MBB: Temple 78, Duke 73, Post-Game Thread

[JBDuke]

Put your post-game thoughts here. But no venting or destructive negativity

[Bob Green]

Discuss the game here, but review the posting guidelines first.

[anon]

I'll support them all the way, but I'm also advising people to temper their expectations for this team. We are talented but young, as displayed tonight.

[Gthoma2a]

Whew, that was rough. Hopefully we really do something to change the makeup of this team. What we saw tonight cannot happen again. That is two bad losses for different reasons. I know K says we had a tough schedule, but maybe we should have thrown in a few more road games for experience.

[FerryFor50]

They looked like a team that thought they could just show up and win. They didn't play with any fire until it was too late.

[A-Tex Devil]

Whew, that was rough. Hopefully we really do something to change the makeup of this team. What we saw tonight cannot happen again. That is two bad losses for different reasons. I know K says we had a tough schedule, but maybe we should have thrown in a few more road games for experience.

I get that this was in Philly but Temple is not a good team this year. Worst regular season loss in a while. Next play.

[gwlaw99]

I understand we had a size advantage, but why didn't we run more plays for our shooters. Was their perimeter defense THAT good? It felt like we took away a large part of our offense from ourselves.

[Devilsfan]

We have been playing much better than most expected so a second loss on an opponents home court isn't that terrible. We did, however, look a couple of steps slower and much less athletic than our opponent tonight. If we can just develop a point guard (Quinn) we'll be fine. Miles had a relatively nice night I thought. Hope we don't run into a team with larger guards in March.

[Freethrw33]

I know the bigs are taught to hedge the high ball screens, but sometimes it makes sense to back off and go underneath. I didn't think there was much of a threat of their guards ever shooting over our defense.

However, I realize that Duke / Coack K live and die with the hedge on the ball screen...

Painful to watch, but glad there is not a long break until the next game...

[Duvall]

I get that this was in Philly but Temple is not a good team this year. Worst regular season loss in a while.

That's certainly not true. This Temple team is probably better than Virginia Tech in 2011, and definitely better than N.C. State in 2010.

[Billy Dat]

Sometimes it just feels like it's the other team's night. When they were throwing in all that 1-on-1 action in the first half and then controlling the tempo, I had that feeling. After that, we couldn't take care of the ball. What really surprised me was how we couldn't get any clean looks from 3, and we couldn't get any big stops when we needed them. Silver lining, this Duke team probably has the best chance of any in recent years of dramatically improving over the course of year (unless Maui was some kind of high water mark - shudder).

Miles pulled a Strap from Hoosiers - maybe we should have kept going to him.

[Dukehky]

Another game where Ryan, Andre, and Seth threw on their invisibility cloaks and hid in the corner for most of the game. At least you could see Thornton, even if he was fouling or turning the ball over, but you would hardly be able to tell 2 of our 3 captains were in the game (good game though Miles!!!). What happens when we play guards who are actually good and have some size? These kids just aren't fast enough to make up for their size deficiency, Austin is actually 6'3; Thornton, Seth, and Quinn are all markedly smaller than their listings. I just don't see how we can play so differently against a similar and better team like washington. This team is going to give me a heart attack. Maybe a little more zone... nah.
Quinn Cook is and should forever be this team's starting and major minutes point guard, period. And in games like these, as the announcers so often pointed out, the jackhammer offense is a great move, but other than that, I don't care if he jacks them up, Austin needs to put up some jumpers especially when he's not getting the calls he wants.

Hey Shabbazz, Hey Tony, help my weary soul.

[DevilWearsPrada]

I don't know if this is posted anywhere, but Jamie K and husband, Chris Spatola had their 2nd baby today, a Little Girl. That makes 8 grandchildren for Coach K. The baby came a little early, but according to Bob Harris on the Duke radio, everyone is doing great.

Next play! Its ACC league play!

[mgtr]

They looked like a team that thought they could just show up and win. They didn't play with any fire until it was too late.

My sentiments exactly. We played leisurely most of the game. It seemed that in the first half, Mason was playing sort of asleep, and Ryan didn't show up at all. Thank God for Miles.

[A-Tex Devil]

That's certainly not true. This Temple team is probably better than Virginia Tech in 2011, and definitely better than N.C. State in 2010.

Not sure about that, although maybe I will grant you NC State. I watched This Temple team in person lose to a mediocre Texas team playing 6 true freshman. There was zero impressive about them once they lost their big man. They played well tonight but I will be somewhat surprised if they make the tourney. Next play.

[dukelifer]

Whew, that was rough. Hopefully we really do something to change the makeup of this team. What we saw tonight cannot happen again. That is two bad losses for different reasons. I know K says we had a tough schedule, but maybe we should have thrown in a few more road games for experience.

A disappointing game by Duke- but it again highlights that this team is really not great defensively and I am not sure if they can be. This team also is not handling these road games well. Curry, Thornton and Cook are very small guys and they we not able to do much on either end of the court. Lots of mistakes - poor ball handling and little defensive pressure. Temple played well and disciplined and Duke was never able to gain control of the game at any point. Miles and Mason played great and did all they could- but the guards were average or below average tonight. That should not be the case. In the end, Duke will learn from this game and improve. Not quite sure they can completely overcome their limitations- but the key is to limit mistakes and turnovers. On to ACC play.

[Duke76]

IMO, our guards are weak physically...reminded me of games in the past we lost where our guards got pushed on the dribble when we were on offense and we couldn't handle that....we either turned it over were taken out of the offense flow of the play.....as opposed to like the Butler championship game where they were physical as heck on us and our guards Nolan and Scheyer and Singler even played right thru the bumps which weren't called and turned it into our advantage by turning the corner to the lane....few turnovers even though they fouled the heck out of us.


We have to get a lot stronger with the ball or count us out for the long run

[superdave]

I understand we had a size advantage, but why didn't we run more plays for our shooters. Was their perimeter defense THAT good? It felt like we took away a large part of our offense from ourselves.

What I saw was Temple disrupting our set plays just enough by fighting over screens and sagging into passing lanes to keep us from running plays for shooters. Their defensive scheme was pretty good. On offense Temple was clearly ready for how our bigs hedge ball screens, they let the big overplay it and ducked under to hit the screener rolling. Good coaching.

But the ball bounced their way too. When they screwed up they often did not turn the ball over. That's always helpful. Errant passes got tipped to other Temple players and rebounds bounced their way too. Some of that is our lack of intensity, some good luck for them.

The disappointing aspects of the game for us would be pressuring the ball, cleaning the glass and Quinn regressing a little. Next play.

[Devilsfan]

What's a zone defense? Wish our next game was in Cameron. We'd win by 20.

[FellowTraveler]

The Plumlees had height advantages inside, were able to score, and were able to pass over defenders. Meanwhile, guards were missing shots and turning the ball over. These two facts were established early on, and remained constant throughout the game. And yet I saw no evidence of a strategy to simply post up the bigs and throw the ball in to them. I did see a fascination with off-the-dribble lobs, which was an unnecessarily high-risk approach to getting the ball inside to a big.

Is Dawkins hurt or in the doghouse?

[duke09hms]

Another game where Ryan, Andre, and Seth threw on their invisibility cloaks and hid in the corner for most of the game. At least you could see Thornton, even if he was fouling or turning the ball over, but you would hardly be able to tell 2 of our 3 captains were in the game (good game though Miles!!!). What happens when we play guards who are actually good and have some size? These kids just aren't fast enough to make up for their size deficiency, Austin is actually 6'3; Thornton, Seth, and Quinn are all markedly smaller than their listings. I just don't see how we can play so differently against a similar and better team like washington. This team is going to give me a heart attack. Maybe a little more zone... nah.
Quinn Cook is and should forever be this team's starting and major minutes point guard, period. And in games like these, as the announcers so often pointed out, the jackhammer offense is a great move, but other than that, I don't care if he jacks them up, Austin needs to put up some jumpers especially when he's not getting the calls he wants.

Hey Shabbazz, Hey Tony, help my weary soul.

I agree.
1. What was Ryan doing only putting up 2 shots? We had a huge size advantage all game. Seth and Andre are somewhat understandable, they're regularly shut down by bigger guards that are decently fast enough to match their average speed.
2. Quinn should be our major minutes PG, although he did put up several ill-advised shots tonight - probably overconfidence from dominating poor competition.
3. Someone teach Austin a mid-range game.
4. Anyone else think we should go to a defense that backs off a little more a la 2010?

[uh_no]

I think the defense breakdown from this game will be really interesting when they ge tput up (forget who's doing them, but they're amazing), especially the quinn/tyler continued battle. We played an opponent who was light years in front of the past couple, and the offensive stats for both guys disappeared. I think one thing is clear that quinn is not the be all end all point guard that some had been declaring him in the other thread.

Mason and Miles were huge. We went down there and had really good games.....33 points combined.....29 for the entire rest of the team....22 for the guards.....we didn't shoot 3pts poorly, so that's hardly an excuse.....just rivers curry and dawkins didn't have it out there today.....bit of a letdown....perhaps some sluggishness after cupcakes and long breaks?

Hope he (and the team) can bounce back from this. Virginia coming up next week....gotta be togehter for that one

[ChrisP]

With the exception of AR's scoring in the last 4 minutes or so, our guard play was atrocious tonight. Couldn't guard anyone on defense and seemingly couldn't wait to turn it over on offense. According the box I'm looking at, our guards were a combined 9-30 from the field. Austin is great at getting into the lane but really had trouble finishing at the rim. I thought he really took it up weak and had lots of shots blocked/altered that resulted in misses and Temple running the other way.

To me, this was a bad loss, however, I will say that it was one of those games where an opponent got absolutely JACKED up to play the team with D U K E on their chests. Our "D" was obviously not very good, but Temple made some ri-DONK-ulous shots, too. After their 4th long three in a row, I said to myself, "This is not our night!"

[Bob Green]

I believe there was too much dribbling, which resulted in turnovers. We should have moved the ball via the pass and created open looks just like we did for our first three points of the game where the ball started in the right corner and was passed two or three times resulting in a wide open 3-point basket for Rivers from the left wing. Oh well, the team will learn and grow and we all expected a few rough spots this season.

[Philadukie]

I was at the game, and Temple played much more inspired than us. They beat Duke in almost every aspect of the game. Hard to believe we got out-rebounded given our size advantage inside, but they had the size advantage on the perimeter and a more aggressive mindset. They seemed to be unguardable from the midrange jumper. Wyatt's two threes and Fernandez's two spectacular behind the back passes were daggers and momentum plays. The building went nuts on all those plays.

All that said, we have some work to do but I think we'll be fine.

[Aditya]

I blame the black uniforms.

I'd like to see Dawkins get some more shots. Maybe pulling out some of the plays K drew up for Redick would help.

[uh_no]

With the exception of AR's scoring in the last 4 minutes or so, our guard play was atrocious tonight. Couldn't guard anyone on defense and seemingly couldn't wait to turn it over on offense. According the box I'm looking at, our guards were a combined 9-30 from the field. Austin is great at getting into the lane but really had trouble finishing at the rim. I thought he really took it up weak and had lots of shots blocked/altered that resulted in misses and Temple running the other way.

To me, this was a bad loss, however, I will say that it was one of those games where an opponent got absolutely JACKED up to play the team with D U K E on their chests. Our "D" was obviously not very good, but Temple made some ri-DONK-ulous shots, too. After their 4th long three in a row, I said to myself, "This is not our night!"

they "only" shot 5-10 from 3....so that's not a huge thing...like 9-13 would be or something. They just cane at very inopportune times for us. Of those 5 threes, i wouldn't classify 4 of them as "long"....maybe one or 2....

[hq2]

What happens when we play guards who are actually good and have some size? These kids just aren't fast enough to make up for their size deficiency, Austin is actually 6'3; Thornton, Seth, and Quinn are all markedly smaller than their listings

Pretty perceptive. Our guards are both short and not particularly quick (Austin first step excluded). The game plan was obviously to get the
ball to our bigs, but nonetheless, the guards should have done something. Also, our bigs were too slow to getting to the drivers in the lane.
They knew we would play man-to-man, so they could get our bigs out some to open up the lane for easier shots. On the whole, we just
got outplayed (and maybe outcoached too, which does happen occasionally).

[Dukehky]

What's a zone defense? Wish our next game was in Cameron. We'd win by 20.

Our next game is against Georgia Tech... We're gonna win by 20. knock on wood.

[weezie]

... but Temple is not a good team this year... Next play.

They sure shot the lights out.

[Freethrw33]

Good catch by the announcer on the Temple guard stepping over the line on his free throws...I started paying attention and think I saw him do this a few more times. And to think we could have only lost by 2 instead of 5...

[Dukehky]

I blame the black uniforms.

I'd like to see Dawkins get some more shots. Maybe pulling out some of the plays K drew up for Redick would help.

While I would also love to see Dre get up more shots (he is by far my favorite player on this team, don't know why), he's not the same type of shooter as JJ. Even as a freshman, JJ was excellent at coming of screens, pivoting, squaring up, and blasting a three. Dre is a great shooter, but predominately as a set shooter, he can't come off screens and hit 3's. In fact, all these guards are similar to that, rarely do you have a shooter who can do what JJ ever did. Austin can shoot on the move, but since the season began, he's shown that he wants to get to the rim or take a super long pull up 3.

[dukelifer]

With the exception of AR's scoring in the last 4 minutes or so, our guard play was atrocious tonight. Couldn't guard anyone on defense and seemingly couldn't wait to turn it over on offense. According the box I'm looking at, our guards were a combined 9-30 from the field. Austin is great at getting into the lane but really had trouble finishing at the rim. I thought he really took it up weak and had lots of shots blocked/altered that resulted in misses and Temple running the other way.

To me, this was a bad loss, however, I will say that it was one of those games where an opponent got absolutely JACKED up to play the team with D U K E on their chests. Our "D" was obviously not very good, but Temple made some ri-DONK-ulous shots, too. After their 4th long three in a row, I said to myself, "This is not our night!"

Temple shot lights out in the first half and that little stretch of 4 threes was the killer. They were beatable but Duke did not exert their will at any time. If Duke had taken control- they might have put game pressure on them and they may have gotten a bit tighter. But give them credit. Temple played as well as they can play tonight and certainly that was good enough to beat Duke- but it is not clear how good they are. This should reset Duke and perhaps get them refocused for ACC play. The fact that they could not get any sizable lead in either of their two road games has me most concerned-suggesting that a piece is still missing.

[dcar1985]

The Plumlees had height advantages inside, were able to score, and were able to pass over defenders. Meanwhile, guards were missing shots and turning the ball over. These two facts were established early on, and remained constant throughout the game. And yet I saw no evidence of a strategy to simply post up the bigs and throw the ball in to them. I did see a fascination with off-the-dribble lobs, which was an unnecessarily high-risk approach to getting the ball inside to a big.

Is Dawkins hurt or in the doghouse?

How bout playing bad...is that not an option?!?

[duke09hms]

I get that this was in Philly but Temple is not a good team this year. Worst regular season loss in a while. Next play.

Today's win over us puts them at 10-3. Hopefully they turn out to be a great team this year.

After Duke football lost to Richmond, remember how people made excuses about how Richmond was a great football program? They finished 3-8 in 1-AA. Let's hope Temple doesn't turn out like that.

[ChrisP]

they "only" shot 5-10 from 3....so that's not a huge thing...like 9-13 would be or something. They just cane at very inopportune times for us. Of those 5 threes, i wouldn't classify 4 of them as "long"....maybe one or 2....

Ok, whatever. Do you REALLY want to argue about how long their 3's were? My point was simply that they didn't make a lot of threes in the game, but I believe I'm correct in saying that of the 5 they made, four of them came on consecutive possessions in the 2nd half. When they hit those back-to-back-to-back-to-back, it just seemed like a sign that it wasn't a winnable game for us. Seemed to me that it was one of those games where our opponent just made everything they threw up. It happens. Glad it happened tonight instead of in March, though.

[loldevilz]

Pretty perceptive. Our guards are both short and not particularly quick (Austin first step excluded). The game plan was obviously to get the
ball to our bigs, but nonetheless, the guards should have done something. Also, our bigs were too slow to getting to the drivers in the lane.
They knew we would play man-to-man, so they could get our bigs out some to open up the lane for easier shots. On the whole, we just
got outplayed (and maybe outcoached too, which does happen occasionally).

This going to be a problem as long as we have Austin guarding 3s and Curry guarding 2s. That's why I think Gbinije needs to be inserted into the starting lineup. He has shown against OSU and tonight that he can guard the 3. It allows Austin to guard 2s which he should be able to do.

[Devilsfan]

I remember what ol' Archie from tOSU was credited with saying, "It's not the size of the dog in the fight but the size of the fight in the dog".

[Duvall]

Today's win over us puts them at 10-3. Hopefully they turn out to be a great team this year.

After Duke football lost to Richmond, remember how people made excuses about how Richmond was a great football program? They finished 3-8 in 1-AA. Let's hope Temple doesn't turn out like that.

Great example, except one team has already played half its season.

[uh_no]

They sure shot the lights out.

5-10 3pt is hardly shooting the lights out....they scored 40 something points in the paint....they had a pretty good shooting night, but hardly ridiculous, and certainly not "shot the lights out"

[kessler]

Watching this game, i honestly thought although the loss wasnt his fault, but at the end there was a glimmer of a hope, with either a couple of threes, or just pounding it down low (which we should have done all game), and Austin blew it. He needs to realize everyone on this team was a high quality recruit, and just because he has alot of potential, does not mean he has to carry this team like he did his Winter Park team.

[dcar1985]

This going to be a problem as long as we have Austin guarding 3s and Curry guarding 2s. That's why I think Gbinije needs to be inserted into the starting lineup. He has shown against OSU and tonight that he can guard the 3. It allows Austin to guard 2s which he should be able to do.

I don't think he should start but I do agree he needs more minutes...Mikes has shown the ability to guard 1-3, I'm really liking Dre's minutes at the 3 less and less especially if he's not providing scoring, might as well go with the better defensive guy if your not gonna get much O out of either...Mike's O is still pretty raw

[Saratoga2]

One big question for this team is how would we do against a team with big guards and small forwards. Well. Temple is one of those teams, although they had little inside presence and the guards weren't super quick either, but were smart, good ball handlers and could see over our defense. We had a big advantage inside but Temple was able to negate that by spreading the floor and making us guard them off the dribble. We just didn't seem to be fired up for much of the game.

So, I think the defense was shown to be weak against this type of offensive approach and seemed to start the game with poor execution. We were turning the ball over at an astounding rate. Without naming individuals, I noted the following offensive issues:
1. Telegraphed passes being picked off
2. Driving into a crowd and losing the ball. Reversion to old habits
3. Reach in fouls
4. Poor play making in the form of poor decision making
5. Poor shooting, especially from the guards
6. Don't know the numbers, but I'll bet the turnover to assist ratio wasn't good tonight.

On defense we appeared to be a step slow and there seemed to be a lack of support when a guard was beaten, I didn't see the bigs rotate to help, even when we had two defensive big men against one Temple big man.
1. When our guards tried to play close, they drove around them and had shots or a pass. When our guards backed off they shot the three
2. Our bigs could not defend their guards away from the basket, not mobile enough.
3. Reach in fouls
4. Surprisingly getting beat giving up offensive rebounds and putbacks.

This was a bad loss, but it is hard to say that Temple didn't outplay us. They deserved the win.

So, we had some good with Mason and Miles doing their offensive job inside, although the help defense they offered wasn't very strong until the end of the game. They did get some decent blocks when balls were brought to them as well. Hard to be enthusiastic about anyone elses game tonight.

Where can this team go to improve?
1. Better ball security, fewer turnovers and more assists. I know where I would go for that
2. Less driving into the teeth of the defense. The fix there is pretty obvious.
3. Get our outside shooters going. Set plays or bigger players taking the shots.
4. Consider adding size at the small forward to improve the defense.

Judging from our substitution pattern in the game, I don't see that coach K was seeing the game in the same way I did, so I will be interested in how others saw what happened and what possibilities there are for improvement.

[Utley]

This team is an enigma to me, probably not surprising as the coaches are still putting the pieces together. It seems like a different team than the beginning of the year - especially in regard to the reduced output from Seth and Ryan.

I generally like the way Coach K is trying different combinations so far - I typically am not a fan of the overly short bench but - but also wonder if its helping when I compare tonight to the MSU or Kansas game. It seems like the response to the OSU game was that we needed to make big changes - any chance that's been an over reaction? Perhaps we are getting what we ask for and need to be patience for it to pay dividends - especially in March (and April :))

[jipops]

I blame Luke Winn - joking (sort of). We didn't exactly look like the best backcourt in the country tonight. I still don't understand why he gave us that title.

[roywhite]

Well, I don't like to generalize, but my main impression from the game was a "suburban team" coming up against a "city team" and getting out-scrapped.

Temple had the quicker hands, the more confident ball handlers, and more hustle to loose balls and rebounds. Does Temple play this well all the time? No, probably not, but this sort of thing can happen when a good team gets up to play a brand-name team.

Duke had some players who didn't respond well to the level of intensity and got out-fought.
That's not something that Coach K likes.

[OZZIE4DUKE]

Thank you Temple for giving K another teaching moment in January. This team is a work in progress, with lots of room to improve. Obviously. And now the point has been re-emphasized.

But having said that, I'll close with SFD. Only one of those words would pass the filters, and that's a maybe.

[FellowTraveler]

How bout playing bad...is that not an option?!?

Well, he was the 3rd player off the bench, stayed on the court for about two minutes, didn't set foot on the court for the first 6+ minutes of either half, and played significantly fewer total minutes than Tyler Thornton and Seth Curry, both of whom played pretty badly -- far worse than Dawkins, to my eye. It is of course your option to suggest it, but seems a clearly inadequate explanation to me, so I didn't bother offering it. Your mileage may vary.

So far as I can tell, Dawkins' usage, like Thornton's, has very little to do with the quality of his on-court performance.

[Gthoma2a]

Watching this game, i honestly thought although the loss wasnt his fault, but at the end there was a glimmer of a hope, with either a couple of threes, or just pounding it down low (which we should have done all game), and Austin blew it. He needs to realize everyone on this team was a high quality recruit, and just because he has alot of potential, does not mean he has to carry this team like he did his Winter Park team.

I disagree in some respects. Was he taking on too much, yeah. But, in his defense, he was one of the few guys out there that could get near the basket outside of the Plumlees. Seth was turning it over every time he put the ball on the paint, Andre is still getting used to driving, Tyler was passing it to the other team on a few occasions and the blame for all of that can't be placed on Austin alone. I'd love to see him pass to the outside for threes more, but this loss was on the team, not just one player.

I wanted to see more Quinn, but it didn't happen. That is the one thing that gets under my skin a little (other than never just going huge with Miles, Mason, Kelly, Austin and anybody to see if we could play keep-away with the rebounds). The dedication to Thornton is not needed on bad outings. It wasn't his night. That means you let him sit and see what Quinn could do. Quinn had one turnover, but had some dishes and could have given us a little spark. I think when Dre isn't working, we should try to play G a little, too. There is no reason to say we have to be led by upperclassmen. When all else fails, give your freshman some minutes to work and grow.

[Newton_14]

We came out uninspired, and sloppy. Bad turnovers, missed layups, and phantom defense. We played the entire first half like that yet were only down two points. Temple was executing on offense, and on defense did a great job of taking away our 3's. However, they had no answer for Miles down low, so we decided to help them out in two ways. One was not going to him nearly enough, and two was K sitting him far too long in both halves. I don't often question the master but I think he erred in judgement with Miles tonight. By all rights, this was a game where Miles should have had 25-30 points and Mason should have had 16 or 18. You have to punish a small team like that by going inside early and often. That was disappointing to me.

Someone mentioned "bad bounces and it was their night". I call that confidence and karma. We created that atmosphere for Temple by not bringing it on defense and the many, many, careless turnovers, missed chippies, missed fastbreak chippies etc. Temple gained more and more confidence throughout, and all of a sudden the ball bounces their way. Had we played defense the entire night with the same intensity we played with in the final 3 minutes, and not turn the ball over so much, we likely win going away.

Credit Temple for hanging in there, executing, and playing great perimeter defense. I did not feel that "road game" had anything at all to do with it really. We just had too many guys that did not come ready to compete and play. Disappointing for sure, but sometimes, for lots of reasons, teams lay an egg. Tonight was one of those nights.

Next play, next game.

[SCMatt33]

I thought the old Len Elmore adage might have actually been true tonight. This team seemed to have no legs and got tired in the second half. After having almost 3 weeks with just one game, plus finals, plus Christmas, they then played three games in six days, with the last one coming on the road against by far the best team of the three. It wasn't one of those bad shooting nights that get arbitrarily attributed to being tired, but they didn't look like they wanted to shoot. They lost a lot of balls on drives without too much pressure and missed a ton of floaters and lay ups while moving tangent to or away from the rim. I was at the game so it might have looked different on TV, but they just seemed a little flat footed. I think they got a little fat and happy over Christmas, and just weren't ready for it. I'm also not going to read too much into the Plumlees big scoring night. Temple had one guy over 6-6 play in this game and no one over 6-9.

[snowdenscold]

Two things that struck me (that haven't been mentioned repeatedly already):

Leaving lots of points hanging on the rim - so frustrating and could have kept us at a 1-5 point lead instead of being consistently 1-5 behind.

Lots of blocked shots that didn't result in us gaining possession (i.e. blocked it right back into Temple). If we could convert some of those into true TO's, it would have gone a little better.

[dcar1985]

Well, he was the 3rd player off the bench, stayed on the court for about two minutes, didn't set foot on the court for the first 6+ minutes of either half, and played significantly fewer total minutes than Tyler Thornton and Seth Curry, both of whom played pretty badly -- far worse than Dawkins, to my eye. It is of course your option to suggest it, but seems a clearly inadequate explanation to me, so I didn't bother offering it. Your mileage may vary.

So far as I can tell, Dawkins' usage, like Thornton's, has very little to do with the quality of his on-court performance.

Could be off court too as in practice.....all I know is Dre hasn't looked good the last few games, and I haven't heard anything about an injury so....Plus Dawkins to me is in kind of a weird spot where he's not really a 3 but isn't good enough with the ball in his hands to play at the 2 or 1, so his sub options get limited to coming in for Austin pretty much.

[DukeDevilDeb]

I have been watching Duke basketball with season tickets to Cameron since 1986, and I don't ever remember seeing a team with less of an understanding of or ability to carry out a viable defensive scheme. OK, so we couldn't stop big guards in the first half tonight... but don't we make "adjustments" at half-time so that we don't look like a high school team out there. I thought Miles was great, and Mason had a pretty good second half... but if height were the only thing that was working, why didn't we just pound it into the paint.

I also agree with several posters in saying that Austin needs to learn that, if you drove the last three times down the court and it didn't work, something other than driving might be a good option! I was actually impressed on 1/1 in Cameron that he seemed to be sharing the ball more, passing for open 3s and not just focusing his eyes on the basket and driving with all else be damned. Tonight, he seemed to regress. He is a potentially very good basketball player, but he is also learning a lot. We need defense (make that good defense!) from him, but we also need him to recognize options. He cannot carry the whole team, period. And if the expectation is that he is going to do so, this is going to be a very long season.

Don't know what is going on with Andre and Seth, especially Andre. And Ryan, who has a great 1/1 game in Cameron, got 5 points, 2 rebounds and a block... that sounds like a line for an 8th or 9th man.

