PDA

View Full Version : Andre's role in 2013-14



SupaDave
10-02-2013, 07:05 PM
What up folks!? I'm excited for the season and based on the projected starting 5 - it appears that my boy Dawkins has launched himself into the six man spot.

This is particularly interesting considering he'll be on the floor with the starters AND the young guys a LOT.

With Scheyer on the bench - he gets a chance to BE Scheyer. An excellent opportunity to have a great 6 man on our coaching staff. Not just that but with the revamped 'Olympic' offense his role will be to BE Carmelo.

When Tyler comes in to run the point he will be bombs away and then some.

I see some very big games in his future. Be excited.

matt1
10-02-2013, 07:34 PM
He will probably not be a starter, but come in when we need a three. His job will be to make a few clutch threes each game. How much playing time he gets will be dictated by how well he shoots the ball.

SupaDave
10-02-2013, 07:59 PM
He will probably not be a starter, but come in when we need a three. His job will be to make a few clutch threes each game. How much playing time he gets will be dictated by how well he shoots the ball.

No one thinks he will be a starter.

g-money
10-02-2013, 08:00 PM
He will probably not be a starter, but come in when we need a three. His job will be to make a few clutch threes each game. How much playing time he gets will be dictated by how well he shoots the ball.

So you're predicting that he'll basically have the same role as two years ago? Man, I hope - and am optimistic - that it will end up being more than that. I am with SupaDave on this one.

Newton_14
10-02-2013, 08:16 PM
He will probably not be a starter, but come in when we need a three. His job will be to make a few clutch threes each game. How much playing time he gets will be dictated by how well he shoots the ball.

I think he plays a bigger role than that personally. I think Andre starts some games, plays a 6th man role in others, but gets plenty of PT game over game. K had four different kids working at PG in the practice Saturday. Quinn, Rasheed, Tyler, Matt. So line ups with Andre in the game could range from:

PG-Quinn, SG-Andre, SF-Hood, F-Amile, F-Jabari, or
PG Quinn SG- Rasheed, SF- Andre, F-Hood, F-Jabari, or
PG-Rasheed, SG-Andre, SF-Hood, F-Amile, F-Jabari, or
PG- Tyler, SG- Rasheed, SF- Andre, F-Amile, F-Jabari, or


That's just 4 different combinations where Andre could be in the mix, and there are more.

Wander
10-02-2013, 08:26 PM
I don't know about the Scheyer comparison. Even putting aside the differences in the styles of their games, Scheyer was functionally a starter - he was guaranteed to be in the top 5 minutes every game, making exceptions for injury or foul issues. He even averaged more minutes than the guy who started over him, Henderson. I don't think this is going to be true for Dawkins - he'll be more of a traditional 6th man (ie, a pretty good player).

roywhite
10-02-2013, 08:28 PM
I put this in another thread, but I'll throw it in here, too:

Andre can hit big baskets in big games. We've seen it.

Andre can also take over a game when he's hot, score points in bunches, and he can do it against a good opponent. We've seen it.

The thought of a more mature, more consistent Andre? What a weapon.

greybeard
10-02-2013, 08:55 PM
I put this in another thread, but I'll throw it in here, too:

Andre can hit big baskets in big games. We've seen it.

Andre can also take over a game when he's hot, score points in bunches, and he can do it against a good opponent. We've seen it.

The thought of a more mature, more consistent Andre? What a weapon.

Just before his season ended two years ago, Andre had showed some potential as a take-it-to-the-basket guy with a forceful finish. Who knows, right. I mean, too much shooting the 3-ball the guy didn't need.

NSDukeFan
10-02-2013, 09:18 PM
Just before his season ended two years ago, Andre had showed some potential as a take-it-to-the-basket guy with a forceful finish. Who knows, right. I mean, too much shooting the 3-ball the guy didn't need.

I hope to see Andre with a bit more of a drive and/or pull-up game, but, in my mind, there is no such thing as Andre shooting too many threes. That is called efficient offense.

OldPhiKap
10-02-2013, 09:28 PM
At the risk of a cliche answer, he is one of six starters. I would guess he will get plenty of minutes, and there will be plenty of times when he, Sheed and either cook or TT will all be in. It is hard for a big guy to hurt you much if you make him do wind sprints up and down the floor, and deny the entry pass through on-ball pressure.

'Dre is a gamer and a deadly shot. Sheed is a serious NBA prospect. Both will get serious burn.

greybeard
10-02-2013, 11:19 PM
I hope to see Andre with a bit more of a drive and/or pull-up game, but, in my mind, there is no such thing as Andre shooting too many threes. That is called efficient offense.

Curie, three,drive qnd floater; Singler, shoot, drive; G shoot, drive; Scheyer, shoot, drive; Rqsheed, shoot, drive (could do shoot better); Ryan, shoot, drive, mid range; Cook, shoot, drive sometimes great, others ugh; Dunley, shoot, drive, mid range; J Will, okay he doesn't belong here; Duhan, drive, mid range, shoot some; Poicus, as we were later to see when healthy, all three; Elliot, after he left, all three.

Andre can shoot lights out with the best of them. Whether he can get, take, and make shots down the stretch, aka Curie, we'll see. If he can put it on the floor and make scoring opportunities and drawing fouls happens, becomes more valuable, much. But can he guard a lamp post?

Might be a more successful pro then any of the other mid range sized players. Feel for the game, comfort, is a very big question mark. Seeing the whole picture and picking out what jumps out and creating for others and himself two, three passes away; shooting the gape on defense, aka Scheyer, knowing that someone guarding him tight on the top was a mistake that would permit him to hurt the defense a good deal of the time and seeing how that might likely happen, is what I am talking about.

Again, he came to Duke and got rocked to his core. He's had time to put it together and grow these other aspects of the game, playing with them. If he comes in lean and lithe, I'd wait on making any predictions.

But, you guys know these new players and I don't so I'm not taking issue with your bottom line assessments. I only write to point out that we can't predict how Andre shows up.

johnb
10-02-2013, 11:27 PM
Rorschach?

DukieInBrasil
10-03-2013, 08:55 AM
Curie, three,drive qnd floater; Singler, shoot, drive; G shoot, drive; Scheyer, shoot, drive; Rqsheed, shoot, drive (could do shoot better); Ryan, shoot, drive, mid range; Cook, shoot, drive sometimes great, others ugh; Dunley, shoot, drive, mid range; J Will, okay he doesn't belong here; Duhan, drive, mid range, shoot some; Poicus, as we were later to see when healthy, all three; Elliot, after he left, all three.

Andre can shoot lights out with the best of them. Whether he can get, take, and make shots down the stretch, aka Curie, we'll see. If he can put it on the floor and make scoring opportunities and drawing fouls happens, becomes more valuable, much. But can he guard a lamp post?



Curie never played basketball, she was a chemist. A kid named Curry however did play basketball for Duke. It's almost like you go out of your way to misspell Duke players' names. Please put the effort into learning players' actual names.

OldPhiKap
10-03-2013, 09:00 AM
Curie never played basketball, she was a chemist. A kid named Curry however did play basketball for Duke. It's almost like you go out of your way to misspell Duke players' names. Please put the effort into learning players' actual names.

Dunley and Duhan, however, rocked.

ChillinDuke
10-03-2013, 09:16 AM
No one thinks he will be a starter.


I think he plays a bigger role than that personally. I think Andre starts some games, plays a 6th man role in others, but gets plenty of PT game over game. K had four different kids working at PG in the practice Saturday. Quinn, Rasheed, Tyler, Matt. So line ups with Andre in the game could range from:

PG-Quinn, SG-Andre, SF-Hood, F-Amile, F-Jabari, or
PG Quinn SG- Rasheed, SF- Andre, F-Hood, F-Jabari, or
PG-Rasheed, SG-Andre, SF-Hood, F-Amile, F-Jabari, or
PG- Tyler, SG- Rasheed, SF- Andre, F-Amile, F-Jabari, or


That's just 4 different combinations where Andre could be in the mix, and there are more.

Supa, I agree with Newton on this one. I understand I'm sticking my neck out considering I've only seen one live, open practice and read a lot of interviews / write-ups, neither of these two really lend a whole lot of credence to my opinion. But I just thought Andre looked great - way better than I was thinking he'd look. I mean, for anyone who didn't know Andre had taken a year off and then watched that practice, I doubt anyone would have realized.

When you group that with unsolicited praise that certain people have thrown his way regarding how he's playing, as well as his playing with the white squad for a considerable amount of time in that practice (at least as it appeared to me from my couch view), my thought at this way-too-early point in the [pre]season is that Andre has a very real chance at starting.

As I've written in other threads, and until I see more information to draw upon, I think the question becomes defense vs. offense. Rasheed vs. Andre.

This is one of those posts that's gonna make me look real smart or real, real dumb later on.

- Chillin

flyingdutchdevil
10-03-2013, 09:22 AM
Supa, I agree with Newton on this one. I understand I'm sticking my neck out considering I've only seen one live, open practice and read a lot of interviews / write-ups, neither of these two really lend a whole lot of credence to my opinion. But I just thought Andre looked great - way better than I was thinking he'd look. I mean, for anyone who didn't know Andre had taken a year off and then watched that practice, I doubt anyone would have realized.

