Has K Ever Won The NCAA Title With A 3 Guard Lineup?

[CALVET]

Did all of Duke's title teams have a big small forward (6'6" or bigger)?

Although Coach K's 3-guard alignments might penetrate and shoot better, do they suffer in terms of defense and rebounding especially at the small forward position and does this put too much responsibility on the 4 and 5 position to rebound and block shots?

Given the paltry amount of minutes Mike Gbinije played this year and his potential to play a small forward or big guard should he also have been redshirted along with Marshall and Murphy if he was not going to be developed this year?

Could silent G play a big 2-guard along side Murphy at small forward?

On offense, Duke never seems to have block out position on the weak-side when the ball goes up, is this a product of the offensive system or my imagination?

Do my questions sound rhetorical and am I wrong to second guess Coach K?

Feel free to slam

[CameronBornAndBred]

Given the paltry amount of minutes Mike Gbinije played this year and his potential to play a small forward or big guard should he also have been redshirted along with Marshall and Murphy if he was not going to be developed this year?

Paltry minutes or not, he got real game experience, which at some point you have to teach also.

[jimsumner]

Selected Duke starting lineups

1986- 6-8, 6-8, 6-5, 6-2, 6-0.

1988-6-10, 6-6, 6-5, 6-5, 6-3.

1991- 6-11, 6-8, 6-6, 6-4, 6-1

1999- 6-8, 6-8, 6-6, 6-3, 6-2

2004-6-9, 6-8, 6-4, 6-3, 6-2

All of these teams advanced to the Final Four. 1998, 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006 and 2009 all advanced at least to the Sweet Sixteen with at least three starters 6-6 or shorter.

[Bob Green]

Did all of Duke's title teams have a big small forward (6'6" or bigger)?

Feel free to slam

I see no reason for anyone to slam you as your post asks reasonable questions. Here are the starting line-ups in the Championship Game of our four titles:

1991: Laettner (6'11"), Grant Hill (6'8"), Koubek (6'6"), Thomas Hill (6'5") and Hurley (6'2")
1992: Laettner (6'11"), Lang (6'8"), Grant Hill (6'8"), Thomas Hill (6'5") and Hurley (6'2")
2001: Sanders (6'11"), Battier (6'8"), Dunleavy (6'9"), Williams (6'2") and Duhon (6'1")
2010: Zoubek (7'1"), Thomas (6'8"), Singler (6'8"), Scheyer (6'5") and Smith (6'2")

So yes, each title team had a small forward who was at least 6'6" and on three of the four National Championship teams the starting small forward was at least 6'8".

[jimsumner]

I see no reason for anyone to slam you as your post asks reasonable questions. Here are the starting line-ups in the Championship Game of our four titles:

1991: Laettner (6'11"), Grant Hill (6'8"), Koubek (6'6"), Thomas Hill (6'5") and Hurley (6'2")
1992: Laettner (6'11"), Lang (6'8"), Grant Hill (6'8"), Thomas Hill (6'5") and Hurley (6'2")
2001: Sanders (6'11"), Battier (6'8"), Dunleavy (6'9"), Williams (6'2") and Duhon (6'1")
2010: Zoubek (7'1"), Thomas (6'8"), Singler (6'8"), Scheyer (6'5") and Smith (6'2")

So yes, each title team had a small forward who was at least 6'6" and on three of the four National Championship teams the starting small forward was at least 6'8".

It should be noted that Grant and Lang both started the 1992 title game because Brian Davis had wrenched a knee in the semifinal win over IU. Prior to that injury, the 6-6 senior started the bulk of Duke's game that season.

[Bob Green]

It should be noted that Grant and Lang both started the 1992 title game because Brian Davis had wrenched a knee in the semifinal win over IU. Prior to that injury, the 6-6 senior started the bulk of Duke's game that season.

Thanks for pointing that out Jim. I simply went with starting line-ups, but according to GoDuke.com Brian Davis started 35 of 36 games in the 91-92 season. I remember being very concerned as I watched (on TV) Brian Davis board the team bus using crutches after the semi-final game.

