PDA

View Full Version : Chemistry and Swag Next Year



slower
02-25-2013, 08:24 AM
I love watching Sheed and Amile interact on the court. These guys have emotion and swag, and I think the crowd LOVES to see them so emotionally involved in the game. They CARE. Throw Quinn into the same category, of course. Tyler, as we all know, is a warrior. If Dre comes back, you can put him in the swag group as well. Rodney and Jabari seem a little more low-key, from what I've seen. I haven't heard much about Semi and Matt's on-court demeanor, but they also seem to be more low-key.

However, if next year's new guys assume the attitude of the veterans, we could have a VERY aggressive and demonstrative group next year. And if, as we all dearly hope, the talent level lives up to the hype, next year's team could be one of those steamroller teams that just demoralizes opponents. That's my hope, at least.

Anyway, on to the end of THIS year. Let's get Kelly back and let's do this.

lotusland
02-25-2013, 09:29 AM
I love watching Sheed and Amile interact on the court. These guys have emotion and swag, and I think the crowd LOVES to see them so emotionally involved in the game. They CARE. Throw Quinn into the same category, of course. Tyler, as we all know, is a warrior. If Dre comes back, you can put him in the swag group as well. Rodney and Jabari seem a little more low-key, from what I've seen. I haven't heard much about Semi and Matt's on-court demeanor, but they also seem to be more low-key.

However, if next year's new guys assume the attitude of the veterans, we could have a VERY aggressive and demonstrative group next year. And if, as we all dearly hope, the talent level lives up to the hype, next year's team could be one of those steamroller teams that just demoralizes opponents. That's my hope, at least.

Anyway, on to the end of THIS year. Let's get Kelly back and let's do this.
I have some real concerns about next years team minus our 3 best players Ryan, MP2 and Seth. Rebounding, shot blocking, and interior passing are concerns. We also won't have a consistently reliable shooter. We will have a lot of young talented wings so we will have to play differently and there is no way to know how well they will come together at this point.

If I had to pick between this year's team at their peek vs next year's team at their peek I would choose this year's team hands down.

we'll have plenty of time to discuss next year's team in the off season hopefully starting in late April.

subzero02
02-25-2013, 09:49 AM
I have some real concerns about next years team minus our 3 best players Ryan, MP2 and Seth. Rebounding, shot blocking, and interior passing are concerns. We also won't have a consistently reliable shooter. We will have a lot of young talented wings so we will have to play differently and there is no way to know how well they will come together at this point.

If I had to pick between this year's team at their peek vs next year's team at their peek I would choose this year's team hands down.

we'll have plenty of time to discuss next year's team in the off season hopefully starting in late April.

The additions of Matt Jones and Andre Dawkins could very well make us a more effective 3 point shooting team next year than we are this year

lotusland
02-25-2013, 09:59 AM
The additions of Matt Jones and Andre Dawkins could very well make us a more effective 3 point shooting team next year than we are this year
TT
If Dre plays next year then Matt "Basketball" Jones will likely not play much unless he beats out Dre which I don't expect. Dre has a nice stroke but based on past performance I would categorize him as a streaky shooter. Ditto for Sheed, Quin and TT. Hood and Parker and Murphy's perimeter shooting are unknown. I understand they have potential but we haven't seen it. Depsite haveing some ups and downs throughout their carreers I would argue that Seth and Ryan are both consistent, reliable shooters at this point in their carreers.

vick
02-25-2013, 10:09 AM
The additions of Matt Jones and Andre Dawkins could very well make us a more effective 3 point shooting team next year than we are this year

Dawkins is a 40.1% career three point shooter with a career high of 42.7%, and Jones will be a freshman fighting for time. Kelly was shooting 52.1% on the year, and 39.3% career. Curry is a 41.7% career shooter (at Duke) shooting 43.7% on the year. It seems unlikely but possible we're a better outside shooting team next year. I think people are really underestimating how hard it is to replace guys who shoot 43%+ with any sort of volume though.

Kedsy
02-25-2013, 10:13 AM
I have some real concerns about next years team minus our 3 best players Ryan, MP2 and Seth. Rebounding, shot blocking, and interior passing are concerns. We also won't have a consistently reliable shooter. We will have a lot of young talented wings so we will have to play differently and there is no way to know how well they will come together at this point.

Personally, I'd rather evaluate a team on what it has than on what it lost. While I agree that Mason, Ryan, and Seth are our best three players this year, and the team will miss their talents and (perhaps even more) their experience, I don't have many (if any) concerns at all about next year.

We may be small up front, but we'll be big on the perimeter. I expect our defense to be outstanding. Among Andre, Rodney (who was a pretty good outside shooter at Mississippi State), Jabari, Rasheed (whose shooting I expect to continue to improve), Quinn (who hopefully will also continue to improve his shot), plus Matt, Semi, Tyler, and Alex, I think we'll have an amazing amount of shooting ability out there, even if Matt and Semi don't play all that much.

Of course you're right that we don't know for absolute sure that all these guys will shoot well, or rebound well, or play good defense. But I'll be shocked if Duke isn't one of the top five teams in the country next year.

slower
02-25-2013, 10:14 AM
Agreed with everything that's been posted. I'm saying that IF Jabari is the real deal, and IF, as some have said, Hood is the best player we have THIS year, and IF Matt Jones is as good as some have said, and IF Semi is better than most think...

Yes, that's a lot of "ifs" and is probably wishful thinking. But my point is that Quinn, Sheed and Amile are very emotional players, who obviously have a connection with each other. So, IF our talent lives up to the hype, there will be a LOT of in-game talking, maybe some woofing, and even some floor-slapping, which we, as fans, LOVE to see.

True, Mason, Seth and Ryan are huge for this year's team. there's absolutely no denying that. My comment was more about the emotional tone of the team, as none of Seth, Ryan or Mason are as outwardly demonstrative as Quinn, Sheed and Amile.

Kedsy
02-25-2013, 10:15 AM
Dawkins is a 40.1% career three point shooter with a career high of 42.7%, and Jones will be a freshman fighting for time. Kelly was shooting 52.1% on the year, and 39.3% career. Curry is a 41.7% career shooter (at Duke) shooting 43.7% on the year. It seems unlikely but possible we're a better outside shooting team next year. I think people are really underestimating how hard it is to replace guys who shoot 43%+ with any sort of volume though.

Yeah, but Rasheed and Quinn are both shooting 41% from three and Tyler is shooting 38%. I'd expect them all to improve on those percentages, and Andre too. I honestly don't think a lack of outside shooting is going to be even close to a concern for us next season.

Bluealum
02-25-2013, 10:16 AM
I have some real concerns about next years team minus our 3 best players Ryan, MP2 and Seth. Rebounding, shot blocking, and interior passing are concerns. We also won't have a consistently reliable shooter. We will have a lot of young talented wings so we will have to play differently and there is no way to know how well they will come together at this point.

If I had to pick between this year's team at their peek vs next year's team at their peek I would choose this year's team hands down.

we'll have plenty of time to discuss next year's team in the off season hopefully starting in late April.

I second the above in spades. Great chemistry happens when players know their roles. Everyone knows that Mason, Seth and Ryan are the leaders and best players. No one now questions Quinn as our PG or Rasheed as our shooting guard. The bench is fairly well developed due to Ryan's injury with Tyler, Josh, Amile, and Alex all having contributed in key situations and they all know they have time ahead of them to become the starters they all imagined themselves to be. All of this makes it easy for good chemistry to happen.

