the case for making Quinn Cook Duke's starting PG, and other changes

[Oriole Way]

In recent years, Coach K has had a tendency to make at least one starting lineup change following losses in which the team played poorly. I wanted to share a few key changes I feel the team should make going forward, including one move I have felt strongly about since the beginning of the season.

As the title of this post suggests, I feel quite strongly about making Quinn Cook Duke’s starting point guard. In fact, I believe this lineup change is the most important single adjustment since Coach K shifted Jon Scheyer over to PG in the 2008-2009 season. As I posted back then, I felt that moving Scheyer to the point and starting Elliot Williams were the biggest keys towards turning Duke’s season around and dramatically improving the team (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?14566-the-case-for-continuing-to-use-Jon-Scheyer-at-the-point), and I called for the moves to be made before they actually were. Just like I got into a few heated debates with posters on DBR over the merits of playing Scheyer at PG at the time (several emphatically disagreed with me in regards to both moving Scheyer and giving Williams extended playing time), I have also debated with posters with regards to how Coach K has handled Cook this season. Making those moves in 2009 turned out to improve the team, and moving Scheyer planted an important seed for a national championship run in 2010. I feel that making Cook Duke’s primary PG this season could have a similar effect.

The moves I would like to see made:

1. Start Quinn Cook
2. Start Miles Plumlee
3. Increase Minutes for Michael Gbinije
4. Change Our Defensive Approach: De-Emphasize Pressure Man-to-Man Defense and Employ Containment Man-to-Man Defense

I believe changes #1 and #4 are the most important to making Duke a better team because they will significantly improve both our offensive and defensive efficiency, and because they will have the greatest positive impact when considering the composition, strengths, and weaknesses of our roster.


Start Quinn Cook, bring Tyler Thornton off the bench

Timeframe: This move should be made as soon as possible, but I suspect Coach K will wait another few games – or, perhaps, until after Duke’s next loss - to allow Cook to get familiarized with ACC competition.


I start with this lineup change because it is the most important in realizing this team’s potential. Not only does installing Cook as the starting PG and giving him the lion’s share of minutes at the position make the team better this season, but it also gives Cook – who will almost certainly be Duke’s starting PG for the next 3 years barring injury – valuable experience running the team so that he’s even more polished and experienced in future seasons. I have been advocating for Duke to make Quinn its starting point guard since November, and I think the sooner he is starting, the better. The reasons for why I state that Cook will make this team better follow.

Cook is Duke’s only true scoring/passing PG. He is the only guard on the roster who can regularly penetrate into the lane and find open teammates off his drives. Austin Rivers is the only other Duke guard who can penetrate with regularity, but he’s a natural scorer who looks to score or get to the foul line first, and set up his teammates second. Cook is always looking to pass, but is also more than capable of creating his own shot and scoring off of penetration. I feel that Cook’s ability to put pressure on the opposing defense is sorely needed at this juncture, and it is needed in the context of the starting lineup.

The main reason starting Cook is so important is that it will significantly improve Duke’s offensive efficiency, which has been a major problem in the team’s losses. Granted, poor team defense is this team’s overall #1 problem, both in losses and in wins. However, given the lack of lateral quickness and defensive ability up and down Duke’s lineup, improving our defensive efficiency is much more difficult than improving our offensive efficiency. As such, making a move to address the team’s excessive turnovers, lack of guard penetration, and inefficient assist-to-turnover ratio is more feasible, and should become more of a priority. Furthermore, improving Duke’s offensive efficiency will simultaneously make Duke a better defensive team.

The simple principle at play here is that Duke is a better defensive team when it is limiting its turnovers and missed field goals on the offensive end – in other words, it’s easier to set up your team’s defense after a made basket. By starting Cook and giving him major minutes, Duke will drastically reduce its turnovers. And because Cook is also Duke’s best passer and play-maker in terms of finding and setting up his teammates for open shot opportunities, our offense will score more often and more easily. Unfortunately, Tyler Thornton, Seth Curry, and Rivers turn the ball over too much in traffic and as a result of good man-to-man and/or pressure team defense. This problem was evident in the loss to Temple, as those three guards combined for 10 turnovers and only 5 assists, with several turnovers leading to fast break opportunities and easy scores for Temple. Offensive efficiency will certainly improve with Cook running the team more and Thornton, Rivers, and Curry handling the ball less.

As I pointed out in November after 5 games, I have been extremely concerned by Duke’s negative assist-to-turnover ratio. (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?26615-the-point-guard-conundrum&p=530047#post530047) At the time, not only did I state that I didn’t expect Duke’s assist-to-turnover ratio to drastically improve given our roster and style of play (and knowing Coach K would likely be slow to install Cook as starting PG), but I noted that Duke would best be served by starting Quinn Cook as the team’s point guard. Well, we’re in January now and our assist-to-turnover ratio is indeed still negative, and we have just lost a game we likely would have had a much better chance of winning with Cook starting and limiting our turnovers.

As I said in November:


This Duke team, if it keeps up anywhere near it's current pace, could potentially be the first team since 2006-2007 Duke - one of the worst Coach K teams in the past 15 years - to have a negative assist to turnover ratio. Even if Duke manages a positive ratio this season, this team looks to be the worst A/T team since 2006-2007. Luckily, this team not only has much more talent and depth than the 2006-2007 edition, but it has a few quality guards who are capable of improving the current A/T ratio. Installing a pure point guard as a more integral part of the rotation will be key to improving Duke's efficiency.


National Championship teams simply don’t have negative assist-to-turnover ratios. If this team wants to reach its potential, it will need to significantly improve both its defense and offense, and it will also need Quinn Cook starting at point guard.

In Duke’s past three games, Cook has 20 assists and only 1 turnover. Cook’s assist-to-turnover ratio on the season is almost 4.5 to 1, which is by far the best on the team. While we may not expect him to maintain such an impressive ratio as a starter, his assist rate would certainly go up by playing more minutes alongside the other starters. Cook’s current level of production is even more impressive considering he has been passing to the lesser offensively-efficient players on the team when he’s come off the bench.

Finally, as much as I love Tyler Thornton, he’s simply not doing the job as Duke’s starting point guard. I believe Coach K is misusing Thornton as a starter, even though I believe K’s original intentions were to reward Thornton for his quality play and energetic defensive effort in the Michigan and Kansas games in the Maui Invitational, as well as send a message to the rest of the team that defense and leadership were priorities for this team. Unfortunately, Thornton’s abilities at this time are not conducive to being an adequate starting point guard, and it would be better for the team to bring Thornton off the bench in a more limited role.

Thornton has several strengths, including being a strong team defender off the ball, a very good spot-up perimeter shooter, a good communicator on the court, and a very good leader. However, Thornton also has several weaknesses in his game at this early stage in his career. For a starting point guard, Thornton does not set up his teammates enough in terms of passing and finding open men – his very low assist totals in steady minutes illustrate that he doesn’t actually control the offense or attack the basket when he’s in the game. Thornton is an inadequate on-the-ball defender, as he frequently has trouble staying in front of his defensive assignment. As evidenced by his assist-to-turnover ratio (1.5 to 1), he does not do a great job of taking care of the ball or distributing the ball, especially considering that Thornton moves very little with the ball once he crosses half court and initiates the offense. Finally, Thornton fouls at an extremely high rate which compromises Duke’s team defense and puts Duke’s opponents in the bonus too quickly.

Since taking over the starting PG position, Thornton has 12 assists and 8 turnovers in 6 games averaging over 20 minutes a game. 2 assists per game is unacceptable from the PG position, in addition to the lackluster assist-to-turnover ratio he has produced. Thornton does little to break down defenses and set up his teammates, as there have been very instances in the 6 games he has started that Thornton has actually penetrated into the lane and produced a shot attempt or pass for an assist. Since Duke has only one other guard - Rivers - who can penetrate regularly, it would make the offense much more effective to add another option for driving into the lane. Cook provides that much-needed capability.

The way Thornton has run this team is by bringing the ball up the court, and then passing the ball on the wings to Curry or Rivers. After that, he simply becomes a spot-up shooter. He does not need to be the starting PG in order to do that and also provide his aforementioned skills/abilities.

Also, by starting, Thornton is involuntarily putting Duke in a precarious team foul situation, allowing opponents to get to the line faster. His foul situation also makes it clear that he is outmatched as a starter against quality teams.

Against Colorado St., Washington, UNC Greensboro, and Temple, he has accrued 3, 4, 4, and 4 fouls respectively in his time as a starter. He was basically at risk of fouling out of each of those games. With the glaring exception of UNC Greensboro (RPI 301), all of those teams are top 100 RPI teams, with Temple (17) and Colorado St. (42) being very good, top 50 RPI teams. Those foul rates tell me that Thornton is outmatched at his position athletically and defensively, and his excessive fouling leads to a better foul situation for our opponents which not only puts them at the line earlier each half, but also puts pressure on Duke's other defenders (as well as Thornton, obviously) not to foul further as a result of being in a disadvantageous team foul position. While not a main contributing factor, this effect does indeed contribute to our porous team defense.

Thornton can continue to be a valuable player if he comes off the bench at less than 20 minutes a game. Starting him at PG for more than 20 minutes, however, is a misuse of Thornton's strengths. He can still provide his strengths (shooting, hustle, leadership, and team defense) from a more appropriate and efficient role off the bench.

