Phase 0 - 2011-12

[Kedsy]

Hallelujah! The new basketball season is here. We have our deepest team in 14 years and it should be great ride. And what better way to celebrate the week of our first North American exhibition game of 2011-12 than to dive headfirst into our first Phase report of the season?

Phase 0 consists of our two exhibition games, against Bellarmine and Shaw, both Division II teams. Despite the fact that Bellarmine is the defending Division II national champion, and current #1 team, we shouldn’t be focusing on wins or losses, or really even the score. True, it would be a warning sign if a Division II team can keep the game close, but it didn’t hurt Syracuse a couple years ago, when they lost to LeMoyne and still ended up as a number one seed in the NCAA tournament.

By the way, here’s a fun fact: this is the third straight year in which Duke plays the defending Division II champion – Bellarmine in 2011, Cal-Poly Pomona in 2010, and Findlay in 2009.

Still, while we probably won’t see how the team reacts under pressure, or how we will play against highly talented teams, there are plenty of things we can watch for. Here are a few things that will hold my attention:

(1) Health

This is always the #1 concern in any Phase report. Sure, we have lots of depth, but it would be nice to get through the Phase without a major injury.

(2) Team Defense

Here’s a funny little coincidence: since Pomeroy’s been archiving his statistics, Duke has had a top ten defense 6 of 9 years. The exceptions: #15 in 2003; #13 in 2006; #20 in 2009. In other words, every three years, and if the pattern holds true we could have an issue on our hands. To support the idea of worrying, we lost our top two individual defenders from last season, and on our current roster, the only player who could fairly be described as an outstanding individual defender would be Tyler Thornton, who probably won’t see more than 10 or 15 minutes a game.

There’s a difference between having outstanding individual defenders and having an outstanding team defense, however. And I believe Duke has a good chance of having strong team defense in 2011-12. For one thing, we have four juniors and a senior among our top six players. The key to Duke defense is rotating properly and we have guys who have experience enough to have learned it. Another plus is our starting backcourt players, Seth Curry and Austin Rivers, both have very quick hands, which should make opposing ballhandlers wary. Seth and Austin have yet to prove they can always stay in front of their man, but we have at least two very adept shotblockers on the back line (Ryan and Mason both ranked in the top 150 in the nation in Block %) to make up for any lapses on the perimeter. Throw in that Andre Dawkins has improved his defense every year he’s been here, and I like our chances.

We should be able to defensively dominate our Division II opponents during this Phase. Here’s hoping we do.

(3) Bottom of our Rotation?

Our top six players seem fairly well entrenched: Seth Curry, Austin Rivers, Andre Dawkins, Miles Plumlee, Mason Plumlee, and Ryan Kelly. The question that’s difficult to answer at this point is who will emerge as the next two or three players in the rotation? There are a lot of unanswered questions about every one of our non-big-six.

There’s been a lot of insider buzz about Alex Murphy, to the point where people are saying he may compete for a starting spot, but he’s a freshman who didn’t really shine in China/Dubai or at Blue/White. Quinn Cook looked good at Blue/White, but is a freshman coming off a major injury. Tyler Thornton is a plus backcourt defender, but is probably not yet ready to play a big role on offense. Josh Hairston has a year under his belt and seemingly unlimited energy, but looks to probably be relegated as the fourth big playing spot minutes. Michael Gbinije has hops and skill, but so far at least the staff has treated him as if he’s the 10th or 11th man. Marshall Plumlee appears to be at least a year away from meaningful contribution.

In our two exhibition games, everybody’s going to play. Our least accomplished player would probably be a superstar on either of our Division II opponents. And I suspect every one of our guys will bring big things to Duke at some point over the next few years. But who of our freshmen and sophomores are ready to step up? Who’ll look smooth and comfortable? Who’s ready to contribute right now? We won’t know the answers to these for awhile, but I suspect we’ll start to see the early favorites over the next week.

For what it’s worth, I’ll predict that the 7 through 9 guys in our rotation turn out to be Alex, Tyler, and Quinn.

(4) Austin Rivers

Austin was ranked the #2 high school senior in the country in the RSCI. He clearly has a ton of talent. But from what we’ve seen so far, he also comes with some red flags. In China/Dubai and again at Blue/White, Austin turned the ball over way too much, didn’t always hustle back on defense, and sometimes reacted poorly to bad calls and bad plays on his own part (turnovers or missed shots). All of these things should improve with maturity, but how fast will he grow up? That question is a big key to Duke’s season. If Austin is one of the top guards in the country, Duke is a top five team. If he’s another freshman going through obvious growing pains, we may struggle a bit.

How much improvement in this area will we see in him? If the improvement is noticeable from two weeks ago to now, then maybe we can expect a quicker path to maturity. If it has gotten no better, then maybe we’ll have to start worrying. Personally, I’m looking for a trajectory similar to Harrison Barnes last year, which would bode well for our NCAA tournament chances, but may make us gnash our teeth for the next couple months.

(5) Big Man Offense

Coach K has been talking up our big men, saying they’ll play a much larger role in the offense. I’m not sold yet, however. Both Austin and Seth will probably be best in high-usage roles, and Andre needs to assert himself as well. When’s the ball going inside?

The good news is we did see some advancement in this area in the China/Dubai games, especially with Ryan Kelly. I think we could advance even further, but it remains to be seen if we will. Not only do the perimeter players have to share the ball, but the interior players need to get into proper position and demand it. And that’s not something they’re used to.

Bellarmine’s tallest player is 6’8”. Shaw has one guy at 6’9”. Based on height alone we’ll have a huge advantage inside, and all our big guys should be able to score. But what I’ll be looking for is how often are the guards looking inside and how confident and comfortable are the big guys at asking for the ball.

(6) Andre Dawkins

Andre is by far the biggest unknown among our returning players. Not surprisingly, he is also the player on whom DBR poster opinions vary the most. Some view him as one of the team’s top scorers and minute-getters, while others think he’s the most susceptible to lose minutes to Alex Murphy, Quinn Cook, or even Mike Gbinije. On the one hand, Andre has a beautiful shot, great hops, and a strong upper body. He has more physical tools and at least as good form on his jumper as JJ Redick. On the other hand, he has in the past tended to disappear for long stretches, played inconsistent defense, and sometimes just stood around on offense.

So which is it? Is Andre a nascent star or simply unfulfilled potential? It will still be hard to say after these exhibition games. If he plays great, we still won’t know the answer with any confidence. But if he plays poorly, it will be a bad sign.

(7) Lack of Traditional Point Guard

A lot of digital ink has been spent discussing the fact that Duke won’t have a traditional point guard in its starting lineup. Seth Curry is closer to Jon Scheyer than Kyrie Irving. Austin Rivers is a scoring guard. Just this week, Jeff Goodman publicly wondered whether Seth will be able to “transition” into the PG role. Some DBR posters have gone so far as to say Quinn Cook needs to start (or play a major role) because he’s our only “true” PG.

Will this be a problem? Will Quinn have to be thrust into a prominent role? I don’t think so. Yes, Austin has to get his turnovers under control, but Seth is actually pretty good about taking care of the ball (top 180 nationally last year according to Pomeroy, and seemingly improved this year). Will it even matter? Austin is used to starting half-court sets with the ball in his hands. Seth seems comfortable with the ball as well. Assuming they’re both capable of finding Andre spotting up and the big men down low, do we really need an ankle-breaking PG who can break down multiple defenders before whipping an unbelievable assist for an easy bucket?

My answer is, sure it would help, but I don’t think it’s necessary. Between Austin, Seth, and Andre we have so much potential offense (especially outside shooting) that if the perimeter guys can merely make the easy pass when double-teamed we should be OK.

Still, the exhibition games should be a good opportunity to see how smoothly the offense runs with Seth and Austin in the backcourt. If we bog down in the half-court against Division II competition, then I may have to revisit this in my own mind.

(8) Leadership, Chemistry, and Communication

Miles Plumlee and Ryan Kelly are our captains. Austin Rivers is our most talented player. Seth Curry is our point guard. No one on the team is an experienced leader. Will someone emerge in this regard during the exhibition games? Maybe, maybe not. It’s an interesting thing to look for, but I won’t be worried if we can’t tell yet.

On-court communication is critical for any Duke team’s success, especially on defense. Our current players don’t have much of a history of being vocal, but again I’m not concerned. Having four juniors and a senior among your top six players means they’ve had plenty of time learning the value of communication and no doubt will embrace it.

Finally, the all-elusive “chemistry.” Specifically, there’s been a fair amount of chatter that Austin Rivers may disrupt Duke’s chemistry this year. Obviously there’s no way to know at this point if it will become an issue, and unless the games are unexpectedly close there will still be no way to tell during Phase 0. But my own personal opinion is I’ll be shocked if this becomes a real story. Austin wants to win as much as anybody on the team. He seems to respect the coaches and expresses a desire to learn. Beyond that, I can’t imagine Coach K allowing any player to disrupt team chemistry the way some people are suggesting. Nothing to see here, folks.

(9) Let’s Go Duke

Can’t wait for the season to start. GTHC.

[davekay1971]

Great, great write-up.

I think you've hit all the major points right on the head. The biggest concerns I have going into the season are as follows:

1) Can the Plums produce consistent offense and good helpside interior defense? We've all seen the physical tools. We've seen the powerful dunks. But can they post up, demand the ball, get themselves in good position to receive it, deliver assertive post moves to score, pass out to open shooters, etc? Can they do that night in and night out? More importantly, on the other end of the floor can they cut off the lane on penetration, rotate over and defend without fouling, and alter/block shots without fouling? We have a very tall team between MP1, MP2, and RK. If those guys (particularly the Plums) can play big and play consistently, it will be a huge asset and could make us very balanced offensviely and much tougher on defense.

2) Is Rivers what we hope he will be? K sure doesn't seem to worry about his attitude. He seems to love it. Until K worries, I won't worry. If there is one thing Mike Krzyzewski can handle, it's getting a player to buy into the team. I believe he can channel's Rivers' attitude into a positive force. Now, can the kid back it up? If Rivers can, if he can be that lethal scoring threat sharing the floor with capable scorers like Curry and Dawkins and with a couple guys who can finish on the inside, we can be an offensive juggernaut.

3) RK - again, a guy who has shown us all the tools, but not consistently. In China/Dubai he was consistent. If RK can work that inside-outside game he can be a matchup nightmare that will really put pressure on defenses who are already trying to contain an athletic Plumlee, a couple long range shooters, and Rivers.

I don't count Curry at the point as a worry. He got pretty good at the role last season. He has worked hard in the offseason to improve his handle. He may not be a natural point, but some guy named Scheyer did a pretty good job in 2010 running the offense despite not being a "natural point guard." Curry can get the job done. He'll make good decisions initiating the offense. The only question is whether he can keep looking for his own offense and strike the kind of balance that Jon and Nolan achieved.

Team defense is a worry, but Rivers isn't my biggest concern. We won't have the kind of on-the-ball pressure with Thornton off the court as we're used to. I'm assuming we'll be seeing a lot of Curry-Rivers-Dawkins on the perimeter, which means our bigs will have to deal with penetration/rotation from time to time. Hopefully the Plumlees can do that. Kelly can - he's a very smart position defender and can alter shots without fouling. If the Plumlees can do that also, our defense will be ok.

[OZZIE4DUKE]

I enter this season with great anticipation and no concerns. I will have much joy in watching our players mature and develop their talents, learning to play together as a team, regardless of trials and tribulations along the way. Unlike last season, I do expect we will win the last game we play next spring! :cool:

[Indoor66]

I enter this season with great anticipation and no concerns. I will have much joy in watching our players mature and develop their talents, learning to play together as a team, regardless of trials and tribulations along the way. Unlike last season, I do expect we will win the last game we play next spring! :cool:

I agree with you Ozz. All I want is for Duke to always win the next game!

[Saratoga2]

Even though this team has starters that will be heavy with juniors or better, this team seems to me to need more deveopment than for last year. The front court is back but has a lot to prove. RK is probably our most clever player defensively and also seems to have the most offensive potential at this time with Mason the next, but team defense by the front court needs to be improved to be considered elite.

Our back court starters are talented, but only Curry has really proven himself to be consistently solid at this level. I hate to see a guy hang his head when things don't go well. Here's hoping that coach K can get though to Austin and to some degree Quinn to just play on. They have the talent to be special. I often thought that Andre deferred to the older and more experienced players. That will not be the case this year as he is now one of the more experienced guys. With his talent level, I expect him to really blossom. His defense has gotten better over time and we know he can score the three and have seen him penetrate at times, so he can do it.

With Quinn, Tyler, Alex, Josh, Michael and Marshall we have a lot of depth in the front court and back court. I would be hard pressed to say what the substitution line is out of those players so defer to those who believe Alex, Quinn and Tyler will be the first group off the bench.

Good luck to the team as it develops into what I hope with be another powerhouse by the start of ACC play.

[sagegrouse]

Thanks, Kedsy for starting us off in royal fashion.

It seems to me that this is a year of "unknowns." No returning player has averaged double digits in scoring (exc. Seth at Liberty three years ago). Only Mason has been a Top 5 ACC player in any major stat (#5 in rebounding at 8.4).

So, I would add: Who is going to step up? Let's keep it simple. I expect three Blue Devils to be All-ACC (first three teams). I have no idea who they will be. There are six candidates, I guess: Miles, Mason, Ryan, Seth, Andre and Austin.

