PDA

View Full Version : MBB: Duke v. Alabama Pre-Game and In-Game Thread



pfrduke
11-26-2013, 08:18 AM
I think it's time to start talking about the next game already. This will be a very tough test, as Alabama's strengths so far this season hit on areas of weakness for Duke. Trevor Releford is having a heck of a start to his senior season, shooting 70% from 2, 50% from 3, and hitting all 11 of his free throws. His one weakness is a significant propensity to turn the ball over, something Duke will have to exploit. Cook/Sulaimon/Thornton will have their hands full with both him and backcourt mate Retin Obasohan, who's also shooting over 60% from 2. Despite not being particularly tall, Alabama kills the offensive glass. They've scooped up 42.7% of their own misses. The guards' penetration ability and the offensive board work have helped propel Alabama to a very strong interior shooting performance. Alabama's biggest weaknesses are turnovers and outside shooting. It will be interesting to see whether Duke's defense tries to exploit the former or the latter - if they go for the former and don't succeed, we could see Releford and Obasohan run layup drills all game (which, yuck).

Alabama's defense is ok - their primary strength so far is avoiding putting the opponent on the free throw line (although in their one loss, the Sooners did get 25 trips to the stripe), followed closely by defending the 3 and forcing steals. Duke can have a size advantage, particularly if we start Hood-Parker-Jefferson across the front-line, as Alabama's starters in the 3 and 4 spots run 6'5" and 6'6". Hood and Parker have already shown strong post games and they should be able to take advantage of the couple inches they'll have on their primary defenders to do some work inside early.

roywhite
11-26-2013, 08:28 AM
Alabama is 3-1 with a loss to Oklahoma, a win over Texas Tech, and then 2 early round NIT wins.

Alabama's ESPN page (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/333/alabama-crimson-tide)

Their most impressive stat is a FG% of 52.4, 12th best in the country.

MChambers
11-26-2013, 08:38 AM
Don't we owe Anthony Grant one? Wasn't he the coach of VCU in 2008? Or am I confused once again?

Matches
11-26-2013, 08:40 AM
Duke can have a size advantage, particularly if we start Hood-Parker-Jefferson across the front-line, as Alabama's starters in the 3 and 4 spots run 6'5" and 6'6". Hood and Parker have already shown strong post games and they should be able to take advantage of the couple inches they'll have on their primary defenders to do some work inside early.

I'll be very surprised if we don't see a lineup change of some sort for this game.

Ggallagher
11-26-2013, 08:41 AM
Don't we owe Anthony Grant one? Wasn't he the coach of VCU in 2008? Or am I confused once again?
Yep, that's the guy. He coached there through the 2009 season.

brlftz
11-26-2013, 08:47 AM
I expect a starting lineup of Andre Buckner, Patrick Davidson, the Big Johnson, Jay Heaps, and Nate James.

Matches
11-26-2013, 08:52 AM
I expect a starting lineup of Andre Buckner, Patrick Davidson, the Big Johnson, Jay Heaps, and Nate James.

Eh, I think that gimmick may have run its course. I would not be surprised to see any of the following lineups though:

Cook, TT, Sheed, Hood, Parker
Cook, TT, Hood, Parker, Hairston
Cook, Sheed, Hood, Parker, Hairston
Cook, TT, Hood, Parker, Amile

K identified lack of communication as our key problem on D, so it stands to reason that if he makes a change, it'll be to guys who he sees as good communicators.

pfrduke
11-26-2013, 08:53 AM
I'll be very surprised if we don't see a lineup change of some sort for this game.

I agree, although thought it might come from the guard spot. Regardless, for as long as we aren't playing 3 guards, at least one or both of Hood and Parker will have a couple inches on their primary defender.

OldPhiKap
11-26-2013, 08:55 AM
I agree, although thought it might come from the guard spot. Regardless, for as long as we aren't playing 3 guards, at least one or both of Hood and Parker will have a couple inches on their primary defender.

I think K will start whoever does not have a broken nose from the post-game practice.

Reilly
11-26-2013, 09:05 AM
I think K will start whoever does not have a broken nose from the post-game practice.

... or whoever gets up from their supine position and out the locker room first after he took their chairs away

brlftz
11-26-2013, 09:23 AM
i expect that it will be whichever 5 guys are showing the most heart and best communication in practice, regardless of anything else. i also expect that they will all be starting at square 1 and will have to earn minutes anew.

Newton_14
11-26-2013, 09:29 AM
I think it's time to start talking about the next game already. This will be a very tough test, as Alabama's strengths so far this season hit on areas of weakness for Duke. Trevor Releford is having a heck of a start to his senior season, shooting 70% from 2, 50% from 3, and hitting all 11 of his free throws. His one weakness is a significant propensity to turn the ball over, something Duke will have to exploit. Cook/Sulaimon/Thornton will have their hands full with both him and backcourt mate Retin Obasohan, who's also shooting over 60% from 2. Despite not being particularly tall, Alabama kills the offensive glass. They've scooped up 42.7% of their own misses. The guards' penetration ability and the offensive board work have helped propel Alabama to a very strong interior shooting performance. Alabama's biggest weaknesses are turnovers and outside shooting. It will be interesting to see whether Duke's defense tries to exploit the former or the latter - if they go for the former and don't succeed, we could see Releford and Obasohan run layup drills all game (which, yuck).

Alabama's defense is ok - their primary strength so far is avoiding putting the opponent on the free throw line (although in their one loss, the Sooners did get 25 trips to the stripe), followed closely by defending the 3 and forcing steals. Duke can have a size advantage, particularly if we start Hood-Parker-Jefferson across the front-line, as Alabama's starters in the 3 and 4 spots run 6'5" and 6'6". Hood and Parker have already shown strong post games and they should be able to take advantage of the couple inches they'll have on their primary defenders to do some work inside early.

Great preview. Thanks Paul. Do you happen to know if Alabama has run any zone defense in any of their games? As bad as our defense is, we are still outstanding on offense. We are destroying man to man defenses to the point that two opponents that really don't like to play zone (ECU/Vermont) played zone almost the entire game after falling behind early. I did feel we attacked Vermont's zone much better than we did the ECU zone (thus the 91 point outburst), but it could be that Vermont just did not play it as welll as ECU did. I am interested to see if Bama will follow the script and play a lot of zone.

I am also anxious to see if our guys play every possession like their collective lives depened on the outcome. The other thing is forcing turnovers. It has been mentioned numerous times now that we expend a ton of energy pressing full court man to man, and even though on the surface it looks good as we are sticking with the opponent like glue in the backcourt, we are not forcing turnovers. We are making them burn time off the shotclock but not enough, as teams are still having enough time to carve up our halfcourt defense.

It will cure a lot of ills and anxiety to play good enough defense to come out of these next two games with cut down nets and a trophy in hand.

CDu
11-26-2013, 09:31 AM
Would not be at all surprised to see a starting 5 of Cook, Thornton, Hood, Parker, Hairston, with the idea being that Thornton and Hairston are our most experienced players and thus the most familiar with the defensive principles Coach K espouses.

I do think that group will do better with assignment basketball, as only Parker would be new to the concepts.

Of course, that group would be a bit more of an offensive liability, as only 3 guys can create offense. But maybe relying entirely on Cook/Hood/Parker offensively isn't such a bad thing?

roywhite
11-26-2013, 09:44 AM
Would not be at all surprised to see a starting 5 of Cook, Thornton, Hood, Parker, Hairston, with the idea being that Thornton and Hairston are our most experienced players and thus the most familiar with the defensive principles Coach K espouses.

I do think that group will do better with assignment basketball, as only Parker would be new to the concepts.

Of course, that group would be a bit more of an offensive liability, as only 3 guys can create offense. But maybe relying entirely on Cook/Hood/Parker offensively isn't such a bad thing?

Well, certainly can't discount the possibility of lineup changes after the Vermont game. But, man, I hope additional reliance on Thornton and Hairston is not the direction Coach K decides to go. They just haven't got the job done so far this year, both are very prone to fouls, and as seniors don't have the excuses of other players who are new to court time. I'm hoping for leadership from other than the senior class, most likely from Quinn Cook and Rodney Hood, as both vocal leaders, and example-setters on the court.

CajunDevil
11-26-2013, 09:48 AM
I want a lineup of Cook, Hood, Jabari, Amile and Plumlee. Let's go big, play off a little - a la 2010, get rebounds and protect the rim. Heck, we aren't creating turnovers by going small... why not?

Bob Green
11-26-2013, 09:49 AM
The more the opponent plays zone, the more I want to see Andre Dawkins on the court. He scored 16 points in 20 minutes against Vermont, although 13 came in the 1st half as Dawkins missed several corner jumpers down the stretch when Coach K was subbing Dawkins/Thornton on offense/defense. He was 5/6 on free throws and committed only one turnover.

I agree the starting line-up will see a shake up and I'll not be surprised to see Dawkins inserted as a starter.

flyingdutchdevil
11-26-2013, 09:54 AM
The more the opponent plays zone, the more I want to see Andre Dawkins on the court. He scored 16 points in 20 minutes against Vermont, although 13 came in the 1st half as Dawkins missed several corner jumpers down the stretch when Coach K was subbing Dawkins/Thornton on offense/defense. He was 5/6 on free throws and committed only one turnover.

I agree the starting line-up will see a shake up and I'll not be surprised to see Dawkins inserted as a starter.

If Coach K is going to shake up the line up (which I think he will to prove a point), it will be because of defense. For that reason, I'd be shocked if Andre started against Bama. His O was amazing, but his D was still Andre. His positioning has still terrible (although, in his defense, so has everyone else's).

Bob Green
11-26-2013, 09:59 AM
If Coach K is going to shake up the line up (which I think he will to prove a point), it will be because of defense.

Coach K is unpredictable so I am not certain you are correct. From my vantage point, on the couch in front of the TV, Dawkins played better than Sulaimon and Thornton. If he followed up with a strong practice, he might have earned the start.

mgtr
11-26-2013, 10:04 AM
I want a lineup of Cook, Hood, Jabari, Amile and Plumlee. Let's go big, play off a little - a la 2010, get rebounds and protect the rim. Heck, we aren't creating turnovers by going small... why not?

I like your thinking here, but what about Ojeleye instead of Plumlee? As the year goes on, we will have to find a way to utilize these guys. Of course, we haven't seen either in practice.

Kedsy
11-26-2013, 10:04 AM
If Coach K is going to shake up the line up (which I think he will to prove a point), it will be because of defense. For that reason, I'd be shocked if Andre started against Bama. His O was amazing, but his D was still Andre. His positioning has still terrible (although, in his defense, so has everyone else's).

From my second watching of the game, Andre's play on ball screens (one of our two biggest defensive issues in the game) was actually pretty good. He, Tyler, and Josh were all pretty good, at least compared to Jabari, Rodney, and Quinn. Which makes sense because Andre, Tyler, and Josh are all seniors.

Andre did lose his man for a couple backdoor cuts, but overall his positioning wasn't bad at all.

Matches
11-26-2013, 10:04 AM
Coach K is unpredictable so I am not certain you are correct. From my vantage point, on the couch in front of the TV, Dawkins played better than Sulaimon and Thornton. If he followed up with a strong practice, he might have earned the start.

Dawkins' first half against Vermont was the best I've seen him play on offense. LOVED watching him take it into the paint rather than just spot-up shooting. I'd be surprised to see him start just because he is still quite limited defensively, but as you say K can be unpredictable.

Troublemaker
11-26-2013, 10:07 AM
Of course, that group would be a bit more of an offensive liability, as only 3 guys can create offense. But maybe relying entirely on Cook/Hood/Parker offensively isn't such a bad thing?

I think it would be. Jabari and Rodney won't shoot above 60% from three all season and Rodney won't continue to shoot 66% from two. We need Sheed to get going offensively just to offset Jabari and Rodney's eventual decline from superhuman to mere excellence, assuming the goal is to remain a top-5 offensive team while the defense improves. I'm comfortable with Tyler and Josh as 5th options (well, more Tyler than Josh), but I don't think having them both on the court together in the predominant lineup would be a good idea long-term.

Matches
11-26-2013, 10:16 AM
I'm comfortable with Tyler and Josh as 5th options (well, more Tyler than Josh), but I don't think having them both on the court together in the predominant lineup would be a good idea long-term.

Even if that does materialize as the starting lineup tomorrow night, I don't think there's any way it will become the predominant lineup, if for no other reason than the chances of both TT and Josh staying on the court 25+ minutes without being in foul trouble are very slim.

Kedsy
11-26-2013, 10:17 AM
Would not be at all surprised to see a starting 5 of Cook, Thornton, Hood, Parker, Hairston, with the idea being that Thornton and Hairston are our most experienced players and thus the most familiar with the defensive principles Coach K espouses.

I thought Rasheed played at least as good if not better D than Tyler in the Vermont game, although maybe Tyler is a better communicator which we certainly need.

