Interesting Podcast Discussion of Duke

[Billy Dat]

CBSSports.com does a really good college basketball podcast a few times a week. It is hosted by Matt Norlander, one of CBSSports.com's bloggers, and typically features CBSSports writers Gary Parish and Jeff Goodman and on-air talent Seth Davis and Doug Gottlieb as guests (not all at the same time).

On the most recent episode, Doug Gottlieb was the guest. From the 39:45 - 45:45 mark, Norlander and Gottlieb do a deep dive on Duke. It is really interesting. Gottlieb, citing sources inside the program, gives an extremely candid take of the team. I know there are a lot of Gottlieb critics on DBR, and as you listen you may continue to feel that he is an acerbic, opinionated jerk (I don't feel that way, but many do), but the takeaways are hugely positive, and while he shares some inside info that many have assumed, I haven't seen it aired with such openness, including:

-Quinn Cook is the key reason why the team is playing better. Last year, he was a source of frustration for the coaches who said he wasn't running what they told him to run and was too often freelancing. That has changed this year.
-While Plumlee has made huge improvements, it is the emergence of Cook and, more importantly, the subtraction of Rivers, that has made the primary difference in Plumlee's game. He portrays Rivers as an island on the team, cut off and doing his own thing. Despite the public staff assertions that the team was united, he calls it a fractured team because of Rivers. Good kid, huge talent, good attitude, but made no one better and stunted the team's growth.

He says a lot more, but his frank descriptions that I have paraphrased above, which he says came straight from people on the staff, were thoughts I had never heard spoken so plainly. Both he and Norlander have Duke pegged as legit title contenders.

The whole pod is good. The first 35 minutes or so are all about Rick Majerus and are really entertaining with several crazy anecdotes. He also gets heavy into the UCLA situation and spares no feelings. For those who want to hear some piling on Larry Drew III and Tony Parker, have at it.

You can get it here or on iTunes
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebask...ajerus-stories

[dchen09]

just FYI, link doesn't work. I think you're trying to link this (http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/blog/eye-on-college-basketball/21239018/podcast-doug-gottlieb-shares-his-best-majerus-stories) one?

It's interesting that Rivers is having the same problems in the NBA. ESPN also criticizes Rivers for not wanting to distribute the ball.

http://espn.go.com/nba/dailydime/_/page/dime-121203/daily-dime

[budwom]

CBSSports.com does a really good college basketball podcast a few times a week. It is hosted by Matt Norlander, one of CBSSports.com's bloggers, and typically features CBSSports writers Gary Parish and Jeff Goodman and on-air talent Seth Davis and Doug Gottlieb as guests (not all at the same time).

On the most recent episode, Doug Gottlieb was the guest. From the 39:45 - 45:45 mark, Norlander and Gottlieb do a deep dive on Duke. It is really interesting. Gottlieb, citing sources inside the program, gives an extremely candid take of the team. I know there are a lot of Gottlieb critics on DBR, and as you listen you may continue to feel that he is an acerbic, opinionated jerk (I don't feel that way, but many do), but the takeaways are hugely positive, and while he shares some inside info that many have assumed, I haven't seen it aired with such openness, including:

-Quinn Cook is the key reason why the team is playing better. Last year, he was a source of frustration for the coaches who said he wasn't running what they told him to run and was too often freelancing. That has changed this year.
-While Plumlee has made huge improvements, it is the emergence of Cook and, more importantly, the subtraction of Rivers, that has made the primary difference in Plumlee's game. He portrays Rivers as an island on the team, cut off and doing his own thing. Despite the public staff assertions that the team was united, he calls it a fractured team because of Rivers. Good kid, huge talent, good attitude, but made no one better and stunted the team's growth.

He says a lot more, but his frank descriptions that I have paraphrased above, which he says came straight from people on the staff, were thoughts I had never heard spoken so plainly. Both he and Norlander have Duke pegged as legit title contenders.

The whole pod is good. The first 35 minutes or so are all about Rick Majerus and are really entertaining with several crazy anecdotes. He also gets heavy into the UCLA situation and spares no feelings. For those who want to hear some piling on Larry Drew III and Tony Parker, have at it.

You can get it here or on iTunes
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebask...ajerus-stories


It's Drew Too (II) not Drew III, the hoop deities having spared us still another one of those (thus far).

[Billy Dat]

It's Drew Too (II) not Drew III, the hoop deities having spared us still another one of those (thus far).

