PDA

View Full Version : Big Man Perception



kostar
11-24-2011, 09:51 PM
The hiring of Capel and the concerted effort to feed the big men as Coach K said during the summer has definitely shown. The Mason/Ryan is really developing quite nicely, and is really showing the wonderful skills sets that both players have. Mason I hope has finally broken out, a very solid 17/12 night verses a physical front line. It may only be for a season, but I hope these 2 guys with Capel's help are able to shed the recent Duke big man perception, of set screens and rebound, because these 2 guys are making their presence felt.

Newton_14
11-24-2011, 10:09 PM
The hiring of Capel and the concerted effort to feed the big men as Coach K said during the summer has definitely shown. The Mason/Ryan is really developing quite nicely, and is really showing the wonderful skills sets that both players have. Mason I hope has finally broken out, a very solid 17/12 night verses a physical front line. It may only be for a season, but I hope these 2 guys with Capel's help are able to shed the recent Duke big man perception, of set screens and rebound, because these 2 guys are making their presence felt.

So Wojo gets no credit for Ryan and Mason's improvements? I am glad to have Coach Capel on the staff and hope he sticks around awhile, but all 3 of our bigs played well down the stretch last year, and have built on that this year. I find it quite unfair to attribute all of that success to Coach Capel when Wojo is the coach of the bigs. The change in the offense to put more emphasis on post scoring was going to happen this year no matter what. The hiring of Coach Capel didn't have anything to do with that. K said even before Capel was hired that he felt the bigs were now ready and capable of taking on more scoring responsibility and that was going to be a focus.

I love Coach Capel and I think we have the best assistant coaches in the game, but I feel Wojo gets way too much unwarranted criticism. He certainly got the most out of Zoubek and Lance Thomas in their career's where the end result was a National Title that never happens without those two guys...

verga
11-24-2011, 10:15 PM
Wojo not Capel is the big man coach, praise him, he certainly has had his share of grief from message boards. I guess if Duke gets a new janitor they will be responsible for the bigs good play, anyone but Wojo, please.

Bob Green
11-24-2011, 11:34 PM
What is Jeff Capel's role? I'm not being snarky, this is a legitimate question that I'm hoping someone on the board can answer.

Devilsfan
11-24-2011, 11:40 PM
I find it hard to believe that Capel had a huge influence on our bigs development. Wojo is their coach. One thing though they put the ball on the court more than I would like to see. This a skill that should be left to our guards and wings IMO.

NovaScotian
11-25-2011, 07:18 AM
Wojo not Capel is the big man coach, praise him, he certainly has had his share of grief from message boards. I guess if Duke gets a new janitor they will be responsible for the bigs good play, anyone but Wojo, please.

well, as long as the janitor is taller than 5-11.

OldPhiKap
11-25-2011, 08:11 AM
well, as long as the janitor is taller than 5-11.

How many cinder blocks is that?

Dr. Rosenrosen
11-25-2011, 08:20 AM
Are we really having this discussion again? My gosh...

davekay1971
11-25-2011, 08:24 AM
Are we really having this discussion again? My gosh...

It's the day after Thanksgiving. It's the perfect day to pull leftovers out of the fridge, reheat them, and have another heapin' helpin' of something you've had more than enough of before...

sagegrouse
11-25-2011, 08:28 AM
With the losses from last season, it made sense that Duke should look inside for increased productivity. We should be pleased with how well our big men have played.


Ryan is the best all-around player on the team.

Mason, maybe with Austin, is proving to be the most talented player on the squad. If he starts "demanding the ball," he could be the highest scorer as well as the best rebounder.

I've got no problem with Plumbeard -- he's a tough and agile performer that gives us defense and a bit of offense.



But let's "go to the videotape:"



Player PPG RPG
Mason 11.4 10.0
Miles 5.6 5.3
Ryan 14.6 4.6
Total 31.6 19.9

Anybody else happy with our bigs rolling for 32 and 20 through the first seven games?

sagegrouse

OldPhiKap
11-25-2011, 08:32 AM
It's the day after Thanksgiving. It's the perfect day to pull leftovers out of the fridge, reheat them, and have another heapin' helpin' of something you've had more than enough of before...

Someone has set the "post of the day" bar pretty high this morning. Well-played.

JMarley50
11-25-2011, 08:32 AM
I haven't seen practices or games in person this season, nor am I privy to any inside info, just what I read here. But based on what I have seen on tv thus far I would somewhat agree with the OP and say Capel is working closely with the big guys. He is the one I have noticed talking to them and coaching them the most during games, not Wojo. I'm not saying Wojo doesn't deserve credit, but I am saying Coach Capel should be getting some of the credit too.

Let me also add that I think the players themselves deserve the most credit. They've obviously been working hard! That hook that Mason developed don't just happen overnight.

OldPhiKap
11-25-2011, 08:37 AM
With the losses from last season, it made sense that Duke should look inside for increased productivity. We should be pleased with how well our big men have played.


Ryan is the best all-around player on the team.

Mason, maybe with Austin, is proving to be the most talented player on the squad. If he starts "demanding the ball," he could be the highest scorer as well as the best rebounder.

I've got no problem with Plumbeard -- he's a tough and agile performer that gives us defense and a bit of offense.



But let's "go to the videotape:"



Player PPG RPG
Mason 11.4 10.0
Miles 5.6 5.3
Ryan 14.6 4.6
Total 31.6 19.9

Anybody else happy with our bigs rolling for 32 and 20 through the first seven games?

sagegrouse

. . . and posted against very good teams. Even the "easiest" team we have played so far beat #20 Cincy in Cincy.

We are very balanced, and I noticed Mason just demanding the ball a lot in the championship game. Which is outstanding. And a confident Ryan is a very dangerous thing. I agree that Miles is solid, and hope he has a Zoubek-like realization that he is a damn good player who can finish at a whole other level.

devildeac
11-25-2011, 08:38 AM
Are we really having this discussion again? My gosh...

Sounds like it, so I will trot out this story again from the team hotel in Indy at about 2AM after the 2010 NC, as relayed to me from a friend of mine (looong time respected DBR poster) who was the 3rd party (silent) in this conversation between Mr. Zoubeard and Wojo. (Paraphrased)

Mr. Z-We'd like to thank you for all the time, patience, understanding and teaching/coaching you provided Brian over his 4 years at Duke.
Wojo-No, thank you for alllowing us the opportunity to work with Brian during his time here and see him grow and mature as a person and player.

He said the tone/voice of both parent and coach were as sincere and humble as he could imagine. Shame that story can't be taken on the recruiting trail. I know folks will be able to counter with stories/examples of fathers named Ken and their experiences with the staff, but I'll always fondly recall the Zoubeard story at Duke and how his 4 years culminated.

Kedsy
11-25-2011, 11:46 AM
I haven't seen practices or games in person this season, nor am I privy to any inside info, just what I read here. But based on what I have seen on tv thus far...

But did you stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night?

uh_no
11-25-2011, 12:10 PM
But did you stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night?

Lets just say this: tyler zeller might be in for a surprise when the team from hell runs into the kelly/plumlee buzzsaw

JMarley50
11-25-2011, 12:27 PM
But did you stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night?

I didn't... Why? Was that my last chance at being qualified to comment on the matter?

duke09hms
11-25-2011, 01:20 PM
I find this topic to be very interesting, and I don't think it to be an easy open and shut case. Nor does it boil down to a blanket statement like "Wojo is a great/terrible big man coach."

Here are a few of my observations:
1. Let's put it to bed - you don't need to be a big man to coach big men. It doesn't matter that Wojo was a guard.
2. Because he was the only coach they over had, Wojo gets full credit for the development of Zoubek and LT who became defensive and rebounding beasts AND learned not to foul.
3. Given observation #2, neither Zoubek nor LT developed a reliable post game, mostly scoring on put-backs. Never truly could create their own shot, especially against physical big post players.
3. The quotes a few entries up between Brian's dad and Wojo doesn't really add much because they've only ever had Wojo. Perhaps with the average big man coach out there, the could have been a lot better or a lot worse. No one knows - we only know Wojo helped them become essential pieces to a national championship.
4. Prior to this year, Mason, Miles, and Ryan showed great rebounding, good interior defense, but no real dependable post offense - similar to Zoubek and LT before them.
5. This year, Mason and Ryan (Miles a little bit) have displayed greatly improved post offense. Mason with his hook shot, ability to create and seal post position, and be a reliable creator of offense in the post. Ryan with his almost Kevin McHale-like post moves in his arsenal to go along with his inside/outside abilities.
6. This year also marks Coach Capel's arrival to the Duke staff.

I think these are the conclusions we can draw:
Wojo can certainly coach defense and rebounding out of the bigs - no small feat given how important those skills are to team success, especially when we see so many teams that are lacking in those areas. However, up until this year, none of our post players showed the ability to consistently score the ball in the post. Seems like the big question is: Are Mason's and Ryan's improvements due to the 3-year cumulative effects of Wojo's coaching, or is the main reason they finally took a huge leap forward this year because of Coach Capel coming on board?

Devilsfan
11-25-2011, 01:27 PM
K gives Mason praise for the win against Kansas, but others put their (Kansas) loss squarely in the hands of Rivers. He stays in the game and perhaps a different ending. Post Thanksgiving "food for thought".

UrinalCake
11-25-2011, 01:31 PM
Capel was a 6'4" combo guard. What makes him any more qualified to coach big men than Wojo? He might have put on a few pounds since his playing days but I don't recall him ever posting anybody up. For some reason there's this need to find a big guy to be our big man coach.

uh_no
11-25-2011, 01:35 PM
I find this topic to be very interesting, and I don't think it to be an easy open and shut case. Nor does it boil down to a blanket statement like "Wojo is a great/terrible big man coach."

Here are a few of my observations:
1. Let's put it to bed - you don't need to be a big man to coach big men. It doesn't matter that Wojo was a guard.
2. Because he was the only coach they over had, Wojo gets full credit for the development of Zoubek and LT who became defensive and rebounding beasts AND learned not to foul.
3. Given observation #2, neither Zoubek nor LT developed a reliable post game, mostly scoring on put-backs. Never truly could create their own shot, especially against physical big post players.
3. The quotes a few entries up between Brian's dad and Wojo doesn't really add much because they've only ever had Wojo. Perhaps with the average big man coach out there, the could have been a lot better or a lot worse. No one knows - we only know Wojo helped them become essential pieces to a national championship.
4. Prior to this year, Mason, Miles, and Ryan showed great rebounding, good interior defense, but no real dependable post offense - similar to Zoubek and LT before them.
5. This year, Mason and Ryan (Miles a little bit) have displayed greatly improved post offense. Mason with his hook shot, ability to create and seal post position, and be a reliable creator of offense in the post. Ryan with his almost Kevin McHale-like post moves in his arsenal to go along with his inside/outside abilities.
6. This year also marks Coach Capel's arrival to the Duke staff.

I think these are the conclusions we can draw:
Wojo can certainly coach defense and rebounding out of the bigs - no small feat given how important those skills are to team success, especially when we see so many teams that are lacking in those areas. However, up until this year, none of our post players showed the ability to consistently score the ball in the post. Seems like the big question is: Are Mason's and Ryan's improvements due to the 3-year cumulative effects of Wojo's coaching, or is the main reason they finally took a huge leap forward this year because of Coach Capel coming on board?

These are all fair points, but you ignore one HUGE factor:

we are making a much more concerted effort to get the ball to them. Last year it was all about kyle and nolan....the offense revolved around getting them the shot...whether it was a three, a drive, whatever....

This year our most experienced guys are bigs. If K is consistent in anything, its that he trusts experience over talent (to a point). You could see a tale of two games last night (or whenever we played KU) before the 12 minute timeout in the first half and after it. When we don't go inside, we pass around the perimeter and end up with a 3pt shot (good or bad). When we began to go inside, we saw a) scoring output from mason and kelly, b) a better balance of shots. Since big guys aren't being used a giant moving walls for setting screens this year (not that there's anything wrong with that), they can be in a better position to score points.