Next year, our 2/3 seniors all may be coming off the bench or starting ahead of players who perceive themselves as more 'talented' and are being told so by their entourage. When your experience (Josh, Tyler, Andre) may not be your most talented all around players, it takes great coaching skill and good team leadership to keep the focus on 'team'. I think that will be MUCH harder next year.

Enjoy the ride this year, hopefully Ryan gets healthy and integrated ASAP so this team can realize its full potential, whatever that may be.

Next year may be a lot more stressful. Lots of hype, lots of talent, but lingering chemistry issues as our 2/3 seniors move in and out of the starting lineup all season long. It will be a fascinating ride, but I don't see a steamroller season as much as many others do.

NashvilleDevil
02-25-2013, 10:25 AM
Why is next year even being discussed? I like the way the guys are playing right now and with Kelly coming back soon this year's team had a chance to go far. I'll worry about next year and the new pieces after Nebraska loses their first football game in September.

vick
02-25-2013, 10:27 AM
Yeah, but Rasheed and Quinn are both shooting 41% from three and Tyler is shooting 38%. I'd expect them all to improve on those percentages, and Andre too. I honestly don't think a lack of outside shooting is going to be a big concern for us next season.

I don't have concerns about it either, but right now we are 3rd in the country (out of 347) in three point shooting accuracy per Kenpom, and this is with one of our best shooters injured for a third of the year. Saying we're going to be "more effective" next year is tantamount to walking in and saying we're going to be the most accurate three point shooting team in the country despite losing our two most accurate shooters. I refuse to bet against Duke in any way, but if I were the type who would, I'd definitely bet against that (and hope I'm wrong).

I also am uncertain whether Rasheed will improve his percentage by much, because I expect his volume to pick up without Seth. This will be a good thing--sort of like JJ's percentage hovering around 40-42% despite increasing volume, but to a lesser degree--but will IMO limit his percentage improvement.

CDu
02-25-2013, 10:31 AM
Why is next year even being discussed? I like the way the guys are playing right now and with Kelly coming back soon this year's team had a chance to go far. I'll worry about next year and the new pieces after Nebraska loses their first football game in September.

Because we have more than enough time to discuss both this season and next season.

OldPhiKap
02-25-2013, 10:44 AM
Rodney Hood may be the impact POY next year in the conference. He is a freaklete.

lotusland
02-25-2013, 10:45 AM
Yeah, but Rasheed and Quinn are both shooting 41% from three and Tyler is shooting 38%. I'd expect them all to improve on those percentages, and Andre too. I honestly don't think a lack of outside shooting is going to be even close to a concern for us next season.

I agree that what we will have is more important than what we lost but right now we know what we will lose but, in many ways, we donít know what we will have. We will have zero established post players, no shot blocker and no one we can count on for rebounding. We have a lot of talent and potential and we have Coach K so I'm not poor mouthing about it but sometimes it takes a while for performance to catch up with potential. Our current and former lineups are full of examples of players who took a little longer to mature. Mason has been portrayed as both a savior and a hopeless case on this board in the past (not even the distant past). Marshall went from a top 6 player on the team to the end of the bench. Murphy went from starting last year in China to struggling get in the game this year. Consider the careers of Zoubek, Nolan and Gerald Henderson for examples of players who struggled before finding their groove and that is just recent history. Each player runs their own race as a wise man often says and they don't arrive as the same player as when they leave. On the other hand our rising seniors are not even starters on most peoples projected roster for next year (although it won't shock me if both TT and Josh both start game 1 next year). UK is a perfect example of how potential relates to performance. Sure you can win a championship but you can also end up with a bubble team. You just don't know which before they play. Give me this yearís team with 3 senior leaders over next yearís roster any day of the year.

slower
02-25-2013, 10:45 AM
Why is next year even being discussed?

If you object to this thread, then don't visit it again.

I'm not trying to take anything away from this year's team (which probably, as some suggest, has a better chance to win it all than next year's team). I was just impressed by the connection shown by Sheed and Amile during the BC game, and was looking forward to seeing how the personalities mesh next year. No disrespect meant to this year's team.

lotusland
02-25-2013, 10:46 AM
Rodney Hood may be the impact POY next year in the conference. He is a freaklete.

Or he may struggle to find his role...

SoCalDukeFan
02-25-2013, 10:48 AM
Why is next year even being discussed? I like the way the guys are playing right now and with Kelly coming back soon this year's team had a chance to go far. I'll worry about next year and the new pieces after Nebraska loses their first football game in September.

Don't follow Nebraska football.

SoCal

Saratoga2
02-25-2013, 10:49 AM
Our bigs next year will be important to how far this team can go. We are fortunate that Amile is showing rapid improvement and we we likely to see him add weight and strength for next year. I expect him to either start or be the first big off the bench. He is quick, long and is a determined rebounder with touch around the basket.

Josh has also come a long way and can fill a role as a big next year. He has more bulk but his lateral quickess and reaction on rebounding is a little slow. He is important to the team but not a dominant big.

Mashall is the one who we need to improve but so far he is lagging the others. Let us hope that he will make a big step forward by next year but there has little evidence of his improvement so far this year.

We will have a couple of other 6'8" guys but bpth will be freshmen and playing big would be out of position.

CDu
02-25-2013, 10:49 AM
Yeah, but Rasheed and Quinn are both shooting 41% from three and Tyler is shooting 38%. I'd expect them all to improve on those percentages, and Andre too. I honestly don't think a lack of outside shooting is going to be even close to a concern for us next season.

I'll believe Dawkins is playing next year when it is actually confirmed that he'll return to the court. That being said, even without Dawkins I'm not too worried about our 3pt shooting. At the very least, we'll be playing Cook, Thornton, Sulaimon, Hood, and Parker major minutes, and all are very capable 3pt shooters. So we should have several guys capable of 40+% 3pt shooting. And if we don't have a dead-eye shooter (i.e., if Dawkins doesn't play and Matt Jones isn't ready to be our marksman), we can always tweak our offense to not focus on running a shooter off multiple screens for open 3s.

Defensively, I think we'll be able to wreak havoc on the perimeter, with lots of length and athleticism. The concern will be interior defense. Right now, I'm not sold on Marshall, Jefferson, or Hairston being strong defensive presences at C, and we'll likely have Parker playing against (often) bigger PFs.

So if anything, my concern will be interior defense and rebounding, not shooting. It's just a question of whether our gains in ballhandling, scoring ability, and perimeter defense offset our losses inside.

rsvman
02-25-2013, 10:51 AM
Pretty sure you mean swagger, not swag.

Well, 'cause all that swag would just slow the players down. /diction police mode

dukelifer
02-25-2013, 10:52 AM
I have some real concerns about next years team minus our 3 best players Ryan, MP2 and Seth. Rebounding, shot blocking, and interior passing are concerns. We also won't have a consistently reliable shooter. We will have a lot of young talented wings so we will have to play differently and there is no way to know how well they will come together at this point.

If I had to pick between this year's team at their peek vs next year's team at their peek I would choose this year's team hands down.

we'll have plenty of time to discuss next year's team in the off season hopefully starting in late April.