Here's the case for each:

Miles -- gritty inside player who is tough on both defense and offensive; the team leader and worthy successor to Zoubeard.

Mason -- talented and athletic big guy, who can rebound and score on the break, inside and in mid-range.

Ryan -- a heady offensive machine who could lead Duke in scoring.

Seth -- a "natural-born killer," who can score a lot of points in a hurry, as in the Blue-White game.

Andre -- best pure shooter in the conference since JJ.

Austin -- most versatile Duke player since JWill and Dunleavy and who will get the All-ACC votes if he has the stats.

It will be fun to see the personality of the team develop and new players become stars.

sagegrouse

[jv001]

1. Health= let's hope we not only stay healthy through phase 0, but through out the entire year. After Kyrie's injury last year, we deserve a non-injury year.
2. Team defense. We should be good in this area as long as our bigs don't get into foul trouble. Shouldn't be a problem in phase 0. However once games get tougher, will lack of on the ball defense be a problem in getting our bigs into foul trouble?
3. Bottom of rotation= way too early for a prediction from me.
4. Austin Rivers= will he be like barnes last year? It didn't seem to click for hb until later in the season.
5. Big men offense. I look for Miles and Mason to use the jump hook as a valuable weapon this year.
6. Andre Dawkins= I am seriously looking forward to see major improvement from our best shooter.
7. Lack of traditional pt. guard= I don't think this will be a problem. Seth will get it done.
8. Leadership, chemistry & communication= Like sage, I look forward to seeing who our go to guy will be. I think that player will probably be our leader. As for chemistry only time will tell.
9. Let's Go Duke= Man I can hardly wait.
GoDuke!

[feldspar]

Only one minor quibble to what was otherwise a flawless evaluation, Kedsy.


Beyond that, I can’t imagine Coach K allowing any player to disrupt team chemistry the way some people are suggesting. Nothing to see here, folks.


I think it's a bit presumptuous to assume Coach K will never and has never had locker-room distractions. Greg Newton was a distraction. Coach K had a rough time handling him, and it affected team chemistry. We all know about the behind-the-scenes stuff with Josh McRoberts. This notion that Coach K just won't put up with it, and that's the end of the story is a bit off.

Coach K can only do so much. Personally, I am concerned about Austin's ego and temperament. We saw some of that in the Blue/White game. There's only so much Coach K can do to control someone's personality. I'm not saying Austin is a ticking time bomb, but there is quite a bit of ego there that needs to be managed, and Coach K can only do so much.

Count me as cautiously optimistic about team chemistry, but I wouldn't say there's "nothing to see here."

[TonyWR]

Only one minor quibble to what was otherwise a flawless evaluation, Kedsy.



I think it's a bit presumptuous to assume Coach K will never and has never had locker-room distractions. Greg Newton was a distraction. Coach K had a rough time handling him, and it affected team chemistry. We all know about the behind-the-scenes stuff with Josh McRoberts. This notion that Coach K just won't put up with it, and that's the end of the story is a bit off.

Coach K can only do so much. Personally, I am concerned about Austin's ego and temperament. We saw some of that in the Blue/White game. There's only so much Coach K can do to control someone's personality. I'm not saying Austin is a ticking time bomb, but there is quite a bit of ego there that needs to be managed, and Coach K can only do so much.

Count me as cautiously optimistic about team chemistry, but I wouldn't say there's "nothing to see here."

I noticed the ego and attitude at CTC as well, mainly after a call or missed shot, he'd shake his head or lower it. I saw him arguing with the ref too instead of getting back down court. I imagine K will fix that, those seconds inbetween can be crucial come crunch time. The thing I've also noticed about Austin is he doesn't 'look' like he fits in with the rest of the team, what I mean is if you watch the highlights from the China/Dubai trip the other guys are having a blast and there is a strong sense of brotherhood but with Austin it's different, it's like he doesn't quite feel comfortable or something. Has anyone else picked up on this?

[superdave]

(1) Health
(2) Team Defense
(3) Bottom of our Rotation?
(4) Austin Rivers
(5) Big Man Offense
(6) Andre Dawkins
(7) Lack of Traditional Point Guard
(8) Leadership, Chemistry, and Communication
(9) Let’s Go Duke
Can’t wait for the season to start. GTHC.

Thanks for the write-up, Kedsy. There are a lot of unknowns this year, especially after losing all but three of our rotations guys from 2010 title squad. The rotation guys remaining being Dawkins, Mason and Miles. We also lose 37 points per game in about 69 minutes, plus stellar defense and leadership, from the departures of Nolan and Kyle. But we'll likely have four juniors and a senior in our rotation, all having seen significant end of game minutes over the past few years. They wont be rattled, but they will need to step up on a consistent basis in ways they have not been called upon in the past.

Team Defense - D is always where Coach K's teams prove themselves. If you dont get your assignments and rotations down, you wind up on the bench. It's a must.

We have a pretty fair amount of athleticism on this team, but not a ton of defensive leadership. I will be looking to see if guys are really disciplined in their defensive assignments early on, more so than if they are making individual plays. Team D is about trusting each other to be in the right place at the right time, and communicating.

Rotation - I think Kedsy has the 7-9 spots about right with Alex, Tyler and Quinn. I would be very happy to see Gbinije play a similar role that Tyler played last year, occasional defensive stopper and energy guy off the bench. Also, I think it would be really helpful to groom Josh Hairston early on to contribute 5-10 minutes. I expect foul trouble to plague more than one of our big guys in some games this year, and we'll need Josh to be the fourth big at some point. Apparently he's bulked up some.

Rivers - Austin is the most talented guy on this team and is projected somewhere in the 10-12 range in the NBA Draft. Expectations are high, but I would imagine he'll be on a shorter leash the first part of the season until he adjusts to the speed of the game, proves himself defensively and becomes integrated with his teammates. The Barnes trajectory from last year is a really good point. Let's hope that Austin's first 3 months wont be that widely discussed by us or frustrating for him though.

Austin will be our best creator off the dribble, and I expect him to be able to get to the rim at will by March. But he will need to do so under control and keep his teammates involved. He cannot put his head down and hunt for shots or it will bog down the offense. I do not know what to expect out his mid-range and 3-point game though. Time will tell.

Post Offense - Coach K has been high on our scoring capabilities inside in interviews. Mason and Ryan are both on a trajectory to put up more scoring, and there are shots to be had. A lot of their scoring will depend on the guards setting them up. But if this is more than just a point of emphasis for Duke, rather a significant part of the gameplan, then I expect the guards to look for it early and often. We have not fed the post a ton since Shelden left after the 2006 season. will be interesting to watch it develop.

Dawkins - Andre needs to prove he can execute the dribble drive consistently for defenders to play off him just enough to make himself at least two dimensional. If he can do that he'll average in double digits, and potentially be one of the top scorers on the team. I expect him to be up some games and down others, but the hope is that he'll be one of our consistent scorers and defenders by Christmas.

Leadership - Even with Miles and Ryan as captains, I expect Seth to take over a lot of leadership duties too. I do worry this team could lack focus and get carried away with the small stuff at times at the expense of team D or offensive execution. Hopefully the older guys can snap them out of it quickly. I also hope that our seniors and juniors dont need to be consistently reminded
to stay focused and intense, that it will be a given. There ought to be enough competition for minutes to keep guys on track. We shall see.

[MChambers]

1. Health= let's hope we not only stay healthy through phase 0, but through out the entire year. After Kyrie's injury last year, we deserve a non-injury year.
You're Jumbo! And you're back!

[Kedsy]

Andre needs to prove he can execute the dribble drive consistently for defenders to play off him just enough to make himself at least two dimensional.

Good points, Dave, although I don't entirely agree with the above statement. Andre doesn't have to dribble drive (although I think he could surprise people in that area). All he has to do is move without the ball. If Andre's man can't help off him (and then jump back because he knows exactly where Andre is), then either Austin and Seth are both being single-covered, or one of the bigs will be left alone. Assuming Austin and Seth keep their head up when they have the ball, that should be enough for a high-octane offense.

If Andre had JJ's competitive desire to get open, he could be just as good. He has all the tools. He hasn't shown that desire so far in his career, but I'm hopeful he'll at least head in that direction.

[MChambers]

Good points, Dave, although I don't entirely agree with the above statement. Andre doesn't have to dribble drive (although I think he could surprise people in that area). All he has to do is move without the ball. If Andre's man can't help off him (and then jump back because he knows exactly where Andre is), then either Austin and Seth are both being single-covered, or one of the bigs will be left alone. Assuming Austin and Seth keep their head up when they have the ball, that should be enough for a high-octane offense.

If Andre had JJ's competitive desire to get open, he could be just as good. He has all the tools. He hasn't shown that desire so far in his career, but I'm hopeful he'll at least head in that direction.
Do we know that he doesn't have that desire? My impression is that the coaching staff designed an offense to maximize JJ's shooting opportunities, in part because Duke wasn't all that offensively talented back then, but hasn't done that for Andre, because he's never been that key of an offensive option.

I agree that he doesn't move that well without the ball, but I don't know if it has anything to do with a lack of competitive desire.

[sagegrouse]

Do we know that he doesn't have that desire? My impression is that the coaching staff designed an offense to maximize JJ's shooting opportunities, in part because Duke wasn't all that offensively talented back then, but hasn't done that for Andre, because he's never been that key of an offensive option.

I agree that he doesn't move that well without the ball, but I don't know if it has anything to do with a lack of competitive desire.

We'll find out this year whether Andre gets featured in the offense. You are right about JJ. His freshman year was after the Great Exodus of JWill, Dunleavy and Boozer. But I remember the ACC championship game against State. We had survived that far only because Daniel Ewing had a wonderful series of games. We are getting buried against State, and then JJ erupts with (I refuse to look it up) about 20 second half points and Duke won going away.

No question from then on that he would be the focus of the offense.

sagegrouse

[superdave]

Good points, Dave, although I don't entirely agree with the above statement. Andre doesn't have to dribble drive (although I think he could surprise people in that area). All he has to do is move without the ball. If Andre's man can't help off him (and then jump back because he knows exactly where Andre is), then either Austin and Seth are both being single-covered, or one of the bigs will be left alone. Assuming Austin and Seth keep their head up when they have the ball, that should be enough for a high-octane offense.

If Andre had JJ's competitive desire to get open, he could be just as good. He has all the tools. He hasn't shown that desire so far in his career, but I'm hopeful he'll at least head in that direction.

I'd also add to my dribble drive point and to your move without the ball point, if Andre will cut to the basket from time to time so the guy with the ball can find him on backdoor cuts or slashes. So Andre could score in the paint without actually having to beat someone off the dribble.

Remember how Kyle would work the baseline trying to lose his man on big man picks down low? By senior year Kyle would occasionally flash in the post and catch a pass for a quick layup. Andre could use that move as well, especially when he's being guarded by a smaller defender. The defender would fight over the top to prevent Andre from getting a 3-point look, but Andre would catch a quick pass from the high post or from the perimeter and get an easy hoop.

I guess my main point is he cant just be a shooter. I think we agree on that. It will be really interesting to see how much Andre's offense comes within the flow of motion offense vs. set plays or quick hitters where we look to get him a shot.

[superdave]

Leadership - Even with Miles and Ryan as captains, I expect Seth to take over a lot of leadership duties too. I do worry this team could lack focus and get carried away with the small stuff at times at the expense of team D or offensive execution. Hopefully the older guys can snap them out of it quickly. I also hope that our seniors and juniors dont need to be consistently reminded to stay focused and intense, that it will be a given. There ought to be enough competition for minutes to keep guys on track. We shall see.

Wow. I must be prescient. Seth named co-captain today. (http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=4200&ATCLID=205324026) I'm going to assume he's earned it during practice these last two weeks. A good sign.

Super "Humblebrag" Dave

[Kedsy]

Do we know that he doesn't have that desire?

Of course we don't know. I didn't say Andre didn't have the desire, I said he hasn't shown the desire. Maybe he has it and he's been simply following his coaches orders for two years. My point was we haven't seen him fighting for his shot, something at which JJ was superb. If Andre shows it this year, even half as much as JJ did, it will be really difficult for opposing defenses, whether Andre employs a dribble-drive or not.

[Des Esseintes]

If Andre had JJ's competitive desire to get open, he could be just as good. He has all the tools. He hasn't shown that desire so far in his career, but I'm hopeful he'll at least head in that direction.

Without questioning the importance of Redick's drive, I think you might be underestimating a couple of JJ's tools. I'm unsure, for instance, that Andre has a release as quick as Redick's. Nor am I sure he's as accurate catching a pass off a curl and rising up to shoot. Andre shoots beautifully, but the ball takes a bit longer to get out of his hand, which can make a huge difference in one's ability to score. Not that Andre cannot compensate elsewhere--since he is clearly the superior run/jump athlete of the two--to become a powerful scorer as well. I could easily be misremembering, of course.

[Kedsy]

Without questioning the importance of Redick's drive, I think you might be underestimating a couple of JJ's tools. I'm unsure, for instance, that Andre has a release as quick as Redick's. Nor am I sure he's as accurate catching a pass off a curl and rising up to shoot. Andre shoots beautifully, but the ball takes a bit longer to get out of his hand, which can make a huge difference in one's ability to score. Not that Andre cannot compensate elsewhere--since he is clearly the superior run/jump athlete of the two--to become a powerful scorer as well. I could easily be misremembering, of course.