Anyway, yeah mason and ryan have gotten better, but not so much better than you'd expect between a sophomore and junior year. And the changes in the offense can largely account for the rest of the improvement.

So in conclusion, there's no doubt that capel is a valuable addition to the coaching staff, but that doesn't prove that wojo is inadequate (in the same way that boeheim being the assistant to team USA doesn't mean that K is inadequate). It simply is another pair of eyes that can watch and give advice.

CDu
11-25-2011, 01:39 PM
I'm not sure why Capel is getting credit for the improvement of the bigs:

1. What evidence do we have that Capel is the one coaching the bigs?
2. What evidence do we have that Capel is a great big man's coach?

It seems like people are giving Capel credit for Blake Griffin's awesomeness and assuming this mean's he's the reason for our bigs having more production. But Capel wasn't the big man coach at Oklahoma (he was the head coach) and I'd argue that Griffin was an awesome big man regardless of coaching anyway.

It's possible that Capel is the reason. I'd say it's more likely that Mason and Kelly are showing improvement in part because they're a year more experienced and in larger part because they're getting more opportunities on a team with less proven go-to guys (as freshmen they were behind three All-ACC scorers and as sophomores they were behind two of those same guy).

OldPhiKap
11-25-2011, 01:52 PM
1. Steve has been on the staff since 1999 and was promoted to associate coach in 2008. We've won a few games in that time, and had a number of excellent big men over that period of time. Steve is obviously filling the role that Coach K wants him to undertake. He would not be there if he did not do the job at the exacting levels required by K. So I'm not sure why this keeps coming up, frankly. He has been working with Ryan and the Plumli since they stepped foot on campus and I am sure he has been an integral part of their development.

2. Jeff III joining the staff gives K something I am not sure he has had before -- a former player whose coaching development was primarily guided by someone else (Jeff II). So Jeff understands how K and Duke works; understands the rivalry in a way most of us don't (through his Tar Heel brother Jason); and has coached his own team after developing in his father's tutelage. I am not sure exactly what Jeff's role is -- I am sure scouting and strategic planning are natural resources to tap -- but I am unaware of anything that would make him a position-specific guru.

Des Esseintes
11-25-2011, 02:05 PM
I think these are the conclusions we can draw:
Wojo can certainly coach defense and rebounding out of the bigs - no small feat given how important those skills are to team success, especially when we see so many teams that are lacking in those areas. However, up until this year, none of our post players showed the ability to consistently score the ball in the post. Seems like the big question is: Are Mason's and Ryan's improvements due to the 3-year cumulative effects of Wojo's coaching, or is the main reason they finally took a huge leap forward this year because of Coach Capel coming on board?

Yeah, maybe it's Capel talking to them for the past couple months. Or maybe teenagers get better at stuff as they mature.

Ryan Kelly
2009-10
Minutes per game: 6.5
3pt %: 26.3
Rebounds/game: 1.1
Points/game: 1.2

2010-11
Minutes per game: 20.1
3pt%: 31.9
Rebounds/game: 3.7
Points/game: 6.6

2011-12
Minutes per game: 28.6
3pt%: 40.7
Rebounds/game: 4.6
Points/game: 14.6

Mason Plumlee
2009-10
Minutes per game: 14.1
FG%: 46.2
Rebounds/game: 3.1
Points/game: 3.7

2010-11
Minutes per game: 25.6
FG%: 59.3
Rebounds/game: 8.4
Points/game: 7.2

2011-12
Minutes per game: 30.7
FG%: 63.3
Rebounds/game: 10.0
Points/game: 11.4

Mason scored four more points as a sophomore than he did as a freshman and is scoring four more points this year than last. Ryan's growth is similar. Sure looks to me like both guys got better at everything every year. But by all means, let's continue to make up transformational narratives.

Wander
11-25-2011, 02:08 PM
1. Let's put it to bed - you don't need to be a big man to coach big men. It doesn't matter that Wojo was a guard.


Your second sentence doesn't follow from your first. For example:

You don't need to shoot free throws well to be a good center. It doesn't matter that Mason is a bad free throw shooter.
You don't need to have the best quarterback to make it to the Super Bowl. It doesn't matter that Green Bay has Aaron Rodgers.
And so on.

Not to root you out in particular (and you clearly recognize the issue is more complex than many people do), because I see a ton of people do this. The existence of successful and short big man coaches doesn't imply that it's not desirable to have a former post player as your big man coach. I'd argue that over the past decade or so, Duke has had significantly more success with guards than with post players, and a lot of the success with our taller guys involve skills you normally associate with guards. I don't see how it's unreasonable to conjecture that the makeup of our assistant coaches has something to do with that, though I admit I'm not sure how that hypothesis is falsifiable without being close to the program.

(This isn't a complaint about the state of the program, by the way - I don't see a problem with us being better at recruiting, coaching, or developing some positions relative to others).

Kedsy
11-25-2011, 02:33 PM
The existence of successful and short big man coaches doesn't imply that it's not desirable to have a former post player as your big man coach.

Well, it certainly does not imply that it would be desirable to have a former post player as your big man coach. In baseball, some of the best hitting coaches were not great hitters when they played. And some of the best hitters (e.g., Rogers Hornsby, Ted Williams) were lousy hitting coaches. Leo Mazzone, considered one of the best pitching coaches of all time, never pitched in the major leagues (although admittedly he was a minor league pitcher). The ability to teach and the ability to perform are not necessarily related.

Being a guard doesn't mean you don't understand footwork or how to use your body to seal someone off. In some ways, a point guard has an advantage teaching big men because he may have a better understanding of where the guard wants to put the ball and how the big man needs to position himself to receive it (although obviously a big man could have a feel for that, as well).

Obviously one way of gaining the knowledge of how a big man should play is by doing it yourself. But clearly it's not the only way. I'm sure there are civil engineering professors out there who have never personally built a bridge. And I'm sure there are wonderful bridge builders out there who couldn't teach their way out of a paper bag.

Ultimately, the fact that there are successful short big man coaches does prove something: that short big man coaches can succeed. Whether they will succeed depends on whether the short big man coach has a good knowledge of the game and is a good teacher. Going further, I would argue that the ability of any coach is primarily a combination of knowledge, teaching ability, and ability to motivate. Assuming a coach has those things, I can't imagine height or having played a particular position having all that much bearing on the matter.

JMarley50
11-25-2011, 02:47 PM
I'm not sure why Capel is getting credit for the improvement of the bigs:

1. What evidence do we have that Capel is the one coaching the bigs?
2. What evidence do we have that Capel is a great big man's coach?

It seems like people are giving Capel credit for Blake Griffin's awesomeness and assuming this mean's he's the reason for our bigs having more production. But Capel wasn't the big man coach at Oklahoma (he was the head coach) and I'd argue that Griffin was an awesome big man regardless of coaching anyway.

It's possible that Capel is the reason. I'd say it's more likely that Mason and Kelly are showing improvement in part because they're a year more experienced and in larger part because they're getting more opportunities on a team with less proven go-to guys (as freshmen they were behind three All-ACC scorers and as sophomores they were behind two of those same guy).

I don't understand why people are so quick to dismiss the impact that Capel has had. I get that Duke fans in general have had to spend a lot of time sticking up for Wojo when it comes to his ability to coach big men. That's one of the go to insults for every Duke hater out there... Could it be that when people try to give Capel some of the credit, people feel that same urge to defend Wojo? To give Capel credit would prove Wojo inadequate somehow?

Like I mentioned earlier, there have been numerous times this season where I have saw Capel pull a big man aside going into a timeout and coach him on something. If I had all of the games saved I would go back and count. I don't remember which game but in Maui he was showing Miles a move to make during one timeout, Miles soon after had a really nice post move and scored, then during the next timeout Capel was grinning from ear to ear ran over gave him a big pat on the back and said (based on lip-reading) "see what did I tell you". I even replayed it to show my wife because I thought it was pretty cool to see the coach instruct, player do then get rewarded. I don't think anyone has said that Wojo is no longer the big men coach, just that Capel is now contributing.

I also don't think you can downplay the impact of Blake Griffin on Coach Capel. Either A: Capel coached Blake Griffin into the player that he is or B: Like most good coaches he learned a lot from interacting with an amazing player on a day to day basis. Either way I would say Coach Capel came away a better coach and learned things that can improve Duke's bigs.

With all that said, I personally still believe that most of the credit should go to the players themselves. As they say "you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink"!

Kedsy
11-25-2011, 02:58 PM
I don't understand why people are so quick to dismiss the impact that Capel has had.

It's not that people are quick to dismiss it so much as wanting to see some evidence before jumping to a conclusion. You apparently saw a piece of evidence, but in my opinion it's anecdotal and incomplete. Certainly not sufficient to give credit to Coach Capel any more than we would give credit to Coach Collins, who I'm sure at least a few times has had similar experiences with big players in the past.

To hear someone say that our big men have improved due to Coach Capel, essentially because he recruited Blake Griffin a few years ago, sounds like (a) a major stretch; and (b) a dig at Coach Wojo. I'm not saying that was your intent, but that's what it sounds like.

duke09hms
11-25-2011, 02:59 PM
Seems like the big question is: Are Mason's and Ryan's improvements due to the 3-year cumulative effects of Wojo's coaching, or is the main reason they finally took a huge leap forward this year because of Coach Capel coming on board?

Seems like the answer is yes.

Jderf
11-25-2011, 03:00 PM
What I don't understand is the urge to reduce the improvement down to one single reason. Was it Wojo? Capel? A natural talent progression? Maturity? More playing time? A more post-centric offense? Well, the reason Mason and Ryan have improved can only be one of these things, right? Right?

I think it's much more reasonable that a confluence of all these factors have contributed to our improved post play. Wojo certainly deserves some credit. As does Capel. But, to be honest, most of the credit probably belongs with Mason and Ryan, who have have put in the time and effort to get to where they are.

Scorp4me
11-25-2011, 03:19 PM
Most feel Wojo is an ineffective big man coach because he was a short guard. So apparently Capel's added 5 inches makes him a more effective big man coach because he was a tall guard?

The post above noting how Capel was instructing Miles would be a great reason to support his influence on the big men. However, it unfortunately seems most would rather attribute it to his added height. Strange.

Troublemaker
11-25-2011, 03:21 PM
1. Steve has been on the staff since 1999 and was promoted to associate coach in 2008. We've won a few games in that time, and had a number of excellent big men over that period of time. Steve is obviously filling the role that Coach K wants him to undertake. He would not be there if he did not do the job at the exacting levels required by K. So I'm not sure why this keeps coming up, frankly. He has been working with Ryan and the Plumli since they stepped foot on campus and I am sure he has been an integral part of their development.

Exactly.

If, at one point in time, Wojo was inexperienced with his role as big man coach, that's certainly not the case anymore. After a decade of coaching big men, helping out at Pete Newell's camp, running drills with NBA superstar big men through Duke's involvement with USA Basketball, and most importantly, 10 years to refine his teaching skills under one of America's great teachers in Mike Krzyzewski, Coach Wojo is almost certainly one of the best big man coaches in the country.

You give a smart, motivated, successful person like Wojo 10 years to do anything, even if that something is completely new to him at the start, and he will become one of the best. Coach K and Coach Wojo and Coach Collins and the rest of Duke's staff are guys who would be successful at anything they choose to do. Thank God we have them coaching Duke Basketball.

Coach K has said many, many times now that he believes he has the best staff of coaches in basketball, pro or college. We should start respecting his judgement on this matter.

Wander
11-25-2011, 03:23 PM
I'm sure there are civil engineering professors out there who have never personally built a bridge.

But it's desirable to have a professor who has a background in civil engineering, rather than electrical engineering, train a graduate student in civil engineering.

