Phase II - 2011-2012

[superdave]

Phase II runs from the Colorado State game through Temple, our last pre-ACC game. We finished Phase I with a 7-1 record and are looking at a slower stretch with 4 home games plus a trip to the Garden and a trip to Philly.

1) Health – This is a pretty deep Duke team, so health is big but not necessarily a season-changer. We came through Phase 1 with one outstanding health issue - Alex. Did Alex’s concussion put him on the shelf for the season? Seems possible.

2) Team Defense – Duke’s defense is not up to par right now and I would expect this to be the biggest area of growth for the team in Phase 2. Through the first phase, they have played D well at times, but not for a full game and not the type of D that buries an opponent.
Perimeter D – Do we need some defensive minutes out of Gbinije in a Tyler Thornton-like stopper role? Can guards stop dribble penetration more, or do we change the scheme to contain? I’ll let the x and o experts tackles that last question, but it’s a concern.

Interior D – I am generally pleased with how our bigs have played on D so far. Their role could adjust with the defensive scheme of our perimeter players to more help, rotations and shot blocking. One point I see the need to improve upon is our bigs getting back on D, helping to prevent transition buckets.

Team D – Rotations to the help side have improved over Phase 1. The bigs need to help out when someone dribbles into the lane and I’ve seen a step in the right direction. Our guards need to help on the boards occasionally, in return. It’s hard via the tele to comment on communication, but I’d assume that fits with the leadership and chemistry thing mentioned at the end of this post. We seem to be playing a slightly slower pace, which could accelerate in Phase 2. But pace means learning to get back in transition and getting into the passing lanes. Can we increase pace, hurrying up lesser teams without turning the ball over too much?

Gimmick D – We used the 1-3-1 soft press once or twice in Phase 1 and the zone in Maui for one end of game possession (vs Tenn?). Those are useful tools to break out on occasion.

Transition – We need easy buckets. We need to generate them via D. How do we improve on this?

3) Rotation - We have gone 9 deep in the first half and 7 deep in the second half, so far. Can Josh and Quinn get consistent minutes, or will they be first half guys for the most part? The only real discussion is will anyone from the 8-11 bunch get more minutes? We have a shorter bench in tight games which should be shocking to no one. We have not had a serious foul trouble game…yet. Josh will be needed at some point in a tight game, probably Phase 3 in January on the road in the ACC, so I am glad he’s getting a few minutes now. I am not sure I care to speculate on minutes a ton, but Gbinije can earn some burn by performing in Phase 2.

4) Austin Rivers - This kid can get into the lane. Hot darn. He’s elite. He needs to keep his head up and either shoot the floater or drop off a pass to a big. I think this will increase the overall team offensive efficiency, and also create space for him to finish better in the lane. I said very purposefully that he can get into the lane at will. Next step is getting to the rim. No more charges or turnovers, finish those plays. Then he can start asserting himself at the right times. He’s a smart kid and he will become a killer soon. He wants it. A nit here: He needs to only shoot 3s in rhythm.

The biggest concern people have had about Austin was how he’d fit into the team. He has a great attitude and he’s reflective in a really positive way. That is wonderful to see, and has led to a ton of improvement in a month, so how much improvement can he make over the whole season? This kid is going to take off. In Phase 0, Kedsy said he thought Austin would follow the Barnes trajectory and I thought the same a month ago. But he’s not had a funky stretch lasting more than a half so far. He has the ball in his hands a good bit more than Barns last year and is not dealing with Larry Drew either.

He has only failed to score in double figures vs Michigan State this year. He’s reduced his turnovers from the first few games. He’s got 18 turnovers and 18 assists so far. Austin will make the leap in January, a month faster than Barnes. I’m feeling it. Oh yeah, he’s leading the team in scoring after 8 games.

5) Big Man Offense – This has been a focus so far. Let’s hope it remains so for purposes of offensive balance. Mason looks good, in that he is pretty assertive and shows no fear in shooting the ball. With more attempts, he’ll start hitting some of those jump hooks more often and gain confidence. Mason is leading the team in turnovers, so that’s a problem. He has games with 3, 3 and 5 field goal attempts, so it seems we are inconsistent in feeding him.

Ryan is playing well as the proverbial stretch 4. He had three straight games scoring 17, then 0 vs OSU. That’s something that I’m not sure how to describe: frustrating? evidence of a problem? Hmmm. Ryan needs to be more assertive and get a little meaner on the court. He’s a starter and a captain. Own it! Half his shots are 3s. Is that going to be the case all year? Do we need more rebounding and shotblocking out of him?

Miles can finish and he can body up on D. We can count on that. He’s got our Team D scheme down pat better than any of our top 6 in my opinion. To become a really big contributor on a title contender (our goal here), Miles should channel his inner-Zoubek and clean the glass. If he can up his offensive rebounding stats, he’ll be big in crunch minutes and can do that rebound, kick out for a 3 thing that Zoubek did so well. Miles’ stats are flat from his Sophomore to Senior years so I think making offensive rebounding his main mission could be the right thing for him. In Phase 1, his minutes have ranged from 8 to 23. If 23 is the upper bound and 17 is most likely, he should play with incredible intensity when he’s in there. He’s a fully evolved senior right now. He is who is, so now is the time to maximize what he’s good at (physical D, leaping ability, second leap) and minimize fouls and TOs.

Josh? He has two games with double figure minutes – PC and OSU – 29 combined minutes, 15 pts, 7 rebounds, 7-9 fgs. Will his productivity increase with increased, consistent usage? He’s not going to be a big offensive option, but he can help open things up for others and earn some minutes.

6) Andre Dawkins – Dawkins can disappear, reappear, etc. I really think his role is determined by the coaches and if they want more Andre, they need to adjust the offensive sets to get him shots. They can do that with more set plays, including set plays out of timeouts. Andre needs to develop a shot fake, his dribble drive and some mid range game to take a step as an offensive player. I also think he would get some nice open looks in a transition game. Andre (and maybe Ryan too) needs to play not just with sense of urgency, but also aggression. Andre can become our knockout punch guy.

Here’s a look at his stats:
• Minutes (and points) so far: 21 (6), 22 (4), 38 (26), 20 (5), 32 (10), 35 (14), 34 (6), 19 (0).
• 8.9 ppg, 27.6 minutes. Throw out the 26 vs. Mich St and it’s 6.5 points a game.
• Shooting .447 from 3. (Get him more shots!)

7) Point Guard - Seth is our starting point guard. Austin has the ball in his hands a lot. That’s the way it will be going forward. One of the things we can get better at is post feeds and pushing the pace. In Phase 2, against lesser teams, we’ll push the pace more, right?

I am pretty sure our offensive chemistry is not yet where it will be by the end of the year. But it’s getting better on the offensive end. The timing and location of screens needs to get better. Guys need to settle into better defined roles. How much of this is incumbent upon Seth growing into a more true point? I don’t know exactly, but I’m guessing it’s going to be a mix this year. The point guard position can collectively get us easier buckets (push the pace, execute) and also cut down on turnovers (get the ball in right place, right time). They can also force some turnovers by pressuring the ball.

I think we’ll see some new wrinkles in Phase 2, on set plays like lobs, out of bounds plays, and at the end of half. This is an incredibly valuable month to practice as a team and get better, as opposed to the rapid pace of games we had in November and will have from January on. I think Seth improves a lot during Phase 2 at running the team.

8) Leadership, Chemistry and Communication – This team is built out of former role players and a freshman. So while some of these guys have a lot of playing time the last few years and are talented, they were typically deferring to Jon, Kyle and Nolan. As they settle into their on-court roles I hope to see the killer instinct grow. In Phase 1 they allowed Belmont and Michigan State to sneak back into games. So the goal for Phase 2 ought to be to finish off an opponent.

Mason and Seth are emerging as leaders. Austin is emerging as our best offensive player. Coach K seems to trust Tyler as much as he did past leaders, like he is the coach’s proxy on the court like Duhon or Battier or Hurley were.

Coach K’s record is over and done with, a tough stretch of games behind us. We have a month of practice to get better, learn new things, get reps. This is the stretch of the season where Duke will either become a title contender or will be an inconsistent but really good team. With the wake-up call that was Ohio State, Duke should be properly motivated to work hard and get better.

Here’s some point in time metrics, closing out Phase 1.
• .469 FG% (down from .492 pre-OSU. Darn).
• .446 Opp FG%.
• .681 FT% (229 to 152 in attempts).
• .432 3pt%.
• +8 Rebounding differential on the season (total, not per game).
• -4 Offensive Rebound differential on the season, total. Doh!
• A:TO ratio: 93:108. Doh!
• 7.8 Steals per game.
• KenPom: 7th overall; AdjO: 116.3 (7th); AdjD: 90.6 (18th).
• Only averaging 77 points a game. This should increase in Phase 2, but we need to push pace more and get more secondary break points.
• Good: 23rd in FG %. 20th in 3pt % - 8 for 19 per game.
• Bad: 274th in rebounding, 249th in assists. 200th in steals. 217th in blocks.

[Bob Green]

6) Andre Dawkins – Dawkins can disappear, reappear, etc. I really think his role is determined by the coaches and if they want more Andre, they need to adjust the offensive sets to get him shots. They can do that with more set plays, including set plays out of timeouts. Andre needs to develop a shot fake, his dribble drive and some mid range game to take a step as an offensive player. I also think he would get some nice open looks in a transition game. Andre (and maybe Ryan too) needs to play not just with sense of urgency, but also aggression. Andre can become our knockout punch guy.

Here’s a look at his stats:
• Minutes (and points) so far: 21 (6), 22 (4), 38 (26), 20 (5), 32 (10), 35 (14), 34 (6), 19 (0).
• 8.9 ppg, 27.6 minutes. Throw out the 26 vs. Mich St and it’s 6.5 points a game.
• Shooting .447 from 3. (Get him more shots!)



Andre Dawkins is a key element to our success this season. He needs to play 25+ minutes at small forward/third guard, be a defensive presence and a double digit scorer. Dawkins is in his third season so it should be clear to all that he is a streak scorer - some games he goes off (Michigan State) - while other games he doesn't (Ohio State). Yes, the 26 points he dropped on Michigan State skews his points per game upward, but the goose egg against Ohio State when he only attempted one shot in 19 minutes skews it downward. Throw out the goose egg and his average is at 10.1 points per game.

Perhaps more important than scoring, or at a minimum, equally important is his continued development on defense. Duke will definitely play Carolina twice down the stretch of the regular season and perhaps a third time in the ACCT, with the match-up between Dawkins and Harrison Barnes being critical. A potential preview of that match-up will be available in Duke's upcoming game at Madison Square Garden against Washington and Terrence Ross. Ross is an exceptional player who isn't quite as big as Barnes but he has superior athleticism and is equal to Barnes as a shooter.

I have lots more thoughts on Phase II so I'll be back...

[mapei]

I love these analyses, thanks.

Rebounding looks like a very big concern. That's been the case with other Duke teams, but the feeling was that what we gave up on the boards we gained through great perimeter defense and steals. Unfortunately, that's not the case so far.

Hard to complain about a 7-1 record against really good competition, but that's where I would most like to see improvement.

[ncexnyc]

Well done superdave! A very balanced write-up, articulating both the positives and negatives.

Austin Rivers: I'm very impressed by how quickly he's been improving his game. The attitude issue, which was my greatest concern about this kid has been put to rest. I wonder, if his game continues to develop at the pace we've seen so far, does K eventually make this Austin's team?

Big Man Offense: Probably the nicest surprise of the season has been the play of Mason. Watching the overseas games, I felt we were in for another year of ugly looking fade away jumpers. WOW, was I wrong. He's really becoming the total package as a post player. Hopefully his decision making will improve, as he becomes more accustomed to his new found post game. Ryan is exactly what we thought he could be. I don't mind his shot selection as the 3 ball is what his game revolves around. He still plays heady D and honestly I don't want him to attempt to be a banger in the post. Miles is as you say, "what he is." I'm quite happy with him being the team enforcer, the muscle in the post. Just play smart and lay the proverbial wood on the opposition when they try to score in the post.

Andre: Amazing how this kid continues to get his very own paragraph every write-up. We've had several long discussions in the past few days about his role with the team. Hopefully we aren't putting to much weight on his shoulders.

[Kedsy]

Good job, superdave. You hit most of the points, especially about defense, which will probably be our biggest question mark for the rest of the season.

To me, the next biggest question (after defense) for Phase II is the Quinn saga. Will Quinn step into a more prominent role, pushing Seth out of the PG role and Andre to the bench? If so, will our defense suffer even more as we get smaller and younger on the perimeter? How will Seth and Andre react to the change/reduction in role? This is probably the set of unanswered questions for which we have the least idea of the answers.

