PDA

View Full Version : Looking Ahead To 2012-2013



Pages : [1] 2 3

Greg_Newton
03-17-2012, 05:55 PM
...I'm curious as to what you guys would like to see, what you think should happen, and what you think will happen.

I think a loss like this could be beneficial in certain ways. It's the kind of wake-up call that will force the staff to go back to the drawing board and reevaluate everything, which, IMO, is a good thing. My main hopes:

1. I've been fairly vocal this season about how I thought we should have been grooming Austin Rivers to run the show as a Nolan Smith-style lead guard (my reasoning (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?26782-Phase-II-2011-2012&p=534370#post534370)). Now, after seeing Austin post-game and considering his situation, I think it could be beneficial for all parties if he return, assuming the staff would start drilling him on the point guard position starting this Monday. Austin is projected as the #16 pick by the most reputable site, currently, and that was before his late-season slump. What position would a GM even be drafting him at right now?

So basically, I hope Austin stays, K immediately names him a co-captain with Cook, and we hand him the reigns at the 1.

2. The other thing I've been fairly vocal about is how I thought it was a mistake to just put our most skilled offensive players on the floor, rather than building from defense-out (my alternate proposal (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?27074-MBB-Temple-78-Duke-73-Post-Game-Thread&p=539751#post539751), my reasoning (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?27103-Phase-III-(2011-12)&p=540409#post540409)).

Hopefully the staff will prioritize defense, rebounding, and getting to the rim higher than they did this year. I'm not sure if Gbinije will be the guy (or if he'll even be here), but I'm really hoping the positive progress reports for Murphy continue through the summer and he takes over the starting SF spot early on.

If we have Murphy at the 3 and Rivers at the pseudo-1, with SRs Mason and Ryan in the frontcourt, I don't really even care who's at the 2. Maybe Seth or Dawkins if they get their heads on straight, maybe Thornton if he can really become a Bruce Bowen-like 3-point shooter over the summer. That gives us a very solid defensive perimeter, solid rebounding, solid shooting, and several players who can get to the rim. Those are the kind of fundamentals that good basketball teams are made of.

3. I hope Mason stays, obviously. Not much reasoning needed here; we'll need him, badly, and I don't think his last few months have scouts salivating. If he returns, our frontcourt goes from a major, major question mark to easily one of the best, most experienced in the country.

4. Lastly, I hope few guys have their come-to-Jesus moment. A big problem this year was chemistry and attitude, whether it's publicly acknowledged or not. All of these X's and O's issues don't mean much if we don't have a group of guys who are all in and absolutely committed to winning and improving as a team; I want next year's team to belong to Thornton and Rivers, and if anyone thinks they're too cool to give as much as those two do every time they're on the court, they're free to go elsewhere. Harsh, but necessary, IMO.

Anyway, I'm actually very hopeful for the future, but I really this slap in the face jolts us into making some changes. What do you guys think?

Indoor66
03-17-2012, 06:01 PM
I think the thread is a little premature. We have no idea what the makeup of the '12-'13 team will be so it difficult, if not impossible, to speculate - even in the abstract.

uh_no
03-17-2012, 06:02 PM
I think the thread is a little premature. We have no idea what the makeup of the '12-'13 team will be so it difficult, if not impossible, to speculate - even in the abstract.

I predict a natty!

ncexnyc
03-17-2012, 06:08 PM
I think the thread is a little premature. We have no idea what the makeup of the '12-'13 team will be so it difficult, if not impossible, to speculate - even in the abstract.
Unfortunately we now have a lot of free time on our hands.:D

SoCalDukeFan
03-17-2012, 06:16 PM
Is Seth Curry going to graduate this year? If so, does he come back to Duke next year, go to another school, or Europe.

I agree that it is a little early to speculate on next year until we understand the roster, but we can speculate on that.

I would guess that only Austin and Mason are the ones who might leave early for the draft.

Next year we need a leader more than anything else.

SoCal

kville33
03-17-2012, 06:24 PM
Is Seth Curry going to graduate this year?

SoCal


I had a class with Seth, and I asked him this very question. He said he was undecided, but the idea of graduating early had a certain appeal.

Scorp4me
03-17-2012, 06:34 PM
Co-captain with Cook? Huh? Am I missing something.

I mean I like Cook, he looks like a kid who has alot of fun. And I understand why many were clamoring for him to start before the season started. But I would have thought after what we saw of him this year people would be a bit more realistic I guess.

loldevilz
03-17-2012, 06:39 PM
Here are a few things that should help:

1. Quinn Cook should be our point guard from day 1. I think this could be the biggest difference for us. Cook is an elite point guard and with a year under his belt should improve on both ends. He will get everyone the ball in the right place at the right time.

2. Murphy should start on the wing from day 1. We all know how nice it is to have a matchup problem on the wing like Singler. Though I don't expect Murphy to be Singler he will definitely help on the offensive and defensive ends. The only worry I have is that Coach K puts him at the four if Mason leaves.

3. Junior/ Senior jumps. Ryan Kelly and Hairston could be great players if they could just get their bodies a bit more refined. Kelly needs to gain at least 20 pounds if he's gonna play center. Hairston needs to slim down so he can guard on the premeter.

3. Sulaimon as X factor. He's a top 10 player in the nation and an elite perimeter defender. I honestly see him taking over for Dawkins when it becomes clear how great Sulaimon is on defense.

I see this lineup eventually:

Cook
Sulaimon
Murphy
Hairston
Kelly

Greg_Newton
03-17-2012, 06:48 PM
Co-captain with Cook? Huh? Am I missing something.

I mean I like Cook, he looks like a kid who has alot of fun. And I understand why many were clamoring for him to start before the season started. But I would have thought after what we saw of him this year people would be a bit more realistic I guess.

DOH.

Meant to type Thornton. Too late to edit.

I completely agree with that assessment. I hope Cook spends all summer regaining his full and health and working on his lateral quickness, because he's been a pretty significant defensive liability, IMO.

But anyway, yeah, I just kind of assume Thornton has already locked down a captain spot, for all practical purposes. He's been our best leader and competitor by such a large margin it's not even funny. I think it's safe to say he'll be the one running the informal practices this summer.


I think the thread is a little premature. We have no idea what the makeup of the '12-'13 team will be so it difficult, if not impossible, to speculate - even in the abstract.

You think it's impossible to speculate, even in the abstract, on any changes going forward?

Feel free to scroll by this thread then, I guess...

OldSchool
03-17-2012, 07:03 PM
Here are a few things that should help:

1. Quinn Cook should be our point guard from day 1. I think this could be the biggest difference for us. Cook is an elite point guard and with a year under his belt should improve on both ends. He will get everyone the ball in the right place at the right time.

2. Murphy should start on the wing from day 1. We all know how nice it is to have a matchup problem on the wing like Singler. Though I don't expect Murphy to be Singler he will definitely help on the offensive and defensive ends. The only worry I have is that Coach K puts him at the four if Mason leaves.

3. Junior/ Senior jumps. Ryan Kelly and Hairston could be great players if they could just get their bodies a bit more refined. Kelly needs to gain at least 20 pounds if he's gonna play center. Hairston needs to slim down so he can guard on the premeter.

3. Sulaimon as X factor. He's a top 10 player in the nation and an elite perimeter defender. I honestly see him taking over for Dawkins when it becomes clear how great Sulaimon is on defense.

I see this lineup eventually:

Cook
Sulaimon
Murphy
Hairston
Kelly


Some questions in my mind: How good can Quinn and MP3 be? They might be really good, or maybe take a while to develop.

If Quinn cannot take the lead pg role from Tyler, we are not going to reach our potential IMO. Yes Tyler brings strong leadership, but if he doesn't drastically improve his playmaking ability we are really limiting our offensive potential with him starting at point.

If MP3 after a year of practicing with the team and getting stronger can step in and play well at the 5, that would be key for us.

If so I see MP3 starting at the 5 and Ryan starting at the 4.

Who will be in the rotation at small forward? Dre, Mike G or Alex? If Alex really has grown an inch or two and gotten stronger, then he may end up in the rotation as a 3/4 swingman, as Kyle was at some points in his career.

Can Silent G work his way into the starting lineup? What really IS his potential?

uh_no
03-17-2012, 07:14 PM
Some questions in my mind: How good can Quinn and MP3 be? They might be really good, or maybe take a while to develop.

If Quinn cannot take the lead pg role from Tyler, we are not going to reach our potential IMO. Yes Tyler brings strong leadership, but if he doesn't drastically improve his playmaking ability we are really limiting our offensive potential with him starting at point.

If MP3 after a year of practicing with the team and getting stronger can step in and play well at the 5, that would be key for us.

If so I see MP3 starting at the 5 and Ryan starting at the 4.

Who will be in the rotation at small forward? Dre, Mike G or Alex? If Alex really has grown an inch or two and gotten stronger, then he may end up in the rotation as a 3/4 swingman, as Kyle was at some points in his career.

Can Silent G work his way into the starting lineup? What really IS his potential?

So I take it you think mason is gone?

OldSchool
03-17-2012, 07:19 PM
So I take it you think mason is gone?

I hope not. My own view is that he should stay and make the most of his senior year both on the court and in the classroom and graduate with his classmates. College can be the best time of your life. Yes, there is a risk of injury. Life is full of risks. But you can never get that senior year back, even if you go to the NBA for several years and then come back and finish your degree or try to do it during the offseason.

My gut feeling though tells me Mason is more likely to go than Austin. But I don't have anything concrete to base that on.

BD80
03-17-2012, 07:31 PM
Is Seth Curry going to graduate this year? If so, does he come back to Duke next year, go to another school, or Europe. ...

Next year we need a leader more than anything else.

SoCal

We need 2/3 s that can: feed the post, stay in front of their man, rotate back on D, rotate down on D when a big rotates to help, put a body on an opponent when a shot goes up, and grab at least one rebound every game. And play with some friggin passion, like each possession matters.

MaxAMillion
03-17-2012, 07:37 PM
Here are a few things that should help:

1. Quinn Cook should be our point guard from day 1. I think this could be the biggest difference for us. Cook is an elite point guard and with a year under his belt should improve on both ends. He will get everyone the ball in the right place at the right time.

2. Murphy should start on the wing from day 1. We all know how nice it is to have a matchup problem on the wing like Singler. Though I don't expect Murphy to be Singler he will definitely help on the offensive and defensive ends. The only worry I have is that Coach K puts him at the four if Mason leaves.

3. Junior/ Senior jumps. Ryan Kelly and Hairston could be great players if they could just get their bodies a bit more refined. Kelly needs to gain at least 20 pounds if he's gonna play center. Hairston needs to slim down so he can guard on the premeter.

3. Sulaimon as X factor. He's a top 10 player in the nation and an elite perimeter defender. I honestly see him taking over for Dawkins when it becomes clear how great Sulaimon is on defense.

I see this lineup eventually:

Cook
Sulaimon
Murphy
Hairston
Kelly

So Cook is now an elite point guard? He didn't look anything like Irving as a freshman. I consider Irving to be an elite point guard. Cook didn't look like Duhon as a freshman either. I don't think Cook is an elite point guard.

uh_no
03-17-2012, 07:40 PM
So Cook is now an elite point guard? He didn't look anything like Irving as a freshman. I consider Irving to be an elite point guard. Cook didn't look like Duhon as a freshman either. I don't think Cook is an elite point guard.

Fully agree. Don't you have to accomplish something on the court before you're called elite? Quinn put up gaudy numbers against some cupcakes in december, which indicates to me its there, he has the talent, but how is he going to apply that against the UNCs MSUs and OSUs of the world? I think he will end up our starting point guard next year, because i think he knows 100% its his defense keeping him on the bench, and he'll want to play....so will work his butt off all summer to get better.

CoachJ10
03-17-2012, 07:47 PM
...I'm curious as to what you guys would like to see, what you think should happen, and what you think will happen.

I think a loss like this could be beneficial in certain ways. It's the kind of wake-up call that will force the staff to go back to the drawing board and reevaluate everything, which, IMO, is a good thing. My main hopes:

1. I've been fairly vocal this season about how I thought we should have been grooming Austin Rivers to run the show as a Nolan Smith-style lead guard (my reasoning (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?26782-Phase-II-2011-2012&p=534370#post534370)). Now, after seeing Austin post-game and considering his situation, I think it could be beneficial for all parties if he return, assuming the staff would start drilling him on the point guard position starting this Monday. Austin is projected as the #16 pick by the most reputable site, currently, and that was before his late-season slump. What position would a GM even be drafting him at right now?

So basically, I hope Austin stays, K immediately names him a co-captain with Cook, and we hand him the reigns at the 1.

2. The other thing I've been fairly vocal about is how I thought it was a mistake to just put our most skilled offensive players on the floor, rather than building from defense-out (my alternate proposal (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?27074-MBB-Temple-78-Duke-73-Post-Game-Thread&p=539751#post539751), my reasoning (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?27103-Phase-III-(2011-12)&p=540409#post540409)).

Hopefully the staff will prioritize defense, rebounding, and getting to the rim higher than they did this year. I'm not sure if Gbinije will be the guy (or if he'll even be here), but I'm really hoping the positive progress reports for Murphy continue through the summer and he takes over the starting SF spot early on.

If we have Murphy at the 3 and Rivers at the pseudo-1, with SRs Mason and Ryan in the frontcourt, I don't really even care who's at the 2. Maybe Seth or Dawkins if they get their heads on straight, maybe Thornton if he can really become a Bruce Bowen-like 3-point shooter over the summer. That gives us a very solid defensive perimeter, solid rebounding, solid shooting, and several players who can get to the rim. Those are the kind of fundamentals that good basketball teams are made of.

3. I hope Mason stays, obviously. Not much reasoning needed here; we'll need him, badly, and I don't think his last few months have scouts salivating. If he returns, our frontcourt goes from a major, major question mark to easily one of the best, most experienced in the country.

4. Lastly, I hope few guys have their come-to-Jesus moment. A big problem this year was chemistry and attitude, whether it's publicly acknowledged or not. All of these X's and O's issues don't mean much if we don't have a group of guys who are all in and absolutely committed to winning and improving as a team; I want next year's team to belong to Thornton and Rivers, and if anyone thinks they're too cool to give as much as those two do every time they're on the court, they're free to go elsewhere. Harsh, but necessary, IMO.

Anyway, I'm actually very hopeful for the future, but I really this slap in the face jolts us into making some changes. What do you guys think?

I think how our offense will be run will be a very interesting dynamic to watch unfold next season.

The high pick and roll offense (which has been a big part of K's offense the last few years) requires two things.

It needs bigs who either are outside shooting threats or who have good hands and can roll and score off of cuts to the hoops or post with a smaller man on them and score effectively. RK can do that to some degree, but Mason (and Hairston) haven't shown that they can run that offense (the latter part of the season, Mase or Miles defenders would essentially double the guard and negate that offensive play. We didn't have the 3/4 (i.e. Kyle) who makes that set a great play to run. Mason is far more effective when he can post up within 6 feet from the hoop. He made great improvements in that part of his game this year...I expect even more so next year.

And it needs guards who can dribble drive to the hoop and shoot from the outside. AR showed he can run this kind of offense...albeit with the growing pains that a shoot first guy has when he must also be a distributor. On the other hand, Seth and Andre are good set shooters (despite their late season woes)...but have not shown that they are consistent at all when it comes to driving against their defenders in isolations or on the pick and roll. Can their games expand by growing stronger physically and learning how to dribble drive and score going to the hoop?

Also, I have mentioned during the season that all our players...especially the guards need to get physically stronger. I think that will be a huge factor in how much more effective the current players can be on offense (and defense).

CarmenWallaceWade
03-17-2012, 07:48 PM
I'll throw in my worthless 2 even though I think it's pretty obvious to most. On each National Championship team Duke has had, a great point guard has been the centerpiece. Hurley and Williams could create and score. Scheyer became a very good if not great point guard because of his ability to score, defend, and not turn the ball over. For Duke to make a deep run next year one critical component will be the ability to consistently start a point guard that can score the ball and set up his teammates. We'll see if someone emerges in this role with those qualities...but I believe it has to happen in order for us to win our games convincingly and seriously challenge the best teams late in the season.

loldevilz
03-17-2012, 07:51 PM
So Cook is now an elite point guard? He didn't look anything like Irving as a freshman. I consider Irving to be an elite point guard. Cook didn't look like Duhon as a freshman either. I don't think Cook is an elite point guard.

Yeah, both those guys are starting or have started as NBA point guards. He's obviously not that good. But he can and should be an elite college point guard. He had like a 3 to 1 To to Assist ratio as a freshman!!! That seems pretty elite to me.

uh_no
03-17-2012, 07:57 PM
Yeah, both those guys are starting or have started as NBA point guards. He's obviously not that good. But he can and should be an elite college point guard. He had like a 3 to 1 To to Assist ratio as a freshman!!! That seems pretty elite to me.

He got >34% of his assists against Western Michigan, Penn, and Georgia tech. Lets let him put up some numbers against actual competition before we tout his gaudy numbers.

Edouble
03-17-2012, 08:13 PM
He got >34% of his assists against Western Michigan, Penn, and Georgia tech. Lets let him put up some numbers against actual competition before we tout his gaudy numbers.

I think Q is a very high level college PG, if not an elite college PG. Pretty much every time he gets in the game he does something really good. He can penetrate and break down defenses. He is a really good ball handler. He can pass. He has really good court vision. I wish I had a tape of all of the game minutes he played this year, so we could all sit and watch. Maybe then, with a steady stream of Q doing awesome stuff, there would be more believers.

I understand he has played few minutes. That's another reason why I think he will be great, given the starting nod. He can come in cold, with the threat of a short leash, and still perform really well.

We need Q to be our starting PG to have a chance at the Final Fur next year, in my opinion.

bluedevilfan1998
03-17-2012, 08:17 PM
I hope not. My own view is that he should stay and make the most of his senior year both on the court and in the classroom and graduate with his classmates. College can be the best time of your life. Yes, there is a risk of injury. Life is full of risks. But you can never get that senior year back, even if you go to the NBA for several years and then come back and finish your degree or try to do it during the offseason.

My gut feeling though tells me Mason is more likely to go than Austin. But I don't have anything concrete to base that on.



Hopefully, Mason will want to stay for his senior year and play with Marshall. And I think Rivers wants to get a Championship, so he's more likely to stay, I think.

#1Duke
03-17-2012, 08:28 PM
At this point in time all I can say is I would like to see us acquire a VERY good BIG.... no matter what else happens.

Saratoga2
03-17-2012, 09:25 PM
I agree with those who would wait and see about both the NBA departures, if any, and the gains through recruiting. The coaches must know where the main deficiencies in the current team lie and surely they will attempt to correct them.

I do think it would be sheer folly to do the same thing with basically the same people and expect different results. Change is needed! We have three waiting in the wings plus one coming through recruiting. Possibly we will get one or even two more depending upon who leaves.

Will those players be able to improve our defense against opposing guard penetration?
Will they help us to box out penetration on rebounds?
Will they allow us to push the balls on offense or to cut down on turnovers?
Will they help us feed the post?
Will they guard the small forwards more effectively?
I am sure the coaches have a list much longer and evaluate kids as total players and have in mind a starting position for them.

One aside, with Ales Murphy gaining both height and weight, will he be more of a 4/3 than a 3 as he was oringinally expected to be?

Scorp4me
03-17-2012, 09:29 PM
If you looked at a collection of my post lately you'd think I didn't like Cook and thought Thornton was the best thing since sliced bread. The fact is that isn't the case, but I just don't understand some people. I mean for crying out loud, I'm hearing the same things now that I heard before last year. Cook will elite, Thornton is no good, Cook has to start...it's just frustrating for both of them. It's puts too much on Cook and slights Tyler way too much.

It reminds me so much of Wojo and Avery. I think Cook and Thornton can complement each other quite nicely. I hope Tyler asserts himself more offensively next year and I hope Cook comes back a stronger defensive player next year. Personally I hope Tyler starts and Cooks comes off the bench...but depending on the situation, assuming they both improve, depending on the situation I have no problem with either finishing a game.

As for Thornton, even last night it seems he is just always involved in a play. Take the mistake he made where he threw it away...he followed it, knocked it away, and threw it to an open Mason for a dunk. It was classic Tyler...except he really doesn't make mistakes all that often.

G man
03-17-2012, 09:48 PM
If you looked at a collection of my post lately you'd think I didn't like Cook and thought Thornton was the best thing since sliced bread. The fact is that isn't the case, but I just don't understand some people. I mean for crying out loud, I'm hearing the same things now that I heard before last year. Cook will elite, Thornton is no good, Cook has to start...it's just frustrating for both of them. It's puts too much on Cook and slights Tyler way too much.

It reminds me so much of Wojo and Avery. I think Cook and Thornton can complement each other quite nicely. I hope Tyler asserts himself more offensively next year and I hope Cook comes back a stronger defensive player next year. Personally I hope Tyler starts and Cooks comes off the bench...but depending on the situation, assuming they both improve, depending on the situation I have no problem with either finishing a game.

As for Thornton, even last night it seems he is just always involved in a play. Take the mistake he made where he threw it away...he followed it, knocked it away, and threw it to an open Mason for a dunk. It was classic Tyler...except he really doesn't make mistakes all that often.

I like Thornton as much as the next guy, and he clearly makes the team better on the defensive side of the ball. That being said I don't think he brings that much to the table offensively besides spot up jump shots. A point guards primary responsibility is to make the game easier for his teammates. Cook does that offensively much better than Thornton does. Thornton is a very good player, but he is a bulldog we have heard everyone say that about him. I have yet to hear from teammates or K on how great he is at setting his team up or running the offense. That is not being disrespectful to Thornton. Cook on the other hand is the better facilitator, but he is not the better leader. It did appear throughout much of the year we lacked a clear identity or had a clear leader. I am sure all of you watched the Duke special on the back to back teams. Something they all mentioned is keeping each other accountable. It did not appear that this team did that. I do hope Mason and Rivers come back because I think this team has something special in it. There is an awful lot of talent with all those pieces to not make a run next year.

BlueDevilBrowns
03-17-2012, 10:14 PM
The following is completely unreasonable and extremey unlikely to happen on any level but if I'm Coach K here's what I do:

1. Take the next available flight to Vegas to see Shabaaz in person, do WHATEVER has to be done to secure his commitment for next year...
2. Then, fly back to Durham, tell MP2 and AR that "'Bazz is commited to a Championship next year, how commited are you?" and lock them up for 1 more year.
3. Conduct exit interviews with the rest of the team, telling Cook and Kelly you are starting next year day 1 so prepare this off-season accordingly.
4. Inform Thornton, Rasheed, and Murph that they are my primary complimentary players next year so be ready(i.e. Thornton improve passing and driving skills).
5. Inform Curry, Dawkins, and Silent G if they want to be a part of something special next year they can, but they have to bust their tale mentally and physically everyday.


The team responds in 2013, finishing the year 34-5, winning the ACC title and winning the NCAA title!

The End.

I know this is ridiculous but, hey, it's my dream:D.

UrinalCake
03-17-2012, 10:14 PM
I also think our team would be best with Austin at the point, but the problem with that is what do you do with Seth, Tyler, and Quinn? Seth could play off the ball but the other two really can't. So unfortunately I think Austin plays the 2 or 3 like he did this year, but does get to initiate the offense a lot.

I think Seth, Tyler and Quinn are all very talented players but their skill sets and size overlap a lot, which kind of limits what we can do. We'll have Rasheed coming in and that brings a lot of promise with his skill set and size. I don't know what to make of Dawkins. In a fantasy world he would spend the entire off season working his butt off and comes back a more determined player, but we can't really expect that. More realistically, my hope is that our offense next year has enough pieces that we do not need him to be anything more than a spot-up shooter.

With Rasheed, Murphy, and Marshall coming in a think we'll have more diverse talents. This year we had a lot of overlapping pieces. And I know we'll have entire threads devoted to discussing whether Austin and Mason will leave, but for the record I think Austin comes back and Mason leaves. Mason would just be risking too much by coming back.

MulletMan
03-17-2012, 10:32 PM
The following is completely unreasonable and extremey unlikely to happen on any level but if I'm Coach K here's what I do:

1. Take the next available flight to Vegas to see Shabaaz in person, do WHATEVER has to be done to secure his commitment for next year...
2. Then, fly back to Durham, tell MP2 and AR that "'Bazz is commited to a Championship next year, how commited are you?" and lock them up for 1 more year.
3. Conduct exit interviews with the rest of the team, telling Cook and Kelly you are starting next year day 1 so prepare this off-season accordingly.
4. Inform Thornton, Rasheed, and Murph that they are my primary complimentary players next year so be ready(i.e. Thornton improve passing and driving skills).
5. Inform Curry, Dawkins, and Silent G if they want to be a part of something special next year they can, but they have to bust their tale mentally and physically everyday.


The team responds in 2013, finishing the year 34-5, winning the ACC title and winning the NCAA title!

The End.

I know this is ridiculous but, hey, it's my dream:D.

I love this type of reasoning. Get (insert hyped high school player's name here) and tell the rest of your guys that he is the key to them being a good team. Do you see any problem at all with this? Anything at all in light of what happened this past season? Anything?

Des Esseintes
03-17-2012, 10:44 PM
I love this type of reasoning. Get (insert hyped high school player's name here) and tell the rest of your guys that he is the key to them being a good team. Do you see any problem at all with this? Anything at all in light of what happened this past season? Anything?

Wait. I was with you until the end. What is it that you think "happened" this season? You think the presence of Austin Rivers was somehow a problem? What happened was we won 26 games. That's a lot. Beat some excellent teams along the way, too, before Kelly got hurt. I don't think we would have won more or bigger minus Austin Rivers. What is your reasoning here?

BlueDevilBrowns
03-17-2012, 10:55 PM
I love this type of reasoning. Get (insert hyped high school player's name here) and tell the rest of your guys that he is the key to them being a good team. Do you see any problem at all with this? Anything at all in light of what happened this past season? Anything?

First of all, no, because as I stated in my original post, this is my "unreasonable, ridiculous dream" so I apologize if my farcical dream offends you. Second, I reject your premise that the thought of AR being the best player on Duke's team this year was why they struggled. In fact, IMO, I think AR showed more heart, passion, will to win, and drive than perhaps anyone else on this team. If more teammates followed his example, perhaps the season would have ended differently. Just because a player is a rising freshman doesn't mean he can't be the key to success(have you watched UK lately?).

lilblue
03-17-2012, 11:36 PM
1) Mason and Austin return with fire in their hearts!
2) Kelly becomes a Nowitski type of player
3) Thornton (Dockery 2.0), Cook (Avery 2.0) and Curry (Scheyer 2.0) spend a lot of time workin on ball handling... maybe at on of the camps, Chris Paul's or whatever, just work on the handle
4) Suliamon= Nolan 2.0
5) Murphy= Singler 2.0
6) Hairston= Lance 2.0
7) Silent G= Hendo/Jones type player
8) Dawkins... I'd like for him to study JJ's senior season... work on the handles, the drive, strength and conditioning and working off the ball.
9) MP3 to just play big, be that back to the basket player, example... maybe a Tim Duncan, David Robinson type player
10) One Shabazz or Amile... both if say either Austin or Curry could pay for one year (Is this possible?)
11) Collins is offered and takes the Illinois job
12) Wojo moves over to the guards and teaches them to defend
13) Bring in a big to coach the bigs... Laettner available!
14) Nate helps to recruit badasses!!!!!!
15) Coach learns some more from coaching against the world and brings that back and intigrates some international flavor to Dukes offense
16) We learn some zone defense and other disruptive defenses to throw in the mix to confuse the enemy

Will any of this happen? I don't know. But I like thinking about it :rolleyes:

GO DUKE

Greg_Newton
03-17-2012, 11:47 PM
I also think our team would be best with Austin at the point, but the problem with that is what do you do with Seth, Tyler, and Quinn? Seth could play off the ball but the other two really can't. So unfortunately I think Austin plays the 2 or 3 like he did this year, but does get to initiate the offense a lot.

I think Seth, Tyler and Quinn are all very talented players but their skill sets and size overlap a lot, which kind of limits what we can do.

To address the first bolded section - I think that's a good point, but I also think that's the question that was responsible for us not getting the most out of our talent this year.

At this point, I think you have reevaluate what gives you the best team from the top down, and let the pieces fall where they may. If that means a senior or two loses a starting spot, maybe even a rotation spot in some games, so be it. If it means some form of attrition, maybe that's necessary too. As for the second bolded section, I think that might be the wrong way to look at it. The fact is, we should have a lot of talented, diverse, complementary pieces next year, and I think that's what should dictate our strategy/rotation, rather than the fact that we may have several overlapping players who are rotation-quality.

FWIW - I think Tyler would be fine playing SG alongside Rivers, especially if he can really solidify his 3-point shot this summer. Which I think is entirely possible - he was a sub-27% 3PT shooter his freshman year, and improved to a ~40% midway through this year before coming down to 35%. If he get a few hundred reps in every day and stay consistently in the 37-40% range next year, that'll be enough to spread the floor and not be liability on offense. It also wouldn't hurt to have a calming, Duhon-ish influence to Austin's J-Will, so to speak.

CLW
03-18-2012, 08:40 AM
I dunno guys but I think we are in another 3-4 year rebuilding period much like we were after 05-06. Year 1 showed us several huge flaws this current group has (lack of quickness/stopping the dribble; inability to create own shot; no post presence; etc...). IMHO the nucleus of the next serious threat for a national championship is going to have to come from this Freshman class (G, MP3, Murphy, Cook) the 2012 Class - Sulaimon and the 2013 Class (Jones and TBD but potentially Parker and Randle).

Just my gut feeling but I believe MP2 and Rivers are gone and Sulaimon is a recruiting class of 1.

That would leave the 12-13 team as:

1. Cook/Thornton
2. Curry/Dawkins/Sulaimon
3. G/Murphy
4. Kelly/Hairston
5. MP3

I'd probably start: Thornton; Sulaimon; Murphy; Kelly and MP3 or (if MP3 is simply not ready for significant mins) Thornton; Sulaimon; G; Murphy; Kelly

That team would likely struggle with many/most of the same issues the 11-12 team had (barring some sort of break out improvement) where we probably are upset in the first weekend again (Round of 32 most likely).

trailblaze
03-18-2012, 09:29 AM
1. Your point guard has to be either a scorer or a distributer and preferably both. Cook and Thornton excel at neither. Not winning a NC unless Cook returns a different player.
2. size and athleticism with Kelly, MP2 and MP3 should be an advantage, but way underdeveloped because of focus on guards and their scoring/3s
3. I agree that AR doesn't appear to make those around him better and not sure thats going to change with score first mentality all the time.
4. Not enough minutes for all the perimeter guys leads to unhappy players. This team did not seem to have alot of fun on the court with rare exception. Not going to get much better next year if AR returns.

