PDA

View Full Version : Quinn Cook



Channing
03-17-2014, 09:36 AM
Not sure where to post this, so I'll just start a new thread and allow it to merge if necessary.

QC has gotten a lot of (much deserved) negative attention over the last third of the season. However, I thought he looked terrific in the UVA game. He is never going to be a lock down defender, but he made smart plays on offense, took good 3 pt shots (that happened to go in), and overall was a very good floor general. IF we can get more of that, I hope he starts to see an increase in his minutes back to early season levels. He brings so much more to our offense as a true PG than our other options, where it seems we labor at times to be efficient.

ChrisP
03-17-2014, 09:44 AM
Not sure where to post this, so I'll just start a new thread and allow it to merge if necessary.

QC has gotten a lot of (much deserved) negative attention over the last third of the season. However, I thought he looked terrific in the UVA game. He is never going to be a lock down defender, but he made smart plays on offense, took good 3 pt shots (that happened to go in), and overall was a very good floor general. IF we can get more of that, I hope he starts to see an increase in his minutes back to early season levels. He brings so much more to our offense as a true PG than our other options, where it seems we labor at times to be efficient.

Don't disagree with anything you've said here. I think we all really, REALLY want to see the "Good Quinn" out there on the court from now on. However, I would just add - and I really don't mean to hijack your thread here - that this Duke team pretty much needs everyone to play their best from here on out. That's a gross oversimplification, of course, but with most/all guys playing at a high level on both ends of the court, I'm not sure there are many teams that can beat us this year. Unfortunately, I don't know that we've seen that much this season (Michigan game, maybe?). For instance, I think UNCII was a great game offensively, but a terrible defensive game.

Anyway, I think I get your point (no pun intended) that Quinn running the point effectively and at a high level (cough, Battle for Atlantis last year, cough) would really help our team's chances in the post season.

dukelion
03-17-2014, 09:51 AM
Anyway, I think I get your point (no pun intended) that Quinn running the point effectively and at a high level (cough, Battle for Atlantis last year, cough) would really help our team's chances in the post season.

Man I wish Quinn reverted to that player from early last year. He was so confident in his midrange game (floaters and pull ups) and now seems loathe to attempt any shot that's not a three.

Truly one of the more puzzling things that happened to a Duke players development for me in some time.

If (big if) he regained that confidence to probe the paint like he did in BFA last year I think we'd be a final four lock.

The Gordog
03-17-2014, 10:02 AM
Not sure where to post this, so I'll just start a new thread and allow it to merge if necessary.

QC has gotten a lot of (much deserved) negative attention over the last third of the season. However, I thought he looked terrific in the UVA game. He is never going to be a lock down defender, but he made smart plays on offense, took good 3 pt shots (that happened to go in), and overall was a very good floor general. IF we can get more of that, I hope he starts to see an increase in his minutes back to early season levels. He brings so much more to our offense as a true PG than our other options, where it seems we labor at times to be efficient.

I agree. I also think that the issue with confidence in his ability to finish at the rim or with a floater is directly related to the ability of Amile to stay on the court without foul trouble. When Quinn has that option to dump off to in the lane he is 3X more effective because they cannot go hard for the block every time. When Josh (too small) or Marshall (bad hands) is manning the post it makes things harder for Quinn and his confidence declines. Being mercurial as he is it infects all aspects of his game. Amile not fouling leads directly to the good Quinn, IMHO.

Matches
03-17-2014, 10:16 AM
I've been pretty critical of him but I thought he played pretty well all weekend. He didn't get a ton of burn against Clemson but he played a lot the last 2 games, and I thought he acquitted himself fine. He's never going to be a plus defender; we just have to live with that. What we need from him is good decisionmaking when he has the ball in his hands. He's the best passer on the team, and the best ballhandler - just needs to be smart with the ball and concentrate on setting up other guys before hunting his own shot.

CBecker
03-17-2014, 10:17 AM
I agree I think it's time for Quinn to return to the starting lineup and get good minutes. I liked the Thornton/Sheed back court because of the smothering defense they were playing, but the offense got really stagnant at times and Quinn at his best can help. I agree that he seems to only be shooting threes, those floaters and scoops he did so often last year aren't around anymore. Hopefully he builds off a decent game against UVA, and has a good tourney.

Kfanarmy
03-17-2014, 10:47 AM
Sometimes I wonder if QC isn't hesitant to pass the ball without the "perfect" set up because he knows the ball is most likely going to be shot by that player, whether a good shot is available or not.

Troublemaker
03-17-2014, 10:53 AM
4 games in a row of good play for Quinn now. I think he'll be seeing big minutes going forward.

Now we just have to sort out the Andre situation. Hopefully Andre was sick, gets healthy, gets more playing time and bangs home some clutch threes in the NCAAs.

Chicken Little
03-17-2014, 11:04 AM
I've been pretty critical of him but I thought he played pretty well all weekend.

Me too. Thought he provided a nice lift all weekend. When he's on, he sees the court better than anyone on our team. If I remember correctly, right before halftime of the Clemson game (or was it State?), he came in, hit a three then threw a perfect alley oop to Parker or Hood. It seemed like it all happened in 15 seconds, and it was dazzling. I think the debate about his playing time still lingers though, when Sheed batters the lane and attacks defenses so aggressively, and Tyler can't stop making big plays that don't show up on the stat sheet. If anything, Quinn's recent improved play just makes me less worried when Thornton racks up fouls quickly. I think it's similar to the debate that rages about Andre's playing time. When they're on, they both make us so hard to defend, but K seems to be more comfortable giving minutes to the more stable, less wow-ing, Sheed/Tyler. I understand both perspectives and ultimately have a feeling K and company know what they're doing.

WillJ
03-17-2014, 11:06 AM
This may attract some abuse, but I think we have to acknowledge that our guards are just not that good. Quinn is playing behind Thornton, for the most part, and, over the last five games (i.e. since WF), TT has 10 assists, 6 points, and 18 fouls. Though K obviously thinks he's our best choice, those are really amazingly bad numbers for a Duke starting point guard. Our off-guards haven't been much better. TT's a great kid, as are the others, but you just can't win consistently against good competition with that kind of play from your guards.

Matches
03-17-2014, 11:13 AM
This may attract some abuse, but I think we have to acknowledge that our guards are just not that good. Quinn is playing behind Thornton, for the most part, and, over the last five games (i.e. since WF), TT has 10 assists, 6 points, and 18 fouls. Though K obviously thinks he's our best choice, those are really amazingly bad numbers for a Duke starting point guard. Our off-guards haven't been much better. TT's a great kid, as are the others, but you just can't win consistently against good competition with that kind of play from your guards.

At the risk of re-igniting the TT debate, he possibly saved the Clemson game with a last-possession strip, and he made quite a few plays over the weekend that I'd call "winning plays" that don't show up in the stat sheet. So just looking at his stats really doesn't tell the whole story of what he contributes while he's out there.

Also: he fouls a lot.

There's 80 minutes to go around between the two guard spots, though - plenty for QC, Sheed, and TT (even if Dre was to soak up 10 or so of them). It's not an either-or situation, IMO - all those guys do slightly different things well.

(By the way, did anyone catch on the raycom broadcast yesterday when they mistakenly referred to TT as "Andre Thornton"? How awesome would an amalgamation of TT and Dre be?)

WillJ
03-17-2014, 11:20 AM
At the risk of re-igniting the TT debate, he possibly saved the Clemson game with a last-possession strip, and he made quite a few plays over the weekend that I'd call "winning plays" that don't show up in the stat sheet. So just looking at his stats really doesn't tell the whole story of what he contributes while he's out there.

Also: he fouls a lot.

There's 80 minutes to go around between the two guard spots, though - plenty for QC, Sheed, and TT (even if Dre was to soak up 10 or so of them). It's not an either-or situation, IMO - all those guys do slightly different things well.

(By the way, did anyone catch on the raycom broadcast yesterday when they mistakenly referred to TT as "Andre Thornton"? How awesome would an amalgamation of TT and Dre be?)

Those are good points - TT made a lot of good plays yesterday that didn't show up in the box score. K of course has his reasons for starting him, and I didn't mean to argue that he should play less. But...but...but...fouls>assists+points? It takes an astronomical amount of non-box-score stuff to make up for that. My read, as I noted, is that neither of our PGs are playing real well taking everything into consideration. I hope they prove me egregiously wrong in the tournament.