Assuming today is a travel day, that means the team only had one day of practice after the Sunday debacle against Vermont. So presumably nobody could have earned a starting spot based on his practice for the week. I suppose it's possible Coach K might try something for shock value for the first few minutes of the game. Based on their foul rates, though, if he starts Tyler and Josh he might not get much more than those few minutes out of his starting lineup.

Not only that, in my view the worst culprits on defense against Vermont were Jabari, Quinn, and Rodney. Not sure what sort of message it sends if you start the three guys who played the worst defense and replace the other two guys in the starting lineup. I think there's a chance he keeps the lineup the way it is and challenges Rodney and Jabari to rise to the defensive occasion.

GGLC
11-26-2013, 10:34 AM
Eh, I think that gimmick may have run its course. I would not be surprised to see any of the following lineups though:

Cook, TT, Sheed, Hood, Parker
Cook, TT, Hood, Parker, Hairston
Cook, Sheed, Hood, Parker, Hairston
Cook, TT, Hood, Parker, Amile

K identified lack of communication as our key problem on D, so it stands to reason that if he makes a change, it'll be to guys who he sees as good communicators.

Ugh.

I'd love to see a Cook/Jones/Hood/Parker/Jefferson or Cook/Hood/Ojeleye/Parker/Jefferson lineup just to shake things up a bit. What we do not need is Hairston getting starter's minutes, even if only at the beginning of the game.

Give Matt and Semi a chance!

GGLC
11-26-2013, 10:40 AM
Not only that, in my view the worst culprits on defense against Vermont were Jabari, Quinn, and Rodney. Not sure what sort of message it sends if you start the three guys who played the worst defense and replace the other two guys in the starting lineup. I think there's a chance he keeps the lineup the way it is and challenges Rodney and Jabari to rise to the defensive occasion.

This is a good point as well. So I look forward to a Jones/Sulaimon/Murphy/Semi/Jefferson starting lineup!

DeBlueDevil
11-26-2013, 10:44 AM
I want a lineup of Cook, Hood, Jabari, Amile and Plumlee. Let's go big, play off a little - a la 2010, get rebounds and protect the rim. Heck, we aren't creating turnovers by going small... why not?

I like this idea!!! I do not see a major drop off in offensive production from the other starting lineup, that is unless Marshall just isn't capable which I don't find the case. Rasheed has been playing ok but it's not like we wouldn't be able to produce with this lineup on the floor. We'd still have our two deadly scorers on the court with our starting PG and we gain more of a post presence with Amile and Marshall now in the post. We lose a little bit of perimeter shooting but it's not a huge step back as Andre and Rasheed having particularly been lights out all season. Of course during the game there will be the usual stretches of Andre, Rasheed, etc. subbing in. But I would love to just take a look at that lineup on the floor.

Plus as far as tempo, I'd imagine it'd slow things down a little but not much. Marshall is capable of running the floor. Just curious as to what more people may think??

Kedsy
11-26-2013, 10:50 AM
I like this idea!!! I do not see a major drop off in offensive production from the other starting lineup, that is unless Marshall just isn't capable which I don't find the case. Rasheed has been playing ok but it's not like we wouldn't be able to produce with this lineup on the floor. We'd still have our two deadly scorers on the court with our starting PG and we gain more of a post presence with Amile and Marshall now in the post. We lose a little bit of perimeter shooting but it's not a huge step back as Andre and Rasheed having particularly been lights out all season. Of course during the game there will be the usual stretches of Andre, Rasheed, etc. subbing in. But I would love to just take a look at that lineup on the floor.

Plus as far as tempo, I'd imagine it'd slow things down a little but not much. Marshall is capable of running the floor. Just curious as to what more people may think??

That lineup would contain exactly zero players who have shown they can successfully execute Duke's defensive schemes. Sure, all of them have the potential to be good defensive players, but so far none of them have done it. If the problem to be solved is defense, I can't see why we'd run that lineup out there. Especially since that lineup would also clearly be worse on offense than our current starting lineup.

CajunDevil
11-26-2013, 11:01 AM
That lineup would contain exactly zero players who have shown they can successfully execute Duke's defensive schemes. Sure, all of them have the potential to be good defensive players, but so far none of them have done it. If the problem to be solved is defense, I can't see why we'd run that lineup out there. Especially since that lineup would also clearly be worse on offense than our current starting lineup.

Kedsy - in that case, we shouldn't start ANYONE... (Josh's D has been neutralized given the change in block/charge, and Tyler has his two hands permanently affixed to the offensive player - even on desperation threes). The big linup would clearly protect the rim much better than any other lineup, and offensive firepower is sufficient. Additionally, in the event there is a missed shot on offense, we will actually have a chance of getting an offensive rebound. Defensive rebounding would be vastly improved and could even lead to more fast breaks than our current - nonsteal, nonrebound transition game.

davekay1971
11-26-2013, 11:03 AM
From my second watching of the game, Andre's play on ball screens (one of our two biggest defensive issues in the game) was actually pretty good. He, Tyler, and Josh were all pretty good, at least compared to Jabari, Rodney, and Quinn. Which makes sense because Andre, Tyler, and Josh are all seniors.


K's defensive system takes time to learn. We've seen plenty of guys simply not be very good defenders walking in the door at Duke, and improve over time. One of the reasons I have hopes for defensive improvement from our team as the season goes on.

I love everything I've seen out of Andre this season - not only is that beautiful shot back, but he seems more confident overall, happier, and he seems to be stepping up to the role of a veteran leader.

OZZIE4DUKE
11-26-2013, 11:04 AM
I'll be there rooting us to victory! Let's Go DUKE! And, as always, especially this week, GO TO HELL carolina! 9F! http://www.crazietalk.net/ourhouse/images/smilies/devil9f.gif http://www.crazietalk.net/ourhouse/images/smilies/devil9f.gif http://www.crazietalk.net/ourhouse/images/smilies/devil9f.gif http://www.crazietalk.net/ourhouse/images/smilies/devil9f.gif

BD80
11-26-2013, 11:42 AM
I think K will start whoever does not have a broken nose from the post-game practice.

I would suggest the opposite, the players who HAVE gotten their nose broken are the list of starters.


From my second watching of the game, Andre's play on ball screens (one of our two biggest defensive issues in the game) was actually pretty good. He, Tyler, and Josh were all pretty good, at least compared to Jabari, Rodney, and Quinn. Which makes sense because Andre, Tyler, and Josh are all seniors.

Andre did lose his man for a couple backdoor cuts, but overall his positioning wasn't bad at all.

Which illustrates the complexity of Coach K's defensive scheme. In concentrating on being available to rotate into the box to help, Andre lost track of his man who had floated to the corner until Andre turned his head, and then broke to the basket along the baseline. Andre was in the right area, he just wasn't positioned to watch his man AND be ready to help down low. Watch Shane play, every movement of the ball causes him to adjust - even if it is just his stance. It takes a while for these things to become second nature. We have a few more games and a few more practices to get better before tourney time.

BTW: for those begging for a bit of zone D, we actually have played a little zone, to me an indicator that they are working on it in practice and will deploy it more in games throughout the season. Of course, it is a 3/4 court zone trapping defense, and the team retreats into MTM once the press is broken. ;)

DeBlueDevil
11-26-2013, 12:28 PM
Kedsy - in that case, we shouldn't start ANYONE... (Josh's D has been neutralized given the change in block/charge, and Tyler has his two hands permanently affixed to the offensive player - even on desperation threes). The big linup would clearly protect the rim much better than any other lineup, and offensive firepower is sufficient. Additionally, in the event there is a missed shot on offense, we will actually have a chance of getting an offensive rebound. Defensive rebounding would be vastly improved and could even lead to more fast breaks than our current - nonsteal, nonrebound transition game.

I 2nd that CajunDevil, I can't agree more with the fact that NO ONE has shown the ability to play great defense so to your point Kedsy, no one would start. Further Kedsy, I don't think it's such a huge dropoff in offense being as though Jabari and Rodney have driven the offense thus far this season w/ Quinn, Rasheed, and Andre occasionally pitching in. They'll still be in the lineup. Again maybe we give up a little in 3 pt shooting but we haven't been that deadly from 3 thus far IMO. If we play off a little bit and add some size to protect the rim a little more, perhaps we actually slow the other teams offense down. We won't need to score 90-100 points a game to win the game. Thus the offensive drop off you fear won't be such a huge difference.

And it's not like we can't substitute to play up tempo if need be. I'm not saying leave this lineup in the whole game, I'm just saying I don't think it's such a bad idea to give it a shot and see if it gives the opposing offense at least a little bit more to think about before driving the lanes and killing us on the boards. The announcers said numerous times (not that they are experts) that we have absolutely no shot blocking threat in the post. And not that Marshall is "the landlord" down there but he definitely is capable of at least giving us some size and presence along with Amile.

Also, it forces the other teams defense to try and matchup with us which I think is pretty tough given the size we'd be putting on the court not to mention Rodney and Jabari being matchup nightmares at the 2 and 3. But again...just suggesting.

MCFinARL
11-26-2013, 12:52 PM
I think K will start whoever does not have a broken nose from the post-game practice.

Well, now, doesn't that depend on exactly how the nose was broken? Maybe the player(s) WITH the broken noses will be the hard chargers who are selected to start, in masks. :)

noworries
11-26-2013, 01:09 PM
Ugh.

I'd love to see a Cook/Jones/Hood/Parker/Jefferson or Cook/Hood/Ojeleye/Parker/Jefferson lineup just to shake things up a bit. What we do not need is Hairston getting starter's minutes, even if only at the beginning of the game.

Give Matt and Semi a chance!

I'd certainly be ok with giving this a go. Semi has been knocking down the outside shot and with his athleticism, he should be cleaning up the glass if he wants to.

Sandman
11-26-2013, 01:13 PM
K's defensive system takes time to learn. We've seen plenty of guys simply not be very good defenders walking in the door at Duke, and improve over time. One of the reasons I have hopes for defensive improvement from our team as the season goes on.

Coach K has has gotten much praise, rightfully so, for his flexibility in "adjusting his offense to take advantage of his teams' abilities". Why does he seem reluctant to apply the same flexibility to his defense? This team does not seem ready/capable of performing at the historical Duke defensive level. With 3 definite and 5 or 6 possible players leaving after this year, it doesn't seem to me that there's a lot to gain by pursuing defensive strategies that will pay off in future years, even though this is a relatively young team.

Eakane
11-26-2013, 01:22 PM
K's defensive system takes time to learn. We've seen plenty of guys simply not be very good defenders walking in the door at Duke, and improve over time. One of the reasons I have hopes for defensive improvement from our team as the season goes on.

Exactly right. I expect K to stick with pressure man to man, but it is a particularly difficult defense to "get" and execute. It will take time. I wouldn't expect it to turn around in one game. The good news is that it's the kind of thing that can be worked on by looking at tape and practicing sets. I don't think K was upset that the defense was bad; he was upset with the apparent lack of effort; the lack of respect for the game (as he put it). Two scares at home against middle of the road teams should be enough to light a fire under them. Heck, look how Carolina responded to their home loss.

Kedsy
11-26-2013, 01:28 PM
Kedsy - in that case, we shouldn't start ANYONE... (Josh's D has been neutralized given the change in block/charge, and Tyler has his two hands permanently affixed to the offensive player - even on desperation threes). The big linup would clearly protect the rim much better than any other lineup, and offensive firepower is sufficient. Additionally, in the event there is a missed shot on offense, we will actually have a chance of getting an offensive rebound. Defensive rebounding would be vastly improved and could even lead to more fast breaks than our current - nonsteal, nonrebound transition game.

First, I don't think having a 7-foot center would have stopped one single basket scored by Vermont the other day. Vermont players were either open because of bad switching on ball screens or because their ball handlers penetrated past their man and our big had to leave his man to close on the ball handler, leaving someone open for a layup. Marshall would have had to do the exact same thing Amile and Josh did, with the exact same results.

Second, Vermont got a grand total of 6 offensive rebounds, so how "vast" would the improvement have been?

Third, I have no idea what you're talking about with the "actually have a chance of getting an offensive rebound" crack. We crushed Vermont on the offensive boards, grabbing 14, which is almost 44% of available offensive rebounds. Not only that, but Amile is an excellent offensive rebounder. Last season he was Duke's leader in offensive rebounding percentage, significantly better than Mason, and if he'd played enough he would have ranked 4th in the ACC in OR%.

Finally, based on his numbers so far, Marshall isn't nearly as good a rebounder (offensive or defensive) as Amile is. Frankly, his defensive rebounding percentage (10.3%) is not only worse than Amile's (17.8%), it's also worse than Rasheed's (12.1%) and Andre's (11.2%). This is not to bust on Marshall, but just to say your underlying assumptions are flawed and thus your conclusions are probably incorrect.

