Ideal Minutes Breakdown?

[richardjackson199]

I posted the following in the playing time for Dawkins thread but it quickly got buried. I'm curious what others think. As one poster pointed out, none of us fans have close to 1000 wins. But we have opinions, hence the joy of a message board a few days before the big dance.

I would like to see what our team can do with the following minutes breakdown. I love all our players and how they represent Duke on and off the floor. I just think the following minutes breakdown would give our team a better chance to win (than some of these recent performances where our team goes on long droughts on the offensive end or long stretches on the defensive end where our opponent scores on almost every possession). I don't think Rasheed needs less playing time as some have suggested. Rasheed can be very effective at slashing, drawing fouls, defense vs. best perimeter opposing player, and setting his teammates up for beautiful assists. I love seeing Rasheed play with Dawkins, Hood, Jabari, and Cook. As I've mentioned elsewhere, I believe Cook has the ability to be an elite point guard and we will need to primarily rely on him to have a chance to be very successful in the dance.

Also, the positions I list below are not true positions in K's system. Many of the guards/wings/positions are interchangeable at times. Jabari is a phenomenal "player without position" as he was recruited to be. So I don't consider him to be a true 5 Center.

I'd love to see the following playing time breakdown in the NCAAT by "position":

1. Cook 85 %; Thornton 15 % (with Thornton starting both halves to set the defensive tone and attitude first; Thornton also could be inserted in brief stints when the team needs a defensive spark or Thornton inserted "to make a play")

2. Hood 70 %; Dawkins 30 %

3. Sulaimon 75%; Hood 15 %; Dawkins 10 % (For these 2 & 3 positions give a guy more minutes if he gets hot. But don't take more minutes away if a guy misses a couple shots.) (For these 2 & 3 positions sub Matt Jones in as needed to rest a guy; or if a guy picks up 2 quick fouls; foul trouble; or if a guy is really not playing well on defense, etc.)

4. Jefferson 75 %; Plumlee 25 % (Adjust these percentages based on matchups and need for size vs. quickness around the basket)

5. Parker 100 % (for 4 & 5 positions sub in Ojeleye/Hairston as needed to rest a guy, if a guy gets 2 quick fouls or foul trouble, or if somebody isn't playing well).

As Kedsy rightly pointed out - it is not realistic to think Thornton will play 6 minutes or Parker will play 40. I just mean I would use the above percentages as starting points which in my opinion might lead to more success than some of the lineups we've seen more of. As another poster rightly pointed out - you can't apply the same formula to every team we play. Agreed - it's all about exploiting matchups. But again I think using the above percentages as a starting point can help us match up pretty well against most teams.
I posted this again in a new thread because I respect your opinions and am curious what lineup percentages others might like to see. Feel free to trash my suggestions! :)

Go Duke in NCAA!! I hated seeing our "region of death" bracket at first glance. But now I like it and think the challenge could be good and motivating for our team. One game at a time.

[-jk]

Wouldn't it depend on who we play?

-jk

[Newton_14]

Wouldn't it depend on who we play?

-jk
It would for me yes. On that note, I thought of our 3 opponents this past weekend, State would have been the best team to play Andre more minutes against. They could not defend the 3 point line to save their lives, and Andre could defend all of their guards and wings effectively not name TJ. I felt UVA was slightly more difficult for him, with Clemson being the toughest matchup for Andre. Yet he started against Clemson, got a DNP against State, and only got in against UVA once all other options had been tried first. HA. So what do I know? :)

[Kedsy]

As Kedsy rightly pointed out - it is not realistic to think Thornton will play 6 minutes or Parker will play 40. I just mean I would use the above percentages as starting points which in my opinion might lead to more success than some of the lineups we've seen more of.

Yeah, I still don't think it's realistic, even as a starting point. Jabari gets tired at the end of games. I'm sure there will be games where Coach K feels the need to play Jabari as many minutes as possible, but it may be more important to keep him fresh. I'd say the starting point for Jabari ought to be in the low 30s, and if he's not tired and we need him then that goes up. It shouldn't be the other way around.

And Tyler has earned the right to play a whole lot more than 6 minutes. My personal choice would be around 15 minutes for Tyler, but at this point I don't think even that's realistic. If you're not penciling Tyler in for 18 to 25 minutes (or possibly even more, but I hope not because I still hold out hope for Andre to get meaningful minutes), then your combinations have very little chance of actually happening in games.