60's Devil
03-18-2012, 09:44 AM
Many posters are hoping for our guys to miraculously change over the summer. You can work on your shot and your strength for sure. Working on quickness, penetration, and defending penetration would seem to be asking for a change in athletic ability or some kind of DNA mutation. We have seen a pretty good team and what we see is what we've got. The answer lies in recruiting. We don't need all McD's. I would love to see a little 5'11'' lightning fast water bug who can really defend and dish. I wouldn't care if he could shoot the three. I have always felt there are a number of these people out there that could make our team better.

sagegrouse
03-18-2012, 10:11 AM
That would leave the 12-13 team as:

1. Cook/Thornton
2. Curry/Dawkins/Sulaimon
3. G/Murphy
4. Kelly/Hairston
5. MP3

I'd probably start: Thornton; Sulaimon; Murphy; Kelly and MP3 or (if MP3 is simply not ready for significant mins) Thornton; Sulaimon; G; Murphy; Kelly



... with a losing NFL team in the backup quarterback. In college BB, losing or not, the most popular guy seems to be the new recruit.

Why else would Seth Curry, third team All-ACC, sit in deference to the new recruit? Is this because he had one bad night against Lehigh, or was there something else?

sagegrouse
'I guess the accent is on the second syllable in my name'

oldnavy
03-18-2012, 10:27 AM
Newton hit it on the head in his original post when he said:

GET TO THE RIM

Watching a lot of the teams in the tournament, I have noticed that most of them push the ball into the lane A LOT!

I absolutely hated watching this team dribble/pass on the perimeter for 25 seconds of the shot clock then heave up a three pointer....

So, whatever we do next year, I hope it includes a player or players driving into the lane on 3 of every 4 posessions at least (ok to kick it out for an open three).... but we are way to easy to guard when we rotate the ball around the perimeter without a threat to go in the paint.

Starter
03-18-2012, 11:17 AM
... with a losing NFL team in the backup quarterback. In college BB, losing or not, the most popular guy seems to be the new recruit.

Why else would Seth Curry, third team All-ACC, sit in deference to the new recruit? Is this because he had one bad night against Lehigh, or was there something else?

sagegrouse
'I guess the accent is on the second syllable in my name'

Agreed. Curry is a very good college player who had an uneven season and a terrible game at the worst possible time.

I think most on this board know what I think about Quinn Cook: I'm a fan of his game, I think he has a high ceiling and I expect big things. I realize at times Cook was beaten badly on defense, and those moments are what stick in one's mind. But he is, after all, a freshman. He's also got quick feet, solid athleticism and the apparent ability to extend full-court, so I didn't think he was nearly as bad as other people made it out to be. With more playing time, I feel like it would have evened out and that what he offered as a penetrator and playmaker would also balance the ledger. I continue to think that with more of a commitment to him, Cook could have made a difference when the offense stagnated toward the end of the season, and I do feel that it capped our potential that he wasn't a more integral part of the team.

Plus, in a recent poll (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1195968/index.htm) of NBA players in Sports Illustrated about what college players could keep up in the League right now, Cook was one of the 21 players who got votes. (It'd be good to know whether it was solely Nolan Smith who voted for him -- which did cross my mind. But in the event that it wasn't, and Cook has played with and against a lot of the recent players to join the league, it's pretty impressive to see what people think of him.)

That said, Thornton is a tough dude. And Krzyzewski loves him, which absolutely counts. It's tough for me to say who gets the starting nod next season. Krzyzewski has spoken in glowing terms about the positive things Thornton brings in terms of leadership and defense, and if he truly believes he's the second coming of Wojo, it's hard to say he won't start knowing the relationship he and Wojo had, and continue to have. But Krzyzewski has also shown an ability to shake things up as needed; a freshman Chris Duhon starting over a senior Nate James down the stretch in '01 for non-injury reasons comes to mind. It can probably go either way starter-wise -- if Thornton is a captain, it's hard to imagine him not starting -- but I would assume it at this point to be a straight time-split either way, assuming Cook stays healthy and works hard on his game over the offseason.

Still though, there's no question that if he improves his defense enough to earn major court time, Quinn would bring a significant upgrade as an offensive player in the time he spends on the court:

TT: 717 minutes, 138 points, 69 assists/34 TO (2.0 A/TO), 38% FG
QC: 387 minutes, 146 points, 63 assists/18 TO (3.5 A/TO), 40% FG

We'll see how it goes, but I think this is probably a good problem to have, two players who offer a variety of advantages between them. Thornton got a lot of game experience under fire this year, grew more comfortable as the season went and is fearless on defense; I'd imagine he continues to hone his outside shot and playmaking abilities. And in Cook, we have a true point guard with an extremely high ceiling on both ends of the ball if he works at it and stays healthy, and the potential to be a transformative player on next year's team.

In fact, that's the most positive thing about next year's team: the recruiting class won't be limited to Sulaimon regardless of whether Krzyzewski pulls what seems like an upset and gets either Muhammad or Parker. Not only will he add Murphy and Marshall Plumlee, but in effect, I think he adds a potentially dynamite point guard in Cook to the rotation mix if he's ready for more responsibility.

Newton_14
03-18-2012, 11:22 AM
At this point in time all I can say is I would like to see us acquire a VERY good BIG.... no matter what else happens.

We have on of those already. (Assuming Mason stays). This team needs forwards not bigs. I thought that became fairly obvious once Kelly went down.

Starter
03-18-2012, 11:27 AM
By the way, I do have to offer the disclaimer that I didn't see the Duke-Lehigh game for reasons out of my control. :) But I did see every other televised game this season.

Starter
03-18-2012, 11:32 AM
We have on of those already. (Assuming Mason stays). This team needs forwards not bigs. I thought that became fairly obvious once Kelly went down.

Very, very true. I'm hoping Murphy can be this guy: I'm pretty sure I recall he was originally a top 15 recruit for 2012. With a year under his belt in this system, I hope he starts at small forward next year. Wasn't that a possibility for THIS year, until his concussion issues?

CameronBlue
03-18-2012, 11:34 AM
We have on of those already. (Assuming Mason stays). This team needs forwards not bigs. I thought that became fairly obvious once Kelly went down.

We do have those already. The key is utilization, the need for forwards notwithstanding.

jamesfrommaiden
03-18-2012, 11:47 AM
Here are a few things that should help:

1. Quinn Cook should be our point guard from day 1. I think this could be the biggest difference for us. Cook is an elite point guard and with a year under his belt should improve on both ends. He will get everyone the ball in the right place at the right time.

2. Murphy should start on the wing from day 1. We all know how nice it is to have a matchup problem on the wing like Singler. Though I don't expect Murphy to be Singler he will definitely help on the offensive and defensive ends. The only worry I have is that Coach K puts him at the four if Mason leaves.

3. Junior/ Senior jumps. Ryan Kelly and Hairston could be great players if they could just get their bodies a bit more refined. Kelly needs to gain at least 20 pounds if he's gonna play center. Hairston needs to slim down so he can guard on the premeter.

3. Sulaimon as X factor. He's a top 10 player in the nation and an elite perimeter defender. I honestly see him taking over for Dawkins when it becomes clear how great Sulaimon is on defense.

I see this lineup eventually:

Cook
Sulaimon
Murphy
Hairston
Kelly

I must be on another planet or something, but this is the first time in any way, shape, or form, that I can recall anyone suggest Ryan Kelly can be a starting center. He has the height. That is about it. He is a face the basket, pick and pop four. His game resembles more of a three than a five anyway. Can you see Kelly manning the post defensively? An ok rebounder at best for his size, moving him to center I am afraid he becomes a below average one for the position. His lack of quickness and leaping ability means the opposition will take it to the rack every time and Ryan will be in constant foul trouble. Don't get me wrong. I love Ryan and what he does. We know all to well now what happened to Duke without him. But his best position and the best position for the team is staying with his current role.

Newton_14
03-18-2012, 11:56 AM
By the way, I do have to offer the disclaimer that I didn't see the Duke-Lehigh game for reasons out of my control. :) But I did see every other televised game this season.

Starter, very happy to still have you among the living and breathing! I saw your note in the other thread about being in the wreck. Very glad you and the soon to be Mrs Starter made it out of that ok.

I also agree that Cook and Thornton can coexist and compliment each other, much like Wojo and Avery in 98. I expect both will improve quite a bit over the summer and be ready to go come October.

Rich
03-18-2012, 12:00 PM
Agreed. Curry is a very good college player who had an uneven season and a terrible game at the worst possible time.

I think most on this board know what I think about Quinn Cook: I'm a fan of his game, I think he has a high ceiling and I expect big things. I realize at times Cook was beaten badly on defense, and those moments are what stick in one's mind. But he is, after all, a freshman. He's also got quick feet, solid athleticism and the apparent ability to extend full-court, so I didn't think he was nearly as bad as other people made it out to be. With more playing time, I feel like it would have evened out and that what he offered as a penetrator and playmaker would also balance the ledger. I continue to think that with more of a commitment to him, Cook could have made a difference when the offense stagnated toward the end of the season, and I do feel that it capped our potential that he wasn't a more integral part of the team.

Plus, in a recent poll (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1195968/index.htm) of NBA players in Sports Illustrated about what college players could keep up in the League right now, Cook was one of the 21 players who got votes. (It'd be good to know whether it was solely Nolan Smith who voted for him -- which did cross my mind. But in the event that it wasn't, and Cook has played with and against a lot of the recent players to join the league, it's pretty impressive to see what people think of him.)

That said, Thornton is a tough dude. And Krzyzewski loves him, which absolutely counts. It's tough for me to say who gets the starting nod next season. Krzyzewski has spoken in glowing terms about the positive things Thornton brings in terms of leadership and defense, and if he truly believes he's the second coming of Wojo, it's hard to say he won't start knowing the relationship he and Wojo had, and continue to have. But Krzyzewski has also shown an ability to shake things up as needed; a freshman Chris Duhon starting over a senior Nate James down the stretch in '01 for non-injury reasons comes to mind. It can probably go either way starter-wise -- if Thornton is a captain, it's hard to imagine him not starting -- but I would assume it at this point to be a straight time-split either way, assuming Cook stays healthy and works hard on his game over the offseason.

Still though, there's no question that if he improves his defense enough to earn major court time, Quinn would bring a significant upgrade as an offensive player in the time he spends on the court:

TT: 717 minutes, 138 points, 69 assists/34 TO (2.0 A/TO), 38% FG
QC: 387 minutes, 146 points, 63 assists/18 TO (3.5 A/TO), 40% FG

We'll see how it goes, but I think this is probably a good problem to have, two players who offer a variety of advantages between them. Thornton got a lot of game experience under fire this year, grew more comfortable as the season went and is fearless on defense; I'd imagine he continues to hone his outside shot and playmaking abilities. And in Cook, we have a true point guard with an extremely high ceiling on both ends of the ball if he works at it and stays healthy, and the potential to be a transformative player on next year's team.

In fact, that's the most positive thing about next year's team: the recruiting class won't be limited to Sulaimon regardless of whether Krzyzewski pulls what seems like an upset and gets either Muhammad or Parker. Not only will he add Murphy and Marshall Plumlee, but in effect, I think he adds a potentially dynamite point guard in Cook to the rotation mix if he's ready for more responsibility.

Excellent post, Starter. I am willing to give Cook a pass because he was a freshman and because of his knee, which contributed to his late integration into the system and, I believe, his defensive liabilities. I saw a lot of potential out of him as a full time ball handler, driver, scorer and passer. My hope is that he can develop in the defensive area in the off season, but on the whole I agree that he may just be sitting under our noses as one answer to what ails us. Plus, given what he brings to the table and what TT brings to the table as a totally different type of player is a nice problem to have at the PG spot.

CLW
03-18-2012, 12:10 PM
... with a losing NFL team in the backup quarterback. In college BB, losing or not, the most popular guy seems to be the new recruit.

Why else would Seth Curry, third team All-ACC, sit in deference to the new recruit? Is this because he had one bad night against Lehigh, or was there something else?

sagegrouse
'I guess the accent is on the second syllable in my name'

I like Seth but in reality he is primarily a catch and shoot guy (and a very good one I might add). However:

(1) He isn't athletic/quick enough to play solid on the ball defense (a SERIOUS flaw from this season's club)

(2) Often cannot create his own shot against solid on the ball defenders (another SERIOUS flaw from this season's club)


In my opinion the 10-11 team was fatally flawed due to #1 and #2 flaws listed above and thus had to rely too heavily on "the lottery" (Seth Andre Kelly shooting a ton of 3s) and died by playing that way.

From what I have read/seen of Sulaimon he is more athletic/quicker than Curry. He is also probably longer/taller than Curry. As such, if he can adjust to the college game he simply adds another dimension to the team that Curry cannot. This will become particularly important if Rivers leaves which is anyone's guess but my gut just thinks he's gone.

Of course no one really knows how Sulaimon (or any Freshman) will adjust from high school to college. If Sulaimon doesn't adjust well and just isn't ready I'd assume Curry would start at the 2 over Dawkins.

Starter
03-18-2012, 12:15 PM
Starter, very happy to still have you among the living and breathing! I saw your note in the other thread about being in the wreck. Very glad you and the soon to be Mrs Starter made it out of that ok.

I also agree that Cook and Thornton can coexist and compliment each other, much like Wojo and Avery in 98. I expect both will improve quite a bit over the summer and be ready to go come October.

Exactly! I think the Wojo/Avery comparison is apt, it's kind of what I had in mind when I was suggesting what each could bring to the table. There's a use for both sort of players.

And thanks very much for the kind words (and to the others who've said stuff -- even the dreaded WHEAT! LOL). Scary stuff, and certainly puts a Duke loss in perspective. If there's a good thing that came out of it, at least I missed Duke-Lehigh. Far as I'm concerned, it never happened. :D

KandG
03-18-2012, 12:22 PM
I dunno guys but I think we are in another 3-4 year rebuilding period much like we were after 05-06. Year 1 showed us several huge flaws this current group has (lack of quickness/stopping the dribble; inability to create own shot; no post presence; etc...). IMHO the nucleus of the next serious threat for a national championship is going to have to come from this Freshman class (G, MP3, Murphy, Cook) the 2012 Class - Sulaimon and the 2013 Class (Jones and TBD but potentially Parker and Randle).

Just my gut feeling but I believe MP2 and Rivers are gone and Sulaimon is a recruiting class of 1.

That would leave the 12-13 team as:

1. Cook/Thornton
2. Curry/Dawkins/Sulaimon
3. G/Murphy
4. Kelly/Hairston
5. MP3

That team would likely struggle with many/most of the same issues the 11-12 team had (barring some sort of break out improvement) where we probably are upset in the first weekend again (Round of 32 most likely).


Wow, these are my thoughts almost to a T. I do hold out a small sliver of hope for Austin returning, not because "college is the best time of your life" (could we please get that cliche banned), but because the post-lockout draft is a crowded draft and Austin has a lot of things to work on, which even draftniks like Chad Ford have acknowledged. But realistically, next year's team will have similar issues to this year's, though it stands a better chance of getting to the round of 16 if Sulaimon can be a good perimeter defender and Kelly, Cook and Curry improve their games as much as we hope. It will still be a perimeter oriented team, but hopefully one with more bite on defense.

I have never been a recruiting alarmist and have generally trusted K's ability to get the most out of his players, like he did this year until things spiraled downward the final couple of weeks. From 2007-2010, I worried about how good our players were to a certain degree, but I felt we still had very highly regarded talent like McRoberts, Paulus, Henderson, Singler, Scheyer etc that just hit a wall during the tournament. I believed in the ability of a few of those players to carry the Duke team singlehandedly in stretches.

I'm more concerned at the gaps in the roster this year, how much more earthbound the talent seems, and how this situation might persist for a few years. I'm not talking about lack of bigs, but lack of high quality athletic wing talent...and yes, point guard worries me, too. Perhaps this year is a blip in the radar, but I look at next year's roster and am not close to blown away.

davekay1971
03-18-2012, 12:23 PM
Reading Featherston's front page article started my mouth watering for next season. Speculating this early requires either a million what-ifs, or some assumptions. To keep things simple I'll go with assumptions:

1) Austin Rivers and Mason Plumlee will return - big assumption in AR's case, but he's never said he's going to go, either. Less of an assumption in Mason's case - he's not likely to be a lottery pick, may not even be a sure 1st round pick, and he's got a strong academic focus as well as an opportunity to both improve his draft stock AND play with Marshall.

2) We'll get Jefferson, but not Parker or Bazz

3) There won't be any transfers or early graduations/transfers (Curry, for example, could theoretically graduate early and do that 1 year graduate school thing)

So that leaves us with the following pieces:

At point - Cook and Thornton.
At wing - Rivers, Dawkins, Curry, Sheed
At small forward - Murphy, Gbinije
At power forward - Kelly, Hairston, Jefferson
At center - Plumlee2, Plumlee3

I think we'll be a more balanced team next year, and a couple of chronic problems we faced this year should be improved.

We can expect a natural maturation of Thornton's and Cook's abilities. Cook will be another year removed from injury. He got significant PT this year and was inconsistent, as you'd expect from a freshman, particularly one who lost prep time due to injury. Cook has tremendous upside potential. I'm hoping to see a big leap forward, but, of course, that doesn't always happen. Even a reasonable improvement in his on-ball defense, scoring, and consistency will be a huge boost for our team next season. Thornton's upside is more limited, but given his work-ethic and desire, I would expect to see some improvement in scoring, ball handling, and continued dedication on defense. Point should be better than it was this year.

If Rivers returns, then we'll be loaded and deep at the 2, probably the best combination of talent and depth at that position in the nation. Obviously it's a real possiblity that Rivers could go pro. If he does, we'll have to hope for improved consistency from Curry and Dawkins. Sheed is a freshman, could be very good, but I never look for consistency from freshmen, and I'm delighted when it happens. If Rivers goes pro, a rotation of Curry, Dawkins, and Sheed at the 2 at least gives us options if Curry and Dawkins continue to show some up and down performance as they have (noting that Curry's inconsistency is NOTHING compared to Dre's). So, if Rivers stays, we'll have an amazing rotation at the 2 and will be able to go small-ball when needed. If Rivers goes, we'll have enough depth with Curry/Dawk/Sheed to rotate guys and go with the hot hand of a very solid rotation.

The 3 is a huge question mark, only because we haven't seen much of those guys. I still maintain that G wasn't really ready for prime time this year. Murphy supposedly has all the tools, and he likely benefitted from the redshirt year, but we have yet to see him play in the college game. If he is ready to be a starter, that will be a huge boost to our flexibility both on offense and defense. If G improves his offense significantly and can become the defensive guy we all think he can be, then he also gives us a great option at the small forward. Upside: our 3 is a real strength and we are much more balanced. Worst case: our 3 is still better than it was this year.

The 4 is certainly going to be a strength. Kelly may have some limitations, but he had a very good year, and we can expect further improvement as a senior. Kelly's upside this year: an all-ACC caliber player. Hairston showed us great energy, good defense, and some offensive skills that he can develop. As a backup power forward, he's very, very solid. Reports on Jefferson indicate he may not have enough perimeter game to be a legitimate contender at the 3, so I put him at the 4. As a freshman, he may have more talent than Hairston, but given Hairston's maturity and strength, Jefferson may be behind him in the rotation. I'm not expecting a huge contribution from Jefferson this season, but that's okay -that means he could be a pleasant surprise.

The 5 COULD also be a strength. Mason has been almost as tantalizing and frustrating as Dre. Part of it isn't his fault - how many times did we all note this year he or Miles being in good position in the post and not getting the ball. So, part of improving the 5 on offense is getting better work on the perimeter in getting the ball to the post in scoring position. Marshall supposedly is a strong back-to-the-basket guy. Mason has shown he can finish when he gets the ball in good position. Remember how well Mason did when Kyrie was driving and dishing to him? So, some of my hope in seeing improved low post production comes from hoping that Mason will be more consistent and Marshall will be ready as a backup. The other part is my hope that Cook, in particular, will do a better job feeding the post than he or the other perimeter guys did this year.

Like this year, there's going to be excitement seeing the team develop, but I think we'll also have some frustration. For folks who only really enjoy a Duke team that's a beast and a likely national championship winner, 2012-2013 could be a frustrating season. This team may have some of the same problems we saw this year (especially perimeter and on-ball defense), but it may also (and I believe it will ultimately) shape into a much more balanced team than the 2011-2012 team. By tournament time, this could be a very good, solid, well rounded team and a legitimate contender.

tdrake51
03-18-2012, 12:26 PM
If keeping quick guards out of the lane is a problem again next year, I hope our bigs learn to make better plays contesting shots. There were a few times every game when a guard would drive and a big would rotate late and try to take a charge, ultimately getting called for a block. I feel like contesting a shot, not even necessarily blocking it, would be much easier for any of the Plumlees to do than taking a charge. Ryan and Josh are quick enough to get in place in time, but even if they do everything right, it doesn't guarantee the refs will see it that way. Taking a charge is still a great defensive play, but better decision making is what I am looking for.

Des Esseintes
03-18-2012, 12:57 PM
I must be on another planet or something, but this is the first time in any way, shape, or form, that I can recall anyone suggest Ryan Kelly can be a starting center. He has the height. That is about it. He is a face the basket, pick and pop four. His game resembles more of a three than a five anyway. Can you see Kelly manning the post defensively? An ok rebounder at best for his size, moving him to center I am afraid he becomes a below average one for the position. His lack of quickness and leaping ability means the opposition will take it to the rack every time and Ryan will be in constant foul trouble. Don't get me wrong. I love Ryan and what he does. We know all to well now what happened to Duke without him. But his best position and the best position for the team is staying with his current role.

The subject of Kelly as center has been discussed multiple times on this board.

The answer is that of course he can do it. He's 6'11". He's had solid shotblocking numbers for much of his career. His rebounding is not where one would like, but some of that comes from guarding fours instead of fives plus Mason and Miles being such accomplished rebounders. If an opposing center had to guard him, it would be huge mismatch on our end of the court. It's possible a year in the post would wear him down physically, but he will be a senior with a man's body next season. K's history is rife with successful Duke teams that had guys at center no burlier or more athletic than Kelly.

Hopefully, though, Mason comes back.

elvis14
03-18-2012, 01:28 PM
OK, I'll take a stab at what I'd like to see next year. I'm going to assume that Austin and MP2 stay and that we don't get Bazz, Jefferson or Parker.

pg - Austin, Cook, TT
sg - Sheed, Curry, Austin, Andre
sf - SG, Alex, Andre, Sheed
pf - Ryan, Josh, Alex
C - MP2, MP3

First, I agree with those that have stated that Austin should be the PG. He should have the ball in his hands and the offense should run through him. Backing him up at PG would be Quinn Cook. I think Quinn's defense got much better as the season went on (and I was backing up games and re-watching is defense) and his attacking style on offense is a nice complement to Austin's attacking style on offense. Backing up Quinn would be TT. I'm not a big TT fan. Love his attitude but I don't think he has enough game. Tyler would be used when we needed to shake things up and I think his leadership is important and will really help the team but I'd prefer for that help to be in practice.

If Austin is our PG, we have to hope Sheed is ready to play. I think Curry would be a good 6th man getting playing time every game and a good bit of PT against teams that he matches up well against. Obviously if Sheed isn't ready we can use Curry again in this role (as long as we have a SF starting). When Quinn is running the point, Austin can play the 2. Andre....sigh. I know this paragraph might not be the most popular thing I've posted on here but I'm calling it like I'm seeing it.

We didn't play a SF this year and it really was an issue. The coaches inability to prepare SG to play was a huge disappointment. Here's hoping that Mike and Alex can step up and be ready. Andre can play SF when the match ups allow and when he's hitting his shots.

Having Ryan starting at PF is a given and a strength. I'd love to see the staff explain to him that he's 6'10" and have him start trying to alter every shot in the paint instead of trying to draw charges like he's a 6'1" guard. Josh is a capable back up PF. His midrange game (if slightly improved) could provide some nice points off the bench. From what we have heard Alex could pitch in at PF when we go small or have foul trouble.

Mason will be a beast and if we can make an entry pass or hit him on the roll off of picks he will have a monster year scoring. He's going to rebound very well and, like this year, he will be improved on defense. We've heard that MP3 is very talented. I'm looking forward to seeing what he can do.

We are going to miss Miles, and I'm looking forward to see who will step up and be a leader on the court. Of course if we land Bazz he starts at the 2 and if Jefferson comes he could supplant Josh as the backup PF. I'd love to have either. We have lots of talent and some really great kids and if we can get them together and play to our strengths we can have another great season of Duke Basketball.

Johnny Chill
03-18-2012, 01:30 PM
Mason
Kelly
Curry
Dawkins

Will they be leaders or will they again let the underclassmen lead?

Furniture
03-18-2012, 02:02 PM
I think duke really missed someone this year who could drive to the basket to either score or pass to he shooting guards. We had that with smith and scheyer the last couple of years. Austin can't seem to do that.
The man to do that next year is cook. I just don't think that Thornton has it in him! I could be wrong...
Just a thought.

#1Duke
03-18-2012, 02:12 PM
We have on of those already. (Assuming Mason stays). This team needs forwards not bigs. I thought that became fairly obvious once Kelly went down.


What's fairly obvious is that for some reason, Coach K. wanted this team to be a 3 point shooting team. He said in a interview I recently watched " it's who we are ".
I have to ask WHY?? I mean, I have to ask why EXCLUDE inside play to the point that we live and die at the three point line?
Seriously, I am wondering if Coach K. deep down didn't have faith that our bigs could get it done. There has to be SOME reason why we neglected our bigs ( in most games ) and kept firing up 3 point shots.
When I am talking about acquiring a BIG I am talking about someone of the caliber of Zeller, Henson, Davis etc.
I personally would like to see more inside out play, more drives to the basket that draws defenders leaving someone open for a shot, a big that demands a double team, etc.
I guess what I am saying is we need a dominate big man that will open our game up and draw coverage.
The right POWER forward could perhaps get this done but he would have to be a special player.

jamesfrommaiden
03-18-2012, 02:17 PM
The subject of Kelly as center has been discussed multiple times on this board.

The answer is that of course he can do it. He's 6'11". He's had solid shotblocking numbers for much of his career. His rebounding is not where one would like, but some of that comes from guarding fours instead of fives plus Mason and Miles being such accomplished rebounders. If an opposing center had to guard him, it would be huge mismatch on our end of the court. It's possible a year in the post would wear him down physically, but he will be a senior with a man's body next season. K's history is rife with successful Duke teams that had guys at center no burlier or more athletic than Kelly.

Hopefully, though, Mason comes back.

But it is a bad idea. Yes he is 6'11. That does not mean he would be nearly as productive at center as he can be at the four. Unless Duke throws all caution to the wind and shoots 40 threes a game with three gaurds, murphy at sf and one big.

Des Esseintes
03-18-2012, 02:22 PM
But it is a bad idea. Yes he is 6'11. That does not mean he would be nearly as productive at center as he can be at the four. Unless Duke throws all caution to the wind and shoots 40 threes a game with three gaurds, murphy at sf and one big.

Why can't he be as productive from the five as the four? A big reason for the usefulness of a stretch four is that it pulls a power forward out to the perimeter where he doesn't like to guard. A center has even less interest/ability to defend outside the lane. That's a mismatch in our favor. There would be some spacing issues for the offense with no one playing inside, but that can be mitigated with motion, just as an example off the top of my head.

Moreover, it isn't as if Ryan's only offensive game is the jumper from distance. He has a good handle for a big man and is pretty subtle around the basket. I think he would function just fine down low if that is where we needed him.

loldevilz
03-18-2012, 02:35 PM
But it is a bad idea. Yes he is 6'11. That does not mean he would be nearly as productive at center as he can be at the four. Unless Duke throws all caution to the wind and shoots 40 threes a game with three gaurds, murphy at sf and one big.

On the defensive side of the ball I'm pretty sure that moving Kelly to center would be an improvement. Kelly is not a good defensive 4. He is a liability there because he's not quick enough to guard most fours. At 6-11 if he puts on some muscle he should be fine at center. He won't be Zoubek or Williams or another extremely physical center, but he will pull down rebounds If you put Hairston and Murphy at 3&4 that will help out tremendously with rebounding and we should be fine. Rebouding is rarely about one individual, but about team size and team commitment.

On the offensive end, I'm not at all worried. Coach K thrives in these kinds of situations. He will make Kelly productive. Frankly I'm looking forward to Kelly improving his midrange game, because I think he can be way more dangerous if he uses his craftiness inside.

Johnny Chill
03-18-2012, 02:36 PM
Why can't he be as productive from the five as the four? A big reason for the usefulness of a stretch four is that it pulls a power forward out to the perimeter where he doesn't like to guard. A center has even less interest/ability to defend outside the lane. That's a mismatch in our favor. There would be some spacing issues for the offense with no one playing inside, but that can be mitigated with motion, just as an example off the top of my head.

Moreover, it isn't as if Ryan's only offensive game is the jumper from distance. He has a good handle for a big man and is pretty subtle around the basket. I think he would function just fine down low if that is where we needed him.

Ryan Kelly will get punished down low on offense and defense. You ignore his lack of strength.

uh_no
03-18-2012, 02:38 PM
On the defensive side of the ball I'm pretty sure that moving Kelly to center would be an improvement. Kelly is not a good defensive 4. He is a liability there because he's not quick enough to guard most fours. At 6-11 if he puts on some muscle he should be fine at center. He won't be Zoubek or Williams or another extremely physical center, but he will pull down rebounds If you put Hairston and Murphy at 3&4 that will help out tremendously with rebounding and we should be fine. Rebouding is rarely about one individual, but about team size and team commitment.

On the offensive end, I'm not at all worried. Coach K thrives in these kinds of situations. He will make Kelly productive. Frankly I'm looking forward to Kelly improving his midrange game, because I think he can be way more dangerous if he uses his craftiness inside.

If Mason and Miles couldn't contain guys like zeller, what makes you think they wouldn't go to town on ryan? He's not strong enough to guard the 5, and probably will never be. Z could get away with it becuase he was giant...and pretty strong...He's plenty fast....I'm not sure there's a more mobile 4 in the conference....