MChambers
11-26-2013, 01:30 PM
Coach K has has gotten much praise, rightfully so, for his flexibility in "adjusting his offense to take advantage of his teams' abilities". Why does he seem reluctant to apply the same flexibility to his defense? This team does not seem ready/capable of performing at the historical Duke defensive level. With 3 definite and 5 or 6 possible players leaving after this year, it doesn't seem to me that there's a lot to gain by pursuing defensive strategies that will pay off in future years, even though this is a relatively young team.

Why do you think he is reluctant to be flexible with his defensive approach? It's true that he disdains the zone and sticks with man-to-man, but he has been quite flexible as to what kind of man-to-man. Contrast 2010 with 2001, for example.

Or are you talking about the first handful of games this year?

Kedsy
11-26-2013, 01:37 PM
Further Kedsy, I don't think it's such a huge dropoff in offense being as though Jabari and Rodney have driven the offense thus far this season w/ Quinn, Rasheed, and Andre occasionally pitching in.

Marshall has by far the worst oRtg on the team. Whether or not it matters is another question, but there would indeed be a huge dropoff in offense.


Again maybe we give up a little in 3 pt shooting but we haven't been that deadly from 3 thus far IMO.

For the season we're shooting 45.2% from three-point range, which is 13th best in the country. What would "deadly" look like in your eyes?


I'm just saying I don't think it's such a bad idea to give it a shot and see if it gives the opposing offense at least a little bit more to think about before driving the lanes and killing us on the boards.

If Marshall was ready to contribute in the way you suggest, don't you think Coach K would already be playing him? And if he's not ready, then plugging him in for starter's minutes would almost certainly be a bad idea.

DeBlueDevil
11-26-2013, 01:48 PM
Marshall has by far the worst oRtg on the team. Whether or not it matters is another question, but there would indeed be a huge dropoff in offense.



For the season we're shooting 45.2% from three-point range, which is 13th best in the country. What would "deadly" look like in your eyes?



If Marshall was ready to contribute in the way you suggest, don't you think Coach K would already be playing him? And if he's not ready, then plugging him in for starter's minutes would almost certainly be a bad idea.



First, I respect the fact you are a stat guy but sometimes stats aren't the end all be all to sports. Just sayin'. While that stat on Marshall may be valid, the kid has barely seen the floor. I understand the "if K doesn't think he's ready" point which is fair and I'll never argue with K but I'm sure some said the same about Zoubs before K inserted him his Senior year and that seemed to work out. In the end I'd just like to see what the kid could do and how he can affect the game with some extended run.

To your second point we've made 57 3 pt attempts this year 25 of which Jabari and Hood whom would remain in the starting lineup per Cajun's theory have made. Another 11 coming from Andre whom hasn't really started this year anyway so is there really a huge difference there?!? I apologize for not saying deadly as I may have misspoken a little there. Either way the point still leans in favor of my argument.

Are you sure your just don't like Marshall? haha jk we're all on the same team here. Go Duke.

DeBlueDevil
11-26-2013, 01:54 PM
First, I don't think having a 7-foot center would have stopped one single basket scored by Vermont the other day. Vermont players were either open because of bad switching on ball screens or because their ball handlers penetrated past their man and our big had to leave his man to close on the ball handler, leaving someone open for a layup. Marshall would have had to do the exact same thing Amile and Josh did, with the exact same results.

Second, Vermont got a grand total of 6 offensive rebounds, so how "vast" would the improvement have been?

Third, I have no idea what you're talking about with the "actually have a chance of getting an offensive rebound" crack. We crushed Vermont on the offensive boards, grabbing 14, which is almost 44% of available offensive rebounds. Not only that, but Amile is an excellent offensive rebounder. Last season he was Duke's leader in offensive rebounding percentage, significantly better than Mason, and if he'd played enough he would have ranked 4th in the ACC in OR%.

Finally, based on his numbers so far, Marshall isn't nearly as good a rebounder (offensive or defensive) as Amile is. Frankly, his defensive rebounding percentage (10.3%) is not only worse than Amile's (17.8%), it's also worse than Rasheed's (12.1%) and Andre's (11.2%). This is not to bust on Marshall, but just to say your underlying assumptions are flawed and thus your conclusions are probably incorrect.

I agree that having a 7 footer play in the defense we are currently using probably wouldn't make much of a difference but if we play off a little more like we did in 2010 I think it could work. And again not to argue, I understand your point of obviously there's some reason the kid isn't on the floor but to base the argument of Amile being a better rebounder than Marshall all on stats when the kid barely has played I don't think is fair. There was a time when K praised Marshall. I won't disagree that there probably is a good reason for his lack of PT but I'd like to see if could make a difference. Just seems if we're struggling with interior D and post presence and we have a athletic 7 footer on the team whom we recruited with expectations of production, why not insert him? It's not like we're saying put Todd in. No offense to Todd of course.

I mean if it were similar to the case with Murphy where he's had some chances and tended to look overwhelmed and lost out there then I wouldn't argue the point so much but I just can't say the same for Marshall outside of health issues.

bbosbbos
11-26-2013, 01:57 PM
When our opponent attacked our rim easily in the last two games, I saw a lot of problem in defense and reminded me of Lehigh game. To address this problem, you guys have discussed a lot in starters or communication or...

I understand it is hard to improve D when frosh is in the starting line, it takes time. But, guys, our O is outstanding. Can we improve our O efficiency to another level to hedge D? Andre's 3 and improving RS's lay up may help.

CajunDevil
11-26-2013, 02:01 PM
Kedsy - My suggestion of starting Cook, Hood, Parker, Jefferson and Plumlee was conditioned on Duke playing less pressure defense. In such a case, then the presence of an actual shotblocker would make a huge difference. (See 2010)

My crack at offensive rebounding wasn't pointed to the Vermont game necessarily but our season, generally.

Kedsy, who would you start, and why?

Kedsy
11-26-2013, 02:08 PM
First, I respect the fact you are a stat guy but sometimes stats aren't the end all be all to sports. Just sayin'. While that stat on Marshall may be valid, the kid has barely seen the floor. I understand the "if K doesn't think he's ready" point which is fair and I'll never argue with K but I'm sure some said the same about Zoubs before K inserted him his Senior year and that seemed to work out. In the end I'd just like to see what the kid could do and how he can affect the game with some extended run.

I like Marshall a lot. But honestly, when I see him out there with my eyes, I don't get the impression that he'd be better than Amile right now, quite the contrary. Marshall doesn't look ready to me. The fact that the numbers support what my eyes are seeing gives me confidence that I'm seeing things correctly.

As far as Brian Zoubek, at the time I argued in his favor against many naysayers. He looked like he got it to me, and his per-minute and tempo-free numbers were terrific, really about the same before and after K "inserted" him. However, I don't think he's a good analog to Marshall, at least not yet. Z played more than 15 minutes per game before Coach K put him in the starting lineup. He was a major part of the rotation. Marshall isn't there yet.

johnb
11-26-2013, 02:23 PM
No one looked great on defense because, while we play man-to-man, it's a highly interdependent man-to-man, and if any one component part gets messed up, the entire thing falls apart. Aggressive perimeter defense is dependent on guys switching around in the paint, etc, not unlike the reality that a completed pass in football is often less the responsibility of the cornerback than a defensive line that doesn't apply adequate pressure.

Sure seems like we are beating a dead horse...

Let's see how Bama goes; I'll be interested in seeing what it's like for two football schools to go after it in basketball.

Kedsy
11-26-2013, 02:28 PM
Kedsy - My suggestion of starting Cook, Hood, Parker, Jefferson and Plumlee was conditioned on Duke playing less pressure defense. In such a case, then the presence of an actual shotblocker would make a huge difference. (See 2010)

My crack at offensive rebounding wasn't pointed to the Vermont game necessarily but our season, generally.

Kedsy, who would you start, and why?

In 2010, Brian Zoubek got 0.8 blocks a game. In fact, nobody on that team averaged as much as a block per game. For comparison, Jabari is currently averaging 1.8 bpg. So the presence of "an actual shotblocker" had nothing to do with the success of the 2010 team. What that team did really well on defense was defend ball screens and rotate properly. But not because they were big bodies, but because they understood Coach K's defensive concepts and executed them well. If Marshall was within miles of being a defensive equal to Brian Zoubek, he'd be in the rotation already. But he isn't, so putting him in would probably make very little difference at all, and would most probably make things worse.

As for offensive rebounding, when we already have the #1 offense in the country, why would we worry about offense at all? Not to mention that the offensive downgrade from Rasheed to Marshall would more than make up for any upgrade we'd get from offensive rebounding.

To answer your last question, at the moment I'd leave the starting lineup the way it is. Quinn/Rasheed/Rodney/Jabari are our best players and Amile is our best center. Andre would be first off the bench.

slower
11-26-2013, 02:31 PM
And not that Marshall is "the landlord" down there.

Perhaps Marshall can be "The Maintenance Man."

subzero02
11-26-2013, 02:36 PM
Don't we owe Anthony Grant one? Wasn't he the coach of VCU in 2008? Or am I confused once again?

He was the coach there in 2008 but the year you are thinking of is 2007... We lost to wvu in the 2008 tourney... Anthony Grant had his bags packed to replace Donovan at UF after Billy had signed on to become the coach of the Orlando Magic. After Donovan backed out of the Magic deal, Grant eventually landed at Bama.

DukieInBrasil
11-26-2013, 02:38 PM
First, I respect the fact you are a stat guy but sometimes stats aren't the end all be all to sports. Just sayin'. While that stat on Marshall may be valid, the kid has barely seen the floor. I understand the "if K doesn't think he's ready" point which is fair and I'll never argue with K but I'm sure some said the same about Zoubs before K inserted him his Senior year and that seemed to work out. In the end I'd just like to see what the kid could do and how he can affect the game with some extended run.

To your second point we've made 57 3 pt attempts this year 25 of which Jabari and Hood whom would remain in the starting lineup per Cajun's theory have made. Another 11 coming from Andre whom hasn't really started this year anyway so is there really a huge difference there?!? I apologize for not saying deadly as I may have misspoken a little there. Either way the point still leans in favor of my argument.

Are you sure your just don't like Marshall? haha jk we're all on the same team here. Go Duke.

No, it doesn't. We have been a very good 3FG shooting team this year, we have 6 guys shooting 33% or better from 3, Quinn shooting at 32% and Murphy shooting 1-5 (20%). As you said, Parker and Hood have been lighting it up, but there are 4 (or 5) other guys making 3s at a good clip too.
Your point about Zoubek is also flawed in that he was playing a lot his Sr. year prior to his awakening, and had played quite a bit in the 3 years prior to that. None of that is true for Marshall, although hopefully he will get a chance to make both those happen in the future, maybe even starting withe game vs. Alabama. I too would like to see MP3 play some more, but the guy has made 2 career FGs (2-11 FGs) and has yet to make a FT (0-8). He has yet to show very much rebounding skill either. He's got a lot of energy and a nice athletic foundation, but K probably has a pretty good grip on what he's ready for. It seems to me that he should at least get on the floor in every game, just so that he can get that deer-in-headlights out of his system, but i'm not ready to say he should start or even be a 15-20 mpg player yet either.

MChambers
11-26-2013, 02:46 PM
He was the coach there in 2008 but the year you are thinking of is 2007... We lost to wvu in the 2008 tourney... Anthony Grant had his bags packed to replace Donovan at UF after Billy had signed on to become the coach of the Orlando Magic. After Donovan backed out of the Magic deal, Grant eventually landed at Bama.

So I was confused, as often is the case. If I had thought a little harder, I would have realized it was Jon Scheyer's freshman year, and then that it was 2007.

DeBlueDevil
11-26-2013, 02:57 PM
No, it doesn't. We have been a very good 3FG shooting team this year, we have 6 guys shooting 33% or better from 3, Quinn shooting at 32% and Murphy shooting 1-5 (20%). As you said, Parker and Hood have been lighting it up, but there are 4 (or 5) other guys making 3s at a good clip too.
Your point about Zoubek is also flawed in that he was playing a lot his Sr. year prior to his awakening, and had played quite a bit in the 3 years prior to that. None of that is true for Marshall, although hopefully he will get a chance to make both those happen in the future, maybe even starting withe game vs. Alabama. I too would like to see MP3 play some more, but the guy has made 2 career FGs (2-11 FGs) and has yet to make a FT (0-8). He has yet to show very much rebounding skill either. He's got a lot of energy and a nice athletic foundation, but K probably has a pretty good grip on what he's ready for. It seems to me that he should at least get on the floor in every game, just so that he can get that deer-in-headlights out of his system, but i'm not ready to say he should start or even be a 15-20 mpg player yet either.

