PDA

View Full Version : MBB: Duke-67 Davidson-50 Post Game Thread



Newton_14
01-02-2013, 09:00 PM
Post your thoughts on the game here.

nyesq83
01-02-2013, 09:03 PM
Great team response to a tough Davidson team, a good tune-up before conference play.

Quinn Cook was superb tonight.

Luther
01-02-2013, 09:04 PM
Another nice win. Mason and seth struggled and we still won by 17.

subzero02
01-02-2013, 09:04 PM
Let me be the first to say that kenpoms predicted margin of victory, 17 points, was dead on...

CLW
01-02-2013, 09:06 PM
Concerned about the lackluster effort the past several games in the 1st half. It's almost like this team "knows" it can just turn it on at will and will wait to see if they have to play hard.

Mason (and Ryan) really struggled with the double from the baseline. It lead to allot of turnovers and bad shots.

Our rebounding is still REALLY bad. Kenpom noted a few weeks back that it would he historically bad for a #1 seed team to be this bad on the glass (i think the only comparable was St. Joe's)

All that said we are now 13-0 headed to ACC play (honestly if you had asked me pre-season I would have predicted 2-4 losses by now)

SCMatt33
01-02-2013, 09:07 PM
I'm sure there is a lot of things to say about that game, the first half, the rebounding, the start of the 2nd, the low assist rate, but I must say, Quinn Cook just sucked the life out of the last 7:30 of that game, and it was glorious to watch. He'd have 2 guys chase him like it was nothing and then get fouled, get a bucket, or find an open man. I know there is a lot of debate every year about stall-fence, but that was text book use of it right there. We haven't had a guy like that running the point (pre-injury Kyrie excepted) since Duhon graduated. I can't say enough about how great he was in that spot. Also want to give a big shout out to Tyler for the four minutes preceding that.

dukelifer
01-02-2013, 09:14 PM
Concerned about the lackluster effort the past several games in the 1st half. It's almost like this team "knows" it can just turn it on at will and will wait to see if they have to play hard.

Mason (and Ryan) really struggled with the double from the baseline. It lead to allot of turnovers and bad shots.

Our rebounding is still REALLY bad. Kenpom noted a few weeks back that it would he historically bad for a #1 seed team to be this bad on the glass (i think the only comparable was St. Joe's)

All that said we are now 13-0 headed to ACC play (honestly if you had asked me pre-season I would have predicted 2-4 losses by now)

Duke cannot match the other teams effort every game because the other teams are playing with nothing to lose. Doing that the whole season will burn you out. I am fine with turning it on for a half. The issue for me is making mistakes and poor decisions and not boxing out. That said, Duke did most everything better in the second half. Kudos to Thornton - the kid is so tough and seems to play best when the pressure is on. Most everyone had an off night other than Ryan and Cook- but Thornton hit huge shots to give Duke the lead. Cook does a very nice job in stall ball. He takes his time going to the bucket and is very smooth. Davidson played a physical game and was pretty solid defensively. Not Duke's best game- but teams will have off nights and bench guys need to step up. Tonight- Thornton stepped up. On to ACC play.

Saratoga2
01-02-2013, 09:17 PM
Another nice win. Mason and seth struggled and we still won by 17.

Mason and Seth both had sub par games and yet the team won by 17. On the other hand, Ryan and Quinn both had excellent games while Tyler chipped in a good 10 and Rasheed had the speed to threaten the Davidson defense. There are enough weapons to score, even against a solid defense. The other side, is that the defense is good enough to choke off a lot of opportunities. Still, the rebounding was rather poor and we did give up second chance points and seemed to be outhustled in the first half.

Where could Mason improve? More hustle and have a feel for when the double team is coming and pass out of it. Generally have a better feel for the game.

Where could Seth improve? Don't have any thoughts. His shot was off tonight and he couldn't drive by Davidson as he did against Santa Clara. I think we just have to be patient and he will reward us with many stellar nights.

Still almost no PT for Marshall, Alex and Amile. I know the game was close, but the time Josh put in was not productive. I would assume one of the three bench players might have contributed as much.

FerryFor50
01-02-2013, 09:17 PM
I'm amazed that with a pair of near 7 footers, we get destroyed so badly on the glass. And this is almost always against undersized teams. Some if it is effort, but I think some of it is the tendency of the bigs to go for the blocked shot, putting them out of position.

If they'd stay home on defense and box out, I think we'd be much better on the boards.

dyedwab
01-02-2013, 09:20 PM
1) We now know that we can beat a good team with Mason having a horrible game.

2) Our slow first half starts are getting old. And they look to be more about effort then about anything else. We keep getting beat to loose balls, play lackluster defense, etc. Won't work against good teams.

3) We played "stall ball" but I doubt there will be complaints about it - because having Quinn Cook execute it makes all the difference. Our stall ball problems over the years have always seemed to me to be about our inability to execute the strategy, rather then the strategy itself. Quinn has almost singlehandedly solved that

4) Ryan Kelly stepped up big time.

5) Boy, that was a physical game.

milehighdukie
01-02-2013, 09:20 PM
Brooks was rebounding like a demon out there...

OZ
01-02-2013, 09:22 PM
Concerned about the lackluster effort the past several games in the 1st half. It's almost like this team "knows" it can just turn it on at will and will wait to see if they have to play hard.

Mason (and Ryan) really struggled with the double from the baseline. It lead to allot of turnovers and bad shots.

Our rebounding is still REALLY bad. Kenpom noted a few weeks back that it would he historically bad for a #1 seed team to be this bad on the glass (i think the only comparable was St. Joe's)

All that said we are now 13-0 headed to ACC play (honestly if you had asked me pre-season I would have predicted 2-4 losses by now)



While I can understand your comment about Mason's play tonight, I am not getting your inclusion of Ryan. 18 points, 7 rebounds, 5 of 8 in field goals and ONE turnover. In fact, I voted him player of the game.

wallyman
01-02-2013, 09:22 PM
Great games by Quinn, Ryan and Tyler. For all the (accurate) talk about how much Mason and Quinn have improved over the past year, same is true for Tyer.
Curious about who on the staff gets credit for recruiting a guy who was barely (if that) viewed as a Top 100 talent, and who has turned out to be such a tough, valuable player. Someone must have gone to bat for him early. Know he wasn't a complete sleeper but certainly was not universally seen as a Duke-level talent.

mapei
01-02-2013, 09:24 PM
I haven't looked at the stats, but it sure seemed like our shots were getting blocked a lot.

Newton_14
01-02-2013, 09:24 PM
Concerned about the lackluster effort the past several games in the 1st half. It's almost like this team "knows" it can just turn it on at will and will wait to see if they have to play hard.

Mason (and Ryan) really struggled with the double from the baseline. It lead to allot of turnovers and bad shots.

Our rebounding is still REALLY bad. Kenpom noted a few weeks back that it would he historically bad for a #1 seed team to be this bad on the glass (i think the only comparable was St. Joe's)

All that said we are now 13-0 headed to ACC play (honestly if you had asked me pre-season I would have predicted 2-4 losses by now)

Tonight was different for me. Although the first half was poor, I attributed that to the tremendous fight, and well conceived defensive scheme's that Davidson brought. Davidson beats a lot of good teams with that effort tonight. I thought our guys got knocked back early by the physical play of Davidson, and let it frustrate them to the point where they pressed on offense which led to mistakes and turnovers. Our first half defense was still good, with the exception again of poor defensive rebounding. But we have had that problem all year even in our best games.

In the 2nd half, we turned up good defense into great defense and then showed more patience on offense which led to the huge run. We held Davidson to 2 points in the first 10 minutes of the 2nd half.

I am very pleased to get that win. Mason, Seth, and Rasheed had subpar games, yet we beat a very good opponent by 17. That is why this DUke team is so good. They can beat you in multiple ways with multiple guys. That was an incredibly physical game too. This team has faced numerous different styles of play against really good teams all year and have had an answer every single time.

Whoever beats this Duke team is darn well going to earn it. Davidson has to come away very frustrated, knowing they played a very solid game yet lost by 17 points.

Bring on conference play!!

wallyman
01-02-2013, 09:29 PM
And Cohen scored 19 in 19 minutes? We got lucky on his fouls.

Saratoga2
01-02-2013, 09:30 PM
1) beat a good team with Mason having a horrible game.

2) Our slow first half starts are getting old. And they look to be more about effort then about anything else. We keep getting beat to loose balls, play lackluster defense, etc. Won't work against good teams.



We got beat running back on defense and Mason in particular seemed to be trying to find his man instead of going for the rebound. He can be such a force, but he can also do things which make you wonder if he has a real feel for what is going on. I am sure the coaches go over the films of the games with the players and show them what they did well and what mistakes they made. Lets hope we don't have a repeat of the mistakes in the first half.

FerryFor50
01-02-2013, 09:33 PM
While I can understand your comment about Mason's play tonight, I am not getting your inclusion of Ryan. 18 points, 7 rebounds, 5 of 8 in field goals and ONE turnover. In fact, I voted him player of the game.

Kelly struggled with the double team in the post, too. His points mostly came from put backs and on the perimeter, not from post moves.

cptnflash
01-02-2013, 09:38 PM
Was that the ugliest 17 point win of all time? I can't remember one that felt worse.

The great thing, though, as others have noted, is that we have five really outstanding players (six if you count Tyler, who can be outstanding in spurts), so we can withstand one or two of them having an off night as long as one or two others step up. It reminds me a little bit of 2010, when we had Kyle, Nolan, and Jon as our primary scoring options. It seemed like at various points in that season at least one of them was in a shooting funk, but it usually didn't matter because we had other options. Same with this team.

That being said, Bob McKillop has just shown the whole world how Mason can be effectively neutralized with a high side overplay and a baseline double from the weak side. It'll be up to the coaches and Mason to adjust and figure out how to beat that scheme. I'm confident that they can do it. It'll be another step in Mason's maturation and growth into a fully deserving POY candidate.

Mission accomplished in the non-conference (to say the least). Great job guys! Bring on the ACC!

cspan37421
01-02-2013, 09:49 PM
Duke cannot match the other teams effort every game because ....

I am fine with turning it on for a half.

Wow; I beg to differ.

My understanding is that when Coach K signs stuff for kids, he often writes, "Always do your best." Maybe it's just me, but I think it's good advice, and at this level, I don't see why you can't give it your all for 30 min over a 2 hr period, 2-3 times per week. If not, I'd question our conditioning regimen - and heart.

dukelifer
01-02-2013, 09:51 PM
Great games by Quinn, Ryan and Tyler. For all the (accurate) talk about how much Mason and Quinn have improved over the past year, same is true for Tyer.
Curious about who on the staff gets credit for recruiting a guy who was barely (if that) viewed as a Top 100 talent, and who has turned out to be such a tough, valuable player. Someone must have gone to bat for him early. Know he wasn't a complete sleeper but certainly was not universally seen as a Duke-level talent.

Thornton had offers from a number of big time programs as I recall. I do not think he was a sleeper. A lot of teams saw what Duke saw - a kid who knows how to win.

dukelifer
01-02-2013, 09:57 PM
Wow; I beg to differ.

My understanding is that when Coach K signs stuff for kids, he often writes, "Always do your best." Maybe it's just me, but I think it's good advice, and at this level, I don't see why you can't give it your all for 30 min over a 2 hr period, 2-3 times per week. If not, I'd question our conditioning regimen - and heart.

Davidson is not Duke's biggest game of the year- Duke is Davidson's biggest game. I probably should have used the word intensity. Duke often seems to counterpunch for most of the half and then turn in on at the end of the first half and beginning of the second to get separation. Playing each game like it is the most important game of the year can burn out a team. That said- Duke can still minimize mistakes and do the little things better.

cptnflash
01-02-2013, 09:59 PM
One more thought - did anyone else feel like the whole Charlotte/Davidson/big brother connection thing was in Seth's head tonight? I mean, he shot two airballs for God's sake. Something wasn't right with him - I hope it was just game-specific mental stuff and not his leg.

superdave
01-02-2013, 10:02 PM
One more thought - did anyone else feel like the whole Charlotte/Davidson/big brother connection thing was in Seth's head tonight? I mean, he shot two airballs for God's sake. Something wasn't right with him - I hope it was just game-specific mental stuff and not his leg.

Yes. He was pressing. It reminded me of his first visit to Blacksburg two years ago, except he is more mature now.

Edouble
01-02-2013, 10:05 PM
This game was painful to watch, particularly the first half.

Was the hardwood sitting over a hockey rink, or were the ball boys just inept? Seemed like a lot of slipping, and a lot of weird ball handling, like there was extra condensation or something in the building. How did we miss a few of those layups?

Seth tied his season high with 3 assists tonight, despite having a pretty poor all around showing.

I'm ready to see another "look" from this team. Maybe when we lose a game, there will be a line-up shift. I'd love to see Tyler or maybe even Amile inserted into the starting line-up over Seth. I think Seth would be best operating like a Trajan Langdon--just shooting the open 3 and not much else. It seems difficult for him to stick to his strengths though. The offense seems to slow when he handles the ball. Maybe the coaching staff tells him to shoot a lot, but he really seems kind of like a black hole out there sometimes. When you have five offensive weapons, maybe there comes a time to sacrifice one in favor of a defensive upgrade.

What I like about Tyler is that he plays hard-nosed D and he hits that open 3 when he needs to to keep the other team's D honest. I would think that Amile could help out our rebounding and provide some tougher defense.

Newton_14
01-02-2013, 10:16 PM
Yes. He was pressing. It reminded me of his first visit to Blacksburg two years ago, except he is more mature now.

Agree. I thought the same thing. Also, this was one of the best defense's we have faced all year, and one of the most physical games all year. I think it is a big mistake to always assume our kids "were not intense" or "were not giving full effort" every time we don't crush a team right out of the gate. Sometimes it is about crediting the opponent for playing better than us. Davidson is no slouch. I went to the game last year in Cameron and it was tight for a long time. We pulled away in that game pounding the ball inside to Mason and Davidson had no answer. This year they bring everybody back and go to the brilliant scheme mentioned by another poster up thread of overplaying high and bringing the late double team from the baseline side. That makes it incredibly tough to pass out of the double team. Brilliant move by a great coach.

Their perimeter defense made it extremely tough on our guards who got almost no open looks from 3 all night long, got bumped, hedged, and swarmed on drive attempts all night. Quinn used his quickness and superior ball handling to overcome that and Tyler used his bulk, strength, and toughness to overcome it. It was tough on Seth and Rasheed.

Credit Davidson for an extremely well executed game plan, and for great toughness. Credit our guys for ratcheting up their toughness and offensive patience and execution as the game progressed.

captmojo
01-02-2013, 10:24 PM
Solid defense, two very timely 3-pointers and two perfectly released free throws, while no other bench player was scoring and two starters(maybe three) were clearly having struggles, caused my voting for young Mr. Thornton.
And, enthusiastically so!

Billy Dat
01-02-2013, 10:34 PM
1) Boy, that was a physical game.

Tonight was different for me. Although the first half was poor, I attributed that to the tremendous fight, and well conceived defensive scheme's that Davidson brought. Davidson beats a lot of good teams with that effort tonight. I thought our guys got knocked back early by the physical play of Davidson, and let it frustrate them to the point where they pressed on offense which led to mistakes and turnovers. Our first half defense was still good, with the exception again of poor defensive rebounding. But we have had that problem all year even in our best games.
In the 2nd half, we turned up good defense into great defense and then showed more patience on offense which led to the huge run. We held Davidson to 2 points in the first 10 minutes of the 2nd half.


I haven't looked at the stats, but it sure seemed like our shots were getting blocked a lot.

When a game is that physical, and the refs are letting kids play, I think it creates an unpredictable environment that generally does not favor our style. It allows less physically talented players to ugly it up. It's fine, I thought they let both teams play physical but, as Newton says, that was Davidson's style and it favored them. I thought we got extremely lucky that they shot so poorly from 3, especially in the first half when they had many good open looks and could have taken a 5-10 point lead if some had gone down. They also missed 3-4 point blank lay-ups that just slid off the rim. We also missed a bunch of lay-ups, many off the front rim. It was that kind of game, very strange and disjointed but interesting.


While I can understand your comment about Mason's play tonight, I am not getting your inclusion of Ryan. 18 points, 7 rebounds, 5 of 8 in field goals and ONE turnover. In fact, I voted him player of the game.

I, too, thought Ryan was player of the game as did most of those who voted in the DBR poll. I thought he was excellent on both ends from start to finish and was a real steadying force on offense, along with Rasheed, in the first half.


I'm sure there is a lot of things to say about that game, the first half, the rebounding, the start of the 2nd, the low assist rate, but I must say, Quinn Cook just sucked the life out of the last 7:30 of that game, and it was glorious to watch.

After the "first quarter" where I thought he was pretty uneffective, I thought Cook was a maestro. Your description of what he did in the last 7:30 is perfect. Once Davidson was forced to extend that defense because the lead was double digits, he carved them up..


