The Importance of the Stretch 4 in Duke's System--and Ryan Kelly

[NM Duke Fan]

It’s no coincidence that without injured junior forward Ryan Kelly (sprained foot) Duke’s offense struggled this weekend in the ACC Tournament. An effective three-point shooter who can also play down low, Kelly’s Stretch 4 position is as identifiable with Duke as pesky defense.

“I really think that we kind of started that whole thing about 25 years ago,” Duke head coach Mike Krzyzewski said. “If you look at the history of our program, we’ve had a lot of really good guys in that position who have gone out to be pros and lottery picks.”

http://lebrownlow.wordpress.com/2012/03/14/duke-ryan-kelly-and-the-stretch-4/

[ncexnyc]

It’s no coincidence that without injured junior forward Ryan Kelly (sprained foot) Duke’s offense struggled this weekend in the ACC Tournament. An effective three-point shooter who can also play down low, Kelly’s Stretch 4 position is as identifiable with Duke as pesky defense.

“I really think that we kind of started that whole thing about 25 years ago,” Duke head coach Mike Krzyzewski said. “If you look at the history of our program, we’ve had a lot of really good guys in that position who have gone out to be pros and lottery picks.”

http://lebrownlow.wordpress.com/2012/03/14/duke-ryan-kelly-and-the-stretch-4/

Maybe, maybe not. Yes, Ryan is an important part of the team, however I'm not sure the staff went out of their way to make adjustments in the offense this past weekend.

Had the news been that Ryan had suffered a season ending injury I believe we would have seem some adjustments put into place for last weekend and beyound, however since the injury wasn't major I don't believe Coach K felt the need to tinker with the offense.

[OldSchool]

Ryan is a very big part of our effectiveness as a team. Without him playing and playing fairly well, we're not going deep in the tourney.

This team is not a great defensive team, as everyone knows, but if they play with intensity and focus they can get the job done defensively.

Offensively, this team is very good. But what is frustrating is that this team, as good as it is offensively, could be much better, in fact one of the all-time great Duke teams.

My biggest criticisms are: failure to hit the open big when rolling on pick-and-roll. It's true that with most lumbering bigs, you have to deliver a perfect pass or else disaster may result, and even if you do deliver a great pass, the big may get called for a charge or turn the ball over if a quick player rotates over while they are collecting the pass.

But with Mason and Miles, there is no excuse for this. These are veteran, athletic bigs. Just get the ball high enough over the hedging big and let them get it and go to the rim. Ryan can also run the roll.

The other point is that with Seth, Austin, Andre and Ryan, there is almost no excuse for shooting a contested 3. It is a matter of being sharp on passing and screening.

We are blessed with a collection of fantastic 3-pt shooters and athletic, mobile, veteran bigs like we haven't had in a long time if ever. It is true they aren't great defenders, but the team is capable of being an offensive juggernaut.

And Ryan's role is absolutely critical to our offensive effectiveness.

[uh_no]

Maybe, maybe not. Yes, Ryan is an important part of the team, however I'm not sure the staff went out of their way to make adjustments in the offense this past weekend.

Had the news been that Ryan had suffered a season ending injury I believe we would have seem some adjustments put into place for last weekend and beyound, however since the injury wasn't major I don't believe Coach K felt the need to tinker with the offense.

I'm with you, I thought the same thing. I think spending lots of time working on offense without ryan would have been wasted assuming he would be back this week. They could instead spend the time working on defense, press....whatever...rather than reinventing the offense.

That said, I'm sure they at least talked about what they would need to do differently to win those games (we need to go through mason more, take advantage of both plumlees....whatever). Because there will be instances when ryan can't be on the floor, and we need to figure out how to score (foul trouble perhaps?).

I only hope that his absence will only make us better!

[CajunDevil]

It’s no coincidence that without injured junior forward Ryan Kelly (sprained foot) Duke’s offense struggled this weekend in the ACC Tournament. An effective three-point shooter who can also play down low, Kelly’s Stretch 4 position is as identifiable with Duke as pesky defense.