Perhaps you were mistaken of what my point was. My point was that the offense wouldn't suffer a huge drop off if Marshall was inserted. Maybe the 3 point shooting but I was pointing out that even that wouldn't be that bad since Jabari and Rodney have been our best 3 pt shooters thus far. Thus, the fact that Jabari and hood would still be on the court leans in favor of my argument that the offense wouldn't suffer too badly.

azzefkram
11-26-2013, 03:20 PM
In 2010, Brian Zoubek got 0.8 blocks a game. In fact, nobody on that team averaged as much as a block per game. For comparison, Jabari is currently averaging 1.8 bpg. So the presence of "an actual shotblocker" had nothing to do with the success of the 2010 team. What that team did really well on defense was defend ball screens and rotate properly. But not because they were big bodies, but because they understood Coach K's defensive concepts and executed them well. If Marshall was within miles of being a defensive equal to Brian Zoubek, he'd be in the rotation already. But he isn't, so putting him in would probably make very little difference at all, and would most probably make things worse.

As for offensive rebounding, when we already have the #1 offense in the country, why would we worry about offense at all? Not to mention that the offensive downgrade from Rasheed to Marshall would more than make up for any upgrade we'd get from offensive rebounding.

To answer your last question, at the moment I'd leave the starting lineup the way it is. Quinn/Rasheed/Rodney/Jabari are our best players and Amile is our best center. Andre would be first off the bench.

In 2010 we ranked 34th in blocks. Today we are 99th. While I agree that 2010's defense owed a lot to execution, I think you are minimizing the role blocks played in 2010. I agree that Marshall isn't within the same time zone of Zoub's defensively, but neither are any of the players he'd be replacing. Marshall is 7th in dRtg, 6th in DRB% and 1st in block%. Marshall is definitely a project but when he's in there he blocks or alters shots. He's rebounding should be better given his size. Should he be starting? Nope but he shouldn't be getting DNPs either.

Not concerned at all about offensive rebounding.

I like your starting 5 and I like Andre first off the bench as long as it's not for Amile. The Q/R/R/J/Dre line-up is almost a 4 guard line-up.

Kedsy
11-26-2013, 03:26 PM
Perhaps you were mistaken of what my point was. My point was that the offense wouldn't suffer a huge drop off if Marshall was inserted. Maybe the 3 point shooting but I was pointing out that even that wouldn't be that bad since Jabari and Rodney have been our best 3 pt shooters thus far. Thus, the fact that Jabari and hood would still be on the court leans in favor of my argument that the offense wouldn't suffer too badly.

Maybe, maybe not. The whole offensive dynamic would change if you inserted a non-offensive-minded big man for a penetrating guard. Neither Marshall nor Amile would leave the paint except to set screens, and this would allow the opponent to clog the lane without doubling Rodney and Jabari, leaving the opposing perimeter players available to guard the three more closely. With the lane packed more tightly, Amile becomes much less of a weapon, too. So conceivably we'd be left with two big guys who can't do much damage inside and the lane clogged with big guys, hindering Quinn, Jabari, and Rodney from getting to the rim and leaving us passing it around the perimeter until someone takes an out-of-rhythm shot.

Put another way, look how out-of-synch we've seemed when the opponent goes zone. With Marshall and Amile both in the game we'd be similarly ineffective in a man-to-man setting, and all of a sudden our #1 offense isn't so good.

Our defense would have to get worlds better in that scenario to make up for the offensive dropoff, and we have no evidence inserting Marshall into the lineup would actually help our D at all. To me, this idea has low upside and big downside, exactly the opposite of what I'd want if I were shaking things up.

CDu
11-26-2013, 03:31 PM
Maybe, maybe not. The whole offensive dynamic would change if you inserted a non-offensive-minded big man for a penetrating guard. Neither Marshall nor Amile would leave the paint except to set screens, and this would allow the opponent to clog the lane without doubling Rodney and Jabari, leaving the opposing perimeter players available to guard the three more closely. With the lane packed more tightly, Amile becomes much less of a weapon, too. So conceivably we'd be left with two big guys who can't do much damage inside and the lane clogged with big guys, hindering Quinn, Jabari, and Rodney from getting to the rim and leaving us passing it around the perimeter until someone takes an out-of-rhythm shot.

Put another way, look how out-of-synch we've seemed when the opponent goes zone. With Marshall and Amile both in the game we'd be similarly ineffective in a man-to-man setting, and all of a sudden our #1 offense isn't so good.

Our defense would have to get worlds better in that scenario to make up for the offensive dropoff, and we have no evidence inserting Marshall into the lineup would actually help our D at all. To me, this idea has low upside and big downside, exactly the opposite of what I'd want if I were shaking things up.

I tend to agree. If Plumlee sees more time, it would be at the expense of Jefferson, Hairston, Ojeleye, and perhaps Dawkins/Sulaimon (by bumping Hood back to SF). We aren't going to replace Sulaimon with Plumlee. That would be a nightmare offensively.

Kedsy
11-26-2013, 03:33 PM
In 2010 we ranked 34th in blocks. Today we are 99th.

Well, they were ranked so high in blocks because they played the most games. According to statsheet.com, in 2010 we were 87th in blocks per game and 80th in block percentage, while this season we're 152nd in blocks per game and 169th in block pct. However, this might be a situation where the ordinal rank is misleading. In 2010 we blocked 4.1 shots per game. This year, we've blocked 3.8 shots per game. Over six games, that's a difference of only 2 blocks for the season so far, which (a) is small enough that it's difficult to say there's any significant statistical difference; and (b) doesn't sound like too much of an increased intimidation factor.

moonpie23
11-26-2013, 03:38 PM
look…i'm still feeling guilty about how badly i dissed Zoubs until his Md breakout game…..I cringed every time he came on the floor…so much for that!!


i'm hoping that the light will come on for marshall...

CajunDevil
11-26-2013, 03:44 PM
Well, they were ranked so high in blocks because they played the most games. According to statsheet.com, in 2010 we were 87th in blocks per game and 80th in block percentage, while this season we're 152nd in blocks per game and 169th in block pct. However, this might be a situation where the ordinal rank is misleading. In 2010 we blocked 4.1 shots per game. This year, we've blocked 3.8 shots per game. Over six games, that's a difference of only 2 blocks for the season so far, which (a) is small enough that it's difficult to say there's any significant statistical difference; and (b) doesn't sound like too much of an increased intimidation factor.

But, don't you think that the early games against lesser competition would naturally inflate a team's early season block averages vs. total year block averages? So, as the year goes on the bpg goes down... I'm too lazy to look up the stats but that seems to make sense...

Henderson
11-26-2013, 04:13 PM
Zoubs/Marshall: I'm only speculating here, but I'm guessing MP3 isn't showing it in practice. OTOH, I'm guessing Zoubs earned his minutes in practice, then improved in games over time. Marshall looks lost in games, but if he were practicing better, I'll bet he'd be playing more minutes.

MTM Defense: It's our bread and butter, as everyone knows. But I remember Duke teams that went zone situationally some years ago. MTM works fine with pressure on the ball (risking an offensive player getting past his man off the dribble or a ball screen), but only if the defensive guys are coordinating their efforts, meaning most importantly they must communicate well. K lambasted his players after the Vermont game for failing to communicate, as though they thought they didn't need to against a team like Vermont. I think that's what K was talking about when he said his players weren't respecting Vermont or the game of basketball.

I like our current starting 5, and I hope they continue to start so they can gel together. But they need to play better, not be replaced. They have the skills.

BD80
11-26-2013, 04:40 PM
First, I respect the fact you are a stat guy but sometimes stats aren't the end all be all to sports. Just sayin'. ...

Kedsy has stats that prove the contrary ...

Kedsy
11-26-2013, 05:26 PM
But, don't you think that the early games against lesser competition would naturally inflate a team's early season block averages vs. total year block averages? So, as the year goes on the bpg goes down... I'm too lazy to look up the stats but that seems to make sense...

Usually yes, and in the case of 2009-10, it did, as that team had 29 blocks in its first 6 games and this year's team only has 23, so it's a one block per game difference. However, Amile only has one block so far, and his block percentage as a freshman (3.7%) was roughly the same as Brian Zoubek's block percentage as a senior (4.0%), so in the case of this year's team, I expect our overall blocks to go up. Obviously, you can't say for sure, so I may end up being wrong about this, but I really don't think blocks were a major difference between the 2010 team and this year's team. Lots of other differences, but probably not blocks.

DeBlueDevil
11-26-2013, 05:51 PM
Ok. So I'll respectfully disagree in the case of inserting Marshall is a bad idea. And that's fine, that's why we have a message board.

Then I return to Cajun's question...who do you suggest Kedsy??

ncexnyc
11-26-2013, 05:53 PM
look…i'm still feeling guilty about how badly i dissed Zoubs until his Md breakout game…..I cringed every time he came on the floor…so much for that!!


i'm hoping that the light will come on for marshall...

An excellent point. People talk about Lance and Brian as if they were some fantastic duo during their four year career, however neither player got much love on this board until their senior year and even then it wasn't until the MD game that those two were solidified as the starters.

Bob Green
11-26-2013, 06:55 PM
An excellent point. People talk about Lance and Brian as if they were some fantastic duo during their four year career, however neither player got much love on this board until their senior year and even then it wasn't until the MD game that those two were solidified as the starters.

If you are saying Lance and Brian starting together was not solidified until the MD game, you have a point. However, Lance Thomas as an individual started 39 of 40 games.

http://goduke.statsgeek.com/basketball-m/players/statlines.php?playerid=519

Kedsy
11-26-2013, 09:06 PM
Then I return to Cajun's question...who do you suggest Kedsy??

I guess I shouldn't have buried this at the end of a longer post:


To answer your last question, at the moment I'd leave the starting lineup the way it is. Quinn/Rasheed/Rodney/Jabari are our best players and Amile is our best center. Andre would be first off the bench.

kAzE
11-26-2013, 09:29 PM
There was an interesting poll result at the end of an article I read this morning. The question was "Should Duke go zone to cure their defensive woes?"

Yes: 79%
No: 21%

Here's the link: http://dukereport.com/duke-basketball/curious-case-dukes-defense/dukeofhoops/

I guess fans are willing to try anything given how bad it's been. Pretty early in the season for such desperation, no? But with this early season tournament coming up, it does feel like we need to find some immediate answers on D.

kAzE
11-26-2013, 10:44 PM
Looking at the KenPom numbers, our defensive rankings are pretty scary.

We have the best offense in the country so far, but just the 177th ranked (out of 351) defense. Of all of our opponents this year, Only Kansas is ranked as a decent offensive team. They are 7th in adjusted offensive efficiency. Get this: the next best offense we've faced is Vermont at 124th . . .

Alabama is ranked 73rd. Right now, Duke is on pace to have the worst defense of any team Coack K has ever had at this school. If we play defense like we did in the Vermont game, we will probably lose . . .

duketaylor
11-26-2013, 11:13 PM
I am kinda shocked by the post Ima made in another thread, that being the lack of communication she heard while sitting basically courtside at the Vermont game. Completely out of the norm for Duke's MTM defense. That must change for Duke to be more effective on D.

NYBri
11-26-2013, 11:13 PM
Not sure the suggested solution of starting MP3 is a good idea. He is reminding me of a puppy out there ...all paws and running in circles not able to focus. The game seems too fast for him right now.

OldPhiKap
11-26-2013, 11:17 PM
There was an interesting poll result at the end of an article I read this morning. The question was "Should Duke go zone to cure their defensive woes?"

Yes: 79%
No: 21%

Here's the link: http://dukereport.com/duke-basketball/curious-case-dukes-defense/dukeofhoops/

I guess fans are willing to try anything given how bad it's been. Pretty early in the season for such desperation, no? But with this early season tournament coming up, it does feel like we need to find some immediate answers on D.

We will not go zone as a primary defense, nor should we,

If anyone wants zone, they need a different coach.

And I am pretty happy and confident with the coach we have.

Throaty must have a number/letter for this, time to check the manifesto.

kAzE
11-26-2013, 11:35 PM
We will not go zone as a primary defense, nor should we,

If anyone wants zone, they need a different coach.

And I am pretty happy and confident with the coach we have.

Throaty must have a number/letter for this, time to check the manifesto.

No, I agree, it's dumb to think that we can suddenly become a much better defensive team by simply switching our entire scheme. I just wanted to comment on how ridiculous it is that almost 80% of people who read that article think it's a good idea.

tommy
11-26-2013, 11:43 PM
I agree that having a 7 footer play in the defense we are currently using probably wouldn't make much of a difference but if we play off a little more like we did in 2010 I think it could work. And again not to argue, I understand your point of obviously there's some reason the kid isn't on the floor but to base the argument of Amile being a better rebounder than Marshall all on stats when the kid barely has played I don't think is fair. There was a time when K praised Marshall. I won't disagree that there probably is a good reason for his lack of PT but I'd like to see if could make a difference. Just seems if we're struggling with interior D and post presence and we have a athletic 7 footer on the team whom we recruited with expectations of production, why not insert him?

