Phase V

[sagegrouse]

So I volunteered to write Phase V, leading into the ACCs. Duke was in a good place; the D was improving; the team had won seven straight, although not without some adventures. Then, there was the UNC game tonight…. Anyway, I am going to write it straight. And I reserve the right to revise and extend my remarks tomorrow.

General Questions

1. Short Memory? Can the team and coaches right the ship in the next six days? (Or, if there is structural damage, can they “wright” the ship?) This is a strength-of-character-and-leadership question. But, for most teams, taking the court next Friday under these circumstances would be a tremendous challenge. This is question #1 and indeed the question foremost in my mind.

2. Inside Game? The question from the beginning of the season is whether Duke can develop the inside game to match the outside shooters, both in scoring inside and in opening up opportunities outside the circle? Last night Los Plumlees tallied 33 with 15 rebounds.. Now if everyone else will be as productive….

3. D and More D? The defense has improved immensely over the course of the season. On-ball defense has stepped up nicely. Will it continue to improve? Will tonight’s lapses on defense and rebounding prove to be an aberration?

4. Ensemble Cast? Duke this season is an “ensemble cast,” not a team with a couple of stars and supporting players. Any one of six or more players can carry the team. It would be great to have an A-A like Nolan or JJ, but it is comforting that so many players can be productive, and it gives the opponents a serious problem in planning their defenses. Can Duke win the ACC or go to the Final Four with an ensemble cast, or does someone have to be a consistently high scorer and go-to guy for the rest of the season?

5. Our ACCs? Duke has had a magical run in the ACC the past 13 years, winning 10 of 13 championships, showing both a focus and a determination other teams have not had. Can K’s witchcraft continue at Philips Arena in Atlanta? It’s too early to tell the match-ups, in that there are three ACC games tomorrow, but Duke will play the winner of the 7-10 game.

6. Health? It has not been a problem this year, but should always be in any summary here. Will Duke stay healthy?

Specific Questions

7. Whither Dre? Will Andre make a major contribution (or, even play significant minutes) in the ACCs? He unofficially played only 11 minutes tonight (it seemed like fewer) and took only one shot. I believe Duke needs an explosive scorer, and Andre, when he’s on, is as good as it gets. C’mon Andre! We’re all pulling for you!

8. Mason? Mason has been another concern, although to some extent the slack has been taken up by Miles. Will he be a major force from here on out? I thought he had a pretty good game against UNC, everything considered, although the team’s blocking out and rebounding was uniformly awful.

9. Our Man Miles? Will Miles’s surge continue into the tournament? He was the best player tonight against UNC, and if he continues to show heart and hustle, he can make a major difference in the two tournaments that lie ahead.

10. No More Walkabouts? We have had periods in a few games where the team really wasn’t with it for considerable periods. Let’s give credit to a hot-shooting opposition and recognize that outside shooting teams will have slumps. But still, there have been too many times when I sensed the tenacity and focus was not there. That happened tonight and in periods against other teams, even Wake on Tuesday. “One walkabout equals one tournament exit.”

Anyway, guys and gals have at it. We are counting on a resurgent Devils’ Team and would love to have another ACC Championship.

Sagegrouse

[uh_no]

So I volunteered to write Phase V, leading into the ACCs. Duke was in a good place; the D was improving; the team had won seven straight, although not without some adventures. Then, there was the UNC game tonight…. Anyway, I am going to write it straight. And I reserve the right to revise and extend my remarks tomorrow.

General Questions

1. Short Memory? Can the team and coaches right the ship in the next six days? (Or, if there is structural damage, can they “wright” the ship?) This is a strength-of-character-and-leadership question. But, for most teams, taking the court next Friday under these circumstances would be a tremendous challenge. This is question #1 and indeed the question foremost in my mind.

I don't see why not. We did it last year, and we know how great coach is at preparing them. They fought back in the second half tonight, i see no reason why they won't fight back in the post season.


2. Inside Game? The question from the beginning of the season is whether Duke can develop the inside game to match the outside shooters, both in scoring inside and in opening up opportunities outside the circle? Last night Los Plumlees tallied 33 with 15 rebounds.. Now if everyone else will be as productive….

I think the bigger question is, can we see this production consistently. The plumlees have had good games....but they also have no show games. They're really good players, they just don't show it every night. Which plumlees are going to show up in the tournaments? We're going to need the tonight plumlees every night.


3. D and More D? The defense has improved immensely over the course of the season. On-ball defense has stepped up nicely. Will it continue to improve? Will tonight’s lapses on defense and rebounding prove to be an aberration?

One can only hope, but I think there are only a handful of teams in the nation that can test the defense/rebounding to the level UNC did tonight. We may see UNC again in the ACC, but we likely won't see a team in the tournament that will challenge us defensively and on the boards as much as UNC did tonight until the Elite 8

[jv001]

So I volunteered to write Phase V, leading into the ACCs. Duke was in a good place; the D was improving; the team had won seven straight, although not without some adventures. Then, there was the UNC game tonight…. Anyway, I am going to write it straight. And I reserve the right to revise and extend my remarks tomorrow.

General Questions

1. Short Memory? Can the team and coaches right the ship in the next six days? (Or, if there is structural damage, can they “wright” the ship?) This is a strength-of-character-and-leadership question. But, for most teams, taking the court next Friday under these circumstances would be a tremendous challenge. This is question #1 and indeed the question foremost in my mind.

2. Inside Game? The question from the beginning of the season is whether Duke can develop the inside game to match the outside shooters, both in scoring inside and in opening up opportunities outside the circle? Last night Los Plumlees tallied 33 with 15 rebounds.. Now if everyone else will be as productive….WE need the inside-outside game that we displayed earlier in the season. Both Plumlee's are ready

3. D and More D? The defense has improved immensely over the course of the season. On-ball defense has stepped up nicely. Will it continue to improve? Will tonight’s lapses on defense and rebounding prove to be an aberration?Our guards must help out on the boards or we'll get bounced early

4. Ensemble Cast? Duke this season is an “ensemble cast,” not a team with a couple of stars and supporting players. Any one of six or more players can carry the team. It would be great to have an A-A like Nolan or JJ, but it is comforting that so many players can be productive, and it gives the opponents a serious problem in planning their defenses. Can Duke win the ACC or go to the Final Four with an ensemble cast, or does someone have to be a consistently high scorer and go-to guy for the rest of the season?Coach K has made Austin our go-to-guy and he needs to recognize when to pass the ball. Too many missed opportunities to pass to an open big on the pick and roll.

5. Our ACCs? Duke has had a magical run in the ACC the past 13 years, winning 10 of 13 championships, showing both a focus and a determination other teams have not had. Can K’s witchcraft continue at Philips Arena in Atlanta? It’s too early to tell the match-ups, in that there are three ACC games tomorrow, but Duke will play the winner of the 7-10 game. We have the best coach, so we can win the ACCT.

6. Health? It has not been a problem this year, but should always be in any summary here. Will Duke stay healthy?I sure hope we do.

Specific Questions

7. Whither Dre? Will Andre make a major contribution (or, even play significant minutes) in the ACCs? He unofficially played only 11 minutes tonight (it seemed like fewer) and took only one shot. I believe Duke needs an explosive scorer, and Andre, when he’s on, is as good as it gets. C’mon Andre! We’re all pulling for you!I don't know why he doesn't get more minutes and more set plays. We need him to be a top team.

8. Mason? Mason has been another concern, although to some extent the slack has been taken up by Miles. Will he be a major force from here on out? I thought he had a pretty good game against UNC, everything considered, although the team’s blocking out and rebounding was uniformly awful.Same as Andre. We need him to play like he did tonight to be successful.

9. Our Man Miles? Will Miles’s surge continue into the tournament? He was the best player tonight against UNC, and if he continues to show heart and hustle, he can make a major difference in the two tournaments that lie ahead.Miles has really been great the last two weeks. I think he keeps it up.

10. No More Walkabouts? We have had periods in a few games where the team really wasn’t with it for considerable periods. Let’s give credit to a hot-shooting opposition and recognize that outside shooting teams will have slumps. But still, there have been too many times when I sensed the tenacity and focus was not there. That happened tonight and in periods against other teams, even Wake on Tuesday. “One walkabout equals one tournament exit.”You nailed it here. LACK OF FOCUS has hurt this team all year.

Anyway, guys and gals have at it. We are counting on a resurgent Devils’ Team and would love to have another ACC Championship.

