Phase III (2011/12)

[Bob Green]

Phase I and II are in the books with Duke entering Phase III sporting a 12-2 record, but coming of a lackluster performance in Philadelphia with the loss to Temple. Phase III runs from the Georgia Tech game through the UNC game in Chapel Hill. The start of conference play means the stakes are raised and the competition becomes a bit tougher as the team must travel and play in hostile arenas.

Phase III covers 10 games including tough road match-ups at Blacksburg and Chapel Hill, and home games versus Virginia and Florida State. Those are four potentially very tough games although FSU appears to be less formidable an opponent than preseason predictions indicated.

The lone non-conference game is against St. John’s in Cameron Indoor Stadium on 1/28/12.

1) Health

Andre Dawkins missed the second half of one game with back spasms, there were reports of Ryan Kelly being limited in practice with a calf injury, and Seth Curry struggled with a sore ankle but overall the team remains in good health.

2) Point Guard

Tyler Thornton established himself as the starting point guard during Phase II with Quinn Cook emerging toward the end as he appears recovered from his knee injury and is now in game shape. Fans can spend tons of time debating which player should start and play more minutes or which guy runs the team more efficiently, but in the end the decision belongs to the coaching staff and based on the following statement from Coach Krzyzewski it is apparent the two will continue to split time at the point:


When we keep a fresh guy there we can push the ball and pressure the ball…Quinn is a natural point guard…Tyler is just a really good leader.

Thornton will most likely remain in the starting line-up because Coach Krzyzewski obviously likes the skills Thornton brings onto the court. It seems silly for me to attempt to explain those skills when Jim Sumner has already hit the nail on the head with the following post in the Tyler Thornton’s Offense thread. So, I’ll defer to Jim:


Let me throw in some additional thoughts on why Tyler Thornton is an appealing option for Mike Krzyzewski. Thornton scores very high in two intangibles dear to Krzyzewski's heart.

The first is his ability to play physical defense. K loves pugnacious defenders. In this respect, Wojo is a better analog than Amaker, although I don't think TT is at the level of either. But Thornton is one of those nice guys who does a Hulk transformation when he gets on the floor. He bumps, trips, gets in the grille of opposing players as early and as often as he can.

Sometimes he gets beat, sometimes he fouls out. But he sets a tone that K wants set. The idea is that at some point in the game, the opposing PG is going to see Thornton coming at him and decide that he'd just as soon airmail a pass into the third row.

Thornton also has advanced verbal-communication skills. This is a focal point for K, on offense but especially on defense. In the post-games after a poor defensive effort by Duke, K will invariably cite some variation of "we didn't communicate well." Freshmen are amazed at how much this is emphasized in practices. Communicate-loudly, quickly, efficiently. Over and Over. And Over.

Thornton does this very well. He sees what needs to be seen and communicates that. Some people see what needs to be seen but don't communicate it. Some people communicate but communicate the wrong thing. Thornton does both. Think traffic cop.

Quinn Cook won back-to-back ACC Rookie-of-the-Week awards based on his sterling performance over the past several games.

3) Rotation

The rotation typically tightens up with the start of conference play and this season will most likely prove to be the same as years past. There is much to be excited about with the skill and depth available for Coach Krzyzewski to manipulate, but the team is still developing so I expect the line-up combinations to continue to vary over the phase.

Through the 14 games played thus far, eight players are averaging double digit minutes while having played in all games. Josh Hairston and Michael Gibinije are averaging nine minutes each, while appearing in 12 and 10 games respectively.

So who loses minutes during Phase III?

The easy money is on Hairston and Gbinije to transition into situational players and see less playing time. For the top eight players in the rotation, the jury is out on whether Coach K will maintain the status quo or if the team will transition to a tighter seven man rotation.

If the rotation shrinks to seven, it will be a battle between Andre Dawkins and Quinn Cook to be the seventh man. Dawkins must discover some consistency in his play as he has made only one 3-point basket over the last three games, while Cook still has a steep learning curve on defense.

4) Austin Rivers

The freshman has been amazing so far. He leads the team in scoring at 15.1 points per game (#7 in the ACC) and is the leading candidate to earn ACC Rookie-of-the-Year honors. As was pointed out by DBR in a front page article last week, Rivers has shown tremendous improvement over the course of the season and it is probable he will continue to improve over the remainder of the year.

Rivers is the perimeter player on this team who can be relied upon to score the ball when the team needs a score. He isn’t perfect, nobody is, and we all need to remember he is a freshman, but Rivers must be the man for Duke to play up to their potential in Phase III.

5) Big Man Offense

Mason Plumlee continues to impress averaging 11.9 points and 9.9 rebounds per game, which ranks number 23 and number two in the ACC respectively. If MP2 continues to average right at a double-double against ACC competition, he will be making a serious statement toward earning First Team All ACC honors. During Phase III, Duke will need MP2 (plus Ryan Kelly and MP1) to score the ball in tough match-ups against Virginia with Assane Sene and Mike Scott, Clemson with Devin Booker, Florida State with Bernard James and Xavier Gibson, Miami with Reggie Johnson and North Carolina with Tyler Zeller, John Henson and James Michael McAdoo.

These are the teams and the players which will test Duke’s ability to score inside and outside and in Phase III it will be critical for Duke to score inside in order to open up the outside game. Through Phase II, two of Duke’s top four scorers are Big Men (Mason Plumlee and Ryan Kelly). Can this continue during Phase III?

6) Miles Plumlee

Miles Plumlee’s improved play has been noticeable during recent games. After struggling early and appearing adrift at times, MP1 has come on like a gangbuster. He scored 17 points against Temple and pulled down 15 rebounds against Western Michigan. On defense, he has blocked 17 shots over the previous six games.

But it isn’t the raw numbers that stand out to me. Miles Plumlee has been energetic and dialed in to the game. He is playing with confidence. He is playing with passion. Continued solid performances from MP1 will be crucial to Duke’s success during conference play.

7) Leadership, Chemistry and Communication

Saving the most important for last the question that begs answering is: who is going to step up and provide this team with strong on court leadership? Somebody has to assert themselves, pull the guys into a circle and say “Hey, let’s go!” I see a need for “in your face” leadership. The early season is over so it is show time!

Tyler Thornton is a possibility and I’m voicing that opinion based on Coach Krzyzewski’s comments on Thornton being a leader. Miles Plumlee is the team’s lone senior and has been coming on of late so he is another possibility as the urgency of the moment – last half year of his Duke career – settles in! If not Miles, perhaps one of the team’s captains will step up and implement some intrusive leadership.

Lead, follow or get the hell out of the way! Who is going to step up and take charge is the most important question to be answered in Phase III.

[Greg_Newton]

Besides health, guard play is #s 1-20 for me. We have a devastatingly talented slashing guard, and a bunch of players who do some things very well, but are almost all undersized or slow-footed relative to their counterparts on your standard top 10 team. We'll be asking guys to perform beyond their abilities against elite teams; this worked in 2010, but that was an extremely unique case (plus, we had incredible size and a system designed to mask their weaknesses). We're undoubtably a very good team, but I'm not sure we have a top-5ish ceiling as we're currently built.