Thanks, I think I've got RGIII on the brain after last night. Is it safe to say that LDII is not RGIII?

Sorry for all the mistakes, but that pod is worth a listen. I have rarely heard a major college hoops pundit be so candid on so many topics. The story he tells about a player trying to get his transfer waiver from a naked Majerus is worth the listen alone. Needless to say, Majerus was more interested in describing a urological problem he was experiencing. No worries, this is not Sandusky territory, rather crazy relative type stuff.

[airowe]

This whole "Duke's ceiling is lower than younger teams" is complete garbage. Duke has A LOT of room to improve. Ryan Kelly just found his stroke in the second half of the Ohio State game, Sulaimon is still figuring things out. Cook still needs to learn how to play under control while keeping the throttle down. Amile, Murphy, Hairston. Are they playing to their potential? Is Sulaimon? Is Seth Curry as healthy as he will be this year?

Keep thinking Duke has no room to improve and you will continue to be wrong.

[Olympic Fan]

The whole idea that Gottlieb has sources within the team is laughable ... he's personna non grata at Duke.

He's just spewing the same half-baked garbage that he's always offered -- remember, Mason was one of his "alarming unathletic big men"

[Class of '94]

This whole "Duke's ceiling is lower than younger teams" is complete garbage. Duke has A LOT of room to improve. Ryan Kelly just found his stroke in the second half of the Ohio State game, Sulaimon is still figuring things out. Cook still needs to learn how to play under control while keeping the throttle down. Amile, Murphy, Hairston. Are they playing to their potential? Is Sulaimon? Is Seth Curry as healthy as he will be this year?

Keep thinking Duke has no room to improve and you will continue to be wrong.

And we also haven't even seen Marshall on the floor yet; and if comes back as anticipated, he will give Duke additional size and options offensively and defensively which will allow this Duke team to continue grow and develop as the season goes along.

[roywhite]

The whole idea that Gottlieb has sources within the team is laughable ... he's personna non grata at Duke.

He's just spewing the same half-baked garbage that he's always offered -- remember, Mason was one of his "alarming unathletic big men"

yeah, probably garbage

Just a guess...he may have some relationship or connection with Jeff Capel, developed while Jeff was at VCU and then Oklahoma.

It pains Gottlieb to say nice things about Duke, but at some point he has to report what he sees. And what he has seen this year so far has been excellent.

I'll go with Airowe in scoffing at the assertion that Duke has a lower ceiling than some other teams, that they've somehow gotten good but are unlikely to improve much further.

[Billy Dat]

The whole idea that Gottlieb has sources within the team is laughable ... he's personna non grata at Duke.
He's just spewing the same half-baked garbage that he's always offered -- remember, Mason was one of his "alarming unathletic big men"

Gottlieb has spent a lot of time around the program, including being part of the trip to the Middle East last summer. If he were personna non grata, why was he a guest on K's Sirius show? I wouldn't write off his sources so quickly. I also don't think what he said was wrong, I just hadn't seen it spoken so bluntly and plainly by a major television media member.

[Kedsy]

Gottlieb has spent a lot of time around the program, including being part of the trip to the Middle East last summer.

I don't think he actually went on the trip last summer. My interpretation of what he said while announcing the games was he was watching remotely on a monitor, probably back in Connecticut.

[SoCalDukeFan]

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/blog/eye-on-college-basketball/21239018/podcast-doug-gottlieb-shares-his-best-majerus-stories

SoCal

[Billy Dat]

I don't think he actually went on the trip last summer. My interpretation of what he said while announcing the games was he was watching remotely on a monitor, probably back in Connecticut.

You are probably correct, now that I recall. Gottlieb is polarizing, I guess I hung my hat to his conclusion that he really liked our team rather than the thinking out loud that came before it where he talked about our ceiling.

[Kedsy]

You are probably correct, now that I recall. Gottlieb is polarizing, I guess I hung my hat to his conclusion that he really liked our team rather than the thinking out loud that came before it where he talked about our ceiling.

While I disagree with him about our ceiling, I agree with you that he was pretty positive about Duke in general. If Gottlieb says he thinks Duke has a chance at the national championship, we must be really good.

[Monmouth77]

You are probably correct, now that I recall. Gottlieb is polarizing, I guess I hung my hat to his conclusion that he really liked our team rather than the thinking out loud that came before it where he talked about our ceiling.