Dr. Rosenrosen
03-17-2014, 11:24 AM
I've been pretty critical of him but I thought he played pretty well all weekend. He didn't get a ton of burn against Clemson but he played a lot the last 2 games, and I thought he acquitted himself fine. He's never going to be a plus defender; we just have to live with that. What we need from him is good decisionmaking when he has the ball in his hands. He's the best passer on the team, and the best ballhandler - just needs to be smart with the ball and concentrate on setting up other guys before hunting his own shot.
I don't know... I just think he may need to learn to play a defensive style that is within his ability. I continue to believe that he could back up a half step and have a better chance at keeping his man in front of him. He gets so close sometimes that his man is able to get around him too easily and then he is essentially out of the play and creating a difficult 2 on 1 type situation for our bigs inside. I'd love to see him make the adjustment that might allow him to stay in more plays defensively instead of trailing his man into the lane on penetrations as seems to happen frequently.

CDu
03-17-2014, 11:27 AM
Since the Wake Forest loss, Cook has put up the following numbers:

22.8 mpg, 8.8 ppg, 4.3 apg, 2.3 rpg, 1 spg, 1 topg (4.3:1 a/to), 52.6 fg%, 50.0 3pt%. He hasn't had a bad game in the bunch.

In my opinion, he should be playing 25-30 mpg in every remaining game. We can't have him getting just 12 minutes like he did in the Clemson game.

Cook is a HUGE part of our chances of tourney success. We need him playing at a high level.

But really, we need ALL of our guys playing at a high level from here on out. Sulaimon and Thornton can't throw up clunkers like they both did in the UVa game (combined 1-6, 2 pts, 2 assists, 8 rebounds, 3 turnovers, and 9 fouls) for us to win against good teams. At least 2 of our 3-man guard rotation needs to be having a decent night.

dukelifer
03-17-2014, 11:33 AM
Since the Wake Forest loss, Cook has put up the following numbers:

22.8 mpg, 8.8 ppg, 4.3 apg, 2.3 rpg, 1 spg, 1 topg (4.3:1 a/to), 52.6 fg%, 50.0 3pt%. He hasn't had a bad game in the bunch.

In my opinion, he should be playing 25-30 mpg in every remaining game. We can't have him getting just 12 minutes like he did in the Clemson game.

Cook is a HUGE part of our chances of tourney success. We need him playing at a high level.

But really, we need ALL of our guys playing at a high level from here on out. Sulaimon and Thornton can't throw up clunkers like they both did in the UVa game (combined 1-6, 2 pts, 2 assists, 8 rebounds, 3 turnovers, and 9 fouls) for us to win against good teams. At least 2 of our 3-man guard rotation needs to be having a decent night.

I agree. Duke success will go as far as the guards take them. Too inconsistent for an elite team. But Quinn and Rasheed are both capable of big games and nights. If they can string a bunch together along with the consistent play of Hood and Parker- Duke is a very tough out- even with the mediocre defense.

Newton_14
03-17-2014, 11:39 AM
Since the Wake Forest loss, Cook has put up the following numbers:

22.8 mpg, 8.8 ppg, 4.3 apg, 2.3 rpg, 1 spg, 1 topg (4.3:1 a/to), 52.6 fg%, 50.0 3pt%. He hasn't had a bad game in the bunch.

In my opinion, he should be playing 25-30 mpg in every remaining game. We can't have him getting just 12 minutes like he did in the Clemson game.

Cook is a HUGE part of our chances of tourney success. We need him playing at a high level.

But really, we need ALL of our guys playing at a high level from here on out. Sulaimon and Thornton can't throw up clunkers like they both did in the UVa game (combined 1-6, 2 pts, 2 assists, 8 rebounds, 3 turnovers, and 9 fouls) for us to win against good teams. At least 2 of our 3-man guard rotation needs to be having a decent night.

Totally agree here. (and WillJ there's a lot of truth in your post). I have said several times lately, and i will not back away from this stance, we need Quinn starting and playing about 25 mpg, and Andre needs to play 17 to 20mpg. I just feel we are a better team with that kind of rotation. Even when Quinn was getting around 28mpg and Andre 12 to 14 we were better. Before anyone shoots me, I am the biggest Thornton fan on the board. Love that kid and what he brings and will hate to see him go. I just think he is more effective playing 17-20mpg vs 28 to 32mpg, and I don't feel he plays bad if he plays heavier minutes. At all. It's just that it hurts our team scoring by keeping two dynamic scorers in Quinn and Andre on the bench.

We just have an odd team this year. Our best offensive units can't defend well, and our best defensive units can't score well. The problem though, is the fact that our best defensive units struggle to get stops too. With that we need to, in my opinion, the minutes distribution needs to lean more toward the better offensive units. Mix and match for sure but make sure the better offensive units have an edge in minutes played over the better defensive units.

We can play with, and beat any team in the country. Florida is the team that would likely be very difficult for us to beat, but outside of them, I am confident this Duke team, if playing at their highest level, would beat any of the other teams.

Just my opinion.

devilwood
03-17-2014, 12:33 PM
Since the Wake Forest loss, Cook has put up the following numbers:

22.8 mpg, 8.8 ppg, 4.3 apg, 2.3 rpg, 1 spg, 1 topg (4.3:1 a/to), 52.6 fg%, 50.0 3pt%. He hasn't had a bad game in the bunch.

In my opinion, he should be playing 25-30 mpg in every remaining game. We can't have him getting just 12 minutes like he did in the Clemson game.

Cook is a HUGE part of our chances of tourney success. We need him playing at a high level.

But really, we need ALL of our guys playing at a high level from here on out. Sulaimon and Thornton can't throw up clunkers like they both did in the UVa game (combined 1-6, 2 pts, 2 assists, 8 rebounds, 3 turnovers, and 9 fouls) for us to win against good teams. At least 2 of our 3-man guard rotation needs to be having a decent night.

We were playing our best defense of the game in the first part of the second half until TT got his fourth foul. He was in there because the lineup with him in it is very strong.

This is one of the many decisions that our hall of fame coach made. There is a tendency to criticize him and his strategies, but don't kid yourselves. Watching him coach is like eating prime steak and drinking champagne every night of the week. He is the best. He will not always be here, and we are very lucky to have him.

LobstersPinchPinch
03-17-2014, 12:49 PM
This may attract some abuse, but I think we have to acknowledge that our guards are just not that good. Quinn is playing behind Thornton, for the most part, and, over the last five games (i.e. since WF), TT has 10 assists, 6 points, and 18 fouls. Though K obviously thinks he's our best choice, those are really amazingly bad numbers for a Duke starting point guard. Our off-guards haven't been much better. TT's a great kid, as are the others, but you just can't win consistently against good competition with that kind of play from your guards.

I'd slightly modify that to say our guards aren't well-rounded. Each can do some good things, but don't think I see any that can do most/all of what we need our guards to do. I continue to believe that our lack of superior point guard play the past 3 years is the biggest reason we've been less successful than we could have been. Case in point was the team's performance (especially Mason's) with Kyrie at point vs. Nolan. Kyrie's penetration collapsed defenders, and his passing, more often than not, resulted in an open 3 or uncontested layup/dunk from our bigs.

Not having a pure, pass-first point guard detracts significantly from our O potential. If Tyus is as good as advertised next year...

DukeAlumBS
03-17-2014, 01:03 PM
4 games in a row of good play for Quinn now. I think he'll be seeing big minutes going forward.

Now we just have to sort out the Andre situation. Hopefully Andre was sick, gets healthy, gets more playing time and bangs home some clutch threes in the NCAAs.

He needs to play more. If things are not developing in the game. So be it. Hit his 3 but only 1 out of 2 yesterday. He can be a big help for that matter. Andre was 3 out of 5 yesterday!
I think a lot of pressure is aimed to have Parker and Hood get involved. Shot selection a lot of times has not been good for the 2. As with Soulamon. There is no reason to throw up a bad shot. Cook is great at keeping the game flowing. I think he needs to add his shot a bit more in a lot of situations.
Andre is not sick. He needs the time to shoot. That he has been doing! In tight games this opens up a bit more. Has in the past!