When you group that with unsolicited praise that certain people have thrown his way regarding how he's playing, as well as his playing with the white squad for a considerable amount of time in that practice (at least as it appeared to me from my couch view), my thought at this way-too-early point in the [pre]season is that Andre has a very real chance at starting.

As I've written in other threads, and until I see more information to draw upon, I think the question becomes defense vs. offense. Rasheed vs. Andre.

This is one of those posts that's gonna make me look real smart or real, real dumb later on.

- Chillin

Are we actually suggesting that our best defender - who isn't too shabby on O either - will not start? This is nothing against Andre, but what does Andre bring that Rasheed doesn't with the exception of lights-out 3pt shooting? Rasheed is a stud, no questions asked. At times last year, he was our best player on the floor and frequently our best defender (especially on-the-ball defender). If the 1, 3, 4, and 5 are filled up, then that only leaves the 2. And between Andre and Rasheed, I don't even think it's a question.

Andre is perfect for a super 6th man role, similar to a Jamal Crawford or JR Smith. I can see Andre ending games, but the bulk of the minutes at the 2 will go to Rasheed.

ChillinDuke
10-03-2013, 09:32 AM
Are we actually suggesting that our best defender - who isn't too shabby on O either - will not start? This is nothing against Andre, but what does Andre bring that Rasheed doesn't with the exception of lights-out 3pt shooting? Rasheed is a stud, no questions asked. At times last year, he was our best player on the floor and frequently our best defender (especially on-the-ball defender). If the 1, 3, 4, and 5 are filled up, then that only leaves the 2. And between Andre and Rasheed, I don't even think it's a question.

Andre is perfect for a super 6th man role, similar to a Jamal Crawford or JR Smith. I can see Andre ending games, but the bulk of the minutes at the 2 will go to Rasheed.

That is what I'm suggesting.

I'm not sure it's a one or the other thing. They may start at different points in the season, certain matchups, etc. They may simply split time 50/50.

It's still way too early to tell. But I do think it's a question.

- Chillin

flyingdutchdevil
10-03-2013, 09:37 AM
That is what I'm suggesting.

I'm not sure it's a one or the other thing. They may start at different points in the season, certain matchups, etc. They may simply split time 50/50.

It's still way too early to tell. But I do think it's a question.

- Chillin

We'll just have to disagree then. I know Coach K didn't name Rasheed as a starter, but I think that was a motivational tool (he does that a lot).

There are a lot of questions that I have for this team, but who starts at the 2 isn't one of them. Just a matter of opinion.

jcastranio
10-03-2013, 09:42 AM
Given everything, I think his best effect will come off the bench. His defense will depend on his understanding and execution of the team defense concept - not his individual ability to "stay in front" of an opponent. I think he will be better at that - he may not pressure or force as many turnovers as Sheed would, but he will be a solid leader on defense.

Paired with Tyler and Josh coming off the bench, we trade experience for sheet ability (don't get me wrong, all three of these seniors have ability, though). With Alex's slashing ability (but still questionable shot), being in with Dawkins spreading the floor could be an advantage. I think you could even see small lineups with Quinn, Sheed, Andre, Rodney, and Jabari.

I am excited about Andre's return.

Kedsy
10-03-2013, 10:48 AM
They may simply split time 50/50.

If Andre plays as well as the early reports suggest, then the fallacy is suggesting both he and Rasheed will be limited to playing the "2" (and I'm not singling you out, Chillin, I just happened to quote your post).

What it probably means is more minutes for a Jabari/Rodney/Andre/Rasheed/Quinn lineup. Thus it's possible that both Andre and Rasheed play more minutes than Amile, for example. It's also possible we'll occasionally see Amile/Jabari/Rodney/Andre/Rasheed, when Quinn is sitting, although I assume Tyler will get his minutes as well, so that last lineup may not happen too often.

In other words, when K says we don't have positions, this season is what he's talking about. There is no "50/50" to split.


Paired with Tyler and Josh coming off the bench, we trade experience for sheet ability (don't get me wrong, all three of these seniors have ability, though). With Alex's slashing ability (but still questionable shot), being in with Dawkins spreading the floor could be an advantage.

Whether or not Andre starts or comes off the bench, our substitution patterns will not resemble an NBA team. In the NBA, they generally keep one star in and bring in four bench guys as a second unit. That rarely happens in college and is almost unheard of at Duke.

So unless it's a blowout, we will almost never see Tyler/Josh/Andre/Alex on the floor together. In competitive games, we probably won't even see three of them together for more than a couple minutes a game.


This is nothing against Andre, but what does Andre bring that Rasheed doesn't with the exception of lights-out 3pt shooting?

What does Quinn bring other than great point-guard play? What does Amile bring, other than being our best option to defend the opposing center? Who starts and who doesn't presumably will reflect the best mix of talents. I'm actually with you in thinking Rasheed will start, but if K decides we need "lights-out 3pt shooting" to mix with Jabari's and Rodney's skills, then it's not out of the realm of possibility that Andre starts and Rasheed plays 30 minutes off the bench.

Nor do I think it matters very much who starts and who doesn't, so long as everybody gets their minutes.

sagegrouse
10-03-2013, 01:30 PM
If Andre plays as well as the early reports suggest, then the fallacy is suggesting both he and Rasheed will be limited to playing the "2" (and I'm not singling you out, Chillin, I just happened to quote your post).

What it probably means is more minutes for a Jabari/Rodney/Andre/Rasheed/Quinn lineup. Thus it's possible that both Andre and Rasheed play more minutes than Amile, for example. It's also possible we'll occasionally see Amile/Jabari/Rodney/Andre/Rasheed, when Quinn is sitting, although I assume Tyler will get his minutes as well, so that last lineup may not happen too often.

.

You realize, Kedsy, that your quoted passage is the kind of incendiary stuff that causes a DBR meltdown. Here, with five talented players 6-8 or taller, you are implying that Duke will go small, leaving three of them on the bench for long periods.

I happen to agree with you, but I think many readers were saying to themselves about this season, "Finally, enough big men that won't have to look at a three-guard lineup."

sagegrouse
'I counted Jabari, Rodney, Amile, Murphy and Marshall as the five, not to slight Hairston or a 6-7 Semi'

Kedsy
10-03-2013, 02:24 PM
'I counted Jabari, Rodney, Amile, Murphy and Marshall as the five, not to slight Hairston or a 6-7 Semi'

Well, it's even worse if you count Josh and Semi, because then we have seven skilled non-guards and five of them may be sitting for long periods.

That said, I do believe it has a good chance of happening for at least 10 or 15 minutes a game. Sorry if that fans the flames.

Troublemaker
10-03-2013, 02:36 PM
Are we actually suggesting that our best defender

Sheed's a good defender but I don't think he's considered the best on the team right now. Based on accumulated offseason tidbits (and there's no way I'll be able to remember where I got this stuff, so TIFWIW) and one streamed practice, I think the coaches and team would consider Hood the best wing defender, Cook the best ball-pressurer, Parker the best interior help-side defender, and Hood the best overall defender. Personally I don't think there's a huge difference defensively between Sheed and Dre off the ball right now. Dre's pretty good at ball-denial and gambling for steals, like pretty much all Duke guards by the time they graduate. Note that Ryan Kelly deservedly won "best defensive player" at the banquet for last season, so no current Duke player has a "defending champ" baseline for that title. We'll see what happens.

flyingdutchdevil
10-03-2013, 02:44 PM
Sheed's a good defender but I don't think he's considered the best on the team right now. Based on accumulated offseason tidbits (and there's no way I'll be able to remember where I got this stuff, so TIFWIW) and one streamed practice, I think the coaches and team would consider Hood the best wing defender, Cook the best ball-pressurer, Parker the best interior help-side defender, and Hood the best overall defender. Personally I don't think there's a huge difference defensively between Sheed and Dre off the ball right now. Dre's pretty good at ball-denial and gambling for steals, like pretty much all Duke guards by the time they graduate. Note that Ryan Kelly deservedly won "best defensive player" at the banquet for last season, so no current Duke player has a "defending champ" baseline for that title. We'll see what happens.

We're going to have to disagree then. IMO, Rasheed was by far the best on-the-ball defender last year. Check out this video by DraftExpress (fast-forward to the 7:40 minute mark): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5L8d_0QEwg

He plays with energy, moves extremely well laterally, and understands team defense. And he was a freshman last year. This year, he's a sophomore, and you know the saying ("best part about freshman is..."). We must have been seeing different Andre's play, because his defense was always fairly subpar. During the 2011-12 season, where our whole backcourt had defensive issues, Andre's was one of the culprits.

I can understand why posters love Andre: he's the player with the most experience, the prettiest shot, and he's gone through a lot. I am on their side for this. Offensively, Andre may be more valuable. But to think that there isn't a huge difference defensively between Sulaimon and Andre is just isn't correct.

azzefkram
10-03-2013, 03:14 PM
What does Quinn bring other than great point-guard play? What does Amile bring, other than being our best option to defend the opposing center?

I don't think you are being fair to Quinn and Amile. They both are significantly more well rounded basketball players than what we've seen from Andre.