The part of his analysis that struck me as less than observant, was the idea that this year's team has to "run plays" to win and that we are better this year than last, in part, because Cook can "run stuff."

He also said we are not like Duke teams from 10 years ago (I presume he means the Jason Williams, Duhon, Dunleavy, Boozer days) because we can't just spread people out and beat defenders off the dribble and make shots.

I think that is exactly what we are doing, especially with Kelly pulling his man out of the post, and opening lanes for Cook and Rasheed and Seth to drive dish and/or score.

Cook is a big part of why Duke is better (and I think we are clearly better), but I don't perceive that to be a consequence of Cook flawlessly executing set plays. He is just playing under control more, playing GREAT defense, and creating opportunities (from half court alleyoops to dishes in traffic) that no one could create last year.

Gottlieb is smart enough to understand that Duke is better and will compete against top competition this year.

But the guy is just relentlessly negative, and not that insightful on the substance. There is a reason he does radio shows and takes pot shots at 18-year olds and Jay Wright instead of trying his own hand at coaching.

[sagegrouse]

The whole idea that Gottlieb has sources within the team is laughable ... he's personna non grata at Duke.

He's just spewing the same half-baked garbage that he's always offered -- remember, Mason was one of his "alarming unathletic big men"


Gottlieb has spent a lot of time around the program, including being part of the trip to the Middle East last summer. If he were personna non grata, why was he a guest on K's Sirius show? I wouldn't write off his sources so quickly. I also don't think what he said was wrong, I just hadn't seen it spoken so bluntly and plainly by a major television media member.

Hey, guys -- It's business. Gottlieb was college basketball guy at ESPN, which pays the bills for the ACC. Now he has a basketball show at CBS, which has carried the NCAA tournament for a couple of decades and throws a billion or so into the college basketball coffers every now and then. Why aren't the coaches at Duke going to talk to him on the phone? Because he dissed a Duke team that later won a national championship? Puh-leese!

Will he have to talk to Chris, Wojo or Jeff rather than K? I don't know the particulars, but Chris seems to take the head coach's role in most press contacts. Duke's pretty disciplined -- the party line is the party line -- so I don't know that it makes a difference, except for the direct quotes.

And I am not throwing Austin Rivers under the bus, even if the inside reports on him from last year were somewhat negative. Who's to say he wouldn't have developed a more complete game if he had stayed two more years? While most players don't make much of a mark as freshmen, Austin made 1st team All-ACC.

sagegrouse
'Grousier than usual today, but that's because I have to wait seven full days for the next Duke game'

[SoCalDukeFan]

Certainly Duke can get better and should get better when Marshall is able to play.

But I am very worried about Seth and just how much we will get out him.

And while I think Marshall will be a good player for Duke, I don't think he's scary good at least not this year.
I would also think that Jefferson and Murphy should improve as the season progresses.


SoCal

[BD80]

If Duke is near its "ceiling," does that mean that the coaching staff has already coached them to their full potential? Sounds like great coaching to me. Thanks douggie.

[bedeviled]

I have a possibly warped view of the podcast and the growth of the team dynamic (I know I’m the island on the fan-team here because I view Rivers as a scapegoat). The overall theme I take away from the podcast is that the difference this year is Duke playing as a team. It seems to me that he posits that returning players now “know their roles, have accepted their roles, and [are] flourishing within their roles.” In fact, he provides examples of Hairston’s and Thornton’s roles to illustrate what he means by “team.”

He spends some time critiquing Duke’s offense, particularly citing last year and the importance of ‘running the offense’ as opposed to ‘freelancing.’ As Monmouth77 pointed out, we are still spreading the floor and opening lanes this year…so what’s the difference? I think Gottlieb is alluding to the difference being that we are continuing to run our motion throughout the possession. So, yes, we are still using a spread with driving, dishing, spotting up, the same as always. But, the offense continues to be dynamic, opening up options as the flow develops. I don’t think the difference he is referring to is set plays or spread offense so much as actually ‘running the offense.’ He states, “They’ve been a little bit too much freelance because they’ve had talented guys who were, you know, ‘ball stoppers’ as they call them. The ball will get to their hands and everybody stops and watches. That’s what they had last year.” He contrasts ‘running the offense’ with a previous tendency to “screen, spread it out, and then we’re just going to climb into you” which is what Austin ended up doing last year.