Well, I did think about that before I said what I said. I agree that JJ had a very quick release off a curl and also off a screen. I don't think we've seen how quick Andre's release is in those situations, though, because he's done that sort of thing so seldom. But the way he squares his body before he catches a pass suggests to me he could be pretty quick as well.

[Wander]

Andre reminds me more of Wayne Ellington than he does of JJ. Neither was as good of a shooter as JJ (who is?), but both were underrated athletically and could probably be the #1 option on a good team if they didn't have guys like Hansbrough, Lawson, Nolan, etc as teammates.

[Kedsy]

Andre reminds me more of Wayne Ellington than he does of JJ. Neither was as good of a shooter as JJ (who is?), but both were underrated athletically and could probably be the #1 option on a good team if they didn't have guys like Hansbrough, Lawson, Nolan, etc as teammates.

Well, I hear you, but how do you measure that? Andre's shooting form looks as good as JJ's to my untrained eye. His range seems equivalent. And his career shooting percentage (overall and 3-point) is actually a little better. In his sophomore year, Andre's overall shooting and 3-point percentages were better than JJ's best year. I guess you could say JJ took more difficult shots, but how do you measure that?

Would Andre's percentage stay high if he shot as often as JJ did, with the defenders as close as they were to JJ? I don't know. But based on the evidence we have, I'm not so sure JJ was a better shooter than Andre.

[Des Esseintes]

Well, I did think about that before I said what I said. I agree that JJ had a very quick release off a curl and also off a screen. I don't think we've seen how quick Andre's release is in those situations, though, because he's done that sort of thing so seldom. But the way he squares his body before he catches a pass suggests to me he could be pretty quick as well.

That's fair. Andre's feet are very good, as you say. I would only reply that the NBA is rife with guys who shoot very well one way, and yet for whatever reason their accuracy does not translate into another way. There are few players who can excel at both a flat-footed catch-and-shoot and catch-off-a-curl-and-shoot. Odd that it should be so, but it is. And this completely leaves aside the much smaller population who can nail a jumper off the dribble, which Redick also had in his toolbox and which Andre has not yet shown. (He's also hasn't *not* shown it either, if that makes sense.)

I'm excited for Dawkins, and I think he'll be excellent this year. My one fear is that I remember reading one of the Basketball Prospectus guys--sorry I cannot think of the author or a link at this moment--saying that his research showed most guys who are good high-usage players start high-usage. Even if they play little, they use a lot of possessions while on the court. Dawkins has yet to be a high-usage guy, and guys who start low-usage rarely graduate to that higher level. There are exceptions to this rule, Jon Scheyer being a major one that springs to mind, but I've wondered about it nonetheless in the case of Andre.

[Des Esseintes]

Andre reminds me more of Wayne Ellington than he does of JJ. Neither was as good of a shooter as JJ (who is?), but both were underrated athletically and could probably be the #1 option on a good team if they didn't have guys like Hansbrough, Lawson, Nolan, etc as teammates.

This comparison makes sense. Or, to mention a guy to whom JJ was often compared, Salim Stoudamire. I remember various media types and maybe Lute Olsen grinching that Stoudamire was obviously an equivalent and probably better shooter than JJ, and their evidence was Stoudamire's higher three-point percentage. What got overlooked by that analysis was the types and volume of shots each guy was taking. JJ was a greater part of our offense and was taking more and therefore, on average, harder shots than Stoudamire. JJ and Jimmer Fredette were remarkable for maintaining superlative efficiency at super-high volume. My guess is Andre could do a great Stoudamire/Ellington impersonation, but the one-time leading scorer in NCAA history will remain a cut above him.

[Kedsy]

I'm excited for Dawkins, and I think he'll be excellent this year. My one fear is that I remember reading one of the Basketball Prospectus guys--sorry I cannot think of the author or a link at this moment--saying that his research showed most guys who are good high-usage players start high-usage. Even if they play little, they use a lot of possessions while on the court. Dawkins has yet to be a high-usage guy, and guys who start low-usage rarely graduate to that higher level. There are exceptions to this rule, Jon Scheyer being a major one that springs to mind, but I've wondered about it nonetheless in the case of Andre.

Very interesting. It makes sense to me, because being "the man" is a mindset, and working to get the ball and/or your shot takes a grit that not everybody has. There's a big difference between shooting well when you happen to be open and get the ball, and shooting well when you're "hunting" for your shot. Your teammates are counting on you in a different way, and the defense is keying on you in a different way. Maybe you rush the shot just a teensy bit, and it throws you off. To me, that's what separated JJ from other high-percentage but not necessarily high-volume shooters. That's what I meant when I said Andre hasn't shown JJ's "competitive desire."

[Mcluhan]

3 thoughts on Andre:

1. It's conceivable that we could be successful if Dawkins shot only 3s. It's insane to leave him open, and
he can open up things for Austin and Seth. He also potential as a zone buster.

2. If Andre were to take on a more versatile role within the offense, I agree with those who are suggesting he watch some old tape of Reggie Miller and Rip Hamilton running around picks.

3. Those dunks in China were genuinely bold baseline drives.

[Wander]

Would Andre's percentage stay high if he shot as often as JJ did, with the defenders as close as they were to JJ? I don't know. But based on the evidence we have, I'm not so sure JJ was a better shooter than Andre.

I think you're trying a bit too hard and outsmarting yourself. Andre Dawkins is a nice role player. JJ Redick was one of the best shooters in the history of college basketball - some would argue the best. The difference is so ridiculously large that it can't simply be accounted for with "competitive desire."

(also, Andre has shot 73% and 79% from the free throw line)

[dcar1985]

3 thoughts on Andre:

1. It's conceivable that we could be successful if Dawkins shot only 3s. It's insane to leave him open, and
he can open up things for Austin and Seth. He also potential as a zone buster.

2. If Andre were to take on a more versatile role within the offense, I agree with those who are suggesting he watch some old tape of Reggie Miller and Rip Hamilton running around picks.

3. Those dunks in China were genuinely bold baseline drives.


They both actually came off back-door cuts which is something Andre could definitely take advantage of to vary his game and get to the rim without necessarily having to dribble-drive to the rim...something to this point he hasn't seemed all to comfortable doing

[sagegrouse]

I think you're trying a bit too hard and outsmarting yourself. Andre Dawkins is a nice role player. JJ Redick was one of the best shooters in the history of college basketball - some would argue the best. The difference is so ridiculously large that it can't simply be accounted for with "competitive desire."

(also, Andre has shot 73% and 79% from the free throw line)

The only people that believe in the perfectability of mankind are Catholic priests, recruiting sergeants, and some of the fans on this Board,like me. I believe Andre has the potential to be a star in the ACC and a long-time player in the NBA.

sage

[Bob Green]

3. Those dunks in China were genuinely bold baseline drives.

I desire to see Dawkins work the baseline this year. It is a thing of beauty when he knocks down the corner 3-pointer, but mixing in backdoor cuts and baseline drives would increase the team's firepower.

[CDu]

I think you're trying a bit too hard and outsmarting yourself. Andre Dawkins is a nice role player. JJ Redick was one of the best shooters in the history of college basketball - some would argue the best. The difference is so ridiculously large that it can't simply be accounted for with "competitive desire."

(also, Andre has shot 73% and 79% from the free throw line)

Agreed. I think people are going too far in suggesting that Dawkins has as good a shot/form as Redick. If Redick was able to only shoot set shots (when open), I'm guessing his percentage would be as good or better than Dawkins' percentage. But Redick had to work so hard to get many of his attempts, and took a much wider variety of types of looks.

As you suggest, Redick was a MUCH better free throw shooter than Dawkins. Obviously that's not a complete picture (there are some good free throw shooters who couldn't shoot 3s, and vice versa).

Dawkins is a terrific 3pt shooter. But Redick had such an incredible ability to hit 3s in any situation (anywhere on the floor, set shot or on the move, with the ball or on the catch and shoot, mid-range, at the line, 5 feet beyond the line).

[J4Kop99]

Dawkins is in no way a "role player" (at least by the common definition) but I don't care what his statistics say so far, he is not even close to JJ Redick. Maybe his form looks similar... but that's where the comparisons end.

All he needs to do is put a little more effort into moving without the ball. I don't know if he needs to drive the ball to the hole as much as some of you want but as long as he can keep his defender honest, that will open up space for Curry, Rivers, and maybe most importantly, our bigs. It's not the worst thing to go back door once or twice a game.

-It's not even that JJ took more difficult shots in his Soph. campaign, it's that JJ took almost 200 more shots than Andre did. Then you start to take into account that JJ was the focal part of the offense (which benefits him in touches) but also hurts him because the opposition's game plan is to stop him (or in most cases, slow him down)


So aside from the idea that their shots look quite similar, I think these JJ-Andre comparisons are useless.

[Kedsy]

I think you're trying a bit too hard and outsmarting yourself. Andre Dawkins is a nice role player. JJ Redick was one of the best shooters in the history of college basketball - some would argue the best. The difference is so ridiculously large that it can't simply be accounted for with "competitive desire."

(also, Andre has shot 73% and 79% from the free throw line)

Hard to imagine anybody arguing that JJ Redick was the best shooter in college basketball history, at least if they'd ever heard of Pete Maravich.

Obviously JJ scored a lot more than Andre has, and obviously he was a focal point of both our offense and the opposing defense. He took many more difficult shots and that affects the percentages. There's no doubt he was a much better free throw shooter. He was a superstar, and so far Andre hasn't been close.

My guess, however, is if Andre's usage % and shots taken % was doubled (which would put him approximately at JJ's levels for those percentages), you wouldn't say the difference between them was "ridiculously large." There's no way that's going to happen, though, so we'll never really know.

I stand by my original point, that Andre has all the tools and if he fought for his shot the way JJ did he could be just as good. He doesn't, and he won't, but I still think the potential is there.

[JMarley50]

Dawkins is in no way a "role player" (at least by the common definition) but I don't care what his statistics say so far, he is not even close to JJ Redick. Maybe his form looks similar... but that's where the comparisons end.

All he needs to do is put a little more effort into moving without the ball. I don't know if he needs to drive the ball to the hole as much as some of you want but as long as he can keep his defender honest, that will open up space for Curry, Rivers, and maybe most importantly, our bigs. It's not the worst thing to go back door once or twice a game.

-It's not even that JJ took more difficult shots in his Soph. campaign, it's that JJ took almost 200 more shots than Andre did. Then you start to take into account that JJ was the focal part of the offense (which benefits him in touches) but also hurts him because the opposition's game plan is to stop him (or in most cases, slow him down)

So aside from the idea that their shots look quite similar, I think these JJ-Andre comparisons are useless.

I don't see how anyone could really argue that Dre has been anything more than a role player thus far in his career... With that said I do think he has the ability and will become a great player, but at this point a role player is all he has been. My idea of a traditional role player is someone does one or two things really well, but is limited in other areas. This player usually plays a supporting role to the main cast and for the most part stays out of the limelight so to speak. His role has been clearly defined, stand around on the wing to spread the defense out. If they sag off, be ready to knock down the open shot. He has done a great job of that I might add. But he hasn't been the go to scorer, a defensive stopper, assist leader or a beast on the boards. If he was capable of doing more than just that one role I'm sure K would have found a way to integrate it into the system.

I agree with the JJ comparisons. Once we see Andre knocking shots down with the opposing coaches throwing everything but the kitchen sink at him then maybe we can compare. Til then JJ rules supreme!!

Just to be clear, I do like Dre and I expect to see big things out of him this season. I will be very disappointed if we don't. I would love to remove that role player tag from him, just can't do it yet!

[CDu]

Hard to imagine anybody arguing that JJ Redick was the best shooter in college basketball history, at least if they'd ever heard of Pete Maravich.

I think as far as pure shooters go, one could put the two players in a similar breath. As far as scoring, playmaking, and overall offensive skills go, it's obviously no comparison.


I stand by my original point, that Andre has all the tools and if he fought for his shot the way JJ did he could be just as good. He doesn't, and he won't, but I still think the potential is there.

I don't think you're appreciating how versatile Redick's shooting ability was. I simply don't think that Dawkins has the same tools that Redick has. When both players' feet are set, maybe. And Dawkins is stronger and a better leaper. But Dawkins has never shown the variety of shots that Redick has, nor the ability to score with the ball in his hands that Redick had. Thus, even if he fought for his shot the same way Redick has, I don't think he'd produce the same results.

[Kedsy]

I think as far as pure shooters go, one could put the two players in a similar breath. As far as scoring, playmaking, and overall offensive skills go, it's obviously no comparison.

I read that Dale Brown went back over the shot charts for Maravich's college career and concluded that if the 19'9" line was in place, Maravich would have averaged 13 made three-pointers per game. (To compare, JJ's career high was 9.) If that's true and the three was part of the game when Pistol Pete played, that means he would have averaged something like 57 points a game, almost exclusively on outside shooting, while being double- or triple-teamed most of the time. And he still had a higher shooting percentage than JJ did. Every argument you make for JJ being a better shooter than Andre can be made equally for Pistol Pete being a better shooter than JJ. So I don't think there's a comparison on any front.



