PDA

View Full Version : Terrence Ross



RockyMtDevil
12-06-2011, 10:54 PM
Anyone catch UW's game in the Garden tonight? I love this kid Ross, wish we would have landed him. We'll see him first hand Saturday. I have no idea who we put on him. Who will guard Ross? kelly? Dawkins? No clue.

DuKe4LiFe#30
12-06-2011, 11:06 PM
dont be suprised if silent G starts tomarow nite and get lots of playing time saturday because hes the only player we have that can matchup with ross.

Kedsy
12-06-2011, 11:35 PM
dont be suprised if silent G starts tomarow nite and get lots of playing time saturday because hes the only player we have that can matchup with ross.

I will not just be "suprised," I'll be absolutely shocked if Mike starts "tomarow nite" or against Washington. Andre will match up fine.

Greg_Newton
12-07-2011, 12:28 AM
I will not just be "suprised," I'll be absolutely shocked if Mike starts "tomarow nite" or against Washington. Andre will match up fine.

I would be surprised, but not shocked to see him start Saturday. K has indicated that the starting lineup will be fluid during this next stretch, and Terrence Ross would really be the perfect test to see how Mike G measures up against a prototypical, 6'6 scoring wing. If he continues to play well, I'd like to see it.

superdave
12-07-2011, 08:56 AM
I would be surprised, but not shocked to see him start Saturday. K has indicated that the starting lineup will be fluid during this next stretch, and Terrence Ross would really be the perfect test to see how Mike G measures up against a prototypical, 6'6 scoring wing. If he continues to play well, I'd like to see it.

Silent G may start a game eventually, but I'm guessing it will be because he's done some obvious things to earn. I have not seen anything that makes me think he's that yet. Quinn is the more likely one to sneak in a start tonight or Saturday.

MulletMan
12-07-2011, 12:28 PM
I will not just be "suprised," I'll be absolutely shocked if Mike starts "tomarow nite" or against Washington. Andre will match up fine.

Dude. C'mon... there is no way that Dawkins can guard Ross. I'm sorry, I love Dre, but his defense is not good. He needs to signifcantly work on moving his feet and getting through/over screens. He has the athleticism to stay will Ross, but he has yet to put all of his talent and skills together on the defensive end. Who guards Ross on Saturday is a very valid concern.

CDu
12-07-2011, 12:36 PM
Dude. C'mon... there is no way that Dawkins can guard Ross. I'm sorry, I love Dre, but his defense is not good. He needs to signifcantly work on moving his feet and getting through/over screens. He has the athleticism to stay will Ross, but he has yet to put all of his talent and skills together on the defensive end. Who guards Ross on Saturday is a very valid concern.

I'll agree with this. I HOPE that Dawkins does fine against Ross. But I've not seen much this season to suggest that will be the case. I don't think Ross is as good as Buford, but Buford ate Dawkins up. And aside from that matchup, Dawkins hasn't really had another matchup against a top-tier SF so far (Rivers was the guy guarding Michigan's Hardaway).

Now, that doesn't mean that we'll suddenly see Gbinije get a ton of minutes, either. He had some moments in the OSU second half, but that was a blowout situation. And other than that, he's been pretty bad in very limited action.

In other words, as you said, I think who guards Ross on Saturday is indeed a very valid concern. It may need to be Rivers.

Bob Green
12-07-2011, 01:02 PM
Who guards Ross on Saturday is a very valid concern.

I've watched multiple UW games this year including every second of last night's Marquette game. Defending Terrence Ross is a concern as is C.J. Wilcox and Tony Wroten. The UW backcourt players are big and talented, but they're equally young and inexperienced and can be rattled. Duke is going to need to pressure point guard Abdul Gaddy relentlessly to disrupt the flow of the Huskies' offense.

I'm exciting to see Andre Dawkins step up to the challenge of guarding Terrence Ross. As I stated in the Phase II thread, I view Ross as a preview to the Harrison Barnes match-up.