“I really think that we kind of started that whole thing about 25 years ago,” Duke head coach Mike Krzyzewski said. “If you look at the history of our program, we’ve had a lot of really good guys in that position who have gone out to be pros and lottery picks.”

http://lebrownlow.wordpress.com/2012/03/14/duke-ryan-kelly-and-the-stretch-4/


This is what Chris Collins mentioned yesterday on local radio in CLT, that without RK, they went with "a traditional two big lineup" that didn't stretch the floor. The result was the stagnant offense we saw in ATL. This is a stalwart of K's teams - from Alarie to Ferry to Laettner to McLeod to Battier to Dunleavy (when he played 4) to Singler (when he played 4) to Ryan Kelly. It clears the defensive man guarding the 4 out for our guards to penetrate, and allows our bigs to operate down low without an immediate double from another big.

[MChambers]

This is what Chris Collins mentioned yesterday on local radio in CLT, that without RK, they went with "a traditional two big lineup" that didn't stretch the floor. The result was the stagnant offense we saw in ATL. This is a stalwart of K's teams - from Alarie to Ferry to Laettner to McLeod to Battier to Dunleavy (when he played 4) to Singler (when he played 4) to Ryan Kelly. It clears the defensive man guarding the 4 out for our guards to penetrate, and allows our bigs to operate down low without an immediate double from another big.

Not arguing with the basic point here, but I'd like to quibble with the term "system" and note that Duke did just fine in 2010 without a stretch 4.

[COYS]

This is what Chris Collins mentioned yesterday on local radio in CLT, that without RK, they went with "a traditional two big lineup" that didn't stretch the floor. The result was the stagnant offense we saw in ATL. This is a stalwart of K's teams - from Alarie to Ferry to Laettner to McLeod to Battier to Dunleavy (when he played 4) to Singler (when he played 4) to Ryan Kelly. It clears the defensive man guarding the 4 out for our guards to penetrate, and allows our bigs to operate down low without an immediate double from another big.

This is very true. It also highlights how unique the 2010 championship team was. Lance hit the very occasional jumper from the elbow, but otherwise the floor spacing was completely different for that team than it has been for many of Coach K's best teams.

Anyway, getting Kelly back and having him hitting on all cylinders would be music to my ears. I don't think this team is as dependent on three point shooting as the media makes it out to be. That being said, both two point shots and three point shots will be much easier to get if Kelly is open for kick-outs, open on a pick n' pop, or draws a defender out of the paint when Austin and Seth drive. Miles and Mason will also enjoy the extra space with which to work in the low post.

[superdave]

Not arguing with the basic point here, but I'd like to quibble with the term "system" and note that Duke did just fine in 2010 without a stretch 4.

Wait, Lance Thomas was not a stretch 4?!

I think the stretch 4 has been around forever - even guys like McHale, Barkley, Malone and Duncan hunted 15 footers to set up their post game. I dont really see this as a Duke thing. We've had some highly skilled big men at the 4 and 5, but it's been a part of the pro game for a long, long time.

[MChambers]

Wait, Lance Thomas was not a stretch 4?!

I think the stretch 4 has been around forever - even guys like McHale, Barkley, Malone and Duncan hunted 15 footers to set up their post game. I dont really see this as a Duke thing. We've had some highly skilled big men at the 4 and 5, but it's been a part of the pro game for a long, long time.
Not really, at least when compared with Kelly and some of the names in the past. Lance's 15 footer became somewhat reliable down the stretch in 2010, but he never pulled his man out to the three point line. See COYS post below my earlier post.

[CajunDevil]

Wait, Lance Thomas was not a stretch 4?!

I think the stretch 4 has been around forever - even guys like McHale, Barkley, Malone and Duncan hunted 15 footers to set up their post game. I dont really see this as a Duke thing. We've had some highly skilled big men at the 4 and 5, but it's been a part of the pro game for a long, long time.


I wouldn't consider McHale a stretch 4 until the very tail end of his career - hitting a 15 footer doesn't do much to stretch the D in the NBA. I would contend that a stretch in the college game is someone that could hit 17-20' with regularity, not just someone with a high-post game. I think K's teams have been a trailblazer of sorts in the college game in this regard.

Good point about 2010 not having a stretch 4 per se. I think that shows the brilliance of K - the unique ability to coach to personnel.

[gwlaw99]

Ryan also brings big defenders away from the basket giving Austin and Seth more room in the lane.

[CDu]

Wait, Lance Thomas was not a stretch 4?!

I think the stretch 4 has been around forever - even guys like McHale, Barkley, Malone and Duncan hunted 15 footers to set up their post game. I dont really see this as a Duke thing. We've had some highly skilled big men at the 4 and 5, but it's been a part of the pro game for a long, long time.