I agree with you that the "Andre question" is a big one for this phase. Whether he's starting or coming off the bench, we need him to be a major offensive threat. His usage % is lower than everyone on the team except Mike and Tyler (and Tyler at least handles the ball a lot when he's in). If the coaches coaxed Andre's usage % higher, either by asking him to be more aggressive or by running plays for him, would we see more performances like we saw against Michigan State? Having said that, I think Andre is an offensive threat even when he doesn't see the ball because he's so dangerous the defense can't ignore him.

I'm really anxious to see if Andre can gain some consistency and get into a groove during Phase II. I believe to be a great team, we need him to play a major part. On the other side of the coin, I'm sort of dreading the hypothetical possibility that he'll drift out of prominence and end up the 8th man, playing 10 minutes a game and taking two shots. I think if it happens that way, the team will be much worse for it.

I am dubious that by the end of this phase we'll have more than one of Quinn/Mike/Josh in the rotation. Assuming a 7 or at most 8 man rotation, Austin/Seth/Mason/Ryan/Miles/Andre/Tyler/Quinn would seem to negate the possibility of Mike or Josh getting a big role in important/close games. Although I suppose if Quinn plays a lot and we need more D at SF than at PG/SG, then conceivably Mike could replace Tyler in the rotation -- but personally I doubt that will happen. As you point out, Tyler is doing well and has Coach K's confidence.

However, having said all that, Phase II will be the time where we get to see if the guys currently at the bottom of the rotation will expand their roles.

Finally, Alex? Will he play at all, or is he really going to redshirt? This phase is when we'll probably find out the answer to that question.


If [Miles] can up his offensive rebounding stats, he’ll be big in crunch minutes and can do that rebound, kick out for a 3 thing that Zoubek did so well.

Miles currently has an offensive rebounding percentage of 16.3%, 44th best in the country. I don't think it's fair to say he needs to "up" his offensive rebounding stats. Zoubek had a once-a-decade sort of proficiency at it, and we can't expect Miles to reach that far, but 44th in the nation is pretty darn good.

What I think Miles has to do is cut down on his concentration lapses (fouls/missed defensive assignments/missed dunks, etc.) so he can stay in the game more and show off his already impressive offensive rebounding skills.

[Saratoga2]

In phase 2 we need to find out if Andre is really going to be able to contribute like a starter should. This is the perfect time to compare him to what others can do at small forward. I think the other starters are pretty well set, with Mason, Austin, Seth and Ryan all good to very good players with reasonble consistency. We should be able to win games during phase 2 if those four get starters minutes and we experiment with the small forward position. Giving Michael, Alex if he is physically able and Andre something like equal time should give the coaches a better idea of who can step up without risking too much. I wouldn't play Austin at Small forward since we really need him to avoid the fouls and banging against larger and stroner players. We need to keep him fresh and in the game for 35 minutes.

In Seth's case, he is wily and has a very good shot, however he is not super quick and he is unlikely to break down defenders off the dribble. I still think he should start, since he offers the best overall game at PG. Given that Austin will also be in the game a lot. I see Tyler as a substitute when Austin goes out and either Quinn or Tyler when Seth goes out. Quinn seems to have the highest potential to become a penetrating PG and one who is pass first but also has some scoring potential. I don't see a three guard lineup with a combination of Quinn, Seth, Tyler and Austin being viable other than perhaps an end of game scenario.

Miles actually played better against OSU than he has in most other games. He will probably remain first sub off the bench for Mason and Ryan. Someone said he seems to lack focus out there, picking up cheap fouls and losing the ball. I agree, and having watched him now for a number of years, while he has gotten stronger, his composure on the court hasn't gotten to be a strong point. Could he have a Zoubek type of metamorphasis? Anything is possible, but he probably will play at an acceptable level for a sub and that will be what I expect going forward.

Lets hope that in phase 2 that the determination and toughnss shown by Mason and Austin in the OSU game will become be copied by our other players.

[superdave]

Miles currently has an offensive rebounding percentage of 16.3%, 44th best in the country. I don't think it's fair to say he needs to "up" his offensive rebounding stats. Zoubek had a once-a-decade sort of proficiency at it, and we can't expect Miles to reach that far, but 44th in the nation is pretty darn good.

What I think Miles has to do is cut down on his concentration lapses (fouls/missed defensive assignments/missed dunks, etc.) so he can stay in the game more and show off his already impressive offensive rebounding skills.


Miles actually played better against OSU than he has in most other games. He will probably remain first sub off the bench for Mason and Ryan. Someone said he seems to lack focus out there, picking up cheap fouls and losing the ball. I agree, and having watched him now for a number of years, while he has gotten stronger, his composure on the court hasn't gotten to be a strong point. Could he have a Zoubek type of metamorphasis? Anything is possible, but he probably will play at an acceptable level for a sub and that will be what I expect going forward.


Coach K has sought to emphasize post offense this year, but I think that might be something that gets limited more to Ryan and Mason, with Miles being instructed to shoot less. I'm not sure we need Miles to look for shots in his 17-20 minutes. That's one of the reasons I suggested he concentrate on certain facets - namely offensive rebounds and D. His offensive rebounding % is impressive. Thanks for sharing that stat, Kedsy. I think his minutes are about where they should be right now, but would like to see him worry less about shooting and more with setting screens and crashing the boards.

[OldSchool]

Good points, SuperDave.

A concern of mine: Free Throw Shooting -- We have GOT to improve on this, especially Mason. This could bite us badly in a close big game.


Perimeter D – Do we need some defensive minutes out of Gbinije in a Tyler Thornton-like stopper role?

If I were the coaching staff I would give Silent G more minutes at the 3. I don't think we know yet how good a defender he is or can be. We may need someone at the end of the season to give us a strong defensive effort against bigger or quicker small forwards. Maybe he can't handle that role yet, but I'd give him some minutes against different teams to give him more of a chance to show what he can do.

[Kedsy]

If I were the coaching staff I would give Silent G more minutes at the 3. I don't think we know yet how good a defender he is or can be. We may need someone at the end of the season to give us a strong defensive effort against bigger or quicker small forwards. Maybe he can't handle that role yet, but I'd give him some minutes against different teams to give him more of a chance to show what he can do.

Clearly we don't know, but I think the coaching staff (who watches him every day in practice) does. I don't think there's that much downside to giving him some run against our December schedule, so I don't entirely disagree with you there, but personally I'd prefer he "show[s] what he can do" in practice, rather than have us experiment during games. Guarding Seth, Austin, Andre, and Alex every day should give him a chance to show how strong he is defensively.

[OldSchool]

Clearly we don't know, but I think the coaching staff (who watches him every day in practice) does. I don't think there's that much downside to giving him some run against our December schedule, so I don't entirely disagree with you there, but personally I'd prefer he "show[s] what he can do" in practice, rather than have us experiment during games. Guarding Seth, Austin, Andre, and Alex every day should give him a chance to show how strong he is defensively.

We don't have talented veteran true small forwards for him to go up against in practice. There is just Alex, fresh out of high school. The others are guards.

I am certainly not suggesting starting G ahead of Andre or giving G more minutes than Andre in most games. But I would give him more minutes at the 3, and maybe Andre would benefit from being more fresh by subbing G in more.

Given the low opinion of Harrison Barnes' abilities on DBR, maybe I am the only one worried about defending him and other true small forwards like Kidd-Gilchrist. But I can envision everyone playing UNC to a draw at 4 positions while HB hits uncontested jump shots over a smaller defender or some other team attacks us by posting up their small forward over our shooting guard playing the 3.

It may well end up that Andre is the optimal solution for us at the 3, taking everything into account including the alternatives.

I wonder what Andre's bodyfat % is. Is he trying to carry more weight in order to be stronger against opposing SFs? He might be better off dropping a few lbs. and being quicker.

[Bob Green]

Given the low opinion of Harrison Barnes' abilities on DBR, maybe I am the only one worried about defending him and other true small forwards like Kidd-Gilchrist.

Other than Harrison Barnes, what other small forwards, on teams on our schedule, pose a problem? I've previously mentioned Washington's Terrence Ross, but how about the other ACC schools? Which other schools have small forwards we should be concerned about?

Scott Wood at NCSU? Okaro White at FSU? Joe Harris at Virginia? I'm probably overlooking someone really talented, but I just don't see any small forwards in the league that strike terror into my heart.

[DukieInBrasil]

Good points, SuperDave.

A concern of mine: Free Throw Shooting -- We have GOT to improve on this, especially Mason. This could bite us badly in a close big game.


I agree with that, but i would also emphasize that Austin Rivers needs to improve on his FTs, maybe even more so than Mason, cuz he's gonna have the ball in his hands more than MP2 but also b/c we'll probably ask him to create O in close, end-of-game situations. We won't ever ask MP2 to create O, but having him be a better FT shooter would certainly increase his usage, or our confidence to go to him in those situations.
If MP2 could get to ~60% FTs, i'd be pleased. If AR got to ~75-80%, i'd be pleased.

[OldSchool]

Other than Harrison Barnes, what other small forwards, on teams on our schedule, pose a problem? I've previously mentioned Washington's Terrence Ross, but how about the other ACC schools? Which other schools have small forwards we should be concerned about?

Scott Wood at NCSU? Okaro White at FSU? Joe Harris at Virginia? I'm probably overlooking someone really talented, but I just don't see any small forwards in the league that strike terror into my heart.

We're going to be at a size disadvantage against a number of teams at the 3 position. FSU is going to be a load to handle all across their front line. As to Scott Wood, if anyone is foolish enough to play lackadaisacal defense on him, he can certainly bury a team if he starts to feel comfortable shooting. You're right about Terrence Ross, it's going to be a good test of our defense.

I'm most concerned about the NCAA tourney, that if possible we develop Mike G during the regular season to the extent we can so that if we need to use him on a defensive matchup, at least he's got some experience going into such a situation.

[ncexnyc]

Given the low opinion of Harrison Barnes' abilities on DBR, maybe I am the only one worried about defending him and other true small forwards like Kidd-Gilchrist. But I can envision everyone playing UNC to a draw at 4 positions while HB hits uncontested jump shots over a smaller defender or some other team attacks us by posting up their small forward over our shooting guard playing the 3.


No you're not the only one who's concerned about our wing match-up with the heels. I think we match-up extremely well at every other position, except for that one. Heck, Kyle the senior, who some believe should have his jersey retired played HB the freshman to what amounted to a stalemate in their 3 games last year. If a defensive stud like Singler can only get a draw, then why should we expect any better from Dre, who is average on defense at best?

I wouldn't put much stock in what some people say about HB on this board. Let's remember this is the kid who Skyped us and some people will never forgive him for how all that played out. I view these folks the same I view those folks on other boards who badmouth kids just because they decided to go elsewhere. Bottom line if Coach K wanted HB, it's because the kid can play.

Hopefully this next phase will enable us to workout the various kinks in our collective armor. Whether it's Dre, Silent G, or Alex at the 3, I don't really care, as long as they are solid and consistent I'll be happy.

P.S. It's nice to have solid depth where we can even have a position controversy.

[Newton_14]

No you're not the only one who's concerned about our wing match-up with the heels. I think we match-up extremely well at every other position, except for that one. Heck, Kyle the senior, who some believe should have his jersey retired played HB the freshman to what amounted to a stalemate in their 3 games last year. If a defensive stud like Singler can only get a draw, then why should we expect any better from Dre, who is average on defense at best?

I wouldn't put much stock in what some people say about HB on this board. Let's remember this is the kid who Skyped us and some people will never forgive him for how all that played out. I view these folks the same I view those folks on other boards who badmouth kids just because they decided to go elsewhere. Bottom line if Coach K wanted HB, it's because the kid can play.

Hopefully this next phase will enable us to workout the various kinks in our collective armor. Whether it's Dre, Silent G, or Alex at the 3, I don't really care, as long as they are solid and consistent I'll be happy.

P.S. It's nice to have solid depth where we can even have a position controversy.

HB will be a load to handle. No argument there at all. I still maintain that in the game at UNC last year, and to a lesser degree during the ACC Title game, Andre did a good job defending HB. In the game at UNC, I felt it was the best defense Andre had ever played. I think the fact that we lost by double-digits in that game has clouded the memories of how Andre played that night to some degree.

Regarding the DBR's view of HB, while the way he handled his recruitment will always be a sore spot with Duke fans, I don't feel that has anything to do with the assessment of HB's game at the moment. For one thing, the aforementioned sore spot is about how the kid handled his recruitment, and not the fact he chose UNC. At least for most here anyway.