Sagegrouse
Great Phase V. Please see bolded comments after Sage's post.

[Greg_Newton]

I think that defensive rebounding continues to be a huge issue for us against teams with size and athleticism, specifically with our guards.

I mean, a shot goes up and we've got a Plumlee or Kelly fighting against both his man and a 6'7-6'8 wing for the rebound, while our 6'2 wing is cast off to the side. You'd like to see our guards box out better, but there's really only so much you can do when you have a 4-6" height disadvantage, ~30 pound weight disadvantage and are guarding a perimeter player that's cutting all over the place.

32-15 is not an acceptable halftime rebounding margin, no matter who you're playing.

[dyedwab]

10. No More Walkabouts? We have had periods in a few games where the team really wasn’t with it for considerable periods. Let’s give credit to a hot-shooting opposition and recognize that outside shooting teams will have slumps. But still, there have been too many times when I sensed the tenacity and focus was not there. That happened tonight and in periods against other teams, even Wake on Tuesday. “One walkabout equals one tournament exit.”

This has been the key question to me - and everything else flow from it. If we could be focused and intense for 40 minutes, we could (and have) overcome many of the physical deficiencies of this team. But we dig big holes when we go to sleep for 5-10 minutes in every game.

[uh_no]

I think that defensive rebounding continues to be a huge issue for us against teams with size and athleticism, specifically with our guards.

I mean, a shot goes up and we've got a Plumlee or Kelly fighting against both his man and a 6'7-6'8 wing for the rebound, while our 6'2 wing is cast off to the side. You'd like to see our guards box out better, but there's really only so much you can do when you have a 4-6" height disadvantage, ~30 pound weight disadvantage and are guarding a perimeter player that's cutting all over the place.

32-15 is not an acceptable halftime rebounding margin, no matter who you're playing.

on the positive side, it was only 10-7 in the second half....

[jv001]

I think that defensive rebounding continues to be a huge issue for us against teams with size and athleticism, specifically with our guards.

I mean, a shot goes up and we've got a Plumlee or Kelly fighting against both his man and a 6'7-6'8 wing for the rebound, while our 6'2 wing is cast off to the side. You'd like to see our guards box out better, but there's really only so much you can do when you have a 4-6" height disadvantage, ~30 pound weight disadvantage and are guarding a perimeter player that's cutting all over the place.
32-15 is not an acceptable halftime rebounding margin, no matter who you're playing.

I agree that our guards are under sized but they do too much ball watching instead of boxing out. They can certainly do better. Matter of fact they had improved going into this game. Next play! GoDuke!

[duke09hms]

32-15 is not an acceptable halftime rebounding margin, no matter who you're playing.

Wasn't it K who said rebounding is a matter of heart and desire? Are our guys going to want it more?

[mapei]

Wasn't it K who said rebounding is a matter of heart and desire? Are our guys going to want it more?

Heart and desire to a point. But strength and staying out of foul trouble are pretty major factors as well.

[Greg_Newton]

I agree that our guards are under sized but they do too much ball watching instead of boxing out. They can certainly do better. Matter of fact they had improved going into this game. Next play! GoDuke!

I'm not sure if I'd agree with this; rather, I'd say that 1) they've looked better against terrible ACC teams (although I remember they even got beat out 22-7 by lowly GT), and 2) Austin Rivers has really improved.

In our previous 4 games against top-100 teams, our guards have been out-rebounded by:

16-10
10-10
18-14
14-11

For a total of 58-45... and 20 of those 45 were Austin Rivers alone, who, really could be our PG. Throw in the 18-6 massacre tonight, and it's a total of 76-51 against the last five possible tournament teams we've played. Not ideal.

[Kedsy]

I think the bigger question is, can we see this production consistently. The plumlees have had good games....but they also have no show games. They're really good players, they just don't show it every night. Which plumlees are going to show up in the tournaments? We're going to need the tonight plumlees every night.

Well, if you count the Plumlees as one entity, they have been reasonably consistent. Here are their combined totals for each game in the 2nd half of the ACC season:



Opp mins pts rebs
---- ---- --- ----
UNC 50 11 17
Md 61 29 32
NCSU 52 13 16
BC 41 12 13
FSU 45 11 13
VPI 58 12 24
Wake 48 15 18
UNC 50 33 15


So, we had a couple huge games and the rest were pretty much the same. And all combined double-doubles. Seems fairly consistent to me.

[Ian]

I don't know what to make of this, but Duke has ended everyone of these phases with a loss.

Phase I ended with loss to Ohio State.
Phase II ended with loss to Temple
Phase III ended with loss to Miami (with FSU also a loss in there)
Phase IV ended with loss tonight.

And unless something unforeseen happens V will end with a loss as well.

[Kedsy]

And unless something unforeseen happens V will end with a loss as well.

And you base this on... what?

[Ian]

I give us no better than a 1/20 chance to win our last game of the season, and I think that's being an optimist, most would give us less.

[MCFinARL]

And you base this on... what?

Maybe on the fact that the NCAA tournament ends with a loss for 64 out of 65 teams? ;) Even the top seed, winning the championship is somewhat "unforeseen."

[Kedsy]

Maybe on the fact that the NCAA tournament ends with a loss for 64 out of 65 teams? ;) Even the top seed, winning the championship is somewhat "unforeseen."

Except Phase V is only the ACC tournament, not the NCAA tournament, so our odds are somewhat better.

[Troublemaker]

I continue to really like this team despite the loss to UNC, who I've conceded since preseason was better than Duke.

Biggest thing to watch for IMO is Austin's shooting percentage. This is 3 games in a row now that he's shot poorly. Has he hit a freshman wall? If so, then Duke is probably finished doing special things this season. If not, I'll take my chances with this team to do some damage in both tourneys.

[Bob Green]

7. Whither Dre? Will Andre make a major contribution (or, even play significant minutes) in the ACCs? He unofficially played only 11 minutes tonight (it seemed like fewer) and took only one shot. I believe Duke needs an explosive scorer, and Andre, when he’s on, is as good as it gets. C’mon Andre! We’re all pulling for you!



Against Carolina, Dawkins only attempted one shot. He is second in the ACC in 3 PT FG Percentage at .410 and fourth in 3 PT FGs Made. We cannot expect to win ball games with Dawkins only attempting one shot. He must be an integral part of our offense going forward.

[ncexnyc]

Here are ten answers to the ten questions:

1. Short Memory: No problem unless someone decides they need to do more than they are capable of, but I really don’t foresee that problem with this team.

2. Inside Game: Mason and Miles will hold their own defensively and on the boards. If Mason just plays and doesn’t think about every shot he’ll do fine on the offensive end as well. The key is Ryan. We’ve all talked about Dre, but I heard an interesting stat the other day. It seems when Ryan scores over 10 points we do really, really well. We need him to score, since he doesn’t provide much in the way your normal 4 does.

3. D and more D: Short guards and no SF to speak of have been factors we’ve dealt with all year. The team D has shown improvements, but I’m not sure what more this team can do to get better in this key area. This team will go as far as it’s OFFENSE will take them.

4. Ensemble Cast: Hey folks, I was definitely one of those who in the past called for a third scorer. Well this year we have that in spades. Nice to have that luxury and it’s really hard to slow this team down offensively.

5. Our ACC’s: Not sure past history means much here. The only factor is Coach K, who might be able to work his magic with the bench to get much needed minutes out of them in a possible 3 games in 3 days scenario.

6. Health: So far so good (knock on wood)

7. Whither Dre: Well here’s one streak Dre has managed to have. That’s having his own question in every Phase thread this season. The consistency just isn’t there and I’m beginning to wonder if it will ever be there. Let’s just go out on a limb and say if we make a deep run the rest of the way, he’ll have at least one awesome game.

8. Mason: This kid needs to realize he has all the physical tools and that he needs to just do it. Don’t think, let your talent takeover. Loved his second half last night. Aggressive, power moves right to the rim with strong finishes.

9. Our Man Miles: I’ll take solid and steady for the rest of the season. Play your game, which is being the anchor for this team.

10. No More Walkabouts: We’ve talked and talked about this all year. Not sure why it happens, but it does. The best we can hope for is that we continue to fight and fight some more as this has managed to be our recipe for success this season.

[MCFinARL]

Except Phase V is only the ACC tournament, not the NCAA tournament, so our odds are somewhat better.

