MBB: Duke 89, BC 68 Post-Game Thread

[JBDuke]

Put your post-game thoughts here.

[Native]

Jabari Parker.

That is all.

[AncientPsychicT]

Jabari Parker.

That is all.

With a seasoning of Quinn, that is.

[DUKEinFW]

Love it....K is massaging this team into a championship team

[DUKEinFW]

Be in Indy for your way to FF....good luck Ya know

[Wildling]

I think this team is firing on all cylinders now. And a bit of swag to boot :cool:

[FerryFor50]

Great game by Duke.

- slow start on defense... but they really locked down in the 2nd
- line changes are likely gone for the year
- Quinn is back; looks healthy and was on fire
- Parker was unstoppable, mainly because he played post most of the game
- I like the Sulaimon/Cook combo on the floor; two PGs with scoring mentality will make it hard for teams to defend Duke
- Sulaimon and Parker had a nice rapport going
- BC is much better than their record. But they are still pretty bad.

[Edouble]

Jabari looked amazing, but I was actually happier to see confidence, a full game's worth of minutes, and great three point shooting from Quinn Cook.

I was sorry to see Marshall log zero minutes. I thought that he could have been pretty effective against BC's front line.

Surprised not to see Dawkins at all in the second half. Again, I am glad that Quinn was playing so well.

That technical foul call on Jabari was complete crap. I have seen Shaq do that many times. I think with some refs, it's just an automatic call if you slap the glass with two hands after a dunk.

Go to Hell Carolina!!!!!

[DukeDevil]

I was sorry to see Marshall log zero minutes. I thought that he could have been pretty effective against BC's front line.

I believe Marshall had a non serious knee injury.

[fitimi1]

With approximately 5 minutes to go in the game, Jabari was called for a technical foul for "hanging onto the rim." Can anyone explain that call?

[DukeDevil]

With approximately 5 minutes to go in the game, Jabari was called for a technical foul for "hanging onto the rim." Can anyone explain that call?

I don't think it was for hanging, I believe it was because he slapped the backboard with both hands.

[FerryFor50]

Jabari looked amazing, but I was actually happier to see confidence, a full game's worth of minutes, and great three point shooting from Quinn Cook.

I was sorry to see Marshall log zero minutes. I thought that he could have been pretty effective against BC's front line.

Surprised not to see Dawkins at all in the second half. Again, I am glad that Quinn was playing so well.

That technical foul call on Jabari was complete crap. I have seen Shaq do that many times. I think with some refs, it's just an automatic call if you slap the glass with two hands after a dunk.

Go to Hell Carolina!!!!!

Marshall was out due to a knee issue.

https://twitter.com/laurakeeley

Also interesting was the tweet about Jabari from Kendall Marshall. UNC guy is a fan of one of our guys???

https://twitter.com/KButter5

[Ggallagher]

With approximately 5 minutes to go in the game, Jabari was called for a technical foul for "hanging onto the rim." Can anyone explain that call?

Well, unless the ref decides to visit our board, I don't think you'll get an answer. Seems like everyone else that saw the play disagreed with the call.

[roywhite]

Jabari was sensational. That's the most explosive I've seen him; he is moving really well and attacking the rim. Looks like he is in the best physical shape that he has been at Duke. Love seeing him and Sulaimon in the open floor; dynamite.

[FerryFor50]

Well, unless the ref decides to visit our board, I don't think you'll get an answer. Seems like everyone else that saw the play disagreed with the call.

I didn't disagree with the T. He definitely slapped the backboard with both hands. That's a T every time.

[Edouble]

Marshall was out due to a knee issue.

https://twitter.com/laurakeeley

Also interesting was the tweet about Jabari from Kendall Marshall. UNC guy is a fan of one of our guys???

https://twitter.com/KButter5

Wondering how a UNC guy is a fan of Jabari of course begs the return question, why are you following a UNC guy's Twitter feed?

Appreciate the info. about Marshall. I didn't catch the beginning of the game, as I had to wait through the Kansas/WVU game to finish before ESPN would go to the Duke game. I assume it was mentioned early on in the broadcast as well.

[BlueDevilBrowns]

I think this team is firing on all cylinders now. And a bit of swag to boot :cool:

Random Thoughts:

"The Swag" is strong with this team right now, for sure.

K played a short bench for most of the 2nd half despite the large lead, perhaps challenging his starters to finish strong. And finish strong they did.

He wants this team sharp, aggressive, and nasty in preparation for Wednesday's game.

K really is coaching this team like an NBA squad right now; personnel and minutes played based on matchups and in-game situations.

IMO, it's brought the team closer together as a result. Everyone feels like they have value.

Also, when Rasheed and Quinn are both on their game, the results are devastating.

[Duvall]

Wondering how a UNC guy is a fan of Jabari of course begs the return question, why are you following a UNC guy's Twitter feed?

Appreciate the info. about Marshall. I didn't catch the beginning of the game, as I had to wait through the Kansas/WVU game to finish before ESPN would go to the Duke game. I assume it was mentioned early on in the broadcast as well.

No, that would have wasted time that could have been used to talk about Danny Ainge.

[brevity]

Also interesting was the tweet about Jabari from Kendall Marshall. UNC guy is a fan of one of our guys???

https://twitter.com/KButter5

Despite his questionable education, Kendall Marshall is no dummy. In case the lottery is rigged so the Lakers get a top pick, Kendall might have to carry Jabari's bags.

[DukeHLM'13]

I was really impressed with the Quinn/Sheed/TinyThor/Jabari/Amile lineup. I'm honestly not sure how much that exact line was in the game, but I felt like there were a couple of times where we had a few good segments and when I looked that was who was in the game.

If Tyler continues to at least make the opponent respect his 3 point shooting then I really think that this could be a line that does some damage. 4 guys who can knock down the 3, 2 guys who can play in the post, 2 guys who can break down a defender and a lot of hustle on the floor!

[PSurprise]

I didn't disagree with the T. He definitely slapped the backboard with both hands. That's a T every time.

I remember when Daniel Ewing would look at the backboard with both eyes and get a T

[Saratoga2]

The three top Duke players tonight were Jabari with his best overall game, (Many points inside against a smaller BC team along with a bunch of rebounds), Rasheed who was terrific in all phases including setting up scoring plays, scoring himself and playing solid defense and Quinn who came out of his scoring doldrums tonight.

On the other hand, I thought Rodney had only a so-so game with some turnovers and his shooting cooled off after a fast start. Amile played okay but his game has become quieter in the last two outings. Andre didn't get a lot of burn tonight after he missed his first couple and Tyler was okay but not much of a factor. Matt also got a few minutes and played aggressive defense but the bench was shortened quite a bit tonight.

I didn't like Josh's game and he played little, considering Marshall didn't play. What occurred was that Semi came in. While Semi really didn't accomplish a lot, he still played at least as well as Josh.

Questions:

Where was Marshall? Was it because BC is small that he didn't play or is he sick or injured?

We went to a lineup with Quinn, Tyler, Rasheed, Jabari and Amile for quite a while. Personally, I prefer a lineup with either Quinn or Tyler at point with either Andre or Matt along with Rasheed and the two bigs. While the lineup was in during the run, it seemed like more to do with Jabari, Rasheed and Quinn were primarily responsible. Am I off base here thinking we are better off to avoid the two small guards together?

Our MTM defense didn't do a good job of staying on their 3 point shooters, now did we do a good job of preventing penetration and some back door plays. In one case, Quinn was beaten on the end line and Jabari didn't rotate over. Shouldn't our MTM minimize their wide open shots from 3 point range? We did reduce their opportunites for a time in the second half but in garbage time they got open looks again.

[Olympic Fan]

Just to put the game into a bit of perspective, this was by far the most lopsided loss the Eagles have suffered in ACC play. The previous high was 11 points -- AT UNC.

Duke's 89 points was the second high that BC has allowed this season. In their third game, they lost 95-92 against Toledo.

Okay, that one's out of the way -- now we can start focusing on UNCheat.

[FerryFor50]

Wondering how a UNC guy is a fan of Jabari of course begs the return question, why are you following a UNC guy's Twitter feed?

Appreciate the info. about Marshall. I didn't catch the beginning of the game, as I had to wait through the Kansas/WVU game to finish before ESPN would go to the Duke game. I assume it was mentioned early on in the broadcast as well.

I don't follow Kendall Marshall (or any UNC guys). Laura Keeley re-tweeted it. :)

[gurufrisbee]

Loved Jabari being aggressive and assertive in the post.

Loved Quinn getting his shot going.

Loved the HUGE run in the second half.

Want to see all of that and much more in Chapel Hill in a couple days!

[Dukehky]

Okay, for the last time guys. MARSHALL DID NOT PLAY BECAUSE HE HAD A NON-SERIOUS KNEE INJURY!!!!! Just read some previous postings and it will more than likely have already answered most questions you may have had.

It is unfortunate that Marshall was unable to play today because I would have liked to see what he could have done against an extremely under-sized team. I would like to see if Marshall could take advantage of extreme mis-matches in the post while he's on offense, just to see if it's a possibility.

Jabari was great, people got him the ball in the right positions and he exploited all of their deficiencies.

As long as Tyler has more points than he has fouls, his value goes up 10x than just bringing "toughness." He has been doing that recently, and he will continue to get open looks with Sheed, JP, Hood, and Jefferson on the court, so keep hitting them big guy.

Gotta come out a lot more fiery on Wednesday, but I don't anticipate that to be a problem.

[Edouble]

I don't follow Kendall Marshall (or any UNC guys). Laura Keeley re-tweeted it. :)

I am sorry to hear that Laura Keeley follows the Twitter feeds of sorry NBA players. I thought I knew Laura Keeley better than that.

[Henderson]

Any talk of Jabari remaining at Duke for another year was silenced tonight.

And I'd hate to be the guy cleaning the chairs in the film room at UNC-CH on Monday.

[roywhite]

Duke 89 -- Boston College 68 (http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?SPSID=22724&SPID=1845&DB_LANG=C&DB_OEM_ID=4200&ATCLID=209402064)

Duke scored 50 points in 2nd half.

Duke had a 37-23 rebounding advantage

Jabari had 38 minutes, and I think Coach K is pushing him to play hard, and still play well when he is tired; this game was a break-through in that regard

Amile has his FT% up to 51.5% for the year, really good progress for a guy who was at 30% at one point; Amile is shooting 66% from the field.

[FerryFor50]

Any talk of Jabari remaining at Duke for another year was silenced tonight.

And I'd hate to be the guy cleaning the chairs in the film room at UNC-CH on Monday.

Why? Did Jabari declare for the draft today?

Otherwise, no one but Jabari and his family know...

[freshmanjs]

why so little Dre tonight? is he hurt?

[Dukehky]

Any talk of Jabari remaining at Duke for another year was silenced tonight.

And I'd hate to be the guy cleaning the chairs in the film room at UNC-CH on Monday.

Did somebody promise you some sporks if you make this wild and crazy prediction that Jabari goes pro early? He's probably going, but it doesn't need to be brought up after every good game he has because we still have him for at least a few more months. The Spurs can't pick him up off the waiver wire for the playoffs.

[roywhite]

why so little Dre tonight? is he hurt?

No specific problem that I know; he played a few minutes and went 0-2. Others played better.

Coach K may be getting to the point where he can use this roster like we see good coaches do in NBA contests; go to certain matchups, see who is playing well, move guys in and out.

[hudlow]

I am sorry to hear that Laura Keeley follows the Twitter feeds of sorry NBA players. I thought I knew Laura Keeley better than that.

Surely she wasn't raised that way...

[sagegrouse]

Marshall was out due to a knee issue.

https://twitter.com/laurakeeley

Also interesting was the tweet about Jabari from Kendall Marshall. UNC guy is a fan of one of our guys???

https://twitter.com/KButter5

Today, the basketball players at Duke and Carolina like each other and, in many cases, have known each other since they were 12 or 13. It's the fans who hate each other.

In the 1960's, the Duke and Carolina fans liked each other OK when it came to hoops (football was another matter). It was the players who hated each other's guts.

[devilnfla]

Loving our bench depth. Tonight it was Quinn and Matt providing the points. It's like having seven starters with that scoring depth.

Also loved Rasheed's line tonight. 10pts, 6 assist and just 1 TO.

[Edouble]

Any talk of Jabari remaining at Duke for another year was silenced tonight.

And I'd hate to be the guy cleaning the chairs in the film room at UNC-CH on Monday.

You must have been watching the game with the sound off, as Doris Burke talked about Jabari staying at Duke for another year throughout the evening.

Not saying she's correct, but tonight there was definitely talk, and not silence on the matter.

Also, he was great tonight, but he put on a show against lowly BC. It's not like he was being guarded by All-Americans out there.

I would like to hear both talk of Jabari staying another year and talk of him going pro silenced. I'm just ready to enjoy March. The rest will sort itself out in April.

[throatybeard]

Put your post-game thoughts here.

I think, for my kid's next birthday, I'm going to put a hoop in my backyard and pay Jabari and Rasheed to re-create that play for, like, three hours.

[NYBri]

GTHC!

[davekay1971]

GTHC!

Excellent work putting the focus right where it belongs. Strong second half against BC, very solid road win, job well done. Now it's time to put a hurtin' on some UNCheaters!

But before we move on...