#1Duke
03-18-2012, 02:46 PM
If Mason and Miles couldn't contain guys like zeller, what makes you think they wouldn't go to town on ryan? He's not strong enough to guard the 5, and probably will never be. Z could get away with it becuase he was giant...and pretty strong...He's plenty fast....I'm not sure there's a more mobile 4 in the conference....

Which is why I said we need to get a very high quality big man. Would open our offense up and tighten our defense up.

uh_no
03-18-2012, 02:48 PM
Which is why I said we need to get a very high quality big man. Would open our offense up and tighten our defense up.

Ah. good thing these types of players are readily available!

CDu
03-18-2012, 02:51 PM
If Mason and Miles couldn't contain guys like zeller, what makes you think they wouldn't go to town on ryan? He's not strong enough to guard the 5, and probably will never be. Z could get away with it becuase he was giant...and pretty strong...He's plenty fast....I'm not sure there's a more mobile 4 in the conference....

Strength would certainly be a concern, though it's not like Zeller outmuscled the Plumlees. He outskilled them.

But I couldn't disagree more with the bolded part. I'd say that just about EVERY other team in the conference had a more mobile 4 than Kelly:

BC: Anderson
Clemson: Jennings
FSU: White
GT: Holsey
Maryland: the only team for which your statement holds true
Miami: Kadji, Jones
NC State: Leslie
UNC: Henson, McAdoo
Va Tech: Finney-Smith
UVa: Scott
Wake: Mescheriakov

Des Esseintes
03-18-2012, 03:00 PM
Ryan Kelly will get punished down low on offense and defense. You ignore his lack of strength.

I'm not ignoring anything. If you think physical strength is the overwhelming requirement for center play, I don't know what to tell you. There is more than one way to be excellent in the post. That's why Marcus Camby, Marc Gasol, and Luis Scola can all cash big checks. Some guys do it with power, others with reach and athleticism, others with skill, etc. But even if strength was determinant, I guarantee you senior year Ryan Kelly could match freshman year Kyle Singler. For that matter, how jacked is Tyler Zeller? He's stronger this year than last year, but he was excellent last year, too. Also, um, Laettner?

Kedsy
03-18-2012, 03:02 PM
At this point in time all I can say is I would like to see us acquire a VERY good BIG.... no matter what else happens.


When I am talking about acquiring a BIG I am talking about someone of the caliber of Zeller, Henson, Davis etc.

This is a thread about next season. What "BIG" of that caliber do you think is available at this time in the recruiting process? And what do you mean by "acquiring"? You think we can make a trade with a Big East team, or do you think there's an aisle at Best Buy where we can purchase such a commodity?

Like it or not, next season our center is going to be Mason (if he returns) or Ryan (if Mason doesn't return). Whichever one it is, I believe he will be 2nd team All-ACC, or maybe 1st team. Despite that, I also predict people on DBR will spend most of the season complaining about him.

CDu
03-18-2012, 03:30 PM
This is a thread about next season. What "BIG" of that caliber do you think is available at this time in the recruiting process? And what do you mean by "acquiring"? You think we can make a trade with a Big East team, or do you think there's an aisle at Best Buy where we can purchase such a commodity?

Like it or not, next season our center is going to be Mason (if he returns) or Ryan (if Mason doesn't return). Whichever one it is, I believe he will be 2nd team All-ACC, or maybe 1st team. Despite that, I also predict people on DBR will spend most of the season complaining about him.

Agreed. We aren't going to land some low post beast this late. We will either see Kelly and Marshall share the center spot or it will be a pair of Plumlees there. And at the PF spot it will be Murphy and Hairston or Kelly, Murphy, and Hairston. And it will be a darn good (and deep) frontcourt either way.

Count me in the camp that thinks Kelly would thrive at the 5. It would accentuate some of his strengths (versatile scoring) and minimize some of his weaknesses (quickness). I think the concerns about his strength and rebounding are overstated - especially with another summer of strength training. At the 5, Kelly is a HUGE matchup nightmare offensively, and I think he would do just fine defensively.

Jackson
03-18-2012, 03:42 PM
Very, very true. I'm hoping Murphy can be this guy: I'm pretty sure I recall he was originally a top 15 recruit for 2012. With a year under his belt in this system, I hope he starts at small forward next year. Wasn't that a possibility for THIS year, until his concussion issues?

Is the concussion the only reason for the redshirt? I, like you, REALLY hope that Murphy can be a big part of next year's team. His addition, if he can deliver, along with Sulaimon, could be a big change. I hated the line-up with a backcourt of 6'1", 6'4", 6'1". Got us killed on the boards. How good can Murphy be?

dcar1985
03-18-2012, 04:19 PM
Very, very true. I'm hoping Murphy can be this guy: I'm pretty sure I recall he was originally a top 15 recruit for 2012. With a year under his belt in this system, I hope he starts at small forward next year. Wasn't that a possibility for THIS year, until his concussion issues?

Top 40 once he reclassified though....I hope he's as good as everyone is pumping him up to be w/o seeing anything yet, I still have a hard time believing that he was on the verge of starting then the concussion cost him a week and he was all of sudden so far behind that everyone involved thought it was best he redshirt.

OldSchool
03-18-2012, 04:32 PM
The debate over Ryan at the 5 will be a moot point.

MP3 will be a BEAST for us next year at the 5. I'm calling it now.

If Mason comes back, then as with this year when we had a rotation of MP1, MP2, Ryan and Josh at the 4/5, next year we'll have the same rotation except with MP3 and without MP1. We'll have an end-of-game free throw shooting lineup with Ryan at the 5, but otherwise he and Josh will be 4s and there will be some lineups with MP3 at the 5 and MP2 at the 4 while Ryan is getting a blow.

Murphy is an unknown at this point. Will he be a natural 3 or a natural 4?

uh_no
03-18-2012, 04:40 PM
The debate over Ryan at the 5 will be a moot point.

MP3 will be a BEAST for us next year at the 5. I'm calling it now.

If Mason comes back, then as with this year when we had a rotation of MP1, MP2, Ryan and Josh at the 4/5, next year we'll have the same rotation except with MP3 and without MP1. We'll have an end-of-game free throw shooting lineup with Ryan at the 5, but otherwise he and Josh will be 4s and there will be some lineups with MP3 at the 5 and MP2 at the 4 while Ryan is getting a blow.

Murphy is an unknown at this point. Will he be a natural 3 or a natural 4?

What is your reasoning behind that? A kid who has never played a minute of college ball, and a wingspan of something like 6'8....that's like t-rex arms, unfortunately...he would have to be REALLY good to compensate for such short arms....and I don't see it...at least not in his first year playing in actual competition....

Starter
03-18-2012, 04:59 PM
Top 40 once he reclassified though....I hope he's as good as everyone is pumping him up to be w/o seeing anything yet, I still have a hard time believing that he was on the verge of starting then the concussion cost him a week and he was all of sudden so far behind that everyone involved thought it was best he redshirt.

It's true, nobody really has any idea. I just know he was a really skilled high school player. But I agree, this is one of the bigger mysteries of the past season. Maybe he just fell behind, and by the time he started getting up to speed, the rotation was already pretty much set? It still seemed like we had a need for what he could presumably provide, however. But that need will still be there next season, so hopefully he's as advertised.

DukieInBrasil
03-18-2012, 05:05 PM
What is your reasoning behind that? A kid who has never played a minute of college ball, and a wingspan of something like 6'8....that's like t-rex arms, unfortunately...he would have to be REALLY good to compensate for such short arms....and I don't see it...at least not in his first year playing in actual competition....
Being 7ft tall helps compensate for short arms. Plus he won the HS dunk contest, so it seems he has no problem playing above the rim. I'm not saying he's gonna be a beast, but i think he'll at least be serviceable as the C if Mason goes pro. If Mason stays, we'll have one of the tallest frontcourts around: 7'0 (MP3), 6'11 (RK), 6'10 (MP2), plus Hairston at 6'8 and Murphy who will probably play a 3/4 type role is 6'8. Still, it would be great if we could get Tony Parker since both MP2 and RK will be gone after next year and we'll only have one legitimate big after that.

Overall, i think it's a bit too early to speculate what this team will be capable of next year b/c a) our recruiting class may or may not be filled out completely yet, b) we don't know how many, if any, players will leave early and c) injuries can happen during the summer too and put guys behind the curve or put them in red-shirt category (obviously i'm hoping this happens to no one).
In spite of that, i will say this: the ability to improve on passing the ball will determine how much this team improves. This year, IMO, what reduced our effectiveness was two-fold: a) our inability to pass the ball well, especially into the post and b) defend the perimeter. A) leads to B) in that opposition transition offense off of missed shots really hurt us defensively: improve offensive efficiency and defense ought to improve as well. Most of the games we lost this year was b/c we went cold from the floor (reduced O efficiency) and gave up transition points.
If we get no additional recruits beyond Sulaimon, i think that Quinn's ability to deliver the ball will improve b/c he'll get more PT b/c he'll improve on D. Hopefully Seth and TT improve on their passing as well. I think that a matured (shh)G plus the additions of Murphy and Sulaimon to the wing will improve our perimeter D, honestly it's hard for it to get any worse.

#1Duke
03-18-2012, 05:10 PM
This is a thread about next season. What "BIG" of that caliber do you think is available at this time in the recruiting process? And what do you mean by "acquiring"? You think we can make a trade with a Big East team, or do you think there's an aisle at Best Buy where we can purchase such a commodity?

Like it or not, next season our center is going to be Mason (if he returns) or Ryan (if Mason doesn't return). Whichever one it is, I believe he will be 2nd team All-ACC, or maybe 1st team. Despite that, I also predict people on DBR will spend most of the season complaining about him.

Yes, I understand this is a thread about next season. The OP asked "I'm curious as to what you guys would like to see, what you think should happen, and what you think will happen."

Which is why I am confused that a high quality big man has not been recruited/signed by now.
Look at what we have. High rated players that we ARE recruiting are waiting to see if they'll be the SHOW.... waiting to see if Austin leaves so they can showcase THEIR talents already reflecting a mindset to me that does not suggest team play in the purest sense of the phrase.
IMHO, teams that show unselfish play and a balanced attack are the more successful teams.

I like Ryan very much but NOT as a center and I would not classify him as a POWER forward either.
So, what are we doing?? It appears to me that we are going to be committed to the 3 point shot again next year.

I asked the question....... Why didn't Coach K. go inside more often?? Did he feel that our bigs couldn't get it done?? Honestly, at times I thought I was watching an NBA team this year with guys standing around watching what someone else was going to do.

I have no doubt that a strong big man in either the center or power forward position would make a HUGE difference in both our offense and defense.
We have very good supporting players right now and I think a very good big is what we are missing.... it would open up our offense a great deal.

uh_no
03-18-2012, 05:13 PM
Being 7ft tall helps compensate for short arms. Plus he won the HS dunk contest, so it seems he has no problem playing above the rim. I'm not saying he's gonna be a beast, but i think he'll at least be serviceable as the C if Mason goes pro. If Mason stays, we'll have one of the tallest frontcourts around: 7'0 (MP3), 6'11 (RK), 6'10 (MP2), plus Hairston at 6'8 and Murphy who will probably play a 3/4 type role is 6'8. Still, it would be great if we could get Tony Parker since both MP2 and RK will be gone after next year and we'll only have one legitimate big after that.

The HS dunk contest means diddly, unfortunately....mason nearly won his dunk contest...

I think you're far underestimating the importance of length. Take a look at the last two national champions, Uconn and duke...both very tall, very long teams....especially in the frontcourt...

Mason and miles wingspans are 6'11 and 7'0 respectively....so despite being half an inch taller than miles, he's effectively a few inches shorter...

Being 7' tall also does not compensate for lateral reach, where he will be severely disadvantaged against other centers.

He will have to compensate for that with skill...but that will take time...and I certainly don't expect it next season.

Greg_Newton
03-18-2012, 05:27 PM
uh_no, I'm as big of a wingspan hawker as anyone, and I agree with you to an extent - he's going to be more like a 6'10 player, for all intents and purposes.

However, I think he might surprise a little bit next year. The one advantage he's always had over his brothers is his approach to contact; he's not afraid of initiating it with his lower body, from what I've seen, but he's just always been too weak to really be effective. He also seems to execute post moves with a little more decisiveness and purpose, even if he's been very unpolished.

However, he's put on a HUGE amount of muscle over the past year. I would be surprised if he's listed as under 240 next year, to be honest. I'm optimistic that he might be physically ready before I expected, thanks to the redshirt... mentally might be another story.

uh_no
03-18-2012, 05:30 PM
uh_no, I'm as big of a wingspan hawker as anyone, and I agree with you to an extent - he's going to be more like a 6'10 player, for all intents and purposes.

However, I think he might surprise a little bit next year. The one advantage he's always had over his brothers is his approach to contact; he's not afraid of initiating it with his lower body, from what I've seen, but he's just always been too weak to really be effective. He also seems to execute post moves with a little more decisiveness and purpose, even if he's been very unpolished.

However, he's put on a HUGE amount of muscle over the past year. I would be surprised if he's listed as under 240 next year, to be honest. I'm optimistic that he might be physically ready before I expected, thanks to the redshirt... mentally might be another story.

Thanks, That's really good info! One thing's for certain, It will be cool to watch him and see how he is similar/different from his brothers. And that's exactly what I mean by he needs to be more skilled. He's going to be good because, as you say, he deals with contact, he has a strong set of post moves, he doesn't get in foul trouble. It won't be because he is 7' tall.

Mcluhan
03-18-2012, 05:35 PM
Disclaimer: I enjoyed this season, and like our guys.

But:

This year we had too many perimeter guys with comparable arguments for playing time, and the team's whole ended up being less than the sum of its parts. We were impressively deep, but somehow we could never find a combination of five guys who could consistently play like a Duke starting 5. Especially on defense.

And this problem could be worse next year.

Let's assume Austin stays. He'll be that guy that K wants to play nearly 40 minutes. The rest of our perimeter minutes will be divided between Curry, Cook, Thornton, Sulaimon, Dawkins, Murphy, and Gbinije. That's way too many guys of comparable ability and competing strengths fighting for 80 minutes of playing time.

(should Austin leave, that opens things up, but leaves a bigger problem: no Austin!)

And I fear that this logjam could undermine the team's leadership structure. Championship caliber teams need a hierarchy that's clear and consistent. Ideally your older guys are amongst your best guys, and have at the very least locked down their spots in the rotation.

Seth is a skilled offensive player, but he's a slow and undersized defender.

Andre, my favorite player, is the riddle of the century. 'Nuff said. Shades of Ricky Price (another favorite) in his regression.

Based on intangibles, hustle and gravitas, Tyler is ready for a big role, but being able to dribble the ball up and pass the ball around the perimeter is not the same thing as running the point, and he absolutely must improve his shooting (I think he will).

That's too many issues with our rising upperclassmen. And these basketball issues are not entirely disconnected from leadership/ team management issues.

Which leads us to the lower classmen. Coach K will give them whatever minutes they earn in practice.

If you believe point guards are born and not made, Quinn Cook is the former: he's got great court vision, and a good spider sense for how much space he has/needs, especially when adjusting shots to shoot over bigger guys, etc. BUT, and I don't think this gets enough recognition: he's even smaller than you think. He looks tiny out there, and though quicker than Seth, is against a lot of teams a problem to be hidden on defense.

Murphy/Gbinije: With height and defense being pressing issues, at least one of these guys has a chance to earn a spot in the rotation, and pose a serious threat to minutes to all the guys mentioned above. I won't speculate on how good/ready they'll be (we don't even know what to make of some of the guys we've watched all season), but the opportunity is there. I think back to someone like Brian Davis, whose offensive skills were inferior to many of the guys mentioned above, but who'd be starting for this team based on tenacity, size, and athleticism.

Sulaimon: If he's a stud from the get go, that's good but we face a situation in which some of the guys mentioned above will fall out of the rotation entirely. I have no problem with that if that's what's meant to be, but it could put further strain on there being a clear hierarchy within the team. If Sulaimon is good but needing work, well, then he's a lot like the other six non-Rivers perimeter guys.

To summarize: there's a shocking amount of uncertainty about which of these guys should be starting and getting the lion's share of the minutes, and even who should be getting the secondary minutes. I hope for the best, but the circumstances do not seem conducive to a solid team identity and understanding of roles and expectations.

At the 4 & 5 spots, I feel like we're in better shape, at least in terms of expectations. Should Mason return, he and Kelly will be our main bigs, and Hairston and Marshall will play supporting roles. If Mason goes, there will be pressure on Marshall to become a rebounding force from day one.

uh_no
03-18-2012, 05:47 PM
To summarize: there's a shocking amount of uncertainty about which of these guys should be starting and getting the lion's share of the minutes, and even who should be getting the secondary minutes. I hope for the best, but the circumstances do not seem conducive to a solid team identity and understanding of roles and expectations.


I think you're exactly right.

I think next year coming into camp, the tone needs to be, there are 5 starting spots, and anyone on the team can have them. Nobody is guaranteed to be a starter....not seth, not andre, not austin, not mason, not tyler, not quinn, not ryan....it will probably be made abundantly clear that if you expect to be starting, you better darn well play tough defense.

It'll be a dogfight for starting spots next year....outgoing seniors who want the PT, newcomers who want to prove they belong....should be fun.

OldSchool
03-18-2012, 05:50 PM
What is your reasoning behind that? A kid who has never played a minute of college ball, and a wingspan of something like 6'8....that's like t-rex arms, unfortunately...he would have to be REALLY good to compensate for such short arms....and I don't see it...at least not in his first year playing in actual competition....

His arms don't look any different than his brothers' arms, except a lot less muscle. T-Rex arms? Uh, no.

2478


Marshall is just as athletic as his brothers and is even taller
He's had a year already in K's system and learning from his older brothers
He seems like a bright kid, I'm counting on him to cut down on the silly fouls MP1 and MP2 were prone to early in their careers
I expect Cook to get a LOT of minutes at point next year, which will directly benefit the 5 position
He is reputed to be even more of a true 5 than either of his older brothers
He seems to get on great with his teammates which could give us better chemistry and trust on the court between the guards and bigs which we desperately needed this year.

uh_no
03-18-2012, 05:53 PM
His arms don't look any different than his brothers' arms, except a lot less muscle. T-Rex arms? Uh, no.


Photos are deceptive

his wingspan is 4" shorter than miles' and 3" shorter than masons.

When your wingspan is 4" less than your height, that is certainly bordering on t-rex proportions.....the opposite being gorilla proportions

and this isn't a slam on Marshall, its just his build...it is what it is...no more no less.

tommy
03-18-2012, 05:57 PM
I think you're exactly right.

I think next year coming into camp, the tone needs to be, there are 5 starting spots, and anyone on the team can have them. Nobody is guaranteed to be a starter....not seth, not andre, not austin, not mason, not tyler, not quinn, not ryan....it will probably be made abundantly clear that if you expect to be starting, you better darn well play tough defense.

It'll be a dogfight for starting spots next year....outgoing seniors who want the PT, newcomers who want to prove they belong....should be fun.

I get the mindset you'd like to instill, but nevertheless, if Austin and Mason are here, they're starting. Period.

DukieInBrasil
03-18-2012, 06:01 PM
I get the mindset you'd like to instill, but nevertheless, if Austin and Mason are here, they're starting. Period.

true, but also they'll be starting b/c they both work hard, which was made obvious by their in-season improvements and demeanor.

OldSchool
03-18-2012, 06:02 PM
Photos are deceptive

his wingspan is 4" shorter than miles' and 3" shorter than masons.

When your wingspan is 4" less than your height, that is certainly bordering on t-rex proportions.....the opposite being gorilla proportions

and this isn't a slam on Marshall, its just his build...it is what it is...no more no less.

You're placing too much weight on this one wingspan measurement. It can vary by inches just by how you hold your arms while you're being measured.

And you're placing too much weight on wingspan as a proxy for basketball ability.

tommy
03-18-2012, 06:06 PM
We will either see Kelly and Marshall share the center spot or it will be a pair of Plumlees there. And at the PF spot it will be Murphy and Hairston or Kelly, Murphy, and Hairston. And it will be a darn good (and deep) frontcourt either way.

Sorry, but if our "centers" are Kelly and Marshall and our PF's are Murphy and Hairston, I don't think that frontcourt is deep, and I don't think it's championship-level good. Kelly struggled mightily against physical inside players -- at the 4. How would he handle even stronger guys playing 5? I get it, he can take them outside on offense. But what about defense? He just isn't a banger, and trying to make him into one may affect other aspects of his game negatively, as well as exhaust him. Marshall is a complete unknown quantity. Yes, the redshirt year helped him mature physically, I'm sure. But remember that neither of his brothers was a big contributor in his first year, so I don't know what basis there is to believe Marshall will be either.

As for the PF's in this scenario, Murphy is also unproven and by most accounts a natural 3 more than a 4. Yes, he may be able to play the 4 in our scheme, but he's likely to struggle against physical guys too. Hairston at this point has proven himself to be a servicable backup, nothing more. It's possible he could develop into a Lance Thomas-type, but he hasn't done that yet. He is not athletic; he plays below the rim and while he plays with great energy, his shot is inconsistent and he struggles defensively as well.

Sorry guys, but Kelly-Marshall-Hairston-Murphy isn't going to scare anybody at the 4-5 next year. Not physical, not athletic, not very good defensively.

uh_no
03-18-2012, 06:12 PM
You're placing too much weight on this one wingspan measurement. It can vary by inches just by how you hold your arms while you're being measured.

And you're placing too much weight on wingspan as a proxy for basketball ability.

No.

I'm simply stating that his height is mitigated by his short arms....his effective height is more like 6'10 than 7'0.

This doesn't mean he can't play basketball or will never be a star. Simply that we can't slot him in as a first team All-ACC center next year simply because he is 7' tall, as a couple seem to be doing.

OldSchool
03-18-2012, 06:15 PM
Sorry, but if our "centers" are Kelly and Marshall and our PF's are Murphy and Hairston, I don't think that frontcourt is deep, and I don't think it's championship-level good. Kelly struggled mightily against physical inside players -- at the 4. How would he handle even stronger guys playing 5? I get it, he can take them outside on offense. But what about defense? He just isn't a banger, and trying to make him into one may affect other aspects of his game negatively, as well as exhaust him. Marshall is a complete unknown quantity. Yes, the redshirt year helped him mature physically, I'm sure. But remember that neither of his brothers was a big contributor in his first year, so I don't know what basis there is to believe Marshall will be either.

As for the PF's in this scenario, Murphy is also unproven and by most accounts a natural 3 more than a 4. Yes, he may be able to play the 4 in our scheme, but he's likely to struggle against physical guys too. Hairston at this point has proven himself to be a servicable backup, nothing more. It's possible he could develop into a Lance Thomas-type, but he hasn't done that yet. He is not athletic; he plays below the rim and while he plays with great energy, his shot is inconsistent and he struggles defensively as well.

Sorry guys, but Kelly-Marshall-Hairston-Murphy isn't going to scare anybody at the 4-5 next year. Not physical, not athletic, not very good defensively.

Don't forget that Ryan had an excellent off-season last year in terms of physical development. If he does that again this year we'll see him significantly stronger again when the season starts. If he improves his shooting percentage and consistency even further, he's a candidate for all-conference at the 4.

Both Mason (assuming he stays) and Marshall are more athletic than Ryan and I expect to seem them defending the opposing 5 before we resort to trying to use Ryan in that role.

OldSchool
03-18-2012, 06:21 PM
No.

I'm simply stating that his height is mitigated by his short arms....his effective height is more like 6'10 than 7'0.

This doesn't mean he can't play basketball or will never be a star. Simply that we can't slot him in as a first team All-ACC center next year simply because he is 7' tall, as a couple seem to be doing.

To my mind the biggest variable in how good our bigs will be next year will be our guards.

If next year our bigs are doing jumping jacks under the rim while our guards are dribbling around pondering whether to shoot a regular 3 or an NBA 3, it won't matter what someone's wingspan is, our post guys won't be having a good offensive year.

uh_no
03-18-2012, 06:28 PM
To my mind the biggest variable in how good our bigs will be next year will be our guards.

If next year our bigs are doing jumping jacks under the rim while our guards are dribbling around pondering whether to shoot a regular 3 or an NBA 3, it won't matter what someone's wingspan is, our post guys won't be having a good offensive year.

Certainly.

Who of Seth,andre,austin,tyler,quinn,new people

are going to step up as the point guard on BOTH the offensive and defensive ends?

#1Duke
03-18-2012, 06:31 PM
To my mind the biggest variable in how good our bigs will be next year will be our guards.

If next year our bigs are doing jumping jacks under the rim while our guards are dribbling around pondering whether to shoot a regular 3 or an NBA 3, it won't matter what someone's wingspan is, our post guys won't be having a good offensive year.


Yes, and who's fault is that and why is that the case??

CA Cameron Crazie
03-18-2012, 07:01 PM
I can't even wrap my head around next year without too much wishful thinking (AR and MP2 returning and at least 2 out of Bazz, Amile and Jabari). Since we are talking about Marshall, how does his skill set compare to the likes of Cody Zeller? I'd be happy if he could provide us with a similar kind of production for his RS Freshman year. I know the Zellers differ in style and skill from the Plumlees when it comes to the older brothers, but I wasn't sure if MP3 differed much at all.

MaxAMillion
03-18-2012, 07:24 PM
Yes, and who's fault is that and why is that the case??

Whose fault is it and what do you suggest the solution is to this identified problem.

SoCalDukeFan
03-18-2012, 07:38 PM
As I see it, Duke's problems in the latter part of this season stemmed mostly because Duke played with five fingers not with a fist. Andre's shooting slump and Ryan's foot added to the woes of course. However there was plenty of talent to beat Lehigh in the NCAA tournament and plenty of talent to beat Miami at Cameron in February and we didn't.

This team averaged 12 assists per game, the lowest number in years. While it is only 1 less than a few years, I think it tells you something.

I really don't know how good Murphy, Marshall or Sulaimon are. However if Mason and Andre come back then we again should have plenty of talent. It will be a struggle without them, unless the new players turn out to be super stars. In any case, if we don't play as a team then the season will be disappointing, and if we do then it will be fun.

SoCal

gumbomoop
03-18-2012, 07:58 PM
Both Mason (assuming he stays) and Marshall are more athletic than Ryan and I expect to seem them defending the opposing 5 before we resort to trying to use Ryan in that role.

I post a response here just to clarify, not to get into a pissing contest.

IMO, no one does - or at least no one should - disagree with your point that Mason and Marshall would play the 5 before Ryan. But as CDu has stated, very precisely .......


We will either see Kelly and Marshall share the center spot or it will be a pair of Plumlees there. And at the PF spot it will be Murphy and Hairston or Kelly, Murphy, and Hairston.

So the key issue is whether Mason returns. If he does, there's no reason to think the staff would need to resort to using Ryan at the 5, except for a few mpg at most, if at all. But if Mason leaves, then the 5 will likely by Ryan and Marshall. It's conceivable that, practically speaking, Josh could play the 5 some. I could be persuaded that, absent Mason, Josh might actually be a 4/5.

tommy
03-18-2012, 08:06 PM
It's conceivable that, practically speaking, Josh could play the 5 some. I could be persuaded that, absent Mason, Josh might actually be a 4/5.

How do you figure that a guy 6'7" and 235 pounds, without much jumping ability at all, and without long arms, can play center effectively against the type of competition that Duke faces every year?

sagegrouse
03-18-2012, 08:15 PM
How do you figure that a guy 6'7" and 235 pounds, without much jumping ability at all, and without long arms, can play center effectively against the type of competition that Duke faces every year?

Well, there's at least precedent. K used Chris Carrawell (6-6) against Tim Duncan in the game at Wake in 1997. And the keeper of the Holy Blackberry, Reggie Love (6-4, 220), was used effectively against 7-0 Brendan Haywood in the 2001 winning game at Chapel Hill after Boozer went down.

sagegrouse

OldSchool
03-18-2012, 08:30 PM
So the key issue is whether Mason returns. If he does, there's no reason to think the staff would need to resort to using Ryan at the 5, except for a few mpg at most, if at all. But if Mason leaves, then the 5 will likely by Ryan and Marshall.

If Mason leaves, I believe the starting 5 spot will be Marshall's to take if he can make me look smart by stepping up.

To me, there is a parallel with the Quinn situation. If Quinn can raise his defensive play and run the point on offense showing maturity, poise and good decision-making, the starting 1 spot is there for him to take, and I think he may be able to step into that role next season.

If Quinn can step up at the point and Marshall can step up at the 5 position, then IMO that gives us the highest ceiling next year in terms of potential.

If we are playing Tyler at point and Ryan at 5, we can win a lot of games but I don't see our ceiling being as high.

Even if Mason returns, having Marshall step up and be the first sub at the 5 position (and perhaps even sometimes playing MP3 at 5 and MP2 at 4) will still be important to realizing our potential.

loldevilz
03-18-2012, 09:05 PM
How do you figure that a guy 6'7" and 235 pounds, without much jumping ability at all, and without long arms, can play center effectively against the type of competition that Duke faces every year?

Richard Howell is 6-8 and of similar build. Frankly, Hairston is a better rebounder than Kelly and has the best technique of all of them. He uses his weight to get good position. I wouldn't want to see it either, but he could be a serviceable center, especially against smaller competition.

gumbomoop
03-18-2012, 09:06 PM
How do you figure that a guy 6'7" and 235 pounds, without much jumping ability at all, and without long arms, can play center effectively against the type of competition that Duke faces every year?

I don't prefer - at all - to have to depend on an undersized 5, but, if Mason departs, we pretty much know that Marshall will play some 5, but not likely 25 mpg. We pretty much know Alex will play most of his 20-25 mpg [??] at the 4.

We know Ryan and Josh are the other 2 bigs, or maybe "bigs." I'm thinking that when Ryan and Josh are the 2 bigs on the floor, they might well switch between the 4 and 5. Josh can't really play the 3/wing, so he's a sort of an outside-inside guy on O. On D, he could, arguably, guard certain 5s as well as Ryan. Josh has some muscle. He'll have to use it, and his footwork, effectively on D next year, whether guarding 4s or 5s.

davekay1971
03-18-2012, 09:31 PM
Richard Howell is 6-8 and of similar build. Frankly, Hairston is a better rebounder than Kelly and has the best technique of all of them. He uses his weight to get good position. I wouldn't want to see it either, but he could be a serviceable center, especially against smaller competition.

K's done more creative things in his time than starting a guy Hairston's size at center.

