PDA

View Full Version : MBB: Duke vs. Michigan Pre-Game and In-Game Thread



wilson
12-02-2013, 08:16 AM
It would seem to be time to put the Arizona game to bed and take a look at Michigan.
Key questions:

1. Can the defense continue to improve?
I thought we saw some strides in the Alabama and Arizona games, but team defense is definitely still a work in progress. Michigan is not an offensive powerhouse; they're around #100 nationally in scoring. This looks like a good opportunity, in the friendly confines of Cameron, to take another step forward on defense before the finals/Christmas lull in the schedule sets in. Michigan's three top scorers, Nik Stauskas, Caris LeVert, and Glenn Robinson III, are all 6'6", so the physical matchup wouldn't seem to be too much of a problem. However, this will need to remain a point of emphasis if the team is to reach its full potential.
2. Will the offense be more consistent and balanced?
It has seemed to me that when the team focuses intently on defense, it tends to lose energy and focus on the offensive end. This has led to a couple of stretches in the last couple of games where there has been little imagination and, in my opinion, too much "wait for Rodney and Jabari to take care of it." I don't think it's a coincidence that in the last two games, Duke has played what looked to me like the best defense of the season, but also had the two lowest scoring outputs of the season (by a pretty considerable margin). Because our leading scorers are relatively inexperienced and because defenses are really keying on them, the rest of the guys will need to pick up a bit of slack and the whole team will need to communicate better, especially in halfcourt sets. When we became a stagnant, jumpshooting team in the second half against Arizona, the results were not pretty.
3. Is the top-10 streak in danger?
If Duke loses tomorrow night, the streak of top-10 poll appearances dating back to 2008 will be in serious jeopardy. I highly doubt that this is much of a priority for the coaches or players, but it would make for rich pundit fodder. You can bet that Doug Gottlieb, et. al. would have something to say about it.
4. Can the ACC reclaim Big 10 Challenge supremacy?
The ACC hasn't won the Challenge since 2008 (tied last year). This year, Indiana @ Syracuse, Penn State @ Pittsburgh, Northwestern @ NC State, and Wisconsin @ Virginia all look winnable. Duke is rightly favored tomorrow night, but will need to play well to win. It could well be a rubber match when all is said and done, because the remaining 7 games look like tossups (Notre Dame @ Iowa, Florida State @ Minnesota, Illinois @ GA Tech, Boston College @ Purdue) or ACC losses (unc @ Michigan State, Maryland @ Ohio State, Miami @ Nebraska).

mattman91
12-02-2013, 08:56 AM
It would seem to be time to put the Arizona game to bed and take a look at Michigan.
Key questions:

1. Can the defense continue to improve?
I thought we saw some strides in the Alabama and Arizona games, but team defense is definitely still a work in progress. Michigan is not an offensive powerhouse; they're around #100 nationally in scoring. This looks like a good opportunity, in the friendly confines of Cameron, to take another step forward on defense before the finals/Christmas lull in the schedule sets in. Michigan's three top scorers, Nik Stauskas, Caris LeVert, and Glenn Robinson III, are all 6'6", so the physical matchup wouldn't seem to be too much of a problem. However, this will need to remain a point of emphasis if the team is to reach its full potential.
2. Will the offense be more consistent and balanced?
It has seemed to me that when the team focuses intently on defense, it tends to lose energy and focus on the offensive end. This has led to a couple of stretches in the last couple of games where there has been little imagination and, in my opinion, too much "wait for Rodney and Jabari to take care of it." I don't think it's a coincidence that in the last two games, Duke has played what looked to me like the best defense of the season, but also had the two lowest scoring outputs of the season (by a pretty considerable margin). Because our leading scorers are relatively inexperienced and because defenses are really keying on them, the rest of the guys will need to pick up a bit of slack and the whole team will need to communicate better, especially in halfcourt sets. When we became a stagnant, jumpshooting team in the second half against Arizona, the results were not pretty.
3. Is the top-10 streak in danger?
If Duke loses tomorrow night, the streak of top-10 poll appearances dating back to 2008 will be in serious jeopardy. I highly doubt that this is much of a priority for the coaches or players, but it would make for rich pundit fodder. You can bet that Doug Gottlieb, et. al. would have something to say about it.
4. Can the ACC reclaim Big 10 Challenge supremacy?
The ACC hasn't won the Challenge since 2008 (tied last year). This year, Indiana @ Syracuse, Penn State @ Pittsburgh, Northwestern @ NC State, and Wisconsin @ Virginia all look winnable. Duke is rightly favored tomorrow night, but will need to play well to win. It could well be a rubber match when all is said and done, because the remaining 7 games look like tossups (Notre Dame @ Iowa, Florida State @ Minnesota, Illinois @ GA Tech, Boston College @ Purdue) or ACC losses (unc @ Michigan State, Maryland @ Ohio State, Miami @ Nebraska).

I'll be pulling for Northwestern in this one :)

Dr. Rosenrosen
12-02-2013, 09:02 AM
Top10 streak is impressive but not important. I would like to see the non-Conf home winning streak continue. 6th man better be in full effect tomorrow!

wk2109
12-02-2013, 09:13 AM
http://www.mlive.com/wolverines/index.ssf/2013/11/john_beilein_on_nik_stauskas_s.html


Will Stauskas be ready for the Blue Devils?

“I don’t know,” Michigan coach John Beilein said Friday. “Until he's practicing 100 percent, he won’t go in there. He’s got to be pretty close to 100 percent to go in there.”

Soon after that press conference, though, Stauskas went to Twitter, saying, "Great win by our guys today. We are getting better! No worries, my ankle will be okay.”

grad_devil
12-02-2013, 01:23 PM
Looks like we're #10 in the AP and #8 in the coaches poll. A loss tomorrow would certainly break "The Streak" we have going.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/rankings

Not that it means anything to anyone besides us fans, but it's still an impressive streak I'd like to see continue!

johnb
12-02-2013, 01:40 PM
I like the top ten streak. It's a fun stat, but, pragmatically, it announces to recruits that we are always in the hunt for a NC. I think I like it better than the non-conference win streak...

-jk
12-02-2013, 01:41 PM
I like the top ten streak. It's a fun stat, but, pragmatically, it announces to recruits that we are always in the hunt for a NC. I think I like it better than the non-conference win streak...

Keep the one tomorrow, keep the other!

-jk

flyingdutchdevil
12-02-2013, 01:59 PM
I like the top ten streak. It's a fun stat, but, pragmatically, it announces to recruits that we are always in the hunt for a NC. I think I like it better than the non-conference win streak...

I gotta agree with you. I don't get the non-conference home game streak. I mean, does Kansas promote that they have the longest winning streak with teams starting with "K" that is in an arena beginning with "P"?

I like the home game win streak. I really like the simple win streak. Non-conference win streak sounds like a politician made it up...

But, I'm with you on top 10. That is incredible. What recruit wouldn't want to see that?

BD80
12-02-2013, 02:01 PM
It amuses me that the Michigan "faithful" are so down on Mitch McGary. He has not "lived up" to the potential he displayed in the tournament last year. Instead of building on those performances and becoming the All-American he was predicted to be by all of the prognosticators, he has "regressed" to his regular season form from last year.

It is particularly ironic that his failure to become a team leader is an issue when he plays Duke, where he would have been the perfect complement to this year's team

flyingdutchdevil
12-02-2013, 02:03 PM
It amuses me that the Michigan "faithful" are so down on Mitch McGary. He has not "lived up" to the potential he displayed in the tournament last year. Instead of building on those performances and becoming the All-American he was predicted to be by all of the prognosticators, he has "regressed" to his regular season form from last year.

It is particularly ironic that his failure to become a team leader is an issue when he plays Duke, where he would have been the perfect complement to this year's team

Are you suggesting that McGary chose the wrong school?

rsvman
12-02-2013, 02:36 PM
Are you suggesting that McGary chose the wrong school?

He's just saying what everybody already knows: Michigan doesn't develop big men.


Oh, and their players never achieve at the next level, either.......:p

flyingdutchdevil
12-02-2013, 02:47 PM
He's just saying what everybody already knows: Michigan doesn't develop big men.


Oh, and their players never achieve at the next level, either.......:p

Ha!

I think Mitch McGary made the right call with Michigan. Mitch's goal was to play right away, and he never would have had that at Duke (possibly more with Kelly going down for most of the season).