Definitely time to discuss. I think it is important to temper expectations. Duke will have a much different team next year- but there is real talent there. Having it come together is easier said than done. My guess is that K will figure it out. Duke will have a versatile but not a big team. The shooting may be streaky- but having 5 guys who can shoot and drive will make it very hard to defend. Next year's players need to work on their free throws- I suspect we will see a lot of Duke players on the line.

lotusland
02-25-2013, 10:56 AM
I'll believe Dawkins is playing next year when it is actually confirmed that he'll return to the court. That being said, even without Dawkins I'm not too worried about our 3pt shooting. At the very least, we'll be playing Cook, Thornton, Sulaimon, Hood, and Parker major minutes, and all are very capable 3pt shooters. So we should have several guys capable of 40+% 3pt shooting. And if we don't have a dead-eye shooter (i.e., if Dawkins doesn't play and Matt Jones isn't ready to be our marksman), we can always tweak our offense to not focus on running a shooter off multiple screens for open 3s.

Defensively, I think we'll be able to wreak havoc on the perimeter, with lots of length and athleticism. The concern will be interior defense. Right now, I'm not sold on Marshall, Jefferson, or Hairston being strong defensive presences at C, and we'll likely have Parker playing against (often) bigger PFs.

So if anything, my concern will be interior defense and rebounding, not shooting. It's just a question of whether our gains in ballhandling, scoring ability, and perimeter defense offset our losses inside.

The difference in shooting next year will be what happens when the shots aren't falling or when the defense takes away the permiter shot. There will be no post presence to draw attention. Hopefully we will have slashers an penetraters to create but that doesn't flow as well as an inside out game IMO. I'm a huge AR fan but having good penetration doesn't always translate to easy baskets for others as we have seen.

DukeAlumBS
02-25-2013, 11:03 AM
My friends,

All my years have seen what you describe as emotion or swag. I think coming to Div 1 sports at a Duke, one automatically develops a subtle arrogance.
Confidence,motivation, bearing even. I have made the comment about Kelly and his court savey in some of the forums. This could be a subtle arrogance.
All the teams IMO at this level display this through their own personality. I think this strengthens the team. Simply, it is a confidence builder just coming to Duke to play.

Good example, Corey Magette high fiving the high back board after a great dunk! And then drawing the T on top of this.
Over my entire life, each team has had this swagger IMO. I like what you see going forward with the team, it carries through.

Have nice day my friends,
Jimmy

NashvilleDevil
02-25-2013, 11:08 AM
Don't follow Nebraska football.

SoCal

My alma mater and it's only until September.

Billy Dat
02-25-2013, 11:23 AM
Good example, Corey Magette high fiving the high back board after a great dunk! And then drawing the T on top of this.


Great call, Jimmy! One of my favorite plays ever, sticking it to the fledgling Donovan Gators!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLsuG9dCckE

Kfanarmy
02-25-2013, 12:02 PM
Rodney Hood may be the impact POY next year in the conference. He is a freaklete. Freaklete...what a great word!

HaveFunExpectToWin
02-25-2013, 12:12 PM
Pretty sure you mean swagger, not swag.

Well, 'cause all that swag would just slow the players down. /diction police mode

Unfortunately, I think they meant #swag (https://twitter.com/search?q=%23swag)

At least they didn't write YOLO.

DukeAlumBS
02-25-2013, 12:15 PM
My friend,

The only other one I liked was Phil Henderson ( God rest his soul) over Alonzo Mourning. And staring at Mourning. Phil did it with an attitude!

You have a nice day my friend

Jimmy

slower
02-25-2013, 12:17 PM
Pretty sure you mean swagger, not swag.

Well, 'cause all that swag would just slow the players down. /diction police mode

Pretty sure that anybody under the age of 40 who has it, calls it swag. ;)

/non-obsolescence mode (but I c what u did there!)

slower
02-25-2013, 12:24 PM
The difference in shooting next year will be what happens when the shots aren't falling or when the defense takes away the permiter shot. There will be no post presence to draw attention. Hopefully we will have slashers an penetraters to create but that doesn't flow as well as an inside out game IMO. I'm a huge AR fan but having good penetration doesn't always translate to easy baskets for others as we have seen.

Well, Sheed seems to have a pretty good mid-range game, as do Hood and Parker (if their highlights reflect reality).

Barr8
02-25-2013, 01:14 PM
Next year has a lot of if's going into the season, but I think a lot of those if's will turn out to be positives.

I may be going against the grain, but I believe Duke will be a stronger rebounding team as a whole. Here's why, first Duke will have more overall height/athleticism(I understand that doesn't make a good rebounder, but it ca nt hurt) we lose Kelly who is IMO an average rebounder for his height, dare I say below average? Replacing him with a stronger Jefferson(think he is best suited for the 4 next year).. As great a player Curry is, rebounding is not anywhere near his strength. Replacing him in the lineup will either be Hood or Parker.. Both should be significantly better rebounders. Of course losing Mason will hurt tremendously and whoever will take his spot will more than likely not be to his standard of rebounding. Sprinkle In the experience for Sheed plus an offseason to get stronger he will be better.

So my point is the overall rebounding will be better. My main question marks are team defense and who steps up as the main scorer? I don't think scoring will be a problem, but who is the go to guy? Quinn? Sheed? Parker? Hood? Last but not least who dominates the paint? Marshall, Josh and Amile be enough?

Kedsy
02-25-2013, 01:22 PM
Replacing him with a stronger Jefferson(think he is best suited for the 4 next year).

This is one of the big questions for next year. It is unlikely that both Marshall and Amile would start. Hard to see anyone on the team starting over Quinn, Rasheed, Rodney, and Jabari for PG, SG, SF, PF. So it would seem that if Amile starts he would actually be "replacing" Mason at C (whether he is best suited for PF or not).

Still, your overall point holds. We should garner more rebounds at SG, SF, and PF, and fewer at C. The total number could very well be greater.

Barr8
02-25-2013, 01:41 PM
This is one of the big questions for next year. It is unlikely that both Marshall and Amile would start. Hard to see anyone on the team starting over Quinn, Rasheed, Rodney, and Jabari for PG, SG, SF, PF. So it would seem that if Amile starts he would actually be "replacing" Mason at C (whether he is best suited for PF or not).

Still, your overall point holds. We should garner more rebounds at SG, SF, and PF, and fewer at C. The total number could very well be greater.

I think you made my point greater than I did.

It wouldn't surprise me to be similar to UNC of this year, they have two guys above 5 RPG but are sixth in the nation at rebounding. Hate to say it, but they are a great rebounding team. Do I think Duke will be a top Ten rebounding team next year? I don't think so.. But I believe they will be better than 183rd(this years).

Disclosure: I understand that rebounds per game reflect on the tempo of the game.

Anyone with kenpom compare the rebound % between this yearn and say 2010?

Indoor66
02-25-2013, 01:43 PM
Pretty sure that anybody under the age of 40 who has it, calls it swag. ;)

/non-obsolescence mode (but I c what u did there!)

A lot of folks under 40 have a hard time finishing their words.

jcastranio
02-25-2013, 01:43 PM
While next year's team will play in next year's college basketball (so comparing this year and next probably isn't helpful), I am amped for the possibilities.

First - the downside. If Andre returns, K will have 12 players. He is not going to play 12 players. Someone is going to sit (usually freshmen, sophomores, or upper classmen who didn't pan out.