As I've said, the logical solution to the above scenario in my mind is to design a system around Rivers, making our most dynamic and physically gifted perimeter player our lead guard and engine (while also allowing us more flexibility on defense). I won't rehash all that again, though.

I also really hope Gbinije continues his growth and follows the EW path rather than the inverse. At some point, you start to get diminishing returns by putting too many skilled, finesse offensive players on the court at the same time; he brings an combination of size, quickness and toughness that we could really use on the perimeter, IMO.

[Newton_14]

Besides health, guard play is #s 1-20 for me. We have a devastatingly talented slashing guard, and a bunch of players who do some things very well, but are almost all undersized or slow-footed relative to their counterparts on your standard top 10 team. We'll be asking guys to perform beyond their abilities against elite teams; this worked in 2010, but that was an extremely unique case (plus, we had incredible size and a system designed to mask their weaknesses). We're undoubtably a very good team, but I'm not sure we have a top-5ish ceiling as we're currently built.

As I've said, the logical solution to the above scenario in my mind is to design a system around Rivers, making our most dynamic and physically gifted perimeter player our lead guard and engine (while also allowing us more flexibility on defense). I won't rehash all that again, though.

I also really hope Gbinije continues his growth and follows the EW path rather than the inverse. At some point, you start to get diminishing returns by putting too many skilled, finesse offensive players on the court at the same time; he brings an combination of size, quickness and toughness that we could really use on the perimeter, IMO.

I somewhat agree with the skilled/finesse part, but I feel that is being magnified due to inconsistency in individual play. Now you may argue that the bigger opponent has caused the inconsistency, but I am not convinced yet that is the case. We have won some very tough games this year against opponents with bigger guards and more physical bigs than Ryan, for example, and we won those games because guys like Seth, Andre, and Ryan won their individual battles and played great. They torched the likes of Mich St, Tennessee, Kansas, and Washington, yet struggled in games against lesser opponents. It wasn't just the OSU and Temple games where the guards & Ryan struggled.

For now, I am still of the belief that consistency is the issue, and not lack of size and toughness. I totally see where you are coming from, and I am certainly not dismissing your opinion at all.

I just keep going back to the games won against tough teams, and scratch my head at why some of the guys cannot find and sustain that consistent play at a high level that they showed us in other games. The ability is certainly there. It makes no sense. To me, Ryan, Seth, and Andre have to step up to the point where they sustain a certain level of play game in and game out. That's why K has not settled on a rotation yet, because those guys are forcing him to try other players due to their inconsistent play.

That's my take right now anyway. It will be interesting watching the next 5 to 6 games to see if those 3 guys can rise back up and sustain.

[Kedsy]

That's why K has not settled on a rotation yet, because those guys are forcing him to try other players due to their inconsistent play.

An interesting way to express the issue, but I think I agree. The keys in many ways are Ryan, Seth, and Andre. I admit to a soft spot where Andre is concerned, but he's only played 15, 20, and 14 minutes the last three games, and I don't like that trend. We've discussed at length the rotation issues, and the 8th guy on K's teams probably won't play more than 10 to 12 minutes, but I think Andre needs to play more than that. One could argue his stats haven't merited more minutes, but I'd call it the other way around -- his limited playing time is the explanation for the low scoring output -- Andre's the kind of guy who needs a chance to get on a roll.

But if Greg_Newton (and others) has his way and Michael gets more minutes, it's even less for Andre. Personally I think that would be bad for the team. I believe we played our best with a Seth/Austin/Andre perimeter. Would Temple have been able to out-tall us on the outside if we played 6'2", 6'4", 6'4" (instead of 6'0", 6'2, 6'4)? I may be in the minority, but I think Andre's playing time is a major question for this Phase.

Ryan and Seth are also at somewhat of a crossroad, Seth more than Ryan. I have documented how Seth scores much less when teamed with Tyler, and maybe that's a coincidence, but maybe it's not a coincidence but has nothing to do with Tyler's play. When Seth plays PG, he's guarded by a smallish player (generally 5'11 to 6'1, his size or smaller). When he plays SG, he's guarded by a taller player. We saw how Temple's tall perimeter flummoxed Seth. I've put together a table showing the height of the starter guarding Seth and his scoring output. Not a perfect correlation (perhaps because some of the issue is due to the way Tyler runs the offense; perhaps it's a matter of reach or quickness as well as height), but maybe it says something:



Team def height Seth points
---- ---------- ---- ------
Belmont 5'11 16
Presbyterian 5'10 10
Michigan St 6'1 20
Davidson 6'3 17
Tennessee 6'1 17
Michigan 5'11 17
Kansas 6'3 9
Ohio State 6'2* 7
Colorado St 6'2 5
Washington 6'5 8
UNCG 6'1 9
Western Mich 6'2 22
Penn 6'3 15
Temple 6'4 6


* - Aaron Craft

I think Ryan just had bad games against Ohio State and Temple, but it's worth noting that in both games he had to play a much shorter (and presumably much quicker) player. So maybe he has the opposite problem that Seth has; he's an outside-in big man, maybe smaller, quicker players keep Ryan from doing what he does best. Here's Ryan's table. Again, not a perfect correlation, probably because the issue is quickness, rather than height:



Team def height Seth points
---- ---------- ---- ------
Belmont 6'9 12
Presbyterian 6'10 17
Michigan St 6'7 14
Davidson 6'7 8
Tennessee 6'7 17
Michigan 6'8 17
Kansas 6'9 17
Ohio State 6'7 0
Colorado St 6'4 8
Washington 6'8 16
UNCG 6'6 10
Western Mich 6'7 9
Penn 6'6 18
Temple 6'6 5

[Kedsy]

Phase III covers 10 games including tough road match-ups at Blacksburg and Chapel Hill, and home games versus Virginia and Florida State. Those are four potentially very tough games although FSU appears to be less formidable an opponent than preseason predictions indicated.

Great job, by the way, Bob. You've covered most of the issues and covered them well. There is one other Phase issue I'm interested in seeing, and that is what pace we're going to play. We went faster against Western Michigan and Penn, and it would seem to suit our personnel, especially when Quinn is in the game. Is that something we can continue against tougher competition? This Phase is when we'll find out.

[Greg_Newton]

Yeah, I guess I would argue that Seth, Dre and Tyler have outperformed what I would expect from them in certain games, more than they've underperformed in others. And I don't say that to bash them; I give them big props for coming up big when they do. They all have one or two things they do extremely well, I just think that they may be better built to be "weapons", rather than the pillars of a contending team.

Physically, Andre is undersized at the SF position, Seth is undersized at the SG position, Cook is undersized at the PG position, and all four (incl. Thornton) are below average when it comes to footspeed. I'm hoping I can phrase all this without sounding like I'm ripping the kids, because it's not like they aren't giving it their all, and I have a personal affinity for all of them; it's just that they have to work really hard to move laterally at the same pace that, say, Rivers does naturally. Against better teams, I think we're putting them in positions where they have to work twice as hard as their opponent to win the matchup (especially with a high-pressure defense), which is a hard thing to ask of our guys every single night.

