PDA

View Full Version : SI.com - impossible not to make Duke the preseason No. 1



Atlanta Duke
05-03-2010, 05:09 PM
Well no pressure to excel next season based on this article by Luke Winn on SI.com:)

Very flattering article, although it is noted that offensive rebounding presumably is headed for a fall next season

Winn concludes with this observation

I suspect that Curry is capable of leading at least 2-3 other ACC teams in scoring right now, and Duke has the luxury of using him as a reserve. With Singler and Smith back for an encore, and Curry's kind of firepower on the bench, it's impossible not to make Duke the preseason No. 1.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/luke_winn/05/03/duke.loaded/index.html

Big Pappa
05-03-2010, 05:14 PM
Well no pressure to excel next season based on this article by Luke Winn on SI.com:)

Very flattering article, although it is noted that offensive rebounding presumably is headed for a fall next season

Winn concludes with this observation

I suspect that Curry is capable of leading at least 2-3 other ACC teams in scoring right now, and Duke has the luxury of using him as a reserve. With Singler and Smith back for an encore, and Curry's kind of firepower on the bench, it's impossible not to make Duke the preseason No. 1.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/luke_winn/05/03/duke.loaded/index.html

Great article thanks for posting it. I just can't wait for the season to start.

Duke of Nashville
05-03-2010, 05:30 PM
Well no pressure to excel next season based on this article by Luke Winn on SI.com:)

Very flattering article, although it is noted that offensive rebounding presumably is headed for a fall next season

Winn concludes with this observation

I suspect that Curry is capable of leading at least 2-3 other ACC teams in scoring right now, and Duke has the luxury of using him as a reserve. With Singler and Smith back for an encore, and Curry's kind of firepower on the bench, it's impossible not to make Duke the preseason No. 1.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/luke_winn/05/03/duke.loaded/index.html

I am not too concerned with the void that Zoubek will be leaving in regards to the offensive rebounding. We will be more efficient from the perimeter with the amount of depth that we will have. The up-tempo style that we will play will not put as much pressure on player’s position wise (or for the lack of size that we may have with certain line-ups). And our ability to run the court for follow-ups on breakaways and our secondary transition offense will make up for some of the discrepancy in the stats that Luke provided.

SilkyJ
05-03-2010, 05:38 PM
I am not too concerned with the void that Zoubek will be leaving in regards to the offensive rebounding. We will be more efficient from the perimeter with the amount of depth that we will have.

How does being deep = more efficient? I guess maybe our starting guards will play a few less minutes and be more fresh, but you think that's going to make a real difference in efficiency? Our 1-3 positions were our best players last year and they played damn near 40mpg.

Also, not sure if you saw this but...



Duke had the most efficient offense in the country last year...

So getting MORE efficient, even from just the perimeter, would be tough.

InSpades
05-03-2010, 05:38 PM
I am not too concerned with the void that Zoubek will be leaving in regards to the offensive rebounding. We will be more efficient from the perimeter with the amount of depth that we will have. The up-tempo style that we will play will not put as much pressure on player’s position wise (or for the lack of size that we may have with certain line-ups). And our ability to run the court for follow-ups on breakaways and our secondary transition offense will make up for some of the discrepancy in the stats that Luke provided.

Agreed. There's no way Kyrie will individually be as efficient as Scheyer was this year. However the efficiency he will add to our offense could be something special. All the open 3s we get when defenses collapse around him as he beats his man off the dribble. All the dishes to open Plumlees under the hoop when he forces teams to commit to stopping his drive. Duke won't get 30+% of the offensive rebounds and might turn the ball over a few times but at the same time our shooting percentage will go up. Last year we had good shooters taking tougher shots... this year we will have good shooters taking easier shots. Another guy in addition to Nolan who can break down a defense will make it easier on everyone else on the floor.

SilkyJ
05-03-2010, 05:53 PM
Agreed. There's no way Kyrie will individually be as efficient as Scheyer was this year. However the efficiency he will add to our offense could be something special. All the open 3s we get when defenses collapse around him as he beats his man off the dribble. All the dishes to open Plumlees under the hoop when he forces teams to commit to stopping his drive. Duke won't get 30+% of the offensive rebounds and might turn the ball over a few times but at the same time our shooting percentage will go up. Last year we had good shooters taking tougher shots... this year we will have good shooters taking easier shots. Another guy in addition to Nolan who can break down a defense will make it easier on everyone else on the floor.

