MBB: Duke 75, Wake Forest 70 Post-Game Thread

[JBDuke]

Put your post-game thoughts here.

[NSDukeFan]

Put your post-game thoughts here.

Really nice poised finish and Plumlee was POTY throughout. Nice to get an ACC road win.

[OldPhiKap]

First road win, build from here. Ryan, get well soon.

[Luther]

Put your post-game thoughts here.

The only thing that comes to mind is ssshhhewwwwww!

[burnspbesq]

Any road win is a good win. Wake is back to being a nuisance. One more good recruiting year and they'll be more than a nuisance.

[dukelifer]

Really nice poised finish and Plumlee was POTY throughout. Nice to get an ACC road win.

Road wins are hard. Sheed's shot may have been a big confidence builder. A close win is sometimes better than a blowout. Guys have to make shots with Pressure. Curry fought hard tonight!

[RoyalBlue08]

Road wins aren't often pretty, so I'll take it.

[kmspeaks]

So what do the haters say now, Duke...live by the Plumlee, die by the Plumlee??

[FerryFor50]

Ugly win.

Inconsistent defense and offense.

Plays of the game:

- Cook's "dribble around for eternity and turn it into a layup" play
- amile's steal that led to a Mason to Cook assist/role reversal
- Curry's dagger 3
- Mason's block with less than a min left and Hairston's subsequent save
- Sulaimon's huge pull up to keep the lead
- Mason's overall game

Gut check win. Road victory monkey is officially off our backs.

[sporthenry]

A road win is a road win. Can't say this team won't be tested come tourney time. ACC road wins are tough and Wake has been tough. Would have liked to see some more defense and Duke go on its patented runs but can't complain. Mason played like a man tonight and even hit his FTs but Seth hit the most important shot of the game. Seth reminded me a lot of Scheyer, struggle throughout but not let it affect you as you hit the shot to win the game.

Hopefully this builds some confidence and Duke can win the next couple of games but they will all be tough and nail biting like this one.

[PADukeMom]

I can't believe it took until January 30th for our 1st ACC road win.

[jipops]

Our guys made winning plays when tbey had to be made. Mason was a force offensively. Hairston had a couple valuable hustle plays at the end. Big shot under pressure by Sheed!

[TKG]

Mason was 8-10 from the line.

[Utley]

Survive is the only word that comes to mind for me. Big last 4 minutes - The Curry 3 was the key shot of the game.

While a win is a win, it sure didn't build on the Md game. we need to see consistent performance from Rasheed and Amile at least to keep going forward (I'm taking great games from Seth and Mason as given). I'd like to see Quin show more of the bravado that he shows at home - I still think we feed off him.

Maybe this gets the whole ACC road monkey off the guys back.

[sporthenry]

I can't believe it took until January 30th for our 1st ACC road win.

To be fair, we only had 2 other chances and they happened to be against other top 25 teams sans Kelly.

[davekay1971]

Strong finish after a frustratingly sloppy defensive performance. No complaints at all about our offense - sometimes for guys like Cook and Sulaimon the shots don't fall. But the team did a nice job looking for Mason (excepting a mystifying few minutes toward the end of the game) and Mason delivered again, and again, and again. Typically gutty game by Curry.

The defense in the endgame was outstanding. That was the difference in the game.

[pamtar]

I have two officiating question. First, the double-dribble call on Mason. Are you not allowed to stop the ball by bouncing it off the floor without taking possession? Second, the over-and-back call where Mason chased down a rebound and had his pass deflected to the backcourt where Amile caught it with a foot on the line. If the ball is deflected, even off a pass, does that not give us full court? Thanks in advance for any help provided. I could be completely wrong on both of these but just wanted to clarify.

Otherwise, good road win. It's gotta be hard taking every team's best shot. Way to tough it out and R.K. get well soon...

[vick]

While I'm not going to claim this game was a thing of beauty, the negativity in the in-game thread was kind of over the top. I believe Wake Forest has scored 0.95 points per possession in ACC play to date if my calculations are right. In this game we gave up...1.01 (http://www.scacchoops.com/ViewHDGame.asp?hSchedule=14587&bView=0). Obviously you want to do better, but it was hardly the total train wreck that it was being made out to be. Given that Mason obviously has to play to avoid fouls--I believe three of his four fouls were on the offensive end, and unlike some others I think those were fair calls, though the fourth one was pretty weak I thought--and our best perimeter defender, Sulaimon, was saddled with foul trouble in the first half, I don't think it was horrible. It was just...average.

[Ben1029]

Mason was 8-10 from the line.

Maybe his poor FT shooting for the last month was a prolonged slump.

[-bdbd]

Ugly win.

Inconsistent defense and offense.

Plays of the game:

- Cook's "dribble around for eternity and turn it into a layup" play
- amile's steal that led to a Mason to Cook assist/role reversal
- Curry's dagger 3
- Mason's block with less than a min left and Hairston's subsequent save
- Sulaimon's huge pull up to keep the lead
- Mason's overall game

Gut check win. Road victory monkey is officially off our backs.

Pretty much agree with almost all of the comments so far. But I really thought Seth was the person the rest of the guys were looking for to make something happen at less than 4 minutes and the game tied. He came through, and I thought inspired the others. Yes MP2 had a great box score night, but I find myself about as frustrated as I've ever been at a Devil who just scored 29 points... He plain out simply played just weak D at several key points in the second half, getting beat by (much) lesser players. More than a couple missed "help D" opportunities for him too. The block at the very end was nice though. But he sure went silent down the stretch - I think G-man said with a minute to go that he hadn't scored since the 12-min mark??

Several guys made key plays in the final minute. Gritty, tough win. I don't know how many of these I can take though!! :rolleyes::rolleyes:

[uh_no]

I have two officiating question. First, the double-dribble call on Mason. Are you not allowed to stop the ball by bouncing it off the floor without taking possession? Second, the over-and-back call where Mason chased down a rebound and had his pass deflected to the backcourt where Amile caught it with a foot on the line. If the ball is deflected, even off a pass, does that not give us full court? Thanks in advance for any help provided. I could be completely wrong on both of these but just wanted to clarify.

Otherwise, good road win. It's gotta be hard taking every team's best shot. Way to tough it out and R.K. get well soon...

1) not positive....i think it may be a judgement call
2) all that matters is the last person who touched it, so despite it being tipped, amile was the last person to touch it before the ball went into the backcourt (implied by his standing on the midcourt line)

[FerryFor50]

Pretty much agree with almost all of the comments so far. But I really thought Seth was the person the rest of the guys were looking for to make something happen at less than 4 minutes and the game tied. He came through, and I thought inspird the others. Yes MP2 had a great box score night, but I find myself about as frustrated as I've ever been at a Devil who just scored 29 points... Just weak D at several key points in the second half, getting beat by (much) lesser players. More than a couple missed "help D" opportunities for him too. The block at the very end was nice though. But he sure went silent down the stretch - I think G-man said with a minute to go that he hadn't scored since the 12-min mark??

Several guys made key plays in the final minute. Gritty, tough win. I don't know how many of these I can take though!! :rolleyes::rolleyes:

He had 32! And 9 boards!

I still think he lays off on D to avoid foul trouble. Unfortunately tonight he picked up two on the offensive end and then a real questionable one late that made him even less aggressive in D.

Huge props for two blocks in crunch time when he had four fouls.

[jv001]

Pretty much agree with almost all of the comments so far. But I really thought Seth was the person the rest of the guys were looking for to make something happen at less than 4 minutes and the game tied. He came through, and I thought inspird the others. Yes MP2 had a great box score night, but I find myself about as frustrated as I've ever been at a Devil who just scored 29 points... Just weak D at several key points in the second half, getting beat by (much) lesser players. More than a couple missed "help D" opportunities for him too. The block at the very end was nice though. But he sure went silent down the stretch - I think G-man said with a minute to go that he hadn't scored since the 12-min mark??
Several guys made key plays in the final minute. Gritty, tough win. I don't know how many of these I can take though!! :rolleyes::rolleyes:

This happens when the guards stop looking for your best and only big down low. If they had kept feeding Mason, he would have scored 40points. And it looks like Mason is not playing tight man to man because we don't have our other 6'11 big guy. I don't get all the Mason bashing lately. Man he had a great game. GoDuke!

[sporthenry]

1) not positive....i think it may be a judgement call
2) all that matters is the last person who touched it, so despite it being tipped, amile was the last person to touch it before the ball went into the backcourt (implied by his standing on the midcourt line)

I didn't see #1 with my terrible feed and #2 wasn't very clear but you are correct. It appeared that Amile took one step in the back court and his second step was on the stripe which would have established possession in the front court. But even if his first step was on the line, he was technically in the front court when he jumped b/c both of his feet were in the front court and the ball was also in the front court so therefore, it was the correct call (assuming he was actually on the line when it is impossible to tell on some of these courts with their images on the court).

[wsb3]

Down the stretch we could not hit that big shot to give us separation. Curry back to back 3 misses on one possession..(i would have bet the house on the second one and be homeless now) and Rasheed missed a big one..
i think any of those shots would have give us a six point lead and a chance to set the defense. On the other hand I thought the D tightened up down the stretch.

I also thought the beginning of the half we had a chance to gain a working margin and we blew our opportunities after the 6-0 run to begin the half..

So whew would be my word of the night.Thank God Mason was good at the free throw line.

[FerryFor50]

I didn't see #1 with my terrible feed and #2 wasn't very clear but you are correct. It appeared that Amile took one step in the back court and his second step was on the stripe which would have established possession in the front court. But even if his first step was on the line, he was technically in the front court when he jumped b/c both of his feet were in the front court and the ball was also in the front court so therefore, it was the correct call (assuming he was actually on the line when it is impossible to tell on some of these courts with their images on the court).

Yea but he got rid of the ball before coming down in the back court. His foot MIGHT have touched the line, but it was close...

