PDA

View Full Version : Martynas Pocius. Wasted at Duke?



soccerstud2210
09-10-2010, 01:13 PM
So if any of you are on twitter and follow duke bloggers or the recruiting college basketball guys I am sure you have seen the heated discussions going around the twitter world about Martynas Pocius.

There are discussions and arguements going around because of how well Martynas has been playing in the world championships.

Some of the basketball guys riled up the duke twitter and blog world by throwing Coach K under the bus for "burrying" MP at the end of the bench and not allowing him to showcase his shooting and talent.

Now, I don't remember a lot about MP's career at Duke, but I do recall that he had a couple injuries that hampered his playing time and developement

I just wanted to ask around and see what everyone's opinion on his career was? Obviously four years at Duke helped to develope his skills and shape him into the player he is today, but how much of it was injuries and how much of it was lack of opportunity to showcase the talent?

DukeSean
09-10-2010, 01:21 PM
I believe much of it also had to do with his defense

CDu
09-10-2010, 01:22 PM
I can't say with any certainty, but I was always under the impression that Pocius's playing time (or lack thereof) was more linked to an inability to master the defensive schemes, combined with being stuck behind some VERY talented players.

In 05/06, he was behind Redick, Nelson, Dockery, and Melchionni on the wing. In 06/07, he was behind Nelson, Scheyer, and Henderson. In 07/08, he was injured. In 08/09, he was behind Scheyer, Henderson, and Williams. So in each season, he had at least two guys who would go on to be drafted and/or play some in the NBA in front of him at his position. It's hard to get regular minutes in a situation like that.

I think everyone acknowledges that Pocius had some offensive talent at Duke (there's certainly debate as to how good he was offensively though). But remember that the FIBA game is very different from the college game. So Pocius's success in this tournament is not necessary any sort of reflection that he was underutilized at Duke.

OldPhiKap
09-10-2010, 01:23 PM
So if any of you are on twitter and follow duke bloggers or the recruiting college basketball guys I am sure you have seen the heated discussions going around the twitter world about Martynas Pocius.

There are discussions and arguements going around because of how well Martynas has been playing in the world championships.

Some of the basketball guys riled up the duke twitter and blog world by throwing Coach K under the bus for "burrying" MP at the end of the bench and not allowing him to showcase his shooting and talent.

Now, I don't remember a lot about MP's career at Duke, but I do recall that he had a couple injuries that hampered his playing time and developement

I just wanted to ask around and see what everyone's opinion on his career was? Obviously four years at Duke helped to develope his skills and shape him into the player he is today, but how much of it was injuries and how much of it was lack of opportunity to showcase the talent?

I don't know about injuries, but poor defense was probably the main culprit.

I'm sure there are a bunch of threads on this a ways back if you want a detailed, contemporaneous discussion -- this has been debated pretty thoroughly in the past.

jimsumner
09-10-2010, 01:26 PM
1.He was defensively challenged at Duke

2.He had injury problems.

3.A list of players who helped keep Pocius on the bench would include J.J. Redick, Sean Dockery, DeMarcus Nelson, Gerald Henderson, Greg Paulus, Jon Scheyer, Elliott Williams and Nolan Smith. Except for Dockery, all were all-conference at some point in their college careers and three were first-round NBA draft picks.

4.Somehow he still managed to learn enough to become an international-caliber player for his national team.

OldPhiKap
09-10-2010, 01:35 PM
Somehow he still managed to learn enough to become an international-caliber player for his national team.

Jim, you're confused. It's big men that K can't develop.

devildeac
09-10-2010, 01:44 PM
Jim, you're confused. It's big men that K can't develop.

Well, on a technicality, it's Wojo who can't develop big men. Just ask Zoubeard.;)

OldPhiKap
09-10-2010, 01:45 PM
Well, on a technicality, it's Wojo who can't develop big men. Just ask Zoubeard.;)

Don't let the facts get in the way of a good myth.

Lord Ash
09-10-2010, 01:58 PM
Well, on a technicality, it's Wojo who can't develop big men. Just ask Zoubeard.;)

Obviously not. Haven't you seen Wojo? He is short.

jimsumner
09-10-2010, 02:09 PM
Jim, you're confused.

Time to tweak my meds again. :)

elvis14
09-10-2010, 02:22 PM
I always liked Marty and wish he would have had a better playing career at Duke. The three reasons listed above are valid (defense, injuries, depth). At the same time, I always thought we needed to let Marty make a few mistakes and capitalize on this strengths. Back when MP was a hot topic on this board, I'd go re-watch games and focus on Marty. If I was going to read all the arguments, I wanted to informed :-). One thing I noticed is that many times he was kept on a very short leash. He'd make one mistake (often defensively) and get the hook immediately. In turn, I thought that lead to some tentative play on his part. Sometimes you have to let a guy make some mistakes so they don't spend their court time trying not to screw up. As many minutes as we played our starters, I would have liked to have seen MP get a little more run (and then maybe we'd argue less over minutes as well ;) ). Of course, then he'd get injured and it wouldn't matter anyway.

I'm happy to see him doing well in the FIFA games and hope he has continued success.

Reilly
09-10-2010, 02:34 PM
I like Marty. "Grease" could come in and lubricate the offense, make things go ... but sometimes grease makes a mess and can make things too loose and slippery: passes to the second row, lapses on D. While I personally wish Marty had played more, I don't think Duke would have won more or gone further if he did.

Spencer's Daddy
09-10-2010, 02:37 PM
I'm happy to see him doing well in the FIFA games and hope he has continued success.

And he plays basketball in addition to soccer.

MChambers
09-10-2010, 02:39 PM
1.He was defensively challenged at Duke

2.He had injury problems.