Now that makes sense. But its going to be tough to get more efficient then we were last year -- we were tops in the country according to KenPom!

http://kenpom.com/rate.php

Duvall
05-03-2010, 05:56 PM
Agreed. There's no way Kyrie will individually be as efficient as Scheyer was this year. However the efficiency he will add to our offense could be something special. All the open 3s we get when defenses collapse around him as he beats his man off the dribble. All the dishes to open Plumlees under the hoop when he forces teams to commit to stopping his drive. Duke won't get 30+% of the offensive rebounds and might turn the ball over a few times but at the same time our shooting percentage will go up. Last year we had good shooters taking tougher shots... this year we will have good shooters taking easier shots. Another guy in addition to Nolan who can break down a defense will make it easier on everyone else on the floor.

Irving may be able to improve Duke's ability to score off of free throws by drawing fouls with his drives to the basket - that was an aspect of Duke's offense that was actually fairly mediocre last year.

Duke of Nashville
05-03-2010, 06:00 PM
How does being deep = more efficient? I guess maybe our starting guards will play a few less minutes and be more fresh, but you think that's going to make a real difference in efficiency? Our 1-3 positions were our best players last year and they played damn near 40mpg.

Also, not sure if you saw this but...



So getting MORE efficient, even from just the perimeter, would be tough.

You are right, I should have been a bit more specific. Efficent to me is to do a task without waste and 1.3 ppp is very good. Legs are always an issue and IMH I see depth as a way to increase efficency. Smaller spans of time on the court for players playing an up-tempo style generally lead to more production. Everyone knows the our offensive rebounding bailed us out throughout the year and where would all these offensive rebounds be coming from???Missed Shots. What my main point that I was trying to get across was that the style of play will change and will make up for those numbers that Luke seemed "concerned" for a lack of better words, stated in the offensive rebounding section.

....our inside guys had a lot to do with the kempom O rankings.

moonpie23
05-03-2010, 06:02 PM
i hope the team enjoys the bulls eye...

houstondukie
05-03-2010, 06:04 PM
It's very possible that the Plumlee brothers will average just as many total rebounds per game next year as Zoubek and Thomas did (Plumlee brothers 8.0 rpg; Zoubek/Thomas 12.6 rpg) and perhaps offensive rebounds per game (Plumlee brothers 2.78 off rpg; Zoubek/Thomas 5.93 rpg).

Miles Plumlee - 16.4 mpg, 4.9 reb, 1.63 off reb, 11.1 OR%
Mason Plumlee - 14.1 mpg, 3.1 reb, 1.15 off reb, 9.1 OR%

Lance Thomas - 25.3 mpg, 4.9 reb, 2.35 off reb, 10.4 OR%
Brian Zoubek - 18.7 mpg, 7.7 reb, 3.58 off reb, 21.4 OR%

ElSid
05-03-2010, 06:07 PM
Love reading this.

Agreed on the efficiency.

Duke was very efficient despite not being a great shooting team in '09/'10. Next year we should get better looks from three and have a lot more high percentage baskets in transition. We may be a little less efficient overall but I'd trade that for the style of play we're likely to see.

Drooling over here thinking of Curry, Irving, Dawkins, Smith, and Singler swapping time on the perimeter with Thornton seeing a few minutes here and there as well. Also imagining a lot of transition dunks by the Plumlees.

Only, what? Six months or so until the season starts?

cspan37421
05-03-2010, 06:16 PM
Actually, I would not mind if we didn't shoot a bunch more threes next year compared to this. I rather enjoyed this past season not having that sense of dread when our shots didn't fall, that sense that haunted me from '05-'09. As great as Shelden was, we didn't survive a lot of bad shooting nights. We really relied on the 3. This year, we not only won games in which we shot badly, we sometimes still dominated them! What a luxury it is to have such great rebounding.

I'd like to think of the three as one tool out of many. What I'd rather see more of is pressure defense and fast breaks off turnovers. Layups are a lot higher % shot than 3-pointers.

Also, I do think we could still have significant size next year with 2 Plumlees - so long as they stay out of foul trouble. Kelly is pretty tall too, but I think the c.w. is that he'll play more on the perimeter. He's not that bulky to bang down low.