Point taken--I didn't understand that the post season included 2 separate phases. Clearly the odds are a lot better, even if you assume that each team has an equal chance to win (which I don't).

Clearly I should stop posting late at night, and maybe especially after tough losses.

[HB TAYLOR]

Against Carolina, Dawkins only attempted one shot. He is second in the ACC in 3 PT FG Percentage at .410 and fourth in 3 PT FGs Made. We cannot expect to win ball games with Dawkins only attempting one shot. He must be an integral part of our offense going forward.

He is not consistent enough to be a integral part of the offense.

[Bob Green]

He is not consistent enough to be a integral part of the offense.

Obviously, I disagree. Take a look at Dawkins' resume, he is second in the ACC in 3 PT FG Percentage and fourth in 3 PT FG Made. Andre Dawkins has made 66 of 161 attempts (.410). He has made more 3 PT FG with a higher percentage than any other Duke player. Ryan Kelly is shooting .408 with 40 made shots. Seth Curry has made 59 at a .399 rate. Austin Rivers has made 54 with a .383 success rate. The team needs Dawkins shooting the ball. He needs to be attempting a minimum of five or six 3-pointers a game.

He can't score if he doesn't shoot.

[greybeard]

They went to Miles Plumlee early and he delivered. First, he hit a 12-15 bank shot from the left side, midway between the lower block and foul line extended. The ball hit rather hard off the backboard and went in. We didn't see him getting an opportunity for such a shot thereafter, at least in the first half. The next basket was an up and under move from the right side, step fake up, step through with his left, layup that had Zeller looking down and wondering where Miles had gone. Miles didn't see they ball againk, during UNC's unprecedented run, and, if I'm correct, again the first half.

I understand the need for threes and that a great shooter who are missing needs to be given the opportunity to shoot his way out of it. But when all three are missing badly, mostly short (some wide open, but others, not so much--UNC was charging at the shooter (witness the foul oon Curry) and made some of those shoots rushed (guy's taking them with chopped footwork, for example), and UNC was going on an unprecdented run off those contininuing missses, why did they not go back to Miles who had proven that he could score the ball against Zeller who UNC left on an Island, that is, no help? Maybe K knew that his team could not win without the 3-ball and couldn't believe that all three of his shooters would miss time and again, maybe he thought that, if they were going to step up in that game, they were going to find it in themselves, he was not going to give them aid of any kind, like, for instance, a time out. Who is going to question K after all he has accomplished.

What I saw was good shooters who were short arming it, and who were knocked back on their heals by a half court offense in which Barnes and the big guard were catching inside the three, taking their small defenders close, getting good shots, and then crashing the boards or hanging inside the lane for long rebounds. UNC was going quick, was effective, got many offensive rebounds and, when they didn't, Duke tried to run, to find open shots or get to the rim but couldn't. You don't score on offense, it gives your opponent greater confidence, they play with more aggression.

Had Miles seen the ball more during those early minutes, he might have drawn one, maybe two, obvious fouls on Zeller. Even with one, Zeller might have been far more cautious in reaching over Miles or Mason and snatching offensive rebounds--who knows why and when those are called and when they are not (an arm in the back is a sure thing), but, if I'm Zeller, I'm backing off. Maybe, if Miles goes 3 for 7 in the first 10-12 minutes and draws a foul on Zeller early, the pressure is lifted a bit from the three shooters whom I think succummed to it, at least a little (the rest, UNC was committed to stopping the three game, although frankly, while they disturbed it some, I don't think that could have disturbed Duke's shooters the same way others like Temple had).

In the Championship game, Duke went inside to a one-on-ne guarded Zoubek who scored 2 quick baskets and then did not see it inside, certainly not off set pieces, again. Duke had an awesome defense, and won by a point while scoring in the fifties. This time, Roy had four guys inside and put the ball in the hands of Barnes and the strong guard to create shots, or get it to Zeller who was guarded one on one, that is, when Miles was not having to try to help.

I think stategically Duke could have done better in the first half and perhaps kept them much closer. How much? I don't know. Would it have mattered, maybe, a long shot, maybe. Is this second guessing after the fact. No.

[Saratoga2]

So I volunteered to write Phase V, leading into the ACCs. Duke was in a good place; the D was improving; the team had won seven straight, although not without some adventures. Then, there was the UNC game tonight…. Anyway, I am going to write it straight. And I reserve the right to revise and extend my remarks tomorrow.

General Questions

1. Short Memory? The ship has been sailing along fairly well at times and several players have improved their performances. We can beat most opponents with the possible exception of Kentucky and Syracuse. That could be said of UNC as well, as they are unlikely to beat the top seeds either.

2. Inside Game? The Plumlees have belately developed an inside game. Now, if they can find consistency, we will be formidable inside.

3. D and More D? Our defense has gotten better, except for last night when the ideas of boxing out, running the floor and preventing the opponent bigs from setting up close to the basket were forgotten.

4. Ensemble Cast? With the Plumlee's playing well, Ryan needs to become more consistent so our bigs will be competitive. We have Seth and Austin who can play well, although can also fall into bad habits. Seth has improved his handle though and that is a big plus. Get use to the idea that Tyler will get a lot of PT and that Quinn and Andre will get very little.
5. Our ACCs? I don't buy the idea there is some kind of magic the coach can bring. We haven't seen his magic work with Andre or with either of our two small forwards. We need our players to bring their A games and have the coaches play them intelligently.

6. Health? Of course health is important.

Specific Questions

7. Whither Dre? Andre appears to be totally in the dog house. The question is one of the chicken and the egg. Does the negative feedback on Andre's play cause him to get worse? Right now, instead of being a major contributor, Andre is unlikely to see much PT. Has he been handled right? Can't forget his wonderful contributions during the season.
8. Mason? Mason showed that he has a lot of ability during the second half last night. I wonder why he seems to play so soft early in games. Almost looks like he has his mind elsewhere. My frank opinion is that Mason seems to be out of position on defense in many instances, again like he doesn't stay focussed.

9. Our Man Miles? Miles is making belated but great strides to become our best inside player. I wonder why it has taken so long for this development. At any rate, we should celebrate his change from a fumbler of the ball and a poor scorer to a much more positive solid player. Would be a good case study to find out how me has made this recent change.

10. No More Walkabouts? When we put Miles, Mason, Austin, Seth and Tyler on the floor together, we have an effective team. If Miles can somehow get Mason off to a fast start we should have no out of focus play from the beginning. When we don't do well from the start, Austin begins to push and take the load on his shoulders. He seems to control the ball most of the time and others get less involved, while Austin get into the charge mode. Getting Austin to realize he can be a very effective playmaker and have him commit to that mode when the drive to the basket is not there would be the biggest plus offensively that I think we could have. Get the bigs involved and keep them involved. Seth has gone from turnover prone to fairly solid with the ball. Dropping the bALL to Seth is also a good play as he has multi-scoring talents.

Substitution for the main 5 players with Ryan, who can make contributions with the right matchups, Quinn who is an adequate Tyler sub and Andre who needs to be brought back into a positive frame of mind, needs to be done intelligrently. I wish we had a small forward to use, but Michael and Alex just seem like they are beyond hope at this point.

Anyway, guys and gals have at it. We are counting on a resurgent Devils’ Team and would love to have another ACC Championship.

Sagegrouse

See my embedded comments

[MCFinARL]

Obviously, I disagree. Take a look at Dawkins' resume, he is second in the ACC in 3 PT FG Percentage and fourth in 3 PT FG Made. Andre Dawkins has made 66 of 161 attempts (.410). He has made more 3 PT FG with a higher percentage than any other Duke player. Ryan Kelly is shooting .408 with 40 made shots. Seth Curry has made 59 at a .399 rate. Austin Rivers has made 54 with a .383 success rate. The team needs Dawkins shooting the ball. He needs to be attempting a minimum of five or six 3-pointers a game.

He can't score if he doesn't shoot.

I agree completely (which will surprise no one who has read any of my numerous-to-a-fault posts on Andre Dawkins--it seems to be an obsession of mine). I understand that he has had issues on defense, and if the rest of the back court were defensive superstars, I could understand minimizing his playing time. But they are not.