If that was our only option, it wouldn't be the end of the world; we're still a very good team with the potential to get hot and beat anyone on a given night. However, I believe it's the cause of the inconsistencies in play, and it seems to me that we could shuffle our lineups to put our guys in positions where they could be better suited to succeed without having to play beyond their abilities.

ETA: I don't realistically expect us to make any big changes, and agree with Kedsy that Seth-Austin-Dre is probably our best realistic scenario. I just get antsy when my team has multiple players that are physically disadvantaged on the floor at the same team, no matter the level of play.

[Kedsy]

I just get antsy when my team has multiple players that are physically disadvantaged on the floor at the same team, no matter the level of play.

I hear that, and agree that it's a big defensive issue when we're undersized at three positions, which we are when we play Quinn/Seth/Austin or Tyler/Seth/Austin. That's a big reason I like Seth/Austin/Andre as our best perimeter. My primary issue with Tyler/Austin/Michael is our offense would completely bog down with that combination. My primary issue with Quinn/Austin/Michael is with three freshmen we don't have enough experience to play good team defense. I think Michael's best role at this point would be a five or so minutes a game to harass the opposing PG and get him out of his comfort zone.

But presumably K will continue tinkering until someone steps up and our team identity gels. That's the hope, anyway.

[Greg_Newton]

I hear that, and agree that it's a big defensive issue when we're undersized at three positions, which we are when we play Quinn/Seth/Austin or Tyler/Seth/Austin. That's a big reason I like Seth/Austin/Andre as our best perimeter. My primary issue with Tyler/Austin/Michael is our offense would completely bog down with that combination. My primary issue with Quinn/Austin/Michael is with three freshmen we don't have enough experience to play good team defense. I think Michael's best role at this point would be a five or so minutes a game to harass the opposing PG and get him out of his comfort zone.

But presumably K will continue tinkering until someone steps up and our team identity gels. That's the hope, anyway.

Yeah, I think it's hard to put Michael in there without moving Rivers to the point (FWIW, the combo I'm wistfully hoping for is Austin/Seth/Michael, with Dre maybe splitting minutes with MG depending on who's on and matchups). But despite my concerns with Seth and Dre's lateral footspeed, I agree that Seth/Austin/Andre is probably our best all-around combination barring a 2009-style change in that vein.

[tommy]

An interesting way to express the issue, but I think I agree. The keys in many ways are Ryan, Seth, and Andre. I admit to a soft spot where Andre is concerned, but he's only played 15, 20, and 14 minutes the last three games, and I don't like that trend. We've discussed at length the rotation issues, and the 8th guy on K's teams probably won't play more than 10 to 12 minutes, but I think Andre needs to play more than that. One could argue his stats haven't merited more minutes, but I'd call it the other way around -- his limited playing time is the explanation for the low scoring output -- Andre's the kind of guy who needs a chance to get on a roll.

I think Andre may need to play more minutes to get himself involved, but maybe we just don't have that luxury. The problem with Andre is that when he's not scoring on jumpshots, he doesn't often bring a whole lot else to the game. He doesn't handle, he doesn't drive much, he doesn't set up his teammates, he doesn't rebound much, and while he seems to me to be adequate defensively, he's by no means a star on that end. So maybe the staff feels he's got to get into it quickly with his shot, and that shot has to be on, or we're playing at a real disadvantage in too many other areas of the game.



Ryan and Seth are also at somewhat of a crossroad, Seth more than Ryan. I have documented how Seth scores much less when teamed with Tyler, and maybe that's a coincidence, but maybe it's not a coincidence but has nothing to do with Tyler's play.
You know, I've been intrigued by this prospect since you first raised it a couple of weeks ago. And I really sat up and took notice when I read the following quote from K from Al Featherston's front page article today:

“Quinn’s playing great. Tyler’s playing well too. Quinn is a natural point guard. Tyler can play both. Tyler is just a really good leader. He should not be a guy trying to make Quinn’s plays. We should run more set offense [with Thornton]. Although his pass to Mason at the end of the half [against Penn] was pretty good play. He’s not any kind of flamboyant playmaker. Just easy passes, get us into stuff and make sure we’re set and use his leadership. We’re more of a set-oriented team when he’s in. We’re a little more open when Quinn’s in. So we give a little different looks.”

And so K at least seems to offer some support for your notion that perhaps one of the reasons that Seth struggles more when paired with Ty is that Ty doesn't do as much to make plays for his teammates, or make strong moves that then set them up, as does Quinn. "Just easy passes" from Ty, "not making Quinn's plays." K doesn't come out and say that Quinn makes it easier for guys like Seth, but like I say, I think his quote offers some support for that idea.




Physically, Andre is undersized at the SF position, Seth is undersized at the SG position, Cook is undersized at the PG position, and all four (incl. Thornton) are below average when it comes to footspeed. I'm hoping I can phrase all this without sounding like I'm ripping the kids, because it's not like they aren't giving it their all, and I have a personal affinity for all of them; it's just that they have to work really hard to move laterally at the same pace that, say, Rivers does naturally.


I don't realistically expect us to make any big changes, and agree with Kedsy that Seth-Austin-Dre is probably our best realistic scenario. I just get antsy when my team has multiple players that are physically disadvantaged on the floor at the same team, no matter the level of play.


Sounds like you're suggesting we might be alarmingly unathletic.

[Mike Corey]

The key is #7. When that falls into line, so will everything else. Without it, we will struggle and exit early in March.

[Saratoga2]

1) Health



2) Point Guard



3) Rotation



4) Austin Rivers



5) Big Man Offense



6) Miles Plumlee


7) Leadership, Chemistry and Communication



2. We and others have won with small point guards in the past. Connecticut won the title with a small but ultra talented guard last year. It can be done. Personally, I think we are better off with a solid ball handler with great court vision and a playmaking mentality. The tendency to turn the ball over can halt the teams progress and was nearly the cause of some early meltdowns after building big leads. Quinn will improve on the defensive end more than Tyler will improve with his playmaking. Tyler will also continue to foul due to his aggressive play, which is also a liability. I see both playing and sharing the PG duty going forward, but I would prefer Quinn in the game early on and in the end of game scenarios. Tyler's leadership skills are more difficult to measure. Some here have tried and we do need someone to step up along that line, so that is a further asset for him.

3. The rotation no doubt will tighten up going forward. I expect Austina and Mason to get starter minutes throughout, although both have some shortcomings, they are the best we have. My view is Austin needs to think of how the team scores rather than how I score. If he changes his view along that line, he still will get many opportunities and his defensive is pretty good, so we need him in the game. Mason seems to have difficulty getting started with a lot of intensity. Once he gets going, he is out best big on the floor and a legitimate NBA prospect.

Beyond those two we have the remainder of our front line. Both Miles and Ryan have shown a lot of capability with Miles coming on lately and Ryan offering more from the outside. Someone else opined that we shall see how well they can do against some of the bigger ACC front lines. I agree, but I believe the rotation will be shortened to cut Josh's minutes going forward. He is a good substitute when we have an injury or foul trouble.

