MBB: Duke 78, St Johns 93 Post-Game Thread [Archive]

PDA

View Full Version : MBB: Duke 78, St Johns 93 Post-Game Thread

JBDuke

01-30-2011, 03:25 PM

Put your post-game thoughts here.

rotogod00

01-30-2011, 03:26 PM

like i said to close out the prior thread, nice to see some fire the last 10 minutes. could have mailed it in.

ice-9

01-30-2011, 03:26 PM

I saw a few posts in the St John's in-game thread suggesting that Nolan isn't a real point guard and implying that this deficiency is a reason why we lost today. In the game against BC, another poster suggested the team would be better if Nolan didn't look for his shot so much and spent more time setting up his teammates.

Well, that talk is frankly starting to piss me off.

The fact of the matter is that this team (post Kyrie) has been best when Nolan plays a little selfishly and takes a lot of shots (especially on drives). This game is just more proof of that.

In the first half Nolan only took 4 shots...4! and we looked horribly stagnant offensively while doing so. This team NEEDS Nolan to force the issue.

Contrast the first half with the second where Nolan finally began asserting himself offensively (and really only in the last 10 to 15 min). There's really just no comparison: he scored 27 points on 9-14 shooting, we won the half by 6, and everybody shot better.

If we played this way the entire game -- with Nolan being aggressive, taking a lot of shots even if it makes him look selfish and not very PG-like -- we might've won this game.

_Gary

01-30-2011, 03:28 PM

Just hate that it was against Lavin. Noticed that Coach K didn't linger at all with Lavin in the handshake line and I don't blame him a bit. He knows Lavin was one of the chief naysayers last year at ESPN when Duke was making it's tournament run. What an absolute jerk.

At least we showed some heart in the 2nd half and didn't roll over. It just wasn't our day.

CameronDuke

01-30-2011, 03:29 PM

ns7

01-30-2011, 03:29 PM

No need to get overexcited.

St. John's gives up 37.7% on 3 point shots to average opponents. If Duke shoots that well, they have 14-15 more points. The final margin was 15, hmmm.... And that's if you assume Duke is an average 3pt shooting team, which it is not.

The real issue was how bad the transition defense was. It looked like the full court press did not work at all, but Duke had to go to it due to the large deficit.

Kyle and Nolan played fairly well. Ryan Kelly played up to expectations. The rest of the team didn't. I expect the team to play very well at Maryland on Wednesday, which really is a key game the team needs to keep up with UNC in the ACC standings.

CLW

01-30-2011, 03:29 PM

I think it is safe to say that w/o Kyrie we aren't athletic/quick enough to extend the man-to-man defense out as far as we have been this season.

IMHO, I wouldn't be shocked to see K go to a more "compressed" (inside the 3 pt line) man-to-man defense like we used last season.

obviously the 3s just didn't fall today (until late).

the effort was good and the team never just threw in the towel.

OZZIE4DUKE

01-30-2011, 03:29 PM

dairedevil

01-30-2011, 03:29 PM

like i said to close out the prior thread, nice to see some fire the last 10 minutes. could have mailed it in.

Agreed. Let's hope that the team is ticked off - and will channel that anger into the next game against not-our-rival.

What is it that we always say in this situation? Oh, yeah....NEXT PLAY!

KShip21

01-30-2011, 03:29 PM

Good to see some fire I the last 10-12 minutes. More than them losing, it was starting to look like they were going to lose both halves of the game. With a lack luster performance, at least they managed to win their last half of basketball. Something to build on at least. A minuscule silver lining.

chrisheery

01-30-2011, 03:30 PM

This game highlighted what we lost when Lance and Zoubs graduated. Interior defense and toughness is crucial to win games against tough teams. However, it is worth noting that we lost a game in almost the exact same fashion to a similar team at the exact same point in the season last year. That day, our interior defense was shredded as well and was excellent from that point on in the season. I hope our big guys get the message from today as well.

If we make shots, we can cover that up, but it would be nice to make shot and play great defense.

kaufmjo

01-30-2011, 03:32 PM

Nice way to end the game with some intensity. Otherwise a difficult game to watch (as have been the last few - kinda boring frankly). Guys playing tough but cant seem to find great chemistry recently. Clearly missing Kyrie big time. Would really like to see either Plumlee make a real post move with a pass into the interior.

Its always good to be humbled at this point in the season going into the ACC season, Duke will bounce back and learn from their mistakes.

Rich

01-30-2011, 03:32 PM

Before anone goes all postal. today is a teaching moment for the coaching staff, nothing more. Losses in January don't count for squat and don't matter for anything. They don't end your season.

Didn't we have a similar performance last year at G'Town? Season ended pretty good, if I recall. Next play.

g-money

01-30-2011, 03:32 PM

I definitely give the team a lot of credit for continuing to play hard. Never quitting is one of the great attributes that Coach K has instilled in his team year after year.

Maybe the end of the second half will give us something to build on from here on out.

Anyway, the fact that we play hard independent of the score makes me proud to be a Duke fan.

CameronBlue

01-30-2011, 03:33 PM

and while that doesn't contribute anything meaningful to the conversation it's cathartic, welcome to my hell, and thank you.
2. This game was not about going 4 for 25 from 3 or whatever. The game was about effort. By the time Duke mustered a competitive effort it was too late.
3. In some ways I've never been prouder of Nolan and Kyle. They fought until the final buzzer and you could see the pain etched in their faces.
4. St. Johns is to be credited obviously. It was a dissection and they wielded the scapel adroitly.
5. Next game.

theAlaskanBear

01-30-2011, 03:37 PM

Tough game to watch. In the first half, St. John's just worked Duke early. The press really took Duke off gaurd, and I wondered if K would go small (Smith, Curry, Dawkins) because the announce was right....we were out-quicked. They were fast, made sharp cuts, and had a successful midrange/layup game.

For about 30 minutes though, Duke got tougher, and played through some pretty ridiculous reffing early in the 2nd half.

At the 2:00 mark Duke had a shot, and thats all you can ask for, to keep fighting. If Nolan found that killer instinct but 3 mimutes earlier, this would have been a different game.

And St Johns gets props, a bunch of seniors who have had a rough time of it thepast couple of years. I hope they make hay in Big East and we see them crushed in the first round of the NCAA tourney (for Lavin's sake).

taiw93

01-30-2011, 03:38 PM

The announcers pointed out at one point that the embarrassing loss to Georgetown last year occurred exactly one year ago today - hopefully, the ending to our 2011 season will mirror last year as closely as our January 30th did. It was nice to see some fire and effort in our team in the second half, but I was dismayed at the lack thereof in the first half. Our guys just looked beat. Hopefully, our guys will learn that they need to play like they did in the last five minutes for 40 minutes every game, regardless of the score. A few thoughts:
-A lot of this was just bad luck with our awful shooting and their fantastic shooting. In that regard, it was just one of those days
-A lot of this was not. We need to do a better job of containing dribble penetration, and the Plumlees need to do a better job of helping on defense and not being caught out of position. Mason had a ton of bonehead plays today.
-As I said above, I loved that our team seemed just positively ticked off in the last five minutes, and were playing angry. Unfortunately, they didn't do so in the first half. That NEEDS to come earlier.
-We need to do a better job of press/transition defense. If the press gets beat, we need to get back more quickly and not give up an easy layup. One suggestion that could help this, as the team demonstrated late in the 2nd, is to have those who are pressing play their guys much tighter, instead of just standing in the general vicinity waving their arms.

Overall, this was a bad loss, but one which we can really learn from. We need to go into every game really angry and focused (like we did in the waning minutes) , and we need to learn to defend teams that are more athletic than we are. This, I believe, has a lot to do with our post D. Kyle and Nolan proved today (as if they hadn't already) that they are hard-nosed, cold-blooded players - these are the type of guys you want leading your team in March. Looking forward to seeing a fired-up Duke team take on Maryland.

Devilsfan

01-30-2011, 03:39 PM

Oriole Way

01-30-2011, 03:40 PM

This game was a lot like the tournament loss to Villanova in 2009. We got blitzed early and often, we played awful on both ends of the floor, couldn't buy a bucket, and our opponent couldn't miss (although it's not hard to miss wide open layups and jumpers).

This was just one of those games, just like NC State and Georgetown last season, as others have mentioned. While it was discouraging to watch, my long-term outlook for this team hasn't changed much at all.

The only thing which concerns me is that we are very vulnerable against Maryland. I hope we use this as a motivation against MD, but I don't think it's likely given the environment Duke will be facing - unless we start playing tougher defense and stop chucking up 3's (or at least try to find more consistent offense driving into the lane when the 3's aren't falling - Nolan, I'm looking at you).

Back to back losses, while nothing to be ashamed of, would be frustrating because we would be starting to throw away a pretty easy path to a #1 seed, especially with so much of the top 25 losing this week and the Big East teams beating each other up.

This team still has the pieces to win another title, even if Kyrie doesn't come back. A lot depends on whether Mason Plumlee can step up and fill the Zoubek role, which he started to do and which he is more than capable of accomplishing. Getting more consistent play from Dawkins and Kelly will also be essential. Kelly needs to continue to build off his recent stellar play, and work on asserting himself in the big games. Smith needs to work a little bit on cutting down his bad turnovers against good competition. He is certainly more than capable of that. Singler needs to work just a little bit on his shot selection, especially taking account game situations. None of these things are very major adjustments, so hopefully we can learn from this beatdown and continue improving.

uh_no

01-30-2011, 03:41 PM

And that's if you assume Duke is an average 3pt shooting team, which it is not.

what team have you watched all year????? duke is #19 in the country in 3pa/gm and #11 in 3pm/g,

If duke isn't a 3pt shooting team, then I don't know who is

edit: i missed the word average.....and for that I apologized.....they are not an average 3pt shooting team....they are clearly much better than most, but that doesn't mean that we can expect to win without any other way to score....we can score in transition, and do so a lot, but without a consistent half court set, we'll be going the ways of the teams from 06-09

Namtilal

01-30-2011, 03:45 PM

I think it is safe to say that w/o Kyrie we aren't athletic/quick enough to extend the man-to-man defense out as far as we have been this season.

IMHO, I wouldn't be shocked to see K go to a more "compressed" (inside the 3 pt line) man-to-man defense like we used last season.

Agree completely. We lost today because we were horrid at executing our defense. So many layups. Changes definitely to come.

Andre Buckner Fan

01-30-2011, 03:45 PM

If it wasn't for Nolan and Kyle I swear I was watching NCSU, ECU or Durham High playing against St. Johns today. I think we should let Kyle and Nolan rest but get the rest of the squad off the plane at RDU and have an intense practice because they didn't play very hard at the Garden. (Just kidding, sort of).

I think this a question of rest and motivation. St. John's had an extra day to rest and they were just humiliated by Georgetown. We'll know the spirit and fire of this Duke team by halftime against Maryland. Adjustments clearly need to be made. Too many players are resting on their laurels.

DukieInBrasil

01-30-2011, 03:45 PM

was the worst basketball I've seen Duke play in exactly a year. They played terribly and the final score made it seem closer than it was.

Saratoga2

01-30-2011, 03:47 PM

One concern for me today was full court pressure defense which turned out to be a big liability with a lot of SJs points coming from esssentially wide open looks at the basket. Is that the best defense for a team with a size advantage but not a quickness adantage. We were better with our half court defense and did a better job with blocks and rebounds when we could set that up. There was an issue with missing so many 3 point shots, with many coming from the corner, we allowed a lot of advantage plays for their offense.

Another concern was our turnovers. Their game plan was to put pressure on us all over the court and use their depth when needed to stay fresh. They pressured us into a lot of turnovers, many coming from our guards. At least in the first half, we didn't seem to have a team in there that could deal with the pressure and still be assertive. Perhaps the issues there got into the shooters heads, since until the end of the game, our shooting was really off.

Nolan was amazing at getting 27 points after the half, but of course the hill was too great to climb, especially with us locked into the full court pressure mode and giving up a ton of easy baskets. Give SJ credit as well, they shot very well from the floor, from the FT line and were much more secure with the ball than we were.

Hard to explain why at the end of the game our three point shots started falling. They were just as contested as before. Did the guys just relax and take them in rythm. I can't explain it.

Watching the various players in the game, I liked Ryan and Mason, Nolan and Kyle and Andre and Tyler. In a high pressure game like this one we did need to sub quite a bit, but the back line combination of Miles and Josh wasn't as effective on defense, and I thought Seth has diffulty against quick physical guards, both defending and getting his shot away. What Nolan needs is another ball handler in to help him. Tyler is the best fit now and he is a freshman making some freshman mistakes.

After watching the game films, I hope that the coaching staff will move away from trying to asset full court pressure and get Nolan more help in the ball handling area. We also need to get Andre to think positively and start hitting more of his shots. Kelly got a lot of PT and deserved it. This team should not hang its head about this loss, just learn from it and come together for the next game.

freshmanjs

01-30-2011, 03:48 PM

LSanders

01-30-2011, 03:49 PM

It's not so much the loss. That's, obviously, not a whole lot of fun. But, as has been pointed out, GTown and NCSU were both horror shows last season, and the world didn't exactly end. I have no doubt K will use this to light a few fires.

But ... Actually allowing a Lavin team to look good. That's just gross. That smarmy, Calipari-coiffed basketball reject. We could play them ten times and beat them eight. But, today, we allowed Lavin to look good. THAT is nauseating!

uh_no

01-30-2011, 03:49 PM

I think this a question of rest and motivation. St. John's had an extra day to rest and they were just humiliated by Georgetown. We'll know the spirit and fire of this Duke team by halftime against Maryland. Adjustments clearly need to be made. Too many players are resting on their laurels.

there were a lot more issues than just 'an extra day to rest' in that game

I think its crazy to think our team is resting on their laurels...did you see how nolan and kyle played the whole game? played their hearts out...the whole team did....to suggest that this team had no heart and spirit out there is ludicrous...coach K ripped the crazies a couple years ago for chanting 'lets get hungry' at a game when we were down big.....his teams always play with fire....nolan got T'd up because of the 'fire' the issues are deeper than that

taiw93

01-30-2011, 03:50 PM

I definitely think it's safe to say we're done with the black jerseys for the season. We were wearing those at FSU also...

Oriole Way

01-30-2011, 03:56 PM

that villanova game was a 3 point game at halftime. things fell apart in the second half after nova built a bit of a lead and duke started pressing.

this was very different.

How about the second half of the Villanova game was the most similar to this entire game? The end result was the same, and that's the last time I remember Duke being so ineffective on both ends of the floor. Clemson a couple years ago was also similar, but Villanova and St. John's today were both similar, guard-heavy teams (obviously that Villanova team was much better than St. John's today, but the style of play the way they beat us was pretty similar).

moonpie23

01-30-2011, 03:56 PM

we came out soft.....stayed soft until about 8 to go in the second half...

they came out aggressively, made shots, gained momentum and confidence and put us in a hole to big to climb out of..

it happens...

we learn and move on....

and for those that think MD might be worried about facing us after a loss cause we're "mad".....i think they smell blood in the water....

we had better tighten up...

Kfanarmy

01-30-2011, 03:57 PM

The team did not look well prepared defensively for what saint Johns was doing at any point in the game. This one is somewhat on the coaches...time and time again, in the first 30 minutes of the game, Saint Johns would have someone drive straight down the center of the lane, and either shoot a wide open layup or one of our bigs would rotate away from one of Saint Johns bigs leaving him wide open for a catch and lay up...almost never did the guy responsible for guarding the man with the ball even try to stay with him past the foul line...I couldn't figure out who had responsibility for the Saint Johns guard once he got to the interior. It looked like Duke defenders were passing the man with the ball off to nobody.

There was also no adjustment, that I could tell to what SJ was doing against Duke's press. Essentially they accepted the double team, broke it and passed to a guard who sprinted straight down the center of the court for a layup. after about three times, I fugured Duke would put the biggest guy on the inbounder, attempt to steal, then immediately get back, but it seemed like ground hog play over and over. just didn't get it. Offensively, Duke was much better in the second half, largely off of Nolan. Kyle just doesn't seem to be shooting well...and hasn't shot great all season. Shouldn't have cut his hair I guess.

Seriously anyone think this team was well prepared defensively?

what team have you watched all year????? duke is #19 in the country in 3pa/gm and #11 in 3pm/g,

If duke isn't a 3pt shooting team, then I don't know who is I think the poster meant Duke is normally an above average 3 pt shooting team, quite the oppositve of what you inferred.