I would like to see Cook start and get 25+ minutes a game as soon as possible, with Thornton getting roughly 15 minutes a game relieving him.


Start Miles Plumlee, bring Ryan Kelly off the bench

Timeframe: This move should be made immediately, and if Coach K makes a change in the starting lineup against Georgia Tech, I expect this to be it. This change should be re-evaluated on a game-by-game basis.


I like this move for 2 primary reasons:

One, Miles played one of his best games in a Duke uniform against Temple (not sure why he only got 19 minutes of playing time despite dominating Temple’s undersized post players), and he has been providing quality minutes on the bench.

Two, Ryan Kelly still seems to be playing hurt. He hasn’t quite been the same player since he suffered an injury in December, and moving him to the bench would give him some time to re-assert himself.

I think starting Miles would create a nice opportunity for our senior captain to continue to build up his confidence, as well as place him in a more prominent position of leadership. The leadership on this team is an intangible area that needs improvement, as Duke’s juniors haven’t quite risen to the occasion – whether because they haven’t provided the example, or they haven’t been vocal enough, or both. As great kids that Curry, Dawkins, Kelly, and Mason are, all of them are rather quiet on the court, and none of them have really asserted themselves as a leader when things aren’t going Duke’s way. Starting Duke’s most experienced captain could potentially be a way to remedy this problem.

More importantly, Miles has been extremely productive since Duke’s loss to Ohio State. He’s made the most of his minutes and he’s been nothing short of excellent on both ends of the floor.

In a little over 20.5 minutes per game in the 6 games since the Ohio State game, Miles has produced the following:

- 23/31 from the floor, a 74.2% FG percentage
- 51 rebounds, 8.5 per game (which is easily his best rebounding stretch of the season)
- a whopping 17 blocks, 2.83 per game, an outstanding rate given his limited minutes
- 11/13 from the foul line, an 84.6% FT percentage

In that 6-game stretch, not once did Miles make more than two turnovers in any game, nor did he commit more than 2 fouls in any game.

While it can’t be said that Ryan Kelly has been shooting poorly over the same stretch (20/43 from the field, 46.5% FG), he is certainly much less assertive on the floor than earlier this season, taking only three shots against UNC Greensboro, six shots against Western Michigan, and two shots against Temple. Coach K’s usage of Kelly also seems to indicate that Ryan is likely playing a little hurt, as Kelly has averaged only 21.8 minutes per game since the Ohio State loss, compared to 26.8 minutes per game in the first eight games of the season.

I think Miles deserves to start on a game-by-game basis (giving him about 25 minutes a game) and changes can be made based on how Miles and Kelly perform, and based on how quickly Kelly returns to health (if he has indeed been slowed by injury). Worst case scenario, Miles doesn’t maintain his recent elite production, and he can return to his role on the bench. Best case scenario, Miles experiences a senior year epiphany similar to that of Brian Zoubek in 2010. While Zoubek’s late season emergence was rare and seemingly out of nowhere, I wouldn’t be surprised if Miles could take his game up another level given his exceptional size and athletic ability.

I’d like to see Miles get 25 minutes a game to see if he can continue to be productive in the additional 4-5 minutes a game. If Miles can’t, the team can simply go back to Kelly if his play merits doing so.

I’ll make another post on my last two points, including changing Duke’s defensive approach, at a later date when I have the time. I’m sure many posters will continue to disagree with me in regards to Cook, but I am certainly open to continuing a good debate about it.

Sorry for the length of the post... Go Duke.

[uh_no]

I appreciate the detail you put in here, but your argument for quinn is heavily biased by stats against 3 cupcakes. I'm sure you noticed the stinker both he and tyler turned in against temple. I'm not sure how one can so assuredly say that quinn is clearly the answer when he played so poorly in our only recent game against quality competition.

Perhaps the answer is to temper expectations until we can see what he does against actual competition instead of claiming he must be the answer since he put up gaudy numbers against weak competition? If we want to go far in the tournament, we'll have to play against the Temple-quality teams of the world, and I don't care if quinn puts up 10 thousand assists against penn and western michigan if he can't do squat against teams stronger than a 12 seed.

We will get a much better idea after virginia next week, and certainly carolina down the road.

[RoyalBlue08]

Looks like Coach reads this board. :)

[OZZIE4DUKE]

Looks like Coach reads this board. :)
He knows where all the great basketball minds reside! :cool:

[Indoor66]

He knows where all the great basketball minds reside! :cool:

Either that or he can also see the obvious.

[wsb3]

To me it is not about playing cupcakes or comparing stats as much as Quinn's upside is far higher than any other player we have at the point. I love Tyler off the bench & the energy he brings & Seth playing off the ball, but if we are going to be really good in March I believe it is with Quinn.

[Oriole Way]

Either that or he can also see the obvious.

It hasn't been obvious to all the posters who disagreed with me for demanding Cook should start and get more minutes, including well-respected posters like Jim Sumner who took me to task for criticizing Coach K's usage of Cook and Thornton. I've argued with lots of posters on this board and The Devil's Den while emphatically claiming that Cook should start and get major minutes.

I feel that Quinn played a very good first game in the fire on the road. We still need to work on our defense, but we are on our way to realizing our potential now.

[ncexnyc]

It hasn't been obvious to all the posters who disagreed with me for demanding Cook should start and get more minutes, including well-respected posters like Jim Sumner who took me to task for criticizing Coach K's usage of Cook and Thornton. I've argued with lots of posters on this board and The Devil's Den while emphatically claiming that Cook should start and get major minutes.

I feel that Quinn played a very good first game in the fire on the road. We still need to work on our defense, but we are on our way to realizing our potential now.
Yes, you did call for Quinn to start and I believe it was after the Washington game that you became very outspoken about that. I think your claims about EWill is what upset a number of people.

[Des Esseintes]

It hasn't been obvious to all the posters who disagreed with me for demanding Cook should start and get more minutes, including well-respected posters like Jim Sumner who took me to task for criticizing Coach K's usage of Cook and Thornton. I've argued with lots of posters on this board and The Devil's Den while emphatically claiming that Cook should start and get major minutes.


I've read the same posts you have, and it didn't go down like you said. Basically no one, not Jim Sumner nor any of the well-respected posters who disagreed with you, suggested Tyler should start for the rest of the year and Quinn should stay on the bench with his same minutes. Nobody suggested that. I cannot think of a single poster on here, excepting perhaps Greybeard, who has suggested Tyler had a higher ceiling than Quinn.

What people said over and over again was that K probably had his reasons for ordering his rotation the way he did and that if history was anything to go by, performance in practice had a lot to do with it. You want to act as though the world finally caught up with your truth-telling. Far more likely, Quinn is finally fully healthy and performing at a level in practice, on defense that merits greater playing time.

I don't think your analysis of the game is bad, man. But you have to drop this Galileo-persecuted-by-Rome act.

[Oriole Way]

Yes, you did call for Quinn to start and I believe it was after the Washington game that you became very outspoken about that. I think your claims about EWill is what upset a number of people.

That's fine, I was right about those claims as well. He was underused before he was given a well-deserved chance to start.

[Duvall]

Is there a less interesting question for this Duke team than trying to determine which two of Mason, Miles and Kelly should start each game? We know they will be dividing up 75 minutes each night; the precise distribution will turn on matchups and foul trouble.

[-jk]

I don't claim to be an expert, but I did notice it was Tyler in at the end.

-jk

[Oriole Way]

I don't claim to be an expert, but I did notice it was Tyler in at the end.

-jk

And there was nothing wrong with that.

Thornton was in for defensive purposes, and Cook actually had become too deferential in the final 6 or so minutes of the game - understandable for a freshman starting his very first game, and on the road. And, after having been removed from games for making mistakes in the past. The minutes distribution was almost exactly what I called for - Quinn played 27 minutes to Thornton's 13. One reason for Duke having a lead to begin with was Cook's quality play.

[JNort]

I don't claim to be an expert, but I did notice it was Tyler in at the end.

-jk

Really for no other reason than to bring his high pressure D for the last bit when we needed the stops. But the the staff probably also trusts him more due to experience in late game situations. The knew 1) Tyler could pressure better 2) Tyler was more fresh and could provide the pressure D longer than Quinn 3) Tyler wouldn't be as likely to force anything 4) Past performance in close situations. Mainly 1,3 and 4 is why he was in. I think...

[JNort]

Oriole: I agree with points 1 and 4 but 2 and 3 not so much. I have thought since China Cook should and would eventually be the starter over Tyler baring his full return from injury. I think our D does need to be changed up, to containment though? I am not sure but it does need some tweaking.

Silent G however I partially agree but mostly I do not. I think he should get more pt just to pressure Dawkins and if Dawkins does not improve his play then yes he should get those mins. But Dawkins is vital to this teams success right now even more so than MG.

Miles is fine with where he is at and he is doing well there. He seems to respond and play better off the bench.

[g-money]

Credit where credit is due: Good call, Oriole.

[mgtr]

Credit where credit is due: Good call, Oriole.

I agree. Most of us are quick to defend any action by Coach K. Well, that is normally a money bet, but he does a miss a few. I also noted Silent G was even more silent today than normal. Any scuttlebutt on that?