Notably, he does say “there was Austin Rivers and there was everybody else,” but he does not say the lack of teamwork was due to Rivers’ play. Quite the contrary. To me, he appears to be referencing other players’ limited roles as the cause of poor teamwork which, in turn, isolated Rivers as a static offense.
· He says the Seth-Mason isolation near the closing of the UK game, could not have happened last year.
· He reports last year’s question of how to use Cook and Thornton
· He notes that Seth’s role was primarily limited to shooting
· He posits that Ryan can’t be used in a ball screen offense
· Most of all, he talks about the improvement of Cook who wasn’t on the same page as the team and couldn't connect the limited pieces

In essence, you can’t build a quality team/system with limited parts. We’ve had a string of extremely strong players and leaders prior to last year. As a result, the members of last year’s team were never forced to take on big roles. It was an unfortunate circumstance: our big roles left, Austin came in and was handed the big role, our little roles deferred (shooters stood in their spots, post-players main task was having their hands ready), Austin was forced to take more control, our little roles deferred more….and, the result is that our offense isn’t run.

This year, we have taken on bigger roles:
· Mason can dominate down low
· Cook and Thornton apparently have worked on their shots and on-ball defense
· Seth developed more craftiness in isolation, fakes, and drives
· Ryan….well, I just disagree with Gottlieb’s whole statement here!
· And, finally, in Gottlieb's view, the presence of a point guard is the biggest difference. We can now direct the roles to work as a unit….you might say it sets the whole offense in motion!

It’s fantastic to see how the players have grown into bigger roles…perhaps they had to because Austin is gone. It is fair to wonder if the team will develop further, but it is ridiculous to think that the ceiling is topped out.

An aside:
I’m not a Rivers’ apologist, but appear to be one by context. In my view, everything fits together as a system. His role develops according to the will of those around him as much as their roles develop according to his will. It is the responsibility of the party outside of the system, the coach, to direct and foster these dynamics. Do we really think Coach K wouldn’t handle Austin if he was the sole cause of strife, stagnation, and the stunting of the team as the popular media and fan meme suggests? If he didn’t follow Coach K’s gameplan, would Coach K really play him the most? In essence, the team requested him to be who he was….and he was darn good at what we asked him to do!
[Also, check out NBA SGs playing 15+ minutes: Austin is 6th in assists per possession (Redick is 3rd)]

[mo.st.dukie]

So he thinks Duke is a legit national title contender but that other teams have a higher ceiling? What ceiling is higher than the National Championship? That's as high as any team can go. I wonder if they mean that other teams have more room for growth (i.e. pretend that Duke is a 7 out of 10 right now and UK is a 3 out of 10.) but even then Duke has plenty to improve on and plenty of room for growth because of young guys like Marshall, Alex, Amile, Quinn, and Rasheed getting better throughout the season (the upperclassmen can get better too).

And I don't know about the whole Austin being a team cancer thing but what I do believe is that Rasheed is a much more complete basketball player. He's a better passer, better shooter, better defender, better finisher in the paint...the only thing he's not better at is getting by his man off the dribble yet he's still pretty good at that.

[Billy Dat]

I’m not a Rivers’ apologist, but appear to be one by context. In my view, everything fits together as a system. His role develops according to the will of those around him as much as their roles develop according to his will. It is the responsibility of the party outside of the system, the coach, to direct and foster these dynamics. Do we really think Coach K wouldn’t handle Austin if he was the sole cause of strife, stagnation, and the stunting of the team as the popular media and fan meme suggests? If he didn’t follow Coach K’s gameplan, would Coach K really play him the most? In essence, the team requested him to be who he was….and he was darn good at what we asked him to do!
[Also, check out NBA SGs playing 15+ minutes: Austin is 6th in assists per possession (Redick is 3rd)]

This is an excellent ending of a very well thought out post. Nice work!

[cptnflash]

And I don't know about the whole Austin being a team cancer thing but what I do believe is that Rasheed is a much more complete basketball player. He's a better passer, better shooter, better defender, better finisher in the paint...the only thing he's not better at is getting by his man off the dribble yet he's still pretty good at that.

But he's way better at finishing when he does get past his man!

[subzero02]

I say Austin and Rasheed are pretty even on the confidence meter too...

[pamtelp]

But he's way better at finishing when he does get past his man!

Let's not take Gottlieb's bait and turn on our own. Austin was a great player...not perfect...but still great.