It is more than fair to state that at the moment, HB is a jumpshooter, with a handle not good enough to attack the rim in traffic. He struggles mightily when he tries to drive the lane. He often gets stopped dead in his tracks, or stripped. It is just not something HB is good at right now. He is however, deadly as a catch and shoot jumpshooter, as well as a one or two dribble pull up jumpshooter from mid-range or 3 Point Land. Which makes him a stud on the perimeter. Also, his release is really high, which allows him to get the shot off on most any defender. You have to make him drive to slow him down which is tough to do. If he was good at attacking off the dribble he would be unstoppable. We he improve in that area? Maybe. It is weird to me, because he has great length, great strength, and good jumping ability, but overall his athleticism is a bit average. For some reason he struggles to cross defenders over or make smooth spin moves. He looks very awkward trying the latter. It's just odd. But even with the weaknesses, he is a very dangerous player on the college level. Had he gotten the pass from Henson yesterday I would bet a lot of money he would have drained it.

I do hope Silent G develops quickly enough that by the time we see UNC, we can alternate him and Andre all game long against HB. With his length and athleticism, Silent G can give HB problems, if he has progressed enough as a Duke defender. Agree with others, that would be a tremendous asset to this Duke team.

[superdave]

It is more than fair to state that at the moment, HB is a jumpshooter, with a handle not good enough to attack the rim in traffic. He struggles mightily when he tries to drive the lane. He often gets stopped dead in his tracks, or stripped. It is just not something HB is good at right now. He is however, deadly as a catch and shoot jumpshooter, as well as a one or two dribble pull up jumpshooter from mid-range or 3 Point Land. Which makes him a stud on the perimeter. Also, his release is really high, which allows him to get the shot off on most any defender. You have to make him drive to slow him down which is tough to do. If he was good at attacking off the dribble he would be unstoppable. We he improve in that area? Maybe. It is weird to me, because he has great length, great strength, and good jumping ability, but overall his athleticism is a bit average. For some reason he struggles to cross defenders over or make smooth spin moves. He looks very awkward trying the latter. It's just odd. But even with the weaknesses, he is a very dangerous player on the college level. Had he gotten the pass from Henson yesterday I would bet a lot of money he would have drained it.

Barnes is shockingly a jumpshooter. I was pretty surprised that Barnes did not try to post up Gilchrist in the UK game Saturday. He's got a few inches and a 40 lbs on the freshman. I spoke to a Unc fan last night about the game and he said he thinks Barnes is over-rated because of the clutch plays last year, and that Barnes does not make enough of the gritty plays. I assured him Barnes would lead the team in scoring and be a top 3 pick next year, but I can see his point.

[superdave]

To me, the next biggest question (after defense) for Phase II is the Quinn saga. Will Quinn step into a more prominent role, pushing Seth out of the PG role and Andre to the bench? If so, will our defense suffer even more as we get smaller and younger on the perimeter? How will Seth and Andre react to the change/reduction in role? This is probably the set of unanswered questions for which we have the least idea of the answers.

I am dubious that by the end of this phase we'll have more than one of Quinn/Mike/Josh in the rotation. Assuming a 7 or at most 8 man rotation, Austin/Seth/Mason/Ryan/Miles/Andre/Tyler/Quinn would seem to negate the possibility of Mike or Josh getting a big role in important/close games. Although I suppose if Quinn plays a lot and we need more D at SF than at PG/SG, then conceivably Mike could replace Tyler in the rotation -- but personally I doubt that will happen. As you point out, Tyler is doing well and has Coach K's confidence.



Kedsy, It's a little surprising that you think Quinn can take away the PG spot from Seth. To clarify, are you saying Quinn CAN pull this off and become the main guy at the 1? Or are you actually advocating for this because you think we need a true point? What is the likelihood of this shift in your mind?

I think Quinn has been pretty good defensively so far this season so I am happy to see him get more minutes. He's so fluid with the ball in his hands and seems to have good court vision. I think he could help us push the pace a little more.

But I also know that Coach K plays his best guys heavy minutes. Unless Quinn really improves in December (or Andre stays the same and starts to lose minutes) then I am not sure I see Quinn playing more than 5-10 minutes and pushing Seth into the 2-guard spot.

Super "In all honesty, I'd like to see Quinn take a few of Tyler's minutes rather than Andre's." Dave

[Kedsy]

Kedsy, It's a little surprising that you think Quinn can take away the PG spot from Seth. To clarify, are you saying Quinn CAN pull this off and become the main guy at the 1? Or are you actually advocating for this because you think we need a true point? What is the likelihood of this shift in your mind?

Oh, I'm sorry, you've misunderstood my post. I don't advocate this at all. I'm against it. I don't think we need a "true point," I think moving Quinn into the starting lineup will hurt our defense and not improve our offense very much (if at all), and I'll be surprised and disappointed if Quinn takes the PG job away from Seth and relegates Andre to the bench. I brought it up as a question because of an external report (CBSSportsline) that it was probably going to happen, as soon as this Wednesday.

To me, that report alone, founded or unfounded, makes the Quinn question something to watch in Phase II. Are the people (like me) who say Seth is performing well at PG and Andre needs to start correct? Or does Coach K disagree? It's something I very much want to know, and I'll be watching to see what happens in Phase II.

[superdave]

Oh, I'm sorry, you've misunderstood my post. I don't advocate this at all. I'm against it. I don't think we need a "true point," I think moving Quinn into the starting lineup will hurt our defense and not improve our offense very much (if at all), and I'll be surprised and disappointed if Quinn takes the PG job away from Seth and relegates Andre to the bench. I brought it up as a question because of an external report (CBSSportsline) that it was probably going to happen, as soon as this Wednesday.

To me, that report alone, founded or unfounded, makes the Quinn question something to watch in Phase II. Are the people (like me) who say Seth is performing well at PG and Andre needs to start correct? Or does Coach K disagree? It's something I very much want to know, and I'll be watching to see what happens in Phase II.

Yeah, I was not clear if you were advocating a larger role for Quinn or raising the possibility. With all the praise Coach K has lavished on Seth in the pre-season and in-season, I'd be shocked to see him lose any minutes. But I could see him initiating the offense less at times so he can play off the ball more.

If only we could combine Tyler's D and Quinn's O into one guy...

[Newton_14]

8) Leadership, Chemistry and Communication – This team is built out of former role players and a freshman. So while some of these guys have a lot of playing time the last few years and are talented, they were typically deferring to Jon, Kyle and Nolan. As they settle into their on-court roles I hope to see the killer instinct grow. In Phase 1 they allowed Belmont and Michigan State to sneak back into games. So the goal for Phase 2 ought to be to finish off an opponent.

Mason and Seth are emerging as leaders. Austin is emerging as our best offensive player. Coach K seems to trust Tyler as much as he did past leaders, like he is the coach’s proxy on the court like Duhon or Battier or Hurley were.

Good write up Dave. Thanks for putting in the work for Phase II. I listened to Coach K's daily Duke Basketball Report this morning on the ride into work. He spoke today on Leadership. Coach spoke about Leadership on and off the court and the differences. Right now, he indicated the staff is still searching for that Leader on the court. He said that right now Tyler is the closest player in terms of having the Leadership qualities the staff wants to see out on the court, but the problem there is Tyler is not on the floor enough to be the guy. K feels that of the heavy minute guys, Mason is startin to take on the leadership role they want to see, which is good, and K believes that Ryan has the personality of a guy that could also become a leader. Interesting that he did not mention Seth. I feel Seth could be that guy, but he is so quiet, maybe it just isn't in him.

I mentioned in another thread that the thing that bothered me the most about the OSU drubbing is no Duke player stepped up and got on teammates vocally. I did notice Mason pulling the guys into a huddle on the court during dead-balls, but during timeouts no player seemed to step up and go off on the group to get their heads out of their rears and play ball ala Lance Thomas in the 74-47 Clemson game in 08. Someone has to be that guy. It can't just be a coach. Also, two years ago, during every stoppage on the floor, Lance would pull the guys together and immediately look to the bench for instructions, then bark them to his teammates. Last year it was Nolan or Kyle that did that. Seth seems to have taken on that role at least, but it may be during this Phase that Mason or Ryan step up and take on all of the responsibilities of a on-court/in the Timeout Huddle Leader.

During this phase, Mason or Ryan, or Seth really need to step up as vocal leaders. It has to be one of them because they are the upperclassmen that will get the most minutes.

I also got to hear Coach Capel in an interview this morning, but I will put those comments in a separate post.

[NSDukeFan]

(Great Phase points)...

Here’s some point in time metrics, closing out Phase 1.
• .469 FG% (down from .492 pre-OSU. Darn).
• .446 Opp FG%.
• .681 FT% (229 to 152 in attempts).
• .432 3pt%.
• +8 Rebounding differential on the season (total, not per game).
• -4 Offensive Rebound differential on the season, total. Doh!
• A:TO ratio: 93:108. Doh!
• 7.8 Steals per game.
• KenPom: 7th overall; AdjO: 116.3 (7th); AdjD: 90.6 (18th).
• Only averaging 77 points a game. This should increase in Phase 2, but we need to push pace more and get more secondary break points.
• Good: 23rd in FG %. 20th in 3pt % - 8 for 19 per game.
• Bad: 274th in rebounding, 249th in assists. 200th in steals. 217th in blocks.

Thanks for the great Phase report Superdave and as usual I appreciate the discussion that has followed. I just relooked at the stats you had posted and was surprised at how poor the team's rebounding numbers are, at least compared to my (perhaps, inflated) expectations. With a good set of big men, I would have hoped that the team would have an advantage rebounding the ball this year, but unfortunately that hasn't been the case. I wonder if that is due to not getting enough rebounds from the 3 and 4 positions, and Ryan and Andre may be average to below average rebounders for their positions. In addition to perimeter defense and seeing some minutes for the non-top 6, this is an area that I would hope to see some improvement in Phase 2.

[superdave]

Thanks for the great Phase report Superdave and as usual I appreciate the discussion that has followed. I just relooked at the stats you had posted and was surprised at how poor the team's rebounding numbers are, at least compared to my (perhaps, inflated) expectations. With a good set of big men, I would have hoped that the team would have an advantage rebounding the ball this year, but unfortunately that hasn't been the case. I wonder if that is due to not getting enough rebounds from the 3 and 4 positions, and Ryan and Andre may be average to below average rebounders for their positions. In addition to perimeter defense and seeing some minutes for the non-top 6, this is an area that I would hope to see some improvement in Phase 2.

Last year Kyle played a lot of minutes at the 3, so there's part of your drop-off. I did notice our guards - anecdotally - crashing the boards a few times, Michigan State coming to mind first. If we are going to play a slower pace this year, which I think our 77ppg and lack of pushing the ball suggest, then I'd hope we'd get a lot better on the boards. To do so we need to the guards and Kelly crashing more. I'm not sure Phase 2 is going to shed much light on this issue though.

[FellowTraveler]

Just spent some time reading this thread, and some others, and checking out Ken Pomeroy’s player stats, which are now online. Following are some thoughts, mostly having to do with Tyler Thornton and Andre Dawkins, and the general question of boosting productivity outside of the Rivers/Curry/Kelly/Mason, about whom there seems to be broad agreement in favor of continued extensive playing time. [NOTE: I wrote most of this last night, and all the statistics referenced were current yesterday, but may not be today.]

Watching Duke play, it’s hard not to like Thornton’s aggressiveness. And if you know how good a shooter, and solid an athlete, Dawkins is, it’s hard not to be frustrated that he isn’t doing more, whether you blame him or team strategy. I think those two very natural reactions created some skewed perceptions of their actual performance.

Tyler Thornton commits a whopping 7.2 fouls per 40 minutes. Only Gbinije (6.1) and Hairston (5.3) come within 2.4 fouls of Hairston. And Thornton was similarly foul-prone last year, committing 6.3 fouls/40 minutes. Among the top ten teams in Pomeroy’s team ratings, only there are only three other players who have accumulated at least 100 minutes of playing time while committing at least 7 fouls per 40 minutes.

Some people tend to excuse or ignore fouls committed by hard-nosed perimeter players, or, even more perversely, see such fouls as further evidence of their defensive tenacity. And that’s fine if we’re talking about the difference between 2.8 and 3.0 fouls per 40; the higher foul rate may indeed be a price you’d happily pay for more aggressive defense. But the extraordinary rate at which Tyler Thornton commits fouls is huge defensive liability. It gives away points. It puts the opposition in the bonus faster, which gives away more points, and affects the way teammates play defense.

I’ve previously said that while I consider Thornton a very good defender, I don’t think he is (yet) a great one. Like others, I’ve been of the opinion that his positives -- disruptiveness in passing lanes, initial harassment of a ball-handler, etc -- are, to some extent, offset by the fact that he can be taken off the dribble. But I hadn’t realized his foul rate was this high. I’m now not sure he’s even a “very good” defender. And it’s hard to make the case that he’s a much better defender than Andre Dawkins when you consider that Thornton commits five more fouls per 40 minutes than Dawkins does.