3.A list of players who helped keep Pocius on the bench would include J.J. Redick, Sean Dockery, DeMarcus Nelson, Gerald Henderson, Greg Paulus, Jon Scheyer, Elliott Williams and Nolan Smith. Except for Dockery, all were all-conference at some point in their college careers and three were first-round NBA draft picks.

4.Somehow he still managed to learn enough to become an international-caliber player for his national team.

He had surgeries, one for each ankle. That had to hurt his development significantly (think Zoubek).

DukeBlueNV
09-10-2010, 03:22 PM
I ALWAYS liked Marty! I always clamored for him to get into the games when he was here. IIRC he had one more year of eligiblity left and could have played last year. He made the decison to play professionaly in Europe instead of riding the bench another year. I think he made the decison before we all knew G was going pro and Ewill was leaving. I think he would have stayed if he knew he would finally get his shot. I'm sure he would have been a great asset to the team, helping with depth at the SG postion and it's sad that he didnt get to be a part of the team who won it all. I'm glad to see he's doing well in Europe tho he deserves it!

Devilsfan
09-10-2010, 05:39 PM
If he went to a school like s. carolina the headline might read, Marty Pocius wasted at ... There would be no comma. Just an attempt at some modern day humor.

AZLA
09-10-2010, 05:51 PM
Marty had a lot of upside -- literally. No one could question is "athleticism." I liked seeing him get into games and always thought he changed the dynamic a little. For as good as a slasher as he is, he also had a solid outside shot. Injuries hurt, yes, but I'm not sure about the comments regarding defense. Was his defense any worse or better than Scheyer, Paulus or Josh? Probably, according to the coaches. We wouldn't know, only because we never saw much of him at gametime and any mistake on his part meant the instant red hook.

ElSid
09-10-2010, 06:31 PM
Marty had "happy feet" on defense, is the term that Coach K or someone else in the program used.

Marty had great calves. Anyone remember Rick Majerus when he was calling one of the Duke games, I believe Seton Hall, and he went on and on about how big his calves were. Marty made a disgusting reverse layup that game. I thought Majerus was going to ask him out on air following that play. Who knows, he might have afterward. Liked Majerus as a commentator, actually.

Marty wasn't wasted. That's been covered pretty well by other posters.

micah75
09-10-2010, 11:30 PM
Marty had great calves. Anyone remember Rick Majerus when he was calling one of the Duke games, I believe Seton Hall, and he went on and on about how big his calves were.

Marty wasn't wasted. That's been covered pretty well by other posters.

Marty spent 4 years at Duke, 1 with redshirt. I seriously doubt he would have gotten much playing time if he stayed the 5th year at Duke. I don't like that some insist that he should have stayed for his 5th season (I presume to get a Master's degree?) when he was clearly a basketball talent who could probably be better utilized elsewhere (Europe?) He's doing well overseas. He paid his dues, mostly riding the bench. I sure wish him all the best.

PS: He may have been a bit weak defensively, but he was strong on offense, and clearly very athletic. On another team, or perhaps on a pro European team, his offensive assests will far outweigh his defensive liabilities. Sure wish him all the best, especially after cheerleading from the bench for 4 seasons. He deserves our respect and future success wherever he plays.

MulletMan
09-10-2010, 11:35 PM
You know... while Marty was a nice contributor in spot duty and (perhaps) in practice, it isn't like the kid lit it up when he was in the game. For his career he shot about 39% from the field and 25% from behind the arc. I get that he's got crazy athletic skills and seemed like the nicest kid in the world, but a lack of hitting shots during game action coupled with his "deer in the headlights" method of D, is probably what kept him on the bench while at Duke.

However, let's just look at each of his seasons, and see who you'd have taken minutes from to get Marty more PT...

2005-2006:
Marty plays a total of 172 minutes in 28 games. Those who play more minutes: JJ, Shel, Paulus, McRoberts, Dockery, DeMarcus and the Milk Man. Bascially your five starters are the first five listed and D-Mark and Melch split the rest of the minutes. Where is frosh Marty getting PT. Also remember that he beats out Boateng and Boykin for PT.

2006-2007:
27 games, 193 minutes. Who plays more? D-mark, McRoberts, Paulus, G, McClure, LT and Zoubs. Marty and Zoubs play roughly the same minutes per game, and both shoot similar percentages... Zoubs a little above 50% and Marty a little below. However, Marty, the offensive specialist and defensive liability only drops about 30% from behind the arc... which isn't going to get it done behind D-mark (36%), Paulus (45%), Scheyer (37%), and G (32%).

2007-2008
The lost season, and perhaps when he might have had a chance to break in before Singler really asserts himself. But alas...

2008-2009
22 games, 135 minutes. Who plays more? G, Kyle, Scheyer, Nolan, LT, Paulus, Zoubs, Williams, McClure and MPI. So now K is developing depth, which everyone was screaming for, and playing more big men, which everyone was screaming for, and Marty can't crack the line up. When he does get into the games, he shoots... wait for it... 28% from the field and 15% from behind the arc.

So somebody tell me why Marty should have been playing more at Duke? Yes, I get that he's a star in the Europe and that he's playing well on the Lithuanian national team. But explain to me why he should have gotten all these minutes at Duke when given the chance he did little to demonstrate that he belonged on the floor in front of the guys who were getting the PT?

tommy
09-10-2010, 11:42 PM
Marty had a lot of upside -- literally. No one could question is "athleticism." I liked seeing him get into games and always thought he changed the dynamic a little. For as good as a slasher as he is, he also had a solid outside shot. Injuries hurt, yes, but I'm not sure about the comments regarding defense. Was his defense any worse or better than Scheyer, Paulus or Josh?

Listen, I wish Marty nothing but the best, but while he did display a lot of athleticism while at Duke, he did not show a "solid outside shot." For his career, he shot 39%, including 25% on threes. He didn't really take advantage of the game opportunities he had, limited though they might have been.

