WBB: Duke vs. DePaul

[CameronBornAndBred]

Depaul and Oklahoma put on the show Saturday, with Depaul scoring 104 to the Sooners' 100 in a wild game. I'm guessing that they played at least some defense, but either it was not very good, or the offense was insane. Unfortunately, I missed the game, so someone else will have to fill in that fact. Duke "only" scored 87, while holding Winthrop to 45. Duke had its best game on both sides of the court in a while. Coach P said "everyone was a point guard", and it seemed like it at times. Although Ka'lia Johnson truly had the position, and she played it well. IF Duke can play the strong D that they did yesterday, and keep the offensive pressure up, I see another Sweet Sixteen in our future. It should be a fun game, hopefully somewhere between the blowout we had and the barn burner that Depaul had. (Leaning to a heavy lead in our favor, though, please!)

By the way, here is something I posted in the pre-game thread before our Winthrop matchup.


First up is Winthrop, and I don't expect much of a matchup in Cameron. That being said, Duke HAS been tested at home before in the first two rounds. (Pay attention, Tar Heels, UT Martin might bite you!)
Shoulda paid attention, Heels. :D Currently down 50-37 with 9 to play.

[devildeac]

Depaul and Oklahoma put on the show Saturday, with Depaul scoring 104 to the Sooners' 100 in a wild game. I'm guessing that they played at least some defense, but either it was not very good, or the offense was insane. Unfortunately, I missed the game, so someone else will have to fill in that fact. Duke "only" scored 87, while holding Winthrop to 45. Duke had its best game on both sides of the court in a while. Coach P said "everyone was a point guard", and it seemed like it at times. Although Ka'lia Johnson truly had the position, and she played it well. IF Duke can play the strong D that they did yesterday, and keep the offensive pressure up, I see another Sweet Sixteen in our future. It should be a fun game, hopefully somewhere between the blowout we had and the barn burner that Depaul had. (Leaning to a heavy lead in our favor, though, please!)

By the way, here is something I posted in the pre-game thread before our Winthrop matchup.

Shoulda paid attention, Heels. :D Currently down 50-37 with 9 to play.

Sshhh. Still waaaay too much time left.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Sshhh. Still waaaay too much time left.
Didn't say they'd win or lose, just that they shouldn'a expected an easy game. :) (And I guarantee you they did.)

[Duvall]

24-3 UNC run, so well done there.

[devildeac]

Depaul and Oklahoma put on the show Saturday, with Depaul scoring 104 to the Sooners' 100 in a wild game. I'm guessing that they played at least some defense, but either it was not very good, or the offense was insane. Unfortunately, I missed the game, so someone else will have to fill in that fact. Duke "only" scored 87, while holding Winthrop to 45. Duke had its best game on both sides of the court in a while. Coach P said "everyone was a point guard", and it seemed like it at times. Although Ka'lia Johnson truly had the position, and she played it well. IF Duke can play the strong D that they did yesterday, and keep the offensive pressure up, I see another Sweet Sixteen in our future. It should be a fun game, hopefully somewhere between the blowout we had and the barn burner that Depaul had. (Leaning to a heavy lead in our favor, though, please!)

By the way, here is something I posted in the pre-game thread before our Winthrop matchup.

Shoulda paid attention, Heels. :D Currently down 50-37 with 9 to play.

You will be held responsible for this heinous act. :mad:

[CameronBornAndBred]

You will be held responsible for this heinous act. :mad:
Not me, blame Diamond for flopping and getting a no call reviewed and turned into a flagrant one. That's when the game turned. That was the heinous act.

[devildeac]

Depaul and Oklahoma put on the show Saturday, with Depaul scoring 104 to the Sooners' 100 in a wild game. I'm guessing that they played at least some defense, but either it was not very good, or the offense was insane. Unfortunately, I missed the game, so someone else will have to fill in that fact. Duke "only" scored 87, while holding Winthrop to 45. Duke had its best game on both sides of the court in a while. Coach P said "everyone was a point guard", and it seemed like it at times. Although Ka'lia Johnson truly had the position, and she played it well. IF Duke can play the strong D that they did yesterday, and keep the offensive pressure up, I see another Sweet Sixteen in our future. It should be a fun game, hopefully somewhere between the blowout we had and the barn burner that Depaul had. (Leaning to a heavy lead in our favor, though, please!)

By the way, here is something I posted in the pre-game thread before our Winthrop matchup.

Shoulda paid attention, Heels. :D Currently down 50-37 with 9 to play.


You will be held responsible for this heinous act. :mad:

And with that post and the subsequent unc win, CB&B joins arnie is still king and me in the Christmas-hating, puppy-kicking, child-loathing group of DBR posters.:o

[burnspbesq]

Not me, blame Diamond for flopping and getting a no call reviewed and turned into a flagrant one. That's when the game turned. That was the heinous act.

That was amazing. She's in the Diego Simeone Memorial Diving Hall of Fame for that one.

Before she's done, DeShields is going to surpass Ivory Latta as the most hated Heel.

[aswewere]

DWHoops preview http://www.dwhoops.com/Duke/1403241-2014-ncaa-preview-duke-depaul.php

[burnspbesq]

Nightmare start for Duke. DePaul is out to prove that none of our players can handle the ball against pressure, and so far they're right. More turnovers that field goals at the under-eight timeout.