Look at it this way: if Mason leaves, our 4-5 is Kelly, Hairston, Marshall, and Alex. Alex is going to play a more outside-inside game, and Kelly is much more dangerous on offense when he's on the perimeter. Marshall is a classic 5. Hairston hasn't shown much more range than low post play and a medium range jumper. But he's an energetic defender and rebounder. I could very easily see K looking to rotate Hairston and Marshall at the 5, opting to keep Kelly and Murphy at the 4 (with Murphy also playing some 3) to maximize their offensive skillset.

All this underscores my view that Mason staying is crucially important. Mason gives us an All-ACC caliber starter at the 5, with Marshall to back him up. It allows Ryan and Hairston to play exclusively at the four, and allows Murphy to play more at the 3 along with G.

RockyMtDevil
03-18-2012, 09:42 PM
My fear is we are back here next year wondering what went wrong because we still have a ton of a. small guards who don't defend well b. Offensively unproductive big men who have had three years (in Mason's case) to develop one post move c. ZERO wing players (or at least none we actually play) d. we continue to be "Alarmingly unathletic" at the 1-4 position, relying heavily on tacticion basketball players e. Dribble, dribble, dribble, chunk a three offense.

My fear is that without the addition of a Jefferson or Muhommed, very few of these deficiencies are going to be answered by Marshall and Murphy. Yes, Sulaimon should help us with some athleticism and defense, but the glaring holes that made themselves all to easy to exploit in March appear to sadly still be lingering.

I am just tired of Duke having fewer athletes than Lehigh, VCU, Baylor, Ohio, NC State, etc.. We may have missed on too many recruits lately, but I find it difficult to believe we can't go into the 75-100 range and get a 6'6 or 6'7 slasher who can lock your butt down on defense, my god, everyteam in the tournament has 3 or four of them it seems, and here we are at home.

I don't believe K will allow this to repeat itself, but the roster is the roster, and nobody is expecting miracles, nor should they be...

CDu
03-18-2012, 09:59 PM
Sorry, but if our "centers" are Kelly and Marshall and our PF's are Murphy and Hairston, I don't think that frontcourt is deep, and I don't think it's championship-level good. Kelly struggled mightily against physical inside players -- at the 4.

And just who are these PF that just overpowered Kelly this year? Most of the PF we have faced are more athletic than bruising. Kelly's defEnsive struggles this year have been due to quickness.


Marshall is a complete unknown quantity. Yes, the redshirt year helped him mature physically, I'm sure. But remember that neither of his brothers was a big contributor in his first year, so I don't know what basis there is to believe Marshall will be either.

and how did those guys do in year 2? Because that is what Marshall will essentially be next year, even though he will technically be a freshman. I don't think he will be a star, but I think it is completely reasonable that he'd be useful as essentially a sophomore in terms of development.


As for the PF's in this scenario, Murphy is also unproven and by most accounts a natural 3 more than a 4. Yes, he may be able to play the 4 in our scheme, but he's likely to struggle against physical guys too.

Again, who are all these physical PF we are going to face? Few teams have bangers at PF. So I think your concerns are unfounded.

We will have 4-5 players 6'8" or taller, 1-2 of them will likely be All-ACC. Go look at some of the other ACC rosters. I would call thhat depth.

Des Esseintes
03-18-2012, 09:59 PM
My fear is we are back here next year wondering what went wrong because we still have a ton of a. small guards who don't defend well b. Offensively unproductive big men who have had three years (in Mason's case) to develop one post move c. ZERO wing players (or at least none we actually play) d. we continue to be "Alarmingly unathletic" at the 1-4 position, relying heavily on tacticion basketball players e. Dribble, dribble, dribble, chunk a three offense.

My fear is that without the addition of a Jefferson or Muhommed, very few of these deficiencies are going to be answered by Marshall and Murphy. Yes, Sulaimon should help us with some athleticism and defense, but the glaring holes that made themselves all to easy to exploit in March appear to sadly still be lingering.

I am just tired of Duke having fewer athletes than Lehigh, VCU, Baylor, Ohio, NC State, etc.. We may have missed on too many recruits lately, but I find it difficult to believe we can't go into the 75-100 range and get a 6'6 or 6'7 slasher who can lock your butt down on defense, my god, everyteam in the tournament has 3 or four of them it seems, and here we are at home.

I don't believe K will allow this to repeat itself, but the roster is the roster, and nobody is expecting miracles, nor should they be...

Yeah. You know who has good-sized speedy guards, a bevy of strong wings, athleticism all over the court, a dynamic offense that stresses attacking the basket as well as fine shooting, and the know-how to hit tourney season with a ton of momentum? MISSOURI. How can we be more like Missouri next year? That's your central question of the offseason right there. And like you, son, I'm not expecting a miracle.

dcar1985
03-18-2012, 10:56 PM
My fear is we are back here next year wondering what went wrong because we still have a ton of a. small guards who don't defend well b. Offensively unproductive big men who have had three years (in Mason's case) to develop one post move c. ZERO wing players (or at least none we actually play) d. we continue to be "Alarmingly unathletic" at the 1-4 position, relying heavily on tacticion basketball players e. Dribble, dribble, dribble, chunk a three offense.

My fear is that without the addition of a Jefferson or Muhommed, very few of these deficiencies are going to be answered by Marshall and Murphy. Yes, Sulaimon should help us with some athleticism and defense, but the glaring holes that made themselves all to easy to exploit in March appear to sadly still be lingering.

I am just tired of Duke having fewer athletes than Lehigh, VCU, Baylor, Ohio, NC State, etc.. We may have missed on too many recruits lately, but I find it difficult to believe we can't go into the 75-100 range and get a 6'6 or 6'7 slasher who can lock your butt down on defense, my god, everyteam in the tournament has 3 or four of them it seems, and here we are at home.

I don't believe K will allow this to repeat itself, but the roster is the roster, and nobody is expecting miracles, nor should they be...


Is that not what Mike is?? I'm not in the practices so I cant say why he didn't play but that's definitely his skill set. If we can pencil in Alex as playing 20-25 mins after not playing a minute this year then why is Mike G getting written off whens he's actually shown flashes of what we are so badly missing

tommy
03-19-2012, 12:45 AM
Well, there's at least precedent. K used Chris Carrawell (6-6) against Tim Duncan in the game at Wake in 1997. And the keeper of the Holy Blackberry, Reggie Love (6-4, 220), was used effectively against 7-0 Brendan Haywood in the 2001 winning game at Chapel Hill after Boozer went down.

sagegrouse

Although we won that game at Wake, Duncan did go for 26 on 11-of-13 shooting.

And in the game in Chapel Hill, Reggie Love only played 4 minutes. Casey Sanders got 11 and Matt Christensen (!) got 12.

UrinalCake
03-19-2012, 01:16 AM
I haven't seen Marshall play or anything but I suspect that his ceiling for next year realistically is about what Miles gave us this year. In reality he'll probably give us less. Miles was really underrated, we can't ignore the fact that we're losing him, and Marshall has zero experience except in practice. So to expect him to come in and be a dominant center is wishful thinking IMO. He has potential, but it takes time for big men to develop. So Assuming Mason comes back I think our front court will be very similar to what it was this year - everyone's a year older, but we "swap" Miles for Marshall.

I tend to agree with RockyMtDevil that the problems of this season don't appear to have any immediate solutions looking at next year's roster, unless Rasheed and Murphy turn out to be better than expected.

Des Esseintes
03-19-2012, 01:22 AM
I tend to agree with RockyMtDevil that the problems of this season don't appear to have any immediate solutions looking at next year's roster, unless Rasheed and Murphy turn out to be better than expected.

Internal development. Better injury luck. Three senior starters who averaged double digits this season. At least three new players. But other than that, I agree, the cupboard is bare.

ChicagoCrazy84
03-19-2012, 01:46 AM
I haven't seen Marshall play or anything but I suspect that his ceiling for next year realistically is about what Miles gave us this year. In reality he'll probably give us less. Miles was really underrated, we can't ignore the fact that we're losing him, and Marshall has zero experience except in practice. So to expect him to come in and be a dominant center is wishful thinking IMO. He has potential, but it takes time for big men to develop. So Assuming Mason comes back I think our front court will be very similar to what it was this year - everyone's a year older, but we "swap" Miles for Marshall.

I tend to agree with RockyMtDevil that the problems of this season don't appear to have any immediate solutions looking at next year's roster, unless Rasheed and Murphy turn out to be better than expected.


Better than expected? I am expecting big things from both Murphy and Sulaimon. You do realize Rasheed is the highest rated SG in the country? The guy may even be a better SG prospect than Austin and some scouts have said he is one of the most NBA ready players in the 2012 class. I'm not worried about either one of them.

My worry again is unfortunately our big men. And I say unfortunately because I feel like our question marks are ALWAYS OUR BIG MEN. We need to start getting consistent offensive production from the inside. If Mason comes back, yeah he would probably be that guy. What if he doesn't though? We're left with Marshall and Ryan? Josh Hairston? Who there can give you production on the inside? Both Alex Murphy and Ryan Kelly's games are more perimeter oriented and I didn't see enough out of Josh Hairston to think he could establish himself as a go to player on the low block. Ugh, around and around we go.

DukieTiger
03-19-2012, 02:12 AM
Some thoughts from reading this thread:

-First, while Seth Curry has his flaws I think it is foolish to question his value. His being in foul trouble hurt us big time against Lehigh. Last year against Arizona, him going down with an injury hurt as well. He's a valuable player, no question.

-Second, someone mentioned moving Wojo over to coach the guards. This is an interesting thing to consider. We have the shooting wiz coaching the guards, and the tough-nosed player coaching the bigs. I'd almost think that it truly would be a step back in the defensive minded direction to have Wojo work with the guards on his defense. There have been a number of players over this weekend on other teams that have made plays and played defense in a way that I wish this Duke team would have done more consistently this year. Maybe what really is needed is just to learn to be more hard-nosed, more intense.

-I don't really want to comment on the things that are up in the air, like what our post rotation will be next year. But I just want to say, generally, that I hope Duke gets back to being a dominant defensive team. This year had a lot of offensive-minded players and that's not a bad thing. But the perfect thing to compliment all those shooters is a defense that can absolutely lock a team down, crank up the pressure, force turnovers, etc. We just didn't do that, and I feel that the opportunity is there next year to really turn up the heat again. We will be deeper, hopefully more athletic, but definitely have more versatility with the moving parts... the deep depth that Coach K likes to have. Between Sulaimon, Murphy, Gbinije, and hopefully Jefferson, Rivers and/or Shabazz- that's multiple guys who can fit at multiple positions. This year, I felt like we were forced into too many lineups with weaknesses (too short, not enough ball handling, etc.) and having versatility helps that... a lot.

-Finally, I truly feel like this loss is really going to drive next year's team. I feel like next year's team is going to be an angry bee's nest. Maybe that's what's needed. This team was filled with a lot of nice, likable guys. That's not a bad thing. It's good for our players to have fun with one another and to be nice guys and fun-loving guys. But I expect to see some anger next year, some killer instinct. And really, isn't that what we've lacked all year, since we blew a 15 point lead at home to Belmont and squeaked out of there with a win? I hope that killer instinct is what grows out of this depressing loss. Right now, for all we know, we only lose 1 player- and the rest of them are hopefully brooding over the loss, the way people are talking about Duke, etc.

loldevilz
03-19-2012, 02:40 AM
-Finally, I truly feel like this loss is really going to drive next year's team. I feel like next year's team is going to be an angry bee's nest. Maybe that's what's needed. This team was filled with a lot of nice, likable guys. That's not a bad thing. It's good for our players to have fun with one another and to be nice guys and fun-loving guys. But I expect to see some anger next year, some killer instinct. And really, isn't that what we've lacked all year, since we blew a 15 point lead at home to Belmont and squeaked out of there with a win? I hope that killer instinct is what grows out of this depressing loss. Right now, for all we know, we only lose 1 player- and the rest of them are hopefully brooding over the loss, the way people are talking about Duke, etc.

I just really don't think it works like that. Last year's blowout loss to Arizona should have driven this year's team. They need to want it for themselves and themselves only. Its not for the fans who want "another championship". Or to live up to the "Duke standard". They should want to win so they can have a ring.

DukieTiger
03-19-2012, 04:50 AM
I just really don't think it works like that. Last year's blowout loss to Arizona should have driven this year's team. They need to want it for themselves and themselves only. Its not for the fans who want "another championship". Or to live up to the "Duke standard". They should want to win so they can have a ring.

It's a little different since that team lost its heart and soul. But I feel like you and I are saying the same thing- that they need to find a way to want it more.

cspan37421
03-19-2012, 09:03 AM
I just really don't think it works like that. Last year's blowout loss to Arizona should have driven this year's team.

Have to agree. We'll largely have the same personnel next year. Also, you're right, if drive and motivation were really factors, and if bad losses turn players into driven, angry bees, then that AZ loss should have done it for this year's team. Or after the Temple loss, or the UNC blowout. If those didn't do it, I don't see that changing next year. But it may not be a mater of anger or drive. It could be skill, speed, height, chemistry, focus.

DukieInBrasil
03-19-2012, 10:05 AM
-I don't really want to comment on the things that are up in the air, like what our post rotation will be next year. But I just want to say, generally, that I hope Duke gets back to being a dominant defensive team. This year had a lot of offensive-minded players and that's not a bad thing. But the perfect thing to compliment all those shooters is a defense that can absolutely lock a team down, crank up the pressure, force turnovers, etc. We just didn't do that, and I feel that the opportunity is there next year to really turn up the heat again. We will be deeper, hopefully more athletic, but definitely have more versatility with the moving parts... the deep depth that Coach K likes to have. Between Sulaimon, Murphy, Gbinije, and hopefully Jefferson, Rivers and/or Shabazz- that's multiple guys who can fit at multiple positions. This year, I felt like we were forced into too many lineups with weaknesses (too short, not enough ball handling, etc.) and having versatility helps that... a lot.


Are any of those guys actually versatile though? Rivers could become a versatile G, if he stays. His passing and recognition improved alot through the year, so it's reasonable to expect some improvement there.
In my view, the versatility will actually stem from getting more PT for our only true PG, Cook. Thornton will certainly play, and hopefully improve in all areas with maturation, but Cook is a real playmaker on O, while TT is more a caretaker. We lacked good ball distribution this year and as a result had a non-versatile offense. Sometimes the lack of versatility on O wasn't a problem cuz we were shooting well. When we lost, it was b/c there was no way to create offense w/o jump shots.

Kedsy
03-19-2012, 10:09 AM
...what most of us with a decent amount of basketball knowledge are requesting is the addition of 1-2 athletic wing players who can take their man off the dribble, finish at the rim and defend their man on an island.

Most of us are requesting this? Who are we requesting it from?

CDu
03-19-2012, 10:37 AM
It seems like the concerns all season this year were as follows (in no particular order):
- lack of size, quickness, and ballhandling in the backcourt
- lack of quickness in the frontcourt (especially at the PF spot against quicker PF)
- too much reliance on the 3pt shot
- inability to prevent dribble penetration
- difficulty forcing turnovers and thus easy points off turnovers

The guy most likely to leave (Rivers) only magnifies those issues, because he was the tallest, quickest, best ballhandler, and one of the best man-to-man defenders among our perimeter guys. The remaining guys were either very small (Cook, Thornton, Curry) or lacking in ballhandling/creating ability (Thornton, Dawkins, and at times Curry), or weak defensively (Cook, Dawkins). Sulaimon may or may not address some of these areas, but he's a freshman and I REALLY doubt he'll be as good next year as Rivers was this year. So unless we see marked improvements from the returning guys or a significant change in approach, a lot of the same issues we saw this year will be there next year too.

We do add a versatile wing/forward in Murphy. And maybe Gbinije makes strides. If they could make enough progress to unseat some of the current regulars, we'd have the versatile, athletic, tall wing defenders that we lacked this year. But that doesn't really address the ballhandling/playmaking concerns.

If Rivers and Mason return, I'd be interested to see what a rotation of Rivers, Curry, Dawkins/Gbinije, Kelly, Mason, Cook/Thornton, Gbinije/Dawkins, Murphy, and Marshall could bring to the table. Of course, that leaves virtually no minutes for Sulaimon and very limited minutes for Hairston and one of Cook, Thornton, Gbinije, or Dawkins. But it'd be a tall, athletic squad with some good shooters and slashers. Of course, that would depend upon the development of Gbinije and Murphy, which is a question mark at the moment. If only Mason returns, I think we're looking at Cook/Thornton, Curry, Dawkins/Gbinije, Kelly, Mason, with Cook/Thornton, Murphy, Gbinije/Dawkins/Sulaimon, and Marshall. Of course, that will also leave virtually no minutes for one of either Sulaimon, Gbinije, or Dawkins and very few minutes for Hairston. If neither Mason nor Rivers return, then we have Cook/Thornton, Curry, Dawkins/Gbinije, Murphy/Hairston, and Kelly, with Cook/Thornton, Sulaimon/Gbinije/Dawkins, Murphy/Hairston, and Marshall on the bench. In that scenario, the only odd man out becomes one of Sulaimon, Gbinije, or Dawkins. Of course, that's assuming a 9-man rotation, which has not historically been Coach K's M.O. So we'll see.

In any case, we'll again have lots of theoretical depth (too much to even get all of our main recruits on the floor regularly), but certainly lots of questions. We'll have a variety of skill sets at our disposal (a playmaking PG, a taller perimeter player, an athletic but undersized PF, size and depth up front, lots of shooters). It's just that we'd still have mostly one-dimensional guys with some glaring limitations (unless they dramatically improve).

Granted, we'll likely be good enough to finish in the top 3 in the ACC (NC State could be really good next year and FSU and UNC will probably also be strong) and win 25 games pretty easily. So even with all of the questions, we'll be really good. It's just a question of whether or not we'll be good enough to mask our deficiencies to the extent that we did in 2010.

dyedwab
03-19-2012, 10:52 AM
It seems like the concerns all season this year were as follows (in no particular order):
- lack of size, quickness, and ballhandling in the backcourt
- lack of quickness in the frontcourt (especially at the PF spot against quicker PF)
- too much reliance on the 3pt shot
- inability to prevent dribble penetration
- difficulty forcing turnovers and thus easy points off turnovers



Actually, I think there was one bigger concern all season - and that was a lack of consistent focus, which led to inexplicable unforced errors on both offense and defense, and exacerbated some of the physical shortcoming you outlined.

It has seemed to me that the best use of our the Plumlees, who are extremely fast north-south runners and great leapers for big men, would have been to run a lot. We didn't. Part of that was our lack of ability to create turnovers. But many times, even with a chance to fast break, we slowed up in the backcourts and ran half court sets. That suggests to me that the coaching staff didn't trust our players decision making on the break enough to loose the reins. Part of that was Tyler playing so much point guard - but that was to compensate for other problems.

So my hope two initial hopes for next year are 1) An improved mental game - meaning improved communication, improved focus and improved intensity and 2) Tyler being able to consistently hit outside shots - because teams need to pay when he's left open (and there is a precedent for this at Duke - See Wojo, '98)

superdave
03-19-2012, 10:57 AM
If Mason and Miles couldn't contain guys like zeller, what makes you think they wouldn't go to town on ryan? He's not strong enough to guard the 5, and probably will never be. Z could get away with it becuase he was giant...and pretty strong...He's plenty fast....I'm not sure there's a more mobile 4 in the conference....

Fortunately, Mister Zeller's college career will be ending shortly. We'll have to worry about guarding McAdoo, Richard Howell and Ryan Anderson though. I'm assuming Henson goes pro.

I think Ryan Kelly can be a 1st team All-ACC performer next year. I think rebounding will be an issue for him, but if we are larger at the 3 next year, that will help mitigate the problem. Josh needs to get his rebounding hard hat ready. Alex and Silent G should be ready to go too!

CDu
03-19-2012, 11:05 AM
Actually, I think there was one bigger concern all season - and that was a lack of consistent focus, which led to inexplicable unforced errors on both offense and defense, and exacerbated some of the physical shortcoming you outlined.

Totally agree. That area is another one that exists in the players that are returning. Hopefully the returning players improve in all areas, though some of those areas are easier to address than others.


Fortunately, Mister Zeller's college career will be ending shortly. We'll have to worry about guarding McAdoo, Richard Howell and Ryan Anderson though. I'm assuming Henson goes pro.

I think Ryan Kelly can be a 1st team All-ACC performer next year. I think rebounding will be an issue for him, but if we are larger at the 3 next year, that will help mitigate the problem. Josh needs to get his rebounding hard hat ready. Alex and Silent G should be ready to go too!

Yeah, I'm firmly in the camp that thinks Kelly would be even better at C than he is at PF. He'd no longer have issues with quickness, and he'd be a matchup nightmare on the offensive end. And I think people are really overstating his issues with stronger players. He didn't really have to guard those guys very often this year. Instead, he was almost exclusively having to guard players quicker than him (pretty much every PF he faced this year had a quickness edge over him - very few could outmuscle him). With another year of strength training and working on his post game, I think he'd be a 2nd Team All-ACC guy at the 5. I think he'll be a 2nd or 3rd team All-ACC guy regardless. And things could get even better for him if Henson and Leslie join Zeller, Scott, and James as outgoing members of the conference.

But again, I think there's a very real possibility (I'd even speculate greater than 50% chance) that the center spot will be manned by a pair of Plumlees. So it may not even matter whether or not Kelly can play the 5.

unexpected
03-19-2012, 11:46 AM
I hate these threads. They ignore what we know to be true, and throw up pie in the sky projections - arm length? really?

These are things we know to be true, that have proven themselves out over the past season and in years past:

1) K does not care how tall you are. If you can play, you can play. In the past, we have seen Reggie Love, Shane Battier, and even DeMarcus Nelson as PF's. K does not pick positions based on height.

2) K prefers playing skill players over "potential" players. Unless an incoming freshman is an all-wordly recruit, (see: Luol Deng, Josh McRoberts, Austin Rivers for recent memory), unless it is out of dire positional need, K is not going to go "over" an existing player to play some freshman.

Those suggesting that Rasheed Sulaimon is going to come in next year and take over the SG spot need to reality check. Rasheed is a good recruit, not a great recruit. I expect him to sit on the bench his first year. There's nothing wrong with that. Nolan Smith pretty much sat on the bench his first year too. People expected Gbinije to come in this year, start from day 1 at the SF spot (we can have seth curry coming in off the bench!) and guard harrison barnes and lead us to championship glory.

3) The only caveat emptor I've seen the #2: If you can shoot the 3-ball, you will play. This is how Redick, Paulus, Scheyer, Kelly, and Dawkins all got significant PT their freshman years. Nolan Smith? not a great shooter 3 pt shooter (thought made significant progress as the years progressed) so he didn't play. Gbinjie? Not a great 3 point shooter, so he doesn't play. I expect that as he'll learn the system more, his minutes will improve.

Given all these things:

Alex Murphy and Marshall Plumlee - no one has seen a minute of basketball from them. To expect them to come in and be incredible - this is setting the bar too high IMO. If they were incredible, they would have played this year. My expectation from MP3 is a freshman year MP1 or freshman year MP2 - because that is what he'll be. I expect both's ceilings next year to be "capable" on the upper end. Murphy's may be higher, but the expectations regarding MP3 are out of control. Here is a center, who was not highly recruited, who was incredibly small coming into college, and now all of sudden is expected to be capable of guarding Zeller?

My opinion - if Rivers stays, and we don't get Bazz, we are still the same flawed team we are this year. One key aspect this year that I felt like we missed is FT's. I'm uncomfortable with Rivers playing a large portion of the offense if he continues to only hit 65% from the FT line. Great Duke guards take care of the charity stripe (see: Redick and Jon Scheyer). The Lehigh game, the FSU game, the Miami game - they take on a totally different complexion if we could simply learn to hit the FT's.

If Rivers goes (which I think is more likely) and we don't get Bazz (which is a toss up at this point) - look out and keep your expectations in check. We're not going to be that great next year (by duke standards). We'll have to shoot the 3 to score points, and we'll have a crying big man need. We'll probably be a 4-5 seed, maybe make some noise in the dance, but that's okay with me, b/c we're doing it the Duke way and laying up an excellent, athletic foundation for future years. Gbinije, Murphy, and Rasheed are all athletic, smart basketball players who could be really something by their junior and senior years.

dcar1985
03-19-2012, 11:47 AM
The one glaring problem to me was the lack of intensity brought by the team this year...that HAS to be addressed, it came across as if at time we we're juts playing cause we were already out there and not that we wanted to actually take it to our opponent. They're are way too many passive attitudes on this team, Tyler was the only one who showed that fire consistently and unfortunately his skill level doesn't match his heart but he has that dog in him that we need, we just needed it from others also.....Watching the end of Kansas game specifically last night and just watching the emotion and intensity coming from Robinson, and Taylor among others after a big play down the stretch...you could see how much they wanted it, it wasn't about talent or rankings or stats it was all about what's inside. For whatever reason no one seemed to be able to get that out of this team, not K, not Tyler it just wasn't there...hopefully next year being seniors Seth, Ryan, Dre, and Mason (maybe) get that sense of urgency and desire to really leave their mark on the program.

roywhite
03-19-2012, 11:58 AM
In my view, the key to next year's team will lie in the class of 2013 (and I'm guessing Mason returns).

Off-hand, I can't recall a Duke class which has had a harder time establishing some consistency.
Mason, Dre, Seth, Ryan---each can and has had big games, and had other games where they almost totally disappeared.

Mason---got to work on hitting a 10 to 15 foot jump shot.
Dre --- got to improve his ball handling, continue to improve on defense, and play at a more even emotional pitch
Seth --- ball handling, leadership development, react better to big game pressure
Ryan -- will need more rebounding, avoid periods of passivity

For all -- will they step up and take ownership of this team?

A good team can be developed with more reliance on underclassman, but the most direct path to success is by better play from the rising seniors.

mo.st.dukie
03-19-2012, 12:00 PM
The one glaring problem to me was the lack of intensity brought by the team this year...that HAS to be addressed, it came across as if at time we we're juts playing cause we were already out there and not that we wanted to actually take it to our opponent. They're are way too many passive attitudes on this team, Tyler was the only one who showed that fire consistently and unfortunately his skill level doesn't match his heart but he has that dog in him that we need, we just needed it from others also.....Watching the end of Kansas game specifically last night and just watching the emotion and intensity coming from Robinson, and Taylor among others after a big play down the stretch...you could see how much they wanted it, it wasn't about talent or rankings or stats it was all about what's inside. For whatever reason no one seemed to be able to get that out of this team, not K, not Tyler it just wasn't there...hopefully next year being seniors Seth, Ryan, Dre, and Mason (maybe) get that sense of urgency and desire to really leave their mark on the program.

Sometimes you have to have your heart broken to really appreciate things. The junior class pretty much road the coattails of the group that came before them. They had success very early on without much of the pain. The group before them suffered some heart breaking losses and was ripped to shreds by the media and fans. That created a certain culture with that group. They understood how difficult it actually was to win and how important it was to bring that intensity and emotion for 40 minutes EVERY SINGLE GAME. They didn't always understand that but by the time the 2010 season rolled around it was just a part of who that team was. That culture just wasn't there for this group. This loss is painful, embarrassing, etc. but hopefully they use it to get better.

dukedoc
03-19-2012, 12:03 PM
In my view, the key to next year's team will lie in the class of 2013 (and I'm guessing Mason returns).

Off-hand, I can't recall a Duke class which has had a harder time establishing some consistency.
Mason, Dre, Seth, Ryan---each can and has had big games, and had other games where they almost totally disappeared.

Mason---got to work on hitting a 10 to 15 foot jump shot.
Dre --- got to improve his ball handling, continue to improve on defense, and play at a more even emotional pitch
Seth --- ball handling, leadership development, react better to big game pressure
Ryan -- will need more rebounding, avoid periods of passivity

For all -- will they step up and take ownership of this team?

A good team can be developed with more reliance on underclassman, but the most direct path to success is by better play from the rising seniors.

Well, given that we had only Miles as a true senior this year, those guys had a bit of a dry run this year at taking the mantle of leadership. We saw some spurts of leadership here and there, but not enough. That either bodes poorly for next year, or they will take this year's dry run, build upon it, and truly lead next year. I honestly don't think any of their personalities/temperaments are those of natural leaders, but leadership can be taught/cultivated to some extent, so hopefully that'll happen under K's guidance.

CDu
03-19-2012, 12:06 PM
3) The only caveat emptor I've seen the #2: If you can shoot the 3-ball, you will play. This is how Redick, Paulus, Scheyer, Kelly, and Dawkins all got significant PT their freshman years. Nolan Smith? not a great shooter 3 pt shooter (thought made significant progress as the years progressed) so he didn't play. Gbinjie? Not a great 3 point shooter, so he doesn't play. I expect that as he'll learn the system more, his minutes will improve.

This is incorrect. Redick got playing time because he was one of the best players on that 2002-2003 team (which was very inexperienced and lacking in proven perimeter scorers). Paulus got playing time because he was (theoretically at least) the only true PG on the roster. In fact, he wasn't even a very good 3pt shooter as a freshman (31%). Dawkins and Kelly only got PT mainly because we literally didn't have other bodies. Dawkins was our third guard, and Kelly was our 9th man. It had nothing to do with 3pt shooting ability.

Conversely, we've had guys who could shoot that just didn't play. Taylor King, for example, was a very capable 3pt shooter, but got buried on the bench.


Alex Murphy and Marshall Plumlee - no one has seen a minute of basketball from them. To expect them to come in and be incredible - this is setting the bar too high IMO. If they were incredible, they would have played this year. My expectation from MP3 is a freshman year MP1 or freshman year MP2 - because that is what he'll be. I expect both's ceilings next year to be "capable" on the upper end.

First, I don't think anyone is expecting Marshall to come in and be incredible. But I disagree with your assessment that we should expect freshman year Miles or freshman year Mason. Marshall will only be a freshman in terms of game experience and eligibility. But he'll have a year's worth of additional physical and emotional maturity, an additional year's worth of strength training with Duke's training staff, and an additional year's worth of practice against two ACC-caliber centers, and an additional year's worth of familiarity with Coach K's defensive system.

Many people continue to discount these things with regard to redshirts. And frankly it's understandable given how rare it is to see redshirts in college basketball. But the differences between a redshirt freshman and a true freshman are vast. It's possible that Marshall only resembles the freshman year results of Mason and Miles. But I think it's much more reasonable to hope for at least sophomore year Miles (as Marshall was a more highly-regarded recruit than Miles) and dream for sophomore year Mason (knowing that Mason was a more highly-regarding recruit than Marshall). That's much closer to the reality, in my opinion.


Murphy's may be higher, but the expectations regarding MP3 are out of control. Here is a center, who was not highly recruited, who was incredibly small coming into college, and now all of sudden is expected to be capable of guarding Zeller?