As for the rest of your post, I've rarely, if ever, seen anyone argue that being a former post player, even a very good former post player, is sufficient to being a good big man coach. I certainly haven't. So I'm not sure why you're bothering to argue against that viewpoint.

I agree the Capel thing is silly. I don't remember Capel playing center, and we don't have anywhere near a meaningful sample size or information to make any judgments about that anyway (well, maybe some others have inside info about what Capel does day-to-day in practice, but I don't).

SilkyJ
11-25-2011, 03:25 PM
What is Jeff Capel's role? I'm not being snarky, this is a legitimate question that I'm hoping someone on the board can answer.

I'd love to know the answer to this as well. For some reason I thought I read the answer earlier in the year and I thought he was spending most of his time with Collins and the guards, but I could be misremembering.

My 2 cents is that specifically for Mason his development of an actual go to move makes all the difference. And we know this is something Wojo worked on with he and Miles. The last 2 years if he caught the ball he looked like he didn't know what to do with it. Actually having a go-to move in that hook shot makes a world of difference for him b/c he can demand the ball and actually do something with it. Now if Miles could get that going...

jv001
11-25-2011, 03:35 PM
Well, it certainly does not imply that it would be desirable to have a former post player as your big man coach. In baseball, some of the best hitting coaches were not great hitters when they played. And some of the best hitters (e.g., Rogers Hornsby, Ted Williams) were lousy hitting coaches. Leo Mazzone, considered one of the best pitching coaches of all time, never pitched in the major leagues (although admittedly he was a minor league pitcher). The ability to teach and the ability to perform are not necessarily related.

Being a guard doesn't mean you don't understand footwork or how to use your body to seal someone off. In some ways, a point guard has an advantage teaching big men because he may have a better understanding of where the guard wants to put the ball and how the big man needs to position himself to receive it (although obviously a big man could have a feel for that, as well).

Obviously one way of gaining the knowledge of how a big man should play is by doing it yourself. But clearly it's not the only way. I'm sure there are civil engineering professors out there who have never personally built a bridge. And I'm sure there are wonderful bridge builders out there who couldn't teach their way out of a paper bag.

Ultimately, the fact that there are successful short big man coaches does prove something: that short big man coaches can succeed. Whether they will succeed depends on whether the short big man coach has a good knowledge of the game and is a good teacher. Going further, I would argue that the ability of any coach is primarily a combination of knowledge, teaching ability, and ability to motivate. Assuming a coach has those things, I can't imagine height or having played a particular position having all that much bearing on the matter.

And Dave Duncan pitching coach for the St. Louis Cardinals and World Series Champions was not a pitcher in the major leagues. He was a catcher. As for big man coaches, Dave Odom was not a bad big man coach for Wake's Duncan one of the ACCs best centers ever. GoDuke!

Kedsy
11-25-2011, 04:20 PM
And Dave Duncan pitching coach for the St. Louis Cardinals and World Series Champions was not a pitcher in the major leagues. He was a catcher.

Thanks, much better than my example. Duncan (considered one of the best pitching coaches around), as a catcher coaching pitchers, is analogous to a point guard coaching big men.

JMarley50
11-25-2011, 05:15 PM
It's not that people are quick to dismiss it so much as wanting to see some evidence before jumping to a conclusion. You apparently saw a piece of evidence, but in my opinion it's anecdotal and incomplete. Certainly not sufficient to give credit to Coach Capel any more than we would give credit to Coach Collins, who I'm sure at least a few times has had similar experiences with big players in the past.

To hear someone say that our big men have improved due to Coach Capel, essentially because he recruited Blake Griffin a few years ago, sounds like (a) a major stretch; and (b) a dig at Coach Wojo. I'm not saying that was your intent, but that's what it sounds like.

Sorry, I wasn't trying to dismiss Wojo at all. I've always been one of the people I was referring to when it came to defending him. At 6'8" I was a big guy myself. The best position coach I ever had was a guard. He taught me a lot of little things dealing with body position, and setting guys up to get position on them, that my previous coaches who were big guys failed to do. So no I don't think that you have to be a big to coach bigs or that Wojo is insufficient. But at the same time I would find it hard to believe that Capel has contributed nothing at all to their development.

To say that Coach Capel merely recruited Blake Griffin and didn't play a role in his development is just as naive as saying it takes a big guy to coach the big guys. I never said, nor have I seen anyone else say that just because Coach Capel coached Blake Griffin our big guys improved. I essentially said that I'm sure Coach Capel learned a few things through dealing with a great player like Blake on a day to day basis that could help our guys. If you really believe that Capel's interactions with Blake Griffin hasn't indirectly had a positive effect on our big guys then I'm also sure you believe that Jim Boeheim had nothing to do Duke's zone defense. Blake was on campus this summer for crying out loud... I know if I'm sitting in the locker room as a college post player and in walks one of the best bigs in the game, you have my full attention!! But that's all besides the point.

You proved my point exactly. I never dismissed anything Wojo has done. I never said he had nothing to do with our bigs improvements. In fact I don't think anyone in this discussion said that. Some were just directing a little credit Capel's way. Yet, you and others felt the need to jump in and defend Wojo by dismissing Coach Capel's abilities or downplaying any effect that he may have had on our guys. I think its habit, when someone brings up our bigs and coaching its an automatic defend wojo response!

Maybe next time I will just say I'm really glad that the whole team and coaching staff helped improve our bigs and turned them into one of the best front courts in the country. But I'm sure someone will still think I'm insulting Wojo.

JMarley50
11-25-2011, 05:20 PM
What I don't understand is the urge to reduce the improvement down to one single reason. Was it Wojo? Capel? A natural talent progression? Maturity? More playing time? A more post-centric offense? Well, the reason Mason and Ryan have improved can only be one of these things, right? Right?

I think it's much more reasonable that a confluence of all these factors have contributed to our improved post play. Wojo certainly deserves some credit. As does Capel. But, to be honest, most of the credit probably belongs with Mason and Ryan, who have have put in the time and effort to get to where they are.

Well said...Perfect actually!!
But why do you think Capel deserves credit? Are saying Wojo can't coach becuase he's short?? ;):cool:

juise
11-25-2011, 05:27 PM
I agree with the confluence of factors theory. I re-watched the last 4 minutes of the Maui final this morning, looking for some of the details that I would have missed in the excitement of the live viewing. When Mason left the game in the last 10 seconds (replaced by Austin), he was enthusiastically greeted on the bench by several coaches, but Capel in particular had some words for him. I read Jason's lips saying "What did I tell you?" more than once. Whatever was said to Mason, I hope that the coaches have some similarly effective words for Tuesday's matchup with tSOU.

JMarley50
11-25-2011, 05:53 PM
I agree with the confluence of factors theory. I re-watched the last 4 minutes of the Maui final this morning, looking for some of the details that I would have missed in the excitement of the live viewing. When Mason left the game in the last 10 seconds (replaced by Austin), he was enthusiastically greeted on the bench by several coaches, but Capel in particular had some words for him. I read Jason's lips saying "What did I tell you?" more than once. Whatever was said to Mason, I hope that the coaches have some similarly effective words for Tuesday's matchup with tSOU.

That's one the things I saw. I must have gotten my Plumli mixed up. I was thinking it was Miles for some reason. At the end of the day I don't really care who is repsponsible, I'm just really happy to see them playing like we always knew they could. I hope they keep it up all the way through the final four! I've enjoyed the debate today, it helped pass the day by at work. Now off to eat leftovers!

juise
11-25-2011, 06:03 PM
I read Jason's lips saying "What did I tell you?" more than once.

Horrible mistake. Obviously, I meant Jeff... the one who knows right from wrong when choosing shades of blue.

Kedsy
11-25-2011, 06:05 PM
But it's desirable to have a professor who has a background in civil engineering, rather than electrical engineering, train a graduate student in civil engineering.

I think we're splitting hairs at this point. Is civil engineering equivalent to basketball while bridge building vs. dam building the equivalent to guard play vs. big man play? Or is engineering equal to basketball, while civil engineering vs. electrical engineering the equivalent to guard play vs. big man play. I would argue the former, you appear to favor the latter, but there really isn't a right answer.

juise
11-25-2011, 06:18 PM
I think we're splitting hairs at this point. Is civil engineering equivalent to basketball while bridge building vs. dam building the equivalent to guard play vs. big man play? Or is engineering equal to basketball, while civil engineering vs. electrical engineering the equivalent to guard play vs. big man play. I would argue the former, you appear to favor the latter, but there really isn't a right answer.

All I know is that I would rather have a civil engineer coach my big men than a former NBA center designing my bridges. :)

Seriously, though, I agree with Kedsy that the differences between basketball positions are smaller than the differences between engineering disciplines (which would be more like comparing different sports, IMO).

Devilsfan
11-25-2011, 06:47 PM
My rub is that two outstanding young men who were on the staff had to make room for Capel. One had to be designated in a new position no longer on the team. And wasn't it Capel that had to go to summer school and caused his teammates to give up a trip to Australia when he was playing? Maybe not but I think so. So let's not be so fast to give him credit when Wojo is doing all the work.

OldPhiKap
11-25-2011, 07:18 PM
And wasn't it Capel that had to go to summer school and caused his teammates to give up a trip to Australia when he was playing? Maybe not but I think so.

While I wish it were under different circumstances, I for one am ecstatic that we have Jeff on the bench. He learned from his father, who was/is a fantastic coach in his own right, and has run a major program. How is anyone throwing darts like this?

Of course, following the rest of your point regarding making room for Jeff, one would assume that if K was somehow unhappy with Wojo he would have made room a different way.

To be clear: K is not infallable. But he is entitled to the staff he wants, and I for one cannot see him having anyone on there that he does not have supreme confidence in. K can pick from hundreds upon hundreds of folks who would love to come assist here. And who would do a damn good job. K has the staff he has because he WANTS the staff he has.

Seriously, given the results we have obtained, how is anyone really questioning the quality or composition of the coaching staff?!? REALLY?!?




Edit to add: this is not intended to target the quoted poster, I just am beyond fed up with this. If anyone doesn't like K's staff, call for the administration to fire K. Otherwise, let the man do his job.

Wheat/"/"/"
11-25-2011, 08:17 PM
Maybe I missed some, but you guys must be seeing "post" play I'm not seeing. In the Kansas game I only recall 1 time that Kelly took an entry pass down low with his back to the basket and made a move to score. (It was a nice move too).

Mason had about 5, back to the basket, in the paint, moves to the rim to attempt to score the entire game. He looked good on a couple of them.
Somebody feel free to check it out on tape, and correct me if I'm wrong, but that's what I recall.

Miles..where was he against Kansas as an offensive threat in the paint? He's a senior with size and athleticism, he should at bare minimum have a catch and jump hook.

Mason and Ryan were active in the post, but it was off plays that had broken down from guard penetration, or offensive rebounding.

And they played well, I'm not trying to say they didn't.

But, there has been very little "traditional" post play from the bigs.... the, "I'm holding this spot, give me the ball, I'm gonna turn on you, put a move on you, and score or you're gonna foul me"... plays from them.

Mason is strong enough and quick enough to get the prime real estate down low almost anytime he wants, and he is athletic enough to get a quality look too.
Kelly has enough strength now and a nice, soft shooting touch.

I can only surmise that traditional post play from a big is just not how coach K wants to play. And the winningest coach of all time can play his players any way he wants to.

Newton_14
11-25-2011, 08:21 PM
I'd love to know the answer to this as well. For some reason I thought I read the answer earlier in the year and I thought he was spending most of his time with Collins and the guards, but I could be misremembering.

My 2 cents is that specifically for Mason his development of an actual go to move makes all the difference. And we know this is something Wojo worked on with he and Miles. The last 2 years if he caught the ball he looked like he didn't know what to do with it. Actually having a go-to move in that hook shot makes a world of difference for him b/c he can demand the ball and actually do something with it. Now if Miles could get that going...