NSDukeFan
12-07-2011, 03:33 PM
I've watched multiple UW games this year including every second of last night's Marquette game. Defending Terrence Ross is a concern as is C.J. Wilcox and Tony Wroten. The UW backcourt players are big and talented, but they're equally young and inexperienced and can be rattled. Duke is going to need to pressure point guard Abdul Gaddy relentlessly to disrupt the flow of the Huskies' offense.

I'm exciting to see Andre Dawkins step up to the challenge of guarding Terrence Ross. As I stated in the Phase II thread, I view Ross as a preview to the Harrison Barnes match-up.

If Ross is a preview to the Harrison Barnes match-up, then, the more important match-up might be if Duke's guards can pressure Abdul Gaddy. This could serve as a preview to being able to pressure Kendall Marshall and improve the team's perimeter defense overall.

DukieTiger
12-07-2011, 04:59 PM
I'll agree with this. I HOPE that Dawkins does fine against Ross. But I've not seen much this season to suggest that will be the case. I don't think Ross is as good as Buford, but Buford ate Dawkins up. And aside from that matchup, Dawkins hasn't really had another matchup against a top-tier SF so far (Rivers was the guy guarding Michigan's Hardaway).

Now, that doesn't mean that we'll suddenly see Gbinije get a ton of minutes, either. He had some moments in the OSU second half, but that was a blowout situation. And other than that, he's been pretty bad in very limited action.

In other words, as you said, I think who guards Ross on Saturday is indeed a very valid concern. It may need to be Rivers.

Andre performed pretty well vs. MSU and Branden Dawson, just for one example.

But yes, defense against wing athletes is a concern this season for Duke. Something tells me this will the last year for quite a while where that will be the case though.

CDu
12-07-2011, 07:01 PM
Andre performed pretty well vs. MSU and Branden Dawson, just for one example.

But yes, defense against wing athletes is a concern this season for Duke. Something tells me this will the last year for quite a while where that will be the case though.

Dawson is a freshman averaging less than 10 ppg. Dawkins did nothing special in that game defensively against Dawson.

Greg_Newton
12-08-2011, 12:18 AM
Given UW's personnel, I wouldn't be against starting Gbinije. There's 6'6 athlete Terrence Ross... but there's also 6'5 athlete/PG Tony Wroten... 6'6 athlete CJ Wilcox... not our ideal matchup.

Especially if Dre's not 100%, because I don't think starting Cook/Thornton and pushing Rivers to the 3 would exactly work in our favor.

Also interesting that their 7' center (Aziz) was the player Nate James originally scouted at CSI, which led to him finding Carrick Felix. Will be an interesting matchup with Mason.

jv001
12-08-2011, 06:30 AM
I've watched multiple UW games this year including every second of last night's Marquette game. Defending Terrence Ross is a concern as is C.J. Wilcox and Tony Wroten. The UW backcourt players are big and talented, but they're equally young and inexperienced and can be rattled. Duke is going to need to pressure point guard Abdul Gaddy relentlessly to disrupt the flow of the Huskies' offense. I'm exciting to see Andre Dawkins step up to the challenge of guarding Terrence Ross. As I stated in the Phase II thread, I view Ross as a preview to the Harrison Barnes match-up.

I look for Tyler to hound Gaddy the entire game. That's providing Tyler doesn't get into foul trouble which he has done in the past. Tyler is not a great on the ball defender but he can get under the skin of opposing players. He is one tough player. GoDuke!

CDu
12-08-2011, 08:24 AM
Given UW's personnel, I wouldn't be against starting Gbinije. There's 6'6 athlete Terrence Ross... but there's also 6'5 athlete/PG Tony Wroten... 6'6 athlete CJ Wilcox... not our ideal matchup.

Especially if Dre's not 100%, because I don't think starting Cook/Thornton and pushing Rivers to the 3 would exactly work in our favor.