Nugget
05-03-2010, 07:22 PM
Perhaps it would be better to say we hope to be as efficient, but in a different way, next season.

In effect, compensating for a drop-off in offensive rebounding with:

1. More turnovers generated via more ball and wing pressure on D (we were #148 in steals last year, which should be much higher next season);

2. More (easy) transition baskets, which we got very little of this year;

3. A slightly higher 3 point fg % (though a relative increase in open threes generated from more drive and kick would be off-set somewhat by a drop in offensive rebound kick-out threes); and

4. A much higher 2 point fg %, as we should not only get more tranition shots but dribble pentratation should get us much better looks in the half court too, with easier shots for Miles and Mason in the paint than Zoubs and Miles had to take this year, and especially should get us easier 2 point shots for Kyle and Nolan than Kyle and Jon had to take this year.

We only shot 47.1% on 2 point fg tries this year (tied for #206 with Savannah St. and Presbyterian!), so that would be the area where we could be significantly more efficient next season.

If we make more shots, obviously it matters less if we aren't quite as good on offensive rebounding.

Nugget
05-03-2010, 07:31 PM
Duvall is certainly right -- we should also compensate for fewer offensive rebounds next year with significantly more free throws attempted.

We ranked #91 in free throws attempted per game last year (22.4).

While Kansas St.'s 30 free throws per game seems wildly anomolous, we could easily get in the 27-28 free throws per game range that Kansas, Kentucky and Gonzaga shot this year.

roywhite
05-03-2010, 07:41 PM
Perhaps it would be better to say we hope to be as efficient, but in a different way, next season.

In effect, compensating for a drop-off in offensive rebounding with:

1. More turnovers generated via more ball and wing pressure on D (we were #148 in steals last year, which should be much higher next season);

2. More (easy) transition baskets, which we got very little of this year;

3. A slightly higher 3 point fg % (though a relative increase in open threes generated from more drive and kick would be off-set somewhat by a drop in offensive rebound kick-out threes); and

4. A much higher 2 point fg %, as we should not only get more tranition shots but dribble pentratation should get us much better looks in the half court too, with easier shots for Miles and Mason in the paint than Zoubs and Miles had to take this year, and especially should get us easier 2 point shots for Kyle and Nolan than Kyle and Jon had to take this year.

We only shot 47.1% on 2 point fg tries this year (tied for #206 with Savannah St. and Presbyterian!), so that would be the area where we could be significantly more efficient next season.

If we make more shots, obviously it matters less if we aren't quite as good on offensive rebounding.

Yes, good list, plus one more:

Go to the FT line more often; the 2009-10 team had an excellent FT shooting% but didn't get to the line as much as some previous Duke teams. The key here would be a presumed increase of dribble penetration into the defense, with more fouls committed against the primary ball handlers and those who receive the passes in scoring position.

Mason and Miles, practice your FT shooting.

**oops, good catch, Nugget; you added this one yourself by the time I got around to it.

uh_no
05-03-2010, 07:44 PM
How does being deep = more efficient? I guess maybe our starting guards will play a few less minutes and be more fresh

yeah...they were so worn down at the end of last season....

kong123
05-03-2010, 07:51 PM
Being able to score in many different ways makes a team almost impossible to stop. The 09 Heels had this quality and the 2011 Devils may have it as well. It still surprises me that Duke won it all last year with the limited amount of weapons available in the arsenal, but they figured out a way to do it. Consistency is the name of the game and scoring quick and often is a great way to dominate your opponents. If KI is able to get comfortable quickly, and K is able to juggle all of the weapons you have in the 2 and 3 spot, then you should be happy. Figuring out a rotation will be K's most difficult hurdle this year. As we have all seen, he only plays the his best guys and he doesn't mind sitting the other talent on the bench. If he has too many guys playing well in practice, how does that translate to the court? Last year it seemed that K primarily played Thomas and Z together and when he substituted for one, he substituted for both of them. The Plumlee's played as a pair too. I guess he felt there was better chemistry there and so he stuck with it. Will he do the same next year with the guards? If so, is it a game by game thing and how does he deal with bruised ego's? This is an issue that Roy has to deal with quite often and a problem Texas had last year. If not negotiated correctly, he could have problems in the locker room and he could deal with inconsistency on the floor.