Then there’s turnovers. Thornton turns the ball over on 29 percent of his possessions -- second-highest on the team, behind only Gbinije’s astounding 45.6 turnover rate (compiled, obviously, in too few minutes to be particularly meaningful.) Among other perimeter players, Curry has a TO rate of 20.0, Rivers 15.6, Quinn 15.3, and Andre 8.0. (Andre’s very low rate -- 57th nationwide -- is, of course, largely a function of the fact that he touches the ball so much less than almost anyone else, though it should be noted that his usage rate is -- slightly -- higher than Thornton’s. Also worth noting: In games when Andre has played more and gotten more touches, he still hasn’t turned the ball over: Only 1 turnover in 107 total minutes against Michigan State, Michigan, and Kansas. None last year in his 28-point outburst against Bradley.)

My bottom line on Thornton, at this point, is that I’m afraid a lot of people -- including, at times, me -- like the idea of Tyler Thornton (solid, aggressive, tough, fully committed defensively) so much that we lose sight of the (current) reality of Tyler Thornton, which is that he commits fouls and turnovers at an extremely high rate, which significantly undermines his effectiveness on both ends of the court.

And what of more PT for Gbinije? He fouls almost as much as Tyler and commits a turnover on every other possession. I’ve seen no reason other than his size and shape to conclude that, given significant minutes, he’d outproduce anyone on the team, except perhaps Alex Murphy and Todd Zafirovski. Murphy? Murphy hasn’t set foot on the court yet. I think I tend to defer to the wisdom of the coaching staff considerably less than the median DBR poster, but even I don’t think the zero minutes I’ve seen Murphy play provide enough evidence to second guess his playing time. Finally, Quinn Cook actually has the best assist rate on the team and a reasonable turnover rate (15.3) and fouls/40 (3.0), but he has not yet shot the ball well and remains a defensive question mark (though he seems further along than many of us expected.) I think there’s a better case for expanding Quinn’s role than that of Tyler/Mike/Alex, but I’m not sure it would make much sense to give Quinn significantly more PT unless he was the primary ball-handler while on the court, which seems both unlikely to occur and fairly risky.

So, from what I’ve seen so far, on the court and in the numbers, if the goal is to improve the productivity of minutes that aren’t used by Rivers, Curry, Kelly or the Plumlees, I think running some plays on a consistent basis for the guy who lit Michigan State up for 26 points is significantly more likely to succeed than giving his PT to anyone else. We know Dawkins can be productive against quality competition. We don’t yet know that about anyone else, and have significant reasons to doubt that they are ready.

The idea of giving Dawkins, Gbinije and Murphy more or less equal PT over the next few games and seeing what happens is not one I find compelling. First: We’ve seen little to nothing out of Gbinije and Murphy that would justify such a move. Second: 10-15 minutes per game of mostly garbage-time PT against overmatched opponents is not likely to provide a strong basis for comparative analysis of their performance. Most importantly: Time spent taking a flyer on Gbinije/Murphy is time not spent figuring out how to work Dawkins into the offense more, which I think is very important. Nor is it time spent perfecting (or coming as close as possible) the overall team offense and defense with the 7 players who are likely to be the core of this year’s team, which I think is of paramount importance.

[OldSchool]

And what of more PT for Gbinije? He fouls almost as much as Tyler and commits a turnover on every other possession. I’ve seen no reason other than his size and shape to conclude that, given significant minutes, he’d outproduce anyone on the team, except perhaps Alex Murphy and Todd Zafirovski.


The idea of giving Dawkins, Gbinije and Murphy more or less equal PT over the next few games and seeing what happens is not one I find compelling. First: We’ve seen little to nothing out of Gbinije and Murphy that would justify such a move. Second: 10-15 minutes per game of mostly garbage-time PT against overmatched opponents is not likely to provide a strong basis for comparative analysis of their performance. Most importantly: Time spent taking a flyer on Gbinije/Murphy is time not spent figuring out how to work Dawkins into the offense more, which I think is very important. Nor is it time spent perfecting (or coming as close as possible) the overall team offense and defense with the 7 players who are likely to be the core of this year’s team, which I think is of paramount importance.

Gbinije has seen 1 minute against Belmont, 14 against Presbyterian, 2 against Davidson and 16 against Ohio State. In my view, one cannot draw firm conclusions about anything from just those minutes.

In his most recent outing against the best team we've played, Ohio State, in 16 minutes Mike had 1 steal, 1 foul and no turnovers and was 1-1 from the floor.

The argument for playing G more is NOT that he would "outproduce" Andre. Obviously Andre is a more potent offensive weapon, and I would certainly expect that to be the case throughout this season.

The point is that a very athletic 6'7" 205 Mike may offer a much stronger defensive ability than Andre at least against teams that field a true forward at the 3 instead of playing three guards like we do. I said "may" because he is only a freshman and it is not a given that he will in fact in game situations be a better defender than Andre.

I would not propose playing G "more or less equal PT" with Andre. But I would give him more minutes than he has been getting, at least before the OSU game, probably in the 10-20 minutes a game range, unless he is playing unusually well and earns more minutes or it makes sense to play him more minutes against a particular team for matchup reasons.

Even if Mike does prove to be an effective defender (and perhaps helps in other areas as well like rebounding) that does not mean Andre would not be our most effective player at the 3 on balance. But if Mike does prove effective, we may find it very beneficial at the end of the season to be able to use him against guys like Barnes or Gilchrist or other talented true forwards.

[Kedsy]

I would not propose playing G "more or less equal PT" with Andre. But I would give him more minutes than he has been getting, at least before the OSU game, probably in the 10-20 minutes a game range, unless he is playing unusually well and earns more minutes or it makes sense to play him more minutes against a particular team for matchup reasons.

Currently, Austin has played 31 mpg and Seth 32, numbers that are unlikely to go down. Add the 80 minutes played at the 4 and 5, and that leaves a total of 57 minutes for everyone else.

Right now that 57 minutes is split: Andre (27), Tyler (16), Quinn (8), Mike (5) (which is only 56 minutes, but that's because of decimal places). If Mike upped his time to 20 (which I realize is at the high end of your range), he'd either be playing the same (or more) minutes as Andre; or Tyler and Quinn would only combine for 15 minutes. Especially considering the reports that Quinn's minutes are about to go up, that latter possibility seems unlikely.

My point is, as a practical matter, you sort of are proposing Mike and Andre having "more or less equal PT."

[OldSchool]

Currently, Austin has played 31 mpg and Seth 32, numbers that are unlikely to go down. Add the 80 minutes played at the 4 and 5, and that leaves a total of 57 minutes for everyone else.

Right now that 57 minutes is split: Andre (27), Tyler (16), Quinn (8), Mike (5) (which is only 56 minutes, but that's because of decimal places). If Mike upped his time to 20 (which I realize is at the high end of your range), he'd either be playing the same (or more) minutes as Andre; or Tyler and Quinn would only combine for 15 minutes. Especially considering the reports that Quinn's minutes are about to go up, that latter possibility seems unlikely.

My point is, as a practical matter, you sort of are proposing Mike and Andre having "more or less equal PT."

Andre's minutes were moving up before OSU -- in the three games before OSU Andre got 32, 35 and 34 minutes. I would split the 3 position between Andre (say, 25-30 mins) and G (say, 10-15 mins, with more possible against particular matchups). (I am assuming Alex redshirts or gets few minutes, which assumption may be unwarranted.)

Against teams playing 3 guards or weaker opponents we could get away with matching up someone other than Andre or Mike at the 3 position, so that could change the minutes and allow more flexible lineup possibilities.

But I would expect against the tougher opponents and at the end of the year it's going to be either Andre or, if Mike works out, Mike defending the 3.

Perhaps Austin could be used in that role if Quinn forces himself into the starting lineup and Seth moves over to start at the 2. Andre would become a sixth man in that situation. Personally, I think that is unlikely though not out of the question.

I think when we start getting deep into conference play we will see Seth, Austin and Andre as starters with Seth and Austin subbed by Tyler and Quinn and, if Mike works out, Andre subbed by Mike.

[FellowTraveler]

Gbinije has seen 1 minute against Belmont, 14 against Presbyterian, 2 against Davidson and 16 against Ohio State. In my view, one cannot draw firm conclusions about anything from just those minutes.

I agree.


The argument for playing G more is NOT that he would "outproduce" Andre. Obviously Andre is a more potent offensive weapon, and I would certainly expect that to be the case throughout this season. The point is that a very athletic 6'7" 205 Mike may offer a much stronger defensive ability than Andre at least against teams that field a true forward at the 3 instead of playing three guards like we do.

Just to clarify, I was using the word "outproduce" more broadly than you seem to have interpreted it. I.e., I was not referring solely to offense.

[superdave]

Nolan's tweet at 10:47pm eastern tonight

NdotSmitty Nolan D. Smith
@QCook323 big day tomorrow!! Get some rest!!
2 minutes ago


Hmmmm....referencing a Quinn starting nod? Or am I reading too much into the twitter?

[Newton_14]

Nolan's tweet at 10:47pm eastern tonight

NdotSmitty Nolan D. Smith
@QCook323 big day tomorrow!! Get some rest!!
2 minutes ago


Hmmmm....referencing a Quinn starting nod? Or am I reading too much into the twitter?

I read it the same way. Interesting. If Andre is the guy sitting that's an awful small perimeter. I will be interested to see what the philosophy on defense is, and what the lineup rotations look like.

[Bob Green]

If Andre is the guy sitting that's an awful small perimeter.

A small perimeter might work tomorrow against Colorado State, but on Saturday we tip it off against Washington who goes 6'3", 6'5" and 6'6" with their starting guards and has a 6'5" Sixth Man. I have a hard time believing Andre Dawkins does not continue to see 25+ minutes per game. I'm a believer in Quinn Cook and would welcome more playing time for him in order to facilitate his development, but I do not believe he is going to be inserted into the starting line-up and immediately start playing major minutes. Yes, Cook's minutes might increase but Dawkins remains our best option at small forward/third guard.

[Greg_Newton]

Not sure where else to put this, but I REALLY hope we arrive at the following strategy by the end of the season.

I've thought a lot about this, and it seems simple to me. Used right, Rivers and Curry should be the best backcourt in the country; as much as I like Cook, there should be no need to replace one of them with an a ~RSCI 30 freshman. I think we just need to straight-up swap their roles in the offense; have Rivers bring the ball up and run the break, while Curry receives the first pass and "initiates" the halfcourt offense. I'm basing this on the following claims/assumptions:

1. Curry bringing the ball up is detrimental to his game. He is not blessed with an intuitive handle or explosive quickness, so when he's pressed, he has to consciously protect the ball, watch his defender, all while executing 2-4 little moves to create space as he gets up the court to initiate the offense. He has to work to do this, and maintain sharp focus on his 1-on-1 matchup. Multiply this by the number of possessions he's bringing it up, and I really think it wears him down, physically and mentally. Then there's also the stat someone posted where he's shooting ~20% better on shots off of passes than on shots off the dribble.

2. Curry bringing the ball up does not benefit the team. For the above reasons, he does not tend to arrive at the top of the key under control, with space and his head up. This means his first pass to a wing player does not usually come at the perfect time and place, it's more of a "here, this guy's bothering me so take it" pass. It's not like he's breaking the defense down and creating an advantage before dishing off the first pass.

3. Curry thrives when receiving the ball on the wing after coming off of a screen. He's at his best when our offense gives him a half-step on the defender, or the defense is broken down in some way he can exploit. He's great when he's a step ahead of the defense, but he can't get that step when he's on an island at the top of the key. He needs to be put in situations where he can rely on his instincts and IQ to be effective, not his handle and quickness.

4. Rivers bringing the ball up would be beneficial for him. It's in his best interests to learn how to be a PG (certainly NBA-wise), and player who can manage a game without springing at any semblance of a lane he sees, and I think K is perfectly capable of teaching him how to bring the ball up and run the break under control without forcing his offense. Furthermore, he has one of the most intuitive handles and quickest first steps I've ever seen; I think he'd love to have an extra 50 feet to humiliate any brave full-court defenders, and to showcase his moves without having to do so in a congested halfcourt set while slowing ball movement.

5. Rivers is not at his best on the wing. How many times have we seen him try to split three defenders on the wing and get stripped, lose the ball, even dribble it off of his foot? He's clearly not in his element in a crowded, constantly shifting halfcourt situation like Curry is. On the other hand, how unstoppable has he looked breaking down defenders on an island when he has space to make that second dribble?