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

It hasn't been obvious to all the posters who disagreed with me for demanding Cook should start and get more minutes, including well-respected posters like Jim Sumner who took me to task for criticizing Coach K's usage of Cook and Thornton. I've argued with lots of posters on this board and The Devil's Den while emphatically claiming that Cook should start and get major minutes.

I feel that Quinn played a very good first game in the fire on the road. We still need to work on our defense, but we are on our way to realizing our potential now.

I admit that I was one of those who poked at you post UW for your firey defense of Quinn Cook. And I will admit that yes, the team seems to benefit from having Quinn run the point, and he ought to be starting at this point.

But you are a lightening rod because of the way you say things on this board. By referencing backwards how you were so incredibly right about E-Will and by saying Quinn Cook should start because he's just flat out better (your early posts on this matter didn't have much in the way of fact or evidence) and by blatantly calling Coach K on the carpet you don't gain many followers.

At any rate, congratulations - Quinn has worked his way into the starting lineup and the team ought to be better for it. I'm just interested to see if this lineup change confirms your doubts about K (why wasn't he starting earlier?!) or proves to you that Coach K recognized his talent and inserted him with the starters.

Actually, I don't care. I just want to see the team succeed. Just don't be too surprised if the board members here don't rally around to say "you were so right!"

Now... let's go run the table in ACC play! Go Duke!

[El_Diablo]

I don't get it. Pretty much everyone here feels that Cook is more talented than Thornton and has the higher upside in the long run. The coaching staff has been easing Cook in, and he's shown progress thus far (despite some obvious setbacks). But he's also openly admitted that he didn't pay much attention to defense when he first arrived, and he's been dealing with physical issues relating to his knee and his ability to play at a high level for sustained periods of time. So how is someone "right" in saying that Cook should have been playing more all along? Maybe Cook is succeeding at this level precisely because the staff has carefully brought him along in a way that is tailored to his learning curve and physical development.

Look, I too have been hoping for Cook to get more playing time because I believe that the team attacks and executes better on offense when he is in. And while Cook and Thornton have different defensive strengths and weaknesses, I think Cook's weaknesses will eventually be overcome with time. Nevertheless, while I recognize that the coaching staff is not infallible, I realize that they have much more insight into the team and the individual players than I do, and I won't use circular reasoning to say that I somehow knew better than they did. It's just going to rub people the wrong way.

[loldevilz]

I just don't get why we need a point guard when our best guards need the ball in their hands to be effective. Not to mention Thornton and Cook clearly don't help our defense. Plus I think the issue of size has been ignored to much on this team. Rivers and Curry clearly have problems guarding larger guards and rebounding.

I prefer the way we played in Maui with Curry and Rivers sharing the point and Dawkins on the wing. Cook could then be a spark off the bench and Gbinije could help against larger wings.

[Greg_Newton]

I don't get it. Pretty much everyone here feels that Cook is more talented than Thornton and has the higher upside in the long run. The coaching staff has been easing Cook in, and he's shown progress thus far (despite some obvious setbacks). But he's also openly admitted that he didn't pay much attention to defense when he first arrived, and he's been dealing with physical issues relating to his knee and his ability to play at a high level for sustained periods of time. So how is someone "right" in saying that Cook should have been playing more all along? Maybe Cook is succeeding at this level precisely because the staff has carefully brought him along in a way that is tailored to his learning curve and physical development.

Look, I too have been hoping for Cook to get more playing time because I believe that the team attacks and executes better on offense when he is in. And while Cook and Thornton have different defensive strengths and weaknesses, I think Cook's weaknesses will eventually be overcome with time. Nevertheless, while I recognize that the coaching staff is not infallible, I realize that they have much more insight into the team and the individual players than I do, and I won't use circular reasoning to say that I somehow knew better than they did. It's just going to rub people the wrong way.

Good post. This isn't the only board where Oriole has received flak for doing the exact same thing on this issue.

On a related note, I would argue that if we're going to be starting a freshman, it should be Gbinije. I mean, they rated similarly as recruits (G actually slightly higher), and I would argue he addresses this team's most urgent needs and deficiencies - namely, size and quickness on the perimeter - much better than Cook does. Defense and rebounding are our issues; our offense is already one of the most efficient in the country.

[Scorp4me]

You know I'm almost to the point where I cringe when I see Cook do something good cause I know I'm going to have to come on these boards and read another "Cook should start" post. It's actually kinda depressing.

[UrinalCake]

I prefer the way we played in Maui with Curry and Rivers sharing the point and Dawkins on the wing. Cook could then be a spark off the bench and Gbinije could help against larger wings.

I also feel like we were playing better earlier in the season and have almost regressed to some extent. I think it's fair to ask whether there might have been some overreaction to the OSU debacle in scrapping the whole idea of curry at the point. Coach k spent the whole preseason talking up Curry's development as our point guard and leader. It seems kind of odd that he gave up on all of that after one game in which everyone except Austin and Mason played like crap. Perhaps he had seen things prior to that game and then the OSU game confirmed it. At an rate, Seth's numbers have gone way down since the switch (though it looks like he played pretty well today). Andre played great his first two games off the bench but has since disappeared. It seems like his confidence is down.

Coach K has an interesting puzzle here. Thankfully there's still plenty of time to get it figured out.

[Steven43]

You know I'm almost to the point where I cringe when I see Cook do something good cause I know I'm going to have to come on these boards and read another "Cook should start" post. It's actually kinda depressing.

Why is it 'depressing' to you when it is suggested that Cook should start? And the fact that you cringe when Quinn does something good is puzzling. What's up with that?

[Kedsy]

Well, two out of four ain't bad, as far as predictions go.



3. Increase Minutes for Michael Gbinije

As Jim Sumner so eloquently put it, every minute for Michael takes away a minute for Austin, Seth, or Andre. I agree with him and don't agree with increasing Michael's minutes very much. Also, as I mentioned in another thread, K rarely plays 9 guys with 10+ minutes in close games once January 1 rolls around, and so I don't think this one has a big chance of happening.


4. Change Our Defensive Approach: De-Emphasize Pressure Man-to-Man Defense and Employ Containment Man-to-Man Defense

I don't necessarily agree with this one, either. But I'll wait to hear exactly what you have in mind before commenting.


The main reason starting Cook is so important is that it will significantly improve Duke’s offensive efficiency, which has been a major problem in the team’s losses. Granted, poor team defense is this team’s overall #1 problem, both in losses and in wins. However, given the lack of lateral quickness and defensive ability up and down Duke’s lineup, improving our defensive efficiency is much more difficult than improving our offensive efficiency.

I have no problem with Quinn starting, although personally I prefer a Seth/Austin/Andre perimeter. Once Andre was sent to the bench, I think the only thing holding Quinn behind Tyler was his defense. If Coach K believes Quinn's defense is up to snuff, then I'm all for him starting ahead of Tyler. And obviously based on tonight's starting lineup, K does believe that.

However, Duke's offensive efficiency is 4th in the country. I can't see how anything we do would significantly improve that. After the Ga Tech game, our defensive efficiency dropped to 50th in the country. In my mind this is our team's #1, #2, and #3 overall problem. And right now, I don't see how inserting Quinn into the starting lineup helps our defense (though, as I said, if it doesn't hurt our defense, Quinn to me is preferable to Tyler). Also, I disagree that offensive efficiency was that big of a problem against Ohio State or Temple (although it wasn't great in either game). Again, I think defensive efficiency was the major culprit in those losses.

[Saratoga2]

Well, two out of four ain't bad, as far as predictions go.



As Jim Sumner so eloquently put it, every minute for Michael takes away a minute for Austin, Seth, or Andre. I agree with him and don't agree with increasing Michael's minutes very much. Also, as I mentioned in another thread, K rarely plays 9 guys with 10+ minutes in close games once January 1 rolls around, and so I don't think this one has a big chance of happening.



I don't necessarily agree with this one, either. But I'll wait to hear exactly what you have in mind before commenting.



I have no problem with Quinn starting, although personally I prefer a Seth/Austin/Andre perimeter. Once Andre was sent to the bench, I think the only thing holding Quinn behind Tyler was his defense. If Coach K believes Quinn's defense is up to snuff, then I'm all for him starting ahead of Tyler. And obviously based on tonight's starting lineup, K does believe that.

However, Duke's offensive efficiency is 4th in the country. I can't see how anything we do would significantly improve that. After the Ga Tech game, our defensive efficiency dropped to 50th in the country. In my mind this is our team's #1, #2, and #3 overall problem. And right now, I don't see how inserting Quinn into the starting lineup helps our defense (though, as I said, if it doesn't hurt our defense, Quinn to me is preferable to Tyler). Also, I disagree that offensive efficiency was that big of a problem against Ohio State or Temple (although it wasn't great in either game). Again, I think defensive efficiency was the major culprit in those losses.

Quinn appears more confident handling the ball. Certainly having TO's galore, which lead to easy fast break baskets doesn't help our defensive efficiency. So if Quinn can cut down on those, he is helping us in that way. Also but getting made baskets off of his assists, we are more likely to get back on defense, another benefit of a competent PG. I think we only had 9 turnovers yesterday and many of those were on Austin and Seth. Only one on Quinn. I was unable to watch the game, but I wonder how many potential assists lost due to our poor shooting as well.