I don't think you're appreciating how versatile Redick's shooting ability was. I simply don't think that Dawkins has the same tools that Redick has. When both players' feet are set, maybe. And Dawkins is stronger and a better leaper. But Dawkins has never shown the variety of shots that Redick has, nor the ability to score with the ball in his hands that Redick had. Thus, even if he fought for his shot the same way Redick has, I don't think he'd produce the same results.

I do appreciate JJ's versatility, as well as his talent and greatness. I was at the Meadowlands for the Texas game his senior year and saw him several other times in person plus practically every game on TV. But how much scoring versatility and shot variety had JJ shown through the end of his sophomore season? My recollection is the criticism of JJ going into his junior year was he was nothing but a spot-up shooter. But putting that aside, I freely admit that Andre hasn't shown the variety of shots or ability to score that JJ showed during his upperclass years. I respect that you don't think he could produce the same results under any circumstances, and you very well may be right. I don't think we'll ever know for sure, because Andre will never be used the way JJ was. Is that because the coaches don't think he could do it? Probably, but maybe it's because of the surrounding personnel.

Either way, that game last year against Bradley, Andre looked pretty unstoppable to me. Far as I can see, there's no reason he couldn't play like that most of the time, if the coaches wanted him to and he had the desire.

[CDu]

I read that Dale Brown went back over the shot charts for Maravich's college career and concluded that if the 19'9" line was in place, Maravich would have averaged 13 made three-pointers per game. (To compare, JJ's career high was 9.) If that's true and the three was part of the game when Pistol Pete played, that means he would have averaged something like 57 points a game, almost exclusively on outside shooting, while being double- or triple-teamed most of the time. And he still had a higher shooting percentage than JJ did.

Maravich made 1368 FG in 83 games (16.5 FG/game). Now, I don't have access to all of his game footage, but I'm going to call shenanigans on any analysis that suggests Maravich would have averaged 13 3pt makes per game. Considering how many fast breaks LSU ran and how many drives to the basket Maravich took (just looking at the video highlights), I just don't see Maravich having hit that many 3s. In my opinion, you should chalk that analysis up to hyperbole. I'd believe 7-8 per game, but not 13.

Further, remember that Maravich attempted nearly 40 shots per game from the field, so 7-8 wouldn't be so unreasonable if he took 20 3s per game.


Every argument you make for JJ being a better shooter than Andre can be made equally for Pistol Pete being a better shooter than JJ. So I don't think there's a comparison on any front.

No disagreement there. Maravich was certainly an even more versatile shooter than Redick (with the leaners and crazy bank shots).

That said, I think the Maravich-to-Redick comparison is analagous (though on a MUCH different scale) to the Redick-to-Dawkins comparison. Dawkins just hasn't shown the versatility to be a Redick-like offensive force. He's got the ability, when open, to bury a ton of 3s. But he's never shown the ability to score when the defense was focused on him. Redick had to have that from day 1, and only got better.

That doesn't mean that Dawkins can't be effective. I certainly think he has the potential to be a 15+ ppg guy this year. I just think the discussion/comparison to Redick is unfair to him.


But how much scoring versatility and shot variety had JJ shown through the end of his sophomore season? My recollection is the criticism of JJ going into his junior year was he was nothing but a spot-up shooter.

Those criticisms would be, in my opinion, incorrect. Underclassman Redick certainly wasn't the force he was as a junior and senior. But his ability to hit shots curling off screens was there as a freshman and sophomore. He was far more than a set shooter from day 1. It was his ability to attack off the dribble and his endurance that improved over time.

[Kedsy]

Maravich made 1368 FG in 83 games (16.5 FG/game). Now, I don't have access to all of his game footage, but I'm going to call shenanigans on any analysis that suggests Maravich would have averaged 13 3pt makes per game.

Well, the "analyst" in this case was Dale Brown, and it wouldn't be the first time he's had shenanigans called on him.


That said, I think the Maravich-to-Redick comparison is analagous (though on a MUCH different scale) to the Redick-to-Dawkins comparison.

I agree, although personally I don't think the scale is really all that different.


But he's never shown the ability to score when the defense was focused on him.

The good news is with the firepower we have in our lineup, opposing defenses will rarely if ever be focused on Andre, at least not the way they were on JJ.

[CDu]

The good news is with the firepower we have in our lineup, opposing defenses will rarely if ever be focused on Andre, at least not the way they were on JJ.

Agreed. Which is part of why I could see him potentially averaging 15+ ppg this year. The key to that will be showing up more in ACC play. Hopefully he breaks through this year in that regard.

[jv001]

I wonder if Andre's work effort is anywhere near JJ's? JJ worked really hard on making himself better and not just a one dimensional player. JJ had better ball handling skills and that came from hard work. I think light will come on for Andre and he'll be a very valuable player for Duke this year. GoDuke!

[ChillinDuke]

Does anyone know how to watch the game tonight? It looks like GoDuke will be streaming it but requires subscription.

Any other ways to view the game? If not, I'll subscribe on GoDuke. Really want to watch the team tonight.

Thanks in advance.

- Chillin

[dcar1985]

Does anyone know how to watch the game tonight? It looks like GoDuke will be streaming it but requires subscription.

Any other ways to view the game? If not, I'll subscribe on GoDuke. Really want to watch the team tonight.

Thanks in advance.

- Chillin

Yea that's likely going to be your only option....10 bucks for 2 games though aint bad at all

[ChillinDuke]

Yea that's likely going to be your only option....10 bucks for 2 games though aint bad at all

Thanks, dcar.

I'll grab the ole plastic card.

- Chillin

[Newton_14]

Hallelujah! The new basketball season is here. We have our deepest team in 14 years and it should be great ride. And what better way to celebrate the week of our first North American exhibition game of 2011-12 than to dive headfirst into our first Phase report of the season?

Phase 0 consists of our two exhibition games, against Bellarmine and Shaw, both Division II teams. Despite the fact that Bellarmine is the defending Division II national champion, and current #1 team, we shouldn't’t be focusing on wins or losses, or really even the score. True, it would be a warning sign if a Division II team can keep the game close, but it didn't’t hurt Syracuse a couple years ago, when they lost to LeMoyne and still ended up as a number one seed in the NCAA tournament.

By the way, here’s a fun fact: this is the third straight year in which Duke plays the defending Division II champion – Bellarmine in 2011, Cal-Poly Pomona in 2010, and Findlay in 2009.

Still, while we probably won’t see how the team reacts under pressure, or how we will play against highly talented teams, there are plenty of things we can watch for. Here are a few things that will hold my attention:

(1) Health

This is always the #1 concern in any Phase report. Sure, we have lots of depth, but it would be nice to get through the Phase without a major injury.

(2) Team Defense

Here’s a funny little coincidence: since Pomeroy’s been archiving his statistics, Duke has had a top ten defense 6 of 9 years. The exceptions: #15 in 2003; #13 in 2006; #20 in 2009. In other words, every three years, and if the pattern holds true we could have an issue on our hands. To support the idea of worrying, we lost our top two individual defenders from last season, and on our current roster, the only player who could fairly be described as an outstanding individual defender would be Tyler Thornton, who probably won’t see more than 10 or 15 minutes a game.

There’s a difference between having outstanding individual defenders and having an outstanding team defense, however. And I believe Duke has a good chance of having strong team defense in 2011-12. For one thing, we have four juniors and a senior among our top six players. The key to Duke defense is rotating properly and we have guys who have experience enough to have learned it. Another plus is our starting backcourt players, Seth Curry and Austin Rivers, both have very quick hands, which should make opposing ballhandlers wary. Seth and Austin have yet to prove they can always stay in front of their man, but we have at least two very adept shotblockers on the back line (Ryan and Mason both ranked in the top 150 in the nation in Block %) to make up for any lapses on the perimeter. Throw in that Andre Dawkins has improved his defense every year he’s been here, and I like our chances.

We should be able to defensively dominate our Division II opponents during this Phase. Here’s hoping we do.

(3) Bottom of our Rotation?

Our top six players seem fairly well entrenched: Seth Curry, Austin Rivers, Andre Dawkins, Miles Plumlee, Mason Plumlee, and Ryan Kelly. The question that’s difficult to answer at this point is who will emerge as the next two or three players in the rotation? There are a lot of unanswered questions about every one of our non-big-six.

There’s been a lot of insider buzz about Alex Murphy, to the point where people are saying he may compete for a starting spot, but he’s a freshman who didn’t really shine in China/Dubai or at Blue/White. Quinn Cook looked good at Blue/White, but is a freshman coming off a major injury. Tyler Thornton is a plus backcourt defender, but is probably not yet ready to play a big role on offense. Josh Hairston has a year under his belt and seemingly unlimited energy, but looks to probably be relegated as the fourth big playing spot minutes. Michael Gbinije has hops and skill, but so far at least the staff has treated him as if he’s the 10th or 11th man. Marshall Plumlee appears to be at least a year away from meaningful contribution.

In our two exhibition games, everybody’s going to play. Our least accomplished player would probably be a superstar on either of our Division II opponents. And I suspect every one of our guys will bring big things to Duke at some point over the next few years. But who of our freshmen and sophomores are ready to step up? Who’ll look smooth and comfortable? Who’s ready to contribute right now? We won’t know the answers to these for awhile, but I suspect we’ll start to see the early favorites over the next week.

For what it’s worth, I’ll predict that the 7 through 9 guys in our rotation turn out to be Alex, Tyler, and Quinn.

(4) Austin Rivers

Austin was ranked the #2 high school senior in the country in the RSCI. He clearly has a ton of talent. But from what we’ve seen so far, he also comes with some red flags. In China/Dubai and again at Blue/White, Austin turned the ball over way too much, didn’t always hustle back on defense, and sometimes reacted poorly to bad calls and bad plays on his own part (turnovers or missed shots). All of these things should improve with maturity, but how fast will he grow up? That question is a big key to Duke’s season. If Austin is one of the top guards in the country, Duke is a top five team. If he’s another freshman going through obvious growing pains, we may struggle a bit.

How much improvement in this area will we see in him? If the improvement is noticeable from two weeks ago to now, then maybe we can expect a quicker path to maturity. If it has gotten no better, then maybe we’ll have to start worrying. Personally, I’m looking for a trajectory similar to Harrison Barnes last year, which would bode well for our NCAA tournament chances, but may make us gnash our teeth for the next couple months.

(5) Big Man Offense

Coach K has been talking up our big men, saying they’ll play a much larger role in the offense. I’m not sold yet, however. Both Austin and Seth will probably be best in high-usage roles, and Andre needs to assert himself as well. When’s the ball going inside?

The good news is we did see some advancement in this area in the China/Dubai games, especially with Ryan Kelly. I think we could advance even further, but it remains to be seen if we will. Not only do the perimeter players have to share the ball, but the interior players need to get into proper position and demand it. And that’s not something they’re used to.

Bellarmine’s tallest player is 6’8”. Shaw has one guy at 6’9”. Based on height alone we’ll have a huge advantage inside, and all our big guys should be able to score. But what I’ll be looking for is how often are the guards looking inside and how confident and comfortable are the big guys at asking for the ball.

(6) Andre Dawkins

Andre is by far the biggest unknown among our returning players. Not surprisingly, he is also the player on whom DBR poster opinions vary the most. Some view him as one of the team’s top scorers and minute-getters, while others think he’s the most susceptible to lose minutes to Alex Murphy, Quinn Cook, or even Mike Gbinije. On the one hand, Andre has a beautiful shot, great hops, and a strong upper body. He has more physical tools and at least as good form on his jumper as JJ Redick. On the other hand, he has in the past tended to disappear for long stretches, played inconsistent defense, and sometimes just stood around on offense.

So which is it? Is Andre a nascent star or simply unfulfilled potential? It will still be hard to say after these exhibition games. If he plays great, we still won’t know the answer with any confidence. But if he plays poorly, it will be a bad sign.

(7) Lack of Traditional Point Guard

A lot of digital ink has been spent discussing the fact that Duke won’t have a traditional point guard in its starting lineup. Seth Curry is closer to Jon Scheyer than Kyrie Irving. Austin Rivers is a scoring guard. Just this week, Jeff Goodman publicly wondered whether Seth will be able to “transition” into the PG role. Some DBR posters have gone so far as to say Quinn Cook needs to start (or play a major role) because he’s our only “true” PG.

Will this be a problem? Will Quinn have to be thrust into a prominent role? I don’t think so. Yes, Austin has to get his turnovers under control, but Seth is actually pretty good about taking care of the ball (top 180 nationally last year according to Pomeroy, and seemingly improved this year). Will it even matter? Austin is used to starting half-court sets with the ball in his hands. Seth seems comfortable with the ball as well. Assuming they’re both capable of finding Andre spotting up and the big men down low, do we really need an ankle-breaking PG who can break down multiple defenders before whipping an unbelievable assist for an easy bucket?

My answer is, sure it would help, but I don’t think it’s necessary. Between Austin, Seth, and Andre we have so much potential offense (especially outside shooting) that if the perimeter guys can merely make the easy pass when double-teamed we should be OK.

Still, the exhibition games should be a good opportunity to see how smoothly the offense runs with Seth and Austin in the backcourt. If we bog down in the half-court against Division II competition, then I may have to revisit this in my own mind.