6. Rivers bringing the ball up would be beneficial for the team. This is largely a function of 3, 4 and 5. Plus, Rivers' quickness, height and natural handle should allow him to arrive in the halfcourt with the space and awareness to make the first pass right when it needs to be made. Lastly, I think you'd quickly see teams stop pressing us full or 3/4 court, even quick ones. Would you want to be Austin's victim on an island for 50 feet every position? Good way to make Sportscenter, I guess...

--------------

Now, for our offensive set. I want to see every offensive possession go like this:

1. Rivers brings the ball up, looking for Curry on the wing. Curry comes off of a Mason screen on the left foul-line extended, and receives the pass at the three point-line as Ryan comes to the top of the key and sets a screen for Rivers to fade to the weak side.

2. If he's wide open, Curry shoots this "layup". If the defender is close but a step behind him, he catches the ball in stride and takes a dribble forward. This is where he's at his best, and can use his sneaky Curry-sense to make plays (and hopefully will have more energy to do so without the burden of all the ballhandling duties). He can a) pull up, b) take another dribble then a floater, c) continue to the rim if there's a lane (where he's actually been very good at finishing if he gets there), d) dish/lob to a rolling Mason, or e) simply kick it back out to Dre, Austin or Ryan.

3. If nothing's there for Curry, he a) looks to see if Mason has established deep post position following the screen, and if not, b) passes to Kelly at the top of the key.

4. Kelly a) takes the three if the PF has not followed him out; otherwise, he b) looks for Mason, who has now had more time to establish iso post position on the left block, his favorite spot, c) waves Mason to the other block and works on his man, or d) swings it to Dre or Austin on the right wing.

I'm not sure what the next couple options would be, because I've never been great at the X's and O's of set plays. However, once we've gone through a few options and the shot clock hits 15-20 without a good shot, THEN we find Austin again, spread the floor, and set a high screen with Kelly.

This "last resort" gives one of the best penetrators in the country room to go to work with the option to a) dish to Kelly, one of the best shooting bigs in the country, on the pop if his man helps, b) dish to Dre or Curry, the two best shooters in the country, on the wings if their men help, c) dish/lob to Mason on the baseline, one of the best finishers in the country, if his man helps, d) shoot a pull-up three from straight ahead, which he's been money on, or e) take it at the rim, what he does best.

Not only does this give us a higher ceiling in March than any other option, IMO, it makes us better right now. I don't know why we're not doing it already.

[Mcluhan]

You make a compelling case.

[billyj]

I am sold! But can Coach K deal with 5 extra turnovers per game. Growing pains I guess?

[Oriole Way]

Not sure where else to put this, but I REALLY hope we arrive at the following strategy by the end of the season.

I've thought a lot about this, and it seems simple to me. Used right, Rivers and Curry should be the best backcourt in the country; as much as I like Cook, there should be no need to replace one of them with an a ~RSCI 30 freshman. I think we just need to straight-up swap their roles in the offense; have Rivers bring the ball up and run the break, while Curry receives the first pass and "initiates" the halfcourt offense. I'm basing this on the following claims/assumptions:

1. Curry bringing the ball up is detrimental to his game. He is not blessed with an intuitive handle or explosive quickness, so when he's pressed, he has to consciously protect the ball, watch his defender, all while executing 2-4 little moves to create space as he gets up the court to initiate the offense. He has to work to do this, and maintain sharp focus on his 1-on-1 matchup. Multiply this by the number of possessions he's bringing it up, and I really think it wears him down, physically and mentally. Then there's also the stat someone posted where he's shooting ~20% better on shots off of passes than on shots off the dribble.

2. Curry bringing the ball up does not benefit the team. For the above reasons, he does not tend to arrive at the top of the key under control, with space and his head up. This means his first pass to a wing player does not usually come at the perfect time and place, it's more of a "here, this guy's bothering me so take it" pass. It's not like he's breaking the defense down and creating an advantage before dishing off the first pass.

3. Curry thrives when receiving the ball on the wing after coming off of a screen. He's at his best when our offense gives him a half-step on the defender, or the defense is broken down in some way he can exploit. He's great when he's a step ahead of the defense, but he can't get that step when he's on an island at the top of the key. He needs to be put in situations where he can rely on his instincts and IQ to be effective, not his handle and quickness.

4. Rivers bringing the ball up would be beneficial for him. It's in his best interests to learn how to be a PG (certainly NBA-wise), and player who can manage a game without springing at any semblance of a lane he sees, and I think K is perfectly capable of teaching him how to bring the ball up and run the break under control without forcing his offense. Furthermore, he has one of the most intuitive handles and quickest first steps I've ever seen; I think he'd love to have an extra 50 feet to humiliate any brave full-court defenders, and to showcase his moves without having to do so in a congested halfcourt set while slowing ball movement.

5. Rivers is not at his best on the wing. How many times have we seen him try to split three defenders on the wing and get stripped, lose the ball, even dribble it off of his foot? He's clearly not in his element in a crowded, constantly shifting halfcourt situation like Curry is. On the other hand, how unstoppable has he looked breaking down defenders on an island when he has space to make that second dribble?

6. Rivers bringing the ball up would be beneficial for the team. This is largely a function of 3, 4 and 5. Plus, Rivers' quickness, height and natural handle should allow him to arrive in the halfcourt with the space and awareness to make the first pass right when it needs to be made. Lastly, I think you'd quickly see teams stop pressing us full or 3/4 court, even quick ones. Would you want to be Austin's victim on an island for 50 feet every position? Good way to make Sportscenter, I guess...

--------------

Now, for our offensive set. I want to see every offensive possession go like this:

1. Rivers brings the ball up, looking for Curry on the wing. Curry comes off of a Mason screen on the left foul-line extended, and receives the pass at the three point-line as Ryan comes to the top of the key and sets a screen for Rivers to fade to the weak side.

2. If he's wide open, Curry shoots this "layup". If the defender is close but a step behind him, he catches the ball in stride and takes a dribble forward. This is where he's at his best, and can use his sneaky Curry-sense to make plays (and hopefully will have more energy to do so without the burden of all the ballhandling duties). He can a) pull up, b) take another dribble then a floater, c) continue to the rim if there's a lane (where he's actually been very good at finishing if he gets there), d) dish/lob to a rolling Mason, or e) simply kick it back out to Dre, Austin or Ryan.

3. If nothing's there for Curry, he a) looks to see if Mason has established deep post position following the screen, and if not, b) passes to Kelly at the top of the key.

4. Kelly a) takes the three if the PF has not followed him out; otherwise, he b) looks for Mason, who has now had more time to establish iso post position on the left block, his favorite spot, c) waves Mason to the other block and works on his man, or d) swings it to Dre or Austin on the right wing.

I'm not sure what the next couple options would be, because I've never been great at the X's and O's of set plays. However, once we've gone through a few options and the shot clock hits 15-20 without a good shot, THEN we find Austin again, spread the floor, and set a high screen with Kelly.

This "last resort" gives one of the best penetrators in the country room to go to work with the option to a) dish to Kelly, one of the best shooting bigs in the country, on the pop if his man helps, b) dish to Dre or Curry, the two best shooters in the country, on the wings if their men help, c) dish/lob to Mason on the baseline, one of the best finishers in the country, if his man helps, d) shoot a pull-up three from straight ahead, which he's been money on, or e) take it at the rim, what he does best.

Not only does this give us a higher ceiling in March than any other option, IMO, it makes us better right now. I don't know why we're not doing it already.

Great post, and you make a lot of great points.

I have to disagree about Rivers bringing the ball up being the ultimate solution, although I wouldn't be surprised if Duke goes that route, and I wouldn't be surprised if I turn out to be wrong and it works. But, I don't think it will work.

I think the main reason we haven't seen Rivers starting/running the offense is that K knows that relying on Rivers so heavily will tire him, and it will also ask him to play the part of a point guard - even if he's only bringing the ball up for an initial pass to Curry - when he doesn't have the passing abilities to do so. When I have more time, I'd like to do a better job of explaining why I think Rivers bringing the ball up as you suggest would be easy (for the better defending teams) to defend against, and would also bog down the offense.

I'd like to qualify my belief that Rivers wouldn't be the ideal solution by saying that he would likely do a fine job in the role against lower-tier opponents. However, when playing against good defensive teams, it will be fairly easy for opponents to game plan for Rivers bringing the ball up because Duke doesn't have any other players who can consistently penetrate into the lane (other than Cook, who will still be on the bench on not playing as much if Rivers is to be used as you suggest). Teams will be able to get away with applying more man-to-man pressure on Rivers further away from the basket, while simultaneously overplaying the passing lanes. With someone like Cook running the offense - someone who has good handles, superior passing ability, and who provides a second penetrating option - it becomes easier for Duke to create offense because our best shot-creator - Rivers - isn't preoccupied with getting the ball up the floor to set up the offense and is instead available to receive a pass and proceed to shoot or make a move into the lane.

With two guards who are capable of penetrating past their initial defender in Cook and Rivers, the opponent's defense will be forced to move much more (and Duke will be better able to move the ball around and create space), which will lead to more opportunities for the other Duke players. An offense with Rivers bringing the ball up the floor will be much more static, in my opinion, and ultimately not as efficient as an offense with Cook bringing the ball up the floor and running the team.

[FellowTraveler]

Not only does this give us a higher ceiling in March than any other option, IMO, it makes us better right now. I don't know why we're not doing it already.

My initial reaction to this is quite favorable. I'd add a wrinkle, though: Switching the Curry/Dawkins roles periodically. Something along the lines of 65 percent of plays as you described, 35 percent as you described but with Curry & Dawkins flipped. A few reasons:

1) When Dawkins is standing in the corner/wing as the 4th or 5th option, he doesn't get shots, or even quality touches. He's basically a non-factor in the offense as you've described. I believe Duke's offense has a higher ceiling if it establishes Dawkins as a significant factor.

2) Though Dawkins isn't as versatile as Curry when receiving the ball as you've described (which is why I advocate a 65/35 split rather than 65/35), I do believe he and Mason have good offensive chemistry, and can run the screen & roll effectively together.

3) Curry gets a bit more rest. Among other reasons why this is important: Duke may still need/want Curry to bring the ball up the court late in close games, either because the opposition is pressing/trapping and Rivers needs help, or because he's a better free throw shooter than Rivers.

My other quibble is that I wouldn't run this set *every* possession; I'd also like to see a non-trivial number that begin by simply feeding Mason in the post, or getting the ball to Kelly in the high post. (Thinking back to the OSU game, Dawkins' one shot was a good look from straight on, about 17 feet out that he just shot a little long ... I think Duke could've gotten that shot again, for Dawkins & others, and could've gotten Kelly the ball in that spot, from which he can shoot or feed the post or drive a bit ... a lot of good things can happen from there, but Duke didn't seem to try.)

[jamesfrommaiden]

So far so good I'd say. The team has come a long way in a short amount of time while winning against good competition and bringing home a championship from Maui. It is not an easy task to maintain such success while trying to replace the best gaurd in the ACC and one of the nation's best in Nolan Smith and the glue of the program over the previous four years in Kyle Singler. One of the greatest Blue Devils ever. We all know what the problems are. There is huge room for improvement with this team. I would say the future is looking extremely bright for this young group of men. Who truley knows how good Duke will be this year? I just jnow there is the talent in place along with the greatest coach in NCAA history to get there.

[Kedsy]

Not sure where else to put this, but I REALLY hope we arrive at the following strategy by the end of the season.

I like this for the most part. I think it makes more sense than starting Quinn because it's a better defensive configuration.

I wouldn't be so rigid about every play looking like that, though. For one thing, as FellowTraveler noted, it makes Andre a lot less involved in the offense, and I think Andre needs to be more involved, not less. For another thing, your strategy seems to also lessen Mason's involvement in the offense, which doesn't seem optimal given how well he's been playing. Finally, Austin giving up the ball and not seeing it again for 15 seconds doesn't sound ideal to me. Instead of always passing to the wing, he can sometimes try to make his play from the top of the key. Of course if he does this, he needs to be more willing to dish off the drive (either inside to Mason or out to a three-point shooter) than he's shown so far, but I think he can get there. I agree he should pass to the wing more often than not. But I think we need more flexibility when we initiate the offense.

[Duke Defense]

I realize sometimes height/weight get inflated for rosters... but according to goduke.com Rivers and Dawkins are the same size-- each 6'4" and 200#. Dre has hops but Rivers has some too. He may just not have enough experience, but I'd be curious if Rivers could guard most opposing teams' 3. Haven't paid enough attention to see how much Rivers has guarded a 3 so far this year. That move might allow Cook and Curry to guard opposing teams' 1 and 2s, and give us someone to handle the press and another penetrator on offense in Cook. Nowadays it appears most teams' 3/wing players don't post up very much anyway-- if they do shoot inside it's off a drive. Dre could sub in for any of 3 and Curry could run point (as he is now) when Cook sat. Curious to see if K tries that in Phase II.