Sigh. :(

[tendev]

I don't know whether the team has this attitude or just us fans but the expectations for this team are unrealistic. This team has some very good players and some good players but no one is a superstar (Rivers is young and is not Kyrie Irving) and they are not going to intimidate any team on their home court that is experienced, well coached and has talent of their own. Thus, any win against a team like Temple away from home is great win and should not be expected to occur. They just need to take it game by game and look to improve with each game. I wish the ACC had more depth this year because playing against tough competition, particularly away from home is the best way to test yourself and improve.

[Newton_14]

Well, he was the 3rd player off the bench, stayed on the court for about two minutes, didn't set foot on the court for the first 6+ minutes of either half, and played significantly fewer total minutes than Tyler Thornton and Seth Curry, both of whom played pretty badly -- far worse than Dawkins, to my eye. It is of course your option to suggest it, but seems a clearly inadequate explanation to me, so I didn't bother offering it. Your mileage may vary.

So far as I can tell, Dawkins' usage, like Thornton's, has very little to do with the quality of his on-court performance.

Have to agree with DCar on this one. Andre (like several others) did not come ready to play tonight. One of those games where he did not work to get open, and missed the two good looks he did have. Also got beat off the dribble a lot. He got put in several times and just never made anything positive happen.

I was more upset with Miles sitting too long than anyone else. He was easily the best Duke player on both ends of the floor. He made a couple of mistakes but at least he competed. All of the other guys got numerous chances to impact the game and just never did. The tape is going to be ugly, but a great teaching opportunity.

[Saratoga2]

I disagree in some respects. Was he taking on too much, yeah. But, in his defense, he was one of the few guys out there that could get near the basket outside of the Plumlees. Seth was turning it over every time he put the ball on the paint, Andre is still getting used to driving, Tyler was passing it to the other team on a few occasions and the blame for all of that can't be placed on Austin alone. I'd love to see him pass to the outside for threes more, but this loss was on the team, not just one player.

I wanted to see more Quinn, but it didn't happen. That is the one thing that gets under my skin a little (other than never just going huge with Miles, Mason, Kelly, Austin and anybody to see if we could play keep-away with the rebounds). The dedication to Thornton is not needed on bad outings. It wasn't his night. That means you let him sit and see what Quinn could do. Quinn had one turnover, but had some dishes and could have given us a little spark. I think when Dre isn't working, we should try to play G a little, too. There is no reason to say we have to be led by upperclassmen. When all else fails, give your freshman some minutes to work and grow.

I agree with your assessment. Seth didn't have a good game, probably due to matchups. Tyler played some good defense, but telegraphed his passes for turnovers. Andre was hard to see out there and Austin, while talented, reverted to his hell bent for leather drives. Quinn is much better with court vision, ball security and play making. Coach K must have felt his defense was inferior, since he didn't play that many minutes. Micheal played reasonably well, but also didn't get much PT. I felt our best team tonight was with the Plumlees, Austin, Quinn and Michael. We really only needed either to reduce our TO's by a few or play a little better on defense to win this one. My guess is that the lineup I suggest above would have given us the best chance.

[Newton_14]

5-10 3pt is hardly shooting the lights out....they scored 40 something points in the paint....they had a pretty good shooting night, but hardly ridiculous, and certainly not "shot the lights out"

I thought they made a ton of mid-range shots though. But, our defense was too soft early, so once they made a few, they started seeing a big basket, and could not miss. As for 3's, I did not think they hit that many, but as most came in succession during crunch time when we had closed, it may have seemed like more than 5. The last one came from NBA range.

Our defense was bad but Temple took full advantage by making shots.

[moonpie23]

temple was well coached and seemed to know exactly how we make our moves......going back and looking at a lot of the strips, temple seemed to know they were coming....

they bundled seth up and exposed his ball handling.....austin some too....


this was just a bad game.....no fire.....no cohesiveness.....we had real problems finishing with confidence,...

[SMO]

5-10 3pt is hardly shooting the lights out....they scored 40 something points in the paint....they had a pretty good shooting night, but hardly ridiculous, and certainly not "shot the lights out"

I too think Temple shot lights out. So there Mr. Semantics.

[UrinalCake]

4. Anyone else think we should go to a defense that backs off a little more a la 2010?

In 2010 we had a ton of size - our starting lineup went something like 6'5, 6'2, 6'8, 6'10, 7'0. That allowed us to play a quasi-zone where our guards would funnel players into the bigs, at which point it was hard for them to shoot or pass. This year we don't have that kind of length, we're looking more like 6'2, 6'2, 6'3, 6'10, 6'10. Our guards have to figure out how to stay in front of their man, or else rely on getting a ton of steals (which isn't happening).

I do think our big guys need to back off on those high screens, but as someone else mentioned Coach K seems pretty wedded to the hedge. I only saw the second half and there were at least five plays where Temple did the exact same thing: high screen, Duke big steps out 35 feet from the basket, pass to the big rolling towards the basket, secondary defender rotates over, pass to his man for a dunk. Very frustrating to know it's coming and then see it unfold.

[uh_no]

I thought they made a ton of mid-range shots though. But, our defense was too soft early, so once they made a few, they started seeing a big basket, and could not miss. As for 3's, I did not think they hit that many, but as most came in succession during crunch time when we had closed, it may have seemed like more than 5. The last one came from NBA range.

Our defense was bad but Temple took full advantage by making shots.

I'd love to see the breakdown.

They were at 36 in the paint with like 8 minutes left or so, so conservative puts it at 40. They had 15 points off 3s and 11 fts

that puts them at 66...so 12 mid range? would be interesting to see their midrange shooting % for the game.

[77devil]

They sure shot the lights out.

It helps when you are wide open as Temple players were much of the night. Can't add much to what's been written already. Duke was out hustled and out played in practically all aspects of the game. Our guards inability to stay in front of their man defensively was particularly poor. Coach K was visibly frustrated and angry for much of the game with one stretch in the second half where he appeared to bury his face in his hands for several minutes.

Not sure how this venue was considered a neutral with the big Temple T floor. While there was plenty of blue in the house, the Temple crowd was much larger, probably a 2 to 1 advantage, and obviously much louder. Fortunately I was ensconced in a suite and met a past captain of the golf team who's a member at Merion. That's the only positive I took away from this evening.

[Newton_14]

Watching this game, i honestly thought although the loss wasnt his fault, but at the end there was a glimmer of a hope, with either a couple of threes, or just pounding it down low (which we should have done all game), and Austin blew it. He needs to realize everyone on this team was a high quality recruit, and just because he has alot of potential, does not mean he has to carry this team like he did his Winter Park team.

Your comments about Austin are over the top and borderline infraction worthy. This was a team loss (as they all are) and Austin does not need to be unfairly targeted as some kind of goat. He made mistakes, like most of his teammates. Once it got under 7 minutes and panic set in, Austin forced some drives and dribbled too much, but in doing so was trying to make something good happen and bring his team back. Can't fault the effort, but he is a freshman who is learning, and will continue to learn. He is actually the most improved player on the team since Game 1 so he has already shown a great ability to learn and improve.

We lost this game due to poor team defense and careless ballhandling by the team.

[sagegrouse]

Anyone else miss Kyle Singler tonight?

Good teams get most of the loose balls. And they did tonight -- the Temple Owls.

Mason missed some easy shots, but -- overall -- Mason and Miles were the stars tonight. I have no idea what happened to the other players.

Lots of messages after halftime, when Mason, Ryan and Seth were on the bench at the start of the 2nd half. I agree. They were not present physically or mentally in the first half. Unhappily it didn't get much better for the team after intermission, although Mason had a good 2nd half.

Next play. I suppose it's better to lay an egg on ther oad in a non-conference game. We'll see a different attitude on Saturday against Georgia Tech. I hope we get a different result.

sage

[Starter]

Honestly, I don't think there's any reason to make any grand proclamations based on this game about how good or bad this team is. Does it stun anyone that they fell flat in their second true road game of the season? It shouldn't. Does it stun anyone that Duke was uneven at best on defense when we know that's not a particular strength of this team? No, we knew all that. I would have liked to see a zone at some point, even just as a change of pace, but does it stun me Krzyzewski didn't use one? Of course not, he rarely does.

And as someone on this board (forget who) lectured me correctly about, Temple's not bad. They shot over 50% and hit the killshots when it counted. They're gritty and have tough guards. (Including Aaron Brown, who my mom taught in middle school.)

Rivers forced it big-time tonight, but I don't think there's any need to resort to some grand narrative. We've seen him play mostly under control all year. It was a bad game. He's human.

Obviously, Cook had his worst game since he started emerging as a legitimate player. I'd contend it was tough for him to get in a groove when it seemed like he was constantly being yo-yo-ed between the court and the bench, and that he made some excellent plays, but he also didn't play well defensively at all. Of course, Thornton didn't really do a whole lot with his 25 miinutes. I still think it's great to get Cook experience in tough games. He's a work in progress, but I do think we're really going to need him by the end of the season. The offense just seems a lot more fluid when he's out there, even tonight.

The Plumlees were awesome. They really stepped up, and Miles is rapidly becoming a heck of a player. Conversely, Ryan Kelly and Andre Dawkins disappeared in a big spot, a continuing concern for me.

This is still a very good team, and a threat to go far. Tonight's loss doesn't change that any more than the oft-alluded-to Georgetown loss did two years ago. If anything, this team is getting better, with Miles finally looking like he's clicking and Cook becoming a potential rotation player at worst, an impact player at best. It's okay to lose a game once in a while, especially if it's a good team on the road. The sky isn't falling. I look forward to continuing to watch this team develop into a winner.

[Duke71]

I just watched the Duke performance vs.Temple earlier this evening and have been holding off on my post to the DBR Bulletin Board. I've been called a pessimist for not having my rose-colored glasses properly positioned on this board recently, I've been called out for pointing out that having more turnovers than assists isn't really relevant anymore, and I've observed people blindly succumb to the ESPN Sports Center mentality that Kenny Dennard eloquently wrote about in a recent DBR post.

I watched with interest in Coach K's body language during the unraveling of this game. He was not intent on sending a message to our team that we are about to turn this around....he was thinking down the road to the next practice-session teaching opportunity. It was as if he were saying, "This is not a conference game. My focus is on preparing you to win the National Championship. So far, you haven't been absorbing that lesson I want you to absorb into your DNA - unlike some recent misguided poster on DBR who decided that turnovers exceeding assists is a stat that doesn't matter anymore - I believe differently". (Just because it is an ex-UNC dude who first squaks that observation on national TV doesn't change the relevance of the historically valid observation.)

The problem with new-school facility with mind-numbing database arguments - afterall, the latest computer stats allow the most facile statistician to "prove" most anything nowadays - is that execution of basic fundamentals still matters a great deal. We sure as heck didn't do justice to the basics in this game. (Save your explanations for what really matters at "the next level" for some other time, thank you.)

I'll admit I'm "old school" and never had to camp out overnight to get into a Duke game, but just because you have a lot invested in the experience of seeing the game doesn't automatically translate to your understanding of why either team won. Think about that!

We lost this game because we needed to do more than just show up. We didn't get the next step done. They did. They won. Go ahead and bring on the stats. It doesn't change a whole lot about the outcome....They won.

[ChrisP]

I too think Temple shot lights out. So there Mr. Semantics.

Word. I can't believe that someone actually thought that Temple did NOT "shoot the lights out" tonight. 50% from three point range? Uh..last time I checked, that was pretty dang good - equivalent to shooting over 70% from two point range. Also, they shot over 56% for the game. Take away the three point shooting and Temple was 26/45 for....57%. Not sure what "uh no" considers to be "lights out" shooting but, from where I sit, those numbers are, indeed, lights out.

[jv001]

There were some good things that happened in this game, but not many. Miles played another very good game. As Newton said, I would like to have seen more of him in the game(19 minutes). Should have been 30+ as he was not in foul trouble. Mason played a good 2nd half but left several points hanging on the rim or completely over it. Michael G played a pretty good 8 minutes. He may be the best at moving his feet on defense. The bad things were: not getting to loose balls, not getting rebounds, certainly not staying in front of the man with the ball and coming out flat to begin the game. I bet practice will be intense. One other thing, it looked to me like the guards didn't do a good job of getting the long rebounds. This team is definitely a work in progress. One with a high ceiling if the perimeter defense can improve. GoDuke!

[tendev]

Word. I can't believe that someone actually thought that Temple did NOT "shoot the lights out" tonight. 50% from three point range? Uh..last time I checked, that was pretty dang good - equivalent to shooting over 70% from two point range. Also, they shot over 56% for the game. Take away the three point shooting and Temple was 26/45 for....57%. Not sure what "uh no" considers to be "lights out" shooting but, from where I sit, those numbers are, indeed, lights out.

Yeah, if you tell me that a team is going to shoot 56% for the game, I can pretty much guess that that is the team that won. And the phrase "shooting the lights" out implies that the shots were made with someone in their jersey. Temple had alot of lay ups tonight and some pretty open mid-range jumpers. Our defense has to get better.

[lotusland]

I blame the black uniforms.

I'd like to see Dawkins get some more shots. Maybe pulling out some of the plays K drew up for Redick would help.

Except Dawkins doesn't shoot well if he's not already facing the basket when he catches the ball. He has a fairly quick release but he doesn't turn and shoot well.

[nmduke2001]

I don't understand the short leash that is on Dre and to some extent Quin while others like Curry and Tyler seemingly have a ton of leeway. How can Dre ever get into the flow of the game if he is always looking over his shoulder?

[WiJoe]

Yeah, if you tell me that a team is going to shoot 56% for the game, I can pretty much guess that that is the team that won. And the phrase "shooting the lights" out implies that the shots were made with someone in their jersey. Temple had alot of lay ups tonight and some pretty open mid-range jumpers. Our defense has to get better.



And the phrase "shooting the lights" out implies that the shots were made with someone in their jersey.

Curious as to where you came up with that idea. I don't think it has anything to do with "someone in their jersey". For me, shooting lights out is shooting 60 percent or more. Also, shooting 50 percent on 3s = shooting 75 percent on 2s.

[UrinalCake]

Word. I can't believe that someone actually thought that Temple did NOT "shoot the lights out" tonight. 50% from three point range? Uh..last time I checked, that was pretty dang good - equivalent to shooting over 70% from two point range. Also, they shot over 56% for the game. Take away the three point shooting and Temple was 26/45 for....57%. Not sure what "uh no" considers to be "lights out" shooting but, from where I sit, those numbers are, indeed, lights out.

I guess people can have different opinions of what "lights out" means, but I'm with uh no on this one. 5-10 from three is really good, and certainly above their season average, but not a complete aberration either. And when they get open looks in the paint, they're going to hit a high percentage. If we were consistently playing good D and they were nailing fadeaways with a guy in their face, like Arizona did to us last year, then I'd say they were shooting lights out, but when we play poor D and then they shoot well then we can't just blame it on bad "luck."

[elvis14]

I usually don't post right after losses. I don't like being negative. So I'm going to try to give some of my thoughts and hope I don't come across too negative. In the pre-game thread when I read that Temple had 3 big physical guards I got worried. I thought "oh boy Seth's going to have a bad night" and "it's going to be interesting to see how QC handles the size". Bummed that my concerns were somewhat warranted. When I was in grad school at Clemson there were guys that got frustrated with Cliff Ellis because it seemed like every time someone would get hot, they'd get put on the bench to rest. It seemed like Coach K did that with Miles tonight. I was a bit frustrated. Ryan, Seth, Andre, Tyler all had rough nights and there were others (anyone not named Plumlee) who were mediocre at best. I also thought that our guys didn't adjust to the way the game was officiated (don't hand check and be really physical in the paint).


Whew, that was rough. Hopefully we really do something to change the makeup of this team. What we saw tonight cannot happen again. That is two bad losses for different reasons. I know K says we had a tough schedule, but maybe we should have thrown in a few more road games for experience.

I think saying that we need to change the makeup of the team is a bit of an overreaction. I do think that as the season goes on we will need to do a better job of putting lineups on the floor that match up with our opponent. I also thought we needed to pound the ball in the paint earlier and more often.


I agree.
1. What was Ryan doing only putting up 2 shots? We had a huge size advantage all game. Seth and Andre are somewhat understandable, they're regularly shut down by bigger guards that are decently fast enough to match their average speed.
2. Quinn should be our major minutes PG, although he did put up several ill-advised shots tonight - probably overconfidence from dominating poor competition.
3. Someone teach Austin a mid-range game.
4. Anyone else think we should go to a defense that backs off a little more a la 2010?

I pretty much agree with all 4 points make by duke09hms.


I believe there was too much dribbling, which resulted in turnovers. We should have moved the ball via the pass and created open looks just like we did for our first three points of the game where the ball started in the right corner and was passed two or three times resulting in a wide open 3-point basket for Rivers from the left wing. Oh well, the team will learn and grow and we all expected a few rough spots this season.

Spot on Bob. We really spent too much time pounding the ball into the ground. This is especially bad when Seth or Tyler are dribbling. All our guards seem like they need to figure out how to attack coming off a screen and pull up for a mid ranger jumper.


Two things that struck me (that haven't been mentioned repeatedly already):

Leaving lots of points hanging on the rim - so frustrating and could have kept us at a 1-5 point lead instead of being consistently 1-5 behind.

Lots of blocked shots that didn't result in us gaining possession (i.e. blocked it right back into Temple). If we could convert some of those into true TO's, it would have gone a little better.

OMG! How many shots did we take around the rim that didn't go in? So crazy!

I thought this was a bad loss where they used their mismatches (large guards) better than we use ours (quick guards and large Plumlees). Not exactly the game I wanted to see right before we enter ACC play. It's not the end of the world. Koach will just have to make adjustments. No need burn the whole thing down and rebuild. No need to lower our expectations (yes I expected to win this game and if we played it again tomorrow, I'd expect us to win tomorrow too). It's going to be interesting to see if this team can get it together and take their play to the next level as the season goes along.

And just to make things worse WVU is setting scoring records against Clemson in the Orange Bowl! Argh!

[sagegrouse]

The problem with new-school facility with mind-numbing database arguments - afterall, the latest computer stats allow the most facile statistician to "prove" most anything nowadays - is that execution of basic fundamentals still matters a great deal. We sure as heck didn't do justice to the basics in this game. (Save your explanations for what really matters at "the next level" for some other time, thank you.)

.

I agree that some of the analytics are truly mind-numbing, and I say this as "quant."

I don't agree that "the most facile statistician" .. [can use] "computer stats".. "to 'prove' most anything." Yeah, you can put together a table that seems plausible, but other analysts will tear it to shreds in about two seconds if it is truly contrived.

Also, Duke71, you seem to have chip on your shoulder. I can't remember your getting abuse on this board on the issue of TOs vs. assists; I thought most people agreed with the proposition. But -- hey -- even implied criticism can hurt a bit.

What's puzzling to me is that we have five all-star quality guards (forcing a bit on TT, but I like him), and NOT ONE managed to show up for the game. If the Plumlees hadn't played well, we could have lost by 20-25.

sagegrouse

[superdave]

Rivers forced it big-time tonight, but I don't think there's any need to resort to some grand narrative. We've seen him play mostly under control all year. It was a bad game. He's human.


On the other hand, Austin had watched his fellow guards be ineffective all night and time slipping away. When he forced his way into the lane in the first half, that was a problem. A reversion. But when he started to become aggressive in the final 10 minutes, it was largely because someone had to get shots up or get the ball to the bigs in scoring position.

But I give credit to Temple's D. They had an answer to all our strengths - especially Austin's dribble drive, 3-point shooting, and Quinn's creativity.

[hustleplays]

How many games so far this season have we not played with full intensity, poise and cohesion? This was certainly one of those games. I remember hearing quotes from our over-achieving 2010 team members that Kyle, Brian, Lance, Jon and Nolan would not let the team practice or play with less than full intensity. We all know that one of Duke's historic signatures is playing really hard, all out, never getting out hustled, and playing with great teamwork. This year's team hasn't achieved that level yet. Too often they look a bit lost, a step late [ok, sometimes due to lack of physical quickness], out of sync, and not hungry, really hungry.

I'm not overlooking the many physical, strategic and tactical dimensions -- already cited in this thread -- that contributed to this loss. But on-court leadership is necessary to make our players give their absolute best, individually and as a team. We see this some nights, not others.

Tonight we saw great intensity, but less poise and cohesion, during the last five minutes or so, when the game was out of hand. Even more than correct strategy and line-ups, I believe that superior leadership is what we are most needing in order to be a top 10 team this season. I don't know from whom it can or will come.

[jv001]

I agree that some of the analytics are truly mind-numbing, and I say this as "quant."

I don't agree that "the most facile statistician" .. [can use] "computer stats".. "to 'prove' most anything." Yeah, you can put together a table that seems plausible, but other analysts will tear it to shreds in about two seconds if it is truly contrived.

Also, Duke71, you seem to have chip on your shoulder. I can't remember your getting abuse on this board on the issue of TOs vs. assists; I thought most people agreed with the proposition. But -- hey -- even implied criticism can hurt a bit.

What's puzzling to me is that we have five all-star quality guards (forcing a bit on TT, but I like him), and NOT ONE managed to show up for the game. If the Plumlees hadn't played well, we could have lost by 20-25.

sagegrouse

Amen on our guards not showing up tonight. Austin spends too much time talking to the refs when he does not get the call and he regressed tonight in his dishing of the ball. Seth was in another world. Must have been the physicality of the Temple guards. Tyler continued to show that he is not a very good passing pg and he is a fouling machine. Quinn in 12 minutes didn't do very much either. Would like to have seen him get some of Tyler's 25 minutes. And last and certainly not least, the guards did a poor job of staying in front of their man. This team has too much talent to come out flat and play the way they did tonight. I expect we will see a different Duke against GT. GoDuke!

[lotusland]

I agree with your assessment. Seth didn't have a good game, probably due to matchups. Tyler played some good defense, but telegraphed his passes for turnovers. Andre was hard to see out there and Austin, while talented, reverted to his hell bent for leather drives. Quinn is much better with court vision, ball security and play making. Coach K must have felt his defense was inferior, since he didn't play that many minutes. Micheal played reasonably well, but also didn't get much PT. I felt our best team tonight was with the Plumlees, Austin, Quinn and Michael. We really only needed either to reduce our TO's by a few or play a little better on defense to win this one. My guess is that the lineup I suggest above would have given us the best chance.

Quinn actually kept his man in front of him mostly but they just shot over him and made it look way too easy. I guess K would rather watch TT foul someone than allow them to score unmolested.

[superdave]

Quinn actually kept his man in front of him mostly but they just shot over him and made it look way too easy. I guess K would rather watch TT foul someone than allow them to score unmolested.

Sometimes you have to smack a guy on the mouth if you cant do anything else to stop him....

[lotusland]

Your comments about Austin are over the top and borderline infraction worthy. This was a team loss (as they all are) and Austin does not need to be unfairly targeted as some kind of goat. He made mistakes, like most of his teammates. Once it got under 7 minutes and panic set in, Austin forced some drives and dribbled too much, but in doing so was trying to make something good happen and bring his team back. Can't fault the effort, but he is a freshman who is learning, and will continue to learn. He is actually the most improved player on the team since Game 1 so he has already shown a great ability to learn and improve.

We lost this game due to poor team defense and careless ballhandling by the team.

Amen. Not AR's best night but who are going to give the keys to crunch time? He's the only player we have who can handle the ball and get a shot. He actually played pretty well at the end getting to the basket and the free throw line. I would like to see him add Nolan's tear drop floater to his arsenal though.

[Greg_Newton]

Well, it appears answer to "Can Cook still do the things he's doing against big, athletic guards?" is no, for now. Which is too bad.

I still really think we should be making Rivers our primary ballhandler (for proof this isn't just a gut overreaction, I was babbling about this last month too (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?26782-Phase-II-2011-2012&p=534370#post534370)). It's like we're using a pistol in a gunfight when we've got an AK-47 strapped to our back; we've got maybe the most dangerous player in the country with the ball in his hands, yet he does about 10% of our ballhandling. He's improved every other facet of his game (save FTs) so dramatically that I don't think it's a stretch to think he could develop some court sense and situational awareness; as it is, he's just kind of idling on the wing until called upon while inferior players struggle with the ball. Give him an ongoing, focused directive of setting up his teammates first and taking only what the defense gives him, and see what happens. His TO's might even go down if he's less focused on getting to the rim at all costs.

Now for my irrational overreaction: I say throw Gbinije in at SF once he gets comfortable enough to exploit his talents. Hey, I just like his size, lateral quickness, defense and length around the rim, and our other "SFs" our kind of undersized and redundant to each other. We need a solid, physically gifted role player. So:

PG - Rivers (6'4) Backup: Cook
SG - Curry (6'2) Backup: Dawkins
SF - Gbinije (6'7 Backup: Thornton
PF - Kelly (6'11) Backup: Hairston
PF Mason (6'10) Backup: Miles

You've got elite size, elite athletes for their position at 3 spots, 3 shooters, 3 above-the-rim-players, a PG who can penetrate at will, and you should be very good on defense and the boards. Play all-out pressure defense (aided by the length and lateral quickness of Rivers and G), run a lot, crash the boards, and either play through the post or let Rivers make a controlled move to initiate the halfcourt.

I think we'd match up better with elite teams, have players in more natural, efficient roles, and perhaps most importantly, not have 2-4 guys with slow feet on the floor at the same time (Kelly, Seth, Dawk, Ty). It'd be fun to watch, at least!

[trinity79]

Toward the end of the game, I was watching with the sound turned off. I think it was Fernandez who had just thrown the prettiest wraparound/behind-the-back pass, which was followed by a second pass that resulted in an easy score by Temple. (Yes guys, you can throw more than one pass as you work the ball toward the basket.) Anyhoo, the camera went to the Duke bench as they went to a break and I could (as you sometimes can) perfectly read Chris Collins' lips as he exclaimed: "What the f*** was that?" Not sure whether that was directed to us, them, or the Almighty.

I suggest Duke's coaching staff might be able to employ said footage to make a few points about what we're NOT doing consistently. We're not looking for the entry passes and not completing them successfully when we do. We're only rarely making that extra pass. We're not defending against opponents under/cutting to the basket. Our interior defense has increased my blood pressure much more this year than usual. I'm not going to get into the merits or demerits of individual players here. Suffice it say that we might need to explore other options to address some of these defensive deficits, especially. I think we have enough players who can score consistently. Not sure exactly where some of them were tonight, though.

[Kfanarmy]

I missed the first 5 minutes or so of the game. When i tuned in, I was surprised by how slow Duke seemed to be playing at both ends of the floor. I was shocked really; they were letting Temple totally dictate the pace. The only real "Duke" intensity I saw was for about 2 minutes after coach K called time out --early in the second half. For about 2 minutes, I thought they were going to dominate the rest of the game as they were playing a bit frenetically...then a couple of bad breaks happened -- ball went in that shouldn't have or a foul was called -- and the intensity was gone again. Just seemed to be playing at 3/4 effort for most of the game.

Thought the guards were slow and undisciplined at both ends of the floor. Know playing away from Cameron has some effect, but wow; there are a couple of folks there who simply don't show up away from home.

Really bad game. poorly played and not too many useful adjustments made.

[loldevilz]

Well, it appears answer to "Can Cook still do the things he's doing against big, athletic guards?" is no, for now. Which is too bad.

I still really think we should be making Rivers our primary ballhandler (for proof this isn't just a gut overreaction, I was babbling about this last month too (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?26782-Phase-II-2011-2012&p=534370#post534370)). It's like we're using a pistol in a gunfight when we've got an AK-47 strapped to our back; we've got maybe the most dangerous player in the country with the ball in his hands, yet he does about 10% of our ballhandling. He's improved every other facet of his game (save FTs) so dramatically that I don't think it's a stretch to think he could develop some court sense and situational awareness; as it is, he's just kind of idling on the wing until called upon while inferior players struggle with the ball. Give him an ongoing, focused directive of setting up his teammates first and taking only what the defense gives him, and see what happens. His TO's might even go down if he's less focused on getting to the rim at all costs.