Son of Mojo

01-30-2011, 04:04 PM

Definitely need to get better in a hurry for the Maryland trip but we'll see what happens. Like others have said, this is reminiscent of Georgetown, State, and Wisconsin games of a year ago. The biggest difference is the guys kept playing hard until the end--the Gtown and State games particularly I think they let up a bit in intensity compared to this. They went down swinging today better than in those games. There are some holes in the game that can and need to get tightened up--we've got the best coach around for teaching that to players after a loss. I don't like losing, and especially to that %&@* Lavin, but learn what you can from it, correct problems, and move on to the NEXT GAME. The sky is NOT falling, by the way, for some who were posting in the in-game thread and the "realistic expectations" thread. I hate seeing people get that easily discouraged that quickly.

WiJoe

01-30-2011, 04:07 PM

I definitely think it's safe to say we're done with the black jerseys for the season. We were wearing those at FSU also...

I doubt that. I would not be surprised to see them at MD. But I feel strongly we'll see them again this season, and more than once.

Andre Buckner Fan

01-30-2011, 04:08 PM

there were a lot more issues than just 'an extra day to rest' in that game

I think its crazy to think our team is resting on their laurels...did you see how nolan and kyle played the whole game? played their hearts out...the whole team did....to suggest that this team had no heart and spirit out there is ludicrous...coach K ripped the crazies a couple years ago for chanting 'lets get hungry' at a game when we were down big.....his teams always play with fire....nolan got T'd up because of the 'fire' the issues are deeper than that

I said rest and motivation. And I said most players with Kyle and Nolan being the exceptions.

Duke teams do not always play with fire, but you can bet they don't do it two games in a row.

KyDevilinIL

01-30-2011, 04:09 PM

Ugh whatever who cares. It doesn't matter.

Would beating the daylights out of St. John's in January have guaranteed another national title in two months? No. So does having the daylights beaten out of us by St. John's in January guarantee we won't win another one in two months? It really doesn't. Duke sucked at basketball today. It happens. We would have been drilled by a lot of teams this afternoon.

Win or lose against St. John's on Jan. 30, with or without a healthy and effective Kyrie Irving – Duke's chances of winning another title are exceptionally small no matter the circumstances. This was a pretty sad showing on many levels, sure, but it wasn't an elimination game. So learn and move on.

sagegrouse

01-30-2011, 04:11 PM

Story line of the game for me were the dynamics: First, we shot incredibly poorly. Then we got behind by 12-14. After that, we had to go to pressure defense. Finally, St. John's, to its credit, took advantage with backdoor cuts, layups, and FTs.

Moral of the Story: Don't get behind by 12 points to an underdog on the road.

Sure, Kyrie would have helped. But if you shoot 1-20 from 3 pt. land, most of them pretty good shots, well.... If you live by the sword, you die by the sword.

Karma theme: my fellow Steamboater Verne and his running mate Clark also worked the Georgetown debacle with Obama last year. Of course, it was a snowy week in New York, just like it was in DC a year ago. But I am not sure we'll see my friend Verne again this season until the NCAA's: although he's the lead basketball announcer, he got big-timed by Jim Nance, who will do the Mar. 5 UNC game on CBS with Kellogg -- kind of a Final Four tune up for the twosome.

Random thoughts:

Tyler Thornton can be a bit chippy. I like that.

Nolan played magnificently in the second half. Kyle had a good game as well, except for his 3-point shooting. Both were tough to the very end of the game.

We owned the boards the first few minutes, and then, to quote Joseph Heller, "Something Happened." What the heck was that?

There was an ugly period for St. John's early in the second half, stupid fouls and pushing, that could have been beneficial. Lavin apparently got his team to calm down.

sagegrouse

uh_no

01-30-2011, 04:12 PM

Would beating the daylights out of St. John's in January have guaranteed another national title in two months? No. So does having the daylights beaten out of us by St. John's in January guarantee we won't win another one in two months? It really doesn't.

Unfortunately, thats a very poor argument....many many teams beat a St. JOhns type team in january who don't win the title that year, very few teams who DO go on to win the title lose games like that in january

its a classic, if A then B is not the same as if not A then not B

KandG

01-30-2011, 04:12 PM

I couldn't figure out who had responsibility for the Saint Johns guard once he got to the interior. It looked like Duke defenders were passing the man with the ball off to nobody.

Agree. Every time a St. John's guard turned the corner, I started to expect an automatic two points or a foul & FTs. Defense was way too porous on the wings and interior.

Offensively, Duke was much better in the second half, largely off of Nolan. Kyle just doesn't seem to be shooting well...and hasn't shot great all season.

I talked about Nolan's issues as a PG in the in-game thread only because I felt our offense was disrupted too easily with the pressure. But Nolan played very well when the pressure eased a bit. Kyle is more concerning to me (even though I never doubt his effort), as well as the continued lack of an interior game.

The defense will improve significantly -- I do believe that. Kyle's shooting (and the team finding other ways for him to get offense) will probably get better. The interior issues, I'm still torn.

cakerace

01-30-2011, 04:13 PM

Thank goodness for the loss to F$U.

If the game today had ended a season long unbeaten streak, I would have thrown myself off a cliff. But without that pressure, the bad taste was out of my mouth by the time I could click the remote. NEXT PLAY...

Good Duke. Beat Maryland.

SCMatt33

01-30-2011, 04:13 PM

First thing's first, there is never a loss bad enough to say that a team "can't" do anything, or this, that and the other thing have to be improved for this team to go far. This was a game in which absolutely nothing went right. Trying to come back in the second half was very tough with the combination of poor shooting and the officiating. The officiating wasn't "bad," but it was unfortunate for Duke. The refs called a very tight game from the opening tip, and you need steals to make that kind of comeback. It's almost impossible to get enough of them in a tightly called game.

On to Duke's play. There were several things to look at in this game and most of them fall into two categories for me. One is the category of things that we couldn't do much about. The aberrations. The other is things that have been consistent problems hidden by wins that could (not will) hurt the team in the future, both in the regular and perhaps post-season.

I'll talk about what I feel belongs in the aberration category first. First and foremost is shooting. Duke shot under 20% from three even with the flurry at the end. Don't get me wrong, a shooting performance like this at an inopportune time will kill any team in the country. It doesn't matter who you are or who you play against, 1-21 going into the last few minutes won't get it done. This is too good of a shooting team though to worry about it. If it happens again, it happens, but you can't expect it, it's not something you can work to prevent, and most importly, Duke wasn't fixated on taking three pointers. Until the last 3 minutes when we shot a bunch of desperation shots, our 3PA/FGA was about 38%, which is above our average, but just by a little bit and certainly not a ridiculous number. Second is the fouls and free throws. Like I said before, it was a really tightly called game, and we couldn't sit back and adjust, because we needed to force turnovers. The game was called pretty consistently tight, and even if there was an individual call or two to argue, it wasn't systematic. The other thing is that St. John's had a really good game from the stripe, shooting 26-33. Teams have inexplicably struggled against Duke from the line this year, but it had to start to even out at some point.

Now for the somewhat concerning things. First is the turnovers. They were a big part of the lead getting bumped out in the first half and was a big part of the low offensive production in the first 20 minutes. This team has been pretty good overall at limited turnovers, ranking in the top 25 in the country in offensive turnover percentage, but it has started to creep up recently and it has hurt us. If you look at the correlation on KenPom, turnovers is almost as important to Duke's offensive efficiency as shooting with a correlation of -.71 as opposed to .74 for eFG%. When you look at the numbers, FT rate and Offensive rebounding have had little effect on the offense with both having a correlation less than .10. If you look closer at the numbers, it has a bit of an effect on our defense as well as Duke has a pretty high offensive steal rate, meaning that when we do turn it over, it is more often live ball turnovers than most teams, leading to some easy points, which we saw today.

The other thing that concerned me was the number of easy looks that St. Johns got at the rim. The Johnnies are a reluctant 3 point shooting team, yet when they spread the floor, Duke would send all 5 guys out to the perimeter to cover leaving the middle wide open. There was a couple times in the half court defense, including at least once in the first half before we were desperate, that Duke had all 5 defenders above the foul line. Most people here aren't big fans of Clark Kellogg (or really any analyst for that matter), but one of the things he pointed out was how much Duke loses in terms on lateral quickness covering the ball in that style of defense without a healthy Kyrie. When Duke plays Kyle at the three, it makes it tough to keep everyone in front of the ball while still applying pressure without getting blown by, especially against a small but quick team like St. Johns. BC was able to similarly exploit this, but they turned the ball over way to much for it to be a factor in the final score. Is that like saying Duke is to "unathletic" to play the same defense without Kyrie, absolutely not. I just think that without him, we are still trying to find that sweet spot defensively between falling back like last year, and the super amped up pressure that we could pull off with Kyrie. There is a fine line there that Duke has to find, because we can't keep up the super amped up pressure with a shorter bench and can't fall back as much without affecting other areas of our game that we have worked on to this point.

One crazy thing that I saw that really doesn't fall into either category is the timeout situation. Coach K almost pulled a Roy with his timeouts. Duke still had four timeouts left at the under 12 timeout in the second half in a game when we were down by 20. Do I think it caused anything or will be a problem, no, but its interesting to point out.

Obviously, there's nothing "good" to pull out of a game like this, but it has to make the team push harder to get better so that it doesn't happen again. If you can do that, and the seniors can lead the team like last year's did, the sky is still the limit with or without Kyrie. If Nolan and Kyle don't both continue to take their leadership to higher levels, the outcome might not be as good. Lukily I have full faith an confidence in both to see it happen.

P.S. They should now edit the "Save Kyrie's Toe" video to say 38-2...and a national championship.

Rudy

01-30-2011, 04:15 PM

A real stinker. Not a lot more to say. I liked it when our guys attacked the press, trying to score off it. But then, offensive charge, turnover on a base line pass and it fizzled, too.

A-Tex Devil

01-30-2011, 04:15 PM

It's a little know fact that the Duke basketball bylaws require that all Duke teams are to get their A-$$ handed to them by a Big East team once a year if on the schedule. The proviso was added on July 15, 2006, Section 5.3(a)(iii) of Article IV. I am glad it was this game and not in the tourney. There is no getting around it, it must happen and K was smart to let it happen here, much like georgetown last year. Great strategery. Just think, if we hadn't wisely dropped that Georgetown game last year, Duke would have been required to lose to West Virginia in the Final Four. K sees that there is a strong possiblity that we would run into a Big East team in the tourney as there are going to be approximately 23 Big East teams in this years tourney making up over a 1/3 of the bracket.

2011 - St. Johns
2010 - Georgetown
2009 - Villanova
2008 - West Virginia
2007 - Marquette

That's the only explanation for that embarassing display. Next play.

ns7

01-30-2011, 04:19 PM

what team have you watched all year????? duke is #19 in the country in 3pa/gm and #11 in 3pm/g,

If duke isn't a 3pt shooting team, then I don't know who is

edit: i missed the word average.....and for that I apologized.....they are not an average 3pt shooting team....they are clearly much better than most, but that doesn't mean that we can expect to win without any other way to score....we can score in transition, and do so a lot, but without a consistent half court set, we'll be going the ways of the teams from 06-09

I should have added that we're quite a bit better than average, on rereading my words don't come across that way, though they should. My point that with an national average shooting performance vs. St John's, the final deficit would be 0-1 points in their favor.

Of course since we're quite a bit better, an average performance for us, probably 50% since they were almost all wide open looks, means that we win by 10 points, which is our predicted margin of victory.

DUKIE V(A)

01-30-2011, 04:20 PM

Like others mentioned, this game reminded me of last year's G-Town game (including that it ended looking closer on the scoreboard than it felt).

I thought St. John's hitting so many early shots (often due to poor defense) made a huge difference in that enabled them to go to the press. Singler and Nolan (and Kelly) were used to break the press and we were not able to punish them for pressing on the back end.

Looking forward to seeing the team bounce back at Garyland.

DevilHorns

01-30-2011, 04:21 PM

A few thoughts:

1. Our defense is giving up far too many easy shots/lay-ups. I felt the same way against BC. A team that is experienced and well-coached can cycle 3-4 passes around the perimeter and eat easy points against us as we have a trend to over-commit. Our help D in the paint is also fairly consistent at over-playing, and therefore leaving a slashing player wide-open at the hole. I think we need to settle back a little on D and not over-play outside the 3 point perimeter during half-court sets.

2. We have trouble against the press, and we have trouble utilizing the press ourselves. I honestly think that we shouldn't press other teams. We are playing a few of our players, Nolan and Kyle, the entire game, and pressing is exhausting over the course of a game.

3. I felt that our energy was good early in the game but our shots just weren't falling. Once the lead ballooned to 15 or so, we lost a little competitiveness in a hostile environment. I thought K could have used a time out 2-3 times in the first half that may have changed some of the momentum. Then again, this is a game to grow from, and it was clear to me that Nolan and Kyle have to be a little bit more loud on the court to motivate the underclassmen. Last year that role largely was taken by Lance. Players like Dawkins, Kelly, Curry, Mason, etc are a little bit more prone to frustration and slumps in energy.... but at the same time, I think they're also a little bit more susceptible to boosts of confidence and energy. We need a leader on the court that is vocal... and we need consistent play from a 3rd option, whether it be Kelly, Curry, or Dawkins.

dukelifer

01-30-2011, 04:21 PM

One bad game does not a season make. But this team's D has been a question mark all year. This game shows that there is still much work to do. Duke can and will play better but they need to bring it every night (or day) and they did not this game. Despite the fact that Duke has two stellar seniors- this is still a pretty young team and they got a bit shell shocked when punched in the face. St Johns had a good game plan and Duke did not adjust. It happens. As for this being St John's coming out party- don't bet on it. They will likely lose a bunch more and not make the tourney despite this win. Duke brings out the best in teams and that is what happened today. The bottom line is that the season has effectively just started and Duke is now just one of the pack and may have lost a 1 seed with this loss- as the ACC has no one in the top 25. They will need to earn their way back now. Maybe that will light a fire going forward. We shall see.

SCMatt33

01-30-2011, 04:22 PM

2. We have trouble against the press, and we have trouble utilizing the press ourselves. I honestly think that we shouldn't press other teams. We are playing a few of our players, Nolan and Kyle, the entire game, and pressing is exhausting over the course of a game.

Seeing as it took us being down 20 to start pressing consistently, I wouldn't worry about it too much.

OldSchool

01-30-2011, 04:23 PM

Our weaknesses in this game were reminiscent to me of those in some of our bad losses in recent years, such as Clemson, Villanova and Georgetown.

1. Our overplay man-to-man defense being constantly exposed by passes to interior cutters (or dribble penetration with dishoffs) for lay-ups. Where a team shows the quickness and intelligence to do this consistently against us, I would like to see us immediately shift to a defense in which the players are told to stay in front of your man and make them shoot over us.

2. Our failure to be able to attack a full-court press. This was the most frustrating thing about our Clemson debacle, and it resurfaced here. I see team after team successfully defeat a full-court press by aggressively passing or pushing the ball all the way to the rim after inbounding to take quick advantage of a 3-on-2 or 2-on-1 or even 2-on-2 momentary advantage at the other end. But in our case, time after time, we failed to attack and were satisfied with just getting the ball over half-court and allowing St John's to run back and get set on defense. We have no excuse for not being able to attack a trapping press. We now have athletic big men who can run, and can pass well out of a trap.

Not every team can expose these weaknesses, but when one can do so, it can get ugly.

richardjackson199

01-30-2011, 04:25 PM

dukeblue1206

01-30-2011, 04:26 PM

It was an ugly game no doubt but I think the guys will bounce back from it. It was this exact date last year, Jan 30th, when G'town took Duke behind the woodshed in DC and things turned out pretty good after that. It was only a 12 point defeat to G'town but it really was not even that close. Same way with the final score of this game. It only shows a 15 point defeat but it felt like 30. Regroup and head to a tough place to play in Maryland. See if they can man up for it.

Oriole Way

01-30-2011, 04:28 PM

uh_no

01-30-2011, 04:33 PM

I have a very hard time with this statement. How can you possibly say that after Duke lost in January to a worse team than St. John's - NC State - in similar fashion, and yet won the national championship with a largely similar roster to this season's team?