Great games by Quinn, Ryan and Tyler. For all the (accurate) talk about how much Mason and Quinn have improved over the past year, same is true for Tyler. Curious about who on the staff gets credit for recruiting a guy who was barely (if that) viewed as a Top 100 talent, and who has turned out to be such a tough, valuable player. Someone must have gone to bat for him early. Know he wasn't a complete sleeper but certainly was not universally seen as a Duke-level talent.

This game was Tyler at his best. He always looks better when he can hit some shots. I am not sure if scoring just makes his overall effort look better or if it actually makes him play better all around but its nice when the defense actually has to pay attention to him. If I recall, he used to own Kendall Marshall in their DC area high school match-ups, a fact that astounded me when I heard it and saw Marshall play. It's obvious that K and the staff love the kid, I'd be surprised if he wasn't their favorite. His bounce pass to Mason for the dunk was a huge play at the time, as were his 2 early second half 3s.

Curry was really off in the first half, but he came around a little. I thought he was flying around pretty good on defense in the second half. I also thought Rasheed worked his butt off on defense all game and generally was a quiet but important part of the win. I feel the need, the need for Sheed!

Very good win. The score does not indicate how close it really was. In a lot of ways, it was similar to last year's game. Bring on the ACC!

FerryFor50
01-02-2013, 10:36 PM
This game was painful to watch, particularly the first half.

Was the hardwood sitting over a hockey rink, or were the ball boys just inept? Seemed like a lot of slipping, and a lot of weird ball handling, like there was extra condensation or something in the building. How did we miss a few of those layups?

Seth tied his season high with 3 assists tonight, despite having a pretty poor all around showing.

I'm ready to see another "look" from this team. Maybe when we lose a game, there will be a line-up shift. I'd love to see Tyler or maybe even Amile inserted into the starting line-up over Seth. I think Seth would be best operating like a Trajan Langdon--just shooting the open 3 and not much else. It seems difficult for him to stick to his strengths though. The offense seems to slow when he handles the ball. Maybe the coaching staff tells him to shoot a lot, but he really seems kind of like a black hole out there sometimes. When you have five offensive weapons, maybe there comes a time to sacrifice one in favor of a defensive upgrade.

What I like about Tyler is that he plays hard-nosed D and he hits that open 3 when he needs to to keep the other team's D honest. I would think that Amile could help out our rebounding and provide some tougher defense.

He had an off game after scoring 30+ last game. Davidson was physical and was allowed to hold and grab off the ball. Plus Seth got clobbered on a few of his jumpers.

Should we sit Mason, too? After all, he had an off night...

Chicago 1995
01-02-2013, 10:38 PM
But I really don't like the shortened bench and the minutes distribution. We're going to need Amile and/or Alex come March. Them getting no time in games like the last two lowers our ceiling.

And hopefully, Marshall's going to get some minutes someday soon.

We're the number one team in the country, but other teams are getting better. We need to get better too and Amile, Alex and Marshall are one of the ways we can improve and grow into March like teams like Kansas and Louisville and Arizona will. Yes, we can get better and Quinn continues to grow and Rasheed continues to learn to be a college star, but we're going to need more than that, I think.

wallyman
01-02-2013, 10:40 PM
Thornton had offers from a number of big time programs as I recall. I do not think he was a sleeper. A lot of teams saw what Duke saw - a kid who knows how to win.

Said he wasn't a complete sleeper but certainly not universally viewed as a Duke-level talent. FWIW, Rivals had him as 33d point guard and ranked 140 in his class. That doesn't usually get you a Duke offer. Not a complete unknown and Duke wasn't alone in being interested, but someone did a great job in seeing how good he could be.

wallyman
01-02-2013, 10:47 PM
But I really don't like the shortened bench and the minutes distribution. We're going to need Amile and/or Alex come March. Them getting no time in games like the last two lowers our ceiling.

And hopefully, Marshall's going to get some minutes someday soon.

We're the number one team in the country, but other teams are getting better. We need to get better too and Amile, Alex and Marshall are one of the ways we can improve and grow into March like teams like Kansas and Louisville and Arizona will. Yes, we can get better and Quinn continues to grow and Rasheed continues to learn to be a college star, but we're going to need more than that, I think.


Yes, beating a dead horse after he's already been beaten, and the coach, whatever his name is, does seem to know what he's doing. But wondering how many McDonald All-Americans not named Tony Parker can't get any burn freshman year or after a year of redshirting. Can Duke's standards be so much higher than everyone else's? (Maybe).

jipops
01-02-2013, 10:50 PM
I think this was an excellent win because of what it took to come out with the W. The offense was sputtering, Davidson's pressure was getting the best of us forcing 9 or 10 turnovers in the 1st half. Then we respond by holding them to 1 fg in the first 10 minutes of the 2nd half. That takes some serious maturity and fortitude to be struggling so badly on offense yet respond by turning up the defensive heat on one of the best coached/most disciplined teams we will face for the remainder of the season. I really don't think this should be dismissed, it's great sign for our guys. As others have mentioned, our 2 leading scorers (both seniors) are having miserable offensive efforts, Rasheed goes 1-7, yet we still beat these guys by 17. I have a hard time not being happy about this.

Yea, I really can't help but have some concern over the rebounding issues. Had we stayed even on the boards in the 1st half, the game probably would have broken open earlier. Even more concerning is this was a team that was manhandled 35-13 by Drexel on the boards. I don't have much hope for this issue being corrected significantly this season (especially after tonight), though hopefully we will be able to effectively compensate.

moonpie23
01-02-2013, 10:51 PM
i would REALLY like to know what K said to the score keeper.....

Newton_14
01-02-2013, 10:54 PM
But I really don't like the shortened bench and the minutes distribution. We're going to need Amile and/or Alex come March. Them getting no time in games like the last two lowers our ceiling.

And hopefully, Marshall's going to get some minutes someday soon.

We're the number one team in the country, but other teams are getting better. We need to get better too and Amile, Alex and Marshall are one of the ways we can improve and grow into March like teams like Kansas and Louisville and Arizona will. Yes, we can get better and Quinn continues to grow and Rasheed continues to learn to be a college star, but we're going to need more than that, I think.

Amile played a couple of minutes in the first half tonight. This was not a game for inexperienced freshman. Far too physical. I was not surpised at all that MP3 did not play, and Alex only came in with under a minute to go.

I do think that Amile will continue to get first half minutes in just about every game, and how he plays will determine if he sees the floor in the 2nd half. The Santa Clara game was an aberration. Don't know why Amile sat the entire game, but that is the only game all year that he did not play in the first half in.

As the year progresses it is possible Amile's minutes will increase slightly. Alex will not play much unless Seth misses games to injury. MP3 will get some minutes backing up Mason if he can get back into game shape and the foot heals up nicely.

The top 6 will log the bulk of the minutes, and Josh will be the first big off the bench unless Amile and MP3 pass him in performance somewhere along the way.

jipops
01-02-2013, 10:58 PM
But I really don't like the shortened bench and the minutes distribution. We're going to need Amile and/or Alex come March. Them getting no time in games like the last two lowers our ceiling.

And hopefully, Marshall's going to get some minutes someday soon.

We're the number one team in the country, but other teams are getting better. We need to get better too and Amile, Alex and Marshall are one of the ways we can improve and grow into March like teams like Kansas and Louisville and Arizona will. Yes, we can get better and Quinn continues to grow and Rasheed continues to learn to be a college star, but we're going to need more than that, I think.

I'm curious, why do you think we are going to need Amile and/or Alex in March? Do you think there is no way for the current seniors to actually get better as the season goes on?

And regarding Marshall, you are going to tear your hair out if you're holding out hope of him getting any significant minutes this season. He is so far behind everyone else right now as a result of the injury. The November and December games were valuable time to be taken advantage of. He isn't going to get much if any time for the rest of the year, just go ahead and accept it.

timmy c
01-02-2013, 10:58 PM
This game was painful to watch, particularly the first half.

Was the hardwood sitting over a hockey rink, or were the ball boys just inept? Seemed like a lot of slipping, and a lot of weird ball handling, like there was extra condensation or something in the building. How did we miss a few of those layups?

Seth tied his season high with 3 assists tonight, despite having a pretty poor all around showing.

I'm ready to see another "look" from this team. Maybe when we lose a game, there will be a line-up shift. I'd love to see Tyler or maybe even Amile inserted into the starting line-up over Seth. I think Seth would be best operating like a Trajan Langdon--just shooting the open 3 and not much else. It seems difficult for him to stick to his strengths though. The offense seems to slow when he handles the ball. Maybe the coaching staff tells him to shoot a lot, but he really seems kind of like a black hole out there sometimes. When you have five offensive weapons, maybe there comes a time to sacrifice one in favor of a defensive upgrade.

What I like about Tyler is that he plays hard-nosed D and he hits that open 3 when he needs to to keep the other team's D honest. I would think that Amile could help out our rebounding and provide some tougher defense.

I agree that Tyler looked great. He's at his best when the refs are swallowing their whistles -- tough, hard nosed, smart player.

I disagree that Seth was a black hole. His shot didn't always fall tonight, but he lead the team in assists. In two consecutive series he found Thornton for a three then found Kelly for a three. Both of those shots were wide open because teams have to respect Seth as a scorer.

cptnflash
01-02-2013, 11:19 PM
But I really don't like the shortened bench and the minutes distribution. We're going to need Amile and/or Alex come March. Them getting no time in games like the last two lowers our ceiling.

And hopefully, Marshall's going to get some minutes someday soon.

We're the number one team in the country, but other teams are getting better. We need to get better too and Amile, Alex and Marshall are one of the ways we can improve and grow into March like teams like Kansas and Louisville and Arizona will. Yes, we can get better and Quinn continues to grow and Rasheed continues to learn to be a college star, but we're going to need more than that, I think.

My concern for Alex and (especially) Amile isn't about this year. Frankly, we don't need either of them this year, barring injury and provided that Marshall comes along. But given that they're both highly skilled and heavily recruited players, I think we have to consider both of them to be transfer risks if they don't start getting some minutes.

mo.st.dukie
01-02-2013, 11:26 PM
My concern for Alex and (especially) Amile isn't about this year. Frankly, we don't need either of them this year, barring injury and provided that Marshall comes along. But given that they're both highly skilled and heavily recruited players, I think we have to consider both of them to be transfer risks if they don't start getting some minutes.

If they don't want to be at Duke simply because they aren't getting minutes then we don't want them at Duke. We want guys like Ryan Kelly who get very limited minutes as a freshman but sticks with it and improves every single season. If Alex and Amile stick with it they will be really good by their junior and senior season. No players should ever be handed playing time on a silver platter simply out of fear that they might transfer if they don't get the minutes. But I definitely think Alex and Amile are the type of players who have the right attitude and understand that everybody has their own path to reaching their full potential. Alex has already shot down any notions of him transferring.

As for the game, Davidson did a heck of a job focusing so much of their gameplan on shutting down Mason, it worked for the most part but this team has several weapons out there and Ryan and Quinn stepped up big time.

OZ
01-02-2013, 11:40 PM
Kelly struggled with the double team in the post, too. His points mostly came from put backs and on the perimeter, not from post moves.


Man, not to belabor an insignificant point, but I don't recall Ryan having a single putback. He had 3 threes... 5 free throws... a short jumper... and a layup with an assist from Mason. He had two offensive rebounds...one early in the second half and he missed a jump shot; the second with less than two minutes left and TT ended up making two free throws.

My seat was not all that great, but I just don't recall those put backs. I just watched the DVR replay and still didn't see them. Sorry.

Newton_14
01-02-2013, 11:45 PM
If they don't want to be at Duke simply because they aren't getting minutes then we don't want them at Duke. We want guys like Ryan Kelly who get very limited minutes as a freshman but sticks with it and improves every single season. If Alex and Amile stick with it they will be really good by their junior and senior season. No players should ever be handed playing time on a silver platter simply out of fear that they might transfer if they don't get the minutes. But I definitely think Alex and Amile are the type of players who have the right attitude and understand that everybody has their own path to reaching their full potential. Alex has already shot down any notions of him transferring.

As for the game, Davidson did a heck of a job focusing so much of their gameplan on shutting down Mason, it worked for the most part but this team has several weapons out there and Ryan and Quinn stepped up big time.

Agree 100& and don't see either kid transferring. Amile has gotten decent minutes all year long and with Ryan and Mason graduating will get plenty of minutes starting next year. Josh will always be a reserve post player, but Amile will be a starter. His ceiling is much higher. I still think the Santa Clara game was an outlier for Amile that was either sickness related, injury related, or possible discipline or something. It is the only DNP he has had all year, and like I said earlier he did play in the first half tonight.

Based on his own words I really don't see Alex transferring either though it may take him until his Jr year before he cracks the main rotation.

I honestly see both guys being 4 year players at Duke with solid careers.

cspan37421
01-02-2013, 11:48 PM
Yes. He was pressing. It reminded me of his first visit to Blacksburg two years ago, except he is more mature now.

What is your definition of pressing? It seems to me like one of those overused words that, at its core, has no valid meaning.

By context (here and elsewhere), it seems to mean "trying, but failing badly." Nothing wrong with trying. And you don't know about the fail badly part except with 20/20 hindsight. So how can you avoid pressing, except by not trying?

I'm not persuaded it's anything but a ex post facto description, not something that can be recognized in the moment, before the shot goes up.

tele
01-03-2013, 12:17 AM
My concern for Alex and (especially) Amile isn't about this year. Frankly, we don't need either of them this year, barring injury and provided that Marshall comes along. But given that they're both highly skilled and heavily recruited players, I think we have to consider both of them to be transfer risks if they don't start getting some minutes.

If Amile and Alex are as good as you (and I) think they are then they will get to play, and I think it will be this year. Where I disagree is that you seem to think we don't need them to play because the starting five are so good, and I think the reason the bench isn't playing is because the first five still needs to get better, while still trying to win every game. The idea is to win a National championship not share minutes equitably. The first five has lots of room for improvement, they trailed Santa Clara by 4 in the second half, shades of lehigh. So improving the bench may be something to look toward when the players who are getting minutes have improved enough to allow it. Right now I don't think they are quite there yet, even though they are still winning, they are still getting ready for what lies ahead.

Great win against a well coached tough team! That was a scrum out there all game, team really battled, and nice second half adjustments by Coach K to get some separation.

toooskies
01-03-2013, 12:25 AM
I think K's very short rotation this year is on purpose, to promote unity for the players on the court. Last year's rotation was almost too large for Duke-- 9 different starters, 8 man rotation. The guards especially had a tough time defining roles because anyone could star on any given night. This year, everyone knows their roles on the court. We have ownership.

And the tighter rotation is what gives that to us. Our core players are figuring out how to play tough games, and tough personal stretches, and solving it on the court. No short leashes for the guys we need to depend on. In March, we don't get to throw every lineup at the other team and hope one combo beats theirs. No, winning takes confidence in the team, unity. Strengthen the strengths of the team.

I loved seeing us win that rugby match tonight convincingly, it reminded me of how the refs called the 2010 championship game.

Kedsy
01-03-2013, 12:29 AM
At halftime I said to myself that the difference between this season and last is that last year we would have been down 6 or 8 at the break. If that had been the case, our big early second half run would simply have put us ahead by a few points and the game would probably have been nip and tuck from there. This team is experienced, knows how to win and doesn't panic. So when the other team goes for the knockout punch all they can manage is to stay close to us and when we counterpunch, we're pulling ahead instead of catching up. It's a very big difference.


2) Our slow first half starts are getting old. And they look to be more about effort then about anything else. We keep getting beat to loose balls, play lackluster defense, etc. Won't work against good teams.

Yeah, it's a real shame we haven't played any good teams yet this season...


I'm amazed that with a pair of near 7 footers, we get destroyed so badly on the glass. And this is almost always against undersized teams. Some if it is effort, but I think some of it is the tendency of the bigs to go for the blocked shot, putting them out of position.

If they'd stay home on defense and box out, I think we'd be much better on the boards.

I don't think it's going after blocked shots at all. Duke's defensive scheme is all about rotating and switching, and that's what puts our guys out of position. They're not always supposed to "stay home" and it's difficult to box out when you're clogging the passing lanes.

That said, it would be great if we could improve out defensive rebounding. I just don't think there's an obviously easy solution, that's all.


I'm ready to see another "look" from this team. Maybe when we lose a game, there will be a line-up shift. I'd love to see Tyler or maybe even Amile inserted into the starting line-up over Seth.

Well, you may be ready for it, but I doubt too many other people are, especially Coach K. Seth has been fantastic this season, especially considering he's playing on an injured leg. The chances of Tyler or Amile replacing a healthy Seth in the starting lineup are approximately zero.


But I really don't like the shortened bench and the minutes distribution. We're going to need Amile and/or Alex come March. Them getting no time in games like the last two lowers our ceiling.

I know others have touched on this, but you really think we are going to "need" them this season? Absent an injury, I completely disagree. In 2010, in the Final Four, we played a five and a half man rotation, and one of those games was a 20 point blowout.

The other thing I don't get is why people think that someone who doesn't play in games won't be ready to play if called upon. Our bench players practice against the #1 team in the country every day. If an emergency arises and Amile or Alex is needed, they'll step up, just as they did in the Delaware game when Seth couldn't play.