I believe we should stick with Quinn/Tyler unless that proves to be untenable, based on my PG discussions. That leaves me in a quandry at the SG/SF position. We have Seth, Andre and Michael. All have shortcomings and strengths. Seth brings experience and scoring ability and handles the ball better than either Andre or Michael but at a generous 6'2" and not particularly quick, he is up against it scoring against a quality bigger guard. Andre seems to have disappeared and has become one dimentional. If that dimension was a scorer who consistently put up solid points and player reasonable defense, he would be a logical choice. Finally, we have Michael, who has a lot more size, a knack for defense and reasonable ball handling for his size, but he is very raw at this time. If I were coaching, I would try to move these guys in and out and see what the best combinations are.

6. Miles seems to have turned the corner, allbeit late in his career at Duke. His confidence seems to be growing, he provides solid defense, and has started to be more consistent scoring. What plagued him in the past still shows up at times. I am talking about him losing balls passed to him, walking, throwing inadvertent passes, etc. All these seem to occur because he loses concentration or maybe his reaction time is bothered by thinking too much. I like what he has done of late and perhaps his confidence will grow and will allow him to perform at a high level against even the better opponents. He just might be a source of team leadership as well. Perhaps he could be more vocal, but he certainly showed by the example of his high intensity in the Temple game what it takes to win.

7. We have had some great leaders on the floor in the recent past, yet no one has fully grasped that role on this team. Guys like Nolan, Kyle and Jon got after it on both ends of the floor and got the guys together to get them restarted if the intensity slipped. Will it be Tyler, Miles or someone else?

[ncexnyc]

So based on what I've read so far, it looks to me like when we're discussing Andre we have the old what came first the chicken or the egg scenario. In his case do more minutes equate to better production or does better production equate to more minutes.

As for Ryan forget about charts and excuses. His games in Maui were all 17 point games. He needs to be hungry and he needs to be aggressive. The kid said so himself.

I do agree that the players need to be put into situations that best suit their abilities, but the question is how is this accomplished when several of them bring the same strengths and weaknesses to the table.

What concerns me the most is that in both losses Andre, Ryan, and Seth all pulled a Houdini. Once this is answered then you might be able to find a solution. Of course the pieces to do it, might not even be present in which case the best we can hope for is that Coach K will find a way to mask these problems.

[Bob Green]

We've discussed at length the rotation issues, and the 8th guy on K's teams probably won't play more than 10 to 12 minutes, but I think Andre needs to play more than that. One could argue his stats haven't merited more minutes, but I'd call it the other way around -- his limited playing time is the explanation for the low scoring output -- Andre's the kind of guy who needs a chance to get on a roll.


So based on what I've read so far, it looks to me like when we're discussing Andre we have the old what came first the chicken or the egg scenario. In his case do more minutes equate to better production or does better production equate to more minutes.

I jump for joy when Dawkins knocks down the first shot he takes in a game. More than the need to get on a roll, I believe Dawkins needs to get off to a fast start. He seems to lose confidence when he misses early or isn't involved in the offense. It is important for Dawkins to get a good look soon after entering the game and to knock it down.

[Wander]

I think you guys are over-complicating the Andre thing. The problem can be described very directly:

Three of our five best players are shooting guards.

Not Nolan Smith combo guards, not Demarcus Nelson forward-in-a-guard's-body. Pure shooting guards. Dawkins would start on most (all?) other teams in the country, but it's sort of awkward managing minutes for three guys who are this good and are all offensive-minded players at a single position who are not particularly versatile. I understand there aren't any rules that say you can only start one guy from each position, but it's still a non-ideal meshing of talent.

Andre Dawkins is our fourth or fifth best player, yet the 3rd string guy at his position.

I don't know if there's a perfect solution. What I'd do is just start Rivers, Curry, and Dawkins anyway and experiment with Rivers at point guard. If Rivers doesn't adapt well, then switch to a point-by-committee thing.

[OZZIE4DUKE]

It really all comes down to the same basic criteria that we've lived with for the last ten years - if we shoot well, we win. If we don't shoot well, we have a problem (and MIGHT not win). This year, because of the defensive realities y'all have pointed out so well above, it is even more true. Seth, Ryan and Andre all have the (occasional) ability to be stone cold assassins from the outside, but for the last month that has been missing all too often. Especially from 'Dre. I hope he turns this around, but the pattern has been much like last season when he started out shooting well and then "lost it". We need him to be a vital and effective part of the rotation. And Ryan, he was All World on the China trip, playing like a first team AA and was looked to as our leader on the court. Other than his double-double the other game, he too has been missing on some cylinders. He needs to turn that around. I'm less worried about Seth, once his ankle is back to 95% and his jump shot is back to "ol' reliable".

While I buy into Tyler and Quinn as a two-headed monster at the point (for freshness of both players), I think we'll see more of Quinn starting and finishing games to give us a quick start offensively and again at the end when we need to either hold the lead (ball handling, which is becoming stellar!) or catch up. Tyler as the change of pace defensive specialist, with his 3 point daggers thrown in, really appeals to me. I see their playing time evolving to 25 minutes for Quinn and 15 for Tyler.

Miles and Mason - if only the Miles we saw in the last game can become his norm! Mason started slowly in that game, yet finished with a double-double. As said above, he needs to start his motor earlier in the game.

I am enthralled with Austin Rivers. He's gaining the maturity we need from him and all aspects of his game, on both sides of the ball (to borrow a football term), is there for him, and us, to tap into. As he develops into the lottery pick he's going to be, he can carry us into the promised land. He does need to watch some tape of Kyrie, either from the small sample of last year (first eight games, not the last three), or perhaps what he's doing in Cleveland. He needs to be stronger with the ball when he drives, and I think the better decisions (to pass) will come. And I'm perfectly happy with him taking 22'+ jumpers when they are there for him.

If G and Josh can give us positive minutes, all the better. Josh needs to make that 16' jumper he made repeatedly last year (and did, finally, in the last home game). G, if he explodes into our rotation it will be a big positive.

The ceiling for this team is very high. But the floor is lower than any of us want to see and hopefully, we won't fall there. :cool:

[Greg_Newton]

If you go back and watch, Cook was getting constantly beat and shot over by Udofia today when he went at him, and Rice scored almost all of his points by simply shooting over the smaller Rivers/Dawkins. We should not be getting outrebounded by 50% by a terrible GT team. Perfect case in point near the end of the game where Rivers had position for a rebound, yet Rice's length allowed him to simply jump over him, grab the rebound, and put it back over his head. That's what you get putting a freshman combo guard on a long, experienced SF.

Rivers had a pretty terrible game, but almost all of his issues came from trying to force a 1-2 dribble move from through traffic on the wing. I still maintain that he would benefit from a shift in mentality (his head and body need to be more upright, and he needs a pace between 0 and 60) and in his role; he needs to be handling the ball more in the open court with a focus on controlled, calculated drives and distributing.