Point Guards or normal-sized Shooting Guards - Quinn, Rasheed, Tyler, Andre, Matt. Quinn, Rasheed, and Tyler get the most burn. Andre plays every game, minutes determined by effectiveness. Matt (who I am very high on) struggles for minutes. Quinn and Rasheed are the starters.

Big Guards, Swing Players, Small Forwards - Rodney, Alex, Semi. Based on what little I know, Rodney is the starter. Alex collects minutes here - his progression from this year to the next will determine how many. Semi seems to be a talent, but I think it will take a year for the speed of the college game to slow down.

Big guys - Jabari, Amile, Josh, Marshall. Jabari and Josh get the starting nods. Jabari on talent and reputation, Josh on the whole senior thing. Amile probably gets more minutes than Josh, but usually comes off the bench. Marshall will be an important part of the the Duke program - I know it. It won't be next year. Still has some development to go. Nothing wrong with that, nothing wrong with the young man. Sometimes, big men take time.

The most who will get significant minutes (8-30) will be 8. So there is still one more unlucky devil out there.

The team will not be big at the center position. It will take quick hands, help defense, and overplays to stop an opposing big. We will generally be long and active throughout. It will take a little time for the team to jell, but they will be good. Losing Ryan and Seth hurts the three-point threat. How well and how confidently we shoot the mid-range (Jabari, Rodney, Josh, Rasheed) will definitely affect our point totals.

Andre will be a wild card. Jabari's "star" power is a key factor.

ChicagoCrazy84
02-25-2013, 01:54 PM
This is one of the big questions for next year. It is unlikely that both Marshall and Amile would start. Hard to see anyone on the team starting over Quinn, Rasheed, Rodney, and Jabari for PG, SG, SF, PF. So it would seem that if Amile starts he would actually be "replacing" Mason at C (whether he is best suited for PF or not).

Still, your overall point holds. We should garner more rebounds at SG, SF, and PF, and fewer at C. The total number could very well be greater.

When I think of next year's team, I can't help but think of our 2001 or better yet 2002 team which was a great team (never mind the loss to IU in the sweet 16). Our lone post presence was Carlos Boozer who was really good mind you, but undersized. Casey Sanders was our biggest guy and was used in a back up role if I remember correctly. I don't think it is unreasonable to think Amile or Josh could fit the mold of Booz and be our leading rebounder. Those teams had a lot of athleticism and versatility with a lot of different scoring options on any given night. With Jones, Dunleavy, JWill, Boozer, Ewing, and Duhon we were very guard heavy.

It's tough to think who may be our leading scorer/go-to-guy at the moment, but I don't think that is such a bad thing. They will figure it out :)

slower
02-25-2013, 02:40 PM
I don't think it is unreasonable to think Amile or Josh could fit the mold of Booz and be our leading rebounder.

If Amile packs on some muscle, he could be a VERY good rebounder. And if he ever develops a reliable jumper, he's gonna be a terror.

lotusland
02-25-2013, 02:42 PM
When I think of next year's team, I can't help but think of our 2001 or better yet 2002 team which was a great team (never mind the loss to IU in the sweet 16). Our lone post presence was Carlos Boozer who was really good mind you, but undersized. Casey Sanders was our biggest guy and was used in a back up role if I remember correctly. I don't think it is unreasonable to think Amile or Josh could fit the mold of Booz and be our leading rebounder. Those teams had a lot of athleticism and versatility with a lot of different scoring options on any given night. With Jones, Dunleavy, JWill, Boozer, Ewing, and Duhon we were very guard heavy.

It's tough to think who may be our leading scorer/go-to-guy at the moment, but I don't think that is such a bad thing. They will figure it out :)

I do not expect to Josh/Amile to be equal to Boozer/Sanders in the post in rebounding, defense or post scoring. I don't see any comparison based on what they have accomplished thus far compared to Boozer coming into 2001-2002. Duke may find a way to manufacture solid post scoring, rebounding and defense next year but I don't think Boozer is a good comparison to use as projection.

lotusland
02-25-2013, 02:43 PM
If Amile packs on some muscle, he could be a VERY good rebounder. And if he ever develops a reliable jumper, he's gonna be a terror.

It's all the "ifs" that temper my expectations

WillJ
02-25-2013, 02:45 PM
Starting lineup - Cook, Sulaimon, Hood, Parker, Jefferson - I think we're going to be awesome next year.

jimsumner
02-25-2013, 02:48 PM
When I think of next year's team, I can't help but think of our 2001 or better yet 2002 team which was a great team (never mind the loss to IU in the sweet 16). Our lone post presence was Carlos Boozer who was really good mind you, but undersized. Casey Sanders was our biggest guy and was used in a back up role if I remember correctly. I don't think it is unreasonable to think Amile or Josh could fit the mold of Booz and be our leading rebounder. Those teams had a lot of athleticism and versatility with a lot of different scoring options on any given night. With Jones, Dunleavy, JWill, Boozer, Ewing, and Duhon we were very guard heavy.

It's tough to think who may be our leading scorer/go-to-guy at the moment, but I don't think that is such a bad thing. They will figure it out :)

Playing at around 260 pounds, Carlos Boozer averaged 18.2 points and 8.7 rebounds per game in 2002, making first-team All-ACC.

It takes a pretty big leap of faith to see Duke getting that kind of production from the 5 next season.

dukelifer
02-25-2013, 02:52 PM
If Amile packs on some muscle, he could be a VERY good rebounder. And if he ever develops a reliable jumper, he's gonna be a terror.

If Amile grows to Boozer's size - he is going pro ;)

jimsumner
02-25-2013, 02:58 PM
If Amile grows to Boozer's size - he is going pro ;)

I don't think we need to concern ourselves with seeing a 260-pound Jefferson. He does not have the frame and no one associated with Duke wants him that big.

If we're going to go all fantasy-island, let's try Chris Bosh. Or Roshown McLeod.

slower
02-25-2013, 03:00 PM
It's all the "ifs" that temper my expectations

True. But I think Amile has exceeded expectations. Alex, not so much.

Indoor66
02-25-2013, 03:03 PM
True. But I think Amile has exceeded expectations. Alex, not so much.

are you referring to your expectations?

NSDukeFan
02-25-2013, 03:15 PM
TT
If Dre plays next year then Matt "Basketball" Jones will likely not play much unless he beats out Dre which I don't expect. Dre has a nice stroke but based on past performance I would categorize him as a streaky shooter. Ditto for Sheed, Quin and TT. Hood and Parker and Murphy's perimeter shooting are unknown. I understand they have potential but we haven't seen it. Depsite haveing some ups and downs throughout their carreers I would argue that Seth and Ryan are both consistent, reliable shooters at this point in their carreers.
I would categorize Dre as someone who is streaky in how much his defense has warranted he play. As far as his shooting goes, I would argue that when he plays, he scores. His streakiness (when his overall play warrants minutes) is mostly whether he will hit a consistent level of 3s or go bonkers and win the team some games by himself.

Yeah, but Rasheed and Quinn are both shooting 41% from three and Tyler is shooting 38%. I'd expect them all to improve on those percentages, and Andre too. I honestly don't think a lack of outside shooting is going to be even close to a concern for us next season.
I agree and agree with CDu who stated that interior defense and rebounding are much bigger potential concerns for next year.