Once again our team can look at their own game film and learn the central point they need to remember every game for the rest of this season. It's all about the defense! Our defense was unfocused and lacking in intensity in the first half. We're good enough on offense to still have a halftime lead against a team like BC when we our defense isn't very good. When we play the defense we're capable of playing, we blow them out of the water.

As was pointed out upthread, this is the most lopsided loss BC has suffered in ACC play, and they suffered it at home, with our team playing only one good half on defense. As long as our guys keep focusing on defense, keep improving on D, we can beat anybody.

Oh, and good to see Quinn's shot come back. Keep it up, Quinn!

[rsvman]

Great second half makes it easy to forget a very lackluster first half with a lot of missed defensive assignments.

As much as I hate to say it, that kind of D will not get us the W in Chapel Hell. We will have to bring it for both halves, and not just the second.

Having said all that, it was awesome watching Jabari and Rasheed hoop it up like gangbusters tonight! Loved that Cook got his confidence and shot back, too. Also a big fan of Dawkins enjoying the win and supporting the other guys even though he didn't get much PT. He'll be back to light somebody up really soon. Here's hoping it's Carolina.

[gep]

A few thoughts...

Great game in the 2nd half. I was at first surprised that Coach K played the same 5 for a long stretch in the 2nd half. Then my thought was that he's trying to get the team to gel... getting ready for UNC. He's said in the past that he's trying to "build a team".

Then when Jabari missed 2 FT, I thought he was getting tired, maybe he should be done for the night. But he stayed in. As another poster said above, Coach K is probably getting Jabari to play through getting tired. And with Danny Ainge in the crowd...

Jabari was awesome in the 2nd half. nuff said. Quinn is baaack (I hope:cool:)

When Nick Pagliuca subbed in, my first thought was... who? why? why not Andre? Then one of the TV folks reminded me that his dad is one of the owners(?) of the Celtics, who, I would assume, was in the crowd. So, props to Coach K for putting Nick in.

Rasheed and Jabari make a great combo. Rasheed IS back.

[UrinalCake]

Also interesting was the tweet about Jabari from Kendall Marshall. UNC guy is a fan of one of our guys???

Despite the animosity between the fanbases, the players from Duke and UNC have always had a healthy respect for each other. At least they DID, until, well, you know...

[Neals384]

What's up with Josh? He came in briefly in the first half, then not again until garbage time. Semi even got into the first half rotation.

Here's my theory, based on the fact he was taken out right after trying to draw a charge, and getting called for the block instead (of course). Perhaps he has been coached to forget about trying to draw charges (since there's no such thing anymore)...just a theory.

[Furniture]

Today, the basketball players at Duke and Carolina like each other and, in many cases, have known each other since they were 12 or 13. It's the fans who hate each other.

In the 1960's, the Duke and Carolina fans liked each other OK when it came to hoops (football was another matter). It was the players who hated each other's guts.

Very well put! I also seem to remember that K Marshall sat behind the Duke bench with Kelly in Miami and Coach K even spoke about him very nicely in the post game interview.
Personally the Hate, Hate, Hate of a things Carolina gets a little infantile for me. But,I did not go to Duke so I guess I don't see the big picture like most people who post here.

[greybeard]

Duke used a three man weave in the second half, on the right side and above the key, that was pure Harlem Globetrotters. Exciting possibilities. Three guys one tossing it two or three feet up, another coming through, catching and popping it up, a couple of run throughs. Either Jefferson or Parker along the lane on the right side, didn't throw it in, but I could see doing so, with one of the three diving down the middle, another down the outside lane, pass over the shoulder. I have not seen a weave run like that except for the Globetrotters. Interested to see where this goes.

[Kedsy]

I was really impressed with the Quinn/Sheed/TinyThor/Jabari/Amile lineup. I'm honestly not sure how much that exact line was in the game, but I felt like there were a couple of times where we had a few good segments and when I looked that was who was in the game.

If Tyler continues to at least make the opponent respect his 3 point shooting then I really think that this could be a line that does some damage. 4 guys who can knock down the 3, 2 guys who can play in the post, 2 guys who can break down a defender and a lot of hustle on the floor!

You want Tyler in there instead of Rodney? Wow, never thought I'd see that suggestion on these boards.

I was disappointed in Andre's lack of minutes. Other than that, and our first half defense, this was fun to watch. I really thought BC could give us a scare, but Jabari took care of that in the first minute and a half after halftime.

[hustleplays]

You want Tyler in there instead of Rodney? Wow, never thought I'd see that suggestion on these boards.

I was disappointed in Andre's lack of minutes. Other than that, and our first half defense, this was fun to watch. I really thought BC could give us a scare, but Jabari took care of that in the first minute and a half after halftime.

Kedsy, I am curious: Whose minutes should have been reduced, IYO, to give Andre more? Not disputing here, just would like to know what you think.

[Olympic Fan]

That technical foul call on Jabari was complete crap. I have seen Shaq do that many times. I think with some refs, it's just an automatic call if you slap the glass with two hands after a dunk.


It's supposed to be automatic when you slap the backboard after a dunk, not just with some refs but all refs. I didn't see it in real time, but watching the replay in slow motion, he definitely did it.

I don't care what Shaq does or doesn't do ... hut in college basketball, it's a T.

Good call.

[roywhite]

It's supposed to be automatic when you slap the backboard after a dunk, not just with some refs but all refs. I didn't see it in real time, but watching the replay in slow motion, he definitely did it.

I don't care what Shaq does or doesn't do ... hut in college basketball, it's a T.

Good call.

Yeah, didn't see it during live action, but the backboard slap was pretty clear when seeing the replay.

In Laura Keeley's N&O account of the game (linked on the front page), Jabari realized it, too:

After collecting a rebound, he stuffed the follow with two hands and slapped the backboard, drawing a technical foul. He walked over to the sideline and put his head on Mike Krzyzewski’s shoulder. Krzyzewski responded by giving him a hug.

“I did a little immature thing,” a contrite Parker said. “I apologized to the official. I didn’t want to show anybody up.”

[CLW]

The offense was a monster yet again last night. However, I didn't see much improvement on the defensive side of the ball. It was also an "odd" rotation last night with only 6 players logging 10+ minutes. It appears the nice "line change" strategy is likely gone b/c if you are not going to use it when up 20 I cannot fathom using it in a close game.

[Matches]

The offense was a monster yet again last night. However, I didn't see much improvement on the defensive side of the ball. It was also an "odd" rotation last night with only 6 players logging 10+ minutes. It appears the nice "line change" strategy is likely gone b/c if you are not going to use it when up 20 I cannot fathom using it in a close game.

The line changes are gone but K is still utilizing the bench a good bit. Jabari was the only player over 30 minutes last night, and although only 6 players got over 10 minutes, 2 more had 8 apiece. 10 guys played in the first half, when the game was still close.

[Bob Green]

10 guys played in the first half, when the game was still close.

This is key to me, utilize depth in the 1st half to wear down the opponent, avoid foul trouble, figure out which individual player has the hot hand and what player combinations are clicking.

[TKG]

This is key to me, utilize depth in the 1st half to wear down the opponent, avoid foul trouble, figure out which individual player has the hot hand and what player combinations are clicking.

Spot on.

[Troublemaker]

Have to keep this short, but I'm extremely pleased with this win.

Defensively, the 110 efficiency Duke allowed is misleading as BC got a bunch of baskets in garbage time. I'm not going to calculate it but I would guess around the 8 minute mark of the 2nd half, we were holding BC to sub-100 efficiency, and Duke was ahead by 25 points in the game score. Can't expect much more than that from this defense, imo. We don't possess a great defense by any means, but the defense did its job in this game for the most part. That's what I liked about the game.

What I LOVED about the game, though, was our approach offensively. Duke played with two bigs for 37 minutes of this game (with the other 3 minutes occurring early in the 1st half), and we relentlessly went to Jabari for post points. It was beautiful to watch us utilize Jabari's post skills against a small team (and utilize Amile's post skills on a couple of occasions, too). Thornton was making good post entry passes throughout the game so credit him for that aspect of the execution. By playing two bigs, Duke also outrebounded BC 37-23. Duke is ready for the Vermont rematch in our first round of the NCAAT. Bring it on, Catamounts.

[Li_Duke]

I think, for my kid's next birthday, I'm going to put a hoop in my backyard and pay Jabari and Rasheed to re-create that play for, like, three hours.

You should probably wait until they go pro to avoid getting them in trouble for illegal benefits.

[Kedsy]

Kedsy, I am curious: Whose minutes should have been reduced, IYO, to give Andre more? Not disputing here, just would like to know what you think.

Here's the minute breakdown from the BC game:

Jabari: 38
Rodney: 30
Amile: 29
Tyler: 27
Rasheed: 25
Quinn: 26
Andre: 8
Semi: 8
Matt: 6
Josh: 2
Nick P: 1
Marshall: 0

I understand that K was trying to get Jabari to play through weariness, but on a regular basis, he probably would be most efficient playing 32 to 34 minutes. Also, I like Tyler, but I would like him just as much if he played 17 minutes instead of 27. So there would be plenty of minutes available for Andre to play 18 to 20, if K had chosen to go that route.

I think it's pretty clear that Semi played Marshall's minutes. Personally, I'd like it if he played some even if Marshall were available, but you can't have everything. A rotation looking like the following seems reasonable to me:

Jabari: 32
Rodney: 32
Quinn: 27
Rasheed: 27
Amile: 26
Andre: 20
Tyler: 17
Marshall: 10
Matt, Josh, Semi: 9 combined

Obviously other people's opinions could vary and you can shift around a couple minutes here and a couple minutes there until the beer runs out. Just as obviously, Coach K has his own ideas and never listens to me. But you asked me so that's my answer.

[kAzE]

The offense was a monster yet again last night. However, I didn't see much improvement on the defensive side of the ball. It was also an "odd" rotation last night with only 6 players logging 10+ minutes. It appears the nice "line change" strategy is likely gone b/c if you are not going to use it when up 20 I cannot fathom using it in a close game.

Also, Plumlee logged a DNP this game. I imagine since we were up against a team with even more size issues than us, he wasn't needed. Still, disappointing not to see him at least get a chance out there.

I thought the rotation other than that was fine. Jabari, Sulaimon, Hood, and Jefferson are the best 4 players, so they should all be playing 25+ minutes in most games. Thornton is the leader of the team, and he's been lethal from 3 this year (best on the team), so it makes sense that he's playing 20+ minutes.

15-20 minutes seems perfect for Andre, if he's hot, keep in longer, if he's not, back to the bench.

Cook shot it well at BC, but he's clearly ceded a significant amount of ball handling duties to Sulaimon, which I think has actually helped his shot. His legs aren't as tired, so he can get more air on his shot.

[Kedsy]

Also, Plumlee logged a DNP this game. I imagine since we were up against a team with even more size issues than us, he wasn't needed. Still, disappointing not to see him at least get a chance out there.

As has been noted several times in this thread, he had a minor injury.

[Acymetric]

Also, Plumlee logged a DNP this game. I imagine since we were up against a team with even more size issues than us, he wasn't needed. Still, disappointing not to see him at least get a chance out there.

I thought the rotation other than that was fine. Jabari, Sulaimon, Hood, and Jefferson are the best 4 players, so they should all be playing 25+ minutes in most games. Thornton is the leader of the team, and he's been lethal from 3 this year (best on the team), so it makes sense that he's playing 20+ minutes.

15-20 minutes seems perfect for Andre, if he's hot, keep in longer, if he's not, back to the bench.

Cook shot it well at BC, but he's clearly ceded a significant amount of ball handling duties to Sulaimon, which I think has actually helped his shot. His legs aren't as tired, so he can get more air on his shot.


As has been noted several times in this thread, he had a minor injury.

I can understand not reading through an entire 10+ page post game before you post, but this one is only 3 pages so far!

Edit: Ok, well 4 now...

[Saratoga2]

What's up with Josh? He came in briefly in the first half, then not again until garbage time. Semi even got into the first half rotation.

Here's my theory, based on the fact he was taken out right after trying to draw a charge, and getting called for the block instead (of course). Perhaps he has been coached to forget about trying to draw charges (since there's no such thing anymore)...just a theory.

My thought is that Josh has not played well in many of the games and he had another poor early showing in the BC game. Semi got into the game and his play was not that memorable, however, he is about the same size and strength as Josh and has a perceived higher upside due to his athleticism. I kind of wished that Semi would play with more fire last night, but he may have been trying not to do anything wrong, rather than just play hard.

[DukeHLM'13]

You want Tyler in there instead of Rodney? Wow, never thought I'd see that suggestion on these boards.

I guess that maybe I wasn't totally clear about what I said; of course I love what Hood brings to the floor and what he adds to the team. All that I meant to say was that we seemed to have a lot of success while Tyler was on the floor with the other 4. I would love for someone with a breakdown of +/- by lineup to either corroborate or discount my observation. It was nothing more that what popped into my head when I looked back just after the game.

[hustleplays]

Here's the minute breakdown from the BC game:

Jabari: 38
Rodney: 30
Amile: 29
Tyler: 27
Rasheed: 25
Quinn: 26
Andre: 8
Semi: 8
Matt: 6
Josh: 2
Nick P: 1
Marshall: 0

I understand that K was trying to get Jabari to play through weariness, but on a regular basis, he probably would be most efficient playing 32 to 34 minutes. Also, I like Tyler, but I would like him just as much if he played 17 minutes instead of 27. So there would be plenty of minutes available for Andre to play 18 to 20, if K had chosen to go that route.