Nice day
Jimmy

Des Esseintes
03-17-2014, 01:16 PM
Since the Wake Forest loss, Cook has put up the following numbers:

22.8 mpg, 8.8 ppg, 4.3 apg, 2.3 rpg, 1 spg, 1 topg (4.3:1 a/to), 52.6 fg%, 50.0 3pt%. He hasn't had a bad game in the bunch.

In my opinion, he should be playing 25-30 mpg in every remaining game. We can't have him getting just 12 minutes like he did in the Clemson game.

Cook is a HUGE part of our chances of tourney success. We need him playing at a high level.

But really, we need ALL of our guys playing at a high level from here on out. Sulaimon and Thornton can't throw up clunkers like they both did in the UVa game (combined 1-6, 2 pts, 2 assists, 8 rebounds, 3 turnovers, and 9 fouls) for us to win against good teams. At least 2 of our 3-man guard rotation needs to be having a decent night.
I pretty much agree. The only amendment I would offer is that we'd be fine if two guys stepped forward and *stayed* stepped forward. Cook, Sulaimon, Thornton, Dawkins have all had five-game stretches of fantastic play only to become complete ciphers for other five-game stretches. I don't think we need everybody playing their best ball if we have a couple of guys we know should be the starters. The guys who "should" be starting seems to change week to week.

sagegrouse
03-17-2014, 01:38 PM
This may attract some abuse, but I think we have to acknowledge that our guards are just not that good.

Here's my ranking:

1. Rasheed: will play in the NBA for years and years, due to his explosiveness and developing skills. Does he "look before he leaps?" Naw, not all the time. Is he a skilled point guard? No, but he's a very strong presence on the court.

2. Quinn: What's going on here? Sometimes he's the best player on the court; other times he is very tentative. Is this a leadership problem for the coaches? We NEED Quinn to play well, both as an offensive force and a point guard.

3. Tyler: Almost never makes a mistake on offense, but while his passes are generally good and accurate, he is not mobile enough to be a real wizard as PG. (No, that pass into the upper deck was originally intended for Cook(?) at the point but Ferrantes(?) flashed out and TT made a last minute adjustment to get the ball to Rasheed(?). And "no," I do not review games on DVR when Duke loses -- life is too short.) Tyler is the "coach on the floor" and his occasional threes are most welcome and always at a key moment. Tyler is a warrior on defense and effectively guards much larger players (who are not necessarily stronger than TT). He fouls too much and unwisely, but he is still a positive defensive presence.

4. Andre: No, Andre is not an idiot-savant, a three-point shooter who can do nothing else. He is a good all-around basketball player. who always seems to get to the right place. But he is more a FORWARD than a GUARD. He can play guard, but except as a "mad bomber," he is probably better as Rodney's substitute.

So, what's the conclusion? Duke has four strong, experienced guards but with flaws and inconsistencies. How do they compare with selected Final Four teams of the past?

2010: Scheyer and Nolan, and not counting freshman Dre. A lot more depth, guys. If our current team is "on," we are probably stronger there today.

2004: JJ, Ewing and Duhon. Yikes! We are not nearly as good today, although that team started three guards.

2001: JWill and freshman Duhon. Nate started a lot of games at guard, and Dunleavy (and heck, Shane) had guard skills. More depth at guard today, but no one to come close to Jason's brilliance. That team featured a #1 pick and three other players who are STILL playing in the NBA.

Summary: our guys are pretty good, if Quinn and Andre step up their games. We are getting consistent performances of late from Rasheed and Tyler.

greybeard
03-17-2014, 02:07 PM
I agree. I also think that the issue with confidence in his ability to finish at the rim or with a floater is directly related to the ability of Amile to stay on the court without foul trouble. When Quinn has that option to dump off to in the lane he is 3X more effective because they cannot go hard for the block every time. When Josh (too small) or Marshall (bad hands) is manning the post it makes things harder for Quinn and his confidence declines. Being mercurial as he is it infects all aspects of his game. Amile not fouling leads directly to the good Quinn, IMHO.

There is no evidence that Marshall has "bad hands." To the contrary.

greybeard
03-17-2014, 02:19 PM
Tyler absorbed, stood up to and they "felt" it, an awful lot of UVa's early aggression and put some of it on them himself. And, it is not just that he does that so well, but it his demeanor in doing it. And, all the while making plays, many, of the sort that creates the possibility of creating something better on offense, the sort that stops X from doing Y while he is on defense when Y would make Duke very vulnerable, etc. Very valuable contribution. Very mentally/emotionally wearing, not just physically. Tyler handles it all with ease. Makes opponents handle it all and what that takes out of them is hard to measure.

Seeing Cook come on the court might be a relief for the other guys, even while Cook is much more the threat to make the team sing. Tyler makes the team dance, and, just ask the other guys, it ain't no fox trot.

Newton_14
03-17-2014, 03:13 PM
He needs to play more. If things are not developing in the game. So be it. Hit his 3 but only 1 out of 2 yesterday. He can be a big help for that matter. Andre was 3 out of 5 yesterday!
I think a lot of pressure is aimed to have Parker and Hood get involved. Shot selection a lot of times has not been good for the 2. As with Soulamon. There is no reason to throw up a bad shot. Cook is great at keeping the game flowing. I think he needs to add his shot a bit more in a lot of situations.
Andre is not sick. He needs the time to shoot. That he has been doing! In tight games this opens up a bit more. Has in the past!

Nice day
Jimmy
And you know this how?

lotusland
03-17-2014, 06:05 PM
Since the Wake Forest loss, Cook has put up the following numbers:

22.8 mpg, 8.8 ppg, 4.3 apg, 2.3 rpg, 1 spg, 1 topg (4.3:1 a/to), 52.6 fg%, 50.0 3pt%. He hasn't had a bad game in the bunch.

In my opinion, he should be playing 25-30 mpg in every remaining game. We can't have him getting just 12 minutes like he did in the Clemson game.

Cook is a HUGE part of our chances of tourney success. We need him playing at a high level.

But really, we need ALL of our guys playing at a high level from here on out. Sulaimon and Thornton can't throw up clunkers like they both did in the UVa game (combined 1-6, 2 pts, 2 assists, 8 rebounds, 3 turnovers, and 9 fouls) for us to win against good teams. At least 2 of our 3-man guard rotation needs to be having a decent night.

TT only shoots when he's wide open so I think his 3-pt % is still above 40%. I was more troubled by the pass to Cook I think that sailed into the stands. Thornton gives Duke some much needed toughness which is another way of saying he fouls a lot and usually get's his money's worth on his fouls. I agree we need Cook to play more and play well to advance far. We need Cook, Sheed and Dawkins combined to make 3s at a 40% rate to be really good. Other wise we'll be trying to eek out nail-biters.

WillJ
03-17-2014, 07:06 PM
This discussion makes me wonder somewhat about what Coach K is, in the language economics, trying to maximize. He clearly wants to win, but he also cares, it seems to me, about focus, about toughness, about dedication to the team, and about other things. If he only wanted to win an NCAA title, it seems to my semi-educated eyes that playing Quinn a lot is clearly the best strategy because, while it's still a long-shot, a hot, dialed-in Quinn gives us our best chance. In contrast, I cannot imagine us winning a title with TT playing a lot of minutes. I guess it could happen, but it seems quite unlikely to me.

-jk
03-17-2014, 07:16 PM
This discussion makes me wonder somewhat about what Coach K is, in the language economics, trying to maximize. He clearly wants to win, but he also cares, it seems to me, about focus, about toughness, about dedication to the team, and about other things. If he only wanted to win an NCAA title, it seems to my semi-educated eyes that playing Quinn a lot is clearly the best strategy because, while it's still a long-shot, a hot, dialed-in Quinn gives us our best chance. In contrast, I cannot imagine us winning a title with TT playing a lot of minutes. I guess it could happen, but it seems quite unlikely to me.

K wants to win. K wants to maximize his chances to win. Don't doubt it.

The question is how do you maximize your chances to win. And K has a lot more experience answering that question. (And it drives us nuts trying to understand...)

-jk

77devil
03-17-2014, 09:11 PM
K wants to win. K wants to maximize his chances to win. Don't doubt it.

No doubt.


The question is how do you maximize your chances to win. And K has a lot more experience answering that question. (And it drives us nuts trying to understand...)