Also, Mason debuted the hook shot late last season, and during one of the games, after Mason made a hook from the baseline, the TV announcer mentioned that Wojo and Mason had been putting in a lot of hours working on that move. This year, Mason has added the short jumphook with both hands. The addition of the left hand jumphook is key, because that move is where Mason used to always shoot the fade-away jumpshot that almost never went in.

As for Capel, I'm not sure of his role. I was unable to catch a practice this year. Last year at practice, when they broke into groups, Collins and Carrawell worked with the guards, and Wojo and Nate was on the other end working with the Bigs. Carrawell is gone, so Capel plugged the hole there. The question is, did Capel take Carrawell's spot, or did K move Nate to the guards and put Capel with Wojo coaching the Bigs. It's possible for sure.

Either way, like others, the thing that irked me about the OP, was the fact that he directly credit's the improvement to Capel and does not even mention Wojo. Ironically, that feeds the "perception" that Wojo is not a good big man coach.

Newton_14
11-25-2011, 09:03 PM
Maybe I missed some, but you guys must be seeing "post" play I'm not seeing. In the Kansas game I only recall 1 time that Kelly took an entry pass down low with his back to the basket and made a move to score. (It was a nice move too).

Mason had about 5, back to the basket, in the paint, moves to the rim to attempt to score the entire game. He looked good on a couple of them.
Somebody feel free to check it out on tape, and correct me if I'm wrong, but that's what I recall.

Miles..where was he against Kansas as an offensive threat in the paint? He's a senior with size and athleticism, he should at bare minimum have a catch and jump hook.

Mason and Ryan were active in the post, but it was off plays that had broken down from guard penetration, or offensive rebounding.

And they played well, I'm not trying to say they didn't.

But, there has been very little "traditional" post play from the bigs.... the, "I'm holding this spot, give me the ball, I'm gonna turn on you, put a move on you, and score or you're gonna foul me"... plays from them.

Mason is strong enough and quick enough to get the prime real estate down low almost anytime he wants, and he is athletic enough to get a quality look too.
Kelly has enough strength now and a nice, soft shooting touch.

I can only surmise that traditional post play from a big is just not how coach K wants to play. And the winningest coach of all time can play his players any way he wants to.

In the 7 games Duke has played this season, all 3 of Mason, Miles, and Ryan, have gotten touches in traditional post-up positions and had success. Mason has scored on sky hooks, jumphooks with both hands, and up and under moves. Miles has scored on all 4 of those moves as well, and Miles has also scored with a drop step to the baseline and then reverse lay-up on the other side. Kelly does not use the jumphook or the skyhook. He almost always uses multiple fakes, and either goes with the up and under move, a bankshot, or just uses the fake to draw a foul. Mason has been the most frequent recipient down low, like he was the other night. Both Mason and Ryan have also drawn numerous fouls on post moves. Also, contrary to popular belief, every team Duke has played except Michigan, has had post guys 6'9 & 6'10.

Belmont's frontline was 6'10 250, and 6'9 235. Davidson's: 6'10 235, 6'10 237.

In the Kansas game, all 3 guys scored on traditional post moves. In the first half, Mile's sealed his man, called for the ball, caught it, pivoted and threw down a hard one-hand dunk. In other games, he has used a right-hand jumphook off glass from that position if the defender slid down to cut off a direct lane to a dunk.


K has made it a point to get the ball in the paint while still allowing the guards to get their shots. It is not a team where the ball needs to go into the post every half-court possession, but it will go into the post a lot more than the last few years. However, if the defense is making life difficult on the perimeter, K will instruct them to feed the bigs. That happened in the 2nd half of the Davidson game. Guards were struggling and we fed the post time and time again and that is when the game turned. Mason was the recipient of most of those touches.

This is the most balanced team that Duke has had in several years in terms of scoring. I think most of us are quite happy with our bigs and their ability to score the ball in the paint. All 3 can score posting up in a traditional fashion, as well as turning and facing up. Josh can also score facing up as well, though it looks like he will not get much PT unless foul trouble comes into play. He does have a nice jumper though.

Troublemaker
11-25-2011, 09:23 PM
Maybe I missed some, but you guys must be seeing "post" play I'm not seeing. In the Kansas game I only recall 1 time that Kelly took an entry pass down low with his back to the basket and made a move to score. (It was a nice move too).

Mason had about 5, back to the basket, in the paint, moves to the rim to attempt to score the entire game. He looked good on a couple of them.
Somebody feel free to check it out on tape, and correct me if I'm wrong, but that's what I recall.

Miles..where was he against Kansas as an offensive threat in the paint? He's a senior with size and athleticism, he should at bare minimum have a catch and jump hook.

Mason and Ryan were active in the post, but it was off plays that had broken down from guard penetration, or offensive rebounding.

And they played well, I'm not trying to say they didn't.

But, there has been very little "traditional" post play from the bigs.... the, "I'm holding this spot, give me the ball, I'm gonna turn on you, put a move on you, and score or you're gonna foul me"... plays from them.

Mason is strong enough and quick enough to get the prime real estate down low almost anytime he wants, and he is athletic enough to get a quality look too.
Kelly has enough strength now and a nice, soft shooting touch.

I can only surmise that traditional post play from a big is just not how coach K wants to play. And the winningest coach of all time can play his players any way he wants to.

lol.

UrinalCake
11-25-2011, 09:25 PM
Maybe I missed some, but you guys must be seeing "post" play I'm not seeing.

I replied to one of your comments in a different thread and I don't want you to think I'm picking on you but here's my two cents - I think Duke fans will consider "post scoring" to be anything inside 15 feet that doesn't come from our guards. Mason and Kelly might only perform traditional post maneuvers on a small percentage of their possessions, but as long as they're finding other ways to score then that qualifies as inside production. Mason tends to set up a little farther outside the lane and either use a spin move or try to dribble around his man. That matches his skill set - he's quicker than the guys guarding him so he tries to use that to his advantage. Kelly uses a lot of pump fakes and pivots to get his man off balance. There's no rule that says our inside guys HAVE to keep their backs to the basket Barkley-style in order to be effective.

Towards the end of the game Kansas was actually double-teaming Mason as soon as he got the ball, which I've never seen before. So at least they were convinced he's capable of doing some damage inside. As for Miles, I agree he's been pretty quiet for a few games now. Hopefully he'll pick it up.

Troublemaker
11-25-2011, 09:31 PM
Sometimes people just see what they want to see. I truly mean no disrespect to Wheat, who is a good poster. But if someone can seriously have watched the Kansas game and not see post play from Duke's bigs, you just have to "lol" and move on.

Nothing more needs to be said.

Duvall
11-25-2011, 09:46 PM
Sometimes people just see what they want to see. I truly mean no disrespect to Wheat, who is a good poster. But if someone can seriously have watched the Kansas game and not see post play from Duke's bigs, you just have to "lol" and move on.

Nothing more needs to be said.

Less surprising to those of us that remember Wheat dismissing the post contributions of Brian Zoubek, Shelden Williams and Carlos Boozer.

Wheat/"/"/"
11-25-2011, 10:53 PM
Sometimes people just see what they want to see. I truly mean no disrespect to Wheat, who is a good poster. But if someone can seriously have watched the Kansas game and not see post play from Duke's bigs, you just have to "lol" and move on.

Nothing more needs to be said.

Just telling it like it is, guys. No need to shoot the messenger.

I don't think I was ever too critical of Sheldon. I did think Boozer could have been better inside wwith his skills.

I think if you look back you'll find I was pretty complimentary of Zoubek his Sr. year.

wilko
11-25-2011, 10:57 PM
RK was facilitating the point Forward position quite nicely... Scoring, dishing, kicking out...
Mason was learning how to be dominant and really contest -good to see..
Miles - who do you bench in THAT game to get him some reps? NOT RK or Mason... We've got work to do, but its better than I could have hoped for so far in this young season..

Dukeface88
11-25-2011, 11:45 PM
Just telling it like it is tar heel fans see it, guys. No need to shoot point in correcting the messenger homer.



Fixed it for you.

-bdbd
11-26-2011, 01:19 AM
Originally Posted by Wheat/"/"/"
Just telling it like it is tar heel fans see it, guys. No need to shoot point in correcting the messenger homer.


Fixed it for you.


Thanks for fixing that post Dukeface. 'just beat me to it!
I swear, on first reading Wheat's description of Duke big-man post play this season I had to do a double-take, checking to see if I had maybe logged onto Inside Carolina by mistake. I swear, if I didn't know better you'd think Wheat was a Kerlina fan spinning a pre-determined story, facts be damned... Oh, wait... ;)

I watched all three Maui games and can remember dozens of instances of Duke bigs being fed within 8 feet of the basket, and then making "post moves" to complete a shot. (I suspect Wheat may split hairs and defend his IC spin of those games by parsing words and (very) tightly defining how he means the term "feeding the post." I define it as "any pass from a guard into the interior - say within about 8 feet of the basket - where a Duke big then has to make an interior move to complete a shot." That includes penetrations designed to dish to bigs in a good spot where they can make an interior move and complete the play/shot/basket.) I can fairly easily recall more than a couple dozen post-feed plays over those three games.

Clearly Duke is feeding the post much more regularly this season than the past couple of excellent-guard-dominated squads did. Mason's and Ryan's strong emergence this season is a big cause (or is it "effect"?) of that. I like this year's balance, as opponents will have to "pick their poison," and the strength of one really enhances the strength of the other. (But I agree with the other poster that, when an opponent is foolish enough to double-up inside on Mason - understandable as it may be given his strength there - we don't want to just keep pounding it inside to him relentlessly while an opportunity has been opened to our guards or other bigs.)

:p



.

JMarley50
11-26-2011, 09:38 AM
My rub is that two outstanding young men who were on the staff had to make room for Capel. One had to be designated in a new position no longer on the team. And wasn't it Capel that had to go to summer school and caused his teammates to give up a trip to Australia when he was playing? Maybe not but I think so. So let's not be so fast to give him credit when Wojo is doing all the work.

Do you get upset that Seth starts over Tyler as well?? Tyler is an outstanding you man... so I guess that means he should be the one starting at point regardless of whether its best for the team or not.

I think most of us on this board would agree that Seth starting is what's best for this team, and that is why K is starting him. So would it be a stretch to think that maybe, just maybe, moving CC and Nate James to different roles in order to bring Capel back is best for the team? I trust that K made the right call. He is only the greatest coach of all time!!

moonpie23
11-26-2011, 09:48 AM
I think we're splitting hairs at this point. Is civil engineering equivalent to basketball while bridge building vs. dam building the equivalent to guard play vs. big man play? Or is engineering equal to basketball, while civil engineering vs. electrical engineering the equivalent to guard play vs. big man play. I would argue the former, you appear to favor the latter, but there really isn't a right answer.

you can replace both those guys with an ME......:D

SilkyJ
11-26-2011, 09:59 AM
Maybe I missed some, but you guys must be seeing "post" play I'm not seeing. In the Kansas game I only recall 1 time that Kelly took an entry pass down low with his back to the basket and made a move to score. (It was a nice move too).
...

(shortened for brevity)

Kelly didn't take that many touches down low in that particular game, but he has been taking quite a few down low. Mason has also been *extremely* active in demanding the ball down low. EXTREMELY active. And he was dominant enough against KU that they had to double team him every time he touched it down low late in the 2nd half.

Miles hasn't been great, but Mason has been a force down low and provided a real presence. SCACChoops.com has stats on this you can check out. I'll do it for you once I get back from shooting sporting clays--Status Check says it 65 in Philly and time to get outside before the game.

GTHC!

NSDukeFan
11-26-2011, 10:17 AM
Maybe I missed some, but you guys must be seeing "post" play I'm not seeing. In the Kansas game I only recall 1 time that Kelly took an entry pass down low with his back to the basket and made a move to score. (It was a nice move too).

Mason had about 5, back to the basket, in the paint, moves to the rim to attempt to score the entire game. He looked good on a couple of them.
Somebody feel free to check it out on tape, and correct me if I'm wrong, but that's what I recall.