Now for my irrational overreaction: I say throw Gbinije in at SF once he gets comfortable enough to exploit his talents. Hey, I just like his size, lateral quickness, defense and length around the rim, and our other "SFs" our kind of undersized and redundant to each other. We need a solid, physically gifted role player. So:

PG - Rivers (6'4) Backup: Cook
SG - Curry (6'2) Backup: Dawkins
SF - Gbinije (6'7 Backup: Thornton
PF - Kelly (6'11) Backup: Hairston
PF Mason (6'10) Backup: Miles

You've got elite size, elite athletes for their position at 3 spots, 3 shooters, 3 above-the-rim-players, a PG who can penetrate at will, and you should be very good on defense and the boards. Play all-out pressure defense (aided by the length and lateral quickness of Rivers and G), run a lot, crash the boards, and either play through the post or let Rivers make a controlled move to initiate the halfcourt.

I think we'd match up better with elite teams, have players in more natural, efficient roles, and perhaps most importantly, not have 2-4 guys with slow feet on the floor at the same time (Kelly, Seth, Dawk, Ty). It'd be fun to watch, at least!

This sounds good to me. The number 1 thing is that Thornton and Cook clearly are not able to play point guard. Thornton has no offense and Cook is a poor defender that isn't ready to dominate against elite teams.

Curry and Rivers are a great duo and were fantastic in the beginning of the year and Thornton has only hurt both of them.

[ncexnyc]

Haven’t seen the game as I’m still at work, but I think it’s safe to say that you’re not as good as you think you are when you win and you’re not as bad as you think you are when you lose.
I also think that every player whose had their name mentioned in this thread for having played poorly, has made those very same mistakes in our previous 13 games, it’s just that they’re magnified due to the loss.
The most frustrating thing for me as a fan, is just when I think a certain player has turned the corner and has found their game, they seem to revert to square one.

[sagegrouse]

Haven’t seen the game as I’m still at work, but I think it’s safe to say that you’re not as good as you think you are when you win and you’re not as bad as you think you are when you lose.
I also think that every player whose had their name mentioned in this thread for having played poorly, has made those very same mistakes in our previous 13 games, it’s just that they’re magnified due to the loss.
The most frustrating thing for me as a fan, is just when I think a certain player has turned the corner and has found their game, they seem to revert to square one.

Re: boldfaced comment: Nahhhh!!!! We sucked -- inefficient on offense, klutzy, not getting the loose balls, dribbling into double teams about 20 times (leading to 15+ TOs). This was a poor performance by all but Miles and Mason.

sagegrouse

[CLW]

#1 - this new up tempo style offense is not going to work well with this team. They simply have no one in the current starting lineup who is capable of running the show at the #1/PG spot as demonstrated by our assist to turnover ratio over the course of this season. I'm not sure Cook is capable either but he is the only guard who is showing much promise as a legit PG.

#2 - this team cannot play extended pressure man-to-man defense. our guards/wings are simply not athletic enough and/or strong enough on the ball defenders. our on ball defense has been exposed time and time again.


This team would be best served adopting the 09-10 style of play and with a slower tempo and a more compressed defense.

I'd also seriously consider changing the lineup and removing Curry and Kelly from the starting lineup. Curry is leading the team with 39 turnovers and only has 42 assists this season. I just don't think he is comfortable playing the 1 and would be better served coming off of the bench as the backup 2. I'd also replace Kelly with MP1 in order to beef up with both Plumlees which could clog the paint in the mold of Zoubs and Lance and help on the boards as well.

[azzefkram]

What's puzzling to me is that we have five all-star quality guards (forcing a bit on TT, but I like him), and NOT ONE managed to show up for the game. If the Plumlees hadn't played well, we could have lost by 20-25.

sagegrouse

I have to disagree with the first part of the above quote. We have maybe two all-star quality guards and they are both freshman. Now I like Seth, TT and Dre, but they are role players on a championship caliber team.

[tele]

This sounds good to me. The number 1 thing is that Thornton and Cook clearly are not able to play point guard. Thornton has no offense and Cook is a poor defender that isn't ready to dominate against elite teams.

Curry and Rivers are a great duo and were fantastic in the beginning of the year and Thornton has only hurt both of them.

How exactly has he "hurt both of them"? I thought the very reason he was starting was to compensate for their shortcomings; guarding the ball (that whole defending your position bugaboo) and pass first distributor of the ball (the what four other guys approach ). Other than that, just did what was asked of him by the coaches and tried to show toughness and leadership. Maybe this is hurtful just by comparison?

[Wander]

Not sure about that, although maybe I will grant you NC State. I watched This Temple team in person lose to a mediocre Texas team playing 6 true freshman. There was zero impressive about them once they lost their big man. They played well tonight but I will be somewhat surprised if they make the tourney. Next play.

I think you're putting way too much emphasis on your experience with Texas man. I'm not going to tout Temple as a Final Four contender or anything, but as I said in the pre-game thread, they return most of their guys from a team that won a game in the NCAA tournament last year. And it's basically a road game. And - if you're a kenpom type of guy - would you be shocked about a road loss to FSU, Creighton, Virginia Tech, or Michigan? Because they're about the same.

I don't mean to say there's no concerns to take from this game, or that we shouldn't beat Temple, or that we shouldn't maybe make lineup changes. But they're not an awful opponent, and hell, when you take margin of victory into account, I'm not even sure it's the worst regular loss of this season.

[Kedsy]

This loss was about porous defense, although their zone befuddled our offense from the very first sequence. Bad combination. Having said that, while admitting that Temple completely outplayed us, I disagree that we have to blow everything up.

For those of you pining for Quinn Cook, to my eyes he didn't show enough on D and to my surprise seemed as confused on offense as anyone. I expected him to come in and make the offense click, but he just wasn't up to it tonight. He'll get there, hopefully sooner rather than later, but he's not there yet. Seth and Tyler were equally confused, no question, but Quinn didn't show enough to say he's the answer.

The call for Michael to start or play big minutes confuses me even more. A banked three-pointer from the top of the key was his best offense, and his D didn't seem to me to be better than anybody else's. It wasn't any worse, either, but it has to be outstanding to justify his offense, and I didn't see that tonight.

To me, Andre and Ryan didn't play poorly so much as the Temple zone kept us from giving them the ball in a decent place to shoot. After watching Miles and Mason have their way inside -- and Austin, too, on his drives -- I don't know why we didn't give one of the three of them the ball on each and every possession.

Ultimately, I agree with those who say to chalk it up to a poor night, and this game doesn't change our status as a contender. But we do have to show up and play hard every minute, and we failed at that tonight.

According to the announcer in the arena, this was the third-largest crowd in the history of the Wells Fargo Center. With the big "T" on the floor and the way the announcing and timeouts were handled, this was in no way a neutral site game. The crowd was not a true home crowd, due to the many Duke fans (I'd say between 35% and 40% based on shirt color, but a lot less based on noise -- Temple's strong play took the wind out of our fans' sails fairly early on), but I can't see looking at it as anything other than a true road game.

Hopefully, we learn from this and get stronger. Going forward, as is usually the case, defense is the key.

[meloveduke]

I have not read every post in this thread, as I came in at page 5. I must say that you guys are forgetting one big factor. All the temple gaurds had 3-4 inchs on ours (aside from Rivers and Dre, but Dre didnt seem to want to play much). We shouldnt see another team like that all year. Our 2 points are only 6-6'1, sure they got shot over. This game really shows how bad we need both Alex and silent G. G can hold his own on D, but looks behind the curve on O. The one thing he does bring is size on the wing, and thats what we needed tonight. Cook, TT, and Cury couldnt see past their defender. They couldnt see what was coming or who was open till it was too late. They only played 1 guy that was shorter then 6'3, and he only saw 4 mins. The only other guy under 6'4 logged 12 mins.

I dont think Rivers is readdy to handle the point role. I dont know how many times he over looked a wide open team mate tonight. I also dont see Curry in that role either. They had half (8) the teams turnovers between the 2 of them with only 5 dimes.

[Mike Corey]

We're not looking for the entry passes and not completing them successfully when we do. We're only rarely making that extra pass. We're not defending against opponents under/cutting to the basket. Our interior defense has increased my blood pressure much more this year than usual.

I think this is an excellent assessment of what went wrong against Temple.

More specifically, I'd suggest that we are not playing effective help defense. And I think we're not only failing to make the extra pass, we're failing to make the pass prior to being able to make the extra pass. We are just not getting enough rotation on offense in tough games, and we're making it easier on opposing defenses to guard us more effectively on the perimeter and in the paint. That minimizes our number of high-percentage shots, and increases our number of contested shots no matter where they're taken on the court.

[Kedsy]

...unlike some recent misguided poster on DBR who decided that turnovers exceeding assists is a stat that doesn't matter anymore...

The problem with new-school facility with mind-numbing database arguments - afterall, the latest computer stats allow the most facile statistician to "prove" most anything nowadays - is that execution of basic fundamentals still matters a great deal.

You realize that assist-to-turnover ratio is just a stat, too, right? Why do you think it's more valuable than a "new-school" stat? Why do you think it "proves" more?

Here's an example for you:

Team A scores 7 times out of 10, but only one of the 7 baskets is assisted. The other three times they turn it over. Assist-to-turnover ratio = 0.33 (1 to 3).

Team B scores 3 times out of 10, and all three baskets are assisted. They only turn it over once. Assist-to-turnover ratio = 3.00 (3 to 1).

My misguided new school database argument says Team A has a better offense, even though its turnovers exceed its assists, and its assist-to-turnover ratio is almost ten times worse than Team B. What does your old school varsity letter tell you?

[Ian]

Because turnovers don't just hurt the offense, they hurt the defense too. Temple had a bunch of easy layups that were the result of live ball turnovers.

As for the game, it just wasn't our night. Every time we pulled close, we would either miss a layup, commit a turnover or do something else silly, or they'd get a big play or a lucky bounce on a lose ball.

The thing to worry about is that our guards got dominated, just like the Ohio State game. You can't win without guard play and it appears our guards aren't as good as we thought. We have great shooters but the ball handling and decision making have major issues.

[dcar1985]

This loss was about porous defense, although their zone befuddled our offense from the very first sequence. Bad combination. Having said that, while admitting that Temple completely outplayed us, I disagree that we have to blow everything up.

For those of you pining for Quinn Cook, to my eyes he didn't show enough on D and to my surprise seemed as confused on offense as anyone. I expected him to come in and make the offense click, but he just wasn't up to it tonight. He'll get there, hopefully sooner rather than later, but he's not there yet. Seth and Tyler were equally confused, no question, but Quinn didn't show enough to say he's the answer.

The call for Michael to start or play big minutes confuses me even more. A banked three-pointer from the top of the key was his best offense, and his D didn't seem to me to be better than anybody else's. It wasn't any worse, either, but it has to be outstanding to justify his offense, and I didn't see that tonight.

To me, Andre and Ryan didn't play poorly so much as the Temple zone kept us from giving them the ball in a decent place to shoot. After watching Miles and Mason have their way inside -- and Austin, too, on his drives -- I don't know why we didn't give one of the three of them the ball on each and every possession.

Ultimately, I agree with those who say to chalk it up to a poor night, and this game doesn't change our status as a contender. But we do have to show up and play hard every minute, and we failed at that tonight.

According to the announcer in the arena, this was the third-largest crowd in the history of the Wells Fargo Center. With the big "T" on the floor and the way the announcing and timeouts were handled, this was in no way a neutral site game. The crowd was not a true home crowd, due to the many Duke fans (I'd say between 35% and 40% based on shirt color, but a lot less based on noise -- Temple's strong play took the wind out of our fans' sails fairly early on), but I can't see looking at it as anything other than a true road game.

Hopefully, we learn from this and get stronger. Going forward, as is usually the case, defense is the key.


Not saying Mike should start but I thought it was clear he was playing better D at his spot then Dre and arguably Austin, he caused a couple of turnovers, and got his hands on a few balls...he might actually be quicker laterally then any of our guards. Why would his defense need to be outstanding to justify his offense? in 8 mins he contributed 5 points in comparison, Seth had 6, Tyler and Quinn had 5 a piece, and Dre who's minutes he would really eat into didn't scratch. Why does it matter whether his 3 was banked in or whether he kicked it up there...3 points is 3 points. I think you can give Mike more minutes without needing him to drop 15 a game especially if it means improvement on the defensive end.

Andre IMO looked out of it all together, and hasn't really looked good the last few games, if he's not providing a scoring punch then I think you play the better defensive player which appears to be Mike and have him spell Austin.

[tommy]

We came out uninspired, and sloppy. Bad turnovers, missed layups, and phantom defense. We played the entire first half like that yet were only down two points. Temple was executing on offense, and on defense did a great job of taking away our 3's. However, they had no answer for Miles down low, so we decided to help them out in two ways. One was not going to him nearly enough, and two was K sitting him far too long in both halves. I don't often question the master but I think he erred in judgement with Miles tonight. By all rights, this was a game where Miles should have had 25-30 points and Mason should have had 16 or 18. You have to punish a small team like that by going inside early and often. That was disappointing to me.

Next play, next game.

Agree with you Newton. Jimmie Dykes, in doing his post game wrapup (and I think he said it more than once during the game too) said that this game showed that the question with this Duke team is "what will they have if the outside game isn't working?" implying that the answer is "not enough." Part of the media's automatic assumption year-in and year-out that Duke is a soft, 3 point shooting only team. Regardless of what's actually happening on the floor.

I don't know what game Dykes was watching, but this game answered his question definitively: the Plumlees. Mason missed some gimmes in there, but he got any shot he wanted, as did Miles, and they essentially scored at will. They were bigger, stronger, and more athletic than Temple's bigs, and they're going to be bigger, stronger and more athletic than the bigs of just about any team we face the rest of the season. When we pounded the ball into them tonight, we scored. When we didn't, things were very shaky, due to turnovers, bad decisionmaking, and bad shooting. When I was watching the game, and when I watched it again, I was saying to myself, "why aren't we throwing it down low every single, and I mean every single time, until they prove they can stop us? Which they can't." I strongly believe that had we done that, we would've won this game, despite our poor play in other areas.

[Matches]

This game didn't bother me too much. Classic teaching loss to a talented (not great, but talented) opponent. This team is still finding its identity, and I wouldn't be surprised to see significant changes in minutes/ roles before the end of the season. Still two months for K to figure it all out. If we're still playing D like this in mid-February, I'll get worried.

The A/TO thing doesn't really bother me so much either. Certainly we want to minimize TOs, so if doing so creates a favorable A/TO ratio, great. I don't worry so much about the number of assists, though, so long as the offense is fluid. For the most part this year, it has been, even in games where we had low assist totals.

[dukeballboy88]

Well, it appears answer to "Can Cook still do the things he's doing against big, athletic guards?" is no, for now. Which is too bad.

I still really think we should be making Rivers our primary ballhandler (for proof this isn't just a gut overreaction, I was babbling about this last month too). It's like we're using a pistol in a gunfight when we've got an AK-47 strapped to our back; we've got maybe the most dangerous player in the country with the ball in his hands, yet he does about 10% of our ballhandling. He's improved every other facet of his game (save FTs) so dramatically that I don't think it's a stretch to think he could develop some court sense and situational awareness; as it is, he's just kind of idling on the wing until called upon while inferior players struggle with the ball. Give him an ongoing, focused directive of setting up his teammates first and taking only what the defense gives him, and see what happens. His TO's might even go down if he's less focused on getting to the rim at all costs.

Now for my irrational overreaction: I say throw Gbinije in at SF once he gets comfortable enough to exploit his talents. Hey, I just like his size, lateral quickness, defense and length around the rim, and our other "SFs" our kind of undersized and redundant to each other. We need a solid, physically gifted role player. So:

PG - Rivers (6'4) Backup: Cook
SG - Curry (6'2) Backup: Dawkins
SF - Gbinije (6'7 Backup: Thornton
PF - Kelly (6'11) Backup: Hairston
PF Mason (6'10) Backup: Miles

You've got elite size, elite athletes for their position at 3 spots, 3 shooters, 3 above-the-rim-players, a PG who can penetrate at will, and you should be very good on defense and the boards. Play all-out pressure defense (aided by the length and lateral quickness of Rivers and G), run a lot, crash the boards, and either play through the post or let Rivers make a controlled move to initiate the halfcourt.

I think we'd match up better with elite teams, have players in more natural, efficient roles, and perhaps most importantly, not have 2-4 guys with slow feet on the floor at the same time (Kelly, Seth, Dawk, Ty). It'd be fun to watch, at least!

In another thread I said AR is a top 5 player right now in college and he needs the ball in his hands as much as possible. He is an elite talent along the lines of Dawkins, Hurley, Jayson Williams, Redick and Kyrie and I think he has the ability to carry a team. Keep the ball in AR's hands and his decision making will improve cutting down his turnoves. I agree with everything you said about Rivers.

I said G should start in another thread as well and everybody pretty much shot it down. One reason I think G needs more burn is to reach the ultimate goal, eventually we are going to face long athletic wings like Gilchrist and Barnes (just off the top of my head) that we cant guard. It might be a good time to get his confidence up. Plus I think he can pick up enough garbage hanging around the rim to avg 10 ppg.

And I said maybe bring Seth off the bench and someone said that was lunacy or something to that nature. I still cant figure out why some, well all posters here are married to Seth? If Kyrie dont get hurt last year Seth probly dont play unless its a big lead. If his shot aint falling he is pretty much a liability. He is the perfect match to Vinny "The Microwave" Johnson as a lethal 6 man that can come off the bench and llight it up. Throw him in there and see if its his night and if it aint give him a break. Now before you guys and gals think I am a Seth hater, Im not. I stand by my excuse that if he dont get hurt against Zona last year, we survive that game because he can get hot with the best of them, and go on to win the title. So I love me some Seth Curry but bottom line is, he is a shooter and thats it.

With all that being said, I wouldve said it if we had won. Ive thought this all along. We still are a top 5 team in the nation.

[cbnaylor]

After watching Duke struggle to Ohio State and now Temple, I believe it's time to move away from the spread out offense. It's just not working for this team. K has always been good adjusting to what his players can do but the spread out offense needs to stop. Ohio State and now Temple have been able to prove that. The spread out offense works if we can take people off the dribble. It worked well when Nolan, Singler, and Irving were there because they were able to create offense. Curry, Dawkins, and Kelly however can't. So what do teams do, they play tight defense up top not caring if they get past them because they know they can't take the ball off the dribble. This forces bad shots which leads to turnovers and the type of game we saw last night. It's time to start Miles and Mason at the same time and force them inside with our guards outside. One guy down low isn't going to cut it.

[jv001]

In another thread I said AR is a top 5 player right now in college and he needs the ball in his hands as much as possible. He is an elite talent along the lines of Dawkins, Hurley, Jayson Williams, Redick and Kyrie and I think he has the ability to carry a team. Keep the ball in AR's hands and his decision making will improve cutting down his turnoves. I agree with everything you said about Rivers.

I said G should start in another thread as well and everybody pretty much shot it down. One reason I think G needs more burn is to reach the ultimate goal, eventually we are going to face long athletic wings like Gilchrist and Barnes (just off the top of my head) that we cant guard. It might be a good time to get his confidence up. Plus I think he can pick up enough garbage hanging around the rim to avg 10 ppg.

And I said maybe bring Seth off the bench and someone said that was lunacy or something to that nature. I still cant figure out why some, well all posters here are married to Seth? If Kyrie dont get hurt last year Seth probly dont play unless its a big lead. If his shot aint falling he is pretty much a liability. He is the perfect match to Vinny "The Microwave" Johnson as a lethal 6 man that can come off the bench and llight it up. Throw him in there and see if its his night and if it aint give him a break. Now before you guys and gals think I am a Seth hater, Im not. I stand by my excuse that if he dont get hurt against Zona last year, we survive that game because he can get hot with the best of them, and go on to win the title. So I love me some Seth Curry but bottom line is, he is a shooter and thats it.

With all that being said, I wouldve said it if we had won. Ive thought this all along. We still are a top 5 team in the nation.

While I like the idea of Austin handling the ball more, I think we are dribbling the ball way too much. We are a better team offensively when we move the ball and don't dribble the cover off the ball. As for Seth, I disagree about him only being a shooter. I think most will agree that we have no real on the ball defenders. So that's a wash. Seth is the best off the ball defender we have. Without looking at the stats, I would think he leads the team in steals. That says he knows Coach Ks defense and can help off the ball. I know some think Tyler is the best off the ball defender, but he fouls way too much. When last season ended there were some threads regarding what to expect from this years team. I asked the question, who's going to guard the ball? I just didn't see anyone returning that could and I really didn't know about Austin. Some said we'll use the defense we played in 2010. I have not seen that style yet. Now that the ACC season is about to begin, I'm still asking that same question. I hope Coach K can find the answer soon. GoDuke!

[duke09hms]

You realize that assist-to-turnover ratio is just a stat, too, right? Why do you think it's more valuable than a "new-school" stat? Why do you think it "proves" more?

Here's an example for you:

Team A scores 7 times out of 10, but only one of the 7 baskets is assisted. The other three times they turn it over. Assist-to-turnover ratio = 0.33 (1 to 3).

Team B scores 3 times out of 10, and all three baskets are assisted. They only turn it over once. Assist-to-turnover ratio = 3.00 (3 to 1).

My misguided new school database argument says Team A has a better offense, even though its turnovers exceed its assists, and its assist-to-turnover ratio is almost ten times worse than Team B. What does your old school varsity letter tell you?

This is the wrong way of looking at it because assist-to-turnover ratio is not solely an offensive measure but rather a useful composite measure of both offense and defense.

1. Turnovers often mean easy buckets for the other team going the other way. Case in point - Temple. Many times in the 2nd half, we were poised to regain momentum until an errant/lazy pass or even several in a row led to easy layups and dunks for Temple. Even if Team A can score more often than Team B w/ fewer assists (7-3 is very unlikely), their plus-minus is probably worse.

2. How likely is it that Team A scores 7 times with only 1 assist? This is indicative of much one-on-one play and not fluid teamwork on offense. Against teams that we match up poorly against (bigger guards, and let's be honest Temple's guards weren't even that big at 6-4), our back-court is very susceptible to being shut down.

[duke09hms]

Well, it appears answer to "Can Cook still do the things he's doing against big, athletic guards?" is no, for now. Which is too bad.



I'm not sure about that. Last night was a sample size of one and Quinn played 12 minutes, scored 5 pts on 2-6, 2 assists vs 1 TO, with a Tyler-esque 3 fouls (1 per 4 minutes).

Sure he had a rough night, just like everyone else in our backcourt, and I'm not ready to conclusively say Quinn can't handle big athletic guards. At least not any worse than the rest of our guards.

Last night was Temple's night. They definitely outplayed us and deserved the win. At 50% from three, I wouldn't say they shot "lights-out" but some of those 3s they hit were backbreakers that came at the most crucial moments for us, right when we closed the gap to 3-4 pts.

[jv001]

This is the wrong way of looking at it because assist-to-turnover ratio is not solely an offensive measure but rather a useful composite measure of both offense and defense.

1. Turnovers often mean easy buckets for the other team going the other way. Case in point - Temple. Many times in the 2nd half, we were poised to regain momentum until an errant/lazy pass or even several in a row led to easy layups and dunks for Temple. Even if Team A can score more often than Team B w/ fewer assists (7-3 is very unlikely), their plus-minus is probably worse.

2. How likely is it that Team A scores 7 times with only 1 assist? This is indicative of much one-on-one play and not fluid teamwork on offense. Against teams that we match up poorly against (bigger guards, and let's be honest Temple's guards weren't even that big at 6-4), our back-court is very susceptible to being shut down.

That our backcourt can at times be shut down is even more reason we need to get the ball to our bigs. Mason and Miles should have had more touches last night. GoDuke!

[davekay1971]

Rather than focus on individual players' strengths and weaknesses in this loss, I'm looking at a couple of team-wide issues that are related and, I believe, were the key contributors to last night's poor performance:

1) Perimeter defense remains a major issue. Teams are still getting into the lane and disrupting our defense way too easily. I can't remember the last time we had a defense ranked in the 30s on KenPom. We have one of the best defensive coaches in the history of college basketball. I hope he finds the magic formula to improve our defensive efficiency, because I sure can't see an easy solution that dramatically improves our defense without significantly impacting our offense.

2) We came out looking like we expected to win and, when it became clear after the first 5 minutes of the 2nd half that we weren't going to be able to simply turn it on and make Temple go away, we played panicked. That's a maturity and leadership issue that hopefully we will learn from.

3) Related closely to issue 2: we don't have that clear cut leader who can figuratively smack the rest of the team upside the head and get them focused when needed, or calmed down when needed. We've seen some great leaders at Duke over the years, of all different types. There was Laettner (Darth Vader style leadership); there were coach-on-the-floor types like Grant, Shane, and Jon; and there have been best-guy-on-the-floor-who-also-happens-to-have-the-most-desire types like Nolan his senior year. Watching the team last night it seemed like they really needed someone on the court who could take charge and show everyone else what needed to be done. I'm not sure we've got anyone among the upperclassmen who has the combination of personality and ability to be that guy.

But if I were Coach K, I'd have Miles in my office today, show him tape of how well he played last night, and tell him that if he wants his senior year to be everything it can be, he needs to get nasty, with is own team when needed, and demand that everyone play every game as if they were in the second half of their senior year.

[mcdukie]

My 2 Cents:

1) Our guards aren't as good as some thought but most teams wish they had this much talent. Having said that, Austin is our only real attack with the dribble threat right now. I still think Quinn will be fine. Seth is a shooter and that is it. He had some huge turnovers when we got the lead to a workable margin. TT is who he is. Some games he will be a threat, some games he is just not suited to play in. Dawkins right now just looks out of it. G needs a little more clock for his D, especially on a team where our perimeter D is not good. Seth and Austin aren't great on the ball defenders and Quinn is a little small. This is where I wish we played some zone. Spreading us out and attacking our guards is a simple and effective way to attack us.

2) Mason needs more shots. Ryan Kelly hasn't played well in a couple of weeks which is a big concern because I thought one of our big advantages would be him facing up and pulling other 4 men away from the basket.

3) We must always remember we will get every teams best shot. I can't wait to watch Temple play again to see how they shoot the ball.

4) We must have a leader.

[Ichabod Drain]

I trust the coaches, but Miles was dominating on offense last night and he was the sole reason we were close at half time. That said he only played 19 minutes last night. That's 17 points in 19 minutes. I know there are a lot of other factors that play into it but the kid should of been on the floor 25-28 minutes.

Side note: I think Mike is far and away the best athlete on the team.

[superdave]

Now for my irrational overreaction: I say throw Gbinije in at SF once he gets comfortable enough to exploit his talents. Hey, I just like his size, lateral quickness, defense and length around the rim, and our other "SFs" our kind of undersized and redundant to each other. We need a solid, physically gifted role player. So:

PG - Rivers (6'4) Backup: Cook
SG - Curry (6'2) Backup: Dawkins
SF - Gbinije (6'7 Backup: Thornton
PF - Kelly (6'11) Backup: Hairston
PF Mason (6'10) Backup: Miles


I still cannot for the life of me think of one thing I've seen in two months of this season that justifies Gbinije getting a starting spot over the other 5 back court and wing guys. I like the kid. I want to see more. He might be our best athlete. But I feel like we're playing 4 on 5 on offense when he's in there. He's timid and does not know our sets. I dont think he's created his own shot once, or beat anyone off the dribble. Maybe his role should increase. Maybe there is a way to make it work. I dont doubt that. I just see no justification for it based on the 75 or so minutes he's played this year.