-jk

That doesn't change the fact that with TT at point the team's chances are limited. (See Greg Paulus). If maximizing your chances to win is the objective, do you place your bet on an option you know cannot succeed or put the ball in the hands of someone who has the ability, if not always successfully executed, to lead this team to a championship. Throw the dice Coach. It's not like you didn't lose 6 of 8 with TT as a starter.

kshepinthehouse
03-17-2014, 09:18 PM
This discussion makes me wonder somewhat about what Coach K is, in the language economics, trying to maximize. He clearly wants to win, but he also cares, it seems to me, about focus, about toughness, about dedication to the team, and about other things. If he only wanted to win an NCAA title, it seems to my semi-educated eyes that playing Quinn a lot is clearly the best strategy because, while it's still a long-shot, a hot, dialed-in Quinn gives us our best chance. In contrast, I cannot imagine us winning a title with TT playing a lot of minutes. I guess it could happen, but it seems quite unlikely to me.

I know it's not popular but I would have to agree that we won't win a National Championship with Tyler playing a lot of minutes. I think he is valuable to the team, but not at starting point guard with extended minutes. I would love for someone to point out a National Champion with a similar point guard.

Kedsy
03-17-2014, 11:48 PM
That doesn't change the fact that with TT at point the team's chances are limited. (See Greg Paulus).

What does Greg Paulus have to do with Tyler Thornton? Greg was a strong offensive player, a very good shooter and flashy passer who maybe turned the ball over a little too much and who wasn't quick enough to defend very well. Tyler is primarily a strong defensive player, although also a good shooter, not a creative passer but rarely turns the ball over. They're essentially opposites.


If maximizing your chances to win is the objective, do you place your bet on an option you know cannot succeed or put the ball in the hands of someone who has the ability, if not always successfully executed, to lead this team to a championship. Throw the dice Coach. It's not like you didn't lose 6 of 8 with TT as a starter.

First of all, it's also "not like [we] didn't lose" 8 games with Jabari and Rodney starting. Does that mean we can't win with them in the starting lineup?

Second, do you really think that Coach K would start Tyler if he "knew [he couldn't] succeed"? That's ridiculous.

Finally, Tyler started in 7 of our losses, but also in 17 of our wins (70.8% wins). Quinn started 5 of our losses and 17 of our wins (77.3%, not much different from Tyler), while Rasheed started 4 of our losses and 12 of our wins (75.0%, same ballpark). We've also won 75% of the games Rodney started and 76.5% of the games Jabari started. For what it's worth, Andre is 4 and 0 (100%).


I know it's not popular but I would have to agree that we won't win a National Championship with Tyler playing a lot of minutes. I think he is valuable to the team, but not at starting point guard with extended minutes. I would love for someone to point out a National Champion with a similar point guard.

What do you mean, "similar point guard"? There have been several national champions with point guards that didn't score a lot and/or weren't flashy drivers or assist machines.

Tyler's oRating is the best on the team (admittedly with a very low usage rate). His assist percentage (17.8%) is lower than Quinn's (27.5%), but higher than Rasheed's (17.3%). Tyler's A/TO ratio (3.5) is significantly better than both Quinn's (2.7) and Rasheed's (2.2).

Personally, I agree with those who might reduce Tyler's minutes a bit in favor of playing Andre and Quinn some more, but I don't think whether or not he starts will determine whether or not we can make the Final Four or win a championship. Tyler's made enough winning plays, both this season and in his career, that I have no problem at all with him starting.

DukeAlumBS
03-18-2014, 03:21 AM
And you know this how?

My dear friend, he had 3 of 5 from the 3 point range against Virginia. A total of 9. Let him play?
He has done this before for the team.
Again, I assume he is not sick at all.
Nice day
Jimmy

Troublemaker
03-18-2014, 06:08 AM
Folks, I find it difficult to be concerned about Quinn's playing time when he plays well. For the season, he still has played the 3rd-most minutes on the team with a wide gap between him and 4th-place Sheed, even though Quinn has been coming off the bench for about a dozen games now. And it was only recently that Jabari passed him for 2nd-place on the team.

In fact, around midseason, it would've seemed absurd to think Quinn wouldn't play 35+ minutes a game during Duke's NCAA run; the only question would be if Coach K was going to attempt to play him 240 minutes in the tourney. Anyway, I'm very pleased with Quinn's past 4 games, especially since I thought that Quinn recovering his good play would be the key to the season. Even though Duke didn't win in Greensboro, Quinn's play there was a huge positive development for the team. I expect that he'll receive 25mpg going forward, maybe more.

The player I'm much more concerned with minutes-wise is Andre. It would make sense to me for him to receive at least a short stint in each half because he can go on scoring bursts that completely change the game -- create separation when it's a close contest, drive a comeback when Duke is trailing, etc.

kAzE
03-18-2014, 08:35 AM
Since the Wake Forest loss, Cook has put up the following numbers:

22.8 mpg, 8.8 ppg, 4.3 apg, 2.3 rpg, 1 spg, 1 topg (4.3:1 a/to), 52.6 fg%, 50.0 3pt%. He hasn't had a bad game in the bunch.

In my opinion, he should be playing 25-30 mpg in every remaining game. We can't have him getting just 12 minutes like he did in the Clemson game.

Cook is a HUGE part of our chances of tourney success. We need him playing at a high level.

But really, we need ALL of our guys playing at a high level from here on out. Sulaimon and Thornton can't throw up clunkers like they both did in the UVa game (combined 1-6, 2 pts, 2 assists, 8 rebounds, 3 turnovers, and 9 fouls) for us to win against good teams. At least 2 of our 3-man guard rotation needs to be having a decent night.

Agreed, Cook has to be back in the starting lineup. This team found its identity a long time ago, back when we first beat Virginia, and we're going to just have to accept the fact that we aren't even close to being an elite defensive unit. Therefore, we need to take advantage of our strengths, which are excellent ball handling and shooting, along with utilizing the best, most versatile offensive weapon in the college game. We're not going to be able to make every stop, so we need to outscore people.

With Cook in the game, we take a hit on defense, but we capitalize on those strengths, and he's the best facilitator of the offense. Cook's performance many times is a function of his confidence in himself, and of Coach K's confidence in him. He wasn't playing very well in the middle stretch of the conference schedule, but this team's ceiling is capped pretty low when he's on the bench for most of the game. I get it, many times, defense wins championships, but we're just not a strong defensive team. We gotta do what we do best, and that's score the basketball. Quinn Cook makes us a better team because our offense is better when he's on the floor.

On a side note, even though we lost to Virginia due to our excessive fouling on defense, I thought we did a GREAT job getting the ball to Jabari when the game was still close. That's something we need to continue doing. Everytime I see the box score and Jabari only put up 10-12 shots, it's just frustrating. With apologies to Doug McDermott, he's the BEST offensive player in the country. I think Cook can help with this. Give him the ball and get out of the way. I believe if we're going to the promised land this year, Jabari's going to have to be the one carrying the load.

77devil
03-18-2014, 09:47 AM
What does Greg Paulus have to do with Tyler Thornton? Greg was a strong offensive player, a very good shooter and flashy passer who maybe turned the ball over a little too much and who wasn't quick enough to defend very well. Tyler is primarily a strong defensive player, although also a good shooter, not a creative passer but rarely turns the ball over. They're essentially opposites.

Different limitations yes, but nevertheless limited. Characteristics they have in common are a walk up, deliberate pace, average ball handling skills, and the inability to create off the dribble.


First of all, it's also "not like [we] didn't lose" 8 games with Jabari and Rodney starting. Does that mean we can't win with them in the starting lineup?

No, it means you need a floor general who has the skills to fully exploit their abilities. No doubt Quinn's judgement on the floor has been poor at times. My opinion, however, is that the TT experiment has failed. There's no guarantee of success with Quinn leading the team but, in my opinion, this team's ability to advance in the tournament is much more limited with TT at the helm.


Second, do you really think that Coach K would start Tyler if he "knew [he couldn't] succeed"? That's ridiculous.

I suspect he understands and believes exactly that but, nevertheless, benched Quinn and reduced his minutes for good reasons. Look, if you believe this team can advance deep in the tournament led by TT, that's fine. I simply don't share the opinion.


Folks, I find it difficult to be concerned about Quinn's playing time when he plays well. For the season, he still has played the 3rd-most minutes on the team with a wide gap between him and 4th-place Sheed, even though Quinn has been coming off the bench for about a dozen games now. And it was only recently that Jabari passed him for 2nd-place on the team.