Also, he played like a senior, elite big man in the tourney. A lot of this is because he had the tools around him to do so (see Burke, Trey).

If McGary was patient, then Duke would have been the ideal place for him to shine, especially as a sophomore. He would have been the shoo-in for the starting 5.

Every recruit, for better or for worse, has a different agenda. McGary's was to play right away. And Michigan worked out pretty good thus far.

CoachJ10
12-02-2013, 06:36 PM
There are 2 primary questions that this team is still trying to figure out in my mind.

A lineup that has Josh and Tyler playing together...and for significant minutes...is not a unit that can be effective on offense and hurts the team (despite whatever positives that potentially could be felt on the defensive end). We need Rasheed playing confident and smart and Amile playing confident and strong...then we are a top 5 team...with Tyler and Josh...we are not. I, like many on this board, like the passion that the latter 2 bring to the table. But that is showing to be insufficient to win meaningful games.

The enigma, wrapped in a puzzle, stuck inside of a riddle that is Quin Cook. When he plays confident, strong and aggressive...we are a different team. When he gets dejected and plays passively and weakly....we are disjointed both offensively and defensively. I wish someone would just whisper in his ear to just let loose and play with the passion that we know is in him.

gurufrisbee
12-02-2013, 09:50 PM
I couldn't believe Katz suggesting that Duke can't win a big match up because of the first two losses this season. No one else in the country has played two opponents as good as those two. Haters everywhere

FerryFor50
12-02-2013, 09:55 PM
Ha!

I think Mitch McGary made the right call with Michigan. Mitch's goal was to play right away, and he never would have had that at Duke (possibly more with Kelly going down for most of the season).

Also, he played like a senior, elite big man in the tourney. A lot of this is because he had the tools around him to do so (see Burke, Trey).

If McGary was patient, then Duke would have been the ideal place for him to shine, especially as a sophomore. He would have been the shoo-in for the starting 5.

Every recruit, for better or for worse, has a different agenda. McGary's was to play right away. And Michigan worked out pretty good thus far.

Yea, but he *was* patient at Michigan by not entering the draft... Michigan fans need to show him the same patience. Plus he's coming off a back issue, which as Dwight Howard has shown, really can affect high energy bigs.

But I predicted he would struggle this year, now that he'd be game planned for. No Burke or Hardaway to take the pressure off...

And yes, he chose the wrong school. :p

SheltonBob
12-03-2013, 06:29 AM
There are 2 primary questions that this team is still trying to figure out in my mind.

A lineup that has Josh and Tyler playing together...and for significant minutes...is not a unit that can be effective on offense and hurts the team (despite whatever positives that potentially could be felt on the defensive end). We need Rasheed playing confident and smart and Amile playing confident and strong...then we are a top 5 team...with Tyler and Josh...we are not. I, like many on this board, like the passion that the latter 2 bring to the table. But that is showing to be insufficient to win meaningful games.

The enigma, wrapped in a puzzle, stuck inside of a riddle that is Quin Cook. When he plays confident, strong and aggressive...we are a different team. When he gets dejected and plays passively and weakly....we are disjointed both offensively and defensively. I wish someone would just whisper in his ear to just let loose and play with the passion that we know is in him.

Well Stated. I Support our team and coaches 100%. But without strength from the #5 position (I know Coach K doesn't play by position, but...) we will have a difficult time against many big quality teams, and with McGary, Michigan is such a team. Josh Hairston is everything one could want in a Duke student-athlete; however, his size does not fill the needs of this year's team. Until MPIII plays 15-20 minutes per game for a stretch of 3-5 games, we will never know whether he can fill our needs. Disappointed that he has not gotten the opportunity. What did he too so terribly against Arizona to only justify 2 or 3 minutes? Coach K has forgotten more basketball than I ever knew, but I
would like it if MPIII were part of the "next play". Lets Go Duke - beat the "Not The Fab Five"

Saratoga2
12-03-2013, 06:58 AM
Well Stated. I Support our team and coaches 100%. But without strength from the #5 position (I know Coach K doesn't play by position, but...) we will have a difficult time against many big quality teams, and with McGary, Michigan is such a team. Josh Hairston is everything one could want in a Duke student-athlete; however, his size does not fill the needs of this year's team. Until MPIII plays 15-20 minutes per game for a stretch of 3-5 games, we will never know whether he can fill our needs. Disappointed that he has not gotten the opportunity. What did he too so terribly against Arizona to only justify 2 or 3 minutes? Coach K has forgotten more basketball than I ever knew, but I
would like it if MPIII were part of the "next play". Lets Go Duke - beat the "Not The Fab Five"

To continue to do the same thing and expect a different result is the height of folly!

Troublemaker
12-03-2013, 09:41 AM
Until MPIII plays 15-20 minutes per game for a stretch of 3-5 games, we will never know whether he can fill our needs.

Coach K does not dole out playing time so fans can know what he already knows by watching MP3 in practice.

Read the Arizona postgame thread towards the end where MP3 was discussed. As if common sense wouldn't be enough to understand that Marshall has been slowed by offseason surgery, there are articles and direct quotes from Coach K discussing that matter and how Duke is waiting for MP3 to get back to where he was last season before the injury, when he could've been a 6th or 7th man.

Give it time to play out. Marshall could be ready tonight, or he could be ready a month from now. Give it time. Let this season breathe.

Also, what is with this habit of marrying ourselves to one player and making him the panacea? I like all our developing young players and think any of them could possibly do the job.

From my perspective, we need ONE of Marshall or Amile or Semi to become an effective frontcourt partner for Jabari. They would all do it in different ways based on their physical talent and skills, but call me crazy, I think it'll happen for us this season. Between the three of them, I give it a better than 50/50 shot that one of them emerges as an effective frontcourt partner for Jabari.

The Gordog
12-03-2013, 09:54 AM
It would seem to be time to put the Arizona game to bed and take a look at Michigan.
Key questions:

1. Can the defense continue to improve?
I thought we saw some strides in the Alabama and Arizona games, but team defense is definitely still a work in progress. Michigan is not an offensive powerhouse; they're around #100 nationally in scoring. This looks like a good opportunity, in the friendly confines of Cameron, to take another step forward on defense before the finals/Christmas lull in the schedule sets in. Michigan's three top scorers, Nik Stauskas, Caris LeVert, and Glenn Robinson III, are all 6'6", so the physical matchup wouldn't seem to be too much of a problem. However, this will need to remain a point of emphasis if the team is to reach its full potential.
2. Will the offense be more consistent and balanced?
It has seemed to me that when the team focuses intently on defense, it tends to lose energy and focus on the offensive end. This has led to a couple of stretches in the last couple of games where there has been little imagination and, in my opinion, too much "wait for Rodney and Jabari to take care of it." I don't think it's a coincidence that in the last two games, Duke has played what looked to me like the best defense of the season, but also had the two lowest scoring outputs of the season (by a pretty considerable margin). Because our leading scorers are relatively inexperienced and because defenses are really keying on them, the rest of the guys will need to pick up a bit of slack and the whole team will need to communicate better, especially in halfcourt sets. When we became a stagnant, jumpshooting team in the second half against Arizona, the results were not pretty.
3. Is the top-10 streak in danger?
If Duke loses tomorrow night, the streak of top-10 poll appearances dating back to 2008 will be in serious jeopardy. I highly doubt that this is much of a priority for the coaches or players, but it would make for rich pundit fodder. You can bet that Doug Gottlieb, et. al. would have something to say about it.
4. Can the ACC reclaim Big 10 Challenge supremacy?
The ACC hasn't won the Challenge since 2008 (tied last year). This year, Indiana @ Syracuse, Penn State @ Pittsburgh, Northwestern @ NC State, and Wisconsin @ Virginia all look winnable. Duke is rightly favored tomorrow night, but will need to play well to win. It could well be a rubber match when all is said and done, because the remaining 7 games look like tossups (Notre Dame @ Iowa, Florida State @ Minnesota, Illinois @ GA Tech, Boston College @ Purdue) or ACC losses (unc @ Michigan State, Maryland @ Ohio State, Miami @ Nebraska).

I too think defence is still our #1 issue. I love Jabari's game, but his D was sorely lacking vs. AZ on many plays where they got relatively easy buckets. He looks to me like a guy who is still not used to guarding players that can shoot from further out than 8 ft.