I'm not sure I follow your logic at all here. First, Marshall wasn't "incredibly small" coming into college. He was 6'11" 225. That's on the thin size, but it's not that thin for a freshman big man. Zeller was 7'0" 250. That's not a huge disparity. And I'd expect at least 10 pounds more on Marshall's frame next year. Second, Zeller isn't going to be playing for UNC next year. So setting the bar at Zeller seems silly. In fact, there could very well be a dearth of great centers next year in the ACC if Henson and Reggie Johnson join Zeller and James in leaving.

roywhite
03-19-2012, 12:10 PM
Well, given that we had only Miles as a true senior this year, those guys had a bit of a dry run this year at taking the mantle of leadership. We saw some spurts of leadership here and there, but not enough. That either bodes poorly for next year, or they will take this year's dry run, build upon it, and truly lead next year. I honestly don't think any of their personalities/temperaments are those of natural leaders, but leadership can be taught/cultivated to some extent, so hopefully that'll happen under K's guidance.

Agree with your comments on leadership; it's important, but may not happen with this group.

Even without the leadership facet, it seems vital that they play more consistently and improve.

dcar1985
03-19-2012, 12:35 PM
This is incorrect. Redick got playing time because he was one of the best players on that 2002-2003 team (which was very inexperienced and lacking in proven perimeter scorers). Paulus got playing time because he was (theoretically at least) the only true PG on the roster. In fact, he wasn't even a very good 3pt shooter as a freshman (31%). Dawkins and Kelly only got PT mainly because we literally didn't have other bodies. Dawkins was our third guard, and Kelly was our 9th man. It had nothing to do with 3pt shooting ability.

Conversely, we've had guys who could shoot that just didn't play. Taylor King, for example, was a very capable 3pt shooter, but got buried on the bench.



First, I don't think anyone is expecting Marshall to come in and be incredible. But I disagree with your assessment that we should expect freshman year Miles or freshman year Mason. Marshall will only be a freshman in terms of game experience and eligibility. But he'll have a year's worth of additional physical and emotional maturity, an additional year's worth of strength training with Duke's training staff, and an additional year's worth of practice against two ACC-caliber centers, and an additional year's worth of familiarity with Coach K's defensive system.

Many people continue to discount these things with regard to redshirts. And frankly it's understandable given how rare it is to see redshirts in college basketball. But the differences between a redshirt freshman and a true freshman are vast. It's possible that Marshall only resembles the freshman year results of Mason and Miles. But I think it's much more reasonable to hope for at least sophomore year Miles (as Marshall was a more highly-regarded recruit than Miles) and dream for sophomore year Mason (knowing that Mason was a more highly-regarding recruit than Marshall). That's much closer to the reality, in my opinion.



I'm not sure I follow your logic at all here. First, Marshall wasn't "incredibly small" coming into college. He was 6'11" 225. That's on the thin size, but it's not that thin for a freshman big man. Zeller was 7'0" 250. That's not a huge disparity. And I'd expect at least 10 pounds more on Marshall's frame next year. Second, Zeller isn't going to be playing for UNC next year. So setting the bar at Zeller seems silly. In fact, there could very well be a dearth of great centers next year in the ACC if Henson and Reggie Johnson join Zeller and James in leaving.


a 25 lb difference in muscle when your banging down low is definitely a huge disparity....

Matches
03-19-2012, 01:09 PM
Sometimes you have to have your heart broken to really appreciate things. The junior class pretty much road the coattails of the group that came before them. They had success very early on without much of the pain. The group before them suffered some heart breaking losses and was ripped to shreds by the media and fans. That created a certain culture with that group. They understood how difficult it actually was to win and how important it was to bring that intensity and emotion for 40 minutes EVERY SINGLE GAME. They didn't always understand that but by the time the 2010 season rolled around it was just a part of who that team was. That culture just wasn't there for this group. This loss is painful, embarrassing, etc. but hopefully they use it to get better.

This is IMO a very salient point. It's always a delicate situation when you have underclassmen who are (arguably) more talented than upperclassmen who have won in the past. UNC went through that in 1994 with Wallace/ Stackhouse/ McInnis supplanting some of the guys who won in 1993.

We have a lot of upperclassmen who have rings, and who are good players, but none who are team-carrying stars. It's hard for any coach to mix those guys with a freshman who immediately becomes the focus of the offense.

CDu
03-19-2012, 01:22 PM
a 25 lb difference in muscle when your banging down low is definitely a huge disparity....

Thankfully that 25lb difference is likely to be only a 10-15 pound difference next year. I highly doubt Marshall hasn't already added weight this year, and I'd be even more surprised if he didn't add even more weight over the summer and fall. By comparison, Mason is listed as only 10lbs heavier, and I only remember one game in which he was really outmuscled (Reggie Johnson). In the other games in which Mason struggled, he was beaten by positioning and skills. Zeller most certainly didn't outmuscle Mason. I'd say a 10lb difference when you're talking about 6'10" guys is basically negligible.

60's Devil
03-19-2012, 02:08 PM
This is a thread about next season. What "BIG" of that caliber do you think is available at this time in the recruiting process? And what do you mean by "acquiring"? You think we can make a trade with a Big East team, or do you think there's an aisle at Best Buy where we can purchase such a commodity?

Like it or not, next season our center is going to be Mason (if he returns) or Ryan (if Mason doesn't return). Whichever one it is, I believe he will be 2nd team All-ACC, or maybe 1st team. Despite that, I also predict people on DBR will spend most of the season complaining about him.

Very funny? If they have got one at Best Buy we had better hightail it over there. While in the store, let's look for a lightning quick point guard who can penetrate and and stop penetration. Maybe all these lesser teams we see in the tournament with great teams and no McD AA's have been shopping at Best Buy.

unexpected
03-19-2012, 02:20 PM
This is incorrect. Redick got playing time because he was one of the best players on that 2002-2003 team (which was very inexperienced and lacking in proven perimeter scorers). Paulus got playing time because he was (theoretically at least) the only true PG on the roster. In fact, he wasn't even a very good 3pt shooter as a freshman (31%). Dawkins and Kelly only got PT mainly because we literally didn't have other bodies. Dawkins was our third guard, and Kelly was our 9th man. It had nothing to do with 3pt shooting ability.

Conversely, we've had guys who could shoot that just didn't play. Taylor King, for example, was a very capable 3pt shooter, but got buried on the bench.

First, I don't think anyone is expecting Marshall to come in and be incredible. But I disagree with your assessment that we should expect freshman year Miles or freshman year Mason. Marshall will only be a freshman in terms of game experience and eligibility. But he'll have a year's worth of additional physical and emotional maturity, an additional year's worth of strength training with Duke's training staff, and an additional year's worth of practice against two ACC-caliber centers, and an additional year's worth of familiarity with Coach K's defensive system.

Many people continue to discount these things with regard to redshirts. And frankly it's understandable given how rare it is to see redshirts in college basketball. But the differences between a redshirt freshman and a true freshman are vast. It's possible that Marshall only resembles the freshman year results of Mason and Miles. But I think it's much more reasonable to hope for at least sophomore year Miles (as Marshall was a more highly-regarded recruit than Miles) and dream for sophomore year Mason (knowing that Mason was a more highly-regarding recruit than Marshall). That's much closer to the reality, in my opinion.



I'm not sure I follow your logic at all here. First, Marshall wasn't "incredibly small" coming into college. He was 6'11" 225. That's on the thin size, but it's not that thin for a freshman big man. Zeller was 7'0" 250. That's not a huge disparity. And I'd expect at least 10 pounds more on Marshall's frame next year. Second, Zeller isn't going to be playing for UNC next year. So setting the bar at Zeller seems silly. In fact, there could very well be a dearth of great centers next year in the ACC if Henson and Reggie Johnson join Zeller and James in leaving.

1) I would argue that during his first two years, Redick was not the best player on the team. I'm not sure where you're getting your stats from (http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/jj-redick-1.html). This seems to say that Redick was a fairly consistent 3pt shooter throughout his career. Dahntay Jones and Chris Duhon were the best players on that freshman year team. Dahntay was a BEAST that year - a very capable scorer, and wasn't Duhon pre-season NPOY?

Don't overlook Daniel Ewing from that team either. He was quicker, as well as a better defender than Redick that year. I would argue that Redick got the starting nod simply b/c of his 3 point ability. Redick will be the first to tell you that he was not in the best of shape his first two years (he trimmed down from 210 to 195) and was not a great defender. Let's not conflate the player he would become (one of the greatest Duke basketball players of all time) with the player he was.

Paulus: Paulus was not the only true PG on the roster. We also had the very capable Sean Dockery. Dockery was a MUCH better defender and MUCH quicker. He was also a highly touted recruit (in fact, Dockery's recruiting line is very similar to Rasheed Sulaimon's), and there was much discussion, even on these very boards, on who would be a better start. Dockery though, was never a great shooter, and did not have nearly the same level of court vision that Paulus had, so Paulus started.

Taylor King: King had multiple issues, his talent notwithstanding. When his 3 shot was falling, he got playing time. When his 3 shot was not, he sat. A highly-touted shooter, I would argue that if he kept scoring, he would have kept playing- but when his shot was not falling, he seemed unwilling to make the adjustments required (play hard d, have a positive mentality) needed to stay on the floor. I don't think correlation equals causation with this one - esp since he ended up as a basketball vagabond.

2) Re: redshirts. I've seen sites where Marshall is listed as 7'0", 200 lb coming into college. Regardless of his weight then and now, Marshall has put on significant lbs and literally has to learn to play in a new body. This is a big adjustment. Red shirts, as you said, are incredibly rare in college hoops, and absolutely no one knows how good marshall and alex were before they red-shirted, so I think it's totally acceptable to treat them as normal freshman. I think it's unfair to simply say "the difference between a redshirt freshman and a regular freshman is vast" - we simply do not know, there have not been enough datapoints to say whether it is true or not. Given that we can't "prove" whether you're right or I'm wrong, I would rather set a low bar, and let them exceed it, than set too high of expectations for them.

We do have a data point re: a year off - Seth Curry. Seth Curry is a great player, but pretty much the same player that he was at Liberty. His transfer year didn't dramatically transform his game.

As far as centers go, you may find this other parallel rather interesting. Wisconsin's Brian Butch was a McDonald's All-American center, who elected to redshirt his freshman year at UW in order to get physically stronger. His redshirt freshman year stat line: 10 min/game of action with 3.6 ppg, 2.5 reb/game. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Butch) Hardly otherwordly. He turned into a competent center by his senior year, however, and averaged 12/10 during his final campaign.

Kedsy
03-19-2012, 02:33 PM
These are things we know to be true...

3) The only caveat emptor I've seen the #2...

"Caveat emptor" means "let the buyer beware."


I'm uncomfortable with Rivers playing a large portion of the offense if he continues to only hit 65% from the FT line. Great Duke guards take care of the charity stripe (see: Redick and Jon Scheyer).

Austin shot 65.5% from the free throw line. Jason Williams shot 65.9% from the line our 2001 championship season. What was that you were saying about "great Duke guards"?


We'll probably be a 4-5 seed, maybe make some noise in the dance, but that's okay with me, b/c we're doing it the Duke way and laying up an excellent, athletic foundation for future years.

In the last 16 years we've only been lower than a #2 seed twice, in 2003 (#3) and 2007 (#6). So you think next season will be the 2nd worst season we've had since 1997? And "these are things we know to be true"? Unexpected, indeed.

Kedsy
03-19-2012, 02:42 PM
Paulus: Paulus was not the only true PG on the roster. We also had the very capable Sean Dockery. Dockery was a MUCH better defender and MUCH quicker. He was also a highly touted recruit (in fact, Dockery's recruiting line is very similar to Rasheed Sulaimon's), and there was much discussion, even on these very boards, on who would be a better start. Dockery though, was never a great shooter, and did not have nearly the same level of court vision that Paulus had, so Paulus started.

Dockery started that year as well. Although since he was a senior, that was not unexpected. Your version of the story doesn't make that much sense.

unexpected
03-19-2012, 02:45 PM
"Caveat emptor" means "let the buyer beware."



Austin shot 65.5% from the free throw line. Jason Williams shot 65.9% from the line our 2001 championship season. What was that you were saying about "great Duke guards"?



In the last 16 years we've only been lower than a #2 seed twice, in 2003 (#3) and 2007 (#6). So you think next season will be the 2nd worst season we've had since 1997? And "these are things we know to be true"? Unexpected, indeed.

Williams was surrounded by incredible talent - talent that the current team does not have. The 1999-2002 teams were able to dominate teams through sheer talent. Williams lack of FT ability was again, a source of much consternation on these boards. Given our limited ability to score, and our offensive woes that plagued us in the 2nd half of the season, we absolutely cannot afford to leave points at the charity stripe.

Given the information we have available - that lottery picks usually jump (so AR leaving), Mason at 50/50 and Bazz at <50%, then yes, I do think next year will be the 2nd worst season since 1997 - and there's nothing wrong with that. There remains much basketball to be played (duh!), but the season I outlined is respectable by any conventional measure. Personally I feel its better to keep our expectations in check, and be pleasantly surprised!

Insert lame pun about Kedsy here.

And if you want to bring up Williams, never forget Duke-Indiana in 2002: "Top-seeded Duke had a chance to tie it with 4.2 seconds left when Williams -- a unanimous All-American -- was fouled as he made a long 3-pointer to get the Blue Devils within a point. But he missed the free throw, and Carlos Boozer couldn't convert a follow shot."

CDu
03-19-2012, 02:53 PM
1) I would argue that during his first two years, Redick was not the best player on the team. I'm not sure where you're getting your stats from (http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/jj-redick-1.html). This seems to say that Redick was a fairly consistent 3pt shooter throughout his career. Dahntay Jones and Chris Duhon were the best players on that freshman year team. Dahntay was a BEAST that year - a very capable scorer, and wasn't Duhon pre-season NPOY?

I didn't say he was the best player on the team. I said he was one of the best. Jones was better at that point, for sure. Your memory is off on Duhon, though. Duhon was never, at any point, the preseason National Player of the Year (I'm not even sure that such an honor exists, but it wasn't him). He was expected to be all-ACC, but he struggled as a junior. He re-emerged as a terrific senior leader. Regardless, you misquoted my statement entirely. I said he was one of the best. And that's absolutely accurate. There is absolutely no question that Redick was one of the five best players on that team and he was one of the three best guards. I say this without any hesitation.

And anyway, I'm not sure why you're comparing Redick to Duhon, Ewing and Jones. All four players were played 27+ mpg. The guys who didn't play as much were Sanders, Williams (a freshman with very limited offensive game at that point), Randolph (injured and not ready defensively), Dockery (the backup PG and very limited offensively), and Melchionni (a role player), and guys even worse than that. So again - Redick played a lot because he had to play a lot. Same thing for Ewing, who wasn't quite the player he was as a junior and senior that year. Both guys played a lot because the team needed them to do so.


Paulus: Paulus was not the only true PG on the roster. We also had the very capable Sean Dockery. Dockery was a MUCH better defender and MUCH quicker. He was also a highly touted recruit (in fact, Dockery's recruiting line is very similar to Rasheed Sulaimon's), and there was much discussion, even on these very boards, on who would be a better start. Dockery though, was never a great shooter, and did not have nearly the same level of court vision that Paulus had, so Paulus started.

Again, you're drawing a false comparison. For one thing, Dockery had shown no inclination for running Coach K's offense. He was a terrific defender, but not a true PG. I'd also note that Dockery was in fact a regular starter on that team and averaged 30mpg, so your argument falls short there. Paulus didn't rob Dockery of playing time.

For another thing, Paulus wasn't actually the initial starter. Nelson was initially the starter, but he had two bad ankle injuries that sidelined him for several weeks and limited his effectiveness. So Paulus took over as the PG with Dockery moving to SG. So Paulus didn't get the start because of 3pt shooting.

Also, I see you're now expanding your definition to "court vision" as opposed to 3pt shooting. Which sort of proves my point. But the bigger point is that Paulus played and played a lot because he had to do so. Coach K needed a body, and he needed a playmaker. Nelson was injured and Dockery had not shown any of the playmaking skill set while at Duke. It was either Paulus, Melchionni, or Pocius.


2) Re: redshirts. I've seen sites where Marshall is listed as 7'0", 200 lb coming into college. Regardless of his weight then and now, Marshall has put on significant lbs and literally has to learn to play in a new body. This is a big adjustment. Red shirts, as you said, are incredibly rare in college hoops, and absolutely no one knows how good marshall and alex were before they red-shirted, so I think it's totally acceptable to treat them as normal freshman. I think it's unfair to simply say "the difference between a redshirt freshman and a regular freshman is vast" - we simply do not know, there have not been enough datapoints to say whether it is true or not. Given that we can't "prove" whether you're right or I'm wrong, I would rather set a low bar, and let them exceed it, than set too high of expectations for them.

Scout, Rivals, ESPN, CBS, and GoDuke, all listed him at 215 or more. I'm not sure where you got your 200lb from, but I'm guessing it was quite out of date. ESPN now lists him at 225. I'd expect him to be at 235 or more by next season. And I simply disagree that redshirts should be viewed the same as freshmen. I see no reason to treat redshirts as normal freshman. They are a year older. They are a year stronger. They have an additional year of college coaching. They have an additional year of familiarity with the Duke system. They have an additional year of acclimation with the college lifestyle, both athletically and academically. I see no reason to assume that they should be viewed as freshmen other than that the NCAA has allowed them that extra year of eligibility.


We do have a data point re: a year off - Seth Curry. Seth Curry is a great player, but pretty much the same player that he was at Liberty. His transfer year didn't dramatically transform his game.

As far as centers go, you may find this other parallel rather interesting. Wisconsin's Brian Butch was a McDonald's All-American center, who elected to redshirt his freshman year at UW in order to get physically stronger. His redshirt freshman year stat line: 10 min/game of action with 3.6 ppg, 2.5 reb/game. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Butch) Hardly otherwordly. He turned into a competent center by his senior year, however, and averaged 12/10 during his final campaign.

You are using a sample size of 1 in each case, and (in Butch's case) cherry picking an argument. I'd respond by saying that an N of 1 is hardly grounds for using a definitive reference.

unexpected
03-19-2012, 03:16 PM
I didn't say he was the best player on the team. I said he was one of the best. Jones was better at that point, for sure. Your memory is off on Duhon, though. Duhon was never, at any point, the preseason National Player of the Year (I'm not even sure that such an honor exists, but it wasn't him). He was expected to be all-ACC, but he struggled as a junior. He re-emerged as a terrific senior leader. Regardless, you misquoted my statement entirely. I said he was one of the best. And that's absolutely accurate. There is absolutely no question that Redick was one of the five best players on that team and he was one of the three best guards. I say this without any hesitation.

And anyway, I'm not sure why you're comparing Redick to Duhon, Ewing and Jones. All four players were played 27+ mpg. The guys who didn't play as much were Sanders, Williams (a freshman with very limited offensive game at that point), Randolph (injured and not ready defensively), Dockery (the backup PG and very limited offensively), and Melchionni (a role player), and guys even worse than that. So again - Redick played a lot because he had to play a lot. Same thing for Ewing, who wasn't quite the player he was as a junior and senior that year. Both guys played a lot because the team needed them to do so.



Again, you're drawing a false comparison. For one thing, Dockery had shown no inclination for running Coach K's offense. He was a terrific defender, but not a true PG. I'd also note that Dockery was in fact a regular starter on that team and averaged 30mpg, so your argument falls short there. Paulus didn't rob Dockery of playing time.

For another thing, Paulus wasn't actually the initial starter. Nelson was initially the starter, but he had two bad ankle injuries that sidelined him for several weeks and limited his effectiveness. So Paulus took over as the PG with Dockery moving to SG. So Paulus didn't get the start because of 3pt shooting.

Also, I see you're now expanding your definition to "court vision" as opposed to 3pt shooting. Which sort of proves my point. But the bigger point is that Paulus played and played a lot because he had to do so. Coach K needed a body, and he needed a playmaker. Nelson was injured and Dockery had not shown any of the playmaking skill set while at Duke. It was either Paulus, Melchionni, or Pocius.



Scout, Rivals, ESPN, CBS, and GoDuke, all listed him at 215 or more. I'm not sure where you got your 200lb from, but I'm guessing it was quite out of date. ESPN now lists him at 225. I'd expect him to be at 235 or more by next season. And I simply disagree that redshirts should be viewed the same as freshmen. I see no reason to treat redshirts as normal freshman. They are a year older. They are a year stronger. They have an additional year of college coaching. They have an additional year of familiarity with the Duke system. They have an additional year of acclimation with the college lifestyle, both athletically and academically. I see no reason to assume that they should be viewed as freshmen other than that the NCAA has allowed them that extra year of eligibility.



You are using a sample size of 1 in each case, and (in Butch's case) cherry picking an argument. I'd respond by saying that an N of 1 is hardly grounds for using a definitive reference.

I'm not trying to cherry pick. As we've said, a redshirt is incredibly rare. Butch was a recent example, of the same talent level (low-level McDonald's All-American), playing the same position. If you think, I'm cherry-picking, let's look for more examples.

I found this article on Big 10 redshirts (http://qctimes.com/sports/basketball/college/big-10/in-big-ten-redshirts-are-golden/article_e796ec88-5c27-11e1-857d-0019bb2963f4.html).

In addition to Butch, it lists 3 more big 10 red shirts (none of same talent level/skill as Butch).

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/player/_/id/45978/jordan-morgan
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/player/_/id/51053/anthony-johnson
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/player/_/id/51050/jonathan-graham

Of these, Jordan Morgan seems to have had the best success, but has seemed to regress this year (9 pts/5 rebounds to 7 pts/5 rebounds). Anthony johnson and jonathan graham - their results seem to be mixed at best. I would love to see examples of "more successful" redshirts. I say "more successful" because I believe the true measure of MP3 and Murphy's redshirt will come in years 4-5.

CDu
03-19-2012, 03:31 PM
I'm not trying to cherry pick. As we've said, a redshirt is incredibly rare. Butch was a recent example, of the same talent level (low-level McDonald's All-American), playing the same position. If you think, I'm cherry-picking, let's look for more examples.

I found this article on Big 10 redshirts (http://qctimes.com/sports/basketball/college/big-10/in-big-ten-redshirts-are-golden/article_e796ec88-5c27-11e1-857d-0019bb2963f4.html).

In addition to Butch, it lists 3 more big 10 red shirts (none of same talent level/skill as Butch).

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/player/_/id/45978/jordan-morgan
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/player/_/id/51053/anthony-johnson
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/player/_/id/51050/jonathan-graham

Of these, Jordan Morgan seems to have had the best success, but has seemed to regress this year (9 pts/5 rebounds to 7 pts/5 rebounds). Anthony johnson and jonathan graham - their results seem to be mixed at best. I would love to see examples of "more successful" redshirts. I say "more successful" because I believe the true measure of MP3 and Murphy's redshirt will come in years 4-5.

I wouldn't expect Marshall to be any better than what Jordan Morgan did. I might even expect a bit less. As I said, I'd expect somewhere between sophomore year Miles (16.4mpg, 5.2ppg, 4.8rpg) and sophomore year Mason (25.6mpg, 7.2ppg, 8.4rpg). I have no expectation that Marshall will threaten anyone's All-ACC list next year. And I completely agree that the real benefit comes in replacing Marshall's 2011-2012 with the possibility of Marshall's 2015-2016 (if he chooses to stay that long), while making his 2012-2015 seasons incrementally better as well by having spent a year preparing to play.

UrinalCake
03-19-2012, 03:35 PM
And if you want to bring up Williams, never forget Duke-Indiana in 2002: "Top-seeded Duke had a chance to tie it with 4.2 seconds left when Williams -- a unanimous All-American -- was fouled as he made a long 3-pointer to get the Blue Devils within a point. But he missed the free throw, and Carlos Boozer couldn't convert a follow shot."

"Couldn't convert a follow shot" might not be the most accurate description of the play around this board :)

unexpected
03-19-2012, 03:39 PM
I wouldn't expect Marshall to be any better than what Jordan Morgan did. I might even expect a bit less. As I said, I'd expect somewhere between sophomore year Miles (16.4mpg, 5.2ppg, 4.8rpg) and sophomore year Mason (25.6mpg, 7.2ppg, 8.4rpg). I have no expectation that Marshall will threaten anyone's All-ACC list next year. And I completely agree that the real benefit comes in replacing Marshall's 2011-2012 with the possibility of Marshall's 2015-2016 (if he chooses to stay that long), while making his 2012-2015 seasons incrementally better as well by having spent a year preparing to play.

I think these expectations are reasonable if we assume that MP2 is leaving. If MP2 stays, though, I'd expect MP2/Kelly/Hairston to see the bulk of the rotation minutes. I think soph year miles is possible if we go with a "line change" concept (which would be pretty neat, given the success we had with it in 2010!)

Needless to say, I think we're both in agreement that MP3 is not going to be the linchpin of next year's success.

OldSchool
03-19-2012, 03:42 PM
I watched the team closely this year. As far as I can tell, our problems were not poor chemistry or players not liking each other or lack of will to win. It was underdeveloped basketball IQ which manifested itself on the offensive end in poor timing and out-of-sync playing and a hesitating offense and on the defensive end with slow reaction and rotations to what the opponent was doing offensively. And offensively, even though looking over the season as a whole we had quite a potent offense (until the end of the season) it could have been much more powerful if we made better use of our personnel.

Some of our underdeveloped basketball IQ was inevitable, as our players were developing themselves. We saw how at the beginning of the year Austin struggled with turnovers and playing out of control and being flummoxed by a double or triple team and poor defense. He made a great improvement throughout the year. We gave heavy minutes to Tyler at the point and some to Quinn and both were new at that at the top college level. Seth was handed the ball and told to be a point guard for a while. So, there was always going to be a big learning curve.

If Austin and Mason come back, here is what I am please BEGGING the coaching staff to do.

Have our video guy string together lots and lots of clips of Nash and Amare Stoudemire in their Phoenix days or Deron Williams and Boozer in their Utah days running the pick and roll. JUST the pick and roll footage, please. No clips of Westbrook/Durant or of Dwight Howard. Focus on the pairings I suggested or similar ones.

Now, Austin, Mason, Collins and Wojo please sit down together for a couple of hours in front of a big screen and watch this. Watch how they roll and how the ball is delivered to the big. Then watch the big make his decisions and his moves. If there is an open lane, he takes a step or two and flushes. If not, he sees what the defense is doing and makes a decision accordingly.

People, we can run this play. With smart, veteran mobile bigs this is the way to attack. Not just planting our guy under the rim like Dwight Howard and bouncing the ball to him or only having him roll across the lane and throw up a hook shot.

People claim Mason is unathletic or has bad hands. That is utter nonsense. Everyone will look like they have bad hands when we don’t deliver the ball to our post guy in the paint until the defense is completely set and waiting for the entry pass and we bounce it to Mason’s knees making him fight a little guy for it.

We can do that with this personnel and college teams will find it extremely difficult to defend us on it. But it does not come without practice, practice, practice (cue Allen Iverson). You can’t run it once or twice and say “Mason fumbled the ball out of bounds” or “Mason charged” and give up on it. Practice it, these guys are athletic and skilled enough to pull it off and once they get the timing down and with experience, wow.

The way to use a mobile big like Mason and a devastating penetrator like Austin is the way the pros do it. Put the big in motion on the pick and roll. If run proficiently, it may well be the hardest play in basketball to defend. It wouldn’t surprise me if we could successfully run this play with Seth or Quinn handling the ball and Ryan as well.

Someone will scoff and say “Austin isn’t Deron Williams and Mason isn’t Amare Stoudemire.” Yeah, okay, but we also aren’t trying to run our plays against defenders like Kobe and Garnett, so they don’t need to be.

This doesn’t mean we give up on three-point shooting or Austin taking it to rack himself. But it would supply a missing key dimension to our offense and give us needed balance.

azzefkram
03-19-2012, 03:48 PM
Austin shot 65.5% from the free throw line. Jason Williams shot 65.9% from the line our 2001 championship season. What was that you were saying about "great Duke guards"?



Jay Williams converted over 50% of his two point shot attempts and was significantly better at finishing through contact. I'd take 65% of and 1's over 65% of shooting two.

superdave
03-19-2012, 03:58 PM
We should start making people sign their posts about minute distributions and scoring projections for the next season on these boards in blood. That could be fun.

Or we should probably all give this a few weeks and see where the recruits land and who the NBA steals.

I am personally concentrating all my powers on helping the Ohio Bobcats beat Carolina by 33 until Duke's 2013 roster becomes a little more clear. First things first.

whereinthehellami
03-19-2012, 04:09 PM
2479

FSU is the obvious choice for a huge dropoff next year. They still have Snaer but they have been gutted.

Zeller is a huge loss for UNC. And they have alot of question marks on who will stay and who goes league. They also have alot of pieces to work with.

Virginia also loses alot, Scott is a huge void they need to fill. I could see them droping a couple of places next year.

NCSU is an interesting team. I think they are adding the most impact players next year. Does Leslie stay? If so, how does the chemistry play out between the upperclassmen and the recruit?

OldSchool
03-19-2012, 04:11 PM
whereinthehellami

So according to your chart Barnes and Henson are returning once again to UNC? Have you alerted the media?

riddle me this
03-19-2012, 04:12 PM
the new title of this thread should be looking back unexpectedly to the early 2000s. pun definitely intended

unexpected
03-19-2012, 04:13 PM
We should start making people sign their posts about minute distributions and scoring projections for the next season on these boards in blood. That could be fun.

Or we should probably all give this a few weeks and see where the recruits land and who the NBA steals.

I am personally concentrating all my powers on helping the Ohio Bobcats beat Carolina by 33 until Duke's 2013 roster becomes a little more clear. First things first.

I face a moral dilemma when doing this. I feel like rooting against UNC so heavily now builds bad karma now that Marshall is hurt (much as UNC fans were laughing at Kelly's injury!). Best to lay low!

unexpected
03-19-2012, 04:24 PM
the new title of this thread should be looking back unexpectedly to the early 2000s. pun definitely intended

I just think its worth noting our previous history when it comes to players. We have just spent 1 1/2 pages of posts discussing Marshal Plumlee's weight, height, and arm length. I'm sure in the next 2-3 pages, I will learn his zodiac sign, likes and dislikes, and his favorite thing to do on a first date.

superdave
03-19-2012, 04:26 PM
I face a moral dilemma when doing this. I feel like rooting against UNC so heavily now builds bad karma now that Marshall is hurt (much as UNC fans were laughing at Kelly's injury!). Best to lay low!