[CDu]

It should be noted that Grant and Lang both started the 1992 title game because Brian Davis had wrenched a knee in the semifinal win over IU. Prior to that injury, the 6-6 senior started the bulk of Duke's game that season.

In the interest of full disclosure, I think Davis was listed at 6'7".

[MChambers]

In the interest of full disclosure, I think Davis was listed at 6'7".
As I recall, he got his ankle rolled in the semifinal, not his knee. Gave a truly gutsy performance in the final.

[Newton_14]

As I recall, he got his ankle rolled in the semifinal, not his knee. Gave a truly gutsy performance in the final.

Gutsy indeed. Brian would have been a great fit on this years team eh?

[Greg_Newton]

I'd say there's a pretty big difference between a 6'6 forward and a 6'4 guard. Corey Maggette/Chris Carrawell certainly do not equal Austin Rivers as a SF, sizewise.

[UrinalCake]

It's kind of hard for me to buy the argument that G should have redshirted. Every freshman faces a learning curve and at the beginning of the season there's no crystal ball to tell you how many minutes he's going to wind up playing. G kept himself ready to play all season long, and the times he did come into the game he was there for a reason.

Perimeter rebounding was definitely a weakness this year but simply plugging in a taller guy doesn't necessarily make us a better team. With that said, there were plenty of fans clamoring for G to get more playing time at various points during the season. None of us knows exactly what went on during practices or how ready he actually was to play. I'm of the mindset that he wasn't ready to play more minutes, but a lot of people disagree with me...

[Newton_14]

It's kind of hard for me to buy the argument that G should have redshirted. Every freshman faces a learning curve and at the beginning of the season there's no crystal ball to tell you how many minutes he's going to wind up playing. G kept himself ready to play all season long, and the times he did come into the game he was there for a reason.

Perimeter rebounding was definitely a weakness this year but simply plugging in a taller guy doesn't necessarily make us a better team. With that said, there were plenty of fans clamoring for G to get more playing time at various points during the season. None of us knows exactly what went on during practices or how ready he actually was to play. I'm of the mindset that he wasn't ready to play more minutes, but a lot of people disagree with me...

Yeah, I agree with you here. Mike got PT in the exhibition games and the early cupcake games that did have value. He showed enough promise that it was the right thing to not red shirt him. It is actually ok for a freshman to play the amount of minutes Gbinije played this year. Several fine players at Duke and other schools have played similar minutes and went on to develop into good players. I had hoped he would have developed faster and garnered more minutes, however, he had Austin, Andre, Ryan, and Josh ahead of him in the rotation on a team that went 27-7 and earned a 2 Seed.

I hope folks do not give up on Gbinije. There is a ton of talent there, and once the game slows down for him, I think everyone will be pleasantly surprised in the results. I think he will get every chance in the world come next October to earn minutes and play his way into the rotation. Based on how things ended this season, I imagine just about every position is up for grabs going into next year. Silent G will work hard this summer and play his way into the rotation. Both he and Murphy are going to step up. That's my prediction anyway. Too much talent in both kids for that not to happen.

[cspan37421]

Selected Duke starting lineups

1986- 6-8, 6-8, 6-5, 6-2, 6-0.



I remember 1986 with a heavy heart, and IMO height was a big factor in that game - though in that year it was not so much the backcourt height as the frontcourt. We suffered 7 blocked shots in that game and were -12 on rebounds. We only lost by 3. And other than Johnny D, we did not shoot well, esp. in the 2nd half. And Johnny was doubled a lot, leaving others open who to that point would make you pay. Not enough of those open shots fell.

1986's lineup offers an interesting contrast to this year. We were a lot bigger in the blocks this year, and reasonably experienced with the 2 Plumlees. [Granted, Kelly was missing, though he played more the role of Danny Ferry, a big guy who could shoot from outside]. Our backcourt & SF were just a touch shorter than in 1986. What was different, besides the obvious (poor shooting)? Experienced leadership. Dawkins + Amaker were a senior & junior tandem, who were starters together from the moment Amaker arrived. I think that - and of course their talent - helped make up for their lack of height.