Edouble
01-03-2013, 12:33 AM
He had an off game after scoring 30+ last game. Davidson was physical and was allowed to hold and grab off the ball. Plus Seth got clobbered on a few of his jumpers.

Should we sit Mason, too? After all, he had an off night...

No. If you'll reread my post, you'll see that I was not writing about just this particular game, but about the season as a whole. Mason is one of our best players and needs to be in the starting line-up and play 30+ minutes/game.

I think Tyler has been better overall and is a better fit to this team. When he is hitting the open three, I think he brings more overall value than Seth.


I agree that Tyler looked great. He's at his best when the refs are swallowing their whistles -- tough, hard nosed, smart player.

I disagree that Seth was a black hole. His shot didn't always fall tonight, but he lead the team in assists. In two consecutive series he found Thornton for a three then found Kelly for a three. Both of those shots were wide open because teams have to respect Seth as a scorer.

I remember that series and being astounded by it. Seth had 10 assists on the year heading into tonight's game. It was the first time I can recall Seth driving and kicking in a while, which he did on the Thornton 3 pointer. On Ryan's 3 pointer, he just sort of dribbled through his legs a few times (why?) and threw it to Ryan, who I am pretty sure was coming off of a screen. Anyway, I don't think that the second assist to Ryan had anything to do with Davidson respecting Seth as a scorer, although the first one certainly did.


Yea, I really can't help but have some concern over the rebounding issues. Had we stayed even on the boards in the 1st half, the game probably would have broken open earlier. Even more concerning is this was a team that was manhandled 35-13 by Drexel on the boards. I don't have much hope for this issue being corrected significantly this season (especially after tonight), though hopefully we will be able to effectively compensate.

Amile.

Zeb
01-03-2013, 01:40 AM
Am I the only one who was surprised to see Mason credited with only 3 blocks? Seemed like he altered about twice that many to me.

camion
01-03-2013, 07:34 AM
Am I the only one who was surprised to see Mason credited with only 3 blocks? Seemed like he altered about twice that many to me.

I thought it was Ryan doing that.

Dopeshop
01-03-2013, 08:20 AM
What's with the coaching staff's high confidence level in Josh ? I'm nervous the whole time he's in the game. I saw him many times in high school

and knew he shouldn't ever take a 12 foot jump shot . (without put backs and lay ups ,what's his FG % ? ). He also telegraphs his fouls almost daring the refs to call it.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
01-03-2013, 08:58 AM
So... let me see if I can sum up the thoughts on this thread so far regarding the short rotation:

We are screwed if we don't use more players, not because we need them right now (we don't! we don't need them!) but because if we don't use them, we run the risk of these players (that we don't need!) might transfer.

Sounds solid.

In regards to tonight's game - I was not terribly surprised to see Davidson play us tough (I doubt anyone who has been paying attention to them for the last ten years or so was) but I do admit a bit of shock when they were tied up at halftime. They certainly matched our intensity and toughness - if not exceeding it at stretches - which is a mark of a well-prepared and well-coached team. Our guys responded after the half the way we would want and expect them to. Good win against a likely tournament bound team away from home. I will take it every time.

As far as "slow first half" conversation goes - what if we look at it from a different perspective? One can watch and say "wow, Duke really didn't show up at the opening tip, I wonder what happened?" Or, you could watch the game in it's entirety and focus on the fact that the second half reflected some excellent adjustments at halftime.

From my perspective, these strong second halves are more encouraging than the slow starts are discouraging. The changes in line-up, strategy, defense, and plays that are made at halftime are really what makes this coaching staff special. As long as I can remember (and it's a while) Duke has had a habit of opening the second half with a strong burst that sometimes puts the game out of reach by the 15 minute mark. Lots of coaches can come up with some sort of effective game plan in the days leading up to a game. It takes a really special group of coaches to watch the first half, analyze it, and take the twenty minutes of halftime to implement changes to take advantage of what they have seen. THERE'S our big advantage. Lackluster first half basketball followed by very good second half basketball isn't just the players sitting down and saying "gee guys, let's focus and try harder."

Excellent win for our guys. I'm really excited to see what this team can do in conference play. Let's go get 'em.

GO DUKE

OldPhiKap
01-03-2013, 09:19 AM
What's with the coaching staff's high confidence level in Josh ? I'm nervous the whole time he's in the game. I saw him many times in high school

and knew he shouldn't ever take a 12 foot jump shot . (without put backs and lay ups ,what's his FG % ? ). He also telegraphs his fouls almost daring the refs to call it.

Josh is the beefiest of the bigger guys (if I can use that word) and can hold position with the big boys. Marshall may develop that ability as well, but Josh has been in the system for three years and I assume he out-executes Marshall in practice presently.

Amile and Alex are very talented as well, but are better subs for the wings or for an offensive switch. If you want rebounding and physical play inside, Josh fits that bill.

My two cents, at least.

Jeffrey236
01-03-2013, 09:24 AM
I'm amazed that with a pair of near 7 footers, we get destroyed so badly on the glass. And this is almost always against undersized teams. Some if it is effort, but I think some of it is the tendency of the bigs to go for the blocked shot, putting them out of position.

If they'd stay home on defense and box out, I think we'd be much better on the boards.

I agree. Mason and, to a lesser extent, Ryan, tend to leave the floor a bit too much. Blocked and altered shots are nice, but it's leaving us very vulnerable to offensive rebounding.

dyedwab
01-03-2013, 09:29 AM
As far as "slow first half" conversation goes - what if we look at it from a different perspective? One can watch and say "wow, Duke really didn't show up at the opening tip, I wonder what happened?" Or, you could watch the game in it's entirety and focus on the fact that the second half reflected some excellent adjustments at halftime.

From my perspective, these strong second halves are more encouraging than the slow starts are discouraging. The changes in line-up, strategy, defense, and plays that are made at halftime are really what makes this coaching staff special. As long as I can remember (and it's a while) Duke has had a habit of opening the second half with a strong burst that sometimes puts the game out of reach by the 15 minute mark. Lots of coaches can come up with some sort of effective game plan in the days leading up to a game. It takes a really special group of coaches to watch the first half, analyze it, and take the twenty minutes of halftime to implement changes to take advantage of what they have seen. THERE'S our big advantage. Lackluster first half basketball followed by very good second half basketball isn't just the players sitting down and saying "gee guys, let's focus and try harder."


I'm gonna amend my previous concern about the slow starts and look at it this way. I would make 2 additional points though.

1) I had said that the slow start wouldn't work against good teams. But we have evidence that we can beat good teams. We did not start slow against them. Our slow starts tend to also come against teams that are less talented but still very good. We tend to get knocked back early - and usually its because the other team is far more physical than we are used to. So, its not the top level teams that worry me - it's the mid level teams

2) We are better at adjusting at halftime this year. E.G., last night, we successfully limited offensive rebounding opportunities after giving up too many in the 1st half.

So, it still concerns me - and suggests that we could lose a game to a team less talented then we are. But, our 2nd half adjustments make me happier.

moonpie23
01-03-2013, 09:41 AM
how many shots did we have short of the rim? how many layups were missed? even a plumlee dunk was short. I felt like our ability to finish the shot was a bit weak in the first half.

Des Esseintes
01-03-2013, 09:56 AM
We're the number one team in the country, but other teams are getting better. We need to get better too and Amile, Alex and Marshall are one of the ways we can improve and grow into March like teams like Kansas and Louisville and Arizona will. Yes, we can get better and Quinn continues to grow and Rasheed continues to learn to be a college star, but we're going to need more than that, I think.

Not to be unpleasant, but if I remember correctly you were of the opinion preseason that Duke was perhaps not even a top 25 team. So why not just let the team continue to exceed your expectations?

UrinalCake
01-03-2013, 10:00 AM
Thornton had offers from a number of big time programs as I recall. I do not think he was a sleeper. A lot of teams saw what Duke saw - a kid who knows how to win.

Yeah, Tyler was in Kyrie's class. Scheyer had just graduated and we knew Nolan would be graduating the following year. Kyrie was obviously going to be the starter, so the thought was probably that Tyler could grow and be a solid contributor or possible starter by his junior or senior year when Kyrie would be gone. He's been much more than an afterthought through his first two years - maybe not a superstar in the stat sheet but a real glue guy, an excellent defender, and he plays within his role on offense

Monmouth77
01-03-2013, 10:06 AM
Josh is the beefiest of the bigger guys (if I can use that word) and can hold position with the big boys. Marshall may develop that ability as well, but Josh has been in the system for three years and I assume he out-executes Marshall in practice presently.

Amile and Alex are very talented as well, but are better subs for the wings or for an offensive switch. If you want rebounding and physical play inside, Josh fits that bill.

My two cents, at least.

I agree with this. My thought last night at one point, when Hairston was subbed into a lineup with Tyler, was that the game's physicality demanded that we push back. I like to think of it as our "fight club" lineup.

And in re: Hairston's limitations, I don't see him as that different from an upperclass Lance Thomas. He'll defend, absorb fouls, grab boards, and put back a miss or two. He isn't out there to shoot jumpers.

Kedsy
01-03-2013, 10:15 AM
I had said that the slow start wouldn't work against good teams. But we have evidence that we can beat good teams. We did not start slow against them. Our slow starts tend to also come against teams that are less talented but still very good. We tend to get knocked back early - and usually its because the other team is far more physical than we are used to. So, its not the top level teams that worry me - it's the mid level teams.

Against Kentucky we were losing after 13.5 minutes and were only up 2 at halftime, after shooting 40% for the half. Against VCU, we were losing after 18.5 minutes and were only up 1 at halftime, after shooting 39% for the half. Against Ohio State, we were down 8 at halftime, having shot 30% for the half. So I don't even think your amended statement is accurate.

Whatever we've been doing has (so far) worked against everyone, top teams, mid-level teams, and even a couple low-level teams. I believe it's because even when we get knocked back, we don't let things get out of hand, we don't panic or let the other teams speed us up, and we know how to win.

Kedsy
01-03-2013, 10:21 AM
And in re: Hairston's limitations, I don't see him as that different from an upperclass Lance Thomas. He'll defend, absorb fouls, grab boards, and put back a miss or two. He isn't out there to shoot jumpers.

I like Josh, but he's nowhere near an upperclass Lance Thomas. Lance was good enough to start more than 100 games in his Duke career. Josh will be lucky to start 5 by the time his career ends.

FerryFor50
01-03-2013, 10:29 AM
I like Josh, but he's nowhere near an upperclass Lance Thomas. Lance was good enough to start more than 100 games in his Duke career. Josh will be lucky to start 5 by the time his career ends.

Lance could also hit an open jumper with regularity and brought more bounce than Josh.

Hairston reminds me more of David McClure.

chalz
01-03-2013, 10:34 AM
I have been impressed all season by how hard Mason has played. He has consistently run the court with the same effort I admired from Tyler Zeller the last four years. For whatever reason, he did not always run hard from end to end in the first half last night. Indeed, one of his fouls resulted from jogging well behind a Davidson fast break and arriving after an initial miss just in time to foul a Davidson rebounder who was converting a basket. It was uncharacteristic, and Mason returned to his more customary pace of play in the second half. Maybe it's the holidays, maybe it's overconfidence, or more likely it's because these are 18 to 22 year old kids, but the first half was a good lesson about the need to match or exceed the intensity that the other team is bringing.

Matches
01-03-2013, 10:43 AM
I thought Mason looked a little under the weather. He didn't quite have the usual spring in his step. I noticed K kept giving him short, more frequent rests than usual. Might have been performance-related but I wondered if he wasn't a little more winded than usual. Easy to get a little bug this time of year.

All in all, I'll take a 17-point win over a good team, even if the final margin was misleading. Davidson's pretty good. I thought their effort defensively was one of the best we've seen. (And yea I know they were mauling the heck out of us but we play physical D too.) Rebounding is a concern of course but we have the horses to fix that.

tommy
01-03-2013, 10:49 AM
I agree. Mason and, to a lesser extent, Ryan, tend to leave the floor a bit too much. Blocked and altered shots are nice, but it's leaving us very vulnerable to offensive rebounding.

Actually, it is Ryan's ability to play solid position defense and NOT leave the floor that has largely made him such a good (and vastly underrated) defensive player. Even his blocked shots, which way exceed the numbers most assume he could get or has gotten, often occur with his feet on the floor. He is playing smart, textbook defense, which more than compensates for his not being a high flying, Sportscenter highlight-grabbing type of shot blocker.

Billy Dat
01-03-2013, 11:08 AM
I have been impressed all season by how hard Mason has played. He has consistently run the court with the same effort I admired from Tyler Zeller the last four years. For whatever reason, he did not always run hard from end to end in the first half last night. Indeed, one of his fouls resulted from jogging well behind a Davidson fast break and arriving after an initial miss just in time to foul a Davidson rebounder who was converting a basket. It was uncharacteristic, and Mason returned to his more customary pace of play in the second half. Maybe it's the holidays, maybe it's overconfidence, or more likely it's because these are 18 to 22 year old kids, but the first half was a good lesson about the need to match or exceed the intensity that the other team is bringing.

I thought a few things combined to lead to a sub-par Mason performance last night. The "let them play" physical style that the refs allowed made it tough to get Mason the ball where he usually likes it. He also didn't start the Temple game very well when the Owls were putting the muscle to him. I thought that our failure to get him the ball early got him frustrated. The first three possessions, I think, were Seth Curry shots where we didn't even look at Mason. I was yelling at the TV for us to get him the ball, especially once Cohen picked up a foul and Mason was being guarded by smaller players. So, he got off on the wrong foot and, uncharacteristically for this year, seemed to lose his cool. He began to hurry on offense - the dropped passes, the fade aways, the travels - he just got out of sync and couldn't get back on track. I didn't see it as an effort issue, I think let the way the game was being called get inside his head a little.

CDu
01-03-2013, 11:11 AM
It should be noted that, for all the complaints about the way we won last night, that win actually moved us UP two spots in Pomeroy's rankings (from 4th to 2nd). We dropped from the #1 offense to the #3 offense, but jumped from #11 to #7 defensively. And we're now just .0003 points behind Indiana for the #1 spot. So Pomeroy thinks it was a pretty good win, even if it wasn't a thing of beauty offensively.

I concur with SCMatt with regard to Cook's mastery of the stallball offense. I take great pleasure in watching a guy with such complete command of his dribble and the ability to force the other team to chase him around the court for 30 seconds. Just really impressive. That he was also able to finish with layups at the end was equally impressive. It's nice having a guy who has the ballhandling skills and court awareness to make those plays. As he keeps getting better, so will this team.

Tough night for 2 of our 3 seniors. Davidson had a really effective strategy of sending double-team help from the baseline on Mason. Mason only beat it a couple of times (perhaps only even once), and committed several turnovers. Hopefully that's just a one-game blip for him in what has otherwise been a fantastic season. And aside from the 6 turnovers (which is of course very bad), a 10 point, 7 rebound, 2 assist, 3 block, 2 steal game (on 4-7 shooting from the field and 2-3 from the line) is not a bad line for a worst game of the season. Curry missed several open shots, and had more trouble than usual getting off screens (Davidson was very physical with cutters, making Curry's job much more difficult). I don't think he played poorly, just didn't hit some of the shots he often hits. Bad shooting nights can happen. He did chip in with 3 assists, so it wasn't a complete bagel from him.

It also didn't hurt that, on a night when Curry and Sulaimon struggled offensively, Thornton had perhaps his best offensive game of the season. He hit 2 big 3s in the second half. He's developing into the Nate James role of solid defense and hitting corner 3s (like James, it seems the corner 3 is really the only one he shoots well, but he definitely shoots that one well). It's nice that we have 5 guys capable of scoring 15+ on any given night. And when we get 10 from Thornton (on just 5 FG attempts), that's just icing on the cake.

And not to be lost, the player of the game had to go to Kelly in my mind. He led the team in scoring and rebounds, and hit a bunch of big shots for us in leading us to victory.

As for the not so good:

The rebounding woes returned in full form last night. Davidson is not a good rebounding team, yet we allowed 12 offensive rebounds and were outrebounded overall. Thankfully, Davidson shot very poorly from the outside (they missed several open 3s), and our interior didn't give them much room on the inside. We really aren't good at boxing out - even when we aren't getting caught in rotations. It hasn't bitten us yet, but it's something to keep an eye on as we move forward. If/when we do lose a key game, I suspect our rebound struggles are going to play a part in it.

And offensively, we've got to do better. Davidson played hard, but they are the #165 rated defense in the country according to Pomeroy. They should not be holding us to 29 first half points, especially when we shoot 45.7% from the field, 45.5% from 3, and 90.9% from the line. They should not be limiting us to 5 assists versus 12 turnovers. Hopefully this was just a hangover game, and we bounce back in ACC play.

OldPhiKap
01-03-2013, 11:27 AM
Mason on Mason (from front page):

http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-basketball/story/2013-01-02/duke-davidson-mason-plumlee-ryan-kelly-jake-cohen-seth-curry-acc-schedule

timmy c
01-03-2013, 11:32 AM
I think Tyler has been better overall and is a better fit to this team. When he is hitting the open three, I think he brings more overall value than Seth.