[ChillinDuke]

I'm officially on the band wagon. Really liked Cook last game and am comfortable with him playing significant minutes and/or starting. Even with some growing pains to be expected.

- Chillin

[SilkyJ]

The moves I would like to see made:

1. Start Quinn Cook
2. Start Miles Plumlee
3. Increase Minutes for Michael Gbinije
4. Change Our Defensive Approach: De-Emphasize Pressure Man-to-Man Defense and Employ Containment Man-to-Man Defense


Best post of the season, imo...mostly b/c I agree with all but #3, which you didn't really delve into as much as 1 & 2.

I've obviously been on board with #1 since starting the QC Start? (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?26400-Quinn-Cook-start&highlight=quinn+cook) thread in October. Glad to see K heed my advice yesterday, I've been texting him for weeks.

I think K is slowly and astutely ratcheting up Quinn's involvement as Q has gotten healthy and earned it in games, and I'm sure in practice. Tonight's result was a great step. Consider: his first career start came on an ACC road opener and the result was 1) he ran the team the majority of the time; 2) he played well to very well doing it; 3) continued to impress with his passing and ball care (see below); and 4) got the win. He's on an upward trajectory and the exciting thing is that he has parts of his game he can still improve, namely his shooting and defense, neither of which are bad to begin with.

I watched the DBP top plays and heard them say QC now leads the country in A/TO ratio. Stat sheet confirms. (http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/stats/assist_turnover_ratio?season=2011-2012). Its a smaller data set, much of it against weaker competition, and I'm not even sure if he qualifies yet. Still, he's playing very well, so congrats Quinn.

On #2, I definitely liked your argument and feel persuaded. The stats and eye ball test for Miles have been good over the past several games; albeit against mostly lesser competition. He was a mostly lone bright spot against Temple, but was average at bests against GA tech...still I think theres a lot for him to build on and if he keeps getting minutes I think he'll stay aggressive. Would like to see him get a few more touches in the post, same for mason (heck same for Ryan...but he seems to drift outside) so they can continue to build confidence there. I think they both look much more comfortable with the ball--Mason looks light years beyond last year, and Miles is improved, though not nearly as much as Mason.

That said, I continue to think Ryan is a weapon and would like to see us try and get him in better spots to attack, particularly with his FT shooting. I agree with your approach that it should be monitored on a game by game basis, and really on a flow basis. If someone's playing well, leave them in.


I don't claim to be an expert, but I did notice it was Tyler in at the end.

-jk

Noticed it too, Quinn was in late-ish tho, I think he started after the under 4 media timeout and then left with 2-something on the clock. Tyler provides good FT shooting and experience, which translates to stability and leadership, so that's just a smart move for now. Its also a situational move, and not really a reflection on QC, much like taking Mason out bc of FT shooting (though I noticed he put him back in with under 30 of so). As Quinn gains more experience and continues his upward development he's likely to be in at crunch time as well. For now I'm fine with using TT situationally, he's proven he can knock down late FTs and handle the ball securely. I won't be surprised to see both in at times late.



However, Duke's offensive efficiency is 4th in the country. I can't see how anything we do would significantly improve that. After the Ga Tech game, our defensive efficiency dropped to 50th in the country. In my mind this is our team's #1, #2, and #3 overall problem. And right now, I don't see how inserting Quinn into the starting lineup helps our defense (though, as I said, if it doesn't hurt our defense, Quinn to me is preferable to Tyler). Also, I disagree that offensive efficiency was that big of a problem against Ohio State or Temple (although it wasn't great in either game). Again, I think defensive efficiency was the major culprit in those losses.

I think this is a very valid and important point, and I agree broadly that our defense isn't great, but I think its OK. Our perimeter defense in particular is less than stellar, and one would tend to say that means we need more Tyler (tho sounds like you might prefer Seth on the ball), but I see Quinn as already matching TT with his on-ball defense. And pressure at the point is what starts our D.

Let's not kid ourselves, Tyler is a great help-side defender with a great nose for the ball, but he lacks footspeed and get's beaten off the dribble constantly. What's more, he fouls a ton. Do I think he'll improve, yes, but footspeed and quickness is 80% god-given (yes I just made that up, hopefully you get my point) so there's only so much he can do. Quinn is not the quickest guard on the planet, but he definitely looks quicker than Tyler to me, and with reps he now looks like a solid on-ball defender.

Much of my lauding of Quinn has to do with his offensive abilities, much of which is instinctual and god-given. Defense is more learned, and as he's gotten healthier and more reps, I think his defense has improved--I think we all see it--but it has a ways to go. Bottom line: I think Quinn is a natural, All-ACC type talent currently on an upward trajectory from an already strong base and I think the trajectory continues. Its taken a little longer for him to get up to speed relative to his teammates after missing the China trip and then being shutdown for 2 months. He's gotten healthier and more experience, as K acknowledges, and he's playing well. Keeping playing him and he'll keep getting better.



I have no problem with Quinn starting, although personally I prefer a Seth/Austin/Andre perimeter.

Lineups of course have to balance O and D, but just from a defensive perspective, Austin and Andre, in that order I think, are clearly the two best perimeter defenders we have (not including G who isn't playing much). To have both of them in puts Seth on point defensively, though situationally you could throw Austin on the PG. Seth has struggled at times getting beaten off the dribble, though I think he's gotten better and is crafty getting steals, something that's hard to teach. If Q continues his improvement, by the end of the season I can see our best defensive lineup being Q/Austin/Andre. Not sure how much time that lineup will see as I don't think Andre is likely to take away too many of Seth's minutes. IMO Seth is probably our 2nd best scorer, even if he doesn't always know it, and the O/D balance probably favors Seth, unless Andre is hot on a particular night.

With all the pieces we have, I expect to see lots of lineups in the backcourt over the next several games. We're right at the halfway point of the season, and we've seen lots of flashes from at least 5 guys on the perimeter. I expect K to put it all together over the next several games, though as we lose some games here and there in the conference I won't be surprised to see continued tinkering.

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

...and will love him even more when he learns to use the high pick effectively by driving his man into the pick. He's got to rub shoulders with whomever is setting the pick. That will create the separation that enables options including a drive and real roll to the basket by the big man. Otherwise he is just letting his defender easily play over the top of the pick and it kills the play. Saw it several times against GT.

[Kedsy]

Our perimeter defense in particular is less than stellar, and one would tend to say that means we need more Tyler (tho sounds like you might prefer Seth on the ball), but I see Quinn as already matching TT with his on-ball defense. And pressure at the point is what starts our D.

I don't know. Quinn's on-ball defense has not been particularly good. I was especially disappointed by his D against Temple and Georgia Tech. He did not do a good job staying in front of his man in either game. He looks shorter than his listed height and the bigger guards we've played in the past couple games didn't seem to have any problems shooting over him as well as driving by him. I agree on-ball D is not Tyler's forte, either, but for Quinn to be our short term answer at PG, he's going to need to ramp up his D pretty quickly.


Lineups of course have to balance O and D, but just from a defensive perspective, Austin and Andre, in that order I think, are clearly the two best perimeter defenders we have (not including G who isn't playing much). To have both of them in puts Seth on point defensively, though situationally you could throw Austin on the PG.

It appears Coach K wants to have a "traditional" PG in the game, so while it's true I personally like the Seth/Austin/Andre perimeter best, I'm losing hope that we'll see it that often. Doesn't mean I can't babble about it, though. From a defensive standpoint, I'd prefer Seth on-the-ball rather than either Quinn or Tyler. Although if we're playing a team whose SG is small enough for Seth to guard, I think Id prefer Austin on-the-ball defensively.


With all the pieces we have, I expect to see lots of lineups in the backcourt over the next several games. We're right at the halfway point of the season, and we've seen lots of flashes from at least 5 guys on the perimeter. I expect K to put it all together over the next several games, though as we lose some games here and there in the conference I won't be surprised to see continued tinkering.

The other thing about offensive configurations is how hard is a lineup to guard? Because, conceivably, a lineup may seem more talented but actually be easier to guard. I will attempt to distinguish this from offensive efficiency, although obviously the two are tightly related. For instance, the lineup we started against Georgia Tech included a strong ballhandling and passing PG (Quinn), a good-shooting SG (Seth), a slashing wing (Austin), a post-up big (Mason), and a banger big who works the offensive glass and scores opportunistic inside buckets (Miles). A very prototypical lineup. The kind of lineup that most teams prepare for when they practice. All five of our guys in that lineup are really good, so the lineup should have a fair amount of success, but opposing defenses are used to playing against that sort of lineup, so they're at least somewhat comfortable defensively.

Contrast that with our lineup for the first several games. With Seth, Andre, and Ryan roaming the perimeter, their defenders have to stick on them like glue to prevent a shower of threes. Most teams aren't used to guarding more than one guy at a time as dangerous from the outside as those three guys, so probably two of the defenders are outside their comfort zone. Having so many perimeter threats also means Austin and Mason have a lot of room to operate and are almost always in single coverage, with the help stuck out on the perimeter. Unless another team is preparing for this lineup specifically, most teams wouldn't be used to stopping a team with this unusual configuration. The lack of defensive comfort should boost that lineup's offensive efficiency, even if our assist-to-turnover ratio is poor.