I only know two things for certain about the upcoming season; one, Coach will figure it out, and two, I'll bellyache about it.

JNort
10-03-2013, 03:34 PM
We're going to have to disagree then. IMO, Rasheed was by far the best on-the-ball defender last year. Check out this video by DraftExpress (fast-forward to the 7:40 minute mark): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5L8d_0QEwg

He plays with energy, moves extremely well laterally, and understands team defense. And he was a freshman last year. This year, he's a sophomore, and you know the saying ("best part about freshman is..."). We must have been seeing different Andre's play, because his defense was always fairly subpar. During the 2011-12 season, where our whole backcourt had defensive issues, Andre's was one of the culprits.

I can understand why posters love Andre: he's the player with the most experience, the prettiest shot, and he's gone through a lot. I am on their side for this. Offensively, Andre may be more valuable. But to think that there isn't a huge difference defensively between Sulaimon and Andre is just isn't correct.

I am not convinced of this either, not yet anyway. Dre in his previous years has been a one trick pony on offense and a liability on defense where Sheed in just his freshmen year could shoot the 3, drive, pass and move well without the ball plus he was a great defender. Andre has always been the best of the best at shooting the 3 but is an ok passer, can't create his own shot, and had tendencies to get caught standing around on offense. Now I hope all that has changed but until it is shown and on a regular basis I can not take Dre over Sheed on offense or defense.

Kedsy
10-03-2013, 03:47 PM
Andre has always been the best of the best at shooting the 3 but is an ok passer, can't create his own shot, and had tendencies to get caught standing around on offense.

I think you are underestimating being the "best of the best" at something. Not necessarily for the purposes of evaluating Andre vs. Rasheed, but anytime you have a "freak" at any skill it's incredibly valuable and needs to be on the court.

Also, in my view you are underestimating Andre's passing and creating abilities. Because he's such a great shooter, he rarely showcased those skills, but at times he showed tantalizing glimpses. I believe Andre could have been a star if he'd had a different mental outlook. If he shows that different mindset this season, he can still be a star.


Now I hope all that has changed but until it is shown and on a regular basis I can not take Dre over Sheed on offense or defense.

The real issue here is shown to whom? If the coaching staff likes what they see in Andre (and by all accounts so far they do), then it won't matter even the smallest bit who you or I would "take" as a starter.

Indoor66
10-03-2013, 03:48 PM
There is no question that Andre must sit. There are newer players and newer is always better. :rolleyes:

nmduke2001
10-03-2013, 03:52 PM
I am not convinced of this either, not yet anyway. Dre in his previous years has been a one trick pony on offense and a liability on defense where Sheed in just his freshmen year could shoot the 3, drive, pass and move well without the ball plus he was a great defender. Andre has always been the best of the best at shooting the 3 but is an ok passer, can't create his own shot, and had tendencies to get caught standing around on offense. Now I hope all that has changed but until it is shown and on a regular basis I can not take Dre over Sheed on offense or defense.

Oh my goodness, the bolded argument drives me crazy. In regards to Dre, it comes up often that he stands around on offense. At this level of basketball, no player independently decides to take a play off and just stand in the corner. The play calls for people to space the floor and yes sometimes stand in the corner. Do you think that any Duke player would see any playing time ever again if they just decided to not follow the play that was called?

JNort
10-03-2013, 03:57 PM
Oh my goodness, the bolded argument drives me crazy. In regards to Dre, it comes up often that he stands around on offense. At this level of basketball, no player independently decides to take a play off and just stand in the corner. The play calls for people to space the floor and yes sometimes stand in the corner. Do you think that any Duke player would see any playing time ever again if they just decided to not follow the play that was called?

I was referring to his lack of desire to move towards the basket after shots by teammates. Not every trip down the court has a play called right away (not that I am aware of) and Dre used to go find a spot a sit.

flyingdutchdevil
10-03-2013, 04:10 PM
There is no question that Andre must sit. There are newer players and newer is always better. :rolleyes:

Actually, I think the same rationale applies to Andre on this board. IMO, because Andre was away for a year, he is a completely new commodity and that all his strengths became significantly stronger and all his weaknesses no longer exist.

I hope that is the case, that it'd be baffled if he went through a Nolan Smith sophomore-to-junior transition. Few college players grow that much over the span of 2 years, especially considering that Andre hasn't practiced in an official setting in so long.

What is interesting is the lack of chatter regarding Cook and Rasheed, two known commodities. I do believe DBR knows their worth, just few people are talking about them.

"New is always exciting" -Someone famous probably said something like this.

JNort
10-03-2013, 04:11 PM
I think you are underestimating being the "best of the best" at something. Not necessarily for the purposes of evaluating Andre vs. Rasheed, but anytime you have a "freak" at any skill it's incredibly valuable and needs to be on the court.

Also, in my view you are underestimating Andre's passing and creating abilities. Because he's such a great shooter, he rarely showcased those skills, but at times he showed tantalizing glimpses. I believe Andre could have been a star if he'd had a different mental outlook. If he shows that different mindset this season, he can still be a star.



The real issue here is shown to whom? If the coaching staff likes what they see in Andre (and by all accounts so far they do), then it won't matter even the smallest bit who you or I would "take" as a starter.

I think you misunderstood everything I typed. I was saying why I value Sheed's present offense vs Dre's past offense. I have said multiple times even before practices started that Dre will play big minutes this year because of his deadly shooting, I undervalued nothing in that regard.

When have we seen Andre show an ability to create shots for himself or others with his ability to dribble or drive? We haven't, true he has slashed to the rim for a dunk once or twice but not enough to be considered glimpses of an ability just glimpses of how deadly he can be if he makes those part of his game.

Shown to the coaches, the fans, opposing teams, scouts, etc... Once again you misunderstood what I was saying. Right now we have nothing to go on but past performances and as I said past Dre is all we know and we have yet to see current Dre in a game. Lets see it at game speed against an opponent, even the coaches have yet to see that.

I think people are thinking I am tearing Dre down which I am not. I am saying exactly what someone above me just said in that many are treating this with the "shiny new toy look" where we haven't seen Dre in over a year and supposedly he has improved all this stuff so now we like him more than the most recent guy in Sheed. Just give it time I am sure Dre will be deadly but Sheed will to

JNort
10-03-2013, 04:13 PM
There is no question that Andre must sit. There are newer players and newer is always better. :rolleyes:

Lol yeah everyone seems to think this is what I am saying. I am saying the exact opposite, Andre is the new guy at the moment and everybody is building him up and forgetting what we got with Sheed. Sheed is no slouch and a much more rounded player than Dre unless of course Dre improves as much as many (including myself) think he has.

vick
10-03-2013, 04:22 PM
I think you misunderstood everything I typed. I was saying why I value Sheed's present offense vs Dre's past offense. I have said multiple times even before practices started that Dre will play big minutes this year because of his deadly shooting, I undervalued nothing in that regard.

When have we seen Andre show an ability to create shots for himself or others with his ability to dribble or drive? We haven't, true he has slashed to the rim for a dunk once or twice but not enough to be considered glimpses of an ability just glimpses of how deadly he can be if he makes those part of his game.

Shown to the coaches, the fans, opposing teams, scouts, etc... Once again you misunderstood what I was saying. Right now we have nothing to go on but past performances and as I said past Dre is all we know and we have yet to see current Dre in a game.

I think people are thinking I am tearing Dre down which I am not. I am saying exactly what someone above me just said in that many are treating this with the "shiny new toy look" where we haven't seen Dre in over a year and supposedly he has improved all this stuff so now we like him more than the most recent guy in Sheed. Just give it time I am sure Dre will be deadly but Sheed will to

I actually would still bet on Sulaimon playing more minutes than Dawkins, but I don't think you're quite getting Kedsy's point. Yes, Sulaimon has shown himself to be better in most phases of the game--certainly defense, and he's a better passer and penetrator. But Kedsy's point--with which I totally agree--is that being very good at one particular task, in Dawkins's case three-point shooting, is extremely valuable. Put differently, with Cook and to a lesser extent Hood already on the floor, having a third player who can distribute the ball is nice, but probably less valuable than being a highly-efficient scorer, and make no mistake, Dawkins in 2011 was a vastly more efficient scorer than Sulaimon was last year. You don't need to be spectacularly well-rounded in basketball if you do some things exceptionally well and you have teammates with complementary skills.

azzefkram
10-03-2013, 04:26 PM
I think you are underestimating being the "best of the best" at something. Not necessarily for the purposes of evaluating Andre vs. Rasheed, but anytime you have a "freak" at any skill it's incredibly valuable and needs to be on the court.

Also, in my view you are underestimating Andre's passing and creating abilities. Because he's such a great shooter, he rarely showcased those skills, but at times he showed tantalizing glimpses. I believe Andre could have been a star if he'd had a different mental outlook. If he shows that different mindset this season, he can still be a star.

I think you are overestimating both what Andre does and what he may do. Guys like Scott Wood, Jack McClinton, Rashad McCants and Anthony Morrow had higher career 3pt% than Andre on higher attempts/gm. I don't think you can underestimate his other abilities because he simply hasn't shown them. His rate stats didn't budge year over year. I suspect and hope that the lack of progression was related to the extreme circumstances that Andre had to go through.