Not buying this argument.



I remember that series and being astounded by it. Seth had 10 assists on the year heading into tonight's game. It was the first time I can recall Seth driving and kicking in a while, which he did on the Thornton 3 pointer. On Ryan's 3 pointer, he just sort of dribbled through his legs a few times (why?) and threw it to Ryan, who I am pretty sure was coming off of a screen. Anyway, I don't think that the second assist to Ryan had anything to do with Davidson respecting Seth as a scorer, although the first one certainly did.


You are “mis-remembering” the play.

Seth accepts Mason’s screen and takes both Mason and his defender with him. Kelly’s defender slides off Ryan to pick up Mason rolling to the basket. Seth keeps his dribble alive while Kelly gets to the 3-point line. Seth finds a wide open Kelly for the three. 41-29 Duke, Timeout Davidson.
No way Kelly gets that open if Davidson isn’t concerned about Seth’s driving/scoring range.

In addition, your larger point -- that Seth was a bit of a black hole – is still incorrect. Instead, Seth kept his head up the whole play and was smart enough to let the play develop and made the right pass.

Maybe the basketball deities are punishing you for your ostentatious prediction that you posted in the pre/in-game thread:



Hmm, I'm expecting a blow out. I'm thinking we'll be up 15 at half. This is a team that has Final Four aspirations and we looked rusty coming off the holiday break. This is Seth's "home town" game and he was just named a captain.

Well, maybe "expect" is too strong of a word, but that's what I would predict. Davidson has earned my respect over the years, but this year I think we will play out of their league tonight.

-bdbd
01-03-2013, 11:36 AM
Strongly concur with SCMatt and CDu that Cook's stark improvement has been a HUGE difference-maker for Duke this year. You could easily argue that it has been at least as impactful as MP2's emergence. The kid is finally looking like what we expected when he signed with Duke two years ago. It has been interesting to see how the process has worked as he's (very slowly) re-emerged from the shadow of a serious injury in HS.

I also agree that Ryan Kelly is vastly underappreciated. His very flexible defense - interior and perimeter as well as bigs and swings - has been key in a high number of critical situations this season. And we're not even talking about his tremendous "European big" inside-outside offensive game.

Yes, MP2 had an off night last night - just wish he could have more effectively passed out of those double-teams from Davidson. But I have no doubt that he'll return to (All-Star) form against Wake.

Give Davidson credit for being well-coached and knowing/playing their roles well. They really gave us a game. Yes, it wasn't Duke's best performance yesterday, but I prefer to get these out of our system now, before we hit Clemson and NCSU in ACC play next week...





It should be noted that, for all the complaints about the way we won last night, that win actually moved us UP two spots in Pomeroy's rankings (from 4th to 2nd). We dropped from the #1 offense to the #3 offense, but jumped from #11 to #7 defensively. And we're now just .0003 points behind Indiana for the #1 spot. So Pomeroy thinks it was a pretty good win, even if it wasn't a thing of beauty offensively.

I concur with SCMatt with regard to Cook's mastery of the stallball offense. I take great pleasure in watching a guy with such complete command of his dribble and the ability to force the other team to chase him around the court for 30 seconds. Just really impressive. That he was also able to finish with layups at the end was equally impressive. It's nice having a guy who has the ballhandling skills and court awareness to make those plays. As he keeps getting better, so will this team.

Tough night for 2 of our 3 seniors. Davidson had a really effective strategy of sending double-team help from the baseline on Mason. Mason only beat it a couple of times (perhaps only even once), and committed several turnovers. Hopefully that's just a one-game blip for him in what has otherwise been a fantastic season. And aside from the 6 turnovers (which is of course very bad), a 10 point, 7 rebound, 2 assist, 3 block, 2 steal game (on 4-7 shooting from the field and 2-3 from the line) is not a bad line for a worst game of the season. Curry missed several open shots, and had more trouble than usual getting off screens (Davidson was very physical with cutters, making Curry's job much more difficult). I don't think he played poorly, just didn't hit some of the shots he often hits. Bad shooting nights can happen. He did chip in with 3 assists, so it wasn't a complete bagel from him.

It also didn't hurt that, on a night when Curry and Sulaimon struggled offensively, Thornton had perhaps his best offensive game of the season. He hit 2 big 3s in the second half. He's developing into the Nate James role of solid defense and hitting corner 3s (like James, it seems the corner 3 is really the only one he shoots well, but he definitely shoots that one well). It's nice that we have 5 guys capable of scoring 15+ on any given night. And when we get 10 from Thornton (on just 5 FG attempts), that's just icing on the cake.

And not to be lost, the player of the game had to go to Kelly in my mind. He led the team in scoring and rebounds, and hit a bunch of big shots for us in leading us to victory.

As for the not so good:

The rebounding woes returned in full form last night. Davidson is not a good rebounding team, yet we allowed 12 offensive rebounds and were outrebounded overall. Thankfully, Davidson shot very poorly from the outside (they missed several open 3s), and our interior didn't give them much room on the inside. We really aren't good at boxing out - even when we aren't getting caught in rotations. It hasn't bitten us yet, but it's something to keep an eye on as we move forward. If/when we do lose a key game, I suspect our rebound struggles are going to play a part in it.

And offensively, we've got to do better. Davidson played hard, but they are the #165 rated defense in the country according to Pomeroy. They should not be holding us to 29 first half points, especially when we shoot 45.7% from the field, 45.5% from 3, and 90.9% from the line. They should not be limiting us to 5 assists versus 12 turnovers. Hopefully this was just a hangover game, and we bounce back in ACC play.

Wander
01-03-2013, 11:36 AM
I agree. Mason and, to a lesser extent, Ryan, tend to leave the floor a bit too much. Blocked and altered shots are nice, but it's leaving us very vulnerable to offensive rebounding.

That's not the impression I get. In fact, one of the very few things I'm disappointed with in Mason's game this year is that he's still not nearly as good and frequent a shot-blocker as I think he can be. But, that might be quasi-intentional to avoid foul trouble. Either way, Mason has been great on the boards and isn't the cause of our defensive rebounding issue.

I also second tommy's point that Kelly doesn't really leave the floor too often. I do think he needs to improve his defensive rebounding - actually he's probably the leading cause of our defensive rebounding woes - but I don't see his shot blocking attempts as the issue there.

CDu
01-03-2013, 11:44 AM
That's not the impression I get. In fact, one of the very few things I'm disappointed with in Mason's game this year is that he's still not nearly as good and frequent a shot-blocker as I think he can be. But, that might be quasi-intentional to avoid foul trouble. Either way, Mason has been great on the boards and isn't the cause of our defensive rebounding issue.

I also second tommy's point that Kelly doesn't really leave the floor too often. I do think he needs to improve his defensive rebounding - actually he's probably the leading cause of our defensive rebounding woes - but I don't see his shot blocking attempts as the issue there.

I'd agree with this. I think Mason is doing a fantastic job on the boards. He's not a huge fan of boxing out, but he usually gets himself in decent position and goes after the ball hard. Kelly is also not a huge fan of boxing out, and does seem to be the culprit on a lot of the missed rebounds. He notably let Brooks beat him to the spot on more than one occasion, and it wasn't a function of getting caught on a switch.

In fact, boxing out seems to be the one trait that we don't do well as a team defensively. Whether that is just a strategic allowance (you can't do everything well defensively), or something that we don't spend a ton of time on in our limited practice time (or both), or whether it's just something that the players aren't focusing enough on, I don't know. Thankfully, we do enough other things very well defensively and we are elite offensively. So it hasn't hurt us yet.

slower
01-03-2013, 12:54 PM
I concur with SCMatt with regard to Cook's mastery of the stallball offense. I take great pleasure in watching a guy with such complete command of his dribble and the ability to force the other team to chase him around the court for 30 seconds. Just really impressive. That he was also able to finish with layups at the end was equally impressive. It's nice having a guy who has the ballhandling skills and court awareness to make those plays. As he keeps getting better, so will this team.

As I watched Quinn at the end of the game last night, the words "Phil Ford" flashed through my mind. Now, before everybody freaks out, I'm NOT saying that Quinn is at Ford's level. But he just seemed to be able to do whatever he wanted with the ball, and it reminded me of Ford.

To paraphrase the great Dennis Green, perhaps "he IS who we thought he was." :D

Jderf
01-03-2013, 12:54 PM
Davidson had a really effective strategy of sending double-team help from the baseline on Mason. Mason only beat it a couple of times (perhaps only even once), and committed several turnovers. Hopefully that's just a one-game blip for him in what has otherwise been a fantastic season. And aside from the 6 turnovers (which is of course very bad), a 10 point, 7 rebound, 2 assist, 3 block, 2 steal game (on 4-7 shooting from the field and 2-3 from the line) is not a bad line for a worst game of the season.

I'm surprised that there hasn't been much discussion of Mason's trouble with the double team last night. It really confused me when the double kept causing Mason so much difficulty, especially when he has been so successful in the past as a passing big man. I suppose it was a unique sort of double team in terms of where the second defender came from (baseline), and perhaps the rest of the team is a bit at fault too (for not being in proper position to offer Mason options to pass out of the double team), but I was still caught off guard by how effective Davidson was at limiting Mason all night long.

Guess it will be a point of focus for the team in practice. Considering how good of a passer Mason is, I don't think it should be too much of a problem moving forward.

Chicago 1995
01-03-2013, 01:09 PM
I'm curious, why do you think we are going to need Amile and/or Alex in March? Do you think there is no way for the current seniors to actually get better as the season goes on?

And regarding Marshall, you are going to tear your hair out if you're holding out hope of him getting any significant minutes this season. He is so far behind everyone else right now as a result of the injury. The November and December games were valuable time to be taken advantage of. He isn't going to get much if any time for the rest of the year, just go ahead and accept it.

Lots of reasons. Foul trouble (2004 vs. UConn). The flu (2008 vs WVa, reportedly). Injuries (Ryan Kelly last year). Legs (2005 vs. MSU). Matchups (2002 vs. Indiana, 2003 vs. Kansas). Might we be fine with the seven it seems like we're going with? I suppose, but I think we're better served to have our eighth (and maybe even ninth) options more prepared for March. Better to have them ready and not need them than the opposite.

Amile, in particular, is a talented kid who has shown quite a bit at both ends of the floor. Does he need to be stronger with the ball? Of course. Are his defensive rotations perfect? No. But his length presents a problem defensively and keeps balls alive on the glass, and he's active moving and running the floor. He's a good role player and one that that most coaches would utilize. Not all. K isn't the only one that goes with a tight bench -- Thad Matta for example -- but teams like Kansas and Indiana and Syracuse as examples -- are playing kids like Amile (or even kids less talented than Amile) more consistently. Does that mean they'll beat us? Of course not. But I think they're better prepared as a team to have more options battle-tested come March.

As for the seniors, I don't think it's impossible they would improve, but I think, and experience shows by and large, that you do not see drastic improvements in the second half of a senior season for players who have played as much as Seth, Ryan and Mason. The improvement they make will be pretty minimal. And yes, of course I remember how much Brian Zoubek improved in 2010 and I know we'd not have that fourth banner without him. But there's no real comparison to Brian's injury riddled career prior to January 2010 and the limited minutes he'd thus seen prior to then and Seth, Ryan or Mason.

As for Marshall, I suppose you are right, although two weeks ago, he was supposed to get minutes before his orthotic gave him issues. Now we're just writing off the season? These two weeks -- especially how we've played which frankly, isn't that impressive -- aren't enough to just put him completely behind, are they?

Chicago 1995
01-03-2013, 01:14 PM
Not to be unpleasant, but if I remember correctly you were of the opinion preseason that Duke was perhaps not even a top 25 team. So why not just let the team continue to exceed your expectations?

Why not let them continue to exceed expectations? I'm happy to do so. That being said, I always want us to continue to improve and point toward March, not peak in December -- whether that's as the #1 team in the country or as something far less.

Quinn's growth and Mason's growth have far exceeded my expectations, and I didn't think running the gauntlet of our November-December schedule possible. I don't think many did. Just because I was wrong about those two -- and as a result the team -- doesn't mean I can't be concerned about our future growth or prospects heading toward the ACC and into March.

Lar77
01-03-2013, 01:15 PM
It should be noted that, for all the complaints about the way we won last night, that win actually moved us UP two spots in Pomeroy's rankings (from 4th to 2nd). We dropped from the #1 offense to the #3 offense, but jumped from #11 to #7 defensively. And we're now just .0003 points behind Indiana for the #1 spot. So Pomeroy thinks it was a pretty good win, even if it wasn't a thing of beauty offensively.

I concur with SCMatt with regard to Cook's mastery of the stallball offense. I take great pleasure in watching a guy with such complete command of his dribble and the ability to force the other team to chase him around the court for 30 seconds. Just really impressive. That he was also able to finish with layups at the end was equally impressive. It's nice having a guy who has the ballhandling skills and court awareness to make those plays. As he keeps getting better, so will this team.

Tough night for 2 of our 3 seniors. Davidson had a really effective strategy of sending double-team help from the baseline on Mason. Mason only beat it a couple of times (perhaps only even once), and committed several turnovers. Hopefully that's just a one-game blip for him in what has otherwise been a fantastic season. And aside from the 6 turnovers (which is of course very bad), a 10 point, 7 rebound, 2 assist, 3 block, 2 steal game (on 4-7 shooting from the field and 2-3 from the line) is not a bad line for a worst game of the season. Curry missed several open shots, and had more trouble than usual getting off screens (Davidson was very physical with cutters, making Curry's job much more difficult). I don't think he played poorly, just didn't hit some of the shots he often hits. Bad shooting nights can happen. He did chip in with 3 assists, so it wasn't a complete bagel from him.

It also didn't hurt that, on a night when Curry and Sulaimon struggled offensively, Thornton had perhaps his best offensive game of the season. He hit 2 big 3s in the second half. He's developing into the Nate James role of solid defense and hitting corner 3s (like James, it seems the corner 3 is really the only one he shoots well, but he definitely shoots that one well). It's nice that we have 5 guys capable of scoring 15+ on any given night. And when we get 10 from Thornton (on just 5 FG attempts), that's just icing on the cake.

And not to be lost, the player of the game had to go to Kelly in my mind. He led the team in scoring and rebounds, and hit a bunch of big shots for us in leading us to victory.

As for the not so good:

The rebounding woes returned in full form last night. Davidson is not a good rebounding team, yet we allowed 12 offensive rebounds and were outrebounded overall. Thankfully, Davidson shot very poorly from the outside (they missed several open 3s), and our interior didn't give them much room on the inside. We really aren't good at boxing out - even when we aren't getting caught in rotations. It hasn't bitten us yet, but it's something to keep an eye on as we move forward. If/when we do lose a key game, I suspect our rebound struggles are going to play a part in it.

And offensively, we've got to do better. Davidson played hard, but they are the #165 rated defense in the country according to Pomeroy. They should not be holding us to 29 first half points, especially when we shoot 45.7% from the field, 45.5% from 3, and 90.9% from the line. They should not be limiting us to 5 assists versus 12 turnovers. Hopefully this was just a hangover game, and we bounce back in ACC play.

CDu, thanks for your observations. Kelly had a very effective game (including keeping De'mon [sp?] Brooks in single digit points despite double digit rebounds). Cook's stall effectiveness was great as well. I have loved Tyler's intensity and he has become much better as a ball handler this year. I can't get too wound up in comparative Pomeroy ratings - they are indicators, but only tell part of a story.

Davidson played us well, showed more hustle, and truly bothered our game in the first half from Mason's turnovers to missing breakaways. The first half was very frustrating. But in the second half it was a different game - we held them to 21 points! Even when they made a little run back, Cook took over and the game was just played out.

superdave
01-03-2013, 01:22 PM
What is your definition of pressing? It seems to me like one of those overused words that, at its core, has no valid meaning.

By context (here and elsewhere), it seems to mean "trying, but failing badly." Nothing wrong with trying. And you don't know about the fail badly part except with 20/20 hindsight. So how can you avoid pressing, except by not trying?

I'm not persuaded it's anything but a ex post facto description, not something that can be recognized in the moment, before the shot goes up.

By pressing I mean trying to hard to force the action, as opposed to playing within the team and within the flow of the game. Sometimes you want to play well so badly that your reactions are too quick, and not measured enough, or you go one dribble too far.

I thought Seth wanted to play well in front of the home crowd and ended up playing over-eager for the first 10 minutes of the game, then never found much of a rhythm.

OldPhiKap
01-03-2013, 01:26 PM
By pressing I mean trying to hard to force the action, as opposed to playing within the team and within the flow of the game. Sometimes you want to play well so badly that your reactions are too quick, and not measured enough, or you go one dribble too far.

I thought Seth wanted to play well in front of the home crowd and ended up playing over-eager for the first 10 minutes of the game, then never found much of a rhythm.

I agree with this (although he did bottom a few nice shots). The whole team looked leg-tired, and Davidson is (to quote Jay Bilas's pregame tweet) "better than their record indicates." Well-coached, good talent, brought their "We are playing Duke A-Game." Crowd obviously had a large Davidson contingency.