[dukelifer]

Pretty much agree with almost all of the comments so far. But I really thought Seth was the person the rest of the guys were looking for to make something happen at less than 4 minutes and the game tied. He came through, and I thought inspired the others. Yes MP2 had a great box score night, but I find myself about as frustrated as I've ever been at a Devil who just scored 29 points... He plain out simply played just weak D at several key points in the second half, getting beat by (much) lesser players. More than a couple missed "help D" opportunities for him too. The block at the very end was nice though. But he sure went silent down the stretch - I think G-man said with a minute to go that he hadn't scored since the 12-min mark??

Several guys made key plays in the final minute. Gritty, tough win. I don't know how many of these I can take though!! :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Games on the road will be like this- get ready

[CDu]

I have two officiating question. First, the double-dribble call on Mason. Are you not allowed to stop the ball by bouncing it off the floor without taking possession? Second, the over-and-back call where Mason chased down a rebound and had his pass deflected to the backcourt where Amile caught it with a foot on the line. If the ball is deflected, even off a pass, does that not give us full court? Thanks in advance for any help provided. I could be completely wrong on both of these but just wanted to clarify.

Otherwise, good road win. It's gotta be hard taking every team's best shot. Way to tough it out and R.K. get well soon...

1. On the double-dribble, it's up to the official's discretion. If he feels that Mason controlled the pass and then dribbled before picking it up, it's a double-dribble. If he didn't feel that Mason had possession, it's not.

2. If the ball is deflected by the defender, we can go back into the backcourt to get it. Where the over-the-back came into play is that Jefferson actually caught it in the frontcourt and then stepped on the line. Had he established himself in the backcourt and then caught the ball, it would probably have been fine.

[buddy]

Mason did play some matador defense after his third foul, but in fairness, we can't afford to have him on the bench. Had he played aggressive defense and fouled out, this game is a loss. Sometimes other guys have to step up and help out. He got us to the last four minutes where everyone's defense improved. What we saw tonight is that there is no second "big" option on this team with Ryan out.

[burnspbesq]

Games on the road will be like this- get ready

At the risk of sounding like Uncle Drew ... back in the day, every game in the ACC was a war. This is the way it should be.

[sporthenry]

Yea but he got rid of the ball before coming down in the back court. His foot MIGHT have touched the line, but it was close...

Well the major point of the OP was that why is it back court if it was deflected and Amile was in the air. So the answer to that question is that, the deflection doesn't change the position of the ball (still in the front court). The only time the deflection matters is if it results in the ball going into the back court. And since Amile never established position in the back court, he was in the front court, hence the back court. Now we can argue about whether he touched the line or was in the back court but assuming he did, it was the right call and both refs did call it. Hoping ESPN3 puts up a replay so I can look at it again though.

[Saratoga2]

What we saw tonight is that Duke doesn't have an effective backup for Mason. Amile might take that role but he is still showing a propensity to foul. As a result, Mason is not really playing defense the way one might expect. To me he seems like the first priority is to stay in the game, with defense of secondary importance. Marshall seems very limited at this point in time and Josh hasn't been very effective. So until Ryan comes back we have no other multi-talented big man who can stay in the game.

Mason's line was kind of interesting with 32 points on efficient shooting (including from the foul line), but at least 7 turnovers.

While Rasheed was playing hard, something has gotten to him as far as scoring. Is it the road game crowd? Is he just being guarded better? Hard to say, but we need more offense from him to be successful. Tough 3 point shooting night for our guards.

I read some criticism of Quinn but I thought he remained solid throughout the game.

Anyone care to speculate why Alex wasn't used more in the game?

[FerryFor50]

Well the major point of the OP was that why is it back court if it was deflected and Amile was in the air. So the answer to that question is that, the deflection doesn't change the position of the ball (still in the front court). The only time the deflection matters is if it results in the ball going into the back court. And since Amile never established position in the back court, he was in the front court, hence the back court. Now we can argue about whether he touched the line or was in the back court but assuming he did, it was the right call and both refs did call it. Hoping ESPN3 puts up a replay so I can look at it again though.

I rewound it on DVR at the time and it still looked iffy. Def tough to make on the fly.

[rocketeli]

While I'm not going to claim this game was a thing of beauty, the negativity in the in-game thread was kind of over the top. I believe Wake Forest has scored 0.95 points per possession in ACC play to date if my calculations are right. In this game we gave up...1.01 (http://www.scacchoops.com/ViewHDGame.asp?hSchedule=14587&bView=0). Obviously you want to do better, but it was hardly the total train wreck that it was being made out to be. Given that Mason obviously has to play to avoid fouls--I believe three of his four fouls were on the offensive end, and unlike some others I think those were fair calls, though the fourth one was pretty weak I thought--and our best perimeter defender, Sulaimon, was saddled with foul trouble in the first half, I don't think it was horrible. It was just...average.

Amen! I'm always amazed at howsome posters have to fly to their keyboards to make some unanalytical negative comment. some seemed unaware that you cant risk fouling out when you are your teams most important player...This was an ACC road win against an improving geeked up team and Duke did not play that badly. we had better ball movement and with Bzdks or however you spell it bad decision to single team Mason, Mason did take advantage.

[CDu]

Great game by Mason and Curry. Seniors doing what seniors should do: lead.

Tough night for the younger guys and role players. Glad we could fight through a tough game and get the win. Hopefully this builds some confidence.

Now that we have the goose egg out of the road win column, let's make it a crooked number this weekend!

[wilko]

While Rasheed was playing hard, something has gotten to him as far as scoring. Is it the road game crowd? Is he just being guarded better? Hard to say, but we need more offense from him to be successful. Tough 3 point shooting night for our guards.

It looked to me like Sheed was expending a lot of energy keeping McKie bottled up.

[davekay1971]

Great game by Mason and Curry. Seniors doing what seniors should do: lead.

Tough night for the younger guys and role players. Glad we could fight through a tough game and get the win. Hopefully this builds some confidence.

Now that we have the goose egg out of the road win column, let's make it a crooked number this weekend!

This is one way in which getting RK back would be huge. Our two best players on the road...not surprisingly...our seniors. Against Miami, no one had a good game. Against NCSU, Mason had 15 and 11 and Seth had 22 points (Quinn also had a very good game). When you get on the road, against a jacked up opponent, with a crowd that's ready to scream their lungs out every time the home team surges, having senior leaders are huge. We can rely on Seth and Mase to play well home or away, while our younger guys are naturally going to perform better on their own court with their fans behind them. Having Kelly back to give us that 3rd senior in the game providing balance, experience, maturity, will be huge.

We're a good team without Ryan. With him, we're potentially great.

Until we get him back, though, we've got another tough road game ahead. FSU isn't what they were last year, but they'll be there, playing hard, and their crowd will be amped up.

[Newton_14]

Pretty much agree with almost all of the comments so far. But I really thought Seth was the person the rest of the guys were looking for to make something happen at less than 4 minutes and the game tied. He came through, and I thought inspired the others. Yes MP2 had a great box score night, but I find myself about as frustrated as I've ever been at a Devil who just scored 29 points... He plain out simply played just weak D at several key points in the second half, getting beat by (much) lesser players. More than a couple missed "help D" opportunities for him too. The block at the very end was nice though. But he sure went silent down the stretch - I think G-man said with a minute to go that he hadn't scored since the 12-min mark??

Several guys made key plays in the final minute. Gritty, tough win. I don't know how many of these I can take though!! :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Sorry BDBD, but you are way off base here. By a long shot. I addressed the same topic in your post in the MOTM match. This was not one of Seth's best games, but it was surely one of Mason's best. 32 points on 15 shot attempts. The only thing that kept him from getting 40 was his teammates not making sure he got 20 shot attempts. Mason's defense is by design. Even before we lost Ryan, Mason had to manage his fouls such that he could play 35+ mpg. W/O Ryan, it has gotten even worse. He basically has to go 38-40 mpg every game. And as consistently inconsistent as ACC refs are on interior foul calls (Mason's 4th being Exhibit A), that means insuring you avoid contact like the plague. Plus without Ryan, Mason is the only rim protector we have. When Amile or Josh get beat and Mason slides over, he has to challenge without the appearance of a foul, let alone making contact to get it to 50/50. The guy is on an island by himself without his former running mate. Our defense has taken a huge hit w/o Ryan. That is not the fault of Mason. With the game on the line he blocked two shots, altered two others, and helped secure the win.

We finally got the road monkey off our back despite our underclassmen all having sub par games. Team defense was not real good either, though they did step it up in the last 3 minutes.

As I suspected, it was a hard fought ACC Road game, where the upperclassmen made enough plays for us to sneak out of there with a win. Wake is a much improving team with some good young talent around the two solid veterans. Much better than that BC team I watched last night.

We won a game we could have easily lost, to help keep us afloat until Ryan returns. We are just a very different team without Ryan. Lots of growing to do. Tonight was another step.

[jipops]

Anyone notice K went with a 4 guard lineup somewhere around the 8 minute mark or so? That lineup actually had some stops on defense... I think.

[uh_no]

Well the major point of the OP was that why is it back court if it was deflected and Amile was in the air. So the answer to that question is that, the deflection doesn't change the position of the ball (still in the front court). The only time the deflection matters is if it results in the ball going into the back court. And since Amile never established position in the back court, he was in the front court, hence the back court. Now we can argue about whether he touched the line or was in the back court but assuming he did, it was the right call and both refs did call it. Hoping ESPN3 puts up a replay so I can look at it again though.