In fact, around midseason, it would've seemed absurd to think Quinn wouldn't play 35+ minutes a game during Duke's NCAA run; the only question would be if Coach K was going to attempt to play him 240 minutes in the tourney. Anyway, I'm very pleased with Quinn's past 4 games, especially since I thought that Quinn recovering his good play would be the key to the season. Even though Duke didn't win in Greensboro, Quinn's play there was a huge positive development for the team. I expect that he'll receive 25mpg going forward, maybe more.

The player I'm much more concerned with minutes-wise is Andre. It would make sense to me for him to receive at least a short stint in each half because he can go on scoring bursts that completely change the game -- create separation when it's a close contest, drive a comeback when Duke is trailing, etc.

The season aggregate hides the fact Quinn's minutes per game have declined significantly since he lost the starting role including 11 minutes against Clemson. His additional time against State and UVA was more likely the consequence of TT's fouls. If TT stays out of foul trouble, we'll have to see how much Quinn is on the floor. Andre's role from a significant contributor in some games to DNP is odd, but if Coach K holds to form, I expect a short bench with limited minutes for Andre and Quinn, to a lesser extent. I'm told Coach K is pretty good and knows what he's doing.;)

Saratoga2
03-18-2014, 10:02 AM
When playing well, as Quinn has of late, he is my preferred point guard. I actually would share Tyler's time with Matt, since both bring defensive toughness and not use either at the point but use Rasheed instead. Rasheed's best game is when there is room to slash. He is by far our best at that. The pack line defense totally negated that. Andre is our best 3 point shooter and when paired with Quinn gets opportunities.

Saying that, I believe coach K believes in Tyler's value and will stick with him regardless of the results.

jv001
03-18-2014, 10:06 AM
When playing well, as Quinn has of late, he is my preferred point guard. I actually would share Tyler's time with Matt, since both bring defensive toughness and not use either at the point but use Rasheed instead. Rasheed's best game is when there is room to slash. He is by far our best at that. The pack line defense totally negated that. Andre is our best 3 point shooter and when paired with Quinn gets opportunities.

Saying that, I believe coach K believes in Tyler's value and will stick with him regardless of the results.

Tyler and Matt are very similar players(defense) but actually Tyler is a much better shooter. Matt really needs to work on his shooting in the off season. He is however a good defender and could get a few minutes(2-3) when we need a stop. GoDuke!

CDu
03-18-2014, 10:25 AM
Tyler and Matt are very similar players(defense) but actually Tyler is a much better shooter. Matt really needs to work on his shooting in the off season. He is however a good defender and could get a few minutes(2-3) when we need a stop. GoDuke!

Thornton is a much better shooter and off-ball defender while Jones is a much better on-ball defender.

Kedsy
03-18-2014, 10:47 AM
No, it means you need a floor general who has the skills to fully exploit their abilities. No doubt Quinn's judgement on the floor has been poor at times. My opinion, however, is that the TT experiment has failed. There's no guarantee of success with Quinn leading the team but, in my opinion, this team's ability to advance in the tournament is much more limited with TT at the helm.


Here's Quinn's minutes played in our losses this season: 36, 31, 39, 40, 40, 33, 26, 30, for an average of 34.4 mpg. Against Virginia in the ACC final, Quinn played 30 minutes and Tyler played 19. I don't know to what "TT experiment" you're referring, but how in the world are you blaming this on Tyler?

azzefkram
03-18-2014, 11:10 AM
Here's Quinn's minutes played in our losses this season: 36, 31, 39, 40, 40, 33, 26, 30, for an average of 34.4 mpg. Against Virginia in the ACC final, Quinn played 30 minutes and Tyler played 19. I don't know to what "TT experiment" you're referring, but how in the world are you blaming this on Tyler?

It's not Tyler's fault but you can't look at minutes without looking at why Tyler's minutes are limited. Tyler fouled out of 3 of our losses in about 22 mpg. In two other losses he had 4. Duke wins as a team and loses as a team. Some here (not you) like to whip out the big finger of blame after every loss.

My personal opinion is that while our floor may be slightly higher with Tyler playing starter minutes, our ceiling is significantly lower.

Matches
03-18-2014, 11:13 AM
It's not Tyler's fault but you can't look at minutes without looking at why Tyler's minutes are limited. Tyler fouled out of 3 of our losses in about 22 mpg. In two other losses he had 4.

While I'd concede that TT is foul-prone, one of the reasons he gets in foul trouble is that he gives his fouls freely to prevent easy baskets. His 4th against UVa was of that variety. That provides value to the team, and it seems unfair to then ding him for it. As the (let's face it) 6th or 7th best player on the team, one of the things he can provide that Cook or Sheed can't is the ability to give himself up.

Troublemaker
03-18-2014, 11:38 AM
The season aggregate hides the fact Quinn's minutes per game have declined significantly since he lost the starting role including 11 minutes against Clemson. His additional time against State and UVA was more likely the consequence of TT's fouls. If TT stays out of foul trouble, we'll have to see how much Quinn is on the floor. Andre's role from a significant contributor in some games to DNP is odd, but if Coach K holds to form, I expect a short bench with limited minutes for Andre and Quinn, to a lesser extent. I'm told Coach K is pretty good and knows what he's doing.;)

Well, I wasn't trying to "hide" anything. Just pointing out that Coach K obviously has no trouble playing Quinn big minutes when he deserves it.



Saying that, I believe coach K believes in Tyler's value and will stick with him regardless of the results.

How do teenagers put it? That's retarded?

This hysteria reminds me of earlier in the season when Tyler was playing ahead of Sheed and it was obvious to me (but apparently not to a lot of people) that once Sheed started playing better, he would receive big minutes again and possibly start. Same thing here. Quinn, if he keeps up his good play, will receive big minutes. Coach K clearly has no issue with giving him those minutes. As for "results" though, Tylers +/- is higher than Quinn's, and since the start of conference play, Tyler's +/- actually blows away Quinn's. These past few games, though, Quinn seems to have restored his good play and he's played better than Tyler. I expect Quinn to see a minutes bump. Wouldn't be shocked if he started.

Why is Tyler the default when other guards slump? I think it's because many of things he provides do NOT slump.

Des Esseintes
03-18-2014, 11:52 AM
Saying that, I believe coach K believes in Tyler's value and will stick with him regardless of the results.



How do teenagers put it? That's retarded?

This hysteria reminds me of earlier in the season when Tyler was playing ahead of Sheed and it was obvious to me (but apparently not to a lot of people) that once Sheed started playing better, he would receive big minutes again and possibly start. Same thing here. Quinn, if he keeps up his good play, will receive big minutes. Coach K clearly has no issue with giving him those minutes. As for "results" though, Tylers +/- is higher than Quinn's, and since the start of conference play, Tyler's +/- actually blows away Quinn's. These past few games, though, Quinn seems to have restored his good play and he's played better than Tyler. I expect Quinn to see a minutes bump. Wouldn't be shocked if he started.

Why is Tyler the default when other guards slump? I think it's because many of things he provides do NOT slump.

Another pattern to be noted: I believe Saratoga does not believe in Tyler's value and will call for his minutes to be reduced regardless of the results. That's been an extremely consistent refrain from him this season.

azzefkram
03-18-2014, 01:01 PM
While I'd concede that TT is foul-prone, one of the reasons he gets in foul trouble is that he gives his fouls freely to prevent easy baskets. His 4th against UVa was of that variety. That provides value to the team, and it seems unfair to then ding him for it. As the (let's face it) 6th or 7th best player on the team, one of the things he can provide that Cook or Sheed can't is the ability to give himself up.

A foul provides minimal if any value to the team so it is absolutely fair to ding him for it. A basket can be made up. A foul can't. As a senior he should know not to foul in that situation. Tyler does a lot of things well but efficiently using his fouls isn't one of them.

My point wasn't that Tyler fouls too much (he does), but his minutes are often limited not by Coach K but by his foul situation.

flyingdutchdevil
03-18-2014, 01:28 PM
A foul provides minimal if any value to the team so it is absolutely fair to ding him for it. A basket can be made up. A foul can't. As a senior he should know not to foul in that situation. Tyler does a lot of things well but efficiently using his fouls isn't one of them.

My point wasn't that Tyler fouls too much (he does), but his minutes are often limited not by Coach K but by his foul situation.