But if the idea of going to a 2010-style defense is to dial back the pressure on the ball and the wings and play more of a sagging man to man, the purpose of doing that is to prevent dribble penetration. If you're limiting dribble penetration, then the need for a shot blocker (if Marshall even was a proven shot locker, which he is not) to protect the rim is reduced, because fewer opponents will be getting to the rim in the first place.

Trying to play 2010 style D makes a shot blocker less vital, not more.

Troublemaker
11-27-2013, 12:23 AM
I wonder if we'll see a little bit more Matt Jones in this game since Coach K did heavily praise him in the preseason for being a great perimeter defender, both on and off the ball. When Andre was dealing with an injury a few games back and Matt was receiving his minutes, I was impressed with Matt's defense (except for being a bit too handsy at times) and ability to drive. His weakness thus far has been his long-range shooting, which is surprising because he was renowned in high school for the ability to shoot. For that reason, I think there's a lot of upside with Matt, and we'll see him back in the rotation at some point. Maybe as soon as this game.

oldnavy
11-27-2013, 07:37 AM
We will not go zone as a primary defense, nor should we,

If anyone wants zone, they need a different coach.

And I am pretty happy and confident with the coach we have.

Throaty must have a number/letter for this, time to check the manifesto.

I want to go on record as saying that I do not nor have I ever suggested that we use it as a primary defense.

But, I would like to see a smattering of it now and then when teams dial in on our defense and go on these +60% shooting nights just to change the tempo.

We have done this in the past. We have or at least had "orange" as our zone, which K admitted he got from Jim Boeheim. We have used half court zone defense in the past. Going zone would not be a first for Coach K.

I love Coach K and always will. I agree that the fix to our problems lies in the communication in the MTM defense. K is brilliant, not doubt one of the best ever so I will trust him as always, but I have to admit at shouting at the TV during games such as the Vermont game "ZONE!"

Mike Corey
11-27-2013, 07:42 AM
I think the rule changes have had a tremendous impact on our defense.

We'll adjust.

And we should stick with man-to-man.

Go Duke, roll the Tide.

mgtr
11-27-2013, 08:11 AM
Some of the recent posts have been like a slap on the face, to which I reply "Thanks, I needed that!" The slap is the reminder that our coach knows what he is doing, and will figure it out, making needed changes. He turned our "alarmingly unathletic" team into champions in 2010. So, this year, if our team is water, I expect it will be wine at some point.

Faison1
11-27-2013, 08:21 AM
I think the rule changes have had a tremendous impact on our defense.

We'll adjust.

And we should stick with man-to-man.

Go Duke, roll the Tide.

I'm in full agreement with this. The hand-checking rule MUST have a major affect on how we play.

We play an aggressive style of D. Now, after 30+ years of playing this style, the rules are taking away one of the most primary aspects of it.

You can't expect a team/coach to be able to adapt to it overnight.

rsvman
11-27-2013, 08:50 AM
We will not go zone as a primary defense, nor should we,

If anyone wants zone, they need a different coach.

And I am pretty happy and confident with the coach we have.

Throaty must have a number/letter for this, time to check the manifesto.

1t.

You're welcome.:cool:

freshmanjs
11-27-2013, 09:57 AM
I'm in full agreement with this. The hand-checking rule MUST have a major affect on how we play.

We play an aggressive style of D. Now, after 30+ years of playing this style, the rules are taking away one of the most primary aspects of it.

You can't expect a team/coach to be able to adapt to it overnight.

then why have so many teams/coaches been able to do it more successfully than Duke?

moonpie23
11-27-2013, 09:58 AM
jay williams said last night that if he were in the game, he'd be taking str8 to the basket every time…….the new rules are affecting the game

CDu
11-27-2013, 11:07 AM
Usually yes, and in the case of 2009-10, it did, as that team had 29 blocks in its first 6 games and this year's team only has 23, so it's a one block per game difference. However, Amile only has one block so far, and his block percentage as a freshman (3.7%) was roughly the same as Brian Zoubek's block percentage as a senior (4.0%), so in the case of this year's team, I expect our overall blocks to go up. Obviously, you can't say for sure, so I may end up being wrong about this, but I really don't think blocks were a major difference between the 2010 team and this year's team. Lots of other differences, but probably not blocks.

I would agree. I think the major differences between the 2010 team and this team were in rebounding and opposing team's FG%. While FG% could be a function of shotblocking presence, I don't think that was the case in 2010. I think it was just excellent position defense, forcing teams into shots that they didn't want (and contesting those). And then, of course, limiting second-chance points.

CDu
11-27-2013, 11:09 AM
jay williams said last night that if he were in the game, he'd be taking str8 to the basket every time…….the new rules are affecting the game

To be fair, I don't know that it is so much "new rules" as emphasizing the calling of existing rules.

But yes, the clear implication of this shift (whatever you want to call it) is that driving to the basket is a MUCH more valuable skill than in the past few years.

roywhite
11-27-2013, 11:10 AM
then why have so many teams/coaches been able to do it more successfully than Duke?

Mostly because this particular group of Duke players has very little game experience together. It's a work in progress and they just received a tough lesson. They are smart, talented players with a great coach -- they'll get better.

freshmanjs
11-27-2013, 11:10 AM
To be fair, I don't know that it is so much "new rules" as emphasizing the calling of existing rules.

But yes, the clear implication of this shift (whatever you want to call it) is that driving to the basket is a MUCH more valuable skill than in the past few years.

which is exactly why the changes should be helping duke, not hurting.

MChambers
11-27-2013, 11:12 AM
To be fair, I don't know that it is so much "new rules" as emphasizing the calling of existing rules.

But yes, the clear implication of this shift (whatever you want to call it) is that driving to the basket is a MUCH more valuable skill than in the past few years.

The block/charge rule has been changed, and that makes a big difference. Seems like 90 of all collisions between a driver and a secondary defender are now blocks.

CDu
11-27-2013, 11:12 AM
which is exactly why the changes should be helping duke, not hurting.

Well, they should be helping Duke on offense. And given that we're the #1 offense in the country, I'd say we're not suffering there.

They should be hurting Duke on defense, because we have generally been a very physical/handsy team defensively. And based on our foul rate, that appears to be the case, too.

The relative defensive result is much worse mainly due to inexperience and poor communication. But the rules changes certainly have affected our absolute performance on defense, too.

CDu
11-27-2013, 11:15 AM
The block/charge rule has been changed, and that makes a big difference. Seems like 90 of all collisions between a driver and a secondary defender are now blocks.

Yes, but the reason the rule was changed was because officials were so bad at correctly calling the block/charge by the rule. Teams were getting way too many charges drawn because officials were over-doing that call. So they changed the rule to make it easier on the official to get it right.

The error should be in favor of the offensive player (i.e., jumping in front of a driver at the last minute shouldn't be rewarded). But too often previously the error was in favor of the defender.

jv001
11-27-2013, 11:17 AM
Well, they should be helping Duke on offense. And given that we're the #1 offense in the country, I'd say we're not suffering there.

They should be hurting Duke on defense, because we have generally been a very physical/handsy team defensively. And based on our foul rate, that appears to be the case, too.

The relative defensive result is much worse mainly due to inexperience and poor communication. But the rules changes certainly have affected our absolute performance on defense, too.

I agree and I think it's affecting Josh and Tyler more than I expected. Tyler has the reputation of playing "chippy" anyway and Josh has been very good at taking the charge. Those things have hurt Duke on defense. GoDuke!

Indoor66
11-27-2013, 11:51 AM
I would agree. I think the major differences between the 2010 team and this team were in rebounding and opposing team's FG%. While FG% could be a function of shotblocking presence, I don't think that was the case in 2010. I think it was just excellent position defense, forcing teams into shots that they didn't want (and contesting those). And then, of course, limiting second-chance points.

Might also want to throw in the experience level of the respective teams. Give the kids a chance.

dukebballcamper90-91
11-27-2013, 11:53 AM
Gosh, another late game. Headed to store to pickup some 5hour energies. Go Duke!!!!! Rip em up, tear em up, give em !!!!!!

CarmenWallaceWade
11-27-2013, 12:19 PM
Good read from Laura Keeley of the N&O: http://www.newsobserver.com/2013/11/26/3410593/advanced-statistics-tell-the-story.html

Snippet:

Duke guards against 3-pointers well, as opponents are making just 27.1 percent of their attempts (good for 34th nationally). But that’s all the Blue Devils are guarding effectively; opponents are making 50.9 percent of their two-point shot attempts, and many of those are coming off of easy shots in the paint.

Again going back to the preseason, Krzyzewski talked about changes the Blue Devils planned to make on defense this year. The original idea of a full-court press has largely gone away (with the new emphasis on calling hand-check fouls, pressing is tougher than ever). It’s been mainly a half-court defense thus far.

“In the half-court defense, there might be more switching, which, if you can do it, switching is a good thing,” Krzyzewski said in September. “It’s a really good thing.”

Duke has tried to switch on most screens, and that hasn’t been a recipe for success. Too often, there hasn’t been any help defense, as a defender has been late on his rotation, especially on the weak side near the basket (Vermont exploited this often, and finished with 50 points in the paint, 55.6 percent of its total points). And without a strong post presence, opponents are scooping up an average of 11.7 offensive rebounds per game (ranking Duke 192nd).

-----
And for anyone thinking zone, don't hold your breath:
-----

For those hoping for Krzyzewski to ditch his man-to-man style and go zone, don’t --he shot that idea down quickly Sunday night.

“We are going to revisit my first three years here,” he said in reference to people doubting his schemes as he went 38-47. “Nothing will work if you don’t talk on defense.”

johnb
11-27-2013, 12:39 PM
jay williams said last night that if he were in the game, he'd be taking str8 to the basket every time…….

if a completely-healthy jay williams were magically allowed to return for a 4th year, these threads would be complaining that he was too offensive minded and argue that we should still play zone and start [insert freshman's name here].

Dukehky
11-27-2013, 12:45 PM
The good thing about our defense is that they do guard the 3 well. If we can ever shore up our interior D even a little bit, Duke is going to be extremely hard to beat. The 3 point shot is the great equalizer in college basketball (or it was before all these fouls started to permeate the game). Duke is eliminating that equalizer. If we can be slightly more effective at limiting points in the paint, we're going to be just fine. In my opinion, Duke is the top offensive team in the country, top 4 at the very worst. Our defense isn't going to get worse, and our offense is going to get better as long as Parker doesn't wear down, which is admittedly a real concern. If you want to beat Duke, better get 'em now.

Optimism, I'm not usually one for it, but I love this team.

NYBri
11-27-2013, 12:47 PM
jay williams said last night that if he were in the game, he'd be taking str8 to the basket every time…….the new rules are affecting the game

I seem to recall that's exactly what JWill did anyway. :)

And did it damn well.

DukeAlumBS
11-27-2013, 12:51 PM
Good read from Laura Keeley of the N&O: http://www.newsobserver.com/2013/11/26/3410593/advanced-statistics-tell-the-story.html

Snippet:

Duke guards against 3-pointers well, as opponents are making just 27.1 percent of their attempts (good for 34th nationally). But that’s all the Blue Devils are guarding effectively; opponents are making 50.9 percent of their two-point shot attempts, and many of those are coming off of easy shots in the paint.

Again going back to the preseason, Krzyzewski talked about changes the Blue Devils planned to make on defense this year. The original idea of a full-court press has largely gone away (with the new emphasis on calling hand-check fouls, pressing is tougher than ever). It’s been mainly a half-court defense thus far.

“In the half-court defense, there might be more switching, which, if you can do it, switching is a good thing,” Krzyzewski said in September. “It’s a really good thing.”

Duke has tried to switch on most screens, and that hasn’t been a recipe for success. Too often, there hasn’t been any help defense, as a defender has been late on his rotation, especially on the weak side near the basket (Vermont exploited this often, and finished with 50 points in the paint, 55.6 percent of its total points). And without a strong post presence, opponents are scooping up an average of 11.7 offensive rebounds per game (ranking Duke 192nd).

-----
And for anyone thinking zone, don't hold your breath:
-----

For those hoping for Krzyzewski to ditch his man-to-man style and go zone, don’t --he shot that idea down quickly Sunday night.

“We are going to revisit my first three years here,” he said in reference to people doubting his schemes as he went 38-47. “Nothing will work if you don’t talk on defense.”

Thank you very much. Your points are right on.
The season started with the new rules. The team will adapt.
Quit the ZONE non sense?
We will win this game by 10.
We will win the Arizona game by the same.
Duke by 10 over the Arizona forum, I may be ahead of that forum, but will be there.
Let coach K do his job ? ????

Duke!
Jimmy

rtnorthrup
11-27-2013, 01:12 PM
Is tonight's game on TV? Saw it listed as ESPN3. That can't be right can it?

tbyers11
11-27-2013, 01:16 PM
Is tonight's game on TV? Saw it listed as ESPN3. That can't be right can it?