[Dukehky]

Nightmare start for Duke. DePaul is out to prove that none of our players can handle the ball against pressure, and so far they're right. More turnovers that field goals at the under-eight timeout.

This is a match-up nightmare right now.

[burnspbesq]

So far, our defense is keeping us in it, and we look like we're starting to calm down and execute. 8-0 run to cut the lead to five, forced DePaul to burn a time out. Heard a whistle just as the feed went to commercial; wondering if DePaul's coach got t'ed up.

[killerleft]

Whew. Down only 27-24, despite many turnovers, at the half.

[DU82]

So far, our defense is keeping us in it, and we look like we're starting to calm down and execute. 8-0 run to cut the lead to five, forced DePaul to burn a time out. Heard a whistle just as the feed went to commercial; wondering if DePaul's coach got t'ed up.

No, he didn't, although he should have. Think Tony Bennett at the ACC tournament.

Halftime score is 24-27. It was 8-20, but we settled down and started playing under control.

After a few kick out threes, we're staying out when they drive, cutting down those open shots.

DePaul seems to be comfortable at this more patient pace, with good passing waiting for the most part. Good coaching on Depaul's part, he's been around a long time.

We've had a few blocks, including one on a foul by Kendall telling them not to come inside. Need to stay at home on D, and be patient on o dealing with their press.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Whew. Down only 27-24, despite many turnovers, at the half.
When it was 20-10, we had as many turnovers as we had points, eek! Looking better now, nice to see Ewill making some shots from a few feet out, too. Kind of a bad time for the half to hit, we had the momentum. Hopefully we pick right back up where we were. LGD!!!

[DU82]

Forgot to mention that point guard number five, Ka'lia, went down hard early in the half, needed her wrist taped, and was clearly favoring it for a while (dribbling mostly with her left hand.). She did hit a three a little while later, so hopefully not a serious injury.

[Duvall]

Dee Kantner was fired from the NBA for being incompetent. Why is the NCAA willing to settle for incompetence?

[Dukehky]

Every time we put something together, they hit some long range bomb in transition. This has been a really rough year for DWB, looks like it may be coming to an end, maybe mercifully.

Oh baby, it's an anti-jynx of the highest order.

[burnspbesq]

DePaul takes threes from six feet beyond the arc. If you run to the paint and then try to recover outside, you'll never get there.

[burnspbesq]

And Duke gets hosed by the officials. There was no change of possession there, shot clock should not have reset.

[bedeviled]

If you run to the paint and then try to recover outside, you'll never get there.Does that apply to fans, too? Not many people in the stands.

[burnspbesq]

Le sigh. What might have been.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Hats off to Depaul for an excellently executed game. They made 13 threes, that is insane. One of the ways they improved their chances was by creating wide open shots by spreading the perimeter, and doing a great job of moving the ball. By the third or fourth pass, someone was ready with no defenders close by. I'm not blaming Duke's D for that, it was just a solid job on offense creating the opportunities that they needed.
The other thing that helped them and hurt us, was their press. That is where our lack of a true PG really showed; we struggled in escaping it, I think at one point we turned it over three straight times before we even got across midcourt. I think we still could have done a better job of getting it to our end, but that is where not having Alexis or Chelsea was glaringly a detriment.

I'm looking forward to next year, and I hope Alexis gets through rehab well. I would love to see us make it through one season healthy for a change. LGD!!!!

[bedeviled]

Agree. 3's and turnovers appear to be the difference makers. Injuries are awful.

[Dukehky]

With the lack of depth/speed in the backcourt, we couldn't play any of the other defenses P has in her arsenal. It was a 2-3 with a 1-2-2 thrown in at the beginning. The only way DePaul wins that game is if they go bonkers from deep, which they did. The team is just so depleted at this point in the backcourt that both they and the coaches were really handcuffed. Offensively, Jackson, Johnson, and Liston made some pretty ill-advised plays, but like others have said, they have little to no experience running the point. Tricia has often initiated the offense, but not been the point guard. I guarantee you if there was a press, Chelsea or Lex was bringing the ball up the court. The girls worked hard tonight, like they have all year, and you can't fault them for much.

Haley, Tricia, RJ, Chelsea, and Amber came in with all the makings of a national championship contender and got bitten by the injury bug, badly, every year they were here, which is a real shame. But if Dawkins and co on the men's side can go 4 years without winning, you can't be surprised by anybody not winning a ship, not to mention the juggernauts that were Britney Griner and UCONN respectively.

I'll miss watching these seniors play, Haley is one of the smartest people at Duke period, that girl seriously might be a Senator or something.

[burnspbesq]

If it's any consolation, more than half of our scoring and almost exactly half of our rebounds tonight came from players who will be back next year.

Is it November yet?

[NYBri]

Turnovers.

[sagegrouse]

I don't about you, but as I get older, the basketball season seems to get shorter and shorter.

[Dukehky]

If it's any consolation, more than half of our scoring and almost exactly half of our rebounds tonight came from players who will be back next year.

Is it November yet?

Not for me. Haley Peters, Tricia Liston, Chelsea Gray, and Richa Jackson aren't walking through the door for another 4 year go round.

