001

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/bk/bkc/men/6930919.html

npdevil27
03-26-2010, 05:24 PM
Glad to read in this article that Shane Battier will be in the stands tonight but surprised to read this will be the first Duke game he has attended since he graduated in 2001

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/bk/bkc/men/6930919.html
I just read that Duke hasn't beaten a top-4 seed in the tournament since... 2001.

Hopefully he'll bring the same karma.

basket1544
03-26-2010, 06:58 PM
Sorry if this is a repeat. Is anyone else worried about this arena and Duke players' propensity for diving off the sidelines? Especially Kyle.

WiJoe
03-26-2010, 07:20 PM
Sorry if this is a repeat. Is anyone else worried about this arena and Duke players' propensity for diving off the sidelines? Especially Kyle.

worried more about Duke's shooting than someone diving off edge.

-bdbd
03-26-2010, 07:48 PM
Would really like to see Scheyer start off well shooting tonight. He needs to go on a little run. That said, I think this game turns on how the Forwards/Bigs do. It should be a general Duke advantage, so we need to capitalize. They can't really match our size, so look for either Lance or Z to have a big game, and I think this looks good match-up wise for Kyle.

I wouldn't be shocked if, at some point, especially if they're getting beat up on the interior, that Purdue starts packing it in some -- guards sloughing off to help double-up our bigs -- effectively challenging our guards to make the outside shots.

One thing for certain, with two very good D's this game won't be in the 90's. 50's and 60's seem much more likely.

Go Duke!!!

Welcome2DaSlopes
03-26-2010, 07:58 PM
Mason needs to show up this game as well as DRE all DAY

jacone21
03-26-2010, 08:16 PM
Man I'm geeked!!!! eeeieiiiiiiigghhhhhh!!!!!

Thanks. Just had to get that off my chest. hehe

_Gary
03-26-2010, 08:31 PM
I just read that Duke hasn't beaten a top-4 seed in the tournament since... 2001.

If you watch ESPN for even 5 seconds they'll remind you of this with their scroll at the bottom of the screen. Then, to top it off tonight before the first games tipped, one of the ESPN anchors was talking about the matchups and pointed out how well Duke had shot from the free throw line this year and just had to sneak in a "Duke gets all the calls" type of comment. I couldn't believe it. At this point I'm assuming that one will stick for the entire 21st century, even if Duke never even makes the Sweet 16 ever again. :mad:

Gary

P.S. Wow! Just as I posted this I heard, I believe Seth Davis, mention the "reffing" in the upcoming Duke/Purdue game and how that would help influence the outcome. We just can't get away from this bull. I bet we don't hear that with any of the other matchups, but if Duke's in it then these guys just automatically go there. Billy Packer is surely smiling right now.

muzikfrk75
03-26-2010, 08:35 PM
Nervous. As. Hell.

MChambers
03-26-2010, 08:36 PM
P.S. Wow! Just as I posted this I heard, I believe Seth Davis, mention the "reffing" in the upcoming Duke/Purdue game and how that would help influence the outcome. We just can't get away from this bull. I bet we don't hear that with any of the other matchups, but if Duke's in it then these guys just automatically go there.

I don't think Davis was suggesting that Duke gets all the calls. He was simply saying that Duke is deeper, and if Purdue gets in foul trouble, they're cooked.

Mind you, I think he's wrong. We're deeper insider, but shallower on the perimeter.

_Gary
03-26-2010, 08:40 PM
I don't think Davis was suggesting that Duke gets all the calls. He was simply saying that Duke is deeper, and if Purdue gets in foul trouble, they're cooked.

Mind you, I think he's wrong. We're deeper insider, but shallower on the perimeter.

I definitely don't think Seth has anything against Duke and I don't think he consciously thought his comments were in any way a dig. But I do believe this "Duke gets all the calls" mantra is so embedded in the mindset of the commentators that it just automatically comes up. And while Seth may have only meant his comments to be in relation to Purdue's depth, I don't believe it came off that way at all. The reason I say that is that he specifically mentioned Duke's FT percentage before he made the comments about how the game would be officiated. I don't believe he said a thing about depth.

Gary

MChambers
03-26-2010, 08:44 PM
I don't believe he said a thing about depth.

Gary

I'm pretty certain he did, because I can't remember the last time anyone said Duke had more depth than its opponent. I thought it was funny.

_Gary
03-26-2010, 08:48 PM
I'm pretty certain he did, because I can't remember the last time anyone said Duke had more depth than its opponent. I thought it was funny.

OK, yeah I think you are right. But he definitely talked about Duke's FT percentage as well and it was in that context that he made the comments about how the game would be officiated. But whatever. :D

AlaskanAssassin
03-26-2010, 08:54 PM
Letsgooooooo!