Our #2 issue is that Mr Sulu takes it right to the hole every time he goes in and nobody respects his ability (I assume it is there) to pass once he draws in the opposing D. He's looking too much like Demarcus Nelson (when he had to try to carry the team) so far this year, and that is not meant as a compliment given that I believe his ceiling is higher.

BD80
12-03-2013, 10:08 AM
... Mr Sulu ... .

Stop. Just stop.

azzefkram
12-03-2013, 10:26 AM
Stop. Just stop.

Oh my

BD80
12-03-2013, 10:42 AM
This is not a game where we will see MP3. UM only has two significant players above 6'6" - 6'10" McGary avg 25 mpg and 6'10" Jon Horford avg 15 mpg (23 mpg when McGary was out).

6' 8" 250 lb Jordan Morgan avgs 10 mpg (9th on the team - avg 13.5 mpg while McGary was out and got 16 min in the Coppin State blow out) and 2.7 ppg - 3.6 rpg

Jabari should match up well with McGary with help from Amile and Josh. The key will be keeping up with him running the floor. Horford or Morgan aren't likely to have break out games, they are strong (250#) but not great offensive threats.

This will be a battle of the wings. A key is that we have a junior point guard and they start a freshman.

Kedsy
12-03-2013, 10:42 AM
Until MPIII plays 15-20 minutes per game for a stretch of 3-5 games, we will never know whether he can fill our needs.

You know, after reading the Arizona game thread and seeing this, maybe there really is something here. I propose the sole way Duke can get out of its horrible funk is if the only players who see the court had in their careers played fewer than 20 minutes for Duke coming into the season. Thus, we need to start a lineup of Matt at PG, Rodney at SG, Semi at SF, Jabari at PF, and Marshall at C. Only then can we achieve Nirvana.

freshmanjs
12-03-2013, 10:52 AM
Until MPIII plays 15-20 minutes per game for a stretch of 3-5 games, we will never know whether he can fill our needs. Disappointed that he has not gotten the opportunity. What did he too so terribly against Arizona to only justify 2 or 3 minutes? Coach K has forgotten more basketball than I ever knew, but I
would like it if MPIII were part of the "next play". Lets Go Duke - beat the "Not The Fab Five"

this actually points to an even greater dilemma. there are infinite lineup possibilities that have not been tested for 15-20 minutes per game. we have no way to know which of them might be the savior lineup. and we don't have time to test them all. aaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

EDIT: As sagegrouse points out below, the combinations are, of course, not infinite.

sagegrouse
12-03-2013, 10:58 AM
this actually points to an even greater dilemma. there are infinite lineup possibilities that have not been tested for 15-20 minutes per game. we have no way to know which of them might be the savior lineup. and we don't have time to test them all. aaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Let me be the first math wannabe to weigh in. Let's see. Twelve players and five on the court at any time. I get 792 possible combinations, which, at 20 minutes per lineup, would take 396 games to test.

sagegrouse

azzefkram
12-03-2013, 11:10 AM
You know, after reading the Arizona game thread and seeing this, maybe there really is something here. I propose the sole way Duke can get out of its horrible funk is if the only players who see the court had in their careers played fewer than 20 minutes for Duke coming into the season. Thus, we need to start a lineup of Matt at PG, Rodney at SG, Semi at SF, Jabari at PF, and Marshall at C. Only then can we achieve Nirvana.

Go big or go home, yeaaahhh!

Kedsy
12-03-2013, 11:11 AM
Let me be the first math wannabe to weigh in. Let's see. Twelve players and five on the court at any time. I get 792 possible combinations, which, at 20 minutes per lineup, would take 396 games to test.

sagegrouse

But the OP said it wouldn't count unless you tested it for 3 to 5 games. Have you worked that into your analysis? Or do we need between 1,188 and 1,980 games?

jamesfrommaiden
12-03-2013, 11:22 AM
We saw it against Kansas. We saw it against Arizona. I do not know why Sheed had the ball in clutch time. Both games he put the ball on the floor in an attempt to drive to the basket and both times it resulted in turnovers. Not a FTA or FGA. Why didn't JP or Hood have the ball. On top of that Sheed has been struggling a lot to find his role on the offense. I don't want Coach K to not play him, but not play him as much. I love what TT contributes to the team, but we all know he is better suited coming off the bench. I would like to see Matt get a lot more PT as well as give Andre some more run. I think Sheed will figure it out at some point, but he hasn't done it yet. In the long run I also think it would be beneficial for Matt and Andre to get as PT as they can now to be better later on. My other concern is JP. He was gassed in the 2nd half against Arizona. We all know we have to have him on the floor as much as possible, but he has to get rest along the way. I want to see more zone, but I don't expect it. A win tonight would be great to continue both the streaks. I think a win for this team would be a huge boost for the psyche of our guys.

howardlander
12-03-2013, 11:24 AM
Let me be the first math wannabe to weigh in. Let's see. Twelve players and five on the court at any time. I get 792 possible combinations, which, at 20 minutes per lineup, would take 396 games to test.

sagegrouse

Huh, I get a much larger number. There are 12 choices for the first player, 11 for the second player, 10 for the third, 9 for the 4th and 8 for the fifth. So I get 95040 possible 5 player combinations (12 * 11 * 10 * 9 * 8). What did I do wrong?

Howard

freshmanjs
12-03-2013, 11:25 AM
Huh, I get a much larger number. There are 12 choices for the first player, 11 for the second player, 10 for the third, 9 for the 4th and 8 for the fifth. So I get 95040 possible 5 player combinations (12 * 11 * 10 * 9 * 8). What did I do wrong?

Howard

you are multiple-counting each lineup. you want combinations, not permutations.

flyingdutchdevil
12-03-2013, 11:27 AM
Huh, I get a much larger number. There are 12 choices for the first player, 11 for the second player, 10 for the third, 9 for the 4th and 8 for the fifth. So I get 95040 possible 5 player combinations (12 * 11 * 10 * 9 * 8). What did I do wrong?

Howard

Because that suggests that a line-up of Cook, Sulaimon, Hood, Parker, and Jefferson is different than a line-up of Sulaimon, Cook, Hood, Parker, and Jefferson.

rsvman
12-03-2013, 11:33 AM
Because that suggests that a line-up of Cook, Sulaimon, Hood, Parker, and Jefferson is different than a line-up of Sulaimon, Cook, Hood, Parker, and Jefferson.

From math class to English class: the word "than" should be replaced by "from."

/grammar Nazi mode

Kedsy
12-03-2013, 11:33 AM
I want to see more zone, but I don't expect it.

After seeing our zone against Arizona, you want more?

Goduke2010
12-03-2013, 11:40 AM
We saw it against Kansas. We saw it against Arizona. I do not know why Sheed had the ball in clutch time. Both games he put the ball on the floor in an attempt to drive to the basket and both times it resulted in turnovers. Not a FTA or FGA. Why didn't JP or Hood have the ball. On top of that Sheed has been struggling a lot to find his role on the offense. I don't want Coach K to not play him, but not play him as much. I love what TT contributes to the team, but we all know he is better suited coming off the bench. I would like to see Matt get a lot more PT as well as give Andre some more run. I think Sheed will figure it out at some point, but he hasn't done it yet. In the long run I also think it would be beneficial for Matt and Andre to get as PT as they can now to be better later on. My other concern is JP. He was gassed in the 2nd half against Arizona. We all know we have to have him on the floor as much as possible, but he has to get rest along the way. I want to see more zone, but I don't expect it. A win tonight would be great to continue both the streaks. I think a win for this team would be a huge boost for the psyche of our guys.

If you mapped Sheed's PER starting with last year, I think you'd see a steady decline starting the tail end of non-conference play last year, and continuing through ACC play, the tourney, this summer with USA, and so far this Fall. The decline appears mostly due to his 2pt and 3pt shooting %.

Sheed reminds me of Singler in one respect - he easily gets down on himself, and appears to let poor shooting impact the rest of his game. I recall 2009 - 2011, when Coach K specifically called plays for Singler to get off early, to bolster his confidence. I wonder if the coaching staff is attempting the same thing with Sheed, hoping his drives will result in easy buckets or free throws.