But more importantly, you have to wonder how the game would have went with Rivers on Udofia and Gbinije on Rice. Do they still combine for 47 points and 12 rebounds from the PG/SF spots on 16-26 shooting?

[Saratoga2]

If you go back and watch, Cook was getting constantly beat and shot over by Udofia today when he went at him, and Rice scored almost all of his points by simply shooting over the smaller Rivers/Dawkins. We should not be getting outrebounded by 50% by a terrible GT team. Perfect case in point near the end of the game where Rivers had position for a rebound, yet Rice's length allowed him to simply jump over him, grab the rebound, and put it back over his head. That's what you get putting a freshman combo guard on a long, experienced SF.

Rivers had a pretty terrible game, but almost all of his issues came from trying to force a 1-2 dribble move from through traffic on the wing. I still maintain that he would benefit from a shift in mentality (his head and body need to be more upright, and he needs a pace between 0 and 60) and in his role; he needs to be handling the ball more in the open court with a focus on controlled, calculated drives and distributing.

But more importantly, you have to wonder how the game would have went with Rivers on Udofia and Gbinije on Rice. Do they still combine for 47 points and 12 rebounds from the PG/SF spots on 16-26 shooting?

I wondered when Michael would come in for Andre. Would have been a good experiment as Andre was not solid shooting the ball either.

[Newton_14]

If you go back and watch, Cook was getting constantly beat and shot over by Udofia today when he went at him, and Rice scored almost all of his points by simply shooting over the smaller Rivers/Dawkins. We should not be getting outrebounded by 50% by a terrible GT team. Perfect case in point near the end of the game where Rivers had position for a rebound, yet Rice's length allowed him to simply jump over him, grab the rebound, and put it back over his head. That's what you get putting a freshman combo guard on a long, experienced SF.

Rivers had a pretty terrible game, but almost all of his issues came from trying to force a 1-2 dribble move from through traffic on the wing. I still maintain that he would benefit from a shift in mentality (his head and body need to be more upright, and he needs a pace between 0 and 60) and in his role; he needs to be handling the ball more in the open court with a focus on controlled, calculated drives and distributing.

But more importantly, you have to wonder how the game would have went with Rivers on Udofia and Gbinije on Rice. Do they still combine for 47 points and 12 rebounds from the PG/SF spots on 16-26 shooting?

It's an interesting question for sure. I would have liked to have seen those two matchups for a couple of 4-5 minute stretches to see how it shook out. FWIW, I thought Austin defended Rice extremely well yesterday, and forced Rice to hit very tough shots. The slight height advantage was just enough to give Rice an edge, but even with that, Rice had to work his rear off and make shots coming down from the jump. If Austin can improve his help defense, and get better at positioning off the ball, along with figuring out the defensive rotations, he will turn into a stud defender. He has already improved greatly with his on ball defense. I agree he has become the best of the guards at that. (I count Gbinije as a wing).

Udofia would have been a different challenge due to quickness, but I would not bet against Austin being able to at least hold his own there. Not sure how MG would have fared against Rice, but with his height and length, had MG been able to stay in Rice's shorts chasing him through all the screens, he could have made life tough. The question there is, could MG have stayed in Rice's shorts through the screens? Not sure. Had it been a home game, I suspect we would have seen MG get a few minutes on Rice.

I mentioned in another thread, that while playing Cook at the point solves one problem (pure point, assists up, TO's down), it comes with a price, as it puts Seth and Austin on the wing and Andre (or MG) on the pine. That trade off hurts our wing defense and also puts a lethal offensive weapon in Andre in a more limited role. That is the current issue K faces with the various combinations he is tinkering with. At the end of the day, if K sticks with the Cook/Thornton duo at the point, he may have to consider putting Seth in a 6th Man role, and start a perimeter of Cook/Rivers/Dawkins. Yet, again, that comes with a price. Seth is a vet who has shown the ability to take over on the offensive side and hit dagger after dagger. We play much better when Seth is on his game too. But, in 07-08, Jon Scheyer excelled in a 6th Man role, and played starters minutes doing so. It gave us an offensive punch coming off the bench. I have no idea if putting Seth in that role would help or not, but I would be interested to see it attempted.

Also agree with Mr Corey in that on court Leadership is still something this team needs. I hope someone steps up soon. I believe Mason may be the best option as of right now, but I feel at least two of Mason, Seth, and Ryan need to step up and play that role. Tyler is a leader and can be counted on to do that when he is in there, but 2 of those other 3 guys need to help Tyler and start showing vocal, and demonstrative, on-court leadership. It matters.

[Kedsy]

At the end of the day, if K sticks with the Cook/Thornton duo at the point, he may have to consider putting Seth in a 6th Man role, and start a perimeter of Cook/Rivers/Dawkins. Yet, again, that comes with a price. Seth is a vet who has shown the ability to take over on the offensive side and hit dagger after dagger. We play much better when Seth is on his game too. But, in 07-08, Jon Scheyer excelled in a 6th Man role, and played starters minutes doing so. It gave us an offensive punch coming off the bench. I have no idea if putting Seth in that role would help or not, but I would be interested to see it attempted.

The thing is, because the PGs are splitting time and our third big is usually the first one off the bench, if you put Seth on the bench he wouldn't be a sixth man. He'd essentially be an eighth man. Same problem we have right now for Andre. Whoever ends up in that role will for the most part be playing 10 to 15 minutes, and I think that's not a great place for either Seth or Andre. If Michael starts getting playing time this issue gets even more troublesome.

[NSDukeFan]

...

I mentioned in another thread, that while playing Cook at the point solves one problem (pure point, assists up, TO's down), it comes with a price, as it puts Seth and Austin on the wing and Andre (or MG) on the pine. That trade off hurts our wing defense and also puts a lethal offensive weapon in Andre in a more limited role. That is the current issue K faces with the various combinations he is tinkering with. At the end of the day, if K sticks with the Cook/Thornton duo at the point, he may have to consider putting Seth in a 6th Man role, and start a perimeter of Cook/Rivers/Dawkins. Yet, again, that comes with a price. Seth is a vet who has shown the ability to take over on the offensive side and hit dagger after dagger. We play much better when Seth is on his game too. But, in 07-08, Jon Scheyer excelled in a 6th Man role, and played starters minutes doing so. It gave us an offensive punch coming off the bench. I have no idea if putting Seth in that role would help or not, but I would be interested to see it attempted.

Also agree with Mr Corey in that on court Leadership is still something this team needs. I hope someone steps up soon. I believe Mason may be the best option as of right now, but I feel at least two of Mason, Seth, and Ryan need to step up and play that role. Tyler is a leader and can be counted on to do that when he is in there, but 2 of those other 3 guys need to help Tyler and start showing vocal, and demonstrative, on-court leadership. It matters.
The bolded part is the biggest conundrum in my mind. I also like the Seth-Austin-Andre perimeter for defensive reasons and because Seth played very well as the primary ball-handler (shared with Austin) early on. But, I have no doubt that, offensively, Quinn brings something at the lead guard spot that no one else does. I don't think the defensive scheme has to change for this team to improve defensively, as I believe they can get better simply by everyone getting a bit better and knowing their rotations a bit better, even if our perimeter gets beaten more often early on.

