Premature speculation on next season's starting lineup

[jamesfrommaiden]

PG: Cook (the best possible thing to happen is Quinn to develop and win the job)
SG: Curry (Seth will start I think this is where)
SF: Murphy (has the size and skills; unless Andre buckles down and earns the position)
PF: Kelly (could have a big year; the ultimate pick and pop big)
C: MP2 (if he returns another senior poised for a monster year)

BENCH:
G: Thornton (experience, toughness, defense)
Sulaimon (a talented defender who can make the three)
Dawkins (all or nothing player who is unstoppable when he is on from behind the arc)
SF:Gbinije (great athelete and potential lock down stopper)
PF: Hairston (plays hard and gives great effort; undersized but is tough)
C: MP3 (legit seven footer: rebounds and shot blocking; great athlete; best Plumlee yet?)

I also expect to some three gaurd looks of course with Cook/Thornton; Curry; Sulaimon/Dawkins;
Murphy/Kelly/Hairston/Gbinije; MP1/Kelly/MP3

Even if we do not sign another player or bring in a transfer, I really like the way the roster currently stands. Especially so if Mason stays.

GO DUKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[slower]

PG: Cook (the best possible thing to happen is Quinn to develop and win the job)
SG: Curry (Seth will start I think this is where)
SF: Murphy (has the size and skills; unless Andre buckles down and earns the position)
PF: Kelly (could have a big year; the ultimate pick and pop big)
C: MP3 (if he returns another senior poised for a monster year)

BENCH:
G: Thornton (experience, toughness, defense)
Sulaimon (a talented defender who can make the three)
Dawkins (all or nothing player who is unstoppable when he is on from behind the arc)
SF:Gbinije (great athelete and potential lock down stopper)
PF: Hairston (plays hard and gives great effort; undersized but is tough)
C: MP3 (legit seven footer: rebounds and shot blocking; great athlete; best Plumlee yet?)

I also expect to some three gaurd looks of course with Cook/Thornton; Curry; Sulaimon/Dawkins;
Murphy/Kelly/Hairston/Gbinije; MP1/Kelly/MP3

Even if we do not sign another player or bring in a transfer, I really like the way the roster currently stands. Especially so if Mason stays.

GO DUKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If Sulaimon is athletic and a good defender, he'll work his way in somehow. If he is truly, as some have speculated, "Nolan-like", why would we NOT want him starting? Hasn't he moved up to Top 10 range as far as incoming Freshmen?

[jamesfrommaiden]

If Sulaimon is athletic and a good defender, he'll work his way in somehow. If he is truly, as some have speculated, "Nolan-like", why would we NOT want him starting? Hasn't he moved up to Top 10 range as far as incoming Freshmen?

It is possible of course. I just gave Alex the nod to start since he has been here for a year already. It would be great for the team if Sulaimon is that good to make the starting five. It is just my humble opinion. Rasheed will get plenty of minutes either way. It is great we can debate about who is will start between these talented young men.


GO DUKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[DukieInBrasil]

If Sulaimon is athletic and a good defender, he'll work his way in somehow. If he is truly, as some have speculated, "Nolan-like", why would we NOT want him starting? Hasn't he moved up to Top 10 range as far as incoming Freshmen?

Nolan didn't start his Fr. year either. If he were to start alongside Seth and Cook or Thornton, then we'd actually be smaller than we were this past season. i don't think anyone is clamoring for that. Would you start a Fr. above either Curry (Sr.) or one of our only 2 PGs? I for one don't think that makes any sense.
Hopefully he will work his way in somehow, but unless he is just light-years ahead of most Fr., i don't see any reason to think he'll start above our leading returning scorer. As athletic and as good of a player as he was as a Fr., even Corey Maggette didn't start (by this i mean a significant fraction of the games), and he was/is 6'6 and BUFF.

[jamesfrommaiden]

Nolan didn't start his Fr. year either. If he were to start alongside Seth and Cook or Thornton, then we'd actually be smaller than we were this past season. i don't think anyone is clamoring for that. Would you start a Fr. above either Curry (Sr.) or one of our only 2 PGs? I for one don't think that makes any sense.
Hopefully he will work his way in somehow, but unless he is just light-years ahead of most Fr., i don't see any reason to think he'll start above our leading returning scorer. As athletic and as good of a player as he was as a Fr., even Corey Maggette didn't start (by this i mean a significant fraction of the games), and he was/is 6'6 and BUFF.

That is what I was thinking when I made the post. We need the size at that position and Alex also has the skill. Don't forget Silent G is going to see his minutes at the three as well.

[CajunDevil]

PG - Cook
SG - Suliamon
SF - Murphy or G
PF - Kelly
C - Mason

Curry should be the first sub, with a rotation of G/Murphy, Tyler and MP3. Curry could thrive in this role and provide instant offense with a second group that would need some firepower given Tyler's lack of O

[DukieinSoCal]

Nolan didn't start his Fr. year either. If he were to start alongside Seth and Cook or Thornton, then we'd actually be smaller than we were this past season. i don't think anyone is clamoring for that. Would you start a Fr. above either Curry (Sr.) or one of our only 2 PGs? I for one don't think that makes any sense.
Hopefully he will work his way in somehow, but unless he is just light-years ahead of most Fr., i don't see any reason to think he'll start above our leading returning scorer. As athletic and as good of a player as he was as a Fr., even Corey Maggette didn't start (by this i mean a significant fraction of the games), and he was/is 6'6 and BUFF.

I would hope that Sheed finds his way into the starting SG spot at some point in the season. I think we've seen what Seth can do already and to be honest, I think he's near his ceiling. He's a solid college guard but not very quick or explosive. He's already been in college for 4 years now and I doubt he'll make a dramatic improvement over the summer. No knock on Seth. He's just limited physically in certain ways.
On the other hand, Sheed seems to have all the tools to become a star and the sooner we get him playing time against real competition, the faster he'll realize his potential. I'd rather play the younger guys with more potential and take some lumps early in the season if it gives us a better chance to win at the end of the year. A lineup of Cook, Sheed, Murphy, Kelly, and either Plumlee could become a pretty potent group by the end of the season. And having Tyler, Seth, Andre, Mike, and Josh off the bench makes us a very deep squad.

[slower]

That is what I was thinking when I made the post. We need the size at that position and Alex also has the skill. Don't forget Silent G is going to see his minutes at the three as well.

Hey, I was thinking Sulaimon at the 2, not the 3. If he's as good as advertised, then he can fight Cook and Curry for starter's minutes. We shall see. If Murphy is for real, that would solve a lot of issues. I'm just not sold on Silent G, based on what I saw this year.

[Kedsy]

I think we've seen what Seth can do already and to be honest, I think he's near his ceiling.

Even if true, that "ceiling" is an All-ACC player. Why would you want to bench him?



I'd rather play the younger guys with more potential and take some lumps early in the season if it gives us a better chance to win at the end of the year.

A lot of people say this, but (a) I doubt they really mean it -- let us lose three or four games before January 1 and watch the fanbase explode -- and (b) losing games early probably won't give us a better chance to win at the end of the year, if for no other reason than we'd have a much lower seed in the NCAA tournament and, despite what some people seem to think, the lower your seed the less likely you are to win a lot of NCAAT games.


And having Tyler, Seth, Andre, Mike, and Josh off the bench makes us a very deep squad.

Well, it would, except only two (or at most three) of those guys would be getting meaningful minutes by the end of the year.

If Mason doesn't come back and we get nobody, we still have 10 players worthy of good minutes but only 7 or 8 will get them. If Mason comes back, that means three or four worthy players are going to sit. If we get one or two newcomers, the numbers go up to 5 or 6 really good players rarely seeing the court. In that situation, I wouldn't be so quick to start guys with "more potential" at the expense of top quality experienced players. And I don't think Coach K will be, either.

[duke09hms]

If Mason stays, and we don't get anyone else, we'll be fine and up to typical Duke standards.
If Mason leaves, we're going to have LOTS of questions and may be in trouble. A "down" year by Duke standards.
Without Mason, we have a shortage of NBA talent. A lot of possibles, but no definite draft picks.
The way recruiting has gone this year, Mason's return is crucial for the team. Sure you can say "oh we have Alex and Marshall coming in as RS freshmen, so it's like we recruited them for this year." But then that means last year's recruiting class is pretty sorry, contributing only Quinn and Mike to this year, who themselves are still unknowns given injury (Quinn) and sickness (Mike).

Definite:
none

Possibles: And a lot of these are VERY questionable since we've never seen them play.
Rasheed - if he turns out to be like Nolan, as many describe. No college experience.
Marshall - if he plays like an athletic big man. No college experience.
Ryan - if he can play consistently well and not Andre (disappear) every other game
Alex - if he becomes a Singler/Dunleavy-type player. Versatile, good athlete. No college experience.
Mike - if he can put it all together, athleticism is there. Essentially no college experience.
Cook - if he can fully recover from injury, play defense, and get stronger. Has a good handle and court vision, but so far hasn't demonstrated the explosiveness needed to overcome size limitations in the NBA.

Unlikely:
Seth - lack of size, athleticism, and versatility. 5th year senior, so ceiling most likely reached.
Dre - one-trick pony, no handle, going to be a 4th year senior.
Josh - almost in the no chance category, but hasn't really been given the opportunity to shine.

No chance:
Tyler

If we lose Mason and don't pick up any recruits (which would constitute a huge recruiting failure by K since there were supposed to be so many post targets in this year's class - like everyone on here said), we will face huge questions next year. And we may be putting teams out on the court with no known preseason NBA talent. Even 2010 had Kyle.

[CameronBornAndBred]

To illustrate the silliness of this thread (and I love silly) here's how my starting 5 looks right now.
2521

I'll have changed my opinion (and my beer) after K gets back with another successful Olympic trip. At least then I'll know who's playing. :cool:

[DukieInBrasil]

If we lose Mason and don't pick up any recruits (which would constitute a huge recruiting failure by K since there were supposed to be so many post targets in this year's class - like everyone on here said), we will face huge questions next year. And we may be putting teams out on the court with no known preseason NBA talent. Even 2010 had Kyle.

And yet, Jon got invited to camp(s), and only didn't stick around cuz of a freak eye injury. Lance is now in the NBA, and has even started a few games. Nolan Smith was a 1st round pick (late) in the NBA. The jury is still out on whether Miles is gonna get drafted/undrafted invite to camp. Mason looks like he'll play in the NBA someday (barring injury). Ryan Kelly, maybe (not). Dawkins, probably not.
Kyle will probably be given a chance to play when he decides to come back from Spain.
Your assertion is weak, given the fact that several players on that team did in fact make it to the NBA and/or still hold on to the chance that they might, and that team won the title. And you're down on this team for what reason?

[duke09hms]

And yet, Jon got invited to camp(s), and only didn't stick around cuz of a freak eye injury. Lance is now in the NBA, and has even started a few games. Nolan Smith was a 1st round pick (late) in the NBA. The jury is still out on whether Miles is gonna get drafted/undrafted invite to camp. Mason looks like he'll play in the NBA someday (barring injury). Ryan Kelly, maybe (not). Dawkins, probably not.
Kyle will probably be given a chance to play when he decides to come back from Spain.
Your assertion is weak, given the fact that several players on that team did in fact make it to the NBA and/or still hold on to the chance that they might, and that team won the title. And you're down on this team for what reason?

Don't be so defensive. I'm well aware of 2010's NBA achievements and very proud of them. I used 2010 as an example since in that preseason, many were saying it was one of the least talented teams in Duke history. Well at least 2010 had Kyle, who was known to be a sure-fire NBA player even before the season started.

If Mason leaves, the 2013 team will have even more questions in the preseason about talent and lack of sure-fire NBA draft picks. 2013 may well answer those questions just as well as 2010 did with a legendary season and multiple NBA players, but for now we're starting out with even more questions and arguably even less talent.

[DukieinSoCal]

Even if true, that "ceiling" is an All-ACC player. Why would you want to bench him?

Seth may be 2nd/3rd team All-ACC caliber, but I just think Sheed could be ACC player of the year caliber given time and experience. Who knows how fast that could happen? Might be after a year, might be after 4 years. But would anyone really argue that Seth's ceiling is anywhere close to Sheed's?




A lot of people say this, but (a) I doubt they really mean it -- let us lose three or four games before January 1 and watch the fanbase explode -- and (b) losing games early probably won't give us a better chance to win at the end of the year, if for no other reason than we'd have a much lower seed in the NCAA tournament and, despite what some people seem to think, the lower your seed the less likely you are to win a lot of NCAAT games.

Losing games in and of itself won't make us better but playing certain guys early and more minutes might. I agree with your argument about seeding but how you finish the season also matters. Plus, if your team is better in March, your chances of advancing in the NCAAT is better. I'd rather be a better team, peaking going into the NCAAT and face slightly stronger teams than just accept a safer lineup. Sometimes a higher seed doesn't really save you, anyways, like this year.
And I don't really think we have the type of unreasonable, crazy fan base that you see at some other programs. Besides, coach K is safe for as long as he wants to coach. Who cares how the fans react? The point is win championships!

[Dukehky]

Thornton
Curry
Sulaimon
Murphy
Kelly


I don't particularly like it, but if our roster stays the same (after losing Mason, hopefully that doesn't happen) but I think this is probably going to be the line-up.

If that is indeed the line-up, K is going to absolutely want Thornton on the floor to start games to give some semblance of vocal leadership, unless Quinn improves leaps and bounds, possible, over the summer.

[Dukehky]

However, if Mason stays, I think the line-up is as follows:

Thornton
Sulaimon
Murphy
Kelly
Mason

I understand that Curry is an All-ACC player but I honestly feel he would be significantly more effective as a 6th man. He's a good shooter and crafty, and despite his advances, I still find him a liability on defense. I also think it would be better for him to not be the focal point offensively, but we'll see, it'd be hard to put him on the bench.

I think that Thornton will start. He's a physical albeit relatively slow point defender who is kind of a liability on offense. However, what I think we need him to do, is one of the few things that can be improved in an off season. Post entry passing, and spot of shooting. As I said before, K loves what this kid brings to the table, and I think he'll start him.

Murphy started in the first exhibition game, he can't have gotten worse since then, and he presents at least a matchup problem for other teams. Those two things in and of themselves warrant a starting spot at the 3 or 4 depending on Mason's stature.

Rasheed Sulaimon brings something else to the table from the rest of our guards, and I think that his abilities are will be developed enough by the time the season begins to start.

Kelly and Mason, enough said.

[pfrduke]

Seth may be 2nd/3rd team All-ACC caliber, but I just think Sheed could be ACC player of the year caliber given time and experience. Who knows how fast that could happen? Might be after a year, might be after 4 years. But would anyone really argue that Seth's ceiling is anywhere close to Sheed's?

We've never seen Sulaimon play against college competition, let alone ACC. We don't have a reasonable way of comparing his ceiling against Curry's. That being said, the relevant comparison should be Curry's ceiling vs. Sulaimon's ceiling next season. Not period, not "given time and experience," over the course of the next ~360 days. And given that Seth was already All-ACC caliber this past season and is only likely to improve, I think it's a pretty safe bet that his ceiling next season is not just "anywhere close" to Sulaimon's, it's much higher. I will eat my hat (and, admittedly, do so gladly) if Sulaimon makes any of the all-ACC teams or even honorable mention. I'll eat your hat too if he's ACC player of the year.

A more global point, this board (and, to be fair, fans all over the place), suffers from a serious case of shiny-new-thing-ism. We assume everyone who we haven't seen will be the best he can be, because we haven't had time to dissect his flaws closely. By contrast, we've had exhaustive discussions of the various shortcomings of people we have seen play, so we don't give them the credit that their achievements, skills, and talent deserve.

[CDu]

However, if Mason stays, I think the line-up is as follows:

Thornton
Sulaimon
Murphy
Kelly
Mason

I understand that Curry is an All-ACC player but I honestly feel he would be significantly more effective as a 6th man. He's a good shooter and crafty, and despite his advances, I still find him a liability on defense. I also think it would be better for him to not be the focal point offensively, but we'll see, it'd be hard to put him on the bench.

I think that Thornton will start. He's a physical albeit relatively slow point defender who is kind of a liability on offense. However, what I think we need him to do, is one of the few things that can be improved in an off season. Post entry passing, and spot of shooting. As I said before, K loves what this kid brings to the table, and I think he'll start him.

Murphy started in the first exhibition game, he can't have gotten worse since then, and he presents at least a matchup problem for other teams. Those two things in and of themselves warrant a starting spot at the 3 or 4 depending on Mason's stature.

Rasheed Sulaimon brings something else to the table from the rest of our guards, and I think that his abilities are will be developed enough by the time the season begins to start.

Kelly and Mason, enough said.

I think Mason will come back. And if I had to guess the starting lineup next year (assuming we don't add anyone else), I'd say:

Thornton/Cook
Curry
Murphy/Gbinije
Kelly
Mason

I think Sulaimon will come off the bench. I don't know who will start at PG and I don't know who will start at SF, but I'd be pretty surprised if Curry, Kelly, and Mason aren't starting. And I'm one of the bigger proponents of Sulaimon, who I think has a very bright future at Duke and will make an impact starting next year.

[Kishiznit]

I'm looking forward to seeing how our Koaching staff taKes inventory and adapts to the talent on the team. Personally, I would be eKstatic if MP2 comes back for a phenomenal senior campaign and we could grab a transfer on the wing. Next year's team will be nothing like the 2012 squad and this is exciting. With 2 legit PGs and size on the wings, I would expect more full court zone pressure next year; not full court man because quickness will still be an issue. This sqaud will not be ranked high in the preseason rankings because of how we finished this year but will steadily climb. With more upperclassmen this year, home games will not be so close (or be lost). I can't wait....GO DUKE.

[ncexnyc]

After what happened last year, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if the starting 5 at the start of the season is vastly different from that, which we see in March.

[Kedsy]

With 2 legit PGs and size on the wings, I would expect more full court zone pressure next year; not full court man because quickness will still be an issue.

You may hope for it, but I wouldn't expect it.

[mo.st.dukie]

Cook
Curry
Gbinije
Kelly
Mason Plumlee (if he returns)

I think Mike provides a better blend of talent and complements Ryan and Mason very well. He could help on the boards and be a good defender. He won't require a whole lot of plays to be run for him, very low maintenance.

Thornton
Sulaimon (could get more minutes than Tyler if he's ready because I think he's a true combo guard, but I could also see him slipping behind Dre if he's not ready)
Murphy (6th man, could get starters minutes while playing a lot at the 4)
Dawkins

Hairston
Marshall Plumlee

[duke09hms]

I'm looking forward to seeing how our Koaching staff taKes inventory and adapts to the talent on the team. Personally, I would be eKstatic if MP2 comes back for a phenomenal senior campaign and we could grab a transfer on the wing. Next year's team will be nothing like the 2012 squad and this is exciting. With 2 legit PGs and size on the wings, I would expect more full court zone pressure next year; not full court man because quickness will still be an issue. This sqaud will not be ranked high in the preseason rankings because of how we finished this year but will steadily climb. With more upperclassmen this year, home games will not be so close (or be lost). I can't wait....GO DUKE.

K while a great coach is not infallible - just check out this year for his inability to improve the team over the year. Sure it's not entirely on him, it's also on the team, but as coach he ultimately bears full responsibility.

Who are our 2 legit PGs? Quinn is one.

[OldSchool]

By the start of conference play (and assuming Mason stays):

Quinn
Seth (Sr.)
Andre (Sr.)
Ryan (Sr.)
Mason (Sr.)

The seniors will start. There will be a lot of minutes for the rest, but the seniors will run this team.

[OldPhiKap]

I read the name of the thread too quickly, and then was ashamed that I posted so early.

Seriously, that's never happened before.



Oh, and the idea of picking starters this early is almost as silly as my post above.

[duke09hms]

By the start of conference play (and assuming Mason stays):

Quinn
Seth (Sr.)
Andre (Sr.)
Ryan (Sr.)
Mason (Sr.)

The seniors will start. There will be a lot of minutes for the rest, but the seniors will run this team.

The best players will start (see Greg Paulus). Tyler, Seth, and Andre have much more experience, but they will face extremely strong challenges for the starting PG, SG, SF spots from Quinn, Rasheed, Alex, and Mike. I wouldn't pencil anyone in yet as starters.

However, I do think our highest-ceiling lineup has Quinn, Rasheed, and Mike/Alex starting, with Tyler/Seth subbing for Quinn and Rasheed, and Andre coming in for shooting. Mason (hopefully) and Ryan will man the post with backups in Marshall, Josh, and Alex.

[BlueDevilBrowns]

K while a great coach is not infallible - just check out this year for his inability to improve the team over the year. Sure it's not entirely on him, it's also on the team, but as coach he ultimately bears full responsibility.

Who are our 2 legit PGs? Quinn is one.

I think, other than MP2 returning, the single most crucial decision that will be made is "who is our point guard?". There's an old saying in football - "if you have 2 QB's, you really have none" and I think the same applies to basketball. Until either Thornton or Cook firmly take control of this team as the unquestioned starter, we will continue to be good, but not great.

Thornton's a nice vocal leader, but can't pass and can't shoot and can't drive - so I think that could be a problem perhaps.
Cook's deficiencies are clearly on defense and we havn't seen him enough on the court yet to know just how good of a leader he may/may not be. Cook seems to have above average handle and passing skills but his shot seemed streaky this year.

We can find a parallel maybe from UNC's 2011 season when the Heels struggled with both LDrewII and Marshall battling for the PG role, but when LDII left, Marshall blossomed because the decision was made going forward.

In 2013, Coach K MUST choose and settle rather quickly on who will be the starter at PG and stick with it before this team will develop into a great team.

[OldSchool]

The best players will start .

I agree. I expect the seniors to be the best players.

I think the team will be very good, but how good they can be will depend on:

1. Quinn. Health, poise, maturity, decision-making.

2. Andre. He puts it all together as a senior.

3. How much of an impact the younger players can make, Rasheed, Alex, MP3, Mike, etc.

The team could end up going very deep in terms of the rotation.

[duke09hms]

I agree. I expect the seniors to be the best players.

I think the team will be very good, but how good they can be will depend on:

1. Quinn. Health, poise, maturity, decision-making.

2. Andre. He puts it all together as a senior.

3. How much of an impact the younger players can make, Rasheed, Alex, MP3, Mike, etc.

The team could end up going very deep in terms of the rotation.

The two bolded statements don't seem to jive. Outside of Ryan and Mason, I don't see our seniors being our best players. Sure it'd be great if Andre learns how to dribble and play defense, but after 3 years, I'm not holding my breath. Same with Seth, the guy is a 5th year senior, and expecting him to make a jump to versatile SG doesn't seem likely.

I'd say Quinn, Alex, and Mike are much more likely to make the big freshman-sophomore jump and be more important contributors at the PG/SG/SF positions.

[Kedsy]

Sure it'd be great if Andre learns how to dribble and play defense, but after 3 years, I'm not holding my breath.

He doesn't have to "learn how to dribble and play defense." On offense, Andre needs to work constantly to get open, shoot with confidence, and the team has to get him the ball. In the 9 games this year when Andre shot 10 or more times, he averaged 18.3 ppg (on 12 shots pg). You don't think if he does that consistently he'll start, even without a dribble-drive game? On defense, he needs to keep his focus for 40 minutes. His defensive errors seem to mostly be errors of concentration loss.


Same with Seth, the guy is a 5th year senior, and expecting him to make a jump to versatile SG doesn't seem likely.

What does "make a jump to versatile SG" even mean? Seth was our 2nd leading scorer, led our team in assists and steals, shot 38% from 3-point, 87% from the FT line, and his offensive rating is in the top ten of returning ACC players. He made an All-ACC team. With those numbers and achievements, why would he have to make a "jump"?

EDIT: Of returning ACC players, Seth is either the 4th or 5th leading votegetter from this year's All ACC voting (depending on whether Leslie goes pro or not). It is comical that people think he's going to ride the bench this coming season.

[dcar1985]

He doesn't have to "learn how to dribble and play defense." On offense, Andre needs to work constantly to get open, shoot with confidence, and the team has to get him the ball. In the 9 games this year when Andre shot 10 or more times, he averaged 18.3 ppg (on 12 shots pg). You don't think if he does that consistently he'll start, even without a dribble-drive game? On defense, he needs to keep his focus for 40 minutes. His defensive errors seem to mostly be errors of concentration loss.


No he definitely needs to learn to dribble, he's a 6'4 SG!!!....Having Andre on the court gives us a non ballhandler at one of the perimeter spots which hurts the offense IMO, when he's on its a beauty to watch but im definitely not comfortable with our offense being "get Dre the ball and watch him jack it up open or not" The big thing for me w/ Dre is that with other players if they're jumper isn't falling what do you do? Go to the cup, get easy buckets. That opens up things for you, gets your game going...Dre can't do that, he's totally one dimensional. He's either hitting or he's not.

Focus is a part of the defensive lapses for Andre but what about the slow footed-ness, the lack of lateral quickness?!? Those seem to be a much bigger problem, they have to factor in somewhere, he honestly has a hard time keeping up with guys focused or not.


What does "make a jump to versatile SG" even mean? Seth was our 2nd leading scorer, led our team in assists and steals, shot 38% from 3-point, 87% from the FT line, and his offensive rating is in the top ten of returning ACC players. He made an All-ACC team. With those numbers and achievements, why would he have to make a "jump"?

EDIT: Of returning ACC players, Seth is either the 4th or 5th leading votegetter from this year's All ACC voting (depending on whether Leslie goes pro or not). It is comical that people think he's going to ride the bench this coming season.

[JNort]

If Sulaimon is athletic and a good defender, he'll work his way in somehow. If he is truly, as some have speculated, "Nolan-like", why would we NOT want him starting? Hasn't he moved up to Top 10 range as far as incoming Freshmen?

Nolan did not start and got very little playing time his freshmen year so I doubt Rasheed does as well baring injury or a big funk from Andre.




If we gain nobody and keep Mason:

Tyler- Quinn
Seth- Andre
Alex-Andre
Ryan- Alex
Mason- Ryan

Spot minutes- Gbiniji, Marshall, Rasheed

Later in the year (same scenario):

Quinn- Tyler
Seth- Andre/Rasheed
Alex- Andre
Ryan- Alex
Mason- Ryan

If Andre gets in a funk I do not think he loses his spot but does give up more mins.

[NSDukeFan]

After what happened last year, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if the starting 5 at the start of the season is vastly different from that, which we see in March.

I agree completely. Better questions might include: Who will not start at least 2 games next year? Who do you expect to start more than 20 games next year? How many games do you expect (insert player) to start next year. I expect there will be many starting line-ups next year, much like this year and hopefully the staff finds the most effective line-up (both starting and off the bench) by the end of the year and everyone stays healthy. Like this year, it should be a very interesting year trying to find the best combinations and styles of play.

[duke09hms]

He doesn't have to "learn how to dribble and play defense." On offense, Andre needs to work constantly to get open, shoot with confidence, and the team has to get him the ball. In the 9 games this year when Andre shot 10 or more times, he averaged 18.3 ppg (on 12 shots pg). You don't think if he does that consistently he'll start, even without a dribble-drive game? On defense, he needs to keep his focus for 40 minutes. His defensive errors seem to mostly be errors of concentration loss.


Great, so he shot well in 9 games. What happened in the other 25? You're cherry-picking his good games and expecting him to play like that every game? Exhibit A on why that's foolish: the last 3 seasons of the PlumBros. That's like saying Quinn had 17 assists in 2 games, so he must have better court vision and passing skills than Kendall Marshall. So yes, Andre needs to learn how to dribble. As a 6-4 guard, he has to at least be a threat to drive.

I would say "learning to play defense" involves focus and concentration. As well as not getting beat off the dribble and lateral quickness. So yes, Andre needs to learn how to play defense. And no, I don't think Andre will start without big jumps in his ball-handling ability and defense. As a rising senior, I'm not expecting that from him.


What does "make a jump to versatile SG" even mean? Seth was our 2nd leading scorer, led our team in assists and steals, shot 38% from 3-point, 87% from the FT line, and his offensive rating is in the top ten of returning ACC players. He made an All-ACC team. With those numbers and achievements, why would he have to make a "jump"?

EDIT: Of returning ACC players, Seth is either the 4th or 5th leading votegetter from this year's All ACC voting (depending on whether Leslie goes pro or not). It is comical that people think he's going to ride the bench this coming season.

I notice you conveniently left out Seth's 42% FG%. Yes he also led our team with a whopping 2.4 assists/game on one of the worst passing teams in K's tenure (recent Chronicle article). And aren't we always talking about how steals are overrated? Don't forget Greg Paulus was 3rd team All-ACC too. At a small 6-2 with slight build and average athleticism, he struggles to guard and dribble against larger more athletic players especially when guarded closely and is largely a spot-up/jump-shooter. Great shooter, okay passer, okay driver, okay defender. Seth is like a shorter and slightly more versatile Andre with a slightly worse shot. Seth is also a 5th year senior, so I'm not sure how much room he has left to improve.