There's no such thing as karma. If so, Unc fans would have caused plagues to overwhelm Chapel Hill years ago. I wont be openly hateful toward Unc, just inwardly. Enjoy laying low!

Super "Only 157 days until Duke's 2013 team pic is released and people start posting about how Marshall looks like he's 7'1'' and been in the weight room all summer." Dave

Kedsy
03-19-2012, 04:27 PM
Jay Williams converted over 50% of his two point shot attempts and was significantly better at finishing through contact. I'd take 65% of and 1's over 65% of shooting two.

Austin shot 47.74% on his two-point shots this season. During his freshman season, Jason Williams shot 47.96% on his two-point shots. At the number of shot attempts they took, that's essentially exactly the same.

Jason Williams was a better passer and a better defender than Austin Rivers. But as freshmen their other stats, especially their shooting, were close to identical.

OldSchool
03-19-2012, 04:30 PM
his favorite thing to do on a first date.

Gotta think those short "T-Rex" arms make it tough for him to put the moves on his date.

MChambers
03-19-2012, 04:39 PM
I just think its worth noting our previous history when it comes to players. We have just spent 1 1/2 pages of posts discussing Marshal Plumlee's weight, height, and arm length. I'm sure in the next 2-3 pages, I will learn his zodiac sign, likes and dislikes, and his favorite thing to do on a first date.
It would be most helpful if we could have some pictures with cinder blocks in the background, so that we can be more certain about Marshall's exact measurements.

whereinthehellami
03-19-2012, 04:48 PM
whereinthehellami

So according to your chart Barnes and Henson are returning once again to UNC? Have you alerted the media?

No I just set up the table to track the defections once they become public:)

Sandman
03-19-2012, 04:54 PM
Next year, we will go as far as the seniors take us -- Ryan, Mason, Dre, and Seth. It is now THEIR team! The question is how hungry are they for excellence? How hard are they willing to drive themselves and their teammates to improve, to focus on making themselves a great team? All these guys were superstars in high school, coaches were convinced they had the potential for excellence. Now it's their last shot; what will they do with it?

How many times have we seen players reach new levels of performance their senior season? Carrawell and Smith come immediately to mind for us. And how about Robinson for Kansas. If our seniors dedicate themselves to success, and I'm convinced they will, we will have a highly motivated, highly skilled, and FANTASTIC team next year, considering all the talent on hand and incoming.

I'm really excited and can't wait to see next year's new and improved Duke Blue Devil team in action- the greatest show on earth!

dukefan1980
03-19-2012, 06:23 PM
...I'm curious as to what you guys would like to see, what you think should happen, and what you think will happen.

I think a loss like this could be beneficial in certain ways. It's the kind of wake-up call that will force the staff to go back to the drawing board and reevaluate everything, which, IMO, is a good thing. My main hopes:

1. I've been fairly vocal this season about how I thought we should have been grooming Austin Rivers to run the show as a Nolan Smith-style lead guard (my reasoning (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?26782-Phase-II-2011-2012&p=534370#post534370)). Now, after seeing Austin post-game and considering his situation, I think it could be beneficial for all parties if he return, assuming the staff would start drilling him on the point guard position starting this Monday. Austin is projected as the #16 pick by the most reputable site, currently, and that was before his late-season slump. What position would a GM even be drafting him at right now?

So basically, I hope Austin stays, K immediately names him a co-captain with Cook, and we hand him the reigns at the 1.

2. The other thing I've been fairly vocal about is how I thought it was a mistake to just put our most skilled offensive players on the floor, rather than building from defense-out (my alternate proposal (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?27074-MBB-Temple-78-Duke-73-Post-Game-Thread&p=539751#post539751), my reasoning (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?27103-Phase-III-(2011-12)&p=540409#post540409)).

Hopefully the staff will prioritize defense, rebounding, and getting to the rim higher than they did this year. I'm not sure if Gbinije will be the guy (or if he'll even be here), but I'm really hoping the positive progress reports for Murphy continue through the summer and he takes over the starting SF spot early on.

If we have Murphy at the 3 and Rivers at the pseudo-1, with SRs Mason and Ryan in the frontcourt, I don't really even care who's at the 2. Maybe Seth or Dawkins if they get their heads on straight, maybe Thornton if he can really become a Bruce Bowen-like 3-point shooter over the summer. That gives us a very solid defensive perimeter, solid rebounding, solid shooting, and several players who can get to the rim. Those are the kind of fundamentals that good basketball teams are made of.

3. I hope Mason stays, obviously. Not much reasoning needed here; we'll need him, badly, and I don't think his last few months have scouts salivating. If he returns, our frontcourt goes from a major, major question mark to easily one of the best, most experienced in the country.

4. Lastly, I hope few guys have their come-to-Jesus moment. A big problem this year was chemistry and attitude, whether it's publicly acknowledged or not. All of these X's and O's issues don't mean much if we don't have a group of guys who are all in and absolutely committed to winning and improving as a team; I want next year's team to belong to Thornton and Rivers, and if anyone thinks they're too cool to give as much as those two do every time they're on the court, they're free to go elsewhere. Harsh, but necessary, IMO.

Anyway, I'm actually very hopeful for the future, but I really this slap in the face jolts us into making some changes. What do you guys think?

It seems to happen every time a talented team gets upset or doesn't perform as expected, people say that their is a chemistry problem. From someone that doesn't live in Carolina and doesn't have access to the team, chemistry problems never seemed to cross my mind this year. Can you elaborate on some of these issues?

gam7
03-19-2012, 06:50 PM
It would be most helpful if we could have some pictures with cinder blocks in the background, so that we can be more certain about Marshall's exact measurements.

Marshall seems to have a more ovular head and longer neck than his brothers, so I wouldn't be surprised if his effective height (height from the shoulders down) is about the same as his brothers.

Des Esseintes
03-20-2012, 01:06 AM
Q. Does this in any way make you more eager to find a post player who can really score?

COACH KRZYZEWSKI: And a point. And we feel -- it's not like we haven't tried to find them. A couple of them have gone to other schools right at the last second. We were like a three-headed monster on offense. And it carried us a long way, but it couldn't -- they played a lot of five against three tonight.

March 26, 2009 (http://www.eyeonsportsmedia.com/2009/03/fastscripts-by-asap-sports2009-ncaa.html)
Villanova over Duke 77-54, Postgame Press Conference

superdave
03-20-2012, 08:44 AM
Q. Does this in any way make you more eager to find a post player who can really score?

COACH KRZYZEWSKI: And a point. And we feel -- it's not like we haven't tried to find them. A couple of them have gone to other schools right at the last second. We were like a three-headed monster on offense. And it carried us a long way, but it couldn't -- they played a lot of five against three tonight.

March 26, 2009 (http://www.eyeonsportsmedia.com/2009/03/fastscripts-by-asap-sports2009-ncaa.html)
Villanova over Duke 77-54, Postgame Press Conference

Yep, and our roster has completely turned over since then so this quote is not relevant any longer.

Super "The angst is palpable" Dave

Billy Dat
03-20-2012, 09:55 AM
Glad to see Seth Davis is so bullish concerning next year's team:

Seth Davis ‏ @SethDavisHoops
A step back. RT @jryan_33: I'm a duke fan. What can I expect next year?

Kedsy
03-20-2012, 10:57 AM
Glad to see Seth Davis is so bullish concerning next year's team:

Seth Davis ‏ @SethDavisHoops
A step back. RT @jryan_33: I'm a duke fan. What can I expect next year?

Well, if Austin and Mason leave, a lot of talking heads will say that. Doesn't mean they're right.

azzefkram
03-20-2012, 11:02 AM
Marshall seems to have a more ovular head and longer neck than his brothers, so I wouldn't be surprised if his effective height (height from the shoulders down) is about the same as his brothers.

Any relation to Candace Flynn?

Des Esseintes
03-20-2012, 11:07 AM
Yep, and our roster has completely turned over since then so this quote is not relevant any longer.

Super "The angst is palpable" Dave

No, no. Sorry, I should have explained myself better. My point was K was getting asked about the need to recruit a post scorer and point guard the year before we won a national title. To win that title, we added no point guards, and though we brought in Mason, he was very much a role player as a freshman. The title was won on the backs of junior and senior leaders, who had been generally deemed to be an insufficient core.

I meant to show these concerns are a) evergreen and b) wildly overblown.

Matches
03-20-2012, 11:21 AM
No, no. Sorry, I should have explained myself better. My point was K was getting asked about the need to recruit a post scorer and point guard the year before we won a national title. To win that title, we added no point guards, and though we brought in Mason, he was very much a role player as a freshman. The title was won on the backs of junior and senior leaders, who had been generally deemed to be an insufficient core.

I meant to show these concerns are a) evergreen and b) wildly overblown.

The fact that the 2010 team was able to overcome those deficiencies and win anyway doesn't negate the validity of the concern. Ultimately each season K and the staff do the best they can do with the pieces they've got, but they're not wrong to identify, and seek to correct, weaknesses before the season begins.

Des Esseintes
03-20-2012, 11:32 AM
The fact that the 2010 team was able to overcome those deficiencies and win anyway doesn't negate the validity of the concern. Ultimately each season K and the staff do the best they can do with the pieces they've got, but they're not wrong to identify, and seek to correct, weaknesses before the season begins.

Maybe it doesn't negate them, but it suggests those deficiencies are perceived in an exaggerated way after a bad season-ending loss. In March 2009, Duke had a rising senior big man who'd had bad injury luck and was foul-prone but was already a fantastic rebounder if you dug into the numbers. It had a rising senior guard who took over the point late in the season and did it superbly. Those two guys took big steps forward in 2010.

What is a deficiency one season does not have to remain so the next year, even though the roster remain the same. On a team such as ours, which will have so much veteran talent next year, internal development is by far our most likely source of improvement. We have plenty of cause to be optimistic.

MIKESJ73
03-20-2012, 04:22 PM
I can't help but be optimistic for next year, 2010 changed my outlook forever.

March 1, 2009 - Pocius decided not to return and use his last year of eligibility after graduation.

March 26, 2009 - Duke was crushed by Villanova. Media has a field day, Duke can't play defense, can't stop penetration. Guards aren't quick enough on the perimeter.

April 6, 2009 - UNC wins NCAA.

April 26, 2009 - Henderson leaves early for the NBA.

May 10, 2009 - Paulus and McClure graduate (32 minutes a game combined).

May 19, 2009 - John Wall commits to UK (the only person that could help).

November 13, 2009 - Harrison Barnes skyped.

November 13 was a friday and that night the 2010 season began against UNC-Greensboro. We would have to play this season with only two returning starters and start three reserve players that combined for less than 18 pts/game. We hadn't got any top 10 recruits to help this season. So it began...

Rich
03-20-2012, 04:27 PM
I can't help but be optimistic for next year, 2010 changed my outlook forever.

March 1, 2009 - Pocius decided not to return and use his last year of eligibility after graduation.

March 26, 2009 - Duke was crushed by Villanova. Media has a field day, Duke can't play defense, can't stop penetration. Guards aren't quick enough on the perimeter.

April 6, 2009 - UNC wins NCAA.

April 26, 2009 - Henderson leaves early for the NBA.

May 10, 2009 - Paulus and McClure graduate (32 minutes a game combined).

May 19, 2009 - John Wall commits to UK (the only person that could help).

November 13, 2009 - Harrison Barnes skyped.

November 13 was a friday and that night the 2010 season began against UNC-Greensboro. We would have to play this season with only two returning starters and start three reserve players that combined for less than 18 pts/game. We hadn't got any top 10 recruits to help this season. So it began...

Wow, perspective. Love it.

DukieTiger
03-20-2012, 06:28 PM
I can't help but be optimistic for next year, 2010 changed my outlook forever.

March 1, 2009 - Pocius decided not to return and use his last year of eligibility after graduation.

March 26, 2009 - Duke was crushed by Villanova. Media has a field day, Duke can't play defense, can't stop penetration. Guards aren't quick enough on the perimeter.

April 6, 2009 - UNC wins NCAA.

April 26, 2009 - Henderson leaves early for the NBA.

May 10, 2009 - Paulus and McClure graduate (32 minutes a game combined).

May 19, 2009 - John Wall commits to UK (the only person that could help).

November 13, 2009 - Harrison Barnes skyped.

November 13 was a friday and that night the 2010 season began against UNC-Greensboro. We would have to play this season with only two returning starters and start three reserve players that combined for less than 18 pts/game. We hadn't got any top 10 recruits to help this season. So it began...

Didn't even mention Elliot Williams deciding to transfer. Yes, things were remarkably bleak in the post-Nova, Skype-gate 2009 world. Makes you really appreciate the following season. We also have to understand that several guys took remarkable steps forward either at the end of 09 or in 2010. Nolan Smith worked tremendously hard in the offseason and came into the next year with a more aggressive mindset and- dare I say- swag. Zoubs stepping up and getting healthy at the same time, Scheyer moving to the point.

To me, that really captures the fun in following college sports. That you can always find reason for optimism in the offseason (even in an offseason as disastrous as 09) and sometimes the answers to your problems aren't out there in a John Wall- but they are in what you've had all along. I'll be optimistic this offseason- not even at the hope of getting Shabazz Muhammed (though it's still possible) but more at the hope that several of our talented players step up and have the kind of offseason that Nolan had 3 summers ago. As a Duke fan, I'd rather win or lose with who we've got than with anyone else. 2010 taught me that.

loldevilz
03-20-2012, 10:31 PM
Wow, perspective. Love it.

No offense but to me this seems like the wrong perspective. Duke had a number of very nice breaks. First of all we had no injuries. A single injury would have derailed that entire season because we had no depth. Second of all we got extremely lucky that the players we had fit extremely well together. Zoubek freakishly developed into one of the best offensive rebounders in the history of college basketball which really helped with the efficiency of our group of three point shooters. Thirdly, Duke benefited from a down year in basketball, an unprecedented upset of the heavy favorites and a bracket with no bad matchups.

To expect this again seems to me absurd.

MCFinARL
03-20-2012, 10:43 PM
No offense but to me this seems like the wrong perspective. Duke had a number of very nice breaks. First of all we had no injuries. A single injury would have derailed that entire season because we had no depth. Second of all we got extremely lucky that the players we had fit extremely well together. Zoubek freakishly developed into one of the best offensive rebounders in the history of college basketball which really helped with the efficiency of our group of three point shooters. Thirdly, Duke benefited from a down year in basketball, an unprecedented upset of the heavy favorites and a bracket with no bad matchups.

To expect this again seems to me absurd.

I don't think the OP is expecting this again; I think his point was more just that often things don't turn out exactly as we expect, and a situation that looks like a problem may turn out to be a success beyond our dreams. It may not, too, of course, but there is no need to give up hope for next year because of an early loss this year and questions about next year's lineup.

UrinalCake
03-20-2012, 10:52 PM
To expect this again seems to me absurd.

Thanks to 2010, every bleak preseason will result in a National Championship. Thanks to that loss to Georgetown, every blowout loss is the turning point of the season. Thanks to Elliot Williams, every freshman riding the bench is capable of being a starter. And thanks to Coach K, every young coach who struggles out of the gate deserves more time because he'll eventually develop into the winningest coach of all time.

Newton_14
03-20-2012, 10:57 PM
I know in most cases, fans tend to over hype freshman recruits, but I am noticing the opposite with Sulaimon. This kid can play. I think folks are going to be pleasantly surprised at how good this kid is going to be right out of the gate. I think he is going to get playing time early and often and will help this team tremendously. I know that means one of the vets will see their minutes reduced, but that won't be the first time we have seen that happen at Duke. I don't often talk up freshman, and fully believe players improve greatly between their freshman and junior years in college, so I expect Duke's current underclassmen to get a lot better. That said, Rasheed has continued to climb the rankings, and may be better than many people realize.

Sleep on him or sell him short if you will, but I think the guy is going to help right away.

tommy
03-20-2012, 11:12 PM
I know in most cases, fans tend to over hype freshman recruits, but I am noticing the opposite with Sulaimon. This kid can play. I think folks are going to be pleasantly surprised at how good this kid is going to be right out of the gate. I think he is going to get playing time early and often and will help this team tremendously. I know that means one of the vets will see their minutes reduced, but that won't be the first time we have seen that happen at Duke. I don't often talk up freshman, and fully believe players improve greatly between their freshman and junior years in college, so I expect Duke's current underclassmen to get a lot better. That said, Rasheed has continued to climb the rankings, and may be better than many people realize.

Sleep on him or sell him short if you will, but I think the guy is going to help right away.

I agree with you. I saw him play once last year and he was impressive, both in terms of the development of his body and his basketball skills.

I think the guys who are going to see their minutes cut are Andre Dawkins almost for sure, and then I think to a lesser extent Seth Curry too. I know, both will be seniors, but Sulaimon may just be a more dynamic all-court player than either of the seniors, and we need that. We need more versatility and more physicality from our guards, most would agree. I think Curry might thrive in a first-guard-off-the-bench, instant offense role, where he is not looked to as a 35 min per game, go-to star.

I also think (hope?) that Quinn Cook is going to make some real strides in the off-season, particularly defensively, and take over major minutes at the point, with Ty as his capable, 10-15 minute per game backup -- a role that will not diminish his ability to be a fire-it-up team leader and havoc-causer on D.

The whole puzzle changes -- indeed, becomes much more complicated -- of course, if Rivers comes back.

Greg_Newton
03-20-2012, 11:25 PM
Agreed. Sheed is everything a lot of Duke fans want in a recruit right now - good size for a guard, terrific length, great lateral quickness/defender, great attacking the rim. Plus, there's this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJ1LMfgF01c), or this:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGgdwG0RDo4

ncexnyc
03-21-2012, 12:34 AM
After reading this thread I'm not sure whether I should get rid of all my Duke gear or convert my man cave into a mini CIS.

Some wildly fluctuating views on next season and I can understand the difference in opinions.

I've pointed this out several times already this year and I just want to bring it up again for those who seem to be so down on our returning players.

Chris Duhon was handed the keys to the team for his junior season after JWill left. As a sophomore Chris put up some pretty solid numbers and many felt he would make a smooth transition into the role of team leader and PG. It didn't happen. His FG% dropped from 41% to 38.6%. His 3FG% dropped from 41% to 38.6%. His FT% dropped from 71.1% to 68.8%. Scoring went up as did APG and RPG, but only slightly and in basically the same amount of minutes.

Chris learned from his mistakes that year and learned how to become a leader and the one player the rest of his teamates could look up too.

I have a feeling several of our returning players will have solid senior years and will display the leadership that wasn't present this year.

DevilYouthCoach
03-21-2012, 08:13 AM
So Cook is now an elite point guard? He didn't look anything like Irving as a freshman. I consider Irving to be an elite point guard. Cook didn't look like Duhon as a freshman either. I don't think Cook is an elite point guard.


My only feelgood takeaway from the Lehigh debacle was the beautiful three that Cook hit in the final seconds of the game -- when it didn't matter and he could shoot with abandon. When Cook is given the freedom and plays with confidence, he will be a game-changer for us. Remember who his "big brother" is? Nolan Smith, who also took awhile to reach his confidence level at Duke. This year Coack K was, I think, a bit too identified with Thornton, hoping that his performance would match his passion. Unfortunately, I don't think that will ever happen. And then there was the Austin Rivers problem -- a young man full of skill, but clearly too enamored of his own abilities. Cook can cook, but he hasn't been given the chance yet.

NSDukeFan
03-21-2012, 08:16 AM
I agree with you. I saw him play once last year and he was impressive, both in terms of the development of his body and his basketball skills.

I think the guys who are going to see their minutes cut are Andre Dawkins almost for sure, and then I think to a lesser extent Seth Curry too. I know, both will be seniors, but Sulaimon may just be a more dynamic all-court player than either of the seniors, and we need that. We need more versatility and more physicality from our guards, most would agree. I think Curry might thrive in a first-guard-off-the-bench, instant offense role, where he is not looked to as a 35 min per game, go-to star.

I also think (hope?) that Quinn Cook is going to make some real strides in the off-season, particularly defensively, and take over major minutes at the point, with Ty as his capable, 10-15 minute per game backup -- a role that will not diminish his ability to be a fire-it-up team leader and havoc-causer on D.

The whole puzzle changes -- indeed, becomes much more complicated -- of course, if Rivers comes back.

I am very excited to see what Rasheed can do next year and expect he will certainly play early and often. I expect he will be in the rotation all year. I think there has been a lot of sleeping on Andre and Seth though. Seth is a returning third team all-ACC player, who increasingly showed an ability to get to the basket and create his own shot (last couple games, notwithstanding.) Andre has been a bit more of an enigma, but I think he will have a good senior year and will get more consistent playing time. He has proven himself to be a solid ACC player with an up and down career, I expect some more ups for him before his time at Duke is done.

Matches
03-21-2012, 08:17 AM
Thanks to 2010, every bleak preseason will result in a National Championship. Thanks to that loss to Georgetown, every blowout loss is the turning point of the season. Thanks to Elliot Williams, every freshman riding the bench is capable of being a starter. And thanks to Coach K, every young coach who struggles out of the gate deserves more time because he'll eventually develop into the winningest coach of all time.

Yup. All those things are fodder for the "you just never know" or "anything can happen" mills. (And I'd add that every time there's a key injury, K will re-invent the team and it will end up being even better than before.)

But it's not as if we should look at every blowout loss and think "aha, we've got them right where we want them."

NSDukeFan
03-21-2012, 08:19 AM
Yup. All those things are fodder for the "you just never know" or "anything can happen" mills. (And I'd add that every time there's a key injury, K will re-invent the team and it will end up being even better than before.)

But it's not as if we should look at every blowout loss and think "aha, we've got them right where we want them."

We may not have them right where we want them this year, but I think we do have them right where we want them next year. :)

whereinthehellami
03-21-2012, 09:19 AM
2483

Updated table to reflect WF losing Chennault, a 30 minute a game player as a sophomore. Not good for WF unless there was some behind the scenes issue where the transfer was done in mutual interest between the player and the team.

CDu
03-21-2012, 09:46 AM
2483

Updated table to reflect WF losing Chennault, a 30 minute a game player as a sophomore. Not good for WF unless there was some behind the scenes issue where the transfer was done in mutual interest between the player and the team.

You're missing one of UNC's incoming players (Joel James).

CDu
03-21-2012, 10:20 AM
There will be lots of interesting pieces next year, even if Rivers and Plumlee go pro. And I think there will be lots of opportunities as well in either case.

With the perimeter players, Sulaimon, Murphy, and Gbinije offer size and athleticism. Dawkins could add to that mix if he can improve his ballhandling and focus, as he certainly has decent size and terrific athleticism. Hopefully those four guys can give us the versatility, length, athleticism, and aggressiveness that we lacked at times this year. Curry is a fantastic shooter and at times showed great ability to create off the dribble. Hopefully he can step up his game even further and become a consistent playmaker. Cook showed flashes of promise as a playmaker, but struggled defensively and just couldn't crack the rotation. Hopefully he's a year healthier, more familiar with the defensive principles, and ready to step up as a playmaker for the team. Thornton is a pesky defender that is willing to take on anybody. But he's really foul prone and struggles staying in front of quicker players. And offensively, he brings very little to the table. Teams essentially played off him down the stretch, and he didn't really make them pay for it. If he can improve as a shooter, he provides a nice rotation option for defensive intensity and doing the little things. I don't think we'll get where we want to go with him as the starter, but I very much like having him available for his unselfishness, effort, and basketball IQ.

As for the bigs, Kelly showed a very versatile scoring game last year, though it was primarily perimeter oriented. He was deadly on the pick-and-pop or spot up, and he showed the occasional ability to attack off the dribble. If he can continue to get stronger and add some post moves and rebounding, he'll be a real force (especially if he has to move to the 5). Hairston showed that he can be a valuable role player in the 10-15mpg mold with a pretty decent 15-18 foot jumper. It'd be great if he could continue to develop into a Tracy Smith type forward - undersized but tough, with crafty scoring skills. I don't have any perspective on Marshall yet. Hopefully he can play somewhere between sophomore year Miles and sophomore year Mason as the primary big off the bench.

There are going to be plenty of talented pieces, just as there were this year. The problem this year was that those pieces were mostly one-dimensional, and that dimension was fairly similar (shooting). Hopefully with the additions of Sulaimon and Murphy and with improvements from our returning players we can get less one-dimensional. We could either be REALLY special or we could be similar to this year (possibly a bit worse if Mason and Rivers both go). It's just hard to tell which direction things will go.

jimsumner
03-21-2012, 10:26 AM
Wow, perspective. Love it.

Let me give you another one. In a three-year period consisting of 1995, 1996 and 1997, Duke won one NCAA Tournament game and one ACC Tournament game (a play-in game).

That post-season slump was followed by a nine-year run that saw seven ACC Tournament titles, nine Sweet Sixteens, three Final Fours and an NCAA title.

Rich
03-21-2012, 10:44 AM
Let me give you another one. In a three-year period consisting of 1995, 1996 and 1997, Duke won one NCAA Tournament game and one ACC Tournament game (a play-in game).

That post-season slump was followed by a nine-year run that saw seven ACC Tournament titles, nine Sweet Sixteens, three Final Fours and an NCAA title.

Thanks Jim. There was a point in my life when I would have considered the Lehigh loss as "the sky is falling," much like a number of posters on this Board. As I get older I realize that Duke is Duke and, as long as Coach K is there, the possibility of magic is more likely than not. It may not be next year, but Duke will be back. Write it down. The sky was also falling in 1995, 2007, 2009, when Boozer hurt his ankle, when we were crushed by Villanova, when Elliot Williams transferred, when Sean Livingston decided to go pro, when Luol Deng went pro, when seemingly the entire 1999 team departed, when we didn't get H. Barnes, etc.

We lost to a team we should've beat. It sucked, but it happens. You can keep naming times when people lost perspective and felt it was the end of an era. Well, I have news for everyone - the end of the era is when Coach K retires. Until then, let's try and keep perspective. How many times does he have to pull a rabbit from a hat for you to realize he's a magician? Why do people continue to doubt him when time and time again he does something extraordinary? Well, I for one am off that bus.

Perspective, I love it.

CDu
03-21-2012, 10:55 AM
After thinking about next season a bit more, here are some areas in which I could see improvement and some hypothetical players to emulate (I don't actually expect these guys to watch video of these players, just what I could see them doing):

Cook: get healthy; work on defense and getting more familiar with Duke's defensive principles; work on shooting touch; watch some video of senior year Ismail Smith.

Curry: get stronger; work on playmaking/distributing skills; get better at attacking off the dribble; watch some video of Jon Scheyer.

Dawkins: ballhandling, ballhandling, ballhandling; get better at scoring off the dribble; work on focus/effort defensively; get more confident; watch some video of Trajan Langdon.

Gbinije: improve ballhandling; work on defense and getting more familiar with Duke's defensive principles; work on shooting touch; watch some video of Chris Carrawell.

Hairston: continue to improve shooting touch; continue to improve defensive game; develop some post moves; watch videos of Tracy Smith.

Kelly: continue to get stronger; try to get quicker and more explosive; work on post defense and rebounding; develop some post moves offensively; watch video of Kevin McHale along with the video he already should be watching of Dirk Nowitzki.

Murphy: hard to say since I've seen so little of him at this point; based on the limited viewing I have of him, I'd guess watch videos of Dunleavy and Grant Hill (obviously he'll have a ways to go to reach those heights, but I think that's the direction to pursue).

Plumlee, Mason (if he returns): work on more post moves; free throw shooting; work on getting more relaxed out there so that his natural athleticism can take over; watch tape of Chris Webber.

Plumlee, Marshall: as with Murphy, it's just hard to tell what to expect of him, but I assume that strength and defensive schemes are the big thing for him at this point; no idea of whom he should be watching video.

Rivers (if he returns): continue to improve his court vision and playmaking skills; get stronger; work on left hand; get better playing off the ball; work on free throw shooting; watch video of Scheyer and Nolan Smith.

Thornton: try to improve ballhandling/distributing; work on quickness and fouling less; work on perimeter shot; watch video of Wojo.

yancem
03-21-2012, 11:07 AM
After thinking about next season a bit more, here are some areas in which I could see improvement and some hypothetical players to emulate (I don't actually expect these guys to watch video of these players, just what I could see them doing):

Cook: get healthy; work on defense and getting more familiar with Duke's defensive principles; work on shooting touch; watch some video of senior year Ismail Smith.

Curry: get stronger; work on playmaking/distributing skills; get better at attacking off the dribble; watch some video of Jon Scheyer.

Dawkins: ballhandling, ballhandling, ballhandling; get better at scoring off the dribble; work on focus/effort defensively; get more confident; watch some video of Trajan Langdon.

Gbinije: improve ballhandling; work on defense and getting more familiar with Duke's defensive principles; work on shooting touch; watch some video of Chris Carrawell.

Hairston: continue to improve shooting touch; continue to improve defensive game; develop some post moves; watch videos of Tracy Smith.

Kelly: continue to get stronger; try to get quicker and more explosive; work on post defense and rebounding; develop some post moves offensively; watch video of Kevin McHale along with the video he already should be watching of Dirk Nowitzki.

Murphy: hard to say since I've seen so little of him at this point; based on the limited viewing I have of him, I'd guess watch videos of Dunleavy and Grant Hill (obviously he'll have a ways to go to reach those heights, but I think that's the direction to pursue).

Plumlee, Mason (if he returns): work on more post moves; free throw shooting; work on getting more relaxed out there so that his natural athleticism can take over; watch tape of Chris Webber.

Plumlee, Marshall: as with Murphy, it's just hard to tell what to expect of him, but I assume that strength and defensive schemes are the big thing for him at this point; no idea of whom he should be watching video.

Rivers (if he returns): continue to improve his court vision and playmaking skills; get stronger; work on left hand; get better playing off the ball; work on free throw shooting; watch video of Scheyer and Nolan Smith.

Thornton: try to improve ballhandling/distributing; work on quickness and fouling less; work on perimeter shot; watch video of Wojo.

I know that the player the most people have tried to compare Dawkins to is Redick because they both have such beautiful strokes so Langdon is also another obvious choice. But I think that the person that he should watch video of is Henderson. Dawkins has great ups to go with his beautiful stroke so if he could develop a 3-5 dribble pull up mid range J, he could be deadly. People keep talking about him needing to be able to get to the basket but one of the things that made (makes) Henderson so effective is that he can pull up at any point and hit the mid range J. This makes driving to the basket that much easier. We saw Dawkins do this a couple of time this season but I don't think that he has the confidence in his dribble to do it consistently. Practice that and Dawkins could be deadly.

dyedwab
03-21-2012, 11:17 AM
After thinking about next season a bit more, here are some areas in which I could see improvement and some hypothetical players to emulate (I don't actually expect these guys to watch video of these players, just what I could see them doing):

Cook: get healthy; work on defense and getting more familiar with Duke's defensive principles; work on shooting touch; watch some video of senior year Ismail Smith.