I'm not going to argue Dawkins versus any one player in terms of minutes because each brings something to the table (and, conversely, none--with the possible exception of Austin Rivers, who is still learning some important freshman lessons--is a complete player), but I think he needs to be in the mix, both as a shooter and as a threat to shoot who creates openings for other guards on the court, if Duke wants to generate the kind of offense needed to beat the high quality, and highly motivated, teams they will face going forward. If his defensive issues are seen as so serious that it's not worth the risk of putting him in, then our other shooters are going to need to have no off nights, or even off halves.

[Troublemaker]

Is this second guessing after the fact. No.

It's the definition of second-guessing after the fact. Look, Miles has to earn his touches and gain the confidence of his teammates, and that's a gradual process. Something big may be happening here, something Zoubek-like, with Miles. I'm afraid to even talk about it to be honest for fear of jinxing it. But you can't be a guy who fumbles the ball in the post for 3.75 years and then all of a sudden be treated like Hakeem Olajuwon by your team because you scored two early buckets. Foul trouble also limited his time and touches, but I'm quite happy with 16 points and 11 rebounds in 26 minutes, thank you very much. He was the Man of the Match and the Man of My Heart yesterday.

Again, I've watched Miles for 3.75 seasons, same as you. I do not trust him in the post.

Going forward, he's going to get opportunities to show that this Zoubek thing he has going on is for real and that he can provide some inside points consistently for Duke. Here's the key for him -- Miles has to show an awareness on the court that's been mostly lacking during his career. One of the differences between how UNC defended him and how other teams will defend him is something called help defense. UNC has the size and length to stay home on Duke's shooters and allow our post guys to go 1-on-1. Other teams that aren't as blessed as UNC inside (basically every team) will dig down into the post with their guards. Can Miles avoid the turnover when the help comes and make a pass that leads to an open shot? Because that's basketball offense in a nutshell, and he hasn't shown it for 3.75 years. You want to treat him as a go-to option in the post? He has to demonstrate he can handle that responsibility first. Here's hoping.

[Mcluhan]

--I woke up this morning mostly thinking about how happy I was to see us playing aggressively in the post and demonstrating an increased desire to score there in the second half. Post play involves confronting your opponent at very close range, and in the last twenty minutes Miles and Mason took it to Zeller and Henson. If getting blown out yesterday is the price of the consistent development of a more dynamic inside-out offense, I will take it.

--Re: Health, it would have been nice to have had Hairston yesterday, to switch up the energy and cushion us on fouls. What is his status?

--Andre is my favorite player on this year's team, but I've long ago stopped trying to figure anything out about him. He's Andre. He's been huge for us in numerous games this year. One memorable facet of this team, win or lose, is what a great bunch of distinct characters they are.

I think Andre should shoot early and often. However, it's become clear that Coach K will not give him minutes based on that dimension of his game alone.

Yet all that uncertainty aside, this year I've become very confident in Andre's consistent readiness to take big shots in games where he decides to come out and shoot. Not a bad thing for one of your quieter players (you also have to love Thornton's penchant for shot clock beaters). As baffled as we all are, he never seems particularly surprised. From Belmont on. Who knows why, but I think we have no choice but to embrace it. He's got a few big games left this spring. He'll earn the opportunity to take those big shots on the defensive end.

The competition for playing time has gotten stiffer, which is not a bad thing. Quinn at off guard was an interesting wrinkle yesterday.

--But mostly, Tyler is earning starter's minutes. His goal should be to become something akin to our leading scorer on defense. And Austin should provide his competition.

[greybeard]

It's the definition of second-guessing after the fact. Look, Miles has to earn his touches and gain the confidence of his teammates, and that's a gradual process. Something big may be happening here, something Zoubek-like, with Miles. I'm afraid to even talk about it to be honest for fear of jinxing it. But you can't be a guy who fumbles the ball in the post for 3.75 years and then all of a sudden be treated like Hakeem Olajuwon by your team because you scored two early buckets. Foul trouble also limited his time and touches, but I'm quite happy with 16 points and 11 rebounds in 26 minutes, thank you very much. He was the Man of the Match and the Man of My Heart yesterday.

Again, I've watched Miles for 3.75 seasons, same as you. I do not trust him in the post.

Going forward, he's going to get opportunities to show that this Zoubek thing he has going on is for real and that he can provide some inside points consistently for Duke. Here's the key for him -- Miles has to show an awareness on the court that's been mostly lacking during his career. One of the differences between how UNC defended him and how other teams will defend him is something called help defense. UNC has the size and length to stay home on Duke's shooters and allow our post guys to go 1-on-1. Other teams that aren't as blessed as UNC inside (basically every team) will dig down into the post with their guards. Can Miles avoid the turnover when the help comes and make a pass that leads to an open shot? Because that's basketball offense in a nutshell, and he hasn't shown it for 3.75 years. You want to treat him as a go-to option in the post? He has to demonstrate he can handle that responsibility first. Here's hoping.

First, I was thinking it during the game, in fact, after Miles made two in a row, shots that were DIFFERENT than he normally takes in games. People have reported elsewhere that he plays much differently and more effectively on offense during practice.

Second, there was a thread about Miles that I contributed to I believe as the last poster. Read it.

Third, it seemed to me apparent, about a third of the way into UNC's prolonged sprint, and the equally prolonged outside shooters' dry spell, that Duke really had no other choice.

Fourth. It seemed to me that K decided to stick with the Kelly, Curry, and Rivers shooting threes no matter what, and that no matter what kept going. When it got to like 12 and the threes kept failing, I thought, "Call a time out, and tell them to go to Miles, who, in case you have missed it, had been on a tear the previous six games, had Zeller one-on-one with no help and beat him twice in a row easily, once mid-range and once near the basket.

I could't watch the second half, knew there was no chance, but apparently Miles did continue where he left off in terms of scoring the ball.

Zoubek, I always thought during his freshman year forward showed great instincts for getting free, and should have gotten the ball, before there was someone on his back. Said so a million times. Midway through his senior year began the multiple screen setting role that made Duke very, very difficult to defend on the three ball and the middle wide open. As the NCAA's began, K got Z the ball early a few times as part of set plays and he delivered, just as he did in the final game.

Miles has NEVER been given the chance to catch it in good position on a consistent basis because Duke has been and continues to be outside oriented. The only times it has lost is when the outside was shut down. This game, they shuted themselves down and when they didn't, UNC did. They should havegone to Miles until he dropped a couple of passing. I don't think thta that would have happened.

[HB TAYLOR]

Obviously, I disagree. Take a look at Dawkins' resume, he is second in the ACC in 3 PT FG Percentage and fourth in 3 PT FG Made. Andre Dawkins has made 66 of 161 attempts (.410). He has made more 3 PT FG with a higher percentage than any other Duke player. Ryan Kelly is shooting .408 with 40 made shots. Seth Curry has made 59 at a .399 rate. Austin Rivers has made 54 with a .383 success rate. The team needs Dawkins shooting the ball. He needs to be attempting a minimum of five or six 3-pointers a game.

He can't score if he doesn't shoot.

There is not doubt when Andre is hitting the 3, no one in the county is better! I went back and read his high school recruiting scouting report...big time athlete who can play above the rim and sinks it deep from long range(Scout.com class of 09). This is where my consistency issue arrises, when he misses early from 3, put the ball on the floor try and draw a foul or put himself in position to attempt higher percentage shots. We saw flashes of this his freshman year, where did it go?

[DukieInBrasil]

It's the definition of second-guessing after the fact. Look, Miles has to earn his touches and gain the confidence of his teammates, and that's a gradual process. Something big may be happening here, something Zoubek-like, with Miles. I'm afraid to even talk about it to be honest for fear of jinxing it. But you can't be a guy who fumbles the ball in the post for 3.75 years and then all of a sudden be treated like Hakeem Olajuwon by your team because you scored two early buckets. Foul trouble also limited his time and touches, but I'm quite happy with 16 points and 11 rebounds in 26 minutes, thank you very much. He was the Man of the Match and the Man of My Heart yesterday.

Again, I've watched Miles for 3.75 seasons, same as you. I do not trust him in the post.

Going forward, he's going to get opportunities to show that this Zoubek thing he has going on is for real and that he can provide some inside points consistently for Duke. Here's the key for him -- Miles has to show an awareness on the court that's been mostly lacking during his career. One of the differences between how UNC defended him and how other teams will defend him is something called help defense. UNC has the size and length to stay home on Duke's shooters and allow our post guys to go 1-on-1. Other teams that aren't as blessed as UNC inside (basically every team) will dig down into the post with their guards. Can Miles avoid the turnover when the help comes and make a pass that leads to an open shot? Because that's basketball offense in a nutshell, and he hasn't shown it for 3.75 years. You want to treat him as a go-to option in the post? He has to demonstrate he can handle that responsibility first. Here's hoping.