Last year's situation is very extenuating....we completely changed the look of our team by placing Z in the starting lineup....If Z were his new self in those two games, we wouldn't have got blown out last year by state or georgetown

I'm not sure how you can say we have a 'largely similar roster' when we lost our starting point guard, starting PF, and starting C, we completely changed the way we play the game, and have significant contributions from players who either didn't contribute last year, or weren't on the team

BlueandWhite

01-30-2011, 04:36 PM

Bob Green

01-30-2011, 04:39 PM

duke74

01-30-2011, 04:41 PM

Congrats to St. Johns. They wanted it more and deserved the big win. More like big annihilation. We know we'll have to play much better at college park. That is we'll have to play with heart for 40 minutes.

Maybe the briefest, but maybe the most insightful post. I was there...you could tell from the start that Lavin had his team ready to go - from the opening pressing to the emotional play before the hometown fans.

Yes, we couldn't shoot (1 for 21 late in the game from 3???) or play interior defense or penetrate until the second half - but the Johnnies seemed to have wanted it more. Additionally, it seemed like we were outmuscled at times. The Johnnies played physically at times (not referring to the Ts), and we didn't seem to respond. Perhaps it was the adrenalin from being up by so much.

I tend toward pessimism by nature - but I hope this DOES become a teaching lesson for the staff and we move on from here as in past seasons.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I adjunct at St. John's. I think a pop quiz is brewing this week...

Oriole Way

01-30-2011, 05:02 PM

Last year's situation is very extenuating....we completely changed the look of our team by placing Z in the starting lineup....If Z were his new self in those two games, we wouldn't have got blown out last year by state or georgetown

I'm not sure how you can say we have a 'largely similar roster' when we lost our starting point guard, starting PF, and starting C, we completely changed the way we play the game, and have significant contributions from players who either didn't contribute last year, or weren't on the team

I can say it's a largely similar roster because it is. More than 60% of the total roster returned, and two of our three biggest scorers returned and resumed similar roles. Of our top 8 players in terms of minutes and usage, 6 were on the team last season. When you don't include Irving, who could be done for the season, 6 of our top 7 most-used players this season were also on the roster last season. 7 is an important number because historically it is K's preferred number of players who get heavy minutes in his rotations in important games.

Zoubek and Thomas were role players, although Zoubek was an essential player. We certainly couldn't have won it all without those two, but Mason Plumlee has the size and skillset to be a replacement for Zoubek. Thomas was an intangibles player. While that might be difficult to replace in theory, in practice it's not hard to replace a player who averaged less than 5 points and 5 rebounds per game, and was fairly inefficient in doing so.

Scheyer was the only major personnel loss from last season. Irving and Curry the two major additions. With Irving, yes, this team was playing differently than last season. But with Irving out, this team is actually playing more like last season's style of play, with the exception of perhaps being less efficient on both sides of the ball and not being as good of a rebounding team, especially offensively when Zoubek was starting towards the end of the season. Kelly is the only returning player with a much greater role and significantly more minutes on the team. And frankly, compared to Thomas, he is a far superior player in almost every regard, aside from leadership and "hustle".

Either way, without Irving, no, we haven't completely changed the way we play.

hudlow

01-30-2011, 05:04 PM

Punked.

St. Johns played their game of the decade.

Shake it off and move on because Maryland desperately wants to do the same thing.

cptnflash

01-30-2011, 05:05 PM

Before anyone goes all postal, today is a teaching moment for the coaching staff, nothing more. Losses in January don't count for squat and don't matter for anything. They don't end your season. Next play.

They do count with regards to NCAA tournament seeding. After today's performance, we are off the #1 line, at least for now. And we saw last year how important being a #1 seed can be.

buddy

01-30-2011, 05:05 PM

As bad as our offense was (and it was terrible in the first half), we scored more than enough points to win. Our defense was just awful. St. John's ran a layup clinic. Our guys may not have been ready to play, but the only real adjustment we made (full court pressure) did not change the course of the game. It looked as if we lost our composure at times, i.e. everyone running down the floor when Kelly got a rebound--no guard for an outlet. That is concentration. We did not have any until it was too late.

I think this was a "heart" game. St. John's needed this, we did not, and we played that way. They won.

Third, I really don't like this talk about us being a "young" team. Yes, next to the Johnnies (9 seniors) we are young, but so is everyone else. We heard after Florida State that our "young" guys had to learn how to play with a target on their jersey, etc., etc. If I am not mistaken, we have two senior "All Americans" and "POY" candidates. Six guys on this team suited up on Monday in Indianapolis, and at least 5 played meaningful minutes. This team should understand pressure and hostile environments. They apparently didn't learn about "targets" after FSU.

Yes we played tough in the last 10 minutes, but by then it was way too late. We need to bring a sense of urgency all day. We did not.

Finally, I hope next year when the inevitable "can this team be undefeated" thread goes up, that it is instantly killed. Seasons are long, teams have bad days, players get hurt. This is a bad loss, make no mistake, but if the team will play with intensity in the future, this too shall pass. However, if we can only play with intensity at Cameron, it will be a short post-season.

Kewlswim

01-30-2011, 05:14 PM

Hi,

I hate losing as much (probably more) than most people. I don't necessarily believe one learns more after a loss. However, what happened today can't be simulated in practice. Over the long haul what happened to the Devils today may actually help them because they will hopefully learn that FSU beating them was no fluke. If an opposing team really wants it, has some talent, and the Devils help them by not showing intensity from the start of the game--they will lose. The technical things of how to break a press, etc. will be cleaned up in practice, but I didn't see the normal Duke intensity out there. I saw a team happy to be in NYC, but not ready to play at a high level. I hope they enjoyed their time there.

GO DUKE! Next Play.

dukestheheat

01-30-2011, 05:17 PM

Way too many layups given up. Frigid from 3 point land. The guys fought at least in the second half, but getting down early on the road and down 21 at the half sealed it for the Johnnies. It will be interesting to see if St. John's can sustain that level of play in their next few games. It's gonna be tough for Duke on Wednesday as well in College Park. Coach K will earn his check in the upcoming game.

Remember, this happened last year at Georgetown and the season turned out okay. Please don't jump off the deep end.

This game was an artifact to Duke; in that, I mean that the play and the results were so far out of line, out of the usual or the expected, that you're almost compelled to throw it out and disregard it. No way we are that bad and that's the bottom line. We will be back and we will be even tougher on Maryland. Right now, there is more shake in Maryland's boots because Duke lost big, on the national stage, today. You can bank on that.

dth.

KyDevilinIL

01-30-2011, 05:19 PM

Unfortunately, thats a very poor argument....many many teams beat a St. JOhns type team in january who don't win the title that year, very few teams who DO go on to win the title lose games like that in january

its a classic, if A then B is not the same as if not A then not B

The point has nothing to do with St. John's. Has everything to do with the fact that Duke has the potential to win a title just as much right now as it did 24 hours ago. It's Jan. 30. We're still about three weeks away from the time it's worth starting to worry about or celebrate about how the team is playing.

When you have a team capable of contending for and aiming for a national title, the regular season is about two things: 1) Winning enough games to position yourself well on Selection Sunday, and 2) Taking your lumps at times and trying to peak at the right time. Today's game was bad, yes, but nothing that happened today has knocked Duke off of either of those paths.

fgb

01-30-2011, 05:24 PM

Zoubek and Thomas were role players

um, they were starters. that was their "role".

technically, you have a point; a large percentage of the players on the roster were in fact on the roster last year. realistically, this doesn't mean a whole lot. we may have only lost three players, sure, but they happened to be three starting seniors. so last year, post georgetown, we put 18 years of collective experience out there on the floor at the start (and finish) of each game, a starting 5 that had been playing together as a unit for three years. so, yeah, we lost a lot. this is in fact a very different team, and one which plays a very different style of ball, even without kyrie.

MChambers

01-30-2011, 05:26 PM

Agree completely. We lost today because we were horrid at executing our defense. So many layups. Changes definitely to come.
Like you and the poster you quoted, I wonder if Duke will switch back to the compact pressure defense from last season. I doubt it, because I think K is committed to extended pressure defense with this team. We sure could have used a less aggressive defensive today, because St. Johns wasn't going to be taking long 3s, and wanted to take us off the dribble. Also, our pressure didn't force many turnovers until the game was over.

Without Irving's speed, we're only average in the quickness department, on both ends of the floor.

Obviously, we need to shoot better -- that was an amazingly bad shooting performance today.

I don't agree with those who say we don't have a good point guard or that the team didn't show any fight.

sagegrouse

01-30-2011, 05:39 PM

Like you and the poster you quoted, I wonder if Duke will switch back to the compact pressure defense from last season. I doubt it, because I think K is committed to extended pressure defense with this team. We sure could have used a less aggressive defensive today, because St. Johns wasn't going to be taking long 3s, and wanted to take us off the dribble. Also, our pressure didn't force many turnovers until the game was over.

Without Irving's speed, we're only average in the quickness department, on both ends of the floor.

Obviously, we need to shoot better -- that was an amazingly bad shooting performance today.

I don't agree with those who say we don't have a good point guard or that the team didn't show any fight.

Many of you (CameronDuke, BlueandWhite) have made the point about "extended pressure defense" or poor transition defense or too many defensive breakdowns resulting in layups. That's not the game I saw. Duke went to the pressure D after it was down by nearly twenty points, as a "what-else-can-we-do?" move. SCMatt made the same point a page or so above.

I don't think we'll do extended pressure defense again except under similar circumstances, or as a change of pace.

Different topic: Anyone else notice the zone for the last few minutes of the first half? Will someone tell Clark Kellogg about it? He didn't seem to notice, and he is a man of many, many words.

sagegrouse

camion

01-30-2011, 05:42 PM

Like you and the poster you quoted, I wonder if Duke will switch back to the compact pressure defense from last season. I doubt it, because I think K is committed to extended pressure defense with this team. We sure could have used a less aggressive defensive today, because St. Johns wasn't going to be taking long 3s, and wanted to take us off the dribble. Also, our pressure didn't force many turnovers until the game was over.

Without Irving's speed, we're only average in the quickness department, on both ends of the floor.

Obviously, we need to shoot better -- that was an amazingly bad shooting performance today.

I don't agree with those who say we don't have a good point guard or that the team didn't show any fight.

The only think I will take exception two is the bolded statement. In K's first several years I think he was stubborn enough to stick with a failing strategy. Now I think he is mainly stubborn about finding a winning strategy. I expect to see defensive and offensive adjustments.

This game was pretty much a perfect storm of ickiness. It happens sometimes and I expect us to rebound. I do think we need to change some things for that to happen, but I usually think that at this time of year. We'll see how things progress and the first test will be our next game against a Maryland team that also presses.

CDu

01-30-2011, 05:47 PM

Firstly, credit goes to St John's for great effort and a great gameplan. They made us look AWFUL on defense. They just picked us apart. And on the other end, they made life difficult enough. Those two things, combined with some really bad shooting are the recipe for a really rough loss.

Moving from that point, I think the complaints about Smith are unfounded. He has so much responsibility on his shoulders that his performances should be viewed as really impressive. I think the real issue is that so many of our players are completely dependent upon Smith to create offense for them. Dawkins, Curry, and Kelly are pretty much just catch-and-shoot players right now. The hope was that Curry would be a playmaker, but right now his game is limited to hitting long jumpers. And the Plumlees just haven't been able to show any sort of consistent back-to-the-basket game. So unless Smith creates for them, they can't score. And sometimes even when Smith creates for them, if the shots aren't falling his numbers look bad.

Since Irving went down, Singler is the only other player who is capable of creating his own offense (or offense for others). Unfortunately, he had a tough game today. He fought and clawed for a 20 point night, but it was rough going for him to get there today.

In spite of this, the offense would have seemed fine if a few more open shots fall. We scored 78 points, and could easily have had another 12 points from 3pt range (even that would have been below our average from 3). There were of course way too many turnovers. And there were not enough assists. But that's the nature of an offense that is very reliant on the 3pt shot. When they aren't falling, the assist numbers suffer (as does the scoring efficiency).

But even 78 points should be enough for us to win most nights. Unfortunately, the defense was terrible. Too many times our perimeter guys lost track of their man cutting for layups off the ball. Too many times those guys failed to stay in front of their men, which then created 2-on-1 situations that led to easy baskets. Some credit goes to St John's, who spread the floor, passed the ball very quickly, and identified opportunities. But the defense has to be better. I'm hopeful that the staff can use this as a teaching tool.

There were a few bright spots. Mason was a force early around the defensive rim, blocking 5 shots. Kelly added a block and 9 rebounds. Smith was incredibly efficient scorer. Smith and Singler showed a lot of fight throughout, even after it was fairly clear we were going to lose. But beyond that, there was a lot not to like, obviously.

Oriole Way

01-30-2011, 05:47 PM

um, they were starters. that was their "role".

technically, you have a point; a large percentage of the players on the roster were in fact on the roster last year. realistically, this doesn't mean a whole lot. we may have only lost three players, sure, but they happened to be three starting seniors. so last year, post georgetown, we put 18 years of collective experience out there on the floor at the start (and finish) of each game, a starting 5 that had been playing together as a unit for three years. so, yeah, we lost a lot. this is in fact a very different team, and one which plays a very different style of ball, even without kyrie.

How exactly is it very different?

Starters can be role players. Just because we lost starters doesn't mean the team as a whole is drastically different, or that the style of play has changed. With Irving, our style of play changed. Now that he's out, we are back to playing a style of basketball which is closer to that of last season.

KyDevilinIL

01-30-2011, 05:47 PM

I expect to see defensive and offensive adjustments.

I don't expect too many adjustments. This was a failure of execution and teamwork, not of strategy and philosophy. If Duke had done what it normally does somewhat adequately today, Duke probably wins. But Duke did nothing well as a team, so it lost.

Kfanarmy

01-30-2011, 05:49 PM

I said earlier in the thread that I didn't think the team was PREPARED for Saint Johns. My point, perhaps not made clearly enough, was that the defensive game plan put no one in position to either rotate in on the guard as he stepped to the interior or, alternatively, had no one step in to cover a Saint Johns post player so that a Duke big could move out far enough to be a factor without giving up a layup....I know Duke didn't shoot well, but Duke not shooting well, shouldn't lead to the opposition having 90+ points. As my moniker implies I am a big fan of coach K, but today the team was unprepared defensively and I think that was a failure in game prep.

Kfanarmy

01-30-2011, 05:53 PM

How exactly is it very different?

Starters can be role players. Just because we lost starters doesn't mean the team as a whole is drastically different, or that the style of play has changed. With Irving, our style of play changed. Now that he's out, we are back to playing a style of basketball which is closer to that of last season.

Rember Zoubek and Thomas setting screens so that Smith, Singler, and Sheyer could get open...How often do you see that? The offensive game plan has been significantly different. Aside from offensive rebounding the bigs this year don't seem to be much of a factor on the offensive end of the floor...at least that's how I see it. That may still be a result of the KI effect going into the season, wherein they probably became accustomed to a slasher getting the ball to them or one of the SGs...right now, I'm not sure they have an offensive role, aside from occupying a defender from time to time.

CDu

01-30-2011, 05:55 PM

How exactly is it very different?

Starters can be role players. Just because we lost starters doesn't mean the team as a whole is drastically different, or that the style of play has changed. With Irving, our style of play changed. Now that he's out, we are back to playing a style of basketball which is closer to that of last season.

The team is drastically different. Mason, Kelly, Dawkins, and Curry are playing new roles. Thornton and Hairston are new to the team. Even Smith is playing a new role. The only ones who are playing a similar role as last year are Singler and Miles. When 7 of your 9 players in the rotation are playing a new role, that's drastically different in my opinion.

Also, while we may be playing a style closer to that of late last season, I'm not sure we have the personnel to match those results. We don't have anyone nearly as effective on the offensive boards as Zoubek. We don't have that third high-IQ ballhandler/playmaker that we had last year in Scheyer. And we don't have that versatile post defender like we had in Thomas.

I think you're underestimating how much different this team is than last year's team at the moment.

MChambers

01-30-2011, 06:00 PM

Many of you (CameronDuke, BlueandWhite) have made the point about "extended pressure defense" or poor transition defense or too many defensive breakdowns resulting in layups. That's not the game I saw. Duke went to the pressure D after it was down by nearly twenty points, as a "what-else-can-we-do?" move. SCMatt made the same point a page or so above.

I don't think we'll do extended pressure defense again except under similar circumstances, or as a change of pace.