I do think a better approach is to run a few sets for Dawkins the first half of each game and tell him to Rip Hamilton his way through some screens to get open. He can be elite on O.

Oh yeah, by the way, we're 12-2.

[Steven43]

I agree with several previous posters about our defense being a step slow all night. I'm not very knowledgable on defense, so I don't really know why that would be the case other than perhaps not getting strong pressure on the ball and not helping teammates out when needed. It certainly wasn't their size that beat us.

On the offensive side, it has been become kind of painful to watch both Seth and Austin play. I've always thought Seth lacked good quickness and athleticism, and it was never more evident than last night. However, when his shot is on and he's confident, it seems like everything goes in for him, but when it's not.....look out. He has become almost as streaky as Andre as far as his shot goes. I really don't know what the remedy for his game would be other than to try to find him more open looks where he can step into his shot. As far as Austin goes, I love his superior athleticism--his quickness in getting past a defender (or two or three) is as good as I've seen in college basketball this year. However, his shooting form needs work. You can see that even in his free throws that something could definitely be improved in the way he releases the ball. I think he releases his jump shot too far to the side instead of out in front. That can be corrected, but he needs to start now before it becomes a very difficult habit to break. Austin needs to be a very good shooter if he is going to progress greatly. Also, he has a major tendency to drive to the basket and try to score off the glass. He would benefit by mixing it up and sometimes pulling up short for jumpers or floaters or even trying to outright dunk it. I saw him do that many times in high school. Yes, college-level defense is vastly superior, but I would think he could attack the rim outright with some success even on the college level. The problem is that he's attacking the basket at times when taller, stronger defenders are just waiting for him. Also, with his lightning quickness and athleticism he could get past his initial defender, draw the defense to him and pass off on the inside to Mason, Miles, or Ryan for an easy basket. He's kind of trying to be Derrick Rose, but he doesn't yet have Rose's decision-making prowess.

As far as the Tyler/Quinn debate goes, I come down firmly on the side of making Quinn a full-time, 30-plus minutes-per-game point guard. He has superior quickness, handles, passing, and scoring ability when compared to Tyler. I'm not really sure where that leaves Tyler, but that's just the way it goes. Quinn is just better, period. Tyler is kind of a tweener in that he really doesn't have great point guard skills, is not a great outside shooter, and he can't create his own shot. So where do you play him? He's not suited for either the one or the two. He's really a career backup at a school the level of Duke.

I'm kind of surprised at the level of play of Ryan Kelly. He started out looking like this was going to be a breakout year for him. I even began thinking of him as a Larry Bird extra light--which is still a great compliment when compared to the best power forward to ever play the game of basketball. It looked like he had the ability to be a very good all-around forward--one who could score on the inside or outside, rebound fairly well, get to the rim decently, pass well, see the game a step ahead, play solid defense, etc. etc. Now I just don't know. It looks like he has regressed in almost every area. If he could get back to playing the way he has at times earlier in the year it would help this team tremendously.

As far as Mason and Miles, I'm happy with the overall play of both of them, particularly Mason. It would be great if Miles could rebound a bit better, though. And with his hops and strength he should be attacking the rim relentlessly.

With Andre I really don't know what to say. He is the enigma on the team. A ton of talent, but something just seems to be missing. I just don't get it. On the bright side, I think Gbinije is a gamer who is going to play well when given an extended opportunity. At this point I'd almost prefer to see him on the court to Andre. All in all I'm looking forward to seeing how this team develops as the year goes on and I still think we have a good chance to beat UNC if we can resolve this point guard situation and Ryan, Andre, and Seth get their confidence back. Those are big if's, but I think it could happen.

[jv001]

Rather than focus on individual players' strengths and weaknesses in this loss, I'm looking at a couple of team-wide issues that are related and, I believe, were the key contributors to last night's poor performance:

1) Perimeter defense remains a major issue. Teams are still getting into the lane and disrupting our defense way too easily. I can't remember the last time we had a defense ranked in the 30s on KenPom. We have one of the best defensive coaches in the history of college basketball. I hope he finds the magic formula to improve our defensive efficiency, because I sure can't see an easy solution that dramatically improves our defense without significantly impacting our offense.

2) We came out looking like we expected to win and, when it became clear after the first 5 minutes of the 2nd half that we weren't going to be able to simply turn it on and make Temple go away, we played panicked. That's a maturity and leadership issue that hopefully we will learn from.

3) Related closely to issue 2: we don't have that clear cut leader who can figuratively smack the rest of the team upside the head and get them focused when needed, or calmed down when needed. We've seen some great leaders at Duke over the years, of all different types. There was Laettner (Darth Vader style leadership); there were coach-on-the-floor types like Grant, Shane, and Jon; and there have been best-guy-on-the-floor-who-also-happens-to-have-the-most-desire types like Nolan his senior year. Watching the team last night it seemed like they really needed someone on the court who could take charge and show everyone else what needed to be done. I'm not sure we've got anyone among the upperclassmen who has the combination of personality and ability to be that guy.

But if I were Coach K, I'd have Miles in my office today, show him tape of how well he played last night, and tell him that if he wants his senior year to be everything it can be, he needs to get nasty, with is own team when needed, and demand that everyone play every game as if they were in the second half of their senior year.

I agree with 1-3 of your points, especially #3. Coach K has said many times that Miles is his best practice player. Now it seems to be carrying over to games. As a senior captain, he should step up and demand hard smart play from the team. Both in practice and especially in game. It might even give him more confidence in himself. GoDuke!

[superdave]

But if I were Coach K, I'd have Miles in my office today, show him tape of how well he played last night, and tell him that if he wants his senior year to be everything it can be, he needs to get nasty, with is own team when needed, and demand that everyone play every game as if they were in the second half of their senior year.

Amen. Miles might be the one guy on the team that wants to kill the other team. His intensity could spread. Andre and Ryan particularly need to play with that kind of abandon more often. Also, I wonder if starting Miles would mean teams game plan for Ryan less which could help him get going. He looks lethargic when the games gets scrappy at times.

[Saratoga2]

That our backcourt can at times be shut down is even more reason we need to get the ball to our bigs. Mason and Miles should have had more touches last night. GoDuke!

I would say Austin could get it to our bigs when he puts pressure on the defense by getting past their first defender. He does have to think about how does the team score versus how do I score. If he could consistently think that way it would result in better opportunities. I am not saying Austin has to look to pass all of the time, just use better judgment as to when he can get to the basket of get fouled versus make a pass to a big or back out for a three.

I would say Quinn also can do that and actually one of his assists last night had him drive towards the basket and throw the ball up for Miles to grab and score.

I don't see the ball handling ability from Seth, Tyler or Andre to be able to make the penetration necessary to get the pass into the bigs. All of those players have difficulty in playmaking and have significant TO issues. That is not to say I think they are bad players, but Seth's primary offensive role is best served as a shooting guard and getting open for the shot. He is a good shooter and often can draw a player off his his feet and get foul shots. Tyler also looks like he can score when open. Both Seth and Tyler are reasonable defenders but give away a lot of size to some guards we play. Andre doesn't appear to have confidence in his ball handling skills and his defense appears spotty.

[jv001]

I would say Austin could get it to our bigs when he puts pressure on the defense by getting past their first defender. He does have to think about how does the team score versus how do I score. If he could consistently think that way it would result in better opportunities. I am not saying Austin has to look to pass all of the time, just use better judgment as to when he can get to the basket of get fouled versus make a pass to a big or back out for a three.

I would say Quinn also can do that and actually one of his assists last night had him drive towards the basket and throw the ball up for Miles to grab and score.

I don't see the ball handling ability from Seth, Tyler or Andre to be able to make the penetration necessary to get the pass into the bigs. All of those players have difficulty in playmaking and have significant TO issues. That is not to say I think they are bad players, but Seth's primary offensive role is best served as a shooting guard and getting open for the shot. He is a good shooter and often can draw a player off his his feet and get foul shots. Tyler also looks like he can score when open. Both Seth and Tyler are reasonable defenders but give away a lot of size to some guards we play. Andre doesn't appear to have confidence in his ball handling skills and his defense appears spotty.

I agree with your post, but to elaborate a little on Austin's play. I know he can usually get by his man and into the lane, but as you say he needs better judgment when he gets into the lane. I'm not picking on Austin when I make this comment, but he reminds me of Bobby Hurley in his freshmen year. He has that whinny look on his face looking for the call from the ref. He needs to concentrate on being strong with the ball(Kyrie strong) and complete the play. Sometimes he seems to make up his mind before he gets to the lane. I have to remind myself he's just a freshman, but boy does he have talent. A great cross-over with very good speed. GoDuke!

[DukieInBrasil]

My 2 Cents:
2) Ryan Kelly hasn't played well in a couple of weeks which is a big concern because I thought one of our big advantages would be him facing up and pulling other 4 men away from the basket.

Aside from the very most recent game before Temple when Ryan had a 2x double with 18pts and 12rebs. He has had several mediocre games lately, but he has played very well at least once in the last couple of weeks.
Aside from that, i agree with what you said.

[HCheek37]

My 5 points from the game:

We left a bunch of points on the floor from missed layups to turnovers on fast break situations.

Temple hit key shots when it mattered and couldn't miss from the elbows. The back to back 3's from Wyatt at the 5 minute mark were the dagger.

Seth, Andre and Ty were truly miserable tonight. 4-13 fg, 2-6 3pt, 3 AST 8 TO. This won't get it done for this team.

In the first half I thought we were witnessing Miles' breakout performance - 10 pts, 2 reb 1 blk in 10 minutes. It had flashes of Zoub vs MD in 2010. Then somehow he only got 9 minutes and 3 shots in the second half.

Playing on the road in the ACC will be very interesting, as we've known for almost 20 years now, we get everyone's best shot. Ohio St barely missed all game, Temple hit every key shot, and all ACC opponents will get pumped up for Duke.

[MCFinARL]

We came out uninspired, and sloppy. Bad turnovers, missed layups, and phantom defense. We played the entire first half like that yet were only down two points. Temple was executing on offense, and on defense did a great job of taking away our 3's. However, they had no answer for Miles down low, so we decided to help them out in two ways. One was not going to him nearly enough, and two was K sitting him far too long in both halves. I don't often question the master but I think he erred in judgement with Miles tonight. By all rights, this was a game where Miles should have had 25-30 points and Mason should have had 16 or 18. You have to punish a small team like that by going inside early and often. That was disappointing to me.


I agree. I will probably get myself in trouble here, but I feel like at least some of the responsibility for what happened has to be allocated to the coaching staff. We talk a lot about how Coach K likes to put the best basketball players on the floor, but last night that was clearly Miles and he didn't stay on the floor enough. And while it's easy to point to sloppy play, poor decision making, lack of intensity, doesn't at least part of that (with the possible exception of sloppy play) go back to game preparation? I'm no expert, but I couldn't really tell what our game plan was, and I didn't see a major focus on adapting and building on the things that were working. To be sure, there were a lot of substitutions, but sometimes I think the quick lineup changes keep players, and groups of players, from establishing a rhythm more than they enable them to bring a spark.

Obviously, the coaches don't go onto the court and play the game. Ultimately the players own the losses. But if most of the team doesn't seem ready to play with intensity, or to make good decisions, in a game like this, why is that? Coach Dunphy, as someone mentioned earlier in the thread, drew up a very effective plan for playing Duke, and it didn't seem Duke could implement a counter strategy. Even great coaches can have off nights.

To be sure, part of this is probably because this is still a team in search of its identity and, even more, its leadership, as hustleplays noted:



I'm not overlooking the many physical, strategic and tactical dimensions -- already cited in this thread -- that contributed to this loss. But on-court leadership is necessary to make our players give their absolute best, individually and as a team. We see this some nights, not others.

Tonight we saw great intensity, but less poise and cohesion, during the last five minutes or so, when the game was out of hand. Even more than correct strategy and line-ups, I believe that superior leadership is what we are most needing in order to be a top 10 team this season. I don't know from whom it can or will come.

I'm not really sure how much on-the-court leadership can be coached into players (though it can doubtless be fostered where the potential exists), and this may continue to be an issue for this team. I'd like to defend Austin here, who has taken some heat on this thread for making poor decisions while trying to be the man at the end of the game. Yes, he could sometimes have made better decisions, and yes, things could have worked out better. But he was trying to step up; he was willing to put responsibility for the outcome on his shoulders. That is a quality the team can use, and with more experience there's a very good chance Austin will learn to channel it more effectively.


Could be off court too as in practice.....all I know is Dre hasn't looked good the last few games, and I haven't heard anything about an injury so....

Granted Andre did not look good last night--although as someone else noted, he came in late and didn't seem to get many sustained opportunities to get into the flow of the game. But I'm not sure I would extend that to "the last few games." Overall this season he has been playing much better defense and moving better on offense than last year; the last few games, in particular, he rebounding numbers have come up a bit as well. As for injuries, he did hurt his back a few games ago; I don't have any inside information about whether that might still be affecting his play, but it seems at least possible.

[MulletMan]

The only part of ESPN's broadcast that you needed to see last night was the cut away of Duke coming out of the tunnel that ESPN showed as they went to the first TV timeout. Curry led the team out of the tunnel and no one came with him. Jimmy Dykes went on some rant about how the guys weren't in sync because they were on the road. However, if you watched the team come out, they were all laughing. They had clearly played a joke on Curry and let him run out alone. That wouldn't happen before a game against UNC or in the ACC or NCAA tournament. We thought we were going into Philly last night for a cakewalk game, and you cannot do that in college basketball today. We were unfocused, and uninspired and it showed from the very minute that we stepped onto the court.

That said, its difficult to judge too much about the pathetic guard play last night, so I'll reserve judgement on specific issues. The one thing that we've learned from OSU and Temple... this Duke team isn't good enough to take parts of games off and expect to win.

I am glad I won't be at practice today.

Next play.

[roywhite]

On reflection, the thing that bothers me most about last night's effort is that those who were missing in action or played poorly included 3 juniors:
Seth Curry, Andre Dawkins, and Ryan Kelly.

A tough game against a good team on the road is exactly where you should normally rely on the most experienced players to provide leadership and steady play.
Didn't get it from those guys.

[millerecu]

I usually do not watch Sportscenter the morning after the loss because they love to show Duke losing about 10 times in the hour. However I was compelled to watch this morning for some reason. Coach K finally got me to smile after the loss last night after responding to the question "did you see this one coming?". His response was "If i saw this one coming i would have faked an injury and stayed home"......still has me smiling!

[elvis14]

The only part of ESPN's broadcast that you needed to see last night was the cut away of Duke coming out of the tunnel that ESPN showed as they went to the first TV timeout. Curry led the team out of the tunnel and no one came with him. Jimmy Dykes went on some rant about how the guys weren't in sync because they were on the road. However, if you watched the team come out, they were all laughing. They had clearly played a joke on Curry and let him run out alone. That wouldn't happen before a game against UNC or in the ACC or NCAA tournament. We thought we were going into Philly last night for a cakewalk game, and you cannot do that in college basketball today. We were unfocused, and uninspired and it showed from the very minute that we stepped onto the court.

That said, its difficult to judge too much about the pathetic guard play last night, so I'll reserve judgement on specific issues. The one thing that we've learned from OSU and Temple... this Duke team isn't good enough to take parts of games off and expect to win.

I am glad I won't be at practice today.

Next play.

I agree that we need to play hard as soon as the ball is in play every game. But I thought the joke they played on Curry was hilarious. A team that's loose and focussed will beat on a team that's tight and focussed all day. Sadly our guys came out loose and unfocussed.

[gumbomoop]

I start with this "ultimately" comment, as Kedsy here reflects what some - not all - have said. I agree that this game, while dismaying, doesn't mean Duke is fatally flawed. But the team has flaws, for sure.


Ultimately, I agree with those who say to chalk it up to a poor night, and this game doesn't change our status as a contender. But we do have to show up and play hard every minute, and we failed at that tonight.

I'll add a couple of points to the concerns about Andre and about leadership. On Andre:


Dawkins to me is in kind of a weird spot where he's not really a 3 but isn't good enough with the ball in his hands to play at the 2 or 1....

If Harrison Barnes has one obvious weakness - his handle - well, that goes triple for Andre. What struck me most about Temple's big guards is that ... Andre is also a big guard. But their wing-guards have much better handles than Andre. I have no idea whether Andre has worked diligently on his handle, but he needs to work a whole lot more. Perhaps on his attitude, too, for Temple's big guards showed absolutely admirable "attitude" last eve.

Now, to leadership:


I believe that superior leadership is what we are most needing in order to be a top 10 team this season. I don't know from whom it can or will come.


.... we don't have that clear cut leader who can figuratively smack the rest of the team upside the head and get them focused when needed, or calmed down when needed.... I'm not sure we've got anyone among the upperclassmen who has the combination of personality and ability to be that guy.

I was struck - surprised - early last season when on his Sat morn TV show, K mentioned that "Tyler is going to be a leader." We all know that early this season K said, maybe more than once, that "We just play better when Tyler is on the floor."

Now, I have no clue as to whether Tyler's leadership is superior. He's not an upperclassman, and his play is inconsistent enough that one would worry that his leadership is undermined by that inconsistent play. Still, recall the following observation from someone on the spot at the UW game:


Was at the game today virtually 2 rows behind press, mid-court... close enough to hear the players talk on the floor. Have to say Tyler's leadership on defense was significant. It's not just his toughness on the ball but each trip down the floor Tyler was turning and telling the teammates what WashU was running and where players wanted to get the ball. It definitely made a difference in how difficult our D mades things for WashU.

I was reminded to go and search out Underdog5's valuable observation because of a comment Jimmy Dykes made last eve. [Paraphrasing here,] Dykes said, "Boy, at Duke's shootaround today, Tyler Thornton's voice just stood out, over and over. He's the leader of this team." [I think that's close.]

So, to davekay1971's striking, and IMO strikingly good, advice ...


... if I were Coach K, I'd have Miles in my office today, show him tape of how well he played last night, and tell him that if he wants his senior year to be everything it can be, he needs to get nasty, with his own team when needed, and demand that everyone play every game as if they were in the second half of their senior year.

... I'd add a friendly amendment: I hope K will tell Tyler to have a chat with Miles. Maybe with Andre, too.

[MCFinARL]

On reflection, the thing that bothers me most about last night's effort is that those who were missing in action or played poorly included 3 juniors:
Seth Curry, Andre Dawkins, and Ryan Kelly.

A tough game against a good team on the road is exactly where you should normally rely on the most experienced players to provide leadership and steady play.
Didn't get it from those guys.

This is a good point, and a good reason to be disappointed. It makes me wonder--did they assume this game would be easy, and if so, why? Do they lack confidence in themselves as leaders and players, and if so, why? At least based on what is said publicly, as well as playing time decisions, it's plausible that Andre may remain uncertain about his role on the team or whether he has the coaches' full confidence--and that could be a vicious circle. But both Seth and Ryan have been heavily and publicly praised by Coach K going all the way back to the China trip. And both have seen plenty of playing time even when they are not at their best.

Regardless of the whys, it would seem the challenge of turning effective role players into effective team leaders remains to be met.

[BlueDevilCorvette!]

I never thought Duke would have lost to Temple. For whatever reason we just seem to lack the intensity and motivation to get the desired win. However, I do realize that Duke takes everybody's best shot and some teams play hot against Duke and then go cold the rest of the year...I'm hoping this is the case with Temple. Ironically, I now have the same feeling I teased my UNC friends when they lost to UNLV (and unranked and supposedly inferior opponent)...it's a shallow, empty feeling like "how the heck did that just happen?" It feels like someone just hit me in the chest with a sledgehammer...

[DUKIE V(A)]

With a such a realitively inexperienced team, these games will happen -- you just never know when. I did not see this one coming at all given that the team seemed to be jelling and getting things rolling. Temple is a very well coached and tough-minded team, but no where near as talented as Duke. Credit to them for taking it to us, but this was not a result I was expecting in the least.

In terms of last night:

Defensively: We looked flat emotionally and seemed to lack our usual fire. Temple shot outstandingly (especially for them), and also outworked and hustled us for loose balls and rebounds. They had some fortunate bounces, but their desire, teamwork, and smart play dictated the outcome.

Offensively: We played very poorly. There were very few plays where teammates made each other better. This Duke team has the ability to play better team basketball and when and if they learn to share the ball more consistently, this can become an elite team this year. I am hopeful that the on court team chemistry continues to improve.

Coach K has a particularly challenging job this year. He has a very deep, talented yet inexperienced team. Aside from Austin and Mason, there is a lot of disagreement about which players deserve the most playing time. It will be interesting who steps up their game on a consistent basis.

[rtnorthrup]

I love to watch Coach K during the games, especially games like last night. For the most part, Coach stayed seated on the bench, only getting up to get us into certain offensive or defensive sets. Contrast this with many games where Coach K is more aggressive and standing the entire game.

This is a huge assumption on my part, but I truly think Coach K wanted his players to figure the game out for themselves. He clearly scheduled this game to prepare us for the tournament, but I think he wanted to see who on the floor would step up and lead. I thought our guards never really adjusted to they way the game was being called by the refs or how the game was being played out.

I think there will be a lot of film watching on this game, and Coach K will use this as motivation for the ACC season.

Not sure why, but this loss doesn't really bother me as some other losses.

[DUKIE V(A)]

One more comment: I have never rooted as hard for any player to consistently play to their potential as I have Andre Dawkins. I am not sure exactly why, but it is emotionally difficult to watch when he is not playing well (even when Duke in winning and particularly when Duke is losing). To me, his consistent play will be one of the keys to this team's ultimate success.

[Mhgraham]

IMO, our guards are weak physically...reminded me of games in the past we lost where our guards got pushed on the dribble when we were on offense and we couldn't handle that....we either turned it over were taken out of the offense flow of the play.....as opposed to like the Butler championship game where they were physical as heck on us and our guards Nolan and Scheyer and Singler even played right thru the bumps which weren't called and turned it into our advantage by turning the corner to the lane....few turnovers even though they fouled the heck out of us.


We have to get a lot stronger with the ball or count us out for the long run

That championship year our guards were not overly athletic or strong. The inconsistent and unbalanced play by our guards is a direct result of YOUTH. These guys just are not fully developed yet. IMO, Cook has the whole package and a very complete guard. Thornton is intense but not your typical "Give this guy the ball with 10 sec left" guard. They both need development, but more so Cook. The comparison you make to Shey and Sing is not even adequate because these guys were seniors playing on biggest stage of career. IMO, I like our youth. In most cases, you look at most teams with freshman and they are riding the bench. Our freshman are averaging 8-12 minutes per game (not including Austin's 25-35 or the MP3/Murphy) This helps when it comes to development and experience. Temple is your typical Ncaa tourny matchup of a 7 playing a 10 (temple ranked 7) winning and having to play Duke (the 2) in tourny time. This was an experience most, if not all, freshman do not get. We ar extremely young this year as I am sure you all are all aware and with youth comes physical and mental weakness. This will come with time. Doesnt Coach K always come through?

[Matches]

I love to watch Coach K during the games, especially games like last night. For the most part, Coach stayed seated on the bench, only getting up to get us into certain offensive or defensive sets. Contrast this with many games where Coach K is more aggressive and standing the entire game.



Based on his post-game comments, I think he was sick. That may explain him being less demonstrative than usual.

[UrinalCake]

Toward the end of the game, I was watching with the sound turned off. I think it was Fernandez who had just thrown the prettiest wraparound/behind-the-back pass, which was followed by a second pass that resulted in an easy score by Temple. (Yes guys, you can throw more than one pass as you work the ball toward the basket.) Anyhoo, the camera went to the Duke bench as they went to a break and I could (as you sometimes can) perfectly read Chris Collins' lips as he exclaimed: "What the f*** was that?" Not sure whether that was directed to us, them, or the Almighty.

Perhaps he was wondering what Mason was doing hedging 35 feet from the basket instead of guarding his man. Not trying to pick on Mason here, I've seen it happen plenty of times to other guys on our team. After the ball screen we need to learn to get back rather than continuing to double team the ballhandler.

2248

[wilko]

Man, folks seem down.
I only skimmed the comments so far as i didnt want to fall prey to undue negativity. Apologies if my comments are somewhat redundant but I gotta get this outta my system.

A loss IS disappointing but the game was not as bad as some folks seem to think it was. I got a call from my UNC buddy who only finds my # when Duke loses. I think I upset him cuz I wasn't more upset.

Let me start with Officiating.
Any time a player gets multiple blows to the head with elbows something is wrong with the officiating. I'm not implying that Duke did anything malicious, but if they called the hip check the way they called the hand check, that prolly would not have happened.

That said, the game being what it was, Duke did not react well and adjust accordingly to the flow of the game.

The 3 signs where I just knew it wasnt our night
Mason made Free-throws
TT threw the ball away for an easy Temple conversion
Miles waited until the end of the game for his obligatory missed dunk.

After this occured I was able to click out of "fan mode" somewhat and into "watch the game more objectively mode". This is rare for me so I'm going with it..

Observations.
Our perimeter players were over-whelmed by taller, stronger, more experienced players. Period.

Seth - was jammed and could not find any comfortable space to operate in. Made sloppy passes and took a few bad shots.

Austin - played like a frosh. Needs to recognize what the D is doing and take advantage, not continually forcing the game around what he perceives to be his strength. If he got a hip check call or two to go his way different story... but this game wasn't like that. He'll get better from this.

Tyler - not his best game. He was out talled.

Cook - Played like another frosh not used to the bumping and size of the defenders.

Dawkins - As long as he can catch and shoot hes good for 20pts. If he has to relocate, handle or dribble then 8-12pt is about what hes going to contribute. If someone is physical with him AND makes him dribble.... He puts on the "Snuggie of Invisibility"

Speaking of which, I think Dre got a Snuggie of Invisibility for Ryan for Christmas.
Ryan - (yes I'm including him as a perimeter player even tho he is tall) When quicker players get physical with him, he puts on a Snuggie too. I think in a world where a jump was considered a travel Ryan would be a basketball God. But this ain't that world and Ryan has great hands. He needs to improve his feet and be quicker to anticipate on the jump or lateral move, not hope that he doesn't have to do it and get caught in the middle of indecision, which seemed to happen last night.

They will have other games where this happens and they run into a opponent who is bigger and tries to out-tough them. They need to find a way to play thru this and rise to meet the next challenge. They will. Its a young team with a Great Coach. I'm confidant this will be a defining moment/teaching tool for Duke.

The only guy not named Plumlee that impressed me was Mike Gbinije. In spot duty, he didn't seem bothered by the physicality. Lefty Driesell might have used G in a box and 1 on Fernandez to shake things up and take them out of rhythm. G has the demeanor for it, but I'm not sure hes ready to be a lock-down defender. K doesn't bother with junk like that.

My lingering question from the game was why didn't we play D the second half like we did in the last 2 minutes? THATS more K's speed. I can only surmise that the birth of another grandchild had him somewhat distracted...(Congrats BTW!) Maybe he was looking to see who would claim the title of leader out on the floor.

The most encouraging thing about last night was that BOTH Plumlees were living up to their destinies. I think that's why I'm so upbeat in getting hung a loss. Our Go-to guys have been guards for so long that when we HAD to have points we forgot what to do on a night when they were jammed. BOTH Miles and Mason played great games. Recognition and confidence.