[Newton_14]

Yeah, I still don't think it's realistic, even as a starting point. Jabari gets tired at the end of games. I'm sure there will be games where Coach K feels the need to play Jabari as many minutes as possible, but it may be more important to keep him fresh. I'd say the starting point for Jabari ought to be in the low 30s, and if he's not tired and we need him then that goes up. It shouldn't be the other way around.

And Tyler has earned the right to play a whole lot more than 6 minutes. My personal choice would be around 15 minutes for Tyler, but at this point I don't think even that's realistic. If you're not penciling Tyler in for 18 to 25 minutes (or possibly even more, but I hope not because I still hold out hope for Andre to get meaningful minutes), then your combinations have very little chance of actually happening in games.

I agree on Tyler. Lost in all this is the fact Tyler is a darn good basketball player that has helped this team in a lot of ways. 6 minutes is ridiculous. We need his defense and toughness. I know 32 minutes is too much but the right answer certainly ain't 6 mpg. I also love Matt Jones, but in all honesty he is a freshman that has his entire career ahead of him, and has not progressed enough yet to take minutes from the two Seniors (Tyler/Andre) or from Rasheed. His time will come but it aint now in my opinion. If we go down, I want to go down with our 4 guys named Quinn, Tyler, Rasheed, Andre.

[CDu]

Yeah, I still don't think it's realistic, even as a starting point. Jabari gets tired at the end of games. I'm sure there will be games where Coach K feels the need to play Jabari as many minutes as possible, but it may be more important to keep him fresh. I'd say the starting point for Jabari ought to be in the low 30s, and if he's not tired and we need him then that goes up. It shouldn't be the other way around.

And Tyler has earned the right to play a whole lot more than 6 minutes. My personal choice would be around 15 minutes for Tyler, but at this point I don't think even that's realistic. If you're not penciling Tyler in for 18 to 25 minutes (or possibly even more, but I hope not because I still hold out hope for Andre to get meaningful minutes), then your combinations have very little chance of actually happening in games.

I agree with this completely. If I had my druthers, I'd like to see a breakdown something like this:

C: Jefferson (23), Plumlee (17)
PF: Parker (35), Jefferson (5)
SF: Hood (35), Dawkins/Jones (5)
SG: Thornton (15), Sulaimon (20), Dawkins/Jones (5)
PG: Cook (30), Sulaimon (10)

That's a 7.5-8-man rotation, which is pretty much my ideal type of rotation assuming the personnel fits. I listed Dawkins/Jones because I want to give the option to go defense or offense as needed. If we need instant offense, Dawkins is the guy. If we need a defender, Jones is the guy.

Given that there is virtually no chance of this happening, I'd say something more realistic might be:

C: Jefferson (28), Plumlee (12)
PF: Parker (35), Hood (5)
SF: Hood (30), Dawkins/Jones (10)
SG: Thornton (20), Sulaimon (20)
PG: Cook (30), Sulaimon (10)

That's a 6.5-7-man rotation, and it's closer to what we'd actually see Coach K do down the stretch. As much as folks talk every offseason about how we're going to play a deeper bench, when the going gets tough Coach K is going to trim the rotation to a 6.5-7 man rotation.

[JNort]

I agree with this completely. If I had my druthers, I'd like to see a breakdown something like this:

C: Jefferson (23), Plumlee (17)
PF: Parker (35), Jefferson (5)
SF: Hood (35), Dawkins/Jones (5)
SG: Thornton (15), Sulaimon (20), Dawkins/Jones (5)
PG: Cook (30), Sulaimon (10)

That's a 7.5-8-man rotation, which is pretty much my ideal type of rotation assuming the personnel fits. I listed Dawkins/Jones because I want to give the option to go defense or offense as needed. If we need instant offense, Dawkins is the guy. If we need a defender, Jones is the guy.

Given that there is virtually no chance of this happening, I'd say something more realistic might be:

C: Jefferson (28), Plumlee (12)
PF: Parker (35), Hood (5)
SF: Hood (30), Dawkins/Jones (10)
SG: Thornton (20), Sulaimon (20)
PG: Cook (30), Sulaimon (10)

That's a 6.5-7-man rotation, and it's closer to what we'd actually see Coach K do down the stretch. As much as folks talk every offseason about how we're going to play a deeper bench, when the going gets tough Coach K is going to trim the rotation to a 6.5-7 man rotation.