Curry: get stronger; work on playmaking/distributing skills; get better at attacking off the dribble; watch some video of Jon Scheyer.

Dawkins: ballhandling, ballhandling, ballhandling; get better at scoring off the dribble; work on focus/effort defensively; get more confident; watch some video of Trajan Langdon.

Gbinije: improve ballhandling; work on defense and getting more familiar with Duke's defensive principles; work on shooting touch; watch some video of Chris Carrawell.

Hairston: continue to improve shooting touch; continue to improve defensive game; develop some post moves; watch videos of Tracy Smith.

Kelly: continue to get stronger; try to get quicker and more explosive; work on post defense and rebounding; develop some post moves offensively; watch video of Kevin McHale along with the video he already should be watching of Dirk Nowitzki.

Murphy: hard to say since I've seen so little of him at this point; based on the limited viewing I have of him, I'd guess watch videos of Dunleavy and Grant Hill (obviously he'll have a ways to go to reach those heights, but I think that's the direction to pursue).

Plumlee, Mason (if he returns): work on more post moves; free throw shooting; work on getting more relaxed out there so that his natural athleticism can take over; watch tape of Chris Webber.

Plumlee, Marshall: as with Murphy, it's just hard to tell what to expect of him, but I assume that strength and defensive schemes are the big thing for him at this point; no idea of whom he should be watching video.

Rivers (if he returns): continue to improve his court vision and playmaking skills; get stronger; work on left hand; get better playing off the ball; work on free throw shooting; watch video of Scheyer and Nolan Smith.

Thornton: try to improve ballhandling/distributing; work on quickness and fouling less; work on perimeter shot; watch video of Wojo.

Been thinking about a post like this myself, but since I'm too lazy, and you did one, I'll just comment on yours. And I'll make three points

For Tyler, becoming a consistent outside threat is the most important thing he can do, imho. Right now, he is no threat to score, according to other teams, leading them to do what VTech did - leave him open to shoot 13 3s, making 3. If he becomes a scoring threat, it will stretch the floor, giving more openings in the paint.

For Andre, if he can improve his handle, it will have almost the same effect as Tyler becoming a better shooter. Making the defense guard more additional things.

If Mason comes back, I hope he spends the summer getting stronger, especially his lower body. I think that much of Mason' offensive problems when he had them were due to his being pushed out of position by stronger players, and getting stronger will also help him make baskets through contact when he's fouled.

The key to the Duke program for the entirety of my fanhood has been players improvement year-to-year. Seeing what new skills and assets our returning players bring to the game at the beginning of the season has always been one of my favorite parts of Duke Basketball. So, hopefully, that's what this off-season brings.

CDu
03-21-2012, 11:32 AM
I know that the player the most people have tried to compare Dawkins to is Redick because they both have such beautiful strokes so Langdon is also another obvious choice. But I think that the person that he should watch video of is Henderson. Dawkins has great ups to go with his beautiful stroke so if he could develop a 3-5 dribble pull up mid range J, he could be deadly. People keep talking about him needing to be able to get to the basket but one of the things that made (makes) Henderson so effective is that he can pull up at any point and hit the mid range J. This makes driving to the basket that much easier. We saw Dawkins do this a couple of time this season but I don't think that he has the confidence in his dribble to do it consistently. Practice that and Dawkins could be deadly.

Henderson is an interesting call as well. I chose Langdon because he had a lot of diversity in his game (especially before he hurt his knee). He was also a deadly shooter, but he really brought a lot of ways to score to the table. Redick did this as well as an upperclassman. Dawkins may very well rival Henderson in terms of athleticism, so that's not a bad comp either (especially given the ballhandling limitations that Henderson had early in his career). But I completely agree that the biggest thing Dawkins can do offensively is become a stronger ballhandler. If he can do that, his athletic gifts and shooting gifts become that much more effective.

Jderf
03-21-2012, 11:55 AM
Plumlee, Mason (if he returns): work on more post moves; free throw shooting; work on getting more relaxed out there so that his natural athleticism can take over; watch tape of Chris Webber.


If Mason comes back, I hope he spends the summer getting stronger, especially his lower body. I think that much of Mason' offensive problems when he had them were due to his being pushed out of position by stronger players, and getting stronger will also help him make baskets through contact when he's fouled.

Personally, at this point I don't think Mason needs to worry all that much about getting stronger. Spend some time in the weight room, sure, but I don't think it should be his primary goal. There aren't that many bigs out there that can straight-up outmuscle him, and I never felt like he actually gets pushed around that much on the blocks. He typically has better size than the man guarding him.

What I would like to see from Mason, and I think this is what CDu is getting at, is a higher comfort-level with the ball in his hands. He has definitely improved his hook-shot to a point where it is a potent weapon, but he still seems very tentative whenever he gets the ball down low. It seems like he is still somewhat unsure about how to approach offense, and he lacks the fluidity and control of a player like Zeller (who has nowhere near Mason's raw strength). If he rounds out his post-game just a bit, and internalizes the mechanics of his moves to the point where it feels and looks natural, we might see Mason produce offense next season with incredible efficiency. I'm hoping...

CDu
03-21-2012, 12:43 PM
What I would like to see from Mason, and I think this is what CDu is getting at, is a higher comfort-level with the ball in his hands. He has definitely improved his hook-shot to a point where it is a potent weapon, but he still seems very tentative whenever he gets the ball down low. It seems like he is still somewhat unsure about how to approach offense, and he lacks the fluidity and control of a player like Zeller (who has nowhere near Mason's raw strength). If he rounds out his post-game just a bit, and internalizes the mechanics of his moves to the point where it feels and looks natural, we might see Mason produce offense next season with incredible efficiency. I'm hoping...

That is EXACTLY what I was trying to say. Thanks for saying it better. He just seems stiff and mechanical, like he has to think heavily about every move he makes. His mistakes tend to be ones of uncertainty and hesitation rather than lack of ability. Maybe ability is part of it too, but I think the biggest thing for him is that the offensive game needs to become more natural for him. I don't know how that happens (if I did, I wouldn't be on a message board!), but that's the only thing holding him back.

Kedsy
03-21-2012, 01:00 PM
Cook: get healthy; work on defense and getting more familiar with Duke's defensive principles; work on shooting touch; watch some video of senior year Ismail Smith.

I agree with most of your video wishes, but my recollection of Ishmael Smith was he did what he did because of his incredible quickness. I don't know if Quinn has that. I'm not sure whose video I think he should be watching, though.

Also, for Austin, I would love him to look at some drive-and-kick PG video. As someone else said in another thread, if Austin could get his assists up in the 5 to 6 range, he'd be a lot closer to unstoppable.


It seems like he is still somewhat unsure about how to approach offense, and he lacks the fluidity and control of a player like Zeller (who has nowhere near Mason's raw strength). If he rounds out his post-game just a bit, and internalizes the mechanics of his moves to the point where it feels and looks natural, we might see Mason produce offense next season with incredible efficiency. I'm hoping...

See, other than his free throw shooting, I think Mason may already be more efficient than Zeller. This season, Zeller has an eFG% of 55.2% and a free throw rate (rate he gets to the line, not the rate he converts) of 58.1%. Mason had an eFG% of 57.2% and a free throw rate of 70.4%. So, based on the numbers, Mason was more efficient.

Yes, Zeller looked smoother, and did his thing with a higher usage rate (24.6% to 22.4%) and (largely because of the free throw shooting -- Zeller is an 81.6% FT shooter) had a much higher offensive rating (123.0 to 106.6), but I don't know that he was more efficient, other than his free throw abilities (and Mason did make strides toward the end of the year in that area).

ChillinDuke
03-21-2012, 01:05 PM
That is EXACTLY what I was trying to say. Thanks for saying it better. He just seems stiff and mechanical, like he has to think heavily about every move he makes. His mistakes tend to be ones of uncertainty and hesitation rather than lack of ability. Maybe ability is part of it too, but I think the biggest thing for him is that the offensive game needs to become more natural for him. I don't know how that happens (if I did, I wouldn't be on a message board!), but that's the only thing holding him back.

x2.

The whole team seemed sorta mechanical in the last few weeks. Many players just seemed to be running sets with very little feel for making something happen out of the set. Too much thinking. I don't really have a rationalization for it. I've never seen this issue (at least consistently) in my time following Duke basketball, especially so late in the season.

My hope is that the players take some time off , then start working on individual improvement during the offseason...and hopefully we won't see this issue next year. I can't imagine we will, but again I'm still a little baffled by this to begin with.

I trust K and the team though. I'll be waiting anxiously for next season.

- Chillin

Rich
03-21-2012, 01:15 PM
x2.

The whole team seemed sorta mechanical in the last few weeks. Many players just seemed to be running sets with very little feel for making something happen out of the set. Too much thinking. I don't really have a rationalization for it. I've never seen this issue (at least consistently) in my time following Duke basketball, especially so late in the season.

My hope is that the players take some time off , then start working on individual improvement during the offseason...and hopefully we won't see this issue next year. I can't imagine we will, but again I'm still a little baffled by this to begin with.

I trust K and the team though. I'll be waiting anxiously for next season.

- Chillin

Coach K said the same thing after the Lehigh game. The word he used was "instinctual." That our offense stopped being instinctual.

Jderf
03-21-2012, 01:56 PM
See, other than his free throw shooting, I think Mason may already be more efficient than Zeller. This season, Zeller has an eFG% of 55.2% and a free throw rate (rate he gets to the line, not the rate he converts) of 58.1%. Mason had an eFG% of 57.2% and a free throw rate of 70.4%. So, based on the numbers, Mason was more efficient.

Yes, Zeller looked smoother, and did his thing with a higher usage rate (24.6% to 22.4%) and (largely because of the free throw shooting -- Zeller is an 81.6% FT shooter) had a much higher offensive rating (123.0 to 106.6), but I don't know that he was more efficient, other than his free throw abilities (and Mason did make strides toward the end of the year in that area).

I certainly agree with you that Mason is already a very efficient scorer, although I'm surprised that his efficiency numbers compare so favorably with Zeller's. But if you look back to my post, I wasn't actually comparing their efficiencies. I don't want Mason to only be as efficient as Zeller, I want him to also be as fluid as Zeller. When Zeller gets the ball down low, he moves decisively and without hesitation. He knows what he is going to do and he wastes no motion in doing it. If Mason can master that -- and I realize that this is asking for a lot, but it seems within the realm of possibility -- I actually think Mason's ceiling is much, much higher than Zeller's. Potential, utter dominance.

azzefkram
03-21-2012, 01:58 PM
I agree with most of your video wishes, but my recollection of Ishmael Smith was he did what he did because of his incredible quickness. I don't know if Quinn has that. I'm not sure whose video I think he should be watching, though.

Also, for Austin, I would love him to look at some drive-and-kick PG video. As someone else said in another thread, if Austin could get his assists up in the 5 to 6 range, he'd be a lot closer to unstoppable.



See, other than his free throw shooting, I think Mason may already be more efficient than Zeller. This season, Zeller has an eFG% of 55.2% and a free throw rate (rate he gets to the line, not the rate he converts) of 58.1%. Mason had an eFG% of 57.2% and a free throw rate of 70.4%. So, based on the numbers, Mason was more efficient.

Yes, Zeller looked smoother, and did his thing with a higher usage rate (24.6% to 22.4%) and (largely because of the free throw shooting -- Zeller is an 81.6% FT shooter) had a much higher offensive rating (123.0 to 106.6), but I don't know that he was more efficient, other than his free throw abilities (and Mason did make strides toward the end of the year in that area).

Kendall Marshall is a big part of this. Remember how Mason looked at the beginning of last year with Kyrie running the show.

Kedsy
03-21-2012, 02:06 PM
Kendall Marshall is a big part of this. Remember how Mason looked at the beginning of last year with Kyrie running the show.

This idea is approaching myth status. Mason had an AMAZING game against Marquette. In the other 7 games he played with Kyrie before Kyrie's injury, Mason averaged 8.4 points per game.

Jderf
03-21-2012, 02:13 PM
Kendall Marshall is a big part of this. Remember how Mason looked at the beginning of last year with Kyrie running the show.


This idea is approaching myth status. Mason had an AMAZING game against Marquette. In the other 7 games he played with Kyrie before Kyrie's injury, Mason averaged 8.4 points per game.

Nice, Kedsy. I've been having the exact same thought. So many people have been echoing this as if it were undisputed fact, but the actual difference in Mason's output, pre- and post-Kyrie, was slim at best. If anything, Mason was better towards the end of that season when he started to finally hit the hook shot with some consistency.

azzefkram
03-21-2012, 02:26 PM
This idea is approaching myth status. Mason had an AMAZING game against Marquette. In the other 7 games he played with Kyrie before Kyrie's injury, Mason averaged 8.4 points per game.

PPG is a useless stat. At the beginning of last year, Mason looked like he made the leap. It is a lot easier to look fluid when you get the ball on the block as opposed to 3 feet off it. It is a lot easier to look fluid when a 6'10" guy doesn't have to try to receive the entry pass at his ankles. Mason (and Miles as well) does have a little hesitation in his moves.

BTW Tyler Zeller's Ortg his sophomore year was 110.3.

CDu
03-21-2012, 02:31 PM
PPG is a useless stat. At the beginning of last year, Mason looked like he made the leap. It is a lot easier to look fluid when you get the ball on the block as opposed to 3 feet off it. It is a lot easier to look fluid when a 6'10" guy doesn't have to try to receive the entry pass at his ankles. Mason (and Miles as well) does have a little hesitation in his moves.

BTW Tyler Zeller's Ortg his sophomore year was 110.3.

It is true that Zeller benefits from a terrific PG getting him the ball in great spots. It is also true that he has a much more versatile and polished offensive game than Mason. Zeller hits the 15-18 foot shot regularly. He has a few more post moves. He runs the floor better and finishes on the move better. And he's a better free throw shooter. Mason is much stronger, a better rebounder, better passer, and able to dunk from incredible distances. But Zeller is the more polished offensive player (with or without Marshall).

MIKESJ73
03-21-2012, 02:32 PM
In the first 8 games with Kyrie his low night was five points in the opener. Those 8 were against Butler, Mich St., Kansas St, & Marquette among others.

In the first 8 games without Kyrie he scored over 4 points just once and averaged only 3.7 pts during that stretch against easier comp (in my opinion).

Mason did look alot better earlier in the year.

whereinthehellami
03-21-2012, 02:35 PM
You're missing one of UNC's incoming players (Joel James).

2485

Thanks. I wish the RSCI was updated more than it is with regards to where a player is going to school.

Based on the table as it stands now, for next year, I'd go;

1.UNC
2.Duke
3.NCSU
4.MD
5.VT
6.Clemson
7.GT
8.Miami
9.UVA
10.FSU
11.WF
12.BC

azzefkram
03-21-2012, 02:41 PM
It is true that Zeller benefits from a terrific PG getting him the ball in great spots. It is also true that he has a much more versatile and polished offensive game than Mason. Zeller hits the 15-18 foot shot regularly. He has a few more post moves. He runs the floor better and finishes on the move better. And he's a better free throw shooter. Mason is much stronger, a better rebounder, better passer, and able to dunk from incredible distances. But Zeller is the more polished offensive player (with or without Marshall).

Completely agree that Zeller has more versatile and polished offensive game, and most definitely better range and FT. I think running the floor and finishing is more a product of Marshall and what UNC does. I think Mason runs the floor very well when given the opportunity. Duke doesn't really seem to run like I remember them running in the past.

I also think both Plumlees occasionally get happy feet which I don't see Zeller do that often.

Jderf
03-21-2012, 02:43 PM
PPG is a useless stat. At the beginning of last year, Mason looked like he made the leap. It is a lot easier to look fluid when you get the ball on the block as opposed to 3 feet off it. It is a lot easier to look fluid when a 6'10" guy doesn't have to try to receive the entry pass at his ankles. Mason (and Miles as well) does have a little hesitation in his moves.

BTW Tyler Zeller's Ortg his sophomore year was 110.3.

But he didn't look like he made the leap. Sorry, but I flat-out disagree. At the beginning of that season, he didn't show anything we hadn't seen from him before. It was only towards the end of the year that he finally developed the hook shot that has made him successful on offense since then. So at the beginning, in my opinion most people were watching tentatively, wondering what we we're going to see out of Mason that year. He did have that big game at Marquette, but otherwise none of his performances were off the charts. When things didn't seem to be panning out for Mason statistically, people retroactively decided it was because the loss of Kyrie, if only because "The Toe" was the single most salient event to occur that entire season. It became the explanation for everything. In time and with repetition, the disparity kept getting magnified (just like how the buck keeps growing everytime your hunting buddy tells "that" story).

Sure, there was a slight, slight drop in performance, statistically speaking. But it was nowhere near the drop that would allow you to definitively say, "Yeah, the loss of Kyrie is the primary and sole cause of this."

Kedsy
03-21-2012, 02:47 PM
PPG is a useless stat.

Give me a more useful stat. In my opinion, other than the Marquette game, Mason didn't look any better early with Kyrie than he did late in the year with Nolan.

CDu
03-21-2012, 02:50 PM
But he didn't look like he made the leap. Sorry, but I flat-out disagree. At the beginning of that season, he didn't show anything we hadn't seen from him before. It was only towards the end of the year that he finally developed the hook shot that has made him successful on offense since then. So at the beginning, in my opinion most people were watching tentatively, wondering what we we're going to see out of Mason that year. He did have that big game at Marquette, but otherwise none of his performances were off the charts. When things didn't seem to be panning out for Mason statistically, people retroactively decided it was because the loss of Kyrie, if only because "The Toe" was the single most salient event to occur that entire season. It became the explanation for everything. In time and with repetition, the disparity kept getting magnified (just like how the buck keeps growing everytime your hunting buddy tells "that" story).

Sure, there was a slight, slight drop in performance, statistically speaking. But it was nowhere near the drop that would allow you to definitively say, "Yeah, the loss of Kyrie is the primary and sole cause of this."

Agreed. Mason had a monster game (against an undersized Marquette team) in which he backed defenders down and scored on a variety of plays. Aside from that, it was the typical Mason game: an alleyoop here and there, a putback here and there, awkward hooks and leaners that didn't go in, and the occasional ill-advised jumper from 15+ feet. What the loss of Irving did was eliminate a lot of the easy uncontested buckets and alley-oops that Mason received, which was the entirety of his offensive game with the exception of the Marquette game. He still had a lot of the same limitations that he had the year before.

azzefkram
03-21-2012, 03:09 PM
But he didn't look like he made the leap. Sorry, but I flat-out disagree. At the beginning of that season, he didn't show anything we hadn't seen from him before. It was only towards the end of the year that he finally developed the hook shot that has made him successful on offense since then. So at the beginning, in my opinion most people were watching tentatively, wondering what we we're going to see out of Mason that year. He did have that big game at Marquette, but otherwise none of his performances were off the charts. When things didn't seem to be panning out for Mason statistically, people retroactively decided it was because the loss of Kyrie, if only because "The Toe" was the single most salient event to occur that entire season. It became the explanation for everything. In time and with repetition, the disparity kept getting magnified (just like how the buck keeps growing everytime your hunting buddy tells "that" story).

Sure, there was a slight, slight drop in performance, statistically speaking. But it was nowhere near the drop that would allow you to definitively say, "Yeah, the loss of Kyrie is the primary and sole cause of this."

If you look at the game logs you would see that there was a significant drop in his stats and usage. With Kyrie he averaged 6 shots per game and made nearly 55% of his attempts with games against #4 KSU, #6 MSU and Butler. I intentionally excluded his stats from that Marquette game. In the 7 games after Butler, he averaged 3.86 shots per game and made only 44% with the toughest opponent probably being Miami. In the last 7 games before Kyrie returned he averaged 4.43 shots per game and made 61%, with two games against UNC and one with Temple.

No one ever stated that the loss of Kyrie was the primary and sole cause of this.

Don't let reality get in the way of your narrative.

Kedsy
03-21-2012, 03:20 PM
If you look at the game logs you would see that there was a significant drop in his stats and usage.

If you do the same analysis this year, I bet you'd find a similar pattern during similar time periods.

azzefkram
03-21-2012, 03:42 PM
If you do the same analysis this year, I bet you'd find a similar pattern during similar time periods.

Nope.

Jderf
03-21-2012, 03:47 PM
If you look at the game logs you would see that there was a significant drop in his stats and usage. With Kyrie he averaged 6 shots per game and made nearly 55% of his attempts with games against #4 KSU, #6 MSU and Butler. I intentionally excluded his stats from that Marquette game. In the 7 games after Butler, he averaged 3.86 shots per game and made only 44% with the toughest opponent probably being Miami. In the last 7 games before Kyrie returned he averaged 4.43 shots per game and made 61%, with two games against UNC and one with Temple.

No one ever stated that the loss of Kyrie was the primary and sole cause of this.

Don't let reality get in the way of your narrative.

Ooh, ouch. Nice zinger at the end there, buddy. It really bolstered your argument.

I guess where we disagree is on what constitutes a significant drop. Like I said before, yes you can highlight a statistical difference, but is that drop big enough or meaningful enough to make it significant? Does it tell us anything?

Did Mason take 2 less shots per game because he didn't have Kyrie feeding him anymore? Or did his shots per game really drop because he played 7 mpg less? I'd bet the difference in his per-minute averages was much less striking. (Though it isn't like the differences are all that striking to begin with.)

Were his percentages over your early period better because of Kyrie's crisp passes? Or were they skewed because the early period had the Marquette game in it (which was a HUGE statistical outlier in terms of the rest of Mason's season)?

These are very tough questions to answer, especially when you consider the meagerness of the differences, as well as the diminutive sample size. I'm not saying it is simply wrong, I'm pointing out how odd it is that this notion has become incontrovertible fact through mere repetition, when the actual difference in question was not nearly so striking. It was actually pretty negligible.

Also, while we're at it, the majority of the benefit that Mason had from Kyrie didn't even have anything to do with entry passes, as I remember it. Most of his points came from drive-and-dish opportunities where Mason's defender helped off of him to try and stop Kyrie, leaving Mason open for the easy lay-in. He didn't really "get the ball on the block," as you said, all that often.

azzefkram
03-21-2012, 04:08 PM
Ooh, ouch. Nice zinger at the end there, buddy. It really bolstered your argument.

I guess where we disagree is on what constitutes a significant drop. Like I said before, yes you can highlight a statistical difference, but is that drop big enough or meaningful enough to make it significant? Does it tell us anything?

Did Mason take 2 less shots per game because he didn't have Kyrie feeding him anymore? Or did his shots per game really drop because he played 7 mpg less? I'd bet the difference in his per-minute averages was much less striking. (Though it isn't like the differences are all that striking to begin with.)

Were his percentages over your early period better because of Kyrie's crisp passes? Or were they skewed because the early period had the Marquette game in it (which was a HUGE statistical outlier in terms of the rest of Mason's season)?

These are very tough questions to answer, especially when you consider the meagerness of the differences, as well as the diminutive sample size. I'm not saying it is simply wrong, I'm pointing out how odd it is that this notion has become incontrovertible fact through mere repetition, when the actual difference in question was not nearly so striking. It was actually pretty negligible.

Also, while we're at it, the majority of the benefit that Mason had from Kyrie didn't even have anything to do with entry passes, as I remember it. Most of his points came from drive-and-dish opportunities where Mason's defender helped off of him to try and stop Kyrie's drive, leaving Mason open for the easy lay-in. He didn't really "get the ball on the block," as you said, all that often.

Sorry about the snarky comment. It was out of line.

2 shots less is a 33% drop which I would say is significant. I agree that the per minute number will probably be different but if I had to guess I don't think neither of us cares enough to put the effort in to calculating it. I also agree with the small sample size negating some of the impact.

FTR, I excluded the Marquette game. As far as how Mason received the ball, I think we both would just be guessing, but whether a drop off or an entry pass he's on the block. Also it goes back to my original point the a good/great point guard makes a bigs job easier.

To step away from Duke since we both seem pretty passionate about it. Take a look at Alex Oriakhi from UConn.

Kedsy
03-21-2012, 04:14 PM
If you look at the game logs you would see that there was a significant drop in his stats and usage.

This year, in the first 26 games, Mason took 7.8 shots per game. In the last 8 games of the season, he only took 5.8 shots per game. Similar drop as you are describing, along with a significant drop in stats and usage, but no major personnel change at that time. Sometimes these things just happen.

NSDukeFan
03-21-2012, 04:18 PM
This year, in the first 26 games, Mason took 7.8 shots per game. In the last 8 games of the season, he only took 5.8 shots per game. Similar drop as you are describing, along with a significant drop in stats and usage, but no major personnel change at that time. Sometimes these things just happen.

Next your going to say that if a player posts below average numbers for a couple of games, he may just be having a bad game and may not necessarily have "regressed". /sarcastic rant from not liking the term regressed when looking at a very small sample size

Saratoga2
03-21-2012, 04:32 PM
Next your going to say that if a player posts below average numbers for a couple of games, he may just be having a bad game and may not necessarily have "regressed". /sarcastic rant from not liking the term regressed when looking at a very small sample size

In the NBA, Mason would have to develop a mid range shot to add to his offensive abilities. Guys with his size and athleticism need to have more than he can bring to the party to be successful. I bring this up since he has shown no sign of going in that direction and he gets very few shots a game unless they are dunks. Why hasn't the staff encouraged him to add an outside shot? I hope the answer is that he has tried but it didn't work out.

NSDukeFan
03-21-2012, 04:34 PM
Next your going to say that if a player posts below average numbers for a couple of games, he may just be having a bad game and may not necessarily have "regressed". /sarcastic rant from not liking the term regressed when looking at a very small sample size

Oops, too late to fix "your" to you're.

Jderf
03-21-2012, 04:36 PM
Sorry about the snarky comment. It was out of line.

2 shots less is a 33% drop which I would say is significant. I agree that the per minute number will probably be different but if I had to guess I don't think neither of us cares enough to put the effort in to calculating it. I also agree with the small sample size negating some of the impact.

FTR, I excluded the Marquette game. As far as how Mason received the ball, I think we both would just be guessing, but whether a drop off or an entry pass he's on the block. Also it goes back to my original point the a good/great point guard makes a bigs job easier.

To step away from Duke since we both seem pretty passionate about it. Take a look at Alex Oriakhi from UConn.

Hmm, see I would say that this fact -- that just 2 shots makes a difference of 33% -- actually supports my point more than yours: we're just not talking about enough shots to substantiate a meaningful difference. But oh well, that's just me.

I think we've pretty much exhausted our talking points here, and I have a feeling that the more and more we debate this, the closer and closer our positions will get to each other's. In any case, I would never deny that having a great distributor can make life much easier for a big. I just don't think Mason's production or style of play in that season changed drastically in the wake of the toe injury. But from the way people around here assert it as undisputed fact, you'd think Mason went from 20 ppg to zero. (I realize that is an exaggeration, and that it is not your position at all. Just saying.)

azzefkram
03-21-2012, 05:01 PM
This year, in the first 26 games, Mason took 7.8 shots per game. In the last 8 games of the season, he only took 5.8 shots per game. Similar drop as you are describing, along with a significant drop in stats and usage, but no major personnel change at that time. Sometimes these things just happen.

Love the back and forth, no snarkiness intended. We lost 3 of our last 8 games and got a little 3pt happy. I also felt that Austin dominated the ball more toward the end of the season.

A better analysis would probably involve touches but I don't know where you could find that data.

My point is that a good/great 1 makes the bigs better. Let me ask you a question. Does Tyler Zeller win ACC POY if you swap Kendall Marshall with either Austin Rivers or Seth Curry? I'd guess no. Does Mason have a better year if we make the same swap? I'd guess yes. Does Duke have a better year if we make that swap? I'd say probably with Austin and definitely with Seth. (FTR, I think Duke had a very good year with an unfortunate crappy ending).

azzefkram
03-21-2012, 05:07 PM
Hmm, see I would say that this fact -- that just 2 shots makes a difference of 33% -- actually supports my point more than yours: we're just not talking about enough shots to substantiate a meaningful difference. But oh well, that's just me.

I think we've pretty much exhausted our talking points here, and I have a feeling that the more and more we debate this, the closer and closer our positions will get to each other's. In any case, I would never deny that having a great distributor can make life much easier for a big. I just don't think Mason's production or style of play in that season changed drastically in the wake of the toe injury. But from the way people around here assert it as undisputed fact, you'd think Mason went from 20 ppg to zero. (I realize that is an exaggeration, and that it is not your position at all. Just saying.)

My goodness... you're a regular Nostradamus. Just joking around. I too don't think Mason's production or style of play in that season changed drastically in the wake of the toe injury, but I think his effectiveness did. While he has pleasantly added to his repertoire, to this day, Mason's best move/shot is a dunk.

Kedsy
03-21-2012, 05:25 PM
Love the back and forth, no snarkiness intended. We lost 3 of our last 8 games and got a little 3pt happy. I also felt that Austin dominated the ball more toward the end of the season.

A better analysis would probably involve touches but I don't know where you could find that data.

My point is that a good/great 1 makes the bigs better. Let me ask you a question. Does Tyler Zeller win ACC POY if you swap Kendall Marshall with either Austin Rivers or Seth Curry? I'd guess no. Does Mason have a better year if we make the same swap? I'd guess yes. Does Duke have a better year if we make that swap? I'd say probably with Austin and definitely with Seth. (FTR, I think Duke had a very good year with an unfortunate crappy ending).

There's no question in my mind that a great PG allows all his players (including the bigs) more shots and in most cases a higher degree of effectiveness. As far as Zeller is concerned, I didn't think he should have been player of the year even with Marshall (I would have given it to Scott), but I think he still would have been first team all-conference if he'd had Austin or Seth instead of Marshall. Of all the UNC players, it seems to me he's the one guy who could pretty much do what he does no matter who's feeding him the ball. My guess is Mason probably has a slightly better year with Marshall -- maybe an extra dunk a game, which is probably what Kyrie gave him, too.