Now, there's no reason we can't mix and match, as you suggest, which could further throw opposing defenses into confusion. Ultimately, even though Quinn appears to be our best offensive PG, I don't know that using him would increase our offensive efficiency very much. I think K's continued tinkering will be to find our solution on the defensive end, or at least the best balance between offense and defense.

[Greg_Newton]

Although if we're playing a team whose SG is small enough for Seth to guard, I think Id prefer Austin on-the-ball defensively.

I think this would be a terrific strategic shift. We've got Austin, who has shown to be our best on-ball defender by a long shot, despite occasionally getting lost off-the-ball and struggling against bigger players. Then we've got Seth, a sneaky and opportunistic off-the-ball defender who is somewhat of a liability on-the-ball against PGs.

To me, it seems that the obvious solution for both players is to put Austin on the ball and Seth on the worst perimeter player, so both can leverage their strengths and hide their weaknesses. Of course, that would require Andre (or preferably, to me, Gbinije) to guard the best/biggest scoring wing, and as you say, it doesn't look like we're trending in the direction of that sort of lineup.

[loldevilz]

I think this would be a terrific strategic shift. We've got Austin, who has shown to be our best on-ball defender by a long shot, despite occasionally getting lost off-the-ball and struggling against bigger players. Then we've got Seth, a sneaky and opportunistic off-the-ball defender who is somewhat of a liability on-the-ball against PGs.

To me, it seems that the obvious solution for both players is to put Austin on the ball and Seth on the worst perimeter player, so both can leverage their strengths and hide their weaknesses. Of course, that would require Andre (or preferably, to me, Gbinije) to guard the best/biggest scoring wing, and as you say, it doesn't look like we're trending in the direction of that sort of lineup.

This makes the most sense to me, but the progress of this team from Curry running the point, to Thornton running the point, to Cook makes me think that the last thing we are going to see is Gbinije on the wing with Curry running the point again.

[SilkyJ]

I don't know. Quinn's on-ball defense has not been particularly good. I was especially disappointed by his D against Temple and Georgia Tech. He did not do a good job staying in front of his man in either game. He looks shorter than his listed height and the bigger guards we've played in the past couple games didn't seem to have any problems shooting over him as well as driving by him. I agree on-ball D is not Tyler's forte, either, but for Quinn to be our short term answer at PG, he's going to need to ramp up his D pretty quickly.

Well agree to disagree for now. I think its been adequate, and has passed Tyler's. I also think it will continue to get better, as will his overall play, as he gets more minutes.

With respect to the bolded part: I'd say Quinn just became the short term answer at PG, hopefully progressing into the long term answer. Given he played 27 mins yesterday, and played very well on offense, the position seems to be his to lose for now. I'm guessing K wouldn't have played him 27 mins if he didn't like his output on the defensive end.



It appears Coach K wants to have a "traditional" PG in the game, so while it's true I personally like the Seth/Austin/Andre perimeter best, I'm losing hope that we'll see it that often. Doesn't mean I can't babble about it, though. From a defensive standpoint, I'd prefer Seth on-the-ball rather than either Quinn or Tyler. Although if we're playing a team whose SG is small enough for Seth to guard, I think Id prefer Austin on-the-ball defensively.



Contrast that with our lineup for the first several games. With Seth, Andre, and Ryan roaming the perimeter, their defenders have to stick on them like glue to prevent a shower of threes. Most teams aren't used to guarding more than one guy at a time as dangerous from the outside as those three guys, so probably two of the defenders are outside their comfort zone. Having so many perimeter threats also means Austin and Mason have a lot of room to operate and are almost always in single coverage, with the help stuck out on the perimeter. Unless another team is preparing for this lineup specifically, most teams wouldn't be used to stopping a team with this unusual configuration. The lack of defensive comfort should boost that lineup's offensive efficiency, even if our assist-to-turnover ratio is poor.

I liked that aspect of playing Seth and Andre together as well. They are two of the best shooters in all of college, and having them along with Ryan out there for kickouts is a deadly combo. I'd love see the combo of Quinn/Seth/Andre get meaningful minutes, as I think Quinn is a much better setup man for both our inside and outside players than Austin, but with Austin playing the most minutes on the team, doubt we'll see much of this...as you say, doesn't mean we can't blab about it :)

(and hopefully with the continued tinkering over the next several games, maybe we will see our desired combos more than we think)

[Aditya]

I have no problem with Quinn starting, although personally I prefer a Seth/Austin/Andre perimeter.

I completely agree. It seems to me that the team functions best when Andre starts and has a shot volume closer to what he had in the beginning of the season. In any case, I think starting Quinn would help Andre and the other three point shooters. Quinn seems to do a great job at finding the open man and getting the offense flowing.

I like TT a lot, but I think his PT is going to decrease the most if Quinn continues to start. If TT moved into the starting lineup so Seth could play off the ball more, then starting Quinn removes a big reason for giving TT 20+ minutes a game.

[Kedsy]

Well agree to disagree for now. I think its been adequate, and has passed Tyler's. I also think it will continue to get better, as will his overall play, as he gets more minutes.

With respect to the bolded part: I'd say Quinn just became the short term answer at PG, hopefully progressing into the long term answer. Given he played 27 mins yesterday, and played very well on offense, the position seems to be his to lose for now. I'm guessing K wouldn't have played him 27 mins if he didn't like his output on the defensive end.

By "short term" I meant over the course of this season, as opposed to next season and beyond (which I consider "long term" and in which I completely assume Quinn will be the answer).

I thought Quinn's defense was adequate against Western Michigan and Penn, but as I said I was disappointed with it against Temple and Georgia Tech. I thought Tyler's on-ball D was disappointing in those games, too, so it's possible Quinn could have passed Tyler and still not be very good. I do think Quinn's defense is better than it was early in the season. Hopefully you're right and his D will continue to improve.

[tommy]

I don't claim to be an expert, but I did notice it was Tyler in at the end.


And there was nothing wrong with that.

Thornton was in for defensive purposes, and Cook actually had become too deferential in the final 6 or so minutes of the game - understandable for a freshman starting his very first game, and on the road. And, after having been removed from games for making mistakes in the past. The minutes distribution was almost exactly what I called for - Quinn played 27 minutes to Thornton's 13. One reason for Duke having a lead to begin with was Cook's quality play.



Really for no other reason than to bring his high pressure D for the last bit when we needed the stops. But the the staff probably also trusts him more due to experience in late game situations. The knew 1) Tyler could pressure better 2) Tyler was more fresh and could provide the pressure D longer than Quinn 3) Tyler wouldn't be as likely to force anything 4) Past performance in close situations. Mainly 1,3 and 4 is why he was in. I think...

Quinn played the majority of the way down the stretch, while of course it was tight. It was only when GT called a timeout with 1:42 to play that K subbed Tyler in for him. At that time we were up 4.

[Scorp4me]

Why is it 'depressing' to you when it is suggested that Cook should start? And the fact that you cringe when Quinn does something good is puzzling. What's up with that?

Because it's over the top. He was anointed the answer even when he was on the bench and everyone is making him fit that mold. I don't think it's fair and I'm glad K has proceeded with things as he has. That's what's up with that!

[mike88]

My feeling is that Quinn's defense is quickly approaching the same level as Tyler's, and he soon may be a better defender. A fair bit of my assessment comes from the difference in foul rates: Tyler has 42 fouls in 280 minutes (0.15 fouls per minute) vs Quinn's 15 fouls in 189 minutes (0.079 fouls per minute). Especially in the G Tech game, we really suffered from putting our opponents on the line after fouls 30 feet away from the basket. Some of this relates to the question of whether we should over-play on defense vs adopt a strategy more like the 2010 team, but it also requires that when you do use pressure, your best defenders don't waste fouls.

[Saratoga2]

I like TT a lot, but I think his PT is going to decrease the most if Quinn continues to start. If TT moved into the starting lineup so Seth could play off the ball more, then starting Quinn removes a big reason for giving TT 20+ minutes a game.

A possibility I like is for Quinn to start at Point, while Seth take the remaining minutes in that role. That cuts Tylers time down a lot but allows a lineup of Quinn, Austin and Andre. It also allows a lineup of Seth, Austin and Andre, which would be a good scoring lineup from the perimeter. In addition, if Andre is not scoring well, Michael could get some time at the wing. Seth is probably the best sub when Austin is out, but it would make us pretty small at guard.

[Oriole Way]

I admit that I was one of those who poked at you post UW for your firey defense of Quinn Cook. And I will admit that yes, the team seems to benefit from having Quinn run the point, and he ought to be starting at this point.

But you are a lightening rod because of the way you say things on this board. By referencing backwards how you were so incredibly right about E-Will and by saying Quinn Cook should start because he's just flat out better (your early posts on this matter didn't have much in the way of fact or evidence) and by blatantly calling Coach K on the carpet you don't gain many followers.

At any rate, congratulations - Quinn has worked his way into the starting lineup and the team ought to be better for it. I'm just interested to see if this lineup change confirms your doubts about K (why wasn't he starting earlier?!) or proves to you that Coach K recognized his talent and inserted him with the starters.