[Kedsy]

Haley, Tricia, RJ, Chelsea, and Amber came in with all the makings of a national championship contender and got bitten by the injury bug, badly, every year they were here, which is a real shame.

Amber wasn't in that class. She started with Elizabeth, but redshirted twice so this year she's technically only a freshman. Chloe Wells was the fifth player who came in with the others you mention. But either way, I'm really going to miss this year's senior class.

DePaul was just a really bad matchup for a team with no healthy guards. It's a shame, but it was just a hard game for Duke to win, especially if DePaul is hitting 25-foot threes. Oh, well. I'm proud of the fight we've showed in the last several games.

[Kedsy]

Not for me. Haley Peters, Tricia Liston, Chelsea Gray, and Richa Jackson aren't walking through the door for another 4 year go round.

True, but we should be in pretty good shape. Our returning frontcourt of Elizabeth, Oderah, Kendall, and Amber is extremely strong, and our returning backcourt of Alexis, Ka'lia, and Rebecca Greenwell should be pretty darn good, too. Plus, we're bringing in the 2nd rated recruiting class in the country (four players plus redshirted Rebecca to replace the five who are leaving). No idea how it will all pan out, and as I said earlier I will really miss this year's seniors, but I'm amped up for next season.

[aswewere]

DWHoops enough blame to go around and not one play run to get Liston a open look.


http://www.dwhoops.com/1314/1403241-ncaa-depaul-74-duke-65.php

[CameronBornAndBred]

DWHoops enough blame to go around and not one play run to get Liston a open look.


http://www.dwhoops.com/1314/1403241-ncaa-depaul-74-duke-65.php
Thanks for the warning, I have no interest in finishing the season reading the blame game and what could have been.

[killerleft]

DWHoops enough blame to go around and not one play run to get Liston a open look.


http://www.dwhoops.com/1314/1403241-ncaa-depaul-74-duke-65.php

Did they blame injuries? Did they say that Tricia wasn't going to be open against anybody because she was our only three-point threat? Just what play would you have run that could have possibly gotten Tricia open when the other team knew she was our only outside threat? There is a misconception (evidently) that teams can just plug anyone into the point guard spot and things will magically happen.

The defense suffered just as much as the offense from the guard quickness we lost.

There's your blame. With good ballhandlers we were a threat at all positions on the floor. Without them we were not. No DWHoops for me, either.

[Duvall]

You know, it would help if you people actually read what Rob wrote instead of projecting.

[miramar]

You know, it would help if you people actually read what Rob wrote instead of projecting.

I thought that Rob's comments were pretty reasonable. He has always struck me as being well informed, so he's definitely worth a look.

[AIM4excellence]

You know, it would help if you people actually read what Rob wrote instead of projecting.

This. Rob C and DWHoops are VERY even handed in reporting. Extremely even-handed in fact. If you can't handle the well researched and factually stated analysis, then you really are a "head in the sand" "defend this coach against a feather of critique" kind of fan.

I saw a glimpse of the kind of coaching I expect against UNC in the ACC tournament. I want more of that. I want game plans that are carefully constructed based on watching hours of tape regarding the tendencies of the other team. I want players prepared to execute the gameplan. This team - with the current players - was not ready for this game. When your strength is a shot blocking defense, make that the heart of your defense and trust them to do their job. That means not collapsing in the paint and staying on shooters. That's a coaching decision that is based on watching tape. Or, you didn't need tape, just watch the second game on Saturday. You know they can shoot lights out and you know our post defense is better than they faced.

I remember when we had Ali Bales in the paint and the defense was actually geared to funneling the offense into her and covering the outlets. The cutter had nobody to pass it to and had to shoot it (blocked shot) or dribble back out. That, my friends is trusting your post defense and using it well. The guards on that team (other than Harding) were not quick, but they stuck to the game plan and were very successful. Getting to the Elite Eight was a great overachievement for what was essentially a re-building team.

This team, even depleted by injuries, is WAY more talented than the DePaul team. Their players can do two things and two things only - pressure defense and shooting threes. Other than that, they aren't especially skilled or talented. They had a gameplan that took advantage of both things to the max. Conceding this game due to the injuries, to me, is a sign of continuing to lower expectations for this program. We got out-hustled and out-played from the coach to the players on the floor to the bench. There is no excuse sufficient to justify what I saw. Enjoy yourselves next season. Until this coach prepares the team to succeed, I won't be there and I know a whole bunch of longtime season ticketholders who aren't renewing.

[77devil]

I don't about you, but as I get older, the basketball season seems to get shorter and shorter.

This year didn't seem, it was.

[AIM4excellence]

This year didn't seem, it was.

Touche'.

[CameronBornAndBred]

DWHoops enough blame to go around and not one play run to get Liston a open look.


http://www.dwhoops.com/1314/1403241-ncaa-depaul-74-duke-65.php


This. Rob C and DWHoops are VERY even handed in reporting. Extremely even-handed in fact. If you can't handle the well researched and factually stated analysis, then you really are a "head in the sand" "defend this coach against a feather of critique" kind of fan.
There are two ways to introduce an article. In the first intro, it was made to seem as if it was a negative piece, which I have no interest in reading. If Aswewere had said "check out this 'very even-handed' report'", I would have not hedged at all.
I love DWB, accept their faults and failures, and don't shy away from criticism. (I'm an artist, after all, I'm used to it.) But there is negative criticism, which this was made to appear to be, vs. constructive criticism, which you do a better job of enlightening us on. I'll read it knowing it is not simply a bash party.