I agree that what we will have is more important than what we lost but right now we know what we will lose but, in many ways, we donít know what we will have. We will have zero established post players, no shot blocker and no one we can count on for rebounding. We have a lot of talent and potential and we have Coach K so I'm not poor mouthing about it but sometimes it takes a while for performance to catch up with potential. Our current and former lineups are full of examples of players who took a little longer to mature. Mason has been portrayed as both a savior and a hopeless case on this board in the past (not even the distant past). Marshall went from a top 6 player on the team to the end of the bench. Murphy went from starting last year in China to struggling get in the game this year. Consider the careers of Zoubek, Nolan and Gerald Henderson for examples of players who struggled before finding their groove and that is just recent history. Each player runs their own race as a wise man often says and they don't arrive as the same player as when they leave. On the other hand our rising seniors are not even starters on most peoples projected roster for next year (although it won't shock me if both TT and Josh both start game 1 next year). UK is a perfect example of how potential relates to performance. Sure you can win a championship but you can also end up with a bubble team. You just don't know which before they play. Give me this yearís team with 3 senior leaders over next yearís roster any day of the year.

I believe you made some good points, but would just mention with the bolded part that coach K >> Cal in consistently building a team if talent is equal and next year coach K will have no shortage of talent, even if it is not in an orthodox 2 bigs, 2 wings, 1 point guard or 1 center, 2 forwards, 2 guards, format.

slower
02-25-2013, 03:16 PM
are you referring to your expectations?

I loves me some rhetorical questions, yes I do.

dukelifer
02-25-2013, 03:29 PM
I don't think we need to concern ourselves with seeing a 260-pound Jefferson. He does not have the frame and no one associated with Duke wants him that big.

If we're going to go all fantasy-island, let's try Chris Bosh. Or Roshown McLeod.

Bosh would be good. I will take that.

jimsumner
02-25-2013, 05:18 PM
Bosh would be good. I will take that.

I'd be (pleasantly) surprised to see AJ become that good. But they have similar body types.

It's hard for me to come up with a really good Duke analog to Jefferson. Maybe Mark Alarie. John Smith was about the same height but didn't have the really long arms. And he wasn't all that highly regarded coming out of high school. And he never did learn to rebound.

Maybe Tony Lang. McLeod was much more physical coming to Duke but he came in after two seasons at St. John's. Guys like Dunleavy and Singler had better ball skills coming in.

Battier had no perimeter game coming into Duke but he was stronger than Jefferson.

Lance Thomas? I hope it doesn't take that long.

So, maybe he'll have to start his own template at Duke. Or, in K-speak, run his own race.

SupaDave
02-25-2013, 05:20 PM
One thing is for sure - practice is gonna be ridiculous next year. I wanna see those first few.

slower
02-25-2013, 05:32 PM
One thing is for sure - practice is gonna be ridiculous next year. I wanna see those first few.

Supa,

From Day One, we know Quinn's gonna be the PG alpha dog (that's a given, right?). Aside from that, who will be the alpha dogs at the other spots?

What's your opinion? We know Sheed's gonna bring it at SG, but SF and PF is gonna be the show, isn't it?

I'm not necessarily asking who will end up being the starters. I want to know who's gonna get out there on Day One and try to TAKE IT.

jimsumner
02-25-2013, 05:39 PM
Supa,

From Day One, we know Quinn's gonna be the PG alpha dog (that's a given, right?). Aside from that, who will be the alpha dogs at the other spots?

What's your opinion? We know Sheed's gonna bring it at SG, but SF and PF is gonna be the show, isn't it?

I'm not necessarily asking who will end up being the starters. I want to know who's gonna get out there on Day One and try to TAKE IT.

The expectation is that Parker and Hood will start at the forward spots and play that position at a very high level.

Doesn't mean it will be given them on a platter. Gonna have to earn it.

slower
02-25-2013, 05:42 PM
The expectation is that Parker and Hood will start at the forward spots and play that position at a very high level.

Doesn't mean it will be given them on a platter. Gonna have to earn it.

Jim,

Is there a consensus opinion that Amile will be fighting for a starter's spot at the 5, or will he be the first backup at 4 and 5? I guess a lot depends on Marshall's progress and the feasibility of a small-ball lineup, right?

arnie
02-25-2013, 05:56 PM
Playing at around 260 pounds, Carlos Boozer averaged 18.2 points and 8.7 rebounds per game in 2002, making first-team All-ACC.

It takes a pretty big leap of faith to see Duke getting that kind of production from the 5 next season.

Agree - Josh grabs a rebound every 6.21 minutes and he's had enough minutes to show that rebounding is not his strength. As example, all Duke players taller than 6'4" rebound at a higher rate. I checked the UNC stats for comparison and the following players rebound at a higher rate: McAdoo, Bullock, Hairston, Johnson, Tokoto, Simmons, James, Hubert, Manor and Robinson. Josh's numbers will edge upward next year without Mason, but don't assume he will be a rebounding force, and comparing him with Boozer is silly.

However, I'm optimistic that rebounding by committee (Jefferson, Parker, Hood and possibly MP3) will be enough with all the other talent.

jimsumner
02-25-2013, 06:02 PM
Jim,

Is there a consensus opinion that Amile will be fighting for a starter's spot at the 5, or will he be the first backup at 4 and 5? I guess a lot depends on Marshall's progress and the feasibility of a small-ball lineup, right?

I think there's a consensus that the 5 spot is wide open. It could be center-by-committee. Or someone could grab it by the you-know-what and not let go.

Jefferson told the media back in October that he had come to Duke at 192 and was up to 208. He told me yesterday that he was still working with the strength staff, trying to get stronger. Can he get to 220? 225? Do we want him to?

Some people can put on good weight, some can't. No one wants Jefferson to sacrifice any of his mobilty or leaping ability in a desperate search to become a prototype 5. How strong can he get without sacrificing the positives that attracted Duke to him in the first case?

I don't know. But I suspect we'll find out.

MarkD83
02-25-2013, 06:31 PM
Does duke really need a prototype 5 next year? I see a team that will press the ball handler and run. If forced into a half court offense next years team becomes the stereotypical coach K team, set ball screens and drive. Get ready for the duke haters saying that K can't develop big men but don't expect duke to be "alarmingly unathletic".

SupaDave
02-25-2013, 06:37 PM
I think there's a consensus that the 5 spot is wide open. It could be center-by-committee. Or someone could grab it by the you-know-what and not let go.

Jefferson told the media back in October that he had come to Duke at 192 and was up to 208. He told me yesterday that he was still working with the strength staff, trying to get stronger. Can he get to 220? 225? Do we want him to?

Some people can put on good weight, some can't. No one wants Jefferson to sacrifice any of his mobilty or leaping ability in a desperate search to become a prototype 5. How strong can he get without sacrificing the positives that attracted Duke to him in the first case?

I don't know. But I suspect we'll find out.

Jim, the amount of mass he's added is incredible. Shawn Bradley would be proud.

Marcus Camby was a beast at 220. 215 pounds could get AJ where he needs to be and I already know the Duke training staff is on top of that. It will be good solid weight on his frame. With a few weeks off after the season to level off and then really eat he will be able to hit the weights come summer time.

ncexnyc
02-25-2013, 06:47 PM
I guess I'm a bit higher than most people on Marshall, but I believe the young man will be more than capable of claiming the 5 spot next season.