Different topic: Anyone else notice the zone for the last few minutes of the first half? Will someone tell Clark Kellogg about it? He didn't seem to notice, and he is a man of many, many words.

sagegrouse
Sagegrouse, I'm not talking about full court or 3/4 court pressure. I'm talking about what defense Duke plays in the half court. Last year's team did not defend much past the three point line; other Duke teams and this year's team do. I'm questioning whether we've got the personnel to do that.

I agree that we went to an even more extended pressure defense after we fell far behind. In fact, we went to full court pressure, which I didn't understand at all. But I'm talking about what this team does in the half court.

MChambers

01-30-2011, 06:01 PM

Rember Zoubek and Thomas setting screens so that Smith, Singler, and Sheyer could get open...How often do you see that? The offensive game plan has been significantly different. Aside from offensive rebounding the bigs this year don't seem to be much of a factor on the offensive end of the floor...at least that's how I see it. That may still be a result of the KI effect going into the season, wherein they probably became accustomed to a slasher getting the ball to them or one of the SGs...right now, I'm not sure they have an offensive role, aside from occupying a defender from time to time.

Actually, Ryan has done a very good job of carving out an offensive role, but his shots weren't falling today (and the refs didn't seem to call fouls on Johnnies hitting three point shooters after the shot, which was bizarre).

duke74

01-30-2011, 06:05 PM

Actually, Ryan has done a very good job of carving out an offensive role, but his shots weren't falling today (and the refs didn't seem to call fouls on Johnnies hitting three point shooters after the shot, which was bizarre).

My son (T '02) said the same thing. Everytime we shot a 3, it seemed like the shooter ended up on his tush.

CDu

01-30-2011, 06:05 PM

Sagegrouse, I'm not talking about full court or 3/4 court pressure. I'm talking about what defense Duke plays in the half court. Last year's team did not defend much past the three point line; other Duke teams and this year's team do. I'm questioning whether we've got the personnel to do that.

I agree that we went to an even more extended pressure defense after we fell far behind. In fact, we went to full court pressure, which I didn't understand at all. But I'm talking about what this team does in the half court.

Agreed. We played extended pressure defense in the half court from the onset of the game, and St John's picked us apart.

Kfanarmy

01-30-2011, 06:10 PM

Actually, Ryan has done a very good job of carving out an offensive role, but his shots weren't falling today (and the refs didn't seem to call fouls on Johnnies hitting three point shooters after the shot, which was bizarre). That's not exactly what most people think of when they imagine what a 7 footers role is...stepping out to hit threes. In those instances he has essentially been functioning as a SG. The MPs and RK just don't seem to be getting anything going inside or freeing up outside players (by screening or passing)...which means Duke often seems to be playing three on three on the perimeter...it has worked well, but is completely different from last year, where Duke would often get Z or LT to step out to screen a defender.

MChambers

01-30-2011, 06:14 PM

That's not exactly what most people think of when they imagine what a 7 footers role is...stepping out to hit threes. In those instances he has essentially been functioning as a SG. The MPs and RK just don't seem to be getting anything going inside or freeing up outside players (by screening or passing)...which means Duke often seems to be playing three on three on the perimeter...it has worked well, but is completely different from last year, where Duke would often get Z or LT to step out to screen a defender.
Yes, well, Ryan doesn't have to do what most people think he should do. If he can pass and hit open threes, it's a very good offensive role.

Early in the year, he was looking to post up too, and I'd like to see some of that, but I was just responding to the idea that he doesn't have an offensive role.

slower

01-30-2011, 06:14 PM

Right now, there is more shake in Maryland's boots because Duke lost big, on the national stage, today. You can bank on that.

dth.

Don't even go there. There's no shake in their boots. They think they can do the SAME thing to us.

hurley1

01-30-2011, 06:26 PM

Duke not only got beat today, they got beat down.......they were defeated in every facet of the game........losing happens, but, when you lose like this, somebody better wake up and start playing basketball.........

weezie

01-30-2011, 06:30 PM

Sorry if this has been covered but did anyone hear Coach K's post game comments?

hq2

01-30-2011, 06:51 PM

This game reminded me a lot of some of the ones we played against the Johnnies about 10 years ago; same kind of smart, good passing streetball team with a lot of quick 'tweeners. In case folks haven't noticed, our only 'tweener defenders are Andre and Josh, one of whom is a little short and the other a little slow. They took full advantage of it. This was a team that could get in the lane and start pouring in the shots, and we couldn't stop 'em. As I recall, this was almost exactly what happened about 10 years ago when Bootsy Thornton dropped 40 on us.

Our horrible three point shooting was an aberration; but even with even average three point shooting, the Johhnies still would probably have won. We simply don't match up against this type of team. Could be trouble come NCAA time.

dukestheheat

01-30-2011, 07:18 PM

Don't even go there. There's no shake in their boots. They think they can do the SAME thing to us.

Historically, we play well off a loss. If I'm up at Maryland, I know this doesn't bode well for me. So, as a fan, I'm shaking a little. I am confident that they know that we are going to be up a couple notches after this performance.

This I will bank on.

dukestheheat.

CDu

01-30-2011, 07:20 PM

Historically, we play well off a loss. If I'm up at Maryland, I know this doesn't bode well for me. So, as a fan, I'm shaking a little. I am confident that they know that we are going to be up a couple notches after this performance.

This I will bank on.

dukestheheat.

Historically, we also play well coming off a win. I wouldn't be surprised at all to see that our probability of winning after a loss is roughly the same as our probability of winning after a win.

RelativeWays

01-30-2011, 07:38 PM

Historically, we also play well coming off a win. I wouldn't be surprised at all to see that our probability of winning after a loss is roughly the same as our probability of winning after a win.

Historically if Duke follows up a bad loss with another loss, then our post season hopes usually go down the drain (2006, 2007). I don't know what to make of today other than St Johns knew exactly how to play the weaknesses in Duke's defense for easy baskets. Something will need to be fixed. I thin I'd rather see us lose the one on one match up from time to time then to have the help D collapse too early for open men and easy buckets.

For offense, the plan is simple, play our perimeter rough, see what the refs let you get away with and see if Duke has a bad shooting night. We have one lone penetrator off the dribble (Nolan) with another who can drive for a 8-10 foot shot (Kyle) and thats it. If either one of them is off and the outside isn't dropping, we have NOTHING. Thats a big problem. I don't know how you fix it with our line-up. Nobody inside can dependably put the ball in the bucket, Nolan doesn't have another slasher to pass to when he collapses the D. This team has really struggled since the 1st UMD game against teams with much less talent, thus when we pull away from NCSU, UVA or BC with double digit wins, it doesn't tell us the whole story. I don't know what to say at this point but I'm sure K will think of something.

OldPhiKap

01-30-2011, 07:41 PM

Historically, we don't do well when the other team scores more than us. Other than that, though, we're pretty good.

Bad game, next play. Beat Md.

Sixthman

01-30-2011, 07:46 PM

Sorry if this has been covered but did anyone hear Coach K's post game comments?

We weren't prepared to meet the effort of the other team, and his comments seemed to be intended to include the coaches as well as the players.

Exiled_Devil

01-30-2011, 07:48 PM

2. Our failure to be able to attack a full-court press. This was the most frustrating thing about our Clemson debacle, and it resurfaced here. I see team after team successfully defeat a full-court press by aggressively passing or pushing the ball all the way to the rim after inbounding to take quick advantage of a 3-on-2 or 2-on-1 or even 2-on-2 momentary advantage at the other end. But in our case, time after time, we failed to attack and were satisfied with just getting the ball over half-court and allowing St John's to run back and get set on defense. We have no excuse for not being able to attack a trapping press. We now have athletic big men who can run, and can pass well out of a trap..

This upset me during the game, especially while watching St John's beat our break exactly the same way. Ryan Kelly would get the ball and then stop. I started yelling at the TV every tie we beat the press and stopped. Let's hope some coaching stops this habit from reoccurring.

cameroncrazy3104

01-30-2011, 07:49 PM

I realize that they had more team speed than we do so Im guessing that is why we played zone. But it seemed like they just had no idea what they were doing when we went zone and St. Johns started running lay up lines. I can deal with them hitting contested shots, but our defense today was atrocious. What was even more discouraging was we would play good defense for 25 seconds and then we just gave up and let them take easy shots. I like showing them a zone every now and then, but I didnt understand why we stayed in it.

Also our man press was awful, they seemed to break it without a problem with the exception of maybe 3 out of the 30 times. I think we found another weakness to go along with bigger teams, more athletic teams.

tele

01-30-2011, 07:51 PM

Ryan had a very good game rebounding the ball, don't think he has had 9 before. Nolan played a great 2'nd half too. Unfortunately, St Johns was pretty good themselves, they outscored Duke 50 to 30 on points in the paint and 28 to 12 on pts off of turnovers. Not to mention 21 assists on 32 field goals, that's just good basketball.

Duke looked a little inexperienced at times against a team full of seniors, not to be completely unexpected. Clanging so many 3's is more unexpected, and so is not playing better inside against a team that didn't start anyone over 6'7". St. Johns had really good interior passing and didn't turn the ball over much.

Sometimes you just get beat.

ncexnyc

01-30-2011, 08:06 PM

I'll skip the post-game analysis, as there's only one thing to say after a game like today's, NEXT PLAY!

gumbomoop

01-30-2011, 08:17 PM

Duke has the potential to win a title just as much right now as it did 24 hours ago. It's Jan. 30. We're still about three weeks away from the time it's worth starting to worry about or celebrate about how the team is playing.

When you have a team capable of contending for and aiming for a national title, the regular season is about two things: 1) Winning enough games to position yourself well on Selection Sunday, and 2) Taking your lumps at times and trying to peak at the right time. Today's game was bad, yes, but nothing that happened today has knocked Duke off of either of those paths.

These are sensible comments from a "meta" perspective.

Also sensible are the numerous comments of these varieties: "It happens, learn and move on, next play."

But I'm wondering [genuinely wondering] what K will want the guys to learn from their mediocre play today. For example, given what appears to be the coaching staff's regular use of video, including for individual players, I'd sure want some players to learn a couple of things. As K says regularly, "We tell the players the truth."

Ryan [whom I have praised, beginning preseason]: that ball [early second half] he lost after a rebound to a player he didn't realize was there - not good, discouraging. Made no difference in the "meta" realm of today's game, but every possession counts in close games. Can aspects of court awareness like this be taught?

Miles [and others]: that failure to block out on the free throw line early in second half cost us a possession. Some posters have expressed some concern over the seasons that free-throw-line-block-outs are not Duke's strength. Not good. Cussably bad.

Andre [and others]: might have gotten at least 2 easy rebounds had he followed his shot. How come so few players do this elementary task? Is it that it would detract from style points of a presumed 3-swish? Does shot-follow actually throw off the shooter's rhythm?

Mason: Gotta not put that ball down when you got it right under the basket. I think he missed 2 easy buckets in first 3-4 minutes [and shuffled his feet, I think, at least once] because he needed a rhythm dribble.

Back to larger picture, for a moment: I've argued a couple of times that the single most important physical attribute in bball is ball handling, and the single most important psychological/emotional attribute is relentlessness, the latter of which is related to, but distinct from, aggressiveness and toughness. The Johnnies had several solid ball handlers, and were more aggressive and relentless from the beginning today.

Both Miami [who lost another tight one tonight, but who might well be on a 3 game win streak when Duke visits] and Md [whom I'd sure like to see lose this eve at GaT] have some pretty good ball handlers and a good big. Those 2 road games, sandwiched around NCSU and UNC in CIS, promise to be testy.

DUKIE V(A)

01-30-2011, 08:20 PM

It will be interesting to see whether the next time we get pressed if 1) Curry, Dawkins, and the Plums can hurt our opponents on the other end (Curry and Dawkins should have plenty of opportunity to hit open threes), or 2) Coach K feels like he can spare either Kelly (who is an amazingly smart, underrated player) or better yet Singler/Smith and use Mason/Thornton to help break the press (giving us an extra shooter/scoring threat on the offensive end). Today our best 3 scorers Kelly (of late), Singler, and Smith were busy breaking the press and were not in position to punish St. John's once the ball got into the front court. It seemed like we had opportunities to do so.

I am still feeling very confident in this team...In close games and especially ones when we have a small lead near the end, I think we have the ability to break down the defense with Smith and hit free throws. I also love the way Mason is hitting the glass and blocking shots...He reminds me of a certain tall bearded man from our not so distant past in those respects and still has lots of potential to improve these last two months (a la the tall bearded man of which I spoke). Even without Kyrie, I would prefer our guys and our coaching staff to anyone else's.

SoCalDukeFan

01-30-2011, 09:18 PM

Didn't we have a similar performance last year at G'Town? Season ended pretty good, if I recall. Next play.

I agree that we should not jump off the deep end. However we might use last year as a lesson.

After the G'Town game Zoubek got healthy and played like an excellent college big man. With Z at that level we became a very good team.

Obviously if we get Kryie back then things should get better. And maybe without him things will jell. But we looked very bad today.

I remain hopeful but less confident.

SoCal

UrinalCake

01-30-2011, 09:33 PM

CDu

01-30-2011, 09:42 PM

I'd love to know what our average score differential is after the first ten minutes of every game. It seems like we always get off to a slow start. Since our loss to FSU: UVA, Wake, and BC have all been close games at halftime (and those are all pretty weak teams). Only NCSU was a comfortable margin. Give Coach K a ton of credit for making adjustments at the break, but why is it that other teams come out of the gate playing us so well?

Well, in this game, the score after 10 minutes was 18-12 (and 20-14 at the 8:31 mark). It was the last 8:31 of the first half that lost it for us. We gave them a 26-11 stretch that we just couldn't recover from. We played even with them for 31:29 of the game. It's the end of the first half that killed us.

Reilly

01-30-2011, 09:47 PM

I'd love to know what our average score differential is after the first ten minutes of every game. It seems like we always get off to a slow start....

Would you consider a 4 point lead at 10:00 in the first half a slow start? That's a 16-point victory pace.

sagegrouse

01-30-2011, 10:01 PM

Andre [and others]: might have gotten at least 2 easy rebounds had he followed his shot. How come so few players do this elementary task? Is it that it would detract from style points of a presumed 3-swish? Does shot-follow actually throw off the shooter's rhythm?

.

This is old time religion. What I remember best about Art Heyman was his set shot from 20 feet (maybe he jumped, but it wasn't much). And when it missed -- I doubt he made more than one-third from that distance -- he was under the basket to grab the rebound and make the follow shot. Art was the fastest guy on the team, except when he raced and lost to sexagenarian Nurmi Shears in the Gothic Dining Room.

sagegrouse
'Mullins, not so much. Jeff was a good shooter but a spectacular driver and he would get into the lane and make shots from incredible angles. In the NBA he was a dual threat shooting guard with a killer first step. He made the semis in the NBA one-on-one contest the one year it was held, before losing to eventual winner, 7-foot, size-22-shoe Bob Lanier.'

Spy

01-30-2011, 10:12 PM

Defense needs some (a lot) of work. Definitely concerned that we haven't had a good shooting night in almost a month. NEXT GAME

jipops

01-30-2011, 10:20 PM

Contrary to what headlines might say, this result is by no means a stunner. Surprising we were practically never in this one? - yes. Surprising we got beat - not at all. The defense has shown gradual signs of decline for the past few games now. Going back to the NC State game, though we had the game in hand we still allowed them to score 50 on us in the 2nd half. And against BC there were two 10 minutes stretches where the Eagles were scoring on nearly every possession. I know we have at least one of these seemingly disastrous type blowouts every year but my concern is that our defense has a repeated tendency to go on extended droughts of little to no ball pressure. This gets us in big trouble on the road and especially if the offense isn't going.

We are going to see the offense struggle time and time again, especially on the road. We don't have a pg (and that is by no means a slight to Nolan who has done a fine job in his unnatural position and is without question the team MVP so far) and only two guys that can get their own scores without being set up. The defense just has to make up for it.

UrinalCake

01-30-2011, 10:23 PM

I would consider a 18-12 deficit after 10 minutes to be a slow start. 12 points in 10 minutes is pretty bad.

jipops

01-30-2011, 10:35 PM

I wonder if K is fighting someone with a chainsaw right now... in the mountains. Oh wait, wrong coach.

jv001

01-30-2011, 10:38 PM

finally got the best of us. We've not gotten off to a good start offensively in a while now. In several games we've wasted a good defensive effort by not scoring early in the game. When we do this, it allows the opponent to get confident and finally they begin to hit shots. Today we just didn't bring it on defense and we once again settled for 3s. As Coach K said, we could not guard anyone in zone, the press and man to man. This bad defense has been creeping up on us and I fear this may not be the exception but the norm. St. Johns did to us what we've done to other teams in the past. They were not a big team, but they are very quick. We just couldn't guard them. Let's hope the team gets it worked out quickly because we play a hungry Twerp team Wednesday. Next Play and Go Duke!

hurley1

01-30-2011, 10:48 PM

If Duke had another shot at St. Johns, would the outcome be any different?