Also interesting that their 7' center (Aziz) was the player Nate James originally scouted at CSI, which led to him finding Carrick Felix. Will be an interesting matchup with Mason.

Well, they'll only be playing all three of those guys for about 10-15 mpg. But they will be big on the wings and at PG as well (Gaddy is tallish too).

CDu
12-08-2011, 08:28 AM
I look for Tyler to hound Gaddy the entire game. That's providing Tyler doesn't get into foul trouble which he has done in the past. Tyler is not a great on the ball defender but he can get under the skin of opposing players. He is one tough player. GoDuke!

I'll be pretty surprised to see Thornton hound Gaddy the entire game. He's yet to show that he can stay on the floor long enough to be a stout defensive presence - especially not against better competition.

I would not be surprised to see Thornton have some stretches where he causes difficulties for the opposition. But I don't think he'll be assigned to Gaddy for a ton of the game.

COYS
12-08-2011, 09:12 AM
Given UW's personnel, I wouldn't be against starting Gbinije. There's 6'6 athlete Terrence Ross... but there's also 6'5 athlete/PG Tony Wroten... 6'6 athlete CJ Wilcox... not our ideal matchup.

Especially if Dre's not 100%, because I don't think starting Cook/Thornton and pushing Rivers to the 3 would exactly work in our favor.

Also interesting that their 7' center (Aziz) was the player Nate James originally scouted at CSI, which led to him finding Carrick Felix. Will be an interesting matchup with Mason.

I have to say, I would be surprised if Mike starts assuming Dre is healthy. Mike's talent and potential is evident, but I'm not sure that he gives us enough defensively to compensate for the drastic drop on the offensive end if Dawkins is on the bench. I'm also not sure that Mike is definitely better than Andre on defense right now, either. If the staff thinks that Mike is capable of completely taking one of their wings out of the game, then maybe he gets the nod. But I'm not sure that Mike is capable of that type of defensive performance at this point in his career.

While some of the matchups favor Washington, I think the Huskies have more to worry about. They are not the most disciplined defensive team. Good ball movement will give us open looks from three, which with Seth, Andre, Austin, and Ryan all deadly shooters. As long as we protect the ball and prevent them from getting steals and transition buckets, we should be able to win the half-court battle on offense.

As a quick aside, if Tyler and Quinn can get comfortable knocking down threes off of drive and kicks, it dramatically increases our offensive firepower.

MulletMan
12-08-2011, 09:18 AM
I have to say, I would be surprised if Mike starts assuming Dre is healthy. Mike's talent and potential is evident, but I'm not sure that he gives us enough defensively to compensate for the drastic drop on the offensive end if Dawkins is on the bench. I'm also not sure that Mike is definitely better than Andre on defense right now, either. If the staff thinks that Mike is capable of completely taking one of their wings out of the game, then maybe he gets the nod. But I'm not sure that Mike is capable of that type of defensive performance at this point in his career.


Not that we are remotely in the situation now that we were then, but your paragraph reminds me of when Elliot Williams broke into the starting lineup. He was a complete offensive liability at that point, but earned his was onto the floor with D. We aren't in those dire straights right now, but there is precedent with the current incarnation of the coaching staff to put start a defensive stopper into the starting lineup without worry about the offensive end.

So... as a purely hypothetical... do we think that Washington's D is bad enough that we could get along with Gbinijie on the floor with, say, Mason, Kelly, Seth and Austin?

COYS
12-08-2011, 09:41 AM
Not that we are remotely in the situation now that we were then, but your paragraph reminds me of when Elliot Williams broke into the starting lineup. He was a complete offensive liability at that point, but earned his was onto the floor with D. We aren't in those dire straights right now, but there is precedent with the current incarnation of the coaching staff to put start a defensive stopper into the starting lineup without worry about the offensive end.

So... as a purely hypothetical... do we think that Washington's D is bad enough that we could get along with Gbinijie on the floor with, say, Mason, Kelly, Seth and Austin?