That said, he's a very good player and has certainly contributed a large share of great Duke memories in the last 2 years. No one here is saying Seth will ride the bench, he will of course get significant minutes and deserve them. However, I'm hoping that we will have a more capable option at SG than Seth by mid-season.

Hopefully Rasheed or some transfer/recruit will be able to pick up the system to start at SG by then. If not, hopefully a more versatile player will have developed to take Andre's place at SF, maybe one of Mike/Alex/Shabazz. Starting both Seth and Andre at the SG/SF does not bode well for the team - two players who are defensive liabilities, mostly spot-up shooters, and weak ball-handlers in the backcourt at the same time.

[CDu]

Nolan did not start and got very little playing time his freshmen year so I doubt Rasheed does as well baring injury or a big funk from Andre.

Nolan Smith was the first guard off the bench and averaged 15 mpg as a freshman. That's more than "very little playing time." And Sulaimon is, in my opinion, further along than Smith was coming out of high school. I'd expect more along the lines of sophomore year Nolan Smith than freshman year Nolan Smith (and with better 3pt shooting).

[Jderf]

Wow. From this thread, you would think Seth is a player who is completely handicapped by his many, many limitations. No way he earns one of next year's five starting spots. Not a chance.

Which is hilarious, seeing as he is one of the five best returning players in the ENTIRE CONFERENCE.

... this offseason is gonna be fun. :)

[rasputin]

To illustrate the silliness of this thread (and I love silly) here's how my starting 5 looks right now.
2521

I'll have changed my opinion (and my beer) after K gets back with another successful Olympic trip. At least then I'll know who's playing. :cool:

Don't underestimate the importance of the sixth man in your lineup.

[Devilsfan]

Good senario is that Murphy becomes a dominate player, our current one man recruiting class expands to two, three or four, and we increase our athleticism enormously. I hope this is not just wishful thinking.

[jamesfrommaiden]

I started this post based on what I know to be the roster for next year at that moment. Mason has not declared and we have no transfers or any more freshman signed at the moment I did it. I think in general alot of you agree. The major point of contention is if Seth will start or be replaced by Rasheed. With all due respect to those of you who think the latter to be true, I just do not see it that way. Yes if Sulaimon does find himself starting from the opening tip off that could mean great things for us. If he is that good and ready to go from the start. However I do not expect it. I do not understand why so many have decided out there that a freshman who has not played a second nor even practiced with the team is certainly going to replace Seth. I think is short sided and a little disrespectful as well. Seth has done alot for the team and been a solid if not at times, though they may have been not as many as we would llike, great player for Duke. With his ability and experience I am very confident he will be a starter at the beginning of next season.

[Kedsy]

Nolan did not start and got very little playing time his freshmen year so I doubt Rasheed does as well baring injury or a big funk from Andre.

As CDu pointed out, Nolan played 15 minutes a game his freshman year. He played double-digit minutes all the way through the NCAAT. He was also rated 19th in RSCI, and the final RSCI isn't out yet, but it sounds like Rasheed will be borderline top ten, which is a bigger difference than it sounds. Rasheed should be a big contributor in 2012-13. Whether he starts or not is more murky, but he could easily be our 6th man.


Great, so he shot well in 9 games. What happened in the other 25? You're cherry-picking his good games and expecting him to play like that every game?

You're missing my point. I didn't cherry pick games in which he shot well. I cherry-picked games in which he got a lot of shots. If you don't understand the difference, then there's no point discussing it, but assuming you do understand, my point is that Andre can be a big part of our offense without the ability to drive, so long as he works hard to get open and his teammates give him the ball when he gets open.

And, yes, if Andre gets 10 to 12 shots most games I'd expect 15 to 18 ppg from him next season. If he gets 3 to 5 shots most games I'd expect about the same as we saw this season.


I would say "learning to play defense" involves focus and concentration.

I disagree. You can already know how to do something and not do it well if you don't focus on it. That's different from learning.


I notice you conveniently left out Seth's 42% FG%.

He took half his shots from three-point range; in that scenario, 42% overall is about normal for a guard.


Yes he also led our team with a whopping 2.4 assists/game on one of the worst passing teams in K's tenure (recent Chronicle article). And aren't we always talking about how steals are overrated? Don't forget Greg Paulus was 3rd team All-ACC too.

Your original statement was he's not "versatile" and doesn't deserve to start. I'm not sure how any of the above supports that.

[Lennies]

even Corey Maggette didn't start (by this i mean a significant fraction of the games), and he was/is 6'6 and BUFF.

Yeah, but he should have started!

[CDu]

And, yes, if Andre gets 10 to 12 shots most games I'd expect 15 to 18 ppg from him next season. If he gets 3 to 5 shots most games I'd expect about the same as we saw this season.

Well, maybe. There's some selection bias in play here. The reason Dawkins' stat line looks so nice when he takes a bunch of shots is that he only takes a bunch of shots when he's "on." The concern is that when Dawkins' shot isn't falling but he's taking a lot of shots, the team struggles. See the Lehigh game, Va Tech tourney game, Belmont game, and Ga Tech as examples were he shot at least 5 times and had a <30% fg% and we struggled to win. Only the Maryland game stands as an example against a reasonably good team where he shot poorly and fairly frequently and we cruised.

I agree that if Dawkins gets 10+ shots per game he'll likely score at least 13-15+ ppg. But that is a LOT of attempts. That'd make him our leading shot-taker. Do we really want a streaky 3pt shooter (who doesn't do much else) taking the most shots on the team? Especially when our second leading shot taker is also going to take over half his shots from 3pt range?

That's not meant to be argumentative. It's a legitimate question. I think our best offensive players next year are likely to be Kelly, Curry, Sulaimon, Mason (if he returns), Dawkins, and perhaps Murphy, and Cook. Dawkins' best attribute is one that is also possessed by 3 other key players, each of whom brings more to the table in other areas. Murphy and Cook are not likely to be as capable offensively as Dawkins, but they each bring something that Dawkins doesn't bring. Does it really make sense to put Dawkins out there over those other guys?


I disagree. You can already know how to do something and not do it well if you don't focus on it. That's different from learning.

Yup. Step 1 in effective defense is knowing what you're supposed to do in different situations. That can be learned on paper. I'd assume that Dawkins has mastered that by this point. Otherwise, there's not much hope. Step 2 is being able to recognize the situations as they happen. That can (to some degree) be learned through experience. Again, Dawkins has been on the floor long enough that if this is a problem, there's not much hope. Step 3 is maintaining concentration so that you can utilize your learning from Steps 1 and 2. Clearly this is an area of concern for him. But it's something he can fix. The question is whether he also needs to fix Step 2. If Step 2 is still a problem (and I just don't know if it is or isn't), I'm afraid he may continue to be a liability defensively.


{Curry} took half his shots from three-point range; in that scenario, 42% overall is about normal for a guard.

Your original statement was he's not "versatile" and doesn't deserve to start. I'm not sure how any of the above supports that.

Yeah, Curry's FG% is not out of whack for a guy who primarily shoots 3s. He's our most proven ballhandler among returning players (could be surpassed by a healthy, more experienced Cook in this regard) and our most proven scorer. I don't see any way he doesn't start. There may be question as to whether he starts at PG (if Sulaimon is further along than Cook and Thornton) or SG (otherwise), but I'd be shocked if Curry isn't starting.

[NSDukeFan]

Well, maybe. There's some selection bias in play here. The reason Dawkins' stat line looks so nice when he takes a bunch of shots is that he only takes a bunch of shots when he's "on." The concern is that when Dawkins' shot isn't falling but he's taking a lot of shots, the team struggles. See the Lehigh game, Va Tech tourney game, Belmont game, and Ga Tech as examples were he shot at least 5 times and had a <30% fg% and we struggled to win. Only the Maryland game stands as an example against a reasonably good team where he shot poorly and fairly frequently and we cruised.

I agree that if Dawkins gets 10+ shots per game he'll likely score at least 13-15+ ppg. But that is a LOT of attempts. That'd make him our leading shot-taker. Do we really want a streaky 3pt shooter (who doesn't do much else) taking the most shots on the team? Especially when our second leading shot taker is also going to take over half his shots from 3pt range?

That's not meant to be argumentative. It's a legitimate question. I think our best offensive players next year are likely to be Kelly, Curry, Sulaimon, Mason (if he returns), Dawkins, and perhaps Murphy, and Cook. Dawkins' best attribute is one that is also possessed by 3 other key players, each of whom brings more to the table in other areas. Murphy and Cook are not likely to be as capable offensively as Dawkins, but they each bring something that Dawkins doesn't bring. Does it really make sense to put Dawkins out there over those other guys?



Yup. Step 1 in effective defense is knowing what you're supposed to do in different situations. That can be learned on paper. I'd assume that Dawkins has mastered that by this point. Otherwise, there's not much hope. Step 2 is being able to recognize the situations as they happen. That can (to some degree) be learned through experience. Again, Dawkins has been on the floor long enough that if this is a problem, there's not much hope. Step 3 is maintaining concentration so that you can utilize your learning from Steps 1 and 2. Clearly this is an area of concern for him. But it's something he can fix. The question is whether he also needs to fix Step 2. If Step 2 is still a problem (and I just don't know if it is or isn't), I'm afraid he may continue to be a liability defensively.



Yeah, Curry's FG% is not out of whack for a guy who primarily shoots 3s. He's our most proven ballhandler among returning players (could be surpassed by a healthy, more experienced Cook in this regard) and our most proven scorer. I don't see any way he doesn't start. There may be question as to whether he starts at PG (if Sulaimon is further along than Cook and Thornton) or SG (otherwise), but I'd be shocked if Curry isn't starting.

I think it would be great if Andre shoots ten times a game and is the team's leader in shot attempts, if he can take 3s where he has a good look every time. I always love when Ande is shooting open 3s and feel that is one of the best shots for the team,even if he was a bit cold the last couple games. The issue is that Andre is going to have to move better without the ball, have a dribble move when he is crowded, defend well enough to stay on the floor and have teammates that can get him the ball when he is open. I don't know if all that will happen, but in that case I would be very happy if Andre took the most shots.

[CDu]

I think it would be great if Andre shoots ten times a game and is the team's leader in shot attempts, if he can take 3s where he has a good look every time. I always love when Ande is shooting open 3s and feel that is one of the best shots for the team,even if he was a bit cold the last couple games. The issue is that Andre is going to have to move better without the ball, have a dribble move when he is crowded, defend well enough to stay on the floor and have teammates that can get him the ball when he is open. I don't know if all that will happen, but in that case I would be very happy if Andre took the most shots.

If he can continually get open 3s, I have no problem with him shooting a lot. If he's hitting 40+% from 3, he's scoring at a 1.2 points per shot rate. That's terrific. The question will be what happens when the defenses focus on him more. Does he work off the ball to try to get open? Does attack the glass? Do the other players create with more space? Is his defense more of a problem than his offense?

For a team that is going to shoot a lot of 3s already, do we want our primary shot taker to be a guy who takes 70+% of his attempts from 3pt range?

[dcar1985]

If he can continually get open 3s, I have no problem with him shooting a lot. If he's hitting 40+% from 3, he's scoring at a 1.2 points per shot rate. That's terrific. The question will be what happens when the defenses focus on him more. Does he work off the ball to try to get open? Does attack the glass? Do the other players create with more space? Is his defense more of a problem than his offense?

For a team that is going to shoot a lot of 3s already, do we want our primary shot taker to be a guy who takes 70+% of his attempts from 3pt range?

No......

[Kedsy]

I agree that if Dawkins gets 10+ shots per game he'll likely score at least 13-15+ ppg. But that is a LOT of attempts. That'd make him our leading shot-taker. Do we really want a streaky 3pt shooter (who doesn't do much else) taking the most shots on the team? Especially when our second leading shot taker is also going to take over half his shots from 3pt range?

Well, that's a good point about both Andre and Seth taking half or more of their shots from 3-point range. But as far as him being able to get 10 shots a game, here's my thinking. Below is the shots per game from our rotation players this past season:

Austin: 12.2 (4.7 threes per game)
Seth: 9.9
Ryan: 7.8
Mason: 7.4
Andre: 6.8
Miles: 4.3
Quinn: 3.5
Tyler: 3.0

If we play at a similar pace, we have to divvy up Austin's shots somehow. Between him and Miles there are 16.5 shots that other people will be taking. If Andre, Mason, and Ryan each moved up to 9 shots a game, we'd still have around 5 each for Alex (or Michael), Rasheed and Quinn. And that's only giving Andre an additional two shots per game. If we start that way and Andre plays well, he could probably find another shot per game somewhere. His offensive efficiency has always been very high (117.2, 124.7, and 114.5) in his three years at Duke.

Of course, it could also happen that Rasheed and Alex take 8 shots a game and Andre gets relegated to 3 or 4 shots in 10 to 12 mpg. We obviously won't know until it happens. But I don't think Andre taking 9 or 10 shots a game next year is out of the realm of reasonable possibility. Nor do I think it would be a bad thing.

[dcar1985]

Well, that's a good point about both Andre and Seth taking half or more of their shots from 3-point range. But as far as him being able to get 10 shots a game, here's my thinking. Below is the shots per game from our rotation players:

Austin: 12.2 (4.7 threes per game)
Seth: 9.9
Ryan: 7.8
Mason: 7.4
Andre: 6.8
Miles: 4.3
Quinn: 3.5
Tyler: 3.0

If we play at a similar pace, we have to divvy up Austin's shots somehow. Between him and Miles there are 16.5 shots that other people will be taking. If Andre, Mason, and Ryan each moved up to 9 shots a game, we'd still have around 5 each for Alex (or Michael), Rasheed and Quinn. If we start that way and Andre plays well, he could probably find another shot per game somewhere. His offensive efficiency has always been very high (117.2, 124.7, and 114.5) in his three years at Duke.

Of course, it could also happen that Rasheed and Alex take 8 shots a game and Andre gets relegated to 3 or 4 shots in 10 to 12 mpg. We obviously won't know until it happens. But I don't think Andre taking 9 or 10 shots a game next year is out of the realm of reasonable possibility. Nor do I think it would be a bad thing.

The thing that bothers me about all that is those 9, 10 shots or whatever would all be 3's, if he was getting to the rack, or even had a decent pull up game then it would be more understandable but he doesn't at this point....defenses would begin to key in on it. Dre hasn't shown much versatility in the way he gets his shots....Im sorry but I don't want Dre taking 9, 10 treys a game.

[Kedsy]

Im sorry but I don't want Dre taking 9, 10 treys a game.

Why not, if he makes four of them?

[Wander]

Why not, if he makes four of them?

JJ Redick didn't even average 10 three point shots a game. That should probably be argument enough.

[dcar1985]

Why not, if he makes four of them?

I don't know if that number stays at 40% doubling his attempts on the season....I have my doubts.

I honestly just think it would benefit Dre and the team if he could've added some versatility to his game instead of force feeding him 3's

[Jderf]

When he takes less than 5 threes: 11-43 (26%)
When he takes 5, 6, 7, or 8 threes: 21-55 (38%)
When he takes more than 8 threes: 34-68 (50%) <--- (!!)

--- Minutes per game in respective categories: 20.8, 22.9, and 30.6


Is Andre just a hot-or-cold, on-or-off, all-or-nothing shooter?

Well, the numbers certainly seem to add fuel to the speculation that the coaches would ride Andre when he was hot and sit him when he was cold. But I don't know if the stats completely settle the debate or not, because you could still argue that if Andre were given additional shots on his supposedly "cold" nights, he probably would have reverted back to the mean. Statistically, at least, that argument should hold water.

Personally, I have no horse in the race. Andre remains a total mystery to me.

*Shrugs*

[Kedsy]

I don't know if that number stays at 40% doubling his attempts on the season....I have my doubts.

I think it would depend on whether the extra shots were good shots or forced shots. If they're forced shots then I agree with you. If they're good, open shots in rhythm, I see no reason why Andre shouldn't continue the 40% success rate he's had his entire Duke career.


I honestly just think it would benefit Dre and the team if he could've added some versatility to his game instead of force feeding him 3's

It's a question of efficiency. If he scores 1.2 points per shot shooting threes and 0.9 points per shot shooting twos, I'd rather he shoot threes.


JJ Redick didn't even average 10 three point shots a game. That should probably be argument enough.

Good point, JJ only shot 9 threes per game. But if Andre took 10 shots, based on his season and career numbers, only 7 of them would be threes. And assuming he kept up his shooting percentage, I'd be fine with that.

[dcar1985]

I think it would depend on whether the extra shots were good shots or forced shots. If they're forced shots then I agree with you. If they're good, open shots in rhythm, I see no reason why Andre shouldn't continue the 40% success rate he's had his entire Duke career.

Definitely, my thinking is..if Dre is taking 9 3's a game, defenses will make him a focal point and key in on it...at that point I don't think he has enough versatility in his game to continue to get good shots


It's a question of efficiency. If he scores 1.2 points per shot shooting threes and 0.9 points per shot shooting twos, I'd rather he shoot threes.

To me thats kind of like saying well 3's or worth 3 points and 2's only 2 so we should just shoot all 3's....

[CDu]

If we play at a similar pace, we have to divvy up Austin's shots somehow. Between him and Miles there are 16.5 shots that other people will be taking. If Andre, Mason, and Ryan each moved up to 9 shots a game, we'd still have around 5 each for Alex (or Michael), Rasheed and Quinn. If we start that way and Andre plays well, he could probably find another shot per game somewhere. His offensive efficiency has always been very high (117.2, 124.7, and 114.5) in his three years at Duke.

You're forgetting about either Hairston or Marshall, one of whom is going to be the backup big man. That's probably 2-3 shots per game as well. I'd also expect Curry's shots to go up and Sulaimon to shoot more than 5 per game. But that remains to be seen.


Of course, it could also happen that Rasheed and Alex take 8 shots a game and Andre gets relegated to 3 or 4 shots in 10 to 12 mpg. We obviously won't know until it happens. But I don't think Andre taking 9 or 10 shots a game next year is out of the realm of reasonable possibility. Nor do I think it would be a bad thing.

We'll see how it plays out. I'm not sure yet, and I think it depends on what we see out of Curry, Cook, Sulaimon, and Murphy. But I'm concerned that going with Dawkins so heavily might make our offense even more one-dimensional than it was this year.


Why not, if he makes four of them?

If he makes 4 of 9, that would be slightly better than senior-year Redick. I think you'll find that this is unlikely. At that volume of attempts, I'm guessing his success rate will go down rather than go up, as he'll likely be taking more bad 3pt attempts. Dawkins has never averaged more than 5 3s per game for a season. He's mostly taken good decision attempts. Doubling his 3pt attempt rate would, in my opinion, be a bad idea.

Now, if he were to expand his game to be able to take 3-5 2pt attempts (and hit over 50% of those without tons of turnovers) to go along with 5-6 3pt attempts, then I'm on board. That will add some more dynamics to the offense, and may help his 3pt shooting too. But that seems unlikely. He's been primarily a spot-up 3pt shooter for his entire career.

[Bojangles4Eva]

Is Andre just a hot-or-cold, on-or-off, all-or-nothing shooter?

I'd have to say.......yes. Look at the @FSU, @VT (before the tech), Wake (1st half), and MSU games (mostly 1st half). In those games you could visibly see that he was HUNGRY to find his shot. I remember distincly one shot in the MSU game where the ball was in his hand for about half a second before he launched it, Bilas even remarked something along the lines of "he set his feet in fire". Also there was one shot I believe right before the T in the @VT game where he was working harder than I've ever seen him to get open for his shot, and of course he drained it when he got it. Don't forget that when the Belmont game was on the line he hit a huge 3, and another one late in the Kansas game that was overshadowed by Tyler's back-to-back 3's.

Go way back to his freshman year and he drained I think 4 threes in a row in the Wisconsin game, played huge in the ACC final game against Ga Tech and the regional semifinal against Baylor (2 big threes in the 1st half), only to completely dissapear in so many other games.

My point is he has the ability focus and place himself in the mental state to hit really big shots (or hit a lot of them) in big games, but it seems he struggles with either getting to that state of mind, or staying in that state of mind (see Wake 2nd half). The result......he is (at least up to this point in his college career) and on-off type of player.

I would love to see him come in next season with an off the dribble shot (either around a screen from 3 a-la Curry, or fake 3 drive + pull up for a mid-range a-la Henderson). It may help him stay in the attack frame of mind.

[Kedsy]

You're forgetting about either Hairston or Marshall, one of whom is going to be the backup big man. That's probably 2-3 shots per game as well.

I didn't really forget them. Last year Josh and Michael combined for 2.6 shots per game (I didn't put them in my table), so I figured the 9th & 10th guys would do about the same next year.



We'll see how it plays out. I'm not sure yet, and I think it depends on what we see out of Curry, Cook, Sulaimon, and Murphy. But I'm concerned that going with Dawkins so heavily might make our offense even more one-dimensional than it was this year.

You could be right. To me, it really depends on Andre's energy level. If he moves around hunting his shot like he did against Michigan State and FSU (1st two games), and Wake, then he makes our offense near unstoppable. If he's just doing his "hang in the corner" thing and we still give him that many shots, then I agree with you.


If he makes 4 of 9, that would be slightly better than senior-year Redick. I think you'll find that this is unlikely. At that volume of attempts, I'm guessing his success rate will go down rather than go up, as he'll likely be taking more bad 3pt attempts.

Again, it depends on the quality of his shots. If he takes open, in rhythm shots, I think he's a better pure shooter than JJ, and wouldn't be surprised at 42%, if not 44%. If he takes rushed, forced shots, or even shots at JJ's level of difficulty, then again, I agree with you.

[CDu]

I didn't really forget them. Last year Josh and Michael combined for 2.6 shots per game (I didn't put them in my table), so I figured the 9th & 10th guys would do about the same next year.

Right, but you forgot that some big guy is going to replace Miles's shots. There's going to be a third big guy playing more than Hairston did this past year. As such, I'd expect that guy to take some shots. There will also be about 2-3 shots per game from the 9th and 10th men.


You could be right. To me, it really depends on Andre's energy level. If he moves around hunting his shot like he did against Michigan State and FSU (1st two games), and Wake, then he makes our offense near unstoppable. If he's just doing his "hang in the corner" thing and we still give him that many shots, then I agree with you.

Again, it depends on the quality of his shots. If he takes open, in rhythm shots, I think he's a better pure shooter than JJ, and wouldn't be surprised at 42%, if not 44%. If he takes rushed, forced shots, or even shots at JJ's level of difficulty, then again, I agree with you.

I don't think he's a better pure shooter than Redick. That's obviously a qualitative analysis. But I feel that Redick was the better shooter in virtually every area of the floor (except dunking). And that's why Redick was allowed to shoot so much. Well, that and the guys around him weren't nearly as good as him his junior and senior years. That won't be the case next year and hasn't been the case in Dawkins' career.

[Listen to Quants]

When he takes less than 5 threes: 11-43 (26%)
When he takes 5, 6, 7, or 8 threes: 21-55 (38%)
When he takes more than 8 threes: 34-68 (50%) <--- (!!)

--- Minutes per game in respective categories: 20.8, 22.9, and 30.6


Is Andre just a hot-or-cold, on-or-off, all-or-nothing shooter?

Well, the numbers certainly seem to add fuel to the speculation that the coaches would ride Andre when he was hot and sit him when he was cold. But I don't know if the stats completely settle the debate or not, because you could still argue that if Andre were given additional shots on his supposedly "cold" nights, he probably would have reverted back to the mean. Statistically, at least, that argument should hold water.

Personally, I have no horse in the race. Andre remains a total mystery to me.

*Shrugs*

Well, the "Hot Hand" controversy rears up ... again. Most statistical analyses suggest it is mostly or all myth http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot-hand_fallacy

I would like to suggest the reason Andre's numbers look good when he takes a lot of shots is because *if* he hits a lot of his early 3s he is left in the game to shoot a lot. In other words, the made shots cause many shots to be taken (and since the early part of the 'many shots' have an unusually good number of makes, the total is liable to show the same, all though lesser, trend), instead of the other way around. K would not be alone in being a classic basketball guy who believes in the hot hand. A quick (and a little dirty) test would be to see if Andre's shooting percentage after (say) shot number 6 is great or about his season avg (which the idea I am presenting would suggest).

[CDu]

Well, the "Hot Hand" controversy rears up ... again. Most statistical analyses suggest it is mostly or all myth http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot-hand_fallacy

I would like to suggest the reason Andre's numbers look good when he takes a lot of shots is because *if* he hits a lot of his early 3s he is left in the game to shoot a lot. In other words, the made shots cause many shots to be taken (and since the early part of the 'many shots' have an unusually good number of makes, the total is liable to show the same, all though lesser, trend), instead of the other way around. K would not be alone in being a classic basketball guy who believes in the hot hand. A quick (and a little dirty) test would be to see if Andre's shooting percentage after (say) shot number 6 is great or about his season avg (which the idea I am presenting would suggest).

I can think of two alternatives to both the "hot hand" theory and your theory:

1. there is a systematic difference in the style of play in the game that is resulting in differences in success (not likely)
2. there is a systematic difference in Dawkins' confidence and overall level of play when he hits shots early and often as compared to when he misses early and often (more plausible)

The second seems like a very reasonable (though thoroughly difficult to prove) possibility: when Dawkins thinks he's feeling it, he shoots more and plays harder/more focused. When he thinks he's off, he shells up. I guess that sort of falls under the "hot hand" theory, but in a very indirect way.

[Listen to Quants]

I can think of two alternatives to both the "hot hand" theory and your theory:

1. there is a systematic difference in the style of play in the game that is resulting in differences in success (not likely)
2. there is a systematic difference in Dawkins' confidence and overall level of play when he hits shots early and often as compared to when he misses early and often (more plausible)

The second seems like a very reasonable (though thoroughly difficult to prove) possibility: when Dawkins thinks he's feeling it, he shoots more and plays harder/more focused. When he thinks he's off, he shells up. I guess that sort of falls under the "hot hand" theory, but in a very indirect way.

Okay, the second possibility, which you like a little better and (correctly I believe) identify as falling within the "hot hand" theory, *could* be true *if* Dawkins were a rare bird in this. Obviously the statistical evidence of the failure of the hot hand idea is from massive data, including tons of players. A few for whom it actually was true, would not greatly upset the general statistical trend. Plausible, as Dawkins does seem to travel to the beat of a different drum.

[Kedsy]

Right, but you forgot that some big guy is going to replace Miles's shots. There's going to be a third big guy playing more than Hairston did this past year. As such, I'd expect that guy to take some shots. There will also be about 2-3 shots per game from the 9th and 10th men.

I really didn't forget. I gave Miles's shots to Mason, Ryan, and Alex. At the current time, I expect Josh and Marshall to split 10 or so minutes but not much more than that (i.e, to be the 9th and 10th men), with Mason and Ryan getting 30 minutes each, give or take, and Alex seeing 10 at PF and 10 at WF. Obviously I could be way off, and when the roster gets finalized I could think differently, but that's the thinking on which I based my shot distribution analysis.

[Scorp4me]

Cook has alot further to improve to be a starter than Thornton does. Cook will make a nice sub off the bench and I hope for alot more from him next year...but he's gotta improve a ton over the summer. I can certainly agree that Thornton is the weaker offensive player, but with Cook you could almost always count on scoring...just usually going the other direction. I mean seriously, I cringed when he was in the game. I can see why everyone was clamoring for him to start last off season, he was an incoming freshman which on this board usually means he's the best thing since sliced bread. I'm a little more confused this off season.

[CajunDevil]

Cook has alot further to improve to be a starter than Thornton does. Cook will make a nice sub off the bench and I hope for alot more from him next year...but he's gotta improve a ton over the summer. I can certainly agree that Thornton is the weaker offensive player, but with Cook you could almost always count on scoring...just usually going the other direction. I mean seriously, I cringed when he was in the game. I can see why everyone was clamoring for him to start last off season, he was an incoming freshman which on this board usually means he's the best thing since sliced bread. I'm a little more confused this off season.

I expect Cook to show dramatic improvement, primarily because he will have an offseason to work on his game instead of rehabbing his knee. Also, you have overstated his defensive issues. Duke's ceiling is MUCH higher with Cook as primary pg than with Tyler bc of Quinn's superior ability to pass and create.

[BlueDevilBrowns]

Cook has alot further to improve to be a starter than Thornton does. Cook will make a nice sub off the bench and I hope for alot more from him next year...but he's gotta improve a ton over the summer. I can certainly agree that Thornton is the weaker offensive player, but with Cook you could almost always count on scoring...just usually going the other direction. I mean seriously, I cringed when he was in the game. I can see why everyone was clamoring for him to start last off season, he was an incoming freshman which on this board usually means he's the best thing since sliced bread. I'm a little more confused this off season.

I agree that Cook is a liability defensively but I do think the tools are there to become at least average on defense. Remember, Cook was coming off a serious knee injury last year and that had to stifle his lateral quickness and reaction time on defense.

Would you agree that Cook has shown a greater ability to create his own shot, pass the ball to teamates where they have an opportunity to score, and push the ball up-court than Tyler Thornton? What have you seen out of Tyler that leads you to believe he is much further along as the established starter at PG than Cook? I love Tyler's passion, communication skills and tenacity, but it seems to me Tyler Thorton is a SF trapped in a PG's body(think a 6'1" Dave McClure).