(8) Leadership, Chemistry, and Communication

Miles Plumlee and Ryan Kelly are our captains. Austin Rivers is our most talented player. Seth Curry is our point guard. No one on the team is an experienced leader. Will someone emerge in this regard during the exhibition games? Maybe, maybe not. It’s an interesting thing to look for, but I won’t be worried if we can’t tell yet.

On-court communication is critical for any Duke team’s success, especially on defense. Our current players don’t have much of a history of being vocal, but again I’m not concerned. Having four juniors and a senior among your top six players means they’ve had plenty of time learning the value of communication and no doubt will embrace it.

Finally, the all-elusive “chemistry.” Specifically, there’s been a fair amount of chatter that Austin Rivers may disrupt Duke’s chemistry this year. Obviously there’s no way to know at this point if it will become an issue, and unless the games are unexpectedly close there will still be no way to tell during Phase 0. But my own personal opinion is I’ll be shocked if this becomes a real story. Austin wants to win as much as anybody on the team. He seems to respect the coaches and expresses a desire to learn. Beyond that, I can’t imagine Coach K allowing any player to disrupt team chemistry the way some people are suggesting. Nothing to see here, folks.

(9) Let’s Go Duke

Can’t wait for the season to start. GTHC.

Great write up Kedsy. Thanks for kicking the season off with the Phase threads. I cheated and waited until after the first exhibition game before posting. The game actually changed my views on a couple of the categories.

(2) Team Defense

Much work to do here, especially with the wings. In the first half especially, the rotations were pretty poor and Bellarmine took full advantage. They had numerous open looks with ball reversals and swing passes. Several of the new guys looked lost at times on where to be. There was improvement in the 2nd half and I am interested in seeing how well the team defense looks on Wednesday. The bigs were not as aggressive in seeking blocked shots as I would have like either. We need to use the size, length, and athletic ability on the frontline to disrupt shot attempts in the lane, and block shots. On ball defense was pretty good. Seth and Tyler applied good ball pressure and I liked Quinn's ball pressure as well. We also showed a passive full-court press with Andre at the point of the press a couple of times which was interesting. I was hoping we would run that a couple of times with Gbinije at the point of attack as well, but we didn't. I think Andre, Alex, or Mike could play that role well actually. I hope we see more of that moving forward.

(3) Bottom of our Rotation?
It was just one exhibition game, and we won't know the answer to this one for awhile. It looks like Tyler is definitely going to be in the rotation, and it may not be at the bottom either. Given K's comments, Tyler will play a lot, the question is at the expense of who? If the wings continue to struggle, I think we are going to see the 3 Guard lineup quite a bit. A trade-off of speed and quickness for size, but it does keep 2 lethal shooters on the wings in Seth and Austin when we go to that look. Other than Tyler, it seems Alex, and Quinn will have a say in the bottom of the rotation as well. Josh will get more minutes than last year, but he is solidly behind the 3 upperclassmen bigs. As of now, I feel Josh will be the 9th player in the rotation. Gbinije and MP3 appear to be 10 and 11.

(4) Austin Rivers
I am solidly in the camp of Austin not being some kind of problem child with team chemistry. Just don't see it. He is progressing well, and making quicker, better decisions on offense. Needs to continue working on reducing turnovers, but that will come with time, as he adapts and gets more comfortable. Defense is still a work in progress, but he is improving there as well. The main thing is rotating properly, and knowing where to be on the court. Has to transition from offense to defense mentally much faster, especially
after made baskets. Another area that should improve with time and experience. By mid-season, I think Austin will come into his own and be very hard to deal with.

(6) Andre Dawkins
I keep reminding myself it is only the CTC and one exhibition, but I am worried here. Andre played really well down the stretch last year when he came out of the mid-season funk, had a great summer, and carried that into the 4 China games. Now, he seems to have regressed which is mind-boggling. Maybe the competition from Murphy rattled him or something, but I hope he snaps out it quickly. I still feel we need Andre to rise up and be an All-ACC caliber player to be the best team we can possibly be. Lots of talent there. I believe he will bounce back, but it better be soon or Tyler and Quinn will be taking those minutes.

(5) Big Man Offense
So far so good. There was a noticeable effort to get the bigs the ball within the offense and set them up with opportunities to score. Good to see and hopefully it will continue. That will only make the perimeter guy's lives easier, especially the shooters. K also noted in the post-game Saturday that once we get in the bonus, he wants the ball going inside for score and foul-drawing opportunities. This, like the other categories will be a key item to watch going forward.

[Kedsy]

If the wings continue to struggle, I think we are going to see the 3 Guard lineup quite a bit. A trade-off of speed and quickness for size, but it does keep 2 lethal shooters on the wings in Seth and Austin when we go to that look.


I keep reminding myself it is only the CTC and one exhibition, but I am worried here. Andre played really well down the stretch last year when he came out of the mid-season funk, had a great summer, and carried that into the 4 China games. Now, he seems to have regressed which is mind-boggling. Maybe the competition from Murphy rattled him or something, but I hope he snaps out it quickly. I still feel we need Andre to rise up and be an All-ACC caliber player to be the best team we can possibly be. Lots of talent there. I believe he will bounce back, but it better be soon or Tyler and Quinn will be taking those minutes.

I hate to admit it after I pumped Andre up so much earlier in this thread, but I'm a little worried too. Personally, I think we need Andre in a prominent role to be the best team we can be. I was playing ball this evening, and the other team had this one guy who hit all his outside shots and they were setting picks for him and doing everything they could to get him free. My team had a bunch of shooters, and when we moved the ball well to get an open look we dominated, but if we didn't we bogged down and shot worse than we should have. And it hit me that you can play the way Duke played in the JJ years and it can work. Or you can spread things out among several shooters and it can work. But if you have shooters who don't get the ball when and where they should, they don't shoot so well.

If our three perimeter guys are Tyler, Seth, and Austin, we're going to struggle to get decent three-point looks. Austin seems to take most of his threes when he starts with the ball. He doesn't really look to get open for a catch-and-shoot. Seth can work for his shot, but neither Tyler nor Austin are great bets to get him the ball when and where he wants it. Tyler doesn't look to shoot all that much. Looking at it that way, it's no huge wonder we didn't shoot so well from 3-point range against Bellarmine.

If Andre is working to get into a catch-and-shoot position, everything opens up for all the perimeter guys. If Austin doesn't have a great look he has someone to dish to. If Seth is the PG, it gives him two perimeter options in addition to himself. Everybody's shots will be easier/better shots. We'll make more of them. And once that happens, it's even easier for the inside guys because our opponent will be paying so much attention to the outside shooters.

I understand the appeal of Tyler's defense, and if Quinn is the PG the dynamic is completely different, because he can feed Seth and even Austin in places where they are likely to succeed (seemingly better than Tyler can). But I think we also need to be able to use the Seth/Austin/Andre trio for much of the game to rise to our potential as a team. Hopefully, Andre will look better in the Shaw game.


As of now, I feel Josh will be the 9th player in the rotation. Gbinije and MP3 appear to be 10 and 11.

I think your math is off. We have 12 recruited scholarship players, so MP3 is 12 and Mike is probably 11. If Andre, Tyler, Alex, and Quinn are all in the rotation, they're 6, 7, 8, and 9. So Josh would be 10, unless he passes Andre, Tyler, Alex, or Quinn.

[dcar1985]

Great write up Kedsy. Thanks for kicking the season off with the Phase threads. I cheated and waited until after the first exhibition game before posting. The game actually changed my views on a couple of the categories.

(2) Team Defense

Much work to do here, especially with the wings. In the first half especially, the rotations were pretty poor and Bellarmine took full advantage. They had numerous open looks with ball reversals and swing passes. Several of the new guys looked lost at times on where to be. There was improvement in the 2nd half and I am interested in seeing how well the team defense looks on Wednesday. The bigs were not as aggressive in seeking blocked shots as I would have like either. We need to use the size, length, and athletic ability on the frontline to disrupt shot attempts in the lane, and block shots. On ball defense was pretty good. Seth and Tyler applied good ball pressure and I liked Quinn's ball pressure as well. We also showed a passive full-court press with Andre at the point of the press a couple of times which was interesting. I was hoping we would run that a couple of times with Gbinije at the point of attack as well, but we didn't. I think Andre, Alex, or Mike could play that role well actually. I hope we see more of that moving forward.

(3) Bottom of our Rotation?
It was just one exhibition game, and we won't know the answer to this one for awhile. It looks like Tyler is definitely going to be in the rotation, and it may not be at the bottom either. Given K's comments, Tyler will play a lot, the question is at the expense of who? If the wings continue to struggle, I think we are going to see the 3 Guard lineup quite a bit. A trade-off of speed and quickness for size, but it does keep 2 lethal shooters on the wings in Seth and Austin when we go to that look. Other than Tyler, it seems Alex, and Quinn will have a say in the bottom of the rotation as well. Josh will get more minutes than last year, but he is solidly behind the 3 upperclassmen bigs. As of now, I feel Josh will be the 9th player in the rotation. Gbinije and MP3 appear to be 10 and 11.

(4) Austin Rivers
I am solidly in the camp of Austin not being some kind of problem child with team chemistry. Just don't see it. He is progressing well, and making quicker, better decisions on offense. Needs to continue working on reducing turnovers, but that will come with time, as he adapts and gets more comfortable. Defense is still a work in progress, but he is improving there as well. The main thing is rotating properly, and knowing where to be on the court. Has to transition from offense to defense mentally much faster, especially
after made baskets. Another area that should improve with time and experience. By mid-season, I think Austin will come into his own and be very hard to deal with.

(6) Andre Dawkins
I keep reminding myself it is only the CTC and one exhibition, but I am worried here. Andre played really well down the stretch last year when he came out of the mid-season funk, had a great summer, and carried that into the 4 China games. Now, he seems to have regressed which is mind-boggling. Maybe the competition from Murphy rattled him or something, but I hope he snaps out it quickly. I still feel we need Andre to rise up and be an All-ACC caliber player to be the best team we can possibly be. Lots of talent there. I believe he will bounce back, but it better be soon or Tyler and Quinn will be taking those minutes.

(5) Big Man Offense
So far so good. There was a noticeable effort to get the bigs the ball within the offense and set them up with opportunities to score. Good to see and hopefully it will continue. That will only make the perimeter guy's lives easier, especially the shooters. K also noted in the post-game Saturday that once we get in the bonus, he wants the ball going inside for score and foul-drawing opportunities. This, like the other categories will be a key item to watch going forward.

I know its just been the one exhibition but I dont agree w/ Alex being 6 or 7 in the rotation, I get that practice is a big part of deciding who gets on the court but you also have to perform during the games....Alex looked pretty lost out there on both sides of the ball, I thought Mike played decent in his limited minutes besides missing that one layup. I dont remember any big lapses on D....I for one believe if Dre continues to struggle as the season start, Mike will be the one that takes those minutes as he becomes more comfortable w/ the system and the team in general.

[CDu]

Great to see the Phase posts come back.

One nitpick: I think the health thing can move off the list. It was very relevant in the 2010 season when Jumbo started these posts because we only had 3 scholarship guards and 4 guard/wings on the roster. An injury (even a minor one) to any of those four perimeter guys would have been devastating. In 2011, it became relevant because of Irving's toe. So I think people have just gotten in a groove in saying it is issue #1. But this season we may be as deep as we've ever been. Obviously health is important, and losing key players would be bad. But I think everyone's aware of that, so maybe we can move on from even mentioning it? And if we mention it, maybe given the depth that we have it's not concern #1 this year?

As for the rest, I'd say this:

1. Leadership and new roles/identity: I'd say this might be the biggest key to the season. Everybody is taking on a new role. It looks like Curry is the leader after one exhibition and being named the third captain. Will he continue to play at a high level and provide that leadership? And who among the rest of the guys taking on new roles will step up and be a consistent producer and leader for this team? Will it be Kelly? A Plumlee or two? Dawkins? What will the team's identity be early in the season?

2. Rivers: I think Kedsy summed it up perfectly in his initial post.

3. Development of the Plumlees: will we see better defensive discipline from them? Will Miles shake the foul problems like Mason seemed to do last year? Will either show an expanded skill set offensively this year? Will they be able to hit free throws at even a tolerable %?

4. The "fifth starter": I think we'll see two bigs, Curry, and Rivers start every game (barring injury of course). The question is who is going to join them. Going into the year, I'd have said with nearly 100% certainty that Dawkins would be the starter and primary player at the 3. After one exhibition game, that's in question. Will Dawkins step up? Will we go small a lot more with Thornton or Cook joining Rivers and Curry? Will Murphy or Gbinije take advantage of the uncertainty and grab the minutes? We probably don't need the 3 spot to be a star, but the spot still needs to be productive. And against Bellarmine, Murphy, Dawkins, and Gbinije weren't productive.

5. Can Kelly be a consistent scorer? He's shown a very good mid range game and the occasional ability to hit from 3 or score in the post. At times, he can't miss. But he also disappeared at times last year. Can he step up and regularly give us double-digit scoring nights?