In spite of all that was wrong... a few different bounces and we could have stole this one.
G'Tech is in for a world of hurt...

[BlueDevilCorvette!]

I can't help but wonder if Silent G can be an answer to our woes. It seems like every team has a player in the 6-6 to 6-8 range that gives us fits thus can Silent G development be key as we more further into the season? Next year, I'm looking forward to seeing Alex Murphy and Silent G on the floor together (possibly) and how teams adjust to "our" perimeter length.

[superdave]

Good writeup here. (http://dukeland.wordpress.com/2012/01/05/the-morning-after-temple-of-doom/) Is this you, Mike Corey?

The first play here has Mason hedging the ball screen. Duke big men do this. It's what they are coached to do. But the Temple guys knew it was coming and the guard did not continue to go high and try to get around Mason's hedge. Instead he went low and under and found Mason's guy cutting to the basket. Ryan and Austin should have been back to help. Ryan was late, Austin was lost. Temple was well-prepared for this hard hedge, a staple of Duke's defense. They executed this a couple of times last night I noticed.

[Olympic Fan]

I just skimmed this thread (it's too painful to read all the way through), but I can't disagree with most of the comments I saw about the invisbility of Seth, Andre and Ryan -- three of our five most experienced players. Austin and Quinn played like freshmen, but at least they PLAYED.

The one point I would like to dispute are the comments early in the tread suggesting that Temple was a weak opponent (somebody compared them to our football loss to Richmond ... another suggested that this is our worst regular season loss in years).

That's balderdash -- Temple is a quality team and will almost certainly be in the NCAA Tournament. Yes, they've had a few ups and downs (who doesn't -- Duke certainly does!), but as of Thursday morning, they are No. 15 in the RPI (one spot ahead of North Carolina) and No. 40 in Pomeroy ... I think the latter is a better guage, but it still indicates that Temple is a solid team. I think Duke should have won -- they've beaten better teams (Kansas, Michigan State ...) but Temple is on the same level with Washington and Michigan.

The key is to use this as a learnign experience. KL keeps saying -- even before the Tenple loss -- that this a a developing team. Hopefully, that process will continue. Right now, I'm disappointed, but not discouraged.

Now, if they don't bounce back Saturday against a Georgia Tech that IS very weak ...

[UrinalCake]

Good writeup here. (http://dukeland.wordpress.com/2012/01/05/the-morning-after-temple-of-doom/) Is this you, Mike Corey?

Wow, he and I were seeing the same thing. The play he highlights happened a minute and a half before the one I thumbnailed - probably just one or two possessions later. Temple runs basically the exact same thing and gets another easy lay-in/dunk.

Mr. Corey places blame on Austin for not helping out, but I think the real blame is on Mason for stepping out so far. That put Temple in a five-on-four situation and no matter what someone will be open. I guess Mason is trying to prevent the ballhandler from turning the corner, but even if he doesn't use a behind the back pass (which is admittedly an uncommon thing) he could just as easily pass over the top of Tyler or turn the other way (towards the camera) and make an easy pass from that side. The other thing that I see happen fairly often is that the ballhandler splits the defenders (which is pretty easy since Mason is BEHIND him - closer to the Duke basket) and now has a five-on-three. I just don't get it.

[Wildcat]

Well, where do i begin? First let me say that our recruiting is telling on us. We are way to homogeneous in player personnel; but that's a moot point right now. I'm about to believe that we should move Aut to the PG position; the kid is strong, fearless and can certainly create his own shot. (I also believe he's gone after this year) The Plums played a heck of a game! Let's hope they keep it up. (player development questions) Cook is okay;still have not seen the talent he is supposed to bring. Tyler is serviceable; not a scorer; but a body man who provides a modicum of toughness, leadership, quickness and strength. Don't know where Ryan Kelly is. He was playing so well earlier in the season; oh well i'm used to our players emerging and fading in big games. Now can you see why i'm tired of our one-dimensional assault of three-pointers? What else is new?

[superdave]

Wow, he and I were seeing the same thing. The play he highlights happened a minute and a half before the one I thumbnailed - probably just one or two possessions later. Temple runs basically the exact same thing and gets another easy lay-in/dunk.

Mr. Corey places blame on Austin for not helping out, but I think the real blame is on Mason for stepping out so far. That put Temple in a five-on-four situation and no matter what someone will be open. I guess Mason is trying to prevent the ballhandler from turning the corner, but even if he doesn't use a behind the back pass (which is admittedly an uncommon thing) he could just as easily pass over the top of Tyler or turn the other way (towards the camera) and make an easy pass from that side. The other thing that I see happen fairly often is that the ballhandler splits the defenders (which is pretty easy since Mason is BEHIND him - closer to the Duke basket) and now has a five-on-three. I just don't get it.

But Duke big men have always aggressively hedged screens. Remember Zoubek finally figuring out how to it hard without fouling, then spring back to the rim in 2010? That was a big key to him staying on the floor to get all those offensive rebounds. His first 3.5 years, he was a step slow and wound up hip checking the ball-handler or sticking his leg out.

I do believe this is how Duke is coached to play this particular ball-screen. The help guys are supposed to cover the backside and the hedging big is supposed to recover ASAP.

But after we saw them make the underneath play, we should have adjusted both the help (protect the paint, thanks) and the intensity of the hedge (flash up but dont hedge so hard maybe?). Mason can read this better, certainly, but help has to occupy the lane.

[Newton_14]

Wow, he and I were seeing the same thing. The play he highlights happened a minute and a half before the one I thumbnailed - probably just one or two possessions later. Temple runs basically the exact same thing and gets another easy lay-in/dunk.

Mr. Corey places blame on Austin for not helping out, but I think the real blame is on Mason for stepping out so far. That put Temple in a five-on-four situation and no matter what someone will be open. I guess Mason is trying to prevent the ballhandler from turning the corner, but even if he doesn't use a behind the back pass (which is admittedly an uncommon thing) he could just as easily pass over the top of Tyler or turn the other way (towards the camera) and make an easy pass from that side. The other thing that I see happen fairly often is that the ballhandler splits the defenders (which is pretty easy since Mason is BEHIND him - closer to the Duke basket) and now has a five-on-three. I just don't get it.

I am at work so will be brief here. That is absolutley not Mason's fault. He played them exactly as designed by K. The help defenders blew their assignments. If you want to argue the strategy, then that is on K, not Mason. You could argue that Mason and Tyler were poor at executing the trap. That would be fair.

I think many times folks blame the kids for doing something, when the kids are doing exactly as directed by the staff. Not really fair to put those type things on the kids unless the execution is poor. I will comment more on the two video clips later tonight. Great pics that show exactly where the defense failed.

[ACCBBallFan]

As in the Ohio State game, most of the Duke players played soft on the road, the exceptions being Tyler, Josh and Miles. Except for the latter, this shows up inthe +/- stats too with Josh, Quinn and Tyler the only ones not negative:

Duke Temple +/- Metrics Total Duke
59 (66) (7) 64 57 Mason Plumlee, F

61 (64) (3) 46 43 Austin Rivers, G

32 (39) (7) 43 36 Miles Plumlee, F
53 (58) (5) 35 30 Seth Curry, G

51 (51) 00 27 27 Tyler Thornton, G
29 (31) (2) 23 21 Ryan Kelly, F

22 (21) +1 16 17 Quinn Cook, G
21 (22) (1) 14 13 Michael Gbinije, G-F
12 (10) +2 11 13 Josh Hairston, F
25 (28) (3) 14 11 Andre Dawkins, G
(25) TOTALS
(5)

Since I started tracking it in the Davidson game, Austin leads in +/-, and the results track closely to the lineup Coach K has been playing:

Dav TN Mich KU tOSU CSU Wash UNC-G W Mich Penn Temple Sum 11

14 06 04 (4) (24) 19 14 23 45 26 (3) 120 Austin Rivers, G

08 05 (4) 12 01 19 00 12 35 12 00 100 Tyler Thornton, G

00 08 06 06 (17) 13 06 16 26 30 (2) 92 Ryan Kelly, F

04 07 07 08 (14) 14 02 05 29 17 (5) 74 Seth Curry, G

09 12 08 14 (22) 08 12 11 14 09 (7) 68 Mason Plumlee, F
14 01 03 (6) (8) 12 (1) 26 23 03 (7) 60 Miles Plumlee, F

13 01 03 02 (3) 03 (3) 15 08 18 01 58 Quinn Cook, G
03 (2) 00 00 03 14 (1) 03 14 18 02 54 Josh Hairston, F

06 12 08 03 (27) 09 03 14 11 09 (3) 45 Andre Dawkins, G

(6) 0 0 00 01 04 (2) 12 01 08 (1) 17 Michael Gbinije, G-F

[Kedsy]

This is the wrong way of looking at it because assist-to-turnover ratio is not solely an offensive measure but rather a useful composite measure of both offense and defense.

1. Turnovers often mean easy buckets for the other team going the other way. Case in point - Temple. Many times in the 2nd half, we were poised to regain momentum until an errant/lazy pass or even several in a row led to easy layups and dunks for Temple. Even if Team A can score more often than Team B w/ fewer assists (7-3 is very unlikely), their plus-minus is probably worse.

2. How likely is it that Team A scores 7 times with only 1 assist? This is indicative of much one-on-one play and not fluid teamwork on offense. Against teams that we match up poorly against (bigger guards, and let's be honest Temple's guards weren't even that big at 6-4), our back-court is very susceptible to being shut down.

I agree that cutting down on turnovers is always a laudable goal. And our team's turnover rate this year is a little bit worse than average for a Duke team:



Year Possessions turnovers pg turnover rate
---- ----------- ------------ -------------
2003 72.6 13.94 0.1920
2004 69.7 13.78 0.1978
2005 69.0 13.61 0.1972
2006 71.5 13.72 0.1919
2007 65.9 15.42 0.2341
2008 73.0 13.59 0.1861
2009 67.4 12.27 0.1821
2010 65.5 11.10 0.1695
2011 69.3 12.03 0.1736
2012 70.1 13.71 0.1956
AVG 69.3 13.23 0.1910


But our performance this year isn't a crazy outlier, either, and it's better than the 2004 Final Four team. Still, I agree we could and should improve our turnover rate. That said, the problem with assist-to-turnover ratio is the assist part. Assists are a flawed statistic because if the guy who receives the pass takes a dribble before he shoots or misses the shot or gets fouled, there's no assist. Last night, do you remember the 2nd amazing behind the back pass Fernandez made? He didn't get an assist on it, because the guy he passed to didn't end up taking the shot (although admittedly in that case, the guy he passed to made a 2nd pass that did get an assist).

But my major point to Duke71 is that turnovers are only one part of what makes an offense efficient. Shooting ability, ability to get to the free throw line, and offensive rebounding are just as important. In my hypothetical, if the 7 for 10 team is a great shooting team or great at driving to the hoop, they could certainly get 7 baskets and only one turnover. Ditto if they were a poor shooting team who cleaned up on the offensive glass. The fact is, even after last night, our team has the 4th best offensive efficiency in the nation, despite our turnovers. To me, that's a better way of looking at it than clinging to assist-to-turnover ratio just because that was considered a good stat 40 years ago.

Also, when you talk about turnovers being damaging to your defense, you have to distinguish between turnovers that lead to fast breaks, live ball turnovers that don't lead to fast breaks, and dead ball turnovers. I don't have stats on that, but I doubt the impact on our defense was as great as you suggest.

[MCFinARL]

Based on his post-game comments, I think he was sick. That may explain him being less demonstrative than usual.

Yes, though--based only on what I have seen on TV--it isn't the first game Duke was losing in which Coach K seemed less than fully engaged. Sometimes, especially in league competition, he gets really revved up, but sometimes he seems to withdraw. However, usually when I have seen this it has been in the games where Duke is getting blown out, not in closer ones where there is still an opportunity to pull out a victory. IIRC there is some precedent for the OP's speculation that Coach K decided to see if the players could figure things out on their own--I seem to remember a couple of games a few years ago where he said in post-game comments that he had done just that. He didn't say that here, but of course in those other games Duke won. On the other hand, he may also have been sick, or he may have been thinking just a little about that new grandchild.

[UrinalCake]

I am at work so will be brief here. That is absolutley not Mason's fault. He played them exactly as designed by K. The help defenders blew their assignments. If you want to argue the strategy, then that is on K, not Mason. You could argue that Mason and Tyler were poor at executing the trap. That would be fair.

A couple things... first off, I completely agree that this is the strategy the bigs are told to employ. When I say it was Mason's fault, I meant that it was the fault of the role that Mason is playing, not that he himself made a bad decision by doing this.

Secondly... there's a minor different in the two plays that are shown. In the one described by Mike Corey, the Temple screener does not actually set a screen. He acts like he is going to set one and then as the ballhandler approaches him he instead cuts toward the basket. I think Mason needs to recognize this and stay with his man rather than trailing the ballhandler.

In the other clip (the one I screenshotted), an actual screen is set. I understand that Mason's job is to flash out in front in order to slow down the ballhandler, but he needs to then immediately get back. As Superdave said, it took Zoubek a long time to learn this but he finally did get the timing down just right. Mason is a lot more athletic than big Z (albeit not quite as big) so there's no reason why he can't do the same thing. It seems though that he has a tendency to stay with the ballhandler much too long. The ballhandler is not a threat at this point, he's well behind the NBA three-point line, so Mason needs to leave him and get back on his man!

Saying it is the fault of the help defense doesn't make sense to me. There are three defenders guarding four guys. There's just no way to keep rotating over. If Austin had moved to cover the middle of the floor (as Mike Corey suggested) then his man would be wide open for a three. If the other post defender comes over (which Mike G does in the screenshotted play) then HIS man is wide open for a dunk (which is what happens).

Sorry for being so negative here. I am by no means an expert, so when I can see these things it just doesn't make sense to me why they keep happening.

[Kedsy]

I even began thinking of him as a Larry Bird extra light--which is still a great compliment when compared to the best power forward to ever play the game of basketball. It looked like he had the ability to be a very good all-around forward--one who could score on the inside or outside, rebound fairly well, get to the rim decently, pass well, see the game a step ahead, play solid defense, etc. etc. Now I just don't know. It looks like he has regressed in almost every area.

Larry Bird played small forward, not power forward (McHale played PF; Parrish played C).

Ryan's last game before Temple was a strong double-double (18 & 12). In his four games before Temple, he averaged 13.3 and 7.5. In the Temple game he was faced with a quicker, small (6'6") aggressive player and he seemed flummoxed by the matchup. That's no reason to say he's "regressed in almost every area." It was just one game and from Ryan's standpoint at least, probably an anomaly.

[superdave]

A couple things... first off, I completely agree that this is the strategy the bigs are told to employ. When I say it was Mason's fault, I meant that it was the fault of the role that Mason is playing, not that he himself made a bad decision by doing this.

Secondly... there's a minor different in the two plays that are shown. In the one described by Mike Corey, the Temple screener does not actually set a screen. He acts like he is going to set one and then as the ballhandler approaches him he instead cuts toward the basket. I think Mason needs to recognize this and stay with his man rather than trailing the ballhandler.

In the other clip (the one I screenshotted), an actual screen is set. I understand that Mason's job is to flash out in front in order to slow down the ballhandler, but he needs to then immediately get back. As Superdave said, it took Zoubek a long time to learn this but he finally did get the timing down just right. Mason is a lot more athletic than big Z (albeit not quite as big) so there's no reason why he can't do the same thing. It seems though that he has a tendency to stay with the ballhandler much too long. The ballhandler is not a threat at this point, he's well behind the NBA three-point line, so Mason needs to leave him and get back on his man!

Saying it is the fault of the help defense doesn't make sense to me. There are three defenders guarding four guys. There's just no way to keep rotating over. If Austin had moved to cover the middle of the floor (as Mike Corey suggested) then his man would be wide open for a three. If the other post defender comes over (which Mike G does in the screenshotted play) then HIS man is wide open for a dunk (which is what happens).

Sorry for being so negative here. I am by no means an expert, so when I can see these things it just doesn't make sense to me why they keep happening.

You dont sound negative. You made good points that have added to the conversation here.

I wonder if it Tyler's job when his man gets screened to fight under and make sure the screener does not get an free run to the basket. Should Tyler be bumping him or getting in his way on this play? Anyone?

[jv001]

I wonder if it Tyler's job when his man gets screened to fight under and make sure the screener does not get an free run to the basket. Should Tyler be bumping him or getting in his way on this play? Anyone?

I don't know about that, but Tyler sure does a lot of bumping and fouling, lol. GoDuke

[Steven43]

Larry Bird played small forward, not power forward (McHale played PF; Parrish played C).

Ryan's last game before Temple was a strong double-double (18 & 12). In his four games before Temple, he averaged 13.3 and 7.5. In the Temple game he was faced with a quicker, small (6'6") aggressive player and he seemed flummoxed by the matchup. That's no reason to say he's "regressed in almost every area." It was just one game and from Ryan's standpoint at least, probably an anomaly.

Larry Bird played both power forward and small forward. Yes, it was incorrect for me to refer to him exclusively as a power forward, but he definitely played both positions--depending upon which period of his career one is talking about, the game situation, the lineup, the match ups, etc.

I'm saying Ryan has regressed compared to how he played in some earlier games this season. He just hasn't had that same almost dominating presence that he had in spurts earlier in the year. Remember, I said 'almost' dominating. And I didn't say he has regressed dramatically, merely regressed somewhat. I think Ryan has shown that he has the ability to be an all-ACC first team-level player. If only he would consistently play that way.

[Kedsy]

I would say Austin could get it to our bigs when he puts pressure on the defense by getting past their first defender. He does have to think about how does the team score versus how do I score. If he could consistently think that way it would result in better opportunities. I am not saying Austin has to look to pass all of the time, just use better judgment as to when he can get to the basket of get fouled versus make a pass to a big or back out for a three.

I would say Quinn also can do that and actually one of his assists last night had him drive towards the basket and throw the ball up for Miles to grab and score.

I don't see the ball handling ability from Seth, Tyler or Andre to be able to make the penetration necessary to get the pass into the bigs. All of those players have difficulty in playmaking and have significant TO issues. That is not to say I think they are bad players, but Seth's primary offensive role is best served as a shooting guard and getting open for the shot. He is a good shooter and often can draw a player off his his feet and get foul shots. Tyler also looks like he can score when open. Both Seth and Tyler are reasonable defenders but give away a lot of size to some guards we play. Andre doesn't appear to have confidence in his ball handling skills and his defense appears spotty.

You don't have to penetrate to feed the post. Quinn, Andre (yes, Andre), and Ryan are all very good at feeding the post with entry passes. Seth, too, but not as consistently. I think last night, Temple's zone (and length) confused our perimeter players and left them unsure where to put the entry pass.


On reflection, the thing that bothers me most about last night's effort is that those who were missing in action or played poorly included 3 juniors:
Seth Curry, Andre Dawkins, and Ryan Kelly.

A tough game against a good team on the road is exactly where you should normally rely on the most experienced players to provide leadership and steady play.
Didn't get it from those guys.

I don't entirely agree. Ryan was clearly affected by having to guard a 6'6" guy who was much quicker than Ryan. It didn't look to me as a matter of effort as much as not being as quick as his man. On offense, Temple's zone defense seemed designed to cut off the passes to the wings. I watched Andre specifically, and he wasn't standing around on offense; he moved around plenty, but our ballhandlers couldn't get the ball to him through the Temple zone. As far as Seth goes, he seemed unable to deal with either the zone or the taller defender, or both. Same as Ohio State (the taller defender, not the zone). To me, this actually is an argument against Seth playing off the ball. When he's playing PG, his defender is his size or smaller, and both his confidence and his ability to score is increased. When he's playing SG, against a taller wing, both his confidence and his ability to score decreases, and I think that's what we saw last night.


Temple is your typical Ncaa tourny matchup of a 7 playing a 10 (temple ranked 7) winning and having to play Duke (the 2) in tourny time.

Playing without their starting center, Temple is not close to a #7. Their last three games they beat Delaware by 3, Buffalo at home by 2 in OT, and Rice by 7. They're possibly a #10, but probably not quite that good. Still, they are a decent, well-coached team, playing at home (sort of) and they came out tough. They deserved to win the game.


The only guy not named Plumlee that impressed me was Mike Gbinije. In spot duty, he didn't seem bothered by the physicality. Lefty Driesell might have used G in a box and 1 on Fernandez to shake things up and take them out of rhythm. G has the demeanor for it, but I'm not sure hes ready to be a lock-down defender. K doesn't bother with junk like that.

I actually think think this may be where Michael can help us this year. Not as a wing defender, but defending an opposing PG for short stretches. Against Washington, in his few minutes, Michael was assigned to guard the opposing PG. I think I saw him on Fernandez once or twice last night, too, but that might have been on switches. He seems quick enough to do it, and long enough to bother most PGs.

That said, I see his contribution as brief disruptions. I still can't see Michael getting a lot of playing time going forward this season. As Jim Sumner said in another thread, every minute Michael plays takes a minute from Seth, Austin, or Andre, and that doesn't make a lot of sense to me at this point in time.

[Billy Dat]

I don't know about that, but Tyler sure does a lot of bumping and fouling, lol. GoDuke

Playing on the theme of the little things that happened that kept us at a 5 point deficit when it seemed like we were about to make a move, how frustrating was Tyler's foul with just under 6 to play. Mason had hit a lay-up to cut it to 4, and Tyler fouls them on the in-bounds pass when they are in the bonus - 2 shots - lead goes back to six. Tyler wasn't the only guy who made or didn't make plays like this. Right after that, Miles had the ball right under the hoop and couldn't convert the and 1, and only made 1 of 2. Right after that extended sequence, Temple hits those back to back 3s followed by another lay-up and the game was pretty much done. As bad as we played, a couple of those sequences turn out different and we might steal one - but we didn't deserve to so maybe it's better that the coaches have the ammo of a loss to keep "motivating".

[ncexnyc]

Larry Bird played small forward, not power forward (McHale played PF; Parrish played C).

Ryan's last game before Temple was a strong double-double (18 & 12). In his four games before Temple, he averaged 13.3 and 7.5. In the Temple game he was faced with a quicker, small (6'6") aggressive player and he seemed flummoxed by the matchup. That's no reason to say he's "regressed in almost every area." It was just one game and from Ryan's standpoint at least, probably an anomaly.

I'm not sure why you felt the need to go this route with Steven43. I got the point that he was trying to make, which is Ryan has many skills as a basketball player and those skills are similar to one of the greatest to ever play the game.

I'd also like to know why over the past few games when people have talked up Quinn's play, it's ok to dismiss his play due to the level of competition, but in this instance you want to post Ryan's stats against the very same competition.

[wilko]

I actually think think this may be where Michael can help us this year. Not as a wing defender, but defending an opposing PG for short stretches. Against Washington, in his few minutes, Michael was assigned to guard the opposing PG. I think I saw him on Fernandez once or twice last night, too, but that might have been on switches. He seems quick enough to do it, and long enough to bother most PGs.

That said, I see his contribution as brief disruptions. I still can't see Michael getting a lot of playing time going forward this season. As Jim Sumner said in another thread, every minute Michael plays takes a minute from Seth, Austin, or Andre, and that doesn't make a lot of sense to me at this point in time.

In games where its not clicking, I'm all for searching for a spark and if G can fill that role on a PG good for him and good for Duke!

I grokk the overall contribution statement and agree; but also its about match-ups and who is producing on given night in a given game. Ride the hot hand.

[NSDukeFan]

Whew, that was rough. Hopefully we really do something to change the makeup of this team. What we saw tonight cannot happen again. That is two bad losses for different reasons. I know K says we had a tough schedule, but maybe we should have thrown in a few more road games for experience.
The team will play 8 games in the next couple of months on the road in conference play. I don't see how scheduling more road games would help. The team's goals are to win championships and the team has tried to play against different types of opponents in situations resembling tournament play and already has one championship. I thought this was a great test for the team, which will hopefully provide great teaching points that they can use to improve.


I thought they made a ton of mid-range shots though. But, our defense was too soft early, so once they made a few, they started seeing a big basket, and could not miss. As for 3's, I did not think they hit that many, but as most came in succession during crunch time when we had closed, it may have seemed like more than 5. The last one came from NBA range.

Our defense was bad but Temple took full advantage by making shots.
I think this is a pretty good assesment. I think why I, and others, seem to feel that Temple shot well, is that some of the points in the paint that uh_no mentioned were perhaps the jumpers at the elbow when Temple had caused Duke's defense to be out of positions (Duke's players helped out some in this regard as well) and I think it was Hollis-Jefferson kept getting to that spot and hitting his open shots. Add that to a few threes, and their guards shooting contested shots over our smaller guards and that was why I felt Temple was shooting well. Of course, the layups didnt' help either.

In 2010 we had a ton of size - our starting lineup went something like 6'5, 6'2, 6'8, 6'10, 7'0. That allowed us to play a quasi-zone where our guards would funnel players into the bigs, at which point it was hard for them to shoot or pass. This year we don't have that kind of length, we're looking more like 6'2, 6'2, 6'3, 6'10, 6'10. Our guards have to figure out how to stay in front of their man, or else rely on getting a ton of steals (which isn't happening).

I do think our big guys need to back off on those high screens, but as someone else mentioned Coach K seems pretty wedded to the hedge. I only saw the second half and there were at least five plays where Temple did the exact same thing: high screen, Duke big steps out 35 feet from the basket, pass to the big rolling towards the basket, secondary defender rotates over, pass to his man for a dunk. Very frustrating to know it's coming and then see it unfold.
I don't know if the big guys necessarily need to back off on those high screens, if they communicate better and either trap more effectively or (what I would hope to see) recover more quickly to their man with the rest of the team ready to help.


How many games so far this season have we not played with full intensity, poise and cohesion? This was certainly one of those games. I remember hearing quotes from our over-achieving 2010 team members that Kyle, Brian, Lance, Jon and Nolan would not let the team practice or play with less than full intensity. We all know that one of Duke's historic signatures is playing really hard, all out, never getting out hustled, and playing with great teamwork. This year's team hasn't achieved that level yet. Too often they look a bit lost, a step late [ok, sometimes due to lack of physical quickness], out of sync, and not hungry, really hungry.

I'm not overlooking the many physical, strategic and tactical dimensions -- already cited in this thread -- that contributed to this loss. But on-court leadership is necessary to make our players give their absolute best, individually and as a team. We see this some nights, not others.

Tonight we saw great intensity, but less poise and cohesion, during the last five minutes or so, when the game was out of hand. Even more than correct strategy and line-ups, I believe that superior leadership is what we are most needing in order to be a top 10 team this season. I don't know from whom it can or will come.
I think your post illustrates the challenges the team has had after losing Nolan and Kyle the year after losing Lance, Brian and Jon. This team appears to have a similar amount of offensive talent as the last couple of teams have had, but I wouldn't be surprised if coach K could not say that this team "never has a bad practice" as he had said about some of the recently graduated players. I think part of this is just experience as well. The team does have some great upperclassmen in Miles, Ryan, Seth and Andre trying to increase their leadership skills, but there are still a lot of young players who are needed who are learning their responsibilities and how hard they have to play all the time. I don't care if I see signs of leadership from my TV or computer screen, but I hope that someone (I realize the coaches have lots of experience here, but am referring to players) is emerging in practices or in the locker room to let everyone know what type of standard is necessary for them to keep improving and play at their best.

Quinn actually kept his man in front of him mostly but they just shot over him and made it look way too easy. I guess K would rather watch TT foul someone than allow them to score unmolested.