The thing is, because the PGs are splitting time and our third big is usually the first one off the bench, if you put Seth on the bench he wouldn't be a sixth man. He'd essentially be an eighth man. Same problem we have right now for Andre. Whoever ends up in that role will for the most part be playing 10 to 15 minutes, and I think that's not a great place for either Seth or Andre. If Michael starts getting playing time this issue gets even more troublesome.

I certainly would not like to see one of our top 3 players as the 8th man, though I think there is still a way that Seth could come off the bench but still split minutes with Andre, Austin and/or the point guards and still get good minutes. The other difficult thing from a minutes perspective is that I think that Josh and Gbinijie have both looked like they deserve more minutes (or would on a team where they wouldn't have to replace very good players to get them.)

[superdave]

A lot of this thread seems to be focusing on Dr. Dawkins. If he plays well enough to earn more minutes, that means he is most likely scoring the ball incredibly efficiently and that is good for Duke. Here's a look at Andre's stats over his first two years:

2010 season - .379 on 3s, averaged 1 2-point shot per game. 4.4 points in 12.6 minutes. 2 DNPs.
We know the personal issues he had about mid-season with his sister. His minutes and scoring really tailed off in January. He only scored 51 points in the final 26 games and had no double digit scoring games during that span.

2011 season- .427 on 3s, averaged 1.5 2-point shots per game. 8.1 points in 21 minutes.
Andre scored in double digits in 10 of the first 17 games last year. Then he only scored 101 points in the final 20 games and had two double digit scoring games over that span. Over that stretch he shot 22-67 from 3, less than the break-even .333 rate. He also had three games in that stretch in single-digit minutes.

Here's a quick look at all his games where he's played 30+ minutes. I know this is a chicken-egg argument. If he's hot early, he's going to play big minutes:

2010 season - No games with 30+ minutes.

2011 season
Butler - 32 minutes - 3-5 fgs, 2-4 3s, 10 points. Win.
Bradley - 31 min - 10-17 fgs, 8-14 3s, 28 points. Win.
Elon - 32 min - 5-9 fgs, 3-6 3s, 17 points. Win.
UAB - 32 min - 3-4 fgs, 2-3 3s, 8 points. Win.
Maryland - 30 min - 3-6 fgs, 2-5 3s, 8 points. Win.
UVa - 32 min - 5-11 fgs, 3-8 3s, 14 points. Win.

2012 season
MSU - 38 minutes - 8-15 fgs, 6-10 3s, 26 points. Win
TN - 32 minutes - 4-7 fgs, 2-4 3s, 10 points. Win.
Michigan - 35 minutes - 5-12 fgs, 4-9 3s, 14 points. Win.
Kansas - 34 minutes - 2-5 fgs, 2-4 3s, 6 points. Win.
Washington - 32 minutes - 5-13 fgs, 2-9 3s, 17 points. Win.

So Duke is 11-0 in games where Andre averages 30+. Some of those games he scores big, some of those games he's right around his average.

Here's a quick look at Andre's stat lines in Duke's losses the past 3 seasons:

2010 season
Wisco - 22 min - 4-4 fgs, 4-4 3s, 12 points.
GT - 12 min - 1-3, 0-2, 2 points.
State - 9 min - 0-0, 0-0.
Gtown - 13 min - 1-4, 1-4, 5 points.
Maryland - 9 minutes - 2-3, 2-3, 6 points.

2011 season
FSU - 29 min - 2-9, 1-8, 8 points.
St Johns - 27 min - 3-8, 1-6, 7 points.
VT - 18 min - 2-4, 2-4, 6 points.
Unc - 12 min - 0-1, 0-1.
Zona - 22 min - 3-5, 1-2, 9 points.

2012 season
OSU - 19 min - 0-1, 0-0.
Temple - 14 min - 0-3, 0-2.
Scoreless in both our losses this year.

I am not entirely sure what all this means. If I were the coach ( a big stretch, thanks) I'd run a few plays for him early and get him 2-3 goods looks and decide from there if it's going to be a 15 minute night or a 30 minute night. This of course assumes he's busting his tail on defense. I would also make sure he knows he must channel Rip Hamilton coming off screens to get open. No loafing. But if he's playing well and earning big minutes, we're going to win. That's awfully enticing.

[Kedsy]

I am not entirely sure what all this means. If I were the coach ( a big stretch, thanks) I'd run a few plays for him early and get him 2-3 goods looks and decide from there if it's going to be a 15 minute night or a 30 minute night. This of course assumes he's busting his tail on defense. I would also make sure he knows he must channel Rip Hamilton coming off screens to get open. No loafing. But if he's playing well and earning big minutes, we're going to win. That's awfully enticing.

Very interesting analysis. Thanks. Although I do think there's some chicken and egg going on here. I agree with you that running a few plays early for Andre would be good for both his game and the team.

[Saratoga2]

A lot of this thread seems to be focusing on Dr. Dawkins. If he plays well enough to earn more minutes, that means he is most likely scoring the ball incredibly efficiently and that is good for Duke. Here's a look at Andre's stats over his first two years:

2010 season - .379 on 3s, averaged 1 2-point shot per game. 4.4 points in 12.6 minutes. 2 DNPs.
We know the personal issues he had about mid-season with his sister. His minutes and scoring really tailed off in January. He only scored 51 points in the final 26 games and had no double digit scoring games during that span.

2011 season- .427 on 3s, averaged 1.5 2-point shots per game. 8.1 points in 21 minutes.
Andre scored in double digits in 10 of the first 17 games last year. Then he only scored 101 points in the final 20 games and had two double digit scoring games over that span. Over that stretch he shot 22-67 from 3, less than the break-even .333 rate. He also had three games in that stretch in single-digit minutes.

Here's a quick look at all his games where he's played 30+ minutes. I know this is a chicken-egg argument. If he's hot early, he's going to play big minutes:

2010 season - No games with 30+ minutes.

2011 season
Butler - 32 minutes - 3-5 fgs, 2-4 3s, 10 points. Win.
Bradley - 31 min - 10-17 fgs, 8-14 3s, 28 points. Win.
Elon - 32 min - 5-9 fgs, 3-6 3s, 17 points. Win.
UAB - 32 min - 3-4 fgs, 2-3 3s, 8 points. Win.
Maryland - 30 min - 3-6 fgs, 2-5 3s, 8 points. Win.
UVa - 32 min - 5-11 fgs, 3-8 3s, 14 points. Win.

2012 season
MSU - 38 minutes - 8-15 fgs, 6-10 3s, 26 points. Win
TN - 32 minutes - 4-7 fgs, 2-4 3s, 10 points. Win.
Michigan - 35 minutes - 5-12 fgs, 4-9 3s, 14 points. Win.
Kansas - 34 minutes - 2-5 fgs, 2-4 3s, 6 points. Win.
Washington - 32 minutes - 5-13 fgs, 2-9 3s, 17 points. Win.