DukieInBrasil

01-30-2011, 11:03 PM

I noticed that on several occasions Duke would come up with a really good defensive play and block a shot and St John's would pick up the block and score because the ball went to the spot where no Duke defenders were. It had to have been demoralizing.

HRAR

01-30-2011, 11:08 PM

I think one thing that we've missed in this discussion is just how we lost all momentum on mason's double dribble. I think if we completed that play properly, gotten the lead down to 15 with plenty of time left, we might've snuck out with a victory. Regardless, I'd like to see us play defense only inside the 3-point line like we did last year. The easy backdoor layups have stopped being an anomaly and instead are indicative of an inability to put enough pressure on the passer to prevent such easy passes. Post-Kyrie, K changed the offense but not the defense, we need to change how we play D too.

dyedwab

01-30-2011, 11:18 PM

...and I agree with a lot of the thoughts folks have. Here are a couple of points to add.

1. We usually think of our defense leading to our offense. Today, our early offensive woes seemed to effect our defensive effectiveness. We attacked the St. John's D well early and got wide open 3's from good shooters (Curry, Singler, etc) - and they didn't go in...and it seemed to knock us back.

2. Our offense may have been off, but we lost this game on the defensive end. St. John's didn't fight hard for their shots - they were easy, and close.

3. St. John's limited our rebounding - after the 1st few minutes, we were one and done on nearly every trip - and when you are shooting less the 30% (which we were for most of the 1st half) that is a recipe for disaster.

4. St. John's also beat us to every loose ball until the 2nd part of the 2nd half.

5. K's comments hit the right note - its was not a game lost on X and Os but on relentlessness and execution. And he noticed it early. For a few minutes in the 1st half, he had both Kyle and Nolan on the bench at the same time. When was the last time that happened in a game that wasn't decided? Clearly he was sending a message....

Anyway, tough loss, less because of the loss, then because of the way we played. Still it's just one game.

But here is a tweet from Marty Pocius that give some interesting perspective: "I'm just happy that tomorrow I'm gonna be in the Zalgiris locker room/practice and not at Duke. Those days after a loss..." http://twitter.com/#!/LTUmarty

Cameron

01-30-2011, 11:23 PM

If Duke had another shot at St. Johns, would the outcome be any different?

I'm really disinclined to further propagate the convention, but if we don't make any three-balls in this hypothetical re-match, we would lose by more than 15.

I say that with the understanding that Nolan likely wouldn't duplicate his 27-point, one-man second-half show. The 1-of-22 start today from beyond the arc reminded me, horrifyingly, of Kentucky's performance against West Virginia in last year's Elite Eight, when the Wildcats continued to haphazardly shoot as numbingly oblivious as a heroin addict.

Surely, I could be wrong. I mean, our interior offense merely suffered an off-day today. If we meet St. John's again, maybe Moses Malone will show up.

(Pardon the excess narcotics analogies today:) It's just one of them days, I suppose.)

Kfanarmy

01-30-2011, 11:39 PM

NYC Duke Fan

01-31-2011, 03:27 AM

Isn't just possible that The Big East is just head and shoulders better than the ACC ?

If Duke was in the Big East this year they could conceivably lose to Ptt, Villanova, Louisville, Syracuse, UConn, Georgetown... They did not blow away Marquette earlier in the seasaon. They could also have tough games against West Virgina and Cincinnatti.

Obviously they could also beat these teams , but after yesterday's showing each game would be difficult.

In my mind, and I know that I am stating the obvious, but unless there is improvement, we could go out early in the tournement.

DUKIE V(A)

01-31-2011, 07:18 AM

If Duke had another shot at St. Johns, would the outcome be any different?

No question IMO. I am sure the team is hoping for a rematch.

Saratoga2

01-31-2011, 07:46 AM

_Gary

01-31-2011, 08:06 AM

I would consider a 18-12 deficit after 10 minutes to be a slow start. 12 points in 10 minutes is pretty bad.

I agree, but in the previous game we only had 11 points after 10 minutes. Frankly, it seems like we have been starting slowly more times than not in the last month. Just one more area where having Kyrie would have made a huge difference. That kid was a one man fast break and I'm sure we'd have far fewer slow starts had he been on the court the entire season.

Further back someone mentioned that our half court defense was getting burned when St. John's spread the floor and used the tried and true method of breaking Duke down off the dribble into the paint, and that a lack of Kyrie was a huge reason why. Once more, I have to say that Kyrie definitely does help that issue immensely since he was easily the quickest guy on the team and was playing great man-to-man on the opposing team's PGs. He wasn't getting beat much from what I can remember.

To sum up, these are the areas where having Kyrie made us much better (with the emphasis on the word "much"):

Fast Break Offense - Kyrie could not only take the outlet pass and motor, he was actually rebounding and motoring!

Half Court Offense - Kyrie could not only break teams down with his dribble penetration (especially if the offensive set was bogged down), he was also hitting a solid percentage of his threes. This made him that much more difficult to defend.

Any Press on Defense - Should be obvious how he helps in that department.

Set Half Court Defense - Again, it's obvious how he helps. He's not only got jets going end to end, but his lateral quickness was unparalleled on this team. And as I mentioned above, he had no problem getting in amongst the trees and rebounding.

The frank reality is that we are suffering in every aspect of the game because of his absence, and there's only so much we can do to improve all those areas because you can't replace raw talent like that. You just can't.

As some others have said, right now I think we are about where we were last year. We certainly have the tools to win another championship, but without Kyrie we are going to either just get really hot in March or catch some breaks. There are certain aspects to both our offense and defense that can be refined to a degree. And I'm sure Coach K and the staff will continue to teach and work with the team on those things. But without Kyrie we just aren't the same dynamic team that I still feel was easily the odds on favorite to win. We are now much more vulnerable.

KyDevilinIL

01-31-2011, 09:32 AM

The frank reality is that we are suffering in every aspect of the game because of his absence, and there's only so much we can do to improve all those areas because you can't replace raw talent like that. You just can't.

Yes. And Kyrie mixed that raw talent with raw intangibles that made him absolutely special. I think many of us have lived in a bit of denial about just how important he was/is to this team, and in recent weeks we're getting a face full of the harsh truth.

I said in another thread that Duke's chances of winning a title are the same today as they were before the St. John's loss. I believe that. But as things stand without Kyrie, we'd need one of those dream runs in March to do it. Unfortunately, I think we used up our dream run a season ago. I doubt it happens again, but you never know.

A healthy Kyrie, however, eliminates the "dream run" factor and puts Duke back in the Duke '01, Florida '07 or UNC '09 category – teams that were not unbeatable but were unlikely to lose as long as they did their thing.

Oh well. Nothing any of us can do about it. K and the boys gotta keep making the best of the team they've got – which can still be pretty good. If Kyrie returns good as new, which I don't expect, that'll just be a happy bonus.

ElSid

01-31-2011, 09:58 AM

I attended the game and I was impressed by the SJU crowd. They were very loud and energetic. Duke looked to have almost no energy from the start. Nolan especially in the first half just seemed disinterested, which is strange. He made a couple terrible passes and at least a couple times was genuinely surprised by a defender guarding him full court on the inbounds after a made basket. I wanted to shout "pay attention!" I kind of thought he was sick or something. Out of character.

Another disturbing observation was body language from Seth and Andre. They usually subbed for each other in this game. Seth on a few occasions rolled his head and eyes in frustration when being taken out. I understand wanting to play, but I was surprised by how demonstrative he was with his frustration. Maybe some combo of that and the crowd noise and energy fueled a pretty disappointing game from him.

The Mason steal and dunk that called back was confusing. I didn't really get a good look at the play and didn't see a replay. If that play works out for us, I think we have a chance. The momentum was definitely starting to turn and the Duke crowd was getting into it. Immediately after that call, SJU scored again at will and it was a total downer.

Finally, and I hate to use the refs as an excuse, but I found there to be some very questionable calls. Specifically, I don't understand why Nolan was also assessed a technical on the play where the SJU kid was clearly locking arms / pushing. From my vantage point, it looked like a clear provocation from SJU. That was another play where I think we should have gotten to shoot personal foul shots, technical foul shots and then gotten the ball. Had the potential to be a 7 point possession. But instead, I think Nolan even missed one of his free throws.

Just didn't bounce our way yesterday.

bass-piscator

01-31-2011, 09:58 AM

Class of '94

01-31-2011, 10:04 AM

The key aspects about this game that remind me of the Fla State game was the team's lack of toughness when the other team comes at Duke aggressively. I think Coach K alluded to this in his post game news conference. St Johns comes out and hit us hard and we don’t respond until it’s too late. Unlike last year, this team is letting its offense dictate its defense as opposed to focusing on defense and letting that dictate our offense. If shots don’t go down, guys are letting the misses affect their defensive play (or lack thereof). Kyle and Nolan have to step up and become better leaders for this team by letting the younger guys know that not playing defense is unacceptable. Instead of embracing the challenge and spot light on the road, guys are shrinking from the challenge and our team becomes a one-dimensional offense with just Nolan and Kyle scoring for the most part.

Whether we have/had Kyrie or not, I'd like to think Duke would beat St. Johns in MSG if we had another shot at them and assuming they focus on playing defense first. And it is still only one game in January; the team still has another month to work and improve on their weaknesses. And I still like our chances of winning of the national championship with or without Kyrie.

CDu

01-31-2011, 10:07 AM

The Mason steal and dunk that called back was confusing. I didn't really get a good look at the play and didn't see a replay. If that play works out for us, I think we have a chance. The momentum was definitely starting to turn and the Duke crowd was getting into it. Immediately after that call, SJU scored again at will and it was a total downer.

I think the double-dribble call on Plumlee was the appropriate call. He tipped the ball on the pass and I think got a dribble in (not that this is the important part). The SJU player reached in and disrupted his dribble, and Mason Secured the ball with two hands. Here's where the violation occurred - he passed/pushed the ball ahead with both hands, and then ran it down himself. That's effectively a self-pass, which is a violation.

It's unfortunate, because (a) it was a great effort play by Mason and (b) it was as you said in the middle of a bit of a run and would have been a momentum play. Unfortunately, the double dribble happened and SJU responded.

PADukeMom

01-31-2011, 10:07 AM

You guys keep going on & on "if we had Kryrie" track. It is pointless; we didn't have Kyrie & we played an uninspired 40 minutes of basketball. You are starting to sound like whiners like a team I won't mention.
After the loss last year to G-Town I predicted we cut the nest down in Indy to my son who thought I was crazy. I saw fire in the team's eyes after that loss. This year I have yet to see that.
We lost to a talented team who put forth every ounce of passion & fire they had at us. I saw a ,ot of "JJ watching" yesterday. Nolan & Kyle can't make every basket.
This loss may have been the thing that wakes the sleeping giant & maybe, like the Groundhog hopefully not seeing his shadow tomorrow, the toe will emerge at 90%.

Udaman

01-31-2011, 10:22 AM

There seems to be a lot of "Duke colored glasses" other there looking at this game.

It was just one of those nights.

They hit all their shots and we missed more than normal.

Last year Georgetown beat us bad and looked what happened.

Not everyone is singing this tune...but lots are.

The fact is....our team is way overrated right now. Way overrated. We are a good team. Top 20, for sure....but the way we have played the last few weeks, I would count a dozen teams that should and would beat us on a neutral floor right now (basically the entire top 10).

St Johns was not ranked. We were 8 point favorites. And they absolutely DOMINATED us. Dominated. It wasn't even close - not for a moment. This was a team that was 11-8 before yesterday with loses to St. Mary's, St. Bonaventure, and Fordham, and blow out losses to Louisville and Syracuse. OK, they beat some good Big Ten teams as well - so you can call them a team that gets up for their competition. But this is a team we should have beaten. This is a team we should have known would get up for us. And we got blasted. As someone else said, this reminded me of the Nova game a few years ago. St. Johns looked bigger, faster, hungrier, and better at just about every facet of the game. They were toying with us - rubbing it in our face.

So where do we go from here? Guess we'll see. Thankfully, like last year we might end up getting a new player for the home stretch. Last year it was Zoubek, who suddenly became an offensive rebounding machine and made it so that it was OK if we shot 30% from the floor, because we got a ton more opportunities. This year, we might get one of the best players in the country back. If we do....I'll feel confident about our chances. If we don't....unless things really turn around, then we are a 2nd round NCAA upset just waiting to happen.

Here's pulling for the former.

Class of '94

01-31-2011, 10:36 AM

Another disturbing observation was body language from Seth and Andre. They usually subbed for each other in this game. Seth on a few occasions rolled his head and eyes in frustration when being taken out. I understand wanting to play, but I was surprised by how demonstrative he was with his frustration. Maybe some combo of that and the crowd noise and energy fueled a pretty disappointing game from him.

If that was true, there's no justification for that. I know these are all young kids; but Seth deserved to be taken out at the various times throughout the game because he wasn't doing anything. I thought Dre played better and displayed more energy and enthusiasm than Seth. I think all this talk of Andre and others displaying the wrong body language is an example of the need for improved leadership by the Seniors. Forget the rebounding that Lance and Zoubek brought to the team, I think the bigger area that this team is missing from last year's is the vocal leadership that last year's Seniors brought to the team. This is something that Nolan and Kyle are still learning to do; and I think they will get better as leaders. In the meantime, Coach K will address body language and attitudes of players if he thinks there is an issue. I think the game with MD will be big for this team in terms of displaying toughness and staying connected on defense; and not letting their offense dictate their defense.

NSDukeFan

01-31-2011, 10:55 AM

First, I'll start off on a positive, there was no quit in the team today. As bad as we played early, the team fought hard all the way to the end. That says a lot about the players heart.

Moving on:

1. We were 1/21 on 3-pointers at one point so that proves that all our shooters can be cold at the same time. This team relies on the 3-point basket and we will not win many games when we shoot 1/21 or 5/26 as we ended up.
2. We did not punish St. John's for pressing but instead backed off and set up our half court offense after successfully getting the ball into the front court. When your opponent presses and you beat the press you have to make them pay by attacking the basket. The perfect example was the pass from Andre to Miles for a dunk. Our approach today was baffling.
3. Our big men need to do a much better job quickly passing the ball up the court after they secure a defensive rebound. We need to push the tempo and the first pass is the key.
4. St. John's made us look like a slow team today.
5. The most important factor going forward is how the team responds. Last year, after being thrashed by Georgetown, we won our next eight games and did not lose again until we played at Maryland. This year our next game is at Maryland so we need to take it to the Terps in order to get this one filtered from our minds.

Finally, we need to throw those black uniforms away. They're cursed!
I thought you made some good points. I wonder about your point #2. This was certainly the case on purpose last year as when teams pressed Duke last year, the team would break the press and deliberately set up the offense to not get forced into a faster tempo. I don't know if this team (minus Kyrie) has identified the proper strategy here. I would tend to agree that capitalizing against a pressing team is important to punish a team, especially if the press is generating turnovers, as it was yesterday. The problem with attacking the press is the increased risk of turnovers, which was already a problem.
I agree with your last point that the most important point that can be taken from this game will be how this team responds.

Like you and the poster you quoted, I wonder if Duke will switch back to the compact pressure defense from last season. I doubt it, because I think K is committed to extended pressure defense with this team. We sure could have used a less aggressive defensive today, because St. Johns wasn't going to be taking long 3s, and wanted to take us off the dribble. Also, our pressure didn't force many turnovers until the game was over.

Without Irving's speed, we're only average in the quickness department, on both ends of the floor.

Obviously, we need to shoot better -- that was an amazingly bad shooting performance today.

I don't agree with those who say we don't have a good point guard or that the team didn't show any fight.
To me, this is the most interesting discussion topic post-game. What is the best defensive strategy for Duke this year? The problem if this team does not pressure and generate turnovers and fast-break points is that they do not have another way (offensive rebounds or consistent interior scoring via post-up) to generate easy baskets. But, if this team does not put enough pressure on the perimeter, a quality team with quickness can exploit Duke's overplaying of the passing lanes for back-door cuts and via penetration. For Duke to play this style of defense, the perimeter pressure has to be enough to make interior passing challenging and the communication and help-side defense has to be much better. Some of that will improve simply due to intensity and some will hopefully come with increased experience and communication.
I also agree that Duke has a very good point guard and that the team did show some fight in yesterday's game. Unfortunately, the intensity came too long after the team had been figuratively punched in the mouth.