[aswewere]

Your suggestions on how to make our team more competitive and resolve some of the embarrassing
issues that have arisen would be appreciated.

[burnspbesq]

This. Rob C and DWHoops are VERY even handed in reporting. Extremely even-handed in fact. If you can't handle the well researched and factually stated analysis, then you really are a "head in the sand" "defend this coach against a feather of critique" kind of fan.

I saw a glimpse of the kind of coaching I expect against UNC in the ACC tournament. I want more of that. I want game plans that are carefully constructed based on watching hours of tape regarding the tendencies of the other team. I want players prepared to execute the gameplan. This team - with the current players - was not ready for this game. When your strength is a shot blocking defense, make that the heart of your defense and trust them to do their job. That means not collapsing in the paint and staying on shooters. That's a coaching decision that is based on watching tape. Or, you didn't need tape, just watch the second game on Saturday. You know they can shoot lights out and you know our post defense is better than they faced.

I remember when we had Ali Bales in the paint and the defense was actually geared to funneling the offense into her and covering the outlets. The cutter had nobody to pass it to and had to shoot it (blocked shot) or dribble back out. That, my friends is trusting your post defense and using it well. The guards on that team (other than Harding) were not quick, but they stuck to the game plan and were very successful. Getting to the Elite Eight was a great overachievement for what was essentially a re-building team.

This team, even depleted by injuries, is WAY more talented than the DePaul team. Their players can do two things and two things only - pressure defense and shooting threes. Other than that, they aren't especially skilled or talented. They had a gameplan that took advantage of both things to the max. Conceding this game due to the injuries, to me, is a sign of continuing to lower expectations for this program. We got out-hustled and out-played from the coach to the players on the floor to the bench. There is no excuse sufficient to justify what I saw. Enjoy yourselves next season. Until this coach prepares the team to succeed, I won't be there and I know a whole bunch of longtime season ticketholders who aren't renewing.

What you're saying, in effect, is that a team that was built to play zone should have played man--and not only should have played man, but should have abandoned any pretense of trying to help and recover. You're willing to take away the three and concede layups. There's an enormous body of data that speaks to the foolishness of that approach.

[jv001]

What you're saying, in effect, is that a team that was built to play zone should have played man--and not only should have played man, but should have abandoned any pretense of trying to help and recover. You're willing to take away the three and concede layups. There's an enormous body of data that speaks to the foolishness of that approach.

I believe the Duke men's team does just that. Take away the 3 ball and this year's team did just that, concede the layups. GoDuke!

[Duvall]

What you're saying, in effect, is that a team that was built to play zone should have played man--and not only should have played man, but should have abandoned any pretense of trying to help and recover. You're willing to take away the three and concede layups. There's an enormous body of data that speaks to the foolishness of that approach.

Though to be fair, the data doesn't speak to the specific case of DePaul's shooters and Duke's shotblockers.

[Kedsy]

What you're saying, in effect, is that a team that was built to play zone should have played man--and not only should have played man, but should have abandoned any pretense of trying to help and recover. You're willing to take away the three and concede layups. There's an enormous body of data that speaks to the foolishness of that approach.

The other issue in this particular game is the DePaul team was taking (and making) 25-footers. It would be particularly foolish to try to guard all the way out there on a consistent basis.

And in any event, the bigger issue was not DePaul's three-point shooting, it was their defense turning us over, especially in the beginning of the game. Unfortunately, we just didn't have the ballhandlers to deal with their pressure consistently. They were just a bad matchup for our injury-ravaged team.

[aswewere]

With 4 out on defense and Elizabeth down low there would be no lay ups, leaving them with
a running difficult jump shot. As usual no in game adjustments, when there starting plans went
sour. Many have requested additional knowledgeable coaching help from our ADs. If Alexis
& Becca Greenwell are near 100%, next years team will a lot more versatile and faster plus
better than this years team. So there still could be a positive if every thing stays the same.

[burnspbesq]

The other issue in this particular game is the DePaul team was taking (and making) 25-footers. It would be particularly foolish to try to guard all the way out there on a consistent basis.

That's a hugely important point that needs to be more completely understood and appreciated. That six feet between the arc and where DePaul launches makes effective help-and-recover vastly more difficult. It also spreads out a zone that much more and makes it much easier to dump the ball into the high post. You would be hard pressed to find a team better equipped to beat Duke.

[burnspbesq]

With 4 out on defense and Elizabeth down low there would be no lay ups, leaving them with
a running difficult jump shot. As usual no in game adjustments, when there starting plans went
sour. Many have requested additional knowledgeable coaching help from our ADs. If Alexis
& Becca Greenwell are near 100%, next years team will a lot more versatile and faster plus
better than this years team. So there still could be a positive if every thing stays the same.

With the personnel that were available on Monday night, the notion that we could play lock-down perimeter man-to-man is a fantasy.