6. Defense: We lost our best perimeter defender (Smith) and our most versatile defender (Singler). That was following a year in which we lost our best post defender (Thomas) and a tree of a rebounding presence (Zoubek), as well as one of our most savvy defenders (Scheyer). I'm not sure we have any elite individual defenders on this team. Thornton might be our best perimeter defender, but I don't think he's a great on-ball defender (he's a fantastic off-ball defender, though). Our bigs can challenge shots, but they frequently get caught out of position and they aren't the quickest bunch. And we may very well be small on the perimeter - especially if our options at the 3 can't stay on the floor. So because we don't have elite lock-down defenders, we're going to need to do it as a team. Hopefully we'll see that team defensive identity develop.

7. Getting everyone involved: we likely won't have a traditional PG in the starting lineup (I'm assuming that Curry and Cook - both very small - won't share the court a ton of the time). Curry and Rivers are both very capable of creating their own shots. In very limited time, Cook has looked capable of creating, too. Kelly has started to show some ability to create his own shot, but that's a work in progress. Dawkins and Kelly are both very capable catch-and-shoot players. But the Plumlees and others aren't likely to generate their own offense. It will be important to see how good a job the guards do of creating offense for others.

I'm just glad it's time to talk serious basketball again!

[ACCBBallFan]

I am not sure the lack of production from the SF's is enitrely due to the players.

it could be that with Duke looking to establish the bigs and also having Austin and Seth able to get shots when they want, SF just becomes the 5th option.

The frosh sem content with that, but need to take the drive when it is there, especially Alex. Dre will pull the trigger when his shot is there too.

The team did better when Dre was on the floor, +10 verus Mike +3 and Alex -5, but Dre was only +2 until the final couple of minutes.

Alex is still the wild card. Coach K started him either to send a message to Dre or because Alex has been getting ti done in practice.

I have a sneaky suspeicion that Dre is slightly injured since he did not partake inthe dunk contest he had won the prior two years. It is not enough to make him sit out, but enough that he may not be going full throttle. His defense looked better.

[dcar1985]

I have a sneaky suspeicion that Dre is slightly injured since he did not partake inthe dunk contest he had won the prior two years. It is not enough to make him sit out, but enough that he may not be going full throttle. His defense looked better.

Not really buying the Dre being injured thing....if he was K likely would have held him out of the blue-white game or exhibition since they don't really count for anything/ Haven't heard about Andre missing any practices either, Seth sat out at least 1 practice last week for a small ankle injury that didn't seem to bother him during the exhibition. The fact that he didn't compete in the slam dunk contest doesn't say much...its all for fun I seriously doubt he was concerned about defending his slam dunk title.

Maybe he's hiding an injury for some odd reason?!? Whatever it is physical or psychological, Dre needs to get it together sooner than later.

[Newton_14]

I think your math is off. We have 12 recruited scholarship players, so MP3 is 12 and Mike is probably 11. If Andre, Tyler, Alex, and Quinn are all in the rotation, they're 6, 7, 8, and 9. So Josh would be 10, unless he passes Andre, Tyler, Alex, or Quinn.

Yeah, my math was off. Had 11 on the brain for some reason. Agree that as of right now MP3 is 12, Josh, Mike are in the battle for 10/11.


I know its just been the one exhibition but I dont agree w/ Alex being 6 or 7 in the rotation, I get that practice is a big part of deciding who gets on the court but you also have to perform during the games....Alex looked pretty lost out there on both sides of the ball, I thought Mike played decent in his limited minutes besides missing that one layup. I dont remember any big lapses on D....I for one believe if Dre continues to struggle as the season start, Mike will be the one that takes those minutes as he becomes more comfortable w/ the system and the team in general.

I agree 100% with your assessment of Murphy in the games so far. I was basing it mainly on the reports from practices and the fact that K started him Saturday night. Maybe it's nerves and he will improve as he gets more comfortable in games. Has to be able to carry the good play from practice to the games or you are right and Murph want be that high in the rotation. Disagree on Mike though. So far he has been very tentative out there. One example of that is a play from Saturday. Bellarmine had a break away layup but it was clear Mike was going to catch the guy. I actually came up out of my seat because I thought Mike was getting ready to sky and try for the spectacular block attempt. Instead he actually slowed and went up very tentatively trying like heck not to foul. Would love to see him get aggressive in a moment like that, and more aggressive overall. He could have blocked that shot easily with his athletic ability and hops.

I really hope 1 or 2 of the 3 true wings will get it together and force K to play them often. We really need 1 of them to start and be counted on night after night. I am pulling hard for that starter to be Andre, and one of the other two play well enough to stick in the rotation. We need their size, and we need Andre's scoring.

[FellowTraveler]

Some thoughts on this year’s team; please forgive the length, but I wanted to get some things down on pixels before the season starts for personal accountability if nothing else. Disclaimer: This might seem like I have a more negative outlook than I actually do. Lots of talented, hard-working players on this team, and there’s the potential for it to come together very, very well. But “everyone is very good and Coach K will figure out how to maximize their abilities” isn’t, to me, a particularly satisfying attempt to think through the situation, so it isn’t the approach I’ve taken here. (FWIW, I didn’t see the first exhibition game and some of this was written before it occurred.)

My primary concern with this year’s team is that the only guys who have established a willingness to aggressively seek their shots (Curry, Rivers) are the guys who will already have the ball in their hands much of the time -- and that neither has demonstrated exceptional ability to create shots for teammates. I worry about what that means for the others, particularly the Plumlees and Dawkins, and fear that they won’t get quality touches and won’t develop to their full potential as a result -- and nor will the offense.

Yes, it’s true, Jon Scheyer reminded those who had forgotten that you don’t need a penetrating, shot-creating PG to win. But Scheyer was playing with Nolan Smith and Kyle Singler -- two guys who were not shy about doing whatever they needed to do to get their own shots. They didn’t need a Kyrie Irving to set them up. That isn’t true of every team. (In general, I reject analysis that simply assumes you need X in order to win, or that Y is not necessary. Teams differ, as do their needs.)

Will Dawkins and the Plumlees and Kelly consistently and aggressively demand the ball and seek their own shots? To the extent that I have concerns about Curry’s ability to play point, it isn’t because I think teams need point guards who break defenses down and create shots in order to succeed. It’s because I’m concerned that this team might need that. But maybe it won’t: It’s early. Dawkins, the Plumlees & Kelly might prove themselves more than capable of getting themselves open and getting themselves shots. (And/or Curry/Rivers/Thornton might prove themselves gifted distributors.)

I think Dawkins is capable of it, and as I’ve said before, I think criticism of him just standing around waiting for someone to throw him the ball for his first two seasons is unfair, as one has to assume that if he was not following K’s instructions, he wouldn’t have been on the floor. So I don’t criticize Dawkins’ past performance -- but the fact remains that we haven’t seen evidence that he’ll play differently going forward.

Good things happen when Mason Plumlee gets the ball. I occasionally see people complain about Mason taking long jumpers, or awkward runners, or not going up forcefully, or trying to dunk too forcefully, but: The guy shot 59 percent from the floor last year. With results like that, it’s hard to say he takes bad shots, or takes them badly. He’s also an excellent and intuitive passer. More than anyone else, even Dawkins, I think the key to Plumlee’s development is that he consistently get the ball. Duke would do well to run their offense through him several times a game by getting him the ball early in the shot clock and letting him create. I’m convinced he’d develop into the player everyone thinks he can be (and that he won’t develop into it otherwise.) And it would add a different look to Duke’s offense, which will be essential on days when Curry & Rivers can’t get good looks for themselves or others -- and those days will come.

(I may have said this late last year, but I get the sense Mason & Dawkins have an intuitive feel for each other’s game, and could be quite effective running the pick & roll. I’d really like to see significant overlap in their PT.)

We pretty much know what Miles Plumlee’s game will be: Rebounds, screens, buckets from 10 feet or closer. We just don’t know how much of it there will be. His ceiling seems lower than Mason’s or Andre’s, but his floor also seems higher.

Of the four, I’m most confident in Ryan Kelly’s ability and willingness to seek his own shots. His midrange game and his passing ability -- even as a freshman, I thought he threw the best entry passes to the post of any Duke player -- should be important offensive weapons. That said, I’d like to see Kelly shoot fewer threes: He hasn’t shown that he’s good at it, and with Andre Dawkins, Seth Curry and Austin Rivers on the team, there’s no reason for someone who makes 32 percent of his threes and 63 percent of his two-pointers to take nearly 40 percent of his shots from outside the arc. Finally, I’ve seen the occasional suggestion since China that Kelly could have a good enough year to leave early for the NBA. Just for the record: I like Kelly’s game, but I’m quite confident this will not happen.

Seth Curry seems like a solid bet to have a good to very good year. He’ll shoot well, probably won’t turn the ball over much, make smart passes, play solid/sneaky defense. I don’t have much concern that he won’t be good; I think he could be second team all-ACC good. (First team would pleasantly surprise, but not shock, me.) I do have some concern his skill set isn’t what his teammates need in a point guard.

Austin Rivers … let’s just say that if Austin Rivers is the player everyone hopes he is, that will mitigate some of my concern about the offense. Maybe he’ll score a ton of points, hand out assists, and generally wreack havoc on defenses, leading to easy scoring opportunities for his teammates.

Tyler Thornton … I think Thornton plays good but not exceptional defense. He’s aggressive and hard-nosed and in time he probably will be exceptional … but not yet. Like Curry, he’s sneaky-good at coming up with steals, and he’ll take a charge. Offensively, he needs improvement. In China -- or was it Dubai -- just getting the ball past half court seemed to be a challenge. He isn’t much of a scorer. Nor will he won’t break down defenses to create good shots for teammates.

So, my fear for this team is that Seth and Austin generally prove capable of getting shots for themselves, though not so capable that they can’t be contained by skilled, athletic defenders. And that while both are willing passers, neither is particularly gifted at creating good shots for teammates. But they will dominate the ball so much that the Plumlees, Dawkins and Kelly won’t develop as much as they might if they consistently get quality touches, including having plays run for them. As a result, when Curry & Rivers do get shut down (or are just off) the entire offense will sputter.

To avoid that fate, I’d like to see, in rough order of preference (though they aren’t mutually exclusive):

1) An approach that discourages Curry & Rivers from dominating the ball for 30 seconds per possession.

2) A real effort to make Mason Plumlee a focal point of the offense, as a playmaker, not just the recipient of the occasional lob pass or awkward hand-off after a screen. Obviously he shouldn’t be the primary ball-handler, but a significant one.

3) A commitment to running actual plays for Dawkins, Kelly & the Plumlees, on a regular basis.

4) Quinn Cook.

I’ve gone on way too long, so quickly:

Defense: I don’t see a truly exceptional defender on this team (though a few have potential to become so before leaving Duke.) I hesitate to even call any “very good.” Nevertheless, I think this can be a strong defensive team; it’s just going to be a matter of figuring out how.

Overall: Despite concerns about the structure of the offense, I expect this team to be among the 8-10 best in the country by season’s end, and to win between one and four games in the tournament.

[Newton_14]

To avoid that fate, I’d like to see, in rough order of preference (though they aren’t mutually exclusive):

1) An approach that discourages Curry & Rivers from dominating the ball for 30 seconds per possession.

2) A real effort to make Mason Plumlee a focal point of the offense, as a playmaker, not just the recipient of the occasional lob pass or awkward hand-off after a screen. Obviously he shouldn’t be the primary ball-handler, but a significant one.

3) A commitment to running actual plays for Dawkins, Kelly & the Plumlees, on a regular basis.

4) Quinn Cook.

I’ve gone on way too long, so quickly:

Defense: I don’t see a truly exceptional defender on this team (though a few have potential to become so before leaving Duke.) I hesitate to even call any “very good.” Nevertheless, I think this can be a strong defensive team; it’s just going to be a matter of figuring out how.

Overall: Despite concerns about the structure of the offense, I expect this team to be among the 8-10 best in the country by season’s end, and to win between one and four games in the tournament.

Good writeup FT, thanks for sharing your thoughts...

I agree with a lot of your ideas on offensive approach and the comments about Mason and Andre especially. I think you may be short selling Miles a bit. He was in double figures in all of the China trip games, the CTC, and Bellmarine. I think he can maintain that if given the opportunity. Feed the post has to be a theme for this team as like you allude to, it will take pressure off of Austin and Seth. The entire perimeter guys really.

That said, I am far less concerned about the offense, than I am about the defense. I believe this team will score points, and the scoring will be more spread out than it has in several years. When it bogs down, Austin has the ability to get to the rim and either score or draw fouls. If he can also learn to draw and dish it will make him even more dangerous.

Defense though, is my main concern as of right now. The guys have to figure out the rotations and learn where to be on the floor. Communication will be more important this year than in years past. The veterans are going to have to communicate early, often, and loudly with the young guys on defense.

[dcar1985]

Yes, it’s true, Jon Scheyer reminded those who had forgotten that you don’t need a penetrating, shot-creating PG to win. But Scheyer was playing with Nolan Smith and Kyle Singler -- two guys who were not shy about doing whatever they needed to do to get their own shots. They didn’t need a Kyrie Irving to set them up. That isn’t true of every team. (In general, I reject analysis that simply assumes you need X in order to win, or that Y is not necessary. Teams differ, as do their needs.)


Yea Kyle had proven himself but coming into the 2010 season Nolan was not a proven scorer....He only averaged 8.4 points as a sophomore

[loldevilz]

Good writeup FT, thanks for sharing your thoughts...