Hard to describe 10+ months of poor performance as just a slump, as some folks on the boards have done. We need one of our 3 SGs to play well, in order to make up for the lack of post presence. I would argue that Matt Jones makes sense to get major playing time, given his potential is unknown, whereas Sheed and Dre are more of a known commodity.

freshmanjs
12-03-2013, 11:43 AM
Sheed reminds me of Singler in one respect - he easily gets down on himself, and appears to let poor shooting impact the rest of his game. I recall 2009 - 2011, when Coach K specifically called plays for Singler to get off early, to bolster his confidence. I wonder if the coaching staff is attempting the same thing with Sheed, hoping his drives will result in easy buckets or free throws.

Interesting. I don't recall Singler having this issue at all. Singler always played well, even when he wasn't shooting well. The only exception I remember was when he got very worn down towards the end of his Freshman year, when he was getting beaten up in the paint all season.

Goduke2010
12-03-2013, 11:54 AM
Interesting. I don't recall Singler having this issue at all. Singler always played well, even when he wasn't shooting well. The only exception I remember was when he got very worn down towards the end of his Freshman year, when he was getting beaten up in the paint all season.

Yeah, he definitely did, I saw it too many times to count. Coach K specifically mentioned trying to stoke Singler's confidence early on, to positively impact the rest of his game.

I'd wager if you looked at a per-game distribution of Singler's shooting % relative to his average, you'd see significant variance relative to other players'. Maybe someone with more time than I have could look that up. :-)

mgtr
12-03-2013, 11:54 AM
I thought that the one sure thing you could say about Singler was that he always played hard.

NSDukeFan
12-03-2013, 12:01 PM
Yeah, he definitely did, I saw it too many times to count. Coach K specifically mentioned trying to stoke Singler's confidence early on, to positively impact the rest of his game.

I'd wager if you looked at a per-game distribution of Singler's shooting % relative to his average, you'd see significant variance relative to other players'. Maybe someone with more time than I have could look that up. :-)

I agree with freshmanjs here. Singler had a poor senior season and may have had a great distribution in shooting % game to game but he was otherwise playing very well, which led to him being a first team all-ACC performer despite having a poor shooting year.

sagegrouse
12-03-2013, 12:02 PM
Huh, I get a much larger number. There are 12 choices for the first player, 11 for the second player, 10 for the third, 9 for the 4th and 8 for the fifth. So I get 95040 possible 5 player combinations (12 * 11 * 10 * 9 * 8). What did I do wrong?

Howard

I did "12 take 5," which (I believe) is the number of possible combinations of lineups for a 12-man hoops team. That calculates as 12!/(7!x5!) and works out to be 11x9x8 = 792. Your calculation may be the number of permutations, which (again, I believe) is a different problem.

Why don't you PM if you disagree, so we don't have to bore the entire planet with our discussion?

sagegrouse

BD80
12-03-2013, 12:10 PM
Because that suggests that a line-up of Cook, Sulaimon, Hood, Parker, and Jefferson is different than a line-up of Sulaimon, Cook, Hood, Parker, and Jefferson.

Can't be different. Coach K teams don't have positions.

But in theory, to fully test the permutations, Amile would have to bring the ball upcourt, and Quinn guard the post.

Fish80
12-03-2013, 12:14 PM
I did "12 take 5," which (I believe) is the number of possible combinations of lineups for a 12-man hoops team. That calculates as 12!/(7!x5!) and works out to be 11x9x8 = 792. Your calculation may be the number of permutations, which (again, I believe) is a different problem.

Why don't you PM if you disagree, so we don't have to bore the entire planet with our discussion?

sagegrouse

I think a more plausible estimate of possible lineups is 3,675.

Let's lay out players by potential position.
Quin 1 or 2
Tyler 1 thru 4
Rasheed 1 thru 4
Andre 2 thru 4
Matt 2 thru 4
Rodney 2 thru 4
Alex 3 or 4
Semi 3 thru 5
Jabari 3 thru 5
Amile 4 or 5
Josh 4 or 5
Marshall 5

We have three potentially at the 1, 6 potentially at the 2 (less one already at the 1), nine potentially at the 3 (less 2 at the 1 or 2), 10 potentiall at the 4 (less 3 at the 1, 2 or 3) and 5 potentially at the five. Multiply out 3 x (6-1) x (9-2) x (10-3) x 5 and you get 3,675.

Kedsy
12-03-2013, 12:37 PM
I would argue that Matt Jones makes sense to get major playing time, given his potential is unknown, whereas Sheed and Dre are more of a known commodity.

Because the unknown is always better than the known?


I think a more plausible estimate of possible lineups is 3,675.

Don't forget to multiply by 3 to 5 games.

howardlander
12-03-2013, 12:52 PM
I did "12 take 5," which (I believe) is the number of possible combinations of lineups for a 12-man hoops team. That calculates as 12!/(7!x5!) and works out to be 11x9x8 = 792. Your calculation may be the number of permutations, which (again, I believe) is a different problem.

Why don't you PM if you disagree, so we don't have to bore the entire planet with our discussion?

sagegrouse

No need, you are right and I'm wrong. I forgot the 5!. That will teach me to do combinatorics without looking at Wikipedia. In my defense, I did finish grad school in 1988...

Howard

Goduke2010
12-03-2013, 12:53 PM
Because the unknown is always better than the known?

Yes, always.

sagegrouse
12-03-2013, 12:54 PM
I think a more plausible estimate of possible lineups is 3,675.

Let's lay out players by potential position.
Quin 1 or 2
Tyler 1 thru 4
Rasheed 1 thru 4
Andre 2 thru 4
Matt 2 thru 4
Rodney 2 thru 4
Alex 3 or 4
Semi 3 thru 5
Jabari 3 thru 5
Amile 4 or 5
Josh 4 or 5
Marshall 5

We have three potentially at the 1, 6 potentially at the 2 (less one already at the 1), nine potentially at the 3 (less 2 at the 1 or 2), 10 potentiall at the 4 (less 3 at the 1, 2 or 3) and 5 potentially at the five. Multiply out 3 x (6-1) x (9-2) x (10-3) x 5 and you get 3,675.

Nope. I disagree. If there are only 792 possible lineups from a roster of 12 players, there is no other logic that can produce a larger number. Here's a website (http://www.mathsisfun.com/combinatorics/combinations-permutations-calculator.html) that may be helpful or may just confuse the issue.

If you have a roster of six players, there are six possible lineups.
If you have a roster of seven players, there are 21 possible lineups.
With eight players, there are 56 lineups.
With nine players, there are 126.
With ten players, there are 252.
With 11 players, there are 462.
A roster of 12 players produces 792 possible lineups.

Adding restrictions like you propose just reduces the number of possible lineups. No way one can one get to the number you suggested.

Now this approach doesn't assign players by position; it just puts them on the floor. I believe that is the Coach K approach. Now if you said, "I want to assign each player to a position 1 thru 5, in addition to deciding which players are on the floor." Then for each set of five players there are 5!, or 120, possible permutations and the overall number of combinations and permutations becomes much larger.

Is there any right-minded poster, who cut his eye teeth on calculating the odds of poker hands (52 take 5) or bridge hands (52 take 13), who can weigh in on this?

sagegrouse

Eakane
12-03-2013, 12:56 PM
You know, after reading the Arizona game thread and seeing this, maybe there really is something here. I propose the sole way Duke can get out of its horrible funk is if the only players who see the court had in their careers played fewer than 20 minutes for Duke coming into the season. Thus, we need to start a lineup of Matt at PG, Rodney at SG, Semi at SF, Jabari at PF, and Marshall at C. Only then can we achieve Nirvana.

I reject your sarcastic proposal, but I bet that team would win 20+ games. A frontline of Semi, Jabari and MPIII would be formidible, and Rodney and Matt are talented enough to handle the guard duties.

What we really need tonight is for Cook to play confident, Hood to play aggressive, Rasheed to come out of his funk, and Jabari to be Jabari. If we get that, with four significant scoring threats, we can rotate Amile/Hairston to emulate Lance Thomas, and give Semi and MPIII opportunities to show that they've progressing. If Rasheed continues to struggle, we could give Matt and Andre a shot. Alas, I think we'll see 7...

wilson
12-03-2013, 01:14 PM
Huh, I get a much larger number. There are 12 choices for the first player, 11 for the second player, 10 for the third, 9 for the 4th and 8 for the fifth. So I get 95040 possible 5 player combinations (12 * 11 * 10 * 9 * 8). What did I do wrong?

Howard


you are multiple-counting each lineup. you want combinations, not permutations.