[pamtelp]

I don't agree wit the ceiling comment. But I do believe Duke is ahead of others in part based on the fact we have 3 seniors. I do think there is the chance that other teams will gain ground on Duke as the season progresses and young players mature. But we have our share of those too so the sky is the limit!

[licc85]

I totally agree with Gottlieb on his assessment of Quinn being the difference for this team. I'm not the world's biggest Austin Rivers fan, but I don't think he was the biggest problem with last year's team, as the lack of consistent perimeter defense was by far the biggest issue. I'd posit that if Quinn had been this good last year, I think we may have had a chance to be just as good last year as we are this year. I mean, Mason and Miles would both have both been MUCH more effective with Quinn at the point and our on ball defense would also have been much improved. Also, if Austin had been asked to do less, he may have even been a little more efficient too. (Though he would have really needed to work on his off-ball movement)

In any case, I'm extremely happy with Rasheed's play thus far, and he will only get better as the season progresses. He and Cook fit almost every hole in our roster that we had last year, and as a result, our teamwork this year has been off the charts, especially in regards to ball movement and team defense. It's been a beautiful team to watch, and I every time I see this team play, I feel like I'm watching team basketball the way it should be played.

As far as our ceiling, I think we have a ton of room for improvement. I don't know what's going on on the inside, but from what I saw in the Delaware game, I don't know how Alex doesn't start getting more minutes. He played extremely hard and showed a ton of effort out there, grabbing boards on both ends and diving on the floor for loose balls. He also had that NASTY block in transition that made me stand up in my seat. With the exception of a bad turnover right when he entered the game, he played very smart too.

I'm also very excited to see if Marshall can carve out a role on this team. Coach K had indicated that he was one of the best 6 players on the team prior to his injury. Not sure how accurate that statement is (and I'm not sure how that's possible), but from everything that I've heard, he's definitely really good, and if he gets back to 100%, this team is going to be crazy deep in the front court. Amile looked pretty good in the Delaware game too, I'm a bit concerned with his lack of strength, which could hurt his offense against bigger guys, but he's got stretch armstrong wingspan, and I like what I see from him on D.

The team is a STRONG title contender, and if fully healthy, I like our chances quite a bit. We're very talented, extremely deep, and team chemistry is as good as any Duke team in recent memory, including 2010. I'm usually a pessimist, but the play thus far from this team has stamped out just about any criticism I could come up with. Coach K has done a masterful job with these guys, and I think he's proving that he may just be better than he's ever been. GO DUKE.

[CDu]

So he thinks Duke is a legit national title contender but that other teams have a higher ceiling? What ceiling is higher than the National Championship? That's as high as any team can go. I wonder if they mean that other teams have more room for growth (i.e. pretend that Duke is a 7 out of 10 right now and UK is a 3 out of 10.) but even then Duke has plenty to improve on and plenty of room for growth because of young guys like Marshall, Alex, Amile, Quinn, and Rasheed getting better throughout the season (the upperclassmen can get better too).

No, I think he meant exactly what he said. One can be a legitimate championship contender and not have as high a ceiling as other teams. A team's ceiling is only part of what makes them a title contender or not. Most teams don't reach their ceiling (or at least don't play at their ceiling for 6 straight games in March/April). The closer you can play to your ceiling, the better your chances of winning the title.

Gottlieb apparently feels that some other teams have higher ceilings. I don't agree. His main knock is that "Ryan Kelly can't guard some guys" and "Duke only has two pros." The first is being proved inaccurate so far this year, as Kelly has been terrific defensively (as Luke Winn notes in his latest column). That's just an outdated opinion that Gottlieb has yet to relinquish. The second may or may not be true (I think the jury is still out on Cook, Murphy, Jefferson, and Marshall), but is (to some degree) irrelevant.


If Duke is near its "ceiling," does that mean that the coaching staff has already coached them to their full potential? Sounds like great coaching to me. Thanks douggie.

Yes, I would consider that a sign of good coaching. And I don't think it would be shocking for Gottlieb to compliment Coach K. He knows Coach K is an amazing coach. Gottlieb's knocks have generally come against the players, not the coaching.

[mo.st.dukie]

I don't agree wit the ceiling comment. But I do believe Duke is ahead of others in part based on the fact we have 3 seniors. I do think there is the chance that other teams will gain ground on Duke as the season progresses and young players mature. But we have our share of those too so the sky is the limit!