For teams w/especially tall guards like Washington, may need to use Dre more on defense and Cook less.

[FellowTraveler]

RE: Dawkins/Cook, it strikes me that the most unfortunate aspect of the possibility of Cook getting some of Dawkins' playing time is that Dawkins may be the Duke player who would most benefit from playing alongside a PG like Cook.

On some teams, the pieces fit together perfectly; on others, they don't. This appears to be the latter type of team -- which doesn't mean it can't be successful, but does mean there's likely to remain greater-than-average uncertainty/debate about the best ways to deploy players.

[Greg_Newton]

My initial reaction to this is quite favorable. I'd add a wrinkle, though: Switching the Curry/Dawkins roles periodically. Something along the lines of 65 percent of plays as you described, 35 percent as you described but with Curry & Dawkins flipped. A few reasons:

1) When Dawkins is standing in the corner/wing as the 4th or 5th option, he doesn't get shots, or even quality touches. He's basically a non-factor in the offense as you've described. I believe Duke's offense has a higher ceiling if it establishes Dawkins as a significant factor.

2) Though Dawkins isn't as versatile as Curry when receiving the ball as you've described (which is why I advocate a 65/35 split rather than 65/35), I do believe he and Mason have good offensive chemistry, and can run the screen & roll effectively together.

3) Curry gets a bit more rest. Among other reasons why this is important: Duke may still need/want Curry to bring the ball up the court late in close games, either because the opposition is pressing/trapping and Rivers needs help, or because he's a better free throw shooter than Rivers.

My other quibble is that I wouldn't run this set *every* possession; I'd also like to see a non-trivial number that begin by simply feeding Mason in the post, or getting the ball to Kelly in the high post. (Thinking back to the OSU game, Dawkins' one shot was a good look from straight on, about 17 feet out that he just shot a little long ... I think Duke could've gotten that shot again, for Dawkins & others, and could've gotten Kelly the ball in that spot, from which he can shoot or feed the post or drive a bit ... a lot of good things can happen from there, but Duke didn't seem to try.)

Good poin -, I actually meant to add that I'd like to see a couple "JJ plays" for Dawkins, especially early. I wouldn't even be opposed to the first 2-3 possessions of each game being double/triple screen sets for Dawk before we move into our "normal" game, just for the heck of it (it's not like we usually start gangbusters anyway). I do think that Mason could be very involved in this kind of progression, though; he's not usually fed from the top of the key from the point guard anyway, so it would just involve K telling Seth/Ryan to look for Mason as their first option.

I do agree we couldn't just run it every time downcourt - I meant that kind of tongue in cheek. It just seems like the ideal way to capitalize on everyone's strengths to me, and in an ideal world, I'd like to see them perfect the flow and run it until someone stops it. We have so many possessions where guys are trying to do things they're not great at, as it is, which is frustrating.

Oriole - I'd be interested to hear your expanded argument (and I don't mean that sarcastically). For now though, off to Cameron (where I'm sure Curry will have 15 assists and Austin 15 TOs, now... :p)

[jipops]

Following the U-Dub game Duke's defensive efficiency is 2nd worst among the top 10 teams with a rating of 28th. Checking back prior years of kenpom records Duke has never finished this low on the defensive side. With so much clamoring over Quinn getting more minutes or dumping it down to the big guys more and more, doesn't it appear that the major point of focus should be elsewhere? I don't think it matters how many minutes Quinn plays or how abundant the Plumlees touch the ball in the post, if the defense doesn't improve March will not last as long as we would like it to.

Granted we have played a pretty rough stretch of schedule so far and the last 6 minutes or so of the U-Dub game skewed this, but that doesn't mask the fact that defense is still a problem. We have finished several games so far in a similar fashion as the last. I do expect this efficiency to improve over the next few weeks solely because of the schedule. But it will be interesting to see where we are around the early part of February. Sorry that would be outside of this defined phase so I guess let's say after Temple.

[Kedsy]

I don't think it matters how many minutes Quinn plays or how abundant the Plumlees touch the ball in the post, if the defense doesn't improve March will not last as long as we would like it to.

I think this is a good point. Less than stellar defense over the course of the 2008-09 season eventually led to us getting killed by Villanova. That season, K ended up popping Elliot Williams into the starting lineup to guard the opposing PG and it helped but apparently not enough. I think we have similar issues this season in containing the opposing ballhandlers.

Not sure who can step up this season, though. I suppose it's possible Austin will improve enough to start guarding opposing PGs, although so far we've seen no inclination on K's part to use Austin in that fashion. I'm not so confident that Seth, Tyler, Quinn, or Andre could consistently stay in front of a quick PG or slashing wing. And I found it interesting that in the minute or two that Mike played against Washington, he guarded Gaddy and Wroten (not Ross as many on this board predicted).

[MChambers]

Following the U-Dub game Duke's defensive efficiency is 2nd worst among the top 10 teams with a rating of 28th. Checking back prior years of kenpom records Duke has never finished this low on the defensive side. With so much clamoring over Quinn getting more minutes or dumping it down to the big guys more and more, doesn't it appear that the major point of focus should be elsewhere? I don't think it matters how many minutes Quinn plays or how abundant the Plumlees touch the ball in the post, if the defense doesn't improve March will not last as long as we would like it to.

Granted we have played a pretty rough stretch of schedule so far and the last 6 minutes or so of the U-Dub game skewed this, but that doesn't mask the fact that defense is still a problem. We have finished several games so far in a similar fashion as the last. I do expect this efficiency to improve over the next few weeks solely because of the schedule. But it will be interesting to see where we are around the early part of February. Sorry that would be outside of this defined phase so I guess let's say after Temple.

Thinking back on the games, I think Duke's defense has been pretty good for the first 25-30 minutes of all of the games other than tOSU. It's the last 10 or 15 minutes where Duke's struggled. Remember Belmont's comeback? And the MSU game? And Michigan? And now UW? For some reason, this team has generally struggled when up big in the second half. I don't know why this is the case.

[NSDukeFan]

Thinking back on the games, I think Duke's defense has been pretty good for the first 25-30 minutes of all of the games other than tOSU. It's the last 10 or 15 minutes where Duke's struggled. Remember Belmont's comeback? And the MSU game? And Michigan? And now UW? For some reason, this team has generally struggled when up big in the second half. I don't know why this is the case.

Tired legs, of course.;)

[roywhite]

Thinking back on the games, I think Duke's defense has been pretty good for the first 25-30 minutes of all of the games other than tOSU. It's the last 10 or 15 minutes where Duke's struggled. Remember Belmont's comeback? And the MSU game? And Michigan? And now UW? For some reason, this team has generally struggled when up big in the second half. I don't know why this is the case.

Interesting question. My sense is that this is due not only to the defense, but also to sub-par execution of the delay game on offense.

The delay game, which we've seen begun somewhere in the last 4 to 8 minutes of games over the years, has always been a little controversial.
However, some Duke teams have run this to near perfection; moving the ball around and scoring in the last 5 seconds or so of the shot clock.
This year's team is not at that stage yet, which may be a function of ball handling responsibilities that we see discussed in lineup comments.

[Kedsy]

Thinking back on the games, I think Duke's defense has been pretty good for the first 25-30 minutes of all of the games other than tOSU. It's the last 10 or 15 minutes where Duke's struggled. Remember Belmont's comeback? And the MSU game? And Michigan? And now UW? For some reason, this team has generally struggled when up big in the second half. I don't know why this is the case.

Well, Duke's defense is pretty good, overall. 28th in the country is better than 317 Division I teams. But even in the beginning of games it's not the suffocating defense we're used to seeing from Duke. For this team to reach its potential, our perimeter defenders need to lock down better and our 2nd big needs to rotate faster. It's not just at the end of games.

Having said all that, I'm sure the coaching staff is doing everything they can to improve our defense. Hopefully they'll succeed.

[roywhite]

Well, Duke's defense is pretty good, overall. 28th in the country is better than 317 Division I teams. But even in the beginning of games it's not the suffocating defense we're used to seeing from Duke. For this team to reach its potential, our perimeter defenders need to lock down better and our 2nd big needs to rotate faster. It's not just at the end of games.

Having said all that, I'm sure the coaching staff is doing everything they can to improve our defense. Hopefully they'll succeed.

Hi, Kedsy; did I see that you attended the Duke--UWash game?
Certainly seemed to me from watching on TV that our perimeter defense for the first 30-32 minutes was greatly improved...had rather obviously been a point of emphasis.
Was this your observation in person? Or do you remain concerned about the lack of one or more really good on-the-ball defenders?

[Saratoga2]

We have identified defense as critical to this teams success, and I agree with that. The question is how does the coaching staff address the issue?

Austin is a freshman still and we need to remember that he will have his difficulty defending big, esperienced and quick guards. Andre has the experience and has shown improvement in the defensive side but at the point we are operating by committee. Seth is experienced and has quick hands, but is not big, that quick or long. Tyler is neither big nor particularly quick but brings a vocal leadership to the floor, while Quinn is a freshman who is not big but has a little more quickness. It should surprise no one that while all of our guards are quality guys, none are super defensive players. There really aren't that many super defenders in the league.

From the standpoint of the offense, which has to be considered as well, we are going to want Andre and Austin on the floor for Starter minutes and Seth also, if he generates points (scores or assists) in the manner he started out the year. I feel that Quinn is showing the best ball handling skills on the team while Tyler has some advantage on the defensive side.

It appears that our major advantage is depth at guard and we also have Michael lurking on the bench. We started off the Washington game with a high pressure defense which seemed to take them aback. Washington adjusted and found that Wroten could take just about any player we could put on the floor.

It seems to me that we need to use our depth to keep the pressure on the opposing point. Make it hard for him to initiate the offense and stay in front of him by fighting through screens and keeping fresh legs in the game. A little bodying would also slow the opposing point down.

We did well for the first half against Washington and not well at all in the second half. Against OSU, I didn't feel we did well in either half. Perhaps we need to be satisfied with incremental improvement during the season and not expect the coaching staff can somehow make a silk purse out of a pigs ear.

[MChambers]

Interesting question. My sense is that this is due not only to the defense, but also to sub-par execution of the delay game on offense.

The delay game, which we've seen begun somewhere in the last 4 to 8 minutes of games over the years, has always been a little controversial.
However, some Duke teams have run this to near perfection; moving the ball around and scoring in the last 5 seconds or so of the shot clock.
This year's team is not at that stage yet, which may be a function of ball handling responsibilities that we see discussed in lineup comments.

This could be part of it, in the sense that the offensive struggles down the stretch have led to a lot of fast breaks, but that doesn't fully explain it. In many of the games, the offensive struggles seemed to be mostly at the free throw line, which shouldn't create problems for the defense.

[MChambers]

Well, Duke's defense is pretty good, overall. 28th in the country is better than 317 Division I teams. But even in the beginning of games it's not the suffocating defense we're used to seeing from Duke. For this team to reach its potential, our perimeter defenders need to lock down better and our 2nd big needs to rotate faster. It's not just at the end of games.

Having said all that, I'm sure the coaching staff is doing everything they can to improve our defense. Hopefully they'll succeed.
Agreed that it's not suffocating, although Saturday's first half was pretty darned good. Part of the success was UW missing makeable jumpers, but that wasn't all of it.

[Kedsy]

Hi, Kedsy; did I see that you attended the Duke--UWash game?
Certainly seemed to me from watching on TV that our perimeter defense for the first 30-32 minutes was greatly improved...had rather obviously been a point of emphasis.
Was this your observation in person? Or do you remain concerned about the lack of one or more really good on-the-ball defenders?

Yes, I was there. I thought our team defense looked much improved -- we covered the passing lanes better, fought through screens, didn't lose our men off the ball as much as we had in previous games. Andre, in particular, stuck to his man off the ball very well (with one exception when Andre tried to help inside and Ross ended up with a wide open three). Austin, too, for the most part.

But one-on-one, I do not think we were significantly better at staying in front of our man and keeping him from getting into the lane. Wroten did whatever he wanted (scored 9 of their first 11 points, mostly on drives) and Gaddy didn't appear to be pressured much at all, although Gaddy also didn't appear to be looking to score when he got into the lane and we were pretty good at making sure he had no easy passes to make. At the end of the game, probably because of our foul trouble, we didn't cover the passing lanes as well, and it led to a lot of easy scores for Washington.

I am hopeful we can continue to play the passing lanes well and stay with our men off the ball. But if the other team has a quick PG and/or slasher and they need to get a basket (because, e.g., they're trying to come from behind) I am concerned about our ability to stop them from getting into the lane. Against a team like Kentucky or Memphis (or Ohio State, I suppose), who plays a lot of dribble-drive and likes to do it right from the get-go, we're going to have to step it up if we want to win.