I agree with a lot of your ideas on offensive approach and the comments about Mason and Andre especially. I think you may be short selling Miles a bit. He was in double figures in all of the China trip games, the CTC, and Bellmarine. I think he can maintain that if given the opportunity. Feed the post has to be a theme for this team as like you allude to, it will take pressure off of Austin and Seth. The entire perimeter guys really.

That said, I am far less concerned about the offense, than I am about the defense. I believe this team will score points, and the scoring will be more spread out than it has in several years. When it bogs down, Austin has the ability to get to the rim and either score or draw fouls. If he can also learn to draw and dish it will make him even more dangerous.

Defense though, is my main concern as of right now. The guys have to figure out the rotations and learn where to be on the floor. Communication will be more important this year than in years past. The veterans are going to have to communicate early, often, and loudly with the young guys on defense.

Though Duke may struggle with some parts of defense, I think defensive rebounding and rebounding in general can be a strength. Duke outrebounded Bellarmine 43-24. Obviously Bellarmine is really small, but if that strength continues Duke shouldn't lose too many games.

The main problem is that Duke needs a lockdown defender or two who can come in and bolster the defense and not ruin the offense. Thornton, Gbinije, Hairston all can potentially do this.

[sagegrouse]

To avoid that fate, I’d like to see, in rough order of preference (though they aren’t mutually exclusive):

1) An approach that discourages Curry & Rivers from dominating the ball for 30 seconds per possession.

2) A real effort to make Mason Plumlee a focal point of the offense, as a playmaker, not just the recipient of the occasional lob pass or awkward hand-off after a screen. Obviously he shouldn’t be the primary ball-handler, but a significant one.

3) A commitment to running actual plays for Dawkins, Kelly & the Plumlees, on a regular basis.



I suspect K may adopt the approach that Bones McKinney took at Wake Forest 50 years ago. When addressing his guards, including Billy Packer: "This here's my man Len Chappell [two-time 1st team A-A center-forward]. If you don't get him the ball, you're gonna be sitting next to me on the bench."

I think K will insist that the guards get the ball to Kelly and the Plumlees. Then we'll get to see what they do with it.

sagegrouse

[Kedsy]

The main problem is that Duke needs a lockdown defender or two who can come in and bolster the defense and not ruin the offense. Thornton, Gbinije, Hairston all can potentially do this.

"Potential" is a big word, but none of those three players have so far shown that they can be "lockdown defenders." At least not at this stage in their development, maybe in a year or two. And none of the three have shown themselves to be especially competent on offense yet, either. Josh seems to have some offense, but to my eye is not very developed defensively at this point. Tyler, while not in my opinion a lockdown defender, is the furthest advanced of the three in that category, but has a long way to go on offense. Mike seems to be a very unfinished product right now. So my personal opinion is that none of your three candidates has a high probability of becoming the player you say we need.

[Newton_14]

Though Duke may struggle with some parts of defense, I think defensive rebounding and rebounding in general can be a strength. Duke outrebounded Bellarmine 43-24. Obviously Bellarmine is really small, but if that strength continues Duke shouldn't lose too many games.

The main problem is that Duke needs a lockdown defender or two who can come in and bolster the defense and not ruin the offense. Thornton, Gbinije, Hairston all can potentially do this.

I agree with you on the rebounding. For sure should be a strength for this team. Mason was an extremely good (among the best in the league good) rebounder last year, and no reason to think he will not be the same this year. Miles can be a good rebounder as well. I expect improvement from Kelly as well, and some of the guards have shown a knack for grabbing their fair share as well. I will be disappointed if this isn't a really good rebounding team.

[FellowTraveler]

I think you may be short selling Miles a bit. He was in double figures in all of the China trip games, the CTC, and Bellmarine. I think he can maintain that if given the opportunity.

I think highly of Miles; it isn't hard to imagine him averaging 10 and 8 or so, while shooting a high percentage and playing solid defense. I just don't think he's as capable as Mason & Andre of being a star.

Yea Kyle had proven himself but coming into the 2010 season Nolan was not a proven scorer....He only averaged 8.4 points as a sophomore

And had he remained at roughly that level, the 2010 season would likely have ended rather less successfully. Similarly, if 'Dre develops like Nolan did, this Duke team will be fine with Curry, Thornton, or Marshall Plumlee running point.

I think K will insist that the guards get the ball to Kelly and the Plumlees.

I hope so. (Dawkins, too.) I'd be very curious to see how this team would develop, individually and collectively, if failing to get the ball to an open Plumlee/Dawkins/Kelly was perceived and treated as an error on par with those that have gotten these supporting players yanked from games in the past.

I will be disappointed if this isn't a really good rebounding team.

Agreed.

[Troublemaker]

Thanks, Kedsy, on the awesome Phase post.

My thoughts on the rotation:

This team is going to be built around Curry, Rivers, and the three-man big rotation of MP1-MP2-Kelly. That group of five should produce our top 4 or 5 leading scorers.

The role players will get playing time by how well they complement those "main five".

Thornton can guard the PG, play some point himself, wreak defensive havoc, and allow Curry to move off the ball. His role is crucial.

Dawkins will either be a 3-pt threat off the bench or a starter that sits if his shot isn't on. If his shot is on, Rivers, Curry, and Thornton will need to find him for 3-point daggers.

Murphy is the guy we use to guard big small forwards and he also does a good job moving the ball in Duke's motion and getting it to our scorers.

Those three guys plus the "main five" will make up Duke's rotation in competitive games, imo.

[ACCBBallFan]

I agree 100% with your assessment of Murphy in the games so far. I was basing it mainly on the reports from practices and the fact that K started him Saturday night. Maybe it's nerves and he will improve as he gets more comfortable in games. Has to be able to carry the good play from practice to the games or you are right and Murph want be that high in the rotation. Disagree on Mike though. So far he has been very tentative out there. One example of that is a play from Saturday. Bellarmine had a break away layup but it was clear Mike was going to catch the guy. I actually came up out of my seat because I thought Mike was getting ready to sky and try for the spectacular block attempt. Instead he actually slowed and went up very tentatively trying like heck not to foul. Would love to see him get aggressive in a moment like that, and more aggressive overall. He could have blocked that shot easily with his athletic ability and hops.

I really hope 1 or 2 of the 3 true wings will get it together and force K to play them often. We really need 1 of them to start and be counted on night after night. I am pulling hard for that starter to be Andre, and one of the other two play well enough to stick in the rotation. We need their size, and we need Andre's scoring.Another example of Mike playing nervously. He made a terrible pass that Miles somehow caught and converted to give Mike an assist, but it had turnover written all over it.

Alex got the ball stolen from behind in corner after getting past his man, and lost another on a bad outlet pass that resulted in a Bellarmine score instead.

The three SF's need to get it together against Shaw as Belmont has 9 guys returning who played double digit minutes last year including a 6'10" 250 pound center and a 6' 9" 235 pound PF, both seniors.

Not sure who Belmont starts, their other 3 of best 5 returning scorers are small 6'3" 175 the tallest but their next 4 returning scorers are all 6'6" and 6' 7" guys. I assume the one that is 240 pounds backs up the PF, with the other three weighing 205, 210 and 220 probably being SF/SG.

[Kedsy]

I think highly of Miles; it isn't hard to imagine him averaging 10 and 8 or so, while shooting a high percentage and playing solid defense. I just don't think he's as capable as Mason & Andre of being a star.

See, here's the thing. Last year in the ACC, only four players had 10+ ppg AND 8+ rpg: Jordan Williams (1st team All-ACC), John Henson (2nd team All-ACC), Jeff Allen (2nd team All-ACC), and Reggie Johnson (Hon. mention All-ACC).

So I would argue that if Miles averages 10 and 8, he would already be a star.

[dcar1985]

Another example of Mike playing nervously. He made a terrible pass that Miles somehow caught and converted to give Mike an assist, but it had turnover written all over it

Yea I saw that play completely different....Mike drove baseline, got cut off by the help defender and made a heads up pass to a cutting Miles instead of throwing up a contested shot which probably wouldve been missed badly....the pass looked quite soft too btw.....but I guess we can agree to disagree

[Bay Area Duke Fan]

And had he remained at roughly that level, the 2010 season would likely have ended rather less successfully. Similarly, if 'Dre develops like Nolan did, this Duke team will be fine with Curry, Thornton, or Marshall Plumlee running point.
.

Marshall Plumlee at point guard ????

[FellowTraveler]

See, here's the thing. Last year in the ACC, only four players had 10+ ppg AND 8+ rpg: Jordan Williams (1st team All-ACC), John Henson (2nd team All-ACC), Jeff Allen (2nd team All-ACC), and Reggie Johnson (Hon. mention All-ACC).

So I would argue that if Miles averages 10 and 8, he would already be a star.

True, but when we establish arbitrary minimums that include only the player we’re assessing and everyone above him, we don’t have a group of which the player in question is a good representative. We’ve set up a group of “comparable” who players who are all better than the player we’re assessing. And we've included some players who really aren't comparable while excluding some who are.

For example: Jordan Williams averaged 17 points (6th in conference) and 12 rebounds (1st.) A 10-8 season would be more similar to CJ Leslie’s 11-7 and Corey Raji’s 12-7 than to Jordan Williams’ All-ACC season. Or John Henson's DPOY season, for that matter.

In any case, I'd certainly be happy with something like 10-8 out of Miles. That is, as you note, nothing to sneeze at.

Marshall Plumlee at point guard ????

Exaggeration for effect.

[Kedsy]

True, but when we establish arbitrary minimums that include only the player we’re assessing and everyone above him, we don’t have a group of which the player in question is a good representative. We’ve set up a group of “comparable” who players who are all better than the player we’re assessing. And we've included some players who really aren't comparable while excluding some who are.

For example: Jordan Williams averaged 17 points (6th in conference) and 12 rebounds (1st.) A 10-8 season would be more similar to CJ Leslie’s 11-7 and Corey Raji’s 12-7 than to Jordan Williams’ All-ACC season. Or John Henson's DPOY season, for that matter.

Of course you're right about arbitrary minimums. Though Corey Raji only pulled down 6.7 rebounds, and I would argue for rebounds per game there's such a huge difference between 8.0 and 6.7 that Raji's year would not be comparable to a 10 and 8 season at all. And Leslie may have underachieved a bit, but he sort of was a star for State last year, so I don't think that comparison dulls my point at all.

In any event, my post wasn't aimed at you as much as it was a response to the posts we get every year when people say things like "so-and-so might go 10 and 8 this year, but we need a real big man if we want to compete," and that sort of thing drives me crazy. I'm sorry to have lumped you in with them.

[CDu]

See, here's the thing. Last year in the ACC, only four players had 10+ ppg AND 8+ rpg: Jordan Williams (1st team All-ACC), John Henson (2nd team All-ACC), Jeff Allen (2nd team All-ACC), and Reggie Johnson (Hon. mention All-ACC).

So I would argue that if Miles averages 10 and 8, he would already be a star.

Star? No. Very solid contributor? Absolutely. 10 and 8 wouldn't get you on any All-ACC teams. The guys you mentioned were all in the 10rpg (or more) neighborhood, and all had at least 11.7 ppg. I think there's a decent difference between 12 (or better) and 10 (or better) and 10 and 8.

I'd absolutely take a 10 and 8 season from Miles. It would be a very solid contribution. But it would not be on the level of the guys you mentioned, and it would not constitute star status.

[CDu]

Of course you're right about arbitrary minimums. Though Corey Raji only pulled down 6.7 rebounds, and I would argue for rebounds per game there's such a huge difference between 8.0 and 6.7 that Raji's year would not be comparable to a 10 and 8 season at all. And Leslie may have underachieved a bit, but he sort of was a star for State last year, so I don't think that comparison dulls my point at all.

There's a huge difference between 8.0 rebound per game and 9.6 rebounds per game (which was the lowest of the guys in the 10 and 8 club last year). I'd even agree that 10.0 and 8.0 would be more similar to Raji than Johnson, Henson, or Allen.

[superdave]

In the Bellarmine game, Ryan and Andre came off the bench even though both are projected by a lot of people to be starters and double-digit scorers. A lot of the lineup combos were not repeated so it seemed to be a real tinkering game for Coach K. I wonder if Shaw will be the same or if the lineups and distribution of minutes will be a little more predictable with the Belmont looming a week later. Austin (19) and Andre (15) got fewer minutes than I'd expect them too against quality teams, while Tyler (24) got more. After Coach K's post game praise of Tyler, I'd expect his minutes to stay elevated partly as a "work harder" message to some of the guys and because he is effective.

The first month of the season is going to be a tough one for Duke, so I wonder how long Coach K will tinker before he goes with a shorter rotation with more predictable minutes.

[Kedsy]

10 and 8 wouldn't get you on any All-ACC teams.

Well, Chris Singleton made 3rd team All-ACC in 2009-10, and his numbers were 10.2 and 7.0. Also on the third team: Solomon Alabi (11.7 and 6.2); Gani Lawal (13.1 and 8.5); and Joe Trapani (14.1 and 6.4). And, yes, Singleton was the conference defensive player of the year, and Alabi was a great shot blocker, but I bet we can find lots of other examples if we go back more than one season. So I'm not so sure 10 and 8 can't get All-ACC recognition.

Anyway, my point is 10 and 8 is really hard to do. No more than a handful of ACC players manage it each season. And if you're one of five guys who achieve something like that, why wouldn't you be considered a star?