Maybe some teams but look at other top teams out there,
Indiana has Hulls (SR), Watford (SR), Oladipo (JR), and will be getting Elston back soon (SR).
Florida has Boynton (SR), Murphy (SR), Rosario (SR), Young (JR).
Louisville has Siva (SR), and a bunch of Juniors back from a Final Four team.
Same thing with Ohio State with Ravenel (SR), and a bunch of Juniors back from a Final Four team. Kansas has Withey (SR), Releford (SR), and Johnson (SR).
Even NCSU has a bunch of upperclassmen in Wood, Howell, Leslie, and Brown.
Syracuse has Triche (SR), Southerland (SR), Fair (JR), Keita (JR).
Arizona has Lyons (SR), Parrom (SR), and Hill (SR)
Gonzaga has Harris (SR), Hart (SR), Landry-Edi (SR), Olynyk (JR), Stockton (JR)

All of these teams also are working in young guys but so is Duke. So either people don't know the roster makeup of other teams as well as they do Duke's or they truly believe all of these teams have reached their ceiling or they are just saying Duke is benefiting from upperclassmen and have reached their ceiling simply out of fear that Duke very well may be better later in the year.

[mo.st.dukie]

No, I think he meant exactly what he said. One can be a legitimate championship contender and not have as high a ceiling as other teams. A team's ceiling is only part of what makes them a title contender or not. Most teams don't reach their ceiling (or at least don't play at their ceiling for 6 straight games in March/April). The closer you can play to your ceiling, the better your chances of winning the title.




Ok, so in other words some teams have more room for error than others, which, like you, I do not agree with when talking about this Duke team. 2010 Kentucky had more room for error than 2010 Duke, didn't really matter much in the end, because like you said most teams can't play their absolute best for 6 straight games.

I think some of the reason a lot of people are saying things like this about Duke is an attempt to rationalize Duke's early season success. Nobody thought Duke would be this good and so when they came out of the gates on fire people have to figure out how they did it and the whole "they have seniors" and "they have already reached their ceiling" is just a way for some people to try to make sense of it all. They certainly didn't see this coming.

[OldPhiKap]

I totally agree with Gottlieb on his assessment of Quinn being the difference for this team.

BlueDevilPlanet has two videos up worth watching. One is Coach Collins breaking down the fast break, which all starts (as Chris points out) with Quinn getting the ball and pushing. The second one is the top plays of November, which oddly enough show a lot of Quinn and Mason on the break. Really drives home this point.




I'm not the world's biggest Austin Rivers fan, but I don't think he was the biggest problem with last year's team, as the lack of consistent perimeter defense was by far the biggest issue.

Defense definitely was our largest problem last year. That is the main takeaway for me.

As for the rest, Austin is a very skilled player who has a pro game -- able to create shots for himself. K has always tried (okay, in the last 25 years has tried) to take the best players, find their strong suits, and design an offense to take advantage of their skillsets. When you have a scorer like Austin, you let him take his shots. I don't have a problem with that at all, and I am sure that is exactly what K told him to do. I have heard several players say over the years that the coaches get mad when the players don't take their shots.

Rasheed is a different kind of player, which maybe appears to mesh a little more. Maybe it is because he is a better passer, maybe it is because he has better options to whom he can pass. He is a real eye opener and game changer already.

Glad we had Kyrie, glad we had Austin. Glad we have Sheed. Sheed, Quinn, and Curry (also plugging in Tyler) may be the best backcourt we have had since Jwill/Duhon. And yes, I know there were some fantastic ones between then and now.

[flyingdutchdevil]

BlueDevilPlanet has two videos up worth watching. One is Coach Collins breaking down the fast break, which all starts (as Chris points out) with Quinn getting the ball and pushing. The second one is the top plays of November, which oddly enough show a lot of Quinn and Mason on the break. Really drives home this point.





Defense definitely was our largest problem last year. That is the main takeaway for me.

As for the rest, Austin is a very skilled player who has a pro game -- able to create shots for himself. K has always tried (okay, in the last 25 years has tried) to take the best players, find their strong suits, and design an offense to take advantage of their skillsets. When you have a scorer like Austin, you let him take his shots. I don't have a problem with that at all, and I am sure that is exactly what K told him to do. I have heard several players say over the years that the coaches get mad when the players don't take their shots.