Does Duke have a better year with Marshall swapped for Seth? Possibly. Marshall wouldn't have fixed our biggest problem -- defense. Our offense was actually rated higher than UNC's for pretty much the entire year before Ryan got hurt, so I'm not sure how much better Marshall could have made us. I suspect whether or not we'd have been better would depend on how well Austin could have learned to play off the ball. I also suspect that of all our players, the one who would have shown the most improvement with Marshall playing PG for us would have been Andre, who would have gotten the ball when he was open a lot more than he did. Swapping Marshall for Austin would have been interesting to see. It would have meant we had nobody who could get his own shot, but someone really good at getting shots for others. Although, again, offense wasn't really our problem, and Austin is a better defensive player than Marshall. (And when I say all this, I'm not talking about the last three games when Ryan was hurt, but for the 31 games before that.)

ncexnyc
03-21-2012, 08:17 PM
Can somebody please pinch me and tell me that I'm dreaming. Am I really seeing Mason Plumlee and his severely limited offensive game being mentioned in the same breath as Tyler "ACC Player of the Year" Zeller?

Get post position. CHECK
Catch entry pass. CHECK
Feel defender on my body. CHECK
Sorry, but this appears to be Mason's offensive M.O. It's as if he's got a mental checklist that he goes down before attempting a shot.

Now he made huge strides this year as he actually seemed to have some moves, but stiff, robotic, and mechanical are pretty good adjectives to describe his post play.

As I've written throughout the year. The physical tools are there. If he can reach the point where his moves become second nature, he can become a true low post beast.

MChambers
03-21-2012, 08:39 PM
Plumlee, Mason (if he returns): work on more post moves; free throw shooting; work on getting more relaxed out there so that his natural athleticism can take over; watch tape of Chris Webber.
Someone should make sure the tape does not show Webber shooting free throws.

ncexnyc
03-21-2012, 08:58 PM
Someone should make sure the tape does not show Webber shooting free throws.
Nor should it involve end of game management.

lotusland
03-21-2012, 09:17 PM
In the NBA, Mason would have to develop a mid range shot to add to his offensive abilities. Guys with his size and athleticism need to have more than he can bring to the party to be successful. I bring this up since he has shown no sign of going in that direction and he gets very few shots a game unless they are dunks. Why hasn't the staff encouraged him to add an outside shot? I hope the answer is that he has tried but it didn't work out.

He just got comfy shooting a set shot unguarded from 15-ft. Besides the rest of the team was standing outside the lane so no room for Mason to join them out there and someone had to try to rebound the three pointers.

UrinalCake
03-21-2012, 09:24 PM
He just got comfy shooting a set shot unguarded from 15-ft. Besides the rest of the team was standing outside the lane so no room for Mason to join them out there and someone had to try to rebound the three pointers.

Yeah, it wouldn't really benefit our team that much for Mason to develop an outside shot. We're better off letting our guards take those shots and keeping Mason under the basket. In the NBA he'll need to have that shot in his arsenal, which is one of the reasons why I think he'll leave this summer - Pro Mason needs different skills than College Mason and he just won't have the opportunity to develop them here.

ncexnyc
03-21-2012, 09:58 PM
Yeah, it wouldn't really benefit our team that much for Mason to develop an outside shot. We're better off letting our guards take those shots and keeping Mason under the basket. In the NBA he'll need to have that shot in his arsenal, which is one of the reasons why I think he'll leave this summer - Pro Mason needs different skills than College Mason and he just won't have the opportunity to develop them here.

You might want to store this away in your memory banks and look it over the next time we have a discussion on recruiting big men.

I know some have said that we could use the fact that Lance has made it to the NBA as a recruiting tool, however I'm sure there are coaches out there who will point to that and say, "See, Duke's scheme prevented Lance from developing to his full potential."

If we can't turn a physical specimen like Mason Plumlee into an NBA ready player, that might be further ammo to be used against us in recruiting.

Matches
03-22-2012, 10:23 AM
You might want to store this away in your memory banks and look it over the next time we have a discussion on recruiting big men.

I know some have said that we could use the fact that Lance has made it to the NBA as a recruiting tool, however I'm sure there are coaches out there who will point to that and say, "See, Duke's scheme prevented Lance from developing to his full potential."

If we can't turn a physical specimen like Mason Plumlee into an NBA ready player, that might be further ammo to be used against us in recruiting.

Those arguments are so circular, though. If a guy comes in and dominates, then he would've been good with or without Duke. If he performs better in college than in the pros, it's because Duke didn't prepare him properly. If he performs better in the pros than he did in college, it's because Duke was holding him back. People will recruit negatively against us under any and all circumstances.

I agree about Mason and his jumper, though. It reminds me of the Heel fans who were convinced Sean May should come back for his senior year so he could play on the perimeter. Sure, because THAT's what he would have been doing in CH.

CDu
03-22-2012, 11:07 AM
You might want to store this away in your memory banks and look it over the next time we have a discussion on recruiting big men.

I know some have said that we could use the fact that Lance has made it to the NBA as a recruiting tool, however I'm sure there are coaches out there who will point to that and say, "See, Duke's scheme prevented Lance from developing to his full potential."

If we can't turn a physical specimen like Mason Plumlee into an NBA ready player, that might be further ammo to be used against us in recruiting.

Yeah, perception is perception. People who don't care for Duke's approach are going to use guys like Thomas as evidence that we don't utilize our bigs properly. And not getting more out of the Plumlees is a question mark.

That said, I don't think Mason should work on his perimeter game. I think he still has enough work to do on his post game before worrying about developing a perimeter shot. I'd argue that his first 1+ years were lost to some degree because he spent too much time playing outside in (I remember some posts during/after his freshman year in which people were suggesting he'd show more shooting range than McRoberts) rather than learning how play closer to the basket.

If he decides to come back, I want to see him work on polishing his back to the basket game and his overall instinctiveness/fluidity in the post. Master that, and he can play with anyone in the league. Without that I think the Jeff Foster comparison isn't too far off.

CameronCrazy06
03-22-2012, 11:51 AM
Been reading over this thread for a few days now, and finally registered so I could share my two cents. First of all, as has been said many times, it's almost impossible to predict what will happen next year until we have a better idea what the roster looks like. Right now, we have so many questions that have yet to be answered. (Will Austin/Mason go pro?/Will we add anymore recruits?/Will we lose any players to transfer?/What will our coaching staff look like?/etc.)

As far as Austin and Mason go, it seems like a lot of it is going to be based on who declares from other programs around them, as this will affect their stock a lot. I just heard that Mason will be "testing the waters", as expected. As of right now, I'm under the assumption that both will declare, and that we will not be able to add anymore recruits to our current class (Muhammed and Parker seem like long shots, and I think Amile is leaning towards NC State). However, that may not be a bad thing in the end, because we also have Marshall Plumlee and Murphy coming off of red-shirts, so it's as if we have three new players coming in next year. We're also filling in needs, big time. Rasheed Sulaimon is the type of player we could have used this year; a very talented offensive player who works hard on defense as well. Murphy should also be a contributor right away, and the reports of him adding height and weight are promising. Marshall may come in raw offensively, and I don't expect him to be able to start right away, but we may be forced to insert him in the lineup early. I think he will provide us with solid rebounding and defense, and I think the red-shirt year will help him a lot. From what I've seen, he's definitely more polished than Miles and Mason were offensively as freshmen, but he doesn't have the elite athleticism.

Also it's hard to predict how players will develop over the course of an off-season. I don't think a lot of people saw Ryan Kelly's emergence coming last season, and we could see a similar improvement from a player we don't expect next season. It's very important for our players to stay healthy in this off-season though (hoping Kelly being sidelined 6-8 weeks doesn't set him back too much), and when I say this I'm mainly speaking of Quinn Cook. Injuries set back his season in a big way; I think he could have played a much bigger role on the team if he had a full off-season with the team and was able to participate in the China trip. But I definitely feel like next season's starting lineup will vary constantly just like this season's did. The notion of defining someone's role during the off-season is absurd because so many things can change over the course of the season, as we saw this year. Finding a lineup that works can sometimes take a lot of experimenting, I'm just hopeful we can find one much quicker than it took us to this year.

But no matter what our lineup looks like next season, I want to dismiss the idea that Duke will not be competitive in the postseason. First of all, I know it is easy to take him for granted, but we have arguably the greatest coach in the history of all sports running our team, and it is unwise to ever bet against him. Look at all he accomplished with this team, despite what we lost from the 2010-11 team. Second of all, as I mentioned earlier, we have no idea how our players will develop from now until the start of the next season. Finally, the landscape of the ACC next year is going to look completely different than it does now. For instance, UNC could end up losing up to FIVE players to the NBA Draft. Obviously that would be a big hit to their program, and the past two times they have been hit like that (2005, 2009), they have not been a top-level team in the ACC. NC State has a great recruiting class coming in, and they have the chance to add to it with Jefferson, and this class could propel them into a chance of winning the ACC next year. Teams like FSU and Virginia are going to lose a lot of key pieces, and should take a step back. Obviously, a lot of this is yet to be determined, but from what I can gather, no matter what roster Duke retains from this season, I don't think they'll be out of contention for an ACC Championship.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see, we'll get a much better idea over the next few weeks.

Channing
03-22-2012, 02:04 PM
One of the most confounding issues this season was the unwillingless/inability of our guards to feed the post. Occasionally it looked like the team focused on getting Mason and Miles the ball deep in the post where they could take one dribble and put up a good shot, but more often than not the ball would swing to a wing and the guard would just wait for the big to come set the screen. Even then, the guard essentially refused to play a two man game on the pick and roll.

I don't know if the failure was due to short guards who couldn't see over or around those guarding them, poor footwork and positioning by our bigs, or just a focus by K and the staff not to feed the post. I watched Zoubek for 4 years, and am convinced that had he gotten more deep post touches he would have been a very good offensive weapon. He had good post moves, even if he only rarely got to show them.

For that reason, I think Cook's improvement this offseason will be crucial to our success next year. TT may bring certain attributes to the team, but Cook is our best playmaker, appears to have the best handle, and will be our best option (from an offensive standpoint) at PG next year. At times this year it became the Austin show, or the Seth show, and I don't think that will fly next year. We are going to need a team effort each and every game, which will require someone quarterbacking everything. I believe in Marshall, and, with a year of practice at Duke under his belt, think he can and will be very good. However, I don't get the sense that he can create his own offense (ala Thomas Robinson). He will need someone to actively watch him and feed him the ball.

I hate to use it as an example, but our foes down the street appear to focus heavily on this aspect, and look at how effective their big men appear to be year after year.

Bluealum
03-22-2012, 11:17 PM
One of the most confounding issues this season was the unwillingless/inability of our guards to feed the post. Occasionally it looked like the team focused on getting Mason and Miles the ball deep in the post where they could take one dribble and put up a good shot, but more often than not the ball would swing to a wing and the guard would just wait for the big to come set the screen. Even then, the guard essentially refused to play a two man game on the pick and roll.

I don't know if the failure was due to short guards who couldn't see over or around those guarding them, poor footwork and positioning by our bigs, or just a focus by K and the staff not to feed the post. I watched Zoubek for 4 years, and am convinced that had he gotten more deep post touches he would have been a very good offensive weapon. He had good post moves, even if he only rarely got to show them.

For that reason, I think Cook's improvement this offseason will be crucial to our success next year. TT may bring certain attributes to the team, but Cook is our best playmaker, appears to have the best handle, and will be our best option (from an offensive standpoint) at PG next year. At times this year it became the Austin show, or the Seth show, and I don't think that will fly next year. We are going to need a team effort each and every game, which will require someone quarterbacking everything. I believe in Marshall, and, with a year of practice at Duke under his belt, think he can and will be very good. However, I don't get the sense that he can create his own offense (ala Thomas Robinson). He will need someone to actively watch him and feed him the ball.

I hate to use it as an example, but our foes down the street appear to focus heavily on this aspect, and look at how effective their big men appear to be year after year.

You rubbed two sore spots so prepare to have your post dissected.
1.) You suggested we don't run a 'big' friendly offense
2.) You suggested our friends down the road do it better while we are still the program least removed from a National Championship

I actually agree with much of what you say, so I shall leave the counter arguments to others. I suspect It is going to be difficult due to the makeup of the team next year to have Cook play a leading role. With 3 or 4 seniors and 2 juniors that give everything they have on every outing, the younger guys have to be dominant to get playing time. If there are pros and cons with players, K usually goes with the older guys.

So....for Cook to take the reigns, and serious minutes away from Curry and Thornton, he has to become stellar on defense. Not better than he is this year, but stellar. I say this because Thornton is a favorite based on attitude and Curry is a 5th year senior who has paid his dues, knows the system, and plays very well against all but the most athletic of defenders. I for one am rooting for, but not expecting, that sort of overwhelming improvement. My guess is he will still be relegated to starting occasionally and playing behind Thornton and Curry since all 3 can't be on the court simultaneously. I think this will be the right strategy to win the most games, but not to win against the most athletic/talented teams, but I know that opinion is not shared by many.

I also agree that our offense has never really been that 'big' friendly, and this obviously is a controversial point. I believe this is why our great big men like Boozer and Williams and even Brand to a lesser extent (he was a #1 pick - but the choice was very controversial in the national media at the time) appear to have exceeded expectations in the NBA. They were great at Duke, but I believe could have been even better in terms of the numbers they put up, if our system used things like the pick and roll, which you mentioned, more extensively. The thing is, even if they were better off in terms of numbers and draft spots (impossible for Brand, but certainly both Williams and Boozer fell further than they should have, for all their talent), it doesn't mean Duke is any better in terms of wins and losses. A big friendly system, like Carolina or Kansas runs, doesn't always translate to more wins. K has great success recruiting elite shooters and encourages them to shoot if they have even a moderate opening. This naturally means less touches for the bigs, which many fail to see in the back and forth that is this never ending topic. We can't be both 3 point shooter friendly and big friendly at the same time, there is a give and take. Our give and take, favoring 3 point shooting and de-emphasizing post entry passing, has proven to be a very successful strategy time and again, as our incredible record over 30 years has shown.

I think the arguments that we don't develop big men is entirely false. I think our talented bigs typically overachieve relative to draft position in the NBA. This speaks to good fundamentals and great coaching....but it also suggests that the system does not spotlight their talents.

I also think that it is easy to argue that Duke is perhaps the best team in the country on which to be a lights out 3 point shooter who can defend. You will get the green light to go, and the screens and movement to get you free. You could argue that our talented guards have often been underachievers relative to draft position in the NBA. Think about where Langdon, Avery, and Redick were drafted compared to Boozer and Williams.

This is our system and it has been enormously successful. Because of it, we will be able to recruit elite shooters to Duke. Also because of it, we will have a bigger challenge recruiting uber-talented big men. When they come, they develop their skills and we win championships, even if they aren't as featured as they would be on other teams. It is what we root for as fans, but I can see why every great shooter wants to come here and most great big men hesitate.

I got a lot more long winded than I expected...so I shall stop. It's just one more opinion on a topic that shall carry on as long as K is coaching at Duke. For that reason alone, I hope it goes on a long, long time.

Kedsy
03-23-2012, 12:17 AM
When they come, they develop their skills and we win championships, even if they aren't as featured as they would be on other teams.

Is this really true? The "golden age" of Duke big men lasted 9 years but we only won one national championship. Singular. Brand and S Williams combined for zero (0).

meowmix911
03-23-2012, 12:55 AM
Wasn't Shelden Williams drafted 5th by the Hawks? He's had a very mediocre pro career. There's no way he's exceeded his expectations... He's fallen way short, if you look at his numbers relative to his college numbers, by any measure.

sagegrouse
03-23-2012, 07:34 AM
Is this really true? The "golden age" of Duke big men lasted 9 years but we only won one national championship. Singular. Brand and S Williams combined for zero (0).

BY that standard, Dawkins, Alarie, Ferry, Gminski, Mullins, Heyman, Verga, and Marin were utter failures for collectively going to 12 Final Fours -- seven distinct ones.

Besides, Singular did win an NCAA championship (2010), but you spelled his name wrong.

Brand and Shel and Boozer did not overlap and won seven ACC titles, three regionals, and one NC in nine years. And there really are 300+ Div I teams trying to win something significant.

sagegrouse

CDu
03-23-2012, 08:47 AM
Is this really true? The "golden age" of Duke big men lasted 9 years but we only won one national championship. Singular. Brand and S Williams combined for zero (0).

Three Final Fours (meaning we were a Regional Champion) and 7 ACC Championships. So yes, it's really true. Those Duke teams were really really good, and better than our more recent Duke teams. And they most certainly won championships.

Granted we had even more success in the other Golden Age of Duke basketball (7 Regional Championships, 2 National Championships, fewer ACC Championships) without a true big man. But that was a different era of college basketball. And we augmented it with bigger wings and more transcendent college talent (with some good fortune sprinkled in).

jv001
03-23-2012, 08:56 AM
Three Final Fours (meaning we were a Regional Champion) and 7 ACC Championships. So yes, it's really true. Those Duke teams were really really good, and better than our more recent Duke teams. And they most certainly won championships.

Granted we had even more success in the other Golden Age of Duke basketball (7 Regional Championships, 2 National Championships, fewer ACC Championships) without a true big man. But that was a different era of college basketball. And we augmented it with bigger wings and more transcendent college talent (with some good fortune sprinkled in).

Good points and I might add that college basketball has really changed over the years. The college game used to flow much smoother. At least offensively it was smoother. But for some reason the game changed to a rougher style of defense. I remember when ACC teams went into the NCAAT, games were called differently. We (ACC) were not used to the contact and had to adjust quickly or be eliminated early. Then this type of play filtered down to our conference and now the game is played the same in all conferences. Personally I liked the way the game was played when it wasn't so rough. GoDuke!

dcar1985
03-23-2012, 11:23 AM
Ok one domino has fallen....Austin is gone, I actually think that allows our offense to flow better next year and be more complex than just having Austin work off a high screen n roll....

Matches
03-23-2012, 11:31 AM
Ok one domino has fallen....Austin is gone, I actually think that allows our offense to flow better next year and be more complex than just having Austin work off a high screen n roll....

I can't recall a year where we knew so little about how next year's team would look - maybe 1999 when Brand et al were leaving. But between NBA defections, possible transfer/ graduation rumors, and undeclared recruits, it's hard to say much of anything about next year's team at this point. We could be anywhere from a natty contender to a bubble team.

Rich
03-23-2012, 11:32 AM
Ok one domino has fallen....Austin is gone, I actually think that allows our offense to flow better next year and be more complex than just having Austin work off a high screen n roll....

Do you have a link?

dcar1985
03-23-2012, 11:47 AM
I can't recall a year where we knew so little about how next year's team would look - maybe 1999 when Brand et al were leaving. But between NBA defections, possible transfer/ graduation rumors, and undeclared recruits, it's hard to say much of anything about next year's team at this point. We could be anywhere from a natty contender to a bubble team.

Im not saying that will necessarily translate into W's...we have a lot of ? on defense and I honestly don't have much faith in Marshall as our starting center if Mason takes off too I just believe the offense will have a better flow to it. Austin is somewhat of a ball stopper and we would get in the habit of standing around and watching him work, that was basically the whole offense....kind of like Melo and how even though he was clearly the best player on the team at times the Nuggets and Knicks look better without him on the court.

azzefkram
03-23-2012, 12:04 PM
So....for Cook to take the reigns, and serious minutes away from Curry and Thornton, he has to become stellar on defense. Not better than he is this year, but stellar.

I hope you are way wrong on this because with Curry and Thornton as our primary playmakers Duke becomes very one dimensional on offense.


Curry is a 5th year senior who has paid his dues, knows the system,

Greg Paulus says "Hi."


I think the arguments that we don't develop big men is entirely false.

Couldn't agree more. If you look at the per 40 of MPI, MPII and Kelly, you see significant improvement in pts & rbds with a decrease in fouls. Most of the other stats have stayed about level. Kelly's improvement is kind of eye opening. The improvement is not as pronounced with our guards.

Channing
03-23-2012, 12:15 PM
I hope you are way wrong on this because with Curry and Thornton as our primary playmakers Duke becomes very one dimensional on offense.



Greg Paulus says "Hi."



Couldn't agree more. If you look at the per 40 of MPI, MPII and Kelly, you see significant improvement in pts & rbds with a decrease in fouls. Most of the other stats have stayed about level. Kelly's improvement is kind of eye opening. The improvement is not as pronounced with our guards.

Our bigs improve, our offense just does not seem to develop low post players. None of our recent bits: zoubek, plumlee a and b, lance, or Kelly have developed a reliable low post move. The plumlees appeared to have the little hook, but it disappeared for games at a time. Despite their universal high ranking (except miles) they never became, or were never used as low post threats.

As I mentioned, I think the reason is just as attributable to the reluctance to feed the post as it is to the play itself. But, there is no reason Mason and miles shouldn't dominate. Their footwork remains questionable and the seem to lack the go-to instinct inside. Watching the first two possessions of Duke v UNC at Cameron clearly showed what miles and Mason are capable of.

Kedsy
03-23-2012, 12:37 PM
BY that standard, Dawkins, Alarie, Ferry, Gminski, Mullins, Heyman, Verga, and Marin were utter failures for collectively going to 12 Final Fours -- seven distinct ones.

It's not my standard. Someone said the Brand/Boozer/Williams teams "won championships." I was pointing out they won "championship" (singular).


Besides, Singular did win an NCAA championship (2010), but you spelled his name wrong.

Ha ha.


Brand and Shel and Boozer did not overlap and won seven ACC titles, three regionals, and one NC in nine years. And there really are 300+ Div I teams trying to win something significant.

I'm not downplaying what they accomplished. Really, my point is we also accomplished plenty both before and after that time period (a lot more before, a little less after, but in the same discussion).

Reilly
03-23-2012, 12:54 PM
... Brand and Shel and Boozer did not overlap and won seven ACC titles, three regionals, and one NC in nine years. And there really are 300+ Div I teams trying to win something significant.

sagegrouse

Comparing various golden ages (if I'm counting right) ...

1986-1994: 16 championships in 9 years (2 national, 7 regional, 3 ACCT, 4 ACC regular)

1998-2006: 17 championships in 9 years (1 national, 3 regional, 7 ACCT, 6 ACC regular)

2007-2012: 6 championships in 6 years (1 national, 1 regional, 3 ACCT, 1 ACC regular)

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/

CDu
03-23-2012, 01:00 PM
Comparing various golden ages (if I'm counting right) ...

1986-1994: 16 championships in 9 years (2 national, 7 regional, 3 ACCT, 4 ACC regular)

1998-2006: 17 championships in 9 years (1 national, 3 regional, 7 ACCT, 6 ACC regular)

2007-2012: 6 championships in 6 years (1 national, 1 regional, 3 ACCT, 1 ACC regular)

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/

Yup, that looks about right. Clearly a distinct difference between the two 9-year golden ages and the last 6 years. Not that the last 6 years have been anything to sneeze at. But clearly a distinct difference.

Kedsy
03-23-2012, 01:18 PM
Yup, that looks about right. Clearly a distinct difference between the two 9-year golden ages and the last 6 years. Not that the last 6 years have been anything to sneeze at. But clearly a distinct difference.

Perhaps. If you skip '83 to '85 and '95 to '97, then there's an argument you should skip '07 to '09 as well (things fall apart plus two recovery seasons). In the last three years according to Reilly's definitions we've had 5 championships in 3 years, which obviously is a smaller sample size, but the ratio is in line with the other two golden ages. We'll have to wait and see, and this would be contingent on K coaching that long, but I think it's very possible the 9 year stretch from 2010 to 2018 will be in the same ballpark as the other two time periods.

CDu
03-23-2012, 01:20 PM
Perhaps. If you skip '83 to '85 and '95 to '97, then there's an argument you should skip '07 to '09 as well (things fall apart plus two recovery seasons). In the last three years according to Reilly's definitions we've had 5 championships in 3 years, which obviously is a smaller sample size, but the ratio is in line with the other two golden ages. We'll have to wait and see, and this would be contingent on K coaching that long, but I think it's very possible the 9 year stretch from 2010 to 2018 will be in the same ballpark as the other two time periods.

I very much hope you're right. We'll see.

DukieinSoCal
03-23-2012, 01:23 PM
Ok one domino has fallen....Austin is gone, I actually think that allows our offense to flow better next year and be more complex than just having Austin work off a high screen n roll....

Let's start getting back to ball pressure and a more up-tempo game with Quinn and Sheed in the backcourt! I think the team has a higher ceiling with Quinn starting than Tyler. Let him play and learn/develop. As long as we keep improving, hopefully we'll peak late instead of early next year.

CDu
03-23-2012, 01:35 PM
Let's start getting back to ball pressure and a more up-tempo game with Quinn and Sheed in the backcourt! I think the team has a higher ceiling with Quinn starting than Tyler. Let him play and learn/develop. As long as we keep improving, hopefully we'll peak late instead of early next year.

I don't think there's much question that Cook provides the higher ceiling. The question is just how close he'll get to that ceiling. Thornton has a lower floor due to his defense and steadiness offensively. Cook could either blossom into really great or struggle mightily.

There are a LOT of interesting pieces for next year. Cook, Sulaimon, Gbinije, Curry, Dawkins, Murphy, Marshall. All have a great chance to make a big jump. Even a guy like Kelly (if he adds some post skills to his perimeter gifts) and Hairston (if he can refine his offensive game more) could make big jumps. There's lots of talent and we could go lots of different ways. All good, some potentially REALLY good.

UrinalCake
03-23-2012, 01:56 PM
I posted this in the Rivers/Mason thread but I think Austin leaving allows us some more clearly defined roles in the backcourt. I see Tyler and Cook splitting time at point (kind of like Avery and Wojo) with Seth playing off the ball. Rasheed will work his way into the rotation and play some at the 2 and some at the 3, or I guess it's possible he may start at the 3 over Dawkins.

If Austin had stayed, we'd have the same problem as this year which is too many small guards and not enough minutes. I think we spent the majority of this season trying different combinations to see what worked. I don't think Seth is a natural point guard at all but Coach K was forced to try him there because of Austin. It got to the point where that just couldn't work, so we continued tinkering. Anyways, as much as I hate to lose Austin, the bright side is that perhaps a more consistent rotation will allow us to develop better as a team. That was part of what made the 2010 so great, we had a set rotation starting around January so everyone knew what to expect.

CDu
03-23-2012, 03:06 PM
I posted this in the Rivers/Mason thread but I think Austin leaving allows us some more clearly defined roles in the backcourt. I see Tyler and Cook splitting time at point (kind of like Avery and Wojo) with Seth playing off the ball. Rasheed will work his way into the rotation and play some at the 2 and some at the 3, or I guess it's possible he may start at the 3 over Dawkins.

If Austin had stayed, we'd have the same problem as this year which is too many small guards and not enough minutes. I think we spent the majority of this season trying different combinations to see what worked. I don't think Seth is a natural point guard at all but Coach K was forced to try him there because of Austin. It got to the point where that just couldn't work, so we continued tinkering. Anyways, as much as I hate to lose Austin, the bright side is that perhaps a more consistent rotation will allow us to develop better as a team. That was part of what made the 2010 so great, we had a set rotation starting around January so everyone knew what to expect.

I'm not sure how this changes things all that much, unless you anticipate more minutes from Gbinije and/or Murphy at the 3. Otherwise, we're replacing Rivers (6'4"/6'5") with more minutes from Sulaimon (6'4" ish) Dawkins (6'4"), and Cook/Thornton (6'2" and under). Losing the tallest guard we had and replacing them with smaller guards would seem to leave us in about the same situation. And in terms of certainty, it would seem even more uncertain than a situation where you know Curry and Rivers are playing 30+ mpg and it's just a battle for the other 50-60.

UrinalCake
03-23-2012, 03:11 PM
I'm not sure how this changes things all that much, unless you anticipate more minutes from Gbinije and/or Murphy at the 3. Otherwise, we're replacing Rivers (6'4"/6'5") with more minutes from Sulaimon (6'4" ish) Dawkins (6'4"), and Cook/Thornton (6'2" and under). Losing the tallest guard we had and replacing them with smaller guards would seem to leave us in about the same situation. And in terms of certainty, it would seem even more uncertain than a situation where you know Curry and Rivers are playing 30+ mpg and it's just a battle for the other 50-60.

With Rivers we have four guys for two positions. One of them (Rivers) would likely play 30+ minutes per game. I don't think any of these four guys will be playing minutes at the 3 next year with the additions of Rasheed and Murphy. Coach K certainly isn't going to sell Rivers on coming back by telling him he's going to play the 3. So with Rivers leaving, now we have three guys for two positions. I'm not saying it makes us better, but it does make it an easier decision as to who is playing where, and that has some benefit.

_Gary
03-23-2012, 03:47 PM
With Rivers we have four guys for two positions. One of them (Rivers) would likely play 30+ minutes per game. I don't think any of these four guys will be playing minutes at the 3 next year with the additions of Rasheed and Murphy. Coach K certainly isn't going to sell Rivers on coming back by telling him he's going to play the 3. So with Rivers leaving, now we have three guys for two positions. I'm not saying it makes us better, but it does make it an easier decision as to who is playing where, and that has some benefit.

I must be missing something. Even after Rivers leaves I still have us with four guys for two positions. Unless you consider Andre a 3. I know we play him there, but I still look at him as a SG.

UrinalCake
03-23-2012, 03:51 PM
I'm looking at Cook, Thornton, and Curry as the guys who will play the two guard spots. I do see Dawkins as a 3, unless he can develop some sort of handle and gain some quickness on D.

_Gary
03-23-2012, 03:55 PM
I'm looking at Cook, Thornton, and Curry as the guys who will play the two guard spots. I do see Dawkins as a 3, unless he can develop some sort of handle and gain some quickness on D.

Okay. Andre is unusual in that he has both positives and negatives that can allow for him being labeled a 2 or a 3. I just feel like he doesn't bang enough or have enough slashing and low post skills to be labeled a 3. Plus, at 6-4 I think he's a tad short to be a true 3. But it's all in the way you look at it. Arguments can be made on both sides concerning him, imho.

diveonthefloor
03-23-2012, 04:04 PM
Ok one domino has fallen....Austin is gone, I actually think that allows our offense to flow better next year and be more complex than just having Austin work off a high screen n roll....

I agree totally. Austin doesn't seem to play the "college game" well. With him on the floor, K converted us to an NBA style offense, and we couldn't make that work well. Austin's game will translate to the NBA but he will be overmatched by more seasoned and more talented shooting guards for awhile. Wouldn't be surprised to see some success after 4 seasons or so, but may have to spend some NBDL time.

Looking forward to a more team oriented approach next year. Would be interesting to see if Austin's departure actually encourages one or two recruits to select Duke who otherwise would go elsewhere.