So Duke is 11-0 in games where Andre averages 30+. Some of those games he scores big, some of those games he's right around his average.

Here's a quick look at Andre's stat lines in Duke's losses the past 3 seasons:

2010 season
Wisco - 22 min - 4-4 fgs, 4-4 3s, 12 points.
GT - 12 min - 1-3, 0-2, 2 points.
State - 9 min - 0-0, 0-0.
Gtown - 13 min - 1-4, 1-4, 5 points.
Maryland - 9 minutes - 2-3, 2-3, 6 points.

2011 season
FSU - 29 min - 2-9, 1-8, 8 points.
St Johns - 27 min - 3-8, 1-6, 7 points.
VT - 18 min - 2-4, 2-4, 6 points.
Unc - 12 min - 0-1, 0-1.
Zona - 22 min - 3-5, 1-2, 9 points.

2012 season
OSU - 19 min - 0-1, 0-0.
Temple - 14 min - 0-3, 0-2.
Scoreless in both our losses this year.

I am not entirely sure what all this means. If I were the coach ( a big stretch, thanks) I'd run a few plays for him early and get him 2-3 goods looks and decide from there if it's going to be a 15 minute night or a 30 minute night. This of course assumes he's busting his tail on defense. I would also make sure he knows he must channel Rip Hamilton coming off screens to get open. No loafing. But if he's playing well and earning big minutes, we're going to win. That's awfully enticing.

Probaby a lot of Duke fans are looking for more consistency as Andre's experience grows. That hasn't been the case as he still can have a big game or two followed by a disappearing act. Andre has been around long enough to expect him show up every night and at least contribute in a meaningful way. We all are rooting for him, but he has to bring his game all of the time.

[NSDukeFan]

Probaby a lot of Duke fans are looking for more consistency as Andre's experience grows. That hasn't been the case as he still can have a big game or two followed by a disappearing act. Andre has been around long enough to expect him show up every night and at least contribute in a meaningful way. We all are rooting for him, but he has to bring his game all of the time.

I agree with you in theory and in practice he has to make sure he brings his 'A' defensive game every game. Offensively, however, his best trait is his fantastic 3-point shooting and that depends on how many open looks he gets, which may not be completely under his control, depending on how well the team is moving the basketball, who is guarding him and how well, and the defensive strategy and focus of the other team. My impression is that Andre has been looking to take the ball to the basket a little bit more lately and he tends not to turn the ball over very much, but his best offense is his spot-up shooting, which is in part determined by his movement without the ball, but also in part on elements outside of his control.

[Kedsy]

I agree with you in theory and in practice he has to make sure he brings his 'A' defensive game every game. Offensively, however, his best trait is his fantastic 3-point shooting and that depends on how many open looks he gets, which may not be completely under his control, depending on how well the team is moving the basketball, who is guarding him and how well, and the defensive strategy and focus of the other team. My impression is that Andre has been looking to take the ball to the basket a little bit more lately and he tends not to turn the ball over very much, but his best offense is his spot-up shooting, which is in part determined by his movement without the ball, but also in part on elements outside of his control.

Also, part of Andre's value on offense is the threat of his taking a three-point shot. Even if he doesn't get many shots, the opposition has to guard him very closely. Obviously this value is not reflected in his stats, but it makes it more difficult for opposing defenses to help on Austin, Seth, Ryan, and Mason, and that's a good thing.

So I agree that the key for more minutes for Andre is his defensive effort.

[Saratoga2]

I mentioned in another thread, that while playing Cook at the point solves one problem (pure point, assists up, TO's down), it comes with a price, as it puts Seth and Austin on the wing and Andre (or MG) on the pine. That trade off hurts our wing defense and also puts a lethal offensive weapon in Andre in a more limited role. That is the current issue K faces with the various combinations he is tinkering with. At the end of the day, if K sticks with the Cook/Thornton duo at the point, he may have to consider putting Seth in a 6th Man role, and start a perimeter of Cook/Rivers/Dawkins. Yet, again, that comes with a price. Seth is a vet who has shown the ability to take over on the offensive side and hit dagger after dagger. We play much better when Seth is on his game too. But, in 07-08, Jon Scheyer excelled in a 6th Man role, and played starters minutes doing so. It gave us an offensive punch coming off the bench. I have no idea if putting Seth in that role would help or not, but I would be interested to see it attempted.



Yes, there are difficult decisions for the coaching staff. We seem to have in Quinn a primary ball handler who has court vision and the ability to get players the ball in scoring position. He is very good in ball security and can to some degree get past his first defender. The problem is that he is also short as guards go and is a freshman learning to play Duke defensive basketball. When you compare him to Tyler, there is a big difference in ball handling and offensive fluidity, yet while Tyler is nearly the same size, he is aggressive, has some leadership skills. He is very aggressive, but runs up the fouls at a high rate. Putting either of these two into the game forces a decision on other players. We want to keep Austin in the game for 30 plus minutes. He has reasonable size for a shooting guard and can put a lot of pressure on the defenses, even though he is still quite turnover prone. That leaves one starting/high PT minute position left. If you play Seth, you get a versitile scoring guard who plays reasonable defense, but the backcourt is small and appears to have difficulty with large guards. If you put Andre in, we get a little more size, but less scoring versatility. He provides a little more size but it hasn't been showing up on the scoreboard. If you put Michael in, you get a lot more size in another Freshman. Maybe it has happened, but I don't remember coach K starting 3 freshmen.

Maybe one answer would be to make Quinn and Seth the two headed point guard monster and place Tyler further back on the bench. That way we could have Andre and Michael share the wing duty while perhaps Andre could sub for Austin to keep the lineup size up while still maintaining significant scoring punch. It is a little different view of the solution and one in which coach K seems unlikely to implement.

[Kedsy]

Maybe it has happened, but I don't remember coach K starting 3 freshmen.

1982-83. Actually four frosh started a lot of games that year (Johnny Dawkins/Mark Alarie/David Henderson/Jay Bilas). On the other hand, our record that year was 11-17.

I also believe we started three freshmen on December 21, 1999 (Jason Williams, Carlos Boozer, Mike Dunleavy -- only game that year), but since 1983 that may be the only time.

[superdave]

We're #50 in Adjusted D on KenPom right now. But as I look over a little more to the right, I see that our Opponents’ average adjusted offensive efficiency (OppO) is #2.

Am I reading this correctly to see that part of why our defense is ranked fairly low for a Duke team is that we've played a solid run of offensive teams?

Here's where our opponents rank in AdjO according to KenPom:
8. Kansas
9. Belmont
10. Michigan St.
12. Ohio St.
14. Davidson
20. Colorado St.
30. Michigan
41. Temple
62. Washington
96. Virginia
97. Tennessee
120. W. Michigan
171. Penn
175. Clemson
178. GT
212. PC
257. UNC-G

That's three games vs. Top 10, six vs. Top 20, and 11 of 17 games vs. Top 100. That's a pretty impressive schedule (we're also #1 in Overall Strength of Schedule (Pyth)).