Let me be the first math wannabe to weigh in. Let's see. Twelve players and five on the court at any time. I get 792 possible combinations, which, at 20 minutes per lineup, would take 396 games to test.

sagegrouse


But the OP said it wouldn't count unless you tested it for 3 to 5 games. Have you worked that into your analysis? Or do we need between 1,188 and 1,980 games?


Because that suggests that a line-up of Cook, Sulaimon, Hood, Parker, and Jefferson is different than a line-up of Sulaimon, Cook, Hood, Parker, and Jefferson.


From math class to English class: the word "than" should be replaced by "from."

/grammar Nazi modeOnly on a Duke board.

Gthoma2a
12-03-2013, 01:16 PM
I reject your sarcastic proposal, but I bet that team would win 20+ games. A frontline of Semi, Jabari and MPIII would be formidible, and Rodney and Matt are talented enough to handle the guard duties.

What we really need tonight is for Cook to play confident, Hood to play aggressive, Rasheed to come out of his funk, and Jabari to be Jabari. If we get that, with four significant scoring threats, we can rotate Amile/Hairston to emulate Lance Thomas, and give Semi and MPIII opportunities to show that they've progressing. If Rasheed continues to struggle, we could give Matt and Andre a shot. Alas, I think we'll see 7...

I agree with this. The biggest problem for Rasheed is over-penetrating, though. He gets in the lane great, but he keeps going too far and gets caught in the air. A floater would serve him well. It was the problem Nolan had until his junior season. I would still see no problem in letting the other two guys get some time in at the spot, anyway. Depth isn't a bad thing for a team that needs fresh legs to outscore its opponents. That's who we are until we communicate better on defense. The backdoor cuts that killed us in the last game could have been called out.

flyingdutchdevil
12-03-2013, 01:19 PM
Can't be different. Coach K teams don't have positions.

But in theory, to fully test the permutations, Amile would have to bring the ball upcourt, and Quinn guard the post.

Is that different than Thornton guarding the post? Like against Wiggins? ;)

Kidding aside, I think roles have been established if you play the 1-4 offensively for Duke. If you play the 5 offensively, roles are in the air like RoyWill's job security for the next 5 years...

Fish80
12-03-2013, 01:26 PM
Nope. I disagree. If there are only 792 possible lineups from a roster of 12 players, there is no other logic that can produce a larger number. Here's a website (http://www.mathsisfun.com/combinatorics/combinations-permutations-calculator.html) that may be helpful or may just confuse the issue.

If you have a roster of six players, there are six possible lineups.
If you have a roster of seven players, there are 21 possible lineups.
With eight players, there are 56 lineups.
With nine players, there are 126.
With ten players, there are 252.
With 11 players, there are 462.
A roster of 12 players produces 792 possible lineups.

Adding restrictions like you propose just reduces the number of possible lineups. No way one can one get to the number you suggested.

Now this approach doesn't assign players by position; it just puts them on the floor. I believe that is the Coach K approach. Now if you said, "I want to assign each player to a position 1 thru 5, in addition to deciding which players are on the floor." Then for each set of five players there are 5!, or 120, possible permutations and the overall number of combinations and permutations becomes much larger.

Is there any right-minded poster, who cut his eye teeth on calculating the odds of poker hands (52 take 5) or bridge hands (52 take 13), who can weigh in on this?

sagegrouse

3,675 lineup combinations assumes that
. . . a line-up of Cook, Sulaimon, Hood, Parker, and Jefferson is different than a line-up of Sulaimon, Cook, Hood, Parker, and Jefferson.

3,675 lineup combinations assumes that it matters what position they play. To some extent, it matters. For example, a lineup of Cook, Sulaimon, Hood, Parker, and Plumlee works better with Cook at the point than Plumlee at the point.

I'll concede the point that there are 792 possible lineup combinations. But I'll continue to assert that it matters what position they play. :D

Indoor66
12-03-2013, 01:34 PM
I have never seen so many Angels dance on the head of so many pins. What a group. Will someone please cut the weeds?

rsvman
12-03-2013, 01:52 PM
...... Depth isn't a bad thing for a team that needs fresh legs to outscore its opponents. ...

True, but fresh legs depend upon that "depth" being exploited. In other words, other players would have to actually play. Just having them sitting on the bench will preserve the freshness of their legs, but not the freshness of the legs belonging to the guys who are actually playing the game. They're still going to get exhausted.

Gthoma2a
12-03-2013, 01:55 PM
True, but fresh legs depend upon that "depth" being exploited. In other words, other players would have to actually play. Just having them sitting on the bench will preserve the freshness of their legs, but not the freshness of the legs belonging to the guys who are actually playing the game. They're still going to get exhausted.

Oh, I know. I am advocating lengthening the rotation.

mgtr
12-03-2013, 02:13 PM
Nope. I disagree. If there are only 792 possible lineups from a roster of 12 players, there is no other logic that can produce a larger number. Here's a website (http://www.mathsisfun.com/combinatorics/combinations-permutations-calculator.html) that may be helpful or may just confuse the issue.

If you have a roster of six players, there are six possible lineups.
If you have a roster of seven players, there are 21 possible lineups.
With eight players, there are 56 lineups.
With nine players, there are 126.
With ten players, there are 252.
With 11 players, there are 462.
A roster of 12 players produces 792 possible lineups.

Adding restrictions like you propose just reduces the number of possible lineups. No way one can one get to the number you suggested.

Now this approach doesn't assign players by position; it just puts them on the floor. I believe that is the Coach K approach. Now if you said, "I want to assign each player to a position 1 thru 5, in addition to deciding which players are on the floor." Then for each set of five players there are 5!, or 120, possible permutations and the overall number of combinations and permutations becomes much larger.

Is there any right-minded poster, who cut his eye teeth on calculating the odds of poker hands (52 take 5) or bridge hands (52 take 13), who can weigh in on this?

sagegrouse

Well, I cut my eyeteeth on teaching statistics in college, both grad and undergrad. You, sir, are 100% correct in your assertions, particularly your line that you cannot come up with more possible lineups than 12 combination 5 = 792.

El_Diablo
12-03-2013, 02:14 PM
The next person to post anything about the upcoming game, or anything about the Michigan Wolverines basketball team, gets a free spork from me.

Gthoma2a
12-03-2013, 02:17 PM
The next person to post anything about the upcoming game, or anything about the Michigan Wolverines basketball team, gets a free spork from me.

Jabari Parker > McGary! Count on it tonght. hehe. If he outrebounds him, I'll lose my mind, with joy!

Dr. Rosenrosen
12-03-2013, 02:19 PM
The next person to post anything about the upcoming game, or anything about the Michigan Wolverines basketball team, gets a free spork from me.

Spork slut here...

Prediction: Beilein throws crazy zone at us tonight. Dre' has a career night blowing it up!

El_Diablo
12-03-2013, 02:29 PM
Spork slut here...

Prediction: Beilein throws crazy zone at us tonight. Dre' has a career night blowing it up!

Sorry, but Gthoma2a beat you to it, and I must spread some comments around before sporking you again anyway.

News reports still have Stauskas as uncertain for tonight's game. I am thinking he will play, even if he still has a little pain...Duke is not Coppin State.

Goduke2010
12-03-2013, 02:43 PM
Nice article on Jabari's NBA potential / draft position.
http://preview.tinyurl.com/n5wlwel

peterjswift
12-03-2013, 02:56 PM
4. Can the ACC reclaim Big 10 Challenge supremacy?
The ACC hasn't won the Challenge since 2008 (tied last year). This year, Indiana @ Syracuse, Penn State @ Pittsburgh, Northwestern @ NC State, and Wisconsin @ Virginia all look winnable. Duke is rightly favored tomorrow night, but will need to play well to win. It could well be a rubber match when all is said and done, because the remaining 7 games look like tossups (Notre Dame @ Iowa, Florida State @ Minnesota, Illinois @ GA Tech, Boston College @ Purdue) or ACC losses (unc @ Michigan State, Maryland @ Ohio State, Miami @ Nebraska).

I was just thinking that this would be the last ACC/Big10 Challenge for Maryland. Then I realized my error...

Gthoma2a
12-03-2013, 03:02 PM
I was just thinking that this would be the last ACC/Big10 Challenge for Maryland. Then I realized my error...