Firstly, credit goes to St John's for great effort and a great gameplan. They made us look AWFUL on defense. They just picked us apart. And on the other end, they made life difficult enough. Those two things, combined with some really bad shooting are the recipe for a really rough loss.

Moving from that point, I think the complaints about Smith are unfounded. He has so much responsibility on his shoulders that his performances should be viewed as really impressive. I think the real issue is that so many of our players are completely dependent upon Smith to create offense for them. Dawkins, Curry, and Kelly are pretty much just catch-and-shoot players right now. The hope was that Curry would be a playmaker, but right now his game is limited to hitting long jumpers. And the Plumlees just haven't been able to show any sort of consistent back-to-the-basket game. So unless Smith creates for them, they can't score. And sometimes even when Smith creates for them, if the shots aren't falling his numbers look bad.

Since Irving went down, Singler is the only other player who is capable of creating his own offense (or offense for others). Unfortunately, he had a tough game today. He fought and clawed for a 20 point night, but it was rough going for him to get there today.

In spite of this, the offense would have seemed fine if a few more open shots fall. We scored 78 points, and could easily have had another 12 points from 3pt range (even that would have been below our average from 3). There were of course way too many turnovers. And there were not enough assists. But that's the nature of an offense that is very reliant on the 3pt shot. When they aren't falling, the assist numbers suffer (as does the scoring efficiency).

But even 78 points should be enough for us to win most nights. Unfortunately, the defense was terrible. Too many times our perimeter guys lost track of their man cutting for layups off the ball. Too many times those guys failed to stay in front of their men, which then created 2-on-1 situations that led to easy baskets. Some credit goes to St John's, who spread the floor, passed the ball very quickly, and identified opportunities. But the defense has to be better. I'm hopeful that the staff can use this as a teaching tool.

There were a few bright spots. Mason was a force early around the defensive rim, blocking 5 shots. Kelly added a block and 9 rebounds. Smith was incredibly efficient scorer. Smith and Singler showed a lot of fight throughout, even after it was fairly clear we were going to lose. But beyond that, there was a lot not to like, obviously.
I agree that St. John's definitely has to be credited with playing a great game. They came out with a great intensity that Duke did not match and (Ugh!) their coaching staff (can I give all the credit to Gene Keady?) had them well prepared and executing a good game plan. Similar to the FSU game, there were a higher percentage of the team's 3-point attempts that were contested.

I think you make good points about the team's difficulty creating offense, outside Nolan and Kyle. I think there have been signs that Seth, Andre and Ryan are getting more comfortable putting the ball on the floor, especially when their pump fakes draw their defenders off-balance. Hopefully, one or more of them will become more consistent offensive threats this year. Miles and Mason have both shown the ability to pass effectively from the post, and I hope to see more of that going forward and perhaps Ryan, Mason and Kyle catching in the high post. Your major point is very true, however, that in spite of the horrendous 3-point shooting (most of which were good shots) offense was not the problem.

I hope the team is ready to step up the defensive intensity more consistently and the communication improves going forward.

Sagegrouse, I'm not talking about full court or 3/4 court pressure. I'm talking about what defense Duke plays in the half court. Last year's team did not defend much past the three point line; other Duke teams and this year's team do. I'm questioning whether we've got the personnel to do that.

I agree that we went to an even more extended pressure defense after we fell far behind. In fact, we went to full court pressure, which I didn't understand at all. But I'm talking about what this team does in the half court.
I agree that it is the half court defense that was the concern in this game. The full-court pressure just exacerbated the problems of allowing penetration off the dribble and pass. I think the team had to go to the full court pressure though to try to generate turnovers. Unfortunately, St. John's was the better team in pressing situations both offensively and defensively on this day.

This game reminded me a lot of some of the ones we played against the Johnnies about 10 years ago; same kind of smart, good passing streetball team with a lot of quick 'tweeners. In case folks haven't noticed, our only 'tweener defenders are Andre and Josh, one of whom is a little short and the other a little slow. They took full advantage of it. This was a team that could get in the lane and start pouring in the shots, and we couldn't stop 'em. As I recall, this was almost exactly what happened about 10 years ago when Bootsy Thornton dropped 40 on us.

Our horrible three point shooting was an aberration; but even with even average three point shooting, the Johhnies still would probably have won. We simply don't match up against this type of team. Could be trouble come NCAA time.
I think you may have forgotten one of our all-American candidates, the guy who will be one of Duke's five highest scoring players before he is done and who is an excellent perimeter defender.

We weren't prepared to meet the effort of the other team, and his comments seemed to be intended to include the coaches as well as the players.

I agree that this was not a great effort from Duke and perhaps a better strategy or motivation from the coaching staff could have helped in this case. Fortunately, as many have said, this team will be judged more by how they play in March (and hopefully, April.)

On the flip side, I agree with those that say that besides the dates being the same, it is hard to just brush aside the game and say, well it happened last year vs. Georgetown and that turned out ok. There is certainly the potential for a great finish to the season as well, but there will certainly have to be some big changes, like someone stepping up a la Zoubs last year. Fortunately, there are a lot of players with a lot of potential on this team, so hopefully there will be another breakout performer or more this year. I am not sure how the comparisons to the losses at Clemson and/or Villanova are related to this team as Kyle and Nolan were the only players who played much in those games who are still around and I believe they have already learned the lessons from those games. Fortunately, you could see the sense of urgency our senior captains seemed have in the second half.

I may be in the minority, but I also don't think Duke wins this game even if Kyrie were still playing. He was obviously playing at an extremely high level and would have helped the team, but even if he played great defense (which was the biggest issue), St. John's was very patient and methodical in working the ball around until they were able to generate dribble penetration or find a back-door cutter. Unless he could have lifted up the intensity of the whole team and caused his teammates to become better shooters, this is a loss.

One of the other reasons I was disappointed in this game was how bad this will look for the ACC, in comparison to the Big East. I still think Duke can get a #1 seed if the team takes care of business and loses only once or twice more in the regular season and can win the ACC championship. I think Duke loses some of the benefit of the doubt if it is between Duke and a Big East team for a #1 seed and their resumes are similar.

I will end on one other bright spot. After playing only 13 minutes last game, Andre did seem to come out with a renewed defensive intensity in the game and played 27 minutes. Let's hope Duke has a renewed focus and intensity beginning with the Maryland game. They will need it.

rhcpflea99

01-31-2011, 11:14 AM

Horrible defense and Duke couldn't match the intensity. You win some you lose some. Next game the Terps lets go Duke!!!!

uh_no

01-31-2011, 11:24 AM

Isn't just possible that The Big East is just head and shoulders better than the ACC ?

If Duke was in the Big East this year they could conceivably lose to Ptt, Villanova, Louisville, Syracuse, UConn, Georgetown... They did not blow away Marquette earlier in the seasaon. They could also have tough games against West Virgina and Cincinnatti.

The Big East is very good, but there's no reason Duke can't play with each and every one of those teams...would they have 4-5 losses right now like most of the top big east teams? probably....

gumbomoop

01-31-2011, 11:35 AM

I think the double-dribble call on Plumlee was the appropriate call. He tipped the ball on the pass and I think got a dribble in (not that this is the important part). The SJU player reached in and disrupted his dribble, and Mason Secured the ball with two hands. Here's where the violation occurred - he passed/pushed the ball ahead with both hands, and then ran it down himself. That's effectively a self-pass, which is a violation.

It's unfortunate, because (a) it was a great effort play by Mason and (b) it was as you said in the middle of a bit of a run and would have been a momentum play. Unfortunately, the double dribble happened and SJU responded.

I don't want to hijack this thread, but also don't want to start a new one on this rules issue, so here goes.

If I understand what happened - and I think CDu's description is roughly accurate - then I don't think it's necessarily a violation. Consider the following: Player receives inbounds pass standing still. Looks around, no defender near, so he tosses the ball upcourt and it bounces 2-3 times, as he walks toward it, catches up to it, and touches/dribbles it with one hand [i.e., starts his dribble]. This is legal, happens semi-regularly, e.g., when a PG needs to wipe some sweat off, so he tosses the ball, wipes his hands on his shorts as ball bounces a couple of times. It's form of "self-pass," but a legitimate form, to begin the dribble sequence. [Or am I wrong about this? Can a player allow the ball to bounce several times only after he's begun to dribble? Help!]

The key to CDu's above description, therefore, is the phrase, "not that this is the important part." If Mason actually dribbled, then "ran it down" and touched it with two hands, paused briefly, then dribbled, that's a violation, a double dribble. But if, as CDu notes, the StJ player "disrupted his dribble" - or if Mason never actually controlled the ball enough to "dribble" it - at that point Mason could legitimately put both hands on the ball, push it upcourt [i.e., restart his "disrupted' dribble, or simply start dribbling], and touch it again with one hand [i.e., continue his dribble].

I've rewatched it several times, and it happens real fast [3 seconds, 13:08-13:05], is an odd play, both players are hacking at the ball. Mason does hit the ball with one hand, trying to gain control of it. Is that a "dribble"? [Here I disagree with CDu, as I contend that this is the most important point.] Then, stilll trying to control the ball, Mason grabs it with 2 hands, tosses it ahead, catches up to it, and with no further dribble grabs the ball, takes a giant step, and dunks it. Thus, Mason never dribbles the ball, period, in the normal sense of the term, which I think includes having control of the ball. He does in fact toss the ball ahead, but I don't think this was a "self-pass," as Clark Kellogg described it. Rather, I think - but am not 100% certain - that this play was analogous to the scenario I described above, in which a player can toss the ball upcourt, then start dribbling - or, in Mason's case, grab it and dunk.

So, if my "scenario" re a player beginning a dribble with a toss of the ball ahead is accurate, then the key point is whether Mason's touching [but not controlling??] the ball constitutes a dribble.

I'd love to have the Playcaller's take on this one.

CDu

01-31-2011, 11:44 AM

I don't want to hijack this thread, but also don't want to start a new one on this rules issue, so here goes.

If I understand what happened - and I think CDu's description is roughly accurate - then I don't think it's necessarily a violation. Consider the following: Player receives inbounds pass standing still. Looks around, no defender near, so he tosses the ball upcourt and it bounces 2-3 times, as he walks toward it, catches up to it, and touches/dribbles it with one hand [i.e., starts his dribble]. This is legal, happens semi-regularly, e.g., when a PG needs to wipe some sweat off, so he tosses the ball, wipes his hands on his shorts as ball bounces a couple of times. It's form of "self-pass," but a legitimate form, to begin the dribble sequence. [Or am I wrong about this? Can a player allow the ball to bounce several times only after he's begun to dribble? Help!]

The key to CDu's above description, therefore, is the phrase, "not that this is the important part." If Mason actually dribbled, then "ran it down" and touched it with two hands, paused briefly, then dribbled, that's a violation, a double dribble. But if, as CDu notes, the StJ player "disrupted his dribble" - or if Mason never actually controlled the ball enough to "dribble" it - at that point Mason could legitimately put both hands on the ball, push it upcourt [i.e., restart his "disrupted' dribble, or simply start dribbling], and touch it again with one hand [i.e., continue his dribble].

I've rewatched it several times, and it happens real fast [3 seconds, 13:08-13:05], is an odd play, both players are hacking at the ball. Mason does hit the ball with one hand, trying to gain control of it. Is that a "dribble"? [Here I disagree with CDu, as I contend that this is the most important point.] Then, stilll trying to control the ball, Mason grabs it with 2 hands, tosses it ahead, catches up to it, and with no further dribble grabs the ball, takes a giant step, and dunks it. Thus, Mason never dribbles the ball, period, in the normal sense of the term, which I think includes having control of the ball. He does in fact toss the ball ahead, but I don't think this was a "self-pass," as Clark Kellogg described it. Rather, I think - but am not 100% certain - that this play was analogous to the scenario I described above, in which a player can toss the ball upcourt, then start dribbling - or, in Mason's case, grab it and dunk.

So, if my "scenario" re a player beginning a dribble with a toss of the ball ahead is accurate, then the key point is whether Mason's touching [but not controlling??] the ball constitutes a dribble.

I'd love to have the Playcaller's take on this one.

The distinction here (at least as I see it) is that he threw it out there with 2 hands. If he then is the first to touch it, that's effectively the same as dribbling with 2 hands (which is a double dribble). Thus, it's a violation. That's why I felt the question of whether there was previous legal dribble is irrelevant.

CDu

01-31-2011, 12:10 PM

So, if my "scenario" re a player beginning a dribble with a toss of the ball ahead is accurate, then the key point is whether Mason's touching [but not controlling??] the ball constitutes a dribble.

I'd love to have the Playcaller's take on this one.

To expand on this, I missed the bolded part in my first response. I don't think your "scenario" is accurate. I think it's rare that a player tosses it to himself with two hands. It's also possible that it's overlooked when it does happen (perhaps the official just waves it off if it has no impact on play).

But if you throw the ball with two hands to yourself and it doesn't hit the rim, backboard, or another player, and you collect it again, it's either a travel (if it doesn't bounce) or a double dribble (if it does). The travel is because of the steps. The double dribble is because you effectively dribbled with two hands. And this case clearly violates the "didn't impact the play," as Mason definitely benefited from the self pass.

UrinalCake

01-31-2011, 12:13 PM

MChambers

01-31-2011, 12:22 PM

A-Tex Devil

01-31-2011, 12:24 PM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't St. John's the last non-ACC team to win in Cameron? Maybe they just have our number. I recall our 1999 juggernaut team almost losing to Ron Artest and the Johnnies as well - aided by an atrocious continuation call in which a St. John's player standing 30 feet from the basket was fouled, dribbled the ball, then heaved it up, and was awarded a shooting foul. At least that's how my mind recalls it :D

2 or 3 coaching changes on one side and 10 years of players on both teams since our last loss to St. John's. Not sure how they could have our number except in some "mystical" name on the uniform/MSG magic type way. Plus we beat them 7 straight times or something like that.

Hopefully, like last year, it is a blip, and not a sign of more systematic problems. We'll lose a couple more games this year, and that's fine, but it's important to get that 1 seed, I think. Just one more game like that, though, and I think it will be difficult considering the sorry state of the ACC (Leonard Hamilton's flaccid defense of the ACC notwithstanding).

jv001

01-31-2011, 12:39 PM

Horrible defense and Duke couldn't match the intensity. You win some you lose some. Next game the Terps lets go Duke!!!!

And let's get rid of those black uniforms. What happened to those beautiful Duke Blue uniforms? Go Duke!

94duke

01-31-2011, 12:44 PM

And let's get rid of those black uniforms. What happened to those beautiful Duke Blue uniforms? Go Duke!

I've been asking myself this question since 1995. ;)
I guess I've never been a big fan of the black uni's.
They're ok, but I much prefer the blue.

CharlestonDevil

01-31-2011, 12:56 PM

Guys this is all my fault. I've missed 2 games this year, guess which ones they were. Yep.

I won't let this happen again.

fisheyes

01-31-2011, 01:04 PM

gumbomoop

01-31-2011, 01:10 PM

To expand on this, I missed the bolded part in my first response. I don't think your "scenario" is accurate. I think it's rare that a player tosses it to himself with two hands. It's also possible that it's overlooked when it does happen (perhaps the official just waves it off if it has no impact on play).

But if you throw the ball with two hands to yourself and it doesn't hit the rim, backboard, or another player, and you collect it again, it's either a travel (if it doesn't bounce) or a double dribble (if it does). The travel is because of the steps. The double dribble is because you effectively dribbled with two hands. And this case clearly violates the "didn't impact the play," as Mason definitely benefited from the self pass.

Because this "scenario play" is unusual - but I think not rare - it is possible that it's (a) a violation, but (b) waved off. I do think officials very occasionally do wave off something, though presumably they might be waving X off because it's not technically a violation. As you interpret my scenario play, it is in fact a violation.

So, in an attempt to drive you nuts with my obsession, let me be very precise, just in case we're speaking past one another on account of my imprecision.