This is what I would want except take 2 mins from Plumlee, 3 mins from Amile and give that extra 5 to Andre for a total of 15

[vick]

I agree with this completely. If I had my druthers, I'd like to see a breakdown something like this:

C: Jefferson (23), Plumlee (17)
PF: Parker (35), Jefferson (5)
SF: Hood (35), Dawkins/Jones (5)
SG: Thornton (15), Sulaimon (20), Dawkins/Jones (5)
PG: Cook (30), Sulaimon (10)

That's a 7.5-8-man rotation, which is pretty much my ideal type of rotation assuming the personnel fits. I listed Dawkins/Jones because I want to give the option to go defense or offense as needed. If we need instant offense, Dawkins is the guy. If we need a defender, Jones is the guy.

Given that there is virtually no chance of this happening, I'd say something more realistic might be:

C: Jefferson (28), Plumlee (12)
PF: Parker (35), Hood (5)
SF: Hood (30), Dawkins/Jones (10)
SG: Thornton (20), Sulaimon (20)
PG: Cook (30), Sulaimon (10)

That's a 6.5-7-man rotation, and it's closer to what we'd actually see Coach K do down the stretch. As much as folks talk every offseason about how we're going to play a deeper bench, when the going gets tough Coach K is going to trim the rotation to a 6.5-7 man rotation.

Maybe I'm just dense, but it looks like the minutes distribution in your ideal is:

35,35,30,30,28,17,15,10

vs. the more realistic

35,35,30,30,28,20,12,10

Am I looking at this right? I'd be hard pressed to say that one of those lineups is a meaningfully deeper one than the other, though both seem like generally reasonable ones (I prefer the one you label realistic, since I'm no fan of the Plumlee-Jefferson duo on the court together if it's at all avoidable).

[jv001]

I agree on Tyler. Lost in all this is the fact Tyler is a darn good basketball player that has helped this team in a lot of ways. 6 minutes is ridiculous. We need his defense and toughness. I know 32 minutes is too much but the right answer certainly ain't 6 mpg. I also love Matt Jones, but in all honesty he is a freshman that has his entire career ahead of him, and has not progressed enough yet to take minutes from the two Seniors (Tyler/Andre) or from Rasheed. His time will come but it aint now in my opinion. If we go down, I want to go down with our 4 guys named Quinn, Tyler, Rasheed, Andre.

This is how I want to see the minutes go down for our guards. Matt is going to be a good basketball player for Duke, but not this year. I know a lot of people want to see Matt in the rotation, but his offense is pretty bad right now. Others have said Tyler is a detriment to our offense, well if TT is a detriment, then what does that make Matt. Tyler is a way better shooter and doesn't turn the ball over. Give the minutes to Andre. I like Kedsy and Cdu's breakdown. GoDuke!

[richardjackson199]

I agree on Tyler. Lost in all this is the fact Tyler is a darn good basketball player that has helped this team in a lot of ways. 6 minutes is ridiculous. We need his defense and toughness. I know 32 minutes is too much but the right answer certainly ain't 6 mpg. I also love Matt Jones, but in all honesty he is a freshman that has his entire career ahead of him, and has not progressed enough yet to take minutes from the two Seniors (Tyler/Andre) or from Rasheed. His time will come but it aint now in my opinion. If we go down, I want to go down with our 4 guys named Quinn, Tyler, Rasheed, Andre.

I agree. Tyler's toughness and attitude epitomize what I and no doubt the coaches want to see from the captain of Duke basketball. 6 minutes probably is ridiculous. Kedsy had a great post, and I think I like the 15 minutes per game he suggested better. Maybe 3 minutes to start each half, then come in for 3 more 3 minute stints to re-energize some toughness. Certainly some in the 2nd half going down the stretch when lock-down defense is crucial.

But another important point, and I think the impetus for many of these posts is that Andre is also a darn good basketball player who has helped Duke basketball in a lot of ways. (I know you're not implying that he isn't, I just also want to emphasize this). He came to Duke a year early to fill a void on the 2010 team. Nobody knows what would have happened, but a few clutch threes vs. Baylor in that regional championship sure changed the momentum when we were down 6 if I remember. I'm not sure whether or not it would have still happened without him, but he sure contributed to an incredible national championship run. He lost his sister. He tried to come right back and not abandon his teammates. He listened to Coach K and took a year suspension from the team to treat a severe depression like a man. He chose Duke again when more playing time somewhere else may have improved his future prospects in his senior year. His smile and attitude this year have been one of the absolute highlights of the season thus far (not to mention several of his explosions from 3). He improved his defense tremendously IMO. He has shown more offensive production than just being one of the best 3 point shooters in the country with a pretty quick release. He can make free throws, which is something else this team sometimes needs at the end of games and could be crucial in the tourney. And Andre Dawkins is also a senior! Seeing those kind of minutes for him (like in the ACC tourney) with his potential to change a game is frustrating to me anyway. Every game we see from here on out could be the last game we see Andre, Tyler, Josh, Jabari, and Rodney play. Tyler is a darn good basketball player helping our team, and he's been playing lots of minutes. I want to see another incredible senior who epitomizes some pretty amazing Duke resilience, attitude, and skill get some more minutes in his final game or games. I believe doing so would actually give us the best chance to win. And I know I'm just a fan, so like Andre said - I'll stand by our coaches decisions 100%.