BlueHeaven
03-26-2010, 09:00 PM
I think I'm going to pass out. I don't know if I can take it. I'm not happy/comfortable until we're up by 20. Let's go Duke!

pfrduke
03-26-2010, 09:01 PM
This game is going fine. We're limiting Purdue exclusively to jump shots. As far as I'm concerned, they can take any 15'+ shot they want all day long - that will equal a win for us. On offense, it's a little skittish, but we're getting good looks.

licc85
03-26-2010, 09:02 PM
the officials are being really kind to purdue thus far . .

fgb
03-26-2010, 09:02 PM
this just hit me, and i hate it: when scheyer shot that first three, i expected him to miss. i do not like feeling like that.

mike88
03-26-2010, 09:03 PM
defense looks good so far; offense, not so much
we can't keep turning it over and fouling

BigZ
03-26-2010, 09:03 PM
I know it is only 5mins in but Scheyer's shooting is still awful. He looks dead out there.

Bluedevil114
03-26-2010, 09:03 PM
The Dome stadium is right now affecting both teams currently. Air balls, short shots. It is ugly right now. Go Duke!!

Wheat/"/"/"
03-26-2010, 09:04 PM
With the Heels playing in the "losers" tournament and a tremendously busy time of year, I have not been motivated to post much lately.

Some quick thoughts...

Duke is tough and experienced. They handle the ball. They make foul shots. They pass and screen well and won't beat themselves with mistakes. This is a good Duke team and one coach K has gotten to play to their potential.

I question this teams defensive quickness, but not their ability to make up for that with good decisions.

It's been a fortunate year to hide defensive weakness with smart play, because the ACC was so weak overall (Yes,including UNC) and they have avoided any really quality/quick teams with a post player to this point in the Tourney. Somewhere I read tonight's Purdue game is the first top 15 team Duke faced all year? Can that be right?

I also question Duke's ability to handle a so so shooting night without any sort of post up game themselves.

At any rate, congrats, it's a very good year already for Duke hoops...and what do I know anyways, I had Syracuse and Kansas as the two best teams.

Good luck tonight.

DukeGirl4ever
03-26-2010, 09:04 PM
Scheyer needed to get a lay-up or easy shot early to feel the ball going through the hoop. And that of course didn't happen. He needs to break out of that slump!

Some pretty crappy calls already.

pfrduke
03-26-2010, 09:04 PM
That was an atrocious call on Miles.

_Gary
03-26-2010, 09:05 PM
Jon's second 3 point attempt looked really bad. He just pushed the ball toward the rim. Also, keep track that both our guards have picked up a foul in the first 4 minutes of the game. The one thing we cannot have is either of those guys off the court with foul trouble. Purdue's defense is pushing us out big time and we must have our starting guards in the game at all times.

jipops
03-26-2010, 09:05 PM
I'm starting to think that Jon has completely lost his shot. Everything is glancing the front of the rim. This is just not good.

pfrduke
03-26-2010, 09:07 PM
Great block Lance!

_Gary
03-26-2010, 09:07 PM
I'm starting to think that Jon has completely lost his shot. Everything is glancing the front of the rim. This is just not good.

I know. I hate to think this is mental and the stress is getting to him, but I'm starting to wonder. It's either that or he does have an injury that's been downplayed.

riverside6
03-26-2010, 09:09 PM
live tempo-based stats for the game here...

http://www.scacchoops.com/ViewHDGame.asp?hSchedule=6787

_Gary
03-26-2010, 09:09 PM
Well, the game is absolutely being called in a way that favors Purdue. Their guards are being allowed to pressure and manhandle our perimeter players but when we go inside we are getting called for offensive fouls.

Billy Dat
03-26-2010, 09:11 PM
Jon needs to keep penetrating to get himself going. We need to keep going to Kyle until they stop him. Feed the hot hand!h

pfrduke
03-26-2010, 09:11 PM
Well, the game is absolutely being called in a way that favors Purdue. Their guards are being allowed to pressure and manhandle our perimeter players but when we go inside we are getting called for offensive fouls.

We've been called for one charge. The other offensive fouls (Lance's push on the rebound, Zoubek's moving screen) had nothing to do with our driving. It looks like a fairly called game so far to me. They haven't gotten many favors either, with Johnson on the bench due to two rebounding fouls.

_Gary
03-26-2010, 09:13 PM
The charge on Nolan was bogus as was the screen on Z. On top of that, Purdue is hand checking and bumping on the perimeter like crazy. It's throwing our offense off a bit.

DukeGirl4ever
03-26-2010, 09:15 PM
Wow.....these calls are getting ridiculous.

Billy Dat
03-26-2010, 09:16 PM
Take care of the ball!

Delaware
03-26-2010, 09:16 PM
Turnovers!!!!! UGGHH

_Gary
03-26-2010, 09:17 PM
Turnovers!!!!! UGGHH

Yep. That's the biggest issue right now.