On to Wake.

Edouble
01-03-2013, 01:32 PM
You are “mis-remembering” the play.

Seth accepts Mason’s screen and takes both Mason and his defender with him. Kelly’s defender slides off Ryan to pick up Mason rolling to the basket. Seth keeps his dribble alive while Kelly gets to the 3-point line. Seth finds a wide open Kelly for the three. 41-29 Duke, Timeout Davidson.
No way Kelly gets that open if Davidson isn’t concerned about Seth’s driving/scoring range.

In addition, your larger point -- that Seth was a bit of a black hole – is still incorrect. Instead, Seth kept his head up the whole play and was smart enough to let the play develop and made the right pass.

Maybe the basketball deities are punishing you for your ostentatious prediction that you posted in the pre/in-game thread:

I think Seth is a black hole. We can go back and forth 'til the cows come home on that one. People around here like stats, so I would point to Seth's assist numbers on the year. They are way below any of the other starters. I'm not talking about that one play, but on the year as a whole. It's not actually a stat thing for me this year, I am just not crazy about his play. Those mouth guard shenanigans are also grossing me out to no end, so I could be biased. I'm really trying to get behind the guy, but with the saliva, the airballs, the missed layups, and Thornton's tough play, Tyler is just winning me over.

I think this team is ridiculously talented. Like some other posters around here, I was disappointed by the slow start. I don't think being up 15 by half time is unreasonable. Jay Bilas, who is brutally honest, noted that Duke was being "outcompeted" in the first half. We won by 17, I think this team is talented enough to be up by that much by half time. I think the squad could use a line-up shakeup, because we're not playing up to our potential. No, Tyler doesn't have a brother in the NBA, but I'm happy with him getting a chance to start. I get the impression that you think I'm being anti-Duke by saying stuff like that. It's actually very pro-Duke, and the kind of thing that Coach K encourages... brutal honesty. In fact, that's probably where Jay got it from.

If the basketball deities actually pay such close attention to my actions... does anyone out there have a live chicken?

Billy Dat
01-03-2013, 01:42 PM
Those mouth guard shenanigans are also grossing me out to no end, so I could be biased.

Classic! His brother does the same thing! Dell and Sonya need to send us some pacifier shots.

Newton_14
01-03-2013, 01:53 PM
I think Seth is a black hole. We can go back and forth 'til the cows come home on that one. People around here like stats, so I would point to Seth's assist numbers on the year. They are way below any of the other starters. I'm not talking about that one play, but on the year as a whole. It's not actually a stat thing for me this year, I am just not crazy about his play. Those mouth guard shenanigans are also grossing me out to no end, so I could be biased. I'm really trying to get behind the guy, but with the saliva, the airballs, the missed layups, and Thornton's tough play, Tyler is just winning me over.

I think this team is ridiculously talented. Like some other posters around here, I was disappointed by the slow start. I don't think being up 15 by half time is unreasonable. Jay Bilas, who is brutally honest, noted that Duke was being "outcompeted" in the first half. We won by 17, I think this team is talented enough to be up by that much by half time. I think the squad could use a line-up shakeup, because we're not playing up to our potential. No, Tyler doesn't have a brother in the NBA, but I'm happy with him getting a chance to start. I get the impression that you think I'm being anti-Duke by saying stuff like that. It's actually very pro-Duke, and the kind of thing that Coach K encourages... brutal honesty. In fact, that's probably where Jay got it from.

If the basketball deities actually pay such close attention to my actions... does anyone out there have a live chicken?

The season stats below show great balance amongst the 5 starters on offense. Granted Seth missed one game, but still the shot attempts are very evenly distributed. Seth is having a tremendous year. I see no evidence of him being a black hole, using stats or the eye test. Seth is not in a role of distributor. His job is to score, and he has done that very effectively and very efficiently without being a ball hog. I don't understand what leads you to that impression, but maybe the mouthguard thing is causing you to see something negative that really isn't there imo.



2012-13 Season Totals







Field Goals

3-Point FGs

Free Throws

Rebounds









Player

GP

GS

Min

FG-FGA

FG-FGA

FT-FTA

OR-DR

TR

PF-DQ

Ast

TO

Blk

Stl

Pts



Mason Plumlee (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2740)

12

12

396

81-127

0-0

72-104

38-101

139

27-1

20

29

19

6

234



Seth Curry (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2736)

11

11

331

60-120

26-62

42-51

4-16

20

18-0

10

14

3

8

188



Ryan Kelly (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2738)

12

12

352

50-112

15-35

34-44

22-42

64

27-2

21

10

23

10

149



Rasheed Sulaimon (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2751)

12

12

367

52-121

19-49

23-30

8-31

39

23-0

33

18

1

13

146



Quinn Cook (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2745)

12

10

385

44-101

19-38

22-27

5-43

48

31-0

71

30

2

22

129



Tyler Thornton (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2743)

12

3

263

13-33

11-30

4-7

3-26

29

33-1

37

19

1

22

41



Amile Jefferson (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2752)

11


107

15-29

0-0

8-15

10-11

21

11-0

3

7

4

4

38



Josh Hairston (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2741)

12


126

9-24

0-1

4-7

11-16

27

26-2

3

4

2

1

22



Alex Murphy (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2747)

10


59

9-21

3-9

1-2

2-13

15

5-0


4

3

2

22



Todd Zafirovski (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2744)

3


11

2-3

0-0

1-4

1-1

2

2-0



1


5



Marshall Plumlee (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2748)

2


3

0-1

0-0

0-0

1-1

2

0-0



1





Team







13-18

31



1






Totals

12



335-692

93-224

211-291

117-310

433

203-6

184

142

60

88

974



Opponents

12



280-722

63-203

130-184

150-274

388

239-3

108

180

30

64

753

Newton_14
01-03-2013, 01:57 PM
Here is the second table. It would not let me put both tables in the same post due to character limit.



2012-13 Season Averages




Player
GP
GS
MPG
FG%
3FG%
FT%
RPG
APG
BPG
SPG
PPG


Mason Plumlee (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2740)
12
12
33.0
.638
.000
.692
11.6
1.7
1.6
.5
19.5


Seth Curry (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2736)
11
11
30.1
.500
.419
.824
1.8
.9
.3
.7
17.1


Ryan Kelly (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2738)
12
12
29.3
.446
.429
.773
5.3
1.8
1.9
.8
12.4


Rasheed Sulaimon (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2751)
12
12
30.6
.430
.388
.767
3.3
2.8
.1
1.1
12.2


Quinn Cook (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2745)
12
10
32.1
.436
.500
.815
4.0
5.9
.2
1.8
10.8


Tyler Thornton (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2743)
12
3
21.9
.394
.367
.571
2.4
3.1
.1
1.8
3.4


Amile Jefferson (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2752)
11
0
9.7
.517
.000
.533
1.9
.3
.4
.4
3.5


Josh Hairston (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2741)
12
0
10.5
.375
.000
.571
2.3
.3
.2
.1
1.8


Alex Murphy (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2747)
10
0
5.9
.429
.333
.500
1.5
.0
.3
.2
2.2


Todd Zafirovski (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2744)
3
0
3.7
.667
.000
.250
.7
.0
.3
.0
1.7


Marshall Plumlee (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2748)
2
0
1.5
.000
.000
.000
1.0
.0
.5
.0
.0


Totals
12


.484
.415
.725
36.1
15.3
5.0
7.3
81.2


Totals
12


.388
.310
.707
32.3
9.0
2.5
5.3
62.8

COYS
01-03-2013, 02:22 PM
I think Seth is a black hole. We can go back and forth 'til the cows come home on that one. People around here like stats, so I would point to Seth's assist numbers on the year. They are way below any of the other starters. I'm not talking about that one play, but on the year as a whole. It's not actually a stat thing for me this year, I am just not crazy about his play. Those mouth guard shenanigans are also grossing me out to no end, so I could be biased. I'm really trying to get behind the guy, but with the saliva, the airballs, the missed layups, and Thornton's tough play, Tyler is just winning me over.

I think this team is ridiculously talented. Like some other posters around here, I was disappointed by the slow start. I don't think being up 15 by half time is unreasonable. Jay Bilas, who is brutally honest, noted that Duke was being "outcompeted" in the first half. We won by 17, I think this team is talented enough to be up by that much by half time. I think the squad could use a line-up shakeup, because we're not playing up to our potential. No, Tyler doesn't have a brother in the NBA, but I'm happy with him getting a chance to start. I get the impression that you think I'm being anti-Duke by saying stuff like that. It's actually very pro-Duke, and the kind of thing that Coach K encourages... brutal honesty. In fact, that's probably where Jay got it from.

If the basketball deities actually pay such close attention to my actions... does anyone out there have a live chicken?

Looking at the stats, though, it seems that Seth has intentionally reduced his role as a playmaker on the team. His assist percentage last year was 16%. This year it has been cut by half plus a little, sitting at 7%. That is low, but it seems that it is low not because he isn't capable of passing, but because he has changed his game to fit the team better. One of his primary forms of scoring is as a spot-up shooter. Spot up shooters rarely rack up assist totals. He is an opportunistic driver to the basket who tends to only go to the hoop when he has a clear lane to take a high percentage shot. It's true he's not driving to kick or driving to dump off an alley oop to Mason (most of the time), but that's because when he does drive, he's doing so precisely because he can get a layup. I think if anything, Seth has shown much more comfort with who he is as a player. His turnover rate has dropped to a Scheyer-like 11% (actually, that's better than Scheyer's sensational 11.5% turnover rate in 2010) from 18% last year. Meanwhile, his FT-rate, fg%, efg% and true shooting percentage are all sitting on career highs.

So basically, Seth has mostly stopped driving into the lane in the hopes of creating something for others (a mediocre skill of his) and instead only drives when he knows he can get a good shot. Similarly, because he has ceded most of the playmaking to Quinn, Rasheed, and (to a slightly lesser but still significant extent) Ryan, he is on the receiving end of passes that allow him to shoot the ball at a high percentage, which is what he does best. Meanwhile, his shot percentage sits only at 22% (meaning that when he is on the floor, he only shoots 22% of the team's total shots). This is basically exactly on par with Mason and Ryan's shot percentages and actually slightly below Rasheed's shot percentage of 22.4%. If he were a total black hole who always plays outside of the offense, his shot percentage would be disproportionately high. The fact that it fits in well with our other scorers means that when he can't get a good shot off, he is playing it safe and passing it off to someone else instead of forcing bad shots (if he were doing this, his true shooting percentage and efg% would be much lower) or turning the ball over trying to make something happen. Also, while he still isn't an ace at delivering entry passes, he gives Mason the ball far more frequently this year. When Mason scores off of a post move following an entry pass from Seth, it's not an assist, but it still is facilitated by Seth. Similarly, whoever is guarding Seth has to stay at home rather than double down on Mason, which makes things easier for Mason in the post.

So yes, his stats related to assists are low, but every other meaningful offensive stat has gone up and gone up significantly. If he were to start trying to be a playmaker again, we'd likely see him take more bad shots and make more turnovers all for an insiginficant improvement in his assist rate. Why make Seth create for others when Quinn, Rasheed, Ryan, and Tyler are already there in that capacity?

http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/player/duke/seth-curry

FerryFor50
01-03-2013, 02:30 PM
Looking at the stats, though, it seems that Seth has intentionally reduced his role as a playmaker on the team. His assist percentage last year was 16%. This year it has been cut by half plus a little, sitting at 7%. That is low, but it seems that it is low not because he isn't capable of passing, but because he has changed his game to fit the team better. One of his primary forms of scoring is as a spot-up shooter. Spot up shooters rarely rack up assist totals. He is an opportunistic driver to the basket who tends to only go to the hoop when he has a clear lane to take a high percentage shot. It's true he's not driving to kick or driving to dump off an alley oop to Mason (most of the time), but that's because when he does drive, he's doing so precisely because he can get a layup. I think if anything, Seth has shown much more comfort with who he is as a player. His turnover rate has dropped to a Scheyer-like 11% (actually, that's better than Scheyer's sensational 11.5% turnover rate in 2010) from 18% last year. Meanwhile, his FT-rate, fg%, efg% and true shooting percentage are all sitting on career highs.

So basically, Seth has mostly stopped driving into the lane in the hopes of creating something for others (a mediocre skill of his) and instead only drives when he knows he can get a good shot. Similarly, because he has ceded most of the playmaking to Quinn, Rasheed, and (to a slightly lesser but still significant extent) Ryan, he is on the receiving end of passes that allow him to shoot the ball at a high percentage, which is what he does best. Meanwhile, his shot percentage sits only at 22% (meaning that when he is on the floor, he only shoots 22% of the team's total shots). This is basically exactly on par with Mason and Ryan's shot percentages and actually slightly below Rasheed's shot percentage of 22.4%. If he were a total black hole who always plays outside of the offense, his shot percentage would be disproportionately high. The fact that it fits in well with our other scorers means that when he can't get a good shot off, he is playing it safe and passing it off to someone else instead of forcing bad shots (if he were doing this, his true shooting percentage and efg% would be much lower) or turning the ball over trying to make something happen. Also, while he still isn't an ace at delivering entry passes, he gives Mason the ball far more frequently this year. When Mason scores off of a post move following an entry pass from Seth, it's not an assist, but it still is facilitated by Seth. Similarly, whoever is guarding Seth has to stay at home rather than double down on Mason, which makes things easier for Mason in the post.

So yes, his stats related to assists are low, but every other meaningful offensive stat has gone up and gone up significantly. If he were to start trying to be a playmaker again, we'd likely see him take more bad shots and make more turnovers all for an insiginficant improvement in his assist rate. Why make Seth create for others when Quinn, Rasheed, Ryan, and Tyler are already there in that capacity?

http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/player/duke/seth-curry

And actually, at least once last night, he drove the lane and kicked out to an open shooter.

I think Seth knows exactly what he is doing. I'd much rather see him shoot than pass any day.

FerryFor50
01-03-2013, 02:32 PM
Here is the second table. It would not let me put both tables in the same post due to character limit.



2012-13 Season Averages




Player
GP
GS
MPG
FG%
3FG%
FT%
RPG
APG
BPG
SPG
PPG


Mason Plumlee (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2740)
12
12
33.0
.638
.000
.692
11.6
1.7
1.6
.5
19.5


Seth Curry (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2736)
11
11
30.1
.500
.419
.824
1.8
.9
.3
.7
17.1


Ryan Kelly (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2738)
12
12
29.3
.446
.429
.773
5.3
1.8
1.9
.8
12.4


Rasheed Sulaimon (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2751)
12
12
30.6
.430
.388
.767
3.3
2.8
.1
1.1
12.2


Quinn Cook (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2745)
12
10
32.1
.436
.500
.815
4.0
5.9
.2
1.8
10.8


Tyler Thornton (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2743)
12
3
21.9
.394
.367
.571
2.4
3.1
.1
1.8
3.4


Amile Jefferson (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2752)
11
0
9.7
.517
.000
.533
1.9
.3
.4
.4
3.5


Josh Hairston (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2741)
12
0
10.5
.375
.000
.571
2.3
.3
.2
.1
1.8


Alex Murphy (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2747)
10
0
5.9
.429
.333
.500
1.5
.0
.3
.2
2.2


Todd Zafirovski (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2744)
3
0
3.7
.667
.000
.250
.7
.0
.3
.0
1.7


Marshall Plumlee (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=2748)
2
0
1.5
.000
.000
.000
1.0
.0
.5
.0
.0


Totals
12


.484
.415
.725
36.1
15.3
5.0
7.3
81.2


Totals
12


.388
.310
.707
32.3
9.0
2.5
5.3
62.8






I'd take a "black hole" jump shooter hitting at 50% from the field any day of the week.

COYS
01-03-2013, 02:40 PM
And actually, at least once last night, he drove the lane and kicked out to an open shooter.

I think Seth knows exactly what he is doing. I'd much rather see him shoot than pass any day.

Totally agree. That was a nice play Seth made last night. But more times than not, we'd all rather Quinn or Rasheed be the one who drives and Seth be the one who's taking the shot

sagegrouse
01-03-2013, 03:01 PM
Totally agree. That was a nice play Seth made last night. But more times than not, we'd all rather Quinn or Rasheed be the one who drives and Seth be the one who's taking the shot

I agree that Rasheed and Quinn are capable drivers, and getting better. OTOH Seth HAS to drive the basket on occasion. Otherwise, he'll get crowded on the perimeter. Also, his teardrops and circus shots, honed against Dad and Steph in the backyard, are fun to see -- when they work.

sagegrouse

COYS
01-03-2013, 03:04 PM
I agree that Rasheed and Quinn are capable drivers, and getting better. OTOH Seth HAS to drive the basket on occasion. Otherwise, he'll get crowded on the perimeter. Also, his teardrops and circus shots, honed against Dad and Steph in the backyard, are fun to see -- when they work.

sagegrouse

I mentioned in my earlier post that he hasn't stopped driving, he just drives more selectively . . . usually when he sees an opening to score with one of those pat tented Curry shots. A lot of players use the threat of driving to set up their jumpers. Seth is the other way around. He has become quite adept at using the threat of his shot to get his defender in the air and out of position.