And you cannot mention his defense, or lack thereof, in the same sentence as Scheyer's. Jon, despite lacking some raw physical tools, was an excellent defender, in particular an excellent team defender with a real instinct for being in the right place at the right time and knowing where the ball was going to be and how to frustrate opponents from getting where they wanted to go. Marty never displayed any of that. If he had, he would likely have had more opportunities on the floor in game situations.

micah75
09-10-2010, 11:44 PM
So somebody tell me why Marty should have been playing more at Duke?

That was sort of my point. If he didn't earn minutes while he was here, and probably wouldn't have enjoyed much PT his 5th season, then.... surely he made the right decision in moving on. It's all relative, and basketball is a different beast overseas, and it does appear that he's making a name for himself in European ball. I really, really think he paid his dues as a Duke cheerleader for all those years, and am enjoying hearing about his on-court success in European ball.

-bdbd
09-11-2010, 12:02 AM
1.He was defensively challenged at Duke

2.He had injury problems.

3.A list of players who helped keep Pocius on the bench would include J.J. Redick, Sean Dockery, DeMarcus Nelson, Gerald Henderson, Greg Paulus, Jon Scheyer, Elliott Williams and Nolan Smith. Except for Dockery, all were all-conference at some point in their college careers and three were first-round NBA draft picks.

4.Somehow he still managed to learn enough to become an international-caliber player for his national team.

Yep, to all of that Jim.

But this brings back a question I frequently ask a Kerlina friend of mine: For the Carolina fans, why is it always "Our guys go on to be great pros." (Nevermind that that's a silly myth.) But they never seem to ask, "Why didn't Coach Williams accomplish more given all of this great talent at his disposal??" Conversely, they want to pretend that Duke guys don't make it in the pros (b/c K didn't develop them?? Nevermind that many in that comparison were lower rated coming out of HS...). But when a Duke guy does well after leaving school...well then "he mnust have been a wasted talent at Duke." Hmmmmmm.

Kinda like having your cake and eating too, huh??!

:confused: :rolleyes: ;) :D

CameronBornAndBred
09-11-2010, 12:13 AM
So somebody tell me why Marty should have been playing more at Duke? Yes, I get that he's a star in the Europe and that he's playing well on the Lithuanian national team. But explain to me why he should have gotten all these minutes at Duke when given the chance he did little to demonstrate that he belonged on the floor in front of the guys who were getting the PT?
Great look back and wrap-up. And there's another nice point too..in Marty's favor. He's a star in Europe. He's getting paid to play the game he loves, and he's doing really well at it. Compared to other pine riders with offensive skills (thinking of one TK specifically), Marty has very little to complain about, and I doubt if you asked if that he would be complaining. He might have a few regrets..but I'd trade shoes with him in two seconds if I were the less than marquee player on any team and wound up working the career most of those guys do. (They aren't getting paid to play basketball.)

wilko
09-11-2010, 07:59 AM
Well it was college... Im sure he had a beer or 2... but wasted.... I'd be surprised.

BD80
09-11-2010, 08:32 AM
... Kinda like having your cake and eating too, huh??!

:confused: :rolleyes: ;) :D

What's the point in having cake if you can't eat it?

77devil
09-11-2010, 10:40 AM
Fortunately the heated debate is on Twitter and not DBR. Good points all around in this thread.

One would think that after the masterful coaching job last year by K and the staff that most of the criticism in recent years questioning player decisions and player development would largely subside. Apparently not. Give it a rest whoever you are.

jimsumner
09-11-2010, 11:05 AM
Yep, to all of that Jim.

But this brings back a question I frequently ask a Kerlina friend of mine: For the Carolina fans, why is it always "Our guys go on to be great pros." (Nevermind that that's a silly myth.) But they never seem to ask, "Why didn't Coach Williams accomplish more given all of this great talent at his disposal??" Conversely, they want to pretend that Duke guys don't make it in the pros (b/c K didn't develop them?? Nevermind that many in that comparison were lower rated coming out of HS...). But when a Duke guy does well after leaving school...well then "he mnust have been a wasted talent at Duke." Hmmmmmm.

Kinda like having your cake and eating too, huh??!

If they're citing Roy's great NBA players from UNC, who are they citing? UNC's great-NBA-players argument has long focused on Jordan, Worthy, Cunningham, et. al. Dean Smith's players.

Since Williams returned, UNC has produced some decent NBA`players, Felton, Marvin Williams, for example, but no real stars. And Sean May and Rashad McCants were the kind of spectacular flame-outs long attributed to Duke.

ChillinDuke
09-11-2010, 12:58 PM
So somebody tell me why Marty should have been playing more at Duke? Yes, I get that he's a star in the Europe and that he's playing well on the Lithuanian national team. But explain to me why he should have gotten all these minutes at Duke when given the chance he did little to demonstrate that he belonged on the floor in front of the guys who were getting the PT?

Great post. I distinctly remember going to the Blue & White game my freshman year with my father and him turning to me mid-game to say, "Wow, this Pocius guy really looks explosive."

And so he was. But that was just about it. It seems to me Marty was quite athletic (could throw down some impressive dunks in pregame warm-ups) and had a quick first step. But his shooting in game situations was rarely on (did he ever score double digits in a game?). He never had that flash you see in players that makes you think a breakout will come at some point.

His defense was downright poor in games. His shot selection - questionable at best. And the depth chart that other posters have cited certainly did not offer him ample opportunities. Just couldn't take advantage of his scattered minutes.

Just goes to show the power of K, though. A 4-year, deep-bench player at Duke is one of the best players on his country's national team. Impressive. Cheers, Marty.

dukelifer
09-11-2010, 01:51 PM
Great post. I distinctly remember going to the Blue & White game my freshman year with my father and him turning to me mid-game to say, "Wow, this Pocius guy really looks explosive."