In the scenario play, IMO, whether the player tosses the ball a few feet ahead with one or two hands, [though I think it's almost always with one, as the player probably intuits that tossing it out there with 2 might be a self-pass] as long as he does not "collect" it - but rather catches up to it and taps it down to the floor with one hand - he's simply beginning his dribble. I definitely agree with you that to "collect" the ball - I assume by this we agree that you refer either to holding it with two hands or even with one for a second or two - and then start dribbling, that's a "self-pass."

But so help me - and I've had this conversation with others, and some agree with me, others not so sure - the scenario play I've described does happen. Maybe the best case I can make to persuade anyone that it does happen is the sweaty-hands-wipe-off image, which I bet you can remember seeing a few times, maybe even many.

So, the first issue is whether the scenario play - my "refined" version, which does not involve "collecting" the ball - is or is not a violation.

Then the second issue is the Mason play. If you accept my refined scenario play as not involving a violation, then - and only then - you might agree also that whether or not Mason dribbled [he flailed at it, did touch it with one hand, not clear whether he controlled it, so not clear whether he dribbled before scenario-play-ing it forward and dunking] is a very important point.

Again, I'd love to hear from Playcaller on both these issues.

And I'd love to hear from you, too!

Either way I'm gonna obsess about this until 9 Wed eve.

Neals384

01-31-2011, 01:47 PM

Guys this is all my fault. I've missed 2 games this year, guess which ones they were. Yep.

I won't let this happen again.

Not your fault!

It was the fault of our local TV station here in Medford. I tuned in for the start of the game...and they were showing "A Special edition of the 700 Club"! Nothing against the 700 Club, but when your TV station pre-empts Duke Basketball for it, we have bad, bad kharma.

Duke was leading 6-4 when they finally pulled the switch on the 700 club. Hey, maybe they should have pre-empted the whole game!

Neal

PADukeMom

01-31-2011, 02:18 PM

Maybe it's the black uniforms. Our other road wins we had the blue on.

dbd4ever

01-31-2011, 03:24 PM

And let's get rid of those black uniforms. What happened to those beautiful Duke Blue uniforms? Go Duke!

I second this idea. I have always hated the black uniforms. They never seem to bring a good performance. And obviously I'm not the only one thinking this. This is from the bleacher report this morning. here's the link:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/590945-duke-basketball-18-reasons-the-blue-devils-should-burn-those-black-uniforms

hurley1

01-31-2011, 03:40 PM

My favorite sport, next to basketball, is boxing. A true fighter will retalliate immediately after he is hit. It is born and bred into him. Take a punch, fire back a harder punch. These Duke boys laid against the ropes and got pummeled. It's all up to them now. If they hate the taste that is in their mouths right now, don't ever let this happen again. Get the attitude that Hurley and Lattener had, a blow for a blow. Sometimes you have to get nasty to meet the challenge and I am just not seeing this from this team. The passion for winning and overcoming any adversity is just not there. Duke has all the talent in the world, with or without Irving, but, if this burning passion for victory is missing, I don't care who you have out there, you are going down. The St. Johns players had fire in their eyes the whole game. They never stopped attacking and they did an excellent job of distributing the basketball. They came in the building to win and they were not going to accept anything less. Duke can learn from them and do the exact same thing. At times Duke's players had the looks of children on their faces. When Buster Douglass wiped the floor with Mike Tyson they immediately asked him how did he do this. He said, " I wanted it ". You can't put it any simplier than that. You gotta want it and want it worse than the other guy or you will be the one going down.

CDu

01-31-2011, 03:54 PM

In the scenario play, IMO, whether the player tosses the ball a few feet ahead with one or two hands, [though I think it's almost always with one, as the player probably intuits that tossing it out there with 2 might be a self-pass] as long as he does not "collect" it - but rather catches up to it and taps it down to the floor with one hand - he's simply beginning his dribble. I definitely agree with you that to "collect" the ball - I assume by this we agree that you refer either to holding it with two hands or even with one for a second or two - and then start dribbling, that's a "self-pass."

Here's where I think the distinction is relevant. The toss of the ball is the start of the dribble. If you flip it with one hand, it's like regular dribbling. Thus, you can either (a) collect it (we agree on the definiton of collecting it) which ends your dribble or (b) keep dribbling. If you flip it with two hands, then any further contact with the ball would be a double dribble (in the same way you aren't allowed to dribble with both hands).

The caveat is that I think the toss would have to be reasonably consistent with a dribble (i.e., you can't throw a baseball pass).

But so help me - and I've had this conversation with others, and some agree with me, others not so sure - the scenario play I've described does happen. Maybe the best case I can make to persuade anyone that it does happen is the sweaty-hands-wipe-off image, which I bet you can remember seeing a few times, maybe even many.

So, the first issue is whether the scenario play - my "refined" version, which does not involve "collecting" the ball - is or is not a violation.

Based on my explanation, if the player is tossing it with one hand, it's just starting the dribble. So it wouldn't be a violation (assuming my explanation is correct of course). And yes - the scenario you describe happens all the time.

Then the second issue is the Mason play. If you accept my refined scenario play as not involving a violation, then - and only then - you might agree also that whether or not Mason dribbled [he flailed at it, did touch it with one hand, not clear whether he controlled it, so not clear whether he dribbled before scenario-play-ing it forward and dunking] is a very important point.

The Mason play is a two-hand toss. So in my explanation, the question as to whether or not he dribbled prior is irrelevant. He's committing a double dribble violation by dribbling with two hands.

UrinalCake

01-31-2011, 04:01 PM

Either way I'm gonna obsess about this until 9 Wed eve.

I hope you're not obsessing because you think it would have changed the outcome of the game - that's something that fans of OTHER teams do! Any time you get beat so thoroughly, there's really no room to blame the officiating. If you're obsessing just because you want to know the answer, then that's ok 8-)

Greg_Newton

01-31-2011, 04:15 PM

The Mason play is a two-hand toss. So in my explanation, the question as to whether or not he dribbled prior is irrelevant. He's committing a double dribble violation by dribbling with two hands.

So wait, are you saying that if Mason had grabbed the ball with two hands but released the ball with one hand it would have been a legal play? And if not, how would that be different then a player starting his dribble from a triple threat stance? Regardless, I think it's a pretty dubious distinction and a call that's not hardly ever made in the classic sense - players essentially dribble with both hands all the time, in practice (i.e. post power dribbbles).

...However, I didn't actually see this play, so I'm probably out of my element here.

CDu

01-31-2011, 04:30 PM

So wait, are you saying that if Mason had grabbed the ball with two hands but released the ball with one hand it would have been a legal play?

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. The problem I see (assuming that the original battle for the ball didn't constitute a dribble) is that he passed the ball to himself with two hands. That's either a travel (if the ball doesn't hit the floor) or a double-dribble (if it does). Had he throw it with one hand, it's not a violation.

And if not, how would that be different then a player starting his dribble from a triple threat stance?

I doesn't differ. That was my point. If he'd tossed it forward with one hand, he'd have been fine.

Regardless, I think it's a pretty dubious distinction and a call that's not hardly ever made in the classic sense - players essentially dribble with both hands all the time, in practice (i.e. post power dribbbles).

Power dribbles still involve releasing with one hand distinctly before the other (i.e., ultimately directing the ball with one hand). It may not look that way, but it's there. Players very rarely actually dribble with both hands. And if they do, it's a violation.

...However, I didn't actually see this play, so I'm probably out of my element here.

I think if you see the play in question, perhaps you'll see the difference between it and a power dribble. It's basically a sloppy two-hand chest pass that he then runs down.

-bdbd

01-31-2011, 05:29 PM

Look, it is never fun to lose. And it's especially painful to lose by a lot -- something we don't have very much experience doing, thankfully.

But, if we HAD to lose a game, then this was the one to do it in. And losing badly serves a purpose as well... If ANYBODY thinks that this team won't come out in the next couple of games really fired up and focused, well then you haven't been paying very close attention to Coach K for a while... These guys will be just killing to get to Comcast. We may just need a new paint job for the inside of CIS and/or the practice facillity after this week's practice sessions, what with all of the peeling paint from the verbal barage all but certain to be released!!

Beware Terrapins. Be very concerned.

:eek: :eek: :eek:

P.S. This result has not altered our conference standing one iota. So that ACC championship is still out there and certainly reachable. Sometimes a little jolt is a GOOD thing. Remember what happened last year after our close loss in CP.....

MrBisonDevil

01-31-2011, 07:23 PM

What me worry? Nope.

I'll worry if:
Duke loses more than 3 ACC games or
Duke loses a home non-conference game or
Duke does not get a 1st or 2nd seed in the ACC tourney

Duke always has holes to fill in late Jan / early Feb. Mid February play is the true indicator of what any Duke team will be in the tourneys.

gumbomoop

01-31-2011, 07:36 PM

I hope you're not obsessing because you think it would have changed the outcome of the game - that's something that fans of OTHER teams do! Any time you get beat so thoroughly, there's really no room to blame the officiating. If you're obsessing just because you want to know the answer, then that's ok 8-)

Nah, only the slimmest of chances that it would have preserved Duke's mini-momentum into a win. As I noted in earlier post, it happened at the 13:08-05 mark, and it would have kept the mini-momentum going with plenty of time left, but it's highly unlikely that it would have turned the game. Duke was lethargic in the first half, so too much to make up.

Allow me to deny thoroughly that I'm obsessed with this play because it involved an officiating error, or worse, "We wuz robbed." Rather, the obsession is with the interesting oddity of the play and its maybe exemplifying a quirky but legitimate move.

78Devil

01-31-2011, 07:41 PM

I actually dreaded checking this thread (and only did so today), as I was so disappointed in the loss (not the existence of it, but the magnitude and the effort), and I wasn't sure that I was up to the "sky is falling" posts I would see.

Its refreshing to see almost everyone so pragmatic and focused. What a contrast to insidecarolina after UNC has a crushing loss.

Having said that, I'm glad to see some upbeat posts, because frankly I'm NOT upbeat. I was sad and frustrated, and I am not at all optimistic about the coming weeks. I can't put my finger on it, but there it is. Thank you, optimists, for guilting me into not being to big of a wet blanket, though.

gumbomoop

01-31-2011, 08:10 PM

It's basically a sloppy two-hand chest pass that he then runs down.

Yes, I think this is a fair way to characterize what Mason did.

I'm still thinking [i.e., obsessing] about your distinction between starting with a two v. one-hand toss, in the scenario play. As I agree with your characterization of Mason's sloppy 2-handed toss ahead, the only way it could have been a legitimate play would be if a player can indeed toss it ahead with 2 hands, but cannot "collect" it.

So, just in case a player can toss the ball ahead with 2 hands - i.e., that in itself is not illegitimate - then we are left [I think] with this: Mason did "collect" the ball, did not dribble further, but instead just took a giant step and dunked it. In "collecting" it at the end of his toss, he thus made a "self-pass," a violation.

But, again, just in case a player can initiate a 2-hand toss ahead, then Mason's mistake was, ironically, that he did not proceed first to tap the ball down once - dribbling it rather than collecting it. Had he dribbled the ball on the way to the dunk, I'm claiming it would not have been a double dribble, having started and ended legitimately.

So, I've now convinced myself that this play's legitimacy depends both on how it started and how it ended.

And I've convinced all but the most patient and bemused posters that some obsessions are just not worth it.

I will add, however, that obsessing interminably over a single play, which probably made no difference whatsoever, is better than watching the Duke women play so abysmally in the first half tonight v. UConn. Hard to take.

stillcrazie

01-31-2011, 08:14 PM

I will add, however, that obsessing interminably over a single play, which probably made no difference whatsoever, is better than watching the Duke women play so abysmally in the first half tonight v. UConn. Hard to take.

Anything is better than that. This is making the men vs. St. John's look not so bad.

CDu

01-31-2011, 08:50 PM

I'm still thinking [i.e., obsessing] about your distinction between starting with a two v. one-hand toss, in the scenario play. As I agree with your characterization of Mason's sloppy 2-handed toss ahead, the only way it could have been a legitimate play would be if a player can indeed toss it ahead with 2 hands, but cannot "collect" it.

So, just in case a player can toss the ball ahead with 2 hands - i.e., that in itself is not illegitimate - then we are left [I think] with this: Mason did "collect" the ball, did not dribble further, but instead just took a giant step and dunked it. In "collecting" it at the end of his toss, he thus made a "self-pass," a violation.

Maybe I wasn't clear in my explanation of why it is a violation. There is nothing illegal about throwing the ball with two hands (obviously). It's illegal to throw the ball with two hands, have it hit the court, and then be the first person to touch it again. The ball must hit the rim, backboard, or another player first. The violation wasn't committed on the throw of the ball. The violation was touching it again after running it down. This made the toss a "two-handed dribble" (which is illegal).

But, again, just in case a player can initiate a 2-hand toss ahead, then Mason's mistake was, ironically, that he did not proceed first to tap the ball down once - dribbling it rather than collecting it. Had he dribbled the ball on the way to the dunk, I'm claiming it would not have been a double dribble, having started and ended legitimately.

If I'm reading what you're saying correctly, then the answer is no. The mistake Mason was touching it AT ALL after he had thrown it ahead with two hands. There is no distinction between dribbling or collecting the ball at that point. Until it either hits the backboard, rim, or someone else, he can't touch it again without it being a violation.

There are two ways he could have avoided a violation:
1. not catching the ball in the first place before he threw it (i.e., just slapping it around until he could establish his dribble
2. not touching it again after he passed it ahead until someone else touched it

Kfanarmy

01-31-2011, 09:08 PM

The distinction here (at least as I see it) is that he threw it out there with 2 hands. If he then is the first to touch it, that's effectively the same as dribbling with 2 hands (which is a double dribble). Thus, it's a violation. That's why I felt the question of whether there was previous legal dribble is irrelevant. i personally think the SJ player hit the ball while Mason had both hands on it and the violation shouldn't have been called at all.

DUKIE V(A)

01-31-2011, 09:23 PM

Guys this is all my fault. I've missed 2 games this year, guess which ones they were. Yep.

I won't let this happen again.

Just trying to help...

2/02 9:00 Maryland at College Park, Md. ESPN
2/05 6:00 NC State Durham, NC ESPN/ESPN2
2/09 9:00 North Carolina Durham, NC Raycom/ESPN
2/13 6:45 Miami at Coral Gables, Fla. FSN
2/16 7:00 Virginia at Charlottesville, Va ESPN/ESPN2
2/20 7:45 Georgia Tech Durham, NC FSN
2/23 7:00 Temple Durham, NC ESPN2
2/26 9:00 Virginia Tech at Blacksburg, Va. ESPN
3/02 9:00 Clemson Durham, NC ESPN/ESPN2
3/05 8:00 North Carolina Chapel Hill, NC CBS
3/10-3/13 TBA ACC Tournament Greensboro, NC Raycom/ESPN
Plus, a little thing called the NCAAs...

CDu

01-31-2011, 09:27 PM

i personally think the SJ player hit the ball while Mason had both hands on it and the violation shouldn't have been called at all.

I think Mason pretty clearly established control of the ball after the SJU player hit the ball, and then he threw it forward to create separation from the defender. The defender touching the ball doesn't give you the right to dribble it with two hands or pass it to yourself. The SJU player's contact is what makes the initial effort to get the ball not a violation, but doesn't change the fact that he committed a self-pass.

gumbomoop

01-31-2011, 09:42 PM

The mistake Mason was touching it AT ALL after he had thrown it ahead with two hands.

This is the fundamental issue, and possible continuing disagreement between us two.

Here I pause to say, sometimes you need to be in the same room to discuss all the nuances of such earth-shattering issues. ["Say, did you guys hear what's going on in Egypt?" "No, but you shoulda seen what the refs called on Mason yesterday."] So maybe we can meet - I don't know, maybe Houston in April.

But here's one more try, just to clarify as much as possible. [If this doesn't work, then it's Houston.] Back to my scenario play: are you pretty sure this hypothetical PG can, needing to wipe that sweat off his hands, toss the ball ahead with one hand, and then catch up to it and dribble, but cannot do so with 2 hands? I noted in an earlier post that as I remember this slightly odd moment in games, players usually toss it out with one hand, probably intuiting that there's something wrong if they do it with two. This would clearly support your view, so you'd say, "Yep, their intuition is spot on."

But, for some reason I have this picture in my mind of that PG gripping the ball with both hands, turning upcourt to make sure the defenders have all gone away, realizing he needs to wipe his hands, and - both hands on the ball - sort of tosses it just ahead, underhand, with a hint of backspin so it doesn't get away, then catches up to it, hits it with one hand, and the dribble goes on..... [Quick edit here: is it possible that this little backspin toss wouldn't look like a pass, and thus wouldn't be called??]