Miles..where was he against Kansas as an offensive threat in the paint? He's a senior with size and athleticism, he should at bare minimum have a catch and jump hook.

Mason and Ryan were active in the post, but it was off plays that had broken down from guard penetration, or offensive rebounding.

And they played well, I'm not trying to say they didn't.

But, there has been very little "traditional" post play from the bigs.... the, "I'm holding this spot, give me the ball, I'm gonna turn on you, put a move on you, and score or you're gonna foul me"... plays from them.

Mason is strong enough and quick enough to get the prime real estate down low almost anytime he wants, and he is athletic enough to get a quality look too.
Kelly has enough strength now and a nice, soft shooting touch.

I can only surmise that traditional post play from a big is just not how coach K wants to play. And the winningest coach of all time can play his players any way he wants to.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=De7JFwHlfKs&feature=player_embedded
Check out play #3

I also love at the end how Kelly says that the reason he likes being MVP (of course after the team getting the win) is because he can be listed on the same trophy as Wojo who was MVP in 1998 I think?

jimsumner
11-26-2011, 10:32 AM
Just telling it like it is, guys. No need to shoot the messenger.

I don't think I was ever too critical of Sheldon. I did think Boozer could have been better inside wwith his skills.

I think if you look back you'll find I was pretty complimentary of Zoubek his Sr. year.

How'd you feel about Shelden?

Bob Green
11-26-2011, 10:37 AM
Check out play #3



Play #3 shows textbook low post basketball on offense and defense. If Mason Plumlee can maintain consistency with both the right and left hand hook shot, he will be a tough match-up in the low post. Of course, he needs to keep working hard to improve his performance at the free throw line. Perhaps the single best statistic from the Kansas game is Mason making 7 of 9 free throws.

I really enjoy watching the "Top 5 Plays" video clips at Duke Blue Planet, especially after a big win.

Mike Corey
11-26-2011, 10:48 AM
Just telling it like it is, guys. No need to shoot the messenger.

I'll respond to you because I had heard that you were a serious man, to be treated with respect. But I must say no to you and let me give you my reasons.

This sentiment--don't shoot the messenger--doesn't apply here.

Don't shoot the messenger applies when you're merely a deliverer of something. So if you were reporting something and were criticized for it, you could defend yourself with the phrase.

Instead, you're delivering your analysis rather than facts, and your analysis is worthy of critique.

You assert the following:

1) Mason only used five post moves in the Kansas game
2) Miles does not even have a hook shot in his repertoire
3) Mason and Ryan "played well" but only because of their ability to score garbage buckets, from offensive boards or from dishes from guards
4) There has been very little "traditional" post play from the bigs

Rather than get into a tit-for-tat, I would respectfully suggest to you that the above indicates that you are sharing your perceptions of this Duke team rather than your observations, or that your observations have been minimal and are being extrapolated unfairly as conclusions. The four points you articulated above are incorrect, and I hope you will consider, um, reconsidering your perception of Duke based on a larger sample of work than the highlights you may have seen on ESPN after the game.

JMarley50
11-26-2011, 11:13 AM
Play #3 shows textbook low post basketball on offense and defense. If Mason Plumlee can maintain consistency with both the right and left hand hook shot, he will be a tough match-up in the low post. Of course, he needs to keep working hard to improve his performance at the free throw line. Perhaps the single best statistic from the Kansas game is Mason making 7 of 9 free throws.

I really enjoy watching the "Top 5 Plays" video clips at Duke Blue Planet, especially after a big win.

I just watched the highlights again and I can't stop smiling. I have been screaming "use the hook" at the tv for the last two seasons. As a 6'8" post player with limited jumping ability I survived with the baby hook. So I knew what it would do for a 6'10" freak athlete like Mason. I think now that he's discovered it, there is no turning back!! It will keep improving and he will start dominating. Or it will demand the double team which is a death sentence for opposing teams considering we have multiple snipers lurking on the perimeter. He has pretty good passing ability as well so finding the open shooters shouldn't be a problem.

I think you hit the nail on the head with the free throws. He will start drawing a lot more fouls now, its imperative that he makes his free throws to keep the hack-a-mason D in check.

SilkyJ
11-26-2011, 02:32 PM
I'll respond to you because I had heard that you were a serious man, to be treated with respect. But I must say no to you and let me give you my reasons.

This sentiment--don't shoot the messenger--doesn't apply here.

Don't shoot the messenger applies when you're merely a deliverer of something. So if you were reporting something and were criticized for it, you could defend yourself with the phrase.

Instead, you're delivering your analysis rather than facts, and your analysis is worthy of critique.

You assert the following:

1) Mason only used five post moves in the Kansas game
2) Miles does not even have a hook shot in his repertoire
3) Mason and Ryan "played well" but only because of their ability to score garbage buckets, from offensive boards or from dishes from guards
4) There has been very little "traditional" post play from the bigs

Rather than get into a tit-for-tat, I would respectfully suggest to you that the above indicates that you are sharing your perceptions of this Duke team rather than your observations, or that your observations have been minimal and are being extrapolated unfairly as conclusions. The four points you articulated above are incorrect, and I hope you will consider, um, reconsidering your perception of Duke based on a larger sample of work than the highlights you may have seen on ESPN after the game.

Well said, Mike. I'd propose we stop feeding the trolls, but I doubt it would do any good. (and I can't help it sometimes either)

OldPhiKap
11-26-2011, 03:25 PM
I'll respond to you because I had heard that you were a serious man, to be treated with respect. But I must say no to you and let me give you my reasons.

"Tattaglia's a pimp. He never coulda outfought Santino. But I didn't know until this day, that it was Barzini all along."

http://www.thegodfathertrilogy.com/gf1/wav/tattaglia.wav



(none of which applies to any poster on this thread, it's just the only real response. Either that, or "leave the gun. Take the cannoli.")

BlueTeuf
11-26-2011, 05:56 PM
Well said, Mike. I'd propose we stop feeding the trolls,

I know Wojo's efficacy is a sensitive topic on the board - but I have a hard time considering Wheat a Troll.

As to this thread's topic - I find ample room for Wheat's perspective - even though I don't wholly agree with him. I am excited by Mason's interior development - and sense that something's started to click for him. With Kelly - I'm not ready for comparisons to McHale(!?)

Here's my observation: With a few notable exceptions over the years, Duke's big men pause when they receive the ball instead of flowing/exploding into an immediate post move. I consider it either a bad habit or a lack of sufficent court sense to understand how the defender is best exploited based on the dynamics of moment. This year Mason is showing some "explodability."

Duke is an elite program - but not one I would consider among the elite in developing big men. If Wojo is Coach K's choice for a big-man coach. that's good enough for me. I expect when it's not good enough for Coach K, he'll make some changes. Perhaps he already has.

jjasper0729
11-26-2011, 06:08 PM
"Tattaglia's a pimp. He never coulda outfought Santino. But I didn't know until this day, that it was Barzini all along."

http://www.thegodfathertrilogy.com/gf1/wav/tattaglia.wav



(none of which applies to any poster on this thread, it's just the only real response. Either that, or "leave the gun. Take the cannoli.")

Totally beat me to the punch :D

SMO
11-26-2011, 08:16 PM
I know Wojo's efficacy is a sensitive topic on the board - but I have a hard time considering Wheat a Troll.

As to this thread's topic - I find ample room for Wheat's perspective - even though I don't wholly agree with him. I am excited by Mason's interior development - and sense that something's started to click for him. With Kelly - I'm not ready for comparisons to McHale(!?)

Here's my observation: With a few notable exceptions over the years, Duke's big men pause when they receive the ball instead of flowing/exploding into an immediate post move. I consider it either a bad habit or a lack of sufficent court sense to understand how the defender is best exploited based on the dynamics of moment. This year Mason is showing some "explodability."

Duke is an elite program - but not one I would consider among the elite in developing big men. If Wojo is Coach K's choice for a big-man coach. that's good enough for me. I expect when it's not good enough for Coach K, he'll make some changes. Perhaps he already has.

I'm curious. Who do think is elite at developing big men?

uh_no
11-26-2011, 08:49 PM
I'm curious. Who do think is elite at developing big men?

Well every big man UNC brings in seems to end up being a huge asset (hansbrough, now zeller). Uconn has a record of developing big men (you don't lead the country 8(?) straight years in blocks by accident). Georgetown tends to do well developing big men.

SMO
11-26-2011, 09:07 PM
Well every big man UNC brings in seems to end up being a huge asset (hansbrough, now zeller). Uconn has a record of developing big men (you don't lead the country 8(?) straight years in blocks by accident). Georgetown tends to do well developing big men.

Are you and BleuTeuf the same entity (serious question)?

So that's 3 elite big man schools. Any others? BTW, has G'town turned out any recent big man success stories aside from Hibbert & Monroe?

uh_no
11-26-2011, 09:32 PM
Are you and BleuTeuf the same entity (serious question)?
Frankly, I'm offended by that. I'm not sure how responding to your post would make you question whether I post under multiple tags. Perhaps you could check my profile and see that I've been a consistent poster for several years before accusing me of something like this. (serious answer)


So that's 3 elite big man schools. Any others? BTW, has G'town turned out any recent big man success stories aside from Hibbert & Monroe?

well hibbert+monroe each being drafted in the top 20 in the past 4 years alone qualifies georgetown as being "elite" with big men. It is to be seen whether they can continue that line.

I'm sure there are other schools, but those three stuck out in my mind.

moonpie23
11-26-2011, 09:34 PM
Well every big man UNC brings in seems to end up being a huge asset (hansbrough, now zeller). Uconn has a record of developing big men (you don't lead the country 8(?) straight years in blocks by accident). Georgetown tends to do well developing big men.

whoa......? EVERY??? let's see....that's ALL.....


zwicker? fingleton?

also....keep this in mind....(this burns tarholes when you say it)

Brian Zoubek has JUST AS MANY RINGS AS Tyler Hanstravel....

uh_no
11-26-2011, 09:42 PM
whoa......? EVERY??? let's see....that's ALL.....


zwicker? fingleton?

also....keep this in mind....(this burns tarholes when you say it)

Brian Zoubek has JUST AS MANY RINGS AS Tyler Hanstravel....

Todd Zafirovski has as many rings too as the beaker muppet look alike, so I'm not sure counting rings is exactly a fair comparison.

okay so not EVERY....that's fair, but certainly tyler and now tyler are, sean may before that, henson now also

Andy7207
11-26-2011, 09:53 PM
So that's 3 elite big man schools. Any others? BTW, has G'town turned out any recent big man success stories aside from Hibbert & Monroe?

Jeff Green is doing well... but yes, GTown benefits from having Patrick Ewing, Mutumbo, and Alonzo Mourning as its legacy. I would also say having 3 schools defined as "elite" is probably a good number.

Wheat/"/"/"
11-26-2011, 11:25 PM
How'd you feel about Shelden?

He was a stud in the post and would attack the rim.
A strong player with pretty good hands.

I don't remember him as having a lot of touch, but if he caught it low he could get a shot off .

Always could be counted on to defend.

Probably Duke's 3rd best post player, after Laettner and Gminski.

COYS
11-26-2011, 11:25 PM
Well every big man UNC brings in seems to end up being a huge asset (hansbrough, now zeller). Uconn has a record of developing big men (you don't lead the country 8(?) straight years in blocks by accident). Georgetown tends to do well developing big men.

I don't understand this logic. Deon Thompson looked terrible once Hansbrough wasn't around to soak up defenses. Ed Davis had a sophomore year that was similar to Josh McRoberts in that he accumulated solid individual numbers while also showing that he wasn't ready to be the go-to scorer every night. There were also whispers of locker-room unhappiness. It's funny because Wheat and others have criticized Mason and Ryan for not scoring enough on the block, but Mason has almost certainly had as many pure post moves as Henson has had this year. Henson's biggest improvement so far this season has been his ability to face up and hit mid-range jumpers, not scoring at will from the low block. I'll give UNC credit for Mae, Hansbrough, and Zeller as nice run of offensive threats in the post. But is that lineage any better than Brand, Boozer, Williams? No way, in my opinion. UCONN definitely has a good history of strong defensive post players. However, perhaps only Okafor had particularly refined post moves.