I think it's pretty clear that Semi played Marshall's minutes. Personally, I'd like it if he played some even if Marshall were available, but you can't have everything. A rotation looking like the following seems reasonable to me:

Jabari: 32
Rodney: 32
Quinn: 27
Rasheed: 27
Amile: 26
Andre: 20
Tyler: 17
Marshall: 10
Matt, Josh, Semi: 9 combined

Obviously other people's opinions could vary and you can shift around a couple minutes here and a couple minutes there until the beer runs out. Just as obviously, Coach K has his own ideas and never listens to me. But you asked me so that's my answer.

Thanks, Kedsy. It must be heartwarming to know that many of us do listen to you even though that Coach K guy doesn't. His loss.

I like your lineup. Still have beer, because it's early Sunday afternoon...I wouldn't mind a few more minutes for Matt, given his D, maybe coming from a disproportionate share of the MJS combo nine and from Andre if his shooting seems to be way off AND his D lackluster. Like you, I can understand Coach K's trying to toughen up Jabari to play while tired, in those critical games where we absolutely need him at the end. I just hope this doesn't become a reversion to old habits. We have so many talented players this year.

I was especially impressed with Rasheed and Tyler's assists.

And with Jabari's rebounding. Given his strength, intelligence and athleticism, he can continue to develop as a major force on the boards -- critical for us. With Jabari, Amile, Marshall and Rodney all rebounding strong, our rebounding, both O & D, could become a strength, at least not a weakness, against most teams.

[azzefkram]

Really good second half by the O. Good to see Quinn shooting and playing with confidence. Great to see us pound it inside against a clearly overmatched front-line of BC. This should have been the gameplan from the opening tip. One of the puzzling things to me is why we don't run more. We certainly appear to have the athletes for it.

I miss the line change subs. It seemed to energize our D which is still fairly suspect. Maybe it was just a gimmick with a limited shelf life, but we don't seem to be improving with what we are currently doing. There is still some basketball to play so things can turn around but it's getting late early.

[kAzE]

I can understand not reading through an entire 10+ page post game before you post, but this one is only 3 pages so far!

Edit: Ok, well 4 now...

Haha . . . So, funny story about that . . . I was out Saturday night, got in at 4:00 in the morning, and since the game was going to be on soon (I'm in Beijing), I said screw it, I'm just gonna stay up and watch it live. Watched the game while half passed out, then hopped on DBR afterwards to post. I was in the middle of typing the post on my iPad, and passed out in bed. Much later on, picked up the iPad, remembered that I was going to post that and just hit send ....

My fault, should have probably combed throughout the thread with the updated info, I feel like an idiot now! I hope Plumlee is okay, and that he's good to go at UNC, we're gonna need his size in that one. They've been playing well lately.

[Troublemaker]

I miss the line change subs. It seemed to energize our D which is still fairly suspect. Maybe it was just a gimmick with a limited shelf life, but we don't seem to be improving with what we are currently doing. There is still some basketball to play so things can turn around but it's getting late early.

Duke has covered 7 consecutive point spreads. Only the first 2 of those were with line changes. The first line change game (UVA), Duke didn't cover and UVA beat us badly down the stretch to almost steal a win, and Duke's kenpom D ranking went down afterwards.

Playing deeper has helped Duke out a lot (or, more precisely, ensuring that Duke's best players don't play >35 min consistently has helped out a lot), but that can be accomplished without line changes. Duke has been playing much better for awhile now, and the line changes were left behind long ago.

[kAzE]

Here's the minute breakdown from the BC game:

Jabari: 38
Rodney: 30
Amile: 29
Tyler: 27
Rasheed: 25
Quinn: 26
Andre: 8
Semi: 8
Matt: 6
Josh: 2
Nick P: 1
Marshall: 0

I understand that K was trying to get Jabari to play through weariness, but on a regular basis, he probably would be most efficient playing 32 to 34 minutes. Also, I like Tyler, but I would like him just as much if he played 17 minutes instead of 27. So there would be plenty of minutes available for Andre to play 18 to 20, if K had chosen to go that route.

I think it's pretty clear that Semi played Marshall's minutes. Personally, I'd like it if he played some even if Marshall were available, but you can't have everything. A rotation looking like the following seems reasonable to me:

Jabari: 32
Rodney: 32
Quinn: 27
Rasheed: 27
Amile: 26
Andre: 20
Tyler: 17
Marshall: 10
Matt, Josh, Semi: 9 combined

Obviously other people's opinions could vary and you can shift around a couple minutes here and a couple minutes there until the beer runs out. Just as obviously, Coach K has his own ideas and never listens to me. But you asked me so that's my answer.

I like your minute distribution, but what is your starting 5? Coach K seems to be hesitant to go back to the original lineup that we started the year with (Parker, Hood, Sulaimon, Jefferson, Cook), and I agree with him. When we have all of our ball dominant guys (Sulaimon, Cook, Hood, Parker) in there at the same time, it decreases their effectiveness because they each get less time with the ball in their hands individually while still using their energy while on the floor, so it makes sense to stagger their minutes so that only 3 of those 4 guys are out there most of the time.

Lately, it's been Parker, Hood, Jefferson, Thornton, and Sulaimon, with Cook off the bench. I actually believe this current starting 5 is the most optimal group, with Jones filling in for Thornton if the opposing team has a big guard who is a good ball handler. I think it's a positive that Thornton has replaced Jones. Thornton is smarter, and as crazy as it sounds, a way better shooter right now. Still, I like what Jones brings, he's the best on ball defender we have, he's a big guard, and he's a very nice slasher, and gets to the free throw line pretty consistently. If he could actually hit threes like he is allegedly capable of doing, he'd be playing much more than he is.

Mainly, I think Parker and Sulaimon are beginning to develop some nice chemistry on the court, and those two have been making some beautiful plays on offense. Also, the development of Sulaimon has done something interesting with Cook. It's only a 2 game sample of this, but Cook in the last 2 games has really turned into more of spot up shooter/cutter in this offense as Sulaimon has developed, which I think is a really great thing. If Cook continues to be an efficient scorer off the ball, this offense will be even more dangerous.

You gotta love what Sulaimon has been doing, though, it's been fantastic. He's just really dynamic with the ball, he's been quick, decisive, and he gets in the paint much more consistently than Cook, so I really agree with what the coaching staff is doing. He still turns it over at times, but it's hard to complain about what he's been able to do lately. He's got some really nice vision, and is a really creative distributor. I love his game, and I think he's going to keep getting better. He's become a real combo guard, and I think he's going to be a really good point guard in the pros. I just hope those NBA scouts don't catch on just yet, we need him for 1 more year!! :)

[roywhite]

I like your minute distribution, but what is your starting 5? Coach K seems to be hesitant to go back to the original lineup that we started the year with (Parker, Hood, Sulaimon, Jefferson, Cook), and I agree with him. When we have all of our ball dominant guys (Sulaimon, Cook, Hood, Parker) in there at the same time, it decreases their effectiveness because they each get less time with the ball in their hands individually while still using their energy while on the floor, so it makes sense to stagger their minutes so that only 3 of those 4 guys are out there most of the time.

Lately, it's been Parker, Hood, Jefferson, Thornton, and Sulaimon, with Cook off the bench. I actually believe this current starting 5 is the most optimal group, with Jones filling in for Thornton if the opposing team has a big guard who is a good ball handler. I think it's a positive that Thornton has replaced Jones. Thornton is smarter, and as crazy as it sounds, a way better shooter right now. Still, I like what Jones brings, he's the best on ball defender we have, he's a big guard, and he's a very nice slasher, and gets to the free throw line pretty consistently. If he could actually hit threes like he is allegedly capable of doing, he'd be playing much more than he is.

Mainly, I think Parker and Sulaimon are beginning to develop some nice chemistry on the court, and those two have been making some beautiful plays on offense. Also, the development of Sulaimon has done something interesting with Cook. It's only a 2 game sample of this, but Cook in the last 2 games has really turned into more of spot up shooter/cutter in this offense as Sulaimon has developed, which I think is a really great thing. If Cook continues to be an efficient scorer off the ball, this offense will be even more dangerous.

You gotta love what Sulaimon has been doing, though, it's been fantastic. He's just really dynamic with the ball, he's been quick, decisive, and he gets in the paint much more consistently than Cook, so I really agree with what the coaching staff is doing. He still turns it over at times, but it's hard to complain about what he's been able to do lately. He's got some really nice vision, and is a really creative distributor. I love his game, and I think he's going to keep getting better.

Interesting points, but I don't think it matters much to have one set starting lineup. Coach K has a good feel for matchups and substitution patterns; overall, he's using more guys and maintaining a higher pace on offense and defense.

Cook and Thornton as weapons as spot up shooters? Yes, terrific weapon. And they should continue to get opportunities, with Sulaimon's driving, good offensive rebounding, Jabari beasting inside, and good ball movement overall.

Overall, just really like the development of this team.

[Indoor66]

Interesting points, but I don't think it matters much to have one set starting lineup. Coach K has a good feel for matchups and substitution patterns; overall, he's using more guys and maintaining a higher pace on offense and defense.

Cook and Thornton as weapons as spot up shooters? Yes, terrific weapon. And they should continue to get opportunities, with Sulaimon's driving, good offensive rebounding, Jabari beasting inside, and good ball movement overall.

Overall, just really like the development of this team.

Maybe we have the joy of a unpredictable, variable assortment of parts that allows the maestro to rewrite the music for each concert. What a fun way to listen to the music.

[kAzE]

Maybe we have the joy of a unpredictable, variable assortment of parts that allows the maestro to rewrite the music for each concert. What a fun way to listen to the music.

I like the way you put that, well said.

This has been a really interesting team to follow because we've changed drastically in style of play probably 2 or 3 times already this season, and I imagine we're STILL not the team that we will eventually become in late March. Opponents are going to have a hard time getting a large volume of accurate game tape on our team because of how we've evolved throughout the course of the year. Improvement from Sulaimon, Jefferson, and even Plumlee have completely changed the way we play, and I foresee a Cook renaissance in the works. Even Parker has been a totally different player lately. He's such a better rebounder than before. Everyone thought Randle and Gordon were superior rebounders, but apparently, mr. Double-double plays for Duke.

[Kedsy]

Everyone thought Randle and Gordon were superior rebounders, but apparently, mr. Double-double plays for Duke.

Well, they're all three pretty close:

Jabari: 22.9% defensive rebound pct; 11.3% offensive rebound pct.
Randle: 21.7% DR%; 13.9% OR%
Gordon: 19.0% DR%; 11.3 OR%

[Kfanarmy]

The offense was a monster yet again last night. However, I didn't see much improvement on the defensive side of the ball. It was also an "odd" rotation last night with only 6 players logging 10+ minutes. It appears the nice "line change" strategy is likely gone b/c if you are not going to use it when up 20 I cannot fathom using it in a close game. I find it a bit disheartening. I think I see the bench shortening once again, which means, IMO, when everything is clicking for the handful of guys, we'll see some great games, but when more than one is struggling to hit the basket, there will be less and less precision and teamwork coming off the bench. I like in game development of those on the bench. I know historically Duke has done well with a short bench, but something in me believes Duke might have garnered a few deeper runs in the tourney in the last decade or so with a more developed bench capable of adjusting to the loss/off night by a Singler, Irving, Kelly etc.

[Edouble]

I find it a bit disheartening. I think I see the bench shortening once again, which means, IMO, when everything is clicking for the handful of guys, we'll see some great games, but when more than one is struggling to hit the basket, there will be less and less precision and teamwork coming off the bench. I like in game development of those on the bench. I know historically Duke has done well with a short bench, but something in me believes Duke might have garnered a few deeper runs in the tourney in the last decade or so with a more developed bench capable of adjusting to the loss/off night by a Singler, Irving, Kelly etc.

I think it's a really good sign that it's practically mid-February and we are seeing Coach K put Semi in the game in the first half to cover some of Marshall's minutes.

Also, I take some small issue with the "off night from Irving". I'm not sure if we even knew what an on/off night was for Kyrie in the 2011 tourney, he'd been out for so long.

[FerryFor50]

I think it's a really good sign that it's practically mid-February and we are seeing Coach K put Semi in the game in the first half to cover some of Marshall's minutes.

Also, I take some small issue with the "off night from Irving". I'm not sure if we even knew what an on/off night was for Kyrie in the 2011 tourney, he'd been out for so long.

Well against Arizona, Kyrie had over 30 pts. Still lost.

Some guy named Derek Williams needed to have an off night. Kind of like the ones he has in the NBA every night.

[Kfanarmy]

Well against Arizona, Kyrie had over 30 pts. Still lost.

Some guy named Derek Williams needed to have an off night. Kind of like the ones he has in the NBA every night.

My point about Irving is that it was harder to adjust to his loss, from injury, because of the short bench...readjusting to his return was difficult as well, but for other reasons.

[roywhite]

Well, they're all three pretty close:

Jabari: 22.9% defensive rebound pct; 11.3% offensive rebound pct.
Randle: 21.7% DR%; 13.9% OR%
Gordon: 19.0% DR%; 11.3 OR%

Numbers for the season?

Certainly, with 73 rebounds in the last 6 games for Jabari, he's rebounding at a high level.
I thought Jabari looked the best physically yesterday that we have seen at Duke. Quick, strong, and explosive.

[Kedsy]

Numbers for the season?