Experience matters, and experience together matters even more.

[CDu]

I remember 1986 with a heavy heart, and IMO height was a big factor in that game - though in that year it was not so much the backcourt height as the frontcourt. We suffered 7 blocked shots in that game and were -12 on rebounds. We only lost by 3. And other than Johnny D, we did not shoot well, esp. in the 2nd half. And Johnny was doubled a lot, leaving others open who to that point would make you pay. Not enough of those open shots fell.

1986's lineup offers an interesting contrast to this year. We were a lot bigger in the blocks this year, and reasonably experienced with the 2 Plumlees. [Granted, Kelly was missing, though he played more the role of Danny Ferry, a big guy who could shoot from outside]. Our backcourt & SF were just a touch shorter than in 1986. What was different, besides the obvious (poor shooting)? Experienced leadership. Dawkins + Amaker were a senior & junior tandem, who were starters together from the moment Amaker arrived. I think that - and of course their talent - helped make up for their lack of height.

Experience matters, and experience together matters even more.

There was a lot more different too. The style of play was vastly different back then. So was the way the game was officiated. And while we had similar height at the 3, Henderson was way more interior oriented than our 3s. And we had an absolute superstar in Dawkins, which covers a lot of ills. And Amaker was a better defender and setup guy than our PG. Mostly, that team was very experienced and had an absolute superstar, and played in a different era of basketball.

[The Gordog]

I remember 1986 with a heavy heart, and IMO height was a big factor in that game - though in that year it was not so much the backcourt height as the frontcourt. We suffered 7 blocked shots in that game and were -12 on rebounds. We only lost by 3. And other than Johnny D, we did not shoot well, esp. in the 2nd half. And Johnny was doubled a lot, leaving others open who to that point would make you pay. Not enough of those open shots fell.

1986's lineup offers an interesting contrast to this year. We were a lot bigger in the blocks this year, and reasonably experienced with the 2 Plumlees. [Granted, Kelly was missing, though he played more the role of Danny Ferry, a big guy who could shoot from outside]. Our backcourt & SF were just a touch shorter than in 1986. What was different, besides the obvious (poor shooting)? Experienced leadership. Dawkins + Amaker were a senior & junior tandem, who were starters together from the moment Amaker arrived. I think that - and of course their talent - helped make up for their lack of height.

Experience matters, and experience together matters even more.
I could be wrong, but I remember Alarie and Bilas being listed at 6-9.

[cspan37421]

There was a lot more different too. The style of play was vastly different back then. So was the way the game was officiated. And while we had similar height at the 3, Henderson was way more interior oriented than our 3s. And we had an absolute superstar in Dawkins, which covers a lot of ills. And Amaker was a better defender and setup guy than our PG. Mostly, that team was very experienced and had an absolute superstar, and played in a different era of basketball.

I hate to admit it but you're right that it was a different era. This was before the one-and-dones. Before the 3-point shot became permanently part of the game. Also, that recent "no charge" zone under the basket was obviously not there. Not sure about the officiating otherwise - I'm guessing you mean the principles for determining a charge (feet set vs. initiating contact), hand-checking, etc.

All that said, I think height was a factor in our title game loss in 1986 and I think height was a factor in our backcourt this year too. Your point is well-taken though, if you have enough talent, you can overcome height deficiencies. But experience drives that talent, too. So it was more than height, it was experience - with more experience together we'd probably play like a well-oiled machine.

[cspan37421]

I could be wrong, but I remember Alarie and Bilas being listed at 6-9.

goduke.statsgeek.com has both at 6-8.

[jimsumner]

I could be wrong, but I remember Alarie and Bilas being listed at 6-9.

Alarie and Bilas were always listed as 6-8. Davis was listed as 6-6 until his senior year, when he became 6-7. In the same way that DeMarcus Nelson suddenly became 6-4 as a senior.