Note that I am not bashing these other players. I actually think Henson is UNC's biggest weapon because he erases so many of the weaknesses of UNC's perimeter defenders with his length and shot blocking ability. However, I don't think his development is really all that much different than Mason's. Henson came in as a more highly touted recruit and potential one and done candidate. By the end of his freshman year his stock had fallen so far that he was projected as a late first or early second rounder. He improved a bit last year and his rebounding and defense (a product more of his extreme length and reach than anything else) alone were enough to make him a solid first rounder, but scouts wanted to see if he could improve his offense. So far, he has done that this year, though he is still raw offensively. Mason came in as a less heralded recruit than Henson. Was not forced to be "the man" his frosh year as Henson was. He was not a centerpiece of the team on offense last year, either, although, like Henson, he showed himself to be a very good rebounder mostly by virtue of his size and athleticism. Scouts wanted to see if he could develop a higher basketball IQ and some offensive skills so he came back for his junior season and, just like Henson, is showing an improved offensive game although he is still rough around the edges. I don't know why Henson's path is viewed as an example of why UNC develops bigs "better" than Duke when Mason has followed a similar path. Also, Mason played alongside Scheyer, Smith, and Singler for his first two years. All three were more accomplished college scorers than anyone on the UNC roster during Henson's tenure so it is to be expected that Henson would have better offensive numbers, for the most part.

Anyway, the point of this is to say that it's clear that Mason, Ryan, Lance, Zoubek . . . even Josh McRoberts developed over their careers at Duke. The story seems to have been written about Mason's failure to develop a consistent low post game before his career has run it's course. Neither Ryan nor Lance were ever supposed to be strong interior players. Both were considered face-up 4's coming in. While Lance never developed much of an offensive game, he became an elite defender. Ryan's offensive game has developed very nicely over his time at Duke. Zoubek struggled through serious injuries until his senior season when he became quite the weapon. If Zeller had not been healthy last year and had struggled to stay on the court and play consistently as a result of injuries, people would be lamenting the stunted development of a once highly touted recruit who may or may not start ahead of the star-frosh McAdoo. I get that schools get reputations for things like Point Guard U (which is what Lute Olsen's Arizona was called for a while) or Georgetown with some of the great centers they had back in the 80's. Hansbrough is definitely someone UNC can still point to as a dominant low post scorer. But let's say that after this season Henson, Zeller, and McAdoo all leave for the NBA (a real possibility). Let's also say that UNC doesn't land a physical and reliable low post scorer in the 2013 recruiting class. Will people start to rewrite Roy Williams' history? Will they point out that Henson never really had a strong offensive post game and that Zeller was all finesse? Yeah, Hansbrough was great, but what has he done in the pros? Plus, the class of 2014 wasn't even in high school during Hansbrough's senior season. They can barely remember back that far. I mean, his teams can win a lot of games, but why would a big, physical post player go to UNC when they haven't had a player like that in 6 seasons?

The reputation of Duke and it's post players may shape the predispositions of recruits who are unwilling to look beyond the surface at a school. However, it is just that: a reputation that doesn't have a particularly strong foundation in reality.

OldPhiKap
11-26-2011, 11:27 PM
Well every big man UNC brings in seems to end up being a huge asset (hansbrough, now zeller). Uconn has a record of developing big men (you don't lead the country 8(?) straight years in blocks by accident). Georgetown tends to do well developing big men.

Brian Bersticker sends his regards.

I am not sure what big guy we've had who has had huge talent but failed to show it at Duke. Shelden and Carlos are probably the two most talented bigs we have had (excluding the present team) and both have done well. We missed on Greg Odum, and Okafor didn't come here either. Kris Humphries decided he wanted to go somewhere that would highlight him and let him jump to the league right away.

If someone wants to argue that we have not attracted the low-post beasts to Duke, I think that is an interesting argument. But I don't see where we've had wonderful talent that just went to waste. It seems to me that we've gotten the best we can get out of the young men we've recruited -- at every position.

How many big men have we had who "underperformed" at Duke but then went on to big pro careers? Or, alternatively, have we by and large gotten the most we can out of the bigs that have come here?

When I was at Duke, the best bigs in the conference all seemed to be at Clemson. Did that make Cliff Ellis a great big man coach? Or, did the Grant brothers and Campbell happen to decide on the same school? Was Dave Odom a great big man coach because he found a tall skinny kid from the Virgin Islands that wanted to play stateside?

UrinalCake
11-26-2011, 11:49 PM
well hibbert+monroe each being drafted in the top 20 in the past 4 years alone qualifies georgetown as being "elite" with big men. It is to be seen whether they can continue that line.

I guess with that criteria you could count OSU, having developed Oden and Sullinger (who will most definitely be a lottery pick). We could ask the question of whether they actually "developed" Oden, but that's a whole new can of worms.

Wheat/"/"/"
11-26-2011, 11:50 PM
Well said, Mike. I'd propose we stop feeding the trolls, but I doubt it would do any good. (and I can't help it sometimes either)

I'm not trolling, never have.

Just offering my observations, and some of you don't want to discuss play, you just want to call me out.

uh_no
11-27-2011, 01:06 AM
Figure it needs to be pointed out that henson+zeller combined for 5-18 and got outrebounded and outscored by mike moser....

elite big man school indeed!

g-money
11-27-2011, 01:31 AM
I just watched the highlights again and I can't stop smiling. I have been screaming "use the hook" at the tv for the last two seasons. As a 6'8" post player with limited jumping ability I survived with the baby hook. So I knew what it would do for a 6'10" freak athlete like Mason. I think now that he's discovered it, there is no turning back!! It will keep improving and he will start dominating. Or it will demand the double team which is a death sentence for opposing teams considering we have multiple snipers lurking on the perimeter. He has pretty good passing ability as well so finding the open shooters shouldn't be a problem.

I think you hit the nail on the head with the free throws. He will start drawing a lot more fouls now, its imperative that he makes his free throws to keep the hack-a-mason D in check.

Just want to give this post a +1. At 6'10", with decently long arms and a high jumper's vertical leap, there aren't a whole lot of D-1 players that can stop Mason from hitting a jump/sky hook (released from a fully vertical position) without fouling.

Big thing to watch for on Tuesday: Can Mason stay out of foul trouble against Sullinger? If he can, I would not be surprised to see a very even matchup.

77devil
11-27-2011, 09:22 AM
I'm not trolling, never have.

Perhaps not but rarely failing to bait.


Just offering my observations, and some of you don't want to discuss play, you just want to call me out.

There are plenty of well reasoned responses with support in the thread in contrast to your unsubstantiated opinion.



By the way, what are your observations about UNC's big men play last night? I did not see the game.

Wheat/"/"/"
11-27-2011, 10:05 AM
Perhaps not but rarely failing to bait.



There are plenty of well reasoned responses with support in the thread in contrast to your unsubstantiated opinion.



Since the board software prevents this, you must be having the same effect on various people. Perhaps you should take some of the criticism expressed openly in this thread into account. If you can't take the heat, well, you know how it goes.

By the way, what are your observations about UNC's big men play last night? I did not see the game.

My observations are in the UNC/UNLV game thread.

I can take criticism just fine. In fact, I'm the kind of guy that likes a strong, sprited debate. Bring it, I say:) I don't take things personal on a basketball fan forum. I just say what I think, try to do it respectfully, and let the chips fall where they may.

Unsubstantiated opinion, huh? I noticed that when I pointed out that Kelly only had 1 play in the Kansas game that, (I think), could be considered an offensive post move, I was roundly criticised, but no-one offered to point out a 2nd one that I missed, much less a 3rd. Kelly can be a better post scorer is what I am saying. You guys are hearing that I think he's not a good player. Listen closely. He's a good player.


Same with Mason. He's a good player. I think he can be much better inside.


One other thing..I'll try to be at the OSU in-game thread...real time..and we will count the times Duke makes an entry pass and Mason, Miles, Kelly or anyone else makes an offensive move to score down low in a half court set. Only point I am trying to make is that if Duke can do more of that, and the players can be better at it, they will be a better team.

Bob Green
11-27-2011, 10:11 AM
By the way, what are your observations about UNC's big men play last night? I did not see the game.

Wheat/"/"/" posted his thoughts in the Nevada-Las Vegas 90, UNC-CH 80 thread. Here is his balanced analysis of Carolina's performance:


Here's my quick thoughts on the game...

UNLV played very well. I don't care where they are ranked, That was a tough team out there last night.

UNC simply did not take care of the ball inside, got outquicked after rebounds, and shot poorly...from the inside, which is generally UNC's strength.

Plus they pretty much all sucked at the FT line in this game.

They never got into an offensive rhythm and missed some shots they would normally make...and that was because UNLV played very well defensively on the bigs by blocking out, playing physical, and reaching in and disrupting their post moves. It was a game that UNLV took from UNC by strong inside defense.

Zeller and Henson had poor games handling the ball after the catch inside. And it all had to do with the aggressiveness of UNLV, They were not the unforced kind of mistakes, they were forced by UNLV.

Barnes had a poor game with decisions, too. He tried to force it off the dribble too often when it wasn't there, or he just couldn't beat a quicker defender. He contributed to the lack of offensive rhythm, with those decisions.

I thought guard play was OK, offensively. PJ can shoot it, Reggie can shoot it, and Marshall makes things happen. Strickland is playing well and staying within his game. It was the poor post play that lost this one.

They have to move better without the ball in the 1/2 court and make stronger cuts because, other than Marshall and Strickland, (who are not "scorers") Barnes, PJ, and Reggie are not going to break people down off the dribble.

Defensively, they have to play with more urgency. This team is a very good defensive team, but they didn't show it last night. It was almost like they were thinking "I'll challenge this shot, pretty good, but I'll leave some space so I can be ready for offense...they can't keep making these shots forever...right?"

Wrong.

UNLV made some big shots, and kept coming. That was a confident, well coached team on the floor.

UNLV's Big Men outplayed Carolina's Big Men, while nobody on Carolina played defense.

Mike Corey
11-27-2011, 10:35 AM
My observations are in the UNC/UNLV game thread.

I can take criticism just fine. In fact, I'm the kind of guy that likes a strong, sprited debate. Bring it, I say:) I don't take things personal on a basketball fan forum. I just say what I think, try to do it respectfully, and let the chips fall where they may.

...



The above aside, if I have time today I will review tape of the Duke-Kansas game and track the number of touches and post moves made by Duke's interior players; I appreciate your willingness to build upon your observations and to track the number of touches and post moves by Duke's players in the OSU game.

CDu
11-27-2011, 11:25 AM
UNLV's Big Men outplayed Carolina's Big Men, while nobody on Carolina played defense.

Which is a bit surprising, because I'd say that the things that UNC did best last year were post play and defense.

Wheat/"/"/"
11-27-2011, 11:26 AM
The above aside, if I have time today I will review tape of the Duke-Kansas game and track the number of touches and post moves made by Duke's interior players; I appreciate your willingness to build upon your observations and to track the number of touches and post moves by Duke's players in the OSU game.

Thanks Mike...what I'm particularly interested in is the number of catch and turn scoring attempts inside from the three bigs.

COYS
11-27-2011, 12:05 PM
Thanks Mike...what I'm particularly interested in is the number of catch and turn scoring attempts inside from the three bigs.