[aswewere]

With the personnel that were available on Monday night, the notion that we could play lock-down perimeter man-to-man is a fantasy.

We did very well until some one dropped off there assignment. Still looking for the coaching and conduct
that over a half a mill, plus Duke standards should receive. If her attitude about her assistants giving suggestions
does not give you big warning bell then-----------

[AIM4excellence]

What you're saying, in effect, is that a team that was built to play zone should have played man--and not only should have played man, but should have abandoned any pretense of trying to help and recover. You're willing to take away the three and concede layups. There's an enormous body of data that speaks to the foolishness of that approach.

I have no idea how this response relates to my post as I said absolutely NOTHING about playing a man defense. I said "trust the post defenders and don't follow them into the paint, leaving 3 pt shooters wide open." Having multiple shot blockers waiting in the paint is NOT "conceding layups." It's the exact opposite - giving the illusion of a layup and having multiple players ready to block it. Since you copied my post, I assumed you had read it, perhaps my assumption is incorrect. I even gave an example of how this system has worked to perfection - with a different coach. I have a simple wish - for our coach to use our advantage in a game. Because this rarely happens, I don't care to spend any more money to watch great players look untalented, slow, and unskilled.

[-jk]

We did very well until some one dropped off there assignment. Still looking for the coaching and conduct
that over a half a mill, plus Duke standards should receive. If her attitude about her assistants giving suggestions
does not give you big warning bell then-----------

I think you're conflating arguments. I'm not sure it really works here.

-jk

[Kedsy]

I don't care to spend any more money to watch great players look untalented, slow, and unskilled.

You've repeatedly told us that you don't plan to renew your season tickets. We get it and I at least don't care. Please stop telling us.

[aswewere]

You've repeatedly told us that you don't plan to renew your season tickets. We get it and I at least don't care. Please stop telling us.

I care there are a lot more like him out there that are greatly disappointed in the
the directions of the program a lot of us love.

[burnspbesq]

I have no idea how this response relates to my post as I said absolutely NOTHING about playing a man defense. I said "trust the post defenders and don't follow them into the paint, leaving 3 pt shooters wide open." Having multiple shot blockers waiting in the paint is NOT "conceding layups." It's the exact opposite - giving the illusion of a layup and having multiple players ready to block it. Since you copied my post, I assumed you had read it, perhaps my assumption is incorrect. I even gave an example of how this system has worked to perfection - with a different coach. I have a simple wish - for our coach to use our advantage in a game. Because this rarely happens, I don't care to spend any more money to watch great players look untalented, slow, and unskilled.

A rejoinder that makes even less sense than the original post.

How would you have proposed that we chase DePaul's shooters off their imaginary arc six feet beyond the actual three-point arc, and funnel them toward our supposed armada of impregnable shot-blockers, other than by playing man? Please be specific.

"Trust the post defenders and don't follow them into the paint" is EXACTLY the same thing as "abandon any pretense of attempting to help and recover."

I read and understood your post. If you don't like seeing the shortcomings of your analysis laid bare, don't post.

[aswewere]

A rejoinder that makes even less sense than the original post.

How would you have proposed that we chase DePaul's shooters off their imaginary arc six feet beyond the actual three-point arc, and funnel them toward our supposed armada of impregnable shot-blockers, other than by playing man? Please be specific.

"Trust the post defenders and don't follow them into the paint" is EXACTLY the same thing as "abandon any pretense of attempting to help and recover."

I read and understood your post. If you don't like seeing the shortcomings of your analysis laid bare, don't post.

ESPN-3 has replay for you so we can talk about the same game. You always play man in your assigned zone area our
players were not instructed to stay in there area --boom wide open shots. Most of this rambling is to avoid the biggest
issues - coaching, staff management and other off court baggage.

[AIM4excellence]

ESPN-3 has replay for you so we can talk about the same game. You always play man in your assigned zone area our
players were not instructed to stay in there area --boom wide open shots. Most of this rambling is to avoid the biggest
issues - coaching, staff management and other off court baggage.

Thank you for trying to explain. He appears unable/unwilling to read what I write. I have not anywhere talked about this team playing a man defense. You are correct - if the defenders stayed in their zone rather than following a player moving from their zone into the paint, the outside shots would not be as wide open as they were continuously throughout the game. When you're too busy deconstructing my analysis to actually read what I say, then it's not going to make sense. Thanks for the attempt aswewere but we're likely to get yet another nonsense response. Continuing to excuse this coaching staff for their lack of preparation does a disservice to the very fine players who played their hearts out on the floor. It's not about who wasn't out there.

[Des Esseintes]

Thank you for trying to explain. He appears unable/unwilling to read what I write. I have not anywhere talked about this team playing a man defense. You are correct - if the defenders stayed in their zone rather than following a player moving from their zone into the paint, the outside shots would not be as wide open as they were continuously throughout the game. When you're too busy deconstructing my analysis to actually read what I say, then it's not going to make sense. Thanks for the attempt aswewere but we're likely to get yet another nonsense response. Continuing to excuse this coaching staff for their lack of preparation does a disservice to the very fine players who played their hearts out on the floor. It's not about who wasn't out there.

What zone is built to contest 25ft threes?