This is good point, but I think the question is do we think Mike's D is good enough that he's comparable to William's insertion into the lineup. As I said in my post, Mike's D would have to be so good that it offsets the loss of Andre on offense. I agree that the staff would insert a true "defensive stopper" in favor of more offense. As you state, with Mason, Kelly, Seth, and Austin it seems we have plenty of offense on the floor. However, I don't think that we can label Mike G a defensive stopper yet. It took Williams more than half a season to earn his chance and I'd say that his physical abilities (quickness and length relative to opposing point guards) are more obviously elite than Mike G relative to other college wings. Elliot also looked good in his cameo appearances as an on the ball defender. Also, Elliot was not exactly an offensive liability. His shooting was a little iffy, but he was incredibly quick, a solid ball handler, and was able to get to the rim. In fact, he scored in double figures his first two games in the lineup. If Mike G is showing an ability to shut down opposing wing players in practice, he'll get a chance in prime time. But unless he starts showing that ability in practice and in the limited minutes he gets right now (which I think have been promising but still a mixed bag), I don't think he gets the nod.

Kedsy
12-08-2011, 09:49 AM
As a quick aside, if Tyler and Quinn can get comfortable knocking down threes off of drive and kicks, it dramatically increases our offensive firepower.

Who's going to drive and kick to them? Austin? He hasn't done that so much so far this season. Also, no matter how comfortable Tyler and Quinn get, they'll never be more effective on that play than Seth and Andre. It would be nice if everyone on the team could hit threes, but I don't see how it would dramatically increase our firepower.

Personally I think Tyler has to get more comfortable driving and kicking as opposed to being the recipient. Quinn seems somewhat comfortable with that already. His challenge at this point is defense.

COYS
12-08-2011, 09:59 AM
Who's going to drive and kick to them? Austin? He hasn't done that so much so far this season. Also, no matter how comfortable Tyler and Quinn get, they'll never be more effective on that play than Seth and Andre. It would be nice if everyone on the team could hit threes, but I don't see how it would dramatically increase our firepower.

Personally I think Tyler has to get more comfortable driving and kicking as opposed to being the recipient. Quinn seems somewhat comfortable with that already. His challenge at this point is defense.

I think you misunderstood my comment. I'm simply saying the team will improve if those guys can hit those shots. If they are going to see more minutes, then they will have opportunities to knock those down, whether designed or not. I'm not advocating that this be a large part of the offense. However, if they can hit those shots the few times they get the opportunity, it makes a big difference. Tyler was open in the corner twice last night and received the ball off of really good ball movement. One was a quick ball reversal after a drive (I can't remember who drove originally) and the other was on a kick out from Austin, I believe. While they both will be the 5th option when they're on the court, sometimes the 5th option is the guy that's open. If they can hit that shot, it would be a bonus.

Kedsy
12-08-2011, 10:06 AM
Not that we are remotely in the situation now that we were then, but your paragraph reminds me of when Elliot Williams broke into the starting lineup. He was a complete offensive liability at that point, but earned his was onto the floor with D.

I'm not sure Mike's situation is comparable to Elliot Williams's. In November and December, Williams averaged 14 minutes a game, and his per 40 minutes (8.8 pts per 40; 7.4 rebs per 40; 2.1 assts per 40) were credible. Mike has only averaged 4.8 minutes per game so far this season. His points per 40 minutes are almost as good (7.4 per 40), but his other stats are not (4.7 rebs per 40; 0.9 assts per 40), and it's a much smaller sample size.

I agree with COYS that he hasn't yet shown evidence that he is a defensive stopper. I think that's mostly message board wishing based on his physique. I suppose it's possible that Mike will break into the starting lineup at some point, but (again as COYS said) the staff would have to be convinced based on his practice time that he's a shut down defender.