EDIT: You beat me to it CajunDevil but I agree competely!

[Bay Area Duke Fan]

If he's so limited, why hasn't K recruited another point guard?

[duke09hms]

You're missing my point. I didn't cherry pick games in which he shot well. I cherry-picked games in which he got a lot of shots. If you don't understand the difference, then there's no point discussing it, but assuming you do understand, my point is that Andre can be a big part of our offense without the ability to drive, so long as he works hard to get open and his teammates give him the ball when he gets open.

And, yes, if Andre gets 10 to 12 shots most games I'd expect 15 to 18 ppg from him next season. If he gets 3 to 5 shots most games I'd expect about the same as we saw this season.

This is clearly an oversimplification and as others have pointed out, Andre getting a lot of shots is not an independent factor but also strongly correlated to how well he is playing and making his shots. You're saying Andre can be a big part of the offense if he plays consistently well. Well I agree. But there's very little evidence from his first 3 years that he plays consistently well game in and game out.

Can't believe you're excusing Andre's lack of a handle. Maybe if he could dribble, he would have more room to get his shots off, allowing him to get more shots a game. It's the biggest factor keeping him from breaking out. He could have been a less explosive Gerald with a much better shot. I mean, how many of us expected from his early entrance in 2009 to the present that his ball-handling would only marginally improve, especially when it was known by everyone to be his biggest weakness. Sure if Andre gets 10-12 shots a game, I'd also expect around 15 ppg, but that's a meaningless thing to say. You think K is going to let him take that many shots without producing?



Regarding Andre's defense:
I disagree. You can already know how to do something and not do it well if you don't focus on it. That's different from learning.

I think we're arguing over semantics here but bottom line is that the kid needs to get better on defense, whether it be learning/focusing whatever. As a senior, he should be at least solid on defense.


Regarding Seth:
He took half his shots from three-point range; in that scenario, 42% overall is about normal for a guard.
Your original statement was he's not "versatile" and doesn't deserve to start. I'm not sure how any of the above supports that.

Exactly, 42% FG is about average for a guard that shoots almost half his shots from 3-pt range. I don't think a Duke starting SG should only be average or normal. As I said before, Seth is not a versatile guard because he is a: great shooter, okay passer, okay dribbler/driver, okay defender. Versatile by Duke standards means very good at multiple things. Think Kyle and Nolan, or Austin (penetration, shooting, defense) and Ryan (diverse offense, mismatch advantage, defense) on last year's team.

You lauded Seth leading the team in assists as evidence of great passing ability. I observed that he only had 2.4 asts/game in 30 minutes/game on the worst-passing team in K's tenure since 1984. I forget the exact year but it's in the Chronicle article.
You said he was a great player because he made 3rd-team All-ACC. I said, maybe so, but remember Greg Paulus made 3rd-team All-ACC.
You pointed to Seth leading the team in steals as evidence of great defense. I reminded you of the general consensus on this board that steals are an overrated defensive stat. I would also remind you that Seth was hardly a defensive stalwart on this year's team, lacking lateral quickness to guard athletic guards along with the rest of our backcourt except for Austin.

In addition, when guarded closely by athletic players, he becomes limited to spot-up shooting. At a small 6-2 and slight stature (not physically strong) and being a 5th year senior, I don't think Seth is up to the standard of starting Duke shooting guard and does not seem to have huge potential for improvement.

Like I also said before, I think Seth is a very good player and extremely important to the team. Will most likely and deserve to start in the beginning, but it would be best for our team's ceiling if a better player emerges to start by mid-season whether it be Rasheed/Dre/some transfer.

I would be fine if EITHER Seth or Andre start at SG, but I strongly believe that having both of them on the floor together for significant periods of time would make our team very vulnerable. You would have two guys who can only shoot, can't really dribble/handle ball pressure, and are defensive liabilities in the backcourt.

[duke09hms]

Cook has alot further to improve to be a starter than Thornton does. Cook will make a nice sub off the bench and I hope for alot more from him next year...but he's gotta improve a ton over the summer. I can certainly agree that Thornton is the weaker offensive player, but with Cook you could almost always count on scoring...just usually going the other direction. I mean seriously, I cringed when he was in the game. I can see why everyone was clamoring for him to start last off season, he was an incoming freshman which on this board usually means he's the best thing since sliced bread. I'm a little more confused this off season.

Come on man. The kid was coming off a knee injury that he played on all throughout his senior year of high school, shut it down all summer to rehab, didn't play in China, and didn't start practicing with the team until early in the season.

Give Quinn a chance to prove himself at full strength/good health before writing him off.

We're excited about Quinn because we think he improved health will address many of his deficiencies from last year. And so we think he can be the playmaking PG we need for our shooters/big men and be okay enough on defense.

[Listen to Quants]

<snip some good stuff>

Exactly, 42% FG is about average for a guard that shoots almost half his shots from 3-pt range. I don't think a Duke starting SG should only be average or normal. As I said before, Seth is not a versatile guard because he is a: great shooter, okay passer, okay dribbler/driver, okay defender. Versatile by Duke standards means very good at multiple things. Think Kyle and Nolan, or Austin (penetration, shooting, defense) and Ryan (diverse offense, mismatch advantage, defense) on last year's team.

You lauded Seth leading the team in assists as evidence of great passing ability. I observed that he only had 2.4 asts/game in 30 minutes/game on the worst-passing team in K's tenure since 1984. I forget the exact year but it's in the Chronicle article.
You said he was a great player because he made 3rd-team All-ACC. I said, maybe so, but remember Greg Paulus made 3rd-team All-ACC.
You pointed to Seth leading the team in steals as evidence of great defense. I reminded you of the general consensus on this board that steals are an overrated defensive stat. I would also remind you that Seth was hardly a defensive stalwart on this year's team, lacking lateral quickness to guard athletic guards along with the rest of our backcourt except for Austin.

In addition, when guarded closely by athletic players, he becomes limited to spot-up shooting. At a small 6-2 and slight stature (not physically strong) and being a 5th year senior, I don't think Seth is up to the standard of starting Duke shooting guard and does not seem to have huge potential for improvement.

Like I also said before, I think Seth is a very good player and extremely important to the team. Will most likely and deserve to start in the beginning, but it would be best for our team's ceiling if a better player emerges to start by mid-season whether it be Rasheed/Dre/some transfer.

I would be fine if EITHER Seth or Andre start at SG, but I strongly believe that having both of them on the floor together for significant periods of time would make our team very vulnerable. You would have two guys who can only shoot, can't really dribble/handle ball pressure, and are defensive liabilities in the backcourt.

Pretty reasonable stuff, particularly for 6:30 AM on a Sat morn. I will, for our amusement, disagree on the part suggesting Seth has pretty much reached his ceiling. He is indeed heading into a fifth year senior year and that sounds a little old and gnarly, but he is not yet 22 (will be on Aug 23, 2012) and his year at Liberty was not full bore high DI. Additionally, I thought I saw a lot of improvement in his ball handling and penetration from the 2010-11 season to the 2011-12 season (he was said to be working to be able to handle the PG spot). No real reason to figure he cannot take another step up there. He *did* seem to finish all right even among the trees, and again, as a new part of his game there is hope that can get better.

His offensive contribution is not ordinary. A 50% eFG% playing against the best defenses in DI is good for a main scorer who also shoots FTs well. And, as a good 3 pt shooter, he was perhaps the main contributor to spreading the defense (freeing up the middle and inside game and helping Rivers and others penetrate ...)

I am afraid I see his defense pretty much as you do, but I am an optimist (cockeyed?), I think it too will improve.

[CDu]

I would be fine if EITHER Seth or Andre start at SG, but I strongly believe that having both of them on the floor together for significant periods of time would make our team very vulnerable. You would have two guys who can only shoot, can't really dribble/handle ball pressure, and are defensive liabilities in the backcourt.

I tend to agree with this, UNLESS the following things happen:

1. Curry makes even more improvements in his ballhandling and playmaking skills (he did make a jump in this area last year, but he still has a ways to go) so that we can play him at PG and not be undersized at all three perimeter positions.
2. Dawkins improves his ballhandling and can score off the dribble.
3. Dawkins and Curry both improve their defense.

Otherwise, I share your concerns about these two guys sharing the floor together for long stretches.

I think we're going to need at least one of Cook and Sulaimon to make a big impact next year to change the dynamics of the team, or Curry to make the jump next year in terms of ballhandling. I'd really prefer to see two strong ballhandlers/playmakers on the court most of the time, so Curry is a key guy in that regard (as I assume he'll play major minutes again).

[NSDukeFan]

This is clearly an oversimplification and as others have pointed out, Andre getting a lot of shots is not an independent factor but also strongly correlated to how well he is playing and making his shots. You're saying Andre can be a big part of the offense if he plays consistently well. Well I agree. But there's very little evidence from his first 3 years that he plays consistently well game in and game out.

Can't believe you're excusing Andre's lack of a handle. Maybe if he could dribble, he would have more room to get his shots off, allowing him to get more shots a game. It's the biggest factor keeping him from breaking out. He could have been a less explosive Gerald with a much better shot. I mean, how many of us expected from his early entrance in 2009 to the present that his ball-handling would only marginally improve, especially when it was known by everyone to be his biggest weakness. Sure if Andre gets 10-12 shots a game, I'd also expect around 15 ppg, but that's a meaningless thing to say. You think K is going to let him take that many shots without producing?

I agree completely that Andre getting a lot of shots depends on a bunch of other factors. I also agree that there is not the evidence that he will play well every game. But I believe that is college basketball. Players can and do get better over the summer and over the course of seasons and there is certainly the possibility that 20-21 year old student athletes can improve. Will Andre show more consistency defensively, moving without the ball and putting the ball on the floor to create other offensive opportunities and will the team move the ball well enough to take advantage of Andre's shooting? We don't know but, fortunately, Andre tends to take good shots and doesn't turn the ball over much while spreading the floor offensively, so he doesn't hurt the team there even if he is not able to get free for shots. I don't think I see the comparison with Gerald very well, as they are completely different players that both jump very well. I think K will let Andre take as many good shots as he can, the issue is how many good shots he can get and can he be effective defensively. I think we basically agree on most of that.


I think we're arguing over semantics here but bottom line is that the kid needs to get better on defense, whether it be learning/focusing whatever. As a senior, he should be at least solid on defense.



Exactly, 42% FG is about average for a guard that shoots almost half his shots from 3-pt range. I don't think a Duke starting SG should only be average or normal. As I said before, Seth is not a versatile guard because he is a: great shooter, okay passer, okay dribbler/driver, okay defender. Versatile by Duke standards means very good at multiple things. Think Kyle and Nolan, or Austin (penetration, shooting, defense) and Ryan (diverse offense, mismatch advantage, defense) on last year's team.

You lauded Seth leading the team in assists as evidence of great passing ability. I observed that he only had 2.4 asts/game in 30 minutes/game on the worst-passing team in K's tenure since 1984. I forget the exact year but it's in the Chronicle article.
You said he was a great player because he made 3rd-team All-ACC. I said, maybe so, but remember Greg Paulus made 3rd-team All-ACC.
I also agree that Seth is not as good as Kyle and Nolan were and isn't as versatile as them, but I think you aren't giving Seth enough credit. By the end of the year, he was pretty good at creating his own shot, improved greatly going to the basket and earlier in the year showed that he could play effectively as the lead guard. I also thought he defended as well as anyone on the perimeter (may not be saying much) except for maybe Thornton's stretch at the end of the year.
I don't know if Seth is a great player or not, but 3rd team all-ACC is nothing to sneeze at and it is nice to have an all-ACC player returning. He has certainly proven that he can play at a level of one of the best 15 players in the conference. I hope and expect he will continue to show improvement and be a very good player and senior leader for Duke next year.
I was disappointed to see your comment that Greg Paulus making all-ACC is somehow demeaning of that recognition. In my opinion, Greg was a very good player at Duke, who had a solid career and a very disappointing senior season. Like the Lehigh loss, sometimes people remember the final game or stretch, without considering everything else.

You pointed to Seth leading the team in steals as evidence of great defense. I reminded you of the general consensus on this board that steals are an overrated defensive stat. I would also remind you that Seth was hardly a defensive stalwart on this year's team, lacking lateral quickness to guard athletic guards along with the rest of our backcourt except for Austin.

In addition, when guarded closely by athletic players, he becomes limited to spot-up shooting. At a small 6-2 and slight stature (not physically strong) and being a 5th year senior, I don't think Seth is up to the standard of starting Duke shooting guard and does not seem to have huge potential for improvement.

Like I also said before, I think Seth is a very good player and extremely important to the team. Will most likely and deserve to start in the beginning, but it would be best for our team's ceiling if a better player emerges to start by mid-season whether it be Rasheed/Dre/some transfer.

I would be fine if EITHER Seth or Andre start at SG, but I strongly believe that having both of them on the floor together for significant periods of time would make our team very vulnerable. You would have two guys who can only shoot, can't really dribble/handle ball pressure, and are defensive liabilities in the backcourt.
I agree that it would be nice if someone can outplay Seth and take over his position. I just don't think there will be enough all-ACC players on Duke's roster to force Seth out of a starting position. Rasheed has more potential, but I don't know if he will be out-playing Seth this coming year. I disagree that Seth can't dribble or handle ball pressure, as I thought he proved that last year. I also don't believe that Seth is a defensive liability, though he has not been a shut down player.

Come on man. The kid was coming off a knee injury that he played on all throughout his senior year of high school, shut it down all summer to rehab, didn't play in China, and didn't start practicing with the team until early in the season.

Give Quinn a chance to prove himself at full strength/good health before writing him off.

We're excited about Quinn because we think he improved health will address many of his deficiencies from last year. And so we think he can be the playmaking PG we need for our shooters/big men and be okay enough on defense.

I just found it a bit ironic that immediately following your post giving all the reasons that Andre and Seth shouldn't be starters next year, that you were telling someone else to give Cook a chance. I did think you made a lot of good points, I just disagreed with some of them.

[nocilla]

Something to remember regarding Curry is that this coming year will be his first opportunity as the lead guard. He was behind Nolan and then behind Rivers last year, yet still averaged 13+ ppg. He did improve in the offseason and I expect he will improve even more this offseason. He showed more versatility in his scoring this year. Being the lead guard will allow him to be more aggresive and I expect he will again be All-ACC.

[Saratoga2]

This is clearly an oversimplification and as others have pointed out, Andre getting a lot of shots is not an independent factor but also strongly correlated to how well he is playing and making his shots. You're saying Andre can be a big part of the offense if he plays consistently well. Well I agree. But there's very little evidence from his first 3 years that he plays consistently well game in and game out.

Can't believe you're excusing Andre's lack of a handle. Maybe if he could dribble, he would have more room to get his shots off, allowing him to get more shots a game. It's the biggest factor keeping him from breaking out. He could have been a less explosive Gerald with a much better shot. I mean, how many of us expected from his early entrance in 2009 to the present that his ball-handling would only marginally improve, especially when it was known by everyone to be his biggest weakness. Sure if Andre gets 10-12 shots a game, I'd also expect around 15 ppg, but that's a meaningless thing to say. You think K is going to let him take that many shots without producing?



I think we're arguing over semantics here but bottom line is that the kid needs to get better on defense, whether it be learning/focusing whatever. As a senior, he should be at least solid on defense.



Exactly, 42% FG is about average for a guard that shoots almost half his shots from 3-pt range. I don't think a Duke starting SG should only be average or normal. As I said before, Seth is not a versatile guard because he is a: great shooter, okay passer, okay dribbler/driver, okay defender. Versatile by Duke standards means very good at multiple things. Think Kyle and Nolan, or Austin (penetration, shooting, defense) and Ryan (diverse offense, mismatch advantage, defense) on last year's team.

You lauded Seth leading the team in assists as evidence of great passing ability. I observed that he only had 2.4 asts/game in 30 minutes/game on the worst-passing team in K's tenure since 1984. I forget the exact year but it's in the Chronicle article.
You said he was a great player because he made 3rd-team All-ACC. I said, maybe so, but remember Greg Paulus made 3rd-team All-ACC.
You pointed to Seth leading the team in steals as evidence of great defense. I reminded you of the general consensus on this board that steals are an overrated defensive stat. I would also remind you that Seth was hardly a defensive stalwart on this year's team, lacking lateral quickness to guard athletic guards along with the rest of our backcourt except for Austin.

In addition, when guarded closely by athletic players, he becomes limited to spot-up shooting. At a small 6-2 and slight stature (not physically strong) and being a 5th year senior, I don't think Seth is up to the standard of starting Duke shooting guard and does not seem to have huge potential for improvement.

Like I also said before, I think Seth is a very good player and extremely important to the team. Will most likely and deserve to start in the beginning, but it would be best for our team's ceiling if a better player emerges to start by mid-season whether it be Rasheed/Dre/some transfer.

I would be fine if EITHER Seth or Andre start at SG, but I strongly believe that having both of them on the floor together for significant periods of time would make our team very vulnerable. You would have two guys who can only shoot, can't really dribble/handle ball pressure, and are defensive liabilities in the backcourt.

I think that either Tyler or Quinn as more likely to start at PG next season and probably share that duty. That puts one 6 foot guard on the floor all of the time. Seth is a possibility but didn't quite make the grade at that position last year and both Tyler and Quinn may experience more improvementby next season just because they are earlier in their careers.

Putting Seth at SG incorporates a second small guard on the floor at the same time, leaving the team with the same defensive issues we experienced later in the season. Putting Andre at SG begs the question about his handle and ball security. Seth is superior in both those areas. Putting Andre at SF with the two smallish guards leaves us vulnerable to teams with quick or large back courts.

We have this quandry as a result of past recruiting and the development rate of our players. Will the new recruits, former redshirts and those with little PT last year offer a solution? Will the coaches be willing to make hard choices if new players shine?

Right now I see the team morphing toward Tyler/Quinn/Seth at PG, Seth/Rasheed/Andre at SG, Alex/Michael/Andre at SF. If we get Shabbaz then he will likely start right off.

[Kedsy]

You lauded Seth leading the team in assists as evidence of great passing ability....

...You said he was a great player because he made 3rd-team All-ACC....

You pointed to Seth leading the team in steals as evidence of great defense....

Actually, I never said he had great passing ability or great defense. Nor did I say he was a great player, although obviously a 3rd team All ACC player is pretty darn good. I mentioned the fact that he led the team in assists and steals and the fact that he made 3rd team All ACC as evidence of his versatility and as evidence that he deserves to start. Mentioning Greg Paulus and saying his assist totals weren't that good doesn't change the fact that they were better than any other returning player on Duke's team.



In addition, when guarded closely by athletic players, he becomes limited to spot-up shooting. At a small 6-2 and slight stature (not physically strong) and being a 5th year senior, I don't think Seth is up to the standard of starting Duke shooting guard and does not seem to have huge potential for improvement.

I agree that when Seth is guarded by taller, more athletic players he has problems getting his shot off and seeing the passing lanes. I don't agree that he's not "up to the standard of starting" nor that he doesn't have potential for improvement.


I would be fine if EITHER Seth or Andre start at SG, but I strongly believe that having both of them on the floor together for significant periods of time would make our team very vulnerable. You would have two guys who can only shoot, can't really dribble/handle ball pressure, and are defensive liabilities in the backcourt.

As far as whether Seth and Andre should be on the court together, I think it depends on who else is on the court. There are combinations with the two of them playing that I think would work, and other combinations that would be more problematic.

[duke09hms]

I just found it a bit ironic that immediately following your post giving all the reasons that Andre and Seth shouldn't be starters next year, that you were telling someone else to give Cook a chance. I did think you made a lot of good points, I just disagreed with some of them.

How is this ironic? Quinn Cook is a freshman only a few months removed from full knee rehab after playing on a torn meniscus his entire senior year of HS. Had to shut it down all last summer to heal and didn't even start practicing with the team until after the season started. He's only been playing Duke basketball for a few months.

Seth will be a 5th year senior.
Andre will be a 4th year senior.

The contrast is HUGE.

[Kedsy]

How is this ironic? Quinn Cook is a freshman only a few months removed from full knee rehab after playing on a torn meniscus his entire senior year of HS. Had to shut it down all last summer to heal and didn't even start practicing with the team until after the season started. He's only been playing Duke basketball for a few months.

Seth will be a 5th year senior.
Andre will be a 4th year senior.

The contrast is HUGE.

I always thought being a senior is a good thing. You seem to think it means they should be discarded. Even accepting your assumption (for the sake of argument) that they won't improve as much as younger players, so what? Lack of upside only matters if you're not good already.

[duke09hms]

I always thought being a senior is a good thing. You seem to think it means they should be discarded. Even accepting your assumption (for the sake of argument) that they won't improve as much as younger players, so what? Lack of upside only matters if you're not good already.

Nope, wrong again. Those statements were in response to someone saying we've already seen the best of Quinn. I replied that looking at his freshmen season, we haven't yet seen him at full health, and that we've seen him play with much less preparation and practice time with the team than freshman typically get. He was essentially playing the freshman year with a handicap. Therefore, it is too soon to judge his performance and say he's not the answer at PG

The point was giving Quinn a fair chance, not "discarding seniors." A misinterpretation.

Playing good basketball is a good thing. Seniors are correlated with playing good basketball but are not necessarily causative nor sufficient.

As rising seniors, we've already seen years of Andre and Seth perform, and so we can form judgments about them and extrapolate predictions for next year. We can't do that accurately with Quinn yet.

[Kedsy]

Same with Seth, the guy is a 5th year senior, and expecting him to make a jump to versatile SG doesn't seem likely.

OK, I went back 15 years, looking at every rotation player (or starter) at Duke who had a senior year and compared their senior season to their junior season, to see if seniors generally improve or stay more or less the same. I compared per game statistics and then made a qualitative analysis. So if a senior played a lot more minutes then he will look good in this chart, but that's sort of what we're talking about here so it made sense to me.

I may have missed somebody, but I counted 26 Duke seniors from 1998 to 2012:

Senior year a lot worse than junior year: 4 (Greg Paulus, Nick Horvath, Lee Melchionni, Ricky Price)

Senior year a little worse than junior year, but still in the same ballpark: 2 (Kyle Singler, Steve Wojciechowski)

Senior year a little better than junior year, but still in the same ballpark: 5 (DeMarcus Nelson, Chris Duhon, Sean Dockery, Taymon Domzalski, Nate James)

Senior year a LOT better than junior year: 15 (Miles Plumlee, Nolan Smith, Jon Scheyer, Lance Thomas, Brian Zoubek, Dave McLure, JJ Redick, Shelden Williams, Casey Sanders, Dahntay Jones, Daniel Ewing, Shane Battier, Chris Carrawell, Trajan Langdon, Roshown McLeod)


Obviously some of this is subjective, but I conclude that there's a pretty good chance that our seniors next season make a "jump" and will put up significantly better numbers than they did this season.

[dragoneye776]

OK, I went back 15 years, looking at every rotation player (or starter) at Duke who had a senior year and compared their senior season to their junior season, to see if seniors generally improve or stay more or less the same. I compared per game statistics and then made a qualitative analysis. So if a senior played a lot more minutes then he will look good in this chart, but that's sort of what we're talking about here so it made sense to me.

I may have missed somebody, but I counted 26 Duke seniors from 1998 to 2012:

Senior year a lot worse than junior year: 4 (Greg Paulus, Nick Horvath, Lee Melchionni, Ricky Price)

Senior year a little worse than junior year, but still in the same ballpark: 2 (Kyle Singler, Steve Wojciechowski)

Senior year a little better than junior year, but still in the same ballpark: 5 (DeMarcus Nelson, Chris Duhon, Sean Dockery, Taymon Domzalski, Nate James)

Senior year a LOT better than junior year: 15 (Miles Plumlee, Nolan Smith, Jon Scheyer, Lance Thomas, Brian Zoubek, Dave McLure, JJ Redick, Shelden Williams, Casey Sanders, Dahntay Jones, Daniel Ewing, Shane Battier, Chris Carrawell, Trajan Langdon, Roshown McLeod)


Obviously some of this is subjective, but I conclude that there's a pretty good chance that our seniors next season make a "jump" and will put up significantly better numbers than they did this season.

Great list! Someone should show that to Mason Plumlee.

[duke09hms]

OK, I went back 15 years, looking at every rotation player (or starter) at Duke who had a senior year and compared their senior season to their junior season, to see if seniors generally improve or stay more or less the same. I compared per game statistics and then made a qualitative analysis. So if a senior played a lot more minutes then he will look good in this chart, but that's sort of what we're talking about here so it made sense to me.

I may have missed somebody, but I counted 26 Duke seniors from 1998 to 2012:

Senior year a lot worse than junior year: 4 (Greg Paulus, Nick Horvath, Lee Melchionni, Ricky Price)

Senior year a little worse than junior year, but still in the same ballpark: 2 (Kyle Singler, Steve Wojciechowski)

Senior year a little better than junior year, but still in the same ballpark: 5 (DeMarcus Nelson, Chris Duhon, Sean Dockery, Taymon Domzalski, Nate James)

Senior year a LOT better than junior year: 15 (Miles Plumlee, Nolan Smith, Jon Scheyer, Lance Thomas, Brian Zoubek, Dave McLure, JJ Redick, Shelden Williams, Casey Sanders, Dahntay Jones, Daniel Ewing, Shane Battier, Chris Carrawell, Trajan Langdon, Roshown McLeod)


Obviously some of this is subjective, but I conclude that there's a pretty good chance that our seniors next season make a "jump" and will put up significantly better numbers than they did this season.

Of course our seniors will improve, but I question the probability of them making the JUMP and demonstrating skills they haven't had before such as Andre developing a handle when that has surely been an emphasis for him the last 3 seasons or overcoming certain combinations of limitations such as Seth being a physically weak 6-2 guard without great athleticism and having an okay handle. Sure it could happen, and I hope it happens, but I'm not holding my breath.

Also, some of the players you list as being a LOT better are suspect. Like Dave McClure making the jump from 1 ppg to 1.9 ppg in double the minutes. Miles going from 4.8 ppg to 6.6 ppg in slightly more minutes. Lance actually dropped from 5.3 to 4.8 ppg while rebounding went up 3.6 to 4.8 rpg with a significant increase in minutes. Even I would say Nolan made the biggest jump between his sophomore and junior years, and not so much between his JR and SR years.

So I don't think it's as common as you try to make it seem, but I hope it happens to all 4 (hopefully 4) of our rising seniors.

[Kedsy]

Also, some of the players you list as being a LOT better are suspect. Like Dave McClure making the jump from 1 ppg to 1.9 ppg in double the minutes. Miles going from 4.8 ppg to 6.6 ppg in slightly more minutes. Lance actually dropped from 5.3 to 4.8 ppg while rebounding went up 3.6 to 4.8 rpg with a significant increase in minutes. Even I would say Nolan made the biggest jump between his sophomore and junior years, and not so much between his JR and SR years.

Well, McClure's rebounding and assists also doubled and, as I said earlier, for our purposes it's not necessarily a counter-argument that a player's minutes went up because some people are arguing that Seth's and Andre's minutes will go down. Also, having seen both senior years recently, I think it's really hard to argue against the statement that Lance and Miles both significantly improved from their junior season to their senior season.

Nolan's numbers went from 17.4/2.8/3.0 as a junior to 20.6/4.5/5.1 as a senior. His sophomore to junior jump was big too, but that's a pretty huge junior to senior jump, at least that's the way I see it. Obviously this is a pretty subjective topic, so feel free to disagree.

[ACCBBallFan]

OK, I went back 15 years, looking at every rotation player (or starter) at Duke who had a senior year and compared their senior season to their junior season, to see if seniors generally improve or stay more or less the same. I compared per game statistics and then made a qualitative analysis. So if a senior played a lot more minutes then he will look good in this chart, but that's sort of what we're talking about here so it made sense to me.

I may have missed somebody, but I counted 26 Duke seniors from 1998 to 2012:

Senior year a lot worse than junior year: 4 (Greg Paulus, Nick Horvath, Lee Melchionni, Ricky Price)

Senior year a little worse than junior year, but still in the same ballpark: 2 (Kyle Singler, Steve Wojciechowski)

Senior year a little better than junior year, but still in the same ballpark: 5 (DeMarcus Nelson, Chris Duhon, Sean Dockery, Taymon Domzalski, Nate James)

Senior year a LOT better than junior year: 15 (Miles Plumlee, Nolan Smith, Jon Scheyer, Lance Thomas, Brian Zoubek, Dave McLure, JJ Redick, Shelden Williams, Casey Sanders, Dahntay Jones, Daniel Ewing, Shane Battier, Chris Carrawell, Trajan Langdon, Roshown McLeod)


Obviously some of this is subjective, but I conclude that there's a pretty good chance that our seniors next season make a "jump" and will put up significantly better numbers than they did this season.

Thanks for doing the research. Kedsy. Marty may qyualify but may have been hurt the prior year.

Though hard to show quantitatively, the other thing that happens with each year in the Duke system is their defense and their consitency improves. Seniors know best when to rotate and they have been in every ACC opponent's gym at least once and usually about 3 or more times.