The game will be shown on TV on ESPN2. It is will also be shown online on ESPN3/WatchESPN

alteran
11-27-2013, 01:18 PM
Is tonight's game on TV? Saw it listed as ESPN3. That can't be right can it?

GoDuke has it listed as ESPN, 9:30.

BD80
11-27-2013, 02:10 PM
Yes, but the reason the rule was changed was because officials were so bad at correctly calling the block/charge by the rule. Teams were getting way too many charges drawn because officials were over-doing that call. So they changed the rule to make it easier on the official to get it right.

The error should be in favor of the offensive player (i.e., jumping in front of a driver at the last minute shouldn't be rewarded). But too often previously the error was in favor of the defender.

Completely disagree. It is MUCH harder to correctly call block/charge now. Before, officials would watch defense and make calls; with the block charge it was simply did the defender establish legal defending position before the offensive player left the floor. Now officials have to watch the offensive player to determine when the "rise" occurs, and then determine if the defender had legal defending position; MUCH harder. The result has been predictable, close calls are blocks not charges, even though offensive players are jumping into contact.

moonpie23
11-27-2013, 02:15 PM
if a completely-healthy jay williams were magically allowed to return for a 4th year, these threads would be complaining that he was too offensive minded and argue that we should still play zone and start [insert freshman's name here].

sigh……watching livingston last night and this subject in general depresses me…. :(

CDu
11-27-2013, 02:28 PM
Completely disagree. It is MUCH harder to correctly call block/charge now. Before, officials would watch defense and make calls; with the block charge it was simply did the defender establish legal defending position before the offensive player left the floor. Now officials have to watch the offensive player to determine when the "rise" occurs, and then determine if the defender had legal defending position; MUCH harder. The result has been predictable, close calls are blocks not charges, even though offensive players are jumping into contact.

Well, I don't know that "when the shooter began the rise" is more difficult to see than "when the shooter left the floor" from the official's standpoint. You're still having to watch two different things simultaneously. The benefit to the new rule is this: if the shooter is in the air when you see the defender establish position, it's UNQUESTIONABLY a blocking foul. If the shooter is not in the air when the defender establishes position, it's a bit more questionable. But again, by pushing the threshold out further, you reduce the likelihood that you miss the call.

So I should have worded my statement a bit differently. The new block/charge rule makes the likelihood of an incorrect charge call much lower. Fouls that should be blocks but were called charges before are much more likely to be called blocks now. Which is a good thing from an intended accuracy perspective.

It will also result in more blocking fouls called, which naturally suggests that more incorrect blocking fouls will be called. Though with the point of emphasis being to reduce the number of incorrect charge calls, that is a natural fallout.

In any case, I don't think it has made the officials' job any more difficult. And I think it's made it easier for them to make a reasonable call (the charge call was getting WAY out of hand).

Troublemaker
11-27-2013, 03:17 PM
then why have so many teams/coaches been able to do it more successfully than Duke?

I think it would be fair to say that Coach K and Duke are currently behind other coaches and teams in adjusting to the rules.

I try to watch every postgame presser, and by far the most striking thing I've seen Coach K say in any of them this season occurred in the ECU postgame when he said that he didn't know the current rules as well, that sometimes he "gets it" and sometimes he doesn't, and that he expected a "long period" of adjustment.

His remarks occur after the 9:50 mark of this video of the ECU presser in case anyone wanted to see: http://www.goduke.com/mediaPortal/player.dbml?&db_oem_id=4200&id=3106708

jimsumner
11-27-2013, 03:45 PM
I think it would be fair to say that Coach K and Duke are currently behind other coaches and teams in adjusting to the rules.

I try to watch every postgame presser, and by far the most striking thing I've seen Coach K say in any of them this season occurred in the ECU postgame when he said that he didn't know the current rules as well, that sometimes he "gets it" and sometimes he doesn't, and that he expected a "long period" of adjustment.

His remarks occur after the 9:50 mark of this video of the ECU presser in case anyone wanted to see: http://www.goduke.com/mediaPortal/player.dbml?&db_oem_id=4200&id=3106708

Mark Gottfried said almost exactly the same thing last night after State's 20-point win over FGCU. He doesn't know when a play is a foul, his players don't, the opposing players and coaches don't, the officials don't. I think that's a universal lament in college hoops.

The most common sentence on press row is some variation of "that wasn't a foul last year."

MChambers
11-27-2013, 03:55 PM
I think it would be fair to say that Coach K and Duke are currently behind other coaches and teams in adjusting to the rules.

I try to watch every postgame presser, and by far the most striking thing I've seen Coach K say in any of them this season occurred in the ECU postgame when he said that he didn't know the current rules as well, that sometimes he "gets it" and sometimes he doesn't, and that he expected a "long period" of adjustment.

His remarks occur after the 9:50 mark of this video of the ECU presser in case anyone wanted to see: http://www.goduke.com/mediaPortal/player.dbml?&db_oem_id=4200&id=3106708


I thought that Duke had real referees do the Blue-White game, and perhaps some practices? I don't think Duke is behind other teams in understanding the new rule and interpretations, but it may be that the changes have more of an effect on Duke's strategy then the strategies used by many other teams.

jv001
11-27-2013, 04:05 PM
Could it be that our two best players are outstanding offensive players but their defense has not gotten there yet? I don't think it's lack of preparation on the coaching staff, because we all know how Coach K feels about defense. It's more on the players in-experience, lack of communication and not putting the effort into playing defense like they do on offense. And it's just not Parker and Hood, because our guards are not staying in front of their man. Part of that is the way refs are calling the game but also terrible switches on screens up top. I look for a more focused effort tonight. GoDuke!

slower
11-27-2013, 04:24 PM
Could it be that our two best players are outstanding offensive players but their defense has not gotten there yet? I don't think it's lack of preparation on the coaching staff, because we all know how Coach K feels about defense. It's more on the players in-experience, lack of communication and not putting the effort into playing defense like they do on offense. And it's just not Parker and Hood, because our guards are not staying in front of their man. Part of that is the way refs are calling the game but also terrible switches on screens up top. I look for a more focused effort tonight. GoDuke!

I think it's a team "effort." In the games I've seen (particularly Vermont and ECU), Andre and Amile get defensively lost/confused fairly regularly and fairly obviously. Not to harp on those two specifically, but it's just more obvious when they get lost. In my "eye test", Matt seems to stay with his man pretty well, Quinn runs hot and cold (he seems to do better going east/west than north/south on D), same for Tyler and Sheed, and nothing really stands out about Alex and Semi. Josh, as much as we may like the guy, seems to be a net negative in most situations. Marshall is still a work in progress (although I want to agree with those who say to put him in there down low and see what happens - he's hardly playing as it is, so what does it matter if he fouls out?).

As for Rodney and Jabari, they don't seem (again, just to my eye) to be any worse than the rest of the guys. But maybe I'm just dazzled by their offensive brilliance - because, without those two, we would be in DEEP trouble.

jv001
11-27-2013, 04:53 PM
Looks like the line is -8.5 favoring Duke tonight. GoDuke!

dukelifer
11-27-2013, 06:10 PM
Looks like the line is -8.5 favoring Duke tonight. GoDuke!

The same group that had Duke at -27 in the last game? Sample size too small at this point. Big game for this team.

mr. synellinden
11-27-2013, 06:25 PM
The same group that had Duke at -27 in the last game? Sample size too small at this point. Big game for this team.

Interesting score right now in the other game.

DieHard
11-27-2013, 06:39 PM
This....

Could it be that our two best players are outstanding offensive players but their defense has not gotten there yet? I don't think it's lack of preparation on the coaching staff, because we all know how Coach K feels about defense. It's more on the players in-experience, lack of communication and not putting the effort into playing defense like they do on offense. And it's just not Parker and Hood, because our guards are not staying in front of their man. Part of that is the way refs are calling the game but also terrible switches on screens up top. I look for a more focused effort tonight. GoDuke!

Newton_14
11-27-2013, 06:41 PM
Completely disagree. It is MUCH harder to correctly call block/charge now. Before, officials would watch defense and make calls; with the block charge it was simply did the defender establish legal defending position before the offensive player left the floor. Now officials have to watch the offensive player to determine when the "rise" occurs, and then determine if the defender had legal defending position; MUCH harder. The result has been predictable, close calls are blocks not charges, even though offensive players are jumping into contact.


Well, I don't know that "when the shooter began the rise" is more difficult to see than "when the shooter left the floor" from the official's standpoint. You're still having to watch two different things simultaneously. The benefit to the new rule is this: if the shooter is in the air when you see the defender establish position, it's UNQUESTIONABLY a blocking foul. If the shooter is not in the air when the defender establishes position, it's a bit more questionable. But again, by pushing the threshold out further, you reduce the likelihood that you miss the call.

So I should have worded my statement a bit differently. The new block/charge rule makes the likelihood of an incorrect charge call much lower. Fouls that should be blocks but were called charges before are much more likely to be called blocks now. Which is a good thing from an intended accuracy perspective.

It will also result in more blocking fouls called, which naturally suggests that more incorrect blocking fouls will be called. Though with the point of emphasis being to reduce the number of incorrect charge calls, that is a natural fallout.

In any case, I don't think it has made the officials' job any more difficult. And I think it's made it easier for them to make a reasonable call (the charge call was getting WAY out of hand).

Actually, while I greatly respect both of your knowledge of the game of hoops, I feel you are both wrong here. In all the games I have watched, the whole idea of "has the offensive player started his rise yet" is not even coming into play. Instead, the ref's are not even considering calling a charge unless it is a case of it being so obvious, they have no choice but to call it a charge. The ref's job is now much easier because they are simply call it a block 99.9% of the time, no matter what. It's so bad, kids are not even attempting to draw a charge. In the Duke games especially, that I have attended, there are maybe 2 to 4 max block/charge plays ( with 1 to 2 being the norm) and I have not seen a game yet where 2 or more of those plays were called a charge. In my opinion, they have overrotated to the max and it's bad for the game in my opinion. No matter what anyone says, the defender has every right to a spot on the floor if he beats the offensive player to that spot and establishes a legal guarding position. You can't just let an offensive player run a defender over at will in the name of "freedom of movement". It's BS. It's gotten to the point where, if a team needs a bucket in the worse way, the give it to a slasher and just let him dribble right into a defender to get the call. That's exactly what K did on the winning play against Vermont. He drew up a play to get the ball to Hood, and Hood dribbled hard right into the chest of the Vermont player and then took his foul shots. The Vermont player made no attempt to try to draw a charge like he would have last season. Instead he tried to block the shot and ended up committing the foul.

The same thing happened in the last 5 minutes of the Duke/Kansas game. Kids knew all they had to do was drive, run into to somebody near them and get the call. That's not basketball. It's cheap BS that puts a defender in a totally helpless situation. I really hope the NCAA makes changes soon to fix this. I agree that the game was too physical the past several seasons but this new strategy is not the answer. Finally, contact works both ways. If as an offensive player, I use my butt, shoulder, etc to drill my defender to create the space I need to get a shot off, then that should be a foul on me, not the defender.

Rant over...

ForkFondler
11-27-2013, 06:50 PM
The same thing happened in the last 5 minutes of the Duke/Kansas game. Kids knew all they had to do was drive, run into to somebody near them and get the call. That's not basketball. It's cheap BS that puts a defender in a totally helpless situation. I really hope the NCAA makes changes soon to fix this. I agree that the game was too physical the past several seasons but this new strategy is not the answer. Finally, contact works both ways. If as an offensive player, I use my butt, shoulder, etc to drill my defender to create the space I need to get a shot off, then that should be a foul on me, not the defender.

Rant over...

I'm thinking Grinnell. To hell with defense, just score more points.

kAzE
11-27-2013, 07:27 PM
Actually, while I greatly respect both of your knowledge of the game of hoops, I feel you are both wrong here. In all the games I have watched, the whole idea of "has the offensive player started his rise yet" is not even coming into play. Instead, the ref's are not even considering calling a charge unless it is a case of it being so obvious, they have no choice but to call it a charge. The ref's job is now much easier because they are simply call it a block 99.9% of the time, no matter what. It's so bad, kids are not even attempting to draw a charge. In the Duke games especially, that I have attended, there are maybe 2 to 4 max block/charge plays ( with 1 to 2 being the norm) and I have not seen a game yet where 2 or more of those plays were called a charge. In my opinion, they have overrotated to the max and it's bad for the game in my opinion. No matter what anyone says, the defender has every right to a spot on the floor if he beats the offensive player to that spot and establishes a legal guarding position. You can't just let an offensive player run a defender over at will in the name of "freedom of movement". It's BS. It's gotten to the point where, if a team needs a bucket in the worse way, the give it to a slasher and just let him dribble right into a defender to get the call. That's exactly what K did on the winning play against Vermont. He drew up a play to get the ball to Hood, and Hood dribbled hard right into the chest of the Vermont player and then took his foul shots. The Vermont player made no attempt to try to draw a charge like he would have last season. Instead he tried to block the shot and ended up committing the foul.