I don't think Quinn was particularly effective at keeping his man in front of him in this game and thought that he and Tyler might both foul out from fouls 35 feet from the basket.

All in all, not the best game. As an optimist (though maybe not quite to Ozzie or gumbomoop's level), I am not hugely surprised that this young team lost a game on the road against a pretty good, experienced team. I think many, if not all, of us were expecting that this young team would have some losses along the way. As the last few teams have, this team will also have to learn how to win on the road (in non-neutral games.)

I was very pleased with Miles' performance and surprised to learn that he only played 19 minutes, after his dominant first half. I agree with other posters who said the team should have been pounding the ball to Miles and Mason (and if they got tired, bring on Marshall ;)) on every possession until Temple could stop it consistently, or it opened up some more space for the backcourt players.

I was also pleased with Gbinijie and Hairston's minutes and am not sure how, but am hoping they continue to see minutes as the ACC play begins.

Next.

[Kedsy]

I'd also like to know why over the past few games when people have talked up Quinn's play, it's ok to dismiss his play due to the level of competition, but in this instance you want to post Ryan's stats against the very same competition.

First of all, I don't think I dismissed Quinn's play against the recent competition. I believe I said I'm interested to see if it would continue against better competition, which is an entirely different thing. (I also talked up Quinn's assist to turnover ratio over the last 5 games, so I don't know where you got your impression.) In addition, my biggest wait-and-see issue with Quinn has always been defense, and that's something you can't see so well against poorer competition.

In the case of Ryan's stats, Steven43 suggested that Ryan's recent play was not on par with his earlier play. I countered with stats from his recent play, because I don't agree with Steven43 that Ryan's recent play has been off. Since I was addressing his point about Ryan's recent performance, what other stats could I quote?

[Duvall]

I know K says we had a tough schedule...

Well, let's be clear. No one has to say Duke has had a tough schedule, Duke has played a tough schedule. It's not really up for dispute.

[NSDukeFan]

In another thread I said AR is a top 5 player right now in college and he needs the ball in his hands as much as possible. He is an elite talent along the lines of Dawkins, Hurley, Jayson Williams, Redick and Kyrie and I think he has the ability to carry a team. Keep the ball in AR's hands and his decision making will improve cutting down his turnoves. I agree with everything you said about Rivers.

I said G should start in another thread as well and everybody pretty much shot it down. One reason I think G needs more burn is to reach the ultimate goal, eventually we are going to face long athletic wings like Gilchrist and Barnes (just off the top of my head) that we cant guard. It might be a good time to get his confidence up. Plus I think he can pick up enough garbage hanging around the rim to avg 10 ppg.

And I said maybe bring Seth off the bench and someone said that was lunacy or something to that nature. I still cant figure out why some, well all posters here are married to Seth? If Kyrie dont get hurt last year Seth probly dont play unless its a big lead. If his shot aint falling he is pretty much a liability. He is the perfect match to Vinny "The Microwave" Johnson as a lethal 6 man that can come off the bench and llight it up. Throw him in there and see if its his night and if it aint give him a break. Now before you guys and gals think I am a Seth hater, Im not. I stand by my excuse that if he dont get hurt against Zona last year, we survive that game because he can get hot with the best of them, and go on to win the title. So I love me some Seth Curry but bottom line is, he is a shooter and thats it.

With all that being said, I wouldve said it if we had won. Ive thought this all along. We still are a top 5 team in the nation.
I believe Seth Curry does a lot of things well other than shooting and I would say that after a good game, or after a loss. I actually thought he may have been the team's most effective perimeter defender last night, though that isn't necessarily saying a lot.

Rather than focus on individual players' strengths and weaknesses in this loss, I'm looking at a couple of team-wide issues that are related and, I believe, were the key contributors to last night's poor performance:

1) Perimeter defense remains a major issue. Teams are still getting into the lane and disrupting our defense way too easily. I can't remember the last time we had a defense ranked in the 30s on KenPom. We have one of the best defensive coaches in the history of college basketball. I hope he finds the magic formula to improve our defensive efficiency, because I sure can't see an easy solution that dramatically improves our defense without significantly impacting our offense.

2) We came out looking like we expected to win and, when it became clear after the first 5 minutes of the 2nd half that we weren't going to be able to simply turn it on and make Temple go away, we played panicked. That's a maturity and leadership issue that hopefully we will learn from.

3) Related closely to issue 2: we don't have that clear cut leader who can figuratively smack the rest of the team upside the head and get them focused when needed, or calmed down when needed. We've seen some great leaders at Duke over the years, of all different types. There was Laettner (Darth Vader style leadership); there were coach-on-the-floor types like Grant, Shane, and Jon; and there have been best-guy-on-the-floor-who-also-happens-to-have-the-most-desire types like Nolan his senior year. Watching the team last night it seemed like they really needed someone on the court who could take charge and show everyone else what needed to be done. I'm not sure we've got anyone among the upperclassmen who has the combination of personality and ability to be that guy.

But if I were Coach K, I'd have Miles in my office today, show him tape of how well he played last night, and tell him that if he wants his senior year to be everything it can be, he needs to get nasty, with is own team when needed, and demand that everyone play every game as if they were in the second half of their senior year.
I hope the team does play with more urgency. Does Miles then look at Coach K and say: "then please play me more than 19 minutes if I am dominating?" Of course, not, but it would be a reasonable reply. ;)


I would say Austin could get it to our bigs when he puts pressure on the defense by getting past their first defender. He does have to think about how does the team score versus how do I score. If he could consistently think that way it would result in better opportunities. I am not saying Austin has to look to pass all of the time, just use better judgment as to when he can get to the basket of get fouled versus make a pass to a big or back out for a three.

I would say Quinn also can do that and actually one of his assists last night had him drive towards the basket and throw the ball up for Miles to grab and score.

I don't see the ball handling ability from Seth, Tyler or Andre to be able to make the penetration necessary to get the pass into the bigs. All of those players have difficulty in playmaking and have significant TO issues. That is not to say I think they are bad players, but Seth's primary offensive role is best served as a shooting guard and getting open for the shot. He is a good shooter and often can draw a player off his his feet and get foul shots. Tyler also looks like he can score when open. Both Seth and Tyler are reasonable defenders but give away a lot of size to some guards we play. Andre doesn't appear to have confidence in his ball handling skills and his defense appears spotty.
I don't necessarily agree that our perimeter players have to be able to penetrate to get the ball inside to our bigs, but I agree that unfortunately the team did have a number of turnovers last night while attempting to do that on penetration. The thought was good, but the execution wasn't and unfortunately, Temple's taller perimeter defenders got their hands on some of those passes.

Well, where do i begin? First let me say that our recruiting is telling on us. We are way to homogeneous in player personnel; but that's a moot point right now. I'm about to believe that we should move Aut to the PG position; the kid is strong, fearless and can certainly create his own shot. (I also believe he's gone after this year) The Plums played a heck of a game! Let's hope they keep it up. (player development questions) Cook is okay;still have not seen the talent he is supposed to bring. Tyler is serviceable; not a scorer; but a body man who provides a modicum of toughness, leadership, quickness and strength. Don't know where Ryan Kelly is. He was playing so well earlier in the season; oh well i'm used to our players emerging and fading in big games. Now can you see why i'm tired of our one-dimensional assault of three-pointers? What else is new?
I think you may be on the wrong board. Duke is too homogeneous in player personnel?

Is that the short good ball-handling scoring point guard; bull-dog defensive leader as point guard; little bit bigger combo guard who is a lights out shooter; little bit bigger wing who may have the prettiest jumper in the country and is a great leaper; other freshman wing who has lightening quick first step and is maturing very well into an outstanding player who may be the first freshman to lead Duke in scoring since Johnny Dawkins; freshman taller wing who is a great athlete and has the potential to be an outstanding defender; 6'8 sophomore who has added a lot of strength and seems to be able to provide good intensity, a decent touch on mid-range jumpers and very good offensive rebounding; a big who can shoot the 3 at 6'11 and is gaining confidence putting the ball on the floor from the perimeter with a few post moves; 6'11 rebounding machine who is almost averaging a double double and has learned effective jump hooks and is aggressive posting up; 6'11 senior who is also an outstanding leaper is doing better offensive rebounding than his brother and is starting to relax offensively in addition to his generally solid defensive play?

Duke shot 6-14 on 3-pointers last night and 22-45 on 2 point FG attempts. I don't understand how that would be considered one-dimensional 3-point shooting that would be tiring. I must be missing something.



But Duke big men have always aggressively hedged screens. Remember Zoubek finally figuring out how to it hard without fouling, then spring back to the rim in 2010? That was a big key to him staying on the floor to get all those offensive rebounds. His first 3.5 years, he was a step slow and wound up hip checking the ball-handler or sticking his leg out.

I do believe this is how Duke is coached to play this particular ball-screen. The help guys are supposed to cover the backside and the hedging big is supposed to recover ASAP.

But after we saw them make the underneath play, we should have adjusted both the help (protect the paint, thanks) and the intensity of the hedge (flash up but dont hedge so hard maybe?). Mason can read this better, certainly, but help has to occupy the lane.


A couple things... first off, I completely agree that this is the strategy the bigs are told to employ. When I say it was Mason's fault, I meant that it was the fault of the role that Mason is playing, not that he himself made a bad decision by doing this.

Secondly... there's a minor different in the two plays that are shown. In the one described by Mike Corey, the Temple screener does not actually set a screen. He acts like he is going to set one and then as the ballhandler approaches him he instead cuts toward the basket. I think Mason needs to recognize this and stay with his man rather than trailing the ballhandler.

In the other clip (the one I screenshotted), an actual screen is set. I understand that Mason's job is to flash out in front in order to slow down the ballhandler, but he needs to then immediately get back. As Superdave said, it took Zoubek a long time to learn this but he finally did get the timing down just right. Mason is a lot more athletic than big Z (albeit not quite as big) so there's no reason why he can't do the same thing. It seems though that he has a tendency to stay with the ballhandler much too long. The ballhandler is not a threat at this point, he's well behind the NBA three-point line, so Mason needs to leave him and get back on his man!

Saying it is the fault of the help defense doesn't make sense to me. There are three defenders guarding four guys. There's just no way to keep rotating over. If Austin had moved to cover the middle of the floor (as Mike Corey suggested) then his man would be wide open for a three. If the other post defender comes over (which Mike G does in the screenshotted play) then HIS man is wide open for a dunk (which is what happens).

Sorry for being so negative here. I am by no means an expert, so when I can see these things it just doesn't make sense to me why they keep happening.

I think I agree with Superdave and Urinal Cake (especially on the non-screen) that Mason hedging on screens is exactly what he is supposed to do, but I think (and this is where I could be wrong and Newton14 might be right) that he is supposed to get back to his man ASAP after our guard has been able to get through the screen. This is where Zoubek excelled his senior year.

[flyingdutchdevil]

I think you may be on the wrong board. Duke is too homogeneous in player personnel?

Is that the short good ball-handling scoring point guard; bull-dog defensive leader as point guard; little bit bigger combo guard who is a lights out shooter; little bit bigger wing who may have the prettiest jumper in the country and is a great leaper; other freshman wing who has lightening quick first step and is maturing very well into an outstanding player who may be the first freshman to lead Duke in scoring since Johnny Dawkins; freshman taller wing who is a great athlete and has the potential to be an outstanding defender; 6'8 sophomore who has added a lot of strength and seems to be able to provide good intensity, a decent touch on mid-range jumpers and very good offensive rebounding; a big who can shoot the 3 at 6'11 and is gaining confidence putting the ball on the floor from the perimeter with a few post moves; 6'11 rebounding machine who is almost averaging a double double and has learned effective jump hooks and is aggressive posting up; 6'11 senior who is also an outstanding leaper is doing better offensive rebounding than his brother and is starting to relax offensively in addition to his generally solid defensive play?

I think you're on to something here. We're definitely not homogeneous - maybe we're too heterogeneous. If you mesh Tyler and Quinn, we would probably have one of the best PGs in the country. Seth and Austin - probably the best 2-guard in the country. Andre and Michael - that wouldn't be fair to opposing teams.

I feel that a major problem is there isn't a lot of overlap in terms of skills between a lot of our perimeter players. I feel that the only similarity is the ability for most - it not all - of our guards to shoot the ball from deep.

[jv001]

I think you're on to something here. We're definitely not homogeneous - maybe we're too heterogeneous. If you mesh Tyler and Quinn, we would probably have one of the best PGs in the country. Seth and Austin - probably the best 2-guard in the country. Andre and Michael - that wouldn't be fair to opposing teams.

I feel that a major problem is there isn't a lot of overlap in terms of skills between a lot of our perimeter players. I feel that the only similarity is the ability for most - it not all - of our guards to shoot the ball from deep.

Well maybe they are similar in that they are not very good on the ball defenders. I do think they well get better. GoDuke!

[superdave]

Three practices today? Emotional meeting last night? (http://dukeland.wordpress.com/2012/01/05/how-duke-is-responding-to-last-nights-loss-three-a-day-practice/)

Watch out, Ramblin' Wreck.

[tendev]

And the phrase "shooting the lights" out implies that the shots were made with someone in their jersey.

Curious as to where you came up with that idea. I don't think it has anything to do with "someone in their jersey". For me, shooting lights out is shooting 60 percent or more. Also, shooting 50 percent on 3s = shooting 75 percent on 2s.

It is my own perception. To me it implies that the team shot well and that there was nothing the defense to could do about it. In other words, our team played great defense and the other team was just could not miss. College players can hit jumpers all night long if they are not well defended. They certainly don't miss lay ups and dunks. I don't think we defended well and that is why Temple's shooting percentage was so high. I don't think that Temple's high shooting percentage was an aberration because it was due to our defense rather than their great shooting.

[wilko]

Three practices today? Emotional meeting last night? (http://dukeland.wordpress.com/2012/01/05/how-duke-is-responding-to-last-nights-loss-three-a-day-practice/)

Watch out, Ramblin' Wreck.

YIKES!!!
That's a big serving of Rump Roast Extra rare..
I guess we'll see who comes out locker room... Scared boys or PO'ed men.

I hope our on-court leaders have emerged!

[heyman25]

Dawkins is not hurt or in the doghouse, he just is not performing well. He is still a one trick pony after 3 years at Duke.

[ScreechTDX1847]

It is my own perception. To me it implies that the team shot well and that there was nothing the defense to could do about it. In other words, our team played great defense and the other team was just could not miss. College players can hit jumpers all night long if they are not well defended. They certainly don't miss lay ups and dunks. I don't think we defended well and that is why Temple's shooting percentage was so high. I don't think that Temple's high shooting percentage was an aberration because it was due to our defense rather than their great shooting.

It was a bit of both. They took some TOUGH contested jumpers and nailed them (7-8 times). You don't shoot 55%+ without some good looks for sure but last night those boys couldn't miss.

All in all we were still outplayed but whenver I see a shooting % that high I know that a team was pretty hot. Look at our "bad" losses over the last few years and check out the shooting %. It always seems to be a bit of an anomoly, does it not?

[Billy Dat]

Luke Winn's take on trying to explain how our defense has slid:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/luke_winn/01/05/power.rankings/index.html

"It's all too predictable to sound the alarm bells on a team after an upset loss, such as the one Duke suffered at Temple on Wednesday, but I'm going to do that to a degree. (Sorry!) The Blue Devils are still the second-best team in the ACC and should be a top-two seed in the NCAAs. But so far, they're responsible for the worst defensive-efficiency ranking of any Duke team in the kenpom era (2003-present), having dropped from fourth in '09-10 and eighth in '10-11 to 32nd this season. That's not bad for most teams, but it's well below the Duke standard. Losing Nolan Smith and Kyle Singer has hurt, as has the fact that their three primary guards, Seth Curry, Austin Rivers and Andre Dawkins, are not exactly defensive-minded. My dig through Synergy Sports Technology's stats yielded two noticeable ways in which the Blue Devils are struggling to contain opponents:
• Their transition defense has dropped from 0.835 PPP (which put them in the 95th percentile last year) to 1.000 PPP (in the 64th percentile).
• They've struggled to contain pick-and-roll ballhandlers, too, going from 0.638 PPP (90th percentile) to 0.822 PPP (28th percentile)."

[superdave]

Luke Winn's take on trying to explain how our defense has slid:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/luke_winn/01/05/power.rankings/index.html

"It's all too predictable to sound the alarm bells on a team after an upset loss, such as the one Duke suffered at Temple on Wednesday, but I'm going to do that to a degree. (Sorry!) The Blue Devils are still the second-best team in the ACC and should be a top-two seed in the NCAAs. But so far, they're responsible for the worst defensive-efficiency ranking of any Duke team in the kenpom era (2003-present), having dropped from fourth in '09-10 and eighth in '10-11 to 32nd this season. That's not bad for most teams, but it's well below the Duke standard. Losing Nolan Smith and Kyle Singer has hurt, as has the fact that their three primary guards, Seth Curry, Austin Rivers and Andre Dawkins, are not exactly defensive-minded. My dig through Synergy Sports Technology's stats yielded two noticeable ways in which the Blue Devils are struggling to contain opponents:
• Their transition defense has dropped from 0.835 PPP (which put them in the 95th percentile last year) to 1.000 PPP (in the 64th percentile).
• They've struggled to contain pick-and-roll ballhandlers, too, going from 0.638 PPP (90th percentile) to 0.822 PPP (28th percentile)."

Excellent find. We've been over this pick and roll issue a lot today.

But transition defense is a concern. One way to improve that is for our big guys to get after the offensive boards enough to make the other team crash the boards more, slowing them down and limiting fast break opportunities. Another way to do this is to reduce live ball turnovers. Quinn did that against weaker competition. Hope he can do it in the conference, and quickly.

[Kedsy]

They've struggled to contain pick-and-roll ballhandlers, too, going from 0.638 PPP (90th percentile) to 0.822 PPP (28th percentile)."

I've noticed this. Our guards don't seem to be strong enough to fight past the screen, and our bigs aren't quick enough to guard the ballhandler on the switch. It happened a couple times to Ryan last night and the little guy zipped right by him.

[tendev]

It was a bit of both. They took some TOUGH contested jumpers and nailed them (7-8 times). You don't shoot 55%+ without some good looks for sure but last night those boys couldn't miss.

All in all we were still outplayed but whenver I see a shooting % that high I know that a team was pretty hot. Look at our "bad" losses over the last few years and check out the shooting %. It always seems to be a bit of an anomoly, does it not?

My unstated point is that this was not a bad loss and that Temple won, not because they shot the lights out, but because they outplayed us and were able to beat our guards and also force us into turnovers. Those guys are a good, solid NCAA team and we just were not ready for them.

[wilko]

I've noticed this. Our guards don't seem to be strong enough to fight past the screen, and our bigs aren't quick enough to guard the ballhandler on the switch. It happened a couple times to Ryan last night and the little guy zipped right by him.

And this is where I buy into Kedsys earlier observation that Michael Gbinije could carve out a role on this team this year.
Makes sense to me.

[Wildcat]

I don't understand why so many of us seem surprised we lossed to this unranked Temple squad. We have glaring weaknesses that are fairly easy to exploit. We will win some games; especially when we are hot from the perimeter. But if these losses alarm you or catch you by surprise; my friend you need to take off the blue-colored sunglasses and step into reality. Dre, is not being coached-up simple as that.

[wilko]

Dre, is not being coached-up simple as that.

One man did not cost us the game. Overall team D was a bigger issue.
Our perimeter players were not ready to be banged on. None of them dealt with the pressure very well.

[MCFinARL]

Dawkins is not hurt or in the doghouse, he just is not performing well. He is still a one trick pony after 3 years at Duke.

You know this how?

[jv001]

I don't understand why so many of us seem surprised we lossed to this unranked Temple squad. We have glaring weaknesses that are fairly easy to exploit. We will win some games; especially when we are hot from the perimeter. But if these losses alarm you or catch you by surprise; my friend you need to take off the blue-colored sunglasses and step into reality. Dre, is not being coached-up simple as that.

While I was reading your post, I was agreeing about our weakness on defense. Then I got to the last statement. Just how do you know Andre is not beinng coached up. Are you at the practice sessions? If so, then you have knowledge that most of us don't have. Some guys just are not step up players that can create shots for themselves. Andre so far falls into that category. He is not an above average defender and not a strong rebounder from the 3 position. However I'd noticed improvement from him until last night and he like all the other guards did not play well. I've not given up on Andre but I'm also not going to blame his shortcomings on coaching. GoDuke!

[Duke71]

Hey Kedsy:

Let's give the barbs a rest for a moment (me included). BTW, sorry I brought the "playing the game stuff" up in the first place because I recognize as well as anyone that even MJ's multiple varsity letters at UNC and later mega-success at Chicago by no means automatically translated to his excellence in player acquisition, team development, and won-loss performance in his subsequent program roles at Washington or Charlotte. I never was in his league, though I played him in a pick-up game once and he embarrassed me badly.

An over-reliance on stats makes me nervous for very particular reasons, also . It's not so much an "old school" thing vs. a "new school" delineation for me as it is the undeniable number crunching ability for computers to deconstruct almost everything in a timely and cost-effective manner today. Just because you can analyze of essentially everything of what happened that way doesn't per se translate to useful player adjustments in real time on the court or even in practice in between.

The magic a coach creates is....well, just plain magical. Always has been. I think there is very little argument on this board that Coach K has been successfully exercising such magic for a long time now. Apart from any insights from the stats - and I'll be unreserved about saying that you, Kedsy, have mined some thought provoking linkages with your stat focus - there is still an eyeball test that fans - and even players - rely heavily on in shaping their decisions. Those on the court decisions trump everything else. Like it or not.

Even good trial lawyers recognize that juries factor in such "eyeball tests" and all the expert witnesses and hard facts often can't trump the common sense that emanates from these eyeball observations.

Current Duke prof, Dr. Ariely, addresses the concepts of such arguable non-statistical "irrationality" in his seminal book "Predictably Irrational" and likely also does so day-to-day in his classes. Stats often compel us to come to terms with mathematically measurable truths, but we still often exercise our amazing capacity to act predictably irrational.

So what does all this mean for this year's team? I'm as uncertain as I think many of the invested readers on this board are on that matter at this moment. My personal eyeball test says that this team has awesome potential. We have a big man presence (MP1, MP2, RK) this year that we've wished for so many other years. The shooting potential of multiple outside players is undeniable (SC, Dre, AR). The penetrate-at-will on/off switch that AR has is downright enviable. The role players have multiple skills that can be deployed at many crucial moments. Team grumping about playing time hasn't been an issue that has bubbled to any public awareness, as of yet. Yes, the free-throw shooting is sometimes freaky and at times just plain scary (but was I pleasantly shocked that MP2 drained both of his free throws late in the game? Hell yes! I was screaming into the TV set !!), but I wouldn't trade this team's chances for grabbing the golden ring with any of our previous National Championship teams at this point of the season. The core elements are there.

There's a helluva lotta work that still needs to happen before we can gloat about such prospects, but the eyeball test says the elements are there. I'm not an over-the-top religious zealot, but there are lots of legitimate reasons to believe that this is true. And I also fully believe, Kedsy, that you will eventually unearth the stats that will confirm that. Go Duke. Make It Happen.

[sagegrouse]

Dre, is not being coached-up simple as that.

Lessee, as coaching resources at Duke, there are K, Collins, Wojo, Capel, Dir. of Basketball Ops Spatola, and Spec. Asst. Nate James. Moreover, all but Nate James were college guards.

There are 13 players on the roster -- 12 on scholarship.

Now, given these coaches, how much time is available for one-on-one instruction of each player of the 20 hours of practice permitted? Maybe 8-10 hours per week in season plus additional time permitted by the rules in the offseason? Why would you think that Dre is not getting enough coaching? Or why would you think Dre is getting bad coaching, when K is acknowledged as one of the greatest coaches in history, and he can have virtually anyone he wants as an assistant coach?

sagegrouse

[Kedsy]

Hey Kedsy:

Let's give the barbs a rest for a moment (me included). BTW, sorry I brought the "playing the game stuff" up in the first place because I recognize as well as anyone that even MJ's multiple varsity letters at UNC and later mega-success at Chicago by no means automatically translated to his excellence in player acquisition, team development, and won-loss performance in his subsequent program roles at Washington or Charlotte. I never was in his league, though I played him in a pick-up game once and he embarrassed me badly.

An over-reliance on stats makes me nervous for very particular reasons, also . It's not so much an "old school" thing vs. a "new school" delineation for me as it is the undeniable number crunching ability for computers to deconstruct almost everything in a timely and cost-effective manner today. Just because you can analyze of essentially everything of what happened that way doesn't per se translate to useful player adjustments in real time on the court or even in practice in between.

The magic a coach creates is....well, just plain magical. Always has been. I think there is very little argument on this board that Coach K has been successfully exercising such magic for a long time now. Apart from any insights from the stats - and I'll be unreserved about saying that you, Kedsy, have mined some thought provoking linkages with your stat focus - there is still an eyeball test that fans - and even players - rely heavily on in shaping their decisions. Those on the court decisions trump everything else. Like it or not.

Even good trial lawyers recognize that juries factor in such "eyeball tests" and all the expert witnesses and hard facts often can't trump the common sense that emanates from these eyeball observations.

Current Duke prof, Dr. Ariely, addresses the concepts of such arguable non-statistical "irrationality" in his seminal book "Predictably Irrational" and likely also does so day-to-day in his classes. Stats often compel us to come to terms with mathematically measurable truths, but we still often exercise our amazing capacity to act predictably irrational.

So what does all this mean for this year's team? I'm as uncertain as I think many of the invested readers on this board are on that matter at this moment. My personal eyeball test says that this team has awesome potential. We have a big man presence (MP1, MP2, RK) this year that we've wished for so many other years. The shooting potential of multiple outside players is undeniable (SC, Dre, AR). The penetrate-at-will on/off switch that AR has is downright enviable. The role players have multiple skills that can be deployed at many crucial moments. Team grumping about playing time hasn't been an issue that has bubbled to any public awareness, as of yet. Yes, the free-throw shooting is sometimes freaky and at times just plain scary (but was I pleasantly shocked that MP2 drained both of his free throws late in the game? Hell yes! I was screaming into the TV set !!), but I wouldn't trade this team's chances for grabbing the golden ring with any of our previous National Championship teams at this point of the season. The core elements are there.

There's a helluva lotta work that still needs to happen before we can gloat about such prospects, but the eyeball test says the elements are there. I'm not an over-the-top religious zealot, but there are lots of legitimate reasons to believe that this is true. And I also fully believe, Kedsy, that you will eventually unearth the stats that will confirm that. Go Duke. Make It Happen.

OK. I understand and I agree with everything you say here. I have never and will never be at your level, but I currently play organized pickup ball five times a week. I know there are a lot of aspects to the game that you have to see or feel or do in order to understand. I believe that there is a very large psychological aspect to coaching and playing basketball. I greatly appreciate the fundamentals.

I don't think the game is played with stats. I don't believe I over-rely on them. But I do think that examining and learning about statistics like offensive efficiency has given me a greater understanding of how offense works. There are a lot of ways to win. In 2010, for example, we made up for somewhat mediocre shooting and no inside scoring by not turning the ball over and getting lots and lots of offensive rebounds. But this year's team shoots so well, we don't necessarily have to protect the ball or clean the offensive glass quite so much as that team did (although obviously it wouldn't hurt).