I say this because if the talent we supposedly have on our team next year is anywhere near it's billing, then Marshall will only need to play D and rebound. The points will come from the rest of the players. For a young man who will be entering his third year in the system next season, I don't believe doing those two things is beyond his abilities.

slower
02-25-2013, 06:50 PM
I guess I'm a bit higher than most people on Marshall, but I believe the young man will be more than capable of claiming the 5 spot next season.

I say this because if the talent we supposedly have on our team next year is anywhere near it's billing, then Marshall will only need to play D and rebound. The points will come from the rest of the players. For a young man who will be entering his third year in the system next season, I don't believe doing those two things is beyond his abilities.

Those are great points, because the expectations (that dirty word again) are that we're going to be flat-out ridiculous at the 1-4.

lotusland
02-25-2013, 06:53 PM
Does duke really need a prototype 5 next year? I see a team that will press the ball handler and run. If forced into a half court offense next years team becomes the stereotypical coach K team, set ball screens and drive. Get ready for the duke haters saying that K can't develop big men but don't expect duke to be "alarmingly unathletic".

I'm not sure about a prototypical 5 but I don't know any precedent where Duke was a contender with the equivalent of Amile/Josh at center. Watch Mason rebounding the ball and tell me who is going to do that next year. It's a legitimate concern IMO.

cptnflash
02-25-2013, 06:57 PM
Next year's team will be:

- Better at rebounding (granted that's a low bar to clear)
- Not as good at shooting 3's (this year's team is our best in at least a decade, by a wide margin)
- Hopefully better at drawing fouls
- Not as good at shooting free throws
- Probably a little more turnover-prone, but not too bad
- Better defensively than this year's team ex-Ryan, but probably not as good as we were before Ryan got hurt

Quinn's leadership will be the key, because he'll be the only upper classman that will be on the court for more than half of the game (hopefully). Roles, minutes, and egos will not be as easy to manage as they have been this year. Lack of experience will hurt us at times. I think top 10 is a realistic expectation, but as I've said before, people who think next year's team is going to dominate need to think about exactly how good this year's team would be without Mason, Ryan, and Seth. There's every reason to expect Jabari Parker and Rodney Hood to be very good, but that's an awful lot to make up for. I still think that when all is said and done, this year's team will turn out to be better, provided that Ryan is full healthy, back in game shape, reintegrated, and playing 30+ minutes a game by the time we're facing single-elimination scenarios.

slower
02-25-2013, 07:13 PM
Next year's team will be:

- Better at rebounding (granted that's a low bar to clear)
- Not as good at shooting 3's (this year's team is our best in at least a decade, by a wide margin)
- Hopefully better at drawing fouls
- Not as good at shooting free throws
- Probably a little more turnover-prone, but not too bad
- Better defensively than this year's team ex-Ryan, but probably not as good as we were before Ryan got hurt

Quinn's leadership will be the key, because he'll be the only upper classman that will be on the court for more than half of the game (hopefully). Roles, minutes, and egos will not be as easy to manage as they have been this year. Lack of experience will hurt us at times. I think top 10 is a realistic expectation, but as I've said before, people who think next year's team is going to dominate need to think about exactly how good this year's team would be without Mason, Ryan, and Seth. There's every reason to expect Jabari Parker and Rodney Hood to be very good, but that's an awful lot to make up for. I still think that when all is said and done, this year's team will turn out to be better, provided that Ryan is full healthy, back in game shape, reintegrated, and playing 30+ minutes a game by the time we're facing single-elimination scenarios.

I thought Matt Jones was considered a dead-eye shooter. And if Dre comes back, that's another threat from 3. Granted, though, that those two will probably not equal Seth and Ryan from 3 (and certainly not in their all-around offensive strength).

Remember that, in addition to Rodney and Jabari, we'll see the freshman-to-sophomore jumps for Amile and Sheed (Lordy!) and probably even more growth from Quinn. Quinn's no slouch, offensively.

Once again, my original thread-starting post was not necessarily a contention that next year's team will be better than this year's team. We'll just have to wait and see.

We're just left to speculate and do rudimentary math:

Subtract Mason, Seth and Ryan.

Add Jabari, Rodney, Matt and Semi. And possibly Dre.

Improved(?) versions of Quinn, Sheed and Amile. Hopefully, improved versions of Alex and Marshall. Josh and Tyler are solid, although they could certainly improve by next year.

POTENTIALLY, a ridiculously talented group.

jimsumner
02-25-2013, 07:57 PM
Jones is indeed considered the best perimeter shooter in this class.

But how much does he play?

If we assume that Cook and Sulaimon retain their starting roles--a pretty safe assumption--then Duke probably is exchanging Curry for Hood.

Hood likely does a number of things better than Curry. But 3-point shooting is not one one them. I would hope Sulaimon will be a tad more consistent next season but the shooting gods are fickle for sophomores, as well as freshmen. And it's hard to see Parker as a 3-point upgrade over Kelly and it sure is hard to see any of the prospective 5s being threats from downtown.

Dawkins could change the equation, as could an improved Murphy.

But it's hard for me to imagine Duke being a better 3-point shooting team next year. Pretty good, to be sure, good enough to make opposing D's respect Duke from outside. Which will open ups lots of other options.



I thought Matt Jones was considered a dead-eye shooter. And if Dre comes back, that's another threat from 3. Granted, though, that those two will probably not equal Seth and Ryan from 3 (and certainly not in their all-around offensive strength). . . .

POTENTIALLY, a ridiculously talented group.

vick
02-25-2013, 08:12 PM
I thought Matt Jones was considered a dead-eye shooter. And if Dre comes back, that's another threat from 3. Granted, though, that those two will probably not equal Seth and Ryan from 3 (and certainly not in their all-around offensive strength).

There's dead-eye in high school and there's dead-eye when a 6'7" Reggie Bullock is chasing you around. I have high hopes for him too, but I think it's virtually certain this pair won't equal Curry and Kelly.

I'm not sure some of our fans grasp how well Curry is playing offensively this season so far. As far as I know, there are two previous Duke players who shot six three point attempts a game while hitting over 43%: A senior Chris Collins in 1996 (79-179 in 29 games, or 6.2 attempts/game and .441) and a senior Trajan Langdon in 1999 (112-254 in 36 games, or 7.1 attempts per game and .441). Curry is at 69-158 in 26 games, or 6.2 attempts per game and 0.435. I would be extremely happy but very surprised if we replace that sort of production from the perimeter, though our incoming players obviously bring things that Curry doesn't have as well.

COYS
02-25-2013, 08:27 PM
Jones is indeed considered the best perimeter shooter in this class.

But how much does he play?

If we assume that Cook and Sulaimon retain their starting roles--a pretty safe assumption--then Duke probably is exchanging Curry for Hood.

Hood likely does a number of things better than Curry. But 3-point shooting is not one one them. I would hope Sulaimon will be a tad more consistent next season but the shooting gods are fickle for sophomores, as well as freshmen. And it's hard to see Parker as a 3-point upgrade over Kelly and it sure is hard to see any of the prospective 5s being threats from downtown.

Dawkins could change the equation, as could an improved Murphy.

But it's hard for me to imagine Duke being a better 3-point shooting team next year. Pretty good, to be sure, good enough to make opposing D's respect Duke from outside. Which will open ups lots of other options.