I think you're right and wrong. The first part about fouls in general is correct. Also, seniors knowing when and how to foul is also correct.

But I'm not too sure on your take on Tyler. Yes - he fouls. A ton. And yes. His minutes are absolutely limited by his fouling. But I'm not sure they are bad fouls. I've come to know a bad Tyler foul when he puts his hands behind his head and does what I call the "Tyler Face" (scrunched nose, left-side of the lip turned up). It's a sight we see once every two games or so.

Tyler fouls hard. So hard, in fact, that he's probably the most disliked player on our team by opposing teams.

All in all, I trust Tyler with fouling. I don't trust Jabari, Hood, Jefferson, Sulaimon, or Cook with fouling. But I do trust Tyler.

vick
03-18-2014, 02:00 PM
This hysteria reminds me of earlier in the season when Tyler was playing ahead of Sheed and it was obvious to me (but apparently not to a lot of people) that once Sheed started playing better, he would receive big minutes again and possibly start. Same thing here. Quinn, if he keeps up his good play, will receive big minutes. Coach K clearly has no issue with giving him those minutes. As for "results" though, Tylers +/- is higher than Quinn's, and since the start of conference play, Tyler's +/- actually blows away Quinn's. These past few games, though, Quinn seems to have restored his good play and he's played better than Tyler. I expect Quinn to see a minutes bump. Wouldn't be shocked if he started.

Why is Tyler the default when other guards slump? I think it's because many of things he provides do NOT slump.

Not that I disagree with your basic point, but where are you getting +/- stats from? Using Statsheet, for the season it looks like Cook is at +237 in 1007 minutes this season, or 9.4 per 40. Tyler's +173 in 722 minutes for 9.6. I'd say by any reasonable standard they are equivalent here, although the fact that Tyler performance is nearly equal to someone people thought, optimistically but not completely unreasonably, might be one of the best point guards in the country this season is certainly evidence of his value.

azzefkram
03-18-2014, 02:07 PM
I think you're right and wrong. The first part about fouls in general is correct. Also, seniors knowing when and how to foul is also correct.

But I'm not too sure on your take on Tyler. Yes - he fouls. A ton. And yes. His minutes are absolutely limited by his fouling. But I'm not sure they are bad fouls. I've come to know a bad Tyler foul when he puts his hands behind his head and does what I call the "Tyler Face" (scrunched nose, left-side of the lip turned up). It's a sight we see once every two games or so.

Tyler fouls hard. So hard, in fact, that he's probably the most disliked player on our team by opposing teams.

All in all, I trust Tyler with fouling. I don't trust Jabari, Hood, Jefferson, Sulaimon, or Cook with fouling. But I do trust Tyler.

Tyler definitely get his money's worth on his fouls which is a good thing but anytime your ability to be on the floor is limited you can't say he's using his fouls efficiently. I chuckle when people toss out Tyler's per 40 numbers because at best he should have per 36 numbers. Tyler also has the worse FC/FD ratio of any non-Josh player on the team. Jabari, Rodney, Sheed and Quinn all have favorable FC/FD ratios.

flyingdutchdevil
03-18-2014, 02:13 PM
Tyler definitely get his money's worth on his fouls which is a good thing but anytime your ability to be on the floor is limited you can't say he's using his fouls efficiently. I chuckle when people toss out Tyler's per 40 numbers because at best he should have per 36 numbers. Tyler also has the worse FC/FD ratio of any non-Josh player on the team. Jabari, Rodney, Sheed and Quinn all have favorable FC/FD ratios.

I assume that a lot of this is because those four players are our best offensive players and are under guidance to not foul as much. Tyler, on the other hand, looks as if he is given free-reign to foul. Obviously, he's not going to foul because he has 5 fouls (and I'll admit that he sometimes does, but it's not as often as fans think), but rather limit the opposing team to easy buckets, which is something we see often due to our porous defense.

Again, I love Tyler. I have come to appreciate what he brings to the team. He is a clearly limited player, but his toughness and number of winning plays is a God send because this team seems to lack both of those qualities.

Matches
03-18-2014, 02:21 PM
I assume that a lot of this is because those four players are our best offensive players and are under guidance to not foul as much. Tyler, on the other hand, looks as if he is given free-reign to foul. Obviously, he's not going to foul because he has 5 fouls (and I'll admit that he sometimes does, but it's not as often as fans think), but rather limit the opposing team to easy buckets, which is something we see often due to our porous defense.


Yes, this. I don't agree that there's no value from a foul. The phrase "make 'em earn it at the line" became a cliche for a reason. TT is a supporting character in the drama that is Duke Basketball and sometimes there is value in having someone out there who is, for lack of a better term, expendable.

With that said, it's also true that TT sometimes commits bad fouls far from the basket - I wouldn't necessarily say he manages his fouls efficiently - but something like his 4th vs UVa does provide a benefit to the team.

jv001
03-18-2014, 02:26 PM
I assume that a lot of this is because those four players are our best offensive players and are under guidance to not foul as much. Tyler, on the other hand, looks as if he is given free-reign to foul. Obviously, he's not going to foul because he has 5 fouls (and I'll admit that he sometimes does, but it's not as often as fans think), but rather limit the opposing team to easy buckets, which is something we see often due to our porous defense.

Again, I love Tyler. I have come to appreciate what he brings to the team. He is a clearly limited player, but his toughness and number of winning plays is a God send because this team seems to lack both of those qualities.

Good points(bolded) and I agree. If every Duke player had the heart Tyler does, we wouldn't have 8 losses this season. But I do believe the refs see that Tyler fouls, fouls hard and often. Therefore he never get's the benefit on calls and I agree he has made numerous fouls stopping layups that were caused by bad defense or bad shot selection. It has to be hard for Coach K to deal out the correct amount of minutes for everyone not named Rodney or Jabari. GoDuke!

Saratoga2
03-18-2014, 02:28 PM
Well, I wasn't trying to "hide" anything. Just pointing out that Coach K obviously has no trouble playing Quinn big minutes when he deserves it.



How do teenagers put it? That's retarded?

This hysteria reminds me of earlier in the season when Tyler was playing ahead of Sheed and it was obvious to me (but apparently not to a lot of people) that once Sheed started playing better, he would receive big minutes again and possibly start. Same thing here. Quinn, if he keeps up his good play, will receive big minutes. Coach K clearly has no issue with giving him those minutes. As for "results" though, Tylers +/- is higher than Quinn's, and since the start of conference play, Tyler's +/- actually blows away Quinn's. These past few games, though, Quinn seems to have restored his good play and he's played better than Tyler. I expect Quinn to see a minutes bump. Wouldn't be shocked if he started.

Why is Tyler the default when other guards slump? I think it's because many of things he provides do NOT slump.

His value is defensive but he does foul at a high rate and he puts up anemic scoring numbers. We shall see relative value in the NCAAs

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
03-18-2014, 02:33 PM
Yes, this. I don't agree that there's no value from a foul. The phrase "make 'em earn it at the line" became a cliche for a reason. TT is a supporting character in the drama that is Duke Basketball and sometimes there is value in having someone out there who is, for lack of a better term, expendable.

With that said, it's also true that TT sometimes commits bad fouls far from the basket - I wouldn't necessarily say he manages his fouls efficiently - but something like his 4th vs UVa does provide a benefit to the team.

Good foul: stopping a fast break without giving the opportunity for a three point play

Bad foul: trying to stop the break, fouling with the body, the shot goes in anyways

Good foul: poking your hands in, knockin the ball away, getting called for the contact

Bad foul: hand check 25 feet from the basket

Good foul: trying to draw the charge, 50/50 call goes against you

Bad foul: getting beat by your man, fouling from behind swatting your arms down

Matches
03-18-2014, 02:39 PM
His value is defensive but he does foul at a high rate and he puts up anemic scoring numbers. We shall see relative value in the NCAAs

Could have said the same thing about Lance Thomas circa 2010 - avgd. less than 5 ppg and got in foul trouble relatively often. His value, like TT's, wasn't always evident on the stat sheet.

flyingdutchdevil
03-18-2014, 02:45 PM
Could have said the same thing about Lance Thomas circa 2010 - avgd. less than 5 ppg and got in foul trouble relatively often. His value, like TT's, wasn't always evident on the stat sheet.

I'd agree, but I would add that Lance Thomas was one of the best on-ball defender and team defender in the last decade at Duke. Tyler is a great team defender and okay on-ball defender. However, I wouldn't even put TT as a top 10 defender in the last decade.