Good riddance to worthless traitors. They can have the Big 10 side of things, even if I can't call them a football conference/football schools anymore (I'd have never admitted it before, but having a good football team is worth not being able to throw that label around at other schools; Thanks Coach Cut!). It would be nice to draw them next year. Have they announced the matchups for next year?

mgtr
12-03-2013, 03:10 PM
It would be great if the Terps drew UNC for next year -- the whiners versus the winers!

Eakane
12-03-2013, 03:31 PM
Sorry, but Gthoma2a beat you to it, and I must spread some comments around before sporking you again anyway.

News reports still have Stauskas as uncertain for tonight's game. I am thinking he will play, even if he still has a little pain...Duke is not Coppin State.

Is a spork similar to a twerk?

Indoor66
12-03-2013, 03:32 PM
Is a spork similar to a twerk?

No, it is not. It is more like a gorp.

PSurprise
12-03-2013, 03:38 PM
So what time do we think the game will actually start? I say 10:38pm

Duvall
12-03-2013, 03:41 PM
So what time do we think the game will actually start? I say 10:38pm

It's not a double-header - ESPN may hold the game for a few minutes, but it shouldn't start long after the scheduled 9:15 tip. May not be on ESPN, though.

sagegrouse
12-03-2013, 03:53 PM
It's not a double-header - ESPN may hold the game for a few minutes, but it shouldn't start long after the scheduled 9:15 tip. May not be on ESPN, though.

IMHO (where the H is silent) ESPN will not delay the start of the game. If there is a delayed ending to the earlier game, it will almost certainly begin on ESPN News, inasmuch as ESPN2 and ESPNU are already broadcasting ACC-BIG Ten games.

BD80
12-03-2013, 04:50 PM
I was just thinking that this would be the last ACC/Big10 Challenge for Maryland. Then I realized my error...

Maryland has a long history of being unsure of which side its fighting for.

Indoor66
12-03-2013, 04:52 PM
Maryland has a long history of being unsure of which side its fighting for.

You went too far. Maryland has a long history of being unsure.

wilson
12-03-2013, 04:54 PM
You went too far. Maryland has a long history of being unsure.Hey, give them a little credit...Maryland is definitely sure about some things (http://web.archive.org/web/20021213114039/www.wam.umd.edu/~blakes/project1.html).

Indoor66
12-03-2013, 05:20 PM
Hey, give them a little credit...Maryland is definitely sure about some things (http://web.archive.org/web/20021213114039/www.wam.umd.edu/~blakes/project1.html).

How could I forget?

devildeac
12-03-2013, 05:42 PM
You went too far. Maryland has a long history of being unsure.

Crazies pointing at K and shouting: Sure!

Crazies pointing to Sweaty Gary and shouting: Unsure!

Dev11
12-03-2013, 06:25 PM
Any enterprising Duke fans out there want to keep a tally of the number of screens McGary sets tonight?

Les Grossman
12-03-2013, 07:49 PM
Looks like we will miss Len Elmore, as he is in Atlanta. Darn!

riverside6
12-03-2013, 08:03 PM
Live tempo-based stats for Duke/Michigan, starters posted...

http://www.scacchoops.com/ViewHDGame.asp?hSchedule=19944

pfrduke
12-03-2013, 08:07 PM
Live tempo-based stats for Duke/Michigan, starters posted...

http://www.scacchoops.com/ViewHDGame.asp?hSchedule=19944

No change from MSG - Cook/Thornton/Hood/Parker/Hairston

Les Grossman
12-03-2013, 08:08 PM
looks like we're starting the 3 on 5 group again

DU82
12-03-2013, 08:11 PM
IIRC the last time Michigan played in Cameron, after their player intros, they gathere on the center Duke emblem and started dancing and stomping on the Duke D. Mr Battier and company did not take kindly to that. When Michigan looked up, the score was 34-2.
Let history repeat.

slower
12-03-2013, 08:13 PM
IIRC the last time Michigan played in Cameron, after their player intros, they gathere on the center Duke emblem and started dancing and stomping on the Duke D. Mr Battier and company did not take kindly to that. When Michigan looked up, the score was 34-2.
Let history repeat.

But of course, it won't.

Gthoma2a
12-03-2013, 08:25 PM
Little confused that Thornton is starting again. He got a rebound, but I just don't think he can keep doing that. We just don't seem to feel that size is valuable at the 2.

FerryFor50
12-03-2013, 08:26 PM
McGary is trying too hard. He should keep that up...

_Gary
12-03-2013, 08:28 PM
No change from MSG - Cook/Thornton/Hood/Parker/Hairston

Color me shocked. Good thing I didn't take a bet in Vegas on that one, becaue I would have bet the house either one or both of Thorton and Hairston wouldn't start.

Gthoma2a
12-03-2013, 08:29 PM
Josh should have just heaved it there. That is why we need to get a 5. We have guys out there that don't have to be guarded.

pfrduke
12-03-2013, 08:30 PM
So, will the new review rules allow them to take away Thornton's 3 during the break? Or can they only review the foot on the line calls?

DU82
12-03-2013, 08:31 PM
But of course, it won't.

8-2 is a good start

slower
12-03-2013, 08:33 PM
Hairston - WHY??

Matt Jones looking good.

duke4ever19
12-03-2013, 08:33 PM
Yay Marshall!!

Gthoma2a
12-03-2013, 08:33 PM
Hairston filling up the stat sheet, the bad way. I love him, but he can't stop fouling.

Gthoma2a
12-03-2013, 08:36 PM
Go Marshall!!!

dukelifer
12-03-2013, 08:37 PM
Need a shooter

_Gary
12-03-2013, 08:39 PM
Need a shooter

Which is incredible for this team. I'd never have thought we'd lack for that at any point, in any game. Amazing that neither Rasheed nor Andre can fill that void consistently.

Gthoma2a
12-03-2013, 08:40 PM
I love seeing all of these guys. That gives us a completely new look. We look nice out here.

Acymetric
12-03-2013, 08:40 PM
Did one of out players throw that shoe in the crowd?

dukelifer
12-03-2013, 08:40 PM
Playing hard- that is for sure

Gthoma2a
12-03-2013, 08:41 PM
Which is incredible for this team. I'd never have thought we'd lack for that at any point, in any game. Amazing that neither Rasheed nor Andre can fill that void consistently.

Or Matt or Jabari or Rodney. We have shooters. I think it is strategic, though. With the new rules, why not attack and draw fouls?

DU82
12-03-2013, 08:42 PM
Did one of out players throw that shoe in the crowd?

The Michigan player threw it.

CDu
12-03-2013, 08:42 PM
OK, who predicted that a lineup of Plumlee, Jefferson, Thornton, Dawkins, and Jones would have the early +/- lead?

dukelifer
12-03-2013, 08:42 PM
Or Matt or Jabari or Rodney. We have shooters. I think it is strategic, though. With the new rules, why not attack and draw fouls?

Not easy against that D- also they do not foul

UrinalCake
12-03-2013, 08:43 PM
Hood, Parker and Cook all on the bench. Not sure if K is sending a message or just stealing some time to rest them as long as we're maintaining the lead. Would definitely like them to be fresh at the end of the game.

dukelifer
12-03-2013, 08:46 PM
Wow- big mistakes by Tyler

NYBri
12-03-2013, 08:47 PM
Cold shooting. Sloppy play so far.

NYBri
12-03-2013, 08:49 PM
Certainly seeing lots of players.

_Gary
12-03-2013, 08:50 PM
Hard for me to believe this current team, with so many good shooters, is struggling so much on offense over the past week or so.

dukelifer
12-03-2013, 08:52 PM
Hard for me to believe this current team, with so many good shooters, is struggling so much on offense over the past week or so.

Expending a lot of energy on D. The team will need to be in better shape

slower
12-03-2013, 08:54 PM
Jabari...just...wow

And Cook...smh...get your HEAD together, man.

And at the risk of being repetitive...Matt Jones!

NYBri
12-03-2013, 08:57 PM
Michigan is ICE cold.

NYBri
12-03-2013, 08:59 PM
Quinn. Do not lose your cool. Leadership!

dukelifer
12-03-2013, 08:59 PM
That was unfortunate

NYBri
12-03-2013, 09:00 PM
Stupid.

Selover
12-03-2013, 09:01 PM
How was that UM ball after the double foul?

dukelifer
12-03-2013, 09:02 PM
Passing is a good thing Quinn

tgotdamp
12-03-2013, 09:07 PM
Hard for me to believe this current team, with so many good shooters, is struggling so much on offense over the past week or so.