SilkyJ
10-03-2013, 05:54 PM
I actually would still bet on Sulaimon playing more minutes than Dawkins, but I don't think you're quite getting Kedsy's point. Yes, Sulaimon has shown himself to be better in most phases of the game--certainly defense, and he's a better passer and penetrator. But Kedsy's point--with which I totally agree--is that being very good at one particular task, in Dawkins's case three-point shooting, is extremely valuable. Put differently, with Cook and to a lesser extent Hood already on the floor, having a third player who can distribute the ball is nice, but probably less valuable than being a highly-efficient scorer, and make no mistake, Dawkins in 2011 was a vastly more efficient scorer than Sulaimon was last year. You don't need to be spectacularly well-rounded in basketball if you do some things exceptionally well and you have teammates with complementary skills.

Great post. This is really the crux of the issue here. Sheed is a dynamite player. He was probably our best 1on1 scorer at guard/wing and the only guard who could reliably get his shot at will. But on this team, creation abilities and 1on1 scoring are at less of a premium. Quinn, Rodney and Jabari can all create at will and Rodney/Jabari can get their own shot whenever they want. So spreading the floor with an assassin is a really good complement to those guys. And as K has said, how you gel with Rodney and Jabari determines how many minutes you'll play.

Now that said, I need to take issue with your comment that Dawkins was a "vastly" better scorer than Sulaimon. I'm not sure what metric you're looking at for that, but I'd look at PPA (points per attempt). In '11-12 Dre's PPA were 1.24 vs Sheed's 1.38. So in their most recent years, Sheed was significantly more efficient. Dre in '10-11, his sophomore year, and I assume the year you are referring to, was 1.43. That's slightly better than Sheed, but .05 points per attempt is hardly "vastly." Moreover, 1.38 for sheed is a very good PPA, and not just for a freshman. Here are what some other recent Duke guards' PPAs looked like

Seth Curry (Sr): 1.44
Seth Curry (Jr): 1.34
Rivers (Fr): 1.31
Nolan (Jr): 1.22
Nolan (Sr): 1.35
Scheyer (Sr): 1.37
Redick (Sr): 1.50
Sheed (Fr): 1.38
Dre (Jr): 1.24
Dre (Sr): 1.43

So, yes, 3 years ago Dawkins had a slightly more efficient scoring year, but Sheed is already a pretty darn good scorer and is only likely to improve here. That said, I think the gelling issue could be even more important and will allow Andre to log a lot of minutes.

Of course, let's not undersell Sheed's 3 pt shooting. He'll probably never be quite as smooth as Dre, but shooting 37% for a freshman is darn, darn good. And most shooters improve significantly from their 1st-2nd year in 3pt %. Dre went 38-43%....

So basically, who the heck knows? This is clearly the coolest position debate we have. A good problem to have in this instance.

JNort
10-03-2013, 05:56 PM
I actually would still bet on Sulaimon playing more minutes than Dawkins, but I don't think you're quite getting Kedsy's point. Yes, Sulaimon has shown himself to be better in most phases of the game--certainly defense, and he's a better passer and penetrator. But Kedsy's point--with which I totally agree--is that being very good at one particular task, in Dawkins's case three-point shooting, is extremely valuable. Put differently, with Cook and to a lesser extent Hood already on the floor, having a third player who can distribute the ball is nice, but probably less valuable than being a highly-efficient scorer, and make no mistake, Dawkins in 2011 was a vastly more efficient scorer than Sulaimon was last year. You don't need to be spectacularly well-rounded in basketball if you do some things exceptionally well and you have teammates with complementary skills.

I understand what he is saying and I agree 100%. We are just saying different things. He seems to think (originally thought anyway) that I was trying to diminish Dawkins in some form. My whole point wasn't actually about Dawkins at all but about Rasheed. I am just saying people are under valuing him more so than anyone else on this team. Cook doesn't get undervalued because he is obviously the most talented pg we have, Jabari is a top ranked recruit, Hood is a shiny new toy who will start, Amile because he is the only real big man we got outside of Marshall who almost everyone agrees is not ready, Josh and Tyler are glue guys and we know what to expect from them, Dawkins is coming back from a 1 year layoff where he supposedly has vastly improved his overall game. That leaves Rasheed as the forgotten man and he isn't a flashy player and doesn't blow you out of the water with any one particular thing he just does it all and last year was the 4 or 5th option scoring wise as a freshmen and still was very good with 12ppg. If he stays all 4 years without significant injury I fully expect him to see him break the 2000 career point mark or at least come real close.

timmy c
10-03-2013, 06:00 PM
Seth Curry (Sr): 1.44
Seth Curry (Jr): 1.34
Rivers (Fr): 1.31
Nolan (Jr): 1.22
Nolan (Sr): 1.35
Scheyer (Sr): 1.37
Redick (Sr): 1.50
Sheed (Fr): 1.38
Dre (Jr): 1.24
Dre (Sr): 1.43


LOVE the stats. But with one quibble... How do you know what Dre's 4th year (sr.) numbers will be? Are you clairvoyant? I need to borrow your magic eight ball!

JNort
10-03-2013, 06:08 PM
LOVE the stats. But with one quibble... How do you know what Dre's 4th year (sr.) numbers will be? Are you clairvoyant? I need to borrow your magic eight ball!

Well he was a sr last year.....

Zeb
10-03-2013, 06:14 PM
When K named Amile as a starter and really praised him, that was just as much a motivational ploy as not naming Sheed. K wants Amile to develop his ego, because if Amile goes to another level, we suddenly have a lot more versatility and lineup options. That said, K has a tendency to play the five best players on the roster in crunch time, position be damned. So my guess is unless Amile makes huge improvements, we will see Cook, Sheed, Dre, Hood and Parker close out a LOT of games. And though that group will be undersized, they will be fast and able to score like crazy.

Troublemaker
10-03-2013, 06:15 PM
We're going to have to disagree then. IMO, Rasheed was by far the best on-the-ball defender last year. Check out this video by DraftExpress (fast-forward to the 7:40 minute mark): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5L8d_0QEwg

He plays with energy, moves extremely well laterally, and understands team defense. And he was a freshman last year. This year, he's a sophomore, and you know the saying ("best part about freshman is..."). We must have been seeing different Andre's play, because his defense was always fairly subpar. During the 2011-12 season, where our whole backcourt had defensive issues, Andre's was one of the culprits.

I can understand why posters love Andre: he's the player with the most experience, the prettiest shot, and he's gone through a lot. I am on their side for this. Offensively, Andre may be more valuable. But to think that there isn't a huge difference defensively between Sulaimon and Andre is just isn't correct.

I have lots of love for Sheed, too, especially when I found out he was a Duke TIP scholar in middle school. Sentiment for Dre is not affecting my takes here!

Re: Dre's defense. In his career, he has always had to spend too much time guarding players bigger than him. Sophomore year his perimeter mates were Kyrie & Nolan and then Nolan & Seth after Kyrie went down. Junior year, he was in there with Curry & Rivers and sometimes one of those guys paired with Cook and Thornton (and sometimes Cook and Thornton were together). Duke has been very small on the perimeter in recent years which meant Dre had to spend a lot of time guarding 3s, which he struggled with. This year, he'll get to guard 2s most of the time hopefully.

With all that said, I stand by what I wrote. Off the ball, Dre is a pretty good defender and will be even better this year with his Senior Bump. Overall Sheed is the better defender but if they both spend much of their time playing off the ball, I don't think we'll notice a difference.

Watch out for that Senior Bump. Duke Seniors historically have improved dramatically from their junior years, a bump as dramatic as the frosh-to-soph bump. Combine this with Dre's Playing-with-a-Clear-Mind and Newly-Happy bumps, I think Dre's going to shoot 40% from three this year (and that may be understating it -- I think 45% is in play) and also play very good Duke ball-denial defense.

I mean, I get that Coach K loves to motivate and maybe his press conference really was designed to motivate Sheed as you hypothesize. But I tend to take things at face value unless there's a compelling reason not to; I find that usually leads to the right conclusion, especially this early in the season. Coach K essentially said in the press conference the 5th starting position is up for grabs, and then in the streamed practice, Sheed and Dre spent the same amount of time in white jerseys and playing with the starters. My take is it's a legit battle (not that it matters all that much who starts).

SilkyJ
10-03-2013, 06:16 PM
LOVE the stats. But with one quibble... How do you know what Dre's 4th year (sr.) numbers will be? Are you clairvoyant? I need to borrow your magic eight ball!

Woopsies. So. not Sr...I was halfway right :)

Much more importantly: yes, I'm clairvoyant. I foresee that Ozzie will predict an undefeated season and one for the thumb.

vick
10-03-2013, 06:18 PM
Great post. This is really the crux of the issue here. Sheed is a dynamite player. He was probably our best 1on1 scorer at guard/wing and the only guard who could reliably get his shot at will. But on this team, creation abilities and 1on1 scoring are at less of a premium. Quinn, Rodney and Jabari can all create at will and Rodney/Jabari can get their own shot whenever they want. So spreading the floor with an assassin is a really good complement to those guys. And as K has said, how you gel with Rodney and Jabari determines how many minutes you'll play.