And so he was. But that was just about it. It seems to me Marty was quite athletic (could throw down some impressive dunks in pregame warm-ups) and had a quick first step. But his shooting in game situations was rarely on (did he ever score double digits in a game?). He never had that flash you see in players that makes you think a breakout will come at some point.

His defense was downright poor in games. His shot selection - questionable at best. And the depth chart that other posters have cited certainly did not offer him ample opportunities. Just couldn't take advantage of his scattered minutes.

Just goes to show the power of K, though. A 4-year, deep-bench player at Duke is one of the best players on his country's national team. Impressive. Cheers, Marty.

Well- Marty could have just gotten better with a year of just playing ball with pros. He may have fixed some mechanics- got stronger and got more confidence. Right now- Marty looks solid- still shaky with his handle and shot but clearly a better player than at Duke. He will get an NBA look at some point.

jimsumner
09-11-2010, 02:05 PM
It seems to me Marty was quite athletic (could throw down some impressive dunks in pregame warm-ups) and had a quick first step. But his shooting in game situations was rarely on (did he ever score double digits in a game?). .

2007 ACC Tournament. Gerald Henderson was suspended for the ACC Tournament opener
against NCSU. Pocius played quite well, 13 points or something in that range. But he broke a
foot early in the next season and never had much of a chance to build on that success.

ElSid
09-11-2010, 02:16 PM
just looking at early box score from the lithuania game, looks like he played pretty well against a bunch of nba guys.

way to go marty. looking forward to reading some background stories on any interaction between him and k.

durant 38 points. love it.

AZLA
09-11-2010, 04:01 PM
Listen, I wish Marty nothing but the best, but while he did display a lot of athleticism while at Duke, he did not show a "solid outside shot." For his career, he shot 39%, including 25% on threes. He didn't really take advantage of the game opportunities he had, limited though they might have been.

And you cannot mention his defense, or lack thereof, in the same sentence as Scheyer's. Jon, despite lacking some raw physical tools, was an excellent defender, in particular an excellent team defender with a real instinct for being in the right place at the right time and knowing where the ball was going to be and how to frustrate opponents from getting where they wanted to go. Marty never displayed any of that. If he had, he would likely have had more opportunities on the floor in game situations.

Not a solid outside shooter?

Since leaving Duke, the facts are, he averages 44.9% from the field and 33.8% in 3-pointers in Euroleague -- 62% from the field and 46.2% in 3-pointers for Lithuania in international play. Did he somehow magically develop this skill after leaving Duke? No, he always had the talent. He just didn't earn the time at Duke. When you're only averaging 6 mins a game, obviously you're not going to have great shooting percentages.

Marty did however shoot 31 and 30 percent outside his first two years at Duke, which is good. Yes, his total accumulative was .250 after injury prone seasons. People say it was his poor defense. Okay. I wouldn't know, because I don't get to see practices and I only watch on TV -- and he was routinely pulled after any mistake, garning hardly any PT. But the guy IS doing well oveseas in a highly competitive league.

John was a good defender, but excellent? No statistic supports that, but I agree from a team and leadership perspective, he was the man. I tend to reserve superlatives like "excellent" for defensive players such as Battier, Jason Williams, Wojo, Shelden or Grant.

OldPhiKap
09-11-2010, 06:28 PM
Since Williams returned, UNC has produced some decent NBA`players, Felton, Marvin Williams, for example, but no real stars. And Sean May and Rashad McCants were the kind of spectacular flame-outs long attributed to Duke.

I'm too lazy to look, but weren't Felton, May and McCants brought in by Doh?

Re: Marty -- good game, hope he does well. I trust and believe that the OP was sincere in asking, but otherwise this horse is well beaten by now it seems to me.

Duvall
09-11-2010, 06:42 PM
Not a solid outside shooter?

Since leaving Duke, the facts are, he averages 44.9% from the field and 33.8% in 3-pointers in Euroleague -- 62% from the field and 46.2% in 3-pointers for Lithuania in international play. Did he somehow magically develop this skill after leaving Duke? No, he always had the talent. He just didn't earn the time at Duke. When you're only averaging 6 mins a game, obviously you're not going to have great shooting percentages.

Why is that obvious? Why isn't it just as obvious that his mediocre shooting limited his playing time?


Marty did however shoot 31 and 30 percent outside his first two years at Duke, which is good.

It's really not. It's certainly not better than the players ahead of him at Duke.

SupaDave
09-11-2010, 07:20 PM
I think Pocious got exactly what he needed from Duke - he just wasn't Trajan Langdon. And he still isn't so we shouldn't over analyze his recent performance which isn't really that far off from what I think a healthy M. Pizzle would have given us last year. As Mullett Man laid down - he simply didn't take advantage of his opportunities but Lord knows it's obvious he's learned from that. He's mad focused now.

He's excelling -we should be as proud of him as we are of Reggie Love. Their situations are much more similar than some player who never got a chance. These guys GET chances. (McRoberts, Lance, Shavlik, Scheyer, Dockery, Markie, Duhon, Dahntay, Ewing, J. Dub. and even Bobby - our list runneth over NOW!!!!). It's basketball - but it's deeper than that. If you want a company line - it shouldn't be that Duke misused him - it should be that he's doing that b/c he went to Duke... That's as real as it gets.

just a lemma
09-11-2010, 07:27 PM
Why is that obvious? Why isn't it just as obvious that his mediocre shooting limited his playing time?

It's really not. It's certainly not better than the players ahead of him at Duke.

While his points are not obvious, they're certain not without merit. Recall that THE JJ Redick struggled shooting the ball in the NBA when his playing time was limited and sporadic. If that could happen to the greatest shooter of all time, then it could happen to Marty. I was and remain a huge fan of Marty. Many people saw the potential in Marty, but he did play behind some fantastic players. I am sure that the experience of going up against those players in practice every day has helped him.