In real time, i thought it was a backcourt, but as you point out there are a few things that would have avoided it (not that any of these things happen, but just to list them)

1) if either of amile's feet were touching the line at the time when he caught the deflected ball, it is not a violation (and he could then dribble all the way to the other end line should he choose)
2) if amile had caught the ball in the air and gotten rid of it before landing on the line, it is not a violation
3) if the ball had first bounced in the backcourt and amile started dribbling it at that time even if his feet were still in the frontcourt, he could then still put a foot on the line, as my understanding is that all 3 of the ball and your 2 feet must be in the front court before there can be a violation

[roywhite]

While I'm not going to claim this game was a thing of beauty, the negativity in the in-game thread was kind of over the top. I believe Wake Forest has scored 0.95 points per possession in ACC play to date if my calculations are right. In this game we gave up...1.01 (http://www.scacchoops.com/ViewHDGame.asp?hSchedule=14587&bView=0). Obviously you want to do better, but it was hardly the total train wreck that it was being made out to be. Given that Mason obviously has to play to avoid fouls--I believe three of his four fouls were on the offensive end, and unlike some others I think those were fair calls, though the fourth one was pretty weak I thought--and our best perimeter defender, Sulaimon, was saddled with foul trouble in the first half, I don't think it was horrible. It was just...average.

And the floor was slippery as could be...looked like the players were on ice sometimes. On a slippery football field, they say the receiver has an advantage over the defender because he knows where he is going and the defender has to react, at greater risk of slipping. Saw some of that tonight on both sides....advantage to the offense.

[sporthenry]

Amen! I'm always amazed at howsome posters have to fly to their keyboards to make some unanalytical negative comment. some seemed unaware that you cant risk fouling out when you are your teams most important player...This was an ACC road win against an improving geeked up team and Duke did not play that badly. we had better ball movement and with Bzdks or however you spell it bad decision to single team Mason, Mason did take advantage.

I don't think calling out our defense is some "unanalytical negative comment" especially during the game. At one point, I believe Wake was shooting 70% from the field and at the half it was mid 50%. They ended at 48% compared to Duke's FG defense % of 39.7% (http://www.ncaa.com/stats/basketball-men/d1/current/team/149/p2). I don't think you'll find many on here say this was a good Duke defensive performance and I'm sure K's presser will allude to that as well (at least in the first half).

And as far as Mason being the most important player so he can't risk fouling out. I have never heard or seen K coach like this. Sure, there have been times when our bigs haven't given 100% b/c of foul trouble and just challenged straight up but there have been several times when Mason's effort on the defensive end has been questioned and again, I'm sure K wasn't exactly happy with that b/c of his obvious emphasis on defense.

[vick]

And as far as Mason being the most important player so he can't risk fouling out. I have never heard or seen K coach like this. Sure, there have been times when our bigs haven't given 100% b/c of foul trouble and just challenged straight up but there have been several times when Mason's effort on the defensive end has been questioned and again, I'm sure K wasn't exactly happy with that b/c of his obvious emphasis on defense.

I disagree with this. While I cannot imagine Coach K coming out and saying "well of course Marshall and Hairston are not good enough right now for us to be competitive if they have to log major minutes," I think it's very clear that Coach K wants players to keep in mind their importance when playing defense--look at how Redick went from an average college defender to one of the NBA's most effective defenders on Ray Allen a couple of years later. I do not believe this is because he woke up and decided to play tougher defense, it's because he knew that the 2005 and 2006 teams were utterly dependent on his offense and he simply couldn't afford to be in foul trouble.

[davekay1971]

I don't think calling out our defense is some "unanalytical negative comment" especially during the game. At one point, I believe Wake was shooting 70% from the field and at the half it was mid 50%. They ended at 48% compared to Duke's FG defense % of 39.7% (http://www.ncaa.com/stats/basketball-men/d1/current/team/149/p2). I don't think you'll find many on here say this was a good Duke defensive performance and I'm sure K's presser will allude to that as well (at least in the first half).

And as far as Mason being the most important player so he can't risk fouling out. I have never heard or seen K coach like this. Sure, there have been times when our bigs haven't given 100% b/c of foul trouble and just challenged straight up but there have been several times when Mason's effort on the defensive end has been questioned and again, I'm sure K wasn't exactly happy with that b/c of his obvious emphasis on defense.

I'm not sure K will say it explicitly, but Mason's defensive tendencies have become enough of a pattern that I suspect he may be being coached to avoid defensive fouls until late in the game. From K's point of view, especially with Ryan being out, Mason is probably our most irreplaceable guy on the court. A front court combo of Amile/Josh/Marshall for any length of time would leave us totally dependent on outside shooting. Defensively, we'd have trouble...though we've defended with an undersized center before often enough. I honestly think Mase got instructed at halftime to avoid the fourth foul the endgame was in sight. Especially with the way he was performing on offense this game, it's not hard to imagine coach telling him: "give up the layup if you have to, Mase...just do NOT pick up that fourth foul!"

[sporthenry]

I disagree with this. While I cannot imagine Coach K coming out and saying "well of course Marshall and Hairston are not good enough right now for us to be competitive if they have to log major minutes," I think it's very clear that Coach K wants players to keep in mind their importance when playing defense--look at how Redick went from an average college defender to one of the NBA's most effective defenders on Ray Allen a couple of years later. I do not believe this is because he woke up and decided to play tougher defense, it's because he knew that the 2005 and 2006 teams were utterly dependent on his offense and he simply couldn't afford to be in foul trouble.

Guards are completely different in the sense that they usually aren't in foul trouble and most of the time that they are, they can avoid the 4th or 5th foul much more easier than someone down low. Redick was also our worst defender at the time and when he first came into the NBA, he wasn't a great defender. This is often cited as one of his greatest growths was his effort and intelligence on defense. This was not something that happened because he decided to just start trying.

[wgl1228]

One question. Why do we stop going to Mason for about 6-7 minutes in the 2nd half when he's virtually unstoppable? he scored 32 on 15 shots and should've had more.

[uh_no]

One question. Why do we stop going to Mason for about 6-7 minutes in the 2nd half when he's virtually unstoppable? he scored 32 on 15 shots and should've had more.

sometimes you can't get him the ball...maybe they were doing something different on defense (until they got into foul trouble)?
maybe K wanted them to run the clock a bit more, and then it was more difficult to dump it down low late in the shot clock?

[sporthenry]

I'm not sure K will say it explicitly, but Mason's defensive tendencies have become enough of a pattern that I suspect he may be being coached to avoid defensive fouls until late in the game. From K's point of view, especially with Ryan being out, Mason is probably our most irreplaceable guy on the court. A front court combo of Amile/Josh/Marshall for any length of time would leave us totally dependent on outside shooting. Defensively, we'd have trouble...though we've defended with an undersized center before often enough. I honestly think Mase got instructed at halftime to avoid the fourth foul the endgame was in sight. Especially with the way he was performing on offense this game, it's not hard to imagine coach telling him: "give up the layup if you have to, Mase...just do NOT pick up that fourth foul!"

I'm sure he tells him to be smart, sure. But I doubt he says to give up a wide open lay up to avoid a foul. This would fly in the face of most of K's philosophy which seems to be it is much easier to keep the other team from scoring 2 points than it is to score 2 points ourselves, which explains the reliance on guys like Hairston and Thornton throughout the years despite their offensive limitations.

Perhaps this is K adapting a bit b/c sometimes I wished our bigs like Shelden or Boozer would have followed this strategy when they were in foul trouble. But I must also say that this trend has been there in situations when Mason wasn't necessarily in foul trouble and even games when Kelly was healthy which would lessen the argument that it was a change to deal with foul trouble.

[jlear]

In real time, i thought it was a backcourt, but as you point out there are a few things that would have avoided it (not that any of these things happen, but just to list them)

1) if either of amile's feet were touching the line at the time when he caught the deflected ball, it is not a violation (and he could then dribble all the way to the other end line should he choose)
2) if amile had caught the ball in the air and gotten rid of it before landing on the line, it is not a violation
3) if the ball had first bounced in the backcourt and amile started dribbling it at that time even if his feet were still in the frontcourt, he could then still put a foot on the line, as my understanding is that all 3 of the ball and your 2 feet must be in the front court before there can be a violation

I thought the over and back rule was only the location of the ball not the player. I didn't see the ball go back over the line, so I thought it was a bad call.

[uh_no]

I thought the over and back rule was only the location of the ball not the player. I didn't see the ball go back over the line, so I thought it was a bad call.

nope, it's any of the three

once they are all established in the front court, if any one of them passes back into the backcourt (touches the line), it is a violation

the only exception is when a defensive player deflects the ball, then the offensive player is allowed to regain possession in the backcourt

[jlear]

nope, it's any of the three

once they are all established in the front court, if any one of them passes back into the backcourt (touches the line), it is a violation

the only exception is when a defensive player deflects the ball, then the offensive player is allowed to regain possession in the backcourt

Thanks! I guess I was yelling for nothing then :)

[dyedwab]

...but was frustrated with our defensive effort. That said, Mason's issue was foul trouble here, not lack of defense. Mason HAS to stay on the floor. As Coach K said in the post game presser, Mason is the most important player to his team in league. He clearly can't challenge as much as we would like because he has to avoid fouls.

But that ups the importance of our perimeter defense, and I thought it was pretty weak tonight. Yes, it was a conference game. And yes, Wake, like every team that plays us at home, was amped and focused. But really, playing hard hustling defense from the outset of a game would be awesome.

On the really positive side, they couldn't guard Mason, we knew it and exploited it. That will serve us extremely well.

[rsvman]

....with Bzdks or however you spell it bad decision to single team Mason, Mason did take advantage.

Totally disagree with this. I think it was an outstanding strategy. They gave us a fight all night long and almost pulled off the win. Had they doubled Mason all night they probably would've lost the game by 10 or 15. Giving our guards a lot of open looks usually results in them heating up and making a few threes. Bzdelik's strategy was to say, essentially, that even if Mason scores 48 points, he usually only scores them 2 at a time. And it Mason scores 50 and Wake Forest wins the game, it's no skin off Bzdelik's back.