Now that said, I need to take issue with your comment that Dawkins was a "vastly" better scorer than Sulaimon. I'm not sure what metric you're looking at for that, but I'd look at PPA (points per attempt). In '11-12 Dre's PPA were 1.24 vs Sheed's 1.38. So in their most recent years, Sheed was significantly more efficient. Dre in '10-11, his sophomore year, and I assume the year you are referring to, was 1.43. That's slightly better than Sheed, but .05 points per attempt is hardly "vastly." Moreover, 1.38 for sheed is a very good PPA, and not just for a freshman. Here are what some other recent Duke guards' PPAs looked like

Seth Curry (Sr): 1.44
Seth Curry (Jr): 1.34
Rivers (Fr): 1.31
Nolan (Jr): 1.22
Nolan (Sr): 1.35
Scheyer (Sr): 1.37
Redick (Sr): 1.50
Sheed (Fr): 1.38
Dre (Jr): 1.24
Dre (Sr): 1.43

So, yes, 3 years ago Dawkins had a slightly more efficient scoring year, but Sheed is already a pretty darn good scorer and is only likely to improve here. That said, I think the gelling issue could be even more important and will allow Andre to log a lot of minutes.

Of course, let's not undersell Sheed's 3 pt shooting. He'll probably never be quite as smooth as Dre, but shooting 37% for a freshman is darn, darn good. And most shooters improve significantly from their 1st-2nd year in 3pt %. Dre went 38-43%....

So basically, who the heck knows? This is clearly the coolest position debate we have. A good problem to have in this instance.

PPA is not a bad metric (certainly better than raw FG%), but it ignores free throws, which are still possessions expended. If you use true shooting percentage, which accounts for this, Rasheed was 55.0% last year--which is good!--but in 2010-11 Andre was 65.2%, which is exceptional. Of course, that ignores that Rasheed had significantly higher usage, and also that drawing fouls has value in and of itself. In some sense which player is more offensively valuable probably depends as much as anything on how high Jabari and Rodney's usage is (as you said, Coach K emphasized that how a player gels with them will impact playing time--almost as if the man knows a thing or two about basketball :D ). If those two are each using up like 25% of the possessions, I'd probably say Dawkins is the more valuable offensive player due to his (likely) higher efficiency. If those two aren't quite at that usage level, Sulaimon might be the better offensive player since he can probably maintain his efficiency with higher usage than a shooter like Dawkins.

All that said, I pretty much agree with you--Rasheed's a heck of a basketball player and it's a great position to be in to have to pick between those two.

Zeb
10-03-2013, 06:19 PM
That leaves Rasheed as the forgotten man and he isn't a flashy player and doesn't blow you out of the water with any one particular thing he just does it all and last year was the 4 or 5th option scoring wise as a freshmen and still was very good with 12ppg. If he stays all 4 years without significant injury I fully expect him to see him break the 2000 career point mark or at least come real close.

Reading your description suddenly made a lightbulb go off... is Rasheed Daniel Ewing 2.0? (BTW - I mean this as a compliment--loved Ewing's game.)

SilkyJ
10-03-2013, 06:21 PM
When K named Amile as a starter and really praised him, that was just as much a motivational ploy as not naming Sheed. K wants Amile to develop his ego, because if Amile goes to another level, we suddenly have a lot more versatility and lineup options. That said, K has a tendency to play the five best players on the roster in crunch time, position be damned. So my guess is unless Amile makes huge improvements, we will see Cook, Sheed, Dre, Hood and Parker close out a LOT of games. And though that group will be undersized, they will be fast and able to score like crazy.

Agreed. Just as importantly as playing the 5 best players at crunch time is playing the 5 best FT shooters when we are ahead. Amile is not a good FT shooter and the lineup you outlined is pretty strong.


Watch out for that Senior Bump. Duke Seniors historically have improved dramatically from their junior years, a bump as dramatic as the frosh-to-soph bump. Combine this with Dre's Playing-with-a-Clear-Mind and Newly-Happy bumps, I think Dre's going to shoot 40% from three this year (and that may be understating it -- I think 45% is in play) and also play very good Duke ball-denial defense.

Totally agree. 9 times out of 10 we see a good if not great senior bump. Given Dre's year off, its just so hard to know if we'll see it. If it happens I'll consider it gravy and I'll up us from "top 5-10" to "top 2-3."

JNort
10-03-2013, 06:29 PM
Reading your description suddenly made a lightbulb go off... is Rasheed Daniel Ewing 2.0? (BTW - I mean this as a compliment--loved Ewing's game.)

Def not an insult! Ewing is one of my all time favorites! I do think Rasheed could and will statistically be better

Zeb
10-04-2013, 01:31 AM
I do think Rasheed could and will statistically be better

As a freshman Rasheed's numbers are very similar to Ewing as a soph/junior. I think Rasheed's sophomore campaign could look similar to Ewing's senior year, though probably not so many minutes and hopefully better FT & 3P%. Elsewhere in the thread the concept of a senior bump is mentioned. You can sure see it for Daniel in his assist and steal numbers. Wow.


Season GP GS Min FG% 3P% FT% RPG APG BPG SPG PPG
2012-13 36 33 29.2 .424 .371 .802 3.4 1.9 .1 .8 11.6

2001-02 35 0 18.2 .479 .457 .686 2.2 1.3 .0 .9 6.5

2002-03 33 15 27.9 .430 .400 .821 3.2 1.4 .2 1.3 12.0

2003-04 37 32 30.6 .417 .411 .742 2.6 1.9 .1 1.4 12.6

2004-05 33 32 34.5 .427 .347 .692 3.2 4.0 .4 2.0 15.3

Saratoga2
10-04-2013, 08:22 AM
I have lots of love for Sheed, too, especially when I found out he was a Duke TIP scholar in middle school. Sentiment for Dre is not affecting my takes here!

Re: Dre's defense. In his career, he has always had to spend too much time guarding players bigger than him. Sophomore year his perimeter mates were Kyrie & Nolan and then Nolan & Seth after Kyrie went down. Junior year, he was in there with Curry & Rivers and sometimes one of those guys paired with Cook and Thornton (and sometimes Cook and Thornton were together). Duke has been very small on the perimeter in recent years which meant Dre had to spend a lot of time guarding 3s, which he struggled with. This year, he'll get to guard 2s most of the time hopefully.

With all that said, I stand by what I wrote. Off the ball, Dre is a pretty good defender and will be even better this year with his Senior Bump. Overall Sheed is the better defender but if they both spend much of their time playing off the ball, I don't think we'll notice a difference.

Watch out for that Senior Bump. Duke Seniors historically have improved dramatically from their junior years, a bump as dramatic as the frosh-to-soph bump. Combine this with Dre's Playing-with-a-Clear-Mind and Newly-Happy bumps, I think Dre's going to shoot 40% from three this year (and that may be understating it -- I think 45% is in play) and also play very good Duke ball-denial defense.

I mean, I get that Coach K loves to motivate and maybe his press conference really was designed to motivate Sheed as you hypothesize. But I tend to take things at face value unless there's a compelling reason not to; I find that usually leads to the right conclusion, especially this early in the season. Coach K essentially said in the press conference the 5th starting position is up for grabs, and then in the streamed practice, Sheed and Dre spent the same amount of time in white jerseys and playing with the starters. My take is it's a legit battle (not that it matters all that much who starts).

What others have said is that we are likely to continuously pressure the ball on defense and run the floor on offense. We have the speed, athletic ability and depth to do that effectively. In order to keep the pressure on, coach K will probably be doing a lot of substitution throughout the game. That is where depth comes in. Whether a guy starts or not, there will be significant playing time for the top 9 or 10 and even guys thought of as beyond 10 could see minutes.

One other thing that comes to mind is the size of our guards. With Quinn, Tyler and Seth last year, we had three smallish guards which caused us difficulty when the opponents had big athlletic guards and small forwards against us. I think coach K has avoided recruiting smallers guards recently except for the PG position. Rasheed is the smallest of our new guards coming in at 6'3" +, we are also getting a lot of athletic guys at the small forward position, some of whom, like Rodney, could play a shooting guard position. The bottom line for us is that we will not have matchup issues except possibly at center this year, while on the other hand we should create matchup problems for the opponents defense. I like what I see happening as coach K's team evolves.

flyingdutchdevil
10-04-2013, 09:16 AM
I have lots of love for Sheed, too, especially when I found out he was a Duke TIP scholar in middle school. Sentiment for Dre is not affecting my takes here!

My sister-in-law was a TIPer at Duke. Rasheed's intelligence is a big part of the reason I am such a fan.


Re: Dre's defense. In his career, he has always had to spend too much time guarding players bigger than him. Sophomore year his perimeter mates were Kyrie & Nolan and then Nolan & Seth after Kyrie went down. Junior year, he was in there with Curry & Rivers and sometimes one of those guys paired with Cook and Thornton (and sometimes Cook and Thornton were together). Duke has been very small on the perimeter in recent years which meant Dre had to spend a lot of time guarding 3s, which he struggled with. This year, he'll get to guard 2s most of the time hopefully.