I think that KI's play will be most important next year. If he is able to penetrate and keep the Plumlee's happy, Duke will win almost all of their games. Winning makes everyone happy. A few loses here and there, like UNC had at the beginning of the 09 ACC season, then everyone starts to second guess whats going on. Back in 09, when Paulus was replaced in the starting lineup, I remember mentioning to a friend who pulls for Duke whether or not that would hurt the chemistry of the team? From a distance, it looked as if it did hurt the team. I believe K will do the right thing in every situation next year, I am not questioning his coaching ability, but sometimes great coaching and great talent isn't enough if the players cannot develop chemistry. Chemistry is key for the 2010-2011 Blue Devils. They will need it, the bulls-eye has been placed directly on their back.

roywhite
05-03-2010, 07:54 PM
yeah...they were so worn down at the end of last season....

No doubt Jon and Nolan and Kyle did a great job in combining efficiency with minutes played. The difference in 2010-11 could be a faster pace, where our offense would push the ball upcourt and try to get more transition baskets. More offensive possessions, more fast breaks, more defensive pressure---yes, greater depth on the perimeter especially should help.

hedevil
05-03-2010, 07:56 PM
No matter where Duke is ranked, they're always my preseason #1. (at heart)

Keep in mind this teams' (potential) ability to run down loose balls. This team should be quicker than last years' at chasing down the rock. This team seems like it will be very mobile, which should allow them to get to the ball quicker (off missed shots) which may offset the size of certain opponents in the rebounding battle. Running down loose balls can lead to alot of fast break opportunities, which in turn can lead to easy buckets or free throws.

MChambers
05-03-2010, 08:28 PM
Could go in the How Dominant Will Duke Be Next Year (answer: pretty dominant), the Starting Lineup with Singler Returning Thread (answer: Kyle's at the 3, with Curry coming off the bench), and the Seth Curry thread (he'll be very good).

I don't think Davis is right to say that the key is how the Plumlees rebound. I think the key will be how Duke defends as a team. It will be a different style of defense next year, and there will be a lot of new players, so it's not just about how the Plumlees defend, but how good Duke's defense is night in and night out.

I worry that articles like this will make it hard for players to focus. On the other hand, there will be lots of competition for playing time, so that may help. I agree with those who say that playing defense will be a key to getting playing time.

striker219
05-03-2010, 09:16 PM
i hope the team enjoys the bulls eye...

With Nolan and Kyle leading the team, I've seen nothing to suggest otherwise.

gumbomoop
05-03-2010, 09:43 PM
Figuring out a rotation will be K's most difficult hurdle this year.

Chemistry is key for the 2010-2011 Blue Devils. They will need it, the bulls-eye has been placed directly on their back.

rotation - Yes, an issue, one of the few that might present a serious ?-mark for '10-'11. My guess is - given that K thinks about everything - and given his valuable experience with the Olympic superstars - he will find this an enjoyable puzzle to solve. He does seem to be genuinely invigorated by puzzles. He doesn't run from them, and he doesn't whine. He's a grown-up, not to mention a nuanced planner.

chemistry - As above, one of the few ?-marks. Without trying to get in a dig at your Heels, I'll claim that the chem issue is a garden-variety issue for Duke in '10-'11, and a bigger ?-mark for the Heels.

Bulls-eye, yep, cannot be avoided. Too much talent, too much experience in 2 super-seniors.

COYS
05-03-2010, 09:43 PM
With Nolan and Kyle leading the team, I've seen nothing to suggest otherwise.

Completely agree. Neither Kyle nor Nolan will be any less hungry than they were last season. They both have a chance to put themselves in the forefront of the Duke history books, restore Duke to its status as the most feared team in the college game, and put themselves in a favorable position to take their games to the NBA. They'll be the unquestioned leaders of the team and will hopefully make the transition as easy as possible for the freshman as well as set the tone for all of our returning players. They know what it takes to win a championship and they will do everything they can to win a second one.

jimsumner
05-03-2010, 09:55 PM
As a general rule, players who are afraid of a bullseye tend to not end up at a program that is almost always in the bullseye.

gumbomoop
05-03-2010, 11:40 PM
Also, I do think we could still have significant size next year with 2 Plumlees - so long as they stay out of foul trouble. Kelly is pretty tall too, but I think the c.w. is that he'll play more on the perimeter. He's not that bulky to bang down low.