Duke's offensive set is not suited for their skill set. Iso-basketball does not work without a lightning quick PG to blow pass the opposing PG. As I watch this game, it troubles me that we have not used the HI-BALL SCREEN action. I mean we have used this play to perfection in the past with the likes of J. Williams and Boozer. With this team, you have limitless players who could run it pretty darn well. The obvious is Hood and Parker, Cook and Parker would do the job and considering Sulaimon is such a good driver, he would also serve this offensive set well (if he doesn't get trigger happy). Employing the HI-BALL screen will free up our shooters as it causes defenders to come off their matchup. Hopefully, we find ourselves because our play isn't Grade A Duke basketball.

dukelifer
12-03-2013, 09:09 PM
Well there went the lead with no shooting

Gthoma2a
12-03-2013, 09:09 PM
The quick shots need to stop. Setting something up isn't a bad thing. I also want to see us get Parker going. There it is.

Les Grossman
12-03-2013, 09:11 PM
well, not a bad half.
Pretty good at times

dukelifer
12-03-2013, 09:11 PM
Tyler is the shooter on this team I guess- D is much better

NYBri
12-03-2013, 09:12 PM
Not to be harsh, but we are playing like we haven't been coached.

pfrduke
12-03-2013, 09:13 PM
Not that anyone around here needs convincing about K's coaching strength, but I've always liked how he uses the use-it-or-lose-it time out. Here, he took it with a little over a minute to go, drew up a play to go 2-for-1 and get Parker an easy shot with about :45 seconds to go, which led to us having the last possession and a chance for a score going into the locker room. It's not rocket science, necessarily, but it's just smart use of clock and a couple well drawn plays.

slower
12-03-2013, 09:13 PM
well, not a bad half.
Pretty good at times

A 10-point lead is nice, but it should be more. I have a feeling we'll need all of that. Hard to say, though - Michigan doesn't seem like a mentally tough team.

NYBri
12-03-2013, 09:14 PM
Is there a chat for this game?

4Gen
12-03-2013, 09:15 PM
How many times have I heard Vitale comment on Tyler's lack of shooting ability after Tyler knocks down a three. It's comical.

jv001
12-03-2013, 09:16 PM
Has Rasheed played yet?

pfrduke
12-03-2013, 09:16 PM
Has Rasheed played yet?

Nope

MartyClark
12-03-2013, 09:16 PM
First, I think these extended video reviews by the refs are killing the game. The technical on Cook must have taken ten minutes. It was the right call but with replays and television timeouts, the games lose all momentum.

Second, let's get Jabari the ball in the paint. Good things happen when he has the ball within 10 or 15 feet of the basket.

pfrduke
12-03-2013, 09:17 PM
Is there a chat for this game?

Yep

DBR Chat Page (http://forums.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/misc.php?do=cchatbox)

arnie
12-03-2013, 09:18 PM
A 10-point lead is nice, but it should be more. I have a feeling we'll need all of that. Hard to say, though - Michigan doesn't seem like a mentally tough team.

Yea our Achilles heel has been play at midway in 2nd half. Weird that Sheed has not played, will probably get a few minutes in 2nd.

slower
12-03-2013, 09:20 PM
How many times have I heard Vitale comment on Tyler's lack of shooting ability after Tyler knocks down a three. It's comical.

Well, he DID miss one right before making that last one. Sorry, but I'd prefer to have somebody else taking those three-pointers.

dukelifer
12-03-2013, 09:20 PM
Not to be harsh, but we are playing like we haven't been coached.

In what way?

dukelifer
12-03-2013, 09:21 PM
Has Rasheed played yet?

Something is going on - he is in a funk and needs to work through it

Duvall
12-03-2013, 09:22 PM
Well, he DID miss one right before making that last one. Sorry, but I'd prefer to have somebody else taking those three-pointers.

Why would you want a 40% 3FG shooter taking wide-open threes? It's madness.

pfrduke
12-03-2013, 09:23 PM
Well, he DID miss one right before making that last one. Sorry, but I'd prefer to have somebody else taking those three-pointers.

He's a 36.7% shooter from 3 for his career over 180 attempts. He's not our best shooter, but he's not a horrible option, particularly when wide open. I thought the one he missed wasn't a good shot because he took it so early in the clock, but he should be a willing shooter when he's wide open at the 3-point line because it's the only way for him to create space while he's out there.

slower
12-03-2013, 09:25 PM
Yea our Achilles heel has been play at midway in 2nd half. Weird that Sheed has not played, will probably get a few minutes in 2nd.

I hope the situation with Sheed works out soon. I love the kid, and I don't think a whole season like this for him will end well. He's too good to be on the bench. And, yeah, I know he has to earn his spot on he floor, but still...

davekay1971
12-03-2013, 09:26 PM
So the emphasis being put on defense seems to be having an effect...

slower
12-03-2013, 09:26 PM
He's a 36.7% shooter from 3 for his career over 180 attempts. He's not our best shooter, but he's not a horrible option, particularly when wide open. I thought the one he missed wasn't a good shot because he took it so early in the clock, but he should be a willing shooter when he's wide open at the 3-point line because it's the only way for him to create space while he's out there.

Point well-taken. Didn't realize his career pct was that high.

arnie
12-03-2013, 09:26 PM
He's a 36.7% shooter from 3 for his career over 180 attempts. He's not our best shooter, but he's not a horrible option, particularly when wide open. I thought the one he missed wasn't a good shot because he took it so early in the clock, but he should be a willing shooter when he's wide open at the 3-point line because it's the only way for him to create space while he's out there.

If he's gonna play, he needs to be willing to shoot. I think he needs to take wide open 3s.

DBFAN
12-03-2013, 09:26 PM
First, I think these extended video reviews by the refs are killing the game. The technical on Cook must have taken ten minutes. It was the right call but with replays and television timeouts, the games lose all momentum.

Second, let's get Jabari the ball in the paint. Good things happen when he has the ball within 10 or 15 feet of the basket.

What I don't understand was why it was not a double tech. Clearly both guys were out of bounds when Cook got shoved. And the play was dead, so why is Cook the only one to receive a tech. Funny thing is, if Cook doesn't respond do the refs even know what happened to begin with?

slower
12-03-2013, 09:30 PM
Hairston needs to stay closer to McGary.

And not shoot jumpers. Ever.

arnie
12-03-2013, 09:33 PM
If he's gonna play, he needs to be willing to shoot. I think he needs to take wide open 3s.

H having another rough night - no bounds, fouls and missed shots

dukelifer
12-03-2013, 09:34 PM
Need to feed Parker in that zone

NYBri
12-03-2013, 09:34 PM
Sheed doesn't look happy. I miss his game.

Marc81
12-03-2013, 09:35 PM
Hairston needs to stay closer to McGary.

And not shoot jumpers. Ever.

Never. Never ever ever!

MartyClark
12-03-2013, 09:39 PM
Nice to see Plumlee have a little success. Wish he could have made a free throw.

dukelifer
12-03-2013, 09:40 PM
Plumlee with a good minute.

dukelifer
12-03-2013, 09:42 PM
Nice to see Plumlee have a little success. Wish he could have made a free throw.

He had all summer to work on that. Don't understand why big guys do not value that skill more

Les Grossman
12-03-2013, 09:43 PM
Wow!

trailblaze
12-03-2013, 09:43 PM
Plumlee with a good minute.

I want more cowbell

NYBri
12-03-2013, 09:44 PM
Jabari

slower
12-03-2013, 09:45 PM
Sheed doesn't look happy. I miss his game.

Agreed. This worries me. Still plenty of time to turn it around, though.

dukelifer
12-03-2013, 09:45 PM
Jabari

Coach K called that. Hmmm- that should be the play every time down

Gthoma2a
12-03-2013, 09:49 PM
Agreed. This worries me. Still plenty of time to turn it around, though.

He has the handle and athletiism. He just needs to find his shot again and play within himself. Pulling up a little will make his drives more effective.

slower
12-03-2013, 09:50 PM
Good board work and hustle by Rodney tonight.

dukelifer
12-03-2013, 09:51 PM
Hmmm - not a good stretch here

_Gary
12-03-2013, 09:51 PM
Hairston was horrible on that last drive +1.

davekay1971
12-03-2013, 09:51 PM
Stressed. Having trouble shaking Michigan.

And then...DRE!