So... as a purely hypothetical... do we think that Washington's D is bad enough that we could get along with Gbinijie on the floor with, say, Mason, Kelly, Seth and Austin?

I don't think that's the right question. The question is whether Mike's D is so much better than Andre's (and at this stage I'm not sure it's better at all, although it might be) that it would make up for how much better Andre's O is than Mike's (because that's an awful lot right now).

Kedsy
12-08-2011, 10:09 AM
I think you misunderstood my comment. I'm simply saying the team will improve if those guys can hit those shots. If they are going to see more minutes, then they will have opportunities to knock those down, whether designed or not. I'm not advocating that this be a large part of the offense. However, if they can hit those shots the few times they get the opportunity, it makes a big difference. Tyler was open in the corner twice last night and received the ball off of really good ball movement. One was a quick ball reversal after a drive (I can't remember who drove originally) and the other was on a kick out from Austin, I believe. While they both will be the 5th option when they're on the court, sometimes the 5th option is the guy that's open. If they can hit that shot, it would be a bonus.

OK, I can agree with that. They're both shooting in the low 30s, percentagewise, on their threes so far this season (Tyler 33%, Quinn 30%). To me that's acceptable for a 5th option and my guess is they can keep it up, but I'd be surprised if their percentages got much higher.

Kedsy
12-10-2011, 03:13 PM
Dude. C'mon... there is no way that Dawkins can guard Ross.

Dude. Way. Andre guarded Ross almost half the time he was out there and he did just fine. Overall, I thought it was a very credible defensive effort for Andre.

MCFinARL
12-10-2011, 03:17 PM
Dude. Way. Andre guarded Ross almost half the time he was out there and he did just fine. Overall, I thought it was a very credible defensive effort for Andre.

I agree. Ross barely scored in the first half of the game.

OldSchool
12-10-2011, 03:46 PM
I agree. Ross barely scored in the first half of the game.

Our perimeter defense against their big wings was nothing to be satisfied with, including Andre's performance.

It was a team effort against Ross. We switched frequently, and relied on our bigs in the lane to frustrate their perimeter wings on drives. Austin started the game against Ross, but multiple players defended him at various points, although Andre had the most time against him. It's true Andre finished with more points (by one) but only because Andre was sent to the line late in the game. Ross had more field goals and more rebounds than Andre.

When Ross had the ball one-on-one against Dre it was no contest. At about the 8:00 minute mark in the first half he had just Dre between him and the basket and just easily crossed Andre over and blew by him. Andre was inexplicably standing on his heels. But for the most part Ross settled for jumpers. At the 16:46 mark in the 2d, Andre was slow to find his man and Ross burned him with a wide open 3-pt shot.

Their other big wing Wroten had an even bigger game. Good big wings are a problem for us.

But overall, Andre had a solid game defensively. Where Andre had a very good game today was on the offensive end. Even though his shooting percentage was not high, he played very well and was a key part of making the action happen on that end.

Kedsy
12-10-2011, 07:59 PM
When Ross had the ball one-on-one against Dre it was no contest. At about the 8:00 minute mark in the first half he had just Dre between him and the basket and just easily crossed Andre over and blew by him. Andre was inexplicably standing on his heels. But for the most part Ross settled for jumpers. At the 16:46 mark in the 2d, Andre was slow to find his man and Ross burned him with a wide open 3-pt shot.

Actually, Andre wasn't slow to find Ross. He was unwisely trying to help in the lane when the ball was swung to Ross and Andre had no chance to get there in time. It's semantic, perhaps, but to me getting burned while helping is different from losing your man.

However, since several people suggested there was "no way" Andre could guard Ross, if he only got burned twice and played his man to a standstill then that's pretty good. Moreover, Ross was 1 for 8 (for 2 points) in the first half while the game got out of hand, and a large reason for that was Andre's D. To say that Andre only outscored him because Andre "was sent" to the line late is unfairly characterizing Andre's performance. He totally won the matchup when it counted.