If that's the c.w. re RK, I dissent. Though I'm not expecting RK to bulk up overmuch, I do expect him to play plenty as backup 4 to MP2, both when MP2 sits, and when MP2 moves over to 5 when MP1 sits. I do agree with you that MPs gotta play smart enough to avoid foul trouble as much as possible, but I'm pretty confident that RK can pass, shoot, block shots, and rebound. Not a bruiser, to be sure, but he's no weakling, and he's smart.

More generally re the Luke Winn/SI article: check out that little chart showing the difference over last 5 years between Duke and UNC re pace. That little chart is very telling; what it tells us validates our collective contention re K's adaptation-to-personnel v. Roy's single-mindedness. I give you '09-'10 as Exhibit A. Also Exhibit A-1, and A-2, and....

Speaking of c.w., the c.w. of The Stoopids - that K can't recruit guys who want to run, and sure can't coach a running game - could stand some crow-eating humble revision. I'll not hold my breath.

CampbellBlueDevil
05-04-2010, 09:01 AM
I am expecting a slight drop in rebounding next season, but also believe there will be a nice increase in FG% to account for that loss.

We are going to put up big numbers each night.

flyingdutchdevil
05-04-2010, 10:04 AM
People seem to be forgetting Singler. He was our second-leading rebounder next year and, if he plays the 3, we will have 3 large, able-bodied rebounders. While rebounding will probably go down, I'm not that worried about it (defense, on the other hand, is going to be interesting).

IMO, what will increase will be FG, 3FG, assists, steals, FT attempted, number of possessions, and probably a lot of other things that I am forgetting.

Our team was awesome and fun to watch this year. However, a large part of that is being a Duke fan. With our personnel next year, we will be one of the most fun teams to watch due to our tempo. UNC got nothing on us!

ElSid
05-04-2010, 10:29 AM
Love the tempo chart as well. I love stats, generally. Seems like college basketball is just now coming into its own, relative to things like MLB, w/r/t measuring quality, performance, style. Things like kenpom didn't exist not too long ago.

Would love to see some defensive efficiency stats comparing our big man rotations. How much better did we do with Lance and Zoubs in the mix vs. Miles and Mason. My guess would be that we did quite a bit better. Can't underestimate the value of Lance switching off of a screen from his big man onto someone like Malcolm Delaney or LaceDarius (still love this name) Dunn and showing little to no drop off in quickness. Oh Lance, how I'll miss ye.

I'd also like to see a stat showing the mass exodus of quality acc big men effect. Think of all those beast horses that left the conference. We aren't the only squad with a big question mark in the front court. That may mean that our relative front court strength, when compared to other teams, is actually pretty high...just not so when compared to our '09/'10 squad.

Anyone have insight into Lance's next steps, by the way? That sounds like a new thread in the making. Whither Lance? The guy is an effort factory and a very versatile player who I could see becoming a defensive specialist in the League down the road, a la Bruce Bowen, should he choose to go that route. He'd need to improve almost all of his offensive skills (Bowen was a great 3-point shooter eventually) but that's possible. McClure is in the D-League trying to do this right now, right? I think Lance maybe have a better shot with his size and athleticism.

Thomas also sounds really bright in his interviews, so I'm sure there's plenty of opportunity for him outside of basketball too.

Rich
05-04-2010, 11:11 AM
He was our second-leading rebounder next year

Can you predict the stock market too? ;)

Huh?
05-04-2010, 11:21 AM
I am expecting a slight drop in rebounding next season, but also believe there will be a nice increase in FG% to account for that loss.

We are going to put up big numbers each night.

Offensive rebounding may be down next year, but with the extra possesions we shouldn't need those extra offensive boards. We had so few possesions a game this year we needed every chance possible to score, next year I am hoping not so much.

Definitely looking forward to the Plumlees progression from this year to next, they could be the beneficiary of some great open court looks and stick backs. They may dunk the ball 5-6 times a game which makes me very excited......

MChambers
05-04-2010, 11:22 AM
Love the tempo chart as well. I love stats, generally. Seems like college basketball is just now coming into its own, relative to things like MLB, w/r/t measuring quality, performance, style. Things like kenpom didn't exist not too long ago.

I'd really like to see tempo stats on some past Duke teams, like 1992, 1999, and 2001. Such information doesn't seem to exist.