Rasheed is a different kind of player, which maybe appears to mesh a little more. Maybe it is because he is a better passer, maybe it is because he has better options to whom he can pass. He is a real eye opener and game changer already.

Glad we had Kyrie, glad we had Austin. Glad we have Sheed. Sheed, Quinn, and Curry (also plugging in Tyler) may be the best backcourt we have had since Jwill/Duhon. And yes, I know there were some fantastic ones between then and now.

If perimeter defense was last year's issue (which I also agree with), then wasn't Austin part of the issue? As amazing as Austin's O was, his D left something to be desired. He may have tried his hardest, but he wasn't even an average defender, IMO.

[duke09hms]

If perimeter defense was last year's issue (which I also agree with), then wasn't Austin part of the issue? As amazing as Austin's O was, his D left something to be desired. He may have tried his hardest, but he wasn't even an average defender, IMO.

Yes but he was probably the best perimeter defender that we had . . . not saying much.

[Monmouth77]

No, I think he meant exactly what he said. One can be a legitimate championship contender and not have as high a ceiling as other teams. A team's ceiling is only part of what makes them a title contender or not. Most teams don't reach their ceiling (or at least don't play at their ceiling for 6 straight games in March/April). The closer you can play to your ceiling, the better your chances of winning the title.

Gottlieb apparently feels that some other teams have higher ceilings. I don't agree. His main knock is that "Ryan Kelly can't guard some guys" and "Duke only has two pros." The first is being proved inaccurate so far this year, as Kelly has been terrific defensively (as Luke Winn notes in his latest column). That's just an outdated opinion that Gottlieb has yet to relinquish. The second may or may not be true (I think the jury is still out on Cook, Murphy, Jefferson, and Marshall), but is (to some degree) irrelevant.



Yes, I would consider that a sign of good coaching. And I don't think it would be shocking for Gottlieb to compliment Coach K. He knows Coach K is an amazing coach. Gottlieb's knocks have generally come against the players, not the coaching.


In re Gottlieb's comment that Duke only has "two pros," I thought it was interesting, and another example of laziness in his assessments that he thought those two pros were Mason and Curry.

Mason, if he keeps playing this way, will go lottery in this year's weakish draft. And I suppose a team could take a late 1st round flyer on Curry, though he falls in the territory of the kind of player with one true NBA skill who is hard to project. He could end up like Nolan or he could do better than that. Or worse.

But how can anyone who has watched Duke play this year not think Rasheed is a future pro? I am not saying he'd go after this season, but at 6' 4" he has enough size for the SG position, NBA level quickness and athleticism, clear defensive instincts, "a high motor" as they say, and a consistent jump shot. There is not a freshman playing better.

Based on his size (and the small sample size of play this year, and his non-stellar freshman year) I could see the jury being out on Cook. And no one has seen enough of Jefferson, Murphy or Marshall to make any assessments.

[CDu]

Ok, so in other words some teams have more room for error than others, which, like you, I do not agree with when talking about this Duke team. 2010 Kentucky had more room for error than 2010 Duke, didn't really matter much in the end, because like you said most teams can't play their absolute best for 6 straight games.

Exactly. The idea of a ceiling is simply the idea of how good that team could be with everything firing on all cylinders. Gottlieb feels that a team like Kentucky has more pro potential on the roster, and as such has a higher ceiling. But he also feels that they are much further from that ceiling than Duke is from our ceiling, which is a big part of why Duke is rolling early (Gottlieb's thoughts, not mine). I think he may be overstating UK's ceiling and understating ours.


I think some of the reason a lot of people are saying things like this about Duke is an attempt to rationalize Duke's early season success. Nobody thought Duke would be this good and so when they came out of the gates on fire people have to figure out how they did it and the whole "they have seniors" and "they have already reached their ceiling" is just a way for some people to try to make sense of it all. They certainly didn't see this coming.

That's partly true, and it's also partly true that we probably are closer to our ceiling than others. Coach K has long been one of the best coaches in the country at getting a team ready for the season. We are generally better prepared and more focused than our opponents early in the season. As some of the other teams experience their bumps and bruises along the way, and as tourney time approaches, sometimes these teams catch up and/or pass Duke. Sometimes they don't.

I do think it's fair to say that we may be closer to our ceiling than some other teams. I don't know that I'd say that our ceiling is necessarily lower than other teams' ceilings, though.