Certainly, with 73 rebounds in the last 6 games for Jabari, he's rebounding at a high level.
I thought Jabari looked the best physically yesterday that we have seen at Duke. Quick, strong, and explosive.

Yes, for the season. I agree Jabari looked great yesterday physically.

[greybeard]

There were a few 3s, and only a few, that I knew were not going in way before the release. I'm betting that many of you did also. They were not late in the clock. They should be eliminated. No reason for anyone to shoot from three unless they feel it, as begin to go. Should be able to reverse movement, and I think it pretty clear that in each case shooter was situated such they he could have stopped, if he should have actually started, which he shouldn't have. No need for this. Might as well just hand it to the defense. Duke is playing with so many highly skilled shooters; I believe that they "know" to a dead certainty before completely committed that shouldn't. Then they shouldn't.

We can all see the difference when someone is well organized to shoot, and when someone is not.

Duke has too many future pros, they need to not make these mistakes; this is not a job for K. However, K does handle it, if he must. Preferable, however, that shooters take those shots out, and not get themselves taken out.

[azzefkram]

Duke has covered 7 consecutive point spreads. Only the first 2 of those were with line changes. The first line change game (UVA), Duke didn't cover and UVA beat us badly down the stretch to almost steal a win, and Duke's kenpom D ranking went down afterwards.

Playing deeper has helped Duke out a lot (or, more precisely, ensuring that Duke's best players don't play >35 min consistently has helped out a lot), but that can be accomplished without line changes. Duke has been playing much better for awhile now, and the line changes were left behind long ago.

The D has been backsliding since the Pitt game. Is it Vermont bad? Nope, but there are red flags. Cuse is an outstanding team but if our D is playing much better we shouldn't allow them to have their most efficient game of the season (1.36 PPP). Wake shouldn't be able to score 1.02 PPP in Cameron without their best player. I know BC has a good O but we allowed them to score 1.1 PPP a number which 15 other teams managed to keep them below.

We had a nice four game stretch defensively starting with the UVA game (ignoring the 3 minute collective brain fart we had at the end of the UVA game). Before the Cuse game, we were ranked around 60th in KenPom's defensive efficiency. Now we are 93rd. So our pop back up in KenPom occurred after Cuse (not UVA) which coincided with our abandoning the line change. The line change probably isn't the answer but it's hard to argue that the D is moving in the right direction right now. I wouldn't say I'm alarmed about our D but I am concerned.

[Troublemaker]

The D has been backsliding since the Pitt game. Is it Vermont bad? Nope, but there are red flags. Cuse is an outstanding team but if our D is playing much better we shouldn't allow them to have their most efficient game of the season (1.36 PPP). Wake shouldn't be able to score 1.02 PPP in Cameron without their best player. I know BC has a good O but we allowed them to score 1.1 PPP a number which 15 other teams managed to keep them below.

We had a nice four game stretch defensively starting with the UVA game (ignoring the 3 minute collective brain fart we had at the end of the UVA game). Before the Cuse game, we were ranked around 60th in KenPom's defensive efficiency. Now we are 93rd. So our pop back up in KenPom occurred after Cuse (not UVA) which coincided with our abandoning the line change. The line change probably isn't the answer but it's hard to argue that the D is moving in the right direction right now. I wouldn't say I'm alarmed about our D but I am concerned.

Our Kenpom D-rank went up after BOTH UVA and Cuse. After the UVA game, we then played 4 consecutive high quality defensive games: NCSU (2), Miami (3), FSU (4), Pitt(7). The numbers in parentheses is where our defensive performance ranked for the opponent. So, for example, we held Miami to their 3rd lowest offensive efficiency of the season. However, line changes stopped after Miami. So our game against FSU, for example, was a very good defensive effort that didn't utilize line changes.

I agree with you that these past 3 games (Cuse, Wake, BC), I would've wanted to see better defensive numbers. But, imo, it's a small sample that's somewhat misleading. For example, we had shut BC down completely by the 8 minute mark of the 2nd half. They scored garbage buckets the rest of the way to inflate the ppp.

Let's see what happens going forward. In any case, you can play deep and play with energy and play good defense without line changes.

[azzefkram]

But, imo, it's a small sample that's somewhat misleading. For example, we had shut BC down completely by the 8 minute mark of the 2nd half. They scored garbage buckets the rest of the way to inflate the ppp.

Three games is a small sample but the errors that are occurring have been present all season long. As for the BC game, they scored 35 points by the half. I am not sure but I'd hazard to guess that they had less than 30 possessions in the half. That gives them a PPP of over 1. We did blitz them both offensively and defensively in the 3rd quarter but for about 3/4 of the game our D wasn't that good.

The good thing about the 3rd quarter of the BC game (and the whole UCLA game) is it shows me that the team is capable of playing good/great D. We just need to up the consistency. Given how awesome we are on the offensive end, I often forget how young we are. There is definitely time to improve the consistency.

[Des Esseintes]

I find it a bit disheartening. I think I see the bench shortening once again, which means, IMO, when everything is clicking for the handful of guys, we'll see some great games, but when more than one is struggling to hit the basket, there will be less and less precision and teamwork coming off the bench. I like in game development of those on the bench. I know historically Duke has done well with a short bench, but something in me believes Duke might have garnered a few deeper runs in the tourney in the last decade or so with a more developed bench capable of adjusting to the loss/off night by a Singler, Irving, Kelly etc.

Hmmm. Duke has four NCAA championships since 1990. UK, UConn, and UNC have three. Florida has two. No one else has more than one. So I'm going to go with "massive sense of entitlement". A massive sense of entitlement is the something that tells you Duke had more postseason success waiting for it if K had only listened more closely to your voicemails.

[Edouble]

Well against Arizona, Kyrie had over 30 pts. Still lost.

Some guy named Derek Williams needed to have an off night. Kind of like the ones he has in the NBA every night.

Kyrie had 28 in that game.

As I originally wrote, my point was that at that time, it was difficult to have a barometer as to what Kyrie could provide, as he was returning from injury.

How do you measure an "off night" for someone that is returning from injury and hadn't played since before the conference season started? I don't see how you can play a guy, not really knowing what you can expect from him, and then label a performance a "good night", or an "off night".

[JBDuke]

I find it a bit disheartening. I think I see the bench shortening once again, which means, IMO, when everything is clicking for the handful of guys, we'll see some great games, but when more than one is struggling to hit the basket, there will be less and less precision and teamwork coming off the bench. I like in game development of those on the bench. I know historically Duke has done well with a short bench, but something in me believes Duke might have garnered a few deeper runs in the tourney in the last decade or so with a more developed bench capable of adjusting to the loss/off night by a Singler, Irving, Kelly etc.


Hmmm. Duke has four NCAA championships since 1990. UK, UConn, and UNC have three. Florida has two. No one else has more than one. So I'm going to go with "massive sense of entitlement". A massive sense of entitlement is the something that tells you Duke had more postseason success waiting for it if K had only listened more closely to your voicemails.

I think you did a disservice to the original post here. He didn't say "in the last 24 years", he said "in the last decade." In the last decade (2004-2013), Duke has the following results:

2004: Loss in Final Four
2005: Loss in Sweet 16
2006: Loss in Sweet 16
2007: Loss in Round of 64
2008: Loss in Round of 32
2009: Loss in Sweet 16
2010: Win!!!
2011: Loss in Sweet 16
2012: Loss in Round of 64
2013: Loss in Elite 8

Now, that's certainly no record of shame - one championship, another Final Four, an Elite Eight, and 3 Sweet 16's. Just about any other program would be proud of that record. But given Duke's level of talent and regular season success during that same decade, it's a legitimate question to ask if a deeper bench would have helped Duke achieve even greater NCAA success. To dismiss the question as coming from a "massive sense of entitlement" is rude and inappropriate.

Personally, I think it would not have made a difference. I am not a proponent of having a deeper bench unless the talent and performance of the bench players merits it. I think Coach K's philosophy is that you put the best team on the floor. So, for example, a tired Jabari Parker operating at 80% may still be better than a rested Marshall Plumlee operating at 100%. But I understand the arguments of the deep bench proponents, and I think it is an interesting question. (And, unfortunately, one that has a long history on these boards...)

[HaveFunExpectToWin]

I don't think it was for hanging, I believe it was because he slapped the backboard with both hands.

Right, it was a subdued Maggette homage. He got caught up in the moment, not a big deal.

[HaveFunExpectToWin]

You must have been watching the game with the sound off, as Doris Burke talked about Jabari staying at Duke for another year throughout the evening.

Not saying she's correct, but tonight there was definitely talk, and not silence on the matter.

Am I the only only who feels like Doris Burke is doing a Dick Vitale impression when she does color? A few years ago, it seemed she did a lot more analysis, but now it's one hyperbole after the other. I could be wrong.

[flyingdutchdevil]

I went to the game and rewatched the game on ESPN.

1) Conte Forum is an awesome arena. It's tiny (smaller than Cameron, I believe) and our noseblood seats were amazing. Was able to see the whole game.

2) BC fans are, well, terrible fans. Between the 132 "Duke sucks" insults I got (given, I was wearing a Redick jersey) and the "Andrew Wiggins" chant, there is zero creativity in that student section.

3) The student section is really pathetic. They tried to make it like Cameron, with students getting great courtside seats, but it just doesn't work at all.

4) Jabari looks fatter in person than on TV. As a matter of fact, he looks exactly like Carmelo Anthony from a far: big, muscular, not lean, and with a healthy layer of puppy fat. I think the College Melo / Jabari comparisons are spot on in nearly every way.

5) Following runs in person is a difficult task. I had no idea Duke went on a heavy run, not to mention an 18-point run at that. Unbelievable!

6) Sulaimon looks really big in person. He doesn't have much muscle, but he's taller than he looks and has a big-boned structure. That bodes well for the NBA.

7) If you want some attention, wear a Redick jersey. After 8 years, opposing fan bases still hate him.

[PSurprise]

Am I the only only who feels like Doris Burke is doing a Dick Vitale impression when she does color? A few years ago, it seemed she did a lot more analysis, but now it's one hyperbole after the other. I could be wrong.

My big beef with Doris Burke is that she feels like she has to say something all the time. If her partner says something, even if it's not directed at her, she chimes in whether or not she needs to. I actually thought to myself the other night, "just please be quiet for a possession or two." I think she does a decent job of analysis while sometimes getting into the Dick Vitale mode, but overall, I don't think she's awful, as least not as bad as Vitale (which I realize isn't saying too much).

[Kedsy]

I think the College Melo / Jabari comparisons are spot on in nearly every way.

I hope they become spot on in one more, really important way.

[uh_no]

I went to the game and rewatched the game on ESPN.

1) Conte Forum is an awesome arena. It's tiny (smaller than Cameron, I believe) and our noseblood seats were amazing. Was able to see the whole game.

apparently you don't have legs!

the one time i was there I was in the no-back half-bench-half-chair things.....i was so uncomfortable i finally got up and stood in the very back

[Eakane]

"So, for example, a tired Jabari Parker operating at 80% may still be better than a rested Marshall Plumlee operating at 100%."

Yeah, but giving the 80% Jabari a quick breather while the 100% Marshall plays means that a 95% Jabari comes back in for the end-game.
That's the crux of the point made by those of us who think the bench is under-utilized.
And somebody please educate me why it's a good idea to keep the starters in during garbage time, with the game clearly out of reach. If 80% Jabari had gotten his clock cleaned by a pick during the last 5 minutes of the BC game, and couldn't go Wednesday due to a slight concussion, we'd be having a very different conversation now.
K doesn't do much wrong; the book entitled "How to beat Coach K's Duke" is almost as thin as the book entitled "How to beat Garry Kasparov" (there is such a book and it is very very thin). But, as you yourself said, it is a legitimate question. Not for the Coaching staff to consider, but for us to debate/discuss.

[flyingdutchdevil]

I hope they become spot on in one more, really important way.

You want Jabari to grow cornrows and dreadlocks?

[tommy]

My big beef with Doris Burke is that she feels like she has to say something all the time. If her partner says something, even if it's not directed at her, she chimes in whether or not she needs to. I actually thought to myself the other night, "just please be quiet for a possession or two." I think she does a decent job of analysis while sometimes getting into the Dick Vitale mode, but overall, I don't think she's awful, as least not as bad as Vitale (which I realize isn't saying too much).

Ex-ZACT-ly. I used to kind of like her, thought she made a real effort to actually watch and analyze the game, but now I find myself saying "Jesus, Doris, would you just shut UP for a minute? Do you have to constantly be talking?" A lot of the time now, she's talking just to talk, and it didn't used to be like that.

But in the BC game, the thing she said that annoyed me the most was when she was talking about the endgame with Syracuse and the no-call on Rodney's dunk. She said something to the effect of "reasonable minds can differ blah blah blah" (which frankly is not accurate) but then, far worse, she said (again, paraphrasing) "if the foul had been called, the people out there who say that Duke gets all the calls would've been all up in arms/raised a hue and cry" etc. or whatever phrase she used.

If she had the guts, smarts, or knowlege to do so, what she should've said was "Hood was clearly fouled. The ref blew the call, and he was standing right in front of the play. Moreover, both the foul-out plays on Parker and Jefferson were at best touch fouls, and at worst out-and-out flops. All those people out there who continue to shout that Duke gets all the calls should realize that in this game, the best, most intense, most-watched game of the season, there were three critical calls down the stretch, and Duke got zero of them. This 'Duke gets all the calls' thing is easy for people who hate Duke to continue to shout year after year, but the fact is Duke gets hosed by the referees just as often as everybody else."