CDu
05-04-2010, 11:27 AM
Offensive rebounding may be down next year, but with the extra possesions we shouldn't need those extra offensive boards. We had so few possesions a game this year we needed every chance possible to score, next year I am hoping not so much.

Logically, I don't think this really holds up. Extra possessions for us also mean extra possessions for the opponent. So we'd still need to be looking at our offensive and defensive efficiency. So the offensive rebounds would still matter just as much, unless other things change as well.

Now, if you want to say that playing up-tempo may generate more easy transition buckets and that these easy buckets may help offset the loss of our second-chance points, then we may have something there. But simply having more possessions doesn't offset a reduction in offensive rebounds.

flyingdutchdevil
05-04-2010, 11:28 AM
Can you predict the stock market too? ;)

Don't buy Apple. Ipad sucks.

ChicagoCrazy84
05-04-2010, 11:32 AM
Could go in the How Dominant Will Duke Be Next Year (answer: pretty dominant), the Starting Lineup with Singler Returning Thread (answer: Kyle's at the 3, with Curry coming off the bench), and the Seth Curry thread (he'll be very good).

I don't think Davis is right to say that the key is how the Plumlees rebound. I think the key will be how Duke defends as a team. It will be a different style of defense next year, and there will be a lot of new players, so it's not just about how the Plumlees defend, but how good Duke's defense is night in and night out.

I worry that articles like this will make it hard for players to focus. On the other hand, there will be lots of competition for playing time, so that may help. I agree with those who say that playing defense will be a key to getting playing time.


Agreed, offensive rebounding is not a necessity, but I think it was last year because of our team make up. Besides Singler and Smith, we didn't have guys that could create their own shot so many times we would milk the shot clock down trying to get a good shot and if we'd miss we had a good shot and grabbing the offensive rebound. I think our team speed will pretty much make up for any offensive rebounding void because it will increase our possessions per game playing an up tempo style. Besides, it's not like Singler and the Plumlee's can't rebound so you are correct, defense is the key. If Miles and Mason can learn to play hard every defensive possession and stay in front without fouling we'll be in good shape because our perimeter defense should be set!

duke4life32182
05-04-2010, 11:39 AM
It does get you excited when talking about next year.

Kedsy
05-04-2010, 11:43 AM
It does get you excited when talking about next year.

True, but I still get a little excited talking about this year...

ice-9
05-04-2010, 12:03 PM
I don't think Davis is right to say that the key is how the Plumlees rebound. I think the key will be how Duke defends as a team. It will be a different style of defense next year, and there will be a lot of new players, so it's not just about how the Plumlees defend, but how good Duke's defense is night in and night out.

Right on! I'm not at all worried about our offense. If we can increase our shooting percentage by 3%, we would offset a 10% decrease in the offensive rebounding percentage. That seems achievable to me.

My main worry is, as MChambers pointed out, defense. While Zoubek in the end got recognition for his contributions to the team, I feel most of us still under appreciate what Lance brought to the table. His versatility, quickness, length, energy and smarts will be dearly missed on the court. Can the Plumlees defend as well as those seniors?

Also, there will be times when we have three guards on the perimeter and Kyle at the four. How will we cope with a perimeter made of 6'2 guards on defense?

We will look extremely good with our pressure defense against overmatched opponents and teams with poor guard play, but we could struggle against teams with elite guards who won't be bothered by our pressure. Once they take that away, can we defend as well as we did this year in the half court?

ReformedAggie
05-04-2010, 12:06 PM
is it November yet?????????????

cspan37421
05-04-2010, 05:00 PM
If that's the c.w. re RK, I dissent. Though I'm not expecting RK to bulk up overmuch, I do expect him to play plenty as backup 4 to MP2, both when MP2 sits, and when MP2 moves over to 5 when MP1 sits. I do agree with you that MPs gotta play smart enough to avoid foul trouble as much as possible, but I'm pretty confident that RK can pass, shoot, block shots, and rebound. Not a bruiser, to be sure, but he's no weakling, and he's smart.


You are probably right; the info I have on RK is sparse. I have only noticed that a) he was listed on a duke roster site as being 6'10" and 220 lbs, which seems VERY light and not particularly conducive to playing low, and b) he won some 3-point contest as an all-star event, maybe McD.

So while I don't doubt you about substitution patterns, it was my impression that he might not be ready to pick up rebounding slack unless our outside shooters have no arc on their shots. And even then, he might be one of them.