[burnspbesq]

ESPN-3 has replay for you so we can talk about the same game. You always play man in your assigned zone area our
players were not instructed to stay in there area --boom wide open shots. Most of this rambling is to avoid the biggest
issues - coaching, staff management and other off court baggage.

Whatever it is you think you're describing, it's not any defense known to contemporary basketball. No zone that I've seen in the last 20 years doesn't slide in the direction of ball movement, temporarily leaving the weakside corner (and, to a lesser extent, the weakside wing) open. Failure to slide in that way exposes the high post, the weakside elbow and the weakside short corner, which are more dangerous areas than the weakside corner (because, among other reasons, if your shot-blocker in the middle has to step out to any of those areas, your defense is going to leak layups). In fact, most contemporary man defenses don't face-guard in the weakside corner, unless a specific player has a "DO NOT HELP OFF THIS GUY" sticker attached.

If you ever knew what you were talking about, your emnity toward Coach P has badly eroded your analytical skills. This is not rocket science. What you're suggesting wouldn't have solved the problem. Period, full stop.

We get that you don't think highly of Coach P. We got that six weeks ago, when you two first showed up and started spreading your unhappiness around this forum. If your objective in coming here was to build up further resentment of and opposition to Coach P's continued tenure as Duke's head coach, you haven't succeeded, because your arguments just don't work.

[-jk]

Coach McCallie is caught in the middle of a love triangle: G, K, and Geno. Horrible place to be. Only place worse will be post-K.

Meanwhile, I have to agree - with a bunch of bigs, way-back jumpers are pretty much impossible to stop. We're too big for m2m, they're too spread for zone.

-jk

[Kfanarmy]

I believe the Duke men's team does just that. Take away the 3 ball and this year's team did just that, concede the layups. GoDuke! I'm not sure that was purposeful...though at times it looked that way.

[AIM4excellence]

This is not rocket science.
.

Well, we finally agree on something. It isn't rocket science. It's painfully easy for professional wbb analysts to see what you can't. Unless you've muted the TV, you've heard multiple wbb analysts dissect Duke's offenses and defenses. You might need to enlighten all of them because they agree with me a LOT more than they agree with you. I heard one analyst say one time that Coach McCallie did a good job figuring out and implementing a good gameplan, and that was after the ACC tourney victory over UNC, to avoid getting swept by them.

Not sure if you've noticed, but we had more post players than guards - all fully capable of blocking shots. So one gets pulled out as the zone shifts, there's more where they came from, if they're on the floor. It was obvious our most effect set of players included three posts, yet this combo was used only briefly in the game. USE YOUR HEIGHT. Height was our biggest advantage and we didn't use it. No matter how you cut it, this team with the healthy players they had, was not prepared for this game and was not put in position to use its' biggest advantage. Put enough bigs in so there's always someone patrolling the paint, no matter how the zone needs to shift. Leave the guards out on the shooters. Period.

You think I have a bias. I know you have one. And it makes you unwilling to recognize critique of this coach and coaching decisions that directly lead to losses. It's not rocket science.

[Des Esseintes]

Well, we finally agree on something. It isn't rocket science. It's painfully easy for professional wbb analysts to see what you can't. Unless you've muted the TV, you've heard multiple wbb analysts dissect Duke's offenses and defenses. You might need to enlighten all of them because they agree with me a LOT more than they agree with you. I heard one analyst say one time that Coach McCallie did a good job figuring out and implementing a good gameplan, and that was after the ACC tourney victory over UNC, to avoid getting swept by them.

Not sure if you've noticed, but we had more post players than guards - all fully capable of blocking shots. So one gets pulled out as the zone shifts, there's more where they came from, if they're on the floor. It was obvious our most effect set of players included three posts, yet this combo was used only briefly in the game. USE YOUR HEIGHT. Height was our biggest advantage and we didn't use it. No matter how you cut it, this team with the healthy players they had, was not prepared for this game and was not put in position to use its' biggest advantage. Put enough bigs in so there's always someone patrolling the paint, no matter how the zone needs to shift. Leave the guards out on the shooters. Period.

You think I have a bias. I know you have one. And it makes you unwilling to recognize critique of this coach and coaching decisions that directly lead to losses. It's not rocket science.

Guy, we can only have five players on the court at one time. If the opponent is trying to win by raining threes, how exactly do you plan to *cover* all that perimeter shooting with two (2) guards/wings? This makes no sense. You're saying pressure the shooters out to 25ft, and oh yeah also play three posts and block everything. Do you see how that's impossible? That's impossible, at least playing by human basketball rules.

[Kedsy]

It's painfully easy for professional wbb analysts to see what you can't. Unless you've muted the TV, you've heard multiple wbb analysts dissect Duke's offenses and defenses. You might need to enlighten all of them because they agree with me a LOT more than they agree with you.

I disagree with your analysis and side with burnspbesq and Des Esseintes. It's not possible to effectively guard players shooting 25 footers without distorting the zone so much it will be completely ineffective from anywhere. It's especially not possible by packing 3 bigs into the paint and asking 2 small-forwards-forced-to-play-guard to patrol the entire halfcourt outside the paint and try to shut down the opponent's threes from 2 feet beyond the NBA arch.