The same thing happened in the last 5 minutes of the Duke/Kansas game. Kids knew all they had to do was drive, run into to somebody near them and get the call. That's not basketball. It's cheap BS that puts a defender in a totally helpless situation. I really hope the NCAA makes changes soon to fix this. I agree that the game was too physical the past several seasons but this new strategy is not the answer. Finally, contact works both ways. If as an offensive player, I use my butt, shoulder, etc to drill my defender to create the space I need to get a shot off, then that should be a foul on me, not the defender.

Rant over...

Totally agree 100% This is not basketball . . . this is "try to get fouled"-ball. I don't think we are going to see many teams go for a jump shot anymore when they are down by 1 or 2 or tied on their last possesion. Why would you? It's mathematically idiotic to go for a low percentage jump shot when you can get to the foul line 80% of the time on a well drawn play. If the rules were like this in 1992, there's no Christian Laettner shot, there's the Christian Laettner pump fake and make contact to try to get fouled play, which isn't nearly as great. They took this way too far, but on the other hand, we can't blame the new rules for our bad defense. Everyone else is playing with these rules and still playing better defensively than we are.

uh_no
11-27-2013, 07:37 PM
drexel up on arizona at the 8 minute 2nd half stoppage

Newton_14
11-27-2013, 07:42 PM
drexel up on arizona at the 8 minute 2nd half stoppage

They were actually up 27-10 at one point but let it get away from them. Arizona is now up 4 with 6 minutes left. Drexel shot selection has not been great in the 2nd half plus they have lost two players to injury in the last 3 minutes.

DU82
11-27-2013, 07:43 PM
drexel up on arizona at the 8 minute 2nd half stoppage

Drexel's down four and pretty much dead. Terrible shot selection and no size to defend inside. Arizona finally realized they could lose and started playing better. They don't look like the number 4 team, but I'm not sure anybody does right now.

kAzE
11-27-2013, 07:59 PM
I think I'd rather play against Arizona, if we get that far. Win or lose, going up against elite teams early on can only help our young team get to where it needs to be. Plus, Parker vs. Gordon is just too much fun to miss out on.

-jk
11-27-2013, 08:00 PM
I've heard elephants have long memories. Devils do deals. We've got this one!
DBR Chat (http://forums.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/misc.php?do=cchatbox) is open. Let's go Duke!

-jk

NSDukeFan
11-27-2013, 08:07 PM
Drexel's down four and pretty much dead. Terrible shot selection and no size to defend inside. Arizona finally realized they could lose and started playing better. They don't look like the number 4 team, but I'm not sure anybody does right now.

The rankings should probably start at around 10 or so. (Except I would like Duke to keep that top 10 streak alive as long as possible, may require 2 wins this week.)

Kedsy
11-27-2013, 08:21 PM
Anybody else here at the game?

-jk
11-27-2013, 08:28 PM
Du82 is...

DU82
11-27-2013, 08:30 PM
Du82 is...

And I ran into Ozzie here at the Garden.

NYBri
11-27-2013, 08:41 PM
Tyler and Josh get the start.

riverside6
11-27-2013, 08:41 PM
Live tempo-based stats for Duke/Alabama...

http://www.scacchoops.com/ViewHDGame.asp?hSchedule=19921

Philadukie
11-27-2013, 08:42 PM
Is that sagging M2M?! It sure looks like it! Let's see!

duke4ever19
11-27-2013, 08:47 PM
Yes, Bobby Knight is here.

chaosmage
11-27-2013, 08:52 PM
The defense looks good, but the offense is out of sync to my eyes. Late start?

duke96
11-27-2013, 08:54 PM
Now we actually have the right lineup in...

arnie
11-27-2013, 08:56 PM
The defense looks good, but the offense is out of sync to my eyes. Late start?

Out of sync - that's a positive spin on this start

duke4ever19
11-27-2013, 08:59 PM
They may end up glad they focused on defense this week, because if the offense continues to sputter they will have to slow 'Bama down on the defensive end.

DU82
11-27-2013, 08:59 PM
Out of sync - that's a positive spin on this start

We're shooting 9% at the 11:30 TO. It looks worse than that.

buddy
11-27-2013, 08:59 PM
Forcing way too much on offense. Looks like they have never played together. Could be a long night.

kingboozer
11-27-2013, 09:01 PM
Defensive game on both sides, Bamas turnovers are gonna bite them when we get on our run

dukelifer
11-27-2013, 09:06 PM
Nice D and a bucket. Matt Jones shows his shooting ability and Duke is back in it.

arnie
11-27-2013, 09:08 PM
Defensive game on both sides, Bamas turnovers are gonna bite them when we get on our run

You nailed it- and refs actually called obvious charge a charge.

duke4ever19
11-27-2013, 09:09 PM
Refs going old school calling charges :)

gus
11-27-2013, 09:09 PM
Nice to see a big lead the break and dish to the point guard for a layup.

Marc81
11-27-2013, 09:10 PM
Defense looks a lot better! I'm still scratching my head on that 2nd foul on Hood.

dukelifer
11-27-2013, 09:10 PM
Nice play by Jefferson to fool the ref. He was set in the circle and then took a step up and got a charge but the ref did not see the move up. Makes up for the phantom call on Hood

DukeDevil
11-27-2013, 09:10 PM
man I love when Bob Knight is commentating...he gives so much insight.

slower
11-27-2013, 09:17 PM
Quinn continues to make some very stupid decisions.

DU82
11-27-2013, 09:18 PM
Defense looks a lot better! I'm still scratching my head on that 2nd foul on Hood.

He moved in on the guy driving. The right call.

FerryFor50
11-27-2013, 09:21 PM
Defense and rebounding are light years better. Looking good!

FerryFor50
11-27-2013, 09:23 PM
Holy cow they are boxing out!

duke4ever19
11-27-2013, 09:24 PM
Parker is the gospel truth.

Marc81
11-27-2013, 09:25 PM
man I love when Bob Knight is commentating...he gives so much insight.

Me to! I love the comment after that turn around fade by Jabari. Uhh, that was pretty good.

arnie
11-27-2013, 09:25 PM
Defense and rebounding are light years better. Looking good!

I like the offense with Hood out. Move Hairston away from the action and let Parker operate against 3 smaller players.

FerryFor50
11-27-2013, 09:26 PM
Maybe Quinn should think about getting an assist or two this game...

slower
11-27-2013, 09:26 PM
Parker is the gospel truth.

And he's got the Dirk step-back. Wow.

slower
11-27-2013, 09:28 PM
Maybe Quinn should think about getting an assist or two this game...

Have been really unimpressed with his decision-making the past few games.

dukelifer
11-27-2013, 09:28 PM
I like the offense with Hood out. Move Hairston away from the action and let Parker operate against 3 smaller players.

A much better performance on D. Lets see if they can keep it up.

FerryFor50
11-27-2013, 09:31 PM
As I mentioned in a previous thread... Sometimes the best defense is good offense - driving and getting the other team's best players in foul trouble. Though, to be fair, Releford did pick up a charge. :)

MartyClark
11-27-2013, 09:31 PM
man I love when Bob Knight is commentating...he gives so much insight.

I like him as an analyst also. He's a smart guy who really understands the game.

He looks like he has lost a lot of weight since last year.

Papa John
11-27-2013, 09:33 PM
He moved in on the guy driving. The right call.

Yes, he moved in... But there must be contact to be a foul, and there was no contact—the offensive player moved right around Hood. That's what K was pointing out to the official. Of course, aside from that one play, I don't think we really have anything to complain about re: officiating. I actually thought a couple of the charges we drew were blocks...

Thus far, defense has been spectacular, and rebounding has been very good as well... Agree with those who are frustrated at Quinn's decision-making at times... He seems to have a Jekyll/Hyde mentality—some trips down, he makes a brilliant play, then the next trip down he seems to have his head up his keister...

NYBri
11-27-2013, 09:34 PM
A much better performance on D. Lets see if they can keep it up.

Odd. Hood out...better D. Small sample set, but....

Gthoma2a
11-27-2013, 09:35 PM
That charge he drew really pointed out what I thought all along. We needed to include Matt Jones a little more. We have guys who we can involve that enjoy defense. We just need to play them.

mr. synellinden
11-27-2013, 09:35 PM
Anybody else here at the game?

Yep. Garden is as empty and quiet as I've ever seen/heard. Sitting relatively close and can hear a lot of talking on defense. What a difference. Releford picking up those fouls changed the game. Like UNLV without Anthony, they are lost without their lead guard.

Papa John
11-27-2013, 09:36 PM
Odd. Hood out...better D. Small sample set, but....

Yeah... Not really fair. I thought we were playing better D from the outset, with Hood out there as well. We were just very tentative offensively to start off [and, actually, Rodney was the only guy out there early on attacking the basket]...

Wheat/"/"/"
11-27-2013, 09:38 PM
My second time seeing Duke...I saw the Kansas game.

What strikes me is as good as Parker is now, he can be even better when he gets his body right. He looks "soft", not toned. He can be quicker, which is scary.
When he gets the right diet and training going, the sky's the limit for that kid.

Pretty good intensity both sides that half.

Cook with some nifty penetration moves.

Duke is looking like it's going to be a year totally dependent on Parker. Tough load to ask any freshman to carry, no matter how talented. The rest of the team has to play better and pray Parker stays healthy for Duke to be elite.

Edit: I 'm back and forth watching Syracuse...they look really strong and balanced. Impressive team.

Papa John
11-27-2013, 09:38 PM
Anybody else here at the game?

I know BillyDat is in attendance, so be on the lookout for him...

FerryFor50
11-27-2013, 09:38 PM
Still shooting more threes than I think they should...

dukelifer
11-27-2013, 09:40 PM
My second time seeing Duke...I saw the Kansas game.

What strikes me is as good as Parker is now, he can be even better when he gets his body right. He looks "soft", not toned. He can be quicker, which is scary.
When he gets the right diet and training going, the sky's the limit for that kid.

Pretty good intensity both sides that half.

Cook with some nifty penetration moves.

Duke is looking like it's going to be a year totally dependent on Parker. Tough load to ask any freshman to carry, no matter how talented. The rest of the team has to play better and pray Parker stays healthy for Duke to be elite.
You have not seen much of Hood then. He is not as polished as Parker but can score. We will see if he can get it rolling in this half.

Papa John
11-27-2013, 09:42 PM
Duke is looking like it's going to be a year totally dependent on Parker. Tough load to ask any freshman to carry, no matter how talented. The rest of the team has to play better and pray Parker stays healthy for Duke to be elite.

I think you can pretty much say that about any team right now... Kansas is pretty dependent on Wiggins being healthy... Kentucky is pretty dependent on Randle being healthy... etc. Pretty much any team near the top is one injury away from from falling back from 'elite'...

slower
11-27-2013, 09:42 PM
Yeah... Not really fair. I thought we were playing better D from the outset, with Hood out there as well. We were just very tentative offensively to start off [and, actually, Rodney was the only guy out there early on attacking the basket]...

Yep, much better D from everyone. You'll have a hard time convincing me that the team is better with Hairston than Hood.

lotusland
11-27-2013, 09:46 PM
Maybe Quinn should think about getting an assist or two this game...

Quinn broke down the defense and got to the basket a couple of times towards the end of the half. Most likely next time he gets in the lane he'll draw a help defender and drop a dime but if they don't stop the ball he has go to the basket. He hasn't played mistake free but he's been pretty good imo.

BlueDevilBrowns
11-27-2013, 09:48 PM
I love how active TT and Josh are tonight on both ends of the floor.

Seniors stepping up.

FerryFor50
11-27-2013, 09:55 PM
Tough game for Hood...

slower
11-27-2013, 09:57 PM
Please, no more alley-oop attempts for Amile. He obviously can't finish them.

duke4ever19
11-27-2013, 09:59 PM
These particular refs are very demonstrative.

FerryFor50
11-27-2013, 09:59 PM
Please, no more alley-oop attempts for Amile. He obviously can't finish them.

That wasn't an alley oop. He cut and got the pass but got his shot blocked, like Duke has had happen 6 times already.

Alabama is an athletic team.

dukelifer
11-27-2013, 10:00 PM
Really bad minute- a chance to crush them and now they have life.

BlueDevilBrowns
11-27-2013, 10:00 PM
Tough game for Hood...

This is Hood's 2nd game away from CIS in 2 years so I'm sure it's an adjustment for him.

FerryFor50
11-27-2013, 10:01 PM
Looks like we may be seeing some Semi or Plumlee tonight with Hood and Amile in foul trouble...

slower
11-27-2013, 10:02 PM
That wasn't an alley oop. He cut and got the pass but got his shot blocked, like Duke has had happen 6 times already.

Alabama is an athletic team.

You're right. Nevertheless, he is by no means a strong finisher.