I think Gottlieb's reasoning is based on (a) past history clouding his judgement, (b) lack of awareness of improvements like Kelly's defense, (c) some of our key players like Plumlee seemingly playing at peak efficiency. He specifically mentions that "there are certain players Kelly can't guard" and "Seth Curry doesn't play good defense". But those are the only tangible comments he has with regards to Duke's limitations. The first is just inaccurate so far this year. The second may be more accurate (especially with Curry's injuries). I suspect that Gottlieb doesn't think Mason will get any better (hard to imagine him playing better than he currently is), and I think he feels the same about Cook, Curry, Kelly, Thornton, and Hairston. And I'm guessing he doesn't expect Murphy and Jefferson to make an impact. So if you think that 6 of the 7-8 players who will be key contributors are at or near their ceiling, then it makes some sense to say that the team is at or near its ceiling.

Where he falls short, in my opinion, is in his awareness of Kelly's defensive improvements, in his acceptance of the idea that the team as a collective can continue to improve, and in his acknowledgement of the possibility that guys like Marshall, Jefferson, and Murphy could potentially make an impact as the season progresses.

[CDu]

In re Gottlieb's comment that Duke only has "two pros," I thought it was interesting, and another example of laziness in his assessments that he thought those two pros were Mason and Curry.

I believe he actually said Mason and Sulaimon (not Curry) were the two pros.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Exactly. The idea of a ceiling is simply the idea of how good that team could be with everything firing on all cylinders. Gottlieb feels that a team like Kentucky has more pro potential on the roster, and as such has a higher ceiling. But he also feels that they are much further from that ceiling than Duke is from our ceiling, which is a big part of why Duke is rolling early (Gottlieb's thoughts, not mine). I think he may be overstating UK's ceiling and understating ours.



That's partly true, and it's also partly true that we probably are closer to our ceiling than others. Coach K has long been one of the best coaches in the country at getting a team ready for the season. We are generally better prepared and more focused than our opponents early in the season. As some of the other teams experience their bumps and bruises along the way, and as tourney time approaches, sometimes these teams catch up and/or pass Duke. Sometimes they don't.

I do think it's fair to say that we may be closer to our ceiling than some other teams. I don't know that I'd say that our ceiling is necessarily lower than other teams' ceilings, though.

I think Gottlieb's reasoning is based on (a) past history clouding his judgement, (b) lack of awareness of improvements like Kelly's defense, (c) some of our key players like Plumlee seemingly playing at peak efficiency. He specifically mentions that "there are certain players Kelly can't guard" and "Seth Curry doesn't play good defense". But those are the only tangible comments he has with regards to Duke's limitations. The first is just inaccurate so far this year. The second may be more accurate (especially with Curry's injuries). I suspect that Gottlieb doesn't think Mason will get any better (hard to imagine him playing better than he currently is), and I think he feels the same about Cook, Curry, Kelly, Thornton, and Hairston. And I'm guessing he doesn't expect Murphy and Jefferson to make an impact. So if you think that 6 of the 7-8 players who will be key contributors are at or near their ceiling, then it makes some sense to say that the team is at or near its ceiling.

Where he falls short, in my opinion, is in his awareness of Kelly's defensive improvements, in his acceptance of the idea that the team as a collective can continue to improve, and in his acknowledgement of the possibility that guys like Marshall, Jefferson, and Murphy could potentially make an impact as the season progresses.

This post is too rationale for a fan forum. CDu, I heard SI or ESPN are hiring. But please stay away from CBSSports - you're new career may die there.

[Poincaré]

I have a possibly warped view of the podcast and the growth of the team dynamic (I know I’m the island on the fan-team here because I view Rivers as a scapegoat).
Many people, including myself, are on that island with you. Austin, for all his amazing skills, was still a freshman. We should have expected him to be not very versed in the finer points of team offense. It was interesting that you would mention JJ in your post, since JJ turned into a multi-dimensional player over his career at Duke. Austin only had one year. It is amazing that JJ has continued to get better in the NBA. JJ is an excellent passer for his position now (I would love to see him on the Lakers with the D'Antoni offense--they already stole Howard, why not JJ, too?). Austin really could have used that extra development time. Since Austin is not especially tall for his position (much like JJ is), I think that he could have used some extra time with Coach K. However, given that he works hard, I think that he will be fine in the long-run. I just hope that he has a patient coach who understands youngsters.

Anyone else enjoying Kyle Singler's season? Love that guy.