I think you're putting too much of that on Miles. Our guards are not good passers, in fact they routinely miss either Plumlee or anybody open going to the basket. They are too short, and they don't pass well. There's no way we should expect Miles to stop asking for the ball when he's open, but we should be able to expect that our guards, especially our PG, to be able to pass the ball to an open man with a lane to the rim. Doesn't happen though.

[Troublemaker]

I think you're putting too much of that on Miles. Our guards are not good passers, in fact they routinely miss either Plumlee or anybody open going to the basket. They are too short, and they don't pass well. There's no way we should expect Miles to stop asking for the ball when he's open, but we should be able to expect that our guards, especially our PG, to be able to pass the ball to an open man with a lane to the rim. Doesn't happen though.

In the early games in the season, Miles had plenty of chances to establish himself as the man in the post for Duke. He started and we went to him early and often because, in the preseason, he and Seth were Duke's two best players in practice. The plan going into the season was actually to build the team around those two and Austin as the main cogs. Unfortunately, Miles didn't fare well in that role. There were lots of turnovers, awkwards shots, and mistakes in general. Mason then started playing well and surpassed him in the rotation, and off Duke went.

I love that Miles has seemingly stepped up at the end of his career, and I think Duke is going to give him a chance to be the man in the post again. But I don't want to re-write history. I remember the early season plans and subsequent struggles, and additionally, I know I can't be the only Duke fan who has cringed for most his career when he has the ball in a crowd. To be a legitimate option in the post, you have to be able to hang out to balls in traffic and pass out of it. With poise, and to a teammate. Mason, for all his faults (can't hold position, inconsistent touch) can play offense when defenders crowd him and re-locate the ball to open shooter. I hope Miles can come through in that role because he's a heck of a lot stronger than Mason, a significantly better screener and offensive rebounder, and should be able to cause damage inside if he plays with poise.

[Wheat/"/"/"]

Against Carolina, Dawkins only attempted one shot. He is second in the ACC in 3 PT FG Percentage at .410 and fourth in 3 PT FGs Made. We cannot expect to win ball games with Dawkins only attempting one shot. He must be an integral part of our offense going forward.

Bad coaching? If Roy sat a player with those stats on the pine in a big game....(you know I'm kidding).

Coach K was in a bind and had to pick his poison. It was clear early that UNC's gameplan was not to leave the shooters. When UNC dashed out front, Dawkins was not going to get clean looks at the basket, and coach K thought Tyler was a better option as defender and ball handler since the drives would be there. Making the tough decisions is why he gets the big bucks.

The 3 spot is a glaring weakness for Duke. Beyond open face up shooting, what are you getting from Kelly and Dawkins? Both are weak defensively,weak ball handlers, and weak rebounders.

Dawkins is a great, pure shooter off the catch. Kelly can shoot it too and has a nice feel for pace, but neither is dictating his play to any defender in the league from the wing off the dribble, and that really hurts from your wing forward.

[Duke76]

He is not consistent enough to be a integral part of the offense.

Is cook consistent, Tyler or Kelly...how about the plumlees? Dawkins needs the time...I'd rather lose with him bombing away and playing no worse defense than the rest of the team...at least if he get hot he can put up big numbers...Tyler won't and neither will cook, why not devise some plays for him to get him off..it beats all the dribbling that Austin and curry do that causes the rest of the team to just stand around

[MCFinARL]

I think you're putting too much of that on Miles. Our guards are not good passers, in fact they routinely miss either Plumlee or anybody open going to the basket. They are too short, and they don't pass well. There's no way we should expect Miles to stop asking for the ball when he's open, but we should be able to expect that our guards, especially our PG, to be able to pass the ball to an open man with a lane to the rim. Doesn't happen though.

While this seems a bit strong, I see your point. Austin is getting better at passing into Miles or Mason, as well as passing to other teammates--but isn't a point guard and will never be a pass-first player (nor should he be). Andre is actually pretty good at passing into Miles or Mason, though he doesn't get that many opportunities. Quinn is admittedly short and is perhaps not a great passer yet, but has promise. I think we will be excited to see what he can do with passing in future seasons.

[RockyMtDevil]

Heading into Tourny Time, it has been a stable of the Duke program to have worked through some major issues and to have arrived at a firm strategy going forward. In 2001, K changed strategies and went small ball, removing Nate from the starting lineup and replacing him with Duhon, allowing for a more up tempo attack. In 2010, we all know K inserted Zoubs into the lineup as a rock down low, which both clogged the middle and gave us ample second chance opportunities on kick out three's.

I see this year and last year being eerily similar heading into March. While last year was a bizarre aberation due to Irving's injury, we still had far to many questions about how to insert him into the lineup and how it would change both chemistry and sets. It proved to be fatal as the team simply didn't have the time to adjust to having him back on the court. Although, I do believe it was well worth the risk, I wouldn't have sat him for a million bucks knowing how great the kid is...

this year, too, we are coming into March with a ton of wins, but still not a set system and strategy in place that we all believe in. We are still struggling for answers, unless of course the answer is to simply shoot 35 three's each game and hope they go in, I sure hope to God K and staff aren't solely employing this strategy, or we'll all be having very early withdrawal symptons this year. My fear is, due to our inconsistencies, K has yet to be able to take the team in a certain, intentional pathway heading into March. How can he plan or create a strategy with Andre's inability to show up nightly, Mason's recent and major slump, porous defense, Kelly's major guarding liabilities, etc... We would be fools indeed to assume that Andre is going to wake up and play consistently on defense and contribute offensively game after game, that Mason would finally become the low post scorer we all hope he can become, that Kelly would be able to guard the dribble drive and actually block someone out, that the mental lapses would suddenly stop, that we would finally stop starting games down by 10 points after 3 minutes, that we wouldn't be a one dimensional/three point chucking offense...Too many questions still needing answers equals a very unpredictable March.

This thread started with about 10 Major Questions to be answered. Nobody should expect most of those to be answered in the next two weeks. this team has had all year to sort through these issues and many of the same problems that have plagued us all year continue to rear their ugly head even now in March. Now, this is in no way to undermine the great things this team has accomplished, they've done more than I would have dreamed them doing. However, for us to automatically assume that all these holes and questions are just going to be fixed is crazy talk.

Simply, in years when we've made deep runs, we had a team identity and K had both the time and talent to tweak our system heading into March, providing new life into the team. With all the remaining question marks, I don't believe he will have the ability to do so this year, or at least he hasn't been able to to date...

Certainly not out of the question that K works some magic, I guess I just believe we should have realistic expectations for these guys. They have fought hard all year, have given everyone a great regular season and we shouldn't expect or put too much unrealistic expectations on them moving forward with all the weaknesses still apparent.

[Kedsy]

Simply, in years when we've made deep runs, we had a team identity and K had both the time and talent to tweak our system heading into March, providing new life into the team. With all the remaining question marks, I don't believe he will have the ability to do so this year, or at least he hasn't been able to to date...

This is an interesting observation. I agree it helps in the post-season if the players are secure in their roles. But I'm not sure it's essential. I don't recall the 1988, 1989, 1990, and 1991 teams necessarily having everything ironed out before the post-season. And I just checked the box scores and K was still tinkering with the starting lineups and rotation going into the ACCT during those years.

I think sometimes teams can gel in the post-season. This year's team seems to play better under pressure, when they have no choice but to dig deep and give their full effort. I sort of wish they gave their full effort all the time, but so far that hasn't happened. This tendency could bite us if we dig ourselves into a hole against the Clemson/Va Tech winner in the ACCT, or in a second or third round NCAAT game, but I think we have a better chance to play hard for 40 minutes against Florida State in the ACC semis or UNC in the ACC final or any game after the Sweet 16 (assuming we get past the earlier games).

So pretty much anything can happen. This team's future just seems very difficult to predict.

[AsiaMinor]

Against Carolina, Dawkins only attempted one shot. He is second in the ACC in 3 PT FG Percentage at .410 and fourth in 3 PT FGs Made. We cannot expect to win ball games with Dawkins only attempting one shot. He must be an integral part of our offense going forward.