Sulaimon was also playing out of position and did a much better job of guarding the 3. They are very similar in height, but Andre is 25 pounds heavier (according to GoDuke.com), meaning he probably is more fit than Sulaimon at guarding the 3. Sulaimon is perfect for the 2, especially against opposing guards who love to handle the ball.


With all that said, I stand by what I wrote. Off the ball, Dre is a pretty good defender and will be even better this year with his Senior Bump. Overall Sheed is the better defender but if they both spend much of their time playing off the ball, I don't think we'll notice a difference.

I don't remember Andre being that good off the ball. During the horrific backcourt year of 2011-2012, I distinctly remember Thornton as the only good off ball defender. Also, if Coach K is going to press like crazy (which he has indicated), then obviously there will be a lot of substitutions. However, I firmly believe that there will also be a lot of the 2 guard giving Quinn a break, and I see Sulaimon doing a fair amount of on the ball defending.


Watch out for that Senior Bump. Duke Seniors historically have improved dramatically from their junior years, a bump as dramatic as the frosh-to-soph bump. Combine this with Dre's Playing-with-a-Clear-Mind and Newly-Happy bumps, I think Dre's going to shoot 40% from three this year (and that may be understating it -- I think 45% is in play) and also play very good Duke ball-denial defense.

Completely agree about the patented Duke senior bump. But I'd argue, as with any program, the sophomore bump shows more improvement than the senior bump. That's why I think that Rasheed will be incredible this year.


I mean, I get that Coach K loves to motivate and maybe his press conference really was designed to motivate Sheed as you hypothesize. But I tend to take things at face value unless there's a compelling reason not to; I find that usually leads to the right conclusion, especially this early in the season. Coach K essentially said in the press conference the 5th starting position is up for grabs, and then in the streamed practice, Sheed and Dre spent the same amount of time in white jerseys and playing with the starters. My take is it's a legit battle (not that it matters all that much who starts).

I don't think Coach K is the best recruiter in the game, and I don't think he's the best X&Os coach either. However, I think that he is head and shoulders above any coach at motivation. And I see not naming the 2 guard as a massive motivational tool for Rasheed. He does this all the time (he did it with Quinn last year when Quinn was clearly the best option at the 1 the whole year long). As someone posted above, he did it with Amile in the reverse as well. Coach K's management style is incredible, and everything he does or say to the media is used as some sort of motivational tactic for his players / organization / NCAA / Jay-Z. RoyWill could learn a little from Coach K.

killerleft
10-04-2013, 12:51 PM
We're going to have to disagree then. IMO, Rasheed was by far the best on-the-ball defender last year. Check out this video by DraftExpress (fast-forward to the 7:40 minute mark): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5L8d_0QEwg

He plays with energy, moves extremely well laterally, and understands team defense. And he was a freshman last year. This year, he's a sophomore, and you know the saying ("best part about freshman is..."). We must have been seeing different Andre's play, because his defense was always fairly subpar. During the 2011-12 season, where our whole backcourt had defensive issues, Andre's was one of the culprits.

I can understand why posters love Andre: he's the player with the most experience, the prettiest shot, and he's gone through a lot. I am on their side for this. Offensively, Andre may be more valuable. But to think that there isn't a huge difference defensively between Sulaimon and Andre is just isn't correct.

I think Rasheed LOOKS like a great defender because he works very hard. He seems to translate all the defensive drills into movement on the court. No doubt he WILL be a great defender, because he won't accept anything less. Is he there yet? Nope, but he edges closer all the time.

Andre is harder to judge. We'll really have to wait a while to see what he can do defensively. There is evidence that he is a wiley so and so, but he hasn't shown great defense so far. But I'd bet on Andre to win over Rasheed in a game of one-on-one.

flyingdutchdevil
10-04-2013, 01:43 PM
Andre is harder to judge. We'll really have to wait a while to see what he can do defensively. There is evidence that he is a wiley so and so, but he hasn't shown great defense so far. But I'd bet on Andre to win over Rasheed in a game of one-on-one.

Not sure I'd agree. Sulaimon has more of a skillset build for one-on-one: ability to drive, solid handle, spin moves, and mid-range shooting. If Andre gets hot, the game is essentially over, but I'd take Sulaimon 9 times out of 10.

OldPhiKap
10-04-2013, 02:02 PM
When we play Syracuse or a zone team, I want me some Andre.

I think their minutes will both be strong, and who is the nominal starter or finisher mainly is a function of the match-up K wants and whether which skillset we need on the floor in any given situation.

flyingdutchdevil
10-04-2013, 02:11 PM
When we play Syracuse or a zone team, I want me some Andre.

I think their minutes will both be strong, and who is the nominal starter or finisher mainly is a function of the match-up K wants and whether which skillset we need on the floor in any given situation.

Come January, I don't think Coach K is going to be tinkering that much with the starting line-up (if he does, that is not a good sign as it means we are struggling). And while both players will see plenty of time, I expect the player who gets the starting nod will also be the player left at the end of a close game. If it's a really close game (we are 1-3 points down), then we'll probably be seeing a lot of Andre during that time.

What's funny is how we're talking about how two stellar guards are going to be playing on this team. At the 2-4, we just have an embarrassment of riches. The season can't start soon enough.

killerleft
10-04-2013, 02:13 PM
Not sure I'd agree. Sulaimon has more of a skillset build for one-on-one: ability to drive, solid handle, spin moves, and mid-range shooting. If Andre gets hot, the game is essentially over, but I'd take Sulaimon 9 times out of 10.

LOL, you could be right. I'm guessing that Andre's usual offense has always relied on him freeing himself up, and that he can defend Rasheed without being directly in front of him. Rasheed will have to work harder, especially on offense. Once he gets the footwork down, watch out for Rasheed.

Kfanarmy
10-04-2013, 03:01 PM
I believe Defense will drive this decision. Unless Duke is down by two with one posession left, I don't see Andre getting the nod over very many on the team.

Kedsy
10-04-2013, 03:10 PM
I expect the player who gets the starting nod will also be the player left at the end of a close game.

I expect we'll see both of them at the end of most close games.

DukieInBrasil
10-04-2013, 03:11 PM
Come January, I don't think Coach K is going to be tinkering that much with the starting line-up (if he does, that is not a good sign as it means we are struggling). And while both players will see plenty of time, I expect the player who gets the starting nod will also be the player left at the end of a close game. If it's a really close game (we are 1-3 points down), then we'll probably be seeing a lot of Andre during that time.
What's funny is how we're talking about how two stellar guards are going to be playing on this team. At the 2-4, we just have an embarrassment of riches. The season can't start soon enough.

No need to worry, we'll be winning by 30 and our closer at the 2 will be Matt Jones! Every game! All the time!
But in all seriousness, i'm glad that people are high on Andre for this year, i hope he has a great one.

flyingdutchdevil
10-04-2013, 03:19 PM
I expect we'll see both of them at the end of most close games.

Ahh...a battle between posters!

If both are on, who comes off? I suspect Amile, but you're giving up our biggest body and probably our best rebounder. If it's Quinn, you're giving up our best distributor and one of the best on the ball defenders. Trade offs, my friend, trade offs.

Kedsy
10-04-2013, 03:23 PM
Ahh...a battle between posters!

If both are on, who comes off? I suspect Amile, but you're giving up our biggest body and probably our best rebounder. If it's Quinn, you're giving up our best distributor and one of the best on the ball defenders. Trade offs, my friend, trade offs.

In a close game, unless the opposing center is a Beast, I agree it would probably be Amile (who is also not as good a free throw shooter as either Rasheed or Andre).

SilkyJ
10-04-2013, 06:29 PM
PPA is not a bad metric (certainly better than raw FG%), but it ignores free throws, which are still possessions expended. If you use true shooting percentage, which accounts for this, Rasheed was 55.0% last year--which is good!--but in 2010-11 Andre was 65.2%, which is exceptional. Of course, that ignores that Rasheed had significantly higher usage, and also that drawing fouls has value in and of itself. In some sense which player is more offensively valuable probably depends as much as anything on how high Jabari and Rodney's usage is (as you said, Coach K emphasized that how a player gels with them will impact playing time--almost as if the man knows a thing or two about basketball :D ). If those two are each using up like 25% of the possessions, I'd probably say Dawkins is the more valuable offensive player due to his (likely) higher efficiency. If those two aren't quite at that usage level, Sulaimon might be the better offensive player since he can probably maintain his efficiency with higher usage than a shooter like Dawkins.

All that said, I pretty much agree with you--Rasheed's a heck of a basketball player and it's a great position to be in to have to pick between those two.

Oh contrare monfrere! PPA most certainly DOES take FTs into account, and while TS% takes into account FT%, it doesn't take into account how often that guy gets to the line. The PPA numerator contains all made FTs, and you're right that the denominator does not penalize them for expending a possession, but how can it and why should it? PPA rewards people who get to the line, as it should, b/c shooting FTs is the most efficient way to score.

Think about it, if two players take the same # of shots and shoot the exact same % from all over the court, but one guy takes 100 FTs in a season vs another guy who takes 10 FTs in a season, who is the better scorer? Well based on TS% they look equal, but clearly the guy who gets to the line and gets freebies is a better all around scorer.