The NBA scouts ahve their own ways of determining these things, however. :)

[cspan37421]

The NBA scouts ahve their own ways of determining these things, however. :)

you mean like measuring them in their shoes, on the theory that they play the game with shoes on? :)

[CDu]

I hate to admit it but you're right that it was a different era. This was before the one-and-dones. Before the 3-point shot became permanently part of the game. Also, that recent "no charge" zone under the basket was obviously not there. Not sure about the officiating otherwise - I'm guessing you mean the principles for determining a charge (feet set vs. initiating contact), hand-checking, etc.

All that said, I think height was a factor in our title game loss in 1986 and I think height was a factor in our backcourt this year too. Your point is well-taken though, if you have enough talent, you can overcome height deficiencies. But experience drives that talent, too. So it was more than height, it was experience - with more experience together we'd probably play like a well-oiled machine.

The other three big things I'd add as different are:

1. The officials are allowing MUCH more contact in general. That takes away some of the difference in skill and swings the balance more toward the more athletic and physical teams (though skill still is important, of course). We've rarely been a brute team and (more recently) have tended to be less quick and explosive than many of our opponents. So that style of play works more against us.

2. There is a much greater expansion of skill sets of forwards (forwards handling the ball more, defending on the perimeter more, shooting from the perimeter more) today than back then. Teams are used to seeing a PF play on the perimeter. As such, teams are much more comfortable defending stretch 4s than they used to be. So we've lost a bit of the matchup edge that guys like Alarie and especially Ferry had in pulling guys away from the basket.

3. More three point shooting from more spots on the floor. Because of this, and in conjunction with point #2, there's much more of an emphasis on defensive versatility. Teams are much more willing to set screens to create open 3s or isolate mismatches. And bigs are much more willing to "pick and pop." It's much harder to defend the high screens these days because there are so many more threats resulting from those screens. So the more versatile you are defensively and more able you are defensively to switch seamlessly on screens, the less susceptible you are to mismatches.

[rasputin]

Gutsy indeed. Brian would have been a great fit on this years team eh?

Brian Davis would be a great fit on any team, any year.

[CDu]

Brian Davis would be a great fit on any team, any year.

Correct. So would Antonio Lang. Or Thomas Hill. Three "role players" from those 1991-1992 teams that would be incredibly valuable key contributors on any of our teams before or after. It's amazing that those were arguably our 4th, 5th, and 6th/7th best players on those teams.

[Nugget]

And Amaker was a better defender and setup guy than our PG.

I think this is a significant point that is vastly overlooked in all of the complaining about Duke not having a "big" small forward this year. The problem as I see it is much less that we played with a "SF" who was 1 or 2 inches shorter than typical this year, but rather that all of our players were constatly out of position on defense because we simply could not stay in front of opposing team's guards off the dribble or high screens without fouling. We lost many more offensive rebounds due to people being out of position because they were helping and trying to cover, than we did because our Guards or SF were jumped over by a slightly taller opposing player.

[Nugget]

Correct. So would Antonio Lang. Or Thomas Hill. Three "role players" from those 1991-1992 teams that would be incredibly valuable key contributors on any of our teams before or after. It's amazing that those were arguably our 4th, 5th, and 6th/7th best players on those teams.

Good lord do people forget what a player Thomas Hill was. He could guard essentially every position from 1-4 (I remember in particular a game at Cameron when he was a freshman in 1990 where he spent much of the afternoon guarding Arizona's 6-11 PF Brian Williams), he could take and make big shots, yet had almost no ego as a player.

[CDu]

Good lord do people forget what a player Thomas Hill was. He could guard essentially every position from 1-4 (I remember in particular a game at Cameron when he was a freshman in 1990 where he spent much of the afternoon guarding Arizona's 6-11 PF Brian Williams), he could take and make big shots, yet had almost no ego as a player.

I think Davis and Thomas Hill would have had a strong probability of starting and playing a major role on any of the Duke teams we've had since. Lang would have started on any team that didn't have Battier, McLeod, Deng, or Singler starting in front of him. And in some cases, he'd have been the starter alongside one of those guys.

The 1991 and 1992 teams were just monstrous teams. No wonder we won a bit with them. :)