[Kedsy]

Yeah, but giving the 80% Jabari a quick breather while the 100% Marshall plays means that a 95% Jabari comes back in for the end-game.

I'm not sure this is true. In my experience, once you're gassed, you're gassed. It takes a lot more than a "quick breather" to recharge.

[FerryFor50]

Ex-ZACT-ly. I used to kind of like her, thought she made a real effort to actually watch and analyze the game, but now I find myself saying "Jesus, Doris, would you just shut UP for a minute? Do you have to constantly be talking?" A lot of the time now, she's talking just to talk, and it didn't used to be like that.

But in the BC game, the thing she said that annoyed me the most was when she was talking about the endgame with Syracuse and the no-call on Rodney's dunk. She said something to the effect of "reasonable minds can differ blah blah blah" (which frankly is not accurate) but then, far worse, she said (again, paraphrasing) "if the foul had been called, the people out there who say that Duke gets all the calls would've been all up in arms/raised a hue and cry" etc. or whatever phrase she used.

If she had the guts, smarts, or knowlege to do so, what she should've said was "Hood was clearly fouled. The ref blew the call, and he was standing right in front of the play. Moreover, both the foul-out plays on Parker and Jefferson were at best touch fouls, and at worst out-and-out flops. All those people out there who continue to shout that Duke gets all the calls should realize that in this game, the best, most intense, most-watched game of the season, there were three critical calls down the stretch, and Duke got zero of them. This 'Duke gets all the calls' thing is easy for people who hate Duke to continue to shout year after year, but the fact is Duke gets hosed by the referees just as often as everybody else."

Hey, the fact that she actually ACKNOWLEDGED the narrative is a step forward, in my opinion. For most, it's an inside joke.

[Eakane]

I'm not sure this is true. In my experience, once you're gassed, you're gassed. It takes a lot more than a "quick breather" to recharge.

Which is why the idea is to keep him fresh throughout the game, and, for that matter, throughout the season.

[Neals384]

Kyrie had 28 in that game.

As I originally wrote, my point was that at that time, it was difficult to have a barometer as to what Kyrie could provide, as he was returning from injury.

How do you measure an "off night" for someone that is returning from injury and hadn't played since before the conference season started? I don't see how you can play a guy, not really knowing what you can expect from him, and then label a performance a "good night", or an "off night".

We can measure "return from injury" performance against Ryan Kelly's amazing return vs. Miami. 36 points!

[tommy]

Hey, the fact that she actually ACKNOWLEDGED the narrative is a step forward, in my opinion. For most, it's an inside joke.

She had a national soapbox, which means she had a golden opportunity to call it out for what it is, though: bunk. Like I said, she didn't have either the guts or the knowledge to do so.

[Kedsy]

Which is why the idea is to keep him fresh throughout the game, and, for that matter, throughout the season.

Well, first of all, depending on a player's conditioning, it's unlikely a couple minutes here and there would really keep him "fresh." It would probably have to be a significant block of down time, which I don't think anybody would agree is a good idea in Jabari's case.

Second, in my experience the phenomenon doesn't carry over from one game to the next. If Jabari plays 30 minutes on Saturday, he's not going to feel any different on Wednesday than he would if he'd played 38 minutes on Saturday.

[Des Esseintes]

Well, first of all, depending on a player's conditioning, it's unlikely a couple minutes here and there would really keep him "fresh." It would probably have to be a significant block of down time, which I don't think anybody would agree is a good idea in Jabari's case.

Second, in my experience the phenomenon doesn't carry over from one game to the next. If Jabari plays 30 minutes on Saturday, he's not going to feel any different on Wednesday than he would if he'd played 38 minutes on Saturday.

No, man, this totally unprovable thing is the key to the universe. Kyle Singler playing 31mpg instead of 33mpg = title. If only our best players had played 80 less minutes over a five month season, we'd have, like, ten more championships. Because nobody else in college basketball is good or trying hard, and it's all that easy.

[Eakane]

No, man, this totally unprovable thing is the key to the universe. Kyle Singler playing 31mpg instead of 33mpg = title. If only our best players had played 80 less minutes over a five month season, we'd have, like, ten more championships. Because nobody else in college basketball is good or trying hard, and it's all that easy.

Yeah, man, if it's unprovable then we should just like, abandon intuition and deductive reasoning, and just like play Jabari 40 minutes a game instead of the 38 he played against BC, because like, he's the best player in the world, and freshmen never hit a wall so why fight it?

[Kedsy]

Yeah, man, if it's unprovable then we should just like, abandon intuition and deductive reasoning, and just like play Jabari 40 minutes a game instead of the 38 he played against BC, because like, he's the best player in the world, and freshmen never hit a wall so why fight it?

If you don't think Jabari will be playing close to 40 minutes in big games you haven't been watching Coach K for very long.

For example, in the championship game in 2010, Nolan Smith and Kyle Singler played 40 minutes, Jon Scheyer played 37, Lance Thomas played 35, and Brian Zoubek played 31. No one else played as many as 10 minutes (Miles Plumlee played 9 in relief of Zoubek, the next highest sub was Andre Dawkins with 5 minutes).

[oldnavy]

If you don't think Jabari will be playing close to 40 minutes in big games you haven't been watching Coach K for very long.

For example, in the championship game in 2010, Nolan Smith and Kyle Singler played 40 minutes, Jon Scheyer played 37, Lance Thomas played 35, and Brian Zoubek played 31. No one else played as many as 10 minutes (Miles Plumlee played 9 in relief of Zoubek, the next highest sub was Andre Dawkins with 5 minutes).


I have NEVER subscribed to the "fatigue" argument. Some kids may need a quick blow during a game, but with the 4 TV timeouts, halftime, and the 5 team timeouts in a 40 minute game (which take over 2 hours to play), these kids are rarely running for more than 5 minutes at a time without a 2-3 minute break. Add in the stoppage for FTs and it may even be less...

If they are in shape (and unless injury is a factor, they should all be in shape by now), fatigue should never be an issue IMO.

[GGLC]

If you don't think Jabari will be playing close to 40 minutes in big games you haven't been watching Coach K for very long.

For example, in the championship game in 2010, Nolan Smith and Kyle Singler played 40 minutes, Jon Scheyer played 37, Lance Thomas played 35, and Brian Zoubek played 31. No one else played as many as 10 minutes (Miles Plumlee played 9 in relief of Zoubek, the next highest sub was Andre Dawkins with 5 minutes).

Would you be in favor of playing Jabari for 40 minutes every game? If not, why not?

[Matches]

Yeah, man, if it's unprovable then we should just like, abandon intuition and deductive reasoning, and just like play Jabari 40 minutes a game instead of the 38 he played against BC, because like, he's the best player in the world, and freshmen never hit a wall so why fight it?

It would never be advisable to play anyone 40 mpg, because that would mean leaving them in regardless of foul trouble or the game situation (i.e. in the game wire-to-wire in non-competitive games). So no, Jabari will never play 40 mpg; nor will any other player.

But if you're suggesting that there's a significant difference fatigue-wise between playing 35 minutes vs. 38 minutes vs. 40 minutes, I disagree. Every player is different, and some don't have the conditioning to play the whole game without a rest, but part of Duke's conditioning program is designed to get kids to the point where they can play most of the game without a significant dropoff. (That's almost certainly why Jabari played as much as he did against BC - it's the equivalent of stretching out a relief pitcher in baseball to make him a starter.)

I don't see that as "abandoning intuition" at all. My intuition tells me we want our best players to play as much of the game as they reasonably can manage.

[GGLC]

So Coach K said that he implemented the line changes and the deeper bench play after the Clemson game because some of the starters were getting fatigued and less effective later in the game. Was he wrong?

[Ichabod Drain]

I have NEVER subscribed to the "fatigue" argument. Some kids may need a quick blow during a game, but with the 8 TV timeouts, halftime, and the 10 team timeouts in a 40 minute game (which take over 2 hours to play), these kids are rarely running for more than 5 minutes at a time without a 2-3 minute break. Add in the stoppage for FTs and it may even be less...

If they are in shape (and unless injury is a factor, they should all be in shape by now), fatigue should never be an issue IMO.

Fixed it for you.

I agree serious fatigue should never be an issue. But I do believe slight fatigue does drop the level of play for some guys later in games. They still hustle hard but its the little things that drop off like not getting quite as high on your jumper or being a split second later on a box out. Personally i'll take a slightly less efficient Jabari over most other players any day of the week, especially if the games on the line.

[roywhite]

So Coach K said that he implemented the line changes and the deeper bench play after the Clemson game because some of the starters were getting fatigued and less effective later in the game. Was he wrong?

Looking for an argument here, or what?

Two important themes here -- Duke has been helped in the last several games by using a deeper rotation, and Duke likes to use it's most talented players for major minutes in major games. I don't find those themes to be mutually exclusive, and I trust the staff to strike the proper balance. It does seem significant that Jabari played 38 minutes, and played very well, vs Boston College; he proved to himself and the staff that he can be effective througout, and even play well when tired. It wouldn't be a shock to see him play 35 minutes or more vs UNC,and I doubt that's a bad thing for the fortunes of the team. We'll see.

[GGLC]

Looking for an argument here, or what?

No, but if people are claiming that the fatigue issue is overblown (and that it should never be an issue) and that there's no real difference between playing 35 minutes vs. 38 minutes vs. 40 minutes, I think it's relevant that Coach K himself appears to disagree.

[Eakane]

No, but if people are claiming that the fatigue issue is overblown (and that it should never be an issue) and that there's no real difference between playing 35 minutes vs. 38 minutes vs. 40 minutes, I think it's relevant that Coach K himself appears to disagree.

Maybe, with all the time outs and deadballs and fouls and such, K should just play the best 5 players for 40 minutes each?

Big minutes in big games; yes. Big minutes in garbage time against BC? Clearly no.

Despite Kedsy's "in my expereince," it's so obvious that a little extra rest makes a difference. Try racing Jabari vs. Jabari. Imagine him going all out for 1000 yards. Then have him go all out for 1000 yards in 100 yard segments, with a minute of rest between each. Which Jabari will have the faster time?

And there's more value to giving him a breather -- there's actually some coaching going on on the bench (thankfully, we have a coach and staff completely unlike Gary Williams, who would just urn around and scream), and letting the starters see the game from the bench gives them a useful perspective.

Look I'm a nervous nelly. I admit it. I want to see Jabari not hit the mythical wall. I'm also concerned about potential injuries in garbage time. I also truly believe we're better when we stretch the bench, especially when we have unbelievable talent sitting on the bench. Andre, MPII, G. Jones, and even TT and JH, each bring something to the game that's valuable.

Serious question -- was there a reason Andre only played 8 minutes and MPIII was a DNP? I got so tired of Doris's constant yammering I turned off the sound so maybe I missed the explanation. Hadn't they both been playing well? Were they injured or sick? Did they not practice well or show up late? Go ahead and mock me, Id really like to know.

[Des Esseintes]

No, but if people are claiming that the fatigue issue is overblown (and that it should never be an issue) and that there's no real difference between playing 35 minutes vs. 38 minutes vs. 40 minutes, I think it's relevant that Coach K himself appears to disagree.

Fans are ignorant. On this board, which offers a higher level of discussion than all but the most specialist sports boards on the internet, maybe 1-2% of posters can note a subtle halftime defensive adjustment. (I include myself in that other 98%. I know I cannot identify these things.) But people then a team such as Duke has the audacity to lose a game, sometimes the final game of the season, and there must be a REASON for this failure. What is easily understandable to the fan? What does he find easy to compare? Playing time. If we lost, our guys must have been tired. We must have leaned on them too hard. We talk about how worn down JJ at the end of seasons. His senior year, JJ played 37.1 mpg game for 36 games--1336 total. Too much for a 21-year-old. Do you know how many minutes LeBron played as a 19-year-old rookie in the NBA? He played 39.5 minutes for 79 games--3122 total. And LeBron had far less comparable talent on his roster than JJ did. All the beatings and jersey pullings JJ received, LeBron was getting it from grown men getting paid to hit him. He scored 21ppg and was still going strong at the end of the year. I understand LeBron has a special body and lots of players hit a rookie wall when they jump to the NBA. But look that difference in numbers! Playing major time in the NBA involves almost 2000 more per season than college. And we're suggesting that the difference between rested and tired is in the neighborhood of 100? Madness.

Again, people fixate on minutes played not because it has explanatory power about wins and losses but because they can make for themselves an easily understood narrative. If only Coach had done this, we'd get to hang a banner, etc. Plus, the playing time debate includes the corollary fantasy that the team possesses all this extra secret talent, which could bring us victory if only we would unlock that treasure by putting it on the court. Semi isn't good enough to be a significant contributor? Hardly! says the playing time crowd, Playing him would make him better! It's a cockroach argument built to survive a nuclear winter's worth of logic and evidence. The whole thing is born from ignorance about what actually happens on a basketball court. It's as if one ran into Flaubert in the 1870s French countryside, overheard him complain about having trouble balancing a draft of Madame Bovary, and suggested (http://translate.google.com/#en/fr/Are%20you%20having%20trouble%20with%20your%20novel %20about%20marriage%3F%20%20I%20like%20kung%20fu%2 0fights.%20%20Try%20putting%20a%20kung%20fu%20figh t%20into%20your%20novel.%20%20That%20will%20solve% 20everything.), "Vous avez des problèmes avec votre roman sur le mariage? J'aime kung fu combats. Essayez de mettre un combat de kung-fu dans votre roman. Ce sera tout résoudre."