No, Thomas was not a stretch 4. He was a PF who was a versatile defender, but nothing about his game was a stretch 4. To clarify: a stretch 4 is a perimeter-oriented big man who can shoot the 3 and thus stretch the floor. The idea being that he spends most of his time on the perimeter, and when he has the ball on the perimeter, the opposing big has to guard him out there. Thomas was usually left unguarded on the perimeter when he got it. By the very end, he could sometimes hit that 15 footer. But it was not the strength of his game. Battier was a stretch 4. Singler was a stretch 4 until he moved to the 3. Kelly is a stretch 4. Randolph was supposed to be a stretch 4, but we didn't really utilize him that way.

Also, I'd not call McHale, Malone, or Duncan stretch 4s. They were true PF who had the ability to hit a 15 footer. But that isn't what a stretch 4 is. Barkley (especially later in his career) fit that mold, especially because he could also handle the ball. But hitting a 15 footer isn't what makes you a stretch 4. It's being a perimeter-oriented PF.

[CDu]

Good point about 2010 not having a stretch 4 per se. I think that shows the brilliance of K - the unique ability to coach to personnel.

I'd also note that the 1991-1992 teams didn't really rely on a stretch 4. They played Grant Hill and Antonio Lang, neither of whom were perimeter shooting threats as freshmen and sophomores. Laettner could certainly hit the 3, but he was still a back-to-the-basket scorer first - just with the additional ability to hit the outside shot too. The 1999 and 2001 teams were the first where we really had tremendous success with a true stretch 4 system.

But yes, one thing about Coach K is that (with the exception of staying man-to-man and switching on ball screens) he's been VERY willing to adapt his approach from year to year to fit the team's needs.

[nmduke2001]

No, To clarify: a stretch 4 is a perimeter-oriented big man who can shoot the 3 and thus stretch the floor. The idea being that he spends most of his time on the perimeter, and when he has the ball on the perimeter, the opposing big has to guard him out there.

Also, I'd not call McHale, Malone, or Duncan stretch 4s. They were true PF who had the ability to hit a 15 footer. But that isn't what a stretch 4 is. Barkley (especially later in his career) fit that mold, especially because he could also handle the ball. But hitting a 15 footer isn't what makes you a stretch 4. It's being a perimeter-oriented PF.

Dirk Nowitzki. End of discussion.

[CajunDevil]

I'd also note that the 1991-1992 teams didn't really rely on a stretch 4. They played Grant Hill and Antonio Lang, neither of whom were perimeter shooting threats as freshmen and sophomores. Laettner could certainly hit the 3, but he was still a back-to-the-basket scorer first - just with the additional ability to hit the outside shot too. The 1999 and 2001 teams were the first where we really had tremendous success with a true stretch 4 system.

But yes, one thing about Coach K is that (with the exception of staying man-to-man and switching on ball screens) he's been VERY willing to adapt his approach from year to year to fit the team's needs.


CDu - You wouldn't consider Ferry a stretch 4?

[CDu]

CDu - You wouldn't consider Ferry a stretch 4?

I would, but Ferry didn't play on those 1991 and 1992 teams.

Ah - I see your point now. Yes, we had good success with Ferry as a stretch 4.

[CDu]

Dirk Nowitzki. End of discussion.

Exactly. Nowitzki is the very definition of a stretch 4. I guess my point was more that we haven't always relied on the stretch 4. For a large chunk of our time we haven't relied on that player. Ferry was one, but after him it wasn't again until McLeod arrived that we went back to the stretch 4 (which Battier then perfected).

[MChambers]

Exactly. Nowitzki is the very definition of a stretch 4. I guess my point was more that we haven't always relied on the stretch 4. For a large chunk of our time we haven't relied on that player. Ferry was one, but after him it wasn't again until McLeod arrived that we went back to the stretch 4 (which Battier then perfected).
Alarie was a stretch 4, except that there was no 3 point shot when he played. And Laettner was essentially a stretch 5, especially his senior year.

[-jk]

I seem to recall Alarie popping from the outside a good bit.

-jk

[Rich]

I would, but Ferry didn't play on those 1991 and 1992 teams.

Ah - I see your point now. Yes, we had good success with Ferry as a stretch 4.

Alarie is a good example of a stretch 4 prior to Ferry in the '80's.