I thought it was a gritty, hard-fought win. Despite shaky defense, they managed to stiffen it at just the right time. The poise at crunch time was vintage Duke.

[rsvman]

Oh, and with regard to the double-dribble call......when I played hoops that was called every single time. Lately (meaning the last several years) I've seen numerous players in many different games get away with what I consider blatant double-dribble. Nobody calls it anymore! I was shocked that it was called, but I don't think it was a bad call.

[sagegrouse]

.. And Duke leads the ACC in three-pointers made and in shooting percentage. Then, when you shoot 2-14 from outside, you are lucky not to die by the jump shot. Our freshman and sophs need to learn to play tough and focused offense on the road.

I am happy for any kind of win on the road, but we need to get our bearings and play better this weekend in Tallahassee.

Mason was dominant, unless one can think of a stronger word. Seth's scoring, mostly on pull-up shots and layups, was also key to our win. I thought our defense got a lot better after the first eight-ten minutes, and later, as others noted, Wake got some easier baskets inside when Mason had to draw back because of fouls.

In the last two minutes, Duke shone and Wake crumbled. And we got the win.

sagegrouse

[dyedwab]

Totally disagree with this. I think it was an outstanding strategy. They gave us a fight all night long and almost pulled off the win. Had they doubled Mason all night they probably would've lost the game by 10 or 15. Giving our guards a lot of open looks usually results in them heating up and making a few threes. Bzdelik's strategy was to say, essentially, that even if Mason scores 48 points, he usually only scores them 2 at a time. And it Mason scores 50 and Wake Forest wins the game, it's no skin off Bzdelik's back.

I thought it was a gritty, hard-fought win. Despite shaky defense, they managed to stiffen it at just the right time. The poise at crunch time was vintage Duke.

During the Shelden era, we employed this strategy to great effect in a victory over Indiana at Assembly Hall. IU had a great 3-point shooting team, so we concentrated on shutting that off, while leaving Shelden on an island to deal with Marco Killingsworth, who went off for something like 35 points. But we won, because we contained there most dangerous weapon, which was the 3 point shot.

[wk2109]

It looks like Duke has added in a new little wrinkle (at least I think it's new) with Seth taking some of the same mid-range shots that Ryan had been getting. He hit three jumpers from around the foul line that were created from curls around screens. Open jumpers from that range are like layups for Seth (and Ryan) and I love that the team is running plays to get him those looks. He'll still take his fair share of threes, but it can only help if he can take a healthy dose of 12-15 foot shots as well.

Defensively, it's up to the perimeter guys to help Mason stay out of foul trouble and/or give up easy shots to stay out of foul trouble. They've gotta prevent entry passes to the post and prevent dribble penetration + drop-offs to the bigs. It's pretty clear how much Ryan's absence has affected Duke's defensive efficiency.

[sporthenry]

During the Shelden era, we employed this strategy to great effect in a victory over Indiana at Assembly Hall. IU had a great 3-point shooting team, so we concentrated on shutting that off, while leaving Shelden on an island to deal with Marco Killingsworth, who went off for something like 35 points. But we won, because we contained there most dangerous weapon, which was the 3 point shot.

I'm not sure if this strategy works from a numbers standpoint. Mason shot 80% tonight. That is the equivalent of shooting 53.3% from 3. Usually you want to hit the 60% from 2/40% from 3 threshold. On the season, Duke is 41.1% from 3. Now this is all 3 pointers and perhaps Wake did an advanced study that when doubled and Mason finds an open 3 point shooter, Duke shoots 53% or greater but I highly doubt that. That said, the two things that work in favor of this strategy is that it seems to take some guys out of their game a la Sheed who has to learn to score without the 3 and the strategy also works when the other team tries to force 3's to try to get going which Duke did a few times tonight.

But Curry and even Cook did a better job than years past of not settling just for the 3, getting to the rim and creating shots. Seth did a very good job of creating openings for himself and looked a bit like Scheyer using his pace and shoulders to get ahead of defenders.

[El_Diablo]

I'm not sure K will say it explicitly, but Mason's defensive tendencies have become enough of a pattern that I suspect he may be being coached to avoid defensive fouls until late in the game.

Yes, it was very much the same way with Zoubek (and many other mature/seasoned big men)...try to disrupt the shot if possible, but don't try to block everything or you'll usually either foul or give up the offensive rebound. Mason has very good ups and can probably average an extra block or two per game if he tried swatting everything that came his way (like Nerlens Noel tries to do). But Mason would also get in more frequent foul trouble, and our offense and defense would be worse off over the course of the game with him on the bench. I am sure Coach K has him calibrated pretty much the way he wants him in that respect.

Of course, it can be frustrating sometimes to see him "give up" a short gimme shot or layup when I would like to see him just send it back, but I am also glad to see that Mason's minutes per foul (the time it takes to accumulate one foul) has increased steadily over the course of his career from 6.71 as a freshman, to 9.85 as a sophomore, to 11.36 as a junior, to 17.15 as a senior.

[mo.st.dukie]

One question. Why do we stop going to Mason for about 6-7 minutes in the 2nd half when he's virtually unstoppable? he scored 32 on 15 shots and should've had more.

Coach K commented on this in the post game, he is 100% aware that Mason and Seth should get the ball but, as he said, getting the ball to them and in the right spot is the challenge. That's kind of what the opponent's job is, to keep you from scoring. It's much easier to say Mason should've had more touches than it is to actually execute that on the court, the other team has some good players too. But there is no way that the team is purposefully not giving Mason the ball.

[Kedsy]

One question. Why do we stop going to Mason for about 6-7 minutes in the 2nd half when he's virtually unstoppable? he scored 32 on 15 shots and should've had more.

It looked to me like that was when Wake stopped with the single-coverage strategy and started doubling Mason. They also started packing the lane to keep Mason from catching the ball. That's why our outside shots were a little more open at the end there.

[Reilly]

Oh, and with regard to the double-dribble call......when I played hoops that was called every single time. Lately (meaning the last several years) I've seen numerous players in many different games get away with what I consider blatant double-dribble. Nobody calls it anymore! I was shocked that it was called, but I don't think it was a bad call.

I agree. My sense is that the refs are more generous these days in labeling that first bounce as some sort of "drop" or "gathering of the ball in" than they used to be. In fact, Mason had a similar play last night before the one where he was called for the double dribble.

It would be cool to see ACC refereeing stats over the years ... how many violations of what kinds called over the years ...

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

I agree. My sense is that the refs are more generous these days in labeling that first bounce as some sort of "drop" or "gathering of the ball in" than they used to be. In fact, Mason had a similar play last night before the one where he was called for the double dribble.
...

I have noticed Mason's tendency to do this for some time. It is borderline at best, and he did get away with it a few plays before they nailed him. If we get a really picky ref, they could make many of those moves miserable - i.e. at UNC.

Good win, great game from Mason, and I liked what I saw from Marshall. He moves well on defense but seems to get caught out front setting picks, leaving him out of position for rebounds. He will get there.

Go Duke

[roywhite]

I agree. My sense is that the refs are more generous these days in labeling that first bounce as some sort of "drop" or "gathering of the ball in" than they used to be. In fact, Mason had a similar play last night before the one where he was called for the double dribble.

It would be cool to see ACC refereeing stats over the years ... how many violations of what kinds called over the years ...

Agree. The failure to call the double dribble is one of my pet peeves about officiating.

Another is the uncertainty and apparent mistakes on who touched the ball last on a play where the ball goes out of bounds. Just watching on TV, it seemed Duke was on the short end of that situation a few times. Happens quickly; seems to me that the refs should consult each other more frequently to get that determination of possession correct.

[camion]

Agree. The failure to call the double dribble is one of my pet peeves about officiating.

Another is the uncertainty and apparent mistakes on who touched the ball last on a play where the ball goes out of bounds. Just watching on TV, it seemed Duke was on the short end of that situation a few times. Happens quickly; seems to me that the refs should consult each other more frequently to get that determination of possession correct.

Sometimes mistaken, but never in doubt. It's part of being a referee.

When a decision must be made you decide and then proceed. It's even better if the decision happens to be correct. (I learned this in the army.)

[OldSchool]

Marshall's play at the end of the first half was encouraging. He looked more solid than in other recent games, albeit we have such a limited sample it is hard to make firm conclusions. On defense he did a good job of locating both the ball and his man as well as blocking out when a shot went up. While on the offensive side the team is clearly not ready to rely on Marshall posting up, nevertheless if we can sneak him onto the floor for a few more minutes here and there and perhaps even in the second half, it might allow Mason to be more aggressive.

Without Ryan it seems to me we are to a larger degree hostage to our 3-point shooting. (In the Maryland game if Rasheed had hit only a normal 2 of 5 from 3 instead of 5 of 5 in the first half, Maryland would actually have had the lead at the half, all other things being equal.) While people talk about missing Ryan's 3-point shooting, something else we are missing (in addition to his strong defense this year) is his mid-range shooting. When our offense was stymied in the post or at the 3-point line Ryan was finding space in the defense at the elbow or out on the wing for 2-pt shots which he was knocking down with consistency. We don't really have anything to replace that dimension of our offense, other than the guards trying to penetrate and hit a floater.

[jcastranio]

As in substitutions:

Marshall - I thought actually his best game. Seemed a little more under control, aggressive on D, gave us a spark on D when Mason had to lay off. Progress shown. Still is a little lost on offense - but I can almost see some potential.

Josh - For a good portion of this game, Josh was awful. Awful. I am a Josh supporter, and I still say awful. Then, he made two or three key plays down the stretch at a time when I was questioning K's sanity for having him in. On another note, I swear he fouled on every single screen (was called once). Still, he brings a physical presence and that must contribute something. And, in retrospect, we needed his plays at the end. I'll allow the poor play early and attribute it to malaria or something.