Lance may not have contributed offensively, but his D was a big part of the reason we won in 2010.

jv001
03-18-2014, 02:48 PM
I'd agree, but I would add that Lance Thomas was one of the best on-ball defender and team defender in the last decade at Duke. Tyler is a great team defender and okay on-ball defender. However, I wouldn't even put TT as a top 10 defender in the last decade.

Lance may not have contributed offensively, but his D was a big part of the reason we won in 2010.

Lance could guard the 1-5 positions when called upon. He also worked on his mid-range jumper and was able to hit some key shots down the stretch his senior year. GoDuke!

roywhite
03-18-2014, 02:55 PM
Could have said the same thing about Lance Thomas circa 2010 - avgd. less than 5 ppg and got in foul trouble relatively often. His value, like TT's, wasn't always evident on the stat sheet.


I'd agree, but I would add that Lance Thomas was one of the best on-ball defender and team defender in the last decade at Duke. Tyler is a great team defender and okay on-ball defender. However, I wouldn't even put TT as a top 10 defender in the last decade.

Lance may not have contributed offensively, but his D was a big part of the reason we won in 2010.


Lance could guard the 1-5 positions when called upon. He also worked on his mid-range jumper and was able to hit some key shots down the stretch his senior year. GoDuke!

Another good word for Lance here. After checking some of his stats, I think it's fair to say he was an improved player as a senior:
Played more minutes
Upped his rebounding
Shot much better from the FT line
Fouled at a lower rate per minute

and, though difficult to measure through stats, he was really an excellent, versatile defender.

77devil
03-18-2014, 03:08 PM
Yes, this. I don't agree that there's no value from a foul. The phrase "make 'em earn it at the line" became a cliche for a reason. TT is a supporting character in the drama that is Duke Basketball and sometimes there is value in having someone out there who is, for lack of a better term, expendable.

With that said, it's also true that TT sometimes commits bad fouls far from the basket - I wouldn't necessarily say he manages his fouls efficiently - but something like his 4th vs UVa does provide a benefit to the team.

If a team's starting point guard is a supporting character, I submit that the team is limited. I love the energy and heart that Tyler brings to this team in an off the bench supporting role, but if he continues to start and take major minutes at the point, I fear an earlier than otherwise exit.

flyingdutchdevil
03-18-2014, 03:11 PM
If a team's starting point guard is a supporting character, I submit that the team is limited. I love the energy and heart that Tyler brings to this team in an off the bench supporting role, but if he continues to start and take major minutes at the point, I fear an earlier than otherwise exit.

He's not. Sulaimon is the team's starting point guard. He handles the ball much more than Tyler and usually guards the opposing 1.

77devil
03-18-2014, 03:19 PM
He's not. Sulaimon is the team's starting point guard. He handles the ball much more than Tyler and usually guards the opposing 1.

I disagree. Tyler almost always brings the ball up the court, the role of the point, and very slowly I might add. Tyler calls the play when he crosses mid court. Sheed may handle the ball more, which is debatable, but he does so more often than not to try to create his own shot, not distribute. When Quinn subs in, it is almost always for Tyler. K never matches D assignments solely by position. Sheed guards the one because he is a better on ball defender than Tyler.

superdave
03-18-2014, 03:25 PM
I'd agree, but I would add that Lance Thomas was one of the best on-ball defender and team defender in the last decade at Duke. Tyler is a great team defender and okay on-ball defender. However, I wouldn't even put TT as a top 10 defender in the last decade.

Lance may not have contributed offensively, but his D was a big part of the reason we won in 2010.


Lance could guard the 1-5 positions when called upon. He also worked on his mid-range jumper and was able to hit some key shots down the stretch his senior year. GoDuke!

Lance was important because he and Singler complimented each other. Singler and Thomas often switched defensive assignments based on the relative quickness of the opponent because Lance was more equipped to guard a quick 3. Lance could also switch off and guard the 1 and 2 positions without too much trouble, which really enabled us to switch nearly every screen that didnt involve Zoubek/Ryan or the Plums. That was huge for us that year.

The idea with Tyler is he plays the passing lanes really well and if Rasheed can guard the ball really well, it makes our D better and helps our frontcourt get into the passing lanes some too. It works for some stretches, but not all. And it works for short stretches but not long ones.

Matches
03-18-2014, 03:30 PM
If a team's starting point guard is a supporting character, I submit that the team is limited. I love the energy and heart that Tyler brings to this team in an off the bench supporting role, but if he continues to start and take major minutes at the point, I fear an earlier than otherwise exit.

Eh, maybe. On the other hand, Tyler started at the point @ Pitt, vs. Syracuse, and vs. UNC. He started alongside Quinn vs. Michigan and vs. UCLA. The only one of our really quality wins that TT didn't start was the UVa game in Cameron.

I think most would agree that our "optimal" team if there is such a thing has Quinn running the point and running it well. But as it stands, with the exception of the Clemson game, Quinn has been running the point for the majority of the game recently. So I guess I'm not sure what the problem is? Is it just a matter of who starts?

roywhite
03-18-2014, 03:54 PM
Eh, maybe. On the other hand, Tyler started at the point @ Pitt, vs. Syracuse, and vs. UNC. He started alongside Quinn vs. Michigan and vs. UCLA. The only one of our really quality wins that TT didn't start was the UVa game in Cameron.

I think most would agree that our "optimal" team if there is such a thing has Quinn running the point and running it well. But as it stands, with the exception of the Clemson game, Quinn has been running the point for the majority of the game recently. So I guess I'm not sure what the problem is? Is it just a matter of who starts?

Well, the problem is we don't defend very well; can't stop teams esp. in the last 8 to 10 mintues.

So far, tinkering with lineup changes and different backcourt combinations hasn't solved it.

greybeard
03-18-2014, 04:43 PM
When Tyler is on the court, Duke runs more sets, multiple on each possession and does so seamlessly. Don't know that they are not called, at least in many instances, or that others do not initiate, aka 2-man ball on the offside between Rasheed and Amile, but the offense is geared to the half court with a priority on getting it to Parker, principally to attack the rim, to Hood, then Hood and Rasheed, and then also Amile, as the clock progresses, of course with variations--priorities are not fixed, and Hood obviously can go and they look to get it to him where he likes often as a two man game with Parker--Hood has the option to take it himself, even while looking to Parker as the preference.

Tyler is tough minded and disciplined without tensing mentally/emotionally or physically, although UVa strained that towards the end (the pass).

Cook can score the ball when the offense stalls, and, if his game is rolling, he jumps up as a very reliable end in the clock option. I think Troublemaker has a point here about his minutes and whomever called it that Rasheed handles more than Thornton when the two are on the court, playing a sort of point wing, turns on a light for me.

Thornton to me remains the Story in college basketball. I think that Duke has 4 sure number 1 picks (Amile and Rasheed when they go), and two or three other guys who will make the league, and might stick around for a reasonable period of time. For Thornton to play such an important and diverse roll on a team with that kind of talent and do it well to me is a remarkable story. Courage, leadership, poise, strength, thinking and acting the game with minimal intervention of the abstraction called words (see http://www.ted.com/talks/ajit_narayanan_a_word_game_to_communicate_in_any_l anguage), and the ability to make plays, all in an improbable package and amidst an incredible array of talent, including the talent that it is Cook, whom I think makes the NBA and has impact. Then there is the fact that Thornton wears the other team out in any number of ways, all the more so because they see their talents as superior to his. Different, not superior, not by a long shot.

The story of the year that might not get told (I'm working on my man T).

Kedsy
03-18-2014, 05:40 PM
When Tyler is on the court, Duke runs more sets, multiple on each possession and does so seamlessly. Don't know that they are not called, at least in many instances, or that others do not initiate, aka 2-man ball on the offside between Rasheed and Amile, but the offense is geared to the half court with a priority on getting it to Parker, principally to attack the rim, to Hood, then Hood and Rasheed, and then also Amile, as the clock progresses, of course with variations--priorities are not fixed, and Hood obviously can go and they look to get it to him where he likes often as a two man game with Parker--Hood has the option to take it himself, even while looking to Parker as the preference.

Tyler is tough minded and disciplined without tensing mentally/emotionally or physically, although UVa strained that towards the end (the pass).