I agree this team has great potential. I'm a bit nervous about our defense. I'm not really so concerned about our offense, although obviously we had a few problems last night. I would like it if we had fewer turnovers, and I wouldn't at all mind if our assists exceeded our turnovers, but I don't think it's a fatal flaw if they don't. We just have to make up for it elsewhere, on this team by good shooting and getting to the free throw line (where we'll be even more efficient if Mason can get his head straight and hit 60% of his free throws). I'm perfectly content to watch the team and discuss it's progress and hope this year's Duke team can get to the pinnacle we all want them to reach.

[Duke71]

I don't yet have a much-sought-after "gut feel" for how this is going to happen for us this year, but I'll bet Coach K does. Never played for the man, didn't get thrilled when he was chosen for the job, but I've never been happier to have been wrong about him getting that job.

I've watched the last couple of Duke victories against Temple in the Temple Prez's sky box and haven't liked the experience in the least, even tho' we won both times. For one thing, you're there rooting for the "wrong" team and for another, the view from up there absolutely sucks. If you want to really see what's happening on the court, you migrate to one of the TV's and the last time I was there they weren't big screens. My big screen at home is a much, much happier experience for me....win or lose.

I think the world of Temple's Fran Dunphy and did long before I realized the close connection between him and Coach K that stretched back so many decades. I was just as wrong about Fran's recent success prospects at Temple as I was about Coach K's legendary success at Duke. I sincerely doubted that Fran would be able to get his inner city players at Temple to adopt the principles that were so highly successful for him at Penn. I was wrong. Maybe it's something about how they train those guys at West Point? Who knows? They apparently do what they do very well.

BTW, Coach Daly - Coach Bubas' assistant at Duke for years in the 60's - enjoyed some well deserved success at Penn as well, back in the day before he went onto greater success at NBA's Detroit and as the original coach of the original "Olympic Dream Team".

So, in an odd sort of way, I felt happy for Fran about this game. Coach K's wheels were already turning about how to leverage the outcome into a much needed learning experience for our team. It's been said by others on this bulletin board before me and I agree with them....I wouldn't want to be enduring practice at Cameron this week.

My personal, private hope is that MP1 "unleashes himself" (to use Skip Bayless's overused ESPN Tim Tebow comment) to become the beast that apparently everybody recognizes him to be during practice. You're absolutely right about the psychological aspect to this nonsense, Kedsy....It's there. It's undeniable. Let's hope it leads to a 5th Championship.

[Newton_14]

A couple things... first off, I completely agree that this is the strategy the bigs are told to employ. When I say it was Mason's fault, I meant that it was the fault of the role that Mason is playing, not that he himself made a bad decision by doing this.

Secondly... there's a minor different in the two plays that are shown. In the one described by Mike Corey, the Temple screener does not actually set a screen. He acts like he is going to set one and then as the ballhandler approaches him he instead cuts toward the basket. I think Mason needs to recognize this and stay with his man rather than trailing the ballhandler.

In the other clip (the one I screenshotted), an actual screen is set. I understand that Mason's job is to flash out in front in order to slow down the ballhandler, but he needs to then immediately get back. As Superdave said, it took Zoubek a long time to learn this but he finally did get the timing down just right. Mason is a lot more athletic than big Z (albeit not quite as big) so there's no reason why he can't do the same thing. It seems though that he has a tendency to stay with the ballhandler much too long. The ballhandler is not a threat at this point, he's well behind the NBA three-point line, so Mason needs to leave him and get back on his man!

Saying it is the fault of the help defense doesn't make sense to me. There are three defenders guarding four guys. There's just no way to keep rotating over. If Austin had moved to cover the middle of the floor (as Mike Corey suggested) then his man would be wide open for a three. If the other post defender comes over (which Mike G does in the screenshotted play) then HIS man is wide open for a dunk (which is what happens).

Sorry for being so negative here. I am by no means an expert, so when I can see these things it just doesn't make sense to me why they keep happening.

First, I don't feel you are being too negative. I did feel you sort of unfairly pinned the breakdown on Mason, but at any rate, I see this as good discussion. The two plays evolved slightly different, but started the same, and where I differ with some, is with the start of the play. Like everything within Duke's defense and offense, it was a "read the play and react" situation. If the ball handler uses the screen, Mason's job there is to hedge him out high forcing him away from the basket towards halfcourt to disrupt the play and push the guard further out than he wants to go. (In that scenario, Mason would release his man to a help defender, then recover once the hedge ended). But, on both plays the guard sat on the play refusing the screen. In that scenario, the Duke big, in this case Mason, has the option to join Tyler and trap the ball handler in the corner, or release the ball handler back to Tyler and retreat to his man.

In both cases Mason read the play and decided to trap (not a bad idea given the score, time left, Duke needing to force turnovers). I do feel both traps were not nearly as strong as they could/should have been. That's on Tyler and Mason. You made the decision to trap, so do it aggressively and pin the ball-handler in the corner. Yell at him, wave your arms, take away his sight lines, and either force the turnover or a timeout. They were too passive both times.

So, the trap is weak, and Fernandez "takes his talents" behind the back, :), which means the help defenders have to kick into action and hold down the fort long enough to prevent a basket until the defense can "recover". "Help and Recover" is what K's defense is predicated on. As Mr Corey so eloquently stated in his article, when they do it correctly, it is poetry in motion. It may seem unfair that it is now "3 defending 4", but with hard work, determination, and moving one's feet quickly enough, it can be done. However, if the help defenders start in the wrong position, they have zero chance of execution. Austin should have had one foot in the lane watching the ball and his man. Ryan was a step late, and should have cut off the big that caught the ball, basically at the catch. Seth was too high beyond the top of the lane. All were toast, due to being out of position to begin with, as depending on how things evolve, it may mean all 3 help defenders leaving their man to pick up their buddies man, until full recovery is made. On that play, after the weak trap, the first line of help failed (Ryan), as did the second line of help based on where the ball went (Austin), and Temple scored on a layup off one pass.

Credit Fran Dunphy for great game planning. The Duke team defense is susceptible to being spread out as it forces the help defenders to cover a lot of ground. I always thought Gary Williams devised good schemes that would put a lot of stress on the Duke defensive system, and he had some success with that, and he did not always spread them out to accomplish it either, which was even more impressive. More often than not though, it works.

It was just a bad night for sure. After 24 hours, my initial thoughts have not changed. Lack of focus, sloppy play, lack of hustle, missed chippies, bad defense like the above, etc. After seeing Mike C's article about 3 practices and two heated meetings last night and this morning, I suspect all of the above has been addressed, and by now, whatever they ate today has likely exited their bodies and not in the normal way.:)

I suppose the words "on the line" came out of K's mouth more than a few times in those practices today...:)

[taiw93]

It is definitely worth noting that KenPom's rankings, as well as the rule of thumb about the vast majority of recent NCAA champions being in the Kenpom's top 7 in both offensive and defensive efficiency, were just about the only source that predicted Duke's championship in 2010 (correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe he had us ranked #1 overall heading into the tourney that year). And, in this case, I do believe that the stats and accompanying explanation that Luke Winn offers accomplish the purpose of statistics that tommy proposed in the "Charting our defense" thread: confirming naked-eye observations. Looking back on the Temple game, I definitely do recall an unusually high transition success rate for Temple, as well as poor pick-and-roll D, both of which, as others have mentioned, seem to be related to the relatively small size (both height and strength-wise) of our guard (1-3) positions.

With that said, I'm wondering if those on the board more well-versed in basketball strategy than I am can answer this for me. Would it perhaps be wise to instruct our bigs (namely Miles, Mason, and Ryan) to do less hedging and switching on screens, therefore anchoring them more securely in the post? I would think that doing so would allow us to take advantage of the bigs' strong shot-blocking/altering ability and negate their relatively poor lateral quickness, and in turn allow the guards to focus less on staying completely in front of their men and more on forcing them into tougher shots and angles down low (negating THEIR lack of lateral quickness and length), thus making drivers easy prey for our shot-blockers in the post. Less switching would also, I imagine, make it easier to defend pick-and-rolls more effectively.

[devildeac]

First, I don't feel you are being too negative. I did feel you sort of unfairly pinned the breakdown on Mason, but at any rate, I see this as good discussion. The two plays evolved slightly different, but started the same, and where I differ with some, is with the start of the play. Like everything within Duke's defense and offense, it was a "read the play and react" situation. If the ball handler uses the screen, Mason's job there is to hedge him out high forcing him away from the basket towards halfcourt to disrupt the play and push the guard further out than he wants to go. (In that scenario, Mason would release his man to a help defender, then recover once the hedge ended). But, on both plays the guard sat on the play refusing the screen. In that scenario, the Duke big, in this case Mason, has the option to join Tyler and trap the ball handler in the corner, or release the ball handler back to Tyler and retreat to his man.

In both cases Mason read the play and decided to trap (not a bad idea given the score, time left, Duke needing to force turnovers). I do feel both traps were not nearly as strong as they could/should have been. That's on Tyler and Mason. You made the decision to trap, so do it aggressively and pin the ball-handler in the corner. Yell at him, wave your arms, take away his sight lines, and either force the turnover or a timeout. They were too passive both times.

So, the trap is weak, and Fernandez "takes his talents" behind the back, :), which means the help defenders have to kick into action and hold down the fort long enough to prevent a basket until the defense can "recover". "Help and Recover" is what K's defense is predicated on. As Mr Corey so eloquently stated in his article, when they do it correctly, it is poetry in motion. It may seem unfair that it is now "3 defending 4", but with hard work, determination, and moving one's feet quickly enough, it can be done. However, if the help defenders start in the wrong position, they have zero chance of execution. Austin should have had one foot in the lane watching the ball and his man. Ryan was a step late, and should have cut off the big that caught the ball, basically at the catch. Seth was too high beyond the top of the lane. All were toast, due to being out of position to begin with, as depending on how things evolve, it may mean all 3 help defenders leaving their man to pick up their buddies man, until full recovery is made. On that play, after the weak trap, the first line of help failed (Ryan), as did the second line of help based on where the ball went (Austin), and Temple scored on a layup off one pass.

Credit Fran Dunphy for great game planning. The Duke team defense is susceptible to being spread out as it forces the help defenders to cover a lot of ground. I always thought Gary Williams devised good schemes that would put a lot of stress on the Duke defensive system, and he had some success with that, and he did not always spread them out to accomplish it either, which was even more impressive. More often than not though, it works.

It was just a bad night for sure. After 24 hours, my initial thoughts have not changed. Lack of focus, sloppy play, lack of hustle, missed chippies, bad defense like the above, etc. After seeing Mike C's article about 3 practices and two heated meetings last night and this morning, I suspect all of the above has been addressed, and by now, whatever they ate today has likely exited their bodies and not in the normal way.:)

I suppose the words "on the line" came out of K's mouth more than a few times in those practices today...:)

I'll bet a few other words came out of K's mouth during the 3 practices today, none of which are safe to include in this post if I wish to maintain posting privileges here:o.

Good summary, BTW, Newt.

[#1Duke]

Coach K has to make some adjustments and get more out of the Bigs.
No mystery here. Temple had big fast guards that hounded our guards and kept them out of their usual game.
We had the advantage inside and didn't capitalize on it.
When we match up with a team such as Temple, our Bigs need to shine.
I didn't care for what I saw in the last 5 minutes of the game. Seemed some attitudes needed adjusted.

[tommy]

Coach K has to make some adjustments and get more out of the Bigs.
We had the advantage inside and didn't capitalize on it.
When we match up with a team such as Temple, our Bigs need to shine.

So the Plumlees combined 33 points on 15 of 24 shooting, coupled with 17 rebounds, 10 of which were offensive, and 4 blocked shots doesn't constitute "shining" for you?

[Mike Corey]

Terrific post from Newt.

Here's what gets lost in our ruminations: these are corrective problems.

Is it frustrating as a fan that they haven't been mastered already? Of course. It's more frustrating as a player and coaching staff.

This Duke squad is young and with just one senior. I'll tell you that it is yet to go through the fires and forge itself. You need adversity to become better. But we have to come together. We did not see a team that is together against Temple. Even had we won, I think that was evident--not in body language, not in reading Twitter messages after the game, but in watching how Duke's players were watching the game from the bench with two minutes left, but in observing how the players treated one another in the most pivotal moments of the game, by seeing how little communication and teamwork was demonstrated on both sides of the ball when the pressure had been turned up.

There is no one better at building teams than Coach K. Not in any sport. He's working hard to make that happen, but a coach can only do so much: which player or players will step up?

[#1Duke]

No, not in this game. I saw points left on the rim, put backs missed and rebounds missed. The numbers you list would be great for ONE Big, spread out over two it really isn't that impressive.
In THIS game.

[ncexnyc]

So the Plumlees combined 33 points on 15 of 24 shooting, coupled with 17 rebounds, 10 of which were offensive, and 4 blocked shots doesn't constitute "shining" for you?
Maybe he wanted them to go supernova. All kidding aside they could have had even bigger numbers had the team focused more on feeding them. As others have said, we're left scratching our heads looking at the fact Miles only logged 19 minutes of playing time.

[tommy]

Terrific post from Newt.

Here's what gets lost in our ruminations: these are corrective problems.

Is it frustrating as a fan that they haven't been mastered already? Of course. It's more frustrating as a player and coaching staff.

This Duke squad is young and with just one senior. I'll tell you that it is yet to go through the fires and forge itself. You need adversity to become better. But we have to come together. We did not see a team that is together against Temple. Even had we won, I think that was evident--not in body language, not in reading Twitter messages after the game, but in watching how Duke's players were watching the game from the bench with two minutes left, but in observing how the players treated one another in the most pivotal moments of the game, by seeing how little communication and teamwork was demonstrated on both sides of the ball when the pressure had been turned up.

There is no one better at building teams than Coach K. Not in any sport. He's working hard to make that happen, but a coach can only do so much: which player or players will step up?

You're 100% right. I think it's going to (have to) be Miles Plumlee. In my experience in sports, it's very hard for a guy who is not one of your premiere players to be a leader that everyone will follow. Not impossible, but it is rare. So as much as Tyler may bring in this area, if he doesn't have the true respect deep down of his teammates (and I'm not saying he does or doesn't -- how would I know?) he can't really be that special type of leader. IMO.

Miles's game really seems to be coming on, at both ends of the floor. He's becoming a real force. He's the senior. He's been through 3+ years of the wars and has seen a lot. It sure seems like he has the capacity for leadership, the "fire in the belly" more so than his brother, for example, and more so than Seth or Andre too. Ryan could be the guy and I thought I saw him starting to embrace the role in Maui, but I think he may be worried about his own game right now while Miles seems to be really taking off. The rest of the guys are just too young.

So, Miles.

[#1Duke]

Maybe he wanted them to go supernova. All kidding aside they could have had even bigger numbers had the team focused more on feeding them. As others have said, we're left scratching our heads looking at the fact Miles only logged 19 minutes of playing time.

EXACTLY. Facing a team that had big, quick, aggressive guards something else needed to be done. Miles only playing 19 minutes is confusing.... not feeding them more in such a situation is confusing.
Yes, I would have liked them go "supernova" under the circumstances.

[Kedsy]

It is definitely worth noting that KenPom's rankings, as well as the rule of thumb about the vast majority of recent NCAA champions being in the Kenpom's top 7 in both offensive and defensive efficiency, were just about the only source that predicted Duke's championship in 2010 (correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe he had us ranked #1 overall heading into the tourney that year).

KenPom did have us ranked #1 going into the 2010 NCAAT. Sagarin (predictor) had us #2 (but by only 0.08 (95.08 to 95.00), so it was pretty darn close to #1), and RPI ranked us #3. But before you go and anoint Pomeroy as a Prophet, he ranked the other three Final Four teams in 2010 as #8, #24, and #26, going into the NCAAT. Last season, he ranked UConn #17 before the NCAAT (#21 in offense and #31 in defense, so nowhere near top 7), and the other three Final Four teams were ranked #7, #54, and #84. His system is good, but it's far from a perfect predictor.

[UrinalCake]

Thanks for the explanation Newton_14. I agree that the help-and-recover can be really effective when executed correctly, but the defenders need to all be on the same page, realize who is going to switch to whose man, and be one step ahead of the play as it develops. When it doesn't all come together then it just looks like we're a step behind where the ball is going and are scrambling to catch up.

Also a great point about our help defenders needing to cheat inside a little more. Temple did a great job of spreading the floor, you can see in the stills that some of their players are well outside the NBA three-point line, but there's no need to actually guard them that far out. I remember Wisconsin doing the same thing to us a few years ago, and NC State that same season. In their case they had bigs who could shoot the three and so it was easy to spread us out and really tough for us to play help defense.

taiw93, the flip side of this - having our big guy just stay back in the lane and not hedge at all - is that our guard has to get around that screen. If he's left all alone and gets picked off by the screen, then the ball handler has an open lane to the basket. And if he goes under the screen then the ballhandler gets an open three. Those aren't good options either.

On a totally different note, I saw that Mason was 2-2 from the line and Austin hit his first 4 before missing his last two. It's unfortunate that those misses came when we really needed them to have any hope of a comeback, but at least this we can see some semblence of improvement.

[hustleplays]

Thanks for the explanation Newton_14. I agree that the help-and-recover can be really effective when executed correctly, but the defenders need to all be on the same page, realize who is going to switch to whose man, and be one step ahead of the play as it develops. When it doesn't all come together then it just looks like we're a step behind where the ball is going and are scrambling to catch up.

Also a great point about our help defenders needing to cheat inside a little more. Temple did a great job of spreading the floor, you can see in the stills that some of their players are well outside the NBA three-point line, but there's no need to actually guard them that far out. I remember Wisconsin doing the same thing to us a few years ago, and NC State that same season. In their case they had bigs who could shoot the three and so it was easy to spread us out and really tough for us to play help defense.

taiw93, the flip side of this - having our big guy just stay back in the lane and not hedge at all - is that our guard has to get around that screen. If he's left all alone and gets picked off by the screen, then the ball handler has an open lane to the basket. And if he goes under the screen then the ballhandler gets an open three. Those aren't good options either.

On a totally different note, I saw that Mason was 2-2 from the line and Austin hit his first 4 before missing his last two. It's unfortunate that those misses came when we really needed them to have any hope of a comeback, but at least this we can see some semblence of improvement.

I think our not-too-quick Bigs do hedge too much, and yes, there are downsides to not hedging. With this team, I think we ought to play more zone. Will be fun to play against Syracuse more often and watch how it's done. :(

[trailblaze]

Is it just me or does there seem to be a lack of smiles on this team. Not just in the recent loss but I don't sense much joy from the players as I have seen in teams of the past. The guards tend to play as if they are one missed shot or lapse on defense from being relegated to the bench. I understand players don't have to all "love" each other to play well and be successful, but this is not the pros. Curry and Dawkins both give off a vibe that is very different from that seen early in the year. On a separate note what about a lineup of Mason,Miles,Kelly, Curry and Cook. Kelly's versatility would allow him to play more out on the wing and be a matchup nightmare. AR would not be happy of course but could bring energy off the bench.

[jv001]

Is it just me or does there seem to be a lack of smiles on this team. Not just in the recent loss but I don't sense much joy from the players as I have seen in teams of the past. The guards tend to play as if they are one missed shot or lapse on defense from being relegated to the bench. I understand players don't have to all "love" each other to play well and be successful, but this is not the pros. Curry and Dawkins both give off a vibe that is very different from that seen early in the year. On a separate note what about a lineup of Mason,Miles,Kelly, Curry and Cook. Kelly's versatility would allow him to play more out on the wing and be a matchup nightmare. AR would not be happy of course but could bring energy off the bench.

I've noticed the lack of smiles as well. Especially from; Austin, Andre, Seth and at times Quinn. I don't know is it's playing time issues, being taken out or from making bad plays. I believe this leads to lack of communication on the court, both on offense and especially defense. As for Austin not starting, I wouldn't look for that to happen and I don't think Coach K will start all 3 of the bigs. By rotating them, we've pretty much stayed out of foul trouble this year. GoDuke!

[cspan37421]

AR would not be happy of course but could bring energy off the bench.

AR is already not happy. Have you noticed his demeanor? Something tells me the Bobby Hurley Video Treatment wouldn't cure him.

As juxtaposition, remember Kyrie cheering on his teammates through his injury? yeah.

Remember K's talk about the fist? We need to see that kind of togetherness. A band of brothers, not a collection of free agents. Put that way, it should be no surprise which two players have the best chemistry on the team.

[MChambers]

Is it just me or does there seem to be a lack of smiles on this team. Not just in the recent loss but I don't sense much joy from the players as I have seen in teams of the past. The guards tend to play as if they are one missed shot or lapse on defense from being relegated to the bench. I understand players don't have to all "love" each other to play well and be successful, but this is not the pros. Curry and Dawkins both give off a vibe that is very different from that seen early in the year. On a separate note what about a lineup of Mason,Miles,Kelly, Curry and Cook. Kelly's versatility would allow him to play more out on the wing and be a matchup nightmare. AR would not be happy of course but could bring energy off the bench.
Who would Kelly guard? You'll never see all three of the bigs on the court at the same time.

[Kedsy]

Who would Kelly guard? You'll never see all three of the bigs on the court at the same time.

I agree. He couldn't guard Temple's 6'6" PF very well. I love Ryan's game, but I doubt he's quick enough to guard a real SF.

[roywhite]

AR is already not happy. Have you noticed his demeanor? Something tells me the Bobby Hurley Video Treatment wouldn't cure him.

As juxtaposition, remember Kyrie cheering on his teammates through his injury? yeah.

Remember K's talk about the fist? We need to see that kind of togetherness. A band of brothers, not a collection of free agents. Put that way, it should be no surprise which two players have the best chemistry on the team.

Based on the reports of multiple practices and team meetings yesterday after the loss, I'm assuming these concerns are being squarely addressed.
We'll have to see what changes come about, but I think there is value in playing a tough road game before the conference season starts to gauge where the team is.

[jv001]

AR is already not happy. Have you noticed his demeanor? Something tells me the Bobby Hurley Video Treatment wouldn't cure him.

As juxtaposition, remember Kyrie cheering on his teammates through his injury? yeah.

Remember K's talk about the fist? We need to see that kind of togetherness. A band of brothers, not a collection of free agents. Put that way, it should be no surprise which two players have the best chemistry on the team.

Wonderful point regarding Kyrie. What a great attitude. Look at Marshall this year the way he cheers the team on. He has not bought into the freshmen against the other guys. I'm not saying that is the case with this recruited class, but sometimes it happens when the freshmen are very talented and are 4-5 star recruits.

[Duvall]

AR is already not happy. Have you noticed his demeanor? Something tells me the Bobby Hurley Video Treatment wouldn't cure him.

How do you know this, exactly? Please don't tell me you are basing this on television closeups.

[homebre]

We could be reading into their expressions too much. What we may be seeing as unhappiness may actually be their expressions of seriousness or toughness. Remember most are only freshman and sophs.

[jv001]

We could be reading into their expressions too much. What we may be seeing as unhappiness may actually be their expressions of seriousness or toughness. Remember most are only freshman and sophs.

This could very well be the case, but can you imagine if Rivers were playing for unc. I think this board would have more posts than the hb thread on his attitude. I can't be sure what the player's attitudes are, but it sure appears to be a lack of communication on defense. Sometimes this comes from attitude more than lack of talent. Whatever the problem, I think Coach K will set straight. GoDuke!

[Kedsy]

This could very well be the case, but can you imagine if Rivers were playing for unc. I think this board would have more posts than the hb thread on his attitude. I can't be sure what the player's attitudes are, but it sure appears to be a lack of communication on defense. Sometimes this comes from attitude more than lack of talent. Whatever the problem, I think Coach K will set straight. GoDuke!

At the beginning of the season, if someone had told you we'd be 12-2 against the schedule we've played, would anybody have been unhappy? Would you assume there was some sort of attitude problem? We're doing fine.

[tele]

Based on the reports of multiple practices and team meetings yesterday after the loss, I'm assuming these concerns are being squarely addressed.
We'll have to see what changes come about, but I think there is value in playing a tough road game before the conference season starts to gauge where the team is.

One of the fortunate things" for Duke fans is getting to see how Coach K builds a team and how they respond to losses. I believe during the 903 event and interviews, Coach K said he was more motivated by not losing than by wins. This seemed to me an intersting statement at the time, and now after a loss, with a young team, it will be just as interesting to see how this value is conveyed and hopefully instilled in this years team. You can learn a lot about the relative strengths of teams from stats and analyses like Kenprom, but for gauging a teams chances for winning a championship, how they comeback from a loss can be just as telling.

I appreciate the info from those closer to the scene and team than I am about the day to day practices and team activities. Go Duke! This has been a looong preconfernece season.

"I would also add Bob Harris and Al Featherston as other reasons Duke Fans are fortunate, win or lose.

[jv001]

At the beginning of the season, if someone had told you we'd be 12-2 against the schedule we've played, would anybody have been unhappy? Would you assume there was some sort of attitude problem? We're doing fine.

I would have been very happy to be 12-2 with the schedule we were set to play. And if I knew in advance we'd be 12-2, I would think there would be absolutely no attitude problems. I am still pleased with our record, especially with the way Coach K has had to bring this team along. But I was a Duke fan when Bobby Hurley was a freshman and I see some of the same attitude with Austin. The sophomore Hurley was a much better player than the freshman Hurley because of the coaching he received. I don't know if Austin will be around for another year but if he is, he will be a much better player because of the coaching he will receive. GoDuke!

[ncexnyc]

Any reports on how many players are now sporting blackeyes or stitches after yesterdays practices.:)

[Olympic Fan]

I would have been very happy to be 12-2 with the schedule we were set to play. And if I knew in advance we'd be 12-2, I would think there would be absolutely no attitude problems. I am still pleased with our record, especially with the way Coach K has had to bring this team along.

I agree that I would have taken 12-2 before season -- against the toughest schedule that any top 20 team has faced.

My only disappointment is in how non-competitive we were against Ohio State. The Temple outcome was disappointing, but I knew that one would be a test.

Now, as happy as I am with the way the season is developing, I will lose all my good feeling if Duke doesn't beat a bad Georgia Tech team Saturday. There are games you hope to win (say, at UNC), games you expect to win (most games in Cameron), games you expect to be competitive (Temple, Michigan State) and games you MUST win ... this is one of the latter.

[1 24 90]

I've seen numerous comments about Austin's demeanor on court. If anyone watched him in his high school games, he looked exactly the same way. He plays with a scowl on his face all the time. I think it's just his focus and intensity. He was jumping up and down and grinning ear to ear along with the entire bench in Maui when Tyler hit the 2nd three pointer at the end. I wouldn't categorize him as unhappy but since I'm in Ohio, what do I know?

[devildeac]

Any reports on how many players are now sporting blackeyes or stitches after yesterdays practices.:)

No definite news about their 3 practice yesterday but I know that Grant Hill's nose healed quite nicely after Tony Lang broke it during the late night/early AM practice many years ago after their poor showing at UVA that evening ;-).

[CDu]

At the beginning of the season, if someone had told you we'd be 12-2 against the schedule we've played, would anybody have been unhappy? Would you assume there was some sort of attitude problem? We're doing fine.

The non-conference season record is about where I expected it to be. Not exactly how I expected the losses to be distributed. But the team is about what I expected: talented and deep, but inconsistent and still unsure of their identity. I can't remember exactly what I said I expected pre-season in terms of losses, but I think it was in the neigborhood of 6-8 losses. I figured we'd lose 3-4 in conference, 0-1 in ACC tourney, 1 in the NCAAs, and 2 pre-conference.

Hopefully, with the ACC being even more down this year than I thought, we might even exceed the 12-13 ACC regular season wins I was expecting. But either way, I think we're right about where I'd have expected coming into the year. We lost a lot of leadership, versatility, and talent when we lost Singler and Smith, and we're still trying to figure out how this team is going to work.