Depending on what happens with Mason, Duke could be in the position only mid-majors are in having potentially 4 senior starters, with Seth actually in his fifth year.

So unless a Shabazz comes on board in limelight like a Kyrie or Austin, the nucleus would be the seniors:

Mason at center if he returns, or the senior Oriakhi? possibly if Mason goes and Tony Parker does not join first. Seemsl ike Tony will decide before Alex. Not sure which of the two Duke would prefer but go with the sure thing.

Ryan at PF unless he has to play center if Mason goes and no Parker nor Oriakhi.

Dre at a guard spot, possibly a 3 guard lineup. He's just too much of a weapon when he's on, not to leverage him his final year, and hope his senior maturity leads to consistently good rather than consistently inconsistent. Coach K has plenty of weapons if Dre does nto do his part Alex/Mike/Sheed plus possibly Amile?/Trey?.

Seth at a guard spot, either SG or PG depending on who the fifth starter is.

If Ryan has to defend at center and spread the floor on Offense, then I would think Duke would need the height and have Alex and Mike (or Amile) at the two forward spots with Josh in reserve capacity as more traditional PF as MP3 is at center, relegating Seth to PG.

The defense has to start with the bigs and work its way down but still play the best 5 which would exclude MP3 and Josh most likely.

If Mason is at center (or Oriakhi or Parker) the Ryan is the spread the floor PF he has been.

Dre and Seth are two of the guards and then a decision whehter to go with a traditional PG Quinn or Tyler or to go with a traditional SF Alex or Mike (or Amile or Trey if eleigible a no decision if it's Shabazz).

This could aslo vary by opponent sometimes being Mason-Ryan-Dre-Seth and Quinn/Tyler.
At other times Mason - Ryan - Alex/Mike (or Amile?/Trey?) - Dre - Seth

Having seniors is a big advantage as evidenced by FSU winning 4 out of 5 versus Duke (2-1) and UNC (2-0). With the presure to go pro early typically these seniors are not lottery pick type of guys but still very experieinced relative to hot shots who were in HS the prior year, and quite often first or second round NBA draftee candidates.

[Bay Area Duke Fan]

Great list! Someone should show that to Mason Plumlee.

Someone should show that list to Andre and Seth.

[CDu]

Well, McClure's rebounding and assists also doubled and, as I said earlier, for our purposes it's not necessarily a counter-argument that a player's minutes went up because some people are arguing that Seth's and Andre's minutes will go down. Also, having seen both senior years recently, I think it's really hard to argue against the statement that Lance and Miles both significantly improved from their junior season to their senior season.

Nolan's numbers went from 17.4/2.8/3.0 as a junior to 20.6/4.5/5.1 as a senior. His sophomore to junior jump was big too, but that's a pretty huge junior to senior jump, at least that's the way I see it. Obviously this is a pretty subjective topic, so feel free to disagree.

McClure most definitely didn't get better, even in a subjective sense. Compare his sophomore stats to his senior stats. He was more productive as a sophomore than he was as a senior. So in his case his bump in stats were entirely minutes based. I think you've taken some liberties with the term "a LOT better" in the cases of McClure, Thomas, and Miles.

That being said, it is certainly much more common that a player gets more productive than that he gets less productive.

[Johnny Chill]

PG: Starter: Cook backup: Thornton, Sheed
SG: Starter: Curry Backup: Dawkins, Sheed
SF: Starter: Gbinije Backup: Murphy
PF: Starter: Hairston Backup: Kelly
C: Starter: Marshall Backup: Kelly

Kelly coming off the bench can play either PF or C depending on the matchup and game situation
Dawkins will probably start at SF, but I rather have either Gbinije or Murphy start and rotate for each other.
Sheed will be a combo guard, but I rather see him primarily at SG behind Curry, instead of PG.
Hopefully Cook is Duke's starting PG, Thornton is better as a backup.

[CDu]

PG: Starter: Cook backup: Thornton, Sheed
SG: Starter: Curry Backup: Dawkins, Sheed
SF: Starter: Gbinije Backup: Murphy
PF: Starter: Hairston Backup: Kelly
C: Starter: Marshall Backup: Kelly

Kelly coming off the bench can play either PF or C depending on the matchup and game situation
Dawkins will probably start at SF, but I rather have either Gbinije or Murphy start and rotate for each other.
Sheed will be a combo guard, but I rather see him primarily at SG behind Curry, instead of PG.
Hopefully Cook is Duke's starting PG, Thornton is better as a backup.

I can say with a great eal of confidence that this will not be the lineup next year.

[wk2109]

I can say with a great eal of confidence that this will not be the lineup next year.

Same here. Despite the indefiniteness that's implicit in the words "Premature speculation," any projected starting lineup without Curry or Kelly is, to me, a little bit silly.

I would love for Andre to start, but the problem with him is that his handle isn't good enough to warrant heavy minutes at the 2 and he's too small to warrant heavy minutes at the 3. During his sophomore year, the team could afford to start him at the 2 for a few games because Kyle could serve as a competent second ballhandler when necessary. If Andre does get significant minutes at the 2, I'm wondering if Alex or Michael could adequately help with ballhandling. Or, hopefully, Andre can get strong enough with the ball to the point where he can handle backcourt ball pressure and not just pass the ball off like a hot potato.

[ACCBBallFan]

Same here. Despite the indefiniteness that's implicit in the words "Premature speculation," any projected starting lineup without Curry or Kelly is, to me, a little bit silly.

I would love for Andre to start, but the problem with him is that his handle isn't good enough to warrant heavy minutes at the 2 and he's too small to warrant heavy minutes at the 3. During his sophomore year, the team could afford to start him at the 2 for a few games because Kyle could serve as a competent second ballhandler when necessary. If Andre does get significant minutes at the 2, I'm wondering if Alex or Michael could adequately help with ballhandling. Or, hopefully, Andre can get strong enough with the ball to the point where he can handle backcourt ball pressure and not just pass the ball off like a hot potato.

Agree with you on Kelly and Curry but FSU on Feb 23 would disagree with you on Dre.

http://espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=320540052

I know you can point to just as many box scores where Dre was on 0-for, but why throw a 3 year investment down the drain. Many wanted to do with same with Zoubs.

Duke should start at least 3 seniors. Whether the third is Mason or Dre depends on Mason's decision this week.

Starting 4 seniors is something usually restricted to mid-majors and can be a huge advantage.

[wk2109]

Agree with you on Kelly and Curry but FSU on Feb 23 would disagree with you on Dre.

http://espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=320540052

I know you can point to just as many box scores where Dre was on 0-for, but why throw a 3 year investment down the drain. Many wanted to do with same with Zoubs.

Duke should start at least 3 seniors. Whether the third is Mason or Dre depends on Mason's decision this week.

Starting 4 seniors is something usually restricted to mid-majors and can be a huge advantage.

I don't think Andre's ability to explode for 6+ threes three times per season means he should be starting. I'm not saying he shouldn't be getting significant minutes, but starting him at the 2 potentially gives you 4 non-ballhandlers on the court. A 2-guard should be able to give you much more ballhandling than Andre has shown he can give. And there has been more than enough discussion on these boards about Andre starting at the 3.

I think Andre should be able to play 20-25 min at the 2/3, perhaps more at the 3. Coming off the bench as the third guard would probably give him more favorable offensive and defensive matchups than starting would.

[Newton_14]

Agree with you on Kelly and Curry but FSU on Feb 23 would disagree with you on Dre.

http://espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=320540052

I know you can point to just as many box scores where Dre was on 0-for, but why throw a 3 year investment down the drain. Many wanted to do with same with Zoubs.

Duke should start at least 3 seniors. Whether the third is Mason or Dre depends on Mason's decision this week.

Starting 4 seniors is something usually restricted to mid-majors and can be a huge advantage.

I have been a staunch supporter and huge fan of Andre since he came in, but I have reached the point where guys like you and Kedsy will need to convince me he can in fact be a valuable, consistent performer. This past season was a huge disappointment for me. I honestly can't recall seeing a more confusing, conflicting player in all my years of watching Duke hoops. The Andre that lit up Mich St for 26 was not a standstill catch and shoot player. He hit really tough shots that night, coming off screens with a defender hanging all over him, and he was lethal. That game sticks out for me moreso than the Wake and FSU games. The shot against Belmont was huge too, and he played strong down the stretch in the Kansas game, hitting another huge 3, that as someone earlier opined, was overshadowed by the two Thornton 3's.

That Andre, combined with the Ryan Kelly we saw in Maui, made Duke a top 5 team. The 0-for Andre, brought Duke down a few notches. With his hops and strength, Andre should be getting 2 to 3 dunks a game. He had a few drives from the baseline or wing this year, where the path to the rim was clear except for a weak side defender rotating over, and even with a full head of steam, each and every time, Andre slowed his pace and went up weakly. Sometimes drawing the foul, sometimes not. Very frustrating to see. I wanted to just will him into attempting to dunk hard, or taking hard directly to the defenders chest to insure the foul call. It never happened.

I also watched him last summer work very hard on his ball handling, and taking it to the rim to do what I described above on drives. He did it numerous times. Sadly, he did not gain enough confidence practicing those drives, and the ball handling in the Summer League to try to do those things in Duke games. He treated the ball like a hot potato so badly during the season, that when the PG brought the ball up, you knew for certain he was going to the wingman opposite of Andre every time to start the set. Which meant the defense always knew exactly where the set would start from.

I love the kid, and want him so badly to play consistently well, but I am close to losing hope that he will ever put it together. While he isn't a great ball handler, he is much better than he shows in College games. It comes down to confidence and lack of faith in his ball handling abilities. The driving thing is confidence as well, and possibly a fear of getting hurt attacking the rim.

Add it all up, and it becomes "The Curious Case Of Andre Dawkins". There is a lot of talent there. I see no reason why he cannot be an above average college player. Yet, at this point he isn't and he only has one chance left.

I want Andre to have a great Sr year, but at this point, I will not be surprised if it does not happen.

[Wander]

With his hops and strength, Andre should be getting 2 to 3 dunks a game.

I hope this isn't considered too nitpicky, but I find most people have a poor intuition for what players should average in college basketball games, and it leads to silly expectations.

Mason Plumlee had 60 dunks last season. That's about 1.75 dunks per game. And that was the single-season record at Duke.

[CDu]

I have been a staunch supporter and huge fan of Andre since he came in, but I have reached the point where guys like you and Kedsy will need to convince me he can in fact be a valuable, consistent performer. This past season was a huge disappointment for me. I honestly can't recall seeing a more confusing, conflicting player in all my years of watching Duke hoops. The Andre that lit up Mich St for 26 was not a standstill catch and shoot player. He hit really tough shots that night, coming off screens with a defender hanging all over him, and he was lethal. That game sticks out for me moreso than the Wake and FSU games. The shot against Belmont was huge too, and he played strong down the stretch in the Kansas game, hitting another huge 3, that as someone earlier opined, was overshadowed by the two Thornton 3's.

That Andre, combined with the Ryan Kelly we saw in Maui, made Duke a top 5 team. The 0-for Andre, brought Duke down a few notches. With his hops and strength, Andre should be getting 2 to 3 dunks a game. He had a few drives from the baseline or wing this year, where the path to the rim was clear except for a weak side defender rotating over, and even with a full head of steam, each and every time, Andre slowed his pace and went up weakly. Sometimes drawing the foul, sometimes not. Very frustrating to see. I wanted to just will him into attempting to dunk hard, or taking hard directly to the defenders chest to insure the foul call. It never happened.

I also watched him last summer work very hard on his ball handling, and taking it to the rim to do what I described above on drives. He did it numerous times. Sadly, he did not gain enough confidence practicing those drives, and the ball handling in the Summer League to try to do those things in Duke games. He treated the ball like a hot potato so badly during the season, that when the PG brought the ball up, you knew for certain he was going to the wingman opposite of Andre every time to start the set. Which meant the defense always knew exactly where the set would start from.

I love the kid, and want him so badly to play consistently well, but I am close to losing hope that he will ever put it together. While he isn't a great ball handler, he is much better than he shows in College games. It comes down to confidence and lack of faith in his ball handling abilities. The driving thing is confidence as well, and possibly a fear of getting hurt attacking the rim.

Add it all up, and it becomes "The Curious Case Of Andre Dawkins". There is a lot of talent there. I see no reason why he cannot be an above average college player. Yet, at this point he isn't and he only has one chance left.

I want Andre to have a great Sr year, but at this point, I will not be surprised if it does not happen.

I echo Wander's comments about what is realistic regarding dunks. But aside from that, I agree with this post.

Dawkins clearly has a wonderful shooting stroke and terrific athleticism. If he could handle the ball confidently he would be lethal. But for whatever reason, he hasn't really progressed. If anything, he regressed a little this past year (FG% dropped 8 points, 3pt% dropped 3.5 points, FT% dropped 5.2 points). I'd love to see him really find his game as a senior. If he does so, he can be an absolute star. But he hasn't done it yet, and I'm losing confidence that he'll do it at all. And next year he'll be competing with (at least) Gbinije and Murphy - two talented prospects who now have a year of physical development and experience with the system for minutes at SF. At SG, he's competing with an All-ACC senior and a VERY talented freshman, and he just doesn't have the ballhandling skills to play the SG at the college level (you need at least two strong ballhandlers unless you have a transcendent PG).

I certainly won't rule Dawkins out as a starter and star. His size, athleticism, and shooting ability are such that he can be an impact player. But as of now I see him like a Ben Gordon/Vinnie Johnson (minus the ballhandling skills) player as a 6th man, instant offense guy. When he's on, he comes in and lights it up. When he's off, you just take him out and play your other SG and SF. If Sulaimon, Gbinije, and Murphy are ready for the responsibility of being regulars, I think this could be an excellent arrangement.

[Newton_14]

I hope this isn't considered too nitpicky, but I find most people have a poor intuition for what players should average in college basketball games, and it leads to silly expectations.

Mason Plumlee had 60 dunks last season. That's about 1.75 dunks per game. And that was the single-season record at Duke.

Fair point. Poor form on my part. Throw out the number, and a more fair statememt, is "With his hops, Andre should be getting more dunks".

[Mike Corey]

With his athleticism and stroke, Dawkins should be a more consistent and valuable offensive weapon.

But the body only goes where the mind leads. Andre's mental game needs more work than his physical game, IMO.

[dcar1985]

I don't know if this is putting Andre down, definitely not my intentions but to be fair Im starting to think a lot of our expectations for Dre were kind of far fetched.....When you actually break down his game there's not a lot there. He has a superb stroke from 3, when he's on it's a site to see, arguably one of the best shooters in CBB...but outside of that there isn't much more....He's never been a ball handler not even in HS, its not a lack of confidence in his ability, its a lack of ability...he doesn't have much of a pull up game, im sure that's compounded by the fact that he rarely puts the ball on the floor. I keep seeing people rave about this terrific athleticism and I just don't see it...he doesn't have jump out of the gym hops, he's extremely slow-footed laterally, and not very quick at all.

I was super high on Dre coming into Duke and thought by last year he would've been an All ACC guy, he honestly just has that look to him...unfortunately that hasn't happen and he's running out of time....I hope he feels that urgency and wants to leave his mark on the program this year but maybe it's just not in him. If it isn't, I honestly have no problem w/ all his minutes going to Mike/Alex.....

[Newton_14]

I don't know if this is putting Andre down, definitely not my intentions but to be fair Im starting to think a lot of our expectations for Dre were kind of far fetched.....When you actually break down his game there's not a lot there. He has a superb stroke from 3, when he's on it's a site to see, arguably one of the best shooters in CBB...but outside of that there isn't much more....He's never been a ball handler not even in HS, its not a lack of confidence in his ability, its a lack of ability...he doesn't have much of a pull up game, im sure that's compounded by the fact that he rarely puts the ball on the floor. I keep seeing people rave about this terrific athleticism and I just don't see it...he doesn't have jump out of the gym hops, he's extremely slow-footed laterally, and not very quick at all.

I was super high on Dre coming into Duke and thought by last year he would've been an All ACC guy, he honestly just has that look to him...unfortunately that hasn't happen and he's running out of time....I hope he feels that urgency and wants to leave his mark on the program this year but maybe it's just not in him. If it isn't, I honestly have no problem w/ all his minutes going to Mike/Alex.....

I will respectfully disagree on a couple of points. Like I said earlier, he is not a great ball handler, but he is better than what he shows in Duke games. His jumping ability is exceptional as well. The Summer League is no comparison in terms of a real college game, but it doesn't have to be when you are looking at skills like ball handling, and attacking the rim. By design, Andre played PG for his team last summer, and thus handled the ball a lot. He hit numerous shots pulling up off the dribble. He also attacked the basket off the dribble and drew a ton of fouls. In Duke games, he rarely, or almost never, even attempted to do those things. The only logical reason to me is confidence.

To be clear, I am not suggesting in any way that his performance in Duke games should match his performance in the summer league. Total different world. What I am saying is that he worked hard on his weaknesses, showed the ability to dribble on the perimeter, and attack the basket aggressively, but when the real games started, for whatever reason, he rarely ever tried to do the things he had worked on all summer.

I agree he lacks lateral quickness, which hurts him on defense. I do think he is an above average leaper, so we disagree there.

I agree with Mike Corey that much of the problem is between his ears.

[dcar1985]

I will respectfully disagree on a couple of points. Like I said earlier, he is not a great ball handler, but he is better than what he shows in Duke games. His jumping ability is exceptional as well. The Summer League is no comparison in terms of a real college game, but it doesn't have to be when you are looking at skills like ball handling, and attacking the rim. By design, Andre played PG for his team last summer, and thus handled the ball a lot. He hit numerous shots pulling up off the dribble. He also attacked the basket off the dribble and drew a ton of fouls. In Duke games, he rarely, or almost never, even attempted to do those things. The only logical reason to me is confidence.

To be clear, I am not suggesting in any way that his performance in Duke games should match his performance in the summer league. Total different world. What I am saying is that he worked hard on his weaknesses, showed the ability to dribble on the perimeter, and attack the basket aggressively, but when the real games started, for whatever reason, he rarely ever tried to do the things he had worked on all summer.

I agree he lacks lateral quickness, which hurts him on defense. I do think he is an above average leaper, so we disagree there.

I agree with Mike Corey that much of the problem is between his ears.


Duke is a high level div 1 team who plays some of the best teams in the nation year in and out....Summer League ball is no comparison, first no one is playing D for real, 2nd the comp isn't on the same level....I've played pick-up and summer league with D1 guys and pros and held my own but wouldn't sniff a look from Duke....its not comparable IMO.

OK I won't say confidence isn't a factor at all but the reason he isn't doing it in games is b/c he can't, the intensity and level of play is not even close. That has to cause some confidence problems, Im sure Dre's handle looks as tight as Kyrie to people who can't play but as the talent goes up and those same moves that were blow-byes before stop working you'll definitely get tentative and lose confidence in your ability to do it.

I've never seen anything from Dre that says he's an above average leaper either, compared to who?!? At his age I could do every dunk I've ever seen Dre do at 5'10...

[ncexnyc]

PG: Starter: Cook backup: Thornton, Sheed
SG: Starter: Curry Backup: Dawkins, Sheed
SF: Starter: Gbinije Backup: Murphy
PF: Starter: Hairston Backup: Kelly
C: Starter: Marshall Backup: Kelly

Kelly coming off the bench can play either PF or C depending on the matchup and game situation
Dawkins will probably start at SF, but I rather have either Gbinije or Murphy start and rotate for each other.
Sheed will be a combo guard, but I rather see him primarily at SG behind Curry, instead of PG.
Hopefully Cook is Duke's starting PG, Thornton is better as a backup.

While I honestly doubt we'll see such a starting line-up I would never be so foolish as to say it never could happen. You would think that some people would have learned from what happened this past season and they would have realized that anything could happen if the cards fall a certain way.

I can certainly envision this possible scenario:

Quinn's knee is 100% healthy and he makes dramatic improvement on the defensive end of the court. With his offensive skillset he gets the nod over Tyler, as Coach K decides to install a very uptempo offense.

Seth has learned from this past season what it takes to be the go to guy and relishes in the role for his final season at Duke.

Silent G. with a year under his belt now has the confidence and experience to play in an uptempo offense, which I mentioned above. His physical tools give him a decided edge over Dre.

Josh can run the court and the toughness he brings to the table negates the loss of Miles and Mason (if Mason does leave). Ryan's lack of offseason conditioning and lack of playing time in the new uptempo offense due to his foot injury has him behined Josh at the start of the season.

Marshall does indeed get the start at center if Mason does go.

Again, I doubt things will playout like this, but you never know and I'd rather admit it's possible than have to backtrack and eat crow.

We'll know a lot more by the end of this week (hopefully).;)

[Newton_14]

Duke is a high level div 1 team who plays some of the best teams in the nation year in and out....Summer League ball is no comparison, first no one is playing D for real, 2nd the comp isn't on the same level....I've played pick-up and summer league with D1 guys and pros and held my own but wouldn't sniff a look from Duke....its not comparable IMO.

OK I won't say confidence isn't a factor at all but the reason he isn't doing it in games is b/c he can't, the intensity and level of play is not even close. That has to cause some confidence problems, Im sure Dre's handle looks as tight as Kyrie to people who can't play but as the talent goes up and those same moves that were blow-byes before stop working you'll definitely get tentative and lose confidence in your ability to do it.

I've never seen anything from Dre that says he's an above average leaper either, compared to who?!? At his age I could do every dunk I've ever seen Dre do at 5'10...

Even though I clarified it as clearly as I could, you still hit me with the "Summer League is no comparison"? I stated that upfront.

The point was Andre played the point which meant he had to handle the ball a lot (he was not working on PG skills, it was just to insure he had to dribble the ball a lot the entire game vs just hanging out on the wing) and he showed that he actually can dribble the ball adequately. It is not a strong point, but he is good enough that he should not be afraid to put the ball on the floor in Duke games. Yet he is. It's confidence/mental.

If you can't see how good of a leaper Andre is, then we will have to just disagree on that. If you want a comparison from this years team, Andre and Austin are roughly the same height, and Andre is a far better leaper than Austin is. Andre won the dunk contest at CTC two years in a row and showed great hops in doing so. If you could match the dunks he threw down in those contests at 5'10, then my hats off to you. Are you Spud Webb by chance?:)

[Saratoga2]

While I honestly doubt we'll see such a starting line-up I would never be so foolish as to say it never could happen. You would think that some people would have learned from what happened this past season and they would have realized that anything could happen if the cards fall a certain way.

I can certainly envision this possible scenario:

Quinn's knee is 100% healthy and he makes dramatic improvement on the defensive end of the court. With his offensive skillset he gets the nod over Tyler, as Coach K decides to install a very uptempo offense.

Seth has learned from this past season what it takes to be the go to guy and relishes in the role for his final season at Duke.

Silent G. with a year under his belt now has the confidence and experience to play in an uptempo offense, which I mentioned above. His physical tools give him a decided edge over Dre.

Josh can run the court and the toughness he brings to the table negates the loss of Miles and Mason (if Mason does leave). Ryan's lack of offseason conditioning and lack of playing time in the new uptempo offense due to his foot injury has him behined Josh at the start of the season.

Marshall does indeed get the start at center if Mason does go.

Again, I doubt things will playout like this, but you never know and I'd rather admit it's possible than have to backtrack and eat crow.

We'll know a lot more by the end of this week (hopefully).;)

We all love to speculate, but if Mason returns, he starts, end of story! Also, if Shabazz comes, I would be very surprised if he didn't start. But where would he start? Would it be SG or small forward? I think this thread will be better served to await the April 11th results and also the April 29th NBA decision.

[dcar1985]

Even though I clarified it as clearly as I could, you still hit me with the "Summer League is no comparison"? I stated that upfront.

The point was Andre played the point which meant he had to handle the ball a lot (he was not working on PG skills, it was just to insure he had to dribble the ball a lot the entire game vs just hanging out on the wing) and he showed that he actually can dribble the ball adequately. It is not a strong point, but he is good enough that he should not be afraid to put the ball on the floor in Duke games. Yet he is. It's confidence/mental.

If you can't see how good of a leaper Andre is, then we will have to just disagree on that. If you want a comparison from this years team, Andre and Austin are roughly the same height, and Andre is a far better leaper than Austin is. Andre won the dunk contest at CTC two years in a row and showed great hops in doing so. If you could match the dunks he threw down in those contests at 5'10, then my hats off to you. Are you Spud Webb by chance?:)

No you clarified the difference well but its still your main point....he did it in the summer league so he can do it now. My point is that Andre adequately handling the ball during the summer league does not equate to him being able to do it at Duke during games....Having a tight handle isn't one of those skills that carries over at every level, you might have been considered to have a great handle at one level but not so much playing against more talented/better defensively players. Its not like shooting where if you can shoot then you can shoot....

Yea I guess we'll just have to disagree....I wouldn't put Dre in the same paragraph as guys like Deuce Bello, Shaq Johnson, JP Tokoto....those guys are great leapers

[Newton_14]

No you clarified the difference well but its still your main point....he did it in the summer league so he can do it now. My point is that Andre adequately handling the ball during the summer league does not equate to him being able to do it at Duke during games....Having a tight handle isn't one of those skills that carries over at every level, you might have been considered to have a great handle at one level but not so much playing against more talented/better defensively players. Its not like shooting where if you can shoot then you can shoot....

Yea I guess we'll just have to disagree....I wouldn't put Dre in the same paragraph as guys like Deuce Bello, Shaq Johnson, JP Tokoto....those guys are great leapers

No, my point was he practiced it in the summer league, and showed enough ability in that practice, that he should not be afraid to try it in Duke games, and have moderate success.

[CajunDevil]

Duke is a high level div 1 team who plays some of the best teams in the nation year in and out....Summer League ball is no comparison, first no one is playing D for real, 2nd the comp isn't on the same level....I've played pick-up and summer league with D1 guys and pros and held my own but wouldn't sniff a look from Duke....its not comparable IMO.

OK I won't say confidence isn't a factor at all but the reason he isn't doing it in games is b/c he can't, the intensity and level of play is not even close. That has to cause some confidence problems, Im sure Dre's handle looks as tight as Kyrie to people who can't play but as the talent goes up and those same moves that were blow-byes before stop working you'll definitely get tentative and lose confidence in your ability to do it.

I've never seen anything from Dre that says he's an above average leaper either, compared to who?!? At his age I could do every dunk I've ever seen Dre do at 5'10...

In 2011 at the NCAA tourney practice in Charlotte, Andre had some very impressive dunks that showed an explosiveness he hasn't shown in games. Now, a 5'10" guy with a 40" vertical could do those same dunks, but that shouldn't discount Dre's leaping ability :)

[ncexnyc]

No, my point was he practiced it in the summer league, and showed enough ability in that practice, that he should not be afraid to try it in Duke games, and have moderate success.

Of course that takes us back to the issue of the quick hook. If Dre attempts these things and fails, does he get yanked off the court?

[CDu]

No, my point was he practiced it in the summer league, and showed enough ability in that practice, that he should not be afraid to try it in Duke games, and have moderate success.

But the difference is that the level of defense played in summer leagues is much less than that played in D-1 college ball (both in terms of capability and effort). So showing capability in the summer leagues doesn't really mean much with regard to capability in college ball. Dawkins has spent considerably more time practicing against D-1 players at Duke. I'm guessing his lack of confidence in his ballhandling stems from not being very successful with it at that level of practice.

[FerryFor50]

But the difference is that the level of defense played in summer leagues is much less than that played in D-1 college ball (both in terms of capability and effort). So showing capability in the summer leagues doesn't really mean much with regard to capability in college ball. Dawkins has spent considerably more time practicing against D-1 players at Duke. I'm guessing his lack of confidence in his ballhandling stems from not being very successful with it at that level of practice.

I think Newton's point was that regardless of the level of competition, the athleticism is still there.

For whatever reason, Dre isn't using it.

[dcar1985]

In 2011 at the NCAA tourney practice in Charlotte, Andre had some very impressive dunks that showed an explosiveness he hasn't shown in games. Now, a 5'10" guy with a 40" vertical could do those same dunks, but that shouldn't discount Dre's leaping ability :)

If your calling him an above average leaper and saying he has terrific athleticism then it should....I guess it all perception though, if I couldn't dunk or didn't know plenty of guys w/ superior hops than Dre has shown then maybe i'd be more inclined to agree.

[dcar1985]

But the difference is that the level of defense played in summer leagues is much less than that played in D-1 college ball (both in terms of capability and effort). So showing capability in the summer leagues doesn't really mean much with regard to capability in college ball. Dawkins has spent considerably more time practicing against D-1 players at Duke. I'm guessing his lack of confidence in his ballhandling stems from not being very successful with it at that level of practice.

Exactly....

[Newton_14]

But the difference is that the level of defense played in summer leagues is much less than that played in D-1 college ball (both in terms of capability and effort). So showing capability in the summer leagues doesn't really mean much with regard to capability in college ball. Dawkins has spent considerably more time practicing against D-1 players at Duke. I'm guessing his lack of confidence in his ballhandling stems from not being very successful with it at that level of practice.