I blame his lack of success on his injuries and...Shelden Williams (or lack thereof). When The Landlord graduated, I felt that our team defense kind of fell apart and we had to slow down to compensate. Shelden not only provided a safety net for the rest of the team with his shot blocking, but also was the primary communicator (a la Shane) on defense. Without Shelden, we just could not afford to have a weak link on the perimeter defense.

We had quite a remarkable run of defensive anchors with Shane and Shelden, didn't we?

If Marty could have played four years with Shelden, like Lee Melchionni did, I am sure that he would have gotten on the court more because his defensive weaknesses would have been partially covered up by The Landlord. I do not think that anyone can say with a great deal of confidence that Lee was better defensively than Marty. He might have been, sure, but that is not something we can confirm with the available evidence.

Here's a toast to yet another great performance in the WCs by Hocus Pocius.

greybeard
09-11-2010, 11:19 PM
That was sort of my point. If he didn't earn minutes while he was here, and probably wouldn't have enjoyed much PT his 5th season, then.... surely he made the right decision in moving on. It's all relative, and basketball is a different beast overseas, and it does appear that he's making a name for himself in European ball. I really, really think he paid his dues as a Duke cheerleader for all those years, and am enjoying hearing about his on-court success in European ball.

Being a bench player on a team is NOT being a cheerleader. The only people who would say such a thing are those who have never been there, which I take it would include you. If you love the game, competing every day against guys who can really play, doing so in a structured environment run by a good coach, in duke's case a great one, hey, if it gets any better do write.

On the other hand, if playing in front of crowds is your thing, or making it on the next level is what you are about, and by "next level" we are talking NBA, then, maybe that can't be enough. But, to get your education paid for and to get to play for a team like Duke, to compete against and with the likes of Scheyer, Nelson, Henderson, Singler, Smith, E. Williams, the dude who could defend anybody whose name I'm blocking on, along with the Bigs whose names I'll omit, well, that's ballin at the highest levels every day and getting paid for it. Not a bad gig, it seems to me. And, it does seem to have paid off for Marty, now don't it?

I'm not getting your put down and think it is a off putting.

Kewlswim
09-12-2010, 04:07 AM
Hi,

I distinctly remember reading an article about Marty where he talks about how much he loves both being at and playing for Duke. This was, I believe, after he had been pretty much relegated (if you want to call it that) to spot duty. I wish I had the link for it. In Marty's eyes it appears he didn't waste his time at Duke why should we presume to think otherwise? It sounds like he is doing well professionally (playing ball in Europe), he is engaged (or have they already married?) to a Duke woman and appears happy. I think Marty is well ahead of the game and I, for one, am very happy for him.

GO DUKE!

ACCBBallFan
09-12-2010, 01:37 PM
Hi,

I distinctly remember reading an article about Marty where he talks about how much he loves both being at and playing for Duke. This was, I believe, after he had been pretty much relegated (if you want to call it that) to spot duty. I wish I had the link for it. In Marty's eyes it appears he didn't waste his time at Duke why should we presume to think otherwise? It sounds like he is doing well professionally (playing ball in Europe), he is engaged (or have they already married?) to a Duke woman and appears happy. I think Marty is well ahead of the game and I, for one, am very happy for him.

GO DUKE!
Agreed, and on twitter Marty seems to keep up with his old mates. He had dinner earlier this week with his ex roomie Jamal Boykin who was in Turkey for some reason. Also seems to interact a lot with Chris Collins

Skitzle
09-13-2010, 02:01 AM
I watched the USA Lithuania Game.

Here's my breakdown of Marty's game.

Offense,
1. His 3 point shot looks better, but if he had worked on it in college it would have gotten better too.
2. He is still a good athletic slasher with a great first step, but has trouble finishing after getting to the basket. I don't know if you guys have memories of Marty flying to the rim and then missing a shot. He did it from freshman year to senior year he did it at the World championship. Nothing has changed.

He scored a lot of his points on open 3s as a result of the Lit system and the USA not caring about defense

Defense.
1. Couldn't get a good read... the USA was just way better than everyone. No team really played great defense against them.

At the end of the day, I wish Marty much success, but how good is the Lithuania Pro League? Better than the NCAA? I've never watched so I can't tell you... The NCAA sends more players to NBA? The NCAA sends more players to the Fiba World Championships... is that some sort of measuring stick?

I can't believe he was misused at Duke.

AZLA
09-13-2010, 02:36 AM
Here are some basic offense stats from the World Championship 2010 -- generally playing the same competition.

Marty
Accumulative
FG3P = 46%
FG2P = 63%
PTS = 86
Mins = 185

Eric Gordon
Accumulative
FG3P = 45%
FG2P = 47%
PTS = 77
Mins = 158

Andre Iguodala
Accumulative
FG3P = 28%
FG2P = 66%
PTS = 51
Mins = 169

Ricky Rubio
Accumulative
FG3P = 11%
FG2P = 36%
PTS = 51
Mins = 226

NSDukeFan
09-13-2010, 07:50 AM
Here are some basic offense stats from the World Championship 2010 -- generally playing the same competition.

Marty
Accumulative
FG3P = 46%
FG2P = 63%
PTS = 86
Mins = 185

Eric Gordon
Accumulative
FG3P = 45%
FG2P = 47%
PTS = 77
Mins = 158

Andre Iguodala
Accumulative
FG3P = 28%
FG2P = 66%
PTS = 51
Mins = 169

Ricky Rubio
Accumulative
FG3P = 11%
FG2P = 36%
PTS = 51
Mins = 226

Well, I guess that settles it. I can't believe the dumb GMs who picked Gordon and Rubio ahead of Marty in the draft. I bet they are kicking themselves now.
On a serious note, nice statistics you pulled up and congratulations to Marty on a great tournament and I hope he continues to have a great career.

gumbomoop
09-13-2010, 09:03 AM
I always liked Marty and wish he would have had a better playing career at Duke. The three reasons listed above are valid (defense, injuries, depth). At the same time, I always thought we needed to let Marty make a few mistakes and capitalize on this strengths. Back when MP was a hot topic on this board, I'd go re-watch games and focus on Marty. If I was going to read all the arguments, I wanted to informed :-). One thing I noticed is that many times he was kept on a very short leash. He'd make one mistake (often defensively) and get the hook immediately. In turn, I thought that lead to some tentative play on his part. Sometimes you have to let a guy make some mistakes so they don't spend their court time trying not to screw up. As many minutes as we played our starters, I would have liked to have seen MP get a little more run (and then maybe we'd argue less over minutes as well ;) ). Of course, then he'd get injured and it wouldn't matter anyway.