So, basically, we agree =).

CDu
01-03-2013, 03:09 PM
I think Seth is a black hole. We can go back and forth 'til the cows come home on that one. People around here like stats, so I would point to Seth's assist numbers on the year. They are way below any of the other starters. I'm not talking about that one play, but on the year as a whole. It's not actually a stat thing for me this year, I am just not crazy about his play. Those mouth guard shenanigans are also grossing me out to no end, so I could be biased. I'm really trying to get behind the guy, but with the saliva, the airballs, the missed layups, and Thornton's tough play, Tyler is just winning me over.

I think this team is ridiculously talented. Like some other posters around here, I was disappointed by the slow start. I don't think being up 15 by half time is unreasonable. Jay Bilas, who is brutally honest, noted that Duke was being "outcompeted" in the first half. We won by 17, I think this team is talented enough to be up by that much by half time. I think the squad could use a line-up shakeup, because we're not playing up to our potential. No, Tyler doesn't have a brother in the NBA, but I'm happy with him getting a chance to start. I get the impression that you think I'm being anti-Duke by saying stuff like that. It's actually very pro-Duke, and the kind of thing that Coach K encourages... brutal honesty. In fact, that's probably where Jay got it from.

If the basketball deities actually pay such close attention to my actions... does anyone out there have a live chicken?

Curry is certainly passing less. But if you're disappointed in a guy who is averaging 16.2 ppg, on 48.1% fg (40.6% 3pt!) and 82.4% ft, then I think you're either expecting too much of a player or just guilty of some sort of bias. Coach K said before the season that the plan was to Curry no longer as a distributor but rather as a scorer. So the gameplan coming in was to try to create scoring opportunities for Curry, and let Curry focus on being a scorer.

I think he's done that to an absolutely fantastic clip. Despite being our primary perimeter scoring threat, he has the highest FG% of any perimeter player on the team. Further, he's been able to score either as a catch and shoot player, or on isolation plays. His progression offensively has been, in my opinion, absolutely fantastic.

Thornton has done his job terrifically well this year, too. Like Curry, he's no longer burdened with PG responsibilities for much of the game. He's just asked to play defense, and find open spots on the court. And when called upon, he's asked to hit open 3 pointers. He's hitting those 3s at a 39% rate, which is fabulous. But his offensive role is entirely that of an afterthought.

Curry, on the other hand, is our primary perimeter scoring threat. Take him out of the lineup, and it puts a TON of pressure on the rest of the team offensively. I think Coach K loves the balance that Curry provides the offense. The combination of Curry along with the other two seniors in an inside/outside attack makes us a very dynamic offense, even ignoring the attacking skills of Cook and Sulaimon.

Kedsy
01-03-2013, 03:09 PM
I think the squad could use a line-up shakeup, because we're not playing up to our potential.

I think if it ain't broke, don't fix it. I also think you'd be surprised how much worse our offense would be if Tyler played 30+ minutes and Seth only 20. Seth's offensive rating is 119.8, even after the poor showing against Davidson. Tyler's offensive rating is 106.3, even after his best offensive showing of the year. And while I agree Tyler is a better defensive player than Seth, I think (a) Seth's defense is much improved over last year; and (b) Tyler's foul rate (over 5 fouls per 40 minutes) would be problematic if he received more minutes. If he was forced to play in a manner in which he fouled less, his defense might not be significantly better than Seth's.

To your main point, my definition of a "black hole" is someone who doesn't give the ball up once he gets it. That's not Seth. If he gets the ball in good shooting position and he's open, he shoots. That's what he's supposed to do. If he gets the ball and he's not in good shooting position or he's not open, he passes around the perimeter to another guard who will re-start the play. In other words, just because Seth isn't getting assists doesn't mean he shoots every time he gets the ball. So by my definition he's not a black hole. Your definition may vary.

Finally, I realize several of our players are shooting well from 3-land right now, but if you look at their shooting forms they are all bound to slump. Only Seth has form good enough to be reliable on a consistent basis. In other words, Tyler, Quinn, Rasheed and Ryan can make their shots when they're wide open. Seth is our only real shooter (plus maybe Ryan, but that flat shot is subject to streaks, as we saw early in the season when he couldn't buy a three). And it wouldn't make sense to me to bench our only true shooting threat.

vick
01-03-2013, 03:29 PM
I think if it ain't broke, don't fix it. I also think you'd be surprised how much worse our offense would be if Tyler played 30+ minutes and Seth only 20.

I believe this is the complete list of players who have had an effective FG% (FG% adjusted for threes being worth more than twos) above 0.580 (where Seth sits now) while averaging 15 points a game (Seth is at 16.2) under Coach K:



Year Player FG FGA 3P eFG% Pts/G
1985 Mark Alarie 206 352 0 0.585 15.9
1988 Kevin Strickland 213 404 55 0.595 16.1
1990 Alaa Abdelnaby 217 350 0 0.620 15.1
1991 Christian Laettner 271 471 18 0.594 19.8
1992 Christian Laettner 254 442 54 0.636 21.5
1993 Grant Hill 185 320 4 0.584 18.0
1996 Chris Collins 155 332 79 0.586 16.3
1999 Elton Brand 255 411 0 0.620 17.7
1999 Trajan Langdon 191 413 112 0.598 17.3
2000 Shane Battier 190 383 79 0.599 17.4
2001 Jason Williams 285 603 132 0.582 21.6
2001 Shane Battier 251 533 124 0.587 19.9
2002 Carlos Boozer 230 346 0 0.665 18.2
2002 Mike Dunleavy 218 451 88 0.581 17.3
2005 Shelden Williams 191 328 0 0.582 15.5
2006 Shelden Williams 237 410 2 0.580 18.8
2011 Kyrie Irving 55 104 18 0.615 17.5


There's an awful lot of All-Americans on that list. Obviously it's hard to tell whether these numbers will hold up over an ACC season (though Duke's SOS so far is probably reasonably comparable to the conference schedule), but I cannot imagine the team being improved by taking substantial minutes from Seth.

Lar77
01-03-2013, 03:31 PM
I think if it ain't broke, don't fix it. I also think you'd be surprised how much worse our offense would be if Tyler played 30+ minutes and Seth only 20. Seth's offensive rating is 119.8, even after the poor showing against Davidson. Tyler's offensive rating is 106.3, even after his best offensive showing of the year. And while I agree Tyler is a better defensive player than Seth, I think (a) Seth's defense is much improved over last year; and (b) Tyler's foul rate (over 5 fouls per 40 minutes) would be problematic if he received more minutes. If he was forced to play in a manner in which he fouled less, his defense might not be significantly better than Seth's.

To your main point, my definition of a "black hole" is someone who doesn't give the ball up once he gets it. That's not Seth. If he gets the ball in good shooting position and he's open, he shoots. That's what he's supposed to do. If he gets the ball and he's not in good shooting position or he's not open, he passes around the perimeter to another guard who will re-start the play. In other words, just because Seth isn't getting assists doesn't mean he shoots every time he gets the ball. So by my definition he's not a black hole. Your definition may vary.

Finally, I realize several of our players are shooting well from 3-land right now, but if you look at their shooting forms they are all bound to slump. Only Seth has form good enough to be reliable on a consistent basis. In other words, Tyler, Quinn, Rasheed and Ryan can make their shots when they're wide open. Seth is our only real shooter (plus maybe Ryan, but that flat shot is subject to streaks, as we saw early in the season when he couldn't buy a three). And it wouldn't make sense to me to bench our only true shooting threat.

Edouble, what does not playing to our potential mean? We're 13-0 against a very tough non-conference schedule, ranked first in both polls, went from being considered 2nd or 3rd best in the conference to being the clear favorite. Currently the best odds to win the whole enchilada. Can we be beaten - of course. Can we get better - probably. Will other teams get better - probably.

Seth has been a key player. Kedsy is spot on If you watch the games, he doesn't get assists because if the shot is not there when it kicks out to him he usually passes it to Quinn who resets. I'm a big Tyler fan for his defense and hustle, but get serious, he should not be seeing more minutes than Seth.

OldPhiKap
01-03-2013, 04:29 PM
If Seth was not doing exactly what was asked of him, would K have named him a co-captain in the last few days?

I don't care if he is a black hole or a doughnut hole. He is a leader on the #1 team in the nation and has his coach's full backing.

Why all the hand-wringing?

Jderf
01-03-2013, 04:39 PM
Why all the hand-wringing?

His assist/mouthgaurd-chewing ratio is abysmal.

Edouble
01-03-2013, 04:54 PM
I think if it ain't broke, don't fix it. I also think you'd be surprised how much worse our offense would be if Tyler played 30+ minutes and Seth only 20.

Tyler doesn't inherit all of Seth's shots just because he gets his minutes though.


Edouble, what does not playing to our potential mean? We're 13-0 against a very tough non-conference schedule, ranked first in both polls, went from being considered 2nd or 3rd best in the conference to being the clear favorite. Currently the best odds to win the whole enchilada. Can we be beaten - of course. Can we get better - probably. Will other teams get better - probably.

Seth has been a key player. Kedsy is spot on If you watch the games, he doesn't get assists because if the shot is not there when it kicks out to him he usually passes it to Quinn who resets. I'm a big Tyler fan for his defense and hustle, but get serious, he should not be seeing more minutes than Seth.

Thank you for asking. I think that Rasheed might be suffering from Grant Hill syndrome and deferring to the upperclassmen to much. I think Quinn, Rasheed, Ryan, and Mason are all more talented offensively and defensively than Seth. Seth, to me, is more along the lines of a DeMarcus, or a Ewing, in that he is a good 3rd option, but not meant to be the man. Talent-wise, I don't think Seth is at the level of a Nolan Smith, Joe Forte, Rasheed Sulaimon.

I think that with all the weapons we have, Quinn should stay the course on his goal of averaging 10 assists a game and score when the opportunity presents itself. I think that if Rasheed and Ryan were getting more of Seth's shots we could be blowing people out of the water from the get-go. Sheed and Ryan have better court vision and are better all around players than Seth. I think either of them could average 16 points a game while moving the ball around crisper and quicker.

I will admit that I was surprised to see how even the distribution of field goal attempts is among the starting five:

Quinn: 110
Seth: 131
Sheed:127
Ryan: 120
Mason: 134

What sticks out to me though is this: with Seth and Sheed averaging 30.2 and 30.6 minutes respectively, Seth has 21 rebounds and 13 assists on the year, Sheed has 46 rebounds and 33 assists on the year. This is with Seth averaging 4.5 points/game more than Sheed. I think Sheed is the more talented player. Give him more shots. Give Ryan more shots. They are matchup nightmares. If you look at the stats blind, I think Seth's stick out among the starting five.

Amile is averaging the same number of rebounds per game as Seth while playing 1/3 of the minutes.

Anyway, I think we are not living up to out potential because we are within a few points of Davidson and Santa Clara at halftime. Yes, these are good teams, and maybe we are more of a second half team, but I think between Quinn, Rasheed, Ryan, and Mason, we have the talent to put a serious hurt on people from the tip. I think that these 4 guys are our most talented and lethal players and there may be someone else on Duke's roster to better compliment those four guys. I'm talking fist, being more than the sum of individual parts, etc. etc. which I don't think we are yet. If we were, with the talent we have, we could make D-U-K-E spell F-E-A-R. We are #1 and undefeated, but I am not sure that we are scaring the pants off of anyone yet.

I am curious to see the start of the Wake game. On paper, I think we should really destroy them.

Kedsy
01-03-2013, 05:21 PM
Tyler doesn't inherit all of Seth's shots just because he gets his minutes though.

Of course not, but since the only thing on offense that Tyler does especially well is shoot wide open, unguarded, nobody-within-ten-feet-of-him threes, the offense is much more limited when he's in there.


I think that with all the weapons we have, Quinn should stay the course on his goal of averaging 10 assists a game and score when the opportunity presents itself. I think that if Rasheed and Ryan were getting more of Seth's shots we could be blowing people out of the water from the get-go. Sheed and Ryan have better court vision and are better all around players than Seth. I think either of them could average 16 points a game while moving the ball around crisper and quicker.

Seth is a significantly better scorer than Quinn and also a better scorer than Rasheed at this point in Rasheed's career.

Right now, Seth's offensive rating is 119.8. Ryan's is a little better at 123.0. Quinn's is a fair amount worse at 113.5. Rasheed's is significantly worse at 108.7. Assuming Rasheed's offensive efficiency stayed the same as it is, then giving Seth's shots to him would actually have the opposite effect than you envision.


What sticks out to me though is this: with Seth and Sheed averaging 30.2 and 30.6 minutes respectively, Seth has 21 rebounds and 13 assists on the year, Sheed has 46 rebounds and 33 assists on the year. This is with Seth averaging 4.5 points/game more than Sheed. I think Sheed is the more talented player. Give him more shots. Give Ryan more shots. They are matchup nightmares. If you look at the stats blind, I think Seth's stick out among the starting five.

I think when I look at the stats Seth does stick out -- as our best perimeter shooter, hands down:



Player eFG% "true" FG%
------ ---- ----------
Seth 58.0 62.4
Ryan 53.3 58.0
Quinn 54.0 57.9
Rasheed 49.2 53.4


Assuming Seth's only shooting good, open shots, why would you want to take shots away from him to give to worse shooters. It doesn't make sense.


Anyway, I think we are not living up to out potential because we are within a few points of Davidson and Santa Clara at halftime. Yes, these are good teams, and maybe we are more of a second half team, but I think between Quinn, Rasheed, Ryan, and Mason, we have the talent to put a serious hurt on people from the tip. I think that these 4 guys are our most talented and lethal players and there may be someone else on Duke's roster to better compliment those four guys.

First of all, if being close at halftime to a top 80 team means a team's not living up to its potential, then I doubt any team in the history of college basketball has lived up to its potential. More to the point, if you look at the skillsets of Quinn, Rasheed, Ryan, and Mason, the best complementary player would seem to be a deadly outside shooter. Which is Seth, not Tyler or Amile or anybody else on the roster.

Without a great outside shooter on the floor, opponents could simply pack it in to stop Mason's inside game and stop Quinn and Rasheed from driving and basically dare Ryan to beat them from the three-point line. That's probably what they'd do if Tyler or Amile was the fifth guy, but they can't do it when Seth is on the floor.

vick
01-03-2013, 05:25 PM
I think that if Rasheed and Ryan were getting more of Seth's shots we could be blowing people out of the water from the get-go. Sheed and Ryan have better court vision and are better all around players than Seth. I think either of them could average 16 points a game while moving the ball around crisper and quicker.


I cannot imagine how taking shots away from someone who averages 1.16 points per shot and giving them to two shooters who average 0.98 and 1.07 would lead to an improvement in the offense. Most people get less efficient if forced to carry a greater part of the offensive load.

AtlDuke72
01-03-2013, 06:02 PM
Someone wants to sit Seth (16 points a game) and replace him with Thornton? This must be a joke. Thornton has a role, but it certainly isn't as a starting guard.

mgtr
01-03-2013, 06:39 PM
OK, I am seriously confused. We have a serious shooter, one of the best in a number of years, but we should sit him in place of a very good defensive player? I think somebody has been drinking the UNC Koolaid! Why don't we take out Plumlee and Kelly while we are at it. This is just nutty George! Here is a guy who is injured, and hobbles around and scores 31 points in the last game. Bench him! He is showing up the rest of the team! Now, he didn't play his normal game last night (but MP2 and Sheed had off nights as well), so, he stopped shooting and passed more.

bedeviled
01-03-2013, 07:09 PM
I think that these 4 guys are our most talented and lethal players and there may be someone else on Duke's roster to better compliment those four guys.I appreciate that you expressed your reasoning for this view, but you didn't expound on how (or who) someone else would be a better complement than Seth. I echo Kedsy's opinion that an outside shooter is an ideal complement on the offensive side as it GREATLY helps with the spacing and firepower, both of which are essentially required by the Duke offense.

EDIT: Oops. Nevermind. I re-read your post, and it appears that you want to give his shots to the other 4, not to a new starter. In this case, I really, really agree with Kedsy. 4 vs 5 isn't very fun. If the other player is a total non-shooter, they just double Mason every play.

timmy c
01-03-2013, 07:15 PM
I get the impression that you think I'm being anti-Duke by saying stuff like that. It's actually very pro-Duke, and the kind of thing that Coach K encourages... brutal honesty.

I do not think you are being anti-Duke. I do, however, think your suggestion to sit Seth is illogical. (See excellent arguments from Newton 14, Kedsy, Vick , and Lar77) More importantly, Coach K clearly disagrees with your assessment, otherwise he would be playing Seth less.

Monmouth77
01-03-2013, 07:26 PM
I like Josh, but he's nowhere near an upperclass Lance Thomas. Lance was good enough to start more than 100 games in his Duke career. Josh will be lucky to start 5 by the time his career ends.

The essence of my post had more to do with Josh's value as a toughness substitution in the front-court. I certainly don't think Josh has Lance's upside -- he won't play a minute in the NBA. And Lance had a nice senior season where he did shoot some jumpers and put the ball on the floor a bit, adding to his all around game. But the comparison is nowhere near as lopsided as a 100:5 game started ratio sounds.