[CDu]

I've seen numerous comments about Austin's demeanor on court. If anyone watched him in his high school games, he looked exactly the same way. He plays with a scowl on his face all the time. I think it's just his focus and intensity. He was jumping up and down and grinning ear to ear along with the entire bench in Maui when Tyler hit the 2nd three pointer at the end. I wouldn't categorize him as unhappy but since I'm in Ohio, what do I know?

I'm in no position to know for sure, but I'd say it's more of a style thing. Rivers has grown up around the NBA game, and lots of NBA players sport the scowl when they play. I think Rivers has (consciously or unconsciously) developed that look as well. I don't read him as being unhappy, either.

[ncexnyc]

At the beginning of the season, if someone had told you we'd be 12-2 against the schedule we've played, would anybody have been unhappy? Would you assume there was some sort of attitude problem? We're doing fine.


I've seen numerous comments about Austin's demeanor on court. If anyone watched him in his high school games, he looked exactly the same way. He plays with a scowl on his face all the time. I think it's just his focus and intensity. He was jumping up and down and grinning ear to ear along with the entire bench in Maui when Tyler hit the 2nd three pointer at the end. I wouldn't categorize him as unhappy but since I'm in Ohio, what do I know?

I wholeheartedly agree with both posts. We definitely don't need to be reading anything into what happened the other night. Teams lose and they lose several times during the season. We all knew this would happen, especially for a team like this one, which was searching for it's identity.

[NSDukeFan]

Larry Bird played both power forward and small forward. Yes, it was incorrect for me to refer to him exclusively as a power forward, but he definitely played both positions--depending upon which period of his career one is talking about, the game situation, the lineup, the match ups, etc.

I'm saying Ryan has regressed compared to how he played in some earlier games this season. He just hasn't had that same almost dominating presence that he had in spurts earlier in the year. Remember, I said 'almost' dominating. And I didn't say he has regressed dramatically, merely regressed somewhat. I think Ryan has shown that he has the ability to be an all-ACC first team-level player. If only he would consistently play that way.
You are not the only one who has said this and it is another mini pet peeve of mine. I feel like people sometimes use the word regressed after one, or two games where they don't feel has played as well as before. You obviously were talking about a number of games, but I wonder if this word gets overused after a loss or poor performance when in fact it may just be that an 18 to 22 year old player who is also at university may have not had a great game. It happens and does not mean the player is getting worse. [/rant]

You're 100% right. I think it's going to (have to) be Miles Plumlee. In my experience in sports, it's very hard for a guy who is not one of your premiere players to be a leader that everyone will follow. Not impossible, but it is rare. So as much as Tyler may bring in this area, if he doesn't have the true respect deep down of his teammates (and I'm not saying he does or doesn't -- how would I know?) he can't really be that special type of leader. IMO.

Miles's game really seems to be coming on, at both ends of the floor. He's becoming a real force. He's the senior. He's been through 3+ years of the wars and has seen a lot. It sure seems like he has the capacity for leadership, the "fire in the belly" more so than his brother, for example, and more so than Seth or Andre too. Ryan could be the guy and I thought I saw him starting to embrace the role in Maui, but I think he may be worried about his own game right now while Miles seems to be really taking off. The rest of the guys are just too young.

So, Miles.
This reminded me of my favorite play in the game. Early on, Miles had the ball near the top of the key. I believe he used a ball fake, read the defense, and in a very relaxed, I am in no rush because I am comfortable playing, way, he saw the opening and drove to the hoop for a layup. My impression is that sometimes Miles may have been thinking too much or been a little rattled in some games and not shown all the skills that he does in practice. This play made me cheer as it looked like Miles was so comfortable in what he was doing and the game seemed to slow down for him. I could, of course, be over-analyzing one play, but I am hoping this bodes well for further solid play from Miles.

I think our not-too-quick Bigs do hedge too much, and yes, there are downsides to not hedging. With this team, I think we ought to play more zone. Will be fun to play against Syracuse more often and watch how it's done. :(

You are right the team will get lots of practice playing against an excellent quality zone when Syracuse joins the conference. I like coach K's defensive system, but do think it can take players a long time to grasp the nuances. I think our not-too-quick Bigs are quicker footspeed wise than Brian Zoubek was, but Zoubek seemed to be very quick in terms of knowing where he needed to be and in hustling to get there. So, I think Miles, Mason and Ryan all have the foot speed to be great defenders when hedging and are getting better and better the more experience they get.

[elvis14]

I'm in no position to know for sure, but I'd say it's more of a style thing. Rivers has grown up around the NBA game, and lots of NBA players sport the scowl when they play. I think Rivers has (consciously or unconsciously) developed that look as well. I don't read him as being unhappy, either.

Maybe Austin is tight with Paul Pierce!

[MCFinARL]

I've seen numerous comments about Austin's demeanor on court. If anyone watched him in his high school games, he looked exactly the same way. He plays with a scowl on his face all the time. I think it's just his focus and intensity. He was jumping up and down and grinning ear to ear along with the entire bench in Maui when Tyler hit the 2nd three pointer at the end. I wouldn't categorize him as unhappy but since I'm in Ohio, what do I know?


I'm in no position to know for sure, but I'd say it's more of a style thing. Rivers has grown up around the NBA game, and lots of NBA players sport the scowl when they play. I think Rivers has (consciously or unconsciously) developed that look as well. I don't read him as being unhappy, either.

Me three. Based on what I have seen (all on TV) in both high school and college, Austin adopts a fierce look in games. No reason to conclude that he is unhappy. He may wish the college game were coming to him more quickly, but that is a different thing, and most likely net positive as it should inspire him to keep working on improving his game. As for the other guards, it wouldn't surprise me if they were unhappy on Wednesday, as they should have been--because they were not playing especially well. Unless someone has inside information, I don't see any basis to speculate about broader team or individual attitude problems.

[jv001]

Me three. Based on what I have seen (all on TV) in both high school and college, Austin adopts a fierce look in games. No reason to conclude that he is unhappy. He may wish the college game were coming to him more quickly, but that is a different thing, and most likely net positive as it should inspire him to keep working on improving his game. As for the other guards, it wouldn't surprise me if they were unhappy on Wednesday, as they should have been--because they were not playing especially well. Unless someone has inside information, I don't see any basis to speculate about broader team or individual attitude problems.

I certainly could be seeing something that's really not there. However I do see Austin complaining way too much to the officials. Of course he could have gotten that from the pros he's been around as well. The entire team needs to concentrate on playing Duke basketball. Hard man to man, communication on defense, filling the passing lanes, switching, rebounding, and having each other's back. Way too much to get done in order to be the team they are capable of being. No time for things they can't control(refs). GoDuke!

[moonpie23]

i think that austin is in need of another year of college ball....yes, he's making some noise, but he's not close to what KI put on the floor....

his handle needs work, and defenses are learning his tricks before they have to play him....he may go ahead and jump to the league, but he's not nearly as good as nolan is and we see where that's getting him...

[Saratoga2]

Against Temple, we had a great opportunity to go up early and put pressure on the Temple team. They must have had 5 or even 6 turnovers within the first 8 plays. Instead, our starters turned the ball over as well. It had to give Temple some confidence that Duke was not all that the rankings implied. My assessment of the start was that we had Seth, Tyler and Austin starting at guard/SF and Mason and Ryan at the bigs. Mason seemed to get off to an uninspired start, while our guards and small forward were extremely sloppy with the ball.

In hindsight, maybe a starting lineup which can take better care of the ball is in order. The one we had just didn't get us off to a good start.

When I look at our team as it stands now, we have two guys that are likely NBA level talent (Austin and Mason). Austin comes out determined look and plays that way at all times. If he makes mistakes at times, he is only a freshman and hasn't even played an ACC game yet, so I expect him to grow. Mason came out and seemed to lack intensity. Yes he gained it as the game got into the second half, but with his talent, we need the intensity from the tip off until the end. The only other player who I see with NBA level talent at this juncture is Miles. He is big, strong and athletic. He is not a high pick at this point since he has some noticable flaws in his game, but his good attributes make him a possiblty. Others may interest the NBA, but lack of size and ability to get it done against good competition may rule out some of our players. Kelly has the size but his defense against a quick small forward might cause NBA teams to pause.

So I would like to see our NBA quality players start the game. Mason, Austin and maybe Miles now that he is playing well. With those, I still think Quinn is the right playmaker who will reduce our turnovers early on and get our bigs scoring opportunities. To me, the most difficult position to fill is the 2 guard/SF. Right now, I think it needs to be either Seth or Michael, since Andre is disappearing and having Tyler start didn't make the team run smoothly against Temple.

[weezie]

not close to what KI put on the floor....


But moonie! KI had seasoned veterans, seniors, NCAA winners! Nolan and Kyle knew the system and played umpteen minutes together.

I'm still pres of the Rivers fan club!

[Mike Corey]

Austin is not unhappy.

He is an extremely intense competitor and he absolutely hates to lose. His scowl is for his opponent, not for anything else.

[Saratoga2]

I know our fans loved to hate Hansborough, however, he would be a good model for our bigs to follow, especially Mason. Tyler was always intense when he played and gave it his all from start to finish. He would be fighting for a rebound or going up against the defense and drawing fouls. Yes, some of us thought he got away with a lot of walking, but it was his intensity which was special. Miles is more like that, but Mason seems to take time to get into the game. Ryan said after the Greensboro game that he had to concentrate more on rebounding to have a more complete game. While I thought he tried hard against Temple, his rebounding and toughness weren't evident.

[-bdbd]

Now, as happy as I am with the way the season is developing, I will lose all my good feeling if Duke doesn't beat a bad Georgia Tech team Saturday. There are games you hope to win (say, at UNC), games you expect to win (most games in Cameron), games you expect to be competitive (Temple, Michigan State) and games you MUST win ... this is one of the latter.

Gotta agree with Olympic there. Temple was a "trap" game from the git-go. It was good practice for a second-round-type NCAA game, and when we actually do play in the 2nd round in March I expect this to have helped. It isn't all bad that we lost it either, as long as they learn from it and maybe gain a little motivation. A prediction: I wouldn't want to be a Yellow Jacket on Saturday. I expect this team to come out fired up, focused and angry.

Go Duke!

[flyingdutchdevil]

Austin is not unhappy.

He is an extremely intense competitor and he absolutely hates to lose. His scowl is for his opponent, not for anything else.

I don't think the scowl is for the opponent at all. It's Rivers-Face, the brother of Scheyer-Face (except not as enjoyable to see pictures of ;)).

I like Rivers's demented. What worries me, however, is when Rivers loses that face.

[Mike Corey]

I don't think the scowl is for the opponent at all. It's Rivers-Face, the brother of Scheyer-Face

Hilarious. Well done.

I hope Georgia Tech gets Riversified.

[Kedsy]

When I look at our team as it stands now, we have two guys that are likely NBA level talent (Austin and Mason). ... The only other player who I see with NBA level talent at this juncture is Miles. He is big, strong and athletic. He is not a high pick at this point since he has some noticable flaws in his game, but his good attributes make him a possiblty. Others may interest the NBA, but lack of size and ability to get it done against good competition may rule out some of our players. Kelly has the size but his defense against a quick small forward might cause NBA teams to pause.

I think you may be selling our talent a little short. They all have to improve and obviously we'll have to wait and see, but I'm confident that Ryan will end up in the League. I also think Seth and Andre will appear on NBA benches. The NBA values high quality shooters. Quinn has a chance, too, and possibly even Michael, based on their potential, at least. (I also agree with you on Austin, Mason, and Miles.)

[dcar1985]

I think you may be selling our talent a little short. They all have to improve and obviously we'll have to wait and see, but I'm confident that Ryan will end up in the League. I also think Seth and Andre will appear on NBA benches. The NBA values high quality shooters. Quinn has a chance, too, and possibly even Michael, based on their potential, at least. (I also agree with you on Austin, Mason, and Miles.)

I love Duke as much as everyone else on this board but seriously....Seth and Dre are not NBA players, I can't name a 2 guard in the league that Dre could guard right now and his lack of ball skills at 6'4 is really going to hurt his chances at earning a roster spot. Seth can shoot it but I think he would have trouble keeping up with the speed of the game (Ryan will have the same problem), plus he still hasn't really shown he can run the point which he would need to do at the next level.

Miles has all the physical tools to play at the next level and if he sticks to it I think he could make a roster eventually, he'll go undrafted though.

[Matches]

I love Duke as much as everyone else on this board but seriously....Seth and Dre are not NBA players, I can't name a 2 guard in the league that Dre could guard right now and his lack of ball skills at 6'4 is really going to hurt his chances at earning a roster spot.

He doesn't have to do it right now. At this point in their Duke careers, neither Nolan Smith nor Lance Thomas looked like NBA players either. Both Seth and Dre still have time and room to improve.

[superdave]

He doesn't have to do it right now. At this point in their Duke careers, neither Nolan Smith nor Lance Thomas looked like NBA players either. Both Seth and Dre still have time and room to improve.

Seth could make some team's rotation. Andre could be potentially but needs to work on the handle and shot fake. The wider court, better spacing and premium on shooting in the NBA favor both to at least stick around a little while.

[ACCBBallFan]

So the Plumlees combined 33 points on 15 of 24 shooting, coupled with 17 rebounds, 10 of which were offensive, and 4 blocked shots doesn't constitute "shining" for you?They shined on Offense but not on defense.

Not sure that is on them, more the Duke system that demands that they follow their man away from the paint.

Both were -7 in the +/-, but team was -5 not far from norm. The best was +2 Josh, +1 Quinn and net zero Tyler.

Duke Temple +/- Metrics Total Duke
59 (66) (7) 64 57 Mason Plumlee, F

61 (64) (3) 46 43 Austin Rivers, G

32 (39) (7) 43 36 Miles Plumlee, F
53 (58) (5) 35 30 Seth Curry, G

51 (51) 0 27 27 Tyler Thornton, G
29 (31) (2) 23 21 Ryan Kelly, F

22 (21) 1 16 17 Quinn Cook, G
21 (22) (1) 14 13 Michael Gbinije, G-F
12 (10) 2 11 13 Josh Hairston, F
25 (28) (3) 14 11 Andre Dawkins, G
(25) TOTALS
(5)


The column labeled Metrics is sum of all positive stats like points, boards etc. minus turnovers minus fouls.

Unfortunately when it comes to 5-man units the two combos that played the most had the worst results, each -4.
The three that did best at +3 each played only once together for a minute or less.

Among those 3, Ryan and Tyler were involved in all 3, Austin, Mason and Dre in 2, Seth, Quinn and Josh for 1 of 3, and none for Miles nor Mike.

That unit of Austin-Dre-Mason-Ryan-Tyler was also one of the +3 groupings but only for 38 seconds of the 40 minutes.

Min Duke Temple +/-

10.2 15 19 (4) Seth-Austin-Mason-Ryan-Tyler *4

7.1 11 15 (4) Austin-Dre-Mason-Miles-Quinn *2

2.9 4 4 0 Seth-Austin-Mason-Tyler-Josh
2.6 11 10 1 Seth-Austin-Mason-Tyler-Mike
2.3 3 6 (3) Seth-Austin-Dre-Mason-Miles
2.1 4 4 0 Seth-Ryan-Miles-Tyler-Mike

1.8 6 4 2 Seth-Austin-Mason-Miles-Quinn *2
1.8 1 4 (3) Seth-Mason-Ryan-Tyler-Mike
1.7 2 4 (2) Austin-Miles-Tyler-Josh-Mile
1.6 0 0 0 Seth-Austin-Mason-Ryan-Quinn
1.2 2 4 (2) Seth-Dre-Mason-Miles-Tyler
1.1 2 0 2 Seth-Austin-Miles-Tyler-Josh
1.1 2 2 0 Seth-Dre-Ryan-Miles-Quinn

1.0 4 1 3 Austin-Dre-Ryan-Tyler-Josh
0.6 3 0 3 Austin-Dre-Mason-Ryan-Tyler
0.6 0 0 0 Seth-Austin-Tyler-Josh-Mike
0.3 0 1 (1) Seth-Austin-Ryan-Tyler-Josh

0.2 3 0 3 Seth-Mason-Ryan-Tyler-Quinn

40.0 73 78 (5)

[Steven43]

I love Duke as much as everyone else on this board but seriously....Seth and Dre are not NBA players, I can't name a 2 guard in the league that Dre could guard right now and his lack of ball skills at 6'4 is really going to hurt his chances at earning a roster spot. Seth can shoot it but I think he would have trouble keeping up with the speed of the game (Ryan will have the same problem), plus he still hasn't really shown he can run the point which he would need to do at the next level.

Miles has all the physical tools to play at the next level and if he sticks to it I think he could make a roster eventually, he'll go undrafted though.

Seth and Andre have less of a chance to make it to the NBA than Daniel Ewing and Demarcus Nelson had, and it hasn't turned out too well for them. Mason, Miles, and Austin will all be pros, though Miles might not last long. Ryan has a shot--but a long shot. He has to really improve his rebounding and his shooting to have a chance, because he can't really jump and he's slow. Mike, Quinn, Alex, and Marshall all have the potential to make it, but we'll need a year or two from each of them to have a decent idea of their chances.

[ncexnyc]

Seth and Andre have less of a chance to make it to the NBA than Daniel Ewing and Demarcus Nelson had, and it hasn't turned out too well for them. Mason, Miles, and Austin will all be pros, though Miles might not last long. Ryan has a shot--but a long shot. He has to really improve his rebounding and his shooting to have a chance, because he can't really jump and he's slow. Mike, Quinn, Alex, and Marshall all have the potential to make it, but we'll need a year or two from each of them to have a decent idea of their chances.

Nelson was 6'4", and weighed 200 lbs., along with a 6'10" wingspan, not bad physical stats, but he was more of a slasher. His shot is nowhere near as good as either Andre's or Seth's. Ewing was a really good player, but I don't believe you could say he was NBA good at anyone facet of the game.

As for Seth and Andre, Seth seems rather frail and while that didn't stop AI, Seth's handle isn't anywhere close to AI's. I don't think his shooting skills will be enough to get him a shot. Andre has the better build and still has time to develop a handle, but I just don't see the fire. I'd say both players are very long shots to find a home on an NBA team.

[Newton_14]

AR is already not happy. Have you noticed his demeanor? Something tells me the Bobby Hurley Video Treatment wouldn't cure him.

As juxtaposition, remember Kyrie cheering on his teammates through his injury? yeah.

Remember K's talk about the fist? We need to see that kind of togetherness. A band of brothers, not a collection of free agents. Put that way, it should be no surprise which two players have the best chemistry on the team.

I'll respectfully disagree with your take on Austin's demeanor. Having seen him play in person several games now, my impression is the kid flat out hates to lose. He appears to hate losing as much as K does. That's a good thing. His demeanor on the court and on the bench has been fine in my view. Another thing he appears to hate with a passion is bad play on his part. He gets angry with himself when he screws up. That has been very evident. At least to me anyway.

The only negative I see demeanor wise, is when Austin does not get a call he thinks he should have gotten. Someone else mentioned that it could be the product of being so close to the NBA game. He has been exposed to NBA players, practices, and games all of his life, so I believe that has merit. That is very correctable though, and Austin has already shown himself to be very coachable. I believe the staff will review tape with him, and get him out of the mode of glaring at refs every time he does not get a call.

I believe Austin is a good teammate, and I don't see him as anything short of a player fully buying into the team concept, and working to help his team improve. His personality is different from Kyrie, but that doesn't mean he is not pulling for his teammates when he is on the bench. He certainly cheers them on, as we have seen that first hand. The last 5 minutes of the Kansas game when Austin sat in favor of Tyler certainly showed us that. That one instance put to bed all of the "bad teammate" myths for me.

[DUKIE V(A)]

AR has been terrific this year and you gotta love his drive and tenacity. The vast majority of his mistakes are errors of commission -- he is aggressive and always attempting to make winning plays (that in itself is pretty impressive for a freshman on such a big stage). He plays hard, finishes well, and gets to the line. In time, I expect he will learn when to drive and dish vs. when to take it himself, but he has been pretty darn good this season. Plus, Austin still has over half the season to get a heck of a lot better. Also, on a side note, it appeared to me that AR got hammered pretty good on a few of his drives to the hoop against Temple with no call...I suspect many of us would have been pretty intense after such "muggings."

I would not bet against Curry and/or Dawkins making the NBA. Both are excellent shooters and have time to continue to develop.

[ncexnyc]

AR has been terrific this year and you gotta love his drive and tenacity. The vast majority of his mistakes are errors of commission -- he is aggressive and always attempting to make winning plays (that in itself is pretty impressive for a freshman on such a big stage). He plays hard, finishes well, and gets to the line. In time, I expect he will learn when to drive and dish vs. when to take it himself, but he has been pretty darn good this season. Plus, Austin still has over half the season to get a heck of a lot better. Also, on a side note, it appeared to me that AR got hammered pretty good on a few of his drives to the hoop against Temple with no call...I suspect many of us would have been pretty intense after such "muggings."

I would not bet against Curry and/or Dawkins making the NBA. Both are excellent shooters and have time to continue to develop.

I think we also need to recognize the fact that Austin’s current numbers aren’t padded by playing a schedule loaded with cupcakes. His numbers have come against some fairly stiff competition.

[duke09hms]

I think you may be selling our talent a little short. They all have to improve and obviously we'll have to wait and see, but I'm confident that Ryan will end up in the League. I also think Seth and Andre will appear on NBA benches. The NBA values high quality shooters. Quinn has a chance, too, and possibly even Michael, based on their potential, at least. (I also agree with you on Austin, Mason, and Miles.)

Austin and Mason are locks for the league.
Miles and Ryan are long shots - Ryan has the skills but Miles has the athleticism.

I don't think Seth and Andre have much of a chance. Seth is essentially a senior (RS junior) already, and Andre is a junior. At this point in time, junior Nolan was already making an impression on draft boards. Kyle (man of steel) Singler went in the 2nd round, and DeMarc went undrafted - these guys were consistent stars, something Seth/Andre have yet to show.

[Kedsy]

I don't think Seth and Andre have much of a chance. Seth is essentially a senior (RS junior) already, and Andre is a junior. At this point in time, junior Nolan was already making an impression on draft boards. Kyle (man of steel) Singler went in the 2nd round, and DeMarc went undrafted - these guys were consistent stars, something Seth/Andre have yet to show.

DeMarcus Nelson was not a "consistent star" at this stage in his career. He didn't even emerge as a starter until his junior year, when he averaged 14+ ppg (Seth is currently at 13+ and Andre around 9.5). Frankly, Seth has achieved much more than DeMarcus did at the same point in their careers. Plus the NBA scouts looked at DeMarcus as an undersized SG/SF who couldn't shoot. Kyle would have been a borderline lottery pick if he'd come out after his junior year. He dropped into the second round because his shooting seemed to regress his senior year.

So I don't think either of them are accurate models for Seth's or Andre's chances, who are both great shooters. Especially since we don't know how Seth and/or Andre will finish their junior years or what they'll achieve in their senior years. It's simply too early to tell.

[Duke71]

Frank Sinatra's crooning and swooning was actually even a bit before my old-school time but I do remember the lyric refrain from his "New York, New York" song which intoned "If you can make it there....you can make it anywhere". The lyric has an appealing ring of supposed truth to it but it speaks no more knowledgeably about succeeding automatically in show business in NY back in his day than it speaks of automatically succeeding or not succeeding in the NBA because of any particular metric in today's pro game.

It so often still comes down to "fit" and opportunity.

After questionable outings in Cameron Indoor Stadium that never measured up to recruiting hype, Shavlick Randolph actually infused passion and performance with the Philly 76ers before his freakish career-ending injury and Josh McBob (who absolutely detests being called that) is certainly defying my predictions about his NBA-worthiness....and save your BS about how YOU saw it coming that he would wind up as a starter for the LA Lakers after taking it "to the next level" prematurely just a few years back. Maybe having mom available to cook breakfast turned out to be the magic elixir after all during those formative years. I don't honestly know.

The point is, there are an unbelievable amount of factors that play into these projections.

Those of you that drop in on the Washington Post may have noticed the recent article about the performance woes of sure-fire, can't miss John Wall's stat output with the Wizards the past two seasons. You number crunchers out there gotta be lovin' that John has the second lowest effective FG% in the entire NBA!! (this is a stat I had not really inhaled before - I'm sorta like Bill Clinton that way - in the past, but I ran the numbers on our Dukie perimeter players and they did themselves proud on that metric....Yes, I KNOW the NBA 3pt stripe is considerably deeper)

So what's the take home message?....I happen to think that Kedsy is right. "It's simply to early to tell."

[jimsumner]

.

After questionable outings in Cameron Indoor Stadium that never measured up to recruiting hype, Shavlick Randolph actually infused passion and performance with the Philly 76ers before his freakish career-ending injury and Josh McBob (who absolutely detests being called that) is certainly defying my predictions about his NBA-worthiness....and save your BS about how YOU saw it coming that he would wind up as a starter for the LA Lakers after taking it "to the next level" prematurely just a few years back.

I suspect Shavlik Randolph equally detests being called Shavlick. :)

[Duke71]

I suspect Shavlik Randolph equally detests being called Shavlick. :)

You picked up on that, did you? That's what I miss about hanging out on campus....you guys are sharp. I love it!

Speaking of being sharp, lets Go Duke about an hour from now. I know you guys don't want to be runnin' those same endless suicide drills in practice two weeks in a row....give yourselves a break and take care of business.

[CajunDevil]

I think Miles could be a 10+ yr NBA back-up player because of his athleticism. If he could learn how to shoot a 20' jumper consistently then he could become an athletic Laimbeer-type. However, I think Miles' better opportunity may be in the NFL. I think that given Miles' athleticism and penchant for physicality that he could be an unreal NFL TE. Before you scream about Miles' inability to catch in traffic Jimmy Graham was not known for his hands at Miami either. Either way, Miles has a bright future, imo.

[Duke71]

I think Miles could be a 10+ yr NBA back-up player because of his athleticism. If he could learn how to shoot a 20' jumper consistently then he could become an athletic Laimbeer-type. However, I think Miles' better opportunity may be in the NFL. I think that given Miles' athleticism and penchant for physicality that he could be an unreal NFL TE. Before you scream about Miles' inability to catch in traffic Jimmy Graham was not known for his hands at Miami either. Either way, Miles has a bright future, imo.


Well, that's certaintly a twist I had never previously considered before.

My major caveat in putting too much money in this particular "Miles in the NFL" investment is that my gut tells me you gotta be a certifiable man-beast to have high odds of success in the NFL. If Miles were that, I'd say our chances of a 5th National Championship this year for the Duke BBall team were a lock. I'd love for you to be right on this one....but I keep gettin' a busy signal when I ask Siri this iPhone question. Why is that?

[jimsumner]

I love the cognitive dissonance on this board. Duke can't do anything right, can't defend, can't compete, has no leadership.

And, hey, how about those eight future NBA players and the greatest coach of all time? :)

[Duke71]

I love the cognitive dissonance on this board. Duke can't do anything right, can't defend, can't compete, has no leadership.

And, hey, how about those eight future NBA players and the greatest coach of all time? :)

Calm down Jimmy,

THAT's why we all were accepted to Dukeat one time or another....to actually make sense of weird stuff like this.

If it were all that easy to figure this stuff out, I'm absolutely sure that they wouldn't have needed us to do that.

Enjoy the game. Let's talk later.

[1 24 90]

And my alma mater, University of Dayton, goes to Temple today and wins 87-77. Good for the Flyers, bad for the Devils.