Gthoma2a
12-03-2013, 09:51 PM
DRE!

NYBri
12-03-2013, 09:52 PM
@ the 7 minute mark against Kansas and 'zonal we had the lead and let them get away.

_Gary
12-03-2013, 09:52 PM
That's my boy!

Gthoma2a
12-03-2013, 09:52 PM
My God. That is what we have had buried on our bench.

davekay1971
12-03-2013, 09:52 PM
I love him.

arnie
12-03-2013, 09:53 PM
Hairston was horrible on that last drive +1.

So what else is new.

dukelifer
12-03-2013, 09:53 PM
That is a shooter folks

NYBri
12-03-2013, 09:53 PM
Dre!

arnie
12-03-2013, 09:54 PM
Dre!

Dawkins may have saved this one!

Billy Dat
12-03-2013, 09:54 PM
That is a shooter folks

Who does Dre think he is, Spike Albrecht? That is exactly what we needed at that exact moment.

NYBri
12-03-2013, 09:54 PM
That is a shooter folks

Waiting for Dre!

bbq-devil
12-03-2013, 09:54 PM
Boom. We needed that.

Gthoma2a
12-03-2013, 09:55 PM
When we are cold or a team is coming on, there is no reason keep him from taking a shot or two.

cbnaylor
12-03-2013, 09:55 PM
It's so frustrating to see him sit that long knowing he's that good. He deserve more than what he has been getting. Dre all day!

CDu
12-03-2013, 09:56 PM
The "play Dawkins", "play Plumlee", and "play Jefferson" crowds have to be pleased with tonight's results so far.

_Gary
12-03-2013, 09:57 PM
It's so frustrating to see him sit that long knowing he's that good. He deserve more than what he has been getting. Dre all day!

Agreed. Let's hope this game changes all that and we see plenty more of Dre game in and game out going forward.

Gthoma2a
12-03-2013, 09:57 PM
Quinn may make some bad decisions in the heat of the moment, but he makes some very good plays, too.

Dawkins is incredible.

bbq-devil
12-03-2013, 09:57 PM
When is the last time we had a Freshman draw a double team every time he gets a touch.

Dre again!

davekay1971
12-03-2013, 09:58 PM
Dawkins: The Microwave.

Vinnie Johnson can sue me.

Billy Dat
12-03-2013, 09:58 PM
Dawkins may have saved this one!

He's the reason Cook was so open on that last 3 and then he hits the lay-up. His presence meant 11 points and growing the lead by 9. Very nice.

Potato Head
12-03-2013, 09:58 PM
Amile needs to learn the art of acting like you've been there before.

DavidBenAkiva
12-03-2013, 09:59 PM
What if we played Dawkins AND Plumlee????

We'd have all the blocks, rebounds, and 3's AT THE SAME TIME!

Mind: Blown

Les Grossman
12-03-2013, 09:59 PM
for QC. When he's on, the team rolls.

Billy Dat
12-03-2013, 10:00 PM
It's so frustrating to see him sit that long knowing he's that good. He deserve more than what he has been getting. Dre all day!

K has juggled so many line-ups this year and the wheel keeps spinning, will it land on Dre for a while?

gurufrisbee
12-03-2013, 10:00 PM
I'm having a hard time figuring out why Dawkins isn't starting. Sheed is better than Tyler and Dawkins is outplaying both of them this season easily.

Absolutely great to see Plumlee get some productive minutes, too.

dukelifer
12-03-2013, 10:00 PM
Who does Dre think he is, Spike Albrecht? That is exactly what we needed at that exact moment.

He thinks he is Vinnie Johnson - the microwave

bbq-devil
12-03-2013, 10:04 PM
Jabari=WOW

NYBri
12-03-2013, 10:04 PM
Jabari II

Gthoma2a
12-03-2013, 10:05 PM
Jabari=WOW

Us right now=WOW. The D is there, mostly, and we are putting the ball through the hoop.

Quinn is doing a lot for us.

bbq-devil
12-03-2013, 10:07 PM
Most complete game against quality competition this year.

dukelifer
12-03-2013, 10:08 PM
Quinn having a strong game - nice to see

Potato Head
12-03-2013, 10:08 PM
So we're all agreed Cook is our X-factor? When he's playing well we're a top 10 team.

GGLC
12-03-2013, 10:08 PM
Hairston cannot shoot, cannot play defense, and cannot rebound. But other than that, he's pretty solid.

Really liking the play from Plumlee, Jones, and Dawkins this game (as well as Quinn, of course).

cbnaylor
12-03-2013, 10:08 PM
And we are finally playing team ball instead of one on one. / let's watch Parker.

Billy Dat
12-03-2013, 10:08 PM
Levert has really impressed me, I would hve never seen it coming based on his highlight tapes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItYIZstQFts&list=PL9D81B16FF5BBE113

lotusland
12-03-2013, 10:11 PM
Quick IC update: Duke gets all the calls and Dre would have developed a more complete game had he gone elsewhere...

NYBri
12-03-2013, 10:11 PM
Good team effort. Let's string together some W's and get ready for conference play.

dukelifer
12-03-2013, 10:11 PM
Levert has really impressed me, I would hve never seen it coming based on his highlight tapes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItYIZstQFts&list=PL9D81B16FF5BBE113

Some guys just play well against Duke and then never show that again

CDu
12-03-2013, 10:12 PM
18 points, 12 rebounds 2 assists, 2 steals, 2 blocks from our bench. Nice to see Jefferson, Dawkins, and Plumlee making an impact.

GGLC
12-03-2013, 10:12 PM
Some guys just play well against Duke and then never show that again

This guy is averaging 14 points a game this year. Let's show him some respect.

DavidBenAkiva
12-03-2013, 10:12 PM
Duke gets all the calls

Billy Dat
12-03-2013, 10:13 PM
And we are finally playing team ball instead of one on one. / let's watch Parker.

Someone commented earlier about Jabari drawing doubles, and he's been great tonight letting the game come to him and quickly moving the ball out of that double. Dre really unclogged the offensive toilet with that burst at the 8-9 minute mark and we have looked smoother since then, maybe Michigan lost a little will at that point.

dairedevil
12-03-2013, 10:13 PM
Not a complaint, but an observation....when was the last time that Duke has only taken 6 free throws with 2 minutes left in the game? Whatever happened to "Duke makes more free throws than the other team attempts?"\

dukelifer
12-03-2013, 10:13 PM
Did not even get his money's worth on that T

dukelifer
12-03-2013, 10:14 PM
Not a complaint, but an observation....when was the last time that Duke has only taken 6 free throws with 2 minutes left in the game? Whatever happened to "Duke makes more free throws than the other team attempts?"\

Michigan does not foul - that is their MO

Gthoma2a
12-03-2013, 10:15 PM
Good team effort. Let's string together some W's and get ready for conference play.

Yeah, if only we could have developed him like McAdoo or used him like they do with Hicks.

dukelifer
12-03-2013, 10:16 PM
This guy is averaging 14 points a game this year. Let's show him some respect.

No disrespect meant - did not know that

arnie
12-03-2013, 10:17 PM
Duke gets all the calls

Yea. Cook keeps making throws. Best game of year for Cook.

arnie
12-03-2013, 10:18 PM
18 points, 12 rebounds 2 assists, 2 steals, 2 blocks from our bench. Nice to see Jefferson, Dawkins, and Plumlee making an impact.

Hairston starting helps those stats.

g-money
12-03-2013, 10:19 PM
I'm happy to see that Andre didn't get yanked after those two defensive lapses. My sense is that if Coach K gives him just a little bit longer leash, we'll find out how much he can really contribute this year.

gurufrisbee
12-03-2013, 10:20 PM
Hairston starting helps those stats.

And Tyler

Billy Dat
12-03-2013, 10:23 PM
Doesn't he have a game to prepare for?

Geno Auriemma ‏@genoauriemma 12m
Dickie V said 4 times "Jabari Parker is special. He's special. He's special he's special . Grant Hill in the audience saying "huh"#enough

GGLC
12-03-2013, 10:24 PM
Doesn't he have a game to prepare for?

Geno Auriemma ‏@genoauriemma 12m
Dickie V said 4 times "Jabari Parker is special. He's special. He's special he's special . Grant Hill in the audience saying "huh"#enough

Yeah, Jabari can't be the most complete freshman that Vitale has ever seen at Duke until he improves his defense.