Also, I didn't hear any of the analysts spouting the same nonsense that you have in your last several posts, and I can't imagine any of them agreeing even a little with what you've been espousing.

[aswewere]

I disagree with your analysis and side with burnspbesq and Des Esseintes. It's not possible to effectively guard players shooting 25 footers without distorting the zone so much it will be completely ineffective from anywhere. It's especially not possible by packing 3 bigs into the paint and asking 2 small-forwards-forced-to-play-guard to patrol the entire halfcourt outside the paint and try to shut down the opponent's threes from 2 feet beyond the NBA arch.

Also, I didn't hear any of the analysts spouting the same nonsense that you have in your last several posts, and I can't imagine any of them agreeing even a little with what you've been espousing.

Some of you are totally lost in this one game, if our vast coaching problems were left
with the DePaul game. Then we could just say there were no in game adjustments but
what's new. Hang around awhile and she will see the light or your opinions will change.

[AIM4excellence]

Some of you are totally lost in this one game, if our vast coaching problems were left
with the DePaul game. Then we could just say there were no in game adjustments but
what's new. Hang around awhile and she will see the light or your opinions will change.

Exactly. ONE player from ONE team hits more than one 25 ft shot and suddenly that's the excuse for everything? Did I ANYWHERE suggest that if we play 3 posts that the 2 guards would have to cover the entire 3 pt line? I said that if you play 3 posts, that when one of them goes out to guard the shooter, that leaves 2 to protect the paint - one high post, one low post. JPM defenders seem to purposely read things into a post to make their own point - that this year's failure is solely due to the injuries/defections, just like last year's was due to injury and the year before due to.... Point is that there is never any critique of the coach that is allowed after a loss.

[CameronBornAndBred]

You think I have a bias. I know you have one. And it makes you unwilling to recognize critique of this coach and coaching decisions that directly lead to losses. It's not rocket science.
There is critique, and there is continuous bashing. You tend to engage in much more of the latter than the former.

[killerleft]

Some of you are totally lost in this one game, if our vast coaching problems were left
with the DePaul game. Then we could just say there were no in game adjustments but
what's new. Hang around awhile and she will see the light or your opinions will change.

You run with a tough crowd. You aren't the only one watching women's basketball, you know. Even the most casual Duke fan knows what the overwhelmingly important issue was for this 2013-2014 team: in your lingo, a vast number of injuries.

In mine? We just didn't have our best three ballhandlers out there for the very important postseason. Our quickness was gone. We couldn't recover our shape in the zone, but couldn't change to man for the same reason. For Pete's sake, we sometimes had to put our power forwards out there trying to keep up with GUARDS. On offense, we had a shooting guard, small forwards, and power forwards running the offense. All in all, Coach P was like the little Dutch boy trying to fix the hole in the dike by plugging it with his finger. Unfortunately, this wasn't some fairy tale, and we finished our season way too early. I'm vastly disappointed. This season could have been so much better, even if we were possibly outmanned by several teams nationally. But I know where the 'blame' goes.

[aswewere]

You run with a tough crowd. You aren't the only one watching women's basketball, you know. Even the most casual Duke fan knows what the overwhelmingly important issue was for this 2013-2014 team: in your lingo, a vast number of injuries.

In mine? We just didn't have our best three ballhandlers out there for the very important postseason. Our quickness was gone. We couldn't recover our shape in the zone, but couldn't change to man for the same reason. For Pete's sake, we sometimes had to put our power forwards out there trying to keep up with GUARDS. On offense, we had a shooting guard, small forwards, and power forwards running the offense. All in all, Coach P was like the little Dutch boy trying to fix the hole in the dike by plugging it with his finger. Unfortunately, this wasn't some fairy tale, and we finished our season way too early. I'm vastly disappointed. This season could have been so much better, even if we were possibly outmanned by several teams nationally. But I know where the 'blame' goes.

I can sale you all the future Duke allotment of finale 4 tickets you want, very cheap like "FREE"

[killerleft]

Exactly. ONE player from ONE team hits more than one 25 ft shot and suddenly that's the excuse for everything? Did I ANYWHERE suggest that if we play 3 posts that the 2 guards would have to cover the entire 3 pt line? I said that if you play 3 posts, that when one of them goes out to guard the shooter, that leaves 2 to protect the paint - one high post, one low post. JPM defenders seem to purposely read things into a post to make their own point - that this year's failure is solely due to the injuries/defections, just like last year's was due to injury and the year before due to.... Point is that there is never any critique of the coach that is allowed after a loss.

Sure, you can critique the coach. But not to the extent you do without seeming to take into account anything but a narrative that makes her look like The Ogre From Outer Space. This defense you describe, using slower players to elastically venture out to contest three-point shots, only guarantees that a crisp-passing opponent will find all the wide open shots they want. Most of the made three pointers were from at least three feet beyond the line. That's JJ deep.

Besides, our biggest problem wasn't defense. It was turnovers.

[killerleft]

I can sale you all the future Duke allotment of finale 4 tickets you want, very cheap like "FREE"

Deleted by me to avoid another bad mark. But the Brooklyn Bridge was involved.