Houston?

Well, at least we agree that Houston would make the StJ game just a quaint, charming even, memory.

CDu

01-31-2011, 10:15 PM

This is the fundamental issue, and possible continuing disagreement between us two.

Here I pause to say, sometimes you need to be in the same room to discuss all the nuances of such earth-shattering issues. ["Say, did you guys hear what's going on in Egypt?" "No, but you shoulda seen what the refs called on Mason yesterday."] So maybe we can meet - I don't know, maybe Houston in April.

Would love to be able to have a reason to go to Houston in early April. Unfortunately, I won't be able to go regardless.

But here's one more try, just to clarify as much as possible. [If this doesn't work, then it's Houston.] Back to my scenario play: are you pretty sure this hypothetical PG can, needing to wipe that sweat off his hands, toss the ball ahead with one hand, and then catch up to it and dribble, but cannot do so with 2 hands? I noted in an earlier post that as I remember this slightly odd moment in games, players usually toss it out with one hand, probably intuiting that there's something wrong if they do it with two. This would clearly support your view, so you'd say, "Yep, their intuition is spot on."

I am not 100% sure this is legal. But I'm inclined to believe it is legal. And if it IS legal, the idea is that he's simply starting his dribble (which you have to do with one hand). I don't think this issue is particularly critical to the discussion, because I'm quite certain that you can't pass it to yourself with two hands or dribble with two hands.

But, for some reason I have this picture in my mind of that PG gripping the ball with both hands, turning upcourt to make sure the defenders have all gone away, realizing he needs to wipe his hands, and - both hands on the ball - sort of tosses it just ahead, underhand, with a hint of backspin so it doesn't get away, then catches up to it, hits it with one hand, and the dribble goes on..... [Quick edit here: is it possible that this little backspin toss wouldn't look like a pass, and thus wouldn't be called??]

Well, I don't have any particular recollection of this particular situation happening (though I'm not saying it hasn't happened). But if it has happened, my understanding is that this should be called a violation. If it wasn't called, my interpretation is that this was just a case of the official overlooking it since it didn't have an impact on the play. Sort of like when they don't call a carry, or when they don't call the slight foot shuffles when a player holds the ball but isn't closely contested.

The backspin issue is irrelevant. If you throw it to yourself with two hands, it's a violation. In this scenario, it's not the "pass" part that matters as much as the "two hands" part. The "pass" part comes into play if the toss is one-handed. Then there's the distinction between a dribble and a pass (i.e., you can't throw an overhand pass to yourself). The "two hands" part means it's a violation of the "no self-pass" rule or the "no dribbling with two hands" rule.

In any case, I think you're overthinking it. You can't dribble with two hands. You can't pass the ball to yourself unless it hits another player or the backboard/rim. Both are against the rules. Mason did one of the two. You can only advance the ball in your possession with one hand at a time. If a self-pass has gone uncalled in the past, it's probably because the official simply overlooked as it was irrelevant to the play. In this case, it was absolutely relevant to the play.

Vincetaylor

01-31-2011, 10:48 PM

gumbomoop

01-31-2011, 10:54 PM

[1]The backspin issue is irrelevant. [2]If you throw it to yourself with two hands, it's a violation.

[3]In any case, I think you're overthinking it. [4]You can't dribble with two hands. [5]You can't pass the ball to yourself unless it hits another player or the backboard/rim. Both are against the rules. [6]Mason did one of the two.

1. Agreed. I didn't include it as a red herring, but as a visual, to help us "remember" an odd version of a slightly odd scenario play.

2. Agreed, but..... I'm not yet sure that "tossing the ball ahead, even with 2 hands, then catching up to it, tapping it to begin a dribble" = "throwing it to yourself," which denotes "collecting" the ball. As we agree that one can toss the ball ahead with one hand to start one's dribble, the only issue here is the 2-hand toss-start.

2a. Try this: imagine a player holding a ball firmly with 2 hands, back to a defender. The player then pivots very slightly to begin his offensive move, literally drops the ball from about chest high - from his 2 hands - and then hits it with one hand to begin dribbling. Is that legal?

3. Probably, very probably, seriously. Just occasionally obsessive [= over-] thinking leads to more clarity, but not often. Not sure in this case.

4. Agreed.

5. Agreed.

6. Agreed, but not for the same reason as you have contended.

Houston's a great idea, even if neither of us is within hundreds, or even thousands, of miles of the city.

Mcluhan

01-31-2011, 10:58 PM

We need someone to average 14ppg alongside Nolan and Kyle. Andre, Kelly, and Seth should take that as a direct challenge. I'd include the Plumlees, but they have defensive and rebounding challenges to meet. Hairston and Thornton should take earning minutes as a direct challenge. Nolan and Kyle should keep doing what they're doing.

CDu

02-01-2011, 09:06 AM

2. Agreed, but..... I'm not yet sure that "tossing the ball ahead, even with 2 hands, then catching up to it, tapping it to begin a dribble" = "throwing it to yourself," which denotes "collecting" the ball. As we agree that one can toss the ball ahead with one hand to start one's dribble, the only issue here is the 2-hand toss-start.

You're getting too caught up in the words. It's not legal to intentionally toss the ball to the floor with two hands and touch it again after it hits the floor until someone else touches it or it hits the rim/backboard (that's at least a double dribble). It's not legal to throw the ball and take any steps to catch it (that's at the least travel). Mason violated one or the other (or both) of these counts.

The only distinction with regard to the one hand toss thing is that you could consider it legally starting your dribble (as long as it wasn't clearly a throw/pass). With two hands, it doesn't matter.

2a. Try this: imagine a player holding a ball firmly with 2 hands, back to a defender. The player then pivots very slightly to begin his offensive move, literally drops the ball from about chest high - from his 2 hands - and then hits it with one hand to begin dribbling. Is that legal?

Did the ball hit the floor before he touched it? If so, it's a double dribble. If the ball didn't hit the floor, did he move a step or two before touching it? If so, that's a travel. I'm not as sure about the scenario where he's drops the ball with two hands but then touches before it hits the floor and without moving. I think it's legal, because neither of the following happened in between the two touches: dribble established or switching your established pivot foot. But that scenario is not really relevant to Mason's scenario if

bluedvl

02-01-2011, 10:18 AM

ya someone needs to step up next to kyle and nolan for sure. Although the Plumlees have defense to worry about i think they should still be more effective on offense

sagegrouse

02-01-2011, 10:41 AM

You're getting too caught up in the words. It's not legal to intentionally toss the ball to the floor with two hands and touch it again after it hits the floor until someone else touches it or it hits the rim/backboard (that's at least a double dribble). It's not legal to throw the ball and take any steps to catch it (that's at the least travel). Mason violated one or the other (or both) of these counts.

The only distinction with regard to the one hand toss thing is that you could consider it legally starting your dribble (as long as it wasn't clearly a throw/pass). With two hands, it doesn't matter.

Did the ball hit the floor before he touched it? If so, it's a double dribble. If the ball didn't hit the floor, did he move a step or two before touching it? If so, that's a travel. I'm not as sure about the scenario where he's drops the ball with two hands but then touches before it hits the floor and without moving. I think it's legal, because neither of the following happened in between the two touches: dribble established or switching your established pivot foot. But that scenario is not really relevant to Mason's scenario if

Lost in all this discussion -- which is informative BTW -- is the fact that we had an athletic seven-footer strip the ball at midcourt, juggle it for control, get past an opponent reaching for the ball, and head for the hoop. With those legs, knees and elbows flying everywhere it was unusual, impressive, and a bit comical, but a hard-to-overlook moment for the refs -- and they didn't. With a six-footer, it may have been more of a blur.

sagegrouse

Kedsy

02-01-2011, 12:57 PM

We need someone to average 14ppg alongside Nolan and Kyle. Andre, Kelly, and Seth should take that as a direct challenge.

Against St. Johns, Andre had 7 points and Ryan had 7 points. You think if one of them had gotten to 14 we would have won the game? Despite the poor shooting and sloppy play against the press, our offense was adequate against St. Johns. Having someone average 14 ppg wouldn't have made our defense any better.

sagegrouse

02-01-2011, 06:25 PM

Last year, after the Georgetown Presidential debacle DBR recorded 262 posts in the 48 hours after the game.

This year, after the St. John's Madison Square Garden debacle, DBR recorded only 162 posts in the 48 hours after the game ended.

Although other explanations are available, I would argue that winning the 2010 NC has produced a level of serenity and restored some degree of sanity in the Duke fan base. Not to sane, I hope, because the on-site Crazies and the stay-at-home Crazies still have serious work to do.

sagegrouse

BattierBattalion

02-01-2011, 06:39 PM

Duke hasn't beaten a single team ranked in this week's top 25 poll. I can't remember ever being able to say that this late in the year. This team has a lot to prove. The current version definitely hasn't convinced me they are worthy of a top ten ranking.

They haven't played anyone currently ranked. It's not Duke's fault. If Florida State lost to Duke, then they would have never been ranked in the first place.

Mcluhan

02-01-2011, 07:27 PM

Against St. Johns, Andre had 7 points and Ryan had 7 points. You think if one of them had gotten to 14 we would have won the game? Despite the poor shooting and sloppy play against the press, our offense was adequate against St. Johns. Having someone average 14 ppg wouldn't have made our defense any better.

It doesn't need to be taken that literally, although I think we need a third scorer to be averaging about that much from here on out. The point is that Kyle and Nolan are carrying us offensively, and someone needs to consciously take on the responsibility of being the third scorer. The opportunity is right there, every good Duke team we've ever had supports the idea that it's necessary, and Andre/Kelly/Seth have thus far just flirted with that responsibility. I'm not talking so much about St. John's as I am about the general post-Kyrie reality.

Kedsy

02-01-2011, 11:58 PM

The point is that Kyle and Nolan are carrying us offensively, and someone needs to consciously take on the responsibility of being the third scorer.

And my point is that offense is not the problem. Even without Kyrie our offense is top ten in the nation. We may not have a third guy averaging 14 ppg (although Andre is averaging 10+), but we have had seven different players who have scored 20 or more points in a game this season. I repeat: offense is not the problem. We don't "need" anything more to happen on that end of the court.

To the extent that we have a problem (and certainly we did against St. Johns) it's on the defensive end, where a third scorer doesn't matter at all.

jipops

02-02-2011, 12:46 AM

And my point is that offense is not the problem. Even without Kyrie our offense is top ten in the nation. We may not have a third guy averaging 14 ppg (although Andre is averaging 10+), but we have had seven different players who have scored 20 or more points in a game this season. I repeat: offense is not the problem. We don't "need" anything more to happen on that end of the court.

To the extent that we have a problem (and certainly we did against St. Johns) it's on the defensive end, where a third scorer doesn't matter at all.

I agree that offense is not THE problem but it is a big issue. Yes, we need the defense to perform first and foremost. We've shown poor instincts reacting to rotations underneath. We seem to lose defensive intensity for long stretches during games and I'm not just referencing the St Johns game.

But as far as the offense it isn't about how many guys we have that can score. At times, many times Sunday, we have shown a lack of ability to manage and value the ball. As great as Nolan has been his strength is not in managing an offense. As a result we see a lot of stretches where our role guys just don't look comfortable out there. I don't know what the answer is to this. Nolan is really our only option at the point with Tyler providing a little spot duty to give him rest on the defensive end. We can't really slow the game down because the less offensive sets the better. Yet with a quicker pace we have the turnover tendency. The St Johns game just further exacerbated this issue which was compounded by non-existent D.

I'd say we have some big issues on both sides of the ball. But we need to take care of the defensive end first.

Kfanarmy

02-02-2011, 12:54 AM

And my point is that offense is not the problem. Even without Kyrie our offense is top ten in the nation. We may not have a third guy averaging 14 ppg (although Andre is averaging 10+), but we have had seven different players who have scored 20 or more points in a game this season. I repeat: offense is not the problem. We don't "need" anything more to happen on that end of the court.

To the extent that we have a problem (and certainly we did against St. Johns) it's on the defensive end, where a third scorer doesn't matter at all. I'm not sure the two are so unrelated...While I'm not sure someone needs to score more points, I think hitting a higher percentage of shots yields more opportunity to get back on defense. There's a reason why a lot of teams slap the ball out of bounds after they make a shot...so the team can set the D before the opposing teams O can get down the floor. three or four more makes in the 1st half against Saint Johns probably means 10-12 points closer at the half...I think. Duke had enough points to win that game, but had way too many misses that led to transition opportunities for SJs...or at least let them get into their offensive set early.

Greg_Newton

02-02-2011, 02:27 AM

"On the heels of what Coach K said was 'the worst loss in the history of the program'..."

:eek:

Did he really say that? Does anyone have a link to his post-game comments? Because I apparently missed something pretty big.

Saratoga2

02-02-2011, 07:42 AM

I'm not sure the two are so unrelated...While I'm not sure someone needs to score more points, I think hitting a higher percentage of shots yields more opportunity to get back on defense. There's a reason why a lot of teams slap the ball out of bounds after they make a shot...so the team can set the D before the opposing teams O can get down the floor. three or four more makes in the 1st half against Saint Johns probably means 10-12 points closer at the half...I think. Duke had enough points to win that game, but had way too many misses that led to transition opportunities for SJs...or at least let them get into their offensive set early.

When you take and miss as many 3 point shots as we did and have them taken by guards or Kyle from the corner,or side, you are going to give up some long rebounds and not have the defense fully back, especially when you face a quick team who is willing to drive the ball down your throat. I haven't tried to count how often that occurred, however, if SJ got 10 or 12 easy points that way, it was a game changer.

Since the 3 is a big part of our game, we need to hope for a better shooting percentage and also make sure our guys in a position to do so get back on that type of shot.

Billy Dat

02-03-2011, 04:20 PM

FWIW, Steve Lavin was on NYC's WFAN with Mike Francesca on Monday. I just listened to a podcast of the interview. Francesca is a St John's alum and he opened the show with a bit of hyperbole, but there was a lot of sincerity in his voice, when he said it was the best game he has seen St. Johns play in 25 years (one assumes in reference to the 1985 Mullin/Berry/Wennington Final Four team). I think that probably qualifies as getting the other team's best effort.

superdave

03-18-2011, 12:00 AM

Eat it, Steve Lavin. You fell to The Curse.

Who's next? Who is the next victim?

House G

03-18-2011, 12:05 AM

Eat it, Steve Lavin. You fell to The Curse.

Who's next? Who is the next victim?

Ditto. And someone tell him and Keady to ditch the white shoes--not a good look.

captmojo

03-18-2011, 07:05 AM

I would like to have seen Duke have another shot at them, with both units in full-force good health, on a neutral floor. Redemption is sweet.

JBDuke

03-18-2011, 07:43 AM

Eat it, Steve Lavin. You fell to The Curse.

Who's next? Who is the next victim?

The Curse only acts against teams that eliminate Duke from the NCAA Tournament, so it wouldn't apply in this circumstance. St. Johns was a much better team at home this year, and Gonzaga is no stranger to tournament success.

Still, it was nice to see Lavin taking another early exit...

moonpie23

03-18-2011, 07:49 AM

sure didn't hurt my feelings.........now that i got that out.....congrats to steve for bringing the johnnies thru a great season...

gotoguy

03-18-2011, 09:07 AM

sure didn't hurt my feelings.........now that i got that out.....congrats to steve for bringing the johnnies thru a great season...

They also lost one of their best players to a torn ACL, might have made a difference. And what's with the white tennies that all the Jonnies' coaches wear?

tbyers11

03-18-2011, 10:00 AM

They also lost one of their best players to a torn ACL, might have made a difference. And what's with the white tennies that all the Jonnies' coaches wear?

The weekend that St John's beat Duke was the weekend that coaches wear tennis shoes in support of Coaches vs Cancer. Lavin and staff thought they played so well against us that they continued to wear they for the rest of the season as a good luck charm.

superdave

03-18-2011, 11:02 AM

The Curse only acts against teams that eliminate Duke from the NCAA Tournament, so it wouldn't apply in this circumstance. St. Johns was a much better team at home this year, and Gonzaga is no stranger to tournament success.

Still, it was nice to see Lavin taking another early exit...

Yeah, not truely caused by The Curse. I realized that after I posted last night. But a tangential, spillover dark cloud was hovering over St. John's because of the Duke game. It was likely caused by the collective will of Duke fans watching on tv.