I agree with you on Matt Jones. I love Jones game. I just think right now our other guards are a little farther along, so I wouldn't put guaranteed minutes for Jones in my starting point if other upper-classmen are playing well. But if we need defensive toughness or a spark and one of the other guys needs a break, I love him on our team.

This team has been very fun to watch, but 10 losses in my opinion is too many losses for the talent on this team. That is what we'll have unless we win the National Championship. Something hasn't been working chemistry wise on both ends of the court for long stretches. Thus I believe our lineup minutes preferences is an interesting topic going into the tournament. We all want to see every one of the players we love be successful this year. Getting excited to see us take down Mercer. Go Duke!

[Troublemaker]

Here's my stab at it.

Throughout the game, rotate the perimeter units of: Cook-Jones-Hood (25 min) and Sulaimon-Thornton-Dawkins (15 min)

Because, imo, those two units had good chemistry during the initial line change "era," and all the guards were playing well then.

Rotate Parker (35 min), Jefferson (30 min), and Plumlee (15 min) as the bigs.

That is all.

[CDu]

Maybe I'm just dense, but it looks like the minutes distribution in your ideal is:

35,35,30,30,28,17,15,10

vs. the more realistic

35,35,30,30,28,20,12,10

Am I looking at this right? I'd be hard pressed to say that one of those lineups is a meaningfully deeper one than the other, though both seem like generally reasonable ones (I prefer the one you label realistic, since I'm no fan of the Plumlee-Jefferson duo on the court together if it's at all avoidable).

Sorry. Meant to give Thornton a few more minutes (22-25) and Jones/Dawkins a few less (5-8). It was intended to be a subtle difference, just not quite so subtle. :)

Basically, the main differences are fewer minutes fore Plumlee. (meaning more small ball with Hood at the 4, and more minutes for Thornton.

[Scorp4me]

So glad to see that after the initial post the positives that Thornton brings to the team were highlighted. In another year they might not have had to the opportunity to show, but they certainly have this year. He's a good player and to be honest...everyone is still waiting on Cook to become the player we all just "know" he can be. Unfortunately we may never get to see that player and in fact we might just have to concede that Cook isn't that player. I know many have mentioned Paulus as a comparison. I think that's fair if you remember that Paulus lead the league in assist his freshman year and was still a contributing player his Senior year, just not as the PG we thought he'd be.

I still liked the platooning system K used in the Virginia game. Not so much for the platooning (although it had benefits, it also had obviously problems too), but because of the way it broke the team up. Allowing players to excel where they excelled best on each "squad". For example making Matt the starter over Rasheed allowed him to be the number 1 option on the second squad where he seems more comfortable than the number 3 option on the first squad. Not saying we should go back to it, but it certainly had some benefits.

[Kedsy]

This team has been very fun to watch, but 10 losses in my opinion is too many losses for the talent on this team. That is what we'll have unless we win the National Championship.

I'm pretty sure we only have 8 losses right now, which would mean we can only get to 10 if we play so poorly they count an NCAAT loss twice. ;)


Here's my stab at it.

Throughout the game, rotate the perimeter units of: Cook-Jones-Hood (25 min) and Sulaimon-Thornton-Dawkins (15 min)

Because, imo, those two units had good chemistry during the initial line change "era," and all the guards were playing well then.

Rotate Parker (35 min), Jefferson (30 min), and Plumlee (15 min) as the bigs.

That is all.

You'd play Matt 25 minutes and Rasheed only 15? And Rodney only 25? Wow, that's pretty bold.

[CDu]

I'm pretty sure we only have 8 losses right now, which would mean we can only get to 10 if we play so poorly they count an NCAAT loss twice. ;)

Maybe he was factoring in the loss to Vermont.