Now, TS% does reflect how well you shoot from the line, but not how many attempts you took. So, if we look back at the previous example, let's say the guy who shoots 10 FTs makes all 10, and the guy who shoots 100 only makes 80. Assuming they both have made the same number of FGs on the same # of FGA, TS% would tell you that the guy with 10FTs is better, but CLEARLY the guy who shot 80/100 and got to the line a ton is a better all around scorer.

So TS% does not tell the whole story. (And BTW, Sheed got to the line more last year than Andre did in his So and Jr years combined: 116 vs 89 FTAs, hence why I think this point is important...part of Sheed's effectiveness is his ability to get to the line often)

[/metrics debate :)]
[self-contradiction]

So, if we simply compare Dre to Sheed in the past, I think PPA is the better metric, BUT, in this case, TS% may be a slightly better indicator for the coming year. Getting back to the heart of it, and contradicting my last 3 paragraphs--FTs don't matter nearly as much for this comparison b/c of what we said before: we need someone to complement Hood/Jabari, and that is potentially best done with spot up shooting. Those guys should get ample opptys at the FT line and I expect Sheed's FTA (on a per minute basis, and maybe even on a usage basis) will be less than last year, so Sheed's ability to get to the line may be less important. So its possible that even if Sheed improves in a number of areas, Dre could be the more efficient scorer simply b/c Sheed won't get to the line nearly as much.

So we're arriving in a similar place, but using a slightly different route to get there :)


Ahh...a battle between posters!

If both are on, who comes off? I suspect Amile, but you're giving up our biggest body and probably our best rebounder. If it's Quinn, you're giving up our best distributor and one of the best on the ball defenders. Trade offs, my friend, trade offs.


In a close game, unless the opposing center is a Beast, I agree it would probably be Amile (who is also not as good a free throw shooter as either Rasheed or Andre).

Kedsy is right and we've seen it over, and over, and over, and over again. K loves to go small and put his best FT shooters out there late in games when we are up. All 5 guys go to the defensive glass and we rebound as a team. Given Sheed and Dre are both good to very good FT shooters, I expect that they may close out plenty of games.

Kedsy
10-04-2013, 09:32 PM
Oh contrare monfrere! PPA most certainly DOES take FTs into account, and while TS% takes into account FT%, it doesn't take into account how often that guy gets to the line. The PPA numerator contains all made FTs, and you're right that the denominator does not penalize them for expending a possession, but how can it and why should it? PPA rewards people who get to the line, as it should, b/c shooting FTs is the most efficient way to score.

Here's why I think the best metric should count the possession for the FTs. Consider the following extreme example:

Player A takes 50 shots and misses every one. He also drives into the lane and is fouled 50 times, on which he misses every layup, but gets 100 free throws, of which he makes 50%. His PPA is 1.0, but he is a very inefficient scorer.

Player B takes 50 2-point shots and makes half. He doesn't drive and shoots zero FTs. His PPA is also 1.0. He doesn't get to the line, but he's a reasonably efficient scorer.

While from a scoring perspective, these two players achieved the same thing, Player A took 100 possessions to do it and Player B only took 50 possessions to do it. Clearly, Player B is the more efficient offensive player. But their PPA is the same.

If I've made some sort of math mistake (which is always possible), please let me know. But assuming my calculations are correct, PPA and TS% really show entirely different things. Yes, getting to the line is important, but it doesn't necessarily make you more efficient.

azzefkram
10-04-2013, 10:16 PM
Here's why I think the best metric should count the possession for the FTs. Consider the following extreme example:

Player A takes 50 shots and misses every one. He also drives into the lane and is fouled 50 times, on which he misses every layup, but gets 100 free throws, of which he makes 50%. His PPA is 1.0, but he is a very inefficient scorer.

Player B takes 50 2-point shots and makes half. He doesn't drive and shoots zero FTs. His PPA is also 1.0. He doesn't get to the line, but he's a reasonably efficient scorer.

While from a scoring perspective, these two players achieved the same thing, Player A took 100 possessions to do it and Player B only took 50 possessions to do it. Clearly, Player B is the more efficient offensive player. But their PPA is the same.

If I've made some sort of math mistake (which is always possible), please let me know. But assuming my calculations are correct, PPA and TS% really show entirely different things. Yes, getting to the line is important, but it doesn't necessarily make you more efficient.

I am not 100% sure but I don't think each free throw counts as a possession. Both players are taking 50 shots to score 50 points so I'd say their efficiency is the same. If anything, you could argue that Player A is more efficient since his points are coming when the clock is stopped.

vick
10-04-2013, 10:37 PM
I am not 100% sure but I don't think each free throw counts as a possession. Both players are taking 50 shots to score 50 points so I'd say their efficiency is the same. If anything, you could argue that Player A is more efficient since his points are coming when the clock is stopped.

It's not each free throw as a possession, it's an estimate of how many possessions the player expends by shooting free throws--it's only an estimate because the box score does not produce any information on whether free throws came from a two-shot, three-shot, one-and-one, or and-one situation. TS% = PTS/(2*(FGA + (0.475*FTA))), so in Kedsy's example, player A would have TS% = 50/(2*(50+(0.475*100))) = 0.256 (note that the estimation throws us off a little here, as the "true" true shooting percentage should really be 0.250). Player B would be 50/(2*50) = 0.500. Player B is (rightly IMO) viewed as the more efficient scorer by true shooting percentage.

The second point about points while the clock is stopped is situationally true, but not the way efficiency is usually thought of, which is on a per-possession rather than per-time basis. Scoring with the clock stopped is especially valuable when you are trailing though, so you are right that that's something to consider when looking at TS%.

Kedsy
10-04-2013, 11:19 PM
I am not 100% sure but I don't think each free throw counts as a possession. Both players are taking 50 shots to score 50 points so I'd say their efficiency is the same. If anything, you could argue that Player A is more efficient since his points are coming when the clock is stopped.

Vick's recitation of how true shooting percentage is calculated is accurate. But I suspect you probably knew that. I think maybe my example wasn't as clear as I thought it was. I wasn't suggesting each free throw was a possession. I was hypothesizing that Player A took 50 shots (but was not fouled) and missed them all, and on 50 separate occasions was fouled (and missed the shot so it wasn't an "and one" situation) and then hit one free throw each time. Thus he used 100 possessions to get his 50 points (but for PPA purposes, he only had 50 attempted shots, so his PPA was 1.0). His TS% would be .250, although again Vick is right that the way they calculate TS% he'd be credited with .256.

azzefkram
10-05-2013, 09:33 AM
Vick's recitation of how true shooting percentage is calculated is accurate. But I suspect you probably knew that. I think maybe my example wasn't as clear as I thought it was. I wasn't suggesting each free throw was a possession. I was hypothesizing that Player A took 50 shots (but was not fouled) and missed them all, and on 50 separate occasions was fouled (and missed the shot so it wasn't an "and one" situation) and then hit one free throw each time. Thus he used 100 possessions to get his 50 points (but for PPA purposes, he only had 50 attempted shots, so his PPA was 1.0). His TS% would be .250, although again Vick is right that the way they calculate TS% he'd be credited with .256.

I get your point but the example is too extreme and also fairly unbalanced. A person who makes 50% of his 2pt jump shots (non-layup) is a fairly good shooter. Someone who shoots 50% from the free throw line is a fairly poor free throw shooter.

CDu
10-05-2013, 09:45 AM
I get your point but the example is too extreme and also fairly unbalanced. A person who makes 50% of his 2pt jump shots (non-layup) is a fairly good shooter. Someone who shoots 50% from the free throw line is a fairly poor free throw shooter.

Kedsy was intentionally using an extreme example to show the flaw in PPA. According to PPA, those two players would appear to be equally efficient scorers, when clearly they are not. In a less extreme example, the bias would be less glaring of course. But his point would remain valid.

azzefkram
10-05-2013, 02:26 PM
Kedsy was intentionally using an extreme example to show the flaw in PPA. According to PPA, those two players would appear to be equally efficient scorers, when clearly they are not. In a less extreme example, the bias would be less glaring of course. But his point would remain valid.

I respectfully disagree. All of these statistics have their weaknesses. Using an extreme and unrealistic situation to "break" the formula doesn't prove a point. Let's take a different example. Player A has one made 3pt shot. Player B has a made 2pt shot in which he's fouled and he makes the "and one." PPA, points, possessions, shooting percentages would all be the same. Player A would have a TS% nearly 50% higher.

Without looking it up, who was a more efficient offensive player last year, Seth or Mason?

As an aside, I really do enjoy the discussions I have with the posters on this board. I do not take offense when you disagree with my posts and I hope I do not offend others.

JNort
10-06-2013, 03:38 PM
Here's why I think the best metric should count the possession for the FTs. Consider the following extreme example:

Player A takes 50 shots and misses every one. He also drives into the lane and is fouled 50 times, on which he misses every layup, but gets 100 free throws, of which he makes 50%. His PPA is 1.0, but he is a very inefficient scorer.

Player B takes 50 2-point shots and makes half. He doesn't drive and shoots zero FTs. His PPA is also 1.0. He doesn't get to the line, but he's a reasonably efficient scorer.