Exactly....

Right, that's why I stated you could not compare performance in the Summer League to performance in College. I also stated that was not my point. You guys keep missing that because you made up in your mind what I was trying to state. So, throw out every mention of the summer league. (One side bar though: Both of you are dismissing something you have never seen, as meaningless. Some of the games out there when both teams are loaded up with the Top D1 players and a NBA guy or two, can get competitive. The majority of the games are played with no team defense. You get some good one on one matchups where they D each other up strongly, but no team defense approaching the level of college defenses. Now the girls games, on the other hand, are very competitive and similar to real womens college games.)

But back to Andre. Ball handling is still a skill that can be assessed in different environments, much like shooting. Having seen Andre play, in person, in numerous college games, 3 CTC games, a couple of Duke practices, and the aforementioned totally worthless, meaningless, waste of time league that K must be crazy to let his kids compete in, I have come to the conclusion that Andre can be an adequate enough ball handler, that he should not be afraid to dribble in college games. He is never going to be a great ball handler, but he is not so bad at it, that he would get the ball stolen every time he attempted to dribble against college defenders.

For whatever reason, he freezes up in games to the point where he treats the ball like a hot potato. I believe that to be a mental issue. You are welcome to both disagree and have the last word, as I am done on the subject.

[Johnny Chill]

PG: Starter: Cook backup: Thornton, Sheed
SG: Starter: Curry Backup: Dawkins, Sheed
SF: Starter: Gbinije Backup: Murphy
PF: Starter: Hairston Backup: Kelly
C: Starter: Marshall Backup: Kelly

Kelly coming off the bench can play either PF or C depending on the matchup and game situation
Dawkins will probably start at SF, but I rather have either Gbinije or Murphy start and rotate for each other.
Sheed will be a combo guard, but I rather see him primarily at SG behind Curry, instead of PG.
Hopefully Cook is Duke's starting PG, Thornton is better as a backup.

Starter Bench
PG: Cook Thornton, Sheed
SG: Curry Dawkins, Sheed
SF: Gbinije or Murphy
PF: Kelly Hairston
C: Mason Marshall

With Mason back, Kelly is a starter at the 4.
Hopefully Duke can add Oriakhi to start next to Mason.
Jefferson will help in the long term.

[NSDukeFan]

Starter Bench
PG: Cook Thornton, Sheed
SG: Curry Dawkins, Sheed
SF: Gbinije or Murphy
PF: Kelly Hairston
C: Mason Marshall

With Mason back, Kelly is a starter at the 4.
Hopefully Duke can add Oriakhi to start next to Mason.
Jefferson will help in the long term.

I believe Kelly Hairston and Mason Marshall are going to be two of Duke's all time greats. :)

[CDu]

Starter Bench
PG: Cook Thornton, Sheed
SG: Curry Dawkins, Sheed
SF: Gbinije or Murphy
PF: Kelly Hairston
C: Mason Marshall

With Mason back, Kelly is a starter at the 4.
Hopefully Duke can add Oriakhi to start next to Mason.
Jefferson will help in the long term.

I can also say with great confidence that we will not be adding Oriakhi now that Mason has decided to return. Oriakhi will be going somewhere he can start, and that opportunity no longer exists at Duke.

I also think it's unlikely that Sulaimon is the #3 SG and #3 PG next year. He's going to play. He's very good.

[Johnny Chill]

I can also say with great confidence that we will not be adding Oriakhi now that Mason has decided to return. Oriakhi will be going somewhere he can start, and that opportunity no longer exists at Duke.

I also think it's unlikely that Sulaimon is the #3 SG and #3 PG next year. He's going to play. He's very good.

I agree Sheed is good. He isnt very good though at least not yet. Better than Dawkins (defensively, ball handling) and better than Thornton (scoring, attacking offensively). But he isnt going to start right away. And he is coming off the bench.

Until Oriakhi decides on a school. Duke is still in contention for him.
And if Oriakhi decides on Duke, he will start over Kelly.

[FerryFor50]

I agree Sheed is good. He isnt very good though at least not yet. Better than Dawkins (defensively, ball handling) and better than Thornton (scoring, attacking offensively). But he isnt going to start right away. And he is coming off the bench.

Until Oriakhi decides on a school. Duke is still in contention for him.
And if Oriakhi decides on Duke, he will start over Kelly.

Oriakhi would not start over Kelly. Kelly is a stretch 4, not a 5. Oriakhi is a 5 all the way. If you thought our offense stagnated without Kelly last year, think how it would stagnate with Oriakhi in there. He's a big body, rebounder and post defender. Not an offensive force.

He would back up Mason and play at the 5 with Mason for big lineups.

[CDu]

I agree Sheed is good. He isnt very good though at least not yet. Better than Dawkins (defensively, ball handling) and better than Thornton (scoring, attacking offensively). But he isnt going to start right away. And he is coming off the bench.

Until Oriakhi decides on a school. Duke is still in contention for him.
And if Oriakhi decides on Duke, he will start over Kelly.

Oriakhi will not be choosing Duke. And if he did, he would not be starting over Kelly. Not in Duke's system. But again, it's irrelevant, because he isn't coming to Duke.

[Johnny Chill]

Oriakhi would not start over Kelly. Kelly is a stretch 4, not a 5. Oriakhi is a 5 all the way. If you thought our offense stagnated without Kelly last year, think how it would stagnate with Oriakhi in there. He's a big body, rebounder and post defender. Not an offensive force.

He would back up Mason and play at the 5 with Mason for big lineups.

I guess you missed the games Miles started along side Mason.

[FerryFor50]

I guess you missed the games Miles started along side Mason.

And Miles is worlds better offensively than Oriakhi.

You must have missed the games with Kelly starting alongside Mason...

[Johnny Chill]

Oriakhi will not be choosing Duke. And if he did, he would not be starting over Kelly. Not in Duke's system. But again, it's irrelevant, because he isn't coming to Duke.

If Oriakhi, comes to Duke or not. He would be a great addition to the team and a upgrade for the frontline.

[FerryFor50]

If Oriakhi, comes to Duke or not. He would be a great addition to the team and a upgrade for the frontline.

Agreed. But I'm not sure I'd want a guy who seems to be a bit of a malcontent due to the minutes he was getting not getting as many minutes as he wants.

I'd rather see Hairston and MP3 develop into that guy.

[Johnny Chill]

Agreed. But I'm not sure I'd want a guy who seems to be a bit of a malcontent due to the minutes he was getting not getting as many minutes as he wants.

I'd rather see Hairston and MP3 develop into that guy.

How do you know he will be upset for minutes? He is going to have to earn them regardless.


And Miles is worlds better offensively than Oriakhi.

You must have missed the games with Kelly starting alongside Mason...

What makes you think Miles is better than Oriakhi on offense? How about defense?
Is Kelly better than Oriakhi at rebounding?

[CameronCrazy06]

How do you know he will be upset for minutes? He is going to have to earn them regardless.

I think he is referring to the fact that Oriakhi was reported complaining about minutes this past season, and didn't like sharing time with Andre Drummond. I suspect he wants to go some place where he will be "the guy".

[FerryFor50]

How do you know he will be upset for minutes? He is going to have to earn them regardless.



What makes you think Miles is better than Oriakhi on offense? How about defense?
Is Kelly better than Oriakhi at rebounding?

He complained about minutes at UConn, so he'd complain about them at Duke likely.

I know Miles is better than Oriakhi on offense by watching them play. I think they're about the same on defense. Both are strong and athletic, but both foul a lot.

Kelly doesn't have to rebound better than Oriakhi because we have Mason for that. Kelly stretches defenses and plays decent enough interior D. Plus he's not a terrible rebounder.

Regardless, it doesn't matter. Oriakhi has ruled Duke out.

[loldevilz]

I think Newton's point was that regardless of the level of competition, the athleticism is still there.

For whatever reason, Dre isn't using it.

In my humble opinion Dre playing to his capacity when he plays with a point guard that can create shots for him. If Quinn breakouts out next year like I hope he does than Dre will be the #1 beneficiary (#2 will be Mason Plumlee). As good as Thornton is at taking care of the ball he has no idea how to create shots for other people.

[Newton_14]

It's wasting internet space to discuss any lineup with Oriakhi in it, because he isn't coming. If Duke adds another big, it will either be Parker or Jefferson. Agree with CDu that Rasheed will play early and often. The kid is good and his defense alone will get him into the rotation. Providing that Kelly's injury heals properly and does not set him back, he will start at the 4 beside Mason.

Everything else is up for grabs. The battles in practice for the 1, 2, and 3 spots is going to be brutal. IF Shabazz chooses to be a Blue Devil, thats a 3rd starting spot penciled in. (Man what a week this will be if that happens! Wow).

[UrinalCake]

Starter Bench
PG: Cook Thornton, Sheed
SG: Curry Dawkins, Sheed
SF: Gbinije or Murphy
PF: Kelly Hairston
C: Mason Marshall


I mostly agree with this, at least at the start of the season. Also agree with those who think Rasheed could work his way up the depth chart as the season progresses. I do think that Thornton will be the starter as we enter the season, simply because he was the starter over Cook at the end of last season. Again, that could change by the time the games start.

Also, I don't imagine Rasheed will play that much at PG. I think we'll see Curry move over to point and Sheed stay at the 2 before that happens. But we'll see...

Finally, will we ever see the Plumlees play together? A lot of us have been overlooking Marshall but if he ends up being able to provide 20ish minutes of solid play then Mason could play some at the 4, which I think is actually his more natural position. This would mean that Hairston gets very little floor time.

[Newton_14]

I mostly agree with this, at least at the start of the season. Also agree with those who think Rasheed could work his way up the depth chart as the season progresses. I do think that Thornton will be the starter as we enter the season, simply because he was the starter over Cook at the end of last season. Again, that could change by the time the games start.

Also, I don't imagine Rasheed will play that much at PG. I think we'll see Curry move over to point and Sheed stay at the 2 before that happens. But we'll see...

Finally, will we ever see the Plumlees play together? A lot of us have been overlooking Marshall but if he ends up being able to provide 20ish minutes of solid play then Mason could play some at the 4, which I think is actually his more natural position. This would mean that Hairston gets very little floor time.

I think K will throw both Plums out there together for a few minutes at times so see how it meshes. I doubt it happens a lot, but do think we will see it in spots. Marshall is a natural back to the basket center, so you are right in that Mason would slide up to the 4 spot. Mason is a really good passer, its just the lack of a consistent jumpshot that limits him at the 4 on offense.

I am anxious to see Marshall get out there. I love his demeanor. A constant scowl, and he goes hard every play. He is going to be enjoyable to watch develop.

[Scorp4me]

I do think that Thornton will be the starter as we enter the season, simply because he was the starter over Cook at the end of last season. Again, that could change by the time the games start.

The same EXACT things were said last year and it didn't happen. I just don't see it happening this year either. I'm sure Cook improves and hopefully he matures as well, but don't see him starting. Based on what I've seen so far if Cook takes anyone's minutes it'll be Dre.

[Greg_Newton]

Honestly, I'm surprised there haven't been any transfers.

We'll have seven minutes-deserving players for the 1-3 spots: Murphy, Dawkins, Gbinije, Curry, Thornton, Cook and Sulaimon.

Budget three players for the post rotation at a bare minimum, and there's no way all seven crack the rotation.

So who gets left out? Gbinije again, I guess, even though I think that would be a mistake. Who would even be next to cut the rotation to 8?

[MarkD83]

There's more to being a Duke basketball player than the number of minutes you might get based on a bunch of fan's opinions.

1. Coach K probably teaches you alot during PRACTICE...
2. You genuinely like your teammates....
3. Duke classes actually teach you something useful....
4. (Please feel free to keep adding to the list.)

Maybe the 2010 team where everyone played 4 years tells us more about how much Duke has to offer than other schools.

[Greg_Newton]

Of course, the 2010 team also had an 8-man rotation. Thus, my point.

(not to mention one of the non-rotation players transferred following the season)

[MarkD83]

And the players on that 2010 team that are seniors now and did not get alot of playing time are still at Duke.

[Greg_Newton]

And the players on that 2010 team that are seniors now and did not get alot of playing time are still at Duke.

A little confused as to what your point is... 3 of the 4 were rotation players as freshman, and two even started some games. And as I said, a sophomore who was left out of the rotation once ACC season started transferred.

My point was that, unless K is going to bust out the ten man rotation, a couple of players who would start for most ACC teams are going to fall out of the rotation. And unlike most seasons, it's hard for me to even begin to figure out who that might be.

[UrinalCake]

I think MarkD83's point was that some of the younger guys might be willing to stick around even if they're not getting playing time right now, with the hopes that by the time they're seniors the playing time will come. Not everyone will automatically decide to transfer just because they're not getting 30 minutes a game.

[uh_no]

Of course, the 2010 team also had an 8-man rotation. Thus, my point.

(not to mention one of the non-rotation players transferred following the season)

Just a note: Olek transferred in the middle of the season, not following it.

[subzero02]

We'll figure out our rotation in Atlantis...

[ACCBBallFan]

Honestly, I'm surprised there haven't been any transfers.

We'll have seven minutes-deserving players for the 1-3 spots: Murphy, Dawkins, Gbinije, Curry, Thornton, Cook and Sulaimon.

Budget three players for the post rotation at a bare minimum, and there's no way all seven crack the rotation.

So who gets left out? Gbinije again, I guess, even though I think that would be a mistake. Who would even be next to cut the rotation to 8?

Assuming no new adds with Bazz or Amile for purposes of this thread at least, Alex or Mike may see some minutes as a small 4, particularly if MP3 is not ready.

That still leaves 6 guys competing for 3 spots with the highly rated Sheed having the longest learning curve particularly on defense.

[Wander]

That still leaves 6 guys competing for 3 spots with the highly rated Sheed having the longest learning curve particularly on defense.

I'm pretty sure Sulaimon won't be the worst defender of the six. He'll probably be better than Dawkins from day 1, and in fact wouldn't be shocking if he's a better defender than Cook, Curry, or Murphy.

[DukieInBrasil]

I'm pretty sure Sulaimon won't be the worst defender of the six. He'll probably be better than Dawkins from day 1, and in fact wouldn't be shocking if he's a better defender than Cook, Curry, or Murphy.

or Thornton.

[Big Pappa]

I'm pretty sure Sulaimon won't be the worst defender of the six. He'll probably be better than Dawkins from day 1, and in fact wouldn't be shocking if he's a better defender than Cook, Curry, or Murphy.

I tend to agree, and I really think that people on this board continue to underrate Sheed. He has an offensive combination that Seth, Dre, Cook, and Tyler simply cannot offer and that is the ability to BOTH knock down outside shots consistently and consistently create his own shot. That combination is something that I think Cook can continue to develop, but IMO it is simply not something we will ever see from Dre, Seth, or Tyler.

[CDu]

Assuming no new adds with Bazz or Amile for purposes of this thread at least, Alex or Mike may see some minutes as a small 4, particularly if MP3 is not ready.

That still leaves 6 guys competing for 3 spots with the highly rated Sheed having the longest learning curve particularly on defense.

I don't see either Murphy or (especially) Gbinije getting all of their minutes at PF next year. So I'd say that we still have at least 6.5 guys competing for 3 spots. And that's assuming that one of Hairston or Marshall isn't ready to provide 10-15 mpg next year, which seems unlikely to me. I'd expect both to be ready to provide that level of contribution.

The reality is that we have 11 fairly heavily-recruited players for 8-9 regular rotation spots. So 2-3 guys are going to get squeezed next year.


I'm pretty sure Sulaimon won't be the worst defender of the six. He'll probably be better than Dawkins from day 1, and in fact wouldn't be shocking if he's a better defender than Cook, Curry, or Murphy.

I would expect Sulaimon to be one the best on-ball defenders we have next year, if not the best. That's a statement both about his abilities and the limitations of the guys returning on the perimeter.

[wk2109]

I tend to agree, and I really think that people on this board continue to underrate Sheed.

I've actually thought the opposite and am afraid people are expecting too much from Rasheed before he even steps on campus. People compare him to Nolan Smith, but Nolan also began his career on a team with several returning guards and didn't get many minutes as a freshman. Rasheed might have certain physical gifts that the other guards don't have, but there's the possibility that the college game might be too fast for him initially. Michael also had certain physical attributes that theoretically filled a need on this past year's team but he barely played.

I like what I've seen from Rasheed so far, but I don't get the impression that he's a Kyrie/Austin type of can't-miss guard who will start from day one.

[CDu]

I've actually thought the opposite and am afraid people are expecting too much from Rasheed before he even steps on campus. People compare him to Nolan Smith, but Nolan also began his career on a team with several returning guards and didn't get many minutes as a freshman. Rasheed might have certain physical gifts that the other guards don't have, but there's the possibility that the college game might be too fast for him initially. Michael also had certain physical attributes that theoretically filled a need on this past year's team but he barely played.

I like what I've seen from Rasheed so far, but I don't get the impression that he's a Kyrie/Austin type of can't-miss guard who will start from day one.

I don't think anyone is projecting him as an Irving/Rivers type contributor from day 1. If they are, they're wrong. I'd expect somewhere around sophomore year Smith from Sulaimon next year. He's further along than Smith was as a senior in high school (better shooter, better ballhandler, as good or better defensively). I'd expect Sulaimon to be a regular in the lineup next year. Not a star, but a solid player. By his sophomore year, I'll be surprised if he's not a 12+ ppg scorer (think Daniel Ewing as a sophomore/junior).

[dcar1985]

I don't see either Murphy or (especially) Gbinije getting all of their minutes at PF next year. So I'd say that we still have at least 6.5 guys competing for 3 spots. And that's assuming that one of Hairston or Marshall isn't ready to provide 10-15 mpg next year, which seems unlikely to me. I'd expect both to be ready to provide that level of contribution.

The reality is that we have 11 fairly heavily-recruited players for 8-9 regular rotation spots. So 2-3 guys are going to get squeezed next year.



I would expect Sulaimon to be one the best on-ball defenders we have next year, if not the best. That's a statement both about his abilities and the limitations of the guys returning on the perimeter.


I for one am not expecting much out of Marshall next year, if your of the belief that Murphy made the decision to redshirt on his own, Marshall didn't make that choice, he just wasn't anywhere near ready and had no chance of seeing time, I'm not sold that it will be a much different story this coming year either.

I could make the argument that Mike G was our best on ball defender this year just based off pure ability, he's just as quick laterally as any of the guards plus he's 6'7 and long...but you still gotta learn the defensive schemes and know exactly where you need to be on the court especially on rotations which Mike had problems with....Hopefully Rasheed can pick things up quickly b/c like Mike the ability is clearly there...gotta put it all together though.

[wk2109]

By his sophomore year, I'll be surprised if he's not a 12+ ppg scorer (think Daniel Ewing as a sophomore/junior).

To me, Daniel Ewing is actually a better comparison than Nolan. Perhaps it's the Texas connection. I hope Rasheed can be the kind of four-year do-it-all guard that Ewing was.

[CDu]

I for one am not expecting much out of Marshall next year, if your of the belief that Murphy made the decision to redshirt on his own, Marshall didn't make that choice, he just wasn't anywhere near ready and had no chance of seeing time, I'm not sold that it will be a much different story this coming year either.

Marshall was not ready last year. He also had the unfortunate situation where he was behind two upperclassmen at his position who were far more ready. Next year, that number reduces to one, and he'll have had a year of physical development and a year of practice in the system. I see no reason why we shouldn't expect 10-15mpg as a backup big man next year. I'm not expecting huge numbers at all. Just expecting him to be a capable backup big man.


I could make the argument that Mike G was our best on ball defender this year just based off pure ability, he's just as quick laterally as any of the guards plus he's 6'7 and long...but you still gotta learn the defensive schemes and know exactly where you need to be on the court especially on rotations which Mike had problems with....Hopefully Rasheed can pick things up quickly b/c like Mike the ability is clearly there...gotta put it all together though.

I wouldn't make the argument that Gbinije was our best on-ball defender last year. He may have had the most potential to be a good on-ball defender, but potential is different from performance. Perhaps that's what you meant to say.

[CDu]

To me, Daniel Ewing is actually a better comparison than Nolan. Perhaps it's the Texas connection. I hope Rasheed can be the kind of four-year do-it-all guard that Ewing was.

Smith is the better comparison in terms of style of play. Sulaimon's game really is reminiscent of Smith moreso than Ewing. It's just that Smith was a little behind Sulaimon in development, and we tried to make him a PG when he really wasn't a PG early in his college career (which probably slowed his progress a bit).

[dcar1985]

Marshall was not ready last year. He also had the unfortunate situation where he was behind two upperclassmen at his position who were far more ready. Next year, that number reduces to one, and he'll have had a year of physical development and a year of practice in the system. I see no reason why we shouldn't expect 10-15mpg as a backup big man next year. I'm not expecting huge numbers at all. Just expecting him to be a capable backup big man.



I wouldn't make the argument that Gbinije was our best on-ball defender last year. He may have had the most potential to be a good on-ball defender, but potential is different from performance. Perhaps that's what you meant to say.

Yea that was my whole point....that based on ability alone you could throw his name in there, but you also have to pick up the schemes and know whats going on and that's what Sheed will have to pick up quickly in order to be considered one of our best on ball defenders....thought I had made it clear

[CDu]

Yea that was my whole point....that based on ability alone you could throw his name in there, but you also have to pick up the schemes and know whats going on and that's what Sheed will have to pick up quickly in order to be considered one of our best on ball defenders....thought I had made it clear

Yes, obviously he'll have to learn the schemes. I tend to think that's easier for the guards than for the bigs. And Sulaimon has seemed to show the acumen (based on his academic career) and ability and desire (based on his efforts defensively in these all-star games) to pick up the system and be an effective player defensively. It's not uncommon for guards to start right away at Duke. It's more uncommon for big men to do so. So I'd definitely expect Sulaimon to be a part of the regular rotation (in the ~18-20mpg range if I had to guess).

[Greg_Newton]

The reality is that we have 11 fairly heavily-recruited players for 8-9 regular rotation spots. So 2-3 guys are going to get squeezed next year.

...And only one will be a true freshman. Sure is going to be interesting to see who's sitting on the bench in February, because I have zero idea who it will be.

[sagegrouse]

I think this is a useful thread. Rather than projecting starting lineups or minutes by player, I think about next year in terms of getting answers to questions about individual players. Here are a few, roughly in order of priority:

1. Could Murphy really be the best player on the team? Would be an interesting development, eh?

2. Whither Andre? We'll be a good team one way or the other, but I would sure like to see him play at a high level.

3. Mason Plumlee, All-American? I would love it.

4. Quinn Cook, strong enough to be the starting point? That would be a big step in terms of physical play, defense and leadership.

5. Rasheed, good enough to start on day one? I always need to be shown by freshman, so I have no idea.

sagegrouse

[Kedsy]

People compare him to Nolan Smith, but Nolan also began his career on a team with several returning guards and didn't get many minutes as a freshman.

Nolan averaged 15 mpg as a freshman, and was getting double-digit minutes right until the end of the season. If Rasheed is a bit ahead of Nolan's development as a high school senior, it doesn't seem like a stretch to predict 18 to 20 minutes for Rasheed, especially considering our need for a defensive-minded guard.

[Duvall]

Nolan averaged 15 mpg as a freshman, and was getting double-digit minutes right until the end of the season. If Rasheed is a bit ahead of Nolan's development as a high school senior, it doesn't seem like a stretch to predict 18 to 20 minutes for Rasheed, especially considering our need for a defensive-minded guard.

Of course, Duke may still have to divide 120 minutes seven ways.

[NSDukeFan]

I think this is a useful thread. Rather than projecting starting lineups or minutes by player, I think about next year in terms of getting answers to questions about individual players. Here are a few, roughly in order of priority:

1. Could Murphy really be the best player on the team? Would be an interesting development, eh?

2. Whither Andre? We'll be a good team one way or the other, but I would sure like to see him play at a high level.

3. Mason Plumlee, All-American? I would love it.

4. Quinn Cook, strong enough to be the starting point? That would be a big step in terms of physical play, defense and leadership.

5. Rasheed, good enough to start on day one? I always need to be shown by freshman, so I have no idea.

sagegrouse

I hope you don't mind if I continue:

6. Tyler, will he continue to surprise many by being a starter and leader for the team? Can he get the ball inside to our post players?

7. Will Michael Gbinijie show the defensive potential and increased offensive abilities that many of us are excited about?

8. Has the year of practice and weight training during his redshirt year prepared Marshall to be a solid back-up center for this year's team?

9. Can Seth continue to improve his ability to create offense off the dribble, even against bigger guards?

10. Will Ryan be fully recovered? Will he increase his ability to create scoring opportunities and rebound at a higher level?

11. Will Josh show enough improvement that he has to be in the rotation as well?

12. Shabazz and Amile, interested in competing for championships?

[COYS]

I think this is a useful thread. Rather than projecting starting lineups or minutes by player, I think about next year in terms of getting answers to questions about individual players. Here are a few, roughly in order of priority:

1. Could Murphy really be the best player on the team? Would be an interesting development, eh?

2. Whither Andre? We'll be a good team one way or the other, but I would sure like to see him play at a high level.

3. Mason Plumlee, All-American? I would love it.

4. Quinn Cook, strong enough to be the starting point? That would be a big step in terms of physical play, defense and leadership.

5. Rasheed, good enough to start on day one? I always need to be shown by freshman, so I have no idea.

sagegrouse

Great list. Assuming we don't get 'Bazz (not to say I'm not hopeful), I'd add Mike G's development as a big priority, perhaps putting it right up there next to point number 1. We need one of Alex or Mike to become solid contributors next year. Preferably both will improve, obviously. If Rasheed's defense is ready to go AND Alex and Mike are ready for the big stage, it will really give us a lot more versatility. Incidentally, it may also play into your second point regarding Andre. If all three or any combination of two of the aforementioned guys are ready to contribute next year, Andre will also have to improve to keep his spot. Mike and Alex offer more size and versatility while Rasheed offers improved defense and better ballhandling (again, assuming he's ready to go and Mike and Alex improve). I think the playing time situation will be really up in the air next year. Outside of Mason and Ryan I'm not sure we can definitely pencil anyone into a starting spot, although I suspect Seth will also start.

[Big Pappa]

1. Could Murphy really be the best player on the team? Would be an interesting development, eh?

2. Whither Andre? We'll be a good team one way or the other, but I would sure like to see him play at a high level.

3. Mason Plumlee, All-American? I would love it.

4. Quinn Cook, strong enough to be the starting point? That would be a big step in terms of physical play, defense and leadership.

5. Rasheed, good enough to start on day one? I always need to be shown by freshman, so I have no idea.


Love this post sage. I'm just going to go through and give my opinions on these 5.

1. I am a HUGE Murphy proponent. I think him becoming the best player this year is a little bit of a stretch, but I do believe that he will be a starter. I think he could have been a starter for us last year. We need to remember that he started in China before his concussion caused him to fall behind and eventually redshirt. Murphy will be a big part of our success next year.

2. I think the trend we saw toward the end of the year last year continues. Dre, because of defensive struggles and the inability to be consistent, will continue to be squeezed into a role player that is used to come off the bench and hit 3's in certain situations. If he makes a few he stays in the game while he's hot.

3. I don't think Mason is an All-American next year, but I see him being first team All-ACC and a 15 & 10 type guy. The offense will be catered toward him and I think with Capel getting an entire year to coach him we will see improvements to his back-to-the-basket game. I also think having Quinn as the primary ball handler will help Mason tremendously. Which leads me to...

4. Yes I think Quinn will be the starting PG and the primary ball-handler. In limited playing time, and coming off a serious knee injury, last year he looked raw but very talented. He has the ability to run, create for others, and feed the post. If he can improve his defensive awareness I think he can be very good. He has shown the ability to lead and the passion to play extremely hard on both ends - two things you need in a PG and things you can't teach. My favorite Quinn memory from last year happened right after AR hit the shot to be Carolina. The team, along with Quinn, ran to tackle and pile on AR, but Quinn didn't fall into the pile. Instead, he got up and walked in front of the Carolina student section with his jersey out and point to DUKE across his chest. I love his passion and talent, and when you pair that with a year of experience and a true off-season I think he will move past TT on the depth chart.

5. I think that Sheed is talented enough to start from day 1, but I don't think he will. I just don't see who you start him over. He is a true SG, and I don't think he supplants Seth as the starter there. He could theoretically play a stretch SF as Austin did last year, but as I said before, I see Murphy starting at SF. I think Sheed will end up averaging 18-20 minutes off the bench and be a REALLY good 6th man.

[Kedsy]

Of course, Duke may still have to divide 120 minutes seven ways.

Yeah, but in reality it will be divided no more than five ways.

[wk2109]

Nolan averaged 15 mpg as a freshman, and was getting double-digit minutes right until the end of the season. If Rasheed is a bit ahead of Nolan's development as a high school senior, it doesn't seem like a stretch to predict 18 to 20 minutes for Rasheed, especially considering our need for a defensive-minded guard.