Tyler - He also brings a toughness and attitude. I think other teams sense it and he attracts trouble like a conservative in Hollywood. That is probably a good thing. Offensively, when he tries too hard or gets out of his lane - it seems awkward. Still, when Quinn went out briefly near the end, I felt good that Tyler was out there handling the ball. Solid, but not spectacular contribution.

Alex - this one puzzled me. I know I am just a fan, but I have been watching basketball my whole life. Alex looked energetic, involved, and effective in the first half. Then, even with foul difficulty, he didn't play in the second. I am so obsessed with it, i actually focus just on him while he is in there, just to see if he is somehow lost or incompetent. He doesn't appear to be. I will say, on offense, the team seems to completely ignore him. I don't know if he doesn't go to the right spot or if there is a vast wing player conspiracy. It is like on offense, he has a cloaking device on and is invisible to his fellow team members. So - I thought a good effort and good minutes - just don't know why not more. It is like the team isn't totally comfortable with him yet.

[94duke]

As in substitutions:

Marshall - I thought actually his best game. Seemed a little more under control, aggressive on D, gave us a spark on D when Mason had to lay off. Progress shown. Still is a little lost on offense - but I can almost see some potential.

Josh - For a good portion of this game, Josh was awful. Awful. I am a Josh supporter, and I still say awful. Then, he made two or three key plays down the stretch at a time when I was questioning K's sanity for having him in. On another note, I swear he fouled on every single screen (was called once). Still, he brings a physical presence and that must contribute something. And, in retrospect, we needed his plays at the end. I'll allow the poor play early and attribute it to malaria or something.

Tyler - He also brings a toughness and attitude. I think other teams sense it and he attracts trouble like a conservative in Hollywood. That is probably a good thing. Offensively, when he tries too hard or gets out of his lane - it seems awkward. Still, when Quinn went out briefly near the end, I felt good that Tyler was out there handling the ball. Solid, but not spectacular contribution.

Alex - this one puzzled me. I know I am just a fan, but I have been watching basketball my whole life. Alex looked energetic, involved, and effective in the first half. Then, even with foul difficulty, he didn't play in the second. I am so obsessed with it, i actually focus just on him while he is in there, just to see if he is somehow lost or incompetent. He doesn't appear to be. I will say, on offense, the team seems to completely ignore him. I don't know if he doesn't go to the right spot or if there is a vast wing player conspiracy. It is like on offense, he has a cloaking device on and is invisible to his fellow team members. So - I thought a good effort and good minutes - just don't know why not more. It is like the team isn't totally comfortable with him yet.

Here are my thoughts on Alex's playing time. His defense more than his offense is preventing more playing time. He doesn't defend against penetration particularly well, and here is why. His feet are a little slow when defending a ball handler on the perimeter. His help-D is pretty good, and he recovers to challenge shooters well. But when he tries to defend a ball handler on the perimeter, he gets beat. He is either slow to react to a ball handler's first step, or his feet are too slow to get in front of the dribbler.

[budwom]

Yes, it was very much the same way with Zoubek (and many other mature/seasoned big men)...try to disrupt the shot if possible, but don't try to block everything or you'll usually either foul or give up the offensive rebound. Mason has very good ups and can probably average an extra block or two per game if he tried swatting everything that came his way (like Nerlens Noel tries to do). But Mason would also get in more frequent foul trouble, and our offense and defense would be worse off over the course of the game with him on the bench. I am sure Coach K has him calibrated pretty much the way he wants him in that respect.

Of course, it can be frustrating sometimes to see him "give up" a short gimme shot or layup when I would like to see him just send it back, but I am also glad to see that Mason's minutes per foul (the time it takes to accumulate one foul) has increased steadily over the course of his career from 6.71 as a freshman, to 9.85 as a sophomore, to 11.36 as a junior, to 17.15 as a senior.

In fact in today's N&O article Mason conceded the coaches want him to play better defense when he's in foul trouble.

[Matches]

Here are my thoughts on Alex's playing time. His defense more than his offense is preventing more playing time. He doesn't defend against penetration particularly well, and here is why. His feet are a little slow when defending a ball handler on the perimeter. His help-D is pretty good, and he recovers to challenge shooters well. But when he tries to defend a ball handler on the perimeter, he gets beat. He is either slow to react to a ball handler's first step, or his feet are too slow to get in front of the dribbler.

Yea that's been my take too. Even in the Miami game when he was scoring effectively, I thought he looked lost on defense. Of course, the whole team looked lost on D in the Miami game, but unfortunately that's been a pattern with Murph. Hard to say if he's having trouble getting his sea legs in limited PT, or if he's getting limited PT because he's not defending well.

[Kedsy]

Marshall - I thought actually his best game. Seemed a little more under control, aggressive on D, gave us a spark on D when Mason had to lay off. Progress shown. Still is a little lost on offense - but I can almost see some potential.

To me, it looks like Marshall has to stop and think on offense before he can figure out where he's supposed to be. This leads to having less-than-great position on his post-ups and being really late on his ball screens. I'm afraid he has a lot of work to do before he's a competent high major big man on offense, but I'm confident he'll get there eventually.

On defense he has a similar problem, especially with his hedges, but I thought the Wake game was a big improvement over his brief appearance against Maryland. Baby steps and all that.


Josh - For a good portion of this game, Josh was awful. Awful. I am a Josh supporter, and I still say awful. Then, he made two or three key plays down the stretch at a time when I was questioning K's sanity for having him in. On another note, I swear he fouled on every single screen (was called once). Still, he brings a physical presence and that must contribute something. And, in retrospect, we needed his plays at the end. I'll allow the poor play early and attribute it to malaria or something.

I agree with this. For most of the game Josh was late on his defensive assignments and moving on his screens. And then he made what seemed to me to be the play of the game with that amazing save after the Mason block. Without that play, it's a different game. Kudos to him for playing through his malaise and still hustling to the very end.


Alex - this one puzzled me. I know I am just a fan, but I have been watching basketball my whole life. Alex looked energetic, involved, and effective in the first half. Then, even with foul difficulty, he didn't play in the second. I am so obsessed with it, i actually focus just on him while he is in there, just to see if he is somehow lost or incompetent. He doesn't appear to be. I will say, on offense, the team seems to completely ignore him. I don't know if he doesn't go to the right spot or if there is a vast wing player conspiracy. It is like on offense, he has a cloaking device on and is invisible to his fellow team members. So - I thought a good effort and good minutes - just don't know why not more. It is like the team isn't totally comfortable with him yet.

To me, Alex's cuts and screens don't seem as sharp as they could be. He is energetic, but a lot of that energy appears to be wasted on inefficient movement. And on defense, as others have noted, he sometimes loses where he's supposed to be. Like Marshall, he should get there eventually.

I would note that against Wake almost all of Alex's minutes came at the 4, rather than on the wing (where almost all his minutes came in previous games). I think I liked that -- he didn't appear to be outsized (at least against Wake) and for a PF he's relatively quick while on the wing his quickness is adequate but not outstanding.

[Kedsy]

Had they doubled Mason all night they probably would've lost the game by 10 or 15.

It was interesting how confident Mason looked and how smoothly he executed his inside moves while in single coverage. Just like the "old" Mason of November and early December. He even made his free throws. Then, when Wake started doubling and crowding him more, late in the game, things seemed more difficult for him. So perhaps he hasn't regressed or hit a wall or any of the things people have been saying, it's just a matter of how he's defended.

Once again it shows how much we miss Ryan. I don't think it was coincidence that the best roll of Ryan's career came just when opponents started doubling Mason in late December and early January.

[Wander]

It looked to me like that was when Wake stopped with the single-coverage strategy and started doubling Mason. They also started packing the lane to keep Mason from catching the ball. That's why our outside shots were a little more open at the end there.

Agreed, I was going to point out the same thing. IIRC you can see it most obviously in the play that everyone here is talking about when Mason was called for the double dribble. Plumlee had an awesome game so the following statement isn't meant to take anything away from him, but for the first 75% of the game he faced a much easier defense to score against than in the past few ACC games. I am not sure whether Wake switching their defense around the ~10 min mark of the second half was done as sort of a strategic chess type thing to confuse us or if Wake was just tired of seeing Mason score 30 points, but they definitely changed the defense sometime around there.

[Saratoga2]

To me, it looks like Marshall has to stop and think on offense before he can figure out where he's supposed to be. This leads to having less-than-great position on his post-ups and being really late on his ball screens. I'm afraid he has a lot of work to do before he's a competent high major big man on offense, but I'm confident he'll get there eventually.

On defense he has a similar problem, especially with his hedges, but I thought the Wake game was a big improvement over his brief appearance against Maryland. Baby steps and all that.



I agree with this. For most of the game Josh was late on his defensive assignments and moving on his screens. And then he made what seemed to me to be the play of the game with that amazing save after the Mason block. Without that play, it's a different game. Kudos to him for playing through his malaise and still hustling to the very end.



To me, Alex's cuts and screens don't seem as sharp as they could be. He is energetic, but a lot of that energy appears to be wasted on inefficient movement. And on defense, as others have noted, he sometimes loses where he's supposed to be. Like Marshall, he should get there eventually.

I would note that against Wake almost all of Alex's minutes came at the 4, rather than on the wing (where almost all his minutes came in previous games). I think I liked that -- he didn't appear to be outsized (at least against Wake) and for a PF he's relatively quick while on the wing his quickness is adequate but not outstanding.

Many of us now believe Mason is backing off on defense and allowing easy buckets because he is fearful of fouling, especially early in the game. Clearly we need him in the game so there is logic in what appears to be happening. Other coaches aren't missing this and will push to score inside and through penetration. What can be done? My believe is that we have at least 3 players who could take the defensive load along with whatever fouls might occur. Marshall clearly has potential and in my opinion, should be given more time in that role. Amile also has a lot of positives except he can get into foul trouble easily, but at least have scoring, rebounding and shot blocking potential. Josh in my opinion was also not effective against Wake until the very end. He has the bulk, strength and experience but is undersized and is not that athletic. Trying all three of these in tandem and encouraging them to play with energy might help us avoid giving away so many easy buckets.