Thank you Bob Green. I've been trying to make that point but you did it better than I ever could. Why the kid keeps getting pulled out so fast is beyond me and must have something to do with things that go on that we cannot see.

[ncexnyc]

How can he plan or create a strategy with Andre's inability to show up nightly, Mason's recent and major slump, porous defense, Kelly's major guarding liabilities, etc... We would be fools indeed to assume that Andre is going to wake up and play consistently on defense and contribute offensively game after game, that Mason would finally become the low post scorer we all hope he can become, that Kelly would be able to guard the dribble drive and actually block someone out, that the mental lapses would suddenly stop, that we would finally stop starting games down by 10 points after 3 minutes, that we wouldn't be a one dimensional/three point chucking offense...Too many questions still needing answers equals a very unpredictable March.

.

These are all valid concerns that you list, but based on our record we've managed to overcome them.

I doubt the staff counts on Dre to be consistent, which is why he no longer starts. If he's hot they ride him, if not they look elsewhere.

Mason's issues are self-inflicted. He needs to stop thinking and trust his God given physical ability. There aren't many bigs who can hang with him when he decides to take the ball to the hoop and not many who can challenge him once he takes it up strong.

Ryan has shown he can play aggressively. He made shots at CH and we won, looked really bad Saturday and we lost. IMO he's more valuable to this team than Dre is.

Back to Dre, considering how much media attention Saturday's game received. Was there not one reporter who asked Coach K why Dre received so little playing time? I'd love to hear his response if indeed the question was put forth.

[millerecu]

Thank you Bob Green. I've been trying to make that point but you did it better than I ever could. Why the kid keeps getting pulled out so fast is beyond me and must have something to do with things that go on that we cannot see.

Let me start out by saying that Andre and Miles are my two favorite players on this years team. However there is no doubt in my mind why Andre was pulled so quickly in Saturday's game. He simply was not trying on the offensive side. This has been said many times on this board. He is best when he is moving through multiple screens to get open. On Saturday he just sat in the corner watching the ball....I just do not get it with him sometimes. My guess is the staff saw the exact same thing and yanked him.

[kmspeaks]

Heading into Tourny Time, it has been a stable of the Duke program to have worked through some major issues and to have arrived at a firm strategy going forward. In 2001, K changed strategies and went small ball, removing Nate from the starting lineup and replacing him with Duhon, allowing for a more up tempo attack. In 2010, we all know K inserted Zoubs into the lineup as a rock down low, which both clogged the middle and gave us ample second chance opportunities on kick out three's.

I see this year and last year being eerily similar heading into March. While last year was a bizarre aberation due to Irving's injury, we still had far to many questions about how to insert him into the lineup and how it would change both chemistry and sets. It proved to be fatal as the team simply didn't have the time to adjust to having him back on the court. Although, I do believe it was well worth the risk, I wouldn't have sat him for a million bucks knowing how great the kid is...

this year, too, we are coming into March with a ton of wins, but still not a set system and strategy in place that we all believe in. We are still struggling for answers, unless of course the answer is to simply shoot 35 three's each game and hope they go in, I sure hope to God K and staff aren't solely employing this strategy, or we'll all be having very early withdrawal symptons this year. My fear is, due to our inconsistencies, K has yet to be able to take the team in a certain, intentional pathway heading into March. How can he plan or create a strategy with Andre's inability to show up nightly, Mason's recent and major slump, porous defense, Kelly's major guarding liabilities, etc... We would be fools indeed to assume that Andre is going to wake up and play consistently on defense and contribute offensively game after game, that Mason would finally become the low post scorer we all hope he can become, that Kelly would be able to guard the dribble drive and actually block someone out, that the mental lapses would suddenly stop, that we would finally stop starting games down by 10 points after 3 minutes, that we wouldn't be a one dimensional/three point chucking offense...Too many questions still needing answers equals a very unpredictable March.

This thread started with about 10 Major Questions to be answered. Nobody should expect most of those to be answered in the next two weeks. this team has had all year to sort through these issues and many of the same problems that have plagued us all year continue to rear their ugly head even now in March. Now, this is in no way to undermine the great things this team has accomplished, they've done more than I would have dreamed them doing. However, for us to automatically assume that all these holes and questions are just going to be fixed is crazy talk.

Simply, in years when we've made deep runs, we had a team identity and K had both the time and talent to tweak our system heading into March, providing new life into the team. With all the remaining question marks, I don't believe he will have the ability to do so this year, or at least he hasn't been able to to date...

Certainly not out of the question that K works some magic, I guess I just believe we should have realistic expectations for these guys. They have fought hard all year, have given everyone a great regular season and we shouldn't expect or put too much unrealistic expectations on them moving forward with all the weaknesses still apparent.

Duke has averaged 21.5 three point attempts per game this year. They have only 2 games where they attempted more than 30 threes-Miami and @UNC. I know, for the Carolina games especially, the media wanted to make it seem like Duke just chucks 3's and hopes they make enough to beat you but when you have a situation where a)UNC isn't all that good at defending the 3 and b)Duke is pretty darn good at shooting them then I would hope K would tell them to shoot early and often. That strategy has not been employed in other games where our opponents 3 point defense is not as putrid.

Yes there are some question marks for this team but its success in the tournament will (like pretty much every other team/year) depend on match-ups and a little luck.

[superdave]

Since if we keep winning we get to play three games in three days, I thought it might be useful to look at the last three years and see if the bench gets any longer during the ACCT.

2011 ACCT
Game 1 - beat Maryland by 16.
Thornton played 5 minutes.
Hairston played 1 minute.

Game 2 - beat VT by 14.
Thornton 1.
Hairston 1.
Peters 1.

Game 2 - beat Unc by 17.
Thornton 1.
Hairston 1.

Tyler had 3 DNPs and averaged 9 minutes. Josh played in 27/37 games and averaged 6 minutes.


2010 ACCT
Game 1 - beat UVa by 11.
Kelly 3.
Dawkins 10.

Game 2 - beat Miami by 3.
Dawkins 9.
Kelly 1.

Game 3 - beat GT by 4.
Dawkins 13.
Kelly 0.

Dawkins and Kelly only had a handful of DNPs between them on the year. Dawkins averaged 12 minutes and Kelly 6 on the season. Dawkins minutes were fairly consistent, but Kelly's dropped and he had a DNP in the title game.


2009 ACCT
Game 1 - beat BC by 1.
Paulus 1.
McClure 14.
Zoubek 5.

Game 2 - beat Maryland by 6.
Paulus 7.
McClure 23.
Zoubek 1.

Game 3 - beat FSU by 10.
Paulus 2.
McClure 16.
Zoubek 9.

Paulus averaged 16 minutes a game so his role had clearly fallen off. Zoubek averaged 12 and saw that cut in half for the tourney. McClure averaged 16 and pretty much stayed at average for the tourney.

This suggests to me that not only will we not see any of our guys who get major minutes sitting on the bench much this weekend, but we're also unlikely to see a whole lot of Gbinije either. I assume Mason and Miles will take up almost as much of Ryan's minutes as Josh does, barring foul trouble.

[CDu]

This suggests to me that not only will we not see any of our guys who get major minutes sitting on the bench much this weekend, but we're also unlikely to see a whole lot of Gbinije either. I assume Mason and Miles will take up almost as much of Ryan's minutes as Josh does, barring foul trouble.

Yeah, Coach K has pretty much always tightened the rotations come tourney time. I agree with you that I anticipate Coach K going with the Plumlees as much as they can handle, and Hairston will fill in the rest as much as he can handle. I'd expect no more than 3-5mpg from Gbinije unless foul trouble or injury gets to the 3 bigs. And I wouldn't be shocked if one of the 5 guards in the rotation gets squeezed, too. I'd expect one of the following (again, barring injury or extreme foul trouble):

1. A 7-man rotation (Hairston plus one reserve guard) with Gbinije and the "odd guard out" each getting < 5 mpg; or
2. An 8-man rotation (Hairston as the 6th man) with the two reserve guards each getting ~8-10mpg and Gbinije getting < 5mpg.

[sagegrouse]

Here's a midweek recalc on Phase V in light of Ryan's injury:

General Questions

1. Short Memory? Memory got a lot shorter when Ryan went down. The team is full-on in an adjustment mode with no time to dwell on the UNC game.