15 mpg is more than I thought Nolan averaged; while I wouldn't be completely shocked if Rasheed averaged 18-20 min, I'm still going to temper my expectations compared to those who are expecting him to jump right in as the starting 2 or 3. I'd absolutely love it if he could turn into the perimeter stopper that the team so sorely needs.

[CDu]

15 mpg is more than I thought Nolan averaged; while I wouldn't be completely shocked if Rasheed averaged 18-20 min, I'm still going to temper my expectations compared to those who are expecting him to jump right in as the starting 2 or 3. I'd absolutely love it if he could turn into the perimeter stopper that the team so sorely needs.

I don't think anyone is saying they expect him to start right away at the 2, though I wouldn't be completely shocked about it either. I can say quite confidently that he won't start (or play at all) at the 3. I think I've been about as high as anyone on Sulaimon, and I'm thinking around 18-20mpg as a backup at the SG spot.

I think Sulaimon will very much be in the mix for reasonable minutes next year and will be a productive player. I don't think he'll be a star next year, and I don't think anyone is expecting such.

[Wander]

Back to the original topic, three of the starting spots are not locked up no matter what happens: Curry, Kelly, and Mason. Judging by the preseason comments this year, unless Shabazz comes, I think there's a very high probability that Murphy is also a starter.

That leaves one spot up for grabs. I'd say there's a 90+% chance it's either Cook or Thornton, with a small chance of Sulaimon or Dawkins starting and pushing Curry to PG. We can probably roughly approximate the whole thing as:

1 Cook (50% chance), Thornton (50% chance)
2 Curry (100%)
3 Murphy (75%), Dawkins (25%)
4 Kelly (100%)
5 Mason (100%)

Add in either Hairston or Marshall as a big man backup, and there's your 8 man rotation.

[CDu]

Back to the original topic, three of the starting spots are not locked up no matter what happens: Curry, Kelly, and Mason. Judging by the preseason comments this year, unless Shabazz comes, I think there's a very high probability that Murphy is also a starter.

That leaves one spot up for grabs. I'd say there's a 90+% chance it's either Cook or Thornton, with a small chance that Sulaimon or Dawkins starting and pushing Curry to PG. We can probably approximate the whole thing as:

1 Cook (50% chance), Thornton (50% chance)
2 Curry (100%)
3 Murphy (75%), Dawkins (25%)
4 Kelly (100%)
5 Mason (100%)

Add in either Hairston or Marshall as a big man backup, and there's your 8 man rotation.

I'd tweak those estimates:

PG: Cook/Thornton (~40-45% chance each), Curry (10-20%)
SG: Curry (80-90%), Sulaimon (10-20%)
SF: Murphy/Dawkins/Gbinije (?, but 100% chance it will be one of those 3)
PF: Kelly (100%)
C: Mason (100%)

I can say with great confidence that Mason (C), Kelly (PF), and Curry (either SG or PG) will start. Where Curry starts depends on what he does this offseason and how guys like Thornton, Cook, and Sulaimon progress. I have absolutely no idea who will start at SF and I won't even venture a guess other than that it will be one of Dawkins, Murphy, and Gbinije.

[Ichabod Drain]

Back to the original topic, three of the starting spots are not locked up no matter what happens: Curry, Kelly, and Mason. Judging by the preseason comments this year, unless Shabazz comes, I think there's a very high probability that Murphy is also a starter.

That leaves one spot up for grabs. I'd say there's a 90+% chance it's either Cook or Thornton, with a small chance of Sulaimon or Dawkins starting and pushing Curry to PG. We can probably roughly approximate the whole thing as:

1 Cook (50% chance), Thornton (50% chance)
2 Curry (100%)
3 Murphy (75%), Dawkins (25%)
4 Kelly (100%)
5 Mason (100%)

Add in either Hairston or Marshall as a big man backup, and there's your 8 man rotation.

That's nine men right there, and I also believe Sulaimon will be heavily in the mix as well. I aslo strongly agree with you on Murphy.

[wk2109]

I don't think anyone is saying they expect him to start right away at the 2, though I wouldn't be completely shocked about it either. I can say quite confidently that he won't start (or play at all) at the 3. I think I've been about as high as anyone on Sulaimon, and I'm thinking around 18-20mpg as a backup at the SG spot.

I think Sulaimon will very much be in the mix for reasonable minutes next year and will be a productive player. I don't think he'll be a star next year, and I don't think anyone is expecting such.

I'm almost certain there have been at least a few posts in this thread slotting Rasheed in as the starting 2. This article says "With Rivers’ departure, the best guess for Duke’s starting lineup is Plumlee, Kelly, Sulaimon, Curry and either Tyler Thornton or Quinn Cook at the point.": http://www.newsobserver.com/2012/04/10/1992461/mason-plumlee-to-return-to-duke.html#storylink=cpy

I think 15-18 min as a backup wing is a reasonable guess. I personally expect less than that, especially in the beginning of the season, but obviously anyone is free to disagree with me.

[CDu]

I'm almost certain there have been at least a few posts in this thread slotting Rasheed in as the starting 2. This article says "With Rivers’ departure, the best guess for Duke’s starting lineup is Plumlee, Kelly, Sulaimon, Curry and either Tyler Thornton or Quinn Cook at the point.": http://www.newsobserver.com/2012/04/10/1992461/mason-plumlee-to-return-to-duke.html#storylink=cpy

I think 15-18 min as a backup wing is a reasonable guess. I personally expect less than that, especially in the beginning of the season, but obviously anyone is free to disagree with me.

I'd take an article from a sportswriter with a grain of salt. Sulaimon will not be starting at the SF next year (which is what that writer suggest). I see an outside chance at him starting at the SG spot, but if he's starting at the SF spot that's evidence of a real problem with Murphy, Dawkins, and Gbinije. I'd be shocked if one of those three isn't starting.

[SoCalDukeFan]

I don't think speculation about the starting line up is that interesting. To me the better question is how will K and staff use their depth. Will we go 8 deep, 9, 10 ?

With no new recruits, and I expect none, we will inside:

Inside Players - Mason, Marshall, Ryan, Alex, Josh,
Outide Players - Andre, Seth, Rasheed, Mike
Point Guards - Quinn, Tyler

Who is not in the rotation?

SoCal

[dcar1985]

Im sorry but im having a hard time wrapping my head around the idea that Murphy is almost assured to start at the 3 and may be the best player on the team....I get that K thinks he's good and that some cherry pick at the fact that he was a top 15 recruit almost 2 years ago before he decided to join his ORIGINAL class...But the only ball any of us has seen him play on the college level was during the China/Dubai trip and maybe I was watching something else but he didn't exactly tear it up out there..and to be blunt he was bad in the exhibitions. I think Dre will be given every opportunity as a Senior to start there at the beginning of the season, but as the year progresses I can see the job being done by committee with Alex and Mike earning more and more minutes. There's just not enough versatility to Dre's game for him to hold onto the spot IMO...

[Johnny Chill]

Im sorry but im having a hard time wrapping my head around the idea that Murphy is almost assured to start at the 3 and may be the best player on the team....I get that K thinks he's good and that some cherry pick at the fact that he was a top 15 recruit almost 2 years ago before he decided to join his ORIGINAL class...But the only ball any of us has seen him play on the college level was during the China/Dubai trip and maybe I was watching something else but he didn't exactly tear it up out there..and to be blunt he was bad in the exhibitions. I think Dre will be given every opportunity as a Senior to start there at the beginning of the season, but as the year progresses I can see the job being done by committee with Alex and Mike earning more and more minutes. There's just not enough versatility to Dre's game for him to hold onto the spot IMO...

Murphy is not a lock to start. It's open competition between him, Gbinije, and Dawkins, well unless Bazz commits to Duke. Then Bazz will start and play major minutes at the 3.
I say the favorite to start is Dawkins and most likely to start there in the 1st game because 1. he has started there before, 2. he has the most experience, 3. he is a senior.
But I wouldnt be surprised if all 3 guys start at the 3 during the course of the season.

[CDu]

Im sorry but im having a hard time wrapping my head around the idea that Murphy is almost assured to start at the 3 and may be the best player on the team....I get that K thinks he's good and that some cherry pick at the fact that he was a top 15 recruit almost 2 years ago before he decided to join his ORIGINAL class...But the only ball any of us has seen him play on the college level was during the China/Dubai trip and maybe I was watching something else but he didn't exactly tear it up out there..and to be blunt he was bad in the exhibitions. I think Dre will be given every opportunity as a Senior to start there at the beginning of the season, but as the year progresses I can see the job being done by committee with Alex and Mike earning more and more minutes. There's just not enough versatility to Dre's game for him to hold onto the spot IMO...

It's not cherry picking to note that Murphy was ranked in the top 15 in this year's class as of last summer. It's merely taking into consideration a data point. We know that he was among the top 15 in this class as of last summer, which puts him in company with Poythress, Goodwin, Harris, Warren, Ledo, and Pollard. And we know that Murphy has gained an advantage over those players by spending the past year practicing exclusively against major D-1 college players, getting superior weight training, and learning the Duke system. And we know that Coach K thinks he could be a 4-time All-ACC player (praise he doesn't throw around lightly). So I don't think it is unreasonable to expect good things from Murphy next year.

I agree that Murphy shouldn't be expected to be our best player. We have 2 All-ACC seniors and a third senior who averaged 12+ ppg last year. Until further notice, those 3 should be expected to be our 3 best players. But I don't see it as ridiculous to expect Murphy to be among our 5-6 best players, if not better.

[NSDukeFan]

I don't think speculation about the starting line up is that interesting. To me the better question is how will K and staff use their depth. Will we go 8 deep, 9, 10 ?

With no new recruits, and I expect none, we will inside:

Inside Players - Mason, Marshall, Ryan, Alex, Josh,
Outide Players - Andre, Seth, Rasheed, Mike
Point Guards - Quinn, Tyler

Who is not in the rotation?

SoCal

I have no idea who will not be in the rotation as I hope and expect that they will all be ready and able to be contributors next year.

[Troublemaker]

Confirmation from Murphy that redshirting was his idea: http://fayobserver.com/articles/2012/01/12/1149824?sac=Sports

A little extra info to help with these lineup predictions...

[FellowTraveler]

And we know that Coach K thinks he could be a 4-time All-ACC player (praise he doesn't throw around lightly). So I don't think it is unreasonable to expect good things from Murphy next year.

I've seen this suggestion several times before, but I've never seen the exact quote, and I've always assumed it to be a misunderstanding. Did Coach K really say he thinks Murphy could be a four-time all-ACC player? Or did he say he thinks Murphy could be someone who plays four years and makes an All-ACC team? Those are, obviously, very different things. I find it implausible that K would predict four years of all-ACC play for anyone, both because it's an extraordinarily unlikely accomplishment and because of the extraordinary pressure it would put on a kid.

The oldest reference to this concept I can find is a January 10 post by roywhite (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?26631-Alex-Murphy&p=541010#post541010):


Nice feature on Alex on a recent Inside Basketball with Duke's Coach K
(it was on DirecTV channel 646 Saturday 1/7 at 9:30 AM, which may put it behind what is seen in the Triangle)
[...]
Coach K mentioned that Alex is the type of player who could be a 4-year starter and an All-Conference selection.

So, absent a direct quote to the contrary, I continue to doubt that K forecast four years of all-conference play from Murphy, and hope that expectations for Murphy don't soar unreasonably high, as I'd hate to see a solid beginning to his career seen as a disappointment based on a misinterpreted statement.

EDIT TO ADD: I do think this is a reasonable hope for Murphy:


I agree that Murphy shouldn't be expected to be our best player. We have 2 All-ACC seniors and a third senior who averaged 12+ ppg last year. Until further notice, those 3 should be expected to be our 3 best players. But I don't see it as ridiculous to expect Murphy to be among our 5-6 best players, if not better.

Of course, I have that hope for 6-7 players ...

[Johnny Chill]

And we know that Coach K thinks he could be a 4-time All-ACC player


I hope he doesnt mean Preseason All ACC

[dcar1985]

It's not cherry picking to note that Murphy was ranked in the top 15 in this year's class as of last summer. It's merely taking into consideration a data point. We know that he was among the top 15 in this class as of last summer, which puts him in company with Poythress, Goodwin, Harris, Warren, Ledo, and Pollard. And we know that Murphy has gained an advantage over those players by spending the past year practicing exclusively against major D-1 college players, getting superior weight training, and learning the Duke system. And we know that Coach K thinks he could be a 4-time All-ACC player (praise he doesn't throw around lightly). So I don't think it is unreasonable to expect good things from Murphy next year.

I agree that Murphy shouldn't be expected to be our best player. We have 2 All-ACC seniors and a third senior who averaged 12+ ppg last year. Until further notice, those 3 should be expected to be our 3 best players. But I don't see it as ridiculous to expect Murphy to be among our 5-6 best players, if not better.

Its definitely cherry picking...even though the technical term is "redshirt freshmen" it will be his second year in the program of course he has an advantage over incoming freshmen, hes a year older, has a year of practice w/ a D-1 team, etc etc...Why not compare him to his actual class and the players he came in with?!? If it was the other way around and he went from ranked 40th to ranked 15th after he reclassified im sure you would wanna throw that 40th ranking out the window......I don't recall K saying "4 year All Acc player" but ok....you still have to go out there and do it right? What have you SEEN that says I shouldn't temper my expectations?

FWIW I expect good things from Murphy also, but I don't expect him to be our best player and I don't expect him to be an All-ACC player next year.....Never said anything about him being one of our best 5-6 players btw.

[CDu]

Its definitely cherry picking...even though the technical term is "redshirt freshmen" it will be his second year in the program of course he has an advantage over incoming freshmen, hes a year older, has a year of practice w/ a D-1 team, etc etc...Why not compare him to his actual class and the players he came in with?!? If it was the other way around and he went from ranked 40th to ranked 15th after he reclassified im sure you would wanna throw that 40th ranking out the window......I don't recall K saying "4 year All Acc player" but ok....you still have to go out there and do it right? What have you SEEN that says I shouldn't temper my expectations?

But what is his "actual" class? Many players these days enter high school a year later than they used to. I counted at least 5 of the top-20 this year as being essentially 5th year seniors. So why shouldn't Murphy's ranking in his 5th year senior class also be relevant data to consider?

I'm not saying to disregard his ranking from last year. Though I will say that he was more accurately about 35th (he didn't get a ranking from one of the services because he reclassified too late, and that hurt his point total in the composite rankings).

I'm just saying that we shouldn't disregard the other ranking. It isn't cherry picking if you're comparing him with the kids coming in to college this year (many of whom will start, and many of whom are 19 just like him).


FWIW I expect good things from Murphy also, but I don't expect him to be our best player and I don't expect him to be an All-ACC player next year.....Never said anything about him being one of our best 5-6 players btw.

I'm not saying you said he'll be worthless. I don't think most people expect him to be our best player next year. I've seen maybe one or two people even hint at this, so I think you're arguing against a straw man here.

[dcar1985]

But what is his "actual" class? Many players these days enter high school a year later than they used to. I counted at least 5 of the top-20 this year as being essentially 5th year seniors. So why shouldn't Murphy's ranking in his 5th year senior class also be relevant data to consider?

I'm not saying to disregard his ranking from last year. Though I will say that he was more accurately about 35th (he didn't get a ranking from one of the services because he reclassified too late, and that hurt his point total in the composite rankings).

I'm just saying that we shouldn't disregard the other ranking. It isn't cherry picking if you're comparing him with the kids coming in to college this year (many of whom will start, and many of whom are 19 just like him).



I'm not saying you said he'll be worthless. I don't think most people expect him to be our best player next year. I've seen maybe one or two people even hint at this, so I think you're arguing against a straw man here.

His actual class would be whatever class he graduated and matriculated into college w/ which is 2011 not 2012....I get that there are kids doing it....Mike G was a 5th yr senior, Alex wasn't though he graduated HS in the same 4 years that most of us do....You can't compare him with incoming freshmen of 2012 cause he's not an incoming freshmen, how many of the top 100 2012 kids have spent the last year practicing w/ their team?!? Im pretty sure the answer is none.

Him being ranked 41st, or 35th or 40 whatever doesn't matter if he shows up next year ready to go, plenty of similarly and lower ranked kids make an impact every year....all im saying is its not really accurate to use that as reasoning for saying he's got a starting spot locked up or that he might be the best player on the team next year even without him playing a minute.....I don't think most people think that either, im speaking to the few that do.

[CDu]

His actual class would be whatever class he graduated and matriculated into college w/ which is 2011 not 2012....I get that there are kids doing it....Mike G was a 5th yr senior, Alex wasn't though he graduated HS in the same 4 years that most of us do....You can't compare him with incoming freshmen of 2012 cause he's not an incoming freshmen, how many of the top 100 2012 kids have spent the last year practicing w/ their team?!? Im pretty sure the answer is none.

I can compare him to whomever I want to compare him to. There is no rule that says we can't compare players however we want to. And when comparing him to incoming freshmen, the #15 ranking (with the benefit of a year of practicing with their team) is a relevant point of comparison. And it suggests that there's no reason he can't be one of the elite freshmen this coming year.


Him being ranked 41st, or 35th or 40 whatever doesn't matter if he shows up next year ready to go, plenty of similarly and lower ranked kids make an impact every year....all im saying is its not really accurate to use that as reasoning for saying he's got a starting spot locked up or that he might be the best player on the team next year even without him playing a minute.....I don't think most people think that either, im speaking to the few that do.

I don't think anyone is saying "he was the #15 prospect among guys coming out this year, so he's got a starting spot locked up or is likely to be the best player." People are saying "he was the #15 prospect among guys coming in this year, so don't write him off." So again, you're arguing against a straw man.

[dcar1985]

I can compare him to whomever I want to compare him to. There is no rule that says we can't compare players however we want to. And when comparing him to incoming freshmen, the #15 ranking (with the benefit of a year of practicing with their team) is a relevant point of comparison. And it suggests that there's no reason he can't be one of the elite freshmen this coming year.



I don't think anyone is saying "he was the #15 prospect among guys coming out this year, so he's got a starting spot locked up or is likely to be the best player." People are saying "he was the #15 prospect among guys coming in this year, so don't write him off." So again, you're arguing against a straw man.

Im speaking as far as ranking...there's a reason he was ranked in a new class when he switched...how is it relevant? Of course he'll be ahead of the curve compared to an incoming freshmen...he's been in college a year already.

But there are people who've said that....if your not one of them then relax, im not speaking to you...b/c besides the fact that I don't think still saying he was a top 15 player is accurate I've agreed that I think he makes and impact next year and that im not writing him off and that he might even get some starts next year and be apart of the rotation etc...

[CDu]

Im speaking as far as ranking...there's a reason he was ranked in a new class when he switched...how is it relevant? Of course he'll be ahead of the curve compared to an incoming freshmen...he's been in college a year already.

That's the point. There will be plenty of freshmen starting for major programs next year. Murphy was considered one of the best among the players in this year's class. And he has a year of experience already.


But there are people who've said that....if your not one of them then relax, im not speaking to you...b/c besides the fact that I don't think still saying he was a top 15 player is accurate I've agreed that I think he makes and impact next year and that im not writing him off and that he might even get some starts next year and be apart of the rotation etc...

I think you're misinterpreting what people have said and creating an argument that doesn't really exist. I haven't seen anyone say Murphy is a lock to start, and I've only seen one person even suggest the possibility (not probability) that Murphy will be the best player on the team.

[dcar1985]

That's the point. There will be plenty of freshmen starting for major programs next year. Murphy was considered one of the best among the players in this year's class. And he has a year of experience already.



I think you're misinterpreting what people have said and creating an argument that doesn't really exist. I haven't seen anyone say Murphy is a lock to start, and I've only seen one person even suggest the possibility (not probability) that Murphy will be the best player on the team.

Ok if you want to consider Alex an incoming freshmen and his ranking as a junior and ignore that he's been in college a year already and graduated 2011 not 2012 then go for it...So if he stayed class of 2012 and say his ranking dropped as a senior would you ignore that too and say well he WAS ranked 15th so thats were we should keep him......Mitch Mcgary was ranked #2 this year, I don't think anyone thinks hes the #2 player in the class today though

[CDu]

Ok if you want to consider Alex an incoming freshmen and his ranking as a junior and ignore that he's been in college a year already and graduated 2011 not 2012 then go for it...So if he stayed class of 2012 and say his ranking dropped as a senior would you ignore that too and say well he WAS ranked 15th so thats were we should keep him......Mitch Mcgary was ranked #2 this year, I don't think anyone thinks hes the #2 player in the class today though

Do you have any reason to assume he would have dropped in rankings had he stayed? Couldn't he just as easily have moved up?

[dcar1985]

Do you have any reason to assume he would have dropped in rankings had he stayed? Couldn't he just as easily have moved up?

No just hypothetical.....definitely but seeing as his ranking went down after reclassifying and that's whats being discounted I went the other way....but I mentioned that earlier, if say he went from 15th as a junior in he 2012 class to top 5 in the 2011 class as a senior, im pretty sure you wouldn't be arguing that his ranking in his old class should matter, you would be perfectly fine with the top 5 ranking in the class he matriculated with

[CDu]

No just hypothetical.....definitely but seeing as his ranking went down after reclassifying and that's whats being discounted I went the other way....but I mentioned that earlier, if say he went from 15th as a junior in he 2012 class to top 5 in the 2011 class as a senior, im pretty sure you wouldn't be arguing that his ranking in his old class should matter, you would be perfectly fine with the top 5 ranking in the class he matriculated with

I am simply using the #15 ranking because that is the data point I have for him with respect to incoming freshmen. If he would have stayed and fallen then so be it. He fell when he reclassified because of his slight frame (he needed the year of physical development as he was really skinny). And as such, he chose to redshirt. Thus, I never considered the 2012 ranking relevant because he didn't play this year. He wasn't physically ready, and as such it made sense for him to be rated lowerin last year's class.

[dcar1985]

I am simply using the #15 ranking because that is the data point I have for him with respect to incoming freshmen. If he would have stayed and fallen then so be it. He fell when he reclassified because of his slight frame (he needed the year of physical development as he was really skinny). And as such, he chose to redshirt. Thus, I never considered the 2012 ranking relevant because he didn't play this year. He wasn't physically ready, and as such it made sense for him to be rated lowerin last year's class.

What caused him the be ranked where he was makes no difference to me...I guess we just disagree on considering him an incoming freshmen, I think the fact that he's been in college a year already says he's not....sounds like you think the fact that he didn't play in games means he is

[JNort]

What caused him the be ranked where he was makes no difference to me...I guess we just disagree on considering him an incoming freshmen, I think the fact that he's been in college a year already says he's not....sounds like you think the fact that he didn't play in games means he is

And that fact that the NCAA and Duke will also call him a freshmen...

[Johnny Chill]

High school rankings don't mean squat once the season starts.

[dcar1985]

And that fact that the NCAA and Duke will also call him a freshmen...

Yea sorry a redshirt freshmen and a freshmen are not the same....If you don't think that year of weight training, conditioning and practice matter then Alex should've just played a 5th year in HS

[CALVET]

There's obviously a logjam at either the 2, the 3, or the 4 position next year because K never goes more than 8-9 deep in the season. I have a feeling that two out of Hairston, Murphy, Gbinije, or Dawkins will sit out most of the season.

I hope it doesn't happen, but unless Sulaimon doesn't pan out or Dawkins doesn't improve the logical guess is that Hairston and Gbinije are odd men out and Murphy will play some power forward.

I really thought last year that a better prepared Gbinije could've helped in Duke losses.

[anon]

Yea sorry a redshirt freshmen and a freshmen are not the same....If you don't think that year of weight training, conditioning and practice matter then Alex should've just played a 5th year in HS

Correction: fourth.

He's going to be a (redshirt) freshman and the age of a freshman.

[dcar1985]

Correction: fourth.

He's going to be a (redshirt) freshman and the age of a freshman.

Nope fifth....

[Greg_Newton]

Correction: fourth.

He's going to be a (redshirt) freshman and the age of a freshman.

He turns 19 in June, so he'll be older than most freshmen. 9 months older than Sheed, for example.

[loldevilz]

There's obviously a logjam at either the 2, the 3, or the 4 position next year because K never goes more than 8-9 deep in the season. I have a feeling that two out of Hairston, Murphy, Gbinije, or Dawkins will sit out most of the season.

I hope it doesn't happen, but unless Sulaimon doesn't pan out or Dawkins doesn't improve the logical guess is that Hairston and Gbinije are odd men out and Murphy will play some power forward.

I really thought last year that a better prepared Gbinije could've helped in Duke losses.

If Gbinije is on the bench another year, there will be a lot of frustrated message board posters.

[CDu]

What caused him the be ranked where he was makes no difference to me...I guess we just disagree on considering him an incoming freshmen, I think the fact that he's been in college a year already says he's not....sounds like you think the fact that he didn't play in games means he is

I'm only interested in the rankings as a means of guesstimating his potential impact next year. I'm not trying to rank him as a prospect - I'm simply interested in how he'll do next year. So I'm using whatever data I have to try to figure that out. As such, I think the junior year ranking before he reclassified (even though it isn't perfect) is the most useful piece of comparative data I have in gauging how he'll produce next year compared with other freshmen.


Yea sorry a redshirt freshmen and a freshmen are not the same....If you don't think that year of weight training, conditioning and practice matter then Alex should've just played a 5th year in HS

The NCAA views them as the same (in terms of years of eligibility), and that's all that matters. He'll have four years of eligibility, as will they. It's silly to compare him to sophomores, because they have only 3 years of eligibility.

You are correct that he has an advantage over true freshmen in that he's got a year of college experience (with the weight training, conditioning, and practice) already. That's my point: he's probably going to be better than most freshmen by virtue of having that year of experience. That's a good thing, yet you seem to be suggesting it is a bad thing.

You are sort of arguing against yourself. You ask why we should be excited about him next year. Then you provide the answer: he's a redshirt freshman who was ranked in the top 20 a year ago and has spent the past year gaining a HUGE advantage over other those (now) incoming freshmen.

[dcar1985]

Only thing I'm arguing is that saying he is a top 15 player is not accurate b/c that wasnt his final ranking nor did he come in with that class and that he can't be ranked among the incoming freshmen b/c he's not an incoming freshmen....if you don't agree that's cool, it's not like I said I thought he was a bum or something

[CDu]

Only thing I'm arguing is that saying he was a top 15 player is not accurate and that he can't be ranked among the incoming freshmen b/c he's not an incoming freshmen....if you don't agree that's cool, it's not like I said I thought he was a bum or something

And I'm not trying to rank him. I don't care about the rankings other than as a gauge of what the players will actually do.

[Jderf]

Haha. Wow. Astonishing that this^ is still going strong...

[Big Pappa]

If Gbinije is on the bench another year, there will be a lot of frustrated message board posters.

Not if we win. Winning cures everything.

[Johnny Chill]

Not if we win. Winning cures everything.

Duke won 27 games last season. Gbinije should of been getting minutes during all of those games that he was available.
He should have been getting minutes in the all of the games.

[superdave]

Andrew Katz (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/7801992/indiana-hoosiers-lead-revised-top-25-plenty-changes-elsewhere)pegs Duke at #15 for next year, in spite of being top 10 all this year and returning everyone but Rivers and adding Sulaimon, Murphy, Marshall.

Unc is ranked higher even though they will have nothing but role players on the roster (similar to Duke last year, sort of).

State is ranked higher even though Calvin Leslie's status is way up n the air, and that affects Amile Jefferson's decision directly.

Methinks Katz doesnt know too much.

[superdave]

Duke won 27 games last season. Gbinije should of been getting minutes during all of those games that he was available.
He should have been getting minutes in the all of the games.

Do you have specific reasons for this claim? What is your line of reasoning here? Do you know more about Gbinije's talents and efforts in practice than Coach K? Because Coach K's limited minutes for Gbinije this past season directly contradict your post. Sure, I'd like to have see Gbinije get more minutes too, but I know very little myself.

[Duvall]

Not if we win. Winning cures everything.

Winning cures most things, but message board griping can survive almost anything.

[Kedsy]

With Mason returning, we're getting a lot closer to when it makes sense to speculate about lineups. So, here's something to think about when divvying up minutes and thinking about the rotation. The following table shows the minutes played by our PG and SG in our Final Four years:



Year PG SG
---- ---- ----
86 30.2 33.1
88 28.7 29.6
89 30.4 29.6
90 33.4 31.5
91 34.7 24.8
92 33.6 30.6
94 26.4 31.0
99 31.0 31.0
01 31.8 27.8*
04 35.4 31.1
10 36.8 35.5


* - in 2001, I put Jason Williams at PG and Chris Duhon at SG. Switch them if you like.


The point of this table is Coach K tends to want to play his backcourt for a lot of minutes, at least he did on his Final Four teams. Only twice in those 11 years have our starting PGs played less than 30 mpg, and the lowest minute total for PGs is 26.4. Only twice have our starting SG played less than 29.5 mpg, and the lowest total is 24.8.

What that says to me is we are likely to see one PG and one SG emerge and play at least 25 or more minutes a game, and if history is a reliable guide then they'll probably play 30+ mpg. Looking at it that way, it seems a lot less likely we'll see an equal timeshare between Quinn and Tyler. Assuming either of them is capable, seems like one of them would take the job and run with it and the other would play 10 to 15 backup minutes. And Seth will probably play 30+ minutes at SG.