The good thing is, we don't even NEED everyone to be as good as this year's team from downtown. As someone noted above, this team (knock on wood) is the best shooting team from downtown that Duke has had in the past 15 years. They are shooting 41.6%, which is wonderful for any one player but is simply scorching hot for an entire team, especially considering the large number of attempts we've taken. Also, while Ryan's 52% from three helps our percentage, it is worth noting that the team percentage is as high is it is with Ryan sidelined. I doubt Ryan would have been able to maintain an average of 52% for the entire year, but his average is so high it could slip a bit and STILL increase the team's over all percentage.

This team has simply been deadly from downtown. Considering that I expect next year's squad to score more on fast breaks, attack the basket with regularity, and get to the free throw line more frequently, the team will have plenty of other weapons to build an offense around even though the three point shooting is likely to fall off a bit.

One last note. Going into the season, other posters and I wondered if three point shooting might actually be a real weakness for our team, this year. Seth and Ryan were our only two proven three point shooters. Rasheed had the reputation of being good but streaky and anything but a pure shooter. Quinn had poor percentages in admittedly limited minutes as a freshman. Finally, Tyler, aside from a few clutch heaves, shot rarely and generally inaccurately his first two seasons. Alex's free throw percentages in Finland did not bode well and Amile was not reputed to shoot from midrange very accurately, much less from three point range. Instead, the team has bested teams led by JJ Redick and J-Will/Dunleavy/Battier . . . heck, the team is better than last year's squad, which I thought would be really accurate from three with Seth, Andre, Ryan, and Austin all capable of going off on a run from three. I would not have expected a team with Seth, Ryan, a sophomore Quinn and a freshman Rasheed to shoot so much better than all those other teams from three. So, it just goes to show that our projections might turn out to be very wrong. Next year's team will likely surprise us.

Ok, I'm going to go knock on some more wood, now.

licc85
02-25-2013, 10:26 PM
It's hard to speculate on whether or not we will be as good or better than this year's team without seeing it all come together, but there's definitely some things that I think are obvious because of our personnel, and also some questions that need to be addressed:

1. We are going to pressure the **** out of the ball.

Quinn I would say, is now a VERY annoying on the ball defender, and Rasheed/Rodney/Amile/Jabari all have the length and quickness to get into passing lanes and be extremely disruptive. We might give up some easy ones here and there due to over-gambling, but we are going to get steals. Lots and lots of steals.

2. Our offense might not be better . . .

It's impossible to predict whether or not our offense will be as good or better than this year. There's too many factors that we can't predict. Chemistry is going to play a huge role in how it all flows, but if I had to guess, I think the offense will take a step back. Our offense this year is actually superb . . . we have a lot of balance between the ability to score from inside or outside. The win against NC State is a case study of how effective our offense is. First half, they were giving us the three, and we shredded them mercilessly from beyond the arc. Early part of the 2nd half, they were chasing us off the 3-pt line, so we dumped it to Mason and he went to work in the post. This is also a VERY good passing team. The ball almost always finds the open man. It's beautiful to watch. Especially with Ryan back, it's really hard to see next year's team being a better, more fluid offensive team.

3. . . . but it's going to be way more exciting.

We are going to run . . . a lot. We have some serious athletes next year, and with the amount of turnovers I believe we are going to force, it's going to lead to quite a few SportsCenter top 10 plays. Bank on it.

So, while our full-court game is almost guaranteed to be more effective, our half-court offense will almost definitely take a step back. We definitely lack that strong rebounder from the center position, so offensive boards are going to be hard to come by unless everyone crashes the boards, which isn't always the best strategy. Also, we don't seem to have a dominant inside scorer like MP2 next year. I could be wrong though. Word is that Jabari actually has post moves and is very effective down low, so maybe he will be our inside scoring threat. We'll just have to see.

4. A lot will depend on Jabari

I think Quinn and Rasheed will obviously improve, and be very big parts of the team, and I actually expect Rasheed to lead the team in scoring, but if we hope to be a Final Four team, Jabari will have to become the MVP of the team in terms of contributing in the areas that we need the most help: Rebounding, defense, toughness, and leadership.

5. How does Rodney fit?

Rodney is a wildcard, I think he is definitely a starter, and a boost to our defense, it remains to be seen how he will fit into our offensive scheme and if he can play without the ball effectively. I'm aware that Rodney is a good ball handler, but I think Quinn, Rasheed, and Jabari are going to be handling the ball a LOT, and our other guys are going to have find ways to contribute without touching the ball every time down the floor.

Our defense will be as good or better, and our offense slightly worse, but I think this is a top 5 team with a ton of potential. I just hope it all works out like I think it should.

SupaDave
02-26-2013, 07:09 AM
Another small note: It's true that we will have a number of slashers next year but the crazy thing about this is that when Sheed and Hood are on the court together we will have a right handed (Sheed) and a left handed (Hood) driver in the game at the same time. This in turn makes the possibilities for the half-court offense limitless b/c the players can be in constant motion to the point where they look like the Harlem Globetrotters out there. Scary.

Saratoga2
02-26-2013, 08:11 AM
We have enough players to put two good teams on the floor, but what will we see for starters? My guess is Quinn and Rasheed as locks. Then probably Rodney and Jabari. That leaves the 5 position. Will it be a stronger Amile playing out of position? Right now, Marshall has the body but hasn't been impressive.

With that group, we would have a Junior, a sophomore, Rodney (junior equivalent), freshman and either a sophomore or a 3 year sophomore equivalent. Decent experience there.

In addition, if I have the starters correct, we have Josh subbing for the 5 position, Tyler for PG and a plethora of folks for the SG/SF and even PF positions.
Andre
Matt
Semi
Alex

Alex and Semi have size enough to fill in at SF/PF while Andre and Matt are terrific talents probably limited to SG on this team. Matt also looks like he has the handle to do some duty at the PG slot if injuries require it.

CDu
02-26-2013, 08:36 AM
We have enough players to put two good teams on the floor, but what will we see for starters? My guess is Quinn and Rasheed as locks. Then probably Rodney and Jabari. That leaves the 5 position. Will it be a stronger Amile playing out of position? Right now, Marshall has the body but hasn't been impressive.

With that group, we would have a Junior, a sophomore, Rodney (junior equivalent), freshman and either a sophomore or a 3 year sophomore equivalent. Decent experience there.

In addition, if I have the starters correct, we have Josh subbing for the 5 position, Tyler for PG and a plethora of folks for the SG/SF and even PF positions.
Andre
Matt
Semi
Alex

Alex and Semi have size enough to fill in at SF/PF while Andre and Matt are terrific talents probably limited to SG on this team. Matt also looks like he has the handle to do some duty at the PG slot if injuries require it.

It has been the consensus that Cook, Sulaimon, Hood, and Parker will start (with almost certainty). After that, it's one of Jefferson, Hairston, and Marshall for the C spot. My guess would be Jefferson, as I don't think Marshall has shown any readiness to jump into a starting spot and Hairston hasn't shown the rebounding ability to man the middle. But I'd guess that the C spot will be a bit fluid throughout the year.

On the bench, I'd say Thornton, one of Jones/Dawkins/Murphy/Ojeleye (it will be Dawkins if Dawkins returns), and one of Hairston/Marshall will get regular minutes. The remaining players outside of those 8 will be spot-minutes guys next year.