I'm happy to see him doing well in the FIFA games and hope he has continued success.

Although one or two posters have suggested that any such discussion of Marty is a "beating a dead horse" thread, I don't think it's turned out that way. My own view echoes elvis14's, both in acknowledging the main counter-arguments to the idea that Marty was underused ["wasted"] at Duke - defensive deficiencies, injuries, talent ahead of him on the wing - while noting that [at least to his fervent advocates] he seemed on a short lease, getting a quick hook.

If one goes back to the OP, we find that this thread started because Marty had become a bit of a political football, used by Duke-haters as evidence of K's bad coaching. [Hmmmmm.....] But as it's turned out, Marty had a fine tourney, as did K. There's no evidence that Marty resents K. Fraschilla noted that some NBA teams have talked of giving Marty a look; but even if that does not eventuate, Marty appears to have a solid career ahead of him in EuroBall, which itself has gained some cred as a result of the disciplined O [multiple screens, pick&roll, good passing, multiple 3-bombers]. We'll get a chance to hear from Marty again.

Although we all want to refute the TweetTwits who had hoped to bash K by using Marty's good play [an irony noted by several posters], it's maybe worth briefly remembering that, in the aftermath of the departures of G and E-Will, but before Andre's announced early arrival, there was a bit of "Jeez, you think Marty might reconsider?" on these boards.

Things worked out for Duke, for K, for USA Basketball, for Marty and Lithuania, for the EuroGame [except maybe the arm-rasslin'-hand-checkin'] - in fact, for pretty much everyone save Duke-hatin'-TweetTwits.

AZLA
09-13-2010, 10:40 AM
Well, I guess that settles it. I can't believe the dumb GMs who picked Gordon and Rubio ahead of Marty in the draft. I bet they are kicking themselves now.



Marty never declared for the NBA draft.

Wildcat
09-13-2010, 12:20 PM
There were times when I said he had NBA po. Posters laughed, scoffed and just about ran me off the board. But when you have basketball gurus such as Fraschelli, and others saying he might get NBA looks, its obvious they know more than any of the "Marty-haters." Marty always had potent offensive skills. I never bought the defensive theory because: the others playing before him were'nt "off the dribble defensive stoppers either." The defensive argument was almost "offensive." You mean to tell me you can't help a guy improve his defense over a 4 or 5 year span?!? C'mon people. The guy was in K's doghouse for reasons only a few can explain. Plain and simple!

OldPhiKap
09-13-2010, 12:50 PM
The guy was in K's doghouse for reasons only a few can explain.


I guess that's the issue. The coaching staff knows, but has kept it internal. Marty hasn't commented on it and apparently has good things to say about his time at Duke. So why not take it at face value -- the coach knew best, and the player does not dispute it?

ncexnyc
09-13-2010, 01:33 PM
Was Marty on a shortleash? No more than any other player at Duke. One thing I've learned from watching approximately 25 years of Duke basketball is that the players who perform are the ones that get the playing time.

I've butted heads with Jumbo over force feeding kids playing time, but that's just not the way it works at Duke and I've come to accept that fact. If a kid gets on the court and then fails to demonstrate what he's been taught in practice he's coming out.

Let's also be honest, with the talent this program brings in year after year, if a kid isn't getting it done, someone will be right behind him to take his place.

just a lemma
09-13-2010, 01:39 PM
A person does not stop growing at age 21. Marty seems to have developed more since leaving Duke, and I am sure all of us are very happy for him. Marty may not be better than Eric Gordon, but he showed that he belongs on the same FIBA court (The same NBA court? That's TBD). That is development. Now, I do believe that Marty has been practicing with the Lithuanian team for a while, so he had an advantage in preparation. However, can anyone deny that he's made a big improvement since leaving Duke? At the foundation of that improvement is four years of going up against All-ACC, All-America, and NBA-level talent in practice. If you aspire to be a pro in basketball without sacrificing your education (as one would in the Euro League junior teams), could you ask for a better environment than what he had at Duke?

I think the reason that any debate about Marty is contentious is that there's a lot of truth to all the arguments being made. Yes, Marty definitely would have put up better stats if he got 20 minutes of PT per game. In that sense, his potential to put up numbers was "wasted' at Duke...except "wasted" isn't the right word. We should ask who did the wasting and what was wasted. Not Duke. The team had many better players ahead of him, who could put up better numbers. Did Marty waste his time at Duke? If he went to an inferior program and got 20+min per game, he would be playing 30 games against competition inferior to what he could have gotten in practice every day at Duke. No, Marty did not waste his time here. But let's be clear, he was better than what he showed at Duke.

The conclusion is that the following two statements are not contradictory:

1) Marty was not wasted at Duke.
2) Marty was/is better than what he showed at Duke.

The few tinges of conflict that have come to be in this thread originate from two lines of reasoning.

A) Marty is better than what he showed at Duke, therefore Marty was wasted at Duke. (Argument: #2 implies negation of #1, which I argued above to be a fallacy).
B) Marty was/is what he showed at Duke (not much), therefore Marty was not wasted at Duke (Argument: negation of #2 implies #1, which I also believe to be a fallacy).