I think you'll agree that Hairston has had (and will have next year) a wee bit more frontcourt talent around him than Lance did.

Saratoga2
01-03-2013, 07:31 PM
Lots of reasons. Foul trouble (2004 vs. UConn). The flu (2008 vs WVa, reportedly). Injuries (Ryan Kelly last year). Legs (2005 vs. MSU). Matchups (2002 vs. Indiana, 2003 vs. Kansas). Might we be fine with the seven it seems like we're going with? I suppose, but I think we're better served to have our eighth (and maybe even ninth) options more prepared for March. Better to have them ready and not need them than the opposite.

Amile, in particular, is a talented kid who has shown quite a bit at both ends of the floor. Does he need to be stronger with the ball? Of course. Are his defensive rotations perfect? No. But his length presents a problem defensively and keeps balls alive on the glass, and he's active moving and running the floor. He's a good role player and one that that most coaches would utilize. Not all. K isn't the only one that goes with a tight bench -- Thad Matta for example -- but teams like Kansas and Indiana and Syracuse as examples -- are playing kids like Amile (or even kids less talented than Amile) more consistently. Does that mean they'll beat us? Of course not. But I think they're better prepared as a team to have more options battle-tested come March.

As for the seniors, I don't think it's impossible they would improve, but I think, and experience shows by and large, that you do not see drastic improvements in the second half of a senior season for players who have played as much as Seth, Ryan and Mason. The improvement they make will be pretty minimal. And yes, of course I remember how much Brian Zoubek improved in 2010 and I know we'd not have that fourth banner without him. But there's no real comparison to Brian's injury riddled career prior to January 2010 and the limited minutes he'd thus seen prior to then and Seth, Ryan or Mason.

As for Marshall, I suppose you are right, although two weeks ago, he was supposed to get minutes before his orthotic gave him issues. Now we're just writing off the season? These two weeks -- especially how we've played which frankly, isn't that impressive -- aren't enough to just put him completely behind, are they?

When we see game situations where we have a significant lead, let Amile, Alex and Marshall play for the reasons you give. We are somewhat better than we were last year due to the progress of our starters, however, last years loss in the tourney with many of these same players (sans Ryan) makes a case for the development of our bigger wing players and backup center, so they might actually contribute in the tourney.

uh_no
01-03-2013, 07:39 PM
When we see game situations where we have a significant lead, let Amile, Alex and Marshall play for the reasons you give. We are somewhat better than we were last year due to the progress of our starters, however, last years loss in the tourney with many of these same players (sans Ryan) makes a case for the development of our bigger wing players and backup center, so they might actually contribute in the tourney.

I think last year's loss says we need to avoid critical pieces getting injured far more than it says anything about the development of our bench.

If someone isn't ready to contribute now, what makes you think they'll be ready to contribute in 2 months time?

we won the national title but 4 years ago with 4 guys playing 35+. Z played a mere 31. But hey, think how much better we could have been had we played the bench more.

Edouble
01-03-2013, 07:39 PM
First of all, if being close at halftime to a top 80 team means a team's not living up to its potential, then I doubt any team in the history of college basketball has lived up to its potential. More to the point, if you look at the skillsets of Quinn, Rasheed, Ryan, and Mason, the best complementary player would seem to be a deadly outside shooter. Which is Seth, not Tyler or Amile or anybody else on the roster.

I doubt any deadly three point shooter in the history of college basketball was third on his team in 3PT%.

Quinn: .487
Ryan: .462
Seth: .406
Tyler: .394
Rasheed: .380



Which is Seth, not Tyler or Amile or anybody else on the roster.

Seth: .406
Tyler: .394

Look, I'm sure Seth is a better 3 point shooter than Tyler. Hell, he's probably more than 1.2% better, I'll give you that. But, I don't think he's exactly deadly. He doesn't have that ultra quick square and release that Trajan had his senior year. He doesn't draw another team's defense like JJ.

I would call a 40% outside shooter, a great or very good outside shooter... but we have a handful of those on the floor already, hence another one does not fill holes/compliment as well as you suggest.


Without a great outside shooter on the floor, opponents could simply pack it in to stop Mason's inside game and stop Quinn and Rasheed from driving and basically dare Ryan to beat them from the three-point line. That's probably what they'd do if Tyler or Amile was the fifth guy, but they can't do it when Seth is on the floor.

I just disagree with this completely. You are asking for a lot. Stop Quinn and Sheed from driving? Dare Ryan (46% 3 point shooter) to beat them? Tyler is basically a 40% 3 point shooter by the numbers. So is Seth.

When Seth or Tyler are on the floor with the other four starters, either one is the least talented Duke player on the floor. Tyler acts like though and plays tough nosed D. Putting Amile on the floor may be a stretch, or maybe not. I'm not entirely sure what he brings. But if his D is where I think it might be and he can pound the boards, I think that he compliments better and brings what the team needs to the table more than Seth.

With Quinn, Sheed, Ryan, and Mason we have a load of offensive firepower. A little more athleticism, rebounding and defense would benefit the team in my opinion, more than another shooter (see 3PT% above).

Edouble
01-03-2013, 07:48 PM
Someone wants to sit Seth (16 points a game) and replace him with Thornton? This must be a joke. Thornton has a role, but it certainly isn't as a starting guard.

Tyler has stared 25 games at Duke. Not joking.

sagegrouse
01-03-2013, 07:52 PM
I doubt any deadly three point shooter in the history of college basketball was third on his team in 3PT%.

Quinn: .487
Ryan: .462
Seth: .406
Tyler: .394
Rasheed: .380



Seth: .406
Tyler: .394

Look, I'm sure Seth is a better 3 point shooter than Tyler. Hell, he's probably more than 1.2% better, I'll give you that. But, I don't think he's exactly deadly. He doesn't have that ultra quick square and release that Trajan had his senior year. He doesn't draw another team's defense like JJ.

I would call a 40% outside shooter, a great or very good outside shooter... but we have a handful of those on the floor already, hence another one does not fill holes/compliment as well as you suggest.



I just disagree with this completely. You are asking for a lot. Stop Quinn and Sheed from driving? Dare Ryan (46% 3 point shooter) to beat them? Tyler is basically a 40% 3 point shooter by the numbers. So is Seth.

When Seth or Tyler are on the floor with the other four starters, either one is the least talented Duke player on the floor. Tyler acts like though and plays tough nosed D. Putting Amile on the floor may be a stretch, or maybe not. I'm not entirely sure what he brings. But if his D is where I think it might be and he can pound the boards, I think that he compliments better and brings what the team needs to the table more than Seth.

With Quinn, Sheed, Ryan, and Mason we have a load of offensive firepower. A little more athleticism, rebounding and defense would benefit the team in my opinion, more than another shooter (see 3PT% above).

Edouble:

I don't have any problems with your line of reasoning "in the small:" you make some cogent points. I tend to disagree because Seth is playing overall at a high level and sometimes he just goes off and dominates the other team.

But "in the large" your arguments seem faintly ridiculous. Why would you say, "I think we could use a lineup shakeup?" The team is undefeated, ranked number one, and at the top of the statistical rankings. Moreover, we are only playing SIX players, plus Josh for nine minutes. How do you shake that up without getting the same result we have now? And if you think Seth should have 20 minutes and Tyler 30, instead of the other way around, how is that anything but a marginal change, not a "shakeup?" And if you think Amile and Alex should play more, why can't they get off the bench, and what have we seen in there very limited minutes that show they would be more productive than Rasheed or Seth or one of the big guys?

sagegrouse

Edouble
01-03-2013, 08:19 PM
Edouble:

I don't have any problems with your line of reasoning "in the small:" you make some cogent points. I tend to disagree because Seth is playing overall at a high level and sometimes he just goes off and dominates the other team.

But "in the large" your arguments seem faintly ridiculous. Why would you say, "I think we could use a lineup shakeup?" The team is undefeated, ranked number one, and at the top of the statistical rankings. Moreover, we are only playing SIX players, plus Josh for nine minutes. How do you shake that up without getting the same result we have now? And if you think Seth should have 20 minutes and Tyler 30, instead of the other way around, how is that anything but a marginal change, not a "shakeup?" And if you think Amile and Alex should play more, why can't they get off the bench, and what have we seen in there very limited minutes that show they would be more productive than Rasheed or Seth or one of the big guys?

sagegrouse

Sage,

I actually have not mentioned Alex once. I do not think he should play more.

I do not think any of Rasheed's minutes should be taken away.

I think Seth is better coming off the bench with a 6th man's scorer's mentality. I know he's a senior and all, but I think we look sluggish out of the gate and Tyler and possibly Amile give us an edge in shutting down the other team's offense from the tip. An extra few rebounds, a few more heavily contests jump shots, etc. and I think we break open a big lead before there are only ten minutes left in the game. The ranking and undefeated record do not have the last say for me, because clearly this is a team that is being built to excel in March. I think the change can come not just in minutes, but in mindset. I think Mason, Ryan and Sheed should be the top 3 options with Seth as an offensive punch off of the bench. Rebounding has been a problem, 3 point shooting has not... so why not start with better rebounding on the floor and pull some extra shooting off of the bench when needed?

Where Kedsey suggests that Seth's scoring opens things up for others, I think that the other's immense talents open up scoring options for Seth. He was very lightly guarded in his effort against Santa Clara. By lightly guarded, I mean that I notice that he went into the lane uncontested after he beat his man... none of the other defenders wanted to leave their man! And they probably should have b/c Seth had 10 assists on the year at that point. Yes, he had back to back assists last night, but I don't think that sequence really represents Seth's passing over the course of the first 13 games of the year.

I wish I had time to watch the games over again and pick up specific examples with time on the game clock so that I could put up an even more concrete post. I have had this opinion, that one less shooter (Seth) and one more defensive player (Amile/TT) would give an overall positive effect to the team for a few games now. I am also wary of relying on Seth to play the role of a primary scoring option during back to back tournament games, after a full season on his leg. I would be in favor of limiting his role to what we know he can give us.

As far as what I know about Amile off the bench... I don't. My idea is theoretical. I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility for him to have some goods that the team can use (rebounding, defense). I'm thinking Chris Carrawell, freshman year.

vick
01-03-2013, 08:21 PM
When Seth or Tyler are on the floor with the other four starters, either one is the least talented Duke player on the floor. Tyler acts like though and plays tough nosed D. Putting Amile on the floor may be a stretch, or maybe not. I'm not entirely sure what he brings. But if his D is where I think it might be and he can pound the boards, I think that he compliments better and brings what the team needs to the table more than Seth.

With Quinn, Sheed, Ryan, and Mason we have a load of offensive firepower. A little more athleticism, rebounding and defense would benefit the team in my opinion, more than another shooter (see 3PT% above).

You realize this is a completely different argument than what you were saying before though, right? Here you are saying that replacing Seth with Tyler is valuable because of "athleticism" (about which I am skeptical), rebounding (partly true--Seth actually has a slightly higher career offensive rebounding percentage, though Tyler's defensive percentage is a good bit higher), and defense (almost certainly true, both based on numbers like steal percentage, and also the eye test--though I would note that Tyler has a career fouls/40 minutes of 5.4, so it's not completely obvious that his defensive intensity can "scale" to logging consistent major minutes against top-level competition). I don't really agree but I don't think anyone would argue that it's ridiculous that this substitution would be beneficial on defense. But before you were saying that replacing Seth with Tyler wouldn't hurt offensively, and would even help by distributing Seth's shots to less efficient scorers, and that just plain doesn't make sense. I like Thornton tons and am proud he represents the university, but I'm not sure the man does anything superior to Curry offensively; we would clearly lose on that end of the court by reducing Curry's minutes.

By the way, while I think you are totally wrong here, I don't think your position is remotely anti-Duke. Just mistaken.

Wander
01-03-2013, 08:42 PM
I doubt any deadly three point shooter in the history of college basketball was third on his team in 3PT%.

Quinn: .487
Ryan: .462
Seth: .406
Tyler: .394
Rasheed: .380



Jon Scheyer and Andre Dawkins were 3rd and 4th on our national title team. I'm pretty sure there were years when JJ Redick didn't lead Duke in that statistic. You are putting too much emphasis on three point percentage as a stat. Curry is by far our best shooter.

vick
01-03-2013, 08:53 PM
I think Seth is better coming off the bench with a 6th man's scorer's mentality. I know he's a senior and all, but I think we look sluggish out of the gate and Tyler and possibly Amile give us an edge in shutting down the other team's offense from the tip. An extra few rebounds, a few more heavily contests jump shots, etc. and I think we break open a big lead before there are only ten minutes left in the game.

I don't mean to be sharp, and I hope it doesn't seem like people are ganging up on you, but just who do you think Tyler Thornton is? Let's put a few numbers behind this. On defense, Duke has had 506 available rebounds (they've given up 163 ORB while grabbing 343 DRB), so 39 per game. Tyler grabs 10.1% of defensive rebounds available when he's on the floor, where Seth gets 4.8%. So if each played 40 minutes, you'd expect Tyler to average 3.9 (10.1% times 39) DRB and Seth 1.9 DRB. A 30 minute Tyler/20 minute Seth split would average 3.9 combined defensive rebounds vs. 3.4 for a 30 minute Seth/20 minute Tyler split (this is assuming that any boards Tyler picks up that Seth didn't would have gone to the other team, so is probably overly generous to Tyler, actually). Benching a team's most efficient scorer to pick up an extra 0.5 defensive rebounds a game? We're talking about a 6'1" guard here, not Dennis Rodman.

Dukeface88
01-03-2013, 09:05 PM
Jon Scheyer and Andre Dawkins were 3rd and 4th on our national title team. I'm pretty sure there were years when JJ Redick didn't lead Duke in that statistic. You are putting too much emphasis on three point percentage as a stat. Curry is by far our best shooter.

Technically, JJ never lead us in 3-pt%. He lost out to Daniel Ewing his freshman and sophmore year and to Sean Dockery as a junior, while his senior season both Jordan Davidson and Ross Perkins went 1-1.

uh_no
01-03-2013, 09:06 PM
Technically, JJ never lead us in 3-pt%. He lost out to Daniel Ewing his freshman and sophmore year and to Sean Dockery as a junior, while his senior season both Jordan Davidson and Ross Perkins went 1-1.

oh man! that banner may have to come down!

AtlDuke72
01-03-2013, 09:37 PM
Tyler has stared 25 games at Duke. Not joking.

. . . and how did the team do last year when he started most of the season? How are they doing this year? They have 5 different guys who can be the star on any given night. You are entitled to your opinions even though no one else seems to agree with you including Coach K.

Edouble
01-03-2013, 11:40 PM
Jon Scheyer and Andre Dawkins were 3rd and 4th on our national title team. I'm pretty sure there were years when JJ Redick didn't lead Duke in that statistic. You are putting too much emphasis on three point percentage as a stat. Curry is by far our best shooter.

If you read through the original thread, you will find that I was responding to a poster that referred to Curry as a "deadly outside shooter". I was questioning the label of "deadly outside shooter" as it applies to Seth, which is where this specific stat, and really the only relevant stat when assessing one's deadliness as an outside shooter, comes into play. I won't respond to the rest because it's going into some new territory that isn't related to what I wrote, as what I wrote was a specific response to one small part of a large post.

Edouble
01-03-2013, 11:42 PM
I don't mean to be sharp, and I hope it doesn't seem like people are ganging up on you, but just who do you think Tyler Thornton is? Let's put a few numbers behind this. On defense, Duke has had 506 available rebounds (they've given up 163 ORB while grabbing 343 DRB), so 39 per game. Tyler grabs 10.1% of defensive rebounds available when he's on the floor, where Seth gets 4.8%. So if each played 40 minutes, you'd expect Tyler to average 3.9 (10.1% times 39) DRB and Seth 1.9 DRB. A 30 minute Tyler/20 minute Seth split would average 3.9 combined defensive rebounds vs. 3.4 for a 30 minute Seth/20 minute Tyler split (this is assuming that any boards Tyler picks up that Seth didn't would have gone to the other team, so is probably overly generous to Tyler, actually). Benching a team's most efficient scorer to pick up an extra 0.5 defensive rebounds a game? We're talking about a 6'1" guard here, not Dennis Rodman.

Please read the sentence that you quoted again. I referred to Tyler or Amile. Amile is the one that would be bringing us more rebounds if he played more.

vick
01-04-2013, 12:00 AM
Please read the sentence that you quoted again. I referred to Tyler or Amile. Amile is the one that would be bringing us more rebounds if he played more.

This is based on what, exactly, the 10.3% DRB he's posted so far? I have qualms about the sample size of 110 minutes, but nothing we've seen on the court so far justifies believing Amile currently adds a great deal to defensive rebounding (certainly not even close to making up for a difference in offensive rating of 123 vs. 102).