Cook can score the ball when the offense stalls, and, if his game is rolling, he jumps up as a very reliable end in the clock option. I think Troublemaker has a point here about his minutes and whomever called it that Rasheed handles more than Thornton when the two are on the court, playing a sort of point wing, turns on a light for me.

Thornton to me remains the Story in college basketball. I think that Duke has 4 sure number 1 picks (Amile and Rasheed when they go), and two or three other guys who will make the league, and might stick around for a reasonable period of time. For Thornton to play such an important and diverse roll on a team with that kind of talent and do it well to me is a remarkable story. Courage, leadership, poise, strength, thinking and acting the game with minimal intervention of the abstraction called words (see http://www.ted.com/talks/ajit_narayanan_a_word_game_to_communicate_in_any_l anguage), and the ability to make plays, all in an improbable package and amidst an incredible array of talent, including the talent that it is Cook, whom I think makes the NBA and has impact. Then there is the fact that Thornton wears the other team out in any number of ways, all the more so because they see their talents as superior to his. Different, not superior, not by a long shot.

The story of the year that might not get told (I'm working on my man T).

I just want to say how happy I am that after four years you've finally spelled Tyler's last name correctly. Well done, Mr. Beard, and thank you.

AZLA
03-18-2014, 05:45 PM
Actually, I think he's been playing really well as of recently -- and the whole team would benefit if AD got in the game more.

77devil
03-18-2014, 05:45 PM
Eh, maybe. On the other hand, Tyler started at the point @ Pitt, vs. Syracuse, and vs. UNC. He started alongside Quinn vs. Michigan and vs. UCLA. The only one of our really quality wins that TT didn't start was the UVa game in Cameron.

I think most would agree that our "optimal" team if there is such a thing has Quinn running the point and running it well. But as it stands, with the exception of the Clemson game, Quinn has been running the point for the majority of the game recently. So I guess I'm not sure what the problem is? Is it just a matter of who starts?


It's not starting per se. Quinn's minutes have diminished considerably since the Clemson loss. Many of his minutes have been with the 2nd platoon or combinations other than the starting five. He was usually in the mid 30's to 40 minutes before Clemson, and except for at Syracuse has generally been in the twenties and sometimes in the teens or even less. To me that's a problem. We agree that Quinn running the point and running it well is preferable. But it appears he'll only get the opportunity if TT gets into foul trouble.

Troublemaker
03-18-2014, 07:59 PM
Not that I disagree with your basic point, but where are you getting +/- stats from?

Also Statsheet. When I wrote "since the start of conference play," I meant tallying only conference games. If one accepts +/- as a useful stat (which one might not), it seems as if Tyler had a much greater impact than Quinn in conference games until the ACC tourney.

Newton_14
03-18-2014, 10:58 PM
It's not starting per se. Quinn's minutes have diminished considerably since the Clemson loss. Many of his minutes have been with the 2nd platoon or combinations other than the starting five. He was usually in the mid 30's to 40 minutes before Clemson, and except for at Syracuse has generally been in the twenties and sometimes in the teens or even less. To me that's a problem. We agree that Quinn running the point and running it well is preferable. But it appears he'll only get the opportunity if TT gets into foul trouble.

I think your memory is off. The Clemson game was early in the conference schedulle. Quinn started and played like 32+ minutes or more for the 1st Half of the year. We went to the hockey line platoon after the Clemson loss (starting with UVA game). Quinn still started and played 25+ mpg up until he hurt his ankles in the Pitt game. (All this is from memory. I have not checked yet but will).

Starting around the GaTech road game, K put Tyler back in the starting lineup, and Quinn's minutes went way down at that point. it may have been a game or two prior to Gatech, I will have to look.

You are right about his minutes going down, I just think your timeline is off a bit.

77devil
03-19-2014, 07:37 AM
I think your memory is off. The Clemson game was early in the conference schedulle. Quinn started and played like 32+ minutes or more for the 1st Half of the year. We went to the hockey line platoon after the Clemson loss (starting with UVA game). Quinn still started and played 25+ mpg up until he hurt his ankles in the Pitt game. (All this is from memory. I have not checked yet but will).

Starting around the GaTech road game, K put Tyler back in the starting lineup, and Quinn's minutes went way down at that point. it may have been a game or two prior to Gatech, I will have to look.

You are right about his minutes going down, I just think your timeline is off a bit.

Your memory is pretty good. Better than mine because I looked up data though not all. I meant to write after Clemson. Quinn had most games in the mid to high 30s and at least three with all 40 through and including Clemson. He went just below 30 in the next game and stayed in the mid+ 20s until at Syracuse which I believe is his last start and is the game I remember him tweaking his ankle. That alone is a 25%-30% decline from the period through Clemson which is significant in my opinion.

I didn't write that he began playing with the second unit after Clemson, and did not mean to imply it either.

After Syracuse he dropped into the low 20s and teens, initially because of the ankle had I assumed at the time. But until last weekend, when Tyler was in early foul trouble against State and UVA, his minutes and role after the game in The Carrier Dome have been materially diminished.

Troublemaker
03-19-2014, 08:12 AM
I disagree. Tyler almost always brings the ball up the court, the role of the point, and very slowly I might add. Tyler calls the play when he crosses mid court. Sheed may handle the ball more, which is debatable, but he does so more often than not to try to create his own shot, not distribute. When Quinn subs in, it is almost always for Tyler. K never matches D assignments solely by position. Sheed guards the one because he is a better on ball defender than Tyler.

I would agree that Tyler's been the PG on offense in recent games. What's interesting is that kind of evolved over time.

When Sheed and Tyler first linked up in the line change era, along with Andre, they were magic. And Sheed was clearly the PG at that time.

Sheed used his improved play on the B-line to upgrade to being a starter at PG. That's why there were articles written by local media and discussions had on EKB about Sheed playing more PG and looking good there. We didn't imagine all that.

Over time, though, Sheed and Tyler (who also became a starter) kind of became co-PGs. Especially because Duke kept running into zone defenses and we used a 2-guard front to attack most of them. In the 2-guard front attack, it's hard to say one guard is the PG and one guard is the SG. Both are responsible for making penetrating passes to the high post and the low post. Sheed obviously did drive more out of that look than Tyler.

Then finally, on Senior Night, Tyler and Andre started in the backcourt as PG and SG respectively. Since the opening tip of that game, Tyler has played the vast majority of his minutes as PG. (On offense; he still guards off-the-ball on defense except when he and Dre were together in the backcourt on Senior Night).

Gotta say... I think Tyler was more effective when he played almost all his minutes as SG. And it's not a great sign for our team that Coach K is still tinkering with his guard configurations this late in the season to try to find something that works.

Hopefully Quinn's improved play of late continues and will simplify and solve some of the guard issues Duke has been having.

jv001
03-19-2014, 12:25 PM
I would agree that Tyler's been the PG on offense in recent games. What's interesting is that kind of evolved over time.

When Sheed and Tyler first linked up in the line change era, along with Andre, they were magic. And Sheed was clearly the PG at that time.

Sheed used his improved play on the B-line to upgrade to being a starter at PG. That's why there were articles written by local media and discussions had on EKB about Sheed playing more PG and looking good there. We didn't imagine all that.

Over time, though, Sheed and Tyler (who also became a starter) kind of became co-PGs. Especially because Duke kept running into zone defenses and we used a 2-guard front to attack most of them. In the 2-guard front attack, it's hard to say one guard is the PG and one guard is the SG. Both are responsible for making penetrating passes to the high post and the low post. Sheed obviously did drive more out of that look than Tyler.

Then finally, on Senior Night, Tyler and Andre started in the backcourt as PG and SG respectively. Since the opening tip of that game, Tyler has played the vast majority of his minutes as PG. (On offense; he still guards off-the-ball on defense except when he and Dre were together in the backcourt on Senior Night).

Gotta say... I think Tyler was more effective when he played almost all his minutes as SG. And it's not a great sign for our team that Coach K is still tinkering with his guard configurations this late in the season to try to find something that works.

Hopefully Quinn's improved play of late continues and will simplify and solve some of the guard issues Duke has been having.

And this is why I hope someone knocks off Louisville before we would meet them(if we win our games). I think our guard play would hurt us against Louisville's pressure defense. I'm not saying Louisville is a great team this year but they are a very good team that is a bad matchup for Duke. At least that's the way I see it. GoDuke!