But yes, Kyle's a good rebounder too, and has experience playing down low. He's not exactly a bulky guy either.

gumbomoop
05-04-2010, 05:23 PM
The info I have on RK is sparse. I have only noticed that a) he was listed on a duke roster site as being 6'10" and 220 lbs, which seems VERY light and not particularly conducive to playing low, and b) he won some 3-point contest as an all-star event, maybe McD.

So while I don't doubt you about substitution patterns, it was my impression that he might not be ready to pick up rebounding slack unless our outside shooters have no arc on their shots. And even then, he might be one of them.

I acknowledge that you might still be right about the c.w. re RK, so I'm just being disputatious for the sake of it, probably. As you and other posters correctly note, rebounding is a key for next year, as is foul trouble for MPs. As I'm a big RK fan, I'm gonna dispute all who hint my guy is less than breakout-ready. And so long as I don't sound crackpot loopy, everyone's gonna say they hope I'm right, so how can I lose?

Even so, I can't quite claim we got no ?-marks on rebounding; just that I'm looking forward to RK getting his chance there, ahead, I think, of Josh H, mostly just on experience.

cato
05-04-2010, 06:13 PM
While Zoubek in the end got recognition for his contributions to the team, I feel most of us still under appreciate what Lance brought to the table. His versatility, quickness, length, energy and smarts will be dearly missed on the court. Can the Plumlees defend as well as those seniors?

Agreed. Just as people may have under appreciated what Nate brought to the table in 01.


Also, there will be times when we have three guards on the perimeter and Kyle at the four. How will we cope with a perimeter made of 6'2 guards on defense?

We will look extremely good with our pressure defense against overmatched opponents and teams with poor guard play, but we could struggle against teams with elite guards who won't be bothered by our pressure. Once they take that away, can we defend as well as we did this year in the half court?

Once again, agreed. Duke will go back to pressuring the ball and getting into the passing lanes, with the Plumlees helping at the rim. Teams that can beat the pressure and make the extra pass once the help commits may pose a problem. Also, I fear that Duke will regress from a decent defensive rebounding team to a team that gives up too many second chance points. Hopefully, there will be plenty of turnovers and easy transition buckets to more than make up for these problems.

Jderf
05-04-2010, 07:27 PM
As you and other posters correctly note, rebounding is a key for next year, as is foul trouble for MPs.

Foul trouble with the MPs? I didn't even know we had any Members of Parliament on our basketball team! Let's hope they push through tons of legislation all season long. ;)

(that's probably only funny if you're Canadian, and even then probably not... sorry.)

ElSid
05-04-2010, 11:01 PM
Foul trouble with the MPs? I didn't even know we had any Members of Parliament on our basketball team! Let's hope they push through tons of legislation all season long. ;)

(that's probably only funny if you're Canadian, and even then probably not... sorry.)

To be funny in Canada you would have had to say "Mounted Police".

Here in the states...we like a little more firepower. "Military Police".

I also like "Mr. Potatoface". "Matthew Perry". and "Max Power".

Wow this got random in a hurry.

gumbomoop
05-04-2010, 11:40 PM
Foul trouble with the MPs? I didn't even know we had any Members of Parliament on our basketball team! Let's hope they push through tons of legislation all season long. ;)

(that's probably only funny if you're Canadian, and even then probably not... sorry.)

Oh, dear, I fear that, as we Brits sometimes say, I'm guilty of being too clever by half. For I now see that when I referred to foul troubled MPs, some posters mistakenly thought I referred to Miles and Mason.

No, no, sorry. I meant the "foul" = fake expenses claimed by several Members of Parliament, the issue that's roiling our upcoming [well, tomorrow, actually] elections. Or at least these numerous false expense claims were front and center until the recent immigration row [Gordon Brown and "that bigoted woman" mess.]

Anyhow, in my posts, at least, MPs refers to British politics, not Duke basketball.

Again, sorry.

DevilHorns
05-04-2010, 11:47 PM
Being able to score in many different ways makes a team almost impossible to stop. The 09 Heels had this quality and the 2011 Devils may have it as well. It still surprises me that Duke won it all last year with the limited amount of weapons available in the arsenal, but they figured out a way to do it.

Also surprises me that the Heels won in 09 after a completely disastrous exit to Kansas the year before. It was a miracle that those players regained any semblance of morale to simply go on.