Edouble
01-04-2013, 12:31 AM
You realize this is a completely different argument than what you were saying before though, right? Here you are saying that replacing Seth with Tyler is valuable because of "athleticism" (about which I am skeptical), rebounding (partly true--Seth actually has a slightly higher career offensive rebounding percentage, though Tyler's defensive percentage is a good bit higher), and defense (almost certainly true, both based on numbers like steal percentage, and also the eye test--though I would note that Tyler has a career fouls/40 minutes of 5.4, so it's not completely obvious that his defensive intensity can "scale" to logging consistent major minutes against top-level competition). I don't really agree but I don't think anyone would argue that it's ridiculous that this substitution would be beneficial on defense. But before you were saying that replacing Seth with Tyler wouldn't hurt offensively, and would even help by distributing Seth's shots to less efficient scorers, and that just plain doesn't make sense. I like Thornton tons and am proud he represents the university, but I'm not sure the man does anything superior to Curry offensively; we would clearly lose on that end of the court by reducing Curry's minutes.

By the way, while I think you are totally wrong here, I don't think your position is remotely anti-Duke. Just mistaken.

I appreciate this well thought out post. It seems like a lot of people are jumping in here without having read the whole thread, and I don't have time to write everything out again.

I don't think that this is completely different. My argument was that a line-up shift, either Tyler or Amile, would have a benefit to rebounding, defense, and/or athleticism, depending on if you are talking about Tyler or if you are talking about Amile. I thought that everyone could understand that I meant Amile would bring rebounding, athleticism and defense, with Tyler bringing defense and perhaps a slight upgrade in rebounding and/or athleticism with little drop off in 3 point shooting. This is where I brought up the current roster's 3PT%s and noted that even without Seth on the floor, we have some pretty serious bombers.

The reason I think that the overall offense would be better is because I think that a better defense and rebounding would lead to more transition baskets, easier shots, etc. etc. When it comes down to it, everyone's numbers are in part reflective of the teammates they are playing with and their mindset. Had JJ, since someone brought him up, played with Grant Hill and Jason Williams, instead of Lee Melchionni and Greg Paulus, he probably would have shot about 60% from 3 point range. Now, this is clearly a drastic comparison, but it serves its purpose.

I think that Ryan or Rasheed is more ready to be the man, alongside Mason, than Seth. I think they're the more talented players and I would love for either of those guys to get more shots. My approach is holistic, and I just feel that the 5th starter should serve to enhance Quinn, Sheed, Ryan, and Mason's capabilities, as I think those 4 stand above everyone else on the team with regard to talent and potential (this year).

cptnflash
01-04-2013, 12:32 AM
I doubt any deadly three point shooter in the history of college basketball was third on his team in 3PT%.

Quinn: .487
Ryan: .462
Seth: .406
Tyler: .394
Rasheed: .380

Tyler is basically a 40% 3 point shooter by the numbers. So is Seth.



Edouble - You are making two quantitative mistakes in your assessment of Seth's and Tyler's relative effectiveness as 3-point shooters. First, you're confusing average efficiency with marginal efficiency. Second, you're failing to control for sample size.

Taking the second issue first, you say that Tyler is a 40% 3-point shooter, like Seth. In a very small sample (33 attempts this year alone), you're correct, Tyler has made (almost) 40% of his three's, while Seth has made slightly more than 40% of his. But when you expand the sample to include the past three years (i.e., his entire career at Duke), Tyler is 44 for 125 from three, or 35.2%. Meanwhile, over the same time period (i.e., his entire career at Duke), Seth is 154 for 378, or 40.7%. A 5.5% difference in 3-point shooting percentage is huge in terms of efficiency (0.165 points per possession), and is also statistically significant at a high degree of confidence over such a large sample.

But more importantly, you're ignoring marginal efficiency. In other words, you're assuming that Tyler could maintain the same level of 3-point efficiency if he dramatically increased his 3-point frequency, as he would have to do in order to match Seth's aggregate output. I think that's a highly dubious assumption. Virtually all of Tyler's 3's are of the WIDE open variety (other than a desperation shot-clock beater against Kansas last year in Maui), because he's the least dangerous offensive option whenever he's on the floor with our starters. Other teams practically dare him to shoot, and to his credit, he does shoot when he is left completely open, and makes a decent percentage. Seth, on the other hand, often fires catch-and-shoot 3's after coming off a screen, where he has a split second to get the shot away before a (usually) bigger defender closes on him. Tyler is never put in that position - we don't run offense for him in that way, and it's for a reason.

As a result of being a featured scorer in our offense for much of the past 3 years, Seth has averaged one three point attempt every 6.1 minutes he's on the floor. Meanwhile, as an offensive afterthought, Tyler has taken one three every 10.7 minutes. Tyler would need to increase his 3-point attempt frequency by approximately 75% to match Seth's output. Do you really believe that if Tyler were to almost double his 3-point attempt frequency, his 3-point shooting percentage would stay the same? I don't. I'm pretty sure his efficiency would decline dramatically, because he's not a great shooter. He's just a guy who can hit wide open 3's 35-40% of the time. That's valuable in its own right, but should not be confused with a guy who can consistently hit 40%+ in high usage situations.

Or if you prefer, turn it around. If Seth only ever shot 3's when he was as wide open as Tyler usually is, what would his percentage be? I'm going to guess it would be higher. Much higher. Probably close to whatever he hits in warmups and practice, which has to be over 50%.

In my mind, the real argument in favor of Tyler starting over Seth is that the expected improvement in defensive efficiency would outweight the inevitable loss of offensive efficiency. Given that our offense is better than our defense, I think it's fair to argue that an extra point prevented might be more valuable than an extra point scored. Unfortunately Tyler's foul rate is such that he would have a hard time playing signficantly more minutes without fouling out of a lot of games (five times already this year, Tyler has picked up 3 or more fouls in less than 20 minutes of action, including fouling out in 19 minutes against Santa Clara). Maybe if he knew he was going to play more minutes he would try to curtail his fouling, but if he did that, would he be as effective defensively? Once again, I doubt it.

In this case I think the coaches have it right. Seth is very likely to be a first team All-ACC performer. We need him to play 30+ minutes a game. He's our best outside shooter and our best overall scorer. Tyler is much better suited to being the first guy off the bench, playing an aggressive 20 minutes a game on defense, not having to worry too much about accumulating fouls, and occassionally hitting wide open 3's when the opposing team's defense decides to completely ignore him. I think reversing their roles would hurt both of them, and more importantly, hurt the team.

Edouble
01-04-2013, 12:36 AM
This is based on what, exactly, the 10.3% DRB he's posted so far? I have qualms about the sample size of 110 minutes, but nothing we've seen on the court so far justifies believing Amile currently adds a great deal to defensive rebounding (certainly not even close to making up for a difference in offensive rating of 123 vs. 102).

I noted in a previous post that Seth and Amile are averaging the same number of rebounds, with Seth playing 3x the minutes. Amile appears to have the size and athleticism to crash the boards and play good D. I have qualms about the sample size too.

toooskies
01-04-2013, 12:37 AM
If you read through the original thread, you will find that I was responding to a poster that referred to Curry as a "deadly outside shooter". I was questioning the label of "deadly outside shooter" as it applies to Seth, which is where this specific stat, and really the only relevant stat when assessing one's deadliness as an outside shooter, comes into play. I won't respond to the rest because it's going into some new territory that isn't related to what I wrote, as what I wrote was a specific response to one small part of a large post.

.406 is a higher 3pt% than 3 of Redick's 4 years at Duke. I guess he wasn't a deadly outside shooter either.

I'm not worried about the 3rd ranked offense and 7th ranked defense in the country, nor its senior captain. You shouldn't be either, unless that's what you do for a good time. I like Tyler too, but he's great in his current role with the team.

cptnflash
01-04-2013, 12:38 AM
If you read through the original thread, you will find that I was responding to a poster that referred to Curry as a "deadly outside shooter". I was questioning the label of "deadly outside shooter" as it applies to Seth, which is where this specific stat, and really the only relevant stat when assessing one's deadliness as an outside shooter, comes into play. I won't respond to the rest because it's going into some new territory that isn't related to what I wrote, as what I wrote was a specific response to one small part of a large post.

There are two relevant stats when assessing outside shooting ability - percentage of shots made, and frequency of attempts relative to minutes played. This is where your argument is flawed.

Edouble
01-04-2013, 01:01 AM
.406 is a higher 3pt% than 3 of Redick's 4 years at Duke. I guess he wasn't a deadly outside shooter either.

I'm not worried about the 3rd ranked offense and 7th ranked defense in the country, nor its senior captain. You shouldn't be either, unless that's what you do for a good time. I like Tyler too, but he's great in his current role with the team.

No he was the greatest ever. You should read through the whole sequence of threads to see how we arrived here. You are missing significant context.

Edouble
01-04-2013, 01:09 AM
There are two relevant stats when assessing outside shooting ability - percentage of shots made, and frequency of attempts relative to minutes played. This is where your argument is flawed.

No offense, but I don't know where such a stat is readily available. For that matter, distance from the basket is another important stat. If someone is shooting all their 3s as a half court heave and he's hitting 35%, then he's a brilliant shooter (maybe...).

Don't mean to offend, but this feels a bit tangent-ish to me though, as this path that we are going down is based off of one line from one post. I'll just say that I don't consider Seth to be a "deadly outside shooter". I think that he's a very good shooter, and would benefit our chances in March by having a different role.

vick
01-04-2013, 01:15 AM
I appreciate this well thought out post. It seems like a lot of people are jumping in here without having read the whole thread, and I don't have time to write everything out again.

I don't think that this is completely different. My argument was that a line-up shift, either Tyler or Amile, would have a benefit to rebounding, defense, and/or athleticism, depending on if you are talking about Tyler or if you are talking about Amile. I thought that everyone could understand that I meant Amile would bring rebounding, athleticism and defense, with Tyler bringing defense and perhaps a slight upgrade in rebounding and/or athleticism with little drop off in 3 point shooting. This is where I brought up the current roster's 3PT%s and noted that even without Seth on the floor, we have some pretty serious bombers.

The reason I think that the overall offense would be better is because I think that a better defense and rebounding would lead to more transition baskets, easier shots, etc. etc. When it comes down to it, everyone's numbers are in part reflective of the teammates they are playing with and their mindset. Had JJ, since someone brought him up, played with Grant Hill and Jason Williams, instead of Lee Melchionni and Greg Paulus, he probably would have shot about 60% from 3 point range. Now, this is clearly a drastic comparison, but it serves its purpose.

Yeah, I mean, I do understand where you are coming from, especially after this post, and I don't think it's crazy. If I believed Amile or Thornton were at the sort of defensive level where they could seriously affect rebounding or defensive FG% enough to do this, it'd make sense. It's just that, while I do believe Thornton is pretty clearly a better defender than Curry, it's not enough to offset the loss in offensive efficiency, and from what I've seen of Amile, he's not capable of guarding quality wings at this stage in his career.

I do think you're view of how another shooter like Curry fits into the offense is mistaken, though. Curry is a wonderful complement to Mason, especially with the development of Cook, I think. If you have three guys (Cook, Sulaimon, and Curry) who are strong off the dribble and can make their own shot inside and are credible three point shooters, then defenders are faced with a difficult dilemma when one of these three gets past their guy--break off Mason (leaving him free for a lob or bounce pass inside), Ryan (who can go inside or pop out), or one of the two shooters floating around the outside. I mean, compare the respective offensive roles of this team vs. the end of year 2001 team:

C: Boozer - Plumlee: efficient inside presence (I'm ignoring that Sanders technically started)
PF: Battier - Kelly: some post game, ability to pop for three
SF: Dunleavy - Sulaimon: strong off dribble, ability to hit the three (Dunleavy had more interior game though)
SG: Duhon - Curry: can distribute if necessary, some midrange game, efficient on open threes
PG: Williams - Cook: I mean obviously J-Will was a much better player at this stage, but Cook is a good shooter, and can get to the the rim, though clearly not at the same proficiency

First off bench: James - Thornton: Strong defensive presence, but ability to hurt teams who leave you open

I'm obviously not claiming this year's team is the equal of a team who sent all five starters to the NBA, so don't read me that way. But I do think the offensive structure consists of a group of reasonably complementary players the way it is, and is a fairly vintage Coach K offense.

Li_Duke
01-04-2013, 10:40 AM
Yeah, I mean, I do understand where you are coming from, especially after this post, and I don't think it's crazy. If I believed Amile or Thornton were at the sort of defensive level where they could seriously affect rebounding or defensive FG% enough to do this, it'd make sense. It's just that, while I do believe Thornton is pretty clearly a better defender than Curry, it's not enough to offset the loss in offensive efficiency, and from what I've seen of Amile, he's not capable of guarding quality wings at this stage in his career.

I do think you're view of how another shooter like Curry fits into the offense is mistaken, though. Curry is a wonderful complement to Mason, especially with the development of Cook, I think. If you have three guys (Cook, Sulaimon, and Curry) who are strong off the dribble and can make their own shot inside and are credible three point shooters, then defenders are faced with a difficult dilemma when one of these three gets past their guy--break off Mason (leaving him free for a lob or bounce pass inside), Ryan (who can go inside or pop out), or one of the two shooters floating around the outside. I mean, compare the respective offensive roles of this team vs. the end of year 2001 team:

C: Boozer - Plumlee: efficient inside presence (I'm ignoring that Sanders technically started)
PF: Battier - Kelly: some post game, ability to pop for three
SF: Dunleavy - Sulaimon: strong off dribble, ability to hit the three (Dunleavy had more interior game though)
SG: Duhon - Curry: can distribute if necessary, some midrange game, efficient on open threes
PG: Williams - Cook: I mean obviously J-Will was a much better player at this stage, but Cook is a good shooter, and can get to the the rim, though clearly not at the same proficiency

First off bench: James - Thornton: Strong defensive presence, but ability to hurt teams who leave you open

I'm obviously not claiming this year's team is the equal of a team who sent all five starters to the NBA, so don't read me that way. But I do think the offensive structure consists of a group of reasonably complementary players the way it is, and is a fairly vintage Coach K offense.

I think comparing Williams - Curry (offense) and Duhon - Cook (distributor) would probably be better for your example.

CDu
01-04-2013, 11:04 AM
Yeah, I mean, I do understand where you are coming from, especially after this post, and I don't think it's crazy. If I believed Amile or Thornton were at the sort of defensive level where they could seriously affect rebounding or defensive FG% enough to do this, it'd make sense. It's just that, while I do believe Thornton is pretty clearly a better defender than Curry, it's not enough to offset the loss in offensive efficiency, and from what I've seen of Amile, he's not capable of guarding quality wings at this stage in his career.

I do think you're view of how another shooter like Curry fits into the offense is mistaken, though. Curry is a wonderful complement to Mason, especially with the development of Cook, I think. If you have three guys (Cook, Sulaimon, and Curry) who are strong off the dribble and can make their own shot inside and are credible three point shooters, then defenders are faced with a difficult dilemma when one of these three gets past their guy--break off Mason (leaving him free for a lob or bounce pass inside), Ryan (who can go inside or pop out), or one of the two shooters floating around the outside. I mean, compare the respective offensive roles of this team vs. the end of year 2001 team:

C: Boozer - Plumlee: efficient inside presence (I'm ignoring that Sanders technically started)
PF: Battier - Kelly: some post game, ability to pop for three
SF: Dunleavy - Sulaimon: strong off dribble, ability to hit the three (Dunleavy had more interior game though)
SG: Duhon - Curry: can distribute if necessary, some midrange game, efficient on open threes
PG: Williams - Cook: I mean obviously J-Will was a much better player at this stage, but Cook is a good shooter, and can get to the the rim, though clearly not at the same proficiency

First off bench: James - Thornton: Strong defensive presence, but ability to hurt teams who leave you open

I'm obviously not claiming this year's team is the equal of a team who sent all five starters to the NBA, so don't read me that way. But I do think the offensive structure consists of a group of reasonably complementary players the way it is, and is a fairly vintage Coach K offense.

Dunleavy didn't really have an interior game as a sophomore. In fact, it's debatable whether he ever had an interior game at Duke. His lack of an interior game (on the defensive end) is a big part of why we lost to Indiana in 2002.

In terms of it being a 4-out, 1-in approach, I agree that this team has a similar arrangement. But the similarities probably end there. That's not to say that this team can't win a championship. But the differences are more than the similarities, in my opinion.

vick
01-04-2013, 11:17 AM
Dunleavy didn't really have an interior game as a sophomore. In fact, it's debatable whether he ever had an interior game at Duke. His lack of an interior game (on the defensive end) is a big part of why we lost to Indiana in 2002.

In terms of it being a 4-out, 1-in approach, I agree that this team has a similar arrangement. But the similarities probably end there. That's not to say that this team can't win a championship. But the differences are more than the similarities, in my opinion.

Oh sure, agreed, I hesitated to even make the comparison just because 2001 was a phenomenally talented top 6 (though I specifically said offensive roles--by the way, as a fun surprising fact, Dunleavy actually led the 2002 team in both defensive rebounds and blocks, not that it really changes your point, just shows the limitations of defensive statistics). My only real point is having a fourth real shooter is valuable on offense, especially when you have an efficient interior scorer, and while Tyler has settled nicely into the corner 3 role, he has two non-three point FGs so far this season--that relatively limited offensive skillset would have to hurt your offensive efficiency.