Actually, I don't care. I just want to see the team succeed. Just don't be too surprised if the board members here don't rally around to say "you were so right!"

Now... let's go run the table in ACC play! Go Duke!

Thanks for the feedback, I appreciate it. I'm with you, I want to see Duke succeed as well, and I'm glad that Coach K has made the move. I think it will accelerate Duke's progress.


However, Duke's offensive efficiency is 4th in the country. I can't see how anything we do would significantly improve that. After the Ga Tech game, our defensive efficiency dropped to 50th in the country. In my mind this is our team's #1, #2, and #3 overall problem. And right now, I don't see how inserting Quinn into the starting lineup helps our defense (though, as I said, if it doesn't hurt our defense, Quinn to me is preferable to Tyler). Also, I disagree that offensive efficiency was that big of a problem against Ohio State or Temple (although it wasn't great in either game). Again, I think defensive efficiency was the major culprit in those losses.

I've really tried to make it clear that I agree that defense is Duke's #1 problem. But, making our offense more efficient and elevating the team's overall effectiveness offensively were more easily realized by starting Cook. And I strongly feel that will make our defense better in the long run, even if statistics from the GT game - a road game where the "Duke effect" of teams getting up for Duke and only Duke was occurring - may not confirm that immediately. I still feel that turnovers (and the transition points which resulted) were a major problem in the Temple game, and they were the #2 reason for the loss. Had Cook been starting in the game, I feel we would have cut down enough on turnovers to win the game.



Good post. This isn't the only board where Oriole has received flak for doing the exact same thing on this issue.

On a related note, I would argue that if we're going to be starting a freshman, it should be Gbinije. I mean, they rated similarly as recruits (G actually slightly higher), and I would argue he addresses this team's most urgent needs and deficiencies - namely, size and quickness on the perimeter - much better than Cook does. Defense and rebounding are our issues; our offense is already one of the most efficient in the country.

Yes, but having Cook as our point guard limits our turnovers, which improves our defense. As I've said repeatedly, I agree that defense is the primary problem for the team and the most glaring area of need. However, the best move for making the team better was to start Cook and give him the majority of minutes at PG. Our defensive issues are difficult to fix with lineup changes. Defensive improvement must come with better defensive positioning and effort through coaching and practice, as well as an overall change in our defensive approach which moves away from overplay, excessive pressure by our guards on the perimeter, and too much switching as a result of overplaying. That will take time, while the positive effects of starting Cook will be more immediate.

I think too many posters get stuck on the idea that Cook isn't a great defender, therefore playing him more isn't addressing the team's defense problem. I think the aggregate affect of Cook is overwhelmingly positive, more so on offense, but also on defense, since a Duke team limiting turnovers and converting more of its shots will be a better defensive team (again, a point I've tried to stress). Offensively, all of our players with the possible exception of Rivers - who will need some time to adjust to the lineup change, but who will still find himself open for quality looks more often playing alongside Cook - are going to be better with a guard who can more easily get the ball to them in a position to score, especially the Plumlees. Having two guards (Cook and Rivers) that can put pressure on the opposing defense and penetrate frequently makes Duke's offense much better.

I agree that Gbinije deserves more time, and that starting him is a move which could help Duke. However, as I will explain more specifically later when I have more time, I think Gbinije starting could be an occasional move based on matchups, and I feel strongly that Gbinije needs to start against UNC. In order to have that happen 8 games from now, Gbinije needs to get more consistent playing time. I have read that Gbinije was sick for the GT game - would appreciate if anyone can confirm this. Either way, I feel K hasn't done the best job with giving him playing time, especially considering he helps us in an area of need. Hopefully he gets more PT going forward.

[Kedsy]

I've really tried to make it clear that I agree that defense is Duke's #1 problem. But, making our offense more efficient and elevating the team's overall effectiveness offensively were more easily realized by starting Cook. And I strongly feel that will make our defense better in the long run, even if statistics from the GT game - a road game where the "Duke effect" of teams getting up for Duke and only Duke was occurring - may not confirm that immediately.

We'll see. I'll be very surprised if our offensive efficiency goes up with Quinn at PG. I don't think it will necessarily go down, but we were very efficient before (although less so with Tyler starting at PG).

While your point about cutting down turnovers helping defense has some merit, I think you're overstating it. I don't know the exact percentage, but the only turnovers that lead to easy points are the ones that lead to runouts (as opposed to dead ball turnovers or live ball turnovers near the basket where we have a chance to get back on D). For example, of our 16 turnovers against Temple, five resulted in quick scores for Temple. Those five turnovers were committed by Austin (1), Seth (2), and Tyler (2), and at least two or three of them were our players getting stripped (which Quinn could not have helped).

So I would estimate that Quinn playing the entire game would have stopped at most two of those runouts. That's not bad, it would have made the game closer (maybe close enough for a win) and marginally improved our defensive efficiency. Unless, Quinn's presence hurt our defensive efficiency in other ways. When Quinn plays we have a very small backcourt (although obviously this is also true when Tyler plays, but he's physically stronger and his defense does seem a bit more advanced than Quinn's at this point). Temple's guards were big and strong. If they'd been able to use their size and strength to score just one or two more baskets, any defensive advantage gained by Quinn's lack of turnovers would have been canceled out.

[mike88]

Duke as a team has committed 260 fouls this year in 15 games, or 0.43 fouls per minute, leading to 253 opponent free throws.
This works out to a per player foul per minute rate of 0.086
Quinn Cook per minute rate is better than the team average: 0.075
Tyler Thornton is considerably worse: 0.15

If the full team fouled at Tyler's rate, we would have 450 fouls (190 more than we actually do)

If Tyler is truly a better defensive option, he must be much better at forcing turnovers or preventing his man from scoring from the field to make up for this high foul rate.

[CDu]

Duke as a team has committed 260 fouls this year in 15 games, or 0.43 fouls per minute, leading to 253 opponent free throws.
This works out to a per player foul per minute rate of 0.086
Quinn Cook per minute rate is better than the team average: 0.075
Tyler Thornton is considerably worse: 0.15

If the full team fouled at Tyler's rate, we would have 450 fouls (190 more than we actually do)

If Tyler is truly a better defensive option, he must be much better at forcing turnovers or preventing his man from scoring from the field to make up for this high foul rate.

These are good points. I'd still like to see our team's defensive efficiency stats with Thornton in the game versus without Thornton in the game. I'd like to see similar stats for Cook as well. Since so much of Thornton's value is theoretically in his intangibles, these benefits should be evidenced in the efficiency stats. My suspicion is that we are actually less efficient (on at least the offensive end, and perhaps on the defensive end as well) with Thornton on the floor. But that's without the benefit of seeing any of the data.

[Kedsy]

These are good points. I'd still like to see our team's defensive efficiency stats with Thornton in the game versus without Thornton in the game. I'd like to see similar stats for Cook as well. Since so much of Thornton's value is theoretically in his intangibles, these benefits should be evidenced in the efficiency stats. My suspicion is that we are actually less efficient (on at least the offensive end, and perhaps on the defensive end as well) with Thornton on the floor. But that's without the benefit of seeing any of the data.

It shouldn't be too hard to get raw efficiency numbers (unadjusted for opponent and venue). If you think such raw numbers would be valuable I would be willing to attempt to calculate them. It will take some time to find and go through the play-by-play, though, so if you don't think the raw numbers would be worthwhile I won't bother.

[SilkyJ]

For example, of our 16 turnovers against Temple, five resulted in quick scores for Temple. Those five turnovers were committed by Austin (1), Seth (2), and Tyler (2), and at least two or three of them were our players getting stripped (which Quinn could not have helped).

So I would estimate that Quinn playing the entire game would have stopped at most two of those runouts.

Conceptually I get your point, but you could argue that with Quinn in the game he would shoulder more of the playmaking duties thereby 1) lowering the usage of those players and keeping them from turning it over as many times per game simply b/c they won't use it as much and 2) help guys like Austin and Seth make easier plays for them selves.

#2 is a little harder to quantify, but I think what we see with Quinn and why he helps the offense run more smoothly is that he has a knack for finding guys in the right position and helping them get easier looks and make better plays. With Tyler at the point, Austin and Seth are forced to create for themselves in 1v1 situations or off the pick-and-roll.

With Quinn at the point he can handle ball handling & creation duties, but does so with a pass first mentality. The obvious examples are when he drives, draws the D and dishes to a Plumlee. But a more subtle way would be in helping Seth and Austin not have to create so much for themselves 1v1. For example, instead of Austin getting the ball stationary at the top of the key and trying to go 1v1, doing a bunch of dribbling, and having to deal with helpside defenders (this is where is often prone to getting stripped, dribbling off his leg, etc.), Quinn can create a little draw Austin/Seth's man, then get them the ball with their defender recovering, making it much easier to either lineup a 3 (for Seth ideally) or blow by without overdribbling while the rest of the D is also recovering (for Austin ideally).

[Oriole Way]

Conceptually I get your point, but you could argue that with Quinn in the game he would shoulder more of the playmaking duties thereby 1) lowering the usage of those players and keeping them from turning it over as many times per game simply b/c they won't use it as much and 2) help guys like Austin and Seth make easier plays for them selves.