Crazy that we could very conceivably have 2 redshirt-sophomores playing only spot minutes, but that's just how deep we'll be next year.

jcastranio
02-26-2013, 08:58 AM
If the starters are Quinn, Rasheed, Rodney, and Jabari (not an unreasonable assumption, even this far out), that fifth starter is someone who fits with that lineup. They would likely be the first subbed out anyway and the fifth starter will not necessarily play the 5th most minutes - could be 7th or 8th most. Given the development of both players this year, Josh (as a senior) could be a reasonable choice - as could Amile. If their individual development continues over the coming months - I would give it to Josh as the senior.

Marshall is a wild card. If (there is that word again) he could understand and embrace the Zoubek role (2nd half of the season, senior year Zoubek) - he obviously gets the start. He is developing, but I don't see him understanding and embracing that role by the start of next season. Zoubs didn't have to score - defense, rebounding, picks/screens, pass-outs. Marshall has the body for that right now - the game just hasn't slowed down for him. He is still like a giant hamster on steroids and sugar out there. I think it will come - just not by the start of next season.

I would go with Josh, right now. I like Amile and I think he is the more talented player with larger upside. Josh's play this year has earned him the start (as it stands now). Amile plays more minutes.

Big Pappa
02-26-2013, 09:03 AM
It has been the consensus that Cook, Sulaimon, Hood, and Parker will start (with almost certainty). After that, it's one of Jefferson, Hairston, and Marshall for the C spot. My guess would be Jefferson, as I don't think Marshall has shown any readiness to jump into a starting spot and Hairston hasn't shown the rebounding ability to man the middle. But I'd guess that the C spot will be a bit fluid throughout the year.

On the bench, I'd say Thornton, one of Jones/Dawkins/Murphy/Ojeleye (it will be Dawkins if Dawkins returns), and one of Hairston/Marshall will get regular minutes. The remaining players outside of those 8 will be spot-minutes guys next year.

Crazy that we could very conceivably have 2 redshirt-sophomores playing only spot minutes, but that's just how deep we'll be next year.

I agree with much of what CDu has said. The biggest question mark is at the 5. Based on what we have seen from Marshall thus far (looking somewhat lost and erratic) I think that Jefferson earns the last starting spot. Although we have had more traditional 5s in the last few years (Mason, Miles, and Zoubek) you don't have to look very far back to see lineups that would resemble a Cook (6'1"), Sulaimon (6'4"), Hood (6'8"), Parker (6'8"), Jefferson (6'8") lineup.

For instance, in 08-09 the top eight players in mpg were Henderson (6'4"), Singler (6'8"), Scheyer (6'5"), Smith (6'2"), Thomas (6'8"), Paulus (6'1"), Williams (6'4") and McClure (6'6"). That team won 30 games. Jefferson also runs the floor significantly better than Marshall does. With the length and athleticism of next year's potential lineup, we will be in passing lanes and running the floor a lot.

Lastly, I think many posters on here on seriously underrating Rodney Hood. I can only assume it is because you didn't see him play at Miss. State or in the preseason action this year. I would encourage you to find some of his film and get excited about a guy who, in my opinion, will be our best player next year.

Kedsy
02-26-2013, 10:08 AM
I agree with much of what CDu has said. The biggest question mark is at the 5. Based on what we have seen from Marshall thus far (looking somewhat lost and erratic) I think that Jefferson earns the last starting spot. Although we have had more traditional 5s in the last few years (Mason, Miles, and Zoubek) you don't have to look very far back to see lineups that would resemble a Cook (6'1"), Sulaimon (6'4"), Hood (6'8"), Parker (6'8"), Jefferson (6'8") lineup.

For instance, in 08-09 the top eight players in mpg were Henderson (6'4"), Singler (6'8"), Scheyer (6'5"), Smith (6'2"), Thomas (6'8"), Paulus (6'1"), Williams (6'4") and McClure (6'6"). That team won 30 games. Jefferson also runs the floor significantly better than Marshall does. With the length and athleticism of next year's potential lineup, we will be in passing lanes and running the floor a lot.

I agree with this. I think our short memories are forgetting life before we had a NPOY candidate at center. Amile has a knack around the basket, he'll score plenty inside and make opponents pay if they ignore him. He's also a sneaky rebounder and should get better with a little more bulk. The big question will be whether he can guard opposing Reggie Johnson types (and I realize Johnson himself will be gone, but no doubt we'll face at least a few 6'10", 300 types next season), but I'm not sure Josh can guard that type either, and Marshall's next-year prospects are a complete mystery to me.

As far as overall rebounding, it will simply be a different distribution. This year it looks approximately like this:

C: 10.5
PF: 5.5
SF: 3.5
SG: 2.5
PG: 3.5
bench: 9
--------
34.5 per game

Next year I'd imagine something along these lines:

C: 7.5
PF: 7.0
SF: 6.0
SG: 4.0
PG: 3.5
bench: 8
--------
36.0 per game

Still not exceptional perhaps, but it won't be any more of a concern than it is this season, even though we won't have a dominant center type.

jimsumner
02-26-2013, 10:40 AM
I'm reasonably certain that Duke is not recruiting any centers in the high-school class of 2013.

That said, I would not be surprised to see Duke kick the tires on any one-year, grad-student options that might become available.

Lauderdevil
02-26-2013, 10:54 AM
What an amazing thread. We're 24-3, ranked third in the country, and we're talking about next year. In all but a handful of schools, this season would be one for the ages -- the one alumni remember wistfully decades later, write songs about, tell tales of. For us, it's another season and-by-the-way-let's-get-excited-about-next-year's-team. We are in a golden era, and it's easy to take that for granted until it's gone. Fun to enjoy it while it lasts, though!

slower
02-26-2013, 11:10 AM
What an amazing thread. We're 24-3, ranked third in the country, and we're talking about next year.

Some of us enjoy multi-tasking.

MChambers
02-26-2013, 11:23 AM
Another small note: It's true that we will have a number of slashers next year but the crazy thing about this is that when Sheed and Hood are on the court together we will have a right handed (Sheed) and a left handed (Hood) driver in the game at the same time. This in turn makes the possibilities for the half-court offense limitless b/c the players can be in constant motion to the point where they look like the Harlem Globetrotters out there. Scary.

Just imagine if we still had an amphibious point guard!

jcastranio
02-26-2013, 11:30 AM
Just imagine if we still had an amphibious point guard!

Ryan's been working out in pool.

Ben1029
02-26-2013, 01:11 PM
Alex and Semi have size enough to fill in at SF/PF while Andre and Matt are terrific talents probably limited to SG on this team. Matt also looks like he has the handle to do some duty at the PG slot if injuries require it.

Jones would be the 4th option at point.

CDu
02-26-2013, 02:24 PM
Jones would be the 4th option at point.

Yup. Assuming Sulaimon and Cook come back, I'd expect roughly 0 minutes for Jones at PG next year. And my guess (purely a guess of course) would be that if Dawkins comes back, there will be very few (if any) regular minutes for Jones, Murphy, and Ojeleye on the perimeter. I'd expect the two seniors (Thornton and Dawkins) to absorb those minutes off the bench (behind Cook, Sulaimon, and Hood). If Dawkins does not return, that opens the door for maybe ~15mpg for one of those other 3 guys.

jimsumner
02-26-2013, 02:33 PM
Jones would be the 4th option at point.

Hood has a pretty good handle.

So, maybe Jones is the fifth option at point. :)

OldPhiKap
02-26-2013, 02:55 PM
Two point-guards, two point-forwards, and Marshall.

Regular Harlem Globetrotters there.


(As opposed to the Harlem Shake, which is point-less)