Can Alex play PF? As the writer points out he has height and quickness but it might be too new for him to contribute. If that is a position that he can play, then we can use 5 players for 2 positions with Mason getting the majority of minutes at his position. Still no word on Ryan. When and if he returns, the team can easily readapt to his insertion.

[CajunDevil]

Alex's playing time is perplexing. His defense is very active - quick hands, good feet, good lateral quickness. When he's in the game he makes plays. He challenged McKie at the rim on a break last night - Alex got the foul but showed toughness. Alex also forced Wake into a TO by his overplay. His D was solid.

On the offensive end, Alex is a very good finisher with good hands and live legs. When he dives to the rim he has often been the recipient of quick passes for nifty reverse layups. However, last night it seemed like he had on the cloak of invisibility the previous poster mentioned. I can understand the cloak for Marshall in the post... but not Alex. However, on one drive Alex drove directly into a double team at the elbow and lost the ball, fortuitously to Rasheed. So, then there's that.

My personal take is that Alex just needs more PT to allow the game to slow a bit. I would like Alex to play either the 4 - where he has the potential to stretch the D in a Kelly-like fashion and free up space for Mason - or the 3 when Curry or Rasheed takes a breather, with Amile/Hairston at the 4. Alex seems like a bigger/sturdier Singler with a good bit less polish on his game at this point than Singler had. I can't wait to see him with longer stretches of playing time to see if he can get into a rhythm. Hopefully, that comes sooner rather than later.

[tbyers11]

In fact in today's N&O article Mason conceded the coaches want him to play better defense when he's in foul trouble.

Mason does have to be cautious when challenging his man's post moves or going for the block on help defense when he is in foul trouble. Wake probably got a couple baskets because he didn't risk fouling.

However I think his quote means the coaching staff wants him to play smarter D besides not challenging shots when in foul trouble. Wake got at least 4 baskets when Mason had very poor decision making on defense. Twice he went for the steal on an entry pass to Thomas, didn't get it and couldn't go for the blocked shot attempt because of his foul situation. He is generally pretty good on selective gambling on trying to steal the entry pass but he needs to just play solid position D when he is foul trouble. He also badly failed to close out on a big on the perimeter twice (Rountree (1st half) led to a dunk and Cavanaugh (2nd half) led to 3 point play and 4th foul on Mason). I know that Mason doesn't typically close out on shooters but both of these plays he looked he really had a very half-hearted close out.

Overall, Mason, particularly offensively, had a great game. He also came up with several big defensive plays late. That being said I think the coaches will have plenty of teaching moments when they review his D on film.

[CDu]

To me, it looks like Marshall has to stop and think on offense before he can figure out where he's supposed to be. This leads to having less-than-great position on his post-ups and being really late on his ball screens. I'm afraid he has a lot of work to do before he's a competent high major big man on offense, but I'm confident he'll get there eventually.

I noticed this as well. There were a couple of plays in which Cook looked - for just a moment - exasperated with Marshall for not being in the right spot for a screen. In each case it was a very quick reaction, and then Cook just changed things up from there and the play went on. So if you weren't looking, you wouldn't have noticed it.


On defense he has a similar problem, especially with his hedges, but I thought the Wake game was a big improvement over his brief appearance against Maryland. Baby steps and all that.

Yeah, defensively I thought he did a fine job tonight. Nothing special, but nothing bad (which is, at this point, all we're going to ask of him defensively).


I agree with this. For most of the game Josh was late on his defensive assignments and moving on his screens. And then he made what seemed to me to be the play of the game with that amazing save after the Mason block. Without that play, it's a different game. Kudos to him for playing through his malaise and still hustling to the very end.

Like Marshall, one thing Hairston won't get cheated on is effort. He doesn't have great hands and has limited skill (or confidence) in his offense, but he gives it his all. In a 5-10 mpg role, you just have to hope that the hustle plays outnumber/outweigh the miscues with Hairston.


I would note that against Wake almost all of Alex's minutes came at the 4, rather than on the wing (where almost all his minutes came in previous games). I think I liked that -- he didn't appear to be outsized (at least against Wake) and for a PF he's relatively quick while on the wing his quickness is adequate but not outstanding.

Yeah, Murphy first entered the game for Jefferson, after Hairston had already subbed in (unsuccessfully) for Jefferson. It should be noted that Wake's PF are Cavanaugh (a 6'9" guy who prefers to play on the perimeter), Adala Moto (6'6", 225), and at times McKie (6'7", 220). Cavanaugh and Adala Moto are not overly-skilled ballhandlers, and neither was likely to look for a post-up. So it was a good matchup for Murphy at PF.

[CDu]

I thought the over and back rule was only the location of the ball not the player. I didn't see the ball go back over the line, so I thought it was a bad call.

No. Once possession of the ball has been established in the frontcourt (either by dribbling with the ball and both feet in the frontcourt or by picking up the dribble with both feet in the frontcourt or by passing to someone with both feet in the frontcourt), a backcourt violation occurs when either the ball or any body part of a player possessing the ball touch the floor in the backcourt (unless the ball was last touched in the frontcourt by a defender).

The only question as to whether that was a backcourt violation or not was whether:
a. Jefferson possessed the ball in the frontcourt after Wake tipped it (which he did); and
b. Jefferson touched the midcourt line with the ball (it was very close and hard to tell from the TV view, but the official was right there).

[nocilla]

Agree. The failure to call the double dribble is one of my pet peeves about officiating.

Another is the uncertainty and apparent mistakes on who touched the ball last on a play where the ball goes out of bounds. Just watching on TV, it seemed Duke was on the short end of that situation a few times. Happens quickly; seems to me that the refs should consult each other more frequently to get that determination of possession correct.

I have another question about a call that was made. There was a play I think in the first half where a Wake defender blocked a shot and the ball bounced off the bottom of the backboard and went out of bounds. I assumed the ball would remain with Duke but it was awarded to Wake. Did I miss a Duke player touching the ball after the block? Even when they showed a replay I didn't see a Duke player anywhere near the ball. Or is there a rule about the ball hitting the bottom of the backboard? Or maybe they ruled that the Wake defender never actually touched the ball. The announcers called it a block and it looked like one, but I guess it is possible that he didn't actually touch it. Does anyone remember that play and know what the call was?

[IBleedBlue]

I believe this wake team is going to be a handful in the next few years. They have a big man in the middle who is already producing at a clip of ~15ppg and he is a freshman. And a solid backup for him is Tyler Cavanuagh, also a freshman. And guards are learning under McKie and Harris. They will be a top tier team starting next year in the ACC.
I wonder how Marshall would measure up against Devin Thomas.

[jv001]

Yes, it was very much the same way with Zoubek (and many other mature/seasoned big men)...try to disrupt the shot if possible, but don't try to block everything or you'll usually either foul or give up the offensive rebound. Mason has very good ups and can probably average an extra block or two per game if he tried swatting everything that came his way (like Nerlens Noel tries to do). But Mason would also get in more frequent foul trouble, and our offense and defense would be worse off over the course of the game with him on the bench. I am sure Coach K has him calibrated pretty much the way he wants him in that respect.

Of course, it can be frustrating sometimes to see him "give up" a short gimme shot or layup when I would like to see him just send it back, but I am also glad to see that Mason's minutes per foul (the time it takes to accumulate one foul) has increased steadily over the course of his career from 6.71 as a freshman, to 9.85 as a sophomore, to 11.36 as a junior, to 17.15 as a senior.

This post is right on. If Mason get's in foul trouble we're in trouble and if he fouls out with major minutes left we're doomed(until/if Ryan returns). Mason is a much better defender than what he showed last night. At least up until the end of the game with said game on the line. Then Mason played defense the way he's suppose to. For those wanting Marshall spell him for 10-12 minutes, it should be evident that the injury set Marshall back to the point he can not be counted on for over 2-3 minutes in conference games. I'm sure he'll contribute at Duke but maybe not this year. GoDuke!

[CDu]

I have another question about a call that was made. There was a play I think in the first half where a Wake defender blocked a shot and the ball bounced off the bottom of the backboard and went out of bounds. I assumed the ball would remain with Duke but it was awarded to Wake. Did I miss a Duke player touching the ball after the block? Even when they showed a replay I didn't see a Duke player anywhere near the ball. Or is there a rule about the ball hitting the bottom of the backboard? Or maybe they ruled that the Wake defender never actually touched the ball. The announcers called it a block and it looked like one, but I guess it is possible that he didn't actually touch it. Does anyone remember that play and know what the call was?

The bottom of the backboard (I'm assuming you literally mean the backboard - not the support behind the backboard) is in play. The support behind the backboard (even the part of it that is in the court of play) is out of bounds. There is no offense/defense out of bounds rule involving either apparatus. If a Wake player blocked the ball and it hit the bottom of the backboard and shot out of bounds, it should have been Duke's ball. If a Wake player blocked the ball off the support, it should have been Duke's ball. I assume that either the ball wasn't actually blocked or the officials simply missed the block.

[Indoor66]

While I'm not going to claim this game was a thing of beauty, the negativity in the in-game thread was kind of over the top. I believe Wake Forest has scored 0.95 points per possession in ACC play to date if my calculations are right. In this game we gave up...1.01 (http://www.scacchoops.com/ViewHDGame.asp?hSchedule=14587&bView=0). Obviously you want to do better, but it was hardly the total train wreck that it was being made out to be. Given that Mason obviously has to play to avoid fouls--I believe three of his four fouls were on the offensive end, and unlike some others I think those were fair calls, though the fourth one was pretty weak I thought--and our best perimeter defender, Sulaimon, was saddled with foul trouble in the first half, I don't think it was horrible. It was just...average.