#2 is a little harder to quantify, but I think what we see with Quinn and why he helps the offense run more smoothly is that he has a knack for finding guys in the right position and helping them get easier looks and make better plays. With Tyler at the point, Austin and Seth are forced to create for themselves in 1v1 situations or off the pick-and-roll.

With Quinn at the point he can handle ball handling & creation duties, but does so with a pass first mentality. The obvious examples are when he drives, draws the D and dishes to a Plumlee. But a more subtle way would be in helping Seth and Austin not have to create so much for themselves 1v1. For example, instead of Austin getting the ball stationary at the top of the key and trying to go 1v1, doing a bunch of dribbling, and having to deal with helpside defenders (this is where is often prone to getting stripped, dribbling off his leg, etc.), Quinn can create a little draw Austin/Seth's man, then get them the ball with their defender recovering, making it much easier to either lineup a 3 (for Seth ideally) or blow by without overdribbling while the rest of the D is also recovering (for Austin ideally).

Completely agree. I have been trying to say this with a couple of my posts, but I feel that you did a much better job of explaining it than I did.

I think the lack of a point guard really hurt against Temple, because as you pointed out, we had Rivers and Curry trying to do too much to create offense, especially Rivers. The turnovers and bad shots which resulted really contributed to the loss, as the empty possessions kept Temple in the game and allowed them to build confidence as well as a lead.

[CDu]

It shouldn't be too hard to get raw efficiency numbers (unadjusted for opponent and venue). If you think such raw numbers would be valuable I would be willing to attempt to calculate them. It will take some time to find and go through the play-by-play, though, so if you don't think the raw numbers would be worthwhile I won't bother.

Well, I certainly don't want you to go to a ton of effort to do it just to appease my mild interest. :) But thanks for offering.

[Kedsy]

Well, I certainly don't want you to go to a ton of effort to do it just to appease my mild interest. :) But thanks for offering.

That wasn't what I was trying to say. The issue is whether the raw numbers have any value and I'm not sure whether they do or not.

[Greg_Newton]

Cook might be my favorite personality on the team, but I'm not sure what some of you guys are seeing defensively. He's gotten beat off of the dribble at an alarming rate during the last three games, as much as I hate to say it... he reminds me of a "funny Wojo" sometimes when he gets his game face on on defense. :p But from where I've been sitting, he's been a major liability on that end of the court.

[DUKIE V(A)]

Duke as a team has committed 260 fouls this year in 15 games, or 0.43 fouls per minute, leading to 253 opponent free throws.
This works out to a per player foul per minute rate of 0.086
Quinn Cook per minute rate is better than the team average: 0.075
Tyler Thornton is considerably worse: 0.15

If the full team fouled at Tyler's rate, we would have 450 fouls (190 more than we actually do)

If Tyler is truly a better defensive option, he must be much better at forcing turnovers or preventing his man from scoring from the field to make up for this high foul rate.

Huge Quinn Cook fan, but I'm not sure this is fair. TT is a VERY aggressive, hard-nosed defender. One of his roles is to mix it up and fouling is a side-effect of his style of defense. You have to give something to get something. I have not crunched the numbers, but in my admittedly very unofficial EYEBALL Test TT seems to benefit our TEAM defense, intensity, and spirit a great deal.

[rotogod00]

Wasn't sure where to ask this, but I suppose a discussion on Duke's PG situation is the best place. Right now our leader in assists is Curry with 2.8/game. Has a Duke team ever had its top guy with a total so low?

(and I have little doubt that if Cook were to start playing more minutes, 20+ let's say, he'd supplant Curry and average 4ish/game)

[SupaDave]

Huge Quinn Cook fan, but I'm not sure this is fair. TT is a VERY aggressive, hard-nosed defender. One of his roles is to mix it up and fouling is a side-effect of his style of defense. You have to give something to get something. I have not crunched the numbers, but in my admittedly very unofficial EYEBALL Test TT seems to benefit our TEAM defense, intensity, and spirit a great deal.

Small detail: It was Tyler at the point when we took control during the UVA game last night. After stepping on the line and causing a "not aware of everything" turnover - Quinn was never heard from again. It was time to sit and learn. He will be good for us but as Ozzie would say - I love the "problem" that we have at point guard.

One thing I've noticed is that everyone on this team needs to run through some dummies. They are not getting around screens fast enough.

[yancem]

Small detail: It was Tyler at the point when we took control during the UVA game last night. After stepping on the line and causing a "not aware of everything" turnover - Quinn was never heard from again. It was time to sit and learn. He will be good for us but as Ozzie would say - I love the "problem" that we have at point guard.

One thing I've noticed is that everyone on this team needs to run through some dummies. They are not getting around screens fast enough.

I thought that it was interesting that for the bulk of the minutes we reverted back to the beginning of ht year starting line up. I know that part of that was due to Dawkins having a good shooting night but I wonder if K is thinking that the platooning pg thing isn't working as well as hoped and/or he has renewed confidence in Curry at the point. Or possibly, the more burn by TT and Cook was meant to be a learning experience during the weaker part of the schedule or possibly a concern about the defensive weaknesses caused by the shorter line ups. Of course it could be just a 1 game blip. Who knows but we played better in the second half then we did against Temple or Ga Tech and we had pretty good results with that line up earlier in the year.

Just food for thought.

[UrinalCake]

I also noticed Curry getting more run at point, during the broadcast they showed both Quinn and Tyler sitting next to each other on the bench a few times in the second half and that was a little odd... but I also thought Seth played really well both scoring and distributing. Such a good yet maddening problem to have.

[94duke]

I also noticed Curry getting more run at point, during the broadcast they showed both Quinn and Tyler sitting next to each other on the bench a few times in the second half and that was a little odd... but I also thought Seth played really well both scoring and distributing. Such a good yet maddening problem to have.

The Seth/Austin/Andre perimeter gives us a bit more size on both sides of the ball. It helps a little with rebounding, and it allows for Seth to have a smaller guy guarding him. If Andre can keep up the good D, I think we will see this line-up more.

[COYS]

The Seth/Austin/Andre perimeter gives us a bit more size on both sides of the ball. It helps a little with rebounding, and it allows for Seth to have a smaller guy guarding him. If Andre can keep up the good D, I think we will see this line-up more.

I agree with you about the size improving the defense, but disagree with the rebounding, at least right now. Andre has the size and hops to rebound, but hasn't been able to do it consistently. Seth and Austin are terrible about boxing out their men right now. There are many reasons why I like this back court. I think we should not overlook the wins we had in Maui playing with this unit (Kansas and Michigan State have proven that they are elite teams this year rising all the way to 2 and 6 in KenPom's rankings). Seth may have limitations as the primary ball handler, but he played well in Maui and played well last night, as well. Offensively, I have almost no doubt that a Curry, Rivers, Dawkins lineup has the most offensive firepower of our back court combos. However, I do wonder if any of those three are capable of giving us good rebounding on a consistent basis. It goes to show you just how valuable Singler was as a player. No one player needs to replace Singler. Between Ryan, Mason and Andre we've replaced a lot of his offense. However, we do miss his rebounding at the three and his defense. That is for certain.

[MChambers]

I agree with you about the size improving the defense, but disagree with the rebounding, at least right now. Andre has the size and hops to rebound, but hasn't been able to do it consistently. Seth and Austin are terrible about boxing out their men right now. There are many reasons why I like this back court. I think we should not overlook the wins we had in Maui playing with this unit (Kansas and Michigan State have proven that they are elite teams this year rising all the way to 2 and 6 in KenPom's rankings). Seth may have limitations as the primary ball handler, but he played well in Maui and played well last night, as well. Offensively, I have almost no doubt that a Curry, Rivers, Dawkins lineup has the most offensive firepower of our back court combos. However, I do wonder if any of those three are capable of giving us good rebounding on a consistent basis. It goes to show you just how valuable Singler was as a player. No one player needs to replace Singler. Between Ryan, Mason and Andre we've replaced a lot of his offense. However, we do miss his rebounding at the three and his defense. That is for certain.
We definitely miss Kyle's defense and rebounding. We also miss Nolan's defense. Remember the ACC Tournament Finals?

Not sure how K is going to address this, but I'm sure he and the rest of the staff are very focused on improving the defense (which is now down to 55 in Pomeroy).

[CDu]

That wasn't what I was trying to say. The issue is whether the raw numbers have any value and I'm not sure whether they do or not.

I know, I was just joking. I'd be mildly interested in seeing the stats. Obviously, adjusted stats for teammates and opposing players would be best, but that'd be darn near impossible (and we'd have nowhere close to a large enough sample size). So realistically the unadjusted efficiency stats would be all that could be done. I'd be interested to see them, but I certainly don't want anyone to go out of their way to create them.

[Scorp4me]

Stuff with Tyler always just seems to happen. I mean you watch it and you think well he was just in the right place at the right time or why did that guy cough it up for no reason or something like that. But I've seen it enough to believe Tyler has something to do with it. And he's just so darn picky. I mean he rarely forces anything, which is why I think he doesn't score that much. But when he takes a shot it's usually a good one.

I think Cook has alot to offer the team, but much like Tyler on the floor I like him being able to come off the bench and disrupt things. I think it's rarely bad for a freshman to get to see the flow of the game before he takes the floor. Maybe I'm wrong though.