But if Tyler and Quinn split all 40 PG minutes and Seth plays 30+ SG minutes, then what happens to Rasheed and Andre, each of whom I would have penciled in for 18 to 20+ minutes. Based on Coach K's comments that Alex could be a four year starter, I'd also probably pencil him in for at least 20 minutes, mostly at SF. And of course a lot of people expect Michael to pick up 15 or 20 minutes at SF.

Part of the logjam could be alleviated by playing Alex some at PF. If Ryan and Mason each play 30 mpg, and we relegate Josh and Marshall to 5 mpg each (which would be a shame, but someone has to sit), that leaves 10 minutes for Alex at PF. But the minute hopes stated in the paragraph above still give us 130 to 140 minutes allocated out of a possible 120. Meaning someone (other than Josh and Marshall) isn't going to play very much at all.

Who will it be?

(a) Rasheed? If his defensive reputation is even half-deserved it seems unlikely he'll be left out of the rotation. He could get the 10 mpg when Seth doesn't play and could give us 10 mpg at SF, although that would give us an even smaller defensive perimeter than last year, which would be alarming. Another possibility is that Rasheed could become one of the main two guards, either by playing PG or by Seth scooting over to PG again. It's hard to expect this from a borderline top-10 freshman (currently rated 17 but very likely to move up in the final RSCI). But personally I'm guessing this may end up making the most sense. However, we won't have any idea if it's even possible until November.

(b) Tyler? Quinn? If Rasheed becomes a big-minute guard, then either Tyler or Quinn (or both) could move to 8th/9th man in the rotation. If Tyler doesn't improve his offense or if Quinn doesn't improve his defense, this might be an easier call. Assuming both of them do improve (which I expect), it's difficult to suggest cutting their minutes, but I think it's a real possibility anyway.

(c) Andre? He has certainly been an enigma but he'll be a senior. It's hard to imagine him as the 9th guy in the rotation. Even Greg Paulus played very healthy minutes until mid-February, and ended up averaging 16.1 mpg for the season. Ricky Price was suspended for the first month and a half of the season and then never really got on track. And other than Ricky, I think you have to go all the way back to Mike Tissaw (who Coach K did not recruit) to find a senior who played 20+ mpg earlier in his career and under 15 his senior year. Still, it could happen if Andre doesn't improve his ability to defend and focus every time he's on the court. He's probably my favorite player on the team, so I hope not.

(d) Michael? He has such great physical tools, but there simply may not be enough minutes to go around. I'm rooting for him, if for no other reason than I'd hate to spend the entire 2012-13 season reading "why isn't {g} starting" threads. Having said that, I think he has to beat out either Andre or Alex for the rotation spot.

(e) Alex? If Michael proves to be the better SF, perhaps Alex slides over as the third big and cuts out Marshall's and Josh's minutes entirely. Although if Josh and/or Marshall prove worthy of 10 to 15 big man minutes, the whole thing becomes even murkier.

Anyway, it's quite a dilemma, but it seems to me that one of the above unfortunate scenarios has to occur. The minutes don't shake out any other way.

[Saratoga2]

Andrew Katz (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/7801992/indiana-hoosiers-lead-revised-top-25-plenty-changes-elsewhere)pegs Duke at #15 for next year, in spite of being top 10 all this year and returning everyone but Rivers and adding Sulaimon, Murphy, Marshall.

Unc is ranked higher even though they will have nothing but role players on the roster (similar to Duke last year, sort of).

State is ranked higher even though Calvin Leslie's status is way up n the air, and that affects Amile Jefferson's decision directly.

Methinks Katz doesnt know too much.

We lose both Austin and Miles and we add Marshall as probably a little lower performer than Miles was this past season and Rasheed a little lower performer than Austin was past season. I would expect Mason, Ryan and Josh to show some improvement on the front line, while Michael and Alex are somewhat unknowns. Our biggest hope for improvement lies with Alex and Michael. At guard I would expect improvement from Quinn and Tyler with Seth holding his level of play and Andre kind of an wildcard vaariable. Actually, I don't think a rating of 15 is that far off for this team after the weak performance to finish off the season.

[CDu]

Andrew Katz (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/7801992/indiana-hoosiers-lead-revised-top-25-plenty-changes-elsewhere)pegs Duke at #15 for next year, in spite of being top 10 all this year and returning everyone but Rivers and adding Sulaimon, Murphy, Marshall.

Unc is ranked higher even though they will have nothing but role players on the roster (similar to Duke last year, sort of).

State is ranked higher even though Calvin Leslie's status is way up n the air, and that affects Amile Jefferson's decision directly.

Methinks Katz doesnt know too much.

Yeah, I think it's ridiculous to say that State (without Leslie and Painter) will be a top-10 team. Their season rests heavily on Leslie's decision. I think it is a fair ranking with Leslie, but not without him. Without him, that's a very good backcourt but very questionable frontcourt.

I think Katz is ranking us too low, Kansas and Syracuse too high, and UNC about right (we should be ahead of them, but they should be about where they are). He's giving lots of cred to Self and not enough to Coach K, and he's giving too much cred to the returning UNC players and not enough to the returning Duke players. It's not a well thought out article.

[superdave]

Yeah, I think it's ridiculous to say that State (without Leslie and Painter) will be a top-10 team. Their season rests heavily on Leslie's decision. I think it is a fair ranking with Leslie, but not without him. Without him, that's a very good backcourt but very questionable frontcourt.

I think Katz is ranking us too low, Kansas and Syracuse too high, and UNC about right (we should be ahead of them, but they should be about where they are). He's giving lots of cred to Self and not enough to Coach K, and he's giving too much cred to the returning UNC players and not enough to the returning Duke players. It's not a well thought out article.

Unless McAdoo is a more dominant scorer than I'd expect (13-14 a game), then I think Unc will suffer an identity crisis because they wont have a go-to guy.

Also, State should drop with Painter transferring out.

With that being said, we've got em right where we want em.

[CDu]

Anyway, it's quite a dilemma, but it seems to me that one of the above unfortunate scenarios has to occur. The minutes don't shake out any other way.

The obvious point to make here is that Coach K didn't just pick a guy and go with him for those big minutes. Part of why those teams were Final Four teams was because the guys he had at those positions were typically really really good. It remains to be seen if we have that situation next year. I don't know that either Thornton or Cook clearly stands out like the Final Four PG of years past. And I certainly don't think Curry stands out like that, though he's admittedly closer.

But your general point holds true. Coach K doesn't like to go deep in his rotations. We have 11 scholarship players to play 8-9 deep at most. At least 2 guys who were heavily recruited are going to sit the bench next year. It's very probable that two of those guys will be doing so for the second time in their Duke careers, considering that Dawkins, Hairston, Thornton, Cook, Gbinije, Marshall, and Murphy and Kelly (clearly he won't be benched, though) have all had small/no on-court roles in past seasons.

It is possible that Cook and Thornton share the PG spot. It's also possible that Curry and Cook (or Thornton) share the PG spot if Sulaimon is really ready and Curry is able to play PG.

If Curry can't play PG, he'll play SG a LOT. That is bad news for Sulaimon, who is pretty much a SG. But I suspect he'll find a way onto the floor and Curry will move over to PG some. That means bad things for one of Cook or Thornton.

SF is going to be some combination of Murphy, Dawkins, and Gbinije. One will start, one might play decent minutes, and one is going to be out of luck.

PF will be Kelly as much as he can handle, and Hairston backing him up with maybe some time for Murphy as well.

C will be Mason as much as he can handle and either Marshall or Kelly backing him up.

I don't think we have the clear personnel to go with one PG for 30+ mpg next year unless somebody really jumps up next year. As such, I think we'll see another 8-9 man rotation. But that still means 2-3 guys get squeezed.

[superdave]

With Mason returning, we're getting a lot closer to when it makes sense to speculate about lineups. So, here's something to think about when divvying up minutes and thinking about the rotation. The following table shows the minutes played by our PG and SG in our Final Four years:



Year PG SG
---- ---- ----
86 30.2 33.1
88 28.7 29.6
89 30.4 29.6
90 33.4 31.5
91 34.7 24.8
92 33.6 30.6
94 26.4 31.0
99 31.0 31.0
01 31.8 27.8*
04 35.4 31.1
10 36.8 35.5


* - in 2001, I put Jason Williams at PG and Chris Duhon at SG. Switch them if you like.


The point of this table is Coach K tends to want to play his backcourt for a lot of minutes, at least he did on his Final Four teams. Only twice in those 11 years have our starting PGs played less than 30 mpg, and the lowest minute total for PGs is 26.4. Only twice have our starting SG played less than 29.5 mpg, and the lowest total is 24.8.

What that says to me is we are likely to see one PG and one SG emerge and play at least 25 or more minutes a game, and if history is a reliable guide then they'll probably play 30+ mpg. Looking at it that way, it seems a lot less likely we'll see an equal timeshare between Quinn and Tyler. Assuming either of them is capable, seems like one of them would take the job and run with it and the other would play 10 to 15 backup minutes. And Seth will probably play 30+ minutes at SG.

But if Tyler and Quinn split all 40 PG minutes and Seth plays 30+ SG minutes, then what happens to Rasheed and Andre, each of whom I would have penciled in for 18 to 20+ minutes. Based on Coach K's comments that Alex could be a four year starter, I'd also probably pencil him in for at least 20 minutes, mostly at SF. And of course a lot of people expect Michael to pick up 15 or 20 minutes at SF.

Part of the logjam could be alleviated by playing Alex some at PF. If Ryan and Mason each play 30 mpg, and we relegate Josh and Marshall to 5 mpg each (which would be a shame, but someone has to sit), that leaves 10 minutes for Alex at PF. But the minute hopes stated in the paragraph above still give us 130 to 140 minutes allocated out of a possible 120. Meaning someone (other than Josh and Marshall) isn't going to play very much at all.

Who will it be?

(a) Rasheed? If his defensive reputation is even half-deserved it seems unlikely he'll be left out of the rotation. He could get the 10 mpg when Seth doesn't play and could give us 10 mpg at SF, although that would give us an even smaller defensive perimeter than last year, which would be alarming. Another possibility is that Rasheed could become one of the main two guards, either by playing PG or by Seth scooting over to PG again. It's hard to expect this from a borderline top-10 freshman (currently rated 17 but very likely to move up in the final RSCI). But personally I'm guessing this may end up making the most sense. However, we won't have any idea if it's even possible until November.

(b) Tyler? Quinn? If Rasheed becomes a big-minute guard, then either Tyler or Quinn (or both) could move to 8th/9th man in the rotation. If Tyler doesn't improve his offense or if Quinn doesn't improve his defense, this might be an easier call. Assuming both of them do improve (which I expect), it's difficult to suggest cutting their minutes, but I think it's a real possibility anyway.

(c) Andre? He has certainly been an enigma but he'll be a senior. It's hard to imagine him as the 9th guy in the rotation. Even Greg Paulus played very healthy minutes until mid-February, and ended up averaging 16.1 mpg for the season. Ricky Price was suspended for the first month and a half of the season and then never really got on track. And other than Ricky, I think you have to go all the way back to Mike Tissaw (who Coach K did not recruit) to find a senior who played 20+ mpg earlier in his career and under 15 his senior year. Still, it could happen if Andre doesn't improve his ability to defend and focus every time he's on the court. He's probably my favorite player on the team, so I hope not.

(d) Michael? He has such great physical tools, but there simply may not be enough minutes to go around. I'm rooting for him, if for no other reason than I'd hate to spend the entire 2012-13 season reading "why isn't {g} starting" threads. Having said that, I think he has to beat out either Andre or Alex for the rotation spot.

(e) Alex? If Michael proves to be the better SF, perhaps Alex slides over as the third big and cuts out Marshall's and Josh's minutes entirely. Although if Josh and/or Marshall prove worthy of 10 to 15 big man minutes, the whole thing becomes even murkier.

Anyway, it's quite a dilemma, but it seems to me that one of the above unfortunate scenarios has to occur. The minutes don't shake out any other way.


My solution to all this - have a B squad that comes in for short stretches 2-3 times in the first half and 1-2 times in the second half to run, trap and press.

Coach K could have a regular rotation with Quinn, Seth, Rasheed, Andre, Alex, Ryan and Mason that plays similar to how we did last year. That's a 7-man rotation plus Marshall/Josh getting some minutes in relief of Mason and Ryan. Then he could have a 2nd group consisting of Tyler, MG and Josh, with the addition of a couple of the guys from the regular rotation. This group would put all kids of pressure on our opponent defensively for short bursts. They could be used to stop the other team's run, to speed up the pace and to get quick and easy transition buckets. It would be 40 minutes of hell for 5-10 minutes a game.

This Duke team is deep and does not have a clear identity. We flirted with this idea some last year when Coach K platooned Tyler and Quinn in mid-January, but got away from it once Quinn tweaked his knee and was sick. This has two advantages - you get some consistent minutes for guys who would otherwise get squeezed out of the rotation, and you develop an identity as a fast-paced team that brings talent at you in waves. You also are not sending in guys like Josh and Michael to stand around and be deferential to the starters, but you send them in with a more clear purpose.

There's a few issues you'd have to manage. What kind of game will you get from Andre; figure it out early on and adjust his minutes accordingly. What matchup advantages will you have with our frontcourt; either go big or small depending on those advantages. Who has improved dramatically over this past season; figure out how best to maximize their minutes.

Thoughts?

[Kedsy]

The obvious point to make here is that Coach K didn't just pick a guy and go with him for those big minutes.

You may be right. But I'd note that five of the 11 years had Quin Snyder ('88, '89); Jeff Capel ('94; really a combo guard who had 3.2 apg but still played 26.4 mpg at PG); Jon Scheyer (great player but not really known as a PG prior to his senior season); and freshman Bobby Hurley (not to be confused with sophomore, junior, or senior Bobby Hurley). And yet they all played big minutes at PG, despite their apparent flaws.

[Kedsy]

My solution to all this - have a B squad that comes in for short stretches 2-3 times in the first half and 1-2 times in the second half to run, trap and press.

* * *

Thoughts?

It's an interesting idea, but the data from the past 31 seasons suggest it's very unlikely to happen.

[NSDukeFan]

You may be right. But I'd note that five of the 11 years had Quin Snyder ('88, '89); Jeff Capel ('94; really a combo guard who had 3.2 apg but still played 26.4 mpg at PG); Jon Scheyer (great player but not really known as a PG prior to his senior season); and freshman Bobby Hurley (not to be confused with sophomore, junior, or senior Bobby Hurley). And yet they all played big minutes, despite their flaws.

The other part I wonder about is whether K has had as good back-up options at the guard spots as he will this year. I know I always think highly of the last players on Duke's bench, but I know that there were not a lot of options when Scheyer played point and suspect that there often weren't a whole lot of great options off the bench.

[Kedsy]

The other part I wonder about is whether K has had as good back-up options at the guard spots as he will this year. I know I always think highly of the last players on Duke's bench, but I know that there were not a lot of options when Scheyer played point and suspect that there often weren't a whole lot of great options off the bench.

Well that was true in 2010, but not as much in other seasons. In 1988, for example, we had Kevin Strickland who was a decent ballhandler at SG, plus Phil Henderson (ditto) playing 16.5 minutes off the bench, plus recruited freshman PG Joe Cook who hardly played. But K handed the reins to two-year backup Quin Snyder for 30.4 mpg. In 1990 we had decent ballhandler Phil Henderson at SG and we had freshmen Billy McCaffrey (who thought of himself as a PG) and Thomas Hill playing under 15 mpg off the bench. Some combination of Henderson and McCaffrey (either together or with T Hill at SG) could have manned the point while but Hurley sat, but Bobby played 33.4 mpg while accruing a mediocre 1.7 assist to turnover ratio. In 1994, Grant Hill was playing point-forward; we could have played anybody who could defend the PG position.

So I don't think Coach K necessarily plays his primary PG that many minutes because of a lack of options so much as he thinks the team performs better when we have consistency from the guard slots (especially PG). Even in 2011-12, we only had a timeshare for a few games.

[CDu]

You may be right. But I'd note that five of the 11 years had Quin Snyder ('88, '89); Jeff Capel ('94; really a combo guard who had 3.2 apg but still played 26.4 mpg at PG); Jon Scheyer (great player but not really known as a PG prior to his senior season); and freshman Bobby Hurley (not to be confused with sophomore, junior, or senior Bobby Hurley). And yet they all played big minutes at PG, despite their apparent flaws.

The short answer is that there was clear separation between each of those guys and the alternatives. I'll discuss each of your examples:

'88: The backcourt was Kevin Strickland, Quin Snyder, and Phil Henderson (more shooting guard than PG) backing them up in '88.

'89: Henderson and Snyder shared the backcourt in '89, with a freshman Brien Davis (certainly no PG) as the closest thing to a backup for them.

'90: The backcourt in 1990 was a senior Henderson, a freshman Hurley, a freshman McCaffrey, and a freshman Thomas Hill. Hurley was nowhere near the player as a freshman that he became as a sophomore and then upperclassman. But he was still signicantly better than McCaffrey (who was more SG than PG at that point anyway) and Hill (who was not a PG at all).

'94: The only alternative to Capel was Kenny Blakeney. And note that he only played 26.4 mpg. That's not exactly a ton of minutes for a starter.

'10: Again, the alternatives were basically nonexistent. We had a freshman Dawkins (who enrolled very late and thus missed all of the summer informal practices). He was no threat to the All-American Scheyer and All-ACC caliber Smith.

If we have some players that clearly distinguish themselves, we'll likely see Coach K rely heavily on them. But that didn't happen last year, and I'm not convinced yet that it will happen next year. It's certainly possible, but I'd be more inclined to expect decent improvements from everyone without too many players clearly distinguishing themselves.

[luvdahops]

One possible scenario:

Mason, Ryan and Alex form the primary post rotation; Marshall and Josh play most games but average 5mpg or less

Quinn, Seth and Rasheed form the primary PG/SG rotation; Tyler sees time every game but minutes vary from 1 to 15 based on the situation

WF is shared among Andre, Mike and Alex, with one being a de factor starter but game to game PT dependent on matchups and hot (or cold) hands

8-man primary rotation (10+ mpg) is Mason, Ryan, Alex, Mike, Andre, Rasheed, Seth and Quinn

Assumes (a lot):
-Quinn makes a big jump and clearly establishes himself as the PG starter
-Seth grows more comfortable at the point
-Rasheed is ready to contribute right away
-Alex projects as more of a stretch 4 (or combo forward) than a 3, and clearly moves ahead of Josh in the pre-season
-Ryan can play some 5 given the right matchups

[Kedsy]

8-man primary rotation (10+ mpg) is Mason, Ryan, Alex, Mike, Andre, Rasheed, Seth and Quinn

I agree it's a possible scenario. However, the biggest assumption that you didn't point out is that a guy who started 19 games last season and played 21+ mpg will drop out of the rotation entirely.

Assuming we have an 8-man rotation, someone worthy is going to sit, but based on his leadership and defensive skills, I think it's a long shot that it's Tyler (although I could see him possibly as the 7th or 8th guy playing 10 to 15 mpg; but only if Rasheed proves worthy of big minutes).

[Johnny Chill]

Do you have specific reasons for this claim? What is your line of reasoning here? Do you know more about Gbinije's talents and efforts in practice than Coach K? Because Coach K's limited minutes for Gbinije this past season directly contradict your post. Sure, I'd like to have see Gbinije get more minutes too, but I know very little myself.

Well thats what fans do, we contradict whats going on with our team, especially when the team loses in the 1st round to a 15 seed. Also during the season everyone was saying this team was missing a SF from the lineup, when that SF was Gbinije. It doesnt matter if he makes mistakes, he still needs time on the court. Thats how he will get better. I'm not saying Gbinije would of been the difference maker, there were major personnel problems all over the court. But if you think playing time doesnt make a difference to a players development, your flat out wrong.

Also, just because Coach K is the GOAT, doesnt mean we fans cant call him out on his recruiting, player development, in game decision making, assistant coaches, play calling or lack of play calling. Because I know I will.

Do you think its ok to win 27 games, then lose in the first round?

This is Duke, the standards are higher, the expectations are higher.

[luvdahops]

I agree it's a possible scenario. However, the biggest assumption that you didn't point out is that a guy who started 19 games last season and played 21+ mpg will drop out of the rotation entirely.

Assuming we have an 8-man rotation, someone worthy is going to sit, but based on his leadership and defensive skills, I think it's a long shot that it's Tyler (although I could see him possibly as the 7th or 8th guy playing 10 to 15 mpg; but only if Rasheed proves worthy of big minutes).

Agree that it is probably a long shot, but would point to Paulus and Ricky Price as examples of guys whose PT dropped substantially due to a combination of incoming talent and other returnees moving ahead. I could see the same happening with Tyler.

[superdave]

Well thats what fans do, we contradict whats going on with our team, especially when the team loses in the 1st round to a 15 seed. Also during the season everyone was saying this team was missing a SF from the lineup, when that SF was Gbinije. It doesnt matter if he makes mistakes, he still needs time on the court. Thats how he will get better. I'm not saying Gbinije would of been the difference maker, there were major personnel problems all over the court. But if you think playing time doesnt make a difference to a players development, your flat out wrong.

Also, just because Coach K is the GOAT, doesnt mean we fans cant call him out on his recruiting, player development, in game decision making, assistant coaches, play calling or lack of play calling. Because I know I will.

Do you think its ok to win 27 games, then lose in the first round?

This is Duke, the standards are higher, the expectations are higher.

I am arguing none of this. I am arguing that in the minutes we saw Gbinije play, he did not clearly demonstrate that he should be getting more minutes. If you saw something different, I'd like to hear it. But all season long, people pined for more of MG (myself included) but that was solely based on eyeballing him on tv which is not a really good reason. If he was ready and killing it in practice he would have gotten PT. But he did not get PT so the only reasonable conclusion is that he was not ready and was not killing it in practice.

I really like the idea of using Gbinije and Thornton in short spurts to press and trap and speed up other teams. But I'm not as enamored with either of them getting big minutes in our normal sets, unless both demonstrate they can be better than they were last season. Short of a great leap in their productivity and effectiveness, I'd like to see them come in as a defensive duo and speed the game up and get us some transition buckets. But likely in short spurts.

[Johnny Chill]

I am arguing none of this. I am arguing that in the minutes we saw Gbinije play, he did not clearly demonstrate that he should be getting more minutes. If you saw something different, I'd like to hear it. But all season long, people pined for more of MG (myself included) but that was solely based on eyeballing him on tv which is not a really good reason. If he was ready and killing it in practice he would have gotten PT. But he did not get PT so the only reasonable conclusion is that he was not ready and was not killing it in practice.

I really like the idea of using Gbinije and Thornton in short spurts to press and trap and speed up other teams. But I'm not as enamored with either of them getting big minutes in our normal sets, unless both demonstrate they can be better than they were last season. Short of a great leap in their productivity and effectiveness, I'd like to see them come in as a defensive duo and speed the game up and get us some transition buckets. But likely in short spurts.

Thats not true. I dont remember the team, but late in the season when Hairston was hurt. Gbinije got in the game made a cut to the basket, got a nice pass from the walk on, and exploded to the hoop for a dunk.

My point is, he needs more consistent minutes, regardless if Duke is up by 20 or down by 10, especially early in the year against non-conference opponents. Thats how players get better, thats how teams develop depth. And its not just Gbinije either, Hairston needs more consistent minutes. When Kelly went out, Hairston also showed flashes that he should of been getting more minutes.

Early in the season, let them make mistakes. I dont like when Duke loses a game, but I rather lose a game early in the season, than a game during ACCT or NCAAT time.
Every time Cook made 1 mistake, he got hooked so fast. Why not let him play through those early mistakes, then let him know about them during the TV timeout?

The thing is I followed Duke long enough, to know that a player has to perform in practice to get minutes, and I know how hard headed Coach K is about that. But that is also the thing that pisses me off about him the most, is that he mainly plays 8 guys, even early in the season.

[Kedsy]

Agree that it is probably a long shot, but would point to Paulus and Ricky Price as examples of guys whose PT dropped substantially due to a combination of incoming talent and other returnees moving ahead. I could see the same happening with Tyler.

As I mentioned in my earlier post, Ricky Price was suspended from school for the first month and a half and never caught up. I don't think he's a great analog for Tyler Thornton.

Greg Paulus played heavy minutes into mid-February and averaged 16+ mpg for the season. He did drop out of the rotation in mid-February, replaced by someone who had not previously been in the rotation, essentially for defensive purposes. Again, not particularly analogous to Tyler. I suppose Tyler could play rotation minutes until February and then drop out in favor of the 9th man (whoever that is: Michael? Andre?), but since Tyler's already a pretty good defensive player, it's hard to imagine him earning big early season minutes and then dropping from the rotation entirely, absent an injury or getting kicked off the team (which I'd view as highly unlikely). But I suppose there's a remote possibility it could happen if our offense was really sputtering and Andre was sitting there at the end of the bench.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Thats not true. I dont remember the team, but late in the season when Hairston was hurt. Gbinije got in the game made a cut to the basket, got a nice pass from the walk on, and exploded to the hoop for a dunk.


Second guessing Coach K is not going to win you many friends here on this board. Go ask the non-stop Quinn Cook advocates from last season how that works out for you.

If you are going to make statements and critiques regarding how players are used by the coaching staff, I would suggest having something more to point to than one athletic series from late in the season.

Wise consensus here would suggest that the winningest coach in NCAA history and 4 time national champion who sees every player go all out (or not) in practice for 20 hours a week has a much better basis for decisions than we, the over-exuberant fan base.

I'm very optimistic about next year's team. We have an amazingly experienced group with some very hungry young kids with at least a year in the system who will be eager to prove themselves (Murphy, MP3, Cook, Hairston, Silent G). This points to very competitive practices and good-natured competition for playing time. Coach K is more than qualified to focus this energy and grit to see if he can develop a diamond.

Go Duke

[Kedsy]

Thats not true. I dont remember the team, but late in the season when Hairston was hurt. Gbinije got in the game made a cut to the basket, got a nice pass from the walk on, and exploded to the hoop for a dunk.

A lot of guys can dunk. That's hardly evidence that they deserve to play major minutes on a top 5 or top 10 Division I team.


My point is, he needs more consistent minutes, regardless if Duke is up by 20 or down by 10, especially early in the year against non-conference opponents. Thats how players get better, thats how teams develop depth.

You seem very positive on this point, like there's only one answer, but many people believe young players get better in practice, rather than games. Coach K happens to be one of those people. Just because you disagree with him doesn't mean he's wrong.


And its not just Gbinije either, Hairston needs more consistent minutes. When Kelly went out, Hairston also showed flashes that he should of been getting more minutes.

If you play Michael and Josh, that means you're sitting someone else who deserves minutes. Why are the less-ready players more deserving of playing time than the more-ready players?


Early in the season, let them make mistakes. I dont like when Duke loses a game, but I rather lose a game early in the season, than a game during ACCT or NCAAT time.

People say this a lot, but (a) I don't believe that they'd be OK losing early season games; (b) it doesn't logically follow that playing your 9th and 10th man early in the year will help you win games later in the year, especially if you play a 7-man rotation in the tournament and so the 9th and 10th man won't actually be playing then anyway; and (c) losing early season games could lead to getting a worse seed in the NCAAT, which means you'd be playing better teams in the tournament and thus have a lower probability of beating them, which means that doing what you suggest might actually make it more likely that we'll lose in the post-season.


The thing is I followed Duke long enough, to know that a player has to perform in practice to get minutes, and I know how hard headed Coach K is about that. But that is also the thing that pisses me off about him the most, is that he mainly plays 8 guys, even early in the season.

It might tick you off, but if you want to root for Duke you just have to grit your teeth and get used to it, because Coach K has done pretty well using this philosophy, and he isn't going to change it any time soon.

[everlong06]

With that being said, we've got em right where we want em.

Yeah I prefer to be ranked lower. This past year, it looked like our team just expected to win games and ceased with the effort late in games, did we ever blow out any quality opponents? I hated the attitude.

[dcdevil2009]

Only thing I'm arguing is that saying he is a top 15 player is not accurate b/c that wasnt his final ranking nor did he come in with that class and that he can't be ranked among the incoming freshmen b/c he's not an incoming freshmen....if you don't agree that's cool, it's not like I said I thought he was a bum or something

Wasn't the class of 2011 considered to be much deeper and stronger overall than the class of 2012, so comparing the relative rankings of individual players across classes is somewhat apples and oranges? Granted ESPN's rankings aren't the most reputable, but since they also give grades to players, they're rankings are the easiest to compare across classes. This year, there are only two 98s, but last year, they gave their 8th ranked player, Marquis Teague a 98. Marshall and Alex were both 96s in ESPN's final 2011 rankings (35 and 41 overall respectively). I don't think it's unreasonable to think they've each added a point to their games since last year, which would make them 97s entering their first year of eligibility and put them at worst 20 and 21 in ESPN's rankings (recruits 3-19 have 97 grades). We haven't seen them play, so it requires some conjecture, but a year of practice against D1 players and the added physical maturity should justify an expectation of improvement instead of stagnation or regression.