Notice that the two lines of reasoning are logically equivalent, and rely on #1 and #2 being mutually contradictory.

Lastly, if I may go on a tangent, Marty's presence on those Duke teams was very enjoyable for me. Waiting for Marty to get PT was an annual tradition. Every Duke team has at least one such player every year. Sometimes, that player develops nicely and we get a huge emotional reward. At other times, that player develops more slowly, and he graduates before he can show us how much he's learned. Yet we can all remember players like Marty fondly. That's all part of what makes the college game great, no?

hq2
09-13-2010, 09:30 PM
At the foundation of that improvement is four years of going up against All-ACC, All-America, and NBA-level talent in practice.

Precisely. If Marty were really better than the players he played against, he had four years in practice to prove it, and it didn't happen. He simply wasn't. The players on his European team are not as good as the ones were at Duke, the overall comp style is different too, and Marty has continued to improve since then. Hopefully, he'll have a nice career in Europe. After his Duke days, however, I'd say the NBA is a stretch.

jimsumner
09-13-2010, 09:42 PM
There were times when I said he had NBA po. Posters laughed, scoffed and just about ran me off the board. But when you have basketball gurus such as Fraschelli, and others saying he might get NBA looks, its obvious they know more than any of the "Marty-haters." Marty always had potent offensive skills. I never bought the defensive theory because: the others playing before him were'nt "off the dribble defensive stoppers either." The defensive argument was almost "offensive." You mean to tell me you can't help a guy improve his defense over a 4 or 5 year span?!? C'mon people. The guy was in K's doghouse for reasons only a few can explain. Plain and simple!

You never bought the defensive theory? You never bought the idea that the coach would play the players who gave his team the best chance to win?

Instead, you prefer a theory where Pocius was in some sort of mysterious doghouse for reasons not explained and causes not evident but still stayed at Duke for four seasons, graduated from the school and maintains a close relationship with the coaches and program.

Some doghouse.

Occam's razor, anyone?

DevilHorns
09-13-2010, 11:50 PM
Does anyone actually know if Marty is getting serious looks from the NBA now because of his international play?

Are people outside of forums/blogs raving about his play?

just a lemma
09-14-2010, 01:45 AM
Precisely. If Marty were really better than the players he played against, he had four years in practice to prove it, and it didn't happen. He simply wasn't. The players on his European team are not as good as the ones were at Duke, the overall comp style is different too, and Marty has continued to improve since then. Hopefully, he'll have a nice career in Europe. After his Duke days, however, I'd say the NBA is a stretch.

Given how good his competition was at Duke, I'd say we can't say much about Marty's abilities other than that he was a clear notch below the excellent guards who were ahead of him. Because his competition was so good, if you think about it, that really leaves us with a wide range of possibilities for Marty's true abilities.

I agree with your assessment above. However, I do object to putting a ceiling on a young man's career already.

I understand that you didn't rule out the NBA completely. After all, a "stretch" is not the same thing as impossible. My elaboration below is merely for those who would completely rule out the NBA for Marty.

Who is to say that he won't be able to make it onto the end of an NBA bench somewhere in say 5 years? Like I said, there is room for Marty to grow. A team might sign him when he hits his peak and play him for two years. He is not good enough today, but who's to say he won't be good enough 5 years from now? Marty is not yet 25! Would you like it if someone told you what your ceiling was at age 25? Yes, his likely career trajectory puts him in Europe, and there is plenty to be proud of in such a career. However, that is something to be celebrated after the fact. To say today that he won't be in the NBA ever seems a little bit tragic to me. Instead, I suggest that we make our well wishes for Marty be more open-ended---i.e., I hope he maximizes his potential; I hope he makes a lot of money; etc.

just a lemma
09-14-2010, 02:11 AM
There were times when I said he had NBA po. Posters laughed, scoffed and just about ran me off the board. But when you have basketball gurus such as Fraschelli, and others saying he might get NBA looks, its obvious they know more than any of the "Marty-haters." Marty always had potent offensive skills. I never bought the defensive theory because: the others playing before him were'nt "off the dribble defensive stoppers either." The defensive argument was almost "offensive." You mean to tell me you can't help a guy improve his defense over a 4 or 5 year span?!? C'mon people. The guy was in K's doghouse for reasons only a few can explain. Plain and simple!

You see, Marty DID improve his defense over those years. The thing is, his teammates improved their defense, too! Also, look at the list of players who were ahead of him each year. That is an impressive list.

05-06 Freshman. Had Shelden Williams, but behind DeMarcus Nelson, JJ Redick, Greg Paulus, Sean Dockery.
06-07 Donut. McBob the only post presence, with freshmen Zoubek and Thomas. Behind Nelson, Scheyer, Paulus, Henderson
07-08 Major Donut. Only pre-beard Zoubs and Lance. Injured. Behind Nelson, Scheyer, Paulus, Smith. Probably his best chance, given that Paulus was fading fast and Smith was a frosh.
08-09 Donut. Miles was a frosh. Zoubs before he was Z-Beard. Behind Scheyer, Henderson, Smith, Williams.

Any defensive shortcomings Marty had would have been magnified on these donut teams. He might not have been as bad on D as some are saying he was, but whatever weaknesses he had as an individual would have made his teammates worse at defense. The few bigs we had, who were defensive liabilities themselves at times, would have gotten into foul trouble quicker.

There is not any reason to believe that Marty was ever in K's doghouse. Now Taylor King...I could see that.

gumbomoop
09-14-2010, 09:55 AM
I was/am a Marty cheerleader. Still, I see no evidence of Marty having been in K's doghouse. It would be interesting to view numerous tapes of Marty's final (junior eligibility) season, to compare his play - with particular focus on mistakes, and how quickly he was pulled thereafter, compared to mistakes by others. But that would take far more research than anyone is likely to do.