FerryFor50
11-27-2013, 10:03 PM
Hairston is killing them on the press break. And Cook with another forced shot...

BlueDevilBrowns
11-27-2013, 10:04 PM
Quinn has started more fast-breaks for Alabama than anyone on their own team.

dukelifer
11-27-2013, 10:04 PM
Duke is in a fight now.

arnie
11-27-2013, 10:05 PM
I love how active TT and Josh are tonight on both ends of the floor.

Seniors stepping up.

Disagree- with H and T in the game together for extended minutes, the offense really bogs down. Parker can do it alone for awhile - but not the whole game.

FerryFor50
11-27-2013, 10:06 PM
Not sure why pressing teams seem to get more leeway on hand checks...

BlueDevilBrowns
11-27-2013, 10:06 PM
Duke is in a fight now.

If we could finish point-blank shots, we'd still be up 16.

FerryFor50
11-27-2013, 10:07 PM
Disagree- with H and T in the game together for extended minutes, the offense really bogs down. Parker can do it alone for awhile - but not the whole game.

Definitely can't have both in the game when Bama presses...

Furniture
11-27-2013, 10:07 PM
Disagree- with H and T in the game together for extended minutes, the offense really bogs down. Parker can do it alone for awhile - but not the whole game.

Especially with TT. Sorry.

BlueDevilBrowns
11-27-2013, 10:08 PM
Disagree- with H and T in the game together for extended minutes, the offense really bogs down. Parker can do it alone for awhile - but not the whole game.

Hindsights 20/20. Josh's play has dropped off some now but earlier they were a big reason why we had an 18 lead.

FerryFor50
11-27-2013, 10:13 PM
Not sure why Bama backed off of the press...

FerryFor50
11-27-2013, 10:16 PM
Parker is a matchup nightmare for just about every player.

chrishoke
11-27-2013, 10:16 PM
Bama really attacking TT when he has the ball - very good strategy.

BlueDevilBrowns
11-27-2013, 10:16 PM
Parker is SO NBA. Just on another level from everyone else.

arnie
11-27-2013, 10:16 PM
Hindsights 20/20. Josh's play has dropped off some now but earlier they were a big reason why we had an 18 lead.

Completely disagree / he has no points and 2 bounds and several fall downs. He hustles and gets in the way some, but has minimal impact.

Furniture
11-27-2013, 10:18 PM
Hindsights 20/20. Josh's play has dropped off some now but earlier they were a big reason why we had an 18 lead.

Really?

Marc81
11-27-2013, 10:19 PM
I'll give them another word for Jabari. Dominate! Nobody can guard him.

LBF
11-27-2013, 10:20 PM
Cook looks exhausted. Jabari is everything.

slower
11-27-2013, 10:20 PM
Parker is SO NBA. Just on another level from everyone else.

It's crazy to think that he's even better than we thought he would be. Amazing skills.

-jk
11-27-2013, 10:21 PM
Much better switching/hedging. Guys aren't getting lost.

-jk

arnie
11-27-2013, 10:21 PM
I'll give them another word for Jabari. Dominate! Nobody can guard him.

I believe he will have greatest freshman season in Duke history. Wish we could see him another year.

BlueDevilBrowns
11-27-2013, 10:21 PM
Really?

Yes, really. Believe me, I'm not the biggest TT and Hairston advocates but IMO they've both played a solid game so far tonight.

kingboozer
11-27-2013, 10:22 PM
Happy to see our free throws going in tonight, that's vital with Hood and Parker being automatic on the drive to draw the foul.

BlueDevilBrowns
11-27-2013, 10:24 PM
It's crazy to think that he's even better than we thought he would be. Amazing skills.

Yes. It's his skill level more than anything. It's like if Tiger played on the Senior PGA tour.

FerryFor50
11-27-2013, 10:24 PM
Press is giving Duke fits. Need to counter with more ball handlers...

FerryFor50
11-27-2013, 10:26 PM
Maybe stop going to the corners? Because they are doubling every time...

dukelifer
11-27-2013, 10:27 PM
Bad ball handling - killing Duke

dukelifer
11-27-2013, 10:28 PM
Guards are not playing well

slower
11-27-2013, 10:29 PM
Time to just slow down.

Cook - seriously?? This is ridiculous. And Hood is just struggling. Not a good showing by anybody not named Jabari.

BlueDevilBrowns
11-27-2013, 10:30 PM
Guards are not playing well

Cook threw up that last shot as if he wasn't sure if he was going to lob it Hairston or not. Poor decision.

dukelifer
11-27-2013, 10:30 PM
Time to just slow down.

Cook - seriously?? This is ridiculous. And Hood is just struggling. Not a good showing by anybody not named Jabari.

Just give the ball to Jabari

slower
11-27-2013, 10:31 PM
Just give the ball to Jabari

Works for me.

FerryFor50
11-27-2013, 10:31 PM
Just give the ball to Jabari

Several possessions, he hasn't even touched the ball. Doesn't make any sense.

DBFAN
11-27-2013, 10:32 PM
Just don't know what to think about this team. Also don't know what to think about the officiating

FerryFor50
11-27-2013, 10:33 PM
Would be real nice if those fouls on drives were called on both ends...

BlueDevilBrowns
11-27-2013, 10:34 PM
Just don't know what to think about this team. Also don't know what to think about the officiating

Well, it looks like it's gonna be a wild ride with Cook as our PG this year.

FerryFor50
11-27-2013, 10:34 PM
I like using Sulaimon and Cook as press breakers.

chaosmage
11-27-2013, 10:35 PM
Ferry beat me to it, but on Hood's fifth foul and his last basket, the contact was the same on both ends. Exactly. So why was one called and the other wasn't? What did I miss? I'm definitely not anything more than a lifelong fan, so I'd love an explanation.

Not complaining about the refs so much as trying to understand why the new rules are interpreted so... randomly.

slower
11-27-2013, 10:35 PM
Just don't know what to think about this team. Also don't know what to think about the officiating

It would seem that comparisons to the '99 team are laughably premature at this point.

NYBri
11-27-2013, 10:36 PM
Tough night for Hood. That 4 on 1 break where he fumbled it ob was his night in one play. Now fouled out.

hang tough, guys.

FerryFor50
11-27-2013, 10:38 PM
Maybe put your 7 foot pogo stick in? At worst he does exactly what your other guys have been doing... Not rebounding and sending Bama to the line.

Also, to the TT haters, he just made a CLUTCH play.

DBFAN
11-27-2013, 10:38 PM
Would be real nice if those fouls on drives were called on both ends...

Sev games in a row now where the other team is allowed to be much more physical than us. And even Knight is ignoring the glaring bias Our guys going down like flies and nothing is ever called.

slower
11-27-2013, 10:38 PM
It would seem that comparisons to the '99 team are laughably premature at this point.

As Thornton bails Cook out after yet ANOTHER stupid play. Enough already.

BlueDevilBrowns
11-27-2013, 10:38 PM
It would seem that comparisons to the '99 team are laughably premature at this point.

Guilty as charged, sad to say.

BTW, Matt Jones is MOTM(other than Parker, of course).

ChrisP
11-27-2013, 10:39 PM
Cook...?

Cook...!

Cook...!?!?!?!?

Wow, really do not understand how he's so up and down in his third year playing for K.

dukelifer
11-27-2013, 10:39 PM
Maybe put your 7 foot pogo stick in? At worst he does exactly what your other guys have been doing... Not rebounding and sending Bama to the line.

Also, to the TT haters, he just made a CLUTCH play.

TT had a bunch of steals - just offset by a few bad passes. Still the ball handling is shaky.

Furniture
11-27-2013, 10:39 PM
Maybe put your 7 foot pogo stick in? At worst he does exactly what your other guys have been doing... Not rebounding and sending Bama to the line.

Also, to the TT haters, he just made a CLUTCH play.

It was a good play but so many people can't be wrong. I'd like to see the plus minus numbers...

DBFAN
11-27-2013, 10:39 PM
It would seem that comparisons to the '99 team are laughably premature at this point.

Not sure I follow you on that

ChrisP
11-27-2013, 10:40 PM
Tough night for Hood. That 4 on 1 break where he fumbled it ob was his night in one play. Now fouled out.

hang tough, guys.

Yeah, let's hope he got his ONE bad game out of his system tonight :D

slower
11-27-2013, 10:40 PM
Guilty as charged, sad to say.

BTW, Matt Jones is MOTM(other than Parker, of course).

Agreed. Have liked what we've seen from Jones tonight.

dukelifer
11-27-2013, 10:40 PM
Guilty as charged, sad to say.

BTW, Matt Jones is MOTM(other than Parker, of course).

MOTM may be other than Parker a lot this year

FerryFor50
11-27-2013, 10:40 PM
BTW, Matt Jones is MOTM(other than Parker, of course).

Uh, why?

He scored a few points and played some D, but TT has 5 steals, including a huge one with a layup on a potential fast break opportunity late in the game.

slower
11-27-2013, 10:41 PM
Not sure I follow you on that

Then I guess you need to visit the board more often.

arnie
11-27-2013, 10:41 PM
Cook...?

Cook...!

Cook...!?!?!?!?

Wow, really do not understand how he's so up and down in his third year playing for K.

Of course we don't have another pg option this year. He has to figure it out.

ChrisP
11-27-2013, 10:42 PM
Just figured out something important: Apparently, you have to get knocked to the ground in order to draw a foul against AL's press. I got it now - I see where the refs are goin' with this.

dukelifer
11-27-2013, 10:42 PM
Agreed. Have liked what we've seen from Jones tonight.

He is smart and knows his strengths. If he can shoot like he is known for- watch out

FerryFor50
11-27-2013, 10:42 PM
Sulaimon has been great against the press.

DBFAN
11-27-2013, 10:43 PM
I made no comparison to any 99 team not really sure why I am getting some sort of sarcasm

Furniture
11-27-2013, 10:44 PM
Jones was very astute there..

DBFAN
11-27-2013, 10:44 PM
Then I guess you need to visit the board more often.

I made no comparison to any 99 team not really sure why I am getting some sort of sarcasm

slower
11-27-2013, 10:46 PM
I made no comparison to any 99 team not really sure why I am getting some sort of sarcasm

Shouldn't have quoted your original post. I didn't mean that YOU had made the comparison. Sorry for the confusion.

dukelifer
11-27-2013, 10:46 PM
That was ugly but that is how defensive teams will make you play. Good performance by Jones. He was a huge spark. We may see more of him going forward.

BlueDevilBrowns
11-27-2013, 10:47 PM
Uh, why?

He scored a few points and played some D, but TT has 5 steals, including a huge one with a layup on a potential fast break opportunity late in the game.

Well, did you expect him to put up double-figure points and hit clutch FT's?

I know I didn't. So, to me, his contributions were extremely important.

TT played a solid game, too, as I said earlier(and got blasted for btw).

sagegrouse
11-27-2013, 10:47 PM
Definitely can't have both in the game when Bama presses...


Especially with TT. Sorry.


Bama really attacking TT when he has the ball - very good strategy.


Completely disagree / he has no points and 2 bounds and several fall downs. He hustles and gets in the way some, but has minimal impact.


Really?

When I look at Tyler and Josh on the court, they look like they know how to play Duke basketball -- where to go on both offense and defense and where to pass the ball. I don't see a lot of that from the other players, especially under pressure. In fact, I wonder about whether some of you guys are watching the game.

TT, a classic "no-stats" player has quite a stats line tonight. How about 6 points, 5 steals, 4 RBs and 4 assists?

sagegrouse

FerryFor50
11-27-2013, 10:48 PM
Cook has been AWFUL against the press.

uh_no
11-27-2013, 10:49 PM
it's like we've never seen a press before....figure our guards would be better at it after the UL disaster....

DBFAN
11-27-2013, 10:49 PM
It's a win I guess. Just wished we would have played better in the 2nd half. But I agree that if the refs are gonna allow the pressing teams to put their hands all over us, then we are gonna need to start falling down more.

FerryFor50
11-27-2013, 10:50 PM
it's like we've never seen a press before....figure our guards would be better at it after the UL disaster....

No one looks to pass to beat the press. And Cook was just retreating at times...

dukelifer
11-27-2013, 10:51 PM
Cook has been AWFUL against the press.

His dribble does not have a lot of power. May need to have Jabari attack the press ala McBob.

uh_no
11-27-2013, 10:51 PM
No one looks to pass to beat the press. And Cook was just retreating at times...

it's almost infuriating.....i watched 30 minutes of it in indy last year.....dribbling straight into a double team with a guy wide open on the other side of the floor...

DukeDevil
11-27-2013, 10:52 PM
not trying to be a sore winner but up 8 with like 5 seconds left...why are you fouling? And then when the shots are made and the other team lays off to let the clock run, why do you run it down and try to hit a three? Last 10-15 seconds of play left a bad taste in my mouth, and the crowd too, by the sound of the boos.