[Matches]

So Coach K said that he implemented the line changes and the deeper bench play after the Clemson game because some of the starters were getting fatigued and less effective later in the game. Was he wrong?

Doubtful. I assume he knows his personnel and their limitations better than.. say.. you or me. I would, however, expect the team to be further along in its conditioning now than it was a month ago.


Serious question -- was there a reason Andre only played 8 minutes and MPIII was a DNP? I got so tired of Doris's constant yammering I turned off the sound so maybe I missed the explanation. Hadn't they both been playing well? Were they injured or sick? Did they not practice well or show up late? Go ahead and mock me, Id really like to know.

Please read upthread, where the MP3 question has been addressed repeatedly. Dre was not having his best game and sat in the 2nd half in favor of guys who were playing better.


Again, people fixate on minutes played not because it has explanatory power about wins and losses but because they can make for themselves an easily understood narrative. If only Coach had done this, we'd get to hang a banner, etc. Plus, the playing time debate includes the corollary fantasy that the team possesses all this extra secret talent, which could bring us victory if only we would unlock that treasure by putting it on the court. Semi isn't good enough to be a significant contributor? Hardly! says the playing time crowd, Playing him would make him better! It's a cockroach argument built to survive a nuclear winter's worth of logic and evidence.

This. So many times, this. Anytime a player slumps late in the season it's attributed to fatigue, but players slump all the time for all kinds of reasons. It's a fallacy to assume that correlation = causation. The 2010 team rode three iron men to a natty. The 2008 team wore out even though only one guy played over 30 mpg. Again, everyone's different. Freshman year Gerald Henderson got visibly fatigued during games, to the point the coaching staff thought he had asthma. Shane Battier could play forever and never lose a step. My father-in-law gets winded crossing the street. But a marginal difference in minutes during a game is such a drop in the bucket in terms of these guys' total physical activity as to be irrelevant.

[Kedsy]

Would you be in favor of playing Jabari for 40 minutes every game? If not, why not?

Personally, as a fan, I like it when we play a deeper bench. It's more fun when all the players play and the players seem to draw energy from it. What I don't believe is that there's any real difference for a particular player between 32 or 35 or 38 minutes. I certainly don't think that by Monday a teenager would even notice the difference between having played 30 minutes or 40 minutes the previous Saturday.

However, the point of my previous post is it doesn't matter what you or I or any other fan would be in favor of. The only person who matters in this scenario is Coach K, and when the games get more important he'll be playing his best players a lot of minutes. In any game from the Sweet 16 on (assuming we get that far), unless Jabari has an injury or foul trouble we'll be seeing him play as many minutes as he can handle, which will probably be in the 36 to 40 range.

[roywhite]

However, the point of my previous post is it doesn't matter what you or I or any other fan would be in favor of. The only person who matters in this scenario is Coach K, and when the games get more important he'll be playing his best players a lot of minutes. In any game from the Sweet 16 on (assuming we get that far), unless Jabari has an injury or foul trouble we'll be seeing him play as many minutes as he can handle, which will probably be in the 36 to 40 range.

Hope I don't overstate this, but I really, really like where Jabari's game is these days. He seems to fully understand his role and what he can do best to help his team. He is playing with energy and purpose, is a terror on the boards, and seems to be dunking everything in sight. His shot selection seems much better, and he has improved on defense. A great talent and a great coach are on the same page, and it is marvelous to watch.

[GGLC]

Personally, as a fan, I like it when we play a deeper bench. It's more fun when all the players play and the players seem to draw energy from it. What I don't believe is that there's any real difference for a particular player between 32 or 35 or 38 minutes. I certainly don't think that by Monday a teenager would even notice the difference between having played 30 minutes or 40 minutes the previous Saturday.

However, the point of my previous post is it doesn't matter what you or I or any other fan would be in favor of. The only person who matters in this scenario is Coach K, and when the games get more important he'll be playing his best players a lot of minutes. In any game from the Sweet 16 on (assuming we get that far), unless Jabari has an injury or foul trouble we'll be seeing him play as many minutes as he can handle, which will probably be in the 36 to 40 range.

Then it's funny that Coach K (who is the only person who matters in this scenario) appears to directly disagree with your underlined sentiments, given his statements regarding the line changes and increased bench play following the Clemson game.

[GGLC]

Hope I don't overstate this, but I really, really like where Jabari's game is these days. He seems to fully understand his role and what he can do best to help his team. He is playing with energy and purpose, is a terror on the boards, and seems to be dunking everything in sight. His shot selection seems much better, and he has improved on defense. A great talent and a great coach are on the same page, and it is marvelous to watch.

I agree with this. Jabari is having a great stretch of games.

[Kedsy]

Then it's funny that Coach K (who is the only person who matters in this scenario) appears to directly disagree with your underlined sentiments, given his statements regarding the line changes and increased bench play following the Clemson game.

I think you're reading too much into what Coach K said one time, almost a month ago. He has said on numerous occasions over the years that he doesn't think playing 35+ minutes a game overly tires the players out.

In addition, my interpretation of what Coach K said was that some of the players were "saving" their effort because they knew they'd be playing big minutes and Coach K understandably wanted them to play all out, all the time. Once the players realized what full effort felt like (after the line-change games), I assume Coach K is now trying to convince them to go all out whether they play big minutes or not.

Finally, I don't think it's a secret that Jabari wasn't in the best of shape when the season started and he's been playing catchup ever since. In that light, Coach K's comments a month ago could have been obliquely referring to that. Obviously, with Jabari playing 38 minutes against BC, that issue is improving.

[Troublemaker]

Then it's funny that Coach K (who is the only person who matters in this scenario) appears to directly disagree with your underlined sentiments, given his statements regarding the line changes and increased bench play following the Clemson game.

It sounds like Coach K is on top of things then. Since he's focusing a lot on keeping Duke's players energized, we needn't worry about the rotation anymore, right?

I mean, Jabari sure as heck looked darn energetic throughout his 38 minutes against BC. In fact, I'm not sure he was subbed for at all in the 2nd half until the two-minute mark and he just kept dunking on Eagle heads throughout the half.

[MChambers]

It sounds like Coach K is on top of things then. Since he's focusing a lot on keeping Duke's players energized, we needn't worry about the rotation anymore, right?

I mean, Jabari sure as heck looked darn energetic throughout his 38 minutes against BC. In fact, I'm not sure he was subbed for at all in the 2nd half until the two-minute mark and he just kept dunking on Eagle heads throughout the half.
I agree with Kedsy on the tiredness issue, but want to point out that Coach K went to the two line approach saying the team looked tired, and explained that Duke doesn't have big, strong players. BC is a very small team, so that might have played into the starters playing so many minutes.

UNC is bigger and also tries to push the tempo. I expect we'll see more of the bench tomorrow night. Leaning on Kennedy Meeks has got to be tiring.

But I also agree that Jabari is in better shape than he was 6 weeks ago.

[Troublemaker]

In addition, my interpretation of what Coach K said was that some of the players were "saving" their effort because they knew they'd be playing big minutes and Coach K understandably wanted them to play all out, all the time. Once the players realized what full effort felt like (after the line-change games), I assume Coach K is now trying to convince them to go all out whether they play big minutes or not.

Finally, I don't think it's a secret that Jabari wasn't in the best of shape when the season started and he's been playing catchup ever since. In that light, Coach K's comments a month ago could have been obliquely referring to that. Obviously, with Jabari playing 38 minutes against BC, that issue is improving.

I'd actually say Coach K never had Jabari in his thoughts with those comments. Jabari played relatively few minutes during his 5-game slump from Elon to UVA, averaging only 25.4 mpg during those games.

Jabari's resurgence began with NCSU when he started attacking more aggressively on offense and rebounding like a mad man, and since then, he's been averaging 30.8 mpg, and looking fresh as a daisy playing 38 against BC.

I've written this in another thread discussing the rotation (we have so, so many of these), but Coach K's comments were very likely referring to Quinn and Rodney, who had been the players mostly likely to be pulling 38-40 mpg duties prior to UVA. Since UVA, they've only done that once.

BTW, I love the heck out of posts by Des Esseintes and Matches above.

[Troublemaker]

I agree with Kedsy on the tiredness issue, but want to point out that Coach K went to the two line approach saying the team looked tired, and explained that Duke doesn't have big, strong players. BC is a very small team, so that might have played into the starters playing so many minutes.

UNC is bigger and also tries to push the tempo. I expect we'll see more of the bench tomorrow night. Leaning on Kennedy Meeks has got to be tiring.

But I also agree that Jabari is in better shape than he was 6 weeks ago.

Just one nit. Only Jabari played big minutes against BC. I'd say with good reason since he was dominant. No other player played more than 30 minutes.

[Eakane]

I think you're reading too much into what Coach K said one time, almost a month ago. He has said on numerous occasions over the years that he doesn't think playing 35+ minutes a game overly tires the players out.

In addition, my interpretation of what Coach K said was that some of the players were "saving" their effort because they knew they'd be playing big minutes and Coach K understandably wanted them to play all out, all the time. Once the players realized what full effort felt like (after the line-change games), I assume Coach K is now trying to convince them to go all out whether they play big minutes or not.

Finally, I don't think it's a secret that Jabari wasn't in the best of shape when the season started and he's been playing catchup ever since. In that light, Coach K's comments a month ago could have been obliquely referring to that. Obviously, with Jabari playing 38 minutes against BC, that issue is improving.

Coach's comments were neither oblique or obtuse. The team was tired. No hidden message to Jabari there.
Where I think we wold agree is that two days after a game, a teenager won't feel a difference whether he played 32 35 or 37. Game days are practically days off compared to practice days. But one question and one comment. First, I'm more concerned with what the player is feeling during the game. Going to the wayback machine, Carlos Boozer was completely exhausted when he collected his fifth foul on a reach with more than 5 minutes left against Florida in the Sweet 16. I can't reasonably argue that we would have 10 more championships if K utilzed the bench more, but I can say it would have been nice to have Carlos for the remainder of that game (while I'm dreaming, wouldn't it be nice to have Carlos on this year's team?). We will have to agree to disagree about a player's freshness during a game, and we'll both have to live with whatever K decides, and be happy with it.
My question is this, given that Jabari is logging heavy minutes, and given that he's been playing catchup, and given that many freshmen do hit a wall somewhere near the end of the season, what is the solution? My own opinion is that this year represents one of K's best jobs ever. He's taken a collection of talented players that had no idea how to play defense and made them into a TEAM. Today's Duke team would not have lost to ND, and would not have given up 89 points to Vermont.
I'm happy with the development and excited as we approach March. I'm not criticizing here, I'm asking: how do we, or how will the Coaching staff keep Jabari playing and avoid the wall?

[Des Esseintes]

Coach's comments were neither oblique or obtuse. The team was tired. No hidden message to Jabari there.
Where I think we wold agree is that two days after a game, a teenager won't feel a difference whether he played 32 35 or 37. Game days are practically days off compared to practice days. But one question and one comment. First, I'm more concerned with what the player is feeling during the game. Going to the wayback machine, Carlos Boozer was completely exhausted when he collected his fifth foul on a reach with more than 5 minutes left against Florida in the Sweet 16. I can't reasonably argue that we would have 10 more championships if K utilzed the bench more, but I can say it would have been nice to have Carlos for the remainder of that game (while I'm dreaming, wouldn't it be nice to have Carlos on this year's team?). We will have to agree to disagree about a player's freshness during a game, and we'll both have to live with whatever K decides, and be happy with it.
My question is this, given that Jabari is logging heavy minutes, and given that he's been playing catchup, and given that many freshmen do hit a wall somewhere near the end of the season, what is the solution? My own opinion is that this year represents one of K's best jobs ever. He's taken a collection of talented players that had no idea how to play defense and made them into a TEAM. Today's Duke team would not have lost to ND, and would not have given up 89 points to Vermont.
I'm happy with the development and excited as we approach March. I'm not criticizing here, I'm asking: how do we, or how will the Coaching staff keep Jabari playing and avoid the wall?

Boozer played 21 minutes in that game (http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/boxscores/2000-03-24-duke.html). So I don't know what you think K could or should have done to protect him. You can't even argue he should have played less during the regular season, since Carlos sat several games with an injury early in the year. That game proves the "play your best players" argument way more than it does yours. If we had had Booz for 30 minutes instead of 21, we might well have won. Instead, we played poor Matt Christensen, who got slaughtered. (Depth is great. Depth means multiple guys who *can* contribute at a high level.) Boozer didn't sit because K was saving him, of course; he sat because he committed too many fouls. Which happens, sometimes even in the tournament. You cannot win them all.

ETA: C'mon, guys. If you want to be taken seriously, come correct and do a little research. Hazy recollections from 14 years ago do not qualify as robust evidence. We all have an internet connection, and, since we are having this conversation, time on our hands for a basic Google search.

[Kedsy]

I'm not criticizing here, I'm asking: how do we, or how will the Coaching staff keep Jabari playing and avoid the wall?

My view of the "freshman wall" is that it's almost entirely mental. These players aren't used to playing against such talented and physically strong opponents. They've never practiced so hard for so long. Their bodies ache at the end of the day and they don't like it. It's like a job, and they've never held a real job before. So at some point, they get mentally tired. They just don't feel like working in practice any more. It doesn't seem to be worth it. They don't feel like preparing so intensely for the games, or even playing as hard as they can during games. They mentally check out for parts of both practices and games, and that hurts their performance and tests their coach's and teammates' trust in them during the games.