[robed deity]

One thing that has frustrated me is the tendency to give up leads. Duke had a 16 point lead to Belmont and won by 1. A 15 point lead to Michigan and won by 7. A 19 point lead to Michigan St and won by 4. A 20 point lead to Washington and won by 6. Even in the Davidson game, a 20 point lead was trimmed to a 13 point win. Now, it's great to get up by these margins against solid clubs, but it'd be nice to keep the foot on the gas. I guess this has to do with a combination of things-missed fts, poorly run delay offense, and lax D.

Also, if memory serves, opponents have had some meaningless threes go in at the buzzer this year. I can remember 2 right away. Obviously, that's going to happen sometimes, but 3 points is not insignificant when KenPom calculates PPP at the end of a game.

[MChambers]

One thing that has frustrated me is the tendency to give up leads. Duke had a 16 point lead to Belmont and won by 1. A 15 point lead to Michigan and won by 7. A 19 point lead to Michigan St and won by 4. A 20 point lead to Washington and won by 6. Even in the Davidson game, a 20 point lead was trimmed to a 13 point win. Now, it's great to get up by these margins against solid clubs, but it'd be nice to keep the foot on the gas. I guess this has to do with a combination of things-missed fts, poorly run delay offense, and lax D.
The good news is that this combination of things that led to the trimming of leads (haven't given one up yet) is very correctable and Duke has a pretty solid group of teachers. Part of the issue may be simply not knowing roles. Or it may be that the coaching staff hasn't really worked on this in practice, because it is still trying to get the basics down.

Personally, I'm trying to focus on how good Duke has been for the first 30 minutes in all but one of its games. But I share your frustration to some degree. Good thing it's December.

[superdave]

This Duke team does not have a defensive identity yet. I thought they would be a step or two closer by now to establishing a style but it seems like the experimentation will continue on this end until something clicks.

So far we've seen the team press and trap some and push the ball in transition as a result, play more of half court style that requires execution and efficiency and play some mix of the two. Please add in anything I may be leaving out.

We have a wealth of height and bulk up front and guards and wings. We have a lack of on-the-ball defense, rebounding (outside of Mason-Miles) and seem to be allowing too many easy buckets on defensive breakdowns.

The team arrived back in Durham on 12/26 and will have Western Michigan, Temple and UPenn to start establishing that necessary identity. So 6-7 practices and three games left in Phase II before the ACC begins.

Do we start settling into a rotation with all the guys improving their defensive assignments or does the lineup remain in flux because of breakdowns? I think the rest of the season turns on how this plays out. I really dont know what to expect but I think it's going to clear up a little over the next week.

[Bob Green]

We have a wealth of height and bulk up front and guards and wings. We have a lack of on-the-ball defense, rebounding (outside of Mason-Miles) and seem to be allowing too many easy buckets on defensive breakdowns.

I'm optimistic our on-the-ball defense will improve as the season progresses. I'm not expecting earth shattering improvement here but do believe we will see some improvement. Rebounding is definitely an area for concern and is one skill set where Andre Dawkins needs work. Dawkins is averaging 1.8 rebounds per game and has a total of two offensive rebounds so far this year. Comparing Dawkins to other wing players:

UNC - Harrison Barnes: 4.8 rpg
Kentucky - Doron Lamb: 3.8 rpg
UConn - Jeremy Lamb: 4.5 rpg
Virginia - Joe Harris: 3.5 rpg
Washington - Terrence Ross: 6.5 rpg

I'm a huge Andre Dawkins fan but it is evident he needs to become more active on the glass. Seth Curry (2.6 rpg) and Austin Rivers (2.5 rpg) have better numbers than Dawkins.

[superdave]

I'm optimistic our on-the-ball defense will improve as the season progresses. I'm not expecting earth shattering improvement here but do believe we will see some improvement. Rebounding is definitely an area for concern and is one skill set where Andre Dawkins needs work. Dawkins is averaging 1.8 rebounds per game and has a total of two offensive rebounds so far this year. Comparing Dawkins to other wing players:

UNC - Harrison Barnes: 4.8 rpg
Kentucky - Doron Lamb: 3.8 rpg
UConn - Jeremy Lamb: 4.5 rpg
Virginia - Joe Harris: 3.5 rpg
Washington - Terrence Ross: 6.5 rpg

I'm a huge Andre Dawkins fan but it is evident he needs to become more active on the glass. Seth Curry (2.6 rpg) and Austin Rivers (2.5 rpg) have better numbers than Dawkins.

Good stats, Bob. Duke is only out-rebounding opponents by about 3 per game. That has to improve or our steals have to go way up. With our ability to get to the free throw line (Mason, Austin particularly) do you send the guards to the paint to rebound on defense, play a more half court style and out-physical opponents? Or do you pressure a lot more because of our guard depth and play more up tempo? Or does it depend on the opponent? A lot depends on how Coach K sees this team executing on D. Seems to be very up in the air.

[tommy]

Good stats, Bob. Duke is only out-rebounding opponents by about 3 per game. That has to improve or our steals have to go way up. With our ability to get to the free throw line (Mason, Austin particularly) do you send the guards to the paint to rebound on defense, play a more half court style and out-physical opponents? Or do you pressure a lot more because of our guard depth and play more up tempo? Or does it depend on the opponent? A lot depends on how Coach K sees this team executing on D. Seems to be very up in the air.

Here's what I see: Our direct, on-the-ball pressure, particularly at the point, is below the standards that have been set at Duke. I don't see that changing much. Tyler gets in his man's grill, but too often his man just goes right around him, or through him. Quinn -- because of his knee? -- has not exhibited the ability to move his feet quickly enough to consistently stay with his man when his man makes a move to the hoop. I think we're going to see more improvement from him on this, but he's not going to be Bobby Hurley or Chris Duhon in this regard. At least not soon.

Without that real good ball pressure, I don't think we're going to be able to increase our steals significantly. If we want to push the ball, it's mostly going to have to come when one of our three bigs takes the ball off the defensive board. Fortunately, Mason Plumlee is one of the best defensive rebounders in the country, IMO, and has the ability to start a lot of breaks.

But if we want to get more easy hoops in transition, I think the guy who Mason or other rebounders need to find with that first pass isn't Seth or Tyler, but Austin Rivers. Austin is obviously our quickest guy with the ball in his hand. He hasn't shown that he's an elite passer in transition, but that's not the point. The point is that Austin has already proven to be near-impossible to stop in the halfcourt when he decides to go to the hoop. He'll only be more dangerous when he's got it in his hand in transition, when there isn't a wall of bigs waiting for him, and when even the smaller guys who are getting back are on their heels and backpedaling. I think Rivers should be leading the break whenever possible, and that's going to be the best way for us to force tempo. And of course the more we make people pay with Rivers in transition, the less aggressive the opponent will be in sending guys to crash the offensive boards, as they'll know they have to stay back. So our defensive rebounding numbers would stand to improve.

But besides not having elite ball pressure, I think our primary defensive deficiency as a team is handling perimeter screens. The smaller, screened man is not fighting through consistently enough, we're trailing behind on too many screens, and our bigs have too often not stepped up to challenge a shot coming off a screen. Of course, sometimes they have, but I think that's an area we need to improve in.

[Newton_14]

Here's what I see: Our direct, on-the-ball pressure, particularly at the point, is below the standards that have been set at Duke. I don't see that changing much. Tyler gets in his man's grill, but too often his man just goes right around him, or through him. Quinn -- because of his knee? -- has not exhibited the ability to move his feet quickly enough to consistently stay with his man when his man makes a move to the hoop. I think we're going to see more improvement from him on this, but he's not going to be Bobby Hurley or Chris Duhon in this regard. At least not soon.

Without that real good ball pressure, I don't think we're going to be able to increase our steals significantly. If we want to push the ball, it's mostly going to have to come when one of our three bigs takes the ball off the defensive board. Fortunately, Mason Plumlee is one of the best defensive rebounders in the country, IMO, and has the ability to start a lot of breaks.

But if we want to get more easy hoops in transition, I think the guy who Mason or other rebounders need to find with that first pass isn't Seth or Tyler, but Austin Rivers. Austin is obviously our quickest guy with the ball in his hand. He hasn't shown that he's an elite passer in transition, but that's not the point. The point is that Austin has already proven to be near-impossible to stop in the halfcourt when he decides to go to the hoop. He'll only be more dangerous when he's got it in his hand in transition, when there isn't a wall of bigs waiting for him, and when even the smaller guys who are getting back are on their heels and backpedaling. I think Rivers should be leading the break whenever possible, and that's going to be the best way for us to force tempo. And of course the more we make people pay with Rivers in transition, the less aggressive the opponent will be in sending guys to crash the offensive boards, as they'll know they have to stay back. So our defensive rebounding numbers would stand to improve.

But besides not having elite ball pressure, I think our primary defensive deficiency as a team is handling perimeter screens. The smaller, screened man is not fighting through consistently enough, we're trailing behind on too many screens, and our bigs have too often not stepped up to challenge a shot coming off a screen. Of course, sometimes they have, but I think that's an area we need to improve in.

I am not sure how high the ceiling is for this team concerning perimeter defense. I do think each of the guys can improve as individuals, some more than others, and that can translate collectively, but, "great perimeter defense" is not likely to be a staple for this team. Hopefully, it will be a case of steady improvement over the course of the season.

Mason is a great defensive rebounder, but I would add, that he is also a great outlet passer. Definitely agree that is something that needs to be utilized and taken advantage of. Also agree that hitting Austin with that pass is a good idea and one way to put pressure on the defense and yet another way to utilize Austin's skillset.

Disagree on one thing though. Quinn is actually the fastest Blue Devil with the ball in his hands. Austin is quick, but Quinn can go coast to coast with the ball quite a bit faster than Austin in my view.

Concerning rebounding, which we need to help offset the shortcomings of the perimeter D, we have to get more out of the 3 position. Andre is where that starts of course. Bob's numbers were disturbing. Especially the part about 2 offensive rebounds on the season. That has to change. This is one area where we really miss Singler. Whoever is playing wing-forward has to make it a focal point to crash the defensive boards, during normal course of play and on free throws. I noticed something in the last game related to this. UNC-G was shooting a free throw. Mason and Ryan were on the low blocks, and Andre and I believe Seth were on the high blocks. I expected Seth to take the shooter so Andre could crash the middle of the lane. (Singler got tons of rebounds from that spot on free throw misses). Instead, Andre took the shooter, and Seth didn't really crash the middle. With Andre's hops, he needs to play the same role Kyle played in that scenario.

The guys have had 4 days of practices to work on some of these things, so it will be interesting to see what improvements have been made and what changes K has made to various areas. Looking forward to the next week to ten days to see how the guys perform.

[Kedsy]

Concerning rebounding, which we need to help offset the shortcomings of the perimeter D, we have to get more out of the 3 position. Andre is where that starts of course. Bob's numbers were disturbing. Especially the part about 2 offensive rebounds on the season. That has to change. This is one area where we really miss Singler. Whoever is playing wing-forward has to make it a focal point to crash the defensive boards, during normal course of play and on free throws. I noticed something in the last game related to this. UNC-G was shooting a free throw. Mason and Ryan were on the low blocks, and Andre and I believe Seth were on the high blocks. I expected Seth to take the shooter so Andre could crash the middle of the lane. (Singler got tons of rebounds from that spot on free throw misses). Instead, Andre took the shooter, and Seth didn't really crash the middle. With Andre's hops, he needs to play the same role Kyle played in that scenario.

I know I have been somewhat of an Andre apologist on the boards lately, but I don't think it's fair to expect Kyle-style rebounding from Andre. Kyle played center his early years at Duke and was used to playing big man. He often lined up on the low block on free throws. Andre has never been asked to play that way at Duke.

This is especially true for offensive rebounds. Whether he's moving or standing still, Andre is always on the perimeter on offense, except for the rare case that he has the ball in his hands and drives. There just aren't a lot of offensive rebounding opportunities for a guy standing around the 3-point line. Whether or not he should be standing (or moving) around the 3-point line is another issue, but obviously that's where the coaching staff has asked him to be.

I believe Andre is big enough to defend most opposing SFs, but that doesn't mean he's not a bit undersized for the position. He rarely is going to have a size advantage on whoever is guarding him, and as I said his place in the offense will rarely put him in good position for an offensive board. Actually Austin should have a better chance to grab these rebounds, as he will much more frequently have a size advantage over the SG who's guarding him, and he almost always has a quickness advantage if he's inclined to slash for rebounds. He also spends more time inside the arc than Andre does.