[Gthoma2a]

I understand what people are saying about Tyler here and there, but he has passed it to the other team quite a few times that seemed questionable. I can't remember which game, but he had a player 4 feet from him (I think it was Austin) and instead of giving a solid pass, he kind of tossed it to him and the defender cut the pass out and had a clear breakaway. Cook just always passes with authority and you see that he isn't trying with his ball-handling. He is just moving naturally, but sometimes I get the feeling that Tyler keeps it simple because he is thinking about his handle while playing.

[elvis14]

I also noticed Curry getting more run at point, during the broadcast they showed both Quinn and Tyler sitting next to each other on the bench a few times in the second half and that was a little odd... but I also thought Seth played really well both scoring and distributing. Such a good yet maddening problem to have.

I wouldn't read too much into this. For the UVa game, having a backcourt of Curry/Dre/Austin was working so we stayed with it. UVa played good defense but little Zugluski (spelling?) wasn't going to overwhelm Curry like others have so it worked. Each of our line ups right now have strengths and weaknesses. In years past it seems to me that we had a more stable 'go to' lineup. Right now the 'go to' lineup seems more fluid and is dependent on who we are playing and match ups. I do think that because of his size that Andre might be the key between this team being good and great.

[SilkyJ]

Didn't get to watch the UVA game til Friday night and then watched the Clemson game yesterday as well. Given how adamant I've been on QC playing more thought I owed some thoughts:

Obviously Quinn didn't have a great game against UVA, but played solidly against Clemson. I think we got to see more of Kedsey's preferred backcourt against both teams (Seth/Dre/Austin) and they played well in both games, though I think particularly against Clemson showed some limitations WRT ballhandling & playmaking, particularly late in the game. I'd like to see Tyler and/or Quinn in there. I also think my preferred backcourt of Quinn/Seth/Dre played very well against Clemson, though part of that was Dre returning to form and hitting some shots...partially bc quinn helped find them in good spots.

When Quinn is in, I think ~50% of the time he's bringing the ball up and then handing off to someone else to initiate the offense, which relegates him to mostly a spotup shooter role. That's not a role that suits him particularly well. I'd like to see him initiating & penetrating more as he's shown a good knack for scoring and for dishing...not to mention he's just not a great shooter from deep.

Quinn's defensive performance in both games was less than impressive. I think he'll get a bit better over the course of the season, but I think he'll need an offseason to make a big leap here. He needs a full (hopefully healthy) offseason to work on his quickness, getting his knees stronger, and obviously the techniques and communication involved with defense. I think he's still about as good as Tyler on-ball, though Tyler seems to be playing well on both ends right now, with the exception of missing a few shots last game...still not sure whether he's a reliable 3 pt shooter or not.

Speaking of: the other x factor with Quinn is how good is his outside shooting. I was under the impression that entering the season he was only an OK 3 point shooter. At times he's looked solid (see Clemson), other times he's been less than stellar (see UVA). He's only shooting 31% for the season. My guess is he raises his average a bit throughout the season, but not a ton.

All in all: I'm about 50/50 right now bw Kedsey's preferred backcourt and my preferred backcourt. I'd like to see both get significant run over the next couple games as we iron out the wrinkles and see who emerges and continues to improve. I still think Quinn is a very dynamic player on offense and has the most upside given he's a freshman still learning the game, team and system and also just got a late start this season with his knee recovery. And even with that upside, he's already a good player.

I'd also say that late in games I want Quinn and/or Tyler in the game. Quinn has the best, most reliable handle on the team and Tyler is very steady with the ball as well. Seth and Austin (our other two main ballhandlers) have both struggled at times, and frankly I'm nervous late in games when its just the two of them in the game. (On that note, I though K sitting Austin a bit more, hopefully so he learns to value the ball more, was a good thing.)

[superdave]

Through 3 ACC games so far:

Quinn 58 minutes, 8-14 FGs, 3-9 3s, 7:4 A:TO

Tyler 41 minutes, 2-7 FGs, 1-4 3s, 6:1 A:TO

This means that Seth has played PG for 0 minutes vs. GT, 12 minutes vs. Virginia and 9 minutes vs. Clemson. It would be nice to see Quinn play well enough to distinguish himself from Tyler and to be able to earn more crunch time minutes. We shall see....

[Kedsy]

Through 3 ACC games so far:

Quinn 58 minutes, 8-14 FGs, 3-9 3s, 7:4 A:TO

Tyler 41 minutes, 2-7 FGs, 1-4 3s, 6:1 A:TO

This means that Seth has played PG for 0 minutes vs. GT, 12 minutes vs. Virginia and 9 minutes vs. Clemson. It would be nice to see Quinn play well enough to distinguish himself from Tyler and to be able to earn more crunch time minutes. We shall see....

Well, based on the stats above, Tyler has both a better assist rate and a/to ratio than Quinn does. And Tyler has played better defense in our three ACC games. So, to be fair to Tyler, Quinn really has to catch up to Tyler first before he can distinguish himself above Tyler. I'm not saying he can't do it, but I do think he has a ways to go.

[superdave]

Well, based on the stats above, Tyler has both a better assist rate and a/to ratio than Quinn does. And Tyler has played better defense in our three ACC games. So, to be fair to Tyler, Quinn really has to catch up to Tyler first before he can distinguish himself above Tyler. I'm not saying he can't do it, but I do think he has a ways to go.

Agreed on Quinn's need to improve, at both ends of the court.

Got any outstanding thoughts on the return of the Seth-Austin-Andre backcourt? I think Coach K likes the idea of having the ball in Seth's hands while running the spread because he's about a 90% free throw shooter. Seth's runner in the lane has been an inspiration of late too.

[UrinalCake]

Got any outstanding thoughts on the return of the Seth-Austin-Andre backcourt? I think Coach K likes the idea of having the ball in Seth's hands while running the spread because he's about a 90% free throw shooter. Seth's runner in the lane has been an inspiration of late too.

I agree that Coach K doesn't trust Cook to go to the line at the end of games. I would feel a little more confident about Tyler in that situation (he has hit free throws at the end of games last year) but I don't like his ability to break the press or even throw over it. Also, in those end of game situations you need to be able to defend the three without fouling, so having a taller guard in there (Andre rather than Quinn/Tyler) helps in that regard.

[DukieInBrasil]

Well, based on the stats above, Tyler has both a better assist rate and a/to ratio than Quinn does. And Tyler has played better defense in our three ACC games. So, to be fair to Tyler, Quinn really has to catch up to Tyler first before he can distinguish himself above Tyler. I'm not saying he can't do it, but I do think he has a ways to go.

No, Quinn has more assists in the 3 games, therefore a higher assist rate (7 vs 6). Tyler's a/t is excellent though. Quinn's offense is much more diverse than TT's and is shooting 2x as well and 2x as much.
I agree that TT's defense has been better. Since K has a tradition of loving gritty defense, so you may be right that it is Quinn who has to catch up to Tyler, but not on offense.

[El_Diablo]

No, Quinn has more assists in the 3 games, therefore a higher assist rate (7 vs 6). Tyler's a/t is excellent though. Quinn's offense is much more diverse than TT's and is shooting 2x as well and 2x as much.
I agree that TT's defense has been better. Since K has a tradition of loving gritty defense, so you may be right that it is Quinn who has to catch up to Tyler, but not on offense.

Actually, Tyler does have a better assist rate than Quinn in ACC play. Tyler has gotten one assist for every 6.8 minutes of playing time. Quinn has gotten one assist for every 8.3 minutes of playing time.

[Kedsy]

No, Quinn has more assists in the 3 games, therefore a higher assist rate (7 vs 6). Tyler's a/t is excellent though. Quinn's offense is much more diverse than TT's and is shooting 2x as well and 2x as much.
I agree that TT's defense has been better. Since K has a tradition of loving gritty defense, so you may be right that it is Quinn who has to catch up to Tyler, but not on offense.

As someone else pointed out, assists per game and assist rate are different things. You are obviously correct that Quinn's scoring is much better than Tyler's, but if we wanted a scorer in that spot, Quinn is still way behind Seth, Austin, and Andre. The reasons people have argued in favor of playing a "true point" are: (1) better assist rate; (2) fewer turnovers; and (3) better defense.

While Quinn has much better upside and runs the offense more smoothly than Tyler (and would in fact be my choice to start over Tyler, if those were my only two choices), the fact is that so far in our three league games, Tyler has outperformed Quinn under all three of the reasons above. So if Quinn wants to be our primary PG this season, it seems to me he has to step up a lot more than he's done already.

Personally, I look at it as what option gives us the best combination of offensive efficiency and defensive efficiency (rather than looking at a stat like a/to). I've been advocating Seth/Austin/Andre because I think that combination gives us equal or better offensive efficiency as Quinn/Seth/Austin and better defensive efficiency than Tyler/Seth/Austin. I assume Coach K will continue to mix and match and ride the hot hand, and it's hard to argue with that strategy.

[CDu]

As someone else pointed out, assists per game and assist rate are different things.

Actually, assists per game is also an assist rate - just a different rate than assists per minute or assists per possession. So both of you are correct. Though I'd say assists per minute or assists per possession are more meaningful assist rate measures.