Wheat, I'll give you some props even though I disagree with some of your posts. I always like reading your posts and appreciate your continued willingness to post here. I do think, however, that too much emphasis is put on just these types of catch and turn scoring attempts when it comes to the development of our bigs at Duke. You're right that Kelly might be able to score more on post up opportunities, but thus far he has been invaluable and efficients operating from the free throw line and the three point line. He draws defenders out of the post and is a big reason that Mason has had room to operate underneath the hoop. Against Kansas, he really started to use the dribble to create offense for himself and others. While Mason is far from refined, he has shown immense improvement in post up situations. Scoring on 5 post ups plus free throws is more than sufficient for Duke's offense. If he can do that every game, Duke and Mason will be in good shape. I think the extra attention Duke gets as a program puts undue emphasis on what Duke players lack rather than what they are good at. Why try to put a round peg into a square hole? The occasional post up for Kelly makes sense, especially if the opposing defender is undersized. Otherwise, he's not an interior offensive player. Why make him one? Mason does many things very well. He's a great passer, a strong finisher on garbage buckets around the hoop, and an excellent rebounder. He's not a refined post scorer although he is getting better. Why not let him come along at his own pace? He's definitely improving. I think overemphasizing scoring on catch and turn moves in the post causes people to overlook the many other things Duke's bigs do well. In the case of Kelly, I think it would be a mistake to force feed him post ups as his greatest strength is taking his defender out of the paint and going to work from the high post or from the wing.

Wheat/"/"/"
11-27-2011, 12:49 PM
Wheat, I'll give you some props even though I disagree with some of your posts. I always like reading your posts and appreciate your continued willingness to post here. I do think, however, that too much emphasis is put on just these types of catch and turn scoring attempts when it comes to the development of our bigs at Duke. You're right that Kelly might be able to score more on post up opportunities, but thus far he has been invaluable and efficients operating from the free throw line and the three point line. He draws defenders out of the post and is a big reason that Mason has had room to operate underneath the hoop. Against Kansas, he really started to use the dribble to create offense for himself and others. While Mason is far from refined, he has shown immense improvement in post up situations. Scoring on 5 post ups plus free throws is more than sufficient for Duke's offense. If he can do that every game, Duke and Mason will be in good shape. I think the extra attention Duke gets as a program puts undue emphasis on what Duke players lack rather than what they are good at. Why try to put a round peg into a square hole? The occasional post up for Kelly makes sense, especially if the opposing defender is undersized. Otherwise, he's not an interior offensive player. Why make him one? Mason does many things very well. He's a great passer, a strong finisher on garbage buckets around the hoop, and an excellent rebounder. He's not a refined post scorer although he is getting better. Why not let him come along at his own pace? He's definitely improving. I think overemphasizing scoring on catch and turn moves in the post causes people to overlook the many other things Duke's bigs do well. In the case of Kelly, I think it would be a mistake to force feed him post ups as his greatest strength is taking his defender out of the paint and going to work from the high post or from the wing.

...Keep in mind that I also said this in my original post that got the dust going in the thread.

"
I can only surmise that traditional post play from a big is just not how coach K wants to play. And the winningest coach of all time can play his players any way he wants to. "


You're right that Kelly is a better face up player. And I don't think he should change his game to a Zeller type post big either. But I do think there are more times that he should be used in that sort of role and that he can be successful at it, which could make Duke a better team. It's just my opinion, I'm not meaning to second guess coach K.

And no doubt Mason has improved. I think he can be even better with making him a little more of the offensive focus than Duke has to this point. Pound it inside, and pound on him to shoot it quickly off the catch and turn with that little jump hook that is slowly coming along. He can get that shot anytime he wants.

*Note: His poor foul shooting might have an effect on why that's not happening more.

Again, coach K is "gonna do what he do", and I respect that. He's winning his way. but thats what I think.

uh_no
11-27-2011, 01:10 PM
...Keep in mind that I also said this in my original post that got the dust going in the thread.

"
I can only surmise that traditional post play from a big is just not how coach K wants to play. And the winningest coach of all time can play his players any way he wants to. "


I think that's the key right there. Unfortunately, what that means is that the players who have the type of skills that we're talking about here may choose to go elsewhere. If I were a big man, I wouldn't necessarily want to come to duke and set screens all the time when i could go elsewhere and simply pound it in the post. That's not an attack on playing that way, just what I'd consider from the player's perspective. In the same vein, why would a star wide receiver go to a college where the football team runs on 80% of the downs? This doesn't mean the big men can't be wildly successful and phenomenal at what they do (as we are seeing from ryan and mason so far this year...and Z 2 years ago) just that their purpose on the floor is to make the offense more prolific, and coach K thinks that happens by not necessarily having them post up 100% of the time.

moonpie23
11-27-2011, 01:20 PM
i think the perception of a "dominant big man" and how he plays is skewed a bit from folks that decry today's game. They see certain positions being "not pure to the game" when played differently.

personally, i think Brian Zoubek emerged as a "dominant big man".....

uh_no
11-27-2011, 01:46 PM
i think the perception of a "dominant big man" and how he plays is skewed a bit from folks that decry today's game. They see certain positions being "not pure to the game" when played differently.

personally, i think Brian Zoubek emerged as a "dominant big man".....

Maybe. i don't think he was a dominant "scorer," but certainly rebounding, defending, and just about every other facet of the game. I think in order to classify someone as truly dominant, they must be at worst very very good at all parts of the game. Just like you wouldn't call a guard dominant if he wasn't good at one of shooting, driving, and passing.....

it all comes down to what one uses as "dominant" criteria...and its largely an arbitrary and meaningless monicker. In the end, we know exactly what brian was capable of and what he meant to that team, and that's good enough for me whether I or anyone else can call him "dominant" or not.

NSDukeFan
11-27-2011, 02:21 PM
Well every big man UNC brings in seems to end up being a huge asset (hansbrough, now zeller). Uconn has a record of developing big men (you don't lead the country 8(?) straight years in blocks by accident). Georgetown tends to do well developing big men.

I think the development of big men (or any players) probably gets overstated. Are we talking development of big men at a school or recruitment?

Here are the RSCI recruing rankings for UNC's big men lately, UConn's, Ohio State's and Georgetown's:
May #9, Hansbrough #4, Wright #3, Davis #9, Zeller #18, Henson #5, McAdoo #6
Drummond (was #1 or 2 in his class before reclassification), Oriakhi #16, Robinson #18, Villanueva #18, Okafor #99
Sullinger #2, Mullens #8, Oden #1, Koufos #12
Hibbert unranked? , Monroe #6 , Macklin #16

So is that great coaching at UNC to turn all of these top 10 recruits into good players inside? Were Okafor and Hibbert great development by the coaches or were they under-ranked? I don't know and manybe the programs can take credit for them (or Derrick Williams at Arizona), but to take top 10 recruits and turn them into good college players that play pro doesn't seem like it is as much outstanding coaching as recruiting. I'm not saying Duke is that different that way as the most highly rated recruits tend to be the better players, but sometimes I think this "development" of bigs at "big man U" gets overstated when it is more a function of good recruiting at those positions.

uh_no
11-27-2011, 02:35 PM
I think the development of big men (or any players) probably gets overstated. Are we talking development of big men at a school or recruitment?


In the end, I don't think it matters. What matters is that the school ends up with a big man that makes HSers say "I want to be like x, so I want to play at y school"

We can call it the calipari effect. HS PGs see other top pgs go to memphis/UK, stay a year, and then get picked high in the draft. Therefore the way to get to the NBA for a HS PG is to go to calipari. Now obviously calipari isn't doing a thing to develop these guys into NBA players. He simply gives them a stage to perform on.

So I understand why a guy like zeller would choose UNC over Duke....(i don't even know if he was considering duke...but its just an example)...he could point to tyler hansbrough and say "I want to be the next him".....who was the guy at duke that he could point to and say "I want to be him?" As valuable as zoubek was to our team, i don't think there were many HSers looking up and saying "i want to be the next zoubek"....and whether that is media driven or based in some sort of reality is irrelevent, because that's what the HSers ends up thinking

Now, will ryan or mason change that? I hope so.....ryan is already getting hailed as the top "euro style" big in the college game, and with the success of gasol and dirk lately in the NBA, that could be a very important media/recruiting tool. If mason becomes a beast down low like he has been for several games already this year, then suddenly what you have on sports center is "duke big men kelly/mason are an unguardable duo" and then HS kids say "i want to be that"

Andy7207
11-27-2011, 03:59 PM
In the end, I don't think it matters. What matters is that the school ends up with a big man that makes HSers say "I want to be like x, so I want to play at y school"

Yes. I would say the tag "elite big man school" has more to do with recruitment and amount of showcasing than development. For example, I think big men like Anthony Davis are becoming more likely to choose Kentucky based off of their draft success with Demarcus Cousins and Enes Kanter.

jimsumner
11-27-2011, 05:46 PM
I think that's the key right there. Unfortunately, what that means is that the players who have the type of skills that we're talking about here may choose to go elsewhere. If I were a big man, I wouldn't necessarily want to come to duke and set screens all the time when i could go elsewhere and simply pound it in the post. That's not an attack on playing that way, just what I'd consider from the player's perspective. In the same vein, why would a star wide receiver go to a college where the football team runs on 80% of the downs?

I'm pretty sure Danny Ferry, Alaa Abdelnaby, Christian Laettner, Cherokee Parks, Elton Brand, Carlos Boozer, Shelden Williams and Josh McRoberts didn't set screens all day. It wasn't that long ago that a 6-9, 250-pound, back-to-the-basket, low-post player averaged almost 19 points per game en route to being a consensus first-team All-American.

If you've got that skill set, I darn well guarantee you that Duke will find a way to utilize it to everyone's mutual benefit.

As for the wide receiver analogy, Georgia Tech always seems to have an elite wide receiver or two. Because when they do throw you the ball, the defense is keying on the run and you have lots of room to operate. I suspect that's what Paul Johnson told Stephen Hill. When Hill is starting in the NFL, it will seem like pretty good advice.

uh_no
11-27-2011, 06:40 PM
I'm pretty sure Danny Ferry, Alaa Abdelnaby, Christian Laettner, Cherokee Parks, Elton Brand, Carlos Boozer, Shelden Williams and Josh McRoberts didn't set screens all day. It wasn't that long ago that a 6-9, 250-pound, back-to-the-basket, low-post player averaged almost 19 points per game en route to being a consensus first-team All-American.

If you've got that skill set, I darn well guarantee you that Duke will find a way to utilize it to everyone's mutual benefit.

As for the wide receiver analogy, Georgia Tech always seems to have an elite wide receiver or two. Because when they do throw you the ball, the defense is keying on the run and you have lots of room to operate. I suspect that's what Paul Johnson told Stephen Hill. When Hill is starting in the NFL, it will seem like pretty good advice.

georgia tech was just a random school that came to mind...replace with any school as you see fit


I think my overall point is that is not how are current bigs have been used in the past 5 whatever years, and in the consciousness of present day high schoolers, what they see from today's high schoolers is by far more important than what happend 20 or even 10 years ago....and I wouldn't be surprised if guys recruiting big men against K would say stuff like "don't go to duke, you'll set screens all day"

whether it is actually true or not isn't exactly relevant since all that matters is they can look at the most recent duke teams and say "wow they don't have high scoring bigs, and they don't get the ball down low, maybe I should go elsewhere"

jimsumner
11-27-2011, 07:12 PM
georgia tech was just a random school that came to mind...replace with any school as you see fit


I think my overall point is that is not how are current bigs have been used in the past 5 whatever years, and in the consciousness of present day high schoolers, what they see from today's high schoolers is by far more important than what happend 20 or even 10 years ago....and I wouldn't be surprised if guys recruiting big men against K would say stuff like "don't go to duke, you'll set screens all day"

whether it is actually true or not isn't exactly relevant since all that matters is they can look at the most recent duke teams and say "wow they don't have high scoring bigs, and they don't get the ball down low, maybe I should go elsewhere"

Shelden Williams finished up six years ago. Not 20, not even 10. And the NBA, the desired designation of all these guys, features more than a few former Duke bigs pulling down a sizeable chunk of change. Now. Not 20 years ago.