2. Inside Game? What's the rotation gonna look like? Miles and Mason both starting and going as long as fouls and stamina will allow? Josh coming in with Andre at the 17:00 minute mark? Josh starting, and Mason coming off the bench? Will these changes help or hurt the inside game, recognizing that Ryan scored a lot from outside.

3. D and More D? Defense should be the same or better, unless foul trouble mounts. In fact, good D becomes a necessity with the loss of Kelly.

4. Ensemble Cast? No change here?

5. Our ACCs? We look like decided underdogs, maybe even on Saturday, assuming we win on Friday. Another championship would be a heckuva accomplishment.

6. Health? So much for dodging this bullet.

Specific Questions

7. Whither Dre? IMHO Dre will get some long looks on the court. We will need his offensive output and, in at least one game, for him to go absolutely berserk.

8. Mason? Not more pressure on Mason, but more opportunity to make offensive plays?

9. Our Man Miles? Needs to be a stud, and he has been acting studly lately.

10. No More Walkabouts? Ugh! Our margin of error just shrunk.

Good luck to Ryan and best wishes for a speedy recovery!

Sagegrouse

[superdave]

I agree with you that Andre will get some long looks. He is due for a monthly outburst. I suspect whoever we play on Friday just may have some tired legs compared to us and that could help Andre get space.

It would be nice to work inside out to start both halves as well. You almost have to remind our bigs to get good position and post up, as they seem to stand upright waiting for someone to call a play. By then it's too late to muscle your defender for position. Hopefully Mason will be aggressive in hunting for shots and Miles will get to the offensive boards. The easier we can get buckets, the easier tournament games will be. You dont want to have to grind out three games in a row.

[jv001]

Yeah, Coach K has pretty much always tightened the rotations come tourney time. I agree with you that I anticipate Coach K going with the Plumlees as much as they can handle, and Hairston will fill in the rest as much as he can handle. I'd expect no more than 3-5mpg from Gbinije unless foul trouble or injury gets to the 3 bigs. And I wouldn't be shocked if one of the 5 guards in the rotation gets squeezed, too. I'd expect one of the following (again, barring injury or extreme foul trouble):

1. A 7-man rotation (Hairston plus one reserve guard) with Gbinije and the "odd guard out" each getting < 5 mpg; or
2. An 8-man rotation (Hairston as the 6th man) with the two reserve guards each getting ~8-10mpg and Gbinije getting < 5mpg.

I go with #2 an 8 man rotation. Andre and Quinn off the bench as the 6th and 7th man. Quinn has been giving Tyler a breather either for foul trouble or to give him a rest. If Andre is ever going to step up now is the time and he needs to do it in practice. Show Coach K he wants to play more minutes. GoDuke!

[CDu]

I go with #2 an 8 man rotation. Andre and Quinn off the bench as the 6th and 7th man. Quinn has been giving Tyler a breather either for foul trouble or to give him a rest. If Andre is ever going to step up now is the time and he needs to do it in practice. Show Coach K he wants to play more minutes. GoDuke!

I'd expect #2 as well. If it's #1, I'd guess that Cook is the guy squeezed. We have 3 other capable ballhandlers but now have only 2 other guys who require defensive attention out to the 3pt line and beyond. But I'd still guess it's option 2 with Hairston getting 15-20mpg, Cook and Dawkins splitting 15-20mpg, and Gbinije getting < 5mpg.

[Kedsy]

But I'd still guess it's option 2 with Hairston getting 15-20mpg, Cook and Dawkins splitting 15-20mpg, and Gbinije getting < 5mpg.

This is possible, but I'd be surprised if this is the case. Just plugging in Josh for Ryan doesn't sound like K's style given their respective skill sets and the makeup of the team. My view of the way Coach K plans things is he looks at his roster and tries to figure out what that combination of players can do that will be difficult for our opponents to counter. With the team we have (sans Ryan) that's not immediately obvious, but if I was starting with that roster, I don't think my first choice would be to plug Josh in Ryan's spot as a 20 minute player.

One possibility would be to try to play an NBA-style offense, with Austin playing the role of, say, Derrick Rose, Miles playing Joakim Noah (post-up, clean-up) and Mason playing Carlos Boozer (most of your post-offense), and the other guys just being shooters for Austin to kick out to, probably Andre and Seth most of the time. Perhaps then Josh subs in for 10 to 12 minutes, but absent foul trouble the MPs would more or less play as much as they're able.

Another possibility would be to roll Quinn, Austin, Seth, and Andre out there with a Plumlee, shoot lots of threes and try to outscore the opposition. Jim Sumner has already debunked this, but personally I think it's an interesting idea.

A third possibility would be to slow it down, make it a low possession game, and trust our high offensive efficiency to carry us while minimizing the number of times we can get burned on D. In that case, we'd be seeing more Tyler and Seth, and maybe Josh could play a prominent frontcourt role as a screener and safety valve.

I'm sure there are other possibilities I'm not thinking of, but one thing that would surprised me is if we go out there and try to do the same thing we've been doing just without Ryan.

[CDu]

This is possible, but I'd be surprised if this is the case. Just plugging in Josh for Ryan doesn't sound like K's style given their respective skill sets and the makeup of the team. My view of the way Coach K plans things is he looks at his roster and tries to figure out what that combination of players can do that will be difficult for our opponents to counter. With the team we have (sans Ryan) that's not immediately obvious, but if I was starting with that roster, I don't think my first choice would be to plug Josh in Ryan's spot as a 20 minute player.

One possibility would be to try to play an NBA-style offense, with Austin playing the role of, say, Derrick Rose, Miles playing Joakim Noah (post-up, clean-up) and Mason playing Carlos Boozer (most of your post-offense), and the other guys just being shooters for Austin to kick out to, probably Andre and Seth most of the time. Perhaps then Josh subs in for 10 to 12 minutes, but absent foul trouble the MPs would more or less play as much as they're able.

Another possibility would be to roll Quinn, Austin, Seth, and Andre out there with a Plumlee, shoot lots of threes and try to outscore the opposition. Jim Sumner has already debunked this, but personally I think it's an interesting idea.

A third possibility would be to slow it down, make it a low possession game, and trust our high offensive efficiency to carry us while minimizing the number of times we can get burned on D. In that case, we'd be seeing more Tyler and Seth, and maybe Josh could play a prominent frontcourt role as a screener and safety valve.

I'm sure there are other possibilities I'm not thinking of, but one thing that would surprised me is if we go out there and try to do the same thing we've been doing just without Ryan.

I responded to this in another thread, but your "Derrick rose" scenario is what we already do. And I wasn't suggesting just plug Hairston in for Kelly. I said we'd see more minutes for Hairston (an increase of about 10-12 mpg) but also more minutes for the Plumlees (an increase of about 10-12 mpg). In short, you'd be replacing half of Kelly with the Plumlees and the other half with Hairston. And so you'd run the stuff you currently run when we have two bigs on the floor. You just would do it for 40 minutes instead of 15.

I also discussed this in another thread, but I don't think a 4-guard lineup makes sense. We don't have the type of team to punish big men off the dribble (Dawkins isn't going to beat a college PF off the dribble consistently). And we'd get destroyed on the glass. So we'd not be making our offense any better (Kelly was a pretty high-percentage perimeter shooter and better off the dribble than Dawkins) and we'd be making our defense substantially worse.

There isn't going to be a solution that makes us a better team than we were with Kelly. If there was, we'd have used that and just benched Kelly, right? So I think what makes the most sense is to do what we were already doing when Kelly was out of the game - just do it for 40 minutes instead of 15.

[Kedsy]

There isn't going to be a solution that makes us a better team than we were with Kelly. If there was, we'd have used that and just benched Kelly, right?

It's not an issue of making us better than we were with Ryan. It's a matter of optimizing what you have. If we'd just plugged Casey Sanders in for Boozer without any other changes, I doubt we'd have won in 2001.

[CDu]

It's not an issue of making us better than we were with Ryan. It's a matter of optimizing what you have. If we'd just plugged Casey Sanders in for Boozer without any other changes, I doubt we'd have won in 2001.

Yeah, and as I said, that's an entirely different situation. Losing Boozer meant we had absolutely no post presence offensively. He was the anchor on our "4-out, 1-in" approach. Without him, we really did need to revamp what we did entirely, because Sanders wasn't going to give us anything offensively in the post.

Losing Kelly hurts, no doubt. But we'll still have 2-3 good perimeter shooters on the floor at all times, and we'll still have a 3-man rotation in the post. We won't be able to run the "4-out, 1-in" style with two Plumlees or Hairston, but we'll be able to run the same stuff that was working when Kelly was out of the game before.