Defensive rebounds are another story, because they depend on where the player you are guarding is located when the shot goes up. Andre can certainly improve there, but I don't think he should fairly be compared to 6'8" Kyle Singler, 6'8" Harrison Barnes, 6'6" Terrence Ross, 6'6" Joe Harris, or even 6'5" Jeremy Lamb. Based on his game and his size relative to his position, he should at least be as good as Seth and Austin, and he isn't but really he's not that far off (Seth's defensive rebound % = 7.4%; Austin's = 7.8%; Andre's = 6.9%).

For what it's worth, Andre has averaged 4.0 rebounds in his last two games (all defensive), so if he keeps that up maybe this is somewhat of a moot point.

[Newton_14]

I know I have been somewhat of an Andre apologist on the boards lately, but I don't think it's fair to expect Kyle-style rebounding from Andre. Kyle played center his early years at Duke and was used to playing big man. He often lined up on the low block on free throws. Andre has never been asked to play that way at Duke.

This is especially true for offensive rebounds. Whether he's moving or standing still, Andre is always on the perimeter on offense, except for the rare case that he has the ball in his hands and drives. There just aren't a lot of offensive rebounding opportunities for a guy standing around the 3-point line. Whether or not he should be standing (or moving) around the 3-point line is another issue, but obviously that's where the coaching staff has asked him to be.

I believe Andre is big enough to defend most opposing SFs, but that doesn't mean he's not a bit undersized for the position. He rarely is going to have a size advantage on whoever is guarding him, and as I said his place in the offense will rarely put him in good position for an offensive board. Actually Austin should have a better chance to grab these rebounds, as he will much more frequently have a size advantage over the SG who's guarding him, and he almost always has a quickness advantage if he's inclined to slash for rebounds. He also spends more time inside the arc than Andre does.

Defensive rebounds are another story, because they depend on where the player you are guarding is located when the shot goes up. Andre can certainly improve there, but I don't think he should fairly be compared to 6'8" Kyle Singler, 6'8" Harrison Barnes, 6'6" Terrence Ross, 6'6" Joe Harris, or even 6'5" Jeremy Lamb. Based on his game and his size relative to his position, he should at least be as good as Seth and Austin, and he isn't but really he's not that far off (Seth's defensive rebound % = 7.4%; Austin's = 7.8%; Andre's = 6.9%).

For what it's worth, Andre has averaged 4.0 rebounds in his last two games (all defensive), so if he keeps that up maybe this is somewhat of a moot point.

I don't disagree with anything you say here. I did not mean to imply Andre needed to rebound as well as Kyle. Sorry, after re-reading, I see my original post was not clear. Like you indicate, Kyle was a great rebounder for 4 years. Andre does not have that skillset. I do believe that Andre can me a better rebounder than he is now. The point about Kyle was really about how much we miss his rebounding from the 3 spot. No one person on this team can replace his rebounds from the 3. We will have to replace those rebounds by committee. All of the guys playing the 3, collectively need to rebound better is what I was trying to say.



.

[Bob Green]

I found this article in the Fayetteville Observer interesting:

http://www.fayobserver.com/articles/2011/12/31/1147327?sac=Sports

Especially this statement:


...the break from games gives Krzyzewski ample time to evaluate what his team has accomplished and what it can become.

This year's discovery period led him to this conclusion: Duke, with its backcourt depth, needs to push the ball more.

With two games left in Phase II (Penn and Temple), is game tempo a statistic we should keep our eyes on? If Coach Krzyzewski has decided to have the team "push the ball more" what will be the impact of that decision on the rotation? Will the bench players see more playing time? Will Quinn Cook break into the starting line-up? The rotation and starting line-up are always two favorite topics for posters on DBR to discuss and this article seems to provide a nice segue with the following statement:


A critical component to the fast-paced approach is Cook, a freshman who invigorated the Blue Devils with a 14-point performance against UNC-Greensboro. He had 16 points, eight assists and no turnovers in 23 minutes Friday.

Phase III and the start of conference play is just around the corner but it appears to me we still have a lot to discuss in Phase II.

[MChambers]

I found this article in the Fayetteville Observer interesting:

http://www.fayobserver.com/articles/2011/12/31/1147327?sac=Sports

Especially this statement:



With two games left in Phase II (Penn and Temple), is game tempo a statistic we should keep our eyes on? If Coach Krzyzewski has decided to have the team "push the ball more" what will be the impact of that decision on the rotation? Will the bench players see more playing time? Will Quinn Cook break into the starting line-up? The rotation and starting line-up are always two favorite topics for posters on DBR to discuss and this article seems to provide a nice segue with the following statement:



Phase III and the start of conference play is just around the corner but it appears to me we still have a lot to discuss in Phase II.
Kedsy can bring out the statistics about Coach K not going that deep in ACC play, etc. :-)

As I was watching last night, I was wondering if we'll really see a 9 or 10 player rotation this season. I'd guess Josh is most likely to get squeezed on PT, and Silent G next, although I liked what I saw from both last night, especially Mike.

[jv001]

I found this article in the Fayetteville Observer interesting:

http://www.fayobserver.com/articles/2011/12/31/1147327?sac=Sports

Especially this statement:



With two games left in Phase II (Penn and Temple), is game tempo a statistic we should keep our eyes on? If Coach Krzyzewski has decided to have the team "push the ball more" what will be the impact of that decision on the rotation? Will the bench players see more playing time? Will Quinn Cook break into the starting line-up? The rotation and starting line-up are always two favorite topics for posters on DBR to discuss and this article seems to provide a nice segue with the following statement:



Phase III and the start of conference play is just around the corner but it appears to me we still have a lot to discuss in Phase II.

Could be that Coach K has seen that this team needs to run more and Quinn and Austin have the skill to get the ball quickly down court. I know it was against lower competition but I like what I saw from both of these guys. What bothered me most was the way Mason played against their 290lb center. To me it looked like Mason may have been under the weather. GoDuke!

[Saratoga2]

When we started the season, coach K decided to go with experience, which meant trying Seth at PG, going with the special talent of Austin and playing Andre, along with a threesome of Ryan, Mason and Miles. He didn't choose to do a lot of substitutions at that time. The fan base was justifyably nervous since we had lost the three best players from the team (scoring, playmaking and defense) in Nolan, Kyle and Kryie. You could say it worked out very well, as Duke prevailed against a tough initial schedule. The problems seemed to be that we didn't do the best job of game management, turning the ball over, shooting early in the clock and not hitting free throws as well as a team, especially closing games out. Our defense also looked weak in stopping penetration and there appeared to be communication problems among the front court, with less rebounding than I expected.

An area that had concerned me also was that both Austin and Quinn appeared to be high school players who hung their heads when things didn't go their way. I definietly was wrong about that, as both players look very positive and coachable. (Credit coach K for that perhaps).

After our weaknesses got exposed in the OSU game, coach K felt he needed to make some changes and went to Tyler to provide ball security at point and add a defensive toughness to the team along with some leadership. That moved Andre into the 1st off the bench role. Andre seemed to have improved quite a bit on the defensive side but still has trouble showing consistent offensive results, so the 6th man role was a natural adjustment. During that time and up until recent games, Seth was struggling with an injury so it complicated understanding the team. Mason had made progress with his offense and rebounding in the paint but during the stretch after OSU, Miles too started to show more, kind of like what happened to Zoubek in his senior year.

Once we were in the weaker part of our schedule, coach K added Quinn to the mix and also gave Michael and Josh some time in the games to allow for development and to see what they could do under pressure. Quinn has really shown his innate PG abilities in that time. Kelly also seems to realize that he needs to buckle down and do more rebounding and make smart plays.

So where are we headed as we look forward to the Temple game?

1. Coach K seems to like the idea of playing both Tyler and Quinn at the point. Keeping them fresh and getting the best talents of both.
2. Austin has grown and is more and more likely to set up others rather than going in hard when the play isn't there. His defense is also improving.
3. Seth has returned to better health now and is a good scorer again, especially from a shooting guard position.
4. Mason has an improved set of inside moves and when playing his hardest can both rebound and block shots. He has probably learned that he needs to do that.
5. Ryan has gotten the message that he needs to do more rebounding and interior defense. His shooting is coming back so he is one of the most solid overall players.
6. Miles play is (miles) better these days. He seems to have grown in confidence. He still is having some problems with the quickness of recognition of the right thing to do, such as when to make a pass and when to try for a steal, but his improvement is really marked from just a couple of weeks ago.
7. We have depth with Andre, Michael and Josh. It appears that Marshall and Alex are in the red shirt mill for now. While Andre's defense is improving, his offensive is kind of spotty. He has such a great shot, but hasn't yet made the move into consistentcy that we need. Josh is a good reserve at this point and Michael looks a little raw, but does have lots of potential.

I expect the starting lineup to remain Tyler, Seth, Austin, Ryan and Mason. Coach K is going to rotate the PG's to keep them fresh. The bigs will be Mason, Kelly and Miles with all of them getting substantial PT, keeping them fresh and reducing the impact of fouls. Josh is likely to get less PT, but has shown he can help out. The most intriguing situation will be at shooting guard and small forward. Will Andre sub in for Seth and or Austin and will Michael come in at small forward instead of Andre?

I would look forward to the next moves as we start the ACC season. It will get more difficult from here on with Virginia being the next matchup where that can give up real problems.

[superdave]

Nice recap of the season, above, Saratoga2...or should I say "Toga!"?

I think the issues we'll see play out in the next few games are the following:

Point Guard - Will the balance of minutes in the new PG platoon shift more towards Quinn? The past two games have had Quinn with a total of 45 minutes and Tyler at 34. I hope to see Quinn improve enough to justify a consistent 25 minutes per game. I'd like to see Tyler be used more in spurts either to press, trap, lock down a specific player, or turn the tide when our opponent makes a run. Coach K really is high on Tyler so his role may remain din the 17-22 minutes range. However, during the last two games Quinn's A:TO is 17:0 and Tyler's is 4:2. Ball dont lie.

Andre Dawkins - He's been coming off the bench a few games now. The past two games since we've seemingly settled on the PG Platoon, Andre has played 35 total minutes and thrown up 13 total shots. I think Andre's role going forward will be to give him the green light and to feed him if he's hot. This is a diminished role from what I thought we'd see at the beginning of the year. But it's reality when you have a coach that puts D first. I dont mean Andre is playing bad D (some good, some bad) but that we need TT/QC at PG a little more than we need Andre at the 3. I still kinda hold out hope for a crunch-time lineup with Seth, Austin and Andre. Am I crazy?

Defensive Scheme - We are picking guys up full court or 3/4 court a little more often. Will we see more of this coupled with some press and traps? I hope so. We have the bench to do it in the first half and grab an early lead. We're not going to be 40 minutes of hell, but we can attack teams with weak ball handlers or throw this curveball at teams that are in the midst of a run or to make a run of our own. I'd like to hear what people think about our ability to pressure the opponents PG now vs. with Seth at point.

Rebounding - We're doing a little better, but I could play backup center for Penn if I got in shape. So no crowing at this point. Let's see how we rebound against a Temple team that I'd expect to swing a few elbows, and especially once we go on the road in the conference. Miles' recent improvement and confidence could give him a little Zoubek senior season magic with rebounding and blocking shots. Our interior D - including rebounding and shot blocking - could erase some of the problems associated with our ability to pressure the ball.

If the past two games are prelude to the next phase, we should see guys learning to read each other better and getting things down to a habit like defensive rotations, in-bounds plays and transition O and D. I think Coach K has a general idea of where all the puzzle pieces go and it's time to start snapping them together.

[jimsumner]

RE: Dawkins.

I'm seeing some real signs that's he's expanding his game. He had a really nice assist against Penn, getting inside off the dribble and finding Kelly for a foul-line jumper. 'Dre hasn't always created shots for himself off the dribble, so creating one for a teammate is a plus. He also had three rebounds against WMU, four against Penn. He's getting tough rebounds in traffic, vital for a team so small on the perimeter. He seems to be playing better D, with more intensity and better technique.

My question about Dawkins has always been, can he help the team when the jumpers aren't falling. The answer is starting to become yes. I see that as a positive development going forward.

[superdave]

RE: Dawkins.

I'm seeing some real signs that's he's expanding his game. He had a really nice assist against Penn, getting inside off the dribble and finding Kelly for a foul-line jumper. 'Dre hasn't always created shots for himself off the dribble, so creating one for a teammate is a plus. He also had three rebounds against WMU, four against Penn. He's getting tough rebounds in traffic, vital for a team so small on the perimeter. He seems to be playing better D, with more intensity and better technique.

My question about Dawkins has always been, can he help the team when the jumpers aren't falling. The answer is starting to become yes. I see that as a positive development going forward.

I would add to Jim's post that a player of Andre's caliber seems to start really clicking his junior year. They get enough minutes under their belt for the game to slow down. I really would love to see AD take off in ACC play and we all know he is capable.