You'd play Matt 25 minutes and Rasheed only 15? And Rodney only 25? Wow, that's pretty bold.

I agree completely. I mean, Jones has shown some real skill in on-ball defense and even a little bit of a knack for rebounds. But I certainly couldn't justify playing him 10 mpg more than Sulaimon.

What I could see is something like this:

Till the under 16:00 timeout: Jefferson, Parker, Hood, Thornton, Sulaimon (line 1)

From the under 16:00 timeout to the under 12:00 timeout: Plumlee, Hairston/Ojeleye, Jones, Dawkins, Cook (line 2)

From the under 12:00 to the under 8:00: back to line 1

For the rest of the first half, drop the line change and go with Jefferson, Parker, Hood, Sulaimon, Thornton/Cook (based on offense/defense need), and sub in individuals as needed.

Start the second half with line 1 until the under 16:00 timeout. Then sub as needed thereafter (i.e., no line changes in the second half).

[mike88]

First half backcourt:
1. Thor / Sheed / Hood x 4-5 min
2. Dre/ Sheed / Hood x 4-5 min
3. Cook / Jones / Dre x 4-5 min
4. Thor or Cook / Sheed / Hood x 4-5 min

First half front court rotation:
Parker x 16 min
Jefferson x 16 min
Plumlee 8 minutes, with Hairston in case of foul trouble
Don't sit Parker when Hood is sitting.

Same starting line-up for the second half.
Aim for totals of:
Jabari 35
Hood 35
Jefferson + Plumlee 40
Cook + Thornton 35
Sheed 30
Dawkins 20
Jones 5

[azzefkram]

Ok I'll play.

Hood 35
Parker 35
Jefferson 25
Cook 25
Sulaimon 25
Thornton 20
Dawkins 15
Plumlee 15
Jones 5

[Troublemaker]

You'd play Matt 25 minutes and Rasheed only 15? And Rodney only 25? Wow, that's pretty bold.

Yeah, bold and very likely dumb. This is just my personal contribution to the pile of dumb lineup fanfic. I have no ego about it and can't defend it other than "I nebulously feel like it might work."

[richardjackson199]

I'm pretty sure we only have 8 losses right now, which would mean we can only get to 10 if we play so poorly they count an NCAAT loss twice. ;)


Whoops. :o Ok so the 8 losses + perilously near-losses in Cameron to Vermont, UVA, Syracuse, Maryland, + Clemson in ACC Tourney + close game with ECU were also representative of this year's Duke team underperforming with the level of talent present. I'm glad we won all those games though, so I'll never count a win as a loss. And whenever I think Duke might be underachieving, looking at what "40-0" Kentucky did in a weaker SEC makes me feel much better.

From here on out, I'd love to win big. I'd love to see Dawkins rain 3's; Cook play pg like I've seen him play at his best and like I know he can; Sulaimon make gorgeous no-look assists, slash, score, and play lock-down D; Thornton make game-winning plays with the heart of a champion; Jefferson dominate the post with efficient scoring and uncanny rebounding numbers; Plumlee rebound, block, and dunk with a mean streak; Parker & Hood play like #1/#2 draft picks respectively without hero ball; Hairston/Ojeleye/Jones giving passionate minutes off the bench to help the team; everyone shooting tourney free throws like Laettner (stomping optional); and Todd scoring our 100th point each time. But I don't care how we win as long as we finish with 8 losses. If we win 6 in a row just like Vermont, fine by me.

Go Duke!

[Newton_14]

Yeah, bold and very likely dumb. This is just my personal contribution to the pile of dumb lineup fanfic. I have no ego about it and can't defend it other than "I nebulously feel like it might work."

We agree often, but not on Jones. Like I said earlier, I love his game and feel he is going to be a really good 4 year player. Just not his time yet. I want to ride the vets and Rasheed.

I have given up though and guessing at what K does with this team, other than the fact he is going to go all in on defense when I would rather he go all in on offense. (But even there still play Tyler at least 20 mpg).

I thought Sunday would have been a great time to go with the line changes. 3rd game in 3 days, young team that seems to tire easily. Motion offense gives them energy. Throw waves of fresher players at UVA in that first half. The early 9-2 deficit knocked us back, but we recovered. Had we not dug that hole it may have turned out differently. Ifs, but's, candy, and nuts and all that jazz.

So who knows what we see this weekend. As long as we leave PNC with two wins, I am quite good.