[jv001]

Yeah, and as I said, that's an entirely different situation. Losing Boozer meant we had absolutely no post presence offensively. He was the anchor on our "4-out, 1-in" approach. Without him, we really did need to revamp what we did entirely, because Sanders wasn't going to give us anything offensively in the post.

Losing Kelly hurts, no doubt. But we'll still have 2-3 good perimeter shooters on the floor at all times, and we'll still have a 3-man rotation in the post. We won't be able to run the "4-out, 1-in" style with two Plumlees or Hairston, but we'll be able to run the same stuff that was working when Kelly was out of the game before.

And when Duhon went into the starting lineup that gave us a very good defender on the ball and a good penetrating guard. Only one of our guards has those two abilities(Austin). Coach K does not have the talent on this squad that we had back then. Well not the defensive talent anyway. GoDuke!

[superdave]

Question for the x and o folks -

Why dont we use Andre to set ball screens for Austin? Would that be a good way to either get Austin a driving lane to the basket or enough space for Andre to shoot the 3?

For example, Andre comes from one wing to the other to set a ball screen. Andre's defender and Austin defender switch, leaving Austin a slower SF to drive on.

Or, Andre's man jumps out on Austin to hedge and Austin's man goes underneath to prevent the drive, so Andre pops out and Austin hits him with enough daylight to get an open look.

Or, Austin's man goes over the screen giving Austin enough daylight to split the two defenders and either get into the lane, kick it back to Andre or find another shooter if a help-side defender steps up into the lane.

Has Coach K used a shooter like Andre to set ball screens before? We use this with Ryan sometimes on the wing to good affect.

[CDu]

Question for the x and o folks -

Why dont we use Andre to set ball screens for Austin? Would that be a good way to either get Austin a driving lane to the basket or enough space for Andre to shoot the 3?

For example, Andre comes from one wing to the other to set a ball screen. Andre's defender and Austin defender switch, leaving Austin a slower SF to drive on.

Or, Andre's man jumps out on Austin to hedge and Austin's man goes underneath to prevent the drive, so Andre pops out and Austin hits him with enough daylight to get an open look.

Or, Austin's man goes over the screen giving Austin enough daylight to split the two defenders and either get into the lane, kick it back to Andre or find another shooter if a help-side defender steps up into the lane.

Has Coach K used a shooter like Andre to set ball screens before? We use this with Ryan sometimes on the wing to good affect.

The reason we don't do that is because most teams switch on on-ball screens whenever the player is of a similar skill set. It's only when you have an on-ball screen with a big on a small that you see the "hedge and recover" strategy that often results in separation for either the guard or the screen man. Dawkins is usually guarded by another guard or SF, so that player would just switch with onto Rivers (with the other player staying with Dawkins). It might create a slightly different matchup, but you'd not usually create any separation with such a screen.

[superdave]

The reason we don't do that is because most teams switch on on-ball screens whenever the player is of a similar skill set. It's only when you have an on-ball screen with a big on a small that you see the "hedge and recover" strategy that often results in separation for either the guard or the screen man. Dawkins is usually guarded by another guard or SF, so that player would just switch with onto Rivers (with the other player staying with Dawkins). It might create a slightly different matchup, but you'd not usually create any separation with such a screen.

Perhaps a switch would give Austin the advantage then, if it did not provide Andre with any daylight. Think Barnes or Dulkys switching to guard Austin. That's a significant advantage with Austin's first step, right?

[Kedsy]

Yeah, and as I said, that's an entirely different situation. Losing Boozer meant we had absolutely no post presence offensively. He was the anchor on our "4-out, 1-in" approach. Without him, we really did need to revamp what we did entirely, because Sanders wasn't going to give us anything offensively in the post.

Losing Kelly hurts, no doubt. But we'll still have 2-3 good perimeter shooters on the floor at all times, and we'll still have a 3-man rotation in the post. We won't be able to run the "4-out, 1-in" style with two Plumlees or Hairston, but we'll be able to run the same stuff that was working when Kelly was out of the game before.

I would argue that our offense is currently structured around the versatility of Austin, Ryan, and Seth, and the fact that we have so many weapons. Take Ryan out of the mix and replace him with Josh and neither of those things are particularly true. It's not as dramatic as what happened in 2001, but in my opinion it's still a big difference.

If it's only for this weekend's games, we may decide to do as you suggest and play the full 40 minutes the way we currently play the 14 mpg that Ryan is on the bench, but I don't think that's a successful strategy. Again, going back to 2001, before his injury Boozer was off the court for 14 mpg, too, but when he was hurt, K didn't decide to play 40 minutes the way we'd been playing those 14. He came up with something new.

[roywhite]

I would argue that our offense is currently structured around the versatility of Austin, Ryan, and Seth, and the fact that we have so many weapons. Take Ryan out of the mix and replace him with Josh and neither of those things are particularly true. It's not as dramatic as what happened in 2001, but in my opinion it's still a big difference.

If it's only for this weekend's games, we may decide to do as you suggest and play the full 40 minutes the way we currently play the 14 mpg that Ryan is on the bench, but I don't think that's a successful strategy. Again, going back to 2001, before his injury Boozer was off the court for 14 mpg, too, but when he was hurt, K didn't decide to play 40 minutes the way we'd been playing those 14. He came up with something new.

Judging by the significant interval between the Saturday evening game with UNC, and the the quarterfinal ACC Tourny game Friday evening, and K's past history of making such changes, I'd say we can reasonably expect some different wrinkles and use of personnel.

[superdave]

Judging by the significant interval between the Saturday evening game with UNC, and the the quarterfinal ACC Tourny game Friday evening, and K's past history of making such changes, I'd say we can reasonably expect some different wrinkles and use of personnel.

Here are the options on the offensive end -

Maximize minutes for Mason and Miles and feed the post more than normal since you dont have Kelly as the extra shooter.

Let Josh pick up Ryan's minutes and be the designated screener/board crasher.

Go small and fast, playing Andre at the 4 and event throwing some minutes at Gbinije. This could work if we press and trap and rotate our guards a lot.

I think we go all in on the Plumlees. I dont think this team at this particular juncture can maximize its potential (meaning 3 wins in 3 days) with Josh playing 25 minutes. I think the third option, going small, is worth a shot. If our opponents struggle on the boards against us, we should at least try it for a few minutes.

[CDu]

I would argue that our offense is currently structured around the versatility of Austin, Ryan, and Seth, and the fact that we have so many weapons. Take Ryan out of the mix and replace him with Josh and neither of those things are particularly true. It's not as dramatic as what happened in 2001, but in my opinion it's still a big difference.

If it's only for this weekend's games, we may decide to do as you suggest and play the full 40 minutes the way we currently play the 14 mpg that Ryan is on the bench, but I don't think that's a successful strategy. Again, going back to 2001, before his injury Boozer was off the court for 14 mpg, too, but when he was hurt, K didn't decide to play 40 minutes the way we'd been playing those 14. He came up with something new.

See my response in the other thread. It's not about the minutes. It's about the complete elimination (or lack thereof in this case) of a style of play. Kelly is definitely versatile and we have definitely used that. But we still will have two versatile perimeter players and 2-3 shooters available. We'll just have to drop the pick-and-pop and iso plays for the PF on the perimeter. You keep implying a 1-for-1 swap of Hairston for Kelly and no change in style. That's not, nor has it ever been, what I've suggested. I've suggested that his minutes will be picked up by the Plumlees and Hairston, with the Plumlees getting as much as they can handle. The difference is that the 14 minutes per game that we played without Kelly were still very effective minutes. The 14 minutes we played without Boozer were survival minutes. We can go with this year's non-Kelly approach. We couldn't go with 2001's non-Boozer approach.

[CDu]

Perhaps a switch would give Austin the advantage then, if it did not provide Andre with any daylight. Think Barnes or Dulkys switching to guard Austin. That's a significant advantage with Austin's first step, right?

Dulkys is actually a very good defender (as are pretty much all of FSU's wings), so I don't think he's a good example. Barnes is a capable defender, and probably not too much worse than Bullock. So it'd be an advantage, but not in the same way that the big on small screen creates an advantage/opening. Especially when you consider that big guys are much better suited to actually administer a solid screen. As such, I'd expect the bigs to remain the primary options in the screen game.