[MChambers]

Well, Chris Singleton made 3rd team All-ACC in 2009-10, and his numbers were 10.2 and 7.0. Also on the third team: Solomon Alabi (11.7 and 6.2); Gani Lawal (13.1 and 8.5); and Joe Trapani (14.1 and 6.4). And, yes, Singleton was the conference defensive player of the year, and Alabi was a great shot blocker, but I bet we can find lots of other examples if we go back more than one season. So I'm not so sure 10 and 8 can't get All-ACC recognition.

Anyway, my point is 10 and 8 is really hard to do. No more than a handful of ACC players manage it each season. And if you're one of five guys who achieve something like that, why wouldn't you be considered a star?

Let's just all agree that Miles is likely to be a star this year! :)

[CDu]

Well, Chris Singleton made 3rd team All-ACC in 2009-10, and his numbers were 10.2 and 7.0. Also on the third team: Solomon Alabi (11.7 and 6.2); Gani Lawal (13.1 and 8.5); and Joe Trapani (14.1 and 6.4). And, yes, Singleton was the conference defensive player of the year, and Alabi was a great shot blocker, but I bet we can find lots of other examples if we go back more than one season. So I'm not so sure 10 and 8 can't get All-ACC recognition.

Yes, it could get recognition - if you were also an elite defender (like Singleton) or shotblocker (like Alabi and Lawal), or if it was a fairly down year for bigs. Note as well that Trapani and Lawal had much higher scoring averages as well.


Anyway, my point is 10 and 8 is really hard to do. No more than a handful of ACC players manage it each season. And if you're one of five guys who achieve something like that, why wouldn't you be considered a star?

I completely agree that 10 and 8 is not an easy thing to do. But that doesn't make you a star. Very solid player? Yes. Star? No.

[greybeard]

The only people that believe in the perfectability of mankind are Catholic priests, recruiting sergeants, and some of the fans on this Board,like me. I believe Andre has the potential to be a star in the ACC and a long-time player in the NBA.

sage

Good get!

[RepoMan]

Good get!

A greybeard sighting. Very nice. Must be getting close to basketball season. Hopefully, Jumbo will not be far behind.

[greybeard]

I think that he might well prove impossible to keep out of the starting lineup by early in the ACC season. He might be the best little for bigs that Duke has seen since Hurley; he gets it inside so the big catches it moving toward advantage (think Butler's big here, that don't happen without the littles). he relocates to space where he can catch and shoot as well as anyone, has the ability to rearrange with a bounce to create rhythm, space, freeze in the defender and then nail it, gets inside the defense and has lots of options, and can run the break without selfishness although he is real tough in the open court. I think that this kid could be the real deal.

On the otherhand, K did make Seth a captain.

Best addition to this team for the bigs is Capal. I think that you might see much more of an inside game as time goes by from the bigs because of him.

The way this team is stacked, watching practice might be better than most games. With the depth and the addition of Jeff, should be very interesting to watch this team develop.

[CDu]

I think that he might well prove impossible to keep out of the starting lineup by early in the ACC season. He might be the best little for bigs that Duke has seen since Hurley; he gets it inside so the big catches it moving toward advantage (think Butler's big here, that don't happen without the littles). he relocates to space where he can catch and shoot as well as anyone, has the ability to rearrange with a bounce to create rhythm, space, freeze in the defender and then nail it, gets inside the defense and has lots of options, and can run the break without selfishness although he is real tough in the open court. I think that this kid could be the real deal.

On the otherhand, K did make Seth a captain.

Best addition to this team for the bigs is Capal. I think that you might see much more of an inside game as time goes by from the bigs because of him.

The way this team is stacked, watching practice might be better than most games. With the depth and the addition of Jeff, should be very interesting to watch this team develop.

Nothing like a little greybeard hyperbole. :)

As for Cook's chances for starting, I'd like to see more than 10 minutes of a single exhibition from him. He looked good in limited time, but I think he has the cards stacked against him a bit because I'm not sure that a Curry/Cook/Rivers perimeter pairing (two very small guards in that group) will work defensively. And I don't see him taking over for Rivers or Curry.

Also, Capel, not Capal. (sorry for the name nitpick - somebody was going to do it!).

[greybeard]

Nothing like a little greybeard hyperbole. :)

As for Cook's chances for starting, I'd like to see more than 10 minutes of a single exhibition from him. He looked good in limited time, but I think he has the cards stacked against him a bit because I'm not sure that a Curry/Cook/Rivers perimeter pairing (two very small guards in that group) will work defensively. And I don't see him taking over for Rivers or Curry.

Also, Capel, not Capal. (sorry for the name nitpick - somebody was going to do it!).

Much easier coming from you. I agree that the three will not be on the floor at the same time. I saw Cook play several times when he was at DeMatha, once against Thorton in the Catholic League Championship game. Kid can play.

My sense is that he brings more than Seth, which is why I mentioned that my barbershop speculation about Cook's cracking the starting lineup took a hit when I read that K made Seth a captain. Cook can really play, I mean really. As for the amount of time that he is currently getting now, you might recall that I was saying the same thing about Eliott throughout the first half of the season when he was getting little playing time and doing nothing with it. Things change. Should be interesting.

[MChambers]

Much easier coming from you. I agree that the three will not be on the floor at the same time. I saw Cook play several times when he was at DeMatha, once against Thorton in the Catholic League Championship game. Kid can play.

My sense is that he brings more than Seth, which is why I mentioned that my barbershop speculation about Cook's cracking the starting lineup took a hit when I read that K made Seth a captain. Cook can really play, I mean really. As for the amount of time that he is currently getting now, you might recall that I was saying the same thing about Eliott throughout the first half of the season when he was getting little playing time and doing nothing with it. Things change. Should be interesting.
Nice to have you back, Greybeard! Waiting for the first soccer analogy, however.

[Newton_14]

Much easier coming from you. I agree that the three will not be on the floor at the same time. I saw Cook play several times when he was at DeMatha, once against Thorton in the Catholic League Championship game. Kid can play.

My sense is that he brings more than Seth, which is why I mentioned that my barbershop speculation about Cook's cracking the starting lineup took a hit when I read that K made Seth a captain. Cook can really play, I mean really. As for the amount of time that he is currently getting now, you might recall that I was saying the same thing about Eliott throughout the first half of the season when he was getting little playing time and doing nothing with it. Things change. Should be interesting.

Welcome back GB. Regarding Cook, I have been impressed with him in what little we have seen, but if he works his way into the starting lineup at some point this season, it won't be at the expense of Curry. Barring injury, Curry will start every game. He has stepped his game up quite a bit since last season.

[ACCBBallFan]

I have not analyzed the Shaw lineups yet, but in the first exhibition, the Duke two-player combination counts were (with 4 the expected median and 4.5 the average:

A couple at the bottom were kind of surprising Austin-Dre only on floor together once since they both ended up playing SF a lot to give Tyler more burn, and Mason-Josh only once. Andre-Quinn and Seth-Quinn only 3 times when one would thingk Quinn could set up the shooters as a traditional PG.

So I will have to take a look at the Shaw rotations to see if there is any consistency.

In one game just about every combination got tried at least once, except for Alex-mike which is how Shaw game ended I recall and Tyler-Mike which remains at zero after two games since neither played much tonmight.

10 Seth-Tyler out of 25 total lineup variations.
10 Seth-Ryan
10 Tyler-Ryan

9 Seth-Miles
9 Seth-Mason
9 Tyler-Miles
9 Mason-Austin
9 Ryan-Andre
9 Miles-Austin

8 Miles-Quinn
7 Seth-Austin
7 Seth-Andre
7 Tyler-Ausitn

6 Seth-Josh
6 Tyler-Mason
6 Tyler-Quinn
6 Mason-Ryan
6 Mason-Miles
6 Austin-Quinn
5 Tyler-Andre
5 Tyler-Josh
5 Mason-Andre
5 Mason-Quinn
5 Ryan-Miles
5 Josh-Quinn

4 Seth-Alex
4 Ryan-Austin
4 Ryan-Quinn
4 Miles-Andre
4 Miles-Josh

3 Seth-Quinn
3 Seth-Mike
3 Mason-Mike
3 Ryan-Josh
3 Ryan-Mike
3 Miles-Aex
3 Miles-Mike
3 Andre-Quinn
3 Andre-Mike
3 Josh-Alex

2 Tyler-Alex
2 Mason-Alex
2 Ryan-Alex
2 Austin-Josh
2 Austin-Mike
2 Andre-Josh
2 Alex-Quinn
2 Quinn-Mike

1 Mason-Josh
1 Austin-Andre
1 Austin-Alex
1 Andre-Alex
1 Josh-Mike

0 Tyler-Mike
0 Alex-Mike

[ACCBBallFan]

For the two games, here are the players most often paired:

Seth: Austin(21), Mason(20), Ryan (20), Dre (19), Miles (16), Tyler (13) Josh (8)

Austin: Seth (21), Mason (20), Miles (18), Ryan (16), Dre (15), Tyler (12), Quinn (8) Josh (6)

Ryan: Dre (23), Seth (20), Austin (16), Tyler (14), Mason (13), Miles (11), Quinn (8)

Dre: Ryan (23), Seth (19), Austin (15), Mason (15), Miles (10), Tyler (8), Quinn (7), Josh (6)

Miles: Austin (18), Seth (16), Tyler (13), Quinn (12), Ryan (11), Dre (10), Mason (9), Josh (6)

Mason: Seth (20), Austin (20), Dre (15), Ryan (13), Tyler (9), Miles (9), Quinn (6)

Tyler: Ryan (14), Miles (13), Seth (13), Austin (12), Mason (9), Dre (8), Quinn (7), Josh (6)

Quinn: Miles (12), Ryan (8)/Josh (8), Austin (8), Dre (7)/Tyler (7), Mason (6)

Josh: Quinn (8), Seth (8), Austin (6)/Dre (6), Miles (6), Tyler (6)

So not surprisingly the players who are paired most often in a starting 5 that maximized player on left are: Austin (7.5), Seth (7), Ryan (5.5), Dre (5) and Miles/Mason (4 each) with Tyler 1.5, Quinn 1 and Josh 0.5.

Mason-Austin-Dre-Seth combos are slightly overstated since coach K did 4 variations alternating Ryan and Josh in last minute of first half vs. Shaw.

The other combinations that occurred 5 or fewer times are:

5 Quinn-Mike
5 Ryan-Josh with Miles/Josh 6 times and Mason/Josh 3 times
5 Miles-Mike

4 Josh-Mike
4 Seth-Quinn versus Tyler/Quinn 7 times
4 Ryan-Mike
4 Miles-Aex
4 Josh-Alex
4 Andre-Mike
4 Seth-Alex

3 Mason-Josh with Ryan/Josh 5 times and Miles/Josh 6 times
3 Austin-Mike
3 Alex-Quinn
3 Seth-Mike
3 Mason-Mike

2 Tyler-Alex
2 Ryan-Alex
2 Mason-Alex

1 Alex-Mike
1 Austin-Alex
1 Andre-Alex

0 Tyler-Mike

[CDu]

Welcome back GB. Regarding Cook, I have been impressed with him in what little we have seen, but if he works his way into the starting lineup at some point this season, it won't be at the expense of Curry. Barring injury, Curry will start every game. He has stepped his game up quite a bit since last season.

Yeah, I think greybeard and I (and you) all agree that Curry has looked very solid as a starter. What we were saying was that Curry's presence may make it more difficult for Cook to crack the starting lineup, because that would mean two pretty small guards on the floor together (Cook and Curry are the smallest of our guards).

[superdave]

Jim Sumner's writeup this AM has a lot of good info that we've been discussing in this thread. Definitely worth checking out.

Here's some good, bad and I-dont-know that I've noticed during Phase 0:

Good
Mason is 14-14 from the field with 30 points, 17 boards in the two games.
Our big men have combined for 83 of 167 points in the two games.
Seth had 30 points and 10 assists in the two games.
Austin seemingly improved from Bellarmine to Shaw. I'm guessing he's very self-aware of what is right and wrong with his game. Good trajectory so far.

Bad
Alex went from starting and 13 minutes vs Bellarmine to coming in for 3 minutes at the tail end of the Shaw game. I do think the freshman need a little more predictability than that.
32 turnovers through two games.
Based on post game quotes, it took us 16 minutes to start stopping the ball vs Shaw.

I Dont Know
Andre has come off the bench twice and played inconsistently. I think he hit 4 straights three vs Shaw, but was otherwise 1 for 9 on field goals. Maybe this should be in the bad section, but I'm assuming Coach K is challenging Andre to be on at all times.
We have a long bench. That can either motivate guys to fight for minutes, confuse some of the younger guys who dont know what kind of minutes they'll be getting or we may never settle on a solid, obvious rotation and our chemistry could hurt for it. Who knows.

[DukiesDohK]

I agree that it has been nice to see Mason play great early, but the exhibition games are tough to read with big men as the teams we are playing don't have comparable big men. I think until the Michigan State game I am not going to say Mason has arrived or made any huge improvements.

Andre worries me a little, but I think K was playing with lineups in these first two games so I am not going to read too much into minutes and stuff.

Here is an indepth Duke preview if you guys want a read. (http://www.stobblog.com/2011/11/blue-devils-corner-20112012-duke.html)