If they manage to get past the "wall" (and a lot of them do, but some don't, at least during their freshman year), then in general they're fine. They now understand and accept what's expected of them and what they need to do to play at a high enough level. They decide it is worth it and they don't need to take mental vacations any more.

I think Jabari already hit the wall and that he's probably past it at this point. I don't think he's going to fade as we hit the end of the season; to the contrary I think he's going to peak. Obviously that's just a guess, though.

[GGLC]

My own opinion is that this year represents one of K's best jobs ever. He's taken a collection of talented players that had no idea how to play defense and made them into a TEAM. Today's Duke team would not have lost to ND, and would not have given up 89 points to Vermont.
I'm happy with the development and excited as we approach March.

I agree with this entirely. K has done a great job and I'm excited to see where we go down the stretch.

[Kedsy]

Boozer played 21 minutes in that game (http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/boxscores/2000-03-24-duke.html). So I don't know what you think K could or should have done to protect him. You can't even argue he should have played less during the regular season, since Carlos sat several games with an injury early in the year. That game probably proves the "play your best players" argument more than it does yours. If we had had Booz for 30 minutes instead of 21, we might well have won that game. He didn't sit because K was saving him, of course; he sat because he committed too many fouls. Which happens, sometimes even in the tournament. You cannot win them all.

In fact, Carlos Boozer only averaged 23.7 minutes per game that season. He wasn't overplayed at all.

[superdave]

My question is this, given that Jabari is logging heavy minutes, and given that he's been playing catchup, and given that many freshmen do hit a wall somewhere near the end of the season, what is the solution? My own opinion is that this year represents one of K's best jobs ever. He's taken a collection of talented players that had no idea how to play defense and made them into a TEAM. Today's Duke team would not have lost to ND, and would not have given up 89 points to Vermont.
I'm happy with the development and excited as we approach March. I'm not criticizing here, I'm asking: how do we, or how will the Coaching staff keep Jabari playing and avoid the wall?

I dont always buy into the notion that players a hit a wall. A few examples from the past seem to be easily explained as being due to different circumstances. In 2006, JJ and Shelden ran into the wrong team - a long and athletic bunch from LSU - that seemed designed to give our guys fits. In 2008, Duke lost to WVU in the tournament. We got pounded on the boards and future rebounding savant Brian Zoubek only played two minutes. Was Singler worn down or was he playing out of position? Who knows, but he only played 27 minutes in that loss.

As for this year, I worry more about Jabari frustrating himself than anything. The BC game was refreshing because I dont think he forced up a single bad shot. He'd been averaging 3-4 forced shots per game in his offensive lull last month. Now he seems to be floating on the perimeter less, attacking the rim more and exploiting opponents' weaknesses rather than putting up 3's out of rhythm. I think getting Jabari in position to make efficient plays is more important than managing his minutes because it manages his desire to carry a lot of the offensive load.

That being said, I've seen Jabari gassed in the second half of a few games. Only once do I recall seeing him stay in the game when he was gassed and lacked explosiveness. He's playing the 5 a little less and seems to be getting more regular breaks with Marshall coming along, so I dont worry about this too much.

[Kedsy]

I dont always buy into the notion that players a hit a wall. A few examples from the past seem to be easily explained as being due to different circumstances. In 2006, JJ and Shelden ran into the wrong team - a long and athletic bunch from LSU - that seemed designed to give our guys fits. In 2008, Duke lost to WVU in the tournament. We got pounded on the boards and future rebounding savant Brian Zoubek only played two minutes. Was Singler worn down or was he playing out of position? Who knows, but he only played 27 minutes in that loss.

Well, we're talking about the "freshman wall," so JJ and Shelden in 2006 would be an entirely different phenomenon, if any.

That said, I don't think all freshmen hit the wall, but it seems real for some. In most cases it would start long before the NCAA tournament, though. In 2008, Kyle Singler did appear to be worn down, but to my eyes it seemed to hit him around mid-February. As evidence beyond how it looked to me, from the beginning of that season to mid-February, he shot 39.2% from three-range (38-97). From 2/17 on, he shot 24.5% (13-53). Tired legs, or just a prolonged slump?

Muddying things up is the fact that he suffered a similar slump his senior year, from mid-January to the end of the season (39.6% from beginning to 1/12 and 23.9% from that point on to the end), and that couldn't have been the freshman wall. So maybe he was just streaky. So, back to eyes evidence, he looked tired in 2008 but not in 2011, at least not to me.

[Troublemaker]

My view of the "freshman wall" is that it's almost entirely mental. These players aren't used to playing against such talented and physically strong opponents. They've never practiced so hard for so long. Their bodies ache at the end of the day and they don't like it. It's like a job, and they've never held a real job before. So at some point, they get mentally tired. They just don't feel like working in practice any more. It doesn't seem to be worth it. They don't feel like preparing so intensely for the games, or even playing as hard as they can during games. They mentally check out for parts of both practices and games, and that hurts their performance and tests their coach's and teammates' trust in them during the games.

If they manage to get past the "wall" (and a lot of them do, but some don't, at least during their freshman year), then in general they're fine. They now understand and accept what's expected of them and what they need to do to play at a high enough level. They decide it is worth it and they don't need to take mental vacations any more.

I think Jabari already hit the wall and that he's probably past it at this point. I don't think he's going to fade as we hit the end of the season; to the contrary I think he's going to peak. Obviously that's just a guess, though.

Agreed. I would add that being new to college academics and new to living on your own also contribute to the "freshman wall." I mean, plenty of non-athlete freshmen are fried by the end of 2nd semester freshman year. (That's why UNC's fake classes SHOULD be an NCAA issue, imo. What an advantage gained when the players only have to focus on football/basketball instead of their studies!)

[Listen to Quants]

Well, we're talking about the "freshman wall," so JJ and Shelden in 2006 would be an entirely different phenomenon, if any.

That said, I don't think all freshmen hit the wall, but it seems real for some. In most cases it would start long before the NCAA tournament, though. In 2008, Kyle Singler did appear to be worn down, but to my eyes it seemed to hit him around mid-February. As evidence beyond how it looked to me, from the beginning of that season to mid-February, he shot 39.2% from three-range (38-97). From 2/17 on, he shot 24.5% (13-53). Tired legs, or just a prolonged slump?

Muddying things up is the fact that he suffered a similar slump his senior year, from mid-January to the end of the season (39.6% from beginning to 1/12 and 23.9% from that point on to the end), and that couldn't have been the freshman wall. So maybe he was just streaky. So, back to eyes evidence, he looked tired in 2008 but not in 2011, at least not to me.

YES to the question in this comment about whether or not the 'freshman wall' even exists. Obviously finding one or even many players whose late season stats fall off doesn't mean anything unless the group 'freshman' show the effect in aggregate (or a pre-determined subgroup, e.g. 'big men' do). For what it's worth (little) I too saw the Singler fall off his freshman year. Could some of that be opponents figuring out how to defense him?

[Listen to Quants]

If you don't think Jabari will be playing close to 40 minutes in big games you haven't been watching Coach K for very long.

For example, in the championship game in 2010, Nolan Smith and Kyle Singler played 40 minutes, Jon Scheyer played 37, Lance Thomas played 35, and Brian Zoubek played 31. No one else played as many as 10 minutes (Miles Plumlee played 9 in relief of Zoubek, the next highest sub was Andre Dawkins with 5 minutes).

Doesn't that all depend on players' inherent endurance, the quality of the bench, the pace/style of the game and such? In close games during the NBA playoffs, coaches rest key players, some for 10 minutes/game of so. This suggests the professionals judge there is a falloff in quality of play of some individuals with too many minutes in one game, despite timeouts and fouls shooting (both of which cluster so they are not always the best distributed rests).

[superdave]

Well, we're talking about the "freshman wall," so JJ and Shelden in 2006 would be an entirely different phenomenon, if any.

That said, I don't think all freshmen hit the wall, but it seems real for some. In most cases it would start long before the NCAA tournament, though. In 2008, Kyle Singler did appear to be worn down, but to my eyes it seemed to hit him around mid-February. As evidence beyond how it looked to me, from the beginning of that season to mid-February, he shot 39.2% from three-range (38-97). From 2/17 on, he shot 24.5% (13-53). Tired legs, or just a prolonged slump?

Muddying things up is the fact that he suffered a similar slump his senior year, from mid-January to the end of the season (39.6% from beginning to 1/12 and 23.9% from that point on to the end), and that couldn't have been the freshman wall. So maybe he was just streaky. So, back to eyes evidence, he looked tired in 2008 but not in 2011, at least not to me.

Singler's stats his senior year do confound the story a bit.

On thing Coach K has mentioned the past few years is that he often has to remind players not to let any offensive slump affect their defensive play. I suppose the reverse is also true.

We know how intense an on the ball defender Sulaimon can be. But he was not bringing that level of intensity every game in November and December. The likely explanation is he did not have the ball in his hands as much this season as last, and he did not know how to respond and he let it undermine all aspects of his game.

Jabari started off the season 11 of 16 from 3 in his first three games. He scored 20+ 10 of his first 12 games. I dont think he's hitting a wall so much as a he's learning how to play more efficiently when defenders take away a couple of his scoring options. He's fought it for a while, taking forced 3s. But he's learning to trust his teammates more. He put up 29 points vs BC and didnt hit a single 3-ball. That seems to me to be a great example of exploiting your opponent rather than going through your offensive arsenal checklist with each catch.

How many times have we seen a player run half-speed back on defense after a bad shot or turnover? How many times have we seen a player sprint back on D after a dunk? To me it's more mental than physical. Trusting the team and maintaining your defensive intensity are two big lessons to learn (especially for freshmen, and especially under K). This team is showing signs they get that, especially Jabari and Rasheed.

[Ultrarunner]

1. Big minutes in big games; yes. Big minutes in garbage time against BC? Clearly no.

2. And there's more value to giving him a breather -- there's actually some coaching going on on the bench (thankfully, we have a coach and staff completely unlike Gary Williams, who would just urn around and scream), and letting the starters see the game from the bench gives them a useful perspective.

3. Serious question -- was there a reason Andre only played 8 minutes and MPIII was a DNP? I got so tired of Doris's constant yammering I turned off the sound so maybe I missed the explanation. Hadn't they both been playing well? Were they injured or sick? Did they not practice well or show up late? Go ahead and mock me, Id really like to know.

I'll tackle these one at a time. . . .I admit I haven't read all the responses yet. If I duplicating effort, my apologies.

1. Has it occurred to you that the big minutes against BC were by design? Jabari has had difficulty playing hard at the ends of games. Leaving him is to experience fatigue and fight through it may well give him the mental resources he needs when the game is on the line - and counts for more than BC. Often, the fatigue factor doesn't affect legs or lungs. Instead, an athlete will reach a set level of effort and mentally begin to let down. Pushing through that wall takes training. It may well be that K's plan was to force Jabari past the boundaries that Jabari had built for himself.

2. See above. Sometimes coaching takes place with the player on the floor. If we had a coach that communicates, he may have said something like "You're not coming out. I want to play tough through to the end and keep bringing it. This is what we need from you and on both ends of the floor. Now, go get'em, kid, and make them respect you."

3. Andre minutes have been interesting all year long. K is really using him as a weapon when needed. We didn't need him at BC but we had some (IMNSHO) terrific in game coaching going on. K knows what Andre brings, didn't really need him, and left him on the bench while he worked with the others. To Andre's credit, he's fully bought into his role on the team. A critical clue is that K went very deep into his bench with Semi and Matt getting a few minutes of quality time. Also, in the toughest games of the year, such as Syracuse, Andre played a large role. Missing minutes in one game doesn't put you in the doghouse.

[Indoor66]

IMO, the outstanding freshmen face a reality that has been passed by the older player: there is more film available on them after the season gets into the new year. Their skills are revealed; their tendencies are revealed; and their deficiencies are revealed. Coaches figure out what to take away, what to attack, what to ignore in the newcomers game. The "wall" is often the function of the disappearance of mystery about the newcomer.

[Des Esseintes]

IMO, the outstanding freshmen face a reality that has been passed by the older player: there is more film available on them after the season gets into the new year. Their skills are revealed; their tendencies are revealed; and their deficiencies are revealed. Coaches figure out what to take away, what to attack, what to ignore in the newcomers game. The "wall" is often the function of the disappearance of mystery about the newcomer.

The "second time around the league" phenomenon. I agree. Jabari clearly experienced that component when he struggled. His perimeter game had been scouted, and ways were discovered to defend him. And, as good players do, Jabari has responded in turn. Going inside more and showing a more comprehensive game has been hugely valuable in his overcoming those defensive strategies.

[Kfanarmy]

Again, people fixate on minutes played not because it has explanatory power about wins and losses but because they can make for themselves an easily understood narrative. If only Coach had done this, we'd get to hang a banner, etc. Plus, the playing time debate includes the corollary fantasy that the team possesses all this extra secret talent, which could bring us victory if only we would unlock that treasure by putting it on the court. Semi isn't good enough to be a significant contributor? Hardly! says the playing time crowd, Playing him would make him better! It's a cockroach argument built to survive a nuclear winter's worth of logic and evidence. The whole thing is born from ignorance about what actually happens on a basketball court.
You put together a nice false argument and derision to make it seem your's is the only valid, and coincidentally cultishly supportive of exactly whatever the coaches decided, conclusion. I for one believe that a longer bench provides flexibility in adjusting to injuries, players having off nights, players being sick, bad personnel matchups, etc. There is a balance between winning today, winning in the tournament, and preparing those on the bench to step in this year or the next. It isn't a fantasy, and while coach K's record speaks for itself I doubt he believes he is infallible as your post suggests. Given a dominant base rotation of 7 players with a more or less developed bench, which would you choose?