[aswewere]

Sure, you can critique the coach. But not to the extent you do without seeming to take into account anything but a narrative that makes her look like The Ogre From Outer Space. This defense you describe, using slower players to elastically venture out to contest three-point shots, only guarantees that a crisp-passing opponent will find all the wide open shots they want. Most of the made three pointers were from at least three feet beyond the line. That's JJ deep.

Besides, our biggest problem wasn't defense. It was turnovers.

Ok so lets give her a free pass on this game or just throw in the whole year, that leaves us a revisit
to her first year. Abby Waners team which was recruited to play a finesse running game, so what is her
first move of course put in her big 10 tractor offense. We all know Abby game was never the same and
soon after a couple of guys from men's side came over for a brief stay along with 4 good assistants departed.
As usual the lack of effort by our ladies has led to all of our losses per her press conference's but don't you love
the great many times she has assumed any responsibility???? Should we bring up some of her and hub's off the court
activity, no less spare Duke any more shame. After Watching elite teams shut down her offense for years she
announces I love my big 10 tractor offense and-------

[CameronBornAndBred]

Ok so lets give her a free pass on this game or just throw in the whole year, that leaves us a revisit
to her first year. Abby Waners team which was recruited to play a finesse running game, so what is her
first move of course put in her big 10 tractor offense. We all know Abby game was never the same and
soon after a couple of guys from men's side came over for a brief stay along with 4 good assistants departed.
As usual the lack of effort by our ladies has led to all of our losses per her press conference's but don't you love
the great many times she has assumed any responsibility???? Should we bring up some of her and hub's off the court
activity, no less spare Duke any more shame. After Watching elite teams shut down her offense for years she
announces I love my big 10 tractor offense and-------
Ahh, Abby Waner. Because she played on this year's team.

http://awesomegifs.com/wp-content/uploads/dead-horse.gif

[Kfanarmy]

interesting thread. Some seem to think no comment on the coaching is acceptable because everything that drives losses is beyond her control, ie injuries are everything. Some seem to think the coach should be able to win the NCAA tourney no matter what players are available, she just needs to employ the right tactics. Perhaps there is a middle ground to be found.

[-jk]

Ok so lets give her a free pass on this game or just throw in the whole year, that leaves us a revisit
to her first year. Abby Waners team which was recruited to play a finesse running game, so what is her
first move of course put in her big 10 tractor offense. We all know Abby game was never the same and
soon after a couple of guys from men's side came over for a brief stay along with 4 good assistants departed.
As usual the lack of effort by our ladies has led to all of our losses per her press conference's but don't you love
the great many times she has assumed any responsibility???? Should we bring up some of her and hub's off the court
activity, no less spare Duke any more shame. After Watching elite teams shut down her offense for years she
announces I love my big 10 tractor offense and-------

Wrong thread. If you want to start a new thread on McCallie's coaching, go for it. (Hell, we've been taking K apart all week.)

Remember: please keep hyperbole, innuendo, and personal animus out of it, though. Rather, bring reasoned arguments and credible sources. That's the DBR standard.

And unless her husband has a role on the team beyond "coach's spouse", please leave him out of it.

thanks,

-jk

[AIM4excellence]

Wrong thread. If you want to start a new thread on McCallie's coaching, go for it. (Hell, we've been taking K apart all week.)

Remember: please keep hyperbole, innuendo, and personal animus out of it, though. Rather, bring reasoned arguments and credible sources. That's the DBR standard.

And unless her husband has a role on the team beyond "coach's spouse", please leave him out of it.

thanks,

-jk

And right there is the key statement - let's apply the same standard to Coach JPM as to Coach K. Before complaining about every criticism of Coach JPM as being "hateful" please check them against criticisms of Coach K. It seems that Coach K does not need to have piles of people defending him against the slightest criticism since HE HAS A RECORD TO STAND ON. When Coach JPM has a record to stand on, maybe some here will stop feeling the need to "protect the delicate flower" who can't stand up to criticism.

[Kfanarmy]

And right there is the key statement - let's apply the same standard to Coach JPM as to Coach K. Before complaining about every criticism of Coach JPM as being "hateful" please check them against criticisms of Coach K. It seems that Coach K does not need to have piles of people defending him against the slightest criticism since HE HAS A RECORD TO STAND ON. When Coach JPM has a record to stand on, maybe some here will stop feeling the need to "protect the delicate flower" who can't stand up to criticism.

I was neutral to your point, but supportive of you making it up to this point. This just seems sexist and isn't responsive to any disagreement I've seen with respect to your argument.

[AIM4excellence]

There is critique, and there is continuous bashing. You tend to engage in much more of the latter than the former.

When JPM does her job of devising a good game plan, I'm the first to come here and give her the credit. Check the ACC tourney game vs UNC. Unfortunately there aren't very many opportunities and I refuse to "give her a trophy for showing up." You want me to applaud her coaching, it's easy. She has to actually do some good coaching. It's really not my fault that she gives so much opportunity for criticism. Motto "Less with More."

[-jk]

As I said: If you want to start a new thread on McCallie's coaching, go for it. (Hell, we've been taking K apart all week.)

Remember: please keep hyperbole, innuendo, and personal animus out of it, though. Rather, bring reasoned arguments and credible sources. That's the DBR standard.

And unless her husband has a role on the team beyond "coach's spouse", please leave him out of it.

thanks,

-jk