If Marshall and Murphy didn't have the redshirt stigma and were graded under the same rubric as the rest of 2012's first year players, I don't see how we're not ranked in the top ten to start the season. It's unfortunate that we're going to lose our consecutive weeks in the top ten streak based on a perception, which I believe doesn't comport with reality. Do people really think Andy Katz would have us ranked 15 in his early preseason rankings if we were bringing in his company's 12th, 20th, and 21st ranked recruits to replace Austin Rivers and Miles Plumlee?

[Chris Randolph]

My sources tell me that Coach K plans on implementing a new system to determine who will be in the starting 5. They will choose the top 8 player performances in the practices leading up to the game and put those names in a drawing. Then on gameday, the Blue Devil mascot will draw 5 names out of the hat and those will be the 5 guys who start. :)

[dcar1985]

Wasn't the class of 2011 considered to be much deeper and stronger overall than the class of 2012, so comparing the relative rankings of individual players across classes is somewhat apples and oranges? Granted ESPN's rankings aren't the most reputable, but since they also give grades to players, they're rankings are the easiest to compare across classes. This year, there are only two 98s, but last year, they gave their 8th ranked player, Marquis Teague a 98. Marshall and Alex were both 96s in ESPN's final 2011 rankings (35 and 41 overall respectively). I don't think it's unreasonable to think they've each added a point to their games since last year, which would make them 97s entering their first year of eligibility and put them at worst 20 and 21 in ESPN's rankings (recruits 3-19 have 97 grades). We haven't seen them play, so it requires some conjecture, but a year of practice against D1 players and the added physical maturity should justify an expectation of improvement instead of stagnation or regression.

If Marshall and Murphy didn't have the redshirt stigma and were graded under the same rubric as the rest of 2012's first year players, I don't see how we're not ranked in the top ten to start the season. It's unfortunate that we're going to lose our consecutive weeks in the top ten streak based on a perception, which I believe doesn't comport with reality. Do people really think Andy Katz would have us ranked 15 in his early preseason rankings if we were bringing in his company's 12th, 20th, and 21st ranked recruits to replace Austin Rivers and Miles Plumlee?

I think everyone has been trying to move off this subject and it really isn't that big of deal to begin with....my problem with what your saying though is that...Im sure you could add a point to both Alex and Marshall as im sure they've both improved but you cant re-rank them seeing as the reason for their improvement is that they're already in college....the rest of those kids aren't (This really only applies to Alex who was possibly going to play a 5th year of HS ball, don't think Marshall had any attentions of doing an extra year)

[dcar1985]

A lot of guys can dunk. That's hardly evidence that they deserve to play major minutes on a top 5 or top 10 Division I team.



You seem very positive on this point, like there's only one answer, but many people believe young players get better in practice, rather than games. Coach K happens to be one of those people. Just because you disagree with him doesn't mean he's wrong.



If you play Michael and Josh, that means you're sitting someone else who deserves minutes. Why are the less-ready players more deserving of playing time than the more-ready players?



People say this a lot, but (a) I don't believe that they'd be OK losing early season games; (b) it doesn't logically follow that playing your 9th and 10th man early in the year will help you win games later in the year, especially if you play a 7-man rotation in the tournament and so the 9th and 10th man won't actually be playing then anyway; and (c) losing early season games could lead to getting a worse seed in the NCAAT, which means you'd be playing better teams in the tournament and thus have a lower probability of beating them, which means that doing what you suggest might actually make it more likely that we'll lose in the post-season.



It might tick you off, but if you want to root for Duke you just have to grit your teeth and get used to it, because Coach K has done pretty well using this philosophy, and he isn't going to change it any time soon.


I don't think he's saying dunking is everything, just that when Mike was in the plays he made few or not were the kind you want from an athletic SF which was something we were missing....how many dunks outside of the bigs did we have on the season? I can think of 3 not counting 2 from Mike...and though not everything they do help momentum and get the crowd pumped. I also remember Mike scoring on a post up against a smaller defender...those are things I at least want to see more of from Mike and Alex next year

[ChicagoCrazy84]

A lot of guys can dunk. That's hardly evidence that they deserve to play major minutes on a top 5 or top 10 Division I team.



You seem very positive on this point, like there's only one answer, but many people believe young players get better in practice, rather than games. Coach K happens to be one of those people. Just because you disagree with him doesn't mean he's wrong.



If you play Michael and Josh, that means you're sitting someone else who deserves minutes. Why are the less-ready players more deserving of playing time than the more-ready players?



People say this a lot, but (a) I don't believe that they'd be OK losing early season games; (b) it doesn't logically follow that playing your 9th and 10th man early in the year will help you win games later in the year, especially if you play a 7-man rotation in the tournament and so the 9th and 10th man won't actually be playing then anyway; and (c) losing early season games could lead to getting a worse seed in the NCAAT, which means you'd be playing better teams in the tournament and thus have a lower probability of beating them, which means that doing what you suggest might actually make it more likely that we'll lose in the post-season.



It might tick you off, but if you want to root for Duke you just have to grit your teeth and get used to it, because Coach K has done pretty well using this philosophy, and he isn't going to change it any time soon.


This is a year where that changes. We could potentially go 11 deep and not that I expect to go that deep throughout the season, we should be going 9-10 deep. We have to get these guys to run and gun more and we'll need more bodies to do that. We should press more too. Also, we have too many unproven but talented players. Between Josh, Alex, Mike G, Rasheed, and Andre someone is going to have to step up in a big way and we should be using the first 10-15 games of the season to figure who that someone is.

[tdrake51]

There are a number of people saying we should press more, but I just don't see that kind of ability in this Duke team. No one on the roster has proved they are able to even consistantly stay in front of perimeter players. Thornton is our presumed best on ball defender, and if he had to press, he would foul out in about ten minutes.

I understand we could trap the ball and force turnovers, but I think it is more likely that Mason or Kelly get in foul trouble trying to protect the basket after the press is broken.

Just my opinion

[superdave]

This is a year where that changes. We could potentially go 11 deep and not that I expect to go that deep throughout the season, we should be going 9-10 deep. We have to get these guys to run and gun more and we'll need more bodies to do that. We should press more too. Also, we have too many unproven but talented players. Between Josh, Alex, Mike G, Rasheed, and Andre someone is going to have to step up in a big way and we should be using the first 10-15 games of the season to figure who that someone is.

I like where your head is at here, and your enthusiasm for running.

I think you'll see a first half rotation that goes deeper than the second half rotation this coming year. To some extent you saw that this past season with Josh and Quinn. I'd prefer to see that dynamic, but that it be more of a platoon style thing where the guys getting limited minutes come in and run and press.

If you want to project what Gbinije does this coming season, I actually think Josh's minutes and production is a good example. His freshman year, Josh played 165 minutes and took 36 shots. His sophomore year, Josh played 246 minutes and had 69 shots. His DNP's dropped from 10 to 5.

I suspect Gbinije will see his DNP's drop. He had 15 of them this year and played 111 minutes and attempted 20 shots. I think he will probably play 6-8 minutes in all but the biggest games. If he shows he can lock someone down defensively or starts getting steals and dunks, then he can see his role increase. But we probably do not need him as a 3-point shooter since we have Andre and Seth and Ryan. I think Gbinije's biggest opportunity to play more minutes is as a lockdown defender on an up-tempo team.

[azzefkram]

You seem very positive on this point, like there's only one answer, but many people believe young players get better in practice, rather than games.


I agree that practice is very important to a young players development, but game time and practice time are very different animals. Without adequate exposure to game time (especially in low leverage situations), I think you run the risk of hindering a players development.



People say this a lot, but (a) I don't believe that they'd be OK losing early season games; (b) it doesn't logically follow that playing your 9th and 10th man early in the year will help you win games later in the year, especially if you play a 7-man rotation in the tournament and so the 9th and 10th man won't actually be playing then anyway; and (c) losing early season games could lead to getting a worse seed in the NCAAT, which means you'd be playing better teams in the tournament and thus have a lower probability of beating them, which means that doing what you suggest might actually make it more likely that we'll lose in the post-season.

(a) I can't speak for everyone but I tend to remember tournament losses (ACC or NCAA) far more often than losses in December and January. (b) I think that depends on how you look at it. Playing the 9th and 10th man earlier in the year could keep your 1 through 7 men fresher. The plan may be to not play the 9th and 10 men but plans often change. (c) performance toward the end of the year will have a far larger impact than early season losses with respect to seeding.

[Johnny Chill]

This is a year where that changes. We could potentially go 11 deep and not that I expect to go that deep throughout the season, we should be going 9-10 deep. We have to get these guys to run and gun more and we'll need more bodies to do that. We should press more too. Also, we have too many unproven but talented players. Between Josh, Alex, Mike G, Rasheed, and Andre someone is going to have to step up in a big way and we should be using the first 10-15 games of the season to figure who that someone is.

Duke is usually 9-10 players deep. With more than half of those players in the backcourt. But K's normal rotation is 7 main players, with 1-2 guys getting spot minutes. K always plays his Studs major minutes, regardless of the game situation, magnitude of the game or if the game is early in the season or during ACC play. I'm pretty sure being 9-10 players deep doesnt mean K will play 9-10 guys on a regular basis.
In fact I expect 2 guys not to get more than 4 minutes a game.
I really hope Marshall and Hairston get consistent minutes each game and every half. The development of those 2 guys for the frontcourt is going to be important not just this upcoming season, but once Mason and Kelly graduate.

Side note: I cant believe how fast the last 2 seasons have gone by. Thornton and Hairston will be in their Junior seasons.

[superdave]

There are a number of people saying we should press more, but I just don't see that kind of ability in this Duke team. No one on the roster has proved they are able to even consistantly stay in front of perimeter players. Thornton is our presumed best on ball defender, and if he had to press, he would foul out in about ten minutes.

I understand we could trap the ball and force turnovers, but I think it is more likely that Mason or Kelly get in foul trouble trying to protect the basket after the press is broken.

Just my opinion

I dont think we should use Ryan or Mason (or Marshall) to press and trap. I think we should specifically designate Tyler, Josh and Michael for that purpose and do it in a more limited manner, such as for two 2-minute spurts in the first half. The biggest advantage depth gives you is you have enough bodies to keep your big guns fresh and aggressive. Pressing and trapping will make a team with significant defensive deficiencies the aggressor. It will change their mindset.

[luvdahops]

As I mentioned in my earlier post, Ricky Price was suspended from school for the first month and a half and never caught up. I don't think he's a great analog for Tyler Thornton.

Greg Paulus played heavy minutes into mid-February and averaged 16+ mpg for the season. He did drop out of the rotation in mid-February, replaced by someone who had not previously been in the rotation, essentially for defensive purposes. Again, not particularly analogous to Tyler. I suppose Tyler could play rotation minutes until February and then drop out in favor of the 9th man (whoever that is: Michael? Andre?), but since Tyler's already a pretty good defensive player, it's hard to imagine him earning big early season minutes and then dropping from the rotation entirely, absent an injury or getting kicked off the team (which I'd view as highly unlikely). But I suppose there's a remote possibility it could happen if our offense was really sputtering and Andre was sitting there at the end of the bench.

Fair point on Price. I do think the analogy to Paulus holds, in that both were de facto starting point guards primarily because the team had no better options. Keep in mind the assumptions I made in laying out the scenario (and one I missed, which is G also making a big jump and being ready for regular PT). And the role that Tyler really played - caretaker on offense, generally drawing the opponent's toughest perimeter player on D - and the factors which led to it, namely:

-Quinn not being 100%, at least to start the year
-Seth not being fully comfortable at the point
-G not being ready for regular minutes
-Dre's inconsistency and defensive lapses
-The need to have both Rivers and Curry on the floor a lot for perimeter scoring

In my rotation scenario, the first three above no longer hold true, and even if Dre remains a bit of a wild card (he did play more minutes than TT over the course of the season), I would expect the team to be less perimeter oriented generally, and for Mason and Kelly to both get more touches. Moreover, the assumption that Rasheed - who is 3 inches taller than Tyler, with long arms, better quickness and more offensive skills - is ready to contribute from day 1 directly threatens Thornton's PT next season in my view, whether or not any or all of my other assumptions hold true. Finally, I have been a Duke fan long enough (my freshman year was K's second at Duke) to know that rotations and PT splits from one year often have little carry over to the next. As Coach K himself has said many times, all spots are open to competition when practice begins. Tyler may very well stay in the rotation, but he'll have to earn against what may be a starkly different competitive backdrop, one which to me looks a lot less favorable to him.

[ChicagoCrazy84]

There are a number of people saying we should press more, but I just don't see that kind of ability in this Duke team. No one on the roster has proved they are able to even consistantly stay in front of perimeter players. Thornton is our presumed best on ball defender, and if he had to press, he would foul out in about ten minutes.

I understand we could trap the ball and force turnovers, but I think it is more likely that Mason or Kelly get in foul trouble trying to protect the basket after the press is broken.

Just my opinion


I respect your opinion but pencil me in as one that thinks Tyler and Quinn will take major steps forward. They know the PG position this past year was not its best in recent seasons and I think these two have too much pride to let that be the case again. Tyler saw a big increase in minutes and I think that allowed him to realize just how much he needs to develop as a weapon both offensively and defensively.

[dcdevil2009]

How much does the offensive system we run impact the type of defense we can play? Even though teams generally press only after made baskets, one would think we'd still have to have time to get in position to set up the press before the ball is inbounded. If we're running a lot of motion sets and shooting a lot of threes where we'd have to get back on defense in case of a miss, it seems like it would be harder to set up the press than if we're penetrating and shooting a lot of layups and short jumpers. Maybe it's that teams that are built to press are also built to get out and run on offense, but I can't remember any teams that used a lot of presses and traps while running a slow-tempo, half-court offense.

[wk2109]

(a) I can't speak for everyone but I tend to remember tournament losses (ACC or NCAA) far more often than losses in December and January. (b) I think that depends on how you look at it. Playing the 9th and 10th man earlier in the year could keep your 1 through 7 men fresher. The plan may be to not play the 9th and 10 men but plans often change. (c) performance toward the end of the year will have a far larger impact than early season losses with respect to seeding.

I think everyone remembers ACCT/NCAAT losses more than early season losses, but that's what happens when you look back on a season as a whole. It's different when you're actually 'in the moment' of watching a game and not looking at the big picture of the whole season. During the last few minutes of the Maui championship game, I doubt anyone was thinking, "I'm ok with doing something that increases our chances of losing this game as long as we're doing something that may or may not pay off later in the season." Coach K always says that he wants to win every game. During that particular game against Kansas, he went with the lineup he thought would give Duke the best chance to win that game, which ended with a victory over the national runner-up and a huge resume-builder.

Of course, the championship game of a preseason tournament is different from a December game against Western Michigan, but K already goes deep into his bench during those cupcake games. Also, during this past season in particular, with so few proven players and a greater need to establish roles, I can't fault K for giving the more experienced guys more playing time to help them come out from the shadows of Kyle and Nolan.

[Kedsy]

This is a year where that changes. We could potentially go 11 deep and not that I expect to go that deep throughout the season, we should be going 9-10 deep. We have to get these guys to run and gun more and we'll need more bodies to do that. We should press more too. Also, we have too many unproven but talented players. Between Josh, Alex, Mike G, Rasheed, and Andre someone is going to have to step up in a big way and we should be using the first 10-15 games of the season to figure who that someone is.

I agree with you, and if I were coaching the team this is probably how I would do it. But Coach K has had deep teams before, and he really hasn't done it this way. A couple years he went 10 deep the first month of the season, but even in those years, by late January he was down to 7.

[elvis14]

Some of the things that people are looking for are fueled by the shortcomings of this year's team (nobody at the 3, weak play at the 1 and 2, players playing roles that don't suit them). The result are people hoping for:


Silent G and Alex to step up and play well at the 3 (and be a backup for Kelly at the 4)
Quinn to start and give us a PG that can run an offense
Rasheed to come in and give us a SG that can play offense and defense


I think that one of our issues last year was that we had people playing roles for which they were not suited:

Tyler starting at PG and playing lots of minutes - I see his role as a backup PG who's strength is as a help defender and general pain the rear for our opponents. We really need Quinn to step up and take over the PG duties. I thought his defense did improve over the last 2 weeks of the season.
Seth starting at SG and trying to play some PG - I think he'd be a great 6th man providing scoring off the bench (I know I'll get killed for that but a short guard who's not very quick is going to have issues). I'm hoping that Rasheed will be good enough to take over (wishful thinking, I know)
Austin playing SF - He was out of position and still played pretty well. I wish Silent G would have made more progress. Hopefully he can make a nice jump into his soph year and stay healthy. Even if Mike was ready to play Curry couldn't shift to PG so were going to have issues.


To get back to the original question, now that we know Mason is staying and Bass is west coast bound here's the lineup I'd LIKE to see (note that I realize that it's not likely):

PG: Quinn/Tyler
SG: Rasheed/Curry/Dawkins
SF: Mike/Alex/Dawkins
PF: Kelly/Alex/Mike/Hairston
C: MP2/MP3/Kelly

We might lose some games early in the season but it would cool to be one of the teams that improves greatly at the end and makes a run like we did in 2010. I also like that K adjusts lineups and PT based on match ups and who we are playing.

[azzefkram]

I think everyone remembers ACCT/NCAAT losses more than early season losses, but that's what happens when you look back on a season as a whole. It's different when you're actually 'in the moment' of watching a game and not looking at the big picture of the whole season. During the last few minutes of the Maui championship game, I doubt anyone was thinking, "I'm ok with doing something that increases our chances of losing this game as long as we're doing something that may or may not pay off later in the season." Coach K always says that he wants to win every game. During that particular game against Kansas, he went with the lineup he thought would give Duke the best chance to win that game, which ended with a victory over the national runner-up and a huge resume-builder.

Of course, the championship game of a preseason tournament is different from a December game against Western Michigan, but K already goes deep into his bench during those cupcake games. Also, during this past season in particular, with so few proven players and a greater need to establish roles, I can't fault K for giving the more experienced guys more playing time to help them come out from the shadows of Kyle and Nolan.

I think when most people call for a deeper bench early in the season it's not to increase our chances of losing the game but to develop the best team possible. Given our current roster, I think it's a mistake to assume that subbing our 8-10 players in for our 5-7 players automatically increases our chances to lose while may or may not help us later on.

While Coach K may go deeper into the bench during cupcake games, some might argue the benefit of playing the 8-12 or 9-13 together. I'd rather see the 8-11 guys mixed in with the 1-7 guys.

I know I can happy beating a cupcake by 15 as opposed to 25 if it means potentially building a better team for March.

[sagegrouse]

I think when most people call for a deeper bench early in the season it's not to increase our chances of losing the game but to develop the best team possible. Given our current roster, I think it's a mistake to assume that subbing our 8-10 players in for our 5-7 players automatically increases our chances to lose while may or may not help us later on.

While Coach K may go deeper into the bench during cupcake games, some might argue the benefit of playing the 8-12 or 9-13 together. I'd rather see the 8-11 guys mixed in with the 1-7 guys.

I know I can happy beating a cupcake by 15 as opposed to 25 if it means potentially building a better team for March.

We got 11 players that we have reason to expect to be productive. So how about a second unit?

Blue Team:
Mason
Kelly
Murphy
Curry/ Rasheed
Thornton

White Team:
Marshall
Hairston
Gbinije
Dawkins
Cook

Or, some other combinations.

sagegrouse

[tdrake51]

I respect your opinion but pencil me in as one that thinks Tyler and Quinn will take major steps forward. They know the PG position this past year was not its best in recent seasons and I think these two have too much pride to let that be the case again. Tyler saw a big increase in minutes and I think that allowed him to realize just how much he needs to develop as a weapon both offensively and defensively.

Yeah, I hope you are right. I would love to see a more up-tempo, attacking style on both sides of the ball.

[m g]

25-30 mpg guaranteed: Kelly, Plumlee 2, Curry
Rotation spot guaranteed, 20 mpg probable: Thornton

That leaves three guards that you could easily make a case for (Dawkins, Cook, Sulaimon), two 6'8 guys who could play on the wing or slide over to the "4" a la Dunleavy, Battier (Murphy, Gbinije), and two bigs (Plumlee 3, Hairston). Who makes the rotation out of this group? Ultimately performance will determine that, but my best guess is:

5th starter: Gbinije
6th man A: Murphy - backs up the wing, would often be the second-biggest guy on the court
6th man B: Cook - nobody else on the team has his offensive skill set
8th man: Sulaimon vs. Dawkins - can't guarantee contributions from a freshman, but if the hype is anywhere close to true, Sulaimon will be a better slasher and defender than Dawkins
9th man: Plumlee 3 vs. Hairston - I say Hairston wins this battle, except when the matchup calls for more size.

I really like Dawkins and hope he earns a rotation spot... and he very well could end up as the 5th starter or winning the competition with Sulaimon to be the 8th man. If he elevates his defense, everything changes. But one of the wings/guards is not going to play that much, and I think that's most likely to be Dawkins. I wouldn't be surprised if he begins the season as the 5th starter but loses that position to a younger player.

[SilkyJ]

To get back to the original question, now that we know Mason is staying and Bass is west coast bound here's the lineup I'd LIKE to see (note that I realize that it's not likely):

PG: Quinn/Tyler
SG: Rasheed/Curry/Dawkins
SF: Mike/Alex/Dawkins
PF: Kelly/Alex/Mike/Hairston
C: MP2/MP3/Kelly

We might lose some games early in the season but it would cool to be one of the teams that improves greatly at the end and makes a run like we did in 2010. I also like that K adjusts lineups and PT based on match ups and who we are playing.

Based on last year's lineup tinkering, I think its going to be tough to predict lineups this year. In the 1-3 spots, particularly the starting 3 spot and backup 2-4 spots its going to be real tough. Kelly and MP2 are locks for starting 4 & 5. I expect (pray) Quinn to start 50%+ of the games this year at the 1, hopefully more, but Tyler will play.

The wing is very hard to predict. From what I heard, Alex was further along last year than Mike in the preseason/early season, but that's almost meaningless for this upcoming year. My guess is Alex plays more than Mike this year, but we'll see. I won't count out Andre either as anyone can have a big offseason, but someone out of those 3 is going to going to get boxed out. On that subject...

We dismiss this notion of going 10+ deep every year, but let's go ahead and do it again. Last year is actually a great barometer for this discussion b/c our lineups will be near identical from a mixture perspective (i.e. we don't become MORE guard heavy or MORE wing heavy MORE bigs heavy this year...really about the same). We had 12 scholarship players last year, we have 11 this year. Last year 3 guys didn't play, (alex mike mp3) and 1 got minimal time (josh) so that's 8 main guys and 1 guy to give the occasional blow/foul trouble/etc.

I expect about the same this year given the lineup mixture is about the same:
- 3 pure backcourt players (Quinn, Tyler, Curry--no difference)
- 3 pure bigs (MP2, MP3, Kelly--same as last year if you sub in MP3 for MP1, who play the same role: backup center/big man)
- 5 wings (Dre, Sheed, Alex, Mike, Josh--same if you sub in Sheed for Austin).

In the backcourt 1 of these guys is very likely to see less than the others. Quinn was that man this year, I expect (pray) him to switch with Tyler and for Curry to play 30mpg. Same with the 3 bigs, with Marshall seeing less time than the other 2.

The wing is the x-factor. 2 will play a good amount (at least 10-15mpg), 2 guys will hardly play and 1 will see minimal time. Last year it was Alex and Mike hardly playing and Josh seeing minimal time. What will the combo be this year? Tough to tell but my guess is its Sheed and Josh hardly playing with Mike seeing minimal time. There's only room for 2 of Dre/Alex/Mike to play a lot at the 3, Dre will get some time there b/c he's a senior and a deadly weapon (believe me I have my gripes, but the dude player 22mpg and never played less than 10 all year...he's GONNA PLAY, whether you like it or not). My guess is Alex get's a chunk of minutes there and is also big enough to take Josh's role of "4th post player," if he proves tough enough, so my guess is Alex wins this spot, reducing Mike to and Josh to minimal players. Sheed is just stuck behind 2 seniors in Dre and Curry, and while he can play some point and may benefit from K preferring 3 guard lineups, its tough for me to see him getting real minutes away from Quinn, Seth, or Tyler, and its tough to play him in a 3G lineup without Dre (otherwise you can someone way too small at the 3), so I don't think he gets much run.

Also like last year, I expect there to be fluctuations throughout the season. We obviously started with Seth as our PG, then moved to Quinn in Dec/Jan, then settled on Tyler, with Seth/Quinn backing up. Miles moved into the starting lineup in the last 3rd of the season.

What does that boil down to? My guess is

1 Quinn
2 Curry
3 Alex
4 Ryan
5 Mason

With Tyler, Dre, and Marshall seeing real minutes off the bench, and Josh, Mike and Sheed being minimized. Different from last year though, is that I don't expect Marshall to play as much as Miles, so that could mean more minutes for Alex/Josh/Mike (since they are wings/posts), but conversely I also expect to see fewer 3 guard lineups, which is why I think one of 5 guards or small wing guys gets minimalized next year (I'm guessing Sheed, but could be Dre or Tyler).

[DukeBlue666s]

Would this help us with Jefferson?? or Hood?

[Johnny Chill]

Would this help us with Jefferson?? or Hood?

Neither has committed yet. Hood has to sit out a year. Jefferson wont be a factor as a Frosh.

[CDu]

If the rumors are accurate and Gbinije does transfer, then the picture becomes a lot more clear. One of Murphy and Dawkins would start at SF, Curry would start at SG or PG, and either Cook, Thornton, or Sulaimon would start at the other guard spot. We'd probably see only two of the three backup guards/wings playing major minutes. The front court will be Mason and Kelly with Marshall, Hairston, and perhaps Murphy filling in the remaining minutes.

[Big Pappa]

Neither has committed yet. Hood has to sit out a year. Jefferson wont be a factor as a Frosh.

What is your reasoning in saying that Amile (if he came) wouldn't be a factor as a freshman?

[CDu]

What is your reasoning in saying that Amile (if he came) wouldn't be a factor as a freshman?

I can't speak for the other poster, but given the history of guys who aren't top 10-15 high schoolers I'd say it is a pretty reasonable guess that Jefferson (a ~20 recruit and incredibly skinny) isn't going to make a big impact as a freshman.

[Big Pappa]

I can't speak for the other poster, but given the history of guys who aren't top 10-15 high schoolers I'd say it is a pretty reasonable guess that Jefferson (a ~20 recruit and incredibly skinny) isn't going to make a big impact as a freshman.

That's fair, but IMO there is a big difference between making a "big impact" and "being a factor." Without G, I think Amile could see 10mpg behind Alex. That's certainly a factor.

[CDu]

That's fair, but IMO there is a big difference between making a "big impact" and "being a factor." Without G, I think Amile could see 10mpg behind Alex. That's certainly a factor.

I'd be surprised if Jefferson plays SF, and I'd definitely be surprised if he played SF over Dawkins. His minutes would likely come at PF, and he'll be competing with Hairston and (probably) Murphy for the scraps that Ryan Kelly leaves behind. I think it's fair to say he wouldn't be a factor next year.

[Johnny Chill]

What is your reasoning in saying that Amile (if he came) wouldn't be a factor as a freshman?

A bit is from what I seen out of him, but also Kelly and Hairston will get most of the minutes at the 4. Also how Kelly and Hairston rarely played as Frosh.

[Saratoga2]

A bit is from what I seen out of him, but also Kelly and Hairston will get most of the minutes at the 4. Also how Kelly and Hairston rarely played as Frosh.

If Michael transfers this team will be without a very athletic 6'7" small forward, the kind of player this team really needed last season. Assuming he will make a jump in his development, if he does move it will hurt the team. With Mason returning and Shabazz going to UCLA, things are solidifying.

The Front line will include Mason and Ryan as starters and Mashall and Josh as backups. Alex will more likely spend most of his time at small forward, especially if Michael leaves. He will share time with Andre. Point guard seems like a competition between Quinn and Tyler. Seth is still a possibility but only if he improves his handle, court awareness and passing. The SG will then be shared with Seth and Rasheed.

We still have a shot at recruits. Tony Parker in particular is the kind of kid who needs to improve his conditioning, but has soft hands, rebounds well and can score around the basket. In college it will be more difficult for him to score against college sized bigs, as Sullinger found despite his 278 pounds. Clearly if Michael leaves, it would be great to have another 6'6" t0 6'8" athletic small forward type.

Just a note on watching Shabazz in the Jordan Classic. He is 6'4 1/2". He is a very determined and physical player but doesn't have the best of handles and tends to go for his shot first. He may have some trouble adapting to the college game.

[ncexnyc]

I've seen Ryan's name thrown around quite a bit on several of these threads. I've even read a couple of bold predictions, but to date what I haven't read is anything concrete on his recovery from the foot surgery.

How's he doing and exactly where is he in his rehabilation of the foot?

I'd really love to have some actual facts before we pencil him in as our starting 4, let alone proclaiming him ACC this or ACC that.