Although no one would be willing - now - to mess with Duke's '09-'10 season, I have to think that, roughly 15-16 months ago, we'd all have been Marty cheerleaders. For, IIRC [but maybe I'm confusing the sequence of events], G departed, then Marty departed, then Elliot departed. Had Elliot left before Marty made his decision, and well before there was any suggestion of an early arrival by Andre, I assume we'd all have been saying, "Wow, Marty's going to get a chanced to play a whole lot this year. He'll do fine on O. Hope his D improves. We need him to step up on both ends of the court, or we're toast."

Tim1515
09-14-2010, 01:28 PM
Marty was on a short leash but i think he earned that leash at practice. I always hoped he would earn more game time at Duke but when he got in he was like a ball of fire. Sometimes things went well but more often then not he'd take a crazy shot or pass a wild ball.

I do think he would've been better with more court time. I also think he could've put up some really good numbers at another school. The issue was that Marty was a gambler. He might have put up good steals over his career but what you would've have seen on the stat sheet is how out of position he was in help side defense or how many times missed steals turned into easy baskets.

I wish him well and enjoy watching him play, he is electric, but he didn't play with the structure K wants in all of his players.

micah75
09-14-2010, 04:38 PM
Being a bench player on a team is NOT being a cheerleader. The only people who would say such a thing are those who have never been there, which I take it would include you.

I'm not getting your put down and think it is a off putting.

I had hestiated to respond to this, as it seems a bit preposterous, and not sure it deserves a reply. But just to set the record straight, in case Marty or his family reads these boards, it was *not* a put-down of Marty. Nothing could be further from the truth. I'm sorry that you took what I said in the wrong way. Perhaps you had a bad day and I was an easy target for venting? Hang in there---it won't be long before Jumbo is back in full season form, and you'll have much more qualified posters with which to spar. :-)

I suppose I could have couched what I said with what had already been said before... a great practice player, a darn good if not great athlete who honed his basketball skills against some of the best players in the country (who were on his own team no less), who received a superb education, etc etc. And there's nothing at all to be ashamed of with cheerleading from the bench. It shows he's a team player and is not one to sulk due to lack of PT. Even star players cheerlead from the bench when they're taken out of the game for whatever reason (fouls, breather, outcome already decided, etc.) I've tended to side with the group that preferred he would have received more PT during his career. Then again, I do understand the reasons why he didn't, from those much closer to the program, so I'm not addressing that issue.

My main point was, as I stated, and which you apparently overlooked, was that he paid his dues. Some fans wish that he would have stayed on for a 5th season (if you count the redshirt year.) I disagree with that minority and feel that now that he's honed his skills and received his degree, he should do what's best for Marty. Apparently he loves playing basketball and feels he has something to contribute professionally. How that translates into a major "put-down" of one of my favorite players during the past decade, I do not know. Perhaps I'm not as articulate as I once was, if I ever was articulate to begin with.

Anyway Marty, and to his family, friends, and fans... I thoroughly enjoyed your time at Duke, and wish you all the best and will be eagerly looking forward to progress reports through DBR and other sources.

Wildcat
09-14-2010, 06:42 PM
I know basketball players; I know scorers; I played the game and was pretty decent. Trust me, Marty could play. If Marty's defense was as bad as posters present it; or if he wasn't that good; we wouldn't be still discussing this issue about a player who transferred the year their favorite team won the NCAA championship. C'mon people, look at the history and the views of this thread/topic? Why would we waste our time on a guy who had bad defense?????

We will be real good this year. Go Duke

jimsumner
09-14-2010, 07:14 PM
I know basketball players; I know scorers; I played the game and was pretty decent. Trust me, Marty could play. If Marty's defense was as bad as posters present it; or if he wasn't that good; we wouldn't be still discussing this issue about a player who transferred the year their favorite team won the NCAA championship. C'mon people, look at the history and the views of this thread/topic? Why would we waste our time on a guy who had bad defense?????

We will be real good this year. Go Duke

I don't follow your logic. We're discussing Pocius because his play on his national team in the recent FIBA World Championships put him back in the spotlight. If he had gone back to Lithuiana to get a graduate degree in Physics, we wouldn't be having this thread.

Look,we have three alternatives here. One is that Pocius didn't play as much as he might because his overall game was not the equal of a number of All-Americans, All-ACC Players and NBA lottery picks who also played his position.

Two, is that for some nefarious reasons, Mike Krzyzewski and his staff kept Pocius in their "doghouse," not playing one of their best players and therefore compromising not only the success of the program but their long-term job prospects. No evidence has been offered for this thesis, I suspect for the very good reason that the theory is nonsense.

The third is that, despite a century or so of playing and coaching in college and the NBA, Krzyzewski, Dawkins/James, Collins and Wojo simply don't "know basketball players" as well as message-board posters.

At the risk of piling on, let me add that the coaching staff made/makes decisions on game-time PT in large part based on practices that are closed to not only the general public but also the media. Thus, I have no first-hand knowledge of what did or did not happen in those practices.

But I do have a fair amount of second-hand knowledge. And I can state with reasonable certainty that Marty Pocius did not demonstrate in practice that he deserved to play ahead of Redick, Dockery, Nelson, Scheyer, Henderson, Williams and Smith.

The untimely ankle injury he suffered that cost him a season played a part in that, as did a general inability to play defense at the level expected by the coaching and an inability to adequately harness his high-risk/high-reward offensive style.

BTW, Pocius did not transfer anywhere. He graduated on time and returned to his home country to begin a career. Pocius remains on excellent terms with the Duke program and the Duke coaches are delighted with the success he's found oversees.

As are Duke fans.

JBDuke
09-14-2010, 08:00 PM
And with that excellent reply by jimsumner (as is his usual), I think this thread has covered all of the ground it needs to. There is no new ground being discussed here. If anyone has further info on Marty's pro career in Lithuania and wants to post about it, please create a new thread. This one is CLOSED.