I'm reasonably certain the Duke coaching staff has ways of conveying this information to prospective student-athletes.

uh_no
11-27-2011, 07:25 PM
Shelden Williams finished up six years ago. Not 20, not even 10. And the NBA, the desired designation of all these guys, features more than a few former Duke bigs pulling down a sizeable chunk of change. Now. Not 20 years ago.

I'm reasonably certain the Duke coaching staff has ways of conveying this information to prospective student-athletes.

I'm not arguing a) that duke has not had great big men as recent as 6 years ago or b) that the duke coaching staff is unable to effectively recruit big men.

Students being recruited now are 16-18 meaning they were 10-12 when shelden finished up. It's a lot easier for roy williams to say "look tyler hansbrough" than it is for K to bring up a big man who had his college heyday when the recruit was in elementary school. It's "what have you done for me lately"....think about kyrie's recruitment: people were telling him not to go to duke because coach K stifles point guards...well....after he flashed it up for a few games, and nolan had a phenomenal year from the point, you don't hear that anymore....public consciousness of these things is a few years at best. Obviously, informed people know better....but I think the public perception of these programs affects recruits decisions, and in the public eye, duke big guys are "soft" and can't score. It's a lot easier for an opposing coach to reinforce the public perception in the recruits eyes than it is for our staff to attempt to demonstrate why the public perception is wrong.

COYS
11-27-2011, 07:27 PM
I think that's the key right there. Unfortunately, what that means is that the players who have the type of skills that we're talking about here may choose to go elsewhere. If I were a big man, I wouldn't necessarily want to come to duke and set screens all the time when i could go elsewhere and simply pound it in the post. That's not an attack on playing that way, just what I'd consider from the player's perspective. In the same vein, why would a star wide receiver go to a college where the football team runs on 80% of the downs? This doesn't mean the big men can't be wildly successful and phenomenal at what they do (as we are seeing from ryan and mason so far this year...and Z 2 years ago) just that their purpose on the floor is to make the offense more prolific, and coach K thinks that happens by not necessarily having them post up 100% of the time.

This is in response to wheat and uh no, but I feel like this post underscores what I think is revisionist history. Coach K has had strong post scorers for most of his career. Brand was the centerpiece of an extremely talented offense. Boozer was not featured as much as brand but still had plenty of post touches. Shelden was co-focus with JJ. And this doesn't go back farther than 1998. Remember that Christian added his perimeter game as his career progressed. K certainly values versatility and has had some incredible face-up forwards as well. But the staff has made great use of post scoring many, many times. We simply have not had a traditional post scorer on the roster for a while other than zoubek. We recruited Patterson but didn't get him. We recruited Monroe (who was more of a hybrid) but didn't get him. We've missed a few other targets who can operate in the post, as well. If we'd gotten Patterson, we'd never even have this thread. When K has had players capable of scoring the post, he's used them extensively. Even this year now that Mason has improved in the post, we've gone to him more. It is a misrepresentation of K's past teams to say
that he doesn't emphasize post scoring.

jimsumner
11-27-2011, 07:42 PM
Even since Shelden, I'm not sure the stereotype is accurate. Josh McRoberts averaged 13 points (and 3.5 assists) per game as Duke's primary center in 2007. McRoberts only made five 3-pointers that season, so he did most of his damage inside.

The next season, Kyle Singler played out of position, as Zoubek had a bad foot. Singler averaged 13.3 ppg.

Neither was a prototype 5. But both played that position and did so without setting an inordinate number of screens.

Mason is averaging a double-double so far this year.

So, were are talking two seasons here, one of which resulted in an NCAA title.

I think we're underestimating how rare are the Elton Brand-Jared Sullinger low-post talents. There just aren't that many. Duke has declined to recruit marginal players at that position on more than one occasion. Last summer a kid named Landen Lucas practically begged Duke for an offer. Duke scouted him and decided to pass. He ended up signing with Kansas but only after Kansas missed on guys like Tarczewski.

Who would you rather have, a mediocre "pure" post or Ryan Kelly? Because Duke has asked that or a similar question on more than one occasion and opted for the Kelly analog. But, make no mistake. Duke will take and use an Elton Brand any day of the year.

uh_no
11-27-2011, 07:45 PM
It is a misrepresentation of K's past teams to say
that he doesn't emphasize post scoring.

I never actually said that. I simply said that dumping it to the big guy is not the best option with all types of rosters, and over the past 5-6 years, it clearly has not been the number one option. This affects public perception, and the result is that recruits don't think coach K uses big men. Reality is largely irrelevent (and as you and I have both pointed out, largely differs from public perception)....but all that matters in the end in terms of landing targets is what they think of duke, and that is (in my opinion) much more affected by public perception than it is by reality, especially reality which is mostly many years in the past.

jimsumner
11-27-2011, 08:02 PM
I never actually said that. I simply said that dumping it to the big guy is not the best option with all types of rosters, and over the past 5-6 years, it clearly has not been the number one option. This affects public perception, and the result is that recruits don't think coach K uses big men. Reality is largely irrelevent (and as you and I have both pointed out, largely differs from public perception)....but all that matters in the end in terms of landing targets is what they think of duke, and that is (in my opinion) much more affected by public perception than it is by reality, especially reality which is mostly many years in the past.

What you said is that you wouldn't go to Duke if you were a big man because you wouldn't want to spend all your time setting screens.

I do not believe that to be an accurate characterization of Duke's use of big men.

OldPhiKap
11-27-2011, 09:08 PM
I'm not arguing a) that duke has not had great big men as recent as 6 years ago or b) that the duke coaching staff is unable to effectively recruit big men.

Students being recruited now are 16-18 meaning they were 10-12 when shelden finished up. It's a lot easier for roy williams to say "look tyler hansbrough" than it is for K to bring up a big man who had his college heyday when the recruit was in elementary school. It's "what have you done for me lately"....think about kyrie's recruitment: people were telling him not to go to duke because coach K stifles point guards...well....after he flashed it up for a few games, and nolan had a phenomenal year from the point, you don't hear that anymore....public consciousness of these things is a few years at best.

So, does that mean the Heels will stop talking about MJ?

Current kids can look to Carlos, Luol, and others. OR they can look to the great support from every pro on the Olympic team. You don't think K could tell a big guy that he reminds Coach of the guys on that team bigger than 6' 9"?

uh_no
11-27-2011, 09:16 PM
What you said is that you wouldn't go to Duke if you were a big man because you wouldn't want to spend all your time setting screens.

I do not believe that to be an accurate characterization of Duke's use of big men.

What I said is that is the perception of the use of duke's big men....and have several times stated that many of the common characterizations of duke's teams are inaccurate.

Dev11
11-27-2011, 11:11 PM
Because Thanksgiving weekend requires a significant amount of sitting around in airports, I took the opportunity to conduct a little research. I looked back over the last ten NBA drafts and took down names of post players (I was slightly liberal in including small forwards if I remembered them as posts in college, like Luol). I chose to cut off at the lottery because while guys like McRoberts are good examples of posts to come from your college, I wanted to focus on the ones who left school with the most NBA "potential," whatever that means (As I type this, Carlos Boozer is probably doing rebounding drills while Kwame Brown waits to see what solid complementary piece he has just been traded for). Without posting the whole list (its about 85 guys), here were my findings, based on numbers by school:

1. Kansas produces big men, apparently. They had 7 guys fit the category by my count.
2. So do Carolina and UCONN, apparently. They had 5 each.
3. Four teams (Duke included) had 3.
4. Many other teams were represented by one or two guys.

OK, so those are my findings just pertaining to American college players. Conclusion from this: there isn't a huge amount of separation among the "top" programs for producing bigs. By the numbers, Kansas would be the only one that I consider a regular producer of bigs. One can easily dissect each school's entries for guys who weren't there long enough to soak up enough knowledge to be considered as coached up by their college (Wright at UNC), guys who flamed out pretty fast (Thabeet for UCONN) and guys who don't play post anymore (Deng at Duke).

Note, however, how many prominent NBA bigs don't fall into my list. Non-college guys who fell outside the lottery of the last ten years include most of the best bigs currently in the league. Think high schoolers (Howard, Garnett), older guys (Shaq, Brand) and foreigners (Gasols, Yao). In fact, if you look over the list of "prominent" NBA bigs, few were actually coached any time recently in college. It would be tough for any coach to claim some kind of real mastery of producing NBA bigs.

I would like to think that this is the kind of information that K shares with recruits like Tony Parker. "Look, nobody regularly produces effective NBA bigs. We coach basketball here, and damnit we're pretty good at getting guys to the league." A kid can hear as much negative recruiting as he wants, but I'm sure there is something much more powerful when coaches like K and Self walk into the living room and detail what the facts are.

(Side note: it is sad how many lottery picks turn out to be total busts. Anybody remember Patrick O'Bryant from Bradley? I didn't).

I think my conclusion here is that bigs don't really come from anywhere. Show me the big man factories and I will poke holes in your assertion. I don't have a problem with the idea that K is showing this to recruits and is dispelling rumors about his lack of production.

This subject interests and irritates me much more than it should. Let me know what you think.

UrinalCake
11-28-2011, 12:00 AM
Cool analysis, Dev11. A couple of points in response:

- I'd be interested in seeing the breakdown before and after the one-year rule was instituted in 2005. Prior to then there was virtually no chance that a skilled, athletic seven-footer would go to college. With that said, my gut tells me that most of the Kansas bigs were probably not one-and-doners, so the rule didn't affect them too much.
- How many prominent bigs would you say there are in the entire NBA? I'd say maybe ten and that's even a bit of a stretch.
- I never considered Deng to be a post player. Definitely a 3/4, but a face-up guy who drove from the perimeter.

Li_Duke
11-28-2011, 03:31 PM
All this angst about our big man perception. :) I recall a time when Duke was known for developing great mobile big men like Danny Ferry and Christian Laettner. Then we were known for developing undersized low post big men like Elton, Carlos, and Sheldon. Mason and Kelly are well on their way to becoming successes, hopefully Marshall follows them, and soon enough, Duke will be known for developing mobile big men again.

Meanwhile, let's just enjoy the continuing perception that we develop great scoring guards (Ferry, Trajan, Jay, JJ, Nolan, Curry, Austin, and later Rasheed) and versatile 6-8/6-9 forwards (Grant, Shane, Mike Dunleavy, Luol, Kyle, and later Alex and hopefully Jabari) and enjoy watching the eventual return of our developing big man reputation.

jimsumner
11-28-2011, 03:45 PM
All this angst about our big man perception. :) I recall a time when Duke was known for developing great mobile big men like Danny Ferry and Christian Laettner. Then we were known for developing undersized low post big men like Elton, Carlos, and Sheldon. Mason and Kelly are well on their way to becoming successes, hopefully Marshall follows them, and soon enough, Duke will be known for developing mobile big men again.

Meanwhile, let's just enjoy the continuing perception that we develop great scoring guards (Ferry, Trajan, Jay, JJ, Nolan, Curry, Austin, and later Rasheed) and versatile 6-8/6-9 forwards (Grant, Shane, Mike Dunleavy, Luol, Kyle, and later Alex and hopefully Jabari) and enjoy watching the eventual return of our developing big man reputation.

Pretty sure Ferry wasn't a guard. Assume you meant Dawkins.

And it's Shelden.

I maintain that Krzyzewski's ability to sculpt his teams to best utilize their skills is one of his least-appreciated talents. Duke has won big, Duke has won small. Duke has won up-tempo and steady tempo, with back-court scoring, with front-court scoring. Duke has won with mobile bigs, Duke has won with low-post power bigs, Duke has won with scoring points, with pass-first points, with veterans, with youngsters, with guys moving from one position to another, with lineups that rarely changed, with lineups that changed every few games.

With the caveat that Duke is going to be a man-to-man defensive team as long as K is running the ship, K is remarkably flexible in how his teams achieve the consistent goal of winning basketball games.