I am glad I suck at mathematics. That way I can enjoy a game without disecting it into such arcane and meaningless numbers that upset me.

[budwom]

Mason does have to be cautious when challenging his man's post moves or going for the block on help defense when he is in foul trouble. Wake probably got a couple baskets because he didn't risk fouling.

However I think his quote means the coaching staff wants him to play smarter D besides not challenging shots when in foul trouble. Wake got at least 4 baskets when Mason had very poor decision making on defense. Twice he went for the steal on an entry pass to Thomas, didn't get it and couldn't go for the blocked shot attempt because of his foul situation. He is generally pretty good on selective gambling on trying to steal the entry pass but he needs to just play solid position D when he is foul trouble. He also badly failed to close out on a big on the perimeter twice (Rountree (1st half) led to a dunk and Cavanaugh (2nd half) led to 3 point play and 4th foul on Mason). I know that Mason doesn't typically close out on shooters but both of these plays he looked he really had a very half-hearted close out.

Overall, Mason, particularly offensively, had a great game. He also came up with several big defensive plays late. That being said I think the coaches will have plenty of teaching moments when they review his D on film.

I very much agree. In fact as a team (and perhaps this is a coaching decision) we've been extending to deny passes, only to give up easy looks inside. As some folks have mentioned, perhaps we need to take
fewer chances on defense and settle back more on defense as we did in 2010....last night we gave up a virtual parade of layups.

[mike88]

I very much agree. In fact as a team (and perhaps this is a coaching decision) we've been extending to deny passes, only to give up easy looks inside. As some folks have mentioned, perhaps we need to take
fewer chances on defense and settle back more on defense as we did in 2010....last night we gave up a virtual parade of layups.

Several of Mason's defensive breakdowns came before he was in foul trouble, and in the second half he made some plays that put him in very poor defensive position. Fortunately, he just missed hacking a ballhandler in the backcourt (out of frustration) late in the game, a foul that would have been very costly. Either the coaching staff is going to have to find a way to bring more offside help when we get beat going for steals, or we are going to have to be more prudent and play guys straight up. I feel like these kind of decisions are where we really miss Ryan, who was outstanding in terms of his decision making on defense.

[COYS]

Several of Mason's defensive breakdowns came before he was in foul trouble, and in the second half he made some plays that put him in very poor defensive position. Fortunately, he just missed hacking a ballhandler in the backcourt (out of frustration) late in the game, a foul that would have been very costly. Either the coaching staff is going to have to find a way to bring more offside help when we get beat going for steals, or we are going to have to be more prudent and play guys straight up. I feel like these kind of decisions are where we really miss Ryan, who was outstanding in terms of his decision making on defense.

I agree with this. Mason had some tough calls go against him on the offensive end, but his defense was average for the entire game. Of course, that was offset by his dominating performance on the offensive end, so no harm done in terms of the outcome. However, once he was in foul trouble, he gambled for steals a few times instead of just playing positional defense and making the opposition shoot over him. Every time he gambled, he lost the bet and gave up an easy layup. I've got no problem with him not challenging shots at the rim when he's rotating over when he's got foul trouble. However, it's a different story when he gambles, loses the gamble, and then allows his man to get an uncontested shot. We want him to at least force his man to shoot over his outstretched arms.

This is not meant to be a Mason bashing post. He was my MOTM for sure. But his D was certainly worthy of some criticism, even considering his foul situation.

[English]

I have another question about a call that was made. There was a play I think in the first half where a Wake defender blocked a shot and the ball bounced off the bottom of the backboard and went out of bounds. I assumed the ball would remain with Duke but it was awarded to Wake. Did I miss a Duke player touching the ball after the block? Even when they showed a replay I didn't see a Duke player anywhere near the ball. Or is there a rule about the ball hitting the bottom of the backboard? Or maybe they ruled that the Wake defender never actually touched the ball. The announcers called it a block and it looked like one, but I guess it is possible that he didn't actually touch it. Does anyone remember that play and know what the call was?

I remember this play, and was as perplexed as you were...Seth over-penetrated on a drive, got caught under the basket and kind of heaved an over-the-shoulder prayer that was blocked by the Wake defender (Rountree, I think) off the bottom of the backboard and out of bounds. The replay also clearly showed the block and subsequently nobody touched the ball. The announcers called it a block. It was clearly a bad play by Curry, but also clearly should have remained with Duke. The refs judged that the ball was not touched by the defender, so it went back to Wake. Missed call, but these things happen.

[sporthenry]

I agree with this. Mason had some tough calls go against him on the offensive end, but his defense was average for the entire game. Of course, that was offset by his dominating performance on the offensive end, so no harm done in terms of the outcome. However, once he was in foul trouble, he gambled for steals a few times instead of just playing positional defense and making the opposition shoot over him. Every time he gambled, he lost the bet and gave up an easy layup. I've got no problem with him not challenging shots at the rim when he's rotating over when he's got foul trouble. However, it's a different story when he gambles, loses the gamble, and then allows his man to get an uncontested shot. We want him to at least force his man to shoot over his outstretched arms.

This is not meant to be a Mason bashing post. He was my MOTM for sure. But his D was certainly worthy of some criticism, even considering his foul situation.

I agree with this. I voted for him as MOM but his defense has been troubling at times throughout the year, it wasn't just a snap judgment on last night and I don't think anyone is above criticism as shown by his apparent quotes in the paper about coaches not being happy with his defense. Defense is the #1 thing on Coach K's list and that is why I was surprised so many people thought K said to give up wide open lay ups to stay on the floor. As many mention, this seems to be Alex's biggest learning curve and will continue to be the biggest thing keeping freshmen off the floor at Duke.

As far as Mason, I agree with the previous poster about his one foul in the back court that was luckily not called. He looked frustrated and should have gotten a foul 80 feet from the hoop which would have been disastrous. Luckily for him and Duke, refs let it go. And when he did gamble, he looked a bit upset that nobody came over to help. I think that is where he misses Kelly the most. Not that he should be gambling that much but guys need to rotate and at least give the guy something to think about.

[DukieinSoCal]

I was just thinking about our tendency to over-rely on the 3. Wondering if anyone can do some research breaking down our 3 point percentage and avg 3 pointers taken in home games vs neutral vs away sites. Maybe in a new thread?

It worries me because we've seen too many times where a cold shooting night basically ends our season in a one and done situation.
By my own subjective memory, I would guess that there is a pretty big disparity in our 3-point shooting percentage home vs away and I wonder if the difference is much different from national averages. Is there anything that can be done about this? Should we try to shoot less 3s on the road, even if we're getting good looks? It seems like good shooters should be able to adapt to different environments and shooting backgrounds.



.. And Duke leads the ACC in three-pointers made and in shooting percentage. Then, when you shoot 2-14 from outside, you are lucky not to die by the jump shot. Our freshman and sophs need to learn to play tough and focused offense on the road.

I am happy for any kind of win on the road, but we need to get our bearings and play better this weekend in Tallahassee.

Mason was dominant, unless one can think of a stronger word. Seth's scoring, mostly on pull-up shots and layups, was also key to our win. I thought our defense got a lot better after the first eight-ten minutes, and later, as others noted, Wake got some easier baskets inside when Mason had to draw back because of fouls.

In the last two minutes, Duke shone and Wake crumbled. And we got the win.

sagegrouse

[TruBlu]

I was just thinking about our tendency to over-rely on the 3. Wondering if anyone can do some research breaking down our 3 point percentage and avg 3 pointers taken in home games vs neutral vs away sites. Maybe in a new thread?

It worries me because we've seen too many times where a cold shooting night basically ends our season in a one and done situation.
By my own subjective memory, I would guess that there is a pretty big disparity in our 3-point shooting percentage home vs away and I wonder if the difference is much different from national averages. Is there anything that can be done about this? Should we try to shoot less 3s on the road, even if we're getting good looks? It seems like good shooters should be able to adapt to different environments and shooting backgrounds.

Yep. And for that someone out there doing the research, how about factoring in which brand of basketball is being used. I read on DBR or somewhere that there are different manufacturers' basketballs being used by different teams (or it might be by conference), but that when the NCAA tourney starts all games are played with a certain brand of ball. When practicing for a road game, does Duke switch to the upcoming opponent's brand?

I would attempt this in-depth study, but it's hard enough for me to keep track of how many naps I take in a day. (Fortunately, so far I have been able to wake up the exact number of times that I have fallen asleep.)

[Reilly]

... Mason was dominant, unless one can think of a stronger word...

superior, controlling, ascendant, assertive, authoritative, commanding, effective, foremost, governing, leading, nate james-like, paramount, patrick davidson-esque, powerful, preeminent, prevailing, prevalent, principal, reigning, ruling, sovereign, supreme, surpassing, transcendent

[davekay1971]

It was interesting how confident Mason looked and how smoothly he executed his inside moves while in single coverage. Just like the "old" Mason of November and early December. He even made his free throws. Then, when Wake started doubling and crowding him more, late in the game, things seemed more difficult for him. So perhaps he hasn't regressed or hit a wall or any of the things people have been saying, it's just a matter of how he's defended.

Once again it shows how much we miss Ryan. I don't think it was coincidence that the best roll of Ryan's career came just when opponents started doubling Mason in late December and early January.

There's no doubt that what you've said here is absolutely true. With Ryan on the floor, teams have to worry about another scorer (and, as much as I love Amile, he's not truly a scorer...yet), AND they have to move their 4 out of the lane to defend Ryan. That gives teams the unenviable decision of either doubling Mason and leaving Ryan, Rasheed, Curry, or Cook alone (and leaving Curry or Cook alone only if they want to bring a guard down to double Mason)...or playing Mase in single coverage. If they double Mase, his numbers will suffer, but Ryan or our perimeter guys are going to get better looks (especially if Mason can pass out of the double) and their production will increase.