[Des Esseintes]

You put together a nice false argument and derision to make it seem your's is the only valid, and coincidentally cultishly supportive of exactly whatever the coaches decided, conclusion. I for one believe that a longer bench provides flexibility in adjusting to injuries, players having off nights, players being sick, bad personnel matchups, etc. There is a balance between winning today, winning in the tournament, and preparing those on the bench to step in this year or the next. It isn't a fantasy, and while coach K's record speaks for itself I doubt he believes he is infallible as your post suggests. Given a dominant base rotation of 7 players with a more or less developed bench, which would you choose?

I don't think K is infallible. K doesn't think he's infallible. But here's where you and I part company: I don't think for one cotton-pickin' second that you or me or the vast majority of posters on this board have demonstrated the acuity to identify his mistakes. How did Duke respond to L'ville's screening-the-screener wrinkle Pitino tossed out in last year's tourney? I'll admit I don't know the answer to that question. Do you? That's just one aspect out of dozens in that game, but it had a bearing on the outcome on the final result. Unlike, say, whether our tenth man got 2 vs. 5 minutes against Virginia Tech in January.

Talk all you want about "balance" as if that means something. Who on this board is opposed to balance? Again, where we part company is that you, through your tv set, have identified some way better way to find balance than the coaching staff paid millions and given hundreds of hours to achieve that very end. But maybe you're the ghost of James Naismith, come back stronger than before, like Obi-Wan after Vader slayed him. If you are in fact the strengthened ghost of James Naismith, I take back all my criticisms.

(Please don't hurt me, stronger-than-ever-before-shade-of-Dr.-James-Naismith.)

[Kedsy]

Doesn't that all depend on players' inherent endurance, the quality of the bench, the pace/style of the game and such? In close games during the NBA playoffs, coaches rest key players, some for 10 minutes/game of so. This suggests the professionals judge there is a falloff in quality of play of some individuals with too many minutes in one game, despite timeouts and fouls shooting (both of which cluster so they are not always the best distributed rests).

Maybe, but Coach K has been pretty consistent with his approach of playing his best players for a LOT of minutes in big games.

[azzefkram]

My view of the "freshman wall" is that it's almost entirely mental. These players aren't used to playing against such talented and physically strong opponents. They've never practiced so hard for so long. Their bodies ache at the end of the day and they don't like it.

I agree that the mental component is very significant, but "almost entirely" is a bit much. As you yourself said, the talent they face is physically stronger and faster. The practices are more intense and longer. These are physical and thus there is a physical component to the freshman wall. We could argue until the cows came home as to how much each component contributes but I think it's safe to say that it's probably not entirely either.

I never have an issue with K playing guys big minutes in big games. As Herm Edwards says "you play to win the game." I have a few beefs with with guys averaging 32+ min/gm over a season. I think a season of major minutes could be a factor (amongst many others) in underperformance/slumps towards a season's end. I also think that to average that many minutes you have to be playing in garbage time which I am not a huge fan of. I do not think that game experience and practice experience are equal and it helps a player's development to be exposed to game experience in low leverage situations. I think it's even better for the team if the developing players can be mingled in with the regulars. Running the 9th, 10th and 11th guys out there with two walk-ons doesn't really help. Another albeit remote issue I have is the spectre of injury. Imagine if Jabari came down on Ryan Anderson's foot and turned an ankle towards the end of the BC game. I am not sure any learning opportunity is worth that risk.

Duke is pretty close to the D-1 average in bench minutes this year and on the high end when compared to the other programs in Kenpom's top 20. In the past, I've been in the "K doesn't play his bench enough" camp, but looking at the numbers this really isn't the case. We are more often than not around the D-1 average. I guess I've switched allegiances. I hope my buddies in the KDPHBE camp will still have a beer with me.

[tommy]

The "second time around the league" phenomenon. I agree. Jabari clearly experienced that component when he struggled. His perimeter game had been scouted, and ways were discovered to defend him. And, as good players do, Jabari has responded in turn. Going inside more and showing a more comprehensive game has been hugely valuable in his overcoming those defensive strategies.

Except that his struggles occurred his first time around the league, not his second. He began to struggle after only 11 or 12 games -- nonconference games all -- and lasted maybe seven or so before he pulled out of it.

I think success in the first stretch of the season came too easy for him. Even against teams like Arizona and Kansas, everything was falling. He fell in love with the step-back, the 3 ball at any time, and other difficult plays as well. Against lesser opponents, forget it. Easy.

Then all of a sudden it wasn't so easy. The shots didn't feel so automatic anymore. He was more closely guarded on a regular basis. He kept jacking em up anyway, and his shooting percentages suffered. Also, on the inside, he wasn't going up against UNC-Asheville and Vermont anymore. He was being challenged in there, and getting his shot blocked, or at least altered, a lot.

I think what he has done to pull out of it is twofold, and it has little to do with overcoming fatigue (though I'm on the side of preferring 33 minutes per game to 38 or 39, but that's another issue). He has gotten smarter about when to take his jumpshot, what is a good shot, taking them in rhythm and in the flow of the offense. Consequently, he's getting better looks and more are going down.

At the same time, he's realized that when he gets the ball inside, via a pass, a dribble drive, or an offensive rebound, he can't just flip it back up there or take a little reverse layup and expect it to be unopposed, like he did in high school or against Florida Atlantic and their ilk What he has realized is that against tougher competition, he is going to be challenged at the rim, and he better go up strong and most importantly, he better dunk anything he can. And he has. I don't know what the numbers are, but I venture to guess his number of dunks has gone up significantly in the last couple of weeks. He's going up with a purpose, and he's not leaving any room for doubt or defense. Dunking the ball, and dunking it hard. Big difference.

[cato]

Doesn't that all depend on players' inherent endurance, the quality of the bench, the pace/style of the game and such? In close games during the NBA playoffs, coaches rest key players, some for 10 minutes/game of so. This suggests the professionals judge there is a falloff in quality of play of some individuals with too many minutes in one game, despite timeouts and fouls shooting (both of which cluster so they are not always the best distributed rests).

I'm not sure the NBA tells us much about this NCAA issue. The worst player on the worst NBA team would still get significant minutes on the best NCAA team.

To put it differently, at the college level, coaches don't have 4-5 elite players sitting on the bench at the tip. The 8th, 9th and 10th options simply may not be able to contribute at a high enough level.

[Tappan Zee Devil]

Personally, as a fan, I like it when we play a deeper bench. It's more fun when all the players play and the players seem to draw energy from it. What I don't believe is that there's any real difference for a particular player between 32 or 35 or 38 minutes. I certainly don't think that by Monday a teenager would even notice the difference between having played 30 minutes or 40 minutes the previous Saturday.

However, the point of my previous post is it doesn't matter what you or I or any other fan would be in favor of. The only person who matters in this scenario is Coach K, and when the games get more important he'll be playing his best players a lot of minutes. In any game from the Sweet 16 on (assuming we get that far), unless Jabari has an injury or foul trouble we'll be seeing him play as many minutes as he can handle, which will probably be in the 36 to 40 range.


Yeah, but does it matter after 36 minutes in that game or in the next game. These kids are young and in shape, but are they bionic?

[Kedsy]

Yeah, but does it matter after 36 minutes in that game or in the next game. These kids are young and in shape, but are they bionic?

If I understand you correctly, I can't imagine it would matter in the next game. In the game in which the player is playing 36 minutes, it may or may not matter, that depends on the kid and what kind of shape he's in. I assume that's why Coach K played Jabari for 38 minutes against BC. He wanted to know how well he'd handle it in case he wanted to play him 38 minutes in a future game.

[El_Diablo]

The worst player on the worst NBA team would still get significant minutes on the best NCAA team.

Raymond Felton wouldn't get all that many minutes backing up Tyler Ennis. :D

[Listen to Quants]

I'm not sure the NBA tells us much about this NCAA issue. The worst player on the worst NBA team would still get significant minutes on the best NCAA team.

To put it differently, at the college level, coaches don't have 4-5 elite players sitting on the bench at the tip. The 8th, 9th and 10th options simply may not be able to contribute at a high enough level.

The 4-5 best bench players in the NBA are 'elite' NCAA players but they are note what I would define as elite NBA players (with some exceptions). I suspect they are significantly worse than at least the top 2-3 starters on most playoff teams. Nonetheless many of those top starters see perhaps 10 minutes of rest in tight playoff games. I conclude from that that the coaches think the top players playing, say, 40 minutes and a lesser sub playing 8 minutes produces a better product than the top player playing all 48. That is, the coaches believe in rest (obviously foul issues enter but the rest occurs often in player not in foul trouble).

But, sure, if your point is with some NCAA teams, e.g. Duke 2010 in the 1-3 spots, the bench is too weak to allow rest for the starters. In that case the drop in the level of play overrides the rest consideration. The question I was trying to address is does rest during one contest matter. I think it does, but if tournament game durations are 2:30 (say) instead of 2:00, I reserve judgement for that situation.

[Clay Feet POF]

After reading these many posts regarding minutes, I have two questions. Also I’m considering if my scale of minutes should be modified.
1) Big minutes: 30 or more
2) Medium: 15 to 29
3) Low : 5 to 14

The BC game breaks down like this.
a) Big: Only 2 Players accounted for at least 75% of the 40 minutes
b) Medium: There were 4 Player that accounted for at least 38%
c) Low: Only 3 Player accounted for at least 13%

Two questions:
1) Will the BC breakdown be somewhat typical of the rest of the season?
2) What is the minimum in game minutes needed for bench players to develop?

Your comments are valued!

[Kedsy]

Nonetheless many of those top starters see perhaps 10 minutes of rest in tight playoff games. I conclude from that that the coaches think the top players playing, say, 40 minutes and a lesser sub playing 8 minutes produces a better product than the top player playing all 48. That is, the coaches believe in rest (obviously foul issues enter but the rest occurs often in player not in foul trouble).

Well, it's not really apples-to-apples, is it? First, 48 minutes are a lot more minutes than 40 (20% more, anyway). The 40 minutes that NBA coaches play their top starters would be the entire game in college. You seem to be focusing on minutes of rest that the coaches think their players need, but wouldn't it make more sense to focus on the number of minutes played that these coaches think is OK without diminishing the "product"?

Second, NBA teams play 3 or 4 times a week, rather than the 2 games a week college teams play during the conference season. When it comes to resting, that seems like a big distinction.

[Listen to Quants]

Well, it's not really apples-to-apples, is it? First, 48 minutes are a lot more minutes than 40 (20% more, anyway). The 40 minutes that NBA coaches play their top starters would be the entire game in college. You seem to be focusing on minutes of rest that the coaches think their players need, but wouldn't it make more sense to focus on the number of minutes played that these coaches think is OK without diminishing the "product"?

Second, NBA teams play 3 or 4 times a week, rather than the 2 games a week college teams play during the conference season. When it comes to resting, that seems like a big distinction.

Sure, and the shorter clock probably means the NBAers run more. On the other hand, they are a more select group and one of the selection criteria may be ability to handle the extra workload, and as professionals they are probably better conditioned than the NCAA guys. Further, during playoff I thought the NBA teams played more like 2 or 3 game a week. (I focused on playoff to make sure the coaches were trying to maximize win probably for that particular game not working for some longer run objectives). As to the 40 vs 48 minute difference, while obviously accurate, don't NBA games last longer allowing more rest during them? This site, http://weaksideawareness.wordpress.com/2011/05/30/real-time-duration-of-nba-games-in-2010-11/, claims the average is 2 hours 18 minutes (regular season, playoffs are probably longer). So one could expect even equally conditioned athletes to go a little longer at game pace with the extra 18+ minutes.

But look, the NBA is not the NCAA, not saying it is. I'm saying many of the pros rest in a partly analogous situation. That raises the distinct possibility that fatigue enters basketball at all levels. I think there are players, Scheyer famously, who probably are such great endurance athletes they didn't need rest. Others, more fast-twitch (and other 'sprint' anatomical) types, may need rest.

[Matches]

You put together a nice false argument and derision to make it seem your's is the only valid, and coincidentally cultishly supportive of exactly whatever the coaches decided, conclusion. I for one believe that a longer bench provides flexibility in adjusting to injuries, players having off nights, players being sick, bad personnel matchups, etc.

Those are all advantages of having a deep bench. It's a bit of goalpost shifting, though, as the discussion in this thread has been centered around whether too many minutes = fatigued or run-down players. The factors you've listed have nothing to do with fatigue.

I think everyone would love to have a deep bench if that's defined as 10-11 guys who can be shuffled in and out without a dropoff in the quality of play. That is, however, an exceedingly rare commodity, and usually when it exists, it exists because the team doesn't have any outstanding players. In other words, if the 9th guy isn't a big dropoff from the 3rd guy, the 3rd guy probably isn't that good. Because we recruit at a high level, we usually have at least 1-2 guys who are really outstanding players, and those guys really need to be in the game as much as possible.