While from a scoring perspective, these two players achieved the same thing, Player A took 100 possessions to do it and Player B only took 50 possessions to do it. Clearly, Player B is the more efficient offensive player. But their PPA is the same.

If I've made some sort of math mistake (which is always possible), please let me know. But assuming my calculations are correct, PPA and TS% really show entirely different things. Yes, getting to the line is important, but it doesn't necessarily make you more efficient.

I too would take the FT shooter. You put the other team in a real pickle with that many fouls.

Mcluhan
10-06-2013, 06:21 PM
One thing I'm looking forward to, assuming Dawkins carves out either the starter and/or 6th man sparkplug role many of us predict, is in March Coach K being able to address a team that has otherwise not been to a Final Four, and say "Andre's been here before, he's hit the big shot when we needed it, and so can you." And Scheyer can back him up, because he was there on the court for those big shots.

MCFinARL
10-06-2013, 07:30 PM
One thing I'm looking forward to, assuming Dawkins carves out either the starter and/or 6th man sparkplug role many of us predict, is in March Coach K being able to address a team that has otherwise not been to a Final Four, and say "Andre's been here before, he's hit the big shot when we needed it, and so can you." And Scheyer can back him up, because he was there on the court for those big shots.

Yes--though to be honest, Andre scored zero points in the Final Four, where he saw relatively few minutes of action. His key buckets (and they WERE absolutely key) were in the regional final against Baylor, where Duke was trailing and he hit two key 3s late in the first half, resulting in a halftime margin of only 3.

NSDukeFan
10-06-2013, 07:34 PM
Yes--though to be honest, Andre scored zero points in the Final Four, where he saw relatively few minutes of action. His key buckets (and they WERE absolutely key) were in the regional final against Baylor, where Duke was trailing and he hit two key 3s late in the first half, resulting in a halftime margin of only 3.

I would argue his buckets vs. Baylor were bigger than any individual hoops (perhaps Davidson's aside) in the national semifinal that year.

MCFinARL
10-07-2013, 11:55 AM
I would argue his buckets vs. Baylor were bigger than any individual hoops (perhaps Davidson's aside) in the national semifinal that year.

Actually, I agree with you. And perhaps I am just getting caught up in semantics. The OP envisioned Andre being presented to his teammates by Coach K as someone who has "been here before...hit the big shot when we needed it" in a Final Four. Since technically only the first half of that statement is accurate, I was having trouble imagining Coach K making that exact speech.

On the other hand, the first half is important, as well as Andre's hitting the big shots in the regional final, and I could easily see Andre (and John Scheyer) as key role models in helping the team manage the pressures and distractions of the Final Four if they get there.

NSDukeFan
10-07-2013, 04:28 PM
Actually, I agree with you. And perhaps I am just getting caught up in semantics. The OP envisioned Andre being presented to his teammates by Coach K as someone who has "been here before...hit the big shot when we needed it" in a Final Four. Since technically only the first half of that statement is accurate, I was having trouble imagining Coach K making that exact speech.

On the other hand, the first half is important, as well as Andre's hitting the big shots in the regional final, and I could easily see Andre (and John Scheyer) as key role models in helping the team manage the pressures and distractions of the Final Four if they get there.

When I said argue, I didn't mean that I disagreed with you at all. I think a more accurate statement that would still be a big thing is that Andre hit key shots that helped the team get to the Final Four and played in the Final Four, both things that nobody else on the roster can say. Hopefully that will change in March.

MCFinARL
10-07-2013, 07:08 PM
When I said argue, I didn't mean that I disagreed with you at all. I think a more accurate statement that would still be a big thing is that Andre hit key shots that helped the team get to the Final Four and played in the Final Four, both things that nobody else on the roster can say. Hopefully that will change in March.

Amen to that!:)

wk2109
10-09-2013, 03:52 PM
http://blogs.newsobserver.com/dukenow/dukes-andre-dawkins-and-sean-kelly-use-his-year-away-from-basketball-to-build-close-bond

Andre talks about his year off and the close bond he built with Ryan Kelly's brother Sean, who is a manager for the team.

I like this quote:


“People ask me if I can still shoot, and I ask them if they can still breathe. That’s kind of the same thing,” Dawkins said

nmduke2001
10-10-2013, 02:12 PM
http://blogs.newsobserver.com/dukenow/dukes-andre-dawkins-and-sean-kelly-use-his-year-away-from-basketball-to-build-close-bond

Andre talks about his year off and the close bond he built with Ryan Kelly's brother Sean, who is a manager for the team.

I like this quote:

You beat me to it. I read the article and thought that was the best/funniest/most honest quote I have read from an athlete in quite some time.

cspan37421
10-12-2013, 08:37 AM
Deciding to take a year away was a two-way street, with Dawkins and the coaching staff having a say. ... He was prepared to have to go elsewhere to continue playing.

Did anyone else pick up on this, or was it well known? I had the impression that Andre's decision to step away was solely his choice, for his stated reason. This makes it sound like there was more to it.

cspan37421
10-12-2013, 09:06 AM
I too would take the FT shooter. You put the other team in a real pickle with that many fouls.

Though I specialized in applied math, I haven't given a ton of thought to many of these newer statistical ratings and effectiveness measures. But a couple things come to mind and JNort touched on one of them that deserves further emphasis. If you can foul out some of the other team's star players, it's a very different ballgame, competitively. We used to excel at this (drawing charges, especially), though rules and their interpretations are changing to make this harder (too often, "let them play" means "let them foul"). Also consider the going from the 1-and-1 to 2 shots from drawing fouls. All those side effects can be really important but under-appreciated.

The other is this business about FTs counting as possessions. I am probably missing something, but it sounds like counting them as possessions treats each one as an attempt and what you do with that attempt to score, and that feeds into efficiency. That makes some sense. But if the other team hasn't taken possession, I don't get why each one should count as a separate possession. E.g., get fouled on a 3, miss the 3, but then hit 2 of 3 free throws, to me that's one possession and that's what you were able to do with it.

I am a bit leery of stats that incorporate a "should be able to make" stat - including effectiveness rating that Barry Jacobs used to run in his Fans' guides to ACC basketball .. I believe the formula was from Dwayne Morrison. In any case, those tend to codify an expected rate of success (from 2pt, 3pt, FT) which doesn't adjust for the evolution of the game and its rules. When possible I prefer a stat without such assumptions, though I think that one is pretty interesting. It seems to me that sometimes it might be easier to form a strategy with your "chess pieces" if you stick to the stripped-down stats. If you bundle them too much you may miss the opportunity to exploit a particular situation or mismatch. But hey, what do I know. My basketball coaching record is 0-0.

Indoor66
10-12-2013, 10:03 AM
But hey, what do I know. My basketball coaching record is 0-0.

WOW - undefeated! :cool:

Kedsy
10-12-2013, 01:09 PM
The other is this business about FTs counting as possessions. I am probably missing something, but it sounds like counting them as possessions treats each one as an attempt and what you do with that attempt to score, and that feeds into efficiency. That makes some sense. But if the other team hasn't taken possession, I don't get why each one should count as a separate possession. E.g., get fouled on a 3, miss the 3, but then hit 2 of 3 free throws, to me that's one possession and that's what you were able to do with it.

True Shooting Pct does NOT treat each free throw as a separate possession. In your example, of course the set of free throws should count as one possession. The problem of course is the formula uses box scores and not play-by-play to make the calculation, so in the formula, each free throw counts as 0.475 of a possession, which theoretically takes into account all the possibilities (three-shot FTs should count as one; two shot FTs should count as one; "and-ones" shouldn't count as any; missed front end of one-and-one should count as one). So, in your case, the three FTs actually are counted as 1.425, which is a little high but is balanced out by missed front ends counted as only 0.475.

It's not perfect, but to me it's a lot closer than PPA, which would count the two points scored in your example as having happened in zero possessions, which clearly skews the result in favor of players who get to the line a lot.

cspan37421
10-12-2013, 01:52 PM
It's not perfect, but to me it's a lot closer than PPA, which would count the two points scored in your example as having happened in zero possessions, which clearly skews the result in favor of players who get to the line a lot.

Zero possessions? If someone shoots a 3, misses it, but is fouled on the shot, and makes 2 of 3 FTs, that's all considered zero possessions under PPA? Or is just the FT shot part of it considered zero possessions? Are we getting possessions and attempts mixed up? PPA is points per attempt, right? Sorry, I'm new to this stuff.

Kedsy
10-12-2013, 03:34 PM
Zero possessions? If someone shoots a 3, misses it, but is fouled on the shot, and makes 2 of 3 FTs, that's all considered zero possessions under PPA? Or is just the FT shot part of it considered zero possessions? Are we getting possessions and attempts mixed up? PPA is points per attempt, right? Sorry, I'm new to this stuff.

Yes, PPA is points per attempt. But if you miss a shot while getting fouled, it doesn't count as a shot attempt, so the whole transaction, the missed shot and all the free throw attempts, are considered zero possessions/zero attempts (meaning the denominator of the PPA formula is unaffected while the numerator is increased by the number of made free throws). Which is why I think True Shooting Pct is a better metric than PPA.