Here's where future opponents rank -
220. WFU
113. FSU
95. Maryland
181. St John's
65. VPI
43. Miami
19. UNC
25. NCSU
278. BC

So our next "really good" offensive opponents are UNC (twice) and State (once). Everyone else is ok to bad. It looks like our AdjD could rise somewhat significantly just because the 2nd half of the season is against teams with significantly less offensive efficiency than the 1st half of the season.

Everyone has known our season was front loaded with Maui, Ohio State and Michigan State, but when you see the relative AdjO rankings of Belmont, Davidson and Colorado State, you can really appreciate the path we've been through already. The mid-majors we've played are pretty solid.

Of course we all know this team has to play better defense, but the fact that we've played such good offensive opponents and are 15-2 is pretty encouraging. We will get better defensively and I look forward to seeing how high we can rise in AdjD considering future opponents.

[Kedsy]

Am I reading this correctly to see that part of why our defense is ranked fairly low for a Duke team is that we've played a solid run of offensive teams?

Theoretically, I don't think you're correct. That's why it's "adjusted," to take into account the quality of the opponent.

I suppose it's possible that the constant pressure of playing great offensive teams has artificially depressed our defensive rating. But I imagine it's also possible our poor D has artificially inflated the offensive rating of the teams we've played. We need to improve on D, either way.

[superdave]

Theoretically, I don't think you're correct. That's why it's "adjusted," to take into account the quality of the opponent.

I suppose it's possible that the constant pressure of playing great offensive teams has artificially depressed our defensive rating. But I imagine it's also possible our poor D has artificially inflated the offensive rating of the teams we've played. We need to improve on D, either way.

Some follow up questions -

Is Pomeroy adjusting for quality of opponent in OppO/AdjO or is he adjusting for pace? I thought he was adjusting for pace to show relative efficiency, by taking a team's level of efficiency (points per possession) and applying it to 100 possessions.

If the average AdjO of the opponents in your first 20 games of the season is 50 and the average AdjO of the opponents in your second 20 games of the season is 150 then your AdjD ranking should steadily improve over the course of the second half of the season, right? You should be less efficient on D vs. above-average AdjO teams and more efficient on D vs. below-average AdjO teams, right? That was the point I was trying to make above. If I'm off base on this point, I'm still not quite sure why.

[NSDukeFan]

Some follow up questions -

Is Pomeroy adjusting for quality of opponent in OppO/AdjO or is he adjusting for pace? I thought he was adjusting for pace to show relative efficiency, by taking a team's level of efficiency (points per possession) and applying it to 100 possessions.

If the average AdjO of the opponents in your first 20 games of the season is 50 and the average AdjO of the opponents in your second 20 games of the season is 150 then your AdjD ranking should steadily improve over the course of the second half of the season, right? You should be less efficient on D vs. above-average AdjO teams and more efficient on D vs. below-average AdjO teams, right? That was the point I was trying to make above. If I'm off base on this point, I'm still not quite sure why.

As Kedsy was saying though, your offensive and defensive number are adjusted for the teams you have played, meaning they are not raw efficiency numbers, but adjusted based on the strength of the team's opposition.

[superdave]

As Kedsy was saying though, your offensive and defensive number are adjusted for the teams you have played, meaning they are not raw efficiency numbers, but adjusted based on the strength of the team's opposition.

OK - this makes sense. Thank you.

[Kedsy]

Some follow up questions -

Is Pomeroy adjusting for quality of opponent in OppO/AdjO or is he adjusting for pace? I thought he was adjusting for pace to show relative efficiency, by taking a team's level of efficiency (points per possession) and applying it to 100 possessions.

If the average AdjO of the opponents in your first 20 games of the season is 50 and the average AdjO of the opponents in your second 20 games of the season is 150 then your AdjD ranking should steadily improve over the course of the second half of the season, right? You should be less efficient on D vs. above-average AdjO teams and more efficient on D vs. below-average AdjO teams, right? That was the point I was trying to make above. If I'm off base on this point, I'm still not quite sure why.

What Pomeroy calls "raw" defensive efficiency is points allowed per 100 possessions, so that's where the pace comes in. What he calls "adjusted" efficiency is adjusted for the quality of opposing offenses, the site of each game, and when each game was played (recent games get more weight) (http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/help_with_team_page/).

Thus, although you're right we should be less efficient against top offenses, Pomeroy claims to take this into account. So the only way your observation is correct is if he's not adjusting enough for the quality of your opponent. Which is possible, but unlikely to be too big a factor.

[Greg_Newton]

So obviously the Gbinije ship has sailed at this point... but dare I say, Rivers is looking more and more like our lead guard on offense. Don't look now, but he's dished out 5 assists in each of the last two games, along with a few more kick-outs for threes that didn't go down. 6 TOs during that span, so he hasn't been perfect, but could we be starting to see a breakthrough in his offensive approach? He's certainly looking up one dribble earlier on most drives - rather than waiting until he's triple-teamed, he's anticipating the help and dishing it off at the correct time.

Our defensive issues are obviously priority 1-A, but this could quietly become an important storyline to follow.

[Kedsy]

...but could we be starting to see a breakthrough in his offensive approach?

Austin said as much in a Herald-Sun article (http://www.heraldsun.com/view/full_story/17383456/article-Duke-slams-Hokies?) linked from the main page:


“Sometimes you look at things you are doing well and things you haven’t been doing well,” Rivers said. “I’ve been looking at it. I know how I can create. Everybody is going to try to come at me because I can score so well. These past couple of games I’ve been trying to distribute more.”

Hopefully he really means it and is not just paying lip service. He and the team will both be much more effective if he hits the open man after drawing the double- or triple-team.

[MCFinARL]

Austin said as much in a Herald-Sun article (http://www.heraldsun.com/view/full_story/17383456/article-Duke-slams-Hokies?) linked from the main page:



Hopefully he really means it and is not just paying lip service. He and the team will both be much more effective if he hits the open man after drawing the double- or triple-team.
Well, there is a middle ground here--probably no reason to think he is just paying lip service, even though he is obviously pretty media savvy. But he might mean it in his head and still not have it so ingrained that he looks to do it instinctively in games. That being said, recent trends in his play suggest he is getting there.

[Kedsy]

Well, there is a middle ground here--probably no reason to think he is just paying lip service, even though he is obviously pretty media savvy. But he might mean it in his head and still not have it so ingrained that he looks to do it instinctively in games. That being said, recent trends in his play suggest he is getting there.

Sorry, that's what I meant. I don't think he was saying it just to say it. But I'm also sure he knows it's the right thing to say. And the right thing to do. And he's done it for two games now. I just hope going forward he expends his mental energy (while on offense) trying to recognize the double team and to distribute more. If so, our offense will be very difficult to stop.

On the other hand, he also has to spend his mental energy on defense. If we can only have one thing, that should be it.

But I'm hoping for both.

[gam7]

Is there a Phase IV in the works? If not, I'd be willing to take a crack at it.

[Kedsy]

Is there a Phase IV in the works? If not, I'd be willing to take a crack at it.

I believe SilkyJ is working on it.