Replacing Ryan with Amile or Hairston effectively gives the opponent an obvious way for a big to double on Mason without significant offensive repurcussions. It's a dramatic change in our offensive capabilities.

What I still find amazing is the defensive fall-off with Ryan out. He's a good defender, but our efficiency numbers have plummeted. Is that all the loss of Ryan (who's being replaced by reasonably good defenders in Hairston or Jefferson)...or is it partly because of Mason's increased hesitation to aggressively defend for fear of picking up fouls and costing us our only scoring big?

[sporthenry]

I was just thinking about our tendency to over-rely on the 3. Wondering if anyone can do some research breaking down our 3 point percentage and avg 3 pointers taken in home games vs neutral vs away sites. Maybe in a new thread?

It worries me because we've seen too many times where a cold shooting night basically ends our season in a one and done situation.
By my own subjective memory, I would guess that there is a pretty big disparity in our 3-point shooting percentage home vs away and I wonder if the difference is much different from national averages. Is there anything that can be done about this? Should we try to shoot less 3s on the road, even if we're getting good looks? It seems like good shooters should be able to adapt to different environments and shooting backgrounds.

I know the common narrative is that Duke lives and dies by the 3 but this isn't exclusive to many top teams. Before Kelly went down, Duke was obviously more versatile and didn't live or die by the 3 as much (I'll try to dig up some stats to back that up). But just looking at Kenpom, Duke is actually 213 in 3PA/FGA at 31.7% which means they aren't necessarily shooting too many 3's. But they are 7th in % of points which come from the 3 at 40.1%. What I take from this is that Duke doesn't take too many 3's, they just hit a lot of the 3's that they take.

[moonpie23]

i really like mason's body language when he is whistled for a transgression.......no baloney, no sheepish droop, no "oh no you did NOT call me on that", no "woe is me"............he's already going the other way.......next play...

[Duvall]

To be honest, any team that's making more than 40% of its threes probably isn't taking enough.

[DukieinSoCal]

I don't care how many 3s we take at home since we seem to shoot a high percentage at CIS but what do we shoot on the road? To be a good road team, we probably have to be more aggressive and try to get more points inside. I would bet that our younger guys, ie Sheed and Quinn, struggle more with 3-point shooting on the road. It would be great if they looked to penetrate more to get themselves going early in the game.



To be honest, any team that's making more than 40% of its threes probably isn't taking enough.

[gep]

i really like mason's body language when he is whistled for a transgression.......no baloney, no sheepish droop, no "oh no you did NOT call me on that", no "woe is me"............he's already going the other way.......next play...

I notice and like that too. And on the other end, after a monster dunk, he immediately turns around and runs down the court... no macho flexing, etc. On that note, if the ball is near to him, he tries to pick it up and toss it to the ref before he goes the other way. This, to me, is why he got that T in the other game... I thought he was trying to tap the ball to the ref, not knowing that the other player was going towards the ball to pick it up...

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

i really like mason's body language when he is whistled for a transgression.......no baloney, no sheepish droop, no "oh no you did NOT call me on that", no "woe is me"............he's already going the other way.......next play...

I'd like to see that emotional maturity extend to when he makes a mistake on offense. It seems to me that more than half of his miscues on defense (fouls, flubbed assignments, being caught out of position) come as a result of getting frustrated on offense (missed drunk, traveling) and trying to "make up for it" with a big play on defense. He's been doing this for years now, and it's not as bad as in year's past, but he still seems he could use a little dose of "next play."

Still, fantastic game by him last night. And to clarify my earlier comments, I don't fault him for the double-dribble. I've seen him "sell that" in the past and get points off it. It just always makes me nervous.

/side note: At some point it will be interesting to compare how each of the Plumlees grew and developed during their Duke years. Clearly, Miles and Mason made huge strides in all difference facets of the game. I'm hoping for similar progress from Marshall in coming years. It's interesting to think that not only do they share the same genetic make up and many of the same physical traits and advantages, but will also have had many of the same coaches in high school and college.

[Kedsy]

I was just thinking about our tendency to over-rely on the 3.

I know this discussion has occurred many times on the board, but what does it mean to "over-rely" on the 3? Does the basic act of taking a lot of threes make you "over-reliant"? I know it's been established that it is one of the most efficient shots to take if you make it at a reasonable clip. Although I guess three-point shots also have a higher deviation from average on a game to game basis. But certainly you'd rather take threes than long twos, right? If the opponent packs the lane and makes open layups difficult to get, shouldn't you take an open three-pointer in rhythm?

FWIW, here's a table showing the percentage of threes attempted vs. overall shots attempted for Duke this century:



Year 3p att/tot att
---- --------------
2013 .320
2012 .386
2011 .353
2010 .330
2009 .350
2008 .392
2007 .296
2006 .352
2005 .398
2004 .334
2003 .339
2002 .375
2001 .418
2000 .342


Looks like the highest percentage (most threes per shot attempt) was in 2001, a national championship season, and the lowest percentage was in 2007 (our consensus worst season for the period and a first round exit in the NCAAT). In what years did we over-rely on the three?

Also, this season is our 2nd lowest ratio of the 21st century, so no matter what else is true it wouldn't appear as if we're over-relying in 2013.


It worries me because we've seen too many times where a cold shooting night basically ends our season in a one and done situation.

Well, isn't it true that most teams who are facing a strong opponent will lose if they shoot poorly? Can't you have cold shooting nights from two as well as from three, especially if the two-point shots aren't all layups or dunks?

That said, since 2005, Duke's lowest percentage from three-land in an NCAA tournament game was 3 for 17 (.176) against California in 2010, and not only did we win that game, but we won a bunch of others that tournament. Our 5 for 17 (.294) against Butler that season was the 9th coldest we've shot in an NCAAT game during the 2005 to 2012 period (of the "bottom ten" in the period, we won 5 and lost 5). So a cold shooting night hasn't always been fatal for us in the one-and-done environment.


Should we try to shoot less 3s on the road, even if we're getting good looks?

First of all, do you think it's practical to practice one style of offense for home games and another for away games? We often play one of each in a week. It sounds like it'd be really difficult to prepare that way.

Not only that, if we're getting good looks why would we want to take fewer such shots?

[Kedsy]

I don't care how many 3s we take at home since we seem to shoot a high percentage at CIS but what do we shoot on the road? To be a good road team, we probably have to be more aggressive and try to get more points inside.

Last season (2011-12) I believe we were undefeated on the road. And we shot a ton of threes. I'm not sure there's a particularly strong correlation.

[Duvall]

I don't care how many 3s we take at home since we seem to shoot a high percentage at CIS but what do we shoot on the road? To be a good road team, we probably have to be more aggressive and try to get more points inside. I would bet that our younger guys, ie Sheed and Quinn, struggle more with 3-point shooting on the road. It would be great if they looked to penetrate more to get themselves going early in the game.

Duke has shot an ice-cold 21.1% from 3 in road games, which might be worrisome if they had not shot a blistering 43.4% on neutral courts.

I don't think it means anything, except maybe that Duke misses Kelly.

[pfrduke]

Duke has shot an ice-cold 21.1% from 3 in road games, which might be worrisome if they had not shot a blistering 43.4% on neutral courts.

I don't think it means anything, except maybe that Duke misses Kelly.

And that a 3-game sample size is not particularly illuminating.

[sporthenry]

I know the common narrative is that Duke lives and dies by the 3 but this isn't exclusive to many top teams. Before Kelly went down, Duke was obviously more versatile and didn't live or die by the 3 as much (I'll try to dig up some stats to back that up). But just looking at Kenpom, Duke is actually 213 in 3PA/FGA at 31.7% which means they aren't necessarily shooting too many 3's. But they are 7th in % of points which come from the 3 at 40.1%. What I take from this is that Duke doesn't take too many 3's, they just hit a lot of the 3's that they take.

To add a bit more onto this whole live by the 3, die by the 3 "myth." With Kelly in there Duke was averaging 17 3's a game versus the 20 they are now averaging. So as you would expect our offense has been limited a bit and thus forced us into outside shots. Now everyone recognizes any hope of a title relies on Kelly's healthy so with him in there, I'm not worried about the 3.

A few caveats to the numbers, the numbers without Kelly include the 2 losses which usually result in more 3's (23 against Miami and 20 against NC State) and with Kelly, Duke played a variety of opponents which ranged from VCU/OSU to FGCU and Delaware. Against FGCU, Duke shot 31 3's, take that game out, and Duke's 3PA per game drops to 16.2. Additionally, in some of Duke's toughest games, Duke wasn't very reliant on the 3. Versus Minnesota (8-10), Louisville (3-15), and OSU (5-12). Took 18 versus UK and 22 versus Temple but I think that shows that Duke will adapt against better opponents.

Finally, of other top 15 teams, Wichita State, Miami, Butler, Arizona, Florida, Indiana, and Michigan all have a higher % of 3PA/FGA (and OSU/Louisville are a few tenths behind). And as far as 3 point % (meaning of all your points, how many come from the 3), Duke is 7th mainly b/c they shoot it so well but Indiana and Michigan are also top 10 and Florida is 15th. So Duke is actually in good company.

[gumbomoop]

Anyone notice K went with a 4 guard lineup somewhere around the 8 minute mark or so? That lineup actually had some stops on defense... I think.

Yes, I did, in-game thread post #175. But it didn't last long, no more than a minute or so, a very few possessions, and I think Wake had no trouble scoring against it.

I think it's an interesting cat-and-mouse coaching decision, but my vague recollection - not yet having re-viewed the game - is its use in the Wake game didn't work so well. Maybe we'll see it again, but mostly as end-of-game FT-shooting team. And even then, K probably likely to use substitution for O